Hello everyone, I wanted to see if we can get some numbers on who uses what style of FFB profile as a whole. When voting please consider “default” as also including the “default+” profiles as well. Thank You!
To qualify my choice for option 1: I've tried and used many custom ffb-files, especially during early AMS2 development. I even spent time learning and altering some files myself to see what is possible. The shear range of ffb-effects on offer in AMS2 is truly amazing. As AMS2 and the FFB default presets developed, so did my preferences in FFB. Over time, those things converged and now I find I'm quite happy to use either Default or Default+ preset. In any case, I think it's good to try different ffb options and learn what is possible but do so gradually enough to become acclimated to the ffb in use.
Would have been interesting to see what the difference is on how many people using default and default+.
When I had a Thurstmaster TMX, Default+ was all I used and it was very good. When I upgraded to a Simagic Alpha Mini, Default+ and Default simply were massively over blown for my tastes with the different wheel base. I suspect that most DD users end up with the customs (KukuMadDog, r****tor or DanielKart mainly) because of this. As DDs penetrate the community and propagate, I wonder if there is the need to a “DD style” default FFB profile to be added, not dissimilar to how Default+ was successfully added and enhanced a lot of users’ experiences
Since I tried customs that I like, defaults always felt worse on my end. From time to time I give them a go , but always end returning to customs.
Still undecided between Default and Default+, up until very recently I was running JP's v12, before that usually a slightly tweaked version of one of Karsten's file. Now that I'm beta testing it makes more sense to stick with the defaults, one less variable to think about when comparing notes but also the default profiles are fantastic.
In regard to detail: Default: FX at 100%. Default+: FX at 35 - 50% With DD-wheels, I suspect one reason why many users consider the details to be overwhelming may be due to a lower level of Damping. I certainly went through a phase where I preferred very fast wheel response with little weightiness. This is certainly better for Drifting purposes. These days, I prefer a more moderate response rate with a good amount of weight to better replicate real life steering-systems mass and friction properties. With that and a bit of smoothening (Recon Filter in TrueDrive), more FX are useful.
I use the latest V900 custom file from @Danielkart It feels excellent on my Moza R9 base & it does not have the floaty/ weightless feeling at low steering angles like the default ffb profiles.
I believe we have similar experience and preferences. I appreciate and respect the number of custom profiles out there and their authors, but keep coming back to default a majority of the time and default+ for a few of the classes. Our settings are very similar, default with high FX and 40-50 on damper, default+ with 50ish on FX and the same on damper. As far as customs go, I think my preference would be the "pure rack force" or similarly named custom that has been floating around for some time now. Some of the popular customs like rfuktor, dkart, alegunner, etc. all have some aspects I love, but plenty of areas I do not. Such is life.
Driving competitively on the lesser known "Nu Scorpii" V2.5 for at least two years now. It worked throughout all AMS2 versions and I simply feel at home with it. Its a pretty small file, which is not prone to lags...as I found out the bigger the file, the heavier its on the system!
Regardless of this survey and how this survey ends, it shows once again how different people's tastes and preferences are.What is the holy grail for one person is just rubbish for another.And exactly the same thing can be seen with the different simulations. "Tactical NuclearPingu" said something crucial and important.Time has changed with dds and they have now become mass-produced and affordable for everyone.The developers should start there and adapt it accordingly, regardless of whether it is for older simulations (if still supported) or for newer ones or those that are still to come
Yeah, and are always going to be cases where some of us are willing to tinker in the FFB toolbox while many others just want to press the "Easy" button for instant FFB.
Yes, that's it Dean.Of course there are people who want to drive straight away without any settings and without testing and they expect the best feeling straight away.But the people who deal with it (with FFB, with their base, with their hardware) will, in my opinion, always have a better experience because they can tailor it more precisely and individually and exactly to their needs, and I'm very grateful to Reiza for thatthere is this possibility
