In the end it comes down to talent
A shitty flamebaity discussion isn't any better than the shitposts that happen usuallyF1r3tar wrote:
This thread is better than 99% of the usual G&R threads because it actually provokes a discussion.LoliPantsu wrote:
the thread is retarded imo, if someone can get to #1 using mouse then mouse players shouldnt be discouraged at all
yesArthraxium wrote:
Did not read OP because of terrible formatting. Is this some new drama again?
FixedRunielVermell wrote:
In the end it comes down totalentplaying more
Yeah I've had the feeling and found this super disorientating. When I switched back to mouse from using a tablet for ages the mouse moved in a totally different way than I expected. My brain probably mixed up the muscle memory of the 2 peripherals and it took a little while to adjust. The same happened when switching to tablet from mouse.shortpotato wrote:
on a side note, tablet feels weird for me because reaching different parts of the tablet require different movements while you can just slide a mouse around on the same plane. Anyone else feel like this? O.o
lolM3ATL0V3R wrote:
The pp of top plays from cookiezi and Rafis both came from higher OD rather than aim
I do, it's more like I need extra effort to do jump.shortpotato wrote:
on a side note, tablet feels weird for me because reaching different parts of the tablet require different movements while you can just slide a mouse around on the same plane. Anyone else feel like this? O.o
You're ignoring a number of other features of mice and tablets with that statement.Kunino Sagiri wrote:
Mouse is basically a fat tablet pen. Make a tablet pen too fat, shape it into something that looks like a mouse and it already has the advantages/disadvantages of a mouse
YeahYuudachi-kun wrote:
I didnt read this thread but is it as dumb as the last one
1000 dpi on 1152x864 isn't really that high tbh.B1rd wrote:
Angel uses high dpi so he can somewhat negate the mouse drift and inertia, the main disadvantages of using mouse. Yet most mouse players don't do well with high dpi. He is just an aberration.
Fite meKupcaH wrote:
lolM3ATL0V3R wrote:
The pp of top plays from cookiezi and Rafis both came from higher OD rather than aim
You're not gonna get anywhere trying to use logic to convince people to not use logic. It's just wasted effortB1rd wrote:
You're not gonna get anywhere trying to use logic to convince people of evident truths that they're too stupid to grasp in the first place. It's just wasted effort.
Its the other way around the weight of a mouse gives stability and the size gives more area to grasp which allows for more control. Combine this with a higher surface area in contact with the surface of your desk compared to a tablet pen and you get a peripheral that has roughly the same amount of control as a tablet.Kunino Sagiri wrote:
Mouse is basically a fat tablet pen. Make a tablet pen too fat, shape it into something that looks like a mouse and it already has the advantages/disadvantages of a mouse
But since this game is MOSTLY about control and not just mere speed (which is the advantage of a mouse), the one with lesser total surface area, weight, volume is always objectively superior (at least for this game) It's somewhat like the chopsticks; they shaped it to be not too thick (for more control over food regardless of size you want to pick up), not too thin (so the chopsticks have the bulk to support the food you picked up) and has long (or varied) reach for ease of eating. It's also like juggling balls; the optimal size and weight for a ball is to ideally make a single hand capable of immediately grabbing it and not some bloated one like basketball's and soccer's since it's too large and heavy. Not like it's impossible to do it but it's harder than juggling with something smaller.
So if I give you a chopsticks of 1km circumference, you'd be able to have more control over your food? Obviously not.M3ATL0V3R wrote:
Its the other way around the weight of a mouse gives stability and the size gives more area to grasp which allows for more control
That's an interesting test. Tablet was harder because there's very little friction between my tablet and the pen nib. There's less consistency between the mouse drawn glyphs but I've spent years writing with a pen.Kunino Sagiri wrote:
Write your name with a tablet pen in MSPaint.
Write your name with a mouse in MSPaint.
Just ignore the matter of speed for now, which among these two peripherals offered more control and ease? Which has better legibility?
Chopsticks with a circumference of 1km doesn't give more control because of the limiting factor which is the size of the human hand. A mouse is a better size than a pen for the hand.Kunino Sagiri wrote:
So if I give you a chopsticks of 1km circumference, you'd be able to have more control over your food? Obviously not.M3ATL0V3R wrote:
Its the other way around the weight of a mouse gives stability and the size gives more area to grasp which allows for more control
So if I give you a pentelpen and ask you to write your name of approximate 12mm standard font size, you'd be able to provide a satisfactory, hassle free result? Obviously not. Pentel pens are structured to discard control of where its ink will go with its increased ballpoint size compared to regular pens (ballpens, fountain pens etc.). Its purpose is just to mark which benefits more in size than precision that's why it's called a marker
I'll give you another clearer example just in case these already clear examples still isn't enough for you to stop with this false statement.
Write your name with a tablet pen in MSPaint.
Write your name with a mouse in MSPaint.
Just ignore the matter of speed for now, which among these two peripherals offered more control and ease? Which has better legibility?
I don't think you get my point. These examples were only used to strengthen my first post where total size, volume, weight objectively influence control and the general usage of the said object. We're supposed to completely ignore the skill or mastery of the peripheral by the user but rather the objective advantage of a peripheral with lesser total physical structure (tablet pen) in terms of control to something with more (mouse) at least for this game.M3ATL0V3R wrote:
...
Control as a metric does not exist without the context of anatomy and physiology. More precisely the control that a pointing device grants an individual is a function of both the physical properties of the device and the anatomical and physiological properties of the individual.Kunino Sagiri wrote:
the objective advantage of a peripheral with lesser total physical structure (tablet pen) in terms of control to something with more (mouse) at least for this game.
It doesn't matter if it fits your hand, it has a good shape, you prefer it or whatever simply because they're irrelevant.
Your point was that a tablet pen is superior because it gives a higher amount of control. The reasons you gave were that a lower weight and size is better for control which is partially true as less force is needed to move the pen. I disagreed since a higher surface area of the hand in contact with the peripheral gives more power to move that weight and a higher weight adds stability so less force is needed to grasp the peripheral to keep it on its path. One example you gave was writing which isn't a good example of equal mastery so its invalid and the other two examples are to do with the size of the object. Larger objects allow for larger movements but my point was if these movements are scaled then the control is similar.Kunino Sagiri wrote:
I don't think you get my point. These examples were only used to strengthen my first post where total size, volume, weight objectively influence control and the general usage of the said object. We're supposed to completely ignore the skill or mastery of the peripheral by the user but rather the objective advantage of a peripheral with lesser total physical structure (tablet pen) in terms of control to something with more (mouse) at least for this game.M3ATL0V3R wrote:
...
It doesn't matter if it fits your hand, it has a good shape, you prefer it or whatever simply because they're irrelevant. Use a ruler, compute for their respective total surface area, volume but I think you don't even need to use those tedious measurements to see which has more/less total.
That's a good point and is a good reason why people should pick based on preference. (though I still disagree that mouse has generally less control)G3T wrote:
Control as a metric does not exist without the context of anatomy and physiology. More precisely the control that a pointing device grants an individual is a function of both the physical properties of the device and the anatomical and physiological properties of the individual.Kunino Sagiri wrote:
the objective advantage of a peripheral with lesser total physical structure (tablet pen) in terms of control to something with more (mouse) at least for this game.
It doesn't matter if it fits your hand, it has a good shape, you prefer it or whatever simply because they're irrelevant.
While I believe your argument that the physical properties of a tablet leads to greater control is true for the majority of human beings, I also think that the difference between mouse and tablet is minor enough that a smaller portion of people would have greater control with a mouse due to some anatomical or physiological oddity.
Thus it would be more reasonable to say that tablet is more likely to give a greater level of control.
That might be a factor. I have quite large hands and I swapped from tablet to mouse because I had trouble gripping the pen. However I also have a limited range of movement in my aim hand's thumb due to an injury I sustained a few years ago and that was likely a contributing factor.M3ATL0V3R wrote:
A possible reason for being anatomically suited to mouse is big hands, though I think mine are average.
How much is the average input lag for tablets? I always thought that the input lag is no more than 2 or 3 ms greater than mouse at worst.G3T wrote:
I've tried switching back to tablet a few times and that difference in input lag is a greater annoyance to me than having to deal with mouse drift.
It's hard to find good specs. The signal timing diagrams in Wacom's original patent from the mid 90's allows for a minimum input lag of 15 ms, excluding USB transfer times. The three factors in tablet input lag are the coil sampling frequency, the number of coils, and the DSP time.Kunino Sagiri wrote:
How much is the average input lag for tablets? I always thought that the input lag is no more than 2 or 3 ms greater than mouse at worst.