Viewspeed v2

[Drimzi]

Edited January 28, 2018 by Drimzi

[KandiVan]

54 minutes ago, Drimzi said:

This diagonal formula is too fast IMO. I really liked the scaling of the bugged formula before it lol. The ratio between all of the FOVs just felt better. I'll see if I can get that scaling without messing around with diagonals, etc.

The scaling of the previous formula was perfect, my hipfires feel good on this but ADS feels too slow, I dont know man why is this so difficult

[Drimzi]

Edited January 28, 2018 by Drimzi

[KandiVan]

3 minutes ago, Drimzi said:

Your low FOVs feel slow?? Slow in general or slow in comparison to hipfire?

Slow in general, i feel like I'm constantly tracking behind. The previous iteration i would just naturally re-adjust to the head. For the record, the lowest FOV I use is 61.84 vFOV.

Edited December 14, 2017 by KandiVan

[Cocyx Skeleton]

Hmm, too fast? Isn't this the slowest sensitivity yet? I get approximately 2.75 sensitivity in CSGO with it, while viewspeed v2 gave me approx 2.89 -- and the previous formula before this one gave me 2.99

[Drimzi]

Edited January 28, 2018 by Drimzi

[Drimzi]

Edited January 28, 2018 by Drimzi

[KandiVan]

On 12/11/2017 at 6:33 PM, Drimzi said:

This feels the best to me in terms of 2D to 3D.

Horizontal Deg. | 4:3 Base

Horizontal Deg. | Res Base

Vertical Degrees

 

3 minutes ago, Drimzi said:

This looks promising.

Viewspeed v2 * Chord/Arc (Viewspeed v1 concept) = 100% monitor match

Viewspeed v2 / Chord/Arc = Similar scaling to the best formula so far

 

CSGO Zoom Sensitivity Ratio = 1.04664

 

 

try taking viewspeed v1 (when my shotty flicks felt the best) and applying the FOV scaling from the above formula. I think thats what you were planning, but just verifying

Edited December 14, 2017 by KandiVan

[Drimzi]

Edited January 28, 2018 by Drimzi

[potato psoas]

On 12/13/2017 at 6:00 AM, potato psoas said:

So because I no longer think VFOV and HFOV have different cm/360, here is another Excel document that you should download:

https://1drv.ms/x/s!AgoMjDNmWWpe6BNOggV8D4ynasKz

 

Quoting my instructions:

Edit: I have also made a Google Sheets Doc as I was asked to make one:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1WVC-ON76awAaqHqJoCP44JNQi6pTJ2jdFvdVGFGC5lM/edit?usp=sharing

It just dawned on me but my method is exactly the same as the Gear Ratio method. (I think I was using the vertical monitor distance as if it were the horizontal monitor distance) LOL

 

So mathematically I came to the same conclusion but a more complicated process than gear ratios.

 

Now if this is so, then why don't people like using Gear Ratios?

Personally I think, because the arc is greater than the chord length, the 2D sensitivity feels faster than the 3D sensitivity. The higher the FOV the slower it feels.

Edited December 15, 2017 by potato psoas

[Drimzi]

Edited January 28, 2018 by Drimzi

[Bryjoe]

12 hours ago, potato psoas said:

It just dawned on me but my method is exactly the same as 100% monitor match. (I think I was using the vertical monitor distance as if it were the horizontal monitor distance) LOL

 

So mathematically I came to the same conclusion but a more complicated process than gear ratios.

 

Now if this is so, then why don't people like using 100% monitor match?

Personally I think, because the arc is greater than the chord length, the 2D sensitivity feels faster than the 3D sensitivity.

Because 100% monitor match often doesn't feel as good towards the center of the screen. Matching a point at the edge of a 16:9 screen is not something you would do frequently in games, shooting an enemy towards the far edge of the screen you probably are already dead in most cases. At that same token, I don't know why people don't like 75% as that is matching on a 4:3 screen that nobody uses anymore.

You would think 0% would feel most natural to people, but it's often too slow. Like how is Viewspeed V2 any different from 75% match? It is surely different, but if you had a blind test could you tell the 1cm difference it makes in most games? Maybe you could, but even if you could, the difference would be small. 

[Drimzi]

Edited January 28, 2018 by Drimzi

[Drimzi]

Edited January 28, 2018 by Drimzi

[potato psoas]

46 minutes ago, Drimzi said:

Viewspeed v2 is only similar to 75% at a very specific aspect ratio, 16:9. You guys got to remember that these monitor match systems depend on the aspect ratio. As soon as you get a wider monitor that grants an extra 25% peripheral vision or whatever, while the 75% of the original vision in front of you looks EXACTLY the same, the sensitivity result you will get from 75% monitor match will be way off of viewspeed.

So once you are certain you know exactly how to make Viewspeed independent of your aspect ratio does that mean you can apply it to any formula or monitor match you choose? I'm probably making the wrong assumptions but I think you'll get what I mean.

Edited December 15, 2017 by potato psoas

[Drimzi]

Edited January 28, 2018 by Drimzi

[potato psoas]

13 minutes ago, Drimzi said:

You just do 1/sin(x/2), where x is the vertical fov for landscape or horizontal for portrait. That will be the 1:1 vert/hor fov.

So let's say I have a 73.74VFOV. Using the formula that is 1/sin(73.74/2)=1.666662697

What do we do with this though?

[Drimzi]

Edited January 28, 2018 by Drimzi

[potato psoas]

2 minutes ago, Drimzi said:

You need to put radians in there.

1/sin((π x)/360) if you want to input the fov value.

The output is the scalar for the circumference.

oh damn forgot

I now got this: 1/sin((pi 73.74)/360) = 89.0392

[Drimzi]

Edited January 28, 2018 by Drimzi

[Drimzi]

Edited January 28, 2018 by Drimzi

[Cocyx Skeleton]

So CSGO at 90 FOV should be 2.771321548400504 if you're using the same DPI in-game with 6/11 windows mouse speed? Just wanna make sure!

How about the zoom sensitivity ratio?

[Drimzi]

Edited January 28, 2018 by Drimzi

[Cocyx Skeleton]

Seems to work really good so far. Is this going to be integrated into the calculator somehow?

[Drimzi]

Edited January 28, 2018 by Drimzi