Jedi's mouse trick

[MacSquirrel_Jedi]

0% MM will be enough. No, it will not!

I will try to make this article simple. To make it understandable not just for the regular settlers here. On this site there is a lot of stuff you like a newcomer probably do not understand. They will instruct you to read a instructions which will make you even more confused at the beginning. Because it’s hard to imagine something behind the text or formulas. Most of the time there is a talking about percentage of Monitor Distance ex.: 0% MM. What does it mean? I will show you on example with 100% Monitor distance – vertical (MDV). Converting from Windows to Game.

In Windows desktop measure the distance traveled by the mouse, if the cursor moves across the entire screen, in the vertical axis. In other words, if you move the cursor from the top edge of the screen to the bottom.

I measured 2,7 inches. Now if I want to reach the center from the top edge of the screen. How much distance must mouse travel? A half right => 2,7/2 = 1,35 inches. So if you set a calculator here to match your game for 100% MDV. It means that if you move your mouse vertically about 1,35 inches. The cursor on screen in game will travel exact same monitor distance like in Windows. Ends at the edge of the screen.

Mouse distance 1,35 inches = A half of monitor distance in Windows and game. So at this mouse distance. We can say, that sensitivity is same for both Windows/Game. 

However the sensitivity is same only for one point on the screen = one mouse distance. Any other mouse distance lower or higher from 1,35 inches. Will result in different monitor distance in Game. More or less. Because of 2D/3D projection.

I created a graph that allows me to see the projected path of the cursor on the screen for several mouse distances. So you better understand what's going on. Graph is simulating one quarter of screen. We don't have to simulate the whole screen, because the rest will just be mirrored to this quarter.

Graph on right side is showing cursor path of our example 100% MDV. Dots represents a cursor path. Green simulates a Windows. Red game. But as you can see, mouse sensitivity is same only for one point = one mouse distance = one monitor distance. All other mouse distances will result in a different monitor distance.

Ideally, we want all pairs of points (Green/Red) to become one. But it’s mostly impossible to achieve it. Recently I found out how to find the smallest difference between points for all mouse distances.

Here comes the Jedi’s mouse trick:
Set the monitor distance to 100% MDV and note the 360° distance = 13,1815.
Set the monitor distance to     0% MDV and note the 360° distance = 11,3097.
Manually adjust the sensitivity so that the 360° distance matches the average of both values (13,1815 + 11,3097)/2 = 12,2456. By this you will receive the smallest deviation for all points. I will demonstrate it on a Square graphs (ratio 1:1).

This method looks easy. But it's practically 11 years of development behind it (With pauses of course). 

You can see the difference visually. But we can compare it also with numbers. I will use sum of absolute monitor distance deviations (SoD) for comparing with 0% MM. We don’t care if the deviation is positive or negative. We just need to know absolute deviation. If the SoD value is lower, it means that method has a lower deviation for all monitor distances. It will be not to much precise. Because we are comparing just 9x points on screen. But it’s enough to demonstrate the differences.

Windows to Hipfire:

Windows to AWP Zoom 1:

Hipfire to AWP Zoom 1:

If you do not want to adjust the distance for all points, but maybe only for 40%. Repeat the same procedure, only use 40% instead of 100%. This give you the smallest deviation for all monitor distances in the range of 40% of monitor screen. 

There is many people who are trying to guide me to use 0% MM. No matter what. But they don't understand that they're taking me back 11 years to the exact moment that led to the development of my Mouse sensitivity utility.

I understand that 0% MM is mathematically correct. But when I leave the game back to Windows. I can't hit the icons, and it makes me mad with 0% MM it’s even more noticeable. Because what we are doing in Windows most of the time? We are opening and closing windows. And to close a window you have to move cursor all the way to upper right corner of screen. And there is the biggest deviation for 0% MM. That’s why some people like to use 100% MDH/V. 

Jedi’s mouse trick is a compromise between tracking (0% MM) and flicks (100% MM). 

Edited November 21, 2021 by MacSquirrel_Jedi

[Vaccaria]

Thank you for your hard work. You helped me finish my research, now I have found the perfect multipliers.  

My topic

Now I did this: I took osu 1x converted to hipfire OW 90Fov at 292.66%. Got a low multiplier (that's what I'm aiming for), since a higher one doesn't fit the firing ranges of my fingers. Then I did the calculations for osu of OW multiplier 292.66% - 5.63. I got MDV 0% - 0.62 and MDV 100% - 0.68, then these multipliers translated into W|A and got centimeters (did by your calculations) got multipliers W - 42.09, A - 51.7 is all to 5.63 in OW. Next I decided to go smarter and made a transfer from W between 0% and 100%, got 4.80 and it was ideal for fingering, but sense of pointer speed in Windows 2D and 3D became different (not much), because 5.63 fits more to 2D 1x osu movement over most of the monitor, but I am shooting at small distances with fingers and wrist, and therefore shooting at medium and long distances will be better than 5.63. At 5.63 effective movement from target to target, but not shooting at the target itself.

[Pyroxia]

15 hours ago, MacSquirrel_Jedi said:

0% MM will be enough. No, it will not!

I will try to make this article simple. To make it understandable not just for the regular settlers here. On this site there is a lot of stuff you like a newcomer probably do not understand. They will instruct you to read a instructions which will make you even more confused at the beginning. Because it’s hard to imagine something behind the text or formulas. Most of the time there is a talking about percentage of Monitor Distance ex.: 0% MM. What does it mean? I will show you on example with 100% Monitor distance – vertical (MDV). Converting from Windows to Game.

In Windows desktop measure the distance traveled by the mouse, if the cursor moves across the entire screen, in the vertical axis. In other words, if you move the cursor from the top edge of the screen to the bottom.

I measured 2,7 inches. Now if I want to reach the center from the top edge of the screen. How much distance must mouse travel? A half right => 2,7/2 = 1,35 inches. So if you set a calculator here to match your game for 100% MDV. It means that if you move your mouse vertically about 1,35 inches. The cursor on screen in game will travel exact same monitor distance like in Windows. Ends at the edge of the screen.

Mouse distance 1,35 inches = A half of monitor distance in Windows and game. So at this mouse distance. We can say, that sensitivity is same for both Windows/Game. 

However the sensitivity is same only for one point on the screen = one mouse distance. Any other mouse distance lower or higher from 1,35 inches. Will result in different monitor distance in Game. More or less. Because of 2D/3D projection.

I created a graph that allows me to see the projected path of the cursor on the screen for several mouse distances. So you better understand what's going on. Graph is simulating one quarter of screen. We don't have to simulate the whole screen, because the rest will just be mirrored to this quarter.

Graph on right side is showing cursor path of our example 100% MDV. Dots represents a cursor path. Green simulates a Windows. Red game. But as you can see, mouse sensitivity is same only for one point = one mouse distance = one monitor distance. All other mouse distances will result in a different monitor distance.

Ideally, we want all pairs of points (Green/Red) to become one. But it’s mostly impossible to achieve it. Recently I found out how to find the smallest difference between points for all mouse distances.

Here comes the Jedi’s mouse trick:
Set the monitor distance to 100% MDV and note the 360° distance = 13,1815.
Set the monitor distance to     0% MDV and note the 360° distance = 11,3097.
Manually adjust the sensitivity so that the 360° distance matches the average of both values (13,1815 + 11,3097)/2 = 12,2456. By this you will receive the smallest deviation for all points. I will demonstrate it on a Square graphs (ratio 1:1).

This method looks easy. But it's practically 11 years of development behind it (With pauses of course). 

You can see the difference visually. But we can compare it also with numbers. I will use sum of absolute monitor distance deviations (SoD) for comparing with 0% MM. We don’t care if the deviation is positive or negative. We just need to know absolute deviation. If the SoD value is lower, it means that method has a lower deviation for all monitor distances. It will be not to much precise. Because we are comparing just 9x points on screen. But it’s enough to demonstrate the differences.

Windows to Hipfire:

Windows to AWP Zoom 1:

Hipfire to AWP Zoom 1:

If you do not want to adjust the distance for all points, but maybe only for 40%. Repeat the same procedure, only use 40% instead of 100%. This give you the smallest deviation for all monitor distances in the range of 40% of monitor screen. 

There is many people who are trying to guide me to use 0% MM. No matter what. But they don't understand that they're taking me back 11 years to the exact moment that led to the development of my Mouse sensitivity utility.

I understand that 0% MM is mathematically correct. But when I leave the game back to Windows. I can't hit the icons, and it makes me mad with 0% MM it’s even more noticeable. Because what we are doing in Windows most of the time? We are opening and closing windows. And to close a window you have to move cursor all the way to upper right corner of screen. And there is the biggest deviation for 0% MM. That’s why some people like to use 100% MDH/V. 

Jedi’s mouse trick is a compromise between tracking (0% MM) and flicks (100% MM). 

I want to use ur method but everything looks so complicated. Can you gave me sensitivity yaw, DPI and WPS for 1920x1080 cs go?

[Pyroxia]

21 minutes ago, Pyroxia said:

I want to use ur method but everything looks so complicated. Can you gave me sensitivity yaw, DPI and WPS for 1920x1080 cs go?

NVM I understand now

[popnik90]

18 часов назад, MacSquirrel_Jedi сказал:

0% ММ будет достаточно. Нет, не будет!

Я постараюсь сделать эту статью простой. Чтобы это было понятно не только обычным поселенцам здесь. На этом сайте есть много вещей, которые вы, как новичок, вероятно, не понимаете. Они посоветуют вам прочитать инструкции, которые вначале запутают вас еще больше. Потому что сложно представить что-то за текстом или формулами. В большинстве случаев говорят о процентном соотношении расстояния монитора, например: 0% MM. Что это значит? Я покажу вам на примере со 100% расстоянием монитора - вертикальным ( MDV ). Конвертация из Windows в Game.

На рабочем столе Windows измерьте расстояние, пройденное мышью, если курсор перемещается по всему экрану, по вертикальной оси. Другими словами, если вы переместите курсор от верхнего края экрана к нижнему.

Я измерил 2,7 дюйма. Теперь, если я хочу добраться до центра с верхнего края экрана. На какое расстояние должна пройти мышь? Половина правая => 2,7 / 2 = 1,35 дюйма. Итак, если вы установите здесь калькулятор, чтобы соответствовать вашей игре на 100% MDV . Это означает, что если вы переместите мышь вертикально примерно на 1,35 дюйма. Курсор на экране в игре будет перемещаться на то же расстояние монитора, что и в Windows. Заканчивается на краю экрана.

Расстояние мыши 1,35 дюйма = половина расстояния монитора в Windows и игре. Так что на таком расстоянии мыши. Можно сказать, что чувствительность одинакова для Windows / Game. 

Однако чувствительность одинакова только для одной точки на экране = одно расстояние мыши. Любое другое расстояние мыши ниже или выше 1,35 дюйма. Приведет к разному расстоянию между мониторами в игре. Более менее. Из-за 2D / 3D проекции.

Я создал график, который позволяет мне видеть прогнозируемый путь курсора на экране на нескольких расстояниях мыши. Так вам лучше понять, что происходит. График моделирует одну четверть экрана. Нам не нужно моделировать весь экран, потому что остальное будет просто отражено в этом квартале.

График справа показывает путь курсора в нашем примере 100% MDV . Точки обозначают путь курсора. Зеленый имитирует Windows. Красная игра. Но, как видите, чувствительность мыши одинакова только для одной точки = одно расстояние мыши = одно расстояние монитора. Все другие расстояния мыши приведут к другому расстоянию монитора.

В идеале мы хотим, чтобы все пары точек (зеленый / красный) стали одним целым. Но добиться этого практически невозможно. Недавно я узнал, как найти наименьшую разницу между точками для всех расстояний мыши.

А вот и трюк с мышью джедая:
установите расстояние монитора на 100% MDV и обратите внимание на расстояние 360 ° = 13,1815.
Установите расстояние монитора на 0% MDV и обратите внимание на расстояние 360 ° = 11,3097.
Вручную отрегулируйте чувствительность так, чтобы расстояние 360 ° соответствовало среднему из обоих значений (13,1815 + 11,3097) / 2 = 12,2456. Таким образом вы получите наименьшее отклонение по всем пунктам. Продемонстрирую это на графиках Квадрата (соотношение 1: 1).

Этот способ выглядит несложным. Но за ним практически 11 лет разработки (конечно, с паузами). 

Вы можете увидеть разницу визуально. Но мы можем сравнить это и с числами. Я буду использовать сумму абсолютных отклонений расстояния до монитора (SoD) для сравнения с 0% MM. Нам все равно, положительное или отрицательное отклонение. Нам просто нужно знать абсолютное отклонение. Если значение SoD ниже, это означает, что метод имеет меньшее отклонение для всех расстояний до мониторов. Это будет не очень точно. Потому что мы сравниваем на экране всего 9x точек. Но этого достаточно, чтобы продемонстрировать различия.

Окна для Hipfire:

Окна в AWP Zoom 1:

Hipfire в AWP Zoom 1:

Если вы не хотите регулировать расстояние для всех точек, а может быть только на 40%. Повторите ту же процедуру, только используйте 40% вместо 100%. Это дает вам наименьшее отклонение для всех расстояний до монитора в диапазоне 40% экрана монитора. 

Есть много людей, которые пытаются научить меня использовать 0% MM. Не важно что. Но они не понимают, что они возвращают меня на 11 лет назад к тому моменту, который привел к разработке моей утилиты для определения чувствительности мыши.

Я понимаю, что 0% ММ математически правильно. Но когда я выхожу из игры обратно в Windows. Я не могу нажимать на значки, и это меня бесит, при 0% MM это даже более заметно. Потому что что мы делаем в Windows большую часть времени? Мы открываем и закрываем окна. А чтобы закрыть окно, вам нужно переместить курсор в правый верхний угол экрана. И есть самое большое отклонение для 0% MM. Вот почему некоторым людям нравится использовать 100% MDH / V. 

Уловка джедая с мышью - это компромисс между отслеживанием (0% MM) и щелчками (100% MM). 

Sorry, I didn't understand everything about your article. Best conversion method MDV 40% ?

[Quackerjack]

no this method is close to 65 % MDV

[MacSquirrel_Jedi]

50 minutes ago, Quackerjack said:

this method is close to 65 % MDV

it looks like you are right, i did not notice it 

[Pyroxia]

Ok I tried enough and I can say nothing special about this method for me. It's just another monitor distance percentage. Sorry jedi but correct method should track PGTI in kovaak's naturally for me. Sadly no method can do this because of projection issues. When u look up sensitivity feels slower when u look down sensitivity feels slower it's the flaw of the 3D game in a 2D plane.

[MacSquirrel_Jedi]

36 minutes ago, Pyroxia said:

correct method should track PGTI

For tracking it's of course best 0% MM.

[Pyroxia]

3 minutes ago, MacSquirrel_Jedi said:

For tracking it's of course best 0% MM.

is he using %0 ? My point is tracking pGTI on my own not others.

Edited November 22, 2021 by Pyroxia

[MacSquirrel_Jedi]

1 minute ago, Pyroxia said:

is he using %0 ?

I don't know. It doesn't matter. Because he is in just one FOV. And our brain will adapt to any sensitivity. Problem will appear in moment when you change game/aim/fov etc. If we will be in a one game only, it doesn't matter what sensitivity we are using (except extremes of course).

To be able compare two worlds (Windows/Game). There should be exist a test like this which in first half will be in 3D like on video and then in second half it will switch to 2D in realtime. And as a result, you will recieve a standalone score for 2D part and 3D part. The test which i believe could benefit from this method. Could be some circle which will appear somewhere on screen and then disappear and appear somewhere else, and more quickly you hit this, more score you should get. Or test which will combine both would be interesting. Tracking and flicks - changing dynamically

[Skwuruhl]

This isn't really new and still inherits all the problems that MD has to begin with. It's gonna come out around 68% MDV for most people https://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=2*x*pi%2Fatan(x*tan(70.5328°%2F2))+%3D+1*pi%2Fatan(1*tan(70.5328°%2F2))+%2B+pi%2Ftan(70.5328°%2F2)

Monitor Distance's initial strategy is dubious at best and completely falls apart once you're on high ground aiming at targets below you. "Matched" distances aren't even close in that scenario. See a 4cm movement away from a jar in hipfire and zoom with MDV 100% (this "should" be about matched based on my cm/360):


Zoom is over 10% off.
Trying to make an arbitrary mouse movement match at an arbitrary point on the screen that will only work if you're facing directly at the horizon is pissing into the wind and getting nowhere.

What you actually want to do is make it so a flick or other mouse movement to a given target on your screen will be consistent.
Consider the scenario where the target is 5cm away from your crosshair on screen and takes 2cm to flick to. When you zoom in the target on screen is now 12.1cm away from your crosshair. The new flick distance should represent this change accurately, so it should take 4.84cm (12.1/5*2cm).

An example of this in-game with exactly 2.4219x zoom:


Hipfire the target is ~241 pixels away, and when you zoom the target is ~582 pixels away, same ratio as the zoom ratio of 2.4219x. In hipfire it takes a 1.4142cm movement to flick to the target. In zoom it will take exactly 2.4219 times that at 3.4251cm. Also note how this works when aiming down at targets below you.

Scaling sensitivity by zoom ratio is the only mathematically sound way of scaling sensitivity between zoom levels. Attempting to convert sensitivity between Windows and 3D using monitor distance doesn't work. Just use whatever is comfortable for use in desktop and decide on your in-game sensitivity independent of that.

Edited November 23, 2021 by Skwuruhl

[MacSquirrel_Jedi]

15 hours ago, Skwuruhl said:

facing directly at the horizon is pissing into the wind and getting nowhere

And aiming at target below you is what? I see a lot of bottles have been filled 

My observations from your pictures:
1) It's too close for this kind of measuring.
2) Trying to aim under yourself makes room for mistakes. Because when you reach bottom, the projection will stop. But your mouse can be still moving. 
3) If I'm looking well, at each picture you are comparing two different points.
4) Both comparing points have different depth (Bottle/Ground)
5) On each picture, the comparing points are under different angle.

but I understood your intention

15 hours ago, Skwuruhl said:

Attempting to convert sensitivity between Windows and 3D using monitor distance doesn't work

But it's the only method for now that can get close to it.

15 hours ago, Skwuruhl said:

Just use whatever is comfortable for use in desktop

People who ends up at this site/article surely wants to hear that... 

15 hours ago, Skwuruhl said:

still inherits all the problems that MD has to begin with

This method does not solve all the pain in the world of mouse sensitivity. Don't try to look for something that isn't there. This method will just always find smallest deviation between points at given % of monitor distance range.

In this article, I have used an example for all points 0-100% MDV. And as I see it, you're all like hey it's MDV around 68 % end of story... But if i will want to find smallest deviation in range of 0-40%. It will be like this:

And now it corresponds to MDV 28.12% (Not 68%). For every range you will recieve different MD%.

In past i was playing at MDV 100% and MDH 100% at the same time (4/3 stretched to 16/9). See below.

All the medals I got from the AWP tournaments were at this crazy setting.

Because i was playing only CS:GO only AWP. I was absolutely satisfied with it. I didn't play rifle, because i couldn't hit anything... From graph you can clearly see why... If i look back I was playing MDH/V at 100%. Then MDV at 100%. Now i'm using my trick approx MDV 68%. So it's obvious that I'm getting closer to 0% MM. Maybe in future i will after all ends up at 0% MM. We will see   But not for now.

Edited November 23, 2021 by MacSquirrel_Jedi

[Pyroxia]

7 minutes ago, MacSquirrel_Jedi said:

And aiming at target below you is what? I see a lot of bottles have been filled 

My observations from your pictures:
1) It's too close for this kind of measuring.
2) Trying to aim under yourself makes room for mistakes. Because when you reach bottom, the projection will stop. But your mouse can be still moving. 
3) If I'm looking well, at each picture you are comparing two different points.
4) Both comparing points have different depth (Bottle/Ground)
5) On each picture, the comparing points are under different angle.

but I understood your intention

But it's the only method for now that can get close to it.

People who ends up at this site/article surely wants to hear that... 

This method does not solve all the pain in the world of mouse sensitivity. Don't try to look for something that isn't there. This method will just always find smallest deviation between points at given % of monitor distance range.

In this article, I have used an example for all points 0-100% MDV. And as I see it, you're all like hey it's MDV around 68 % end of story... But if i will want to find smallest deviation in range of 0-40%. It will be like this:

And now it corresponds to MDV 28.12% (Not 68%). For every range you will recieve different MD%.

In past i was playing at MDV 100% and MDH 100% at the same time (4/3 stretched to 16/9). See below.

All the medals I got from the AWP tournaments were at this crazy setting.

Because i was playing only CS:GO only AWP. I was absolutely satisfied with it. I didn't play rifle, because i couldn't hit anything... From graph you can clearly see why... If i look back I was playing MDH/V at 100%. Then MDV at 100%. Now i'm using my trick approx MDV 68%. So it's obvious that I'm getting closer to 0% MM. Maybe in future i will after all ends up at 0% MM. We will see   But not for now.

I don't understand one thing how can u find deviation?

[MacSquirrel_Jedi]

1 hour ago, Pyroxia said:

I don't understand one thing how can u find deviation?

 

On 11/21/2021 at 11:06 PM, MacSquirrel_Jedi said:

As you can see, at mouse distance 0,6 inches cursor will travel distance 2,56535 inches on the screen in Windows. And if you make same mouse move in game (0,6 inches), cursor in game will travel distance 2,26312 inches (more precisely chosen object will travel this distance on screen). So the deviation is = 2,26312 -2,56535 = -0,30223 inches. Deviation = Difference = -0,30223 inches. Sorry if i confused you, with this term.

It's physical distance. If you place ruler to your monitor (please don't destroy/scratch your screen - only plastic ruler will not harm your screen). You can verify it. Most precise way to verify it is straight vertical mouse move. At home environment. Like in my video (Correction). But it is not necessary because you will always receive distance needed to reach the edge of the screen (value in green rectangle above). So the edge of monitor can be used as a ruler.

And graph is showing you differences for these 9x mouse distances across your screen. So you can make a nice picture. What is happening with sensitivity.

Edited November 23, 2021 by MacSquirrel_Jedi

[Pherall]

Your windows sensitivity hasnt anything to do with hitting with rifles in cs go. Practice ingame and let wps be whats comfortable. With that said, I checked my Desktop to Destiny 2 sens and it was almost exactly 68% =D

Edited November 23, 2021 by Pherall

[MacSquirrel_Jedi]

@MacSquirrel_Jedi It's like talking to a wall. Go to sleep Jedi...

[Skwuruhl]

You kinda missed my point entirely.

5 hours ago, MacSquirrel_Jedi said:

My observations from your pictures:
1) It's too close for this kind of measuring.
2) Trying to aim under yourself makes room for mistakes. Because when you reach bottom, the projection will stop. But your mouse can be still moving. 
3) If I'm looking well, at each picture you are comparing two different points.
4) Both comparing points have different depth (Bottle/Ground)
5) On each picture, the comparing points are under different angle.

1) what?
2) I know how to avoid bottoming out the camera when doing tests.
3) I'm not sure what you mean by this. The two sets of pictures are different examples. They're about two different things.
4) ^
5) ^

5 hours ago, MacSquirrel_Jedi said:

This method does not solve all the pain in the world of mouse sensitivity. Don't try to look for something that isn't there. This method will just always find smallest deviation between points at given % of monitor distance range.

The point isn't finding  a monitor distance % that has the least deviation from other monitor distance measurements. The point is that basing your sensitivity off of monitor distance to begin with is a flawed start. You should instead be looking to make sensitivity consistent with the amount of zoom your ADS has.

[MacSquirrel_Jedi]

21 hours ago, Pherall said:

I checked my Desktop to Destiny 2 sens and it was almost exactly 68% =D

No way  are you kidding me ?  

[MacSquirrel_Jedi]

18 hours ago, Skwuruhl said:

You kinda missed my point entirely

Yeah it looks like it. And I don't seem to understand it any time soon. Sorry.

18 hours ago, Skwuruhl said:

You should instead be looking to make sensitivity consistent with the amount of zoom your ADS has

So you are setting 360° distance for ADS according to zoom ratio? Because that's the only conclusion from your answer by me. 

It still seems to me that you are living only in game to game converting. Totally ignoring that there is also Windows (2D). I see no problem in using my trick for Main game (Windows/Main game). And after that for Main Game/Secondary games, use as you are saying your consistent method. And transition between Windows/Main game/Secondary games can feel more smooth. 

Maybe instead of talking. You can provide us the example of your "right" way ? 

Edited November 24, 2021 by MacSquirrel_Jedi

[CaptaPraelium]

I probably should pipe up on this one since the concept is originally mine... but I never could get the math right and eventually decided not to bother, so I'm glad you've made some effort, Jedi.

The concept with this is simple: if you're using some monitor distance, it's always going to be wrong everywhere but one place, so let's just minimise the error overall, right? But it's not so simple as splitting your 0% and 100% distances (averaging) because it's nonlinear. That's where the math gets fun. It's not totally hard math but it's not garden variety either
Then it gets saucy when you realise there's a difference between minimising error magnitude (how wrong is it, 1 dimension) and error volume (how much of the screen is wrong and how wrong is it? 3 dimensions....)

Reason I decided not to bother in the end was because, put simply, the more I brushed up on my calculus (it's been a long while) the more I realised that 0% was 'the way'.

Buuuuut, back then I was completely focussed on in-game matching, and cared not for the desktop. And I had the same experience as you, jedi: I'd leave game from flicking to heads like it was easy and I couldn't flick to an OK button or a text box if my life depended on it. And I don't know about the rest of you, but I use the windows desktop a LOT. More than I do 3D gaming, such is life. As far as I can see it, if there's any value to maintaining sensitivity between games and zoom levels, there is that same value in maintaining it to the desktop.

Trouble is there's absolutely no way you're matching the desktop to any more than one FOV. So you've definitely got to pick one. I tend to play the same kind of games so my hipfire FOV is always the same and it's not an issue for me: match desktop to my standard hipfire, then 0% from there in the 3D world. But for people who don't have a standard hipfire, I'm not sure there's any way to extract any benefit in matching to desktop at all.

And then there's the million dollar question of what defines desktop speed in the first place. 0%? 100%? Horizontal? Vertical? Fight!

And the very real consideration of how far we are from the monitor/monitor dimensions, which matter less in the 3D space, but actually help to answer the above question, in a 2D space.

Welcome to my years-old rotting can of worms.

[MacSquirrel_Jedi]

11 hours ago, CaptaPraelium said:

But for people who don't have a standard hipfire, I'm not sure there's any way to extract any benefit in matching to desktop at all

I'm sure. There's not! If people have different hipfire FOV (they are playing more than one game). It's of course useless to use this method for Desktop/Hipfire. Because even if the sensitivity will feel the similar on screen. It will not feel same when looking around. Because 360° distance will be different.

This method is most beneficial for Desktop/Scopes - AWPers. Or for specific needs. If someone is focusing just on one game/aim. Or maybe when tournament is coming and we will want to setup Desktop to have minimum deviation from that tournament game/aim. To not much cripple our aiming when working in Desktop.

11 hours ago, CaptaPraelium said:

And then there's the million dollar question of what defines desktop speed in the first place. 0%? 100%? Horizontal? Vertical? Fight!

Any combination of that will result in different speed for each monitor distance (except one distance). So what is so wrong on this method (averaging).

I have also one question. For example in CSGO the command zoom_sensitivity_ratio_mouse is driving all scopes. How do you want set all scopes to 0% MM?

0% MM is absolutely great method for Game to Game converting. It make perfect sense. And calculator here works absolutely fine at default.

I'm trying to make really deep dive into mouse sensitivity. Few examples:

1) If we have set mouse to 400 DPI. It means 1inch/400 DPI = 0,0025 inch is minimum mouse distance that will create a move in Desktop/Game. I assume here that the mouse is able to detect minimal movement by a difference of one dot. And this mouse distance is equal 0,01069 inch at monitor screen. Which is equal to 0,09259 % MDV (in my case). What's the point of setting 0% MM when you will never reach that value in this case? Difference here is practically nothing. But i wanted to demonstrate how much i'm torturing myself.

2) Desktop cursor vs. Game Crosshair. When working in Windows. On what we are focusing the most when moving across desktop? On cursor of course but what part of it? On the sharp end, where is a click point? This click point is size of one pixel. No one is able to track one pixel when moving fast. So we are focusing to center of gravity. So when we switch to game where we have crosshair with different center of gravity. It will create also slight difference in mouse sensitivity feel.

I solved this problem by creating a cursor in Windows that is the same as the crosshair in the game.

3) But it is still not enough, because if the crosshair lines have a thickness equal to 1 pixel. It will never be in the middle of the screen. Because middle of the screen at 1920x1080 is between pixels 960 and 961. So to remove the half of pixel deviation is possible only when the crosshair have thickness equal to 2 pixels (or 4, 6, 8, etc.). 

But 2 pixels for crosshair is too thick for me, so i use 1 pixel anyway.

There is lots of small things that can reduce difference in sensitivity. No matter what method we are using.

Edited November 28, 2021 by MacSquirrel_Jedi

[CaptaPraelium]

1 hour ago, MacSquirrel_Jedi said:

To not much cripple our aiming when working in Desktop.

I think this sums it up well. It's not so much about matching to the desktop because it will always be a huge compromise, but it would be nice to minimise the impact of being in 2D land at the desktop... So, I get it, I see your goal here.... It's just not so simple as you think. Have a play with those things I said above about how it's nonlinear and 3D - you're still treating it as linear and 1D. Averaging is finding the middle of two points, but this is a cloud of points shaped like a weird lumpy hat and you have to find out where the good spot is. Oh yeh and you have to define the good spot. The concept is good, to find the smallest error, but the algorithm of averaging isn't up to the job.

There was a lot of talk about this subject around the birth of viewspeed, you might like to dig around the forums of olde.

[DPI Wizard]

21 hours ago, MacSquirrel_Jedi said:

1) If we have set mouse to 400 DPI. It means 1inch/400 DPI = 0,0025 inch is minimum mouse distance that will create a move in Desktop/Game. I assume here that the mouse is able to detect minimal movement by a difference of one dot. And this mouse distance is equal 0,01069 inch at monitor screen. Which is equal to 0,09259 % MDV (in my case). What's the point of setting 0% MM when you will never reach that value in this case? Difference here is practically nothing. But i wanted to demonstrate how much i'm torturing myself.

The "distance" in MDV 0% is infinitesimally small, once you move 1 pixel you are basically off. That's why I usually refer to it as tracking speed, because what it does is keep the rate at which you move the mouse consistent with the rate that the target on the monitor moves at any FOV.

 

[Pyroxia]

4 hours ago, DPI Wizard said:

The "distance" in MDV 0% is infinitesimally small, once you move 1 pixel you are basically off. That's why I usually refer to it as tracking speed, because what it does is keep the rate at which you move the mouse consistent with the rate that the target on the monitor moves at any FOV.

 

It's awesome for scopes but when we match from windows I swear every method feels different in 3D. I hit %32 lg with %0 in quake champions, %38 with %100mdh from windows and %41-47 with %100mdh horizontal-%100mdv vertical sensitivity from windows. This results are not coming from just one game. I'm hitting them consistently which is why I say when I match from windows everythink feels different.

 

Now there is another result for overwatch. When I play with tracer. %0MDV from windows to game make my accuracy %47-55 consistently. Other matching methods wont work for that game for me.  Data I get from every method crazy different I really don't know what is practically or what is mathematically best anymore.