potato psoas

Does anyone know of a comparable mouse to this one? Looks like the campaign got stuffed over by coronavirus. A month or so ago they talked about finding a distributor, but it's been so long since the crowdfunding started...

On 19/06/2020 at 03:05, DPI Wizard said:

A new version was just published that contains two new features:

1. Focal length

This is a function available in the Aspect Ratio box of the output game. What this does is calculate the correct resolution you need to set (with black bars) to keep the same focal length based on your FOV. This is useful for games that does not support FOV change.

2. Monitor size conversion

When you enter a different monitor size and/or aspect ratio the calculator will now account for this based on your setup.

• 360 distance will be the same, as it doesn't change based on monitor size or aspect ratio.
• Monitor Distance Horizontal and Viewspeed Horizontal will take into account the horizontal size of the monitor.
• Monitor Distance Vertical and Viewspeed Vertical will take into account the vertical size of the monitor.

This means that if you go from a 24" to a 27" 16:9 monitor, both horizontal and vertical will give you the same result.

However if you go from a 27" 16:9 to a 35" 21:9 the vertical sensitivity will stay about the same, while horizontal will account for the extra width.

 

Please report back if any of these features are acting weird!

This is perfect, I've wanted this to be added for ages. Will keep an eye out for bugs.

Maybe first thing I noticed is that when converting from windows to windows with different monitor sizes, there is no discrepancy for changes in DPI. And maybe it would also be cool to have the option to convert DPI in custom intervals, as most mice don't have less than 50 DPI intervals. These are small ideas off the top of my head, but it might help. I leave it to you DPIWizard. Thanks for your hard work.

5 hours ago, Guest ZSfGuBcu said:

Hello

i'm not really sure if it is ok to even post this on this site ( it has nothing to do with mouse ) but since it is labeled off topic i hope it is fine

my question is : does it make sense to use a high fov with stretched aspect res instead of lowering the fov

 

to me the high fov always made the game and guns more stable and gets rid of the character up and down motion when running/moving but i wanna know it is better to play with low fov

 

ps. i know it is all preference and all that so i am just trying to have a conversation : )

Nah don't worry, anything that has to do with games you can talk about on this website, and your FOV definitely has an impact on your sensitivity settings so you're definitely on topic.

In terms of playing stretched, the only reason to do it is to increase player size to make targets easier to acquire because they are bigger. This is useful in games where you can't change your FOV, like in CS:GO. If you can change your FOV then don't stretch, just use a lower FOV.

However, in saying this, I would not recommend stretching because it looks stupid, and if the game doesn't have a vertical sensitivity setting it will cause your sensitivity to no longer be 1:1, thus confusing your muscle memory. By stretching, the horizontal sensitivity will feel much faster than the vertical sensitivity. This is because usually the game only has one sensitivity value, which determines the sensitivity of both axes. But Fortnite, for example, is different as it does have a vertical sensitivity setting, so you could lower the horizontal sensitivity to match the vertical sensitivity in these types of games.

But even if the targets are bigger, that doesn't necessarily mean you will be more accurate. If anything, if you find you get an advantage from stretching then that may mean your sensitivity is too high and you should lower it. An adequate sensitivity will allow you to acquire targets of any size. It may also depend on your grip style as different styles of holding the mouse affect how much control and flexibility you have with your aim.

Now I guess your question is: high FOV while stretched?

...Which is interesting. I guess it depends on the game, but if having a higher vertical FOV helps make guns and movement more stable then I can see the advantage. That doesn't have much to do with the lack of accuracy but more ease of recoil management. It's a pretty smart idea. I'd like to know what games you think it would help in and see some video comparisons. Or did you get the idea from a Youtube channel?

2 hours ago, Pyroxia said:

I played 3 months with 34.5 cm/360 with %0 MM everything. 2 days ago I changed my cm/360 28.5. mostly I'm playing counter strike/battlefıeld/call of duty is it so high for theese games?

It's not really that high for COD or Battlefield but compared to other players it's high for CS. Most CS players are greater than 30cm/360. You can always use a different sensitivity for different games. There's honestly no harm in doing that. It all depends on the game. However, your current setting would be a good sweet spot for all types of games.

Bottom line, it's better to have High DPI and Low Sens, especially with mouse these days.

Here's a good thread about this:

3 hours ago, Drimzi said:

Maintain a constant hipfire cm/360° for consistent navigation and convert 0% to ads/scopes (anything that changes the fov) to maintain the same sensitivity relative to the hipfire. You end up having a different sensitivity for each game, but it is muscle memory associated per game.

Sometimes I play a game at default sensitivity because I can't be bothered to change it. It's different, but as long as the game converts ADS using 0% it at the very least feels consistent. Heck, some days I even change my DPI and play at a really high sens because I'm feeling too lazy to swing my arm around with my usual low sens.

13 hours ago, Quackerjack said:

why u think so potato? U see everywhere that u shouldnt change it.

If you have non-1:1 fields of view for the axes yet you use the same sensitivity value (cm/360) for each axis then the perceived sensitivity will be different for the two axes. Therefore to compensate for the difference in perceived sensitivity you have to change the sensitivity value of one of the axes, depending on which conversion method you are using and which axis you base the conversion on.

57 minutes ago, Sirpedrovic said:

Is changing the vertical and horizontal sensitivities a good way to counter sensitivity changes in stretched resolutions such as 4:3 on csgo??

Yeah that is the best thing to do in such a case if you really do want to play stretched.

3 hours ago, Pyroxia said:

Hello I have a question. I hate vertical sync because it does input lag. I want to know did FPS limit works like a vsync or different system vithout input lag?

What GPU you got?

Congratulations cchhqq!

7 hours ago, NukeON said:

Good morning, I've been thinking about sensitivity for about a year, and I do not end up feeling comfortable especially when going from one game to another, I've gone from slow to fast since I've realized that I have a hard time repositioning the mouse and with small adjustments I have practically the same precision with high sensitivity, the doubt comes to me in scope / ADS, I always use MM 0%, but I have a problem and that is that I press the mouse too much when I hit the shot that I have a hard time tracking, is not a problem in games with my standard fov, 90V, but in games like tarkov with 75 V, and pubg 103 H, something wrong happened to correct since I move the mouse a little, here comes the question of the post, I have seen that viewspeed converts between fovs much better, at least when working for sensations, which after all is an important factor, is it viable ?, I know that I do not export everything I should to games with different fov, but it is also In those games, everything feels so different, that gives me the feeling of not exporting anything with respect to my main game when I use the same methods for everyone, thanks for the answers!

The assumption that Viewspeed is good for "sensations" is too indeterminable and misinformed. By "good for sensations" I assume you mean your muscle memory. Well the thing is that monitor matching maintains perceived sensitivity, depending on which points (angles) on the monitor we match, and is therefore the best method for muscle memory.

0% will always be matched at the exact center of the screen and should therefore give you perfect muscle memory at that point on the monitor. Which makes it especially great for tracking and precision aim. And higher monitor match percentages will obviously feel perfectly matched at their respective points, though they would have less effect on accuracy and more effect on the overall feel of turning speed since you don't e.g. aim with the 50% point of the screen.

Now the thing with Viewspeed is that it is both arbitrary and the point it matches is variable.

To explain what I mean, you must realize that monitor matching is a bit flawed because it doesn't take into account different monitor sizes and the angle the point on the monitor makes with the eyes. If you match 100% on one monitor and 100% on another, they may have the same percentage but 100% on one monitor does not convert the same to another monitor size. See what I mean:

(same problem applies to the vertical axis)

Viewspeed doesn't take into account perceived monitor size so we can conclude that it is flawed.

The second reason why it's flawed is because the point you match on the monitor changes. It hangs around 75% but changes depending on the FOV. Now this isn't necessarily a bad thing. All points on the monitor should theoretically be matched at all times but they aren't because of distortion. It's just that there really is no mathematical reason why the percentage has to change. It's a convoluted and baseless formula that we developed when we didn't know much about perceived sensitivity, and it was somehow similar to CS:GO and Battlefield's 75% default so it had a lot going for it.

The thing you need to realize is that there is no perfect method. Because you sit in exactly the same spot for changes in zoom there is inevitably going to be distortion. If you convert your sensitivity with monitor match then this inevitably has to affect the cm/360 which may make objects in the gameworld appear to move faster. This is why the moment you ADS you have to adjust to a change in target speed.

The other alternative to this is converting by cm/360 but we know that this method is also flawed because it doesn't take into account perceived sensitivity - the reason why we convert sensitivity in the first place. If you use the same cm/360 you may get perfect spatial muscle memory but what you see on the screen will feel off - low FOV will feel too fast and high FOV feel too slow, as shown in this video:

Just imagine looking through a pair of binoculars or the scope of a gun and you'll realize just how difficult it is to aim at things far away. The cm/360 method may actually be the most natural way to convert sensitivity but natural doesn't always mean advantageous.

53 minutes ago, SteelAdder said:

I was watching this video and saw the part where it says that the lower the FOV, the smaller the difference between the monitor distance and the FOV.

Correct me if I'm wrong (as this is why I'm making this post to clear my confusion), doesn't that mean having a lower FOV would result in less discrepancy between different monitor match percentages? From what I interpret from the video, if I monitor match at 0% and play at a really high FOV, that would make the difference in monitor distance and FOV bigger, therefore resulting in more discrepancy at higher monitor match percentages; however if I play at a really low FOV, there would be less difference between the monitor distance and the FOV, therefore resulting in less discrepancy and resulting in better muscle memory for other monitor match percentages compared to a higher FOV.

Thanks for any responses to clear my confusion

Yes, distortion is more evident at higher FOV, which is why you should not set your FOV too high. 0% ends up becoming too sensitive and 100% feels too slow at the crosshair ruining accurate muscle memory.

568356
66067

On 25/12/2018 at 23:45, Pyroxia said:

Can someone help me I started playing cod bo3 I'm using %0MM for every game is this game using %0MM default? I feel my optics much faster than BO4 but I'm much more accurate in this game.

I think it was just the thermal that was a tad faster than the other scopes. On Console they changed to using 100%MM, but it is still 0%MM on PC for BO3.

We talked some more about this here:

20 hours ago, NeXus . said:

full arm movement is terrible for tracking but feels much better, wrist has been much better for tracking however still feels to fast for precise shots.

I feel exactly the same way. I think I've decided it's easier to progress with a lower sensitivity, whereas I am simply limited by a high sensitivity. I don't wish to have a tense aim posture because it starts to hurt after a while. Though I wouldn't go too low or you a) start to have problems with mousepad space and b) find it difficult to move your arm fast enough to react to enemies.

It also depends on the game - target speed, target size, and the FOV you set the game to all cater to different sensitivity ranges. App. E.g. Call of Duty prefers higher sensitivity (>~20cm/360); Overwatch prefers mid sensitivity (~30cm/360); CS:GO prefers a lower sensitivity (<~40cm/360).

6 hours ago, Skidushe said:

Out of curiosity, do you buy into any of the 'control' type mats. My brain 4 years ago when I bought my mat said I like sniping so I went with the goliathus control mat which I like, but I've never had a feel of anything different. Do you think you can be more accurate with a faster mat?

Well by definition if it has more control it has more friction. But it does need to have balance. You can't be sliding on moist ice or you will never be stable. But most mousepads are never going to be that frictionless so there is always going to be enough control.

Control mousepads are probably better for higher sensitivities since you aren't going to need to move your mouse much to track, but less friction is better for low sensitivities because you need to move your mouse a greater distance while tracking, and if you stutter even a little bit, that will mess with your aim. Just try digging your fingers into the pad while trying to smoothly rotate back and forth at either wrist or elbow. That's why I absolutely hate playing on plastic pads - there is so much friction that you can't track at all.

This is all another reason why I use a gaming sleeve. I rest my arm on the desk, but I don't want that to cause too much friction so I have a silk/spandex sleeve all the way down my arm. Sometimes even the jumper I'm wearing works well enough and my arm slides within my jumper.

Some other things to consider - in Winter you need a jumper but your hand is frozen so you're not going to play very well, yet in Summer if you have a sleeve on you sweat like crazy and can't grip the mouse...

6 minutes ago, DPI Wizard said:

 

Ah ok I never knew that, I wonder why they are different

2 hours ago, DPI Wizard said:

For OW yes, but for a lot of games NO! This only works for about half the games. For any game that has 0 as a valid sensitivity this does not work.

Using the calculator like potato shows does the trick though.

Wait, which games can you give as an example?

1 hour ago, RockieSmithson said:

im trying to lower my dpi from 3200 down to 1600, but ive gotten pretty comfortable with my current overwatch sens of 2.9. is there a way that the calculator can adjust for the dpi change?

i could just double my ow sens to compensate but im not sure if its that easy or not

Yes that is exactly how you do it, and the calculator can help if you need it (as shown below). Your effective sensitivity is a product of in-game sensitivity and DPI (as well as Windows Pointer Speed).

I actually use ESDF for my movement keys so it is actually much easier to use my pinky if I need it. But I still press Z with my ring finger.

2 hours ago, Zwei said:

Honestly, I don't see a lot of talk about this, but I think the factor looking for is mousepad thickness.  The thicker the mousepad, the more likely when you can press the mouse into the mousepad, making it feel a little harder to move.  You'll notice this happens more often with spraying or track aiming.  You're pressing down on left click  (or left click AND right click in the case you're playing a game that has ADS) and there for you press the mouse into the pad.   There probably isn't a whole lot of talk about this cause I feel like its more noticeable with High Sens and there aren't a whole lot of professional competitive gamers that use high sens.  I have a range of about 4 to 6 inch 360 @ 103 FOV. 

The mousepads that you have listed are 4mm to 5mm in thickness.  On Amazon, the Steel Series Classic QCK small/medium/large is 2mm (my old go-to mousepad).  Same with the "Amazon Basics" mousepad which seems to be a rebranded QCK 2mm lol. Give that a shot.   The mousepad I landed on was the  "Reflex Lab Pro 9" which is 3mm but it seems denser and feels like a QCK 2mm imo.  Be warned tho, the Pro 9 is small.  I'm a  high sens aimer, so I don't need a lot of room.  The other option is to change habits; try not to press hard on the mouse when tracking. 

This is pretty solid advice. The best mousepads are the ones with the least of amount of friction. Otherwise, if you have a habit of pressing hard on the mouse pad it makes it hard to track because you stutter as you move. This is why I hate hard plastic mousepads because they have so much friction when connected to my hand, whereas cloth mousepads you can dig into and still move around.

As an example, I used to use the Razer Goliathus Speed a long time ago, which is adequate to say the least, but compared to the QCK+ it has way more friction and makes tracking targets smoothly so much harder. But I still feel like there has gotta be a mousepad that's even smoother than my QCK+. Or maybe there is some kind of wax you can add to it to get the same effect. It's a pretty absorbant mousepad and gets very dirty easily.

3 hours ago, schubi said:

Is it better to have legacy / relative 0% Monitor Distance Coeeficient for muscle memory?

 

Or can i use any value and compensate it with ADS Horizontal Multiplier?

Legacy and Relative 0% are the same thing.

Compensating by adjusting the ADS multiplier would be redundant as well.

Did you have something to say about mousepad friction?

On 01/12/2018 at 16:02, Ravi said:

can anyone explain this with an example with more details as i couldn't understand well ?

Have you had a look at this forum post?

43 minutes ago, Ganja said:

Thanks for that answer but im still a bit confused. Sorry english is not my main language so i have a few problems to understand all of this perfectly. So i always convert all my games with 0% MDH (Monitor Distance Horizontal) and i just want to do this in battlefield aswell because it feels best to me in all other games.

Til today i played with these calculations and also changed all multipliers.

Now i changed all multipliers to 100% default and just used the hipfire of 5% like you said that the game can do all the calculations.

Now the scopes are of course faster than before but for the best muscle memory transfer i should leave the multipliers on 100% now if i understood your answer correctly ?

I find it a bit confusing that the calculator gives different values for each zoom even thought its better to have all multipliers on 100% while uniform soldier aiming is on.

Please correct me if im wrong, thanks for all of your help

Yeah it seems to me like you have understood it. So all you need to do now is set your hipfire and change your coefficient in-game (0% coefficient for 0% monitor match & 133% coefficient for 75% monitor match), making sure to set Universal Soldier Aim to On and have all the multipliers set to 100%.