Main > Main Forum
U360: strange behavior
TheShanMan:
I've been playing with the maps this evening (up until now I've only used mame's built in analog to digital translation). I'm experiencing the same thing Ummon and arzoo have reported. I haven't paid too much attention to it until now because I had mala's and mame's deadzone set fairly high. But I find with the maps that come with UltraMap, the dead zone barely extends beyond the slop zone. So for instance in 4 or 8 way mode, where mala's and mame's dead zone settings don't come into play, it takes FAR too little pressure to leave the dead zone (i.e. it's far too sensitive).
(For the record I have circular restrictors, and I have told ultramap that I have them - not sure how that might factor into my observations)
So I started doing what arzoo mentioned... altering the map to increase the dead zone. I almost think that for 4/8 way games EVERY little cell should be a deadzone except the outer cells (i.e. the "engaged" zone is only one small cell thick, rather than the default of 3 small cells thick).
I'm curious to know if anyone else sets up their maps like this? When I stop to think about it, it's probably more like a switch based stick anyway.
But it seems to me that the Ultimarc maps have 2 problems: 1 - They don't work well out of the box. 2 - If you settle on a customized map like I described, it gives you a perception that the maps aren't as powerful as they seem at first. A 9x9 grid makes it sound super-flexible, but if the dead zone is 7x7, then there's not a whole lot of flexibility in what you can do. For instance, I remember people mentioning tron maps where they made the corners difficult to hit. In this case, it doesn't seem that it could be made to be any harder to hit than any other position.
Anyone else have similar observations?
Now remember that I've only started to play with these maps tonight, so perhaps as I use my maps I'll change my mind and shrink the dead zone. But the fact that I've had to make this change just gives me a feeling of disappointment in the u360. It's probably just an initial reaction to the fact that I was forced to make a change to these maps when it should have worked better out of the box though. I imagine as I play with it more that disappointment will go away.
Also, I should say that I'm not ready to say I don't like the u360's. There is a lot that is very likable about them. But this illustrates what aspects of the u360's have given me a somewhat negative first impression.
headkaze:
Changing the restrictor plate setting certainly does effect the way the mappings work. Try turning off the restrictor plate altogether.
TheShanMan:
Do you mean set the sticks to "no restrictor" in ultramap but physically leave the restrictors on?
headkaze:
--- Quote from: TheShanMan on October 25, 2008, 02:50:06 am ---Do you mean set the sticks to "no restrictor" in ultramap but physically leave the restrictors on?
--- End quote ---
Yeah, when I was writing my UltraStik.dll I noticed the restrictor settings in UltraMap severly screwed around with things. In my opinion the UltraMap software is quite buggy and again I remember those restrictor settings being screwy. You might want to try turning them off and on. Just another thing to try out I guess.
AndyWarne:
The restrictor setting changes the scale factor which is applied to the raw analog output before the maps are applied and data sent out. So leaving the no-restrictor setting and installing a restrictor means the range of analog data is limited so you will only get the center portion of the map not all of the cells.
It might well be that the default maps we supply can be improved on. Feedback on this is welcome and I will change them if necessary. Likewise the instructions.
There should not be any bugs in Ultramap. There were a few in old versions.
Andy