Arramis

@TheNoobPolice just read a post you made and it was really helpful, but what if your Mouse_zoom_sens_scalar values arent 1? Mine are all set to 1.685269 in Apex from when i converted from Overwatch.

Hi! trying to convert from Apex to COD like a bunch of others. Could anyone tell me if this is the best way to keep my cm/360 hipfire normal while still converting for scopes? Because If i use "All w/ holo and 3.25x" it doesnt let me put my apex Mouse_zoom_scalar values in, so its probably not doing it right. On another note, I converted my Apex values from my overwatch sens a while ago (which i dont play anymore), so not sure if converting from that would be a better metric or not? Thanks fam

Yes

But when you change the coefficient the relative aim sens doesnt change?

Thanks for explaining, and yes i did notice the hipfire thing. I've attached a snap of how i've inputed what you showed me, because it feels abysmal to aim with. I generally am quite accurate in overwatch however using these settings my aim is awful, would you have any idea why? I also had a few other questions, Why is using this method better than just modifying the Bo4 coefficient to be equivalent to 38 relative sense in Overwatch? What's the math to get 0.1 from 38? and what is the difference between "all w/ ADS" and "all w/ scope"?

@stereo3D Thank you so much. I understand basically nothing of how this works. Is there something you could link me to, to understand this better? I've read a few of the informative threads on here, but this completely made no sense to me.

@stereo3D @DPI Wizard im sorry guys i thought i understood how to do this, but I'm horribly confused again. Do i make my vertical monitor distance, and my coefficient the same number?

@stereo3D ah, much sense. Thanks!

Thanks! Also, why monitor distance vertical, and not horizontal?

Hi, this is very helpful information. I was wondering how you figured out 1.72 from 49 relative sens in overwatch. I use 38 relative, and wanted to do the same for black ops scopes too. Also, if its possible to make your sense compatible across all scopes this way, why is this not default for the calculator?

Hello resident geniuses, I think i've successfully converted my 2.83/1200dpi sens from overwatch using 0% horizontal distance. Im just not entirely sure what the difference between affected and unaffected does for the ADS FOV. I've left my ADS coefficient at 1.33, is this right? And also, what exactly does "all with scope" and "all with ADS" actually mean?

This is cool stuff. However is there any actual reason beside preference, that this is better than having more than 1 count per pixel?

I was wondering if anyone would know how to find out what pointer speed/dpi would make moving a cursor around on windows simulate my in-game overwatch sens? I find that when ever I try to snap to a window or a tab, I'm often consistenly a few centimetres short. Now obviously this isnt an issue, but i was thinking if could make this feel 1:1 it could potentially reduce warm-up time/improve muscle memory. I play on 2000dpi/1.7 I dont really know how i would even work this out aside from just abritrarily making the cursor distance from left to right the same as my cm/360 or 180 in game. Any suggestions?

Thanks for the link ill check it out when i have a little more time. If you wouldn't mind, how does setting your mm to 0% even work? Why is it that better than setting your mm % to a specific flick distance? its also kind of frustrating, the innate subjectivity in trying out each method. It makes it almost impossible to find which is the 'best', because there's like a million layers of bias preventing accurate assessment of that by humans. I think i was really hoping the maths (that are way beyond me) would all point one way.

Hi, this information has been very helpful and after reading that first thread where everyone 'discovered' DNAMTE's method it felt like i was watching history unfold. I am now very glad to be supporting this site, you're all freaking geniuses. However the videos to get started still explain monitor distance, but it seemed like the consensus at the end of that thread was that the DNAMTE method, which was incorporated as view-speed v1 and v2, was the best way to go about sens calculations? everyone seemed to be saying it was amazing when they tried it etc etc Did some new information come to light after this that changed everyone's minds again? i have been using the monitor distance method for the last few weeks or so and after reading this thread felt like i was completely wasting muscle memory. However the post above by @potato psoas says everyone is still undecided. So, to viewspeed or not to viewspeed?