massivelivefun

That kind of response might as well be conjecture. Thanks for making me "understand" the topic more, geez.

I swear by vertical viewspeed for ads though Is there any reason why I should use monitor distance over vert. viewspeed? I'm compelled to hear an argument against viewspeed and for monitor distance cause i lowkey thought that viewspeed v2, aka vert viewspeed, was supposed to be the holy grail or something along the lines. EDIT: I understand that all of this is preference, I'm still curious otherwise as to one from the other.

Perhaps the terminology that the calculator uses could be changed to accurately reflect each viewspeed method?

Does viewspeed v1 still have to take the aspect ratio into account? Or has this been adjusted?

Um. With the new changes to the calculator why has viewspeed v2 been regulated to viewspeed vertical?

Okay I understand, literally changing the hipfire fov is making the objects smaller if the fov is wider. However, the scopes are the same regardless. Okay.

So I just saw this video and there is some pretty good evidence that the hipfire fov messes with the "zoom" (fov) for the scopes. Does the calculator reflect this evidence? I think the calculator just has each of the scope's fov locked at their default fov values. The author of the video does say that each scope's fov is normalized, but I wouldn't understand the implications of this... Just thought that I'd show this to you @DPI Wizard. Idk if this was discuss before in this thread.

So I'm using the new viewspeed alpha calculator with perfectly matched FOV. Is Aim Hero really off from CSGO by 0.000001 or is it fucked up by the smallest bit? Shouldn't they basically be the same configuration sensitivity? I understand that there is 0% discrepancy with the first conversion. EDIT: CSGO 0.599999 to Aim Hero gets 0.6 btw, so it works back and forth.

Thank you for the responses. So the only problem left with your viewspeed formula is to handle stretched resolutions?

Okay, so I did this; a basic example of 4:3 csgo hipfire: 2.4 @ 400dpi, 1.2 @ 800, & 0.6 @ 1600, et cetera: a=3/4; x=90; θ=2 arctan(a tan((π x)/360)); (C csc(θ/2))/sqrt(2)=43.2955 cm; http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=a%3D3%2F4;+x%3D90;+θ%3D2+arctan(a+tan((π+x)%2F360));+(C+csc(θ%2F2))%2Fsqrt(2)%3D43.2955; And C solved to 36.7374 cm. I then try to match hipfire viewspeed to the first awp zoom with my C I found: a=3/4; x=40; θ=2 arctan(a tan((π x)/360)); (36.7374 csc(θ/2))/sqrt(2); http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=a%3D3%2F4;+x%3D40;+θ%3D2+arctan(a+tan((π+x)%2F360));+(36.7374+csc(θ%2F2))%2Fsqrt(2); Which got me 98.6445 cm. However the alpha calculator shows 98.6446 cm, which probably means that the calculator just rounds up at the ten thousandths place. Just to check, I put my C back into the formula that handles hipfire, a=3/4; x=90; θ=2 arctan(a tan((π x)/360)); (36.7374 csc(θ/2))/sqrt(2); http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=a%3D3%2F4;+x%3D90;+θ%3D2+arctan(a+tan((π+x)%2F360));+(36.7374+ csc(θ%2F2))%2Fsqrt(2) I get 43.2954 cm, but it should be 43.2955. Just more minor discrepancies I suppose. For the sake of redundancy I'll try your other way you recommended with the random dpi: a=3/4; x=90; h=1080; m=130.611; C=(sqrt(2) π h)/m; θ=2 arctan(a tan((π x)/360)); (C csc(θ/2))/sqrt(2); http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=a%3D3%2F4;+x%3D90;+h%3D1080;+m%3D130.611;+C%3D(sqrt(2)+π+h)%2Fm;+θ%3D2+arctan(a+tan((π+x)%2F360));+(C+csc(θ%2F2))%2Fsqrt(2) The above got me approximately 43.2955 cm. Then I isolated h, m, c to see if I get the same C from earlier, 36.7374 cm. http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=h%3D1080;+m%3D130.611;+C%3D(sqrt(2)+π+h)%2Fm; I got approximately 36.7374 as my C. From this exercise I have a few questions: 1. Does variable 'a' have to equal '3/4' when said game uses strict horizontal 4:3 fov handling? 2. Otherwise does 'a' have to 'match' the screen's aspect ratio when using the other formulas? 3. Can I use the same 'C' in other games, or will I have to check for 'C' for every game?

How do I go about using the formula with wolfram alpha? I'm trying to compare values to the calculator's alpha to results that I get on wolfram. @Drimzi Could you check if I re-purposed the formula correctly so that I can use a specific 360, or is that not possible anymore? a=3/4; h=1440; m=400; C=(sqrt(2) π h)/m; C=43.2955 x=90; θ=2 arctan(a tan((π x)/360)); [no a variable] (C csc(θ/2))/sqrt(2); http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=x%3D90;+d%3D43.2955;+θ%3D2+arctan(tan((π+x)%2F360));+(d+csc(θ%2F2))%2Fsqrt(2);

@DPI Wizard So like do ALL guns in Destiny 2 have the same ads sensitivity "speed"? I noticed when playing that most of the guns have varying zooms. However, it seems that fov doesn't effect sensitivity. Some insight into this question would be cool.

You should check out this thread bro.

Um, DPI Wizard, is something wrong with the calculator? I rock 0.02 @ 800dpi for hipfire, which is (was) a 10.125 inch 360. I wrote it down on a txt file and everything. Coming back to the calculator, now it's reading as a 10.126 inch. Grant it, it's not the end of the world, but is this intentional? What has changed?

Bryjoe, just go onto page seven and look at my posts. What you are asking for is what Drimzi walked me through. I have examples of how to use them, with one mistake within the walk through being the following: Make sure that you use the right formula for the game that you are using, i.e. csgo uses 4:3 horizontal res, so use the 4:3 horizontal res formula.