|
I've used this combo of deathadder and goliathus (currently use it until my Xai ships)
It's very very nice. The DA is easy to clean if you start having issues, but it took over two years for me to start seeing a decrease in performance due to dirtiness. It tracks nicely on the goliathus, but the softness of the map can get scratched up very easily (like if you run a fingernail across it, that line will be there forever).
|
I love my DeathAdder. Had to turn the dpi down to 1800 tho. 3600 seemed to be too touchy for me. Also turned the polling down to 500ms.
|
Depends on what you need.
Been using this combo (1800DPI deathadder tho) for about 2 months now - heavier than the MX (somewhat, you can adjust), different shape (that's obvious, just try them at the shop if you can, I think it might be better for a claw grip, tho I use varying grips), supports firmware/driver polling adjustment (the USB clock rate), tracks at higher speeds (if you're hardcore enough to reach those speeds you probably wouldn't be asking around though, we're talking 2m/s + here)... Ok just check this and this(here's the deathadder review) out and decide for yourself whether you need the new mouse - the WMO is solid. As for the pad - you should be able to get it cheap and IMO it's worth it. Just don't scratch it/whatever as people have pointed out 
|
I use this exact setup and have no complaints.
I was previously using the MS Explorer 3.0.
|
I don't care too much about the all of the mumbo jumbo numbers that come attatched with the deathadder, but it's the most fucking comfortable mouse I've ever used, something that is very important when playing long RTS sessions.
|
I have a DeathAdder and it's pretty darn solid. It probably wasn't the best choice for me, since I exclusively use a fingertip grip - it's a little large for that. I run it on full DPI and full refresh, since I use a ridiculous amount of sensitivity.
Don't bother getting a "Gaming mousepad" because they really aren't much different than a good 10 dollar one you can get at Staples or something. I bought an XL size hard mousepad at office depot and its been pretty awesome so far.
Next mouse will either be a SteelSeries (apparently they are smaller) or Razer's small mobility mouse.
|
lmfao i dont even i know, i just found this mouse out of nowhere and i just plugged it in to my laptop and i use it on 45-50% mouse sensitivity for sc2 and i really like it, i guess im gonna keep my trustworthy microsoft optical
|
On November 29 2010 18:53 UniversalSnip wrote:Show nested quote +On November 29 2010 16:48 Char711 wrote:I think something crucial has been missed when we're talking about mouse choice: the games being played. Those older FPS games run at lower resolutions and, therefore, don't require high DPI. That and FPS players naturally use incredibly low sensitivities. If you're running SC2 at a moderately high resolution, a higher DPI is important. Not the 5,000 or ridiculous amount that some mice advertise, but some (for example, the 1,800 on the MX518 is good; I haven't heard of many people going much higher than 2,500 or so with SC2, but I also haven't seen too many people say what their settings are) is helpful. Now, you might say, like D3ath3nat0r, that you can adjust the sensitivity in the settings. No. You can't. Why? Because, for a 1:1 ratio of mouse movement to movement on screen (assuming you've turned mouse acceleration off), you need a Windows mouse sensitivity of 6/11. Since the SC2 sensitivity is partly linked to it, without getting into the math behind it, it should be set to 51-54% (the "setting" isn't actually notched up any until you hit multiples of 5) for what most people call "optimal settings." The DPI on your mouse is what picks up the rest of the slack (as it is essentially saying how many pixels per inch that your mouse will traverse). You can up the SC2 sensitivity, but you'll get slight loss of accuracy in the form of skipping pixels. So, that said, I'd recommend at least a slightly more modern mouse. Yes, some people are totally fine with those old ones and there is nothing wrong with using them: the most important thing is, obviously, comfort/personal preference. With what I've seen through my research, though, the increasingly high resolutions of the modern day (that you will have unless you play on the lowest setting) are usually complemented by a higher DPI. All of that said, I'm going from my MX518 that I've used for around 4 years to a DeathAdder. It's widely held to be one of the best mice (right up there with the MX518 and "RTS favorites" like the Salmosa). I'd say go for it! Total nonsense. High DPI provides equal (and dubious) benefits between every resolution. High resolution just lets you see the effects.
Based on both the statement implying there is a benefit on the fourth page of the review Lwerewolf posted (second page of this thread and from one of the most testing-intensive and knowledgable sites you'll find for this) and the very information-filled post by Black Gun at the bottom of the page of this thread, I'll have to disagree with you.
The benefits are far from dubious and there is clearly a difference in benefit between resolutions. I think you're vastly underestimating the effects of resolution changes.
If you have some sources that prove me wrong, I'd love to see them. I'm really interested in this stuff because I like getting all of the little things right!
|
On November 30 2010 10:28 Char711 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 29 2010 18:53 UniversalSnip wrote:On November 29 2010 16:48 Char711 wrote:I think something crucial has been missed when we're talking about mouse choice: the games being played. Those older FPS games run at lower resolutions and, therefore, don't require high DPI. That and FPS players naturally use incredibly low sensitivities. If you're running SC2 at a moderately high resolution, a higher DPI is important. Not the 5,000 or ridiculous amount that some mice advertise, but some (for example, the 1,800 on the MX518 is good; I haven't heard of many people going much higher than 2,500 or so with SC2, but I also haven't seen too many people say what their settings are) is helpful. Now, you might say, like D3ath3nat0r, that you can adjust the sensitivity in the settings. No. You can't. Why? Because, for a 1:1 ratio of mouse movement to movement on screen (assuming you've turned mouse acceleration off), you need a Windows mouse sensitivity of 6/11. Since the SC2 sensitivity is partly linked to it, without getting into the math behind it, it should be set to 51-54% (the "setting" isn't actually notched up any until you hit multiples of 5) for what most people call "optimal settings." The DPI on your mouse is what picks up the rest of the slack (as it is essentially saying how many pixels per inch that your mouse will traverse). You can up the SC2 sensitivity, but you'll get slight loss of accuracy in the form of skipping pixels. So, that said, I'd recommend at least a slightly more modern mouse. Yes, some people are totally fine with those old ones and there is nothing wrong with using them: the most important thing is, obviously, comfort/personal preference. With what I've seen through my research, though, the increasingly high resolutions of the modern day (that you will have unless you play on the lowest setting) are usually complemented by a higher DPI. All of that said, I'm going from my MX518 that I've used for around 4 years to a DeathAdder. It's widely held to be one of the best mice (right up there with the MX518 and "RTS favorites" like the Salmosa). I'd say go for it! Total nonsense. High DPI provides equal (and dubious) benefits between every resolution. High resolution just lets you see the effects. Based on both the statement implying there is a benefit on the fourth page of the review Lwerewolf posted (second page of this thread and from one of the most testing-intensive and knowledgable sites you'll find for this) and the very information-filled post by Black Gun at the bottom of the page of this thread, I'll have to disagree with you. The benefits are far from dubious and there is clearly a difference in benefit between resolutions. I think you're vastly underestimating the effects of resolution changes. If you have some sources that prove me wrong, I'd love to see them. I'm really interested in this stuff because I like getting all of the little things right!
dude, I come from that site and the mousescore is a joke. Nobody there takes it seriously and they don't do it anymore. I suggest you ask on that forum or any number of hardcore hardware forums, I don't feel like educating you. I guarantee they will tell you the same thing.
|
On December 01 2010 06:22 UniversalSnip wrote:Show nested quote +On November 30 2010 10:28 Char711 wrote:On November 29 2010 18:53 UniversalSnip wrote:On November 29 2010 16:48 Char711 wrote:I think something crucial has been missed when we're talking about mouse choice: the games being played. Those older FPS games run at lower resolutions and, therefore, don't require high DPI. That and FPS players naturally use incredibly low sensitivities. If you're running SC2 at a moderately high resolution, a higher DPI is important. Not the 5,000 or ridiculous amount that some mice advertise, but some (for example, the 1,800 on the MX518 is good; I haven't heard of many people going much higher than 2,500 or so with SC2, but I also haven't seen too many people say what their settings are) is helpful. Now, you might say, like D3ath3nat0r, that you can adjust the sensitivity in the settings. No. You can't. Why? Because, for a 1:1 ratio of mouse movement to movement on screen (assuming you've turned mouse acceleration off), you need a Windows mouse sensitivity of 6/11. Since the SC2 sensitivity is partly linked to it, without getting into the math behind it, it should be set to 51-54% (the "setting" isn't actually notched up any until you hit multiples of 5) for what most people call "optimal settings." The DPI on your mouse is what picks up the rest of the slack (as it is essentially saying how many pixels per inch that your mouse will traverse). You can up the SC2 sensitivity, but you'll get slight loss of accuracy in the form of skipping pixels. So, that said, I'd recommend at least a slightly more modern mouse. Yes, some people are totally fine with those old ones and there is nothing wrong with using them: the most important thing is, obviously, comfort/personal preference. With what I've seen through my research, though, the increasingly high resolutions of the modern day (that you will have unless you play on the lowest setting) are usually complemented by a higher DPI. All of that said, I'm going from my MX518 that I've used for around 4 years to a DeathAdder. It's widely held to be one of the best mice (right up there with the MX518 and "RTS favorites" like the Salmosa). I'd say go for it! Total nonsense. High DPI provides equal (and dubious) benefits between every resolution. High resolution just lets you see the effects. Based on both the statement implying there is a benefit on the fourth page of the review Lwerewolf posted (second page of this thread and from one of the most testing-intensive and knowledgable sites you'll find for this) and the very information-filled post by Black Gun at the bottom of the page of this thread, I'll have to disagree with you. The benefits are far from dubious and there is clearly a difference in benefit between resolutions. I think you're vastly underestimating the effects of resolution changes. If you have some sources that prove me wrong, I'd love to see them. I'm really interested in this stuff because I like getting all of the little things right! dude, I come from that site and the mousescore is a joke. Nobody there takes it seriously and they don't do it anymore. I suggest you ask on that forum or any number of hardcore hardware forums, I don't feel like educating you. I guarantee they will tell you the same thing.
I'm sorry you "don't feel like educating": I thought that's what threads like this were for.
Still, I have yet to see a truly good thread on TL saying that same thing, which makes me suspicious: TL people are very good about their testing and research, in general.
Is the mouse score only a joke now or was it always a joke (as the ones we're looking at are older)? The tests seem fairly solid when you look at them, if only in terms of technical limits.
|
On December 01 2010 11:26 Char711 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2010 06:22 UniversalSnip wrote:On November 30 2010 10:28 Char711 wrote:On November 29 2010 18:53 UniversalSnip wrote:On November 29 2010 16:48 Char711 wrote:I think something crucial has been missed when we're talking about mouse choice: the games being played. Those older FPS games run at lower resolutions and, therefore, don't require high DPI. That and FPS players naturally use incredibly low sensitivities. If you're running SC2 at a moderately high resolution, a higher DPI is important. Not the 5,000 or ridiculous amount that some mice advertise, but some (for example, the 1,800 on the MX518 is good; I haven't heard of many people going much higher than 2,500 or so with SC2, but I also haven't seen too many people say what their settings are) is helpful. Now, you might say, like D3ath3nat0r, that you can adjust the sensitivity in the settings. No. You can't. Why? Because, for a 1:1 ratio of mouse movement to movement on screen (assuming you've turned mouse acceleration off), you need a Windows mouse sensitivity of 6/11. Since the SC2 sensitivity is partly linked to it, without getting into the math behind it, it should be set to 51-54% (the "setting" isn't actually notched up any until you hit multiples of 5) for what most people call "optimal settings." The DPI on your mouse is what picks up the rest of the slack (as it is essentially saying how many pixels per inch that your mouse will traverse). You can up the SC2 sensitivity, but you'll get slight loss of accuracy in the form of skipping pixels. So, that said, I'd recommend at least a slightly more modern mouse. Yes, some people are totally fine with those old ones and there is nothing wrong with using them: the most important thing is, obviously, comfort/personal preference. With what I've seen through my research, though, the increasingly high resolutions of the modern day (that you will have unless you play on the lowest setting) are usually complemented by a higher DPI. All of that said, I'm going from my MX518 that I've used for around 4 years to a DeathAdder. It's widely held to be one of the best mice (right up there with the MX518 and "RTS favorites" like the Salmosa). I'd say go for it! Total nonsense. High DPI provides equal (and dubious) benefits between every resolution. High resolution just lets you see the effects. Based on both the statement implying there is a benefit on the fourth page of the review Lwerewolf posted (second page of this thread and from one of the most testing-intensive and knowledgable sites you'll find for this) and the very information-filled post by Black Gun at the bottom of the page of this thread, I'll have to disagree with you. The benefits are far from dubious and there is clearly a difference in benefit between resolutions. I think you're vastly underestimating the effects of resolution changes. If you have some sources that prove me wrong, I'd love to see them. I'm really interested in this stuff because I like getting all of the little things right! dude, I come from that site and the mousescore is a joke. Nobody there takes it seriously and they don't do it anymore. I suggest you ask on that forum or any number of hardcore hardware forums, I don't feel like educating you. I guarantee they will tell you the same thing. I'm sorry you "don't feel like educating": I thought that's what threads like this were for.
Well, I'm sorry to put the burden of fulfilling this thread's destiny on someone else.
Still, I have yet to see a truly good thread on TL saying that same thing, which makes me suspicious: TL people are very good about their testing and research, in general.
Is the mouse score only a joke now or was it always a joke (as the ones we're looking at are older)? The tests seem fairly solid when you look at them, if only in terms of technical limits.
They're fine technically, they're just meaningless. There's simply no respect for the significance of those numbers any more.
|
On December 01 2010 19:03 UniversalSnip wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2010 11:26 Char711 wrote:On December 01 2010 06:22 UniversalSnip wrote:On November 30 2010 10:28 Char711 wrote:On November 29 2010 18:53 UniversalSnip wrote:On November 29 2010 16:48 Char711 wrote:I think something crucial has been missed when we're talking about mouse choice: the games being played. Those older FPS games run at lower resolutions and, therefore, don't require high DPI. That and FPS players naturally use incredibly low sensitivities. If you're running SC2 at a moderately high resolution, a higher DPI is important. Not the 5,000 or ridiculous amount that some mice advertise, but some (for example, the 1,800 on the MX518 is good; I haven't heard of many people going much higher than 2,500 or so with SC2, but I also haven't seen too many people say what their settings are) is helpful. Now, you might say, like D3ath3nat0r, that you can adjust the sensitivity in the settings. No. You can't. Why? Because, for a 1:1 ratio of mouse movement to movement on screen (assuming you've turned mouse acceleration off), you need a Windows mouse sensitivity of 6/11. Since the SC2 sensitivity is partly linked to it, without getting into the math behind it, it should be set to 51-54% (the "setting" isn't actually notched up any until you hit multiples of 5) for what most people call "optimal settings." The DPI on your mouse is what picks up the rest of the slack (as it is essentially saying how many pixels per inch that your mouse will traverse). You can up the SC2 sensitivity, but you'll get slight loss of accuracy in the form of skipping pixels. So, that said, I'd recommend at least a slightly more modern mouse. Yes, some people are totally fine with those old ones and there is nothing wrong with using them: the most important thing is, obviously, comfort/personal preference. With what I've seen through my research, though, the increasingly high resolutions of the modern day (that you will have unless you play on the lowest setting) are usually complemented by a higher DPI. All of that said, I'm going from my MX518 that I've used for around 4 years to a DeathAdder. It's widely held to be one of the best mice (right up there with the MX518 and "RTS favorites" like the Salmosa). I'd say go for it! Total nonsense. High DPI provides equal (and dubious) benefits between every resolution. High resolution just lets you see the effects. Based on both the statement implying there is a benefit on the fourth page of the review Lwerewolf posted (second page of this thread and from one of the most testing-intensive and knowledgable sites you'll find for this) and the very information-filled post by Black Gun at the bottom of the page of this thread, I'll have to disagree with you. The benefits are far from dubious and there is clearly a difference in benefit between resolutions. I think you're vastly underestimating the effects of resolution changes. If you have some sources that prove me wrong, I'd love to see them. I'm really interested in this stuff because I like getting all of the little things right! dude, I come from that site and the mousescore is a joke. Nobody there takes it seriously and they don't do it anymore. I suggest you ask on that forum or any number of hardcore hardware forums, I don't feel like educating you. I guarantee they will tell you the same thing. I'm sorry you "don't feel like educating": I thought that's what threads like this were for. Well, I'm sorry to put the burden of fulfilling this thread's destiny on someone else. Show nested quote +Still, I have yet to see a truly good thread on TL saying that same thing, which makes me suspicious: TL people are very good about their testing and research, in general.
Is the mouse score only a joke now or was it always a joke (as the ones we're looking at are older)? The tests seem fairly solid when you look at them, if only in terms of technical limits. They're fine technically, they're just meaningless. There's simply no respect for the significance of those numbers any more.
So . . . you're saying that they actually are valid and that people just don't understand that. I fail to see how that contradicts anything I said.
|
razer mouses are more fps specific. i use a diamondback 3g and love it, but i've had it since it came out and i'm just so used to it.
a good mousepad actually can make your mouse seem way better (you have a quality mouse really)
FYI****** if you buy a nice mousepad, DO NOT EVER set a hot plate or mug on it like my dumb ass. i bought a big ass ocZ pad and it's now warped in the middle cause i was setting hot tea and the occasional food plate on it. it's to the point where only a corner of it is playable and i have it angled so my mouse is on that corner now =(
|
definately mousepad, It helps so much. i have to say im addicted to my mouse pad haha
|
On December 02 2010 09:41 Char711 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2010 19:03 UniversalSnip wrote:On December 01 2010 11:26 Char711 wrote:On December 01 2010 06:22 UniversalSnip wrote:On November 30 2010 10:28 Char711 wrote:On November 29 2010 18:53 UniversalSnip wrote:On November 29 2010 16:48 Char711 wrote:I think something crucial has been missed when we're talking about mouse choice: the games being played. Those older FPS games run at lower resolutions and, therefore, don't require high DPI. That and FPS players naturally use incredibly low sensitivities. If you're running SC2 at a moderately high resolution, a higher DPI is important. Not the 5,000 or ridiculous amount that some mice advertise, but some (for example, the 1,800 on the MX518 is good; I haven't heard of many people going much higher than 2,500 or so with SC2, but I also haven't seen too many people say what their settings are) is helpful. Now, you might say, like D3ath3nat0r, that you can adjust the sensitivity in the settings. No. You can't. Why? Because, for a 1:1 ratio of mouse movement to movement on screen (assuming you've turned mouse acceleration off), you need a Windows mouse sensitivity of 6/11. Since the SC2 sensitivity is partly linked to it, without getting into the math behind it, it should be set to 51-54% (the "setting" isn't actually notched up any until you hit multiples of 5) for what most people call "optimal settings." The DPI on your mouse is what picks up the rest of the slack (as it is essentially saying how many pixels per inch that your mouse will traverse). You can up the SC2 sensitivity, but you'll get slight loss of accuracy in the form of skipping pixels. So, that said, I'd recommend at least a slightly more modern mouse. Yes, some people are totally fine with those old ones and there is nothing wrong with using them: the most important thing is, obviously, comfort/personal preference. With what I've seen through my research, though, the increasingly high resolutions of the modern day (that you will have unless you play on the lowest setting) are usually complemented by a higher DPI. All of that said, I'm going from my MX518 that I've used for around 4 years to a DeathAdder. It's widely held to be one of the best mice (right up there with the MX518 and "RTS favorites" like the Salmosa). I'd say go for it! Total nonsense. High DPI provides equal (and dubious) benefits between every resolution. High resolution just lets you see the effects. Based on both the statement implying there is a benefit on the fourth page of the review Lwerewolf posted (second page of this thread and from one of the most testing-intensive and knowledgable sites you'll find for this) and the very information-filled post by Black Gun at the bottom of the page of this thread, I'll have to disagree with you. The benefits are far from dubious and there is clearly a difference in benefit between resolutions. I think you're vastly underestimating the effects of resolution changes. If you have some sources that prove me wrong, I'd love to see them. I'm really interested in this stuff because I like getting all of the little things right! dude, I come from that site and the mousescore is a joke. Nobody there takes it seriously and they don't do it anymore. I suggest you ask on that forum or any number of hardcore hardware forums, I don't feel like educating you. I guarantee they will tell you the same thing. I'm sorry you "don't feel like educating": I thought that's what threads like this were for. Well, I'm sorry to put the burden of fulfilling this thread's destiny on someone else. Still, I have yet to see a truly good thread on TL saying that same thing, which makes me suspicious: TL people are very good about their testing and research, in general.
Is the mouse score only a joke now or was it always a joke (as the ones we're looking at are older)? The tests seem fairly solid when you look at them, if only in terms of technical limits. They're fine technically, they're just meaningless. There's simply no respect for the significance of those numbers any more. So . . . you're saying that they actually are valid and that people just don't understand that. I fail to see how that contradicts anything I said.
meaningless, the quality of having no value or significance. These measurements tell you NOTHING useful about the mouse, especially the arbitrary rating scale.
|
steelseries xai > deathadder
|
Deathadder is a great mouse, but if you want a cloth mousepad I think the steelseries Qck range are a better option than the goliathus. There's even starcraft themed ones out now 
|
I use your very mouse, its a really really good mouse. Dont let kids bullshit you that it doesnt track well. It has perfect tracking good and good control.
Buy some teflon skates and decent cloth pad and you are set.
Also, to the people who act like they know why higher dpi= better at higher resolutions need to set down and listen to this.
lets use starcraft as an example cause its input is done on 2d my 400 dpi mouse @ 1:1 ratio @ 1024x768= 2.56 inches horizontal 1.92 inches vertical. A perfectly normal fucking value.
And that's pixel perfect.Starcraft 2 is not a game that requires pixel perfect control
now fps's are more complicated than that, but honestly more dpi does mean more accurate "technically" but its also REDUNDANT accuracy. It is also alot fucking faster in many cases and requires lower in game sensitivities to reach the same real world movement.
Lets take quake 3s mouse calculation
ill use my sensitivity
(in game sense)x .022(in game degrees per input)x DPI= N
360 / N = (real world sense in inches)
mine equals 10.22 inches for a 360
now remember aim is decided by degrees not pixels
tired of math and shit.
Point is more DPI is redundant and low sensitivity is nothing bad.
|
Currently $39.99 at NCIX, go go go!
pretty good price imo, I got it for $34.99 back in late August.
|
I love my deathadder. I use it on a CM storm cloth pad and I couldn't be happier with it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
