BF2042 - Soldier Zoom Sens

[Simonstorm]

Hi, 

 

I am trying to get to 1 to 1 aiming. For me 1 to 1 aiming is to practice in Aim Lab / Kovaak, than going to the game it make sure that it's the same. So the practice is effective. 

For this I am using the BF parameters in Aim Lab, config file sens. 

in BF I us Uniform aiming (USA) and ZERO coefficient.  

My target is that my mouse movement on the pad (distance) will stay the same to the movement on the screen at ALL ZOOM scopes. 

So - what Soldier zoom sens parameter should I use ? I seen FR33THY video Explaing that 168 value will get me 1 to 1 aiming.  Is this what I need ? 

   

minute 9:26

 

thx 

[ChocoboGoesKweh]

You cant actually have it be the same movement for all scopes itll always be different because of changing FOV you can only have it accurate to one point on the screen for all scopes. Most common are 0% Uhhhh I cant think of an example because I use it in all of them 100% Valorant 133% CSGO.

If you want more info from someone who knows a lot more than me here you go.

[TheNoobPolice]

19 hours ago, Simonstorm said:

I seen FR33THY video Explaing that 168 value will get me 1 to 1 aiming.  Is this what I need ? 

thx 

Always be wary of people who tell you to do things, but then don't explain how it works on what it is doing, and / or why they have arrived at the conclusion they have.

In pretty much every case someone doesn't do this, they are probably telling you bollocks.

EDIT: I didn't watch more than few moments of it, but just one example - he explains USA 0% is focal length scaling (it is) but then changes the solder zoom multiplier to 1.68x, which is blanket linear multiplier to every soldier ADS function.

If you take a sensitivity calculated by focal length and then multiply it by 1.68, it's not a focal length scaling anymore, which he would realise if he understood  what focal length scaling was, or what the slider he was changing actually did.

EDIT 2: I've just learned this guy recommends people mess with their windows OS to optimise for latency - I sincerely hopes he puts more effort into understanding the effects of those functions and fully explains the pros and cons of every change more than he does those sensitivity settings, for the sake of his viewers not having completely borked PC's

Edited November 16, 2021 by TheNoobPolice

[Simonstorm]

6 hours ago, TheNoobPolice said:

Always be wary of people who tell you to do things, but then don't explain how it works on what it is doing, and / or why they have arrived at the conclusion they have.

In pretty much every case someone doesn't do this, they are probably telling you bollocks.

EDIT: I didn't watch more than few moments of it, but just one example - he explains USA 0% is focal length scaling (it is) but then changes the solder zoom multiplier to 1.68x, which is blanket linear multiplier to every soldier ADS function.

If you take a sensitivity calculated by focal length and then multiply it by 1.68, it's not a focal length scaling anymore, which he would realise if he understood  what focal length scaling was, or what the slider he was changing actually did.

EDIT 2: I've just learned this guy recommends people mess with their windows OS to optimise for latency - I sincerely hopes he puts more effort into understanding the effects of those functions and fully explains the pros and cons of every change more than he does those sensitivity settings, for the sake of his viewers not having completely borked PC's

That's exactly what got me asking my questions here in this forum. the use of 0 coefficient and then 168 ADS is conflicting. 

I still try to fully understand your details information, it's kind of heavy stuff. 

I currently switched 0 coefficient after playing COD with the default 1.33   

I kind of used to 1.33 , and have many hours sniping with scopes.... so it was used and my muscle memory is there. Now switching to 0 coefficient sounds to me like a long time investment so I am switching. But still from time to trying the 1.33 and get confused. for some reason it feels better  

as I motioned I am using aim trainers every day to practice it. 

 

[Simonstorm]

12 hours ago, ChocoboGoesKweh said:

You cant actually have it be the same movement for all scopes itll always be different because of changing FOV you can only have it accurate to one point on the screen for all scopes. Most common are 0% Uhhhh I cant think of an example because I use it in all of them 100% Valorant 133% CSGO.

If you want more info from someone who knows a lot more than me here you go.

Thank you !!! it explains it perfectly. I will keep practicing with O%, it's a good investment .... I am not a pro. yet

 

[TheNoobPolice]

3 hours ago, Simonstorm said:

But still from time to trying the 1.33 and get confused. for some reason it feels better  

There's this idea that people need to use aspect ratio equivalent values for some reason. It really is totally irrelevant.

There's nothing more "1:1" about 1.33 then there would be any other arbitrary value. It's just like a domain of a trigonometric function that can scale up or down the size of output value very, very granularly. In other words, it's just a fine-tune sens slider.

You can only define "1:1" in two ways between two FOV values, but even then they would not "feel" the same.

1: Same degree per count (i.e 360 distance)
2: Same cursor velocity (i.e cursor / crosshair speed)

Both of these satisfy the definition of "sensitivity" (i.e the ratio of output / input) depending on whether you consider the out/in values in 3D space or mapped back to 2D space respectively.

These two things would never be the same resulting value for any transition so it's just a case of what is more intuitive for a given task. If you are wanting to match hipfire between two games even at different FOVs, it's unlikely that matching the cursor velocity will feel satisfactory. If you are matching a transition of a zoom / ADS animation, it's likely the opposite.

All monitor distances / coefficients above 0 are just a hack to arrive at a compromise when either focal length or 360 distance is not satisfactory (for example, too "slow" relative to hipfire on high zoom sniper scopes when scaled by focal length).

None of this is at all relevant to becoming better in aim trainers, which is only a result of combined practice, developing hand-eye coordination and motor skills resulting in better control of the camera with the mouse. Sensitivity is a comfort / familiarity thing, (and sometimes a mechanical necessity given the movements required in certain games), but it's not a barometer you need to tune to get good.

[Simonstorm]

21 minutes ago, TheNoobPolice said:

There's this idea that people need to use aspect ratio equivalent values for some reason. It really is totally irrelevant.

There's nothing more "1:1" about 1.33 then there would be any other arbitrary value. It's just like a domain of a trigonometric function that can scale up or down the size of output value very, very granularly. In other words, it's just a fine-tune sens slider.

You can only define "1:1" in two ways between two FOV values, but even then they would not "feel" the same.

1: Same degree per count (i.e 360 distance)
2: Same cursor velocity (i.e cursor / crosshair speed)

Both of these satisfy the definition of "sensitivity" (i.e the ratio of output / input) depending on whether you consider the out/in values in 3D space or mapped back to 2D space respectively.

These two things would never be the same resulting value for any transition so it's just a case of what is more intuitive for a given task. If you are wanting to match hipfire between two games even at different FOVs, it's unlikely that matching the cursor velocity will feel satisfactory. If you are matching a transition of a zoom / ADS animation, it's likely the opposite.

All monitor distances / coefficients above 0 are just a hack to arrive at a compromise when either focal length or 360 distance is not satisfactory (for example, too "slow" relative to hipfire on high zoom sniper scopes when scaled by focal length).

None of this is at all relevant to becoming better in aim trainers, which is only a result of combined practice, developing hand-eye coordination and motor skills resulting in better control of the camera with the mouse. Sensitivity is a comfort / familiarity thing, (and sometimes a mechanical necessity given the movements required in certain games), but it's not a barometer you need to tune to get good.

Well, I do agree that the Aim training in aim trainers will be focused on the skills you mentioned.  but. these skills developed in a certain setting and creat muscle memory elso. 

so , if to translate the skill in aim trainer to a real game I Basically need the game to have the same settings. 

what I think is most important is the translation between two points on screen to the mouse movement on the pad. if I have the same movements between two points  , no matter what is the fov (zoomed in or hip fire) my muscle memory will be the same. if I understand correctly it's support the monitor distance theory.  

 

[TheNoobPolice]

3 minutes ago, Simonstorm said:

 

so , if to translate the skill in aim trainer to a real game I Basically need the game to have the same settings. 

 

Not true at all. It can help maintain your level of comfort and familiarity, but you should use sensitivity values that are correct for the game and it's movement requirements.

If you were a cs beast who used a very low sensitivity because you had to pre-aim angles and control complex camera movement patterns on firing, do you think the best way to optimise your skill if you played Quake would be to use the same sensitivity? Where you have to rocket jump around and track at incredible high speed on and off screen? No, you'd probably want to double it at least.

[Simonstorm]

17 hours ago, TheNoobPolice said:

Not true at all. It can help maintain your level of comfort and familiarity, but you should use sensitivity values that are correct for the game and it's movement requirements.

If you were a cs beast who used a very low sensitivity because you had to pre-aim angles and control complex camera movement patterns on firing, do you think the best way to optimise your skill if you played Quake would be to use the same sensitivity? Where you have to rocket jump around and track at incredible high speed on and off screen? No, you'd probably want to double it at least.

Well it's not what I am saying. And I agree with your response. I train in Aim Trainers for getting better in the game I main. 

Let's say that I main Battlefield. 

I will use in the aim trainer the sensitivity settings just as I use in game  (Also same FOV, Co efficient) .

and yes what I use in the game is changing.  For COD for example, since I snipe a lot (Quick scopes etc.) I had to get my sensitivity up , and trade for less accuracy for sniping, just for me to get quick movement. I raised my sensitivity up until it wasn't comfortable to snipe and got used to it. 

Than I can train in my aim trainer effectively. The drills that I do can translate to the game.