jabbothehut

Yes I have. Took me months of experimenting and going nutty over it but I'm petty sure I've found a method which works since I am using the same sensitivity for games like battlefield, doom, csgo, rainbow six etc....... I tried to use impulsive's guide on csgo (put a bullet hole on wall and try and try to keep xhair on target while strafing) but found that there was too much bias in that there is no set feedback as to how well you are keeping your xhair on target so I decided to use a different method.
First of all download csgo and the map "sensitivity finder" - http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=439365028
Next stand at the back of the map facing the moving block (you will see once you download this) and hold mb1 while tracking the block. The blue block will rise according to how well you are tracking. To do this be extremely conscious of how you hold your mouse. It needs to be as naturally relaxed as possible to simulate how you would subconsciously hold it. Lower the sens until you cannot feel the little "Shiver" in your wrist if that makes sense. This shiver is due to your muscles not having enough control over the movement (similar to trying to do a core exercise at the gym and not being strong enough at first). This may be surprisingly low and feel unnatural at first but fear not.
Once you have that sensitivity (will probably be lower than expected as previously mentioned) you need to train yourself to use your arm a lot to move and fight off the natural habit of the body to use your wrist for everything. Will feel like aids at first but you will get used to it and aiming will become significantly easier.
Bear in mind that I do not know how foolproof this method is but it has worked wonders for me (shooting up to 35% accuracy with the automatico on bf1 now if that means anything to you).
Give it a shot and see how it goes! Good luck! 

Consoles man, blame the consoles! 

u can adapt to any sens u will have same aim after 1 week of adaptation
after your fully adaptation u will miss flicks like before cause your aim adapted

Scope added and Iron Sight updated
Use the config file for best range, as the scope maxes out at 1 in-game, which will be too low for some conversions.

Just checked now, and yes there's still acceleration and smoothing issues with this game.

Checking this out later today!

The mod worked fine though, except for loading any old savegame you have 

I forgot I had this on Uplay, almost re-bought it on Steam 
Added now.

Lot's of TLC for KF2!
Added zoom sens, correct FOV multiplier and in-game settings!

Warband is added

Yes I have. Took me months of experimenting and going nutty over it but I'm petty sure I've found a method which works since I am using the same sensitivity for games like battlefield, doom, csgo, rainbow six etc....... I tried to use impulsive's guide on csgo (put a bullet hole on wall and try and try to keep xhair on target while strafing) but found that there was too much bias in that there is no set feedback as to how well you are keeping your xhair on target so I decided to use a different method.
First of all download csgo and the map "sensitivity finder" - http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=439365028
Next stand at the back of the map facing the moving block (you will see once you download this) and hold mb1 while tracking the block. The blue block will rise according to how well you are tracking. To do this be extremely conscious of how you hold your mouse. It needs to be as naturally relaxed as possible to simulate how you would subconsciously hold it. Lower the sens until you cannot feel the little "Shiver" in your wrist if that makes sense. This shiver is due to your muscles not having enough control over the movement (similar to trying to do a core exercise at the gym and not being strong enough at first). This may be surprisingly low and feel unnatural at first but fear not.
Once you have that sensitivity (will probably be lower than expected as previously mentioned) you need to train yourself to use your arm a lot to move and fight off the natural habit of the body to use your wrist for everything. Will feel like aids at first but you will get used to it and aiming will become significantly easier.
Bear in mind that I do not know how foolproof this method is but it has worked wonders for me (shooting up to 35% accuracy with the automatico on bf1 now if that means anything to you).
Give it a shot and see how it goes! Good luck! 

Done! Pay special attention to the aiming FOV being the sensitivity 2 value

Just throwing ideas out there man. If people can disprove them then that's all I need. You don't progress without trying to challenge a theory. As I said if someone proves me wrong and explains it logically and well then I'm happy.

It's arbitrary. The degrees don't matter, and with your method you will get different scaling depending on the shape of the monitor. With that logic, over hanging a cloth on either side of the monitor to reduce its width will require a new sensitivity.
 
Use this applet. Change the FOV to visually see the change in magnification. Pretend it's a 180 degree frame just moving forward/back to have the desired angle of view within the monitor, since the monitor doesn't grow or shrink to change the amount you can see. As the frame moves forward/back, everything will scale by the change in magnification. You simply undo that scaling on the sensitivity, which is what 0% MDV/MDH achieves. It will scale the sensitivity by the change in magnification.
 
0% scales only by the change, so it will only work when dealing within that monitor. If you wanted to translate that sensitivity to a different monitor, you would have to take the focal length into consideration. Two different sized monitors could have the same angle of view, but require different sensitivities, as the physical scale will differ. The quantity of degrees on screen hardly matters. You just use them to calculate the change in magnification relative to that monitor. If you are wondering, if two different sized monitors both have the same angle of view, then you just need to scale the sensitivity by the difference in monitor size.
 
The focal length is the radius for the image. 2pi * radius = circumference. Translating the sensitivity using 0% MDV/MDH will maintain the ratio between the image circumference and the sensitivity circumference. Any other method is just an arbitrary change in sensitivity.
Here is a visualisation:

1 count is 1 pixel is dependent on the location on the screen. For the center of the screen it's unsurprisingly match distance for 1/960th of the screen (for a 1080p monitor). However for the edge of the screen it's a bit more complicated.
The equation I'm using is
(arctan(1/960*4/3*tan(90*pi/360))*180/pi-arctan(0/960*4/3*tan(90*pi/360))*180/pi)/.022 Which is basically
(1st pixel's degrees away from 0th pixel)/m_yaw (counting pixels from the center of the screen) To get the multiplier m_yaw needs so that 1 count is equal to that number of degrees.
So CS:GO http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=(arctan(1%2F960*4%2F3*tan(90*pi%2F360))*180%2Fpi-arctan(0%2F960*4%2F3*tan(90*pi%2F360))*180%2Fpi)%2F.022
3.61716 sensitivity
But for pixels at the far right of the screen
(960th pixel's degrees away from 959th pixel)/m_yaw (counting pixels from the center of the screen) which is
(arctan(960/960*4/3*tan(90*pi/360))*180/pi-arctan(959/960*4/3*tan(90*pi/360))*180/pi)/.022 http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=(arctan(960%2F960*4%2F3*tan(90*pi%2F360))*180%2Fpi-arctan(959%2F960*4%2F3*tan(90*pi%2F360))*180%2Fpi)%2F.022
1.30305 sensitivity
If you apply this to AWP Zoom 1 the sensitivity multiplier would be 0.817919 (when the default is 0.444444) for a horizontal match distance of ~621%.
 
Unless I made a mistake in my equation, you probably shouldn't set your sensitivity based on 1 pixel per 1 degree at the edge of the screen or really any part at all. (worth nothing that a pixel is a completely arbitrary unit of measurement and has no direct link to perceivable skipping).

I've been meaning to add this for years actually, but never got around to do it.
I'll work on it for the next update, with a calculation for how many counts/pixel you have and what sensitivity equals 1 count/pixel.

Also @DPI Wizard there is an option to enable "one frame lag". When you have it on your performance increases a shitload but I swear you get input lag. When you turn it off your frame rate shoots itself but the mouse movement feels more responsive. Could you test it to see if it's my brain screwing with me or if that is actually the case. Thanks!

I'll check them! I think some tanks are different from others btw, I'll do some more tests and specify it if there's any difference.

Tank sensitivity added!

Yes, will add more during the weekend

Dev just answered me! What is your email so he can send you a key!? He said you analysing was awesome as it could help them figure problems out!

If you match at 0%, you will judge the necessary mouse distances properly, since the distances scale proportionately with the fov, whereas any other method is going to be counter intuitive for this, despite the whole concept being to match a a perceived speed or match a screen distance.
Instead, these alternative methods give the illusion of better, more consistent aim because they maintain the area on your mouse pad that you use to aim within your field of view. This lets you become very proficient in a single aiming style/method (such as wrist aiming) with specific swiping distances as you don't have to scale your input with the fov.
It also lets you get away with low sensitivity at high fovs (people reduce sensitivity for instant results instead of just improving their mechanical skill) due to the same reason, not having to scale your input.
Since 0% does not match a distance, it instead matches the velocity, and since other methods are not 0%, they have to result in different speeds in order to accomplish what they were made to do. Matching the velocity has to result in different perceived speeds and different required mouse movement as every fov is unique. The amount of information and distortion scales with the fov. The very essence of increasing the fov is increasing the number of degrees that you can see. So naturally, if you pan the camera, there is going to be a lot more activity on your screen and it is going to look faster than a lower, flatter, more zoomed in fov. So it makes sense that the correct conversion is going to be something where the distance and view speed is not matched. If you do match the view speed instead, then you are slowing the velocity of the camera down for high fovs and increasing the velocity for low fovs in order to make them look the same. The biggest issue with this is that low fovs will feel too sensitive as the required mouse distances are far shorter than assumed. Only 0% will have the correct distance scaling.
The reason why you can judge distances properly with 0% is because the distance scales with the zoom. If you zoom in 2x, the target will be 2x further away on your screen, and will require 2x more mouse movement to flick to compared to before the zoom. If you make this a fair comparison and scale the distance between you and the target to counteract the zoom, then the mouse distances will be the same. This will also benefit tracking, since the perceived movement speed, size, and distance of the movement will scale with the zoom, and so will the sensitivity. So if the distance between you and the target scales with the zoom also, then a target will move the same speed across your screen, and require the exact same mouse movement.
As for the question about 'match at' percentages and matching a distance in general, the best distance match IMO is the inverse of your aspect ratio, multiplied by 100. E.g. 9/16 * 100 = 56.25. It will match the distance to the radius of the 1:1 aspect ratio. Higher percentages, like 75% are close to matching viewspeed, which suffers from the sensitive low FOV issue. Besides, all distance match methods are arbitrary, and you will get drastically different results depending on what fov measurement you use. 0% is the only method that has the same result regardless of the measurement used.
Matching the view speed, screen distance, or 360 distance, is only going to be detrimental to aim performance in the long run. You will have to compromise and develop unique muscle memory for a wide range of fov and hope that your brain can fill in the blanks for fovs in between. These methods will only improve comfort and may give better results, but only in the short term (due to being only proficient in one aiming style, or having a low sensitivity for a high fov, or not having enough mouse pad space in general). They only seem correct because when you zoom in/out, the distance between you and the reference point is remaining static, you don't teleport forward/back to counteract the zoom.
For long term, you need to get used to 0%. Ignore the deceptive issues with view speed and the variance in mouse movement. You won't really have to develop muscle memory for every fov, as you will figure out the distances automatically as they scale with the zoom, but the different distances will require you to master your aim with all the styles, such as micro, finger, wrist, and arm (from elbow and shoulder) movement, and you will probably have to use a higher sensitivity in general.
 
And yes, for anyone wondering, I have switched over to 0%.

No it wouldn't

It is screen dependent, but not aspect ratio dependent.

The calculator uses a percentage of your width. If you had a square monitor, then 100% would be identical to 16:9's 56.25%.
 
Just to add, these are the equivalent values for other aspect ratios:
1:1 - 100%
5:4 - 80%
4:3 - 75%
16:10 - 62.5%
16:9 - 56.25%
21:9 - 42.1875%
32:9 - 28.125%