Please add ffb offset in controller configuration

The differences between 100 110 120 % etc are bull**** ... 70 gain in game with 100 in driver, is like 30 -33 in game and 110% in driver.
So if multiplies the input by a lot more than 10%, which explains why the threshold is lower.

 

WheelCheck is car indepentant - it just measure wheel's response - for the first 16% of forces my wheel just doesn't move and if you would add 16% offset, it will react even to 1% calculated force, because the sim will send 17% force to the wheel then.

No, it doesn't work like that at all.
The profiler ffb force setting is responsible rather for the shape of the calculated force response, the more above 100%, the more weak forces are boosted.
In game ffb gain is responsible for what physics calculated force at steering rack is projected to 100% of the wheel force, so this is the setting where you can tune if there will be clipping.

 

I don't think you're right, I think max ffb output from the game will be stronger with 150% than 100%. Can you test that with this software from the wheel's movement max speed and acceleration?

 

Yes I understand that, however some cars produce higher forces from centre faster than others, therefore the deadzone is less noticeable in the F40 than Abarth 500. But the underlying problem is still there in that the wheel can't produce forces below 16%.

 

Slightly off-topic, but I see mixed opinions on damping and spring being enabled in logitech profiler, my understanding is that they do not add any artificial effect but simply scale any effects generated by the game that use these "springs", whereas of course centering spring is clearly artificial and should be off. anyone able to shed any light on the damping and spring settings?

 

Spring and damping effects are artificial and not connected to ffb forces calculated by the simulation.

Look at those plots with 100% and 120% FFB Force set in the logitech profiler. The maximum wheel response, thus the maximum force generated by the wheel is the same. The difference is that at 120% the lower forces are simply boosted so you'll feel that overall the FFB is stronger although the maximum force is the same.

 

^Just to add to what you said about your graphs - if you use 120% in the profiler and then drop the in-game force to say 50% this will have the in-game effect of reducing the slope of the red line above making the response over the first 16% of force being submitted to the wheel much more linear instead of quasi-binary. It will lower the highest felt force as well though but for me that is not an issue since full-force is too strong except for situations like wall crashes.

 

Have you got any links to confirm this? From my reading they are standard directx effects that games can choose to use, the value in the driver is simply a scaler... I can understand why people would reduce them as they may unintentionally mask some of the subtle effects, but I think they are required to give the realistic weight to the wheel (easily noticeable in most games when the car is stationary and you try to turn the wheel, this is easy with the effects on 0 and there is good resistance with them on as there should be.)

 

This is what David Tucker, developer of iRacing FFB said about damping:

Spring effect is wrong from the definition - you dont' have any spring attached to the steering shaft in real car.

 

+1

 

I would absolutely love this feature in Assetto Corsa! It does make a huge difference in rFactor 2 where they call it "Steering Torque Minimum". Minimizing the ffb deadzone makes every car feel so much more responsive and gives you precise control. It does transform the experience.


edit: Hey actually I think the Kunos devs are already aware and working on implementing this feature according to this post - https://www.assettocorsa.net/forum/i...teering-force-strength-gain.7640/#post-101632

 

Anyone from Kunos can confirm here that you working on this ( I mean elimination dead zone in the middle G27 or another wheel)? Btw go ahead a good job you are doing.

 

Haven't seen any updates on this, is the fix still being worked on?

 

Hmmm ... still no offset-feature?

This should really be included (and best would be, if you could also apply curves to compensate for nonlinear behaviour).
It would make the experience with most wheels dramatically better.

 

This option should really be implemented!

Tested my Fanatec Porsche Turbo S with wheelchecker and found an offset off 8.5 - 9 %!
FFB could be so much better with this option i'm sure...

In this picture you can see the improvement in FFB-response, when minforce of 8.5% (850 dx-units) is added:

 

Obviously this function is also available in iRacing: it was implemented there first and that caused ISI developers to add it to rFactor 2.

This thread from the ISI forums shows some more plots and thoughts:
http://isiforums.net/f/showthread.p...with-rfactor-2?p=247017&viewfull=1#post247017

If you read through the thread they also started testing minimum force once it was added to rFactor 2. Too much minimum force causes the wheel to oscillate on straights, so tuning has to be done carefully.

 

We have alot more measurements and some properrly calibrated wheels now, and we NEED this option to compensate for our hardware. ISI and iRacing understood the need for them, let's hope Kunos realize that our wheels are not entirely linear and have a deadzone.

 

Couldn't agree more.
I don't understand, why those options are still not included already.

 

I'm guessing they're still prioritizing other tasks, or maybe don't know yet how to implement it in AC, as this has been suggested many months back and no feedback received from them.

 

But isn't this like super-easily done in a few minutes, if you have access to the source-code?

Maybe I am missing something here, but this shouldn't be a problem at all.