Will playing with the same sensitivity, with a few extremely small disrepencies, make my aim better in the long run?

[exel]

Just wondering about peoples personal, and perhaps professional, point of view.

[Sebo]

Personal point of view (non professional).
Yes, great impact.

[NoMaD.oW]

I personally narrow it down to 0% discrepency on 100% monitor distance. With playing Overwatch competitively I feel like if I play something else I don't want to come back and feel like my flickshots aren't on point anymore. I think having anything under <1% discrepency will make it feel very similar to what you have on the game you play mainly.

I just switch the DPI or the FoV accordingly until it hits 0% Discrepency.

Ofcourse this is not a professional opinion, other than switching back to my main game with my flickshots not feeling off whatsoever.

Edited November 20, 2016 by NoMaD.oW

[Skwuruhl]

I personally narrow it down to 0% discrepency on 100% monitor distance. With playing Overwatch competitively I feel like if I play something else I don't want to come back and feel like my flickshots aren't on point anymore. I think having anything under <1% discrepency will make it feel very similar to what you have on the game you play mainly.

 

I just switch the DPI or the FoV accordingly until it hits 0% Discrepency.

 

Ofcourse this is not a professional opinion, other than switching back to my main game with my flickshots not feeling off whatsoever.

If you have the patience to set per game DPI to achieve the lowest discrepancy possible that's great. However I would aim to have the most similar FOV instead of adjusting the FOV trying to get 0% discrepancy.

 

Also I would personally advise using lower than 100% screen distance. Like 75% at most. 75% is effectively what CS:GO and BF1 use by default for zoom sensitivity adjustments. Note that this is assuming you're using 16:9.

[NoMaD.oW]

If you have the patience to set per game DPI to achieve the lowest discrepancy possible that's great. However I would aim to have the most similar FOV instead of adjusting the FOV trying to get 0% discrepancy.

 

Also I would personally advise using lower than 100% screen distance. Like 75% at most. 75% is effectively what CS:GO and BF1 use by default for zoom sensitivity adjustments. Note that this is assuming you're using 16:9.

 

Yeah i get what you mean for the cs go sniper rifle with the black bars. But in BF1 you can still see through the DoF on the outsides of the scope if I remember correctly. or Maybe I'm confusing it with another game like Rainbow Six. In overwatch I do use 100% because you can see through what's supposedly the outskirts of the scope.

Edited November 21, 2016 by NoMaD.oW

[Bernd Matthys]

if your FOV isn't the same your aim won't be the same also, the bigger the FOV the faster your crosshair travels from point A to B.

in other words, it's impossible to have consistent aim across the whole display between games with different FOV like Overwatch or CSGO

since CSGO uses 106.26 FOV for a 16:9 widescreen display and overwatch a maximum of 103° FOV.

So your aim won't be the same and your flick shots will indeed suffer from that if you switch between those 2 games.

And while 3.26° difference doesn't seems that much, it's in fact a huge difference for flick shooting because your crosshair travels at different speeds. 

[NoMaD.oW]

if your FOV isn't the same your aim won't be the same also, the bigger the FOV the faster your crosshair travels from point A to B.

in other words, it's impossible to have consistent aim across the whole display between games with different FOV like Overwatch or CSGO

since CSGO uses 106.26 FOV for a 16:9 widescreen display and overwatch a maximum of 103° FOV.

So your aim won't be the same and your flick shots will indeed suffer from that if you switch between those 2 games.

And while 3.26° difference doesn't seems that much, it's in fact a huge difference for flick shooting because your crosshair travels at different speeds. 

So even if the discrepency is 0% on monitor distance . the mouse movement on the monitor with different FoV isn't similar? It feels like it's actually identical movement when I move towards a certain point of my monitor with the crosshair.

 

Not too sure what I need to do then because the FoVs are so vastly limited in some FPS games.

Any advice? I mean, I love playing other games like BF1 and Rainbow six siege. But if it negatively impacts my aim in overwatch then I can't really play it.

 

I'm not sure but, I thought the bf1 vFov is different to overwatch and Rainbow six doesn't push 103 FoV

Edited November 22, 2016 by NoMaD.oW

[Bernd Matthys]

The distance your mouse travels between both games will only be the same at the match percentage selected by you and not across the whole display or any other point for that matter if the FOV isn't the same. To keep the difference across the whole display as small as possible 50% is the best match.

 

I don't have any advice, because their isn't any. The only thing you can do is match your field of view for all games. For bf1 this isn't a problem since it goes up to 133 FOV horizontal. So bf1 and overwatch can be perfectly matched for rainbow six I don't know the maximum FOV limit but if it's smaller than 103 degrees it's not possible to have consistent aim between both games.

[NoMaD.oW]

The distance your mouse travels between both games will only be the same at the match percentage selected by you and not across the whole display or any other point for that matter if the FOV isn't the same. To keep the difference across the whole display as small as possible 50% is the best match.

 

I don't have any advice, because their isn't any. The only thing you can do is match your field of view for all games. For bf1 this isn't a problem since it goes up to 133 FOV horizontal. So bf1 and overwatch can be perfectly matched for rainbow six I don't know the maximum FOV limit but if it's smaller than 103 degrees it's not possible to have consistent aim between both games.

Oh well, that's too bad then. I'm just going to have to find games that match FoV then. only problem I have with BF1 is that it also has like different FoV because of the scopes. Thanks a bunch for taking the time to write up a response, appreciate it.

 

After checking, apparantly 70.53 Vfov / 130 Hfov is what overwatch uses makes things a lot easier I guess. 

Since both Rainbow Six Siege and Battlefield 1 can go up to that number.

 

It seems impossible to get in source games unless it's possible by console like in Killing Floor 2.

Edited November 23, 2016 by NoMaD.oW

[potato psoas]

EDIT: THIS FORMULA IS NOT CORRECT... I HAVE AMENDED IT IN A LATER POST

 

I created a formula that would give you the best monitor distance with the least discrepancy across the whole range of useful FOVs. It is as follows:

 

1/120 . Integral [0 to 120] 1/(2.cos(x/2)) dx

 

If any of you have a graphics calculator you can plug in the integral with the given limits (0 to 120) and it should give you: 62.88010774% monitor distance - interestingly enough this is close to the golden ratio. I also decided on 120 FOV because it is the range of our stereoscopic field of view (the field of view where both our eyes overlap, creating a sense of depth). The FOV that actually relates to the golden ratio is 117.9452156 (probably the actual limit of our stereoscopic field of view).

Edited December 6, 2016 by Joshua Willis

[Drimzi]

Edited January 28, 2018 by Drimzi

[Quackerjack]

u play ur games with raw input on?

[Skwuruhl]

Just match monitor distance at 0% and call it a day. You don't have to worry about matching FOVs across all your games, which is impossible when all the games have different limitations set. At 0% the mouse sensitivity will feel perfect in all games, no matter what their FOV is. If you match 0% 2D to 3D, then even better. As an added bonus, if you set your Windows sensitivity to 3/11 (25%) and match 0%, you will never ever have pixel skipping at any FOV and resolution (Shannon's Law).

 

As an example, Call of Duty uses 0% matching, you configure the sensitivity for the default FOV and behind-the-scenes it scales that sensitivity at 0% to whatever FOV the game is currently at, whether it is the configured Hipfire FOV or the preconfigured Aim Down Sight FOV values. At all times, the sensitivity is matched 0%.

 

If you're worried about other games with custom zoom ratios, in Counter-Strike: Global Offensive, you can set the zoom sensitivity to 0.818933 and achieve 0% match with the AWP and other weapons using 40 FOV. In other games you will need to find the correct values.

 

I personally have 0% from Windows (2000 DPI, 3/11, 2560x1440) to all my games. I never have to convert from a game to another game. I just have to convert from Windows. I can just use whatever FOV the game allows and the sensitivity feels perfect, even if the FOV is drastically different compared to another game. If I focus purely on the crosshair and move it around, it moves at the same exact speed no matter what, making the FOV feel irrelevant. If I alt tab out of the game, the 2D cursor is moving at the exact same speed. Everything feels 1:1.

 

Never use anything but 6/11 windows sensitivity.

 

 

At a pointer speed setting of 6/11, for every one mouse count your computer will move the pointer one pixel on your screen, a 1:1 ratio. If the mouse pointer speed it set higher or lower than 6, Windows will artificially modify the mouse input. For instance, at the 7/11 mark, your computer moves the cursor 1.5 pixels for every one mouse count and at the 11/11 mark, your pointer moves 3.5 pixels for every one mouse count. This means that not only does Windows skip pixels, it actually can become impossible for the mouse cursor to land on certain columns. Conversely if you have your slider at the 5/11 mark, your pointer will move .75 pixels for every one mouse count. Since computers cannot show 1.5 pixels, it rounds to either 1 or 2 making uneven mouse movements.

 

You can test this by going into Paint and setting your windows sensitivity to 6/11 and drawing a circle. Then next to it draw a circle but with 5/11 sensitivity. The edges of the 5/11 circle will be jagged with pixel skipping:

It's more clear if you do it yourself because imgur compresses the image.

 

The effect of Shannon's law are in practice non-existent provided you're not using 200 DPI with 30 CS:GO sensitivity. Virtually all pro CS:GO players use 400 DPI, and Overwatch mostly use 800 DPI. The negative effects of not using 6/11 will way outweigh any positive effects.

 

If you still really want to get around shannon's law, use a different DPI in-game than you do at desktop. You'd need to dedicate a DPI toggle switch, but it'd be much better than running at 3/11.

 

Also 0% matches movement directly under the crosshair, so it is perfect for tracking targets. It's even fairly accurate for smaller mouse flicks. However if you're doing mouse flicks across like half your monitor then 0% is inaccurate. Since most people won't be doing flicks that large I still recommend 0% as a starting point, but it's still personal preference and not "perfect".

You should always try to match hipfire FOV. That way your screen distance to mouse distance is exactly the same for hipfire, and so is your distance/360.

Edited December 6, 2016 by Skwuruhl

[Drimzi]

Edited January 28, 2018 by Drimzi

[potato psoas]

I created a formula that would give you the best monitor distance with the least discrepancy across the whole range of useful FOVs. It is as follows:

 

1/120 . Integral [0 to 120] 1/(2.cos(x/2)) dx

 

If any of you have a graphics calculator you can plug in the integral with the given limits (0 to 120) and it should give you: 62.88010774% monitor distance - interestingly enough this is close to the golden ratio. I also decided on 120 FOV because it is the range of our stereoscopic field of view (the field of view where both our eyes overlap, creating a sense of depth). The FOV that actually relates to the golden ratio is 117.9452156 (probably the actual limit of our stereoscopic field of view).

 

I also posted this in the Battlefield 4 Uniform Soldier Aiming topic...

 

AMENDMENT TO MY FORMULA:

 

I should have instead calculated the average value of the curve between the crosshairs and the edge of the screen just the same way as I found the average coefficient for the given FOV range. Now I should get the perfect, least discrepancy coefficient. That number is: 0.6339745962 or 63.3975% monitor distance

 

The formula for calculating this coefficient is: (1/θ)integral[0,θ]integral[0,sin(θ)](sqrt(1-x))dxdy where θ is the range of your chosen FOV

 

You can definitely see that it works here: http://www.wolframal... [//math:120//]

 

Just so you know, you can use whatever FOV range you want. It's up to you. Actually, the lower the better since the curve is reduced. But I put 120 because it is still in the range of useful FOV. Whether or not you want to use it does not matter. If you can get a monitor big enough you may be able to use 120 FOV. You could theoretically go higher but peripheral vision probably doesn't matter much when calculating coefficients.

 

To anyone saying to use 0% monitor distance - it's only good to use a lower coefficient if all you ever do is use low FOV, but even then 0% is far too inaccurate. The key principle of finding the perfect coefficient is to find a balance between turning speeds at all points on the monitor. If your coefficient is too low your turning speed will not be accurate at the edge of the monitor and if you coefficient is too high your turning speed will not be accurate at the crosshairs. You have to find a middle ground which will give you the least discrepancy for all points on the monitor. It's not perfect but it's theoretically way better than 0% for building muscle memory.

 

You should pick the maximum FOV you want to use (forever) and then calculate the average coefficient you should use as per my formula.

Edited December 6, 2016 by Joshua Willis

[Quackerjack]

Sorry but I see zero difference in quality between 3/11 2000 DPI and 6/11 500 DPI during any circle tests. However in-game the difference is incredible, whether or not the game uses Raw Input. I never truly understood how fine the movement could be. At 500 DPI and 40cm/360 (my old sensitivity), there would be a very slight delay before movement would register as a skip. At 2000 DPI, there is so much movement in between each pixel. The lower the sensitivity in-game the better, as it uses a finer grid for which the mouse skips to. Difference is night and day. Refer to http://www.mouse-sensitivity.com/forum/topic/5-how-sensitivity-works/

 

Example

 

500 DPI 6/11

 

 

2000 DPI 3/11

 

 

The benefits of a finer grid outweigh any kind of downside of WPS (if there is any at 25%), and with Raw Input enabled in most games, your point is moot.

But if u use raw input it doesnt affect ur ingame sensitivity. So it cant feel different with 400 dpi Win. 6 and 2000dpi and Win. 3

[NoMaD.oW]

I feel like 0% Match at is spot on for ADS Your going to hipfire aim towards the target anyway in pretty much all scenarios. So, matching hipfire FoV across games seem the more valid option and then match at 0% for ADS like you suggested.

i don't know in which post you said CoD runs 0% too, but it isnt the case for CoD BO III. it is considerably lower there.
But other than that, I think 0% is a really good thing to take for ADS

Edited December 7, 2016 by NoMaD.oW

[Drimzi]

Edited January 28, 2018 by Drimzi