I am posting this in case others felt like experimenting, or just wanted a few ideas. I was considering all the different options, and I think I found one that might actually be sensible, and considerably cheaper. Normal hotas configs cost at minimum 150-220 for Saitek with heavy QC issues, 280-350 for CH products with minimalist buttons, but very good build quality, and then 420+ (unless on sale on newegg) for a thrustmaster warthog (+100-220 for rudder pedals).
My use of cheap dual joysticks (initially for testing purposes) costs 50 to 100 depending on where you bought them from. Logitech extreme 3d pro (20-37 usd) and the Thrustmaster T-16000m (25-60 usd). Both are very decent and very accurate single joysticks. Prior to my actual full post, I would like to say that I would I possibly consider changing the logitech for either a ch stick (110 to 160) or a thrustmaster warthog (stick only 200usd at microcenter) for more hats and buttons.
Current route:
Kb/m (for fine tuning, or if someone seriously pisses me off)
Dual joystick for racing and dogfighting.
Left stick focuses on strafe, throttle, brake/boost, and countermeasures. Also a 'just in case' option for roll, if I decide to forgo right stick in favor of a mouse for a small and annoying target.
Right stick handles pitch, yaw, roll with firing options, cycling of targets, and shield controls.
Buttons on joystick bases do have some 'in case' configuration, but I won't worry about it as I got a keyboard in between if needed.
Specific peripherals:
Right stick: Logitech extreme 3d pro.
Is a cheap stick known for accuracy, and limited deadzone. Also a tad heavy in comparison, so it can make do with the oversensitivity of the current star citizen controls (options to change are not too good yet).
Z-axis is very sensitive, so I have it as roll with x-axis as yaw, and it works far better than the reverse. I do have the opposite as a decoupled version to test with
Left stick: Thrustmaster T-16000m
Ambidextrous stick where you can adjust wrist guard, etc to make things easier. It has less overall buttons on the stick but will work just fine for the current setup. Very accurate, even more so than the 3d pro, but a bit lighter, and less tense, so might not be as easy if used for pitch, roll, yaw.
Has virtually no deadzone and is quite ergonomic. Major downside is the lack of numbered buttons which makes organizing the controls when inputting to be a pain.
Current control scheme:
Right stick: (logitech extreme 3d pro)
Pitch: y-axis
Yaw: x-axis
Roll: z-axis (twist)
Trigger: Fire Group 1
Button 2: Fire Group 2 (position on thumb rest)
Button 3: Fire Group 3
Button 4: Fire Group 4 / Missiles
Button 5: Cycle targets
Button 6: Shield reset
Hat: shield control (front, back, left, right; when top/bottom is added, will use double tap on up/down for those)
Trigger: Boost/afterburn
Button2: fire countermeasure
Button3: spacebreak
Button4: cycle countermeasure
Hat:
up/down throttle with double tap max/min
left/right roll (in case I use mouse instead of right stick)
__________________________
I hope this post will be of some use to you guys. Also, for a fun little tidbit, if you consider a few of the ship interiors, the Connie and a few others actualy have dual sticks in the interior, so I wouldn't completely discount immersion being only for hotas.
It's true that in most cases combat spread is more efficient than formation flying. Flying spread in X and a little in Z not only gives you a bigger scanner sweep but also the wingman can more easily check the leader's 6. This rule doesn't exactly apply to SC because unlike in real world, the SC radars sweep the full 360 whereas the fighter plane radar only works in a cone radius in front of the plane. Still the spread is better for the visual searching for targets.
V Formation on an X-Axis is a waste of resources UNLESS you're already engaged in a fight.
Preferably you'd actually want a reverse V in the Y-Axis to maximize scanners capabilities. And if you're in a somewhat advanced crew you'd want your team mates to be in different locations on the z-axis to max your sensors capabilities and to disorient targets. For example
1
2 x
3
4
5 y z
6
7
a b c d e f g h I j k l m n
Assume that x is dead center at Z0 and there are 3 units of space in front of it and 3 units of space behind it
In order to truly maximize scanners you'd want x at location g,2,Z0 y would be at a,5,Z+2 and z would be near l,5,Z-2
You'd still have the benefits of 2 of the wingmen being in a -Y axis while maximizing your scanning arrays.
On top of that if someone were to attack x. x could fly on a direct path towards y or z (depending on angle of attack and access of route) let's say x is flying directly toward y. z falls in behind the enemy while y flies directly toward x. now the enemy is following x into a frontal and cold 6 attack formation.
But that is an ideal unlikely situation.
Worst case scenario an enemy gets the drop on z. z flies directly towards x with a bit of an angle lower in the Y-axis so x can come down and get on the enemies tail while y comes in to clean up.
This formation would be a little tricky to master considering there would be quite a bit of room for error when trying to engage an enemy who has the drop on an outlying craft. But could prove beneficial in maximizing sensor arrays.
jaboudreau reacted to drewjn in Dual joystick
jaboudreau got a reaction from Maciek in Operational Organization & Basic 6DOF combat Theory
