VSH/VSV Calculations Not Accurate For PUBG

[MarkTheSkilled]

For the purpose of this post, I will specify that sensitivity, in a shooter game, consists of two main components: 360° Distance and Mouse Speed (Rotational Speed).

It appears that the ViewSpeed calculations for PUBG are not accurate, as it is clear that PUBG scales the 360° Distance according to the current FOV in the game, provided ALL sensitivity figures are the same (except for Vertical Sensitivity Multiplier, of course). This scaling keeps the Mouse Speed constant, while adjusting the 360° Distance to ensure that your character rotates at the same constant speed while using every aiming method in-game.

However, when attempting to use the VSH/VSV options in the calculator, it changes the value of the sensitivity slightly as the FOV narrows (decreases due to scoping). For example, in my case, my General Sensitivity value of 36, changed to 34 for all magnified (2x or greater) scopes, and the ADS Sensitivity changed to 35. This does not appear correct to me.

Unless I'm missing something, given a native Aspect Ratio of 16:9 and a 1080p resolution, when the game's engine changes your FOV in relation to magnification, it doesn't require you to change the base sensitivity figure in order to match the Mouse Speed correctly. If such were the case, then wouldn't using a different Hipfire FOV setting change the resulting Mouse Speed (in some cases, significantly) for higher-power scopes?

[DPI Wizard]

PUBG scales the sensitivity to MDH 100%. Meaning that half the FOV is twice the 360 distance distance etc.

This is not the same as the Viewspeed calculations, they work in a completely different way than a fixed monitor distance, so what you are seeing is expected.

If you want to set up the calculator to match how PUBG works (so you get the same value for all aims), set the ADS and Scope conversions to Monitor Distance Horizontal 100%.

[MarkTheSkilled]

19 hours ago, DPI Wizard said:

PUBG scales the sensitivity to MDH 100%. Meaning that half the FOV is twice the 360 distance distance etc.

This is not the same as the Viewspeed calculations, they work in a completely different way than a fixed monitor distance, so what you are seeing is expected.

If you want to set up the calculator to match how PUBG works (so you get the same value for all aims), set the ADS and Scope conversions to Monitor Distance Horizontal 100%.

TLDR: I would like to confirm that, by using the same sensitivity setting for every aiming method in PUBG, I am in fact turning my character at the same Mouse Speed. If this is not the case, then what, if anything, am I keeping constant by using such settings?

 

Thanks, I can confirm that MDH 100% does in fact yield the results I initially expected.

However, I'm still a little confused about the relationship between these 3 components that interact with a given sensitivity value: FOV, Mouse Speed (Rotational Speed), and 360° Distance.

These are the facts I know:

1. In first-person shooters, your character is the Origin (center point) of a sphere, whose viewing angles are constrained by the available (and internally supported) Aspect Ratios. The FOV setting determines the X and Y components of said Aspect Ratio.

2. Provided that Enhance Pointer Precision is disabled, or the game in question uses raw mouse input, the cursor (as far as one can measure for an optical gaming mouse) always moves at a constant speed.

3. A change to one of the 3 components MUST always affect at least 1 of the other 2 components. For example, an increase in 360° Distance will cause a decrease in Mouse Speed, provided the FOV is constant.

 

Where my confusion lies is in the explanation given for the MDH matching method in the Instructions page for this website. In the description for MDH 100%, it is explained that the matching method should yield the "same mouse movement" when aiming at a point on the edge of the monitor, while in that of MDH 0%, it is explained that the results from that method should yield the same tracking speed across all aiming methods. Does this imply that, despite keeping the FOV constant, and the 360° Distance linearly scaled, I'm not in fact moving the mouse at the same constant speed as I initially theorized?

I believe I might have gotten something wrong along the line while trying to understand the relationship between the 3 aforementioned components of sensitivity. What, exactly, am I matching or keeping consistent (if anything) when I use the same sensitivity setting for every aiming method?

Thanks in advance!

Edited May 28, 2023 by MarkTheSkilled
Added a TLDR to better communicate my main goal.

[DPI Wizard]

6 hours ago, MarkTheSkilled said:

In the description for MDH 100%, it is explained that the matching method should yield the "same mouse movement" when aiming at a point on the edge of the monitor, while in that of MDH 0%, it is explained that the results from that method should yield the same tracking speed across all aiming methods. Does this imply that, despite keeping the FOV constant, and the 360° Distance linearly scaled, I'm not in fact moving the mouse at the same constant speed as I initially theorized?

Correct, the only movement that is consistent between different FOVs when using MDH 100% is the exact distance you have to move the mouse to aim at what's at the edge of your monitor. While MDH 0% keeps the continuous tracking consistent, meaning you have to move your mouse at the same speed to to track a moving target.

[MarkTheSkilled]

On 5/28/2023 at 2:26 AM, DPI Wizard said:

Correct, the only movement that is consistent between different FOVs when using MDH 100% is the exact distance you have to move the mouse to aim at what's at the edge of your monitor. While MDH 0% keeps the continuous tracking consistent, meaning you have to move your mouse at the same speed to to track a moving target.

Hello, sorry to revive this topic but I felt I should give an update, and I also have a question at the end too.

I have been using MDH 0% for a few months now and it is PERFECT. The thing is, I had a high-level idea of how I believe sensitivities should be set up, but I needed the right tool to make the correct calculations. That being said, thanks once again for making this website a resource!

My line of thinking was: Every flick is technically done in a tracking motion, so why not match the pixel increments (also known as the pixel ratio) for every aiming method so you can learn to move your mouse more consistently and aim more accurately, everyday, every time? I then did a comprehensive trial to find which pixel increment worked the best for my anatomy, and after finding that, I matched every aiming method's pixel increments using MDH 0%. Seems like a trivial concept, but I have never seen myself aim so consistently and accurately. For reference, I am in the 100th percentile according to KovaaK's data for the most-played hybrid (tracking and flicking) scenario, and I am considered to be a top-1% aimer globally.

Now, to the question:

Does the pixel ratio given for a certain aiming method also apply to its vertical component? For example, if the pixel ratio is exactly 1.0000, meaning that no pixels are skipped and that 1 pixel is rendered every count, does this logic also apply to the Y component, such that tracking a target moving vertically at a constant speed (while also moving the mouse at a constant speed) will result in the starting point being tracking exactly the same for all "MDH 0%-matched" scopes?

This is especially important to me as my trial involved testing my ability to handle the most difficult form of tracking; random recoil control. The sensitivity setting that yielded that result was then used as the base figure for matching all the other aiming methods in PUBG (and every other shooter I play).

[DPI Wizard]

12 hours ago, MarkTheSkilled said:

Does the pixel ratio given for a certain aiming method also apply to its vertical component?

Yes it does, as long as the vertical sensitivity is 1:1 to the horizontal.