Oops
I meant HR HD plays
Fixed that post
I meant HR HD plays
Fixed that post
I am skeptical about this. Programs have managed to do much more complicated things without unreasonable performance strains. It seems more likely that peppy doesn't want to fix a design flaw with the algorithm itself that makes going past 500 ranks meaningless. In the programming world, these flaws are probably based on dependencies.Yuugoh wrote:
Again, this.Just be patient~peppy wrote:
I plan on making a fallback pp calculation for people with less top-500 records. I don't plan on increasing the number past 500 (because it begins to get both intensive to calculate, and less meaningful with the current algorithm) but do plan on allowing people without such records to still improve their pp to visible levels. This will likely work based on your ranks achieved (and possible ranked score).
It ranks effort, no viable skill ranking will ever be incorporated into osuAqo wrote:
However PP is supposed to rate skill, not effort, right?
Are you suggesting its impossible?JappyBabes wrote:
It ranks effort, no viable skill ranking will ever be incorporated into osuAqo wrote:
However PP is supposed to rate skill, not effort, right?
Ok, good point. However performance is still directly related to skill. To perform well you must first perform, and if you don't perform enough or at all you won't get rated for it - this much is true. But to be able to perform well you need the skill to do it, or else even with enough time it shouldn't be possible for you.lolcubes wrote:
There is no system in the world which measures true skill. These aren't skill points, they are performance points, and they judge a person's performance. A person can be skilled to unmeasurable levels, however if he doesn't perform then he won't have good performance points.
While performance is affected by skill, it is not skill rating.
This is true, but back then you had to spend a year or so to get even to top 100, because of the amount of beatmaps. It certainly doesn't take a year to get to high PP, if you really deserve it. Playing should be rewarded, not how "good" you are while you aren't playing.Aqo wrote:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but it was my belief that PP was introduced because people complained that the old scoring system rated how much time players put into the game and not how "good" they are, which is why the need for a new rating system arose.
While players who don't perform do not deserve a high performance rating, isn't the inverse true as well? Players who do get high performance rating should be the ones that perform well, not just the one who perform a lot.Well, this is already happening. It's just that you probably didn't get to that number yet.
I thought we already established that even if we had a perfect difficulty calculation formula for maps it wouldn't be used to rankings because: I don't have a clue why not actuallyTheVileOne wrote:
I have to say this about differences in harder difficulties. My thoughts i that it would be balanced if the pp system took percent failed in mind when it decided how Easy/Hard something is. And the harder a map is, the lower the pass rate, and that means it will be worth more pp regardless of if it's popular. Remember there are different factors that determine how much pp a difficulty is worth. I'm not sure what exactly those factors are, but I have no reason to assume they are inaccurate and we shouldn't make such claims without evidence of such inaccuracies.
Besides the difference is probably fairly insignificant anyways. But even if I did assume it would matter, then it would give difficulty the point advantage anyways, which would invalidate the balance claim. Harder difficulties get higher pp gains. What's so wrong with associating difficulty with skill level?
I still feel almost everyone would prefer a system based on difficulty rather than the amount of players which play a map; I think it would be less flawed than the current system atleast. Even if one in 5 maps were slightly out it's still better than the current weightings which appear to be random maps everywhere.peppy wrote:
Such thoughts could potentially be used to make a new star rating system, but are redundant in pp calculations. I am not using any map heuristics in pp calculations because they always have limitations, and can be manipulated by mappers.
plus those maps were insanes, but you are too good for this gameTom94 wrote:
Lol. Today I actually tried ranking hards to see how far I could get. In mere 3hours of ranking I got from #37 to#25#23! What the hell. (Nearly) all of the #1s I did today were easier than the DT I did yesterday... which earned me zero to 1 PP per rank.
We srsly need a way to properly filter the easier maps. It's just ridiculous how easy one can rank if one just ranked the easy, boring stuff. D:
Well.. to be fair, I got a good day in terms of accuracy today.
Still easy compared to the ranks I usually do... and the ones other good players usually do. :>Tanzklaue wrote:
plus those maps were insanes, but you are too good for this gameTom94 wrote:
Lol. Today I actually tried ranking hards to see how far I could get. In mere 3hours of ranking I got from #37 to#25#23! What the hell. (Nearly) all of the #1s I did today were easier than the DT I did yesterday... which earned me zero to 1 PP per rank.
We srsly need a way to properly filter the easier maps. It's just ridiculous how easy one can rank if one just ranked the easy, boring stuff. D:
Well.. to be fair, I got a good day in terms of accuracy today.
Just take every single top rank from himnrii wrote:
please keep farming shadowsouls top ranks, pleaseTom94 wrote:
Still easy compared to the ranks I usually do... and the ones other good players usually do. :>
he doesn't think that, nobody in germany thinks that.thelewa wrote:
Just take every single top rank from himnrii wrote:
please keep farming shadowsouls top ranks, please
If he still thinks that he's the best player in Germany after that, well shit.
You probably lost internet connection and scores didn't submit online.RAMPAGE88 wrote:
I don't know what's happend .. I can only do a local score http://prntscr.com/dhj8r
yesterday I had 3 maps in first place and all moves to local score only no online score
I do. Not really.Tanzklaue wrote:
he doesn't think that, nobody in germany thinks that.
This.silmarilen wrote:
ive been getting a lot of pp only to see them disappear over night, but i think there is a topic in technical support about it
Something like this. I got 20 pp daily then all of them disappears until I'm sleeping. And even the graph is not showing it.silmarilen wrote:
ive been getting a lot of pp only to see them disappear over night, but i think there is a topic in technical support about it
Bullshitlewa strikes again!thelewa wrote:
I'm starting to get pissed off
I'm still at #10 even though I'm not supposed to even be in the top 100
Yes and you belong in top 5.silmarilen wrote:
i agree #10 is too high, but you definetly belong in the top 100