Bryjoe

Switching sensitivity all the time is not good for consistency. You know this, though. As for the "perfect sensitivity" obviously there is none, but certain games are more suited for high or low sensitivity. CSGO, most players use over 40 cm 360 and the majority of pros use 50+ cm 360. 50 cm is ill suited for fast paced games, however, although it can be done. There was a poll on this site recently asking what the most preferred sensitivity was and the most picked was 40cm 360, the reason for this is simple. This is a sensitivity that is precise enough for CSGO, but quick enough for the vertical movements common in Quake and other games. For a sight like this where you want to match a single sensitivity across many games, it seems to be a happy medium. If you wanted to go higher like 30 cm/360 that works well for most games too, but I personally feel you start to struggle as a rifler at anything below 30/cm 360 in CSGO. TLDR anything between 30-45 cm/360 seems to be OK for any game, with 40-45 being the "happy medium" as it were.

Sure, use whatever makes you feel comfortable. One thing I would like to mention is the reason pros use 90 is because they probably think it is 106.26. 106.26 or CSGO's FOV is commonly known as 90 FOV, but the pros don't understand there is a difference between vertical (what R6 uses) and Horizontal (what CSGO uses). And it's not a knock on them, who knows these things besides visitors of sites like this? The pros are good because they play the game an absurd amount of time and probably have a lot of past FPS experience that no amount of aim matching/training can replace.

Well whatever you use stick to it. 130 is an insane FOV, but it's all opinion. Facts are you will be better and more consistent using one FOV. So if you use 130 crank it up in every game. Most console games use a much lower FOV than 106.26 HFOV, so unless you're used to Quake or one of those types of games not sure why you would prefer that, but again it's opinion. Your anecdote on Overwatch to Seige can be explained simply that you got used to using the high FOV in seige, maybe you think there is tactical advantages (maybe there are) but as far as aim goes you would of been better off sticking with your OW FOV. Like the purpose of this site is to mirror your aiming between games, if you're changing your FOV, you are no longer doing that. Still others would say keeping the same hipfire 360 is more important than matching FOV. So if you keep the same distance/360 the high FOV would feel very fast, but you would acclimate quickly. It still would be preferable to match FOV if you can. Let's take an example of a popular streamer who switches games a lot say shroud. He doesn't really take the time to match aims between games and is good at them all. Why is this? Well after you play the same game for 4+ hours or for weeks on end using the same aim settings you will naturally acclimate and become skilled. Then he goes back to CSGO and says he's "rusty" this site attempts to avoid that "rusty" period. It's not going to turn you into a pro overnight, but yes if you use the same aim/FOV in every game, you WILL be more consistent, you will have less slumps. It's like anything if you eliminate factors that force you to adapt on the fly, introduce things you can do without thinking you will become better at that activity. Be more efficient, if your body can flick to a head across the screen with the same sensitivity and same FOV and you have done it thousands of times you will be able to flick to that head when it matters.

Every time I see a post about this game from this site I am hoping Ubisoft finally fixed this stupid issue. Like how hard is it? You have one of the most popular FPS esports in the world and you can't fix the frickin scaling of your scopes. And @Duszolap don't change your FOV ever, for any reason, it is so bad for muscle memory. CSGO's FOV of 106.26 HFOV is actually the best of all worlds in my opinion, good for fast and slow games. That is kind of the purpose of this site.

You should match FOV ideally and then monitor distance = 360 distance. Then you would only need to use monitor match for scopes, and for that simply base it off your hipfire that you already calculated. I would use 360 distance over monitor match for hipfire if FOV differs by, like 15-20+ degrees. That is just my opinion, I feel that consistent movement for hipfire matters more than matching aim. Again, there is almost no shooter on the market that locks your FOV besides CSGO. For any type of "aimed" sights I would always use monitor match. I use CSGO as my base game because it has a very balanced and universal HFOV 106.26 or 90 FOV. That FOV works for both fast-paced and tactical games. So when I convert for overwatch, I actually use monitor distance, but only because it's only a few degrees off. If Overwatch was locked to, say 70 FOV, I would 100% use 360 distance for hipfire.

Yeah it seems complicated, but it really isn't. There are a lot of options, but you should simply just use a "base game" like you have with Overwatch, match the HFOV and then use the hipfire to calculate all the other values you need. Overwatch has a HFOV of 103 which is actually about 87 FOV. When converting this to something like CSGO which has a 90 FOV, you may want to use monitor match 0% on hipfire. Whenever the FOVs differ and you can't match them up exactly, you should be using a monitor match, with the exception (my opinion) of games where the FOV is way different,(like 3rd person shooters) then I would use 360 distance.

Make sure you are matching hipfire FOV in R6 Seige to 103. Otherwise it won't be the same. You also need to edit the actual config for r6 seige. The monitor distance calculation relies on something called "xfactoraiming". Essentially, if you are using the config file, (which you should be) the in-game values for mouse sensitivity are needed, but just as a base. Don't use the default, use whatever you have. See below, notice i've changed the R6 FOV to 70.53 to correctly convert: Then you take the multiplier unit you got in the first calculation and put it in for monitor distance 0% on ironsights like so. You also need to put a value for "sensitivity 2" which is actually "aimdownsightsmouse" in the config, so put whatever you have in for that.

True, he basically said in the review he can't use it because it's too large. But it would be his favorite if they had a smaller version. Yeah I actually just measured my hands again, lol, and I have very wide hands at basically 12cm. I think the FK1+ might be the perfect mouse for me. I want to try both it and the finalmouse, but they are $60+ a piece, so.

The ultra light phantom is exactly that. It's the finalmouse ultralight with a cable that, as Zy describes it, feels wireless. Pretty bold claim. A mouse bungee pretty much eliminates any issues with a cable, so for me it's kinda irrelevant. It's worth noting you can't get the phantom anywhere right now, except for like $250+ on ebay. Even the normal ultralights are sold out. I would have to try it for myself, but I think it might be a revolutionary mouse design, if that can even be said about a mouse, lol.

The main reason I prefer the g403 is because of the finish on it, it's so great for sweaty hands. It's almost like a "matte" plastic, but I honestly don't know exactly. It feels more premium than traditional plastic as well. It also has the best left and right click of any mouse i've used, but not the best scroll wheel. The FK is actually RJN's favorite, or it was before finalmouse came out with their ultralight phantom. Again, I think it comes down to lighter mice just being easier to use, combine a light mouse with a safe shape (no crazy contours) and you have a winning combination. Examining my grip last night, it definitely is a hybrid. I use a decently low sens, 41.6cm/360, so I have to palm it to make flicks, but my fingers are too long to do a proper palm grip. I am tempted to try the FK at this point, but really if I am going to get another no frills mouse, I think I would go with the finalmouse. That's another con(or benefit) is that zowie and finalmouse have no software. I have one of the mouse buttons on my g403 bound to ALT and it's invaluable as an extra keybind in MMOs.

Hmm, is there something wrong with using a fingertip grip? That is what I have to use as a palm makes my fingers go over the mouse as he said above. Claw seems unnatural to me, what are the benefits of using claw versus fingertip?

The ACOG scales incorrectly in rainbow six siege. But that shouldn't effect your calculation. Your problem is your using 90 FOV (which is actually 121.28 degrees.) Instead of 73.74 which would correctly match with CSGO. I assume you want to match ACOG and AWP? Honestly, there are a ton of variables for this calculation. For scoped weapons, you need to use a match. The AWP and the ACOG have different FOVS, so you can't match them in the calculator, you need to match them based on a scaling method. Preferably monitor distance 0%. You need to match FOVs like so. Then your hipfire in both games is the same. You can round up to 74 FOV in R6 seige. Then you take the sensitivity value you got for CSGO 3.125213. And use it to convert for the AWP This should be exact feel in both games, but it would actually be better to convert your ACOG and your AWP sens using Monitor distance 0%. The above will accomplish what you are looking for, though.

http://www.rocketjumpninja.com/top-40/ I follow this guys recommendations pretty closely he's tried hundreds of mice and is an excellent quake player. Follow his size guides for you hand size. Probably the reason the FK is so loved is because 1. Safe Shape 2. Light weight (the lighter the mouse, the easier it is to aim within reason) 3. Fits all hand sizes depending on what you get. I meant the EC1-A is meant for large hands.

I have 19.5CM hands, so pretty large and there are many choices for us now. I actually think the mouse market is best suited for large hands. Rival 600, EC2-A (I think there is an updated version of this now) the Deathadder Elite, the G403 (my personal favorite) and the finalmouse ultralight (debateably the best mouse on the market for FPS shooters due to it's light weight). The FK is an also a great mouse, I think it is tailored for more medium sized hands, however. Some people like a smaller mouse to aim with, though.

So, what was his solution, is it actually implemented in any games? How could he hate this site, it's the only one on the internet that discusses this topic in depth. If he cares so much about it, why is he not contributing? Is 0% not essentially the same thing as "zoom ratio" if not what is? This seemingly implies that monitor match differs between different games. I have spent a lot of timing relearning my sensitivity over the years and then you have the best players in the world who don't give a crap about any of this and just play the games. I just have a bit of a hard time believing zoom ratio instead of 0% match will actually reap dividends in my actual in-game performance and that is what we are really trying to accomplish here, correct?

How can you really solve this, though? Wouldn't 1:1 ratio be ideal? Isn't 0% closest to 1:1 zoom ratio? It's still imperfect, but how can you make the ratio perfect in all scenarios?

I feel 360 distance is best for hipfire, third person games or vehicles (unless you are doing a lot of aiming in said vehicle). You should be matching FOV for consistency in both movement and aiming across all your games. On a side note, I am getting really good with the awp in CSGO using 0% matchmaking for about 4 months now. The flicks are amazingly consistent. IMO 0% MM is the "holy grail", but you should also be trying to match your FOV on hipfire if you can.

Considering I use 41.6cm/360 I don't think I can give you any tips besides lower it. I have become a much much better aimer since lowering it.

I think 0% is the most consistent way to do scopes and ADS for a lot of reasons that have been exhausted in this thread. I don't feel this translates to 3rd person hipfire, but some do. 3rd person hipfire is typically a much lower FOV compared to FPS and the FOV is not even remotely comparable in my opinion. In that case, I prefer distance/360. In other FPS, I match FOV as close as I can to 106.26 HFOV (my preferred FOV) and then match at 0%. This is usually very close or identical to distance/360 anyways. It's a point of contention around here, but hipfire can be whatever you want but you should match your scopes based on 0%(objectively best) or another matching method. More important to be consistent than to try a bunch of different methods though.

2.2 Cm 360 is crazy. I am not sure how you handle that, wrist aimer or not.

I use 0% match for all zoomed modes, including over the shoulder. I didn't think the FOV effects TPP?

True, it's just in a game like pubg for instance matching 0% for 3rd person is like a 20+ cm/360 distance. For instance: Why does your accuracy at the crosshair matter if it takes you nearly twice as much mouse space to turn as you're used to?

No, you just have to get used to it. For hipfire it will feel slow, but the best option for hipfire is to match your FOV between games so it would be the same distance/360 anyways. Nothing inherently wrong with using 75% as some of the best CS players in the world use it, getting "used to" it is the key, right? 0% should be better, and you see a lot of sniper mains in Overwatch using 38 or 0%. It was determined early on in that game what is closest to "1:1" ratio between hipfire and the Widowmaker scope and no surprise that it was 0%. It's the same concept described here, 0% is the only match that scales the same no matter what. For reference, it took me about 25 hours to really start to get used to 0%. Depending on how often you play, it could be weeks or months before it feels natural.

What do you do for 3rd person games? Do you match 0% for hipfire? I tend to prefer 360 distance on hipfire, most games FPS it's irrelevant because you can match the FOV, but in ones where you can't I prefer 360.

The one caveat I would say is for 3rd person and games where you can't change the FOV. I prefer plain 360 distance matching on those games. I don't think the advantages of 0% are nearly as apparent in hipfire. And familiarity with turn distance and movement is very important in hipfire modes. 3rd person "aimed" modes and when you scope I obviously would like 0%.