TheNoobPolice

Yeah, would be useful for me for games that do this cause I know how to script, but you also don't want to start publishing scripts for obvious reasons and it would mean the feature ends up being pretty much "gate kept" against users without knowledge of how to do that.

TFW a "remastered" game doesn't have granular sensitivity and locks the FOV.

I think to say you had everything done correct first attempt you are probably the least noobie newbie the site has seen Yes, the entry for Kovaak's aim trainer on the calculator does not look fully updated with the latest meta 2.0 features. Although the game has some quirks anyway - the "zoom sens auto scale" does indeed use "0% monitor distance", and the zoom multiplier works separately - you can't auto scale, and use the zoom multiplier combined. Also, there are two options for the same setting depending on trainer mode or sandbox. So if you wanted to use say a 75% monitor distance for zoom, you would need to know the zoom FOV and apply a multiplier, but I think the zoom amount is variable depending on scenario, and these are just all added to daily through steam workshop, so is likely beyond the scope of what is realistic to measure. EDIT: I checked it again, there is an option to set the zoomFOV and FOV type regardless of scenario now, so this could indeed be added to the calculator EDIT 2: Its already there, clearly more coffee needed today!

@Wiet PotThat's correct, and there's nothing wrong with your logic The scale % acts as a post-multiplier, so if you applied a 70% scale to the monitor distance of 0%, it would be effectively the same as having the ADS sens multiplier at 0.7 in game with 0% coefficient

Awesome!

I mean the DPI field

ahh, they just aren't saving with the profiles - it reverts to one decimal place

Works great! I now have an exact 36cm 360 at my preferred FOV of 100 4:3, whilst maintaining precise 0% match from game to windows cursor at 1 pixel per count exactly which I also prefer https://www.mouse-sensitivity.com/?share=d7790af24e41c9b7ac399f7f641c3d2a

Yeah, I understand it's been like that for a reason and that's fair enough, it's just "my" dpi isn't really limited like that so it would be great if it could be an option in some way.

Thanks, related to this, is it possible for the "windows desktop" output to not round to 10 dpi increments for the same reason?

Is it possible to add this in both parts of the calculator? It already supports one decimal place. I understand you may think "well, you can't have half a count" and that's true, but I use accel software which downscales dpi and uses math to carry the remainders with the interception driver, so the cursor velocity can be the equivalent of it (albeit with a bit of rounding). It would just mean I could end up with slightly more accurate calculations. Esoteric request it may be, but I'm presuming it's a very easy change to make.

Thanks! Once the bindings have been amended as above, if you then change a different binding in game, does it continue to update the [BmGame.RPlayerInput] as one would expect?

lol. Nuff said.

All that's happening here is you are changing the reference point of your "fast to slow". If you use fast in windows slow in game (e.g windows to game 100% mdh, so basically "zero" FOV to high FOV) then your sens overall is lower in the game so you will feel more accurate at the expense of manoeuvrability (Remember 0% feels slower and slower the more you zoom in with scopes, so when you do the opposite and convert from windows zero FOV to a high hipfire FOV in game, it also does the opposite and feels faster and faster the higher you set the hipfire FOV. ). The reason it feels so accurate at 100% mdh, is just because your tracking at the screen centre is actually now much slower than what the cursor speed is in windows per pixel - you are used to pointing at icons on your desktop, and then go in a game and get an increased accuracy bonus from the slower cross hair sensitivity per pixel. It's not magic from the formula, it's just increased accuracy from a lower sensitivity. If you do the opposite and set windows to game 0%, then your manoeuvrability increases, your tracking stays the same as the windows cursor, but the sens is higher overall across the screen compared to the 100% mdh windows to game conversion. There isn't a healthy human alive who is not more precise on lower sensitivity than higher once they get used to the feel, because human motor skills, muscles / nerves / brains all fundamentally process the same type of signals in the same way.

Interesting question. Regarding the change in resolution, there is no difference unless you are wanting to match a game to your windows desktop cursor or a 2d game. 3D games usually use a yaw/pitch value per count sent from the mouse multiplied by a configurable sensitivity factor - sometimes that is also affected by FOV setting, sometimes that isn't..... but the resolution the game world textures are then rendered in has no bearing on this. Screen size and perceived sensitivity - a different thing. Technically, changing screen size doesn't do anything regarding what the calculator will tell you for conversions, because technically it is the same sensitivity - however, if you change screen size yet sit the same distance from it, it will no doubt feel different for you. There has been some discussion about this here in the past so it might be worth a search to see what was recommended as the best approach.

No such thing as 1:1. You pick a method how you want to convert from one game to another that best benefits either your play-style, the gameplay meta, or some other reason. The speed of the game, the size of the targets or engagement range, the time to kill, the FOV limitations, even the individual rotational mechanics of the camera (which are often slightly different between 1st person games, and very different for 3rd person games) all factor in to what type of conversion will work best. Higher sensitivity will generally allow for ease of mechanical use and low physical effort, and is especially useful when low on desk space, at the cost of it being very difficult to be precise. Low sensitivity generally allows you to aim precisely with far less effort and greater ease, but sacrifices mobility, often requires increased physical effort and of course, needs desk space. If you want to go deep, you can also experiment with custom mouse accel such as InterAccel or Custom Curve 2.0 which, when set up correctly; can give you the best of both worlds, at the cost of learning a different aiming style and extra adaptation. Read the post here to help you figure out what will work best for your own requirements.

Fortunate is correct, but his wording is a little misleading for stretched... Stretched doesn't increase your FOV to 106 units, it just fills the screen with the same horizontal FOV. If you see 90 degrees of the game world Horizontally at 4:3, you will still see 90 degrees horizontal if you stretch it to a 16:9 screen. Stretched is not usually recommended from a sensitivity perspective, because you end up with a faster horizontal sensitivity than vertical sensitivity within screen space. The targets are fatter of course, and the approach is debatable overall - but IMO it is best paired with an understanding of the impact on aim, and probably a different x/y sensitivity, which isn't always possible depending on mouse driver or game.

You just need to enter your dpi, then add in the m_sensitivity value that appears.

Did you not check here? https://funender.com/quake/mouse/index.html#about You can at least arrive at the 360 sensitivity value for your settings at your usual FOV. You could then use the calculator here to convert to any game by any method.

Forget about eDPI. It doesn't mean anything. It's just used by counter strike players to compare their in game sens to each other - but It ignores the impact of FOV and doesn't apply to any game engine that uses a yaw multiplier that scales non-linearly.

Don't artificially limit your body mechanics. A fingertip grip is very advantageous in that it allows fine adjustments of vertical movement (e.g for recoil control, or a body to head hitbox adjustment) using the highly dexterous control your body naturally has in your finger tips. This goes for you, me and everyone else in the human race - unless someone has a health problem, your fingers are more dexterous than your wrist, and your wrist is more dexterous than your arm. Here's the good news - this doesn't stop your arm and wrist from also working! You can use your whole arm to move large sweeping distances with a very low sensitivity, you can use your wrist for very quick flicks within a small area of screen space, and you can use your fingers for fine adjustment. Your bodies muscle groups and skeletal structure have evolved to work together. There really is no mechanical advantage in trying to keep your wrist and/or fingers locked and just using your arm to aim. It'd be the same as attempting to write with a pen/pencil whilst keeping your wrist and fingers in a completely locked position, it should be really obvious why this isn't a good idea.

The Aiming.Pro ADS would need to be added to the calculator, as it currently only has hipfire. I'm sure DPI WIzard will take care of it if you ask.

You haven't shown your target conversion method? I imagine those numbers are from 0% or similar. When converting from a 3D game using something like 0% then only the velocity of the central pixel on the games FOV will be matched across the whole screen in Osu, this definitely makes it feel very slow. For this reason, people tend to use a 100% or higher vertical monitor match for that use case.

Yeah it's always been like that. You get around it by sending multiple lines or looping the same line with either a for i = x,x or repeat function

They were originally a boolean value to enable or disable the respective line that actually affects the sensitivity. They probably have no effect now.