If you raise your sens in order to deal with a lower DPI, yes, you will have skipped pixels.

I didn't think raising in game sensitivity caused pixel skipping. Windows sensitivity will stay at 6/11 and I will adjust the in game sensitivity. Will this still cause pixel skipping?

Thanks for the help.

Consider how sensitivity works. Either you have 1:1 ratio between your mouse movement and your DPI (perfect accuracy) or you have one of the two possible sensitivity problems:

1) You have too much DPI, so you lower your sensitivity to less than 1:1. In this case, in order to slow it down, it has to drop some input from the mouse, or accumulate rounded values. Either way, the result is movement from your hand that does not translate directly into in-game results.

2) You have too low DPI, and you up your sensitivity to deal with it. The only way to do this is the increase just how much any movement is worth. If you want a 400 DPI mouse to move 800 pixels (in one inch), you need it to skip every other pixel.

Both of these are bad. Optimally, you would want to get as close to a 1:1 ratio between DPI and screen traversal of pixels.

Having windows 6/11 and your in game sensitivity at 1 in games like counterstrike 1.6, TF2 or CSS is considered 1:1 movement right?

Thank you for the explanation. I guess I will look for another alternative with enough DPI.

You have to check by manually testing. There are a lot of points that can scale the input (drivers, windows, game) and that isn't even considering any accel.

sensitivity 1 ingame means nothing.

since its just a value thats multiplied by m_pitch and m_yaw and etc etc..

You could lower your ingame sensitivity, lower your ingame resolution or get a mouse with higher dpi.

Regarding lift-off distance you could try to dim the LED that lights the mousepad like that, it's worth a shot.

Those two cases are not equally bad, 2) is bad I agree, while 1) is no problem at all, just a matter of preference (all low sens players experience 1)).

Wait, experienced, past tense. With the new laser mice it is possible to lower dpi considerably so you could have 1:1 translation with low sens...

It's possible to be low sens without suffering the above issue so long as you use low DPI on high resolution. Neither can be preference, as they are both inaccurate.

How inaccurate could 1) be ? ...

What issue do you mean?

It doesn't really help to lower dpi because the whole point of low sens is to move the mouse more for the same result on screen. I don't see why there would be a difference if it is done by software or hardware, unless it happens in some weird way, where movement information is not processed consistently.

Yeah to higher the screen resolution indeed adds precision as long as the dpi limit of the mouse is not reached, because then case 2) would happen.

Knowing this, I still play with 800x600...I guess pixel precision is not really needed in Quake games

Yes having not enough CPI for pixel perfect aiming is bad but there is no problem having more CPI than you need.

Lowering your ingame sensitivity neither drops some info from the mouse nor does it round the data. The game just turns your avatar for a certain degree per count sent by the mouse.
So the ingame movement is totally linear allthough a certain amount of counts sent by the mouse don't have to represent always the exact same movement on your screen, the higher your screen resolution and CPI are the less important it gets.

ofc it would be optimal to perfectly sync your screen resolution with your CPI but thats just a theoretical thing because you will pretty much never achieve it.

I'm specifically talking about if you could lower the ratio below 1:1. In such a situation, any in-game result would be a lack of movement when movement occured. The only way to represent LESS than 1600 DPI with a 1600 DPI input is to round off, or consider movements smaller than x distance to not count as actual movement. You won't manage this, though, as it's not how it works, just an example of the only way to do it.

The above is ignoring the fact that the human hand is incapable of accuracy at these levels anyway - no human is accurate to 1600 points per inch, or even a fraction of that. This is just an example of the optimal way to represent hand movement into direct screen feedback.

If you are running at high DPI (on a lower resolution) and scaling upwards via sensitivity, you have both the inaccuracies of your hand to deal with, and the addition of potentially missed pixels due to rounding upward.

"consider movements smaller than x distance to not count as actual movement. You won't manage this, though, as it's not how it works"

Care to explain how it works then, because I don't see it "managing" any other way.

http://h8m3.wippiespace.com/pack/DPI.xls

did you really feel a difference playing with the 1:1 sens instead of just lowering and playing with uberhigh dpi ?

gna try i never thought it could do something

wat
i made that calc to check how high resolution can i use with my sens, everything else was just additional
and i never tried 1:1 myself, 400/450dpi 2.8sens for life

well considering there's a formula (didn't check it at all) to get the 1:1 sens with windows and considering vedic's post about having too much DPI, I thought you tested it properly :)

But since I can set pretty much any dpi on the g9x (yea, yea, pos accel etc.) i'll try if there's any difference.

lol g9x lol

hhmz so i play 1800 dpi with a sens of 28 cm/360... would i actually be better of lowering my dpi? Never thought you could have to high dpi.

never in the field of human history have i seen so much mis-information, misunderstanding, and pure ignorance in one thread.

I think this is your queue to prove your claims.

Why must he wait in line? Ohhhh, you must have meant the word 'cue'.

Oops.

:(

Good to know, was thinking wtf this was all about. :p

you say that in every thread about mice. :D

First of all Sujoy's formula is wrong and with 1680*1050 you most likely have a FOV higher than 90.

That's the correct formula (thx to injx):

R = ( pi * W ) / ( I * tan[ F / 2 ] )

where
W = screen resolution width
I = real sensitivity (distance per 360 turn)
F = horizontal fov

R = mouse resolution required

dunno with what FOV you play but there is good chance thet the 400 CPI of a IME 3.0 are enough

LOL! Sadly I have no clue how to use your formula. Lets use TF2 for an example.

Screen resolution = 1680x1050
360 = 11.5 inches
FOV setting = 90

Maybe you should make a calculator for derps like me. I tried and it came out around 50! I know that has to be wrong lmao.

:D

458,95

but the question is if your FOV is really 90 because in modern games the FOV in your config is mostly the same no matter if you use 4:3 or 16:10

I have been playing with fov_desired at 90 in tf2 because it shows more of the game compared to the default 75. Will turning FOV down a bit drastically lower the DPI needed?

no, lower FOV needs more CPI

my guess is that setting FOV 90 with a widescreen resolution in TF2 result in a real FOV higher than 90

with screen res 800x600
4:3 crt monitor
& fov 100

is it alright to have 800cpi ? :)

that depends on your sensitivity

from the formula with a sensitivity of about 7-8cm/360° or lower you have pixel perfect aiming

To be honest who needs a formula when you can go ingame and just move your mouse a bid and see if it's precise. And i don't know how to have pixel perfect aiming when it's rendered in 3D and afaik double(data type) is used, so higher dpi=better, but it's not much of a difference at 800+ at 800x600.

ofc but it's a way to know befor buying a mouse (or new monitor) to rule out at least theoretical limitations

25-30cm/360° is ok ?

jep, for that 800 CPI is way enough

I thought TF2's fov didn't actually change anything but the viewmodel? Did they change it again?

There are two commands, default_fov and viewmodel_fov.

Yeah but I remember there being a big huff on the TF2 forums over them locking the ability to actually change fov (I guess the default fov commandd), and that people with widescreen resolutions were getting to see more to the sides of the screen

Nah, fov_desired is locked between 75-90.

The last time they changed anything was viewmodel_fov, they capped the command to the same limits as the slider in the options, making people cry because they couldn't use ridiculous viewmodel fovs anymore. I think they unlocked it a bit later.

i gave a link on the calc counting by this formula above
http://www.esreality.com/?a=post&id=1842555#pid1842555

What a stupid misinformation tread. Theres is no connection bewhten dpi and resolution (at least in quake) use whatever resn and dpi u want, no need to calculate dpi&resolution.

Let me try to clarify some stuff.

Resolution

The resolution of your screen tell you the number of pixels of a 2D plane. The fov tells you what portion of the view sphere is projected to that plane. Due to this projection, the view is compressed in the center and dilated at the boundary (which means that pixels in the center express wider angles than those at the boundary. If you think it should be the inverse, make a drawing, or think twice).

To put some numbers down, let's make an example only on one dimension: If you have an horizontal fov of 90 and play at 1680, a pixel will span (on average) ~0.05 degrees.

Mouse DPI

The mouse DPI determines how many ticks the mouse gets by moving it by one inch. By fixing a certain sensitivity (x inches per 360 degrees), you can compute the smallest angle you can rotate. I made a graph to show this:
http://n.ethz.ch/student/gnoris/download/mouse_precision.png

With a 400DPI mouse, most people will have a precision below 0.2 degrees.

High res, low DPI, is this a problem?

No. With low DPI and high res, there is no influence of the resolution over the aiming capabilities.

Consider you moving your mouse. Your mouse input gets converted to the game internal representation of where your character is aiming, and than, based on it, a representation of the world is rendered. How accurate this representation is depends on the resolution, but such resolution will not influence the internal representation (you will always hit that spot, no matter how many pixels are used to represent that spot).

So the real question is if 400DPI is enough, or not, and I think that with all IE3.0 used among pros, this question should not be a concern.

What *might* be a problem is the inverse, high DPI and low resolution. In this scenario your mouse is capable of expressing rotations that on your screen look all the same, as it is simply too low res for representing them. This however is science fiction for quake, as nobody really cares about high DPI mice, and nobody plays on 200x150 screens.

I have very noticable pixel skipping with 400DPI@1920x1080 at high sens.
Noticed in CSS and UT3
For example CSS:
1)Sens 9@400DPI=pixel skipping (~3-4), I can't move crosshair on 1 pixel.
2)Sens 2.25@1600DPI=no pixel skipping, I can move crosshair on 1 pixel.
In UT3 the same problem with sens4000@400DPI vs 1000@1600DPI.
So you NEED higher DPI to play high res.

So your mouse skips in those games. And you think the res matters, right? Can you try to set low res and see if you skip the same angle? (it's gonna be different in pixels, as these are larger, but should be the same in game angle)

still pixelskipping is bad, since you won't be able to aim at everything you see.
if someone decides for himself to use high-res and high-sens, why not get the full potential out of it?

If i push my IE3 ~1-0.5mm, it doenst move, that shit ;/ sometimes i feel i need to move so little and it fucksup.. so imo 400 dpi is not enought :/

DEATHADDER!

SUCKS!

Slipadder slips!

WTH, for IE3 you still have 15 dots per millimiter.

Maybe you have broken mouse? Or clugged sensor?

All my IE3s move cursor onscreen with the slightest touch to them.

maybe its becose of 1024 windows gfx, maybe pixels are to big (im not pro in these things).but i can move my mouse for a very little and it stil stands.
QCK.

I ended up sticking with my deathadder because I found that adding a piece of scotch tape over the sensor lowered the lift off distance to under 1.2mm!, it will not track at the height of 1 dvd on my QCK, without the tape it is 3.6mm lift off or three dvd's before it stopped tracking. Maximum tracking speed or accuracy are not affected.

Seriously shocked the hell out of me how well it works without any problems.

"I found that adding a piece of scotch tape over the sensor lowered the lift off distance to under 1.2mm!"

..................................

Cool, its a parrot.

I'm not a parrot. It's just that what you're suggesting sounds like more of a hinderence then a proper solution. The tape would obviously need to be re-applied over time and would also create resistance. That's ok though because I don't have any liftoff issues because I'm using a Purtrak Talent w/ the DA3.5 =]

Actually the tape is not supposed to cover the sensor, but the source of the light, but I guess this is what you meant.

It might work with everything covered too, but I would predict some downsides like reduced precision.

The tape is completely covering the sensor hole. I know this sounds retarded but the deathadder had no problems with it. However I tried the same thing on my MX518 and it severely lowered its maximum tracking speed. After running mousetest it confirms (if it is accurate) that there is no difference between tape covering the hole or no tape at all on the 3G DA.

No tape:

Enotus Mouse Test v0.1.4
Mouse: @msmouse.inf,%hid.mousedevice%;HID-compliant mouse
Model: DA 900DPI + QCK + NO TAPE
Resolution: 800 dpi \ok\
Polling speed: 986 Hz
Max speed: 3.87 m/s (121993 points/s) \excellent\
Precision: 99.0 % (0.27 m/s) \excellent\
Smoothness: 21.6 % \bad\
Debug data: [('103', '0.41'), ('121', '0.99'), ('121', '1.00'), ('107', '1.00'), ('125', '1.00'), ('107', '0.97'), ('125', '0.99'), ('107', '1.05'), ('124', '1.00'), ('105', '0.99')]


With Tape:

Enotus Mouse Test v0.1.4
Mouse: @msmouse.inf,%hid.mousedevice%;HID-compliant mouse
Model: DA 900DPI + QCK + TAPE
Resolution: 800 dpi \ok\
Polling speed: 997 Hz
Max speed: 3.81 m/s (120022 points/s) \excellent\
Precision: 99.5 % (0.17 m/s) \excellent\
Smoothness: 21.8 % \bad\
Debug data: [('128', '0.99'), ('120', '1.00'), ('128', '1.00'), ('64', '1.00'), ('128', '1.00'), ('128', '1.01'), ('124', '1.00'), ('128', '0.99'), ('120', '1.00'), ('128', '1.00')]

Interesting. If it works, it works (:

The results of enotus are not accurate, but useful for comparison like you did.

Maybe try a quick comparison in-game to see if really nothing else besides lift-off is affected.

Could you link me to that mousetest program?

http://www.esreality.com/?a=post&id=1809005#pid1809005

http://phoon.us/mouse/

For q3 that is.

Also I'd second what Memento_Mori said.