Aiming Test v1.0 (test your mouse)

[onlycape]

Hi all,
I recently published a web "minigame" (it's just a prototype) that is perfect for testing the mouse and measuring our expertise and reflexes. And it can be useful to warm up before a game.
The graphics are absolutely hardcore, to the taste of the top players .

How to play:

There are 3 play modes: normal, evasion and tracking.
The challenge is shoot to 10 static targets (normal and evasion).

NORMAL MODE:
Each objective remains on screen between 0.8 and 1 second. (some players kill me in 0.0 )
The score for each hit varies depending on the distance in pixels to the center of the target and the shooting time in milliseconds.
This is the formula: score = 400 - distance x 2 - time / 10

EVASION MODE:
Each target remains on screen until it is shot down.
The targets are mobile and reacts to our actions.
The score is the same than in normal mode.

Bonus:

• Distance to target center < 5px : +400 points

• Shot time < 400ms : +1000 points (I got this bonus only 1 time)

Penalties:

• Failed shot : -400 points

TRACKING MODE:
It's meant to be a form of training to use the lg.

In this test we must hit with the pointer as long as possible (the test ends in 1 minute) on the target.

Score system:

• Every second we shoot on the target: +10 points

• Every second we fail: -10 points

• Every second we do not shoot: -0.5 points

Final results shows the average distance to the target.

Links:

Here is the link to play: https://jjcapellan.github.io/aimingtest/
The code is open source : https://github.com/jjcapellan/aimingtest

Notes:

I recommend using Google Chrome to play it (I confess, I've only tested it with this ).
In a next version I will add a tracking test (lg style).

And here is my best result :

screenshot.png

screenshot1.png

Any suggestion is welcome. I hope you like it.
I'm curious to know what scores others do ...

Regards.

[tar]

[fernandinho1337]

looks nice. gotta check it out when i am home

best regards

[onlycape]

Hi @tar ,
Wooooow! And I thought that lowering the 400ms was a challenge . For something you are one of the top players.
A bonus is supposed to be a reward for an exceptional achievement, but you have just killed my time bonus and my ego has been seriously damaged .
Today I played some games focusing on the response time, but at the most I get a bonus time and several penalties, with which my score does not improve. I have to try the wired mouse, my wireless mouse may have a lot of lag and I really am a champion .

I'll wait for results from other players for a possible adjustment of the bonuses that favor aim and reaction time equally.
Watching the screenshot, I realized that I have to fix the html design.

Thanks for try it.

Regards.

[fernandinho1337]

Today I played some games focusing on the response time, but at the most I get a bonus time and several penalties, with which my score does not improve. I have to try the wired mouse, my wireless mouse may have a lot of lag and I really am a champion .

It is really interesting to see how people play: I thought nowadays everybody has top equipment (atleast good enough) to play quake 3 but apparently some people use wireless(????) mice and such...amazing.

i guess the level of competition would double if everybody would be using sort of serious hardware and game configs ^^.

best regards

[tar]

Wooooow! And I thought that lowering the 400ms was a challenge . For something you are one of the top players.
A bonus is supposed to be a reward for an exceptional achievement, but you have just killed my time bonus and my ego has been seriously damaged .
Today I played some games focusing on the response time, but at the most I get a bonus time and several penalties, with which my score does not improve. I have to try the wired mouse, my wireless mouse may have a lot of lag and I really am a champion .

You should use a wired mouse - as it has a lower input lag which is the reason you are not able to hit under 400 ms. Furthermore, you should just flinch shot into the target area and don't focus on the center of the target. Therefore I always moved the mouse immediately back to the bottom center position after each shot.

Btw. I just challenged an old buddy... result attached. As you can clearly see, he went a little deeper into himself before he fired the last shot

[fernandinho1337]

@newb.zi: you have already broken the game. i will not bother attempting this game

[onlycape]

Heeeey @tar do'nt scare the other players (You're winning a ban ) For a moment I thought it was a bug in the code . Although the results seemed more like a modification of the code than an aimbot (the score per shot can not be more than 400pts).

Effectively any javascript client-side game is very easy to hack. That's why the main idea of this game is not competition, although here people are by nature competitive, but have a tool that provides interesting data about our performance with the mouse.. For example: we can know how much our reaction time increases with 3 beers (This is an essential data to play Quaque ).

@fernandinho1337 I'm sure others players want to know your honest results. It is evident that you are very competitive, how can you get back .

Regards.

[adminless]

30k+ WTF lolz ok it's clear that there's a reason why I set maximum credible stats around tar's performance, that's what I was talking about. to think that I struggle to make just 3k+, I seem to do better at precision rather than reaction actually thought, anyways shot is just a average normal sample, not really trying to set a record nice applet mate, good addition

[tar]

It's pretty obvious that he hacked the code.

On average I get around 8k, better results around 10k and had a bit luck as I got 13k. It depends on how far in the left/right borders the target appears - as then it takes longer to move the mouse and the flinch shot can fail. It is also irritating that the target appears not within the same time.

When I try to hit the center of the target I get around 3-4k only as then you need more time, of course. So hey, it was not my intention to scare anybody

Btw. also consider the fact that you usually use a different sensitivity between Quake and Windows. In Quake I have a slightly acceleration, lower DPI (800) and higher frequency (1000) while in Windows I have no acceleration at all, higher DPI (1800) and a lower frequency (500). But I am too lazy to tweak that for this game

[fernandinho1337]

I am at 11.620

best regards

[onlycape]

[/quote]

30k+ WTF lolz ok it's clear that there's a reason why I set maximum credible stats around tar's performance, that's what I was talking about. to think that I struggle to make just 3k+, I seem to do better at precision rather than reaction actually thought, anyways shot is just a average normal sample, not really trying to set a record nice applet mate, good addition

Thanks Admin !! .
There were some processes (array writing, sound reproduction ...) between the the shot and the second time stamp, with which I measure the reaction time, which were consuming some time and could increase the reaction time in slower CPUs. In my case it was sometimes 1ms / 1.5ms (Athlon64 X2 2.8Gh). So now you could improve a couple of milliseconds or none at best .

You should use a wired mouse - as it has a lower input lag which is the reason you are not able to hit under 400 ms. Furthermore, you should just flinch shot into the target area and don't focus on the center of the target. Therefore I always moved the mouse immediately back to the bottom center position after each shot.

Thanks tar. You were right. Today I tested the wired mouse and the lag to improved over 150ms, and also has red lights . Although I am still somewhat uncomfortable with the weight of the mouse (the previous one weighed twice) I have already overcome after a few attempts (a lot ) my previous mark:

recordwiredv101.png

I am at 11.620

best regards

I will create a level of difficulty specially designed for you and newb.zi, and I will call it level "HyperSuperMega hellish nightmare".

[adminless]

@tar yeah i guess so because those reaction times (in the order of tens of ms) were just way too absurd (inhuman). mmmm yes 3/4k is more like me, so that's cool hahaha

btw cape this lead to my suggestion/impression about your applet I don't think that there should be such a difference in score between the two strategies here (precision/reaction) as noted even by tar (precision 3/4k reaction 8/12k, i.e. more than twice of score difference) I think that a bit may be but probably not that much, in other words I feel like probably the code don't reward enough the precision. anyways, like I'm telling that's just a impression after playing a couple of games and reading this not from reading the code so it may not be that much meaningful just saying. I also feel like the target would be better a circle instead of a square and probably also in other color could be a bit better, more like black/white/red perhaps (and may be black hit 1xscore, white hit 1.25xscore and red hit 1.5xscore, would even the scores).

although now probably thinking about it perhaps is the reaction rewards that are overpowered you can also think it that way and would be easier (as I would expect the score to be inversely proportional to the distance already) xD so perhaps just tone them down a bit would also even the score.

[onlycape]

Thanks Admin for the usefull feedback. Yes you are right, the score system is unbalanced.
Maybe with a "great shot" bonus (shot score > 350 or 340) in the place of actual bonus... Or directly eliminate the bonuses... I have to think about it.
And yes, I can use circles, in the end there is no collision system that affects performance, and to calculate distances I have to use a square root as well.

[tar]

btw cape this lead to my suggestion/impression about your applet I don't think that there should be such a difference in score between the two strategies here (precision/reaction) as noted even by tar (precision 3/4k reaction 8/12k, i.e. more than twice of score difference) I think that a bit may be but probably not that much, in other words I feel like probably the code don't reward enough the precision. anyways, like I'm telling that's just a impression after playing a couple of games and reading this not from reading the code so it may not be that much meaningful just saying. I also feel like the target would be better a circle instead of a square and probably also in other color could be a bit better, more like black/white/red perhaps (and may be black hit 1xscore, white hit 1.25xscore and red hit 1.5xscore, would even the scores).

although now probably thinking about it perhaps is the reaction rewards that are overpowered you can also think it that way and would be easier (as I would expect the score to be inversely proportional to the distance already) xD so perhaps just tone them down a bit would also even the score.

I thought UnFreeZe v2.0 would look a bit different