Mathematical alternatives to 0%/100%/133%/178% Vert/Hor

[makojunki]

Hi,

Is there a list of any other mathematical alternatives to Monitor Distance Coefficients of 0%, 100%, 133%, 178%?  Ive seen some mentioning of 56.25%, but is that vertical or horizontal?

Are there any other monitor coefficients that can be considered, while also being backed up by a mathematical rationale such as gear ratios etc....

I would be very appreciative if a list could be made with a quick explanation as to how the figure is derived.  Many thanks.

[DPI Wizard]

The ones you mention are the most common ones used by games (but note that a lot of games use either no scaling or a completely arbitrary one).

• MDV 0%
• MDV 100% = MDH 56.25% for 16:9
• MDV 133% = MDH 100% for 4:3
• MDV 178% = MDH 100% for 16:9

The 100% values are derived directly from the FOV value, so for instance a 90 FOV hipfire to a 45 FOV scope would be 90/45=twice the 360 distance. The different percentages are linked to the FOV type of games, if they use vertical FOV you will get MDV 100%, if they use a 4:3 based FOV you get MDV 133% (4/3) or MDH 100% for 4:3 etc.

My suggestion is always to start at MDV 0% and go up in these increments if it feels too slow. Then go to some middle value if the next step turns out to be too fast.

[makojunki]

So is there a mathematically viable coefficient that sits between 0% MDV and 100% MDV. The reason I ask, is because 0% MDV (although feels great when getting used to it) sometimes feels too slow, and 100% MDV sometimes feels too fast using scopes.  Is there a recommended MDV between 0% and 100% that uses a known rationale? Thanks

Edited September 21, 2021 by makojunki
typo

[DPI Wizard]

3 minutes ago, makojunki said:

Is there a recommended MDV between 0% and 100% that uses a known rationale?

Not that I can think of, anything between is arbitrary so just start with 50% and go from there.

[makojunki]

ok many thanks for the time and infos

 

[TheNoobPolice]

88.9% vertical is exactly halfway between the centre screen and horizontal edge on a 16:9 monitor, if you wanted a "rationale"

Not that it matters, in all honesty.

[MacSquirrel_Jedi]

2 hours ago, makojunki said:

Is there a recommended MDV between 0% and 100% that uses a known rationale?

Working on it  

On 8/16/2021 at 7:36 PM, MacSquirrel_Jedi said:

Hello guys,

neither one  i think i found so far the best method from Windows to game conversion ! It lies between 0% and 100% and it's changing depending on ingame FOV. It has much better results that 0% or 100%. The principle is simple, I can find the smallest possible deviation for all monitor distances ! For now it's not in my power to create formula for it. So i just created 10 000 distances (from center to edge of screen) in excel. For each monitor distance i receive a deviation from Windows at same mouse distance. And now i'm manually tuning sensitivity until the sum of all these deviations is as small as possible  

This method will also find the smallest possible deviation between Hipfire and Scopes. Something you will never achieve with 0% or 100%.

I will try to implement it to my utility in future. Now i want to focus to add aims to PUBG and ApexL.

 

[makojunki]

1 hour ago, TheNoobPolice said:

88.9% vertical is exactly halfway between the centre screen and horizontal edge on a 16:9 monitor, if you wanted a "rationale"

Not that it matters, in all honesty.

I am currently using 84% in BF4, for no real reason, but it feels acceptable. Ill try 88.9% thanks for the infos.