DNAMTE

What method are you talking about exactly?

Without re-writing my earlier posts, quite simply you are matching the length of circumferential movement to transverse movement. Doing that makes your cursor speed/view speed exactly the same. Regardless of FOV. People should not care about matching parts of their monitor. It's about how your cursor reacts. Knowing exactly how fast your cursor will react allows you to better judge your shots. As for zero, it's zero. You can't use it to multiply anything hence why the conventional monitor match uses only 'close to zero'. If you used zero then there is no difference in arc length to chord length, meaining your in 2D not 3D. No need for a 2D to 3D conversion. Hope that helps EDIT: if you want to match different 3d games you can just use 2d as a basepoint. You could use another formula as it's simply the difference between arc length but there is no need.

You rotate ingame, the circumferential speed of rotation is what needs to be familiar. When you spot a target you accelerate the centre of you screen towards the target, approaching your target you decelerate. This overtime can become reflex like in speed of execution.I don't buy for a second that distance solely has anything to do with aiming. It's always distance / time. Speed of rotation & cursor speed on desktop. It's also easily made consistent throughout different FOV's, unlike matching distance.

I've been thinking how I can describe my post in the easiest way possible. Firstly I'd like to start with some basics. Field of View makes up your view window within a game, this measurement (in degrees) is removed from the remainder of your full rotation (360). Obviously your screen window is fixed in size. Hence, when we lower our FOV the image is scaled larger, when we increase our FOV the image is scaled smaller, maintaining the overall boundaries of the original view box. The reason selecting the correct FOV is important, minimize distortion but maintain a reasonable view angle, however that is another topic and I don't want to lead off track. Here's where my creative side attempts to give you an analogy to understand the relationship between your desktop and in game. http://coewww.rutgers.edu/classes/mae/mae488/hw/lectures/adv_connect/rack_pinion.gif As you can see moving your cursor on desktop is indeed related to how you rotate in game, For every FOV there's only one speed/ sensitivity that is actually 1:1 with your aspect ratio (allowing the gears to mesh perfectly). As in this example given that the gears interlock perfectly as the gear rotates over the pinion it's clear they move in unison, 1:1 movement. That relationship is outlayed in my previous posts. Here's another example that I'll attempt to explain why IT IS possible to match ALL FOV 1:1. http://www.f-lohmueller.de/pov_anim/engineering/Bike_Chain_043cb.gif As you can see we have two gears of dissimilar diameters (simulating different FOV). They both rotate at different speeds, however the chain travels around them at uniform speed, clearly. It does not matter how big the gear/FOV is or how many times it rotates. What matters is that the 'chain' moves between the two perfectly. Essentially adjusting your speed/sensitivity at the desired FOV so the 'gears' match the chain speed PERFECTLY. Answering the above question then YES, it can be perfect. Perfect does not mean every pixel on your screen should move in sync regardless of FOV. That's physically impossible. Different diameters will complete a rotation at different times. The centre of your screen can be perfect and that's the only bit that matters, that's the only part of the screen you used to line up your shots. Moving to your next target is simply a matter of distance / time, the better you judge this the faster you become.

I Dont understand the over complication. You either want to match cursor speed or you don't. Don't forget if you want true 1:1 cursor speed between differing planes its quite simply, cursor speed = distance / time. Averages, especially over such a broad range of FOV will never match anything accurately. 3D and 2D cannot be measured using the same methods, they are not the same. Trying will result in a 'best fit' scenario. ONE sweet spot. As you rotate in-game, the radial speed of the cursor moving should ideally match, exactly, the desktop cursor movement speed. That's the only true 1:1 match. No average can determine that. Going back to my first post in relation to arc & chord length, using their relationship we can quickly establish 100% monitor match, that is, the start & finish of maximum movement in both rotation (3D) and length (2D). Using 106.26FOV. 400dpi Windows / Desktop Distance 16.256cm (360' / 106.26') = 55.07396950875211cm (100% Monitor match) That simply mimics the relationship shared between 2D and 3D maximums. Which ultimately is monitor matching '100%'. Following that its simply allowing for the difference in Arc length (3D) to Chord length (2D) and adjusting as I previously posted to provide 1:1 mouse speed.

Unless your using the minimum, maximum or median of the two (0%, 100% or 50%) given the way arc length changes with FOV you cannot provide a percentage that works accurately for any broad range of FOV. 25% of 150fov versus 25% of 90fov using the same monitor is going to feel vastly different when trying to match with 2D desktop. The cursor speed will be completely different. Ideally your desktop cursor speed will match the crosshairs speed ingame. that's what matters. You could Project your screen to a cinema sized screen and because your cursor speed remains relative you will be ready to go. distance matching from two different planes IMO has little merit.

IMO the perfect match is with cursor speed rather than monitor distance. Afterall that is essentialy what you are learning, not a distance on a monitor. Your familiarising yourself with the speed your cursor moves from point to point. The better you judge this the faster the movement, the more 'snappy' you can become. Matching cursor speed is also much easier and consistent across ALL FOV or even 2D-3D. If you match your 2D cursor speed to the rotational speed in 3D then the 'feel', the 'speed' of your cursor is the same. You can match this to any FOV and cursor speed will always feel identical. To give a brief example of this: Here we have a monitor distance (in red) and the arc Field of View of 180 degrees in black. (highlighting larger FOV's, the less accurate monitor matching becomes. This is also true when comparing two FOV's, the greater the difference the worse they match) For simplicity, the monitor distance (chord length) is 2 therefore the Arc length is equal to 3.142... A 57% increase in length. This means when matched at 100% monitor distance the 3D 'cursor' must move at 57% greater speed than the 2D cursor. The inaccuracies 'reduce' as you eventually lower FOV as close to zero as possible. Essentially reducing the sample size to something so small the difference appears negligible. IMO not ideal. Making the 100% monitor match value 57% less however places cursor speed identical in both planes... 2D & 3D? NOTE: obviously the percent changes with each FOV. For example 106.26FOV (90 4:3) is 15.8% which equates to roughly 65% on the implemented monitor match calculator.

I'm no expert on mouse accel. But, using acceleration, the faster you move your mouse the further the cursor moves being my basic understanding. Given that then how would the calculator (or yourself) know at what speed your moving your mouse to calculate how far the cursor will move. There's no standard for mouse acceleration, each game can implement it to their liking. If you really want consistency id suggest looking at using a third party software (there's a few) and setting ingame accel to 0. Some brands like Steelseries have mouse accel options within their mouse software. That way you can match games using the calculator and maintain a consistent acceleration across all games.

No equations necissary it was a simple post with little meaning. Besides unless your going to use FOV 180' then there's little point in trying to calculate it with Pi. I was simply pointing out two maximums, that is 360 distance and monitor distance isn't a bad way to pair 2d - 3d. I personally use 0%. My opinion is pointer acceleration rather than distance is how your brain locks it's targets.

Yea but they origionally intended (or so they said) to implement USA in to TF2. If they matched everything with 0 percent then thats at least consistency between zooms. Now everything is different between zooms if your not using 70FOV. Whilst thats not a bug its not very good either way.

That's a shame. Fingers crossed they fix it up in the future. Just have to match up your favourite I suppose! PS, is this also the story with COD bo3? Would make sense if they only match up at 'x' fov.

So playing around with the calc.. Setting 0% from desktop conversion to TITANFALL 2 using 70fov gives me the same value as HIPFIRE. Perfect. (across ALL zoom sensitivities) But if i make it 90fov and convert from 0% desktop i get different values for each individual zoom sensitivity. Maybe i didnt understand what was said above but i would expect to be able to match one zoom sensitivity to 0% desktop and then the game will scale the rest the same? But the calculator does not? Thanks in advance.

I have been Recently thinking similar. I'v been using 0% matching from 2D - 3D which im thinking of changing. In my opinion setting your cm 360 in ratio with Pi (3.142) isnt such a bad idea.. That is the maximum distance your cursor can travel across your monitor equals one full 360 ingame. Your dealing with the two extremes in terms of relative mouse movement. cm 360 / Pi In my situation using a 4:3 FOV of 90 (106 16:9) yields very close results to the 100% monitor matching option. 40cm 360 / Pi = 12.73 (100% monitor match is 11.82cm) Food for thought

Great work on the calc with the ADS support. appreciated!

I'v not got the update yet but theres an ADS slider now. I dont know if its just variable sensitivity or a co efficient for USA?? anyone confirm?

OK.. I need some clarification with the calculator... I'll try and make this pretty simple what im trying to achieve... For explanation my mouse rate will be 600DPI My hipfire is 37cm/360 using 90fov 4:3, 106 actual Hfov for 16:9. 1 cm mouse movement = 3.7956 cm crosshair movement Call of duty standard Iron sight is 50fov 4:3, 63.7 actual Hfov for 16:9. Giving me an Aim Down Sight of 78.7cm/360 (Matching with 0% - COD) Taking this to BF1.. I'd like to set the above with the Zoom sensitivity slider and then lock it in with USA co eff of 1.33... I seem to be getting some stupid results and would appreciate some help! PS: I realise if I set USA to 0% it will be the same as COD? But I only want to match the one 50FOV by ratio and then link the remainder of the FOV with 1.33 co eff. Thanks.\ EDIT: Maybe ill just use 0% Co eff and leave it at that... Has anybody played the new titanfall update? Does that have USA or is it just an ADS slider?

Hence why ADS converter for COD would be a great addition. Even just assault rifle iron sight.

Any chance on throwing in a generic 'iron sight assault rifle' ADS option? Would be really great to have. Was simply 50fov previously for bo3. Thanks mate, appreciate your efforts

Look down a couple lines from where your highlighted. see my post above. Same rules apply to all. Edit them there. Not different for everyone, all the same

The highlighted section on the left, numbers left of number 42 are the values.... The highlighted section on the right, numbers left of 43 are the values. They are always located before 42 and 43. In your case it rolls over two lines and the sens are as follows; b8 d0 b5 3f (its always 4 doubles). Hope that helps anyone looking for them! PS: if you look at the column on the far right youll always see <..=..> the row you require is always under that one (in your case it rolls on to the next line aswell)

I'v been playing with 2200dpi @ WPS 3 to simulate 550dpi WPS 6. Obviously now IW has raw input I no longer want the value of 1.36 and require 0.34. I cannot get the hex value provided for 0.34 or any number similar to work (example fdbbb83e) EDIT: So after much trial and error... IMPORTANT: Set the HEX Value then go try a custom game and it will be perfect, if you re enter the options menu and navigate to the 'look' options often the mouse sensitivity slider will be reset.. if you go back in to the custom game you'll realise your sensitivity has gone back to default! Some values will stick if you re enter the menu and some will not. So my advice is to set and forget, double check with a manual measurement to see if it looks correct if in doubt. PS: keep a saved copy of the settings file so if you re enter the menu options by mistake you can simply paste the correct sens back in.

You cant change zoom sensitivity in Infinite Warfare? Not that I'm aware??? All the FOV are different but no doubt they are linked with some sort of system.

Any luck with the iron sight FOV? my own test seem to make it different to bo3??? Be great to know what it is exactly so i can convert it to BF1 appreciate your effort

i tried that command in the settings file, il try an auto. thx EDIT: Didn't work. looks like ill have to use two different DPI settings

ok so after recently discovering the wonders of going from 500dpi to 2k dpi and adjusting ingame settings accordingly results in a smoother cursor.... obviously this game is raw input by default and you cannot add a value lower then 1.... i need around 0.6 Anyone know how to disable raw mouse input? Thanks in advance.