i think jesses point is the difference between 1 100 and 0 100s is the same as the difference of 50 100s and 51 100s, purely the acc and score difference is reward enough
This essentially is what I'm trying to say.nrii wrote:
i think jesses point is the difference between 1 100 and 0 100s is the same as the difference of 50 100s and 51 100s, purely the acc and score difference is reward enough
that's in theorysilmarilen wrote:
having 0x 100 means you have perfect accuracy, having 1 means you lost that perfect accuracy.
having 50x 100 or having 51x 100 both means your accuracy sucks
its the fact that you performed the song glawlessly that makes it better
i agree to an extent, but pp goes A DAMN LONG WAY to being skill based in comparison to old ranks. obviousl a system will ALWAYS require effort and time, such as the world chess ratings; you cant just beat the current world top and then you are the world top. you have to work your way up through tournaments and gain rating, regardless of how good you were to begin with.( though i believe you can play at a higher level if you want to and gain faster but thats same as jumping into high level insanes and going to 4k pp in a day)Aqo wrote:
The old scores system measured effort and time. The current way PP works, also, measures effort and time spent, over actual skill.
The thing is, you ARE improving by practicing that, but the actual amount of skill you end up with varies. A person who grinded a map until getting an SS run on it will still not be able to get an SS every time he plays it again, while a person who got that SS in just one or two tries will be able to get it again many times with ease. That's why the amount of tries has to affect your /skill/ rating. If the person who grinded that map actually got good enough to SS all maps of that level on his first try, good for him! The moment he plays some other maps it will show on his skill rating. But if he keeps getting mediocre accuracies in most of his tries, while somebody else gets good accuracies in very little tries, this should show - or else as mentioned earlier, the system would rate effort and not skill.boat wrote:
Irregardless of how many times you tried to get the score, you still got it, meaning thats what you are able to do, and that result is what you'll get the points for. Counting the amount of times it took you to reach the goal and cutting it off the PP you gain would be quite silly, in my opinion at least.
Trying to achieve a good accuracy is in a way improving, so you're in a way asking for people who take longer time to achieve improvement to get less of a reward?
Then go and take them if it's so easy.I already did for testing. It took me 10 minutes. I raised my pp by 25 and my rank increased from 40 to 35. With one #1 rank on a hard diff! (meanwhile my rank decreased by a bit through that new SS bonus though.)
I agree with this 100%.Tom94 wrote:
I guess I said it often enough already so this will be the last time, this time in detail though:
Why would SS or accuracy or "Perfect" earn you extra PP? This doesn't make any sense!
Having SS earns you a higher map rank over non-SS.
Having higher accuracy earns you a higher map rank over lower accuracy.
Having a "Perfect" earns you a higher map rank over non-"perfect" (because of higher combo obv.).
So why in god's name take those factors into account a 2nd time?
All this is achieving is favoring ranks onAnd because of this players who rank a lot on Hards are put unnaturally high in the list. I'll just take ShadowSoul as an example (no offense ShadowSoul. You are an awesome player, but your rank 10 is ridiculous.)
- easier-to-fc maps (because of "Perfect" bonus)
- lower OD maps (because of SS and accuracy bonus)
Just look at this: There are only hard diffs (except of one "expert" and "insane" one)!
Now for the people who sayThen go and take them if it's so easy.I already did for testing. It took me 10 minutes. I raised my pp by 25 and my rank increased from 40 to 35. With one #1 rank on a hard diff! (meanwhile my rank decreased by a bit through that new SS bonus though.)
It's not fun to grind SS (or 99.99999999% plays) on easier Hard diffs by memorizing the slow patterns. For people who actually want to rank on more challenging stuff this is a problem.
I repeat: No offense. ShadowSoul also got a bunch of awesome ranks. He is an awesome player. But those awesome ranks I know from him aren't even shown under the best performance tab while other easier ranks make him get a ridiculously high rank. In god's name, he is claimed on par with wobeinimacao, Remilia-Scarlet, even as better than Niko-. Please note that this is just an example. There are many other issues with the order.
Before the "perfect" bonus and the SS bonus were added the ranking was a lot better in terms of skill. And I am quite sure that if the additional accuracy-rating is being adjusted (mainly lowered) that the PP ranking would improve further.
But isn't this taking map heuristics like OD into account? Higher OD on the same map -> everyone got lower accuracy -> everyone got lower PP regardless of quality of performance. This also applies to SS scores of course.peppy wrote:
The second-time factors are to rewards certain gameplay attempts over others — specifically devaluing the over-valued mod additions.
Would you mind telling us how the system detects easier maps if not through contention / map heuristics?peppy wrote:
Easier map = exponentially less pp = doesn't matter.
Thanks for the inside info.peppy wrote:
Think stuff like sparsity of scores relative to highest SS, ratio of SS to S to poorer ranks, pass ratios.
Also consider that it isn't all about finding the most insanely hard maps (though this would be optimal); higher played maps should inherently be considered more because they are more prominent in the community. It doesn't matter so much if they are "only" hard, because if you are a good player you will also be able to do well in these maps. That said, I do plan on making continual adjustments until a consensus is reached that we have a long-term usable solution.
For speculation, I can tell your the currently highest pp-ranked map is http://osu.ppy.sh/b/21010
@Lybydose: thanks for the examples provided. I found an edge case which causes hards to get highly prioritised where they shouldn't be. Will make amendments which will propagate tomorrow.Hoping to see things go better tomorrow. :>
Tom94 wrote:
Would you mind telling us how the system detects easier maps if not through contention / map heuristics?
Sparsity of scores cannot be used to evaluate difficulty or anything at all because of the simple reason that not everybody plays every map. It was already mentioned multiple times and yet it seems like you choose to disregard this.peppy wrote:
Think stuff like sparsity of scores relative to highest SS, ratio of SS to S to poorer ranks, pass ratios.
Also consider that it isn't all about finding the most insanely hard maps (though this would be optimal); higher played maps should inherently be considered more because they are more prominent in the community. It doesn't matter so much if they are "only" hard, because if you are a good player you will also be able to do well in these maps.
You said you've taken Lybydose's post into account, but when saying things like "because if you are a good player you will also be able to do well in these maps" it seems like you don't fully comprehend what was being said. There are maps that almost nobody can "do well on", a few examples:Lybydose wrote:
the "Hard" difficulties are more worthwhile to play for a number of reasons:
1. Large number of scores from "average" people playing that difficulty because they can't pass Insane maps. Thus, high "contention".
2. Very few "pro" players bother to even play the Hard, so it's very easy to rank top 10 or better with only HD or HD/HR or DT at < OD7.
3. It's very difficult to get top 10 on Insane maps AND get high accuracy, because this usually requires playing HR or DT on something that's OD8 or higher.
Just don't know how you can say this. There is a huge difference and the examples people have given shows it clearly. All of those combined:peppy wrote:
The cases you mention where Hard is worth "more" than insane (I checked the provided ones) isn't actually a huge difference
I play for fun, not for rank. 90% of my plays are on unranked/unapproved maps; I wouldn't care for rank at all if it wasn't for people who, now, look at profile's PP and use that to judge the value of a person's post. It just strikes me odd how you ignore people's constant reports on issues with your system. I tried to point out the key issues and explain them thoroughly to make it as clear as possible just in case other people's posts weren't clear enough for you, but when you reply with messages like:peppy wrote:
I have a suggestion though Aqo: do you want to become the ranking system yourself? Wire yourself in and rate everyone from 1 to 1 million? , updating as close to realtime as possible? This will likely make you happy, though I doubt you'll have time to play anymore.
This one is funny because while it's called [Hard], it totally feels like your average Insane to me.Lybydose wrote:
http://osu.ppy.sh/b/64909&m=0
brb farmingpeppy wrote:
https://docs.google.com/a/ppy.sh/spread ... oY0E#gid=0
Nah, if you get a SS but spin poorly, non-SS ranks could beat you on the spinner.Tom94 wrote:
Having SS earns you a higher map rank over non-SS.
Who is the more skilful player, you judge by yourself.Aqo wrote:
We have Player A and Player B, playing a map.
Player A first played that map with 89% accuracy and a few miss, and then proceeded to retry that map again and again for several hours, having about 50-100 retries on it, until eventually getting an SS on it. Even despite getting that SS, if Player A kept playing that map he would most likely get 95%-97% accuracy on an average run.
Player B played that map and had 98% accuracy on his first try. He thought he might try going for an SS on it, so he played it again, then getting about 98% again, maybe slightly higher. He then decided this map isn't very fun for him, and moved on.
Who do you think is a more skilled player, A or B?
And who is PP going to rate higher?
inb4 countless FL ranks pop up outta nowhereJappyBabes wrote:
brb farmingpeppy wrote:
https://docs.google.com/a/ppy.sh/spread ... oY0E#gid=0
Now everyone will farm pp doing somehow high-weighted hard diffs S:peppy wrote:
making public is not yet possible due to the complexity. i am constantly moving towards that direction, and you will likely see more information as time goes on and the process is refined. people complaining is fine, but we are already in a better state than "ranked score ranks", and i am constantly looking for improvements to the calculation. as i previously said, keep up the feedback, but try and keep it constructive.
here is a fully editable spreadsheet with the top 1000 weighted maps. you're free to leave comments beside beatmaps you feel are out of place or not getting the love they deserve (or follow up in this thread).
https://docs.google.com/a/ppy.sh/spread ... oY0E#gid=0
spreadsheet is flawed in general, i know of a few hard maps that will be top or near top on many top 100 players that arent on this listJappyBabes wrote:
@Aqo You must realize that this isn't a potential skill rankings, it's a ranking based on your performances.
Also, airman isn't even on that spreadsheet.
Afaik the "best performance" tab isn't ordered. I believe ppy once said something about that.nrii wrote:
spreadsheet is flawed in general, i know of a few hard maps that will be top or near top on many top 100 players that arent on this listJappyBabes wrote:
@Aqo You must realize that this isn't a potential skill rankings, it's a ranking based on your performances.
Also, airman isn't even on that spreadsheet.
edit: equally looking at tom94's tops, he has a hd+hr SS on a map that is 327 on this list, lower ranked than a hd+hr non SS of a map that is 409 on this list. the map weighting is lower, hes rank 1 on both, and his acc is higher on bulletproof, so why does the lower weighted map give more pp?
i've had friends play maps that are my top's and they also appear at the top of their list, it has to be ordered by somethingTom94 wrote:
Afaik the "best performance" tab isn't ordered. I believe ppy once said something about that.
You are basically trying to rank people by using one song. The thing is you really can't do that. Even in a perfect pp calculation world, you still need an average of at least several maps. It doesn't really matter if Player B played a few times, got a good score, got a little less pp than Player A, and moved on to either just take a break or play/rank on other maps. If Player B is truly better, he would then be able to get much better scores than Player A on other maps, in which case his PP would clearly show (though I'm still assuming a perfect pp calculation world). Obviously, right now, that may not be the case, but I'm just saying that you can't attribute this to one map... It doesn't matter if on one map a "worse" player obtains a higher rank than you. Secondly, the computer cannot measure your emotional state, and calculating pp by play count is WAY too unreliable. So much crap happens in the real world that could make your play count skyrocket for certain reasons or another (whether emotional or physical (e.g. you are tired or you are depressed, or your mom is being an ass, not that my mom is )Aqo wrote:
We have Player A and Player B, playing a map.
Player A first played that map with 89% accuracy and a few miss, and then proceeded to retry that map again and again for several hours, having about 50-100 retries on it, until eventually getting an SS on it. Even despite getting that SS, if Player A kept playing that map he would most likely get 95%-97% accuracy on an average run.
Player B played that map and had 98% accuracy on his first try. He thought he might try going for an SS on it, so he played it again, then getting about 98% again, maybe slightly higher. He then decided this map isn't very fun for him, and moved on.
Who do you think is a more skilled player, A or B?
And who is PP going to rate higher?
I don't think someone who can only do 89% can magically get a SS even if playing for 3-5 hoursAqo wrote:
We have Player A and Player B, playing a map.
Player A first played that map with 89% accuracy and a few miss, and then proceeded to retry that map again and again for several hours, having about 50-100 retries on it, until eventually getting an SS on it. Even despite getting that SS, if Player A kept playing that map he would most likely get 95%-97% accuracy on an average run.
Player B played that map and had 98% accuracy on his first try. He thought he might try going for an SS on it, so he played it again, then getting about 98% again, maybe slightly higher. He then decided this map isn't very fun for him, and moved on.
Who do you think is a more skilled player, A or B?
And who is PP going to rate higher?
Just gonna quote this to spare myself some typing. I'm gonna be acting as if the pp algorithm is really simple here, for clarity reasons.winber1 wrote:
The reason it exists is because if a song is popular, a rank #100 will be worth more than a rank#100 on a non-popular song. On non-popular songs it's easier to get higher ranks, and so rank #1 on some map very people like to play is not nearly as hard to achieve then #1 on a very popular map (because a lot more pros start playing the map). With that in mind, a rank #10 on that popular should be worth a lot more than rank #1 on some map no one really cares much about. Removing this will probably cause a lot of weird pp changes, probably for the worse (because there are a lot of maps where not as pro people have #1's or top 10's that could mess up the pp rankings)