Jump to content

Whisper

Members
  • Posts

    691
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Whisper

  1. Little update : I guess Virpil is a bit puzzled by the issue :) First of all, once your ticket is taken care of (which can be 2 or 3 days, but seeing how seriously they take each ticket, that's normal, I'd say), support is awesome. Kudos to VPC for this, you get contacted in off hours, they respond live, check directly your configs over TeamViewer, etc... I'm probably praising too soon, since issue is not resolved, but the support action talk for themselves. Great team. So.... We've checked out everything with support, I even have had a new version of the firmware to test , unfortunately that didn't fix the issue. Then week-end came by. Since I have a working older version (thanks again Thomasew), I've not been that pressing on them :) @Thomasew : yes, there is an internal binding that you can configure in the software between the physical Id of buttons, and the logical Id that are presented to Windows . You can change that in the Buttons configuration of the CPV Software. @mdee : that looks similar, but not exactly the same. For me, it's when a button is pressed that another button physical Id is being spammed ON/OFF. Look in the screenshot, I keep "button 19" pressed and software sees, between "button 19 ON" and "button 19 OFF", the button 8 being ON/OFF all the time. A bit of same as you, but happens as soon as Button X is pressed, and continuously.
  2. Not the case for me, firmware upgrade was the first necessary step
  3. We're onto debugging. Awesome support by them, tbh. I'll keep updated
  4. Thanks a lot. I downgraded, and it made the problem disappear. So it is either a firmware issue (but strange that I would be the only one having it) or a very subtle hardware issue that only brings defect since the latest firmware version. I'd guess the latter, I see no reason to be the only one suffering this issue. It helped a ton, thanks a lot again!
  5. Thank you Karon, but unfortunately that's only the firmware file, if I downgrade to it, my current version of VPC Configuration Tool will tell me it's incompatible and I won't be able to re-sync until I re-upgrade to the latest firmware. If you also have the corresponding Configuration Tool version that would be great, otherwise, I'm in touch with VPC Support now, we're going through divers tests and check what could be wrong Thanks a lot for the help anyway
  6. Yes 180828 is the latest one. Maybe it's something to do with the PCB version I have. Would you still have, by chance, the old version of the Virpil Software / FW somewhere on you disk ? :) I can"t it anywhere on mine to try for a downgrade
  7. Since I upgraded my T50 Stick firmware last sunday, I face a very strange (and annoying ) thing. I noticed that just after the upgrade, jumping in my Mi8, each time I tried to reach radio (via trigger button on the Mi8), I had a unusual button sound played. I appeared the thumb button on the stick was also pushed at the same time the trigger was pushed. I try to use the same mapping as IRL on my DCS configurations, so the DCS Mi8 thumb button (trim button) is the T50 thumb button for me as well. So I was pushing the trim button when I was contacting radio, for some reason.... Looking deeper into it via the Virpil configurator, I saw the following : Each button on the T50 is assigned a phsical ID. You can then map the pushing of "physical Id X" to "logical Id" (let's call it that way) Y being sent to Windows/DCS. Typically on my setup, trigger detent (stage 1) is physical Id 8 and mapped to logical Id 1, thumb button is physical Id 7 and mapped to logical Id 17. For the completion of my post, I'll list several other buttons : trigger detent (Stage 2) is physical Id 1 and mapped to logical Id 2, retractable trigger is physical Id 2 and mapped to "I don't remember". So what I saw happening in the Virpil configurator is that for trigger detent (stage 1), thumb button and retractable trigger, when I push them, I see the corresponding physical Id being activated, but ALSO the physical Id - 1 being activated. Ie : when I push the trigger, the physical Id 8 is triggered (which triggers 'button 1' in DCS), but ALSO physical Id 7 (which triggers 'button 17' in DCS). When I push the retractable trigger (Id 2), I have both Id 2 and Id 1 (trigger detent stage 2) being triggered In the Virpil configurator, this behavior is not consistent, sometimes only the correct button is triggered, sometimes, button + 'Id -1' are pushed. I need to spam the button to see the strange behavior. In DCS, it looks like both buttons are caught everytime, and from what I see the second, wrong Id is being triggered on button deactivation. It doesn't happen for all buttons, Hats, PoV, 2-ways and the 2 buttons bunched together are OK, the rest has wrong behavior. The behavior looks a lot like a hardware fault to me, but : * it happened just after a firmware upgrade where I didn't touch the hardware, hardware mishandling didn't happen on that period. * The "ID - 1" thing looks a lot like a software bug :) From what I understood of it, I'm running a PCB version 5 (I think you see this by the name of the configuration file that the Virpil configurator proposes you after you upgraded firmware, '.cnfv05' means PCB v5, '.cnfv06' means PCB v6, etc....) So, 2 questions : * Has anyone seen such behavior? I guess not or we would hear of this sooner :) * I stupidely have overwritten my old Virpil configurator / firmware files in the upgrade process. I want to confirm if it's a firmware issue or not, I guess downgrading the firmware to previous version would prove that. Has anyone still the older firmware version somewhere available? It's not on Virpil site anymore. Ofc, I opened a ticket, so I'm also waiting on it.
  8. Actually, I didn't exactly test & compare, but seeing how "trim" works in a 109 and in DCS, trimming when your controls are locked should permit you to reach more G and better turn : DCS simulate controls lock-up at high speed by cutting the max deflection possible on the stabilizer axis, ie past some point, pulling the stick more does asbolutely nothing anymore. The 109 Stabilizer trims doesn't move actual stabilizer "more", which would be cut by the DCS lock-up implementation, but it moves the whole stab. Which ends up adding to the stab movement induced by the stick, so you should have more authority.... To be tested, gut feelings tell me that using trim makes for tighter turns at high speed.
  9. In case the advice helps : trim to turn helps a lot, though it prohibits fast reaction, but you can follow anyone at any speed (perhaps not Spits) with proper trimming.
  10. I wish we had a similar mod in DCS to Lefuneste IL2 VR mod (or that what it does would be enabled by default in both sims :) ). That way we would have a similar zoom to flat screen users which would compensate for loss of resolution and thus enable us to identify correctly, and the mod has apparently made possible to hide labels when behind obstacle (I've not tested that part, I never play w/ labels in IL2, no need) As for settings, I run at quite low as I want the necessary FPS for my system, knowing I also fly Mig21 & Gazelle which are the 2 most FPS demanding modules. So I disable fancy settings, all kind of in-game AA and limit the PD level to smtg like 1.2 in Rift value (!= Steam value). The blurriness it creates make simple pixel dots stick out more because they are rendered bigger due to blur.
  11. Clouds are not in sync between clients in DCS, whatever the weather type (static or dynamic). I concur with Reflected, it's better to have them at altitude where they won't really play a tactical role, because that would mis-lead players to thinking they are hidden , for example, while they could be in plain view of another player.
  12. Actually I find long distance target detection on high targets easier in VR. For other situation, I don't really know. We're not too handicapped with detection in VR, if you ask me. The label mode made labels stick out a LOT in VR and we were having a big advantage here
  13. I'm doing the same right now DCS_updater.exe update 2.5.2.20601@openbeta
  14. Mmmh, instead, the beta branch is in dire need of a quick hotfix. Like, tomorrow...
  15. And since the latest updates messed up all commands, guess what happens when you try a module you didn't hop into for some time?? ....
  16. I can confirm the issue when using mouse look configuration in VR (ie having the option "use mouse" unchecked in VR options, and having configured HOTAS buttons to act as mouse buttons). These 2 specific levers do not react to any interaction. I've mapped them to HOTAS controls currently.
  17. See these threads : https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=217751 https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=217672 https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=218764
  18. Things are possible right now (taking off without taking care of keeping the plane aligned with flight vector) that are absolutely not possible IRL, no plane would slide like that without the tire at some point adhering and making the plane flip. Yes, when you strictly follow good takeoff procedure (ie, you already master how to takeoff), you won't probably notice anything wrong. It's when you relax on your procedure that you start seeing the plane doing wrong things. The more you relax, the more wrong you see, until you relax so much that you don't touch the rudder anymore in K4 during takeoff and still see your ride slide to the sky. In between strict and relaxed procedures are all variations of "trying to follow the procedure correctly" (typically, what a new pilot coming to K4 will do) which will nearly all end up in a successfull take-off and will probably never teach proper procedures. One cannot really know which of his takeoff is really the best if they all work, can he? We're not talking about taking the K4 to absurd extremes of its enveloppe. Just not strictly following the normal takeoff. And it's the same for landing. This change was done apparently because lack of feedback in Spitfire was the cause of too many wing tipping, from what I understood. Words have been passed to dev to re-check the values and re-assess if needed to have a better middle-ground. I'll wait for news (and ask for news if none in patches to come), but I'd also like to ask if that was really the only possible fix for the issue. Isn't it possible to somehow add feedback (sound, vibration, etc...) so that virtual pilot feels the need to keep plane centered better, instead of allowing him to slide?
  19. I would really like to understand how MAD-MM 109 landing can be considered a ok rendition, tbh.
  20. Seeing mad-mm first video above, I think it has been tipped too much toward stability. It's not a completely out of enveloppe landing, so it's not testing something that would never happen irl (like trying to land backward woukd be :) ) and there I would expect some more consistent behavior, and at least wing tip, if not worse. This is just a purposefully very bad landing, the kind of which a beginner should learn to not repeat. I'm not quite sure tweaking physics so much out of reality to compensate for lack of feedback and simulate pilot behavior is a good solution. Though I don't have a solution to Mr Grey problem, I don't like this way of solving it
  21. Actually, for features like distance fading and terrain masking, the srs server needs to be installed alongside the dcs server
  22. Fixed skins are actually good gameplay wise, we are able to identify easier in a furball. Currently, "stripes" means Blue team
×
×
  • Create New...