mlem

I suppose another option would be to increase my 360cm sensitivity in line with the increased FOV (from 73.74 to 80). If i were to do this, I would imagine MDV 0% would still be the way to go, opposed to say using MDV 100/133? (i know it is probably kind of subjective but would like your view nonetheless). Thanks for the responses so far, it has helped me understand the MDV0% and my own calculations better. :S

Ahh I suppose that would explain why the higher FOV (at the same 360cm) would feel slower for both hipfire and ADS. This was ultimately what i wanted to achieve. Question 1: Does that mean, where I want to change my hipfire FOV but want to maintain MDV 0%, i would need to make sure both games have the same FOV in the calculations? Because i was originally doing this (https://www.mouse-sensitivity.com/?share=0b870418ee14016eac1309b04bcbb09c) to convert from <CS> (this is my reference game for all my conversions) which has default FOV 73.74 (16:9) to <Game i want, BF2042 in this case> at FOV 80 (i normally match Game2 FOV to v73.74) which resulted in the changes to ADS zoom ratio (GstInput.SoldierZoomSensitivityAll) from 1.0 to 1.118. Question2: What is my calculations above actually converting to?

Hello, I am trying to understand USA ceoff= 0 and its interactions with differing FOVs. My very simplified understanding of USA coeff = 0 is that it is something along the lines of 'same' tracking feeling between hipfire and ADS. I thought this applied to all hipfire FOVs. I play bf2042 as an example and i've used FOV 73.74 and USA on + coeff = 0 (and the aim sensitivity ratios in the game are at 1.0) for a long time. But recently i was trying a different hipfire FOVs, such as 80. With the higher hipfire FOV at 80, i expected the ADS fov (say 1.25xscope) to increase (and it did as i used FOV scaling in the game). I would have thought the sensitivity for that ADS/zoom to also increase automatically. (I didnt touch zoom sensitivity ratio at the time, it was still at 1.0). However It felt off, slower than it should, so i did some manual 360/cm test and noticed the ADS sensitivity didn't change at all despite the increase in hipfire + ADS fov. After some random tinkering on mousesensitivty.com it became obvious that i was meant to also change the zoom sensitivity ratio to 1.112 (from 1.0). I guess ultimately i should just follow whatever figures the calculator spits out even if i don't understand but i wanted to give it a shot at understanding, so is anyone able to explain why the hipfire FOV change causes a need to also change/adjust the zoom sensitivity ratio when coeff is already 0? That might not even be the right question lol but just giving it a go. Thanks regardless.

Hello, I noticed they now have a FOV slider in the options. It appears to affect the sensitivity. Could you update this please

So is the take away that. 1. Some ppl like to overcomplicate things and ignore simple solutions. 2. Blurbuster wall of text is outdated and doesn't actually know what he is talking about and invent problems to create solutions to sell, even though they aren't actually 'problems'. 3. Bugs are bugs.

Oh yea out of curiosity, how does pixel ratio operate when you run a lower resolution on say a 1080p monitor. Does the pixel ratio apply to the native or the resolution u set in a particular game? I assume it still applies to native resolution (no black bar stuff - fullscreen)?

Out of curiosity, the original version (vFOV) - you had mentioned limit 2/power 2 made sense as it resulted in 0.5 zoom sensitivity multiplier (im guessing that is 50% MDV?) at exactly half the hipfire vFOV. With the change to zoom level instead of vFOV ratio, is there a new set of 'make the most sense' limit/power figures? I note that limit 2/power 2 results in 50% MDV at zoom level of x2.00. I don't understand enough of the formula relationship etc but figured best to just ask you. TLDR = what are the 'makes most sense' limit/power figures for zoom level (instead of vFOV ratio), if any?

fantastic! works perfectly now.

Fantastic, love that it is automated. I found that for deep rock galactic + remnant from the ashes where there are separate sensitivity for vertical and horizontal, the vertical sensitivity doesn't populate, just says "NA'. The vertical sensitivity is also sometimes different, not 1:1 with horizontal (pretty sure remnant is like this) so cannot just copy the horizontal figure.

Yep a quick test showed my suggestion is redundant. only applies for that specific hipfire FOV.

Yea i should have added, this was only for hipfire vFOV at 73.74 (this is wat i use). I haven't tried another FOV so perhaps that 2.364 figure is purely for 73.74. But i've tried limits of 1.5/1.78/2 and at vFOV hipfire 73.74, the power of 2.364 (zoom scaling) matches very closely to power of 2 (FOV scaling). This has been done x1, 1.25, 1.5, 2, 3.0, 6.0 zoom (Battlefield series, COD etc). I will play around with another hipfire vFOV out of curiosity though. I just plugging numbers and observed that. =/

This may/may not help but under the v2 zoom scale formula - using power 2.364 provides the same results as v1 fov scale formula at power 2 at the same limit.

nice i been enjoying your coefficient method - fiddly but worth it for me. Thanks for the updated version.

By the way - does the hipfire vFOV entered change what values should be used. In your default example, it uses hipfire 90 vFOV with 1.5 limit/2power (your personal preference). But say the hipfire vFOV is 55, would it be more ideal to use say higher limit/lower power etc. I personally use hipfire 73.74 vFOV and the dynamic coefficient looks significantly flatter/not as pronounced at either ends of the hipfire vFOV (1.5 limit/2 power) compared to your hipfire 90 vFOV. I tweaking the limit/power and trying to determine whether the power/limit have ideal ranges (closer to 1 or 2) depending on your base/hipfire vFOV being high/low, or is this really all just 'preference'?

Been using this and I like it. Would be good if it could be integrated into this website to automatically calculate the figures as it a bit tedious calculating every scope value. Good stuff.