Devs! Please return the control of the tank from the commander, as it was before!

[Beagle 684]

The changes were long due since AI drivers still can't do their job exept for open terrain without objects...so basically only on 10% of the terrain in official ArmA III. The changes are very welcome. A lot of feedback from users on Dev branch went into it. Developemt branch is open for everyone, so bringing your voice up after an major updates is a bit late.

 

ArmA III still want's you to ADAPT  ;) its the main theme of the game.

[biggerdave 56]

1 hour ago, mickeymen said:

 

Probably this is a question for me. I did not say that the old system was 100% realistic. I said that the old tank control system was only much more realistic than the new one. Can you feel the difference? Not completely realistic, but much more realistic!

 

Here is an example, let's imagine that the old system had a realism of 30%, while the new system is completely unrealistic (maybe 4%, not more) and you all can not call me unfounded because I give the facts:

 

1. The old system gave the player the feeling that the tank is controlled by another person (driver). Pay attention, in real life it is the other person (the driver) who controls the tank, not the commander! The new system of control does not give this feeling. This is completely uncontested, since the commander is completely equivalent to the driver

 

Right, but again, like I said, realistically, Tank commanders don't micromanage their crews. There's a lot of things that the AI simply can't understand that you'd expect between a tank commander and their driver (ie, "forward" might mean "follow the road a bit", not "just go straight directly forward until I tell you otherwise").

 

Is it realistic to have "steering wheel" control over the driver? No. But it's more realistic than a bunch of very abstract "direct" commands.

 

I don't get your point about it being uncontested? Insubordination would not be a fun mechanic for the AI.

 

 

1 hour ago, mickeymen said:

2. The old system had a small delay before the order was executed. If the commander-player said "Right" or "Left", then the subordinate AI-driver executed the order namely after the end of the voice command!  In the rael life the Voice command - this is the only way of communication, between the commander / driver. This is realistic. In the new control system, the commander manages the tank directly and without any delays, as if the driver understands the commander telepathically! This is far from even a minimal realism, But in the old system was at least this.

 

Delay isn't realistic (and more importantly, it isn't fun!) - this is why WGL/ACE disabled it under the old system. Commanders and Drivers do understand each other. Tank crews train together for this exact purpose. (Moreover, even untrained crews can preplan their movements, to prevent delay)

 

Again, a simple command, such as "bring us up behind that wall" is completely beyond the capabilities of the AI (and that's not even a complaint about the AI, it's a simple fact that machines can't easily process that kind of instruction from a person). It is near impossible to execute under the old system, but probably the easiest thing for an actual tank crew to perform.

 

Or, an even better example "as soon as we fire, get us back behind cover" - a very simple instruction for a human driver, but with an AI crew under the old system, you'd potentially have about a 2-5 second delay trying to get the AI to perform this action - not ideal in a combat situation!

 

1 hour ago, mickeymen said:

3. Within a game, there is no manual difference in the control of the tank commander/driver. In the new system of control In both cases, the player must hold down the W/A/S D buttons. By analogy with this keys, in real life the driver holds the levers of movement, the pedals and this is logical! Tell me, then what can the commander hold inside the tank in order to move it? The clear answer -  is nothing! The commander only needs to give his verbal orders to the driver and that's all. As part of the simulation, the new management is less realistic for commander because it forces him to hold the buttons. There is a simple analogy - holding the buttons, this is keeping the levers and pedals inside any vehicle

And you can still give grid reference commands by using the map or command view. (I haven't tried it yet, but I imagine the "next waypoint" and "take formation" commands still work too) The only thing that's really changed is the micro-management commands.

 

And, in the old system, you gave commands with the keyboard, too, so...?

 

1 hour ago, mickeymen said:

4. In the new control system, After each turn, the game forces the commander-driver to automatically stop the rotation. Could this be realistic? lol! this is arcade feature. In the old system, the commander himself must be stopped theany  rotation, by means of a voice command. In real life, the same thing happens!

 

 @biggerdave this points special for you) Is that enough for you?

 

The old system was much more realistic, although it was less accurate.

Why do I say so long in my ticket? I would like to see Arma as realistic sim-game, so it would not be like CallofFuckBattleField. 

 

Old control from commander, in the Arma was a unique tank control, which does not exist in any game of the genre!

It was so original! We are could try to improve it (add additional subtle commands for AI-driver or try improve Ai in general), but do not delete!

 

I honestly don't follow that last point? Turning vehicles feels identical in the new system, the only difference is it doesn't spam the message log, and you get the arguably more realistic "stop" when stopping turns than the old "forward". (Did this change between the dev branch and release?)

 

If a system "feels" realistic, but it's impossible to perform actions that are completely trivial for real crews, then it's not a realistic system.

[froggyluv 2136]

 

 I think the issue here is eliminating immersion AI features instead of ever saying 'we're hiring a new team to handle some nice AI improvements'. Things like AI wounding and dragging/carrying -streamline remove rather than correct/expand. Women civs/Alice. ChangeSides module etc etc..

 

 Tho this particular area doesnt personally bother me a whole lot - the pattern surely does.

[Beagle 684]

3 hours ago, froggyluv said:

 

 I think the issue here is eliminating immersion AI features instead of ever saying 'we're hiring a new team to handle some nice AI improvements'. Things like AI wounding and dragging/carrying -streamline remove rather than correct/expand. Women civs/Alice. ChangeSides module etc etc..

 

 Tho this particular area doesnt personally bother me a whole lot - the pattern surely does.

Unfortunately, you're right in that points.

And that's part of the reason why i still fire up ArmA II from time to time for all the little detailed features that got lost in the streamlining of ArmA III. ("Good Day sir"..."Sergeant!"..."What's the weather"..."I think it will stay like this for a while." ..."stop asking me that". ;)

 

[mickeymen 324]

9 hours ago, biggerdave said:

But it's more realistic than a bunch of very abstract "direct" commands.

I don't get your point about it being uncontested? Insubordination would not be a fun mechanic for the AI.

 

 

The old orders were abstract, I agree! But it is fixable in the technical sense! For more precise control through the AI-driver, BIS just need to add additional micro commands. It's so simple. R-button  turn on several degrees in the right, adds Ctrl + R and it can be a slow and jewelry turn. May be this even could work until the player releases the buttons and the commander could say "Slow Right, Slow Right, Slow Right" Thus, for more accuracy tank control we all can have Ctrl+W, Ctrl+R, Ctrl+L, Ctrl+S.

But why did we even talk about bad AI? In the paragraph №1, I was just talking about the sensation. Your arguments on the first point are not relevant to my first point. Bad AI -this is another topic. I only said about the feeling of player - who is drives the tank, but not about good or bad AI.

 

 

9 hours ago, biggerdave said:

 

Delay isn't realistic

 

You do not understand what I said in the paragraph №2. 

In the real life big delay should not be, but I said about the micro-delay. Namely - as the voice phrase must end, before the meaning of what has been said will be understood by the driver and only after this point he will can be able a use the order!

Namely - The driver can not begin to execute the order, until the commander has completed his voice command! This is a very thin and delicate detail, yes! But such trifles can add a special realistic feeling. Try it in the new version. Pay attention. On the position of commander, you press the "R" button and the tank starts turn without any micro-delay! The commander does not have time to finish his sentence!  The BIS simply gave the commander the ability to influence the tank, just like a driver - thisis all and stupid new control system. What problems? Problems here - It looks stupid, not realistic , arcade. This is control from Battlefield but not from Arma.

 

9 hours ago, biggerdave said:

 

And you can still give grid reference commands by using the map or command view. (I haven't tried it yet, but I imagine the "next waypoint" and "take formation" commands still work too) The only thing that's really changed is the micro-management commands.

 

And, in the old system, you gave commands with the keyboard, too, so...?

 

 

Again, your answer has nothing to do with what I said in paragraph 3.

I talked about simulating the pedals and levers. And you tell me about the commands by using the map or command view. 

These are completely different topics!

In the paragraph №3, I wanted to say - In the old control system, unlike the driver, the commander did not have to hold anything to move the tank. It was realistic, because - hold the keys on the keyboard by analogy is keeping levers and pedals in the real life. In the old control the one-touch (no hold) was enough. This caused a voice command and the tank was moved by another person, not the commander. that's what I was talking about. It was realistic! In the new control system, both the driver and the commander must hold the buttons on the keyboard, in order for the tank to move/turns. 

 

9 hours ago, biggerdave said:

 

I honestly don't follow that last point? Turning vehicles feels identical in the new system, the only difference is it doesn't spam the message log, and you get the arguably more realistic "stop" when stopping turns than the old "forward". (Did this change between the dev branch and release?)

 

If a system "feels" realistic, but it's impossible to perform actions that are completely trivial for real crews, then it's not a realistic system.

 

Yes, I was not exactly accurate when I said in the pargraph №4, that in the old system the commander had to always stop the tank turning manually (by means voice command). There it was like this: The commander said "Right" and the AI driver made a turn for a certain number of degrees (at his own discretion) Once again, "Right" and the AI driver made an additional turn! But still, in the old control, the player-commander could stop every turn and at any time (using the Stop command (S-button)) 

In the new system, the turn can only be stopped by the game (automatically) My opinion - It's arcade and not suitable for Arma

 

All that I've listed is the subtle and even not imprortant  details for a not attentive player.

But, my conviction - is precisely on such details that a good game is built.

[blackburnrus 31]

On 01.12.2017 at 1:57 PM, oukej said:

The feedback for the new control has been positive so far. Incl. feedback from the more 'hardcore' audience. That's why we decided to keep it in. We also believe that the current state provides overall better tank experience than the previous. There are still some bugs, rough edges and things to improve before the Tanks DLC.

 

I'd like to stress out that the game is not about 100% realism but about authentic engagements. The primary goal is that MBTs accurately fulfill their role on the battlefield. Were they able to do so better before the change or after?

Please, make the new system to be optional, without replacing the old one

[Blafirelli 24]

On 12/1/2017 at 12:57 PM, oukej said:

I'd like to stress out that the game is not about 100% realism...

Shame! *Ding ding*

 

But srsly, previous implementation of commanding the driver did leave a lot to be desired, so this new one improves the game flow, even while being less authentic.

[AveryTheKitty 2626]

Please never change it back, driving the BTR-K Kamysh around in Dynamic Combat Ops with this new system was probably one of the funnest experiences I've had. This was a badly needed change imo; the commands from the commander should be removed, however. It becomes very very annoying especially when you're making micro adjustments.

[biggerdave 56]

6 hours ago, mickeymen said:

 

The old orders were abstract, I agree! But it is fixable in the technical sense! For more precise control through the AI-driver, BIS just need to add additional micro commands. It's so simple. R-button  turn on several degrees in the right, adds Ctrl + R and it can be a slow and jewelry turn. May be this even could work until the player releases the buttons and the commander could say "Slow Right, Slow Right, Slow Right" Thus, for more accuracy tank control we all can have Ctrl+W, Ctrl+R, Ctrl+L, Ctrl+S.

But why did we even talk about bad AI? In the paragraph №1, I was just talking about the sensation. Your arguments on the first point are not relevant to my first point. Bad AI -this is another topic. I only said about the feeling of player - who is drives the tank, but not about good or bad AI.

 

 

 

You do not understand what I said in the paragraph №2. 

In the real life big delay should not be, but I said about the micro-delay. Namely - as the voice phrase must end, before the meaning of what has been said will be understood by the driver and only after this point he will can be able a use the order!

Namely - The driver can not begin to execute the order, until the commander has completed his voice command! This is a very thin and delicate detail, yes! But such trifles can add a special realistic feeling. Try it in the new version. Pay attention. On the position of commander, you press the "R" button and the tank starts turn without any micro-delay! The commander does not have time to finish his sentence!  The BIS simply gave the commander the ability to influence the tank, just like a driver - thisis all and stupid new control system. What problems? Problems here - It looks stupid, not realistic , arcade. This is control from Battlefield but not from Arma.

 

 

Again, your answer has nothing to do with what I said in paragraph 3.

I talked about simulating the pedals and levers. And you tell me about the commands by using the map or command view. 

These are completely different topics!

In the paragraph №3, I wanted to say - In the old control system, unlike the driver, the commander did not have to hold anything to move the tank. It was realistic, because - hold the keys on the keyboard by analogy is keeping levers and pedals in the real life. In the old control the one-touch (no hold) was enough. This caused a voice command and the tank was moved by another person, not the commander. that's what I was talking about. It was realistic! In the new control system, both the driver and the commander must hold the buttons on the keyboard, in order for the tank to move/turns. 

 

 

Yes, I was not exactly accurate when I said in the pargraph №4, that in the old system the commander had to always stop the tank turning manually (by means voice command). There it was like this: The commander said "Right" and the AI driver made a turn for a certain number of degrees (at his own discretion) Once again, "Right" and the AI driver made an additional turn! But still, in the old control, the player-commander could stop every turn and at any time (using the Stop command (S-button)) 

In the new system, the turn can only be stopped by the game (automatically) My opinion - It's arcade and not suitable for Arma

 

All that I've listed is the subtle and even not imprortant  details for a not attentive player.

But, my conviction - is precisely on such details that a good game is built.

 

Oh god, we've got to referencing paragraphs by number... this is going to be one of those threads, isn't it?

 

Microdelay: How many commands begin with "Fo-" "Ri-" "Le-" "Ba-" that are likely to be used by tank commanders to their drivers? A full delay isn't realistic and again, realistically, tank crews can pre-plan their movements to prevent any delay in terms of commands being executed.

 

Map commands: I'd say that's entirely relevant. You've just said you want a system where you don't have to constantly have hands-on-keyboard, and there it is. One click on the map, and off you go, then, as a commander can freely plan your next move or just wander off and make some tea (or, if you're a hardcore sim-er, you'll use the kettle in the decommissioned scorpion tank you've turned into the ultimate simulation PC!)

 

Holding down a forward button vs. Pressing a forward button and then a stop button: Are both abstract systems. Neither one is more realistic than the other, because, realistically, you don't command a tank with a keyboard. It's completely meaningless to equate the two. Perhaps you "feel" one is more realistic, but, that's just like, your opinion, man. (you've said Coddlefield uses "hold down" commands, but pretty much all the dedicated tank simulators use "hold-down" commands, as well)

 

Stopping the tank turning manually: Was never a feature in the old system. The tank would turn while you held the "turn right" key, and stop when you let go. It's exactly the same.

 

Stopping the tank completely: Can be done in the new system with the "handbrake" command (I think it's "X" by default? I've remapped it to "Shift-S"). Also, you realise you're now complaining that the new system works too much like the old one, right?

[lex__1 422]

I have advice, for those who used to operate the tank, used only W / S / A / D keys.
Go to the vehicle control settings. Look at other ways of keys for commands:
- the command "quickly"
- the command "slow"
I think you'll figure it out - how to give the command to the driver, that the AI would go straight and do not stop.
In order that would not keep the key pressed.

[dragon01 902]

I think that we need a new system entirely. Something like clicking on terrain (it used to work well in OFP) and having a few context-sensitive options for the driver. For example, clicking on a road gives you an option to follow it in either direction or to move directly to position. Click on an object and you'll get options to take cover behind it, drive up to it, etc...

 

Of course, that'd need both better AI and a better way of selecting things than the action menu. Maybe for ArmA4...

[Blafirelli 24]

19 minutes ago, dragon01 said:

I think that we need a new system entirely. Something like clicking on terrain (it used to work well in OFP) and having a few context-sensitive options for the driver. For example, clicking on a road gives you an option to follow it in either direction or to move directly to position. Click on an object and you'll get options to take cover behind it, drive up to it, etc...

 

Of course, that'd need both better AI and a better way of selecting things than the action menu. Maybe for ArmA4...

That would be indeed awesome...

[blackburnrus 31]

18 hours ago, lex__1 said:

I have advice, for those who used to operate the tank, used only W / S / A / D keys.
Go to the vehicle control settings. Look at other ways of keys for commands:
- the command "quickly"
- the command "slow"
I think you'll figure it out - how to give the command to the driver, that the AI would go straight and do not stop.
In order that would not keep the key pressed.

Thank u man! I thought that new system has overwhite the old one. But they are both live

[mickeymen 324]

20 hours ago, biggerdave said:

Also, you realise you're now complaining that the new system works too much like the old one, right?

 

@biggerdave I tried to explain to you and created two huge posts for you, but you absolutely do not understand what I'm telling.

I have no desire to communicate with you further, be happy with the new arcade control system, enjoy...

[kremator 1065]

Devs please ignore OP request.  I like it as it is now.  Previously it was too laborious (and annoying with the commands being called out!).  Now at least we have direct control of the moronic AI drivers!

[mickeymen 324]

20 hours ago, biggerdave said:

Stopping the tank turning manually: Was never a feature in the old system. The tank would turn while you held the "turn right" key, and stop when you let go. It's exactly the same.

 

Among other things, you absolutely do not remember the old control of the tank from the commander's place. Then what should I talk with you about.

[Dedmen 2714]

It's 2035.. Don't you think by that time tanks will be computerized enough that a commander could drive it?

In the end it's just joysticks and pedals.. Why does it make a difference if the joystick is on the driver seat or the commander seat?

 

You could literally pull the joystick out. put a long cable onto it that goes to the driver seat and just ducttape it next to the commander seat. I don't see any "realism" problem with that.

Well besides that the Army would be mad at you for partly diassembling their tank.

[Strike_NOR 898]

3 hours ago, dragon01 said:

Click on an object and you'll get options to take cover behind it, drive up to it, etc...

 

Funny, a few days ago I was just thinking about something along the lines of this. That as a tank commander, you can use a "click and drag"-style move command where you see a 3D model of your tank (or an arrow or something) to show you where the tank physically will be, then by holding shift, like in the editor, rotate the tank. When you release the mouse button, the AI driver will move to the position and orientation of your choice. If this was coupled with the map, you could also create a chain of waypoints for "fine-maneuvering" around the battlefield, then exit the map view to see from the eyes of your character where exactly you want to command the tank, and which orientation.

 

If you ever played brothers in arms, you will remember you could send your fireteams on flanking maneuvers, this showed up as a marker in the 3D world. If you now imagine that marker as a tank, and a second function where you can rotate it, then you have your command-interface-tool.

 

I also miss a gunner orientation and fire command that works better. Like looking in a direction, slam [spacebar] for gunner to look in your direction, then simply click targets for him with your mouse.

 

If you are in a pinch, and do not have time to plan a route for the tank, you default to the WASD keys with the current control scheme (post-1.78) and GTFO.

[blackburnrus 31]

1 hour ago, mickeymen said:

 

Among other things, you absolutely do not remember the old control of the tank from the commander's place. Then what should I talk with you about.

do u know that the old command system is still in the game?

[blackburnrus 31]

On 30.11.2017 at 9:32 PM, mickeymen said:

Why does the character of the player after each order must say "Stop"? After each turn right/ left  player character says - "Stop". Now the player automatically says "Stop" and does not choose when to stop the tank! Every few seconds the player hears - "Stop", "Stop", "Stop", "Stop"! It looks irritable to the player's ears. Among other things, a normal, adequate Stop command does not sound exactly when it's needed!  For example, when player as commander accelerate tank forward (hold the W key) and press "S"-button, player hear not "Stop ,  player hear "Backward". Note! Yes, player says "Backward", but if In this case, the tank does not go back, it just stops! Why "Backward"!???  In order to actually go back, you need again to press the "S" button and again hear "Backward!  OMG I do not want to hear this!

 

 

 

go to option-contols-command  and set diffrent buttons to your driver-comands. I set ctrl+wasdqe

U stiil can use old command system,

Your glitch happends because on default buttons for old and new driver-command system are the same. Set another buttons and all'll be fine

[biggerdave 56]

2 hours ago, mickeymen said:

 

Among other things, you absolutely do not remember the old control of the tank from the commander's place. Then what should I talk with you about.

Didn't you just say you didn't want to talk to me anymore? =p (Like, the time stamps of those two posts are only 4 minutes apart! I literally spent more time than that making this post!)Then again, I guess when you don't proofread you have more time for changing your mind, right?

 

Your point seems to be that turning under the old system involved just tapping the turn button and then hoping that your tank faces the right direction. I mean, you could have done that, I guess, but that's definitely not how it was intended to be used.

 

Go boot up OFP, put yourself in as a tank commander, and hold down the A key, see what happens. (Spoiler alert, your tank is going to spin around on the spot until you let go of the key)

[lex__1 422]

4 hours ago, mickeymen said:

 

Among other things, you absolutely do not remember the old control of the tank from the commander's place. Then what should I talk with you about.

For me, the old tank control in place of the commander - did not exist. I was forced to perform the role of tank commander from the position of the tank driver, in most situations.
Now, with the new control system, I am able to perform the role of tank commander from the position of the tank commander. This worked before in OFP, and returned only now in Arma3.
The problem is that on the maps of the terrain in the OFP, for AI drivers there were few obstacles that could cause the problem, execute the commands of the commander. In Arma3, this causes a lot of problems. For AI driver, each curb as an insurmountable obstacle. AI driver does not want to go through an obstacle. Near the obstacle AI driver does nothing, or performs commands in an unpredictable manner.
I personally have not experienced problems with the new management system, but there is something to fix.

But I understand your desire - to have an option in the game complexity settings, like those of planes, "a simple control system or an advanced control system." Is it worth it ?, it's only two additional keys and commands.

[mickeymen 324]

On 05.12.2017 at 4:37 PM, blackburnrus said:

do u know that the old command system is still in the game?

 

How can a player return this old command system to himself? If so, then I will make a video and prove (to some uncomprehending) that in the old control system, the player could in some cases stop the rotation of the tank using the STOP command. I really liked this feature. In the old control system, the player-commander could accelerate the tank at full speed (W+Shift buttons) and after this point, order STOP (S-button)! At this point, when the vehicle was slowing down, you could order "RIGHT" (R-button) and theAI-driver started spinning!  Notice! Rotation occurred after the commander already used the STOP command (S-button). This rotation could take some time, and you as commander could also AGAIN stop this rotation, using the STOP command! (S-button)  Again, I presented a subtle detail, which most of the users most likely did not even suspect, but such a maneuver was a pleasure for me! 

Now there is not even a trace left of this feature.

 

 

 

On 05.12.2017 at 7:01 PM, lex__1 said:

For me, the old tank control in place of the commander - did not exist. I was forced to perform the role of tank commander from the position of the tank driver, in most situations.
Now, with the new control system, I am able to perform the role of tank commander from the position of the tank commander. This worked before in OFP, and returned only now in Arma3.
The problem is that on the maps of the terrain in the OFP, for AI drivers there were few obstacles that could cause the problem, execute the commands of the commander. In Arma3, this causes a lot of problems. For AI driver, each curb as an insurmountable obstacle. AI driver does not want to go through an obstacle. Near the obstacle AI driver does nothing, or performs commands in an unpredictable manner.

I was very fond of tanks in Arma3 and I constantly worked with it. What you're talking about? Never before have I experienced such problems! Never! 

I always played on the commander's place and it looked for me realistic and precise enough.

 

 In the old control system everything was good - If the player desired from the AI driver, more precise maneuvers, then he could always use his orders with slow motion (Ctr + W), but not (W) or (Shift + W). No problems!  You, those who are not happy with the AI driver, did you know about the existence of this type of tank-movement?  In this case, the commander said "Slow" and the AI-driver was accurate.

 

I even remember that BIS have already improved the accuracy of the AI-drivers, in one of the previous updates. It was

approximately 6-9 months ago. After this update, AI drivers became somewhat better. Their turns became smoother and ceased to be jerky! The problem of inaccurate AI driving, could only occur only with a fast driving pace (Shift + W) I think most users had problems for this reason.

 

On 05.12.2017 at 7:01 PM, lex__1 said:

his worked before in OFP, and returned only now in Arma3.

 

what's the point of comparing the game of 2017 with the game that was released in 2001? Yes, OFP is the parent of Arma, but in 2001 the technical issues of gameplay could have lesser requirements. If you want to compare, then it will be more logical to compare the new tank-control of Arma with modern games. Now the control of the tank is the same as Call of Duty and Battlefield. The player just needs to be sure that the driver is sitting still. But the driver does not participate at all, absolutely nothing.  Do you consider this (Call of Duty and Battlefield) to be good games? For me, this game with a beautiful picture, but with a primitive, arcade gameplay. The last thing I want is for Arma to become the same.

 

On 05.12.2017 at 7:01 PM, lex__1 said:

But I understand your desire - to have an option in the game complexity settings, like those of planes, "a simple control system or an advanced control system." Is it worth it ?, it's only two additional keys and commands.

 

Yes it would not be bad to have Advanced Tank Driving in the game settings.

But, only two additional keys - you not right. The old system - This is a completely different control of the tank, which gave the player at least some kind of simulation. 

 

 

[mickeymen 324]

On 05.12.2017 at 4:42 PM, blackburnrus said:

go to option-contols-command  and set diffrent buttons to your driver-comands. I set ctrl+wasdqe

U stiil can use old command system,

Your glitch happends because on default buttons for old and new driver-command system are the same. Set another buttons and all'll be fine

 

Aliluya !!!! Thank you! @blackburnrus You gave me salvation and saved me from depression) Thank you

 

ps: If someone needs my video about which I mentioned above, let me know and I will do it.

[mickeymen 324]

I returned the old system, but I realized that I made the video and can not prove anything, because the viewer will not see when and which one I press the button on my keyboard! On the video It will look similar to the new control system, because in the new system the player automatically speaks "Stop", as soon as release  the buttons of turns (A, D), while I will use the S-button (push) manually

 

As a whole, I achieved the result. Now everyone is happy) 

Thanks to all for the discussion...