Quote
I feel now that this method of controlling is superior to the default joystick input, which when you move the stick, it moves the cursor at a certain rate, relative to where you place the stick. Absolute mode is closer to that of a mouse, although I am not superior to using mouse as yet, maybe I might approach that with time. The only problem is due to the high sensitivity of this mode, you almost need to have a stick extender for finer control.
You are probably only one of like 8 people that actually understands what it means that I
built my own stick specifically for absolute inputs and mech piloting (mounted in
my new mechpit). Rather than a spring centering pitch/roll gimbal it's an azimuth/zenith bearing and has greased plastic rubs for damping, since there is more to a mouse than it's use of absolute inputs that gives it the edge (see below). The bad news is that using a normal stick does quite get you there due to the pith/roll/spring centered gimbal being largely suited for relative inputs, so even if you use relative inputs it's still pretty goofy, just not as goofy as relative inputs, but you
have identified one of the key pieces of the puzzle, which puts you in a much better position than most that have the desire to pilot with a stick.
Question: does your program allow independent control of x/y axis? I have found (corroborated by other stick users) that the y axis is noticeably more sensitive than the x and needs to be dumbed down a little more than the x does to get them proportionally correct with each other. From your post it sounds like there is no sensitivity control, but at least you can lower the mouse sensitivity in your user .cfg to at least get some level of controllability...
cl_sensitivity = 1.0 //mouse sensitivity, default = 1.0
Now that your on emulator controls, you can do nifty things like be able to toggle between different sensitivities on the fly and such. You are also immune to all the pitfalls of bugs/support everytime there is an update to the UI.
From spending far too much time on the forums, most folk assume there is some level of support or tuning that is supposed to happen on the development side of MWO that will
then magically make joysticks equally competitive with a mouse. It's a myth, and I have identified what I feel are the underlying reasons why. In short what it breaks down to is not that a
joystick is poorly suited for MWO, it's that an
airplane joystick is poorly suited for MWO, which is unfortunately the only kind of joystick one can buy at the moment. The problem has everything to do with the opposing design criteria of a stick that controls something that moves like a mech/tank, which was designed around/benefits from
unrestricted absolute inputs vs flying an aircraft, which is in turn designed around/benefits from
restricted relative inputs. Comparing a mouse first to a normal airplane joystick, then to your joystick, then to my own stick:
-attributes (effects)
Mouse:
-moves in x/y Cartesian Plane (natural range of movement of the reticule)
-has no spring centering or detents (nothing fighting inputs, unrestricted movement)
-no deadzones (always in control, precision across centers no different than any other point in x/y)
-uses absolute inputs (obvious and easy to control, very precise)
Airplane stick:
-moves in pitch/roll (unnatural range of motion, not reflexively intuitive)
-
spring centering, most likely with detents (fights inputs, negative interactions across the axes center's)
-
requires deadzones (distracting, imprecise, disconnected feeling between inputs and in-game reactions, wasted range of motion)
-
uses relative inputs (mech movements wind up either too slow or uncontrollable, difficult to not to overshoot past target, combined with the first 3 problems adds up to a non-viable control option)
Metal Patient's stick:
-moves in pitch/roll (unnatural range of motion, not reflexively intuitive)
-
spring centering, most likely with detents (fights inputs, negative interactions across the axes center's)
-requires deadzones (distracting, imprecise, disconnected feeling between inputs and in-game reactions, wasted range of motion)
-
uses relative absolute inputs (mech movements wind up either too slow or uncontrollable, difficult to not to overshoot past target, combined with the first 3 problems adds up to a non-viable control option obvious and easy to control, very precise)
Loc Nar's MWO stick
-
moves in zenith/azimuth (pitch/twist -natural range of movement of the mech)
-no spring centering/detents, but has tensioned/greased rubs (nothing fighting inputs, unrestricted smooth damped movement, holds position when not being moved therefore maintains physical orientation related to on-screen state)
-no deadzones (always in control, precision across center no different than any other point in x/y)
-uses absolute inputs (obvious and easy to control, very precise)
1
Its a notable improvement over just absolute aiming, due to its limitations, at least for my stick. Now, when there is a target to the periphery of my torso, moving the joystick towards that direction I can still have the advantage of absolute precision of cursor movement, but can still reach the target for full torso deflection thanks to the added relative input. I had to adjust the relative input sensitivity to be fairly low, so it didnt interfere too much with the precision of the absolute joystick input. Here is my user.cfg file i am using:
How hard can it be to implement proper peripheral support with adjustment options?! I currently play with both mouse and joystick, brawl with stick and sniping with mouse 
