Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Need slightly more clarification on monitor distance matching


  • Please log in to reply
34 replies to this topic

#21 DPI Wizard

DPI Wizard

    Advanced Member

  • Wizards
  • 1,843 posts

Posted 18 February 2017 - 12:24 AM

For those wondering, the monitor distance calculator works like this (very simplified):

  1. The 360° distance in counts is calculated for the input game. Let's say it's 10000 counts.
  2. If you choose 50% monitor distance, and the FOV of the input game is 90° (1.5708 radians), this equals atan(tan(1.5708/2)*0.5) = 0.4636 radians = 26.57°. And 26.57° = 10000/360*26.57 = 738.053 counts.
  3. If the output game has an FOV of 106.26° (1.8546 radians), we do the same here: atan(tan(1.8546/2)*0.5) = 0.588 radians = 33.69°.
  4. We now know that 33.69° in the output game should equal 738.053 counts. To match this, the 360° counts is calculated based on these two values: 738.053/33.69*360 = 7886.5859.
  5. The sensitivity for the output game is then calculated based on a 360° distance of 7886.5859 counts.

0% matching is using the same premise, but is instead using the formula tan(radians/2).



#22 Kilroy

Kilroy

    Newbie

  • Premium Members
  • Pip
  • 8 posts

Posted 18 February 2017 - 03:07 AM

I think it's pretty agreed upon here that 2D to 3D "cursor speed matching" lies somewhere around 65% monitor distance matching, depending on edge to edge distance. But some are saying that to convert between different fovs in 3D games, 0% is the way to go, whereas Joshua Willis' post is saying that an average of 20% is the way to go since I never go higher than 126 hfov.

 

My settings are 960 * 540 with 102.884 dpi, which results in 23.7005 cm edge to edge.

 

(360/106.26)(23.7005-(23.7005*0.1591183424841393))=  67.51885621 cm/360

 

When using the monitor distance calculator, to convert from 2D to 106.26 fov, it is roughly 65% that works here to achieve that same cm/360, as we've already established. Now if I wanted to convert from 106.26 to 51.77 hfov:

I can use 0%, which results in 186.2257 cm/360

Or I can use 20%, which results in 182.5608 cm/360

 

Well if the 2D to 3D way that I just used works to give me a 1:1 for 106.26 hfov, couldn't it do the same to give me a 1:1 for other fovs? Why not do that instead of monitor distance matching between the fovs? So I used the same formula to convert from 2D to 51.77 fov this time:

 

An angle of 51.77 gives and arc length of 0.9035569538 and a chord length of 0.8731325395

 

From arc length to chord length, the percent increase is 3.48451271%

 

(360/51.77)(23.7005-(23.7005*0.0348451271))= 159.0665463 cm/360

 

As you can see, between 106.26 and 51.77 it is neither a monitor distance matching of 0% nor 20%. I did this between other fovs, and the monitor distance match is close to 65% but never the same exact percentage, and definitely not 0 or 20%. I don't know if this is a coincidence that this time it's still 65% between 2 fovs instead of between 2D and 3D, or if if I'm seriously missing something here. But anyway, isn't it correct that I should use this formula and the 2D edge to edge distance, to figure out sensitivities at different fovs?

 

Edit: Alright well, while writing all this GLiSN answered my question in an edit that wasn't there when I read it the first time, ahah.


Edited by Kilroy, 18 February 2017 - 03:14 AM.


#23 Drimzi

Drimzi

    Newbie

  • Premium Members
  • Pip
  • 58 posts

Posted 18 February 2017 - 04:52 AM

Yeah you just repeat the calculation for every other FOV. That will be the best way. Sadly there are always games that change the FOV on the fly (aim down sights) with no way to control the sensitivity scaling, and so you get stuck with their implementation, which is either 0% or 100% 4:3 (75% at 16:9). So you just need to choose what you think is the best method for you.



#24 Joshua Willis

Joshua Willis

    Newbie

  • Premium Members
  • Pip
  • 29 posts

Posted 18 February 2017 - 03:55 PM

I don't think anyone seems to understand exactly what the purpose of the monitor distance value is. Even though there is no such thing as the perfect monitor distance, we can attempt to calculate mathematically the monitor distance value that will maximise muscle memory at all points on the monitor by making sensitivities across all FOV ranges feel as similar as possible.
 
We do this by finding the halfway point on the curve of a given FOV, taking note of the x value, then finding the halfway point for a whole bunch of FOVs (from 0 to your chosen max FOV) and then calculating the average of all these halfway points to give us our "perfect" monitor distance. We do it this way because the halfway point is an equal distance to the center AND the edge of the monitor, so therefore no matter what point on the screen we are aiming to, sensitivities across different FOVs will feel as close to each other as possible, ultimately maximising muscle memory.
 

I should also point out that if you are interested in tracking better using a low monitor distance such as 0%, 1% or 5% will work, but it really doesn't benefit you in the long run. You really are hindering yourself from a wide range of manoeuvres in FPS gaming. You aren't always going to be looking down the barrel of a sniper scope and holding angles all the time. If you are like me you want to be able to overall flick to ANY point on the screen even if it means you are a little bit less consistent at the center of the screen. Same goes for a monitor distance of 100%.


#25 Joshua Willis

Joshua Willis

    Newbie

  • Premium Members
  • Pip
  • 29 posts

Posted 18 February 2017 - 04:21 PM

I've been thinking how I can describe my post in the easiest way possible.

Hey I found a great way to explain/visualise the 3D to 2D projection concept.

 

Just go to:

https://www.mathsisf...r-equation.html

 

Then input this equation:

x^2+(y+0)^2=1^2

 

You will notice that you get a unit circle, which represents a FOV of 180 since the y intercept and the x intercept are both 1. If you change the r and k values in the equation (of the form x^2+(y+k)^2=r^2), where k=sqrt(r^2-1), you will notice that the circle gets bigger but still maintains its interception with x=1. Try x^2+(y+2)^2=5.

 

If you consider that your monitor is the line from x=0 to x=1, you can imagine how the parallax motion effect would determine the "speed" of the curve along the x axis as it is projected onto a 2D plane.

 

http://i.imgur.com/BkdMHQn.png

BkdMHQn.png


Edited by Joshua Willis, 18 February 2017 - 04:25 PM.


#26 Drimzi

Drimzi

    Newbie

  • Premium Members
  • Pip
  • 58 posts

Posted 18 February 2017 - 11:34 PM

I have tried a fixed percentage across all of the FOVs and I no longer think it is the way to go. The feeling always drifts out. This is because if the speeds were the exact same across the FOVs, then they would always match at a different point on the monitor, meaning every FOV needs its own unique distance match. Josh's formula seems to find all of these points and creates an average that will most likely be the best middle ground but at the end of the day, it's still not a perfect match.

 

I used 0% for a long time, and as the FOV decreases, the sensitivity gets the tiniest bit slower every time. I'm already use to this as I play Call of Duty and this is the system they use, so naturally I didn't really notice. After shooting circles on a wall in CS:GO for an hour and changing the FOV every couple minutes, I found it comfortable using every FOV except for the original 90 FOV. It always felt a little quick after practicing all of the sub 20-85 FOVs. 95 and up felt fine, it was only 90 that felt strange and 90 was the base sensitivity used to calculate 0% for the rest. If I used 25% like Josh suggests, this difference would have been less extreme.

 

With the solution that DNAMTE came up with, I think it truly is the correct way. Everything feels exactly the same, it is phenomenal. You have to calculate every FOV individually and not use an average.

 

To test this yourself, create a config file for FOVs 10, 20, 30, 40, etc up until 150 in CS:GO with the sensitivity calculated from DNAMTE's method, and do the Aim Botz 100 kill challenge with every FOV. Compare this to a 0% match, or the 25% match from Josh's formula. See what actually feels the best.


Edited by GLiSN, 19 February 2017 - 12:03 AM.


#27 DNAMTE

DNAMTE

    Newbie

  • Premium Members
  • Pip
  • 46 posts

Posted 19 February 2017 - 01:28 AM

I don't think anyone seems to understand exactly what the purpose of the monitor distance value is. Even though there is no such thing as the perfect monitor distance, we can attempt to calculate mathematically the monitor distance value that will maximise muscle memory at all points on the monitor by making sensitivities across all FOV ranges feel as similar as possible.

We do this by finding the halfway point on the curve of a given FOV, taking note of the x value, then finding the halfway point for a whole bunch of FOVs (from 0 to your chosen max FOV) and then calculating the average of all these halfway points to give us our "perfect" monitor distance. We do it this way because the halfway point is an equal distance to the center AND the edge of the monitor, so therefore no matter what point on the screen we are aiming to, sensitivities across different FOVs will feel as close to each other as possible, ultimately maximising muscle memory.


I should also point out that if you are interested in tracking better using a low monitor distance such as 0%, 1% or 5% will work, but it really doesn't benefit you in the long run. You really are hindering yourself from a wide range of manoeuvres in FPS gaming. You aren't always going to be looking down the barrel of a sniper scope and holding angles all the time. If you are like me you want to be able to overall flick to ANY point on the screen even if it means you are a little bit less consistent at the center of the screen. Same goes for a monitor distance of 100%.

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.

Edited by DNAMTE, 19 February 2017 - 01:40 AM.


#28 COMECOCO

COMECOCO

    Newbie

  • Premium Members
  • Pip
  • 28 posts

Posted 19 February 2017 - 06:00 PM

I think we need a better clarification on how to use the calculator... After i read this idk what im doing anymore... lets say i have a BASE sensitivity that i want to export to every game i have and even to windows. What i mean with this? Well that i want to move exactly the same way in other games and have the same "feeeling" of movement on every single one, and yes windows and 2D games too.

 

But after this idk what to use... for example lets say my base game Counter Strike go i use this:

 

Sensitivity: 2.9

Mouse DPI: 400

WPS 6 (Disabled accel in windows)

Monitor 27"

FOV 90

 

So now i want to have the same aim on overwatch for ex...? What match i have to use 0% 25% 65% 100% ????

 

Some of u said 0% is the best , others say 25% is the best!! i do all my calculations at 100%

 

So i did this wrong? I just dont understand!!! Can someone give me a hand please!!



#29 DPI Wizard

DPI Wizard

    Advanced Member

  • Wizards
  • 1,843 posts

Posted 19 February 2017 - 06:13 PM

So now i want to have the same aim on overwatch for ex...? What match i have to use 0% 25% 65% 100% ????

 

Some of u said 0% is the best , others say 25% is the best!! i do all my calculations at 100%

 

So i did this wrong? I just dont understand!!! Can someone give me a hand please!!

 

There is no right or wrong answer to this, as it comes down to personal preference.

 

If you do 100%, this means that moving 50% of the monitor distance will be slightly different between different FOV's. If you instead do 50%, moving 100% will be slightly different, and so on.

 

Some might find it better to match 100% with hipfire, and go down as the zoom levels get higher. Say 50% on a 4x scope and 0% on snipers scopes. Higher zoom levels also means more tracking and pixelhunting in many cases, so 0% might make more sense on snipers etc.


  • COMECOCO likes this

#30 COMECOCO

COMECOCO

    Newbie

  • Premium Members
  • Pip
  • 28 posts

Posted 19 February 2017 - 09:52 PM

Thank u wizard!



#31 Drimzi

Drimzi

    Newbie

  • Premium Members
  • Pip
  • 58 posts

Posted Yesterday, 12:38 AM

I think we need a better clarification on how to use the calculator... After i read this idk what im doing anymore... lets say i have a BASE sensitivity that i want to export to every game i have and even to windows. What i mean with this? Well that i want to move exactly the same way in other games and have the same "feeeling" of movement on every single one, and yes windows and 2D games too.

 

But after this idk what to use... for example lets say my base game Counter Strike go i use this:

 

Sensitivity: 2.9

Mouse DPI: 400

WPS 6 (Disabled accel in windows)

Monitor 27"

FOV 90

 

So now i want to have the same aim on overwatch for ex...? What match i have to use 0% 25% 65% 100% ????

 

Some of u said 0% is the best , others say 25% is the best!! i do all my calculations at 100%

 

So i did this wrong? I just dont understand!!! Can someone give me a hand please!!

 

Try the method in my post. I am going to assume you have 1920x1080 resolution.

 

2D = 400 DPI, 1920x1080, 12.192 cm edge-to-edge

 

360 degrees (106.26 actual HFOV)  = 34.733 cm

360 degrees (103 actual HFOV) = 36.2838 cm

 

CS:GO sensitivity = 2.991653

CS:GO zoom sensitivity ratio = 0.955056

 

Overwatch sensitivity = 9.55

 

Let us know how it feels.


Edited by GLiSN, Yesterday, 12:58 AM.


#32 Joshua Willis

Joshua Willis

    Newbie

  • Premium Members
  • Pip
  • 29 posts

Posted Yesterday, 11:39 AM

Okay I'm going to try converting all my FOVs using the method that DNAMTE and GLiSN are recommending... I'm just not sure with something. The calculation you recommend which is: ([2D edge to edge distance] - [percent increase from [arc length] to [chord length]]) x (360/HFOV) This seems to convert FROM 2D to 3D. What if I want to convert from 3D to 2D what is the formula?


Edited by Joshua Willis, Yesterday, 11:45 AM.


#33 COMECOCO

COMECOCO

    Newbie

  • Premium Members
  • Pip
  • 28 posts

Posted Yesterday, 04:53 PM

Try the method in my post. I am going to assume you have 1920x1080 resolution.

 

2D = 400 DPI, 1920x1080, 12.192 cm edge-to-edge

 

360 degrees (106.26 actual HFOV)  = 34.733 cm

360 degrees (103 actual HFOV) = 36.2838 cm

 

CS:GO sensitivity = 2.991653

CS:GO zoom sensitivity ratio = 0.955056

 

Overwatch sensitivity = 9.55

 

Let us know how it feels.

 

Nice thank u GLiSN...actually my desktop res is 2560 x 1440...according to the calculator my mouse needs 650 dpi in windows to match my base 2.9 CSGO...(converting from game to windows)

 

My idea always was like to "sync" all my others sensitivities (desktop included) to match CSGO, it is like i want everything to match that game and keep it consistent.. For example i "move" my settings from CSGO (2.9 sen 400 dpi 27 inches monitor and default 90 fov) to Overwatch default fov too... i got 9.37 sensitivity IF i choose match at 100% but if use 25% the calculator gives me 9.15 and thats exactly what i dont understand... What is the best match to use from and why?



#34 Drimzi

Drimzi

    Newbie

  • Premium Members
  • Pip
  • 58 posts

Posted Yesterday, 07:45 PM

Alright. At 2560x1440.

 

6/11

CS:GO = 2.243738
CS:GO zoom = 0.955056
Overwatch = 7.16

4/11 (to prevent pixel skipping by having double DPI and half sensitivity, important at 2560x1440)

Refer to https://pyrolistical...watch-dpi-tool/ and http://www.mouse-sensitivity.com/forum/topic/5-how-sensitivity-works/

CS:GO = 1.121869
CS:GO zoom = 0.955056
Overwatch = 3.58

3/11 (to prevent pixel skipping by having quadruple DPI and quarter sensitivity, important at 3840x2160)

Refer to https://pyrolistical...watch-dpi-tool/ and http://www.mouse-sensitivity.com/forum/topic/5-how-sensitivity-works/

CS:GO = 0.560935
CS:GO zoom = 0.955056
Overwatch = 1.79

That will sync it all up. Now you just decide on a DPI which will determine the final speed. As long as the DPI remains the same in each game and the desktop, you do not need to recalculate sensitivity values. Your current 360° is 35.8307.

 

Here is the 360° outcomes of various DPIs at 6/11 in CS:GO (106.26 actual HFOV).

200 = 92.6214
250 = 74.0971
300 = 61.7476
350 = 52.9265
400 = 46.3107
450 = 41.1651
500 = 37.0486
550 = 33.6805
600 = 30.8738
650 = 28.4989
700 = 26.4633
750 = 24.699
800 = 23.1554
850 = 21.7933
900 = 20.5825
950 = 19.4992
1000 = 18.5243

To calculate the results yourself for other games

1. Use this formula https://www.wolframa...841393 percent)

2. Change 106.26 to the actual HFOV of the game.

3. Calculate the new arc and chord values by putting the new HFOV into the angle of this calculator, set 10 decimal places http://planetcalc.com/1421/

4. Calculate the new percentage you need by using this formula, from chord to arc https://www.wolframa...545868631691746

5. In the mouse-sensitivity calculator, set mode to 360 distance and use 400 DPI (regardless of what your actual DPI is) to get the correct in-game sensitivity value. Remember DPI doesn't matter once you have the sensitivity value. If it really bothers you, change 16.256 in the formula to the desktop edge-to-edge distance of your DPI.


Edited by GLiSN, Yesterday, 08:08 PM.


#35 COMECOCO

COMECOCO

    Newbie

  • Premium Members
  • Pip
  • 28 posts

Posted Yesterday, 08:08 PM

GLiSN  :)  Thanks man i will!




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users