Jump to content

Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, Volcano said:

The attempt to strong arm some kind of change through a poll (as is common on game forums these days) is rather pointless. 

I would say you're pretty good at trolling your self.  Not sure what you were trying to accomplish beyond saying something just to get someone riled up.  Troll much?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 90
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

15 minutes ago, thewood said:

I would say you're pretty good at trolling your self.  Not sure what you were trying to accomplish beyond saying something just to get someone riled up.  Troll much?

 

No, sorry, you have been trolling this community for long enough to spot it.

 

And besides, if I was actually trolling in my initial reply, then why, in that very same post did I say: 

 

"That said, could there be an option to allow for mouse traverse for all manual traversing turrets one day, possibly, who knows."? 

 

Illogical, but nice try.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mirzayev said:

My apologies if I interpreted your meaning wrongly. I'm human, and I can admit to not being faultless. 

 

Regardless, it is present, and people know about it. They are free to vote on it if they want. I know it likely won't change anything. Just trying to give a method for the community to give input that gives quantifiable data. 

 

OK, now that I can reply...

 

Fair enough. And my apologies for the wording of the initial reply.

 

After re-reading my first reply, I can see that it may have seemed like I was saying that I personally didn't care about the poll or the subject, but that is not the case (I try to never vote in polls anyway, because I don't want to affect the result). 

 

I was attempting to say that some people may have seen the poll and not voted, either because they didn't care about the subject or were too busy, or they weren't even aware of the poll to begin with, and so couldn't be used as anything useful. But in time, with enough votes, I am sure it will help provide useful feedback if it turns out to be lean heavily in either direction, as long as there is not an expectation that a poll will always result in a change.  

 

And again, maybe there could be an options menu selection here that affects it in a universal way to allow for either mouse or arrow keys.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So ...

My final 2 cents on this:

I am not going to go into a discussion of what has been written.

I would simply state that the solution which accommodates both overall positions, as I read it, would be to have an option of either using a mouse or the button system which is there now.
 

You do not have to agree with other people, to accept that they have a different opinion than yourself. And I believe that there is room for both in this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

For me the best option is what Rotar said, keys for fast traverse, mouse for slow precise movement.

That begin said, i think is a big discussion for such a small thing, there are muche more things and more important to improve.

Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, Colebrook said:

For me the best option is what Rotar said, keys for fast traverse, mouse for slow precise movement.

That begin said, i think is a big discussion for such a small thing, there are muche more things and more important to improve.

Other way around

 

Mouse for fast, keys for fine.

There's that huge mouse cursor that gets in the way.

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Lt DeFault said:

 

I met Billy Corgan once. At a Camelot Music CD store in the mall. Must've been in the mid '90s. Very nice guy.

Those were the good times. I know its of no use for longing the lost times. We were lucky to have lived them and survived, to have stories to share.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/24/2021 at 12:02 PM, Lumituisku said:

In forestmachine that I work with there is this brilliand  finger wheel for steering. 

Also I am wondering, and perhaps hoping that AFV sim would  see this as great opportunity.  

 

 

The finger wheel looks great, but there could be a few issues:

  1. The encoders (£2 each) would need to be connected to a COTS joystick circuit board (£15) and SB only permits one main joystick.
  2. £2 encoders are low resolution and have a limited range of pulses per revolution, usually 8-24.  This could be worse than than using the arrow keys.
  3. The encoders we use in our Scimitar and Warrior desktop trainers effectively have 512 pulses per revolution, but these are £50 each and require a special purpose circuit board. These boards are not plug and play, so eSim have to integrate them into SB.
  4. If we priced the finger wheels at more than £5 a set (1 x traverse and 1 x elevation), I doubt if we would sell more than 3 sets here, so it's a non-starter for us. 🙁 Maybe we'd have more success with another genre game community, but I have no interest in building devices for aircrafts, F1 racing cars, trains etc.

The Scimitar and Warrior hand cranks have coarse and fine, high/low gear positions in traverse. I think it would be simpler if the left and right arrow keys simulated the coarse position and the arrow keys '+ some other key' simulated the fine position. I'm not sure what other systems have this coarse/fine arrangement. If they have just one speed, then the '+ some other key' would have no effect.

 

Just my 2 pence worth.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...