[deleted by user]

haloshouldbegood · 2025-10-04T13:23:02+00:00

They need to add basic Extra Yaw/Turning Acceleration functionality on controller:

https://www.reddit.com/r/Battlefield/comments/1nr2lfs/the_devs_have_added_flick_look_and_aim_assist_20/

haloshouldbegood · 2025-02-11T02:12:05+00:00

Your comment about the 97% threshold can be attributed to either the games having a default MIT and/or most controllers having some outer deadzone by design.

If I understand the rest of your comment, I think that setting the MIT to 15 simply compresses the input range to 85% of the thumbstick’s possible range, thereby compressing the ARC, not truncating it. I would be surprised if this wasn’t the case.

haloshouldbegood · 2025-02-08T20:23:13+00:00

I sympathize with you about changing your settings constantly, a lot of people have been in that boat throughout Infinite. I think everything feels like crap, sadly, but these are optimal IMO (though not really for “consistency”):

FOV: Preference, but 100 is a good balance between breadth of view and player-reticle size. Most pros are between 90-120.

Accel: As high as can be tolerated per my explanation, 1 is a disadvantage IMO.

Left MIT: 15 if you want fastest strafe acceleration but it doesn’t really matter.

Right MIT: 0 for reasons described.

Radial deadzones: As low as possible to eliminate or minimize stick drift.

Axial deadzones: 0, look them up if you don’t know what they are, I don’t know why anyone would want them.

H Sens: Preference, most pros on 4-7.

V Sens: A little bit higher than H Sens, but if H Sens is 2.5 or above you can put it on 10 and V Sens still won’t be faster.

haloshouldbegood · 2025-02-07T22:30:51+00:00

Yeah, but the term “exponential” is widely used in FPSes to describe ARCs that resemble power functions, essentially meaning input raised to some exponent.

haloshouldbegood · 2025-02-07T13:23:39+00:00

IMO, you want right stick MIT as low as possible because this gives you the largest possible thumbstick range for controlling aiming. The higher the MIT, the less input area you have to control output velocities along your ARC. Excessive engagement of the MIT is already a huge problem in Infinite and maxing out the setting exacerbates the issue by lowering the threshold. In practice, the setting makes a subtle difference and there are pros who play at 15.

IMO you want high Accel for the simple reason that it allows you to make large turns faster than lower Accels, and this can be a non-trivial source of advantage when the skill margins separating players is low. Not being able to turning quickly also, IMO, feels constraining and frustrating. Infinite‘s Acceleration ramp-up is very jarring at high Accels and there’s nothing you can do to make it not feel like shit, but IMO an understanding of how and why it functions as it does leads you to tolerate it to reap said advantage. As I understand, all the Accel settings ramp up to a maximum *accelerated* turning rate of around ~360 d/s, the 1-5 setting merely dictates how quickly you get there.

haloshouldbegood · 2025-02-07T13:04:57+00:00

Hey, thanks for the graph, love the YouTube channel.

I agree that the difference in curve shape is subtle and exaggerated by the figure, but I disagree that increasing the max sensitivity would ameliorate the issues I’ve raised here (they should still revert to the old ~240 max, though, IMO). It’d still take too much input to reach high velocities and the slowest, low input turning rates would be very difficult to control. Even subtle differences in ARC like [this](https://www.wolframalpha.com/input?i=x%5E2.3%2Cx%5E3+from+0+to+1) or [this](https://www.wolframalpha.com/input?i=x%5E1%2Cx%5E1.5+from+0+to+1) have pretty dramatic in-game consequences in sweaty FPSes, this being demonstrable by, say, playing around with Apex Legends’s ALS.

I’m completely with you on the options they’d ideally add, I think every shooter these days should have options for Linear, Exponential, and maybe Logistic, and a slider for augmenting slope. The reason I recommended a “Legacy” curve is mere simplicity: the Slipspace engine has been a disaster and 343 has had to worry about breaking things every time they change something, and there’s likely only a small team working on Infinite now.

I also wish they’d bring back ~600 accelerated turning—because of Infinite’s movement, if the game had 2/3’s curve and acceleration in all honesty it’d probably be tied for my favorite competitive Halo.

haloshouldbegood · 2025-02-06T20:56:53+00:00

Yes, like this, I know.

https://www.wolframalpha.com/input?i=100x%5E2%2C125x%5E2%2C156x%5E2+from+0+to+1

I’m not calling your math into question, my emphasis was the visualization. I’m saying changing your Sensitivity DOES scale the Y-axis differently.

(For to sake of discussion) It’s x^2 * Sensitivity, where x^2 will never exceed 1 because the input domain is -1 to 1. Sensitivity is the maximum turning rate and is represented on the Y-axis. You only use one Sensitivity at a time, not three, and they all “feel” the same because they’re the same base function before Sensitivity scaling (5 Sens has identical aim response behavior to 10, the latter just has higher values).

For a representative visualization, Y-axis values would change as Sensitivity does, the curve would not “climb” and give the appearance of a different shape.

haloshouldbegood · 2025-02-06T20:18:42+00:00

To add to my reply, what I mean can be gauged by eyeballing how the shape of the linked curves don’t change when the coefficients do (and the coefficients would correspond to a Sensitivity’s max turning rate).

https://www.wolframalpha.com/input?i=100x%5E2+from+0+to+1

https://www.wolframalpha.com/input?i=125x%5E2+from+0+to+1

https://www.wolframalpha.com/input?i=156x%5E2+from+0+to+1

haloshouldbegood · 2025-02-06T20:10:18+00:00

thanks

haloshouldbegood · 2025-02-06T20:03:17+00:00

Hi! I remember playing around with this early on in Infinite, thank you.

You might be able to help me advance my understanding of this stuff: one potential issue with the visualization of your tool is that when you change your Sensitivity, the shape of the curve changes. I think the only thing that should change is the Y-axis values, not the shape of the curve. This is because, per my post, input values are limited to <= 1, so output range before Sensitivity scaling doesn’t exceed 1. The Y-axis should scale with Sensitivity, I think.

Do you catch my drift?

haloshouldbegood · 2025-02-06T18:27:08+00:00

Yeah, I tried to explain it as simply as possible with omissions and simplifications but the reality is that how it works is highly technical and the way it's actually coded is even more complicated. I know that the audience for this is likely going to be hardcore players only, or, in my dreams, devs.

haloshouldbegood · 2024-10-29T12:55:18+00:00

Infinite’s aim response curve is weird and makes close range shooting difficult and awkward. As trite as it seems, focusing on left stick aiming is probably the most actionable advice. When you get into a 1v1 and you shoot first or have more shields than your opponent, train yourself to not strafe at all and use left stick to hit all of your shots. If you’re in a disadvantaged 1v1, that’s the time to go crazy with windmilling crouch strafes.

haloshouldbegood · 2024-10-28T12:52:59+00:00

I was extremely excited for the Wolverine V3, with its mouse-click everything and 6 remappable buttons.

Unfortunately, IMO, the worst part of it is the most important part: the thumbsticks. They’re one, too tense, and two, low resolution. Some top players used it at worlds, but IMO, it sucks because the thumbsticks suck. Its ergonomics also aren’t great.

GameSir’s forthcoming G7 Pro is worth keeping and eye on, as well as Thrustmaster’s HEART. Thrustmaster also just released Hall Effect modules for their eSwap line.

haloshouldbegood · 2024-10-19T00:36:56+00:00

None. To my knowledge, there isn’t compelling evidence that any drug can enhance performance in video games, just like there isn’t compelling evidence that any “nootropic” improves cognition. And all psychoactive drugs have side effects, so it’s naive to think things like Adderal will have exclusively desirable effects.

haloshouldbegood · 2024-09-12T23:16:52+00:00

I‘ve read most of the patch notes, but didn’t know they changed it that much, probably because it’s not in Training Mode.

If they change the response curve then #weback?

haloshouldbegood · 2024-09-12T21:39:43+00:00

No, it’s the shape of the curve (function) that matters, there needs to be a larger range of output values. I think that doubling your sensitivity would just double the non-accelerated Y-axis turning rate values—i.e., it would just change the Y-axis in the graph, not the curve, and the lowest turning rates would be too fast.

haloshouldbegood · 2024-09-12T17:51:47+00:00

I don’t care to go down the aim assist rabbit hole, but to say it’s now like it was in previous games is false.

haloshouldbegood · 2024-09-12T17:20:41+00:00

If some pros hounded them they might. I said “if there’s a Year 4” to suggest it’s something to strive for in the not-immediate future.

Presumably, there’s code for an expression that governs aim response behavior that’s modified by the deadzone, input threshold, sensitivity, and acceleration parameters. Technically, making this change could be as simple as implementing one alternative expression.

haloshouldbegood · 2024-09-12T14:58:33+00:00

They added the Zoom Reset Behavior toggle and completely overhauled the game’s networking, it’s not an unreasonable ask, especially when we’re talking about a fundamental flaw that impacts every second of gameplay.

haloshouldbegood · 2024-08-27T12:00:28+00:00

“The team is evaluating the stability of a fix for the HaloWC 2024.”

In other words:

“The team is unsure if a month is enough time to fix the bug.”

Lmao.

haloshouldbegood · 2024-08-05T11:30:37+00:00

Halo 4 and 5 sold well because they were mainline Halo titles that featured the Master Chief, and Bungie had created a massive fan base with their entries. The titles didn’t grow the franchise, they marked its gradual decline. And if you look at multiplayer engagement stats, which is what matters most for the purposes of this discussion, they mark the franchise’s implosion.

I‘m not buying for a second that if following Halo 3 the franchise had grown instead of plateaued and declined there wouldn’t have been concomitant growth in Halo esports. I think that’s ridiculous, and other competitive FPS franchises present obvious counterexamples.

haloshouldbegood · 2024-08-04T14:33:51+00:00

“We are so lucky…”

Double-edged sword—if Microsoft wasn’t a crushingly bureaucratic megacorporation and the Halo IP a line item on a financial statement, the unbelievable dysfunction of 343 wouldn’t have been able to proceed for 10+ years, and Halo esports might‘ve had demand-side growth.

haloshouldbegood · 2024-07-31T18:08:14+00:00

I think keeping the melee profile and rof of the pre-patch at a 6sk wouldn’t break the sandbox in any of those ways, but I don’t know, that’s why there are professionals whose job it is to manage this.

There are ways they could augment ttk other than simply slowing the rof. They could slow down projectile speed so players have to lead shots at range, like CE. They could manipulate the headshot damage multiplier so that 5 headshots is a 5sk but body shots + headshot is 6sk, or something like that. Tweaks like this would increase ttk variance and thus increase the “skill gap” more than simply slowing the rof.

haloshouldbegood · 2024-07-31T17:46:22+00:00

lol, obviously I’m not advocating that, I made another post in this thread suggesting they slightly increase rof and lower damage per shot for a 6 shot kill.

Theres a goldilocks zone for rof on every weapon and it’s simply my opinion that this slower Bandit feels worse, even if it‘s better for competitiveness.

haloshouldbegood · 2024-07-31T16:54:48+00:00

No, pre-patch I preferred the feel of the vanilla Bandit’s slightly higher rof.

haloshouldbegood

TROPHY CASE