Thanks! I didn't realise the output was in inches, I always forget you guys aren't metric!

Right, so I play BF1 on 3% in-game, 800 dpi, FOV 106.26 (4:3) that's a 20.6684  inch 360 - so a desktop distance equivalent according to your formula = 9.0876 inches

I then used the formula based off that with the scaled ADS 1.25x scope 4:3 FOV of 93.67 to find a new 360 distance of 22.9763 for ADS. (Incidentally, the existing "viewspeed" would produce 23.6892 inch 360 at this FOV, so your new formula seems to be slightly faster and probably closer to 100% monitor distance? (at least in this example))

Only thing I can't work out is how to apply the resulting 360 distance to the 1.25x scope slider  in order to test this in-game when transitioning between hipfire and ADS. 

Any ideas?

Edited June 29, 20179 yr by TheNoobPolice

Edited January 28, 20188 yr by Drimzi

23 hours ago, Drimzi said:

I made a formula that starts at 0 for 90, goes to -1 at 0 and 1 at 180. Use that as a multiplier for 0% formula.

You have to be saying this incorrectly. You can't use 0 as a multiplier for obvious reasons.

 

On 6/29/2017 at 3:35 AM, TheNoobPolice said:

Just a point about this - sounds good in theory but people don't turn THEN aim, they turn AND aim simultaneously, and rightly so, otherwise you're taking too long to acquire a target and at higher levels get owned.

One of the key overlooked advantages of a proceedural turn-rate adjustment like BF's USA, rather than a turn rate mutilpier (either static or configurable by a slider), is that it adjusts the turn rate during the FOV transition also. Meaning the turn-rate gradually slows as you are zooming in. When you run USA off, the game "switches" to the ADS turn-rate as soon as click the ADS button, which means there is a split second of turning as the FOV is transitioning where the sensitivity feels far too slow, even if you use the calcualtor on this site to otherwise match the ADS sensitivity to be the same.

Sure but I never said to use a multiplier instead of USA. I know how it works.

Edited June 30, 20179 yr by Skwuruhl

Edited January 28, 20188 yr by Drimzi

8 minutes ago, Drimzi said:

Yeah I had to +1 to it.

The formula is here:

d = desktop length, θ = actual hfov

(d π) / (1+(sin((π θ)/360)) - (cos((π θ)/360)))

Okay here's a (mathematical, not practical) issue: going from 179° to 170° is a change of 10x zoom. Yet your equation says to only change sensitivity by a factor of 1.04x. Maybe you don't think it should change by a factor of 10x, no insignificant amound of zoom, but it's only met with a 4% change. This doesn't seem right at all.

My concern is mathematical problems generally coincide with practical ones.

Edited January 28, 20188 yr by Drimzi

26 minutes ago, Skwuruhl said:

Sure but I never said to use a multiplier instead of USA. I know how it works.

I wasn't suggesting you didn't. The reply and information might be useful to more people other than yourself viewing the thread, perhaps?

I do disagree though that expecting a player to turn in hipfire, and then aiming once the target is in the centre of the screen is a "bright side" of using 0% monitor distance. This is not realistic and is not how people play first person shooters. We both know what the advantages of 0% monitor distance are, and it's not that.

I wonder what you guys think of this video that shows 1:1 mouse count changes for different FOVs.

Edited January 28, 20188 yr by Drimzi

Edited January 28, 20188 yr by Drimzi

Hi drimzi, I am having trouble trying to apply your new forumla, when attempting lower hfovs it doesnt seem to scale well as compared to higher fovs as inches/360 for low fov seems way faster than it should be as comapred to higher fovs. I think I'm doing something wrong if I am inputting the formula wrong or if θ is HFOV 4:3???? Sorry and thanks.

Edit: Thanks for editing the equation drimzi, it seems to work now.

Edited July 4, 20179 yr by fenriquez