Jump to content

Atlas

Added!
Read more...

Just Cause 4

Just added!
Read more...

Supraland

Acceleration is fixed and sensitivity numbers are added, so this game is in!
Read more...

Hitman 2

Pretty much the same as the previous Hitman, but here it is!
Read more...

Spellbreak

In-game and config file sensitivity added!
Read more...
Insight_BF

Battlefield USA Coefficient

Recommended Posts

Hello, recently I came back to Battlefield 1 since the new title will come out soon, I was trying to solve a problem that I always had since the USA option came out, basically my ADS from 1x to 4x magnifiers feels perfect for me, I use it since years, but when I play snipers with 6x and 8x, I feel they are really too slow with USA on at 133% coefficient.

This is my current settings, playing infantry feels perfect but sniping doesn't

https://i.imgur.com/bTf1fPm.png

I tried to convert my AWP sens from CSGO and I increased my coefficient to match the viewspeed calculation since I don't want to change my ADS sensitivity (it would ruin my infantry sensitivity) at 177% coefficient sniping felt so good for me, but I don't want to use a bad settings or risk to ruin my muscle memory since I took years to develop it.

https://i.imgur.com/ma2wakH.png

 

What you guys suggest to do in my case?

Edited by Insight_BF

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The thing is, the higher the coefficient value, the faster the zoom will feel in relation to a higher matched FOV, so that's why 177% feels faster than 133% when zooming. But of course a FOV is going to feel too slow if it is too low. This one situation should not determine which coefficient you use  - if it's too slow then you probably should avoid using the weapon in that particular situation because you really don't need its extra magnification. Use it only if your target is far away enough.

Instead, you should pick a coefficient based on its advantages: 0%MM has better precision at the crosshair, 100%MM (177%) has better overall muscle memory (but worse precision at the crosshair), and everything else leans more towards precision or more towards better overall muscle memory. Though, keep in mind you can go above 100%MM... At this point, what you define as "100%" becomes arbitrary and dependent on your monitor size/sitting distance. We've actually been discussing this in another forum. It's probably a better idea to think in angles rather than distance on the screen due to the concept of perceived size, i.e. you want to match your sensitivity to a point on your monitor of the same visual angle instead of the same percentage of monitor distance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree about the coefficient usage, that's why I didn't change it, but I wanted to do this "test" and it surprised me how well I was performing with 177% coefficient. Probably I should have used a lower magnification, that's true, but it's also true that hitting a bigger target is easier and for some reason considering how aggressive I play it ended working out very well for many games, and I had no problems adapting to the new sensitivity, I didn't expect that and I even considered switching coefficient, but I didn't want to ruin my muscle memory, that's the reason of my post basically

Probably I should simply adjust my fov a bit and use lower magnification, I guess

 

Edited by Insight_BF

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, when you zoom in, targets end up moving faster so it may seem like you should use a faster coefficient but it won't help you in the long run. You just need to move your arm faster to match the changed speed. Targets move slower at higher FOV and faster at lower FOV.

This very process is the reason why I use 0%MM/coefficient. DPIWizard made a video demonstrating just how in sync your sensitivity can be while tracking, with 0%. You don't even need to worry about the FOV, you naturally adjust to target speed.

If this is a problem you have I would definitely recommend using it. The ADS may feel slower, but it's only slower relative to a higher FOV. 0% actually converts sensitivity much higher than other methods. Try playing on 130 FOV with 0% and you'll see how fast it is... and yet you still have that precision and tracking advantage which is so nice.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just tested it, tracking feels nice but when I go to higher and higher magnifications navigating with the crosshair feels slow, considering I play with 90 Fov.

As csgo player I always navigate a lot with the crosshair and check every spot, and I can do that easily with low sensitivity and low magnifications, when I use higher magnifications tho I can't do it consistently since it feels slow and uncomfortable to check spots quickly and smoothly, and that's basically my issue, as you said I probably just need to use lower magnification, I guess there is no solution that allows me to get higher sens only on high magnifications without ruining my close range aiming and muscle memory.

Edited by Insight_BF

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Insight_BF said:

I guess there is no solution that allows me to get higher sens only on high magnifications without ruining my close range aiming and muscle memory.

There are other options but doubt you'd want to use them: have a secondary sensitivity, using a DPI adjustment on your mouse, for quickly checking spots; or use acceleration

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yea all of these have huge downsides, not worth it, guess i'll just get used to move more my arm while checking spots on high magnifications, not that big of a deal

Edited by Insight_BF

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If your sensitivity is in the low 50-80 cm/ 360 you will do fine with 177% coefficient. The muscle memory and consistency you gain from 100% mm surpasses the "loss of better tracking precision at the crosshair" as you won't follow enemies with a 8x scope. If you've played a lot of cs before battlefield the transition should be faster and feel more natural to your brain than if say you came from the COD genre.

Edited by MuntyYy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, MuntyYy said:

Are you as accurate as in COD with 00% mm ?

yeah, probably even moreso since I use such a low sensitivity - I'm able to turn around quicker at higher FOV

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well that's impressive.
The main reason of why I changed from 00% to 100% was cuz of Quake. With half the sensitivity it was impossible for me to be as accurate as in other games. I then tried playing with the 360 conversion method but that was the opposite of 00%.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, MuntyYy said:

Well that's impressive.
The main reason of why I changed from 00% to 100% was cuz of Quake. With half the sensitivity it was impossible for me to be as accurate as in other games. I then tried playing with the 360 conversion method but that was the opposite of 00%.

Yeah it could be that higher FOV exacerbates difficulties you might have with precision aiming. You may just prefer it because now your sensitivity at the crosshair is much slower. Since targets are smaller at higher FOV, your aim needs to be capable of shooting such small targets. To be honest though, this is a really bad way to decide which conversion method to use. You pick the conversion method you think will give you the best advantage and then convert, not the other way around.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, potato psoas said:

You pick the conversion method you think will give you the best advantage and then convert, not the other way around.

Well.. I've always tried playing with 90 FOV (106). However in Quake no conversion method felt natural for me. On top of that, with a sensitivity of 104cm / 360 ( at that time ) I've had problems tracking properly with 4x or higher magnification. I then proceeded into studying and testing different conversion methods, lowered my sensitivity to roughly 61cm hipfire and decided to finally stick with it. SMG's and pistols felt better for me in COD ( mostly played cod2 and 4 promod )  - I thought that's because of my play style. But that wasn't the case as Quake showed me. I made the change from 00% to 100% and I can play pretty much all the FPS you can name at any FOV. as long as I have 9 cm from the center of the screen to the edge. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I will test both 133% and 177%, with lower magnification scopes as well. I realized 0% is not an option for me since it's too slow, I already have around 60cm/360 (1,25x) with 133 coefficient, with higher zoom scopes it would be more noticeable as well. I believe 0% might work well when someone doesn't have already a low sensitivity.

Edited by Insight_BF

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Go for 0% or 100% coefficient (56.25% monitor match). 0% will scale with zoom, but since you zoomed in, the distances, speed, etc are also scaled by the zoom and can become a problem if your sens is slow by default. If you countered the zoom by teleporting back (like a dolly zoom), then it would feel perfectly normal. DPI Wiz posted a video with scripting tracking at different fovs using 0%. 100% will keep the distance to rotate to the 1:1 aspect ratio boundary (pure vertical or pure horizontal movement), which is also tied to the lowest angle denominator that determines the zoom/focal length. Other coefficients are more arbitrary.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Drimzi said:

0% will scale with zoom, but since you zoomed in, the distances, speed, etc are also scaled by the zoom and can become a problem if your sens is slow by default.

In my honest opinion you can do well with any match percentage. I've used to play on 104cm/360 - 00%mm. Personally, I choose 100%mm over 00% now, for one reason alone. And that is my first shot accuracy, if that's consistent and manageable then I just need to come up with a solution to be "as precise" from the center as to the edge of the screen. 100% does just that for me. I can be accurate at the center and flick precisely near/ at the edge with any FOV.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/12/2018 at 8:19 PM, potato psoas said:

Yeah, when you zoom in, targets end up moving faster so it may seem like you should use a faster coefficient but it won't help you in the long run. You just need to move your arm faster to match the changed speed. Targets move slower at higher FOV and faster at lower FOV.

This very process is the reason why I use 0%MM/coefficient. DPIWizard made a video demonstrating just how in sync your sensitivity can be while tracking, with 0%. You don't even need to worry about the FOV, you naturally adjust to target speed.

If this is a problem you have I would definitely recommend using it. The ADS may feel slower, but it's only slower relative to a higher FOV. 0% actually converts sensitivity much higher than other methods. Try playing on 130 FOV with 0% and you'll see how fast it is... and yet you still have that precision and tracking advantage which is so nice.

 

The problem is tracking is really only difficult when transitioning from a flick to a tracking motion or when tracking an accelerating object. In addition most weapons that uses scopes are single shot or semi autos, which requires less tracking accuracy than automatics. I think the loss of accurate tracking motion is negligible because slow tracking is easy. Flicking is the more important factor to account for when finding a good sensitivity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, noaimBoii said:

The problem is tracking is really only difficult when transitioning from a flick to a tracking motion or when tracking an accelerating object.

It depends on how far the target is situated. If you are scoped with a 4x magnification and the enemy is approx 4x further from you ( and the game you play is not quake ) - then 00% is the way to go. However, if you are scoped in by the same amount but now your target is 2x further, on a low sensitivity it will be challenging to track it accurately. Imagine tracking a vehicle in PUBG on more than 60cm/ 360 with a 4x scope or properly compensating for the recoil. Unless you have 1 meter arms and a gigantic mouse pad, it won't happen.

 

9 hours ago, noaimBoii said:

slow tracking is easy

Try that with tinychris's sensitivity or even nate gibson's one. Their 8x scope @00% mm is comparable with my hipfire.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, noaimBoii said:

The problem is tracking is really only difficult when transitioning from a flick to a tracking motion or when tracking an accelerating object. In addition most weapons that uses scopes are single shot or semi autos, which requires less tracking accuracy than automatics. I think the loss of accurate tracking motion is negligible because slow tracking is easy. Flicking is the more important factor to account for when finding a good sensitivity.

Well it's not like other percentages have that much of a muscle memory advantage over 0%. They have more of a tighter overall match but you will still not maintain perfect muscle memory at all points on the monitor for all FOVs. No matter what percentage you use, you are going to have to develop muscle memory for all points on the screen for all FOVs through practice regardless.

But I don't think any of that matters. I have a much better reason why 0% is better: when you are moving your crosshair towards a target you are not exactly predicting how much you have to move and flicking in one moment - you are constantly making micro-adjustments as you approach the target... and guess what, as you approach a target, 0% is going to become more in control and higher match percentages are going to become less in control. Actually shooting the enemy will always feel awkward at higher percentages.

Then combine the fact that you are going to have to develop muscle memory anyway and you'll soon realize that it's actually easier to build muscle memory with 0% monitor match since you can rely on making micro-adjustments until you develop enough muscle memory to make those fast flicks.

Since you are constantly making micro-adjustments, this is a good reason to get a higher refresh rate monitor so you can more quickly predict and respond to changes in perceived sensitivity.

Edited by potato psoas

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem is that I use 70% ads sensitivity to get my sensitivity low enough with 1x and 1,25x magnification scopes. With 70 ads sensitivty using 0% coefficient makes the higher zoom scopes extremely slow, I tried 0% MM with 100% ads sens and aiming feels nice (still a bit slow), but I just can't ruin my assault rifles aiming to be able to play snipers. I am kinda forced to use high coefficient.

I have this problem since the uniform soldier aiming came out, didn't find a solution yet. I am not sure what the optimal choice is, and I am not sure I want to learn a new sensitivity and I don't want to ruin my muscle memory either since I use the same settings since years.

Edited by Insight_BF

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, Insight_BF said:

I am not sure what the optimal choice is, and I am not sure I want to learn a new sensitivity and I don't want to ruin my muscle memory either since I use the same settings since years.

If you played for years, then you should be sure. Stick with what you are good at and keep practicing. 100% can be best for me, 00% for the majority you can play better at 75, but who knows ? as long as you maintain the same settings across all fps you are good to go regardless of mm%.

Edited by MuntyYy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Insight_BF said:

The problem is that I use 70% ads sensitivity to get my sensitivity low enough with 1x and 1,25x magnification scopes. With 70 ads sensitivty using 0% coefficient makes the higher zoom scopes extremely slow, I tried 0% MM with 100% ads sens and aiming feels nice (still a bit slow), but I just can't ruin my assault rifles aiming to be able to play snipers. I am kinda forced to use high coefficient.

I have this problem since the uniform soldier aiming came out, didn't find a solution yet. I am not sure what the optimal choice is, and I am not sure I want to learn a new sensitivity and I don't want to ruin my muscle memory either since I use the same settings since years.

Another workaround if it really is a problem that your sens is too low for low FOV is you could use a smaller sized monitor or sit further away from your current monitor to decrease perceived sensitivity and then increase your settings to match your old perceived sensitivity. If you can do that it might give you that little extra boost at low FOV without having to mess with your muscle memory.

I actually have the same problem atm. While I want a bigger monitor I also want to maintain the sensitivity I'm using atm, yet if I do that, I'm only exacerbating the low FOV difficulties I've been having because I'll have to decrease my settings to match my old perceived sensitivity. And I'm not budging on this sensitivity for muscle memory's sake either - it's because it is low enough to give me control to shoot the smallest perceivable targets. Helps with getting consistent headshots...

I guess it's a problem we'll always have. A pick your poison kind of thing. If we pick a low sens, best thing we can do is get a bigger mousepad and just develop our arm speed. It's actually a truly athletic thing. I used to use a medium sens before I played some games with Drimzi. I always thought he had the biggest biceps. Now I've gotten used to it and can say I can make flicks just as fast as those with high sensitivities, no thanks to playing osu! of course.

I do also wish they made bigger monitors (TVs).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×