forum

A few words of so-called combos

posted
Total Posts
120
show more
Rewben2

GoldenWolf wrote:

Rewben2 wrote:

peppy thinks the game would be better this way (but he can't change it now, it would upset too many people) and I agree, accuracy is a better measurement than combo in my opinion.
I don't get it. osu! is about aim, not accuracy, why would you make it the main measurement?
I explained myself - I believe rankings should stay the same but things like OWC should rely on accuracy if you're trying to determine who the better team/player is. Anyone can randomly drop and be consistent throughout the rest of the song - While someone else who is constantly getting 100's may fc with an unimpressive accuracy and win. I think it's just a more accurate way of determining who is a better player opposed to combo. Perhaps misses could be more of a detriment to accuracy than it is now if there was a system that was accuracy based, to prevent people doing what was listed in the thread above (Ignoring hard parts of the song and just doing well on the rest).

But rankings should stay the same because then people can't ignore parts of the song at all. A lot of songs are just who can get the higher % fc, though.
Full Tablet

Rewben2 wrote:

RaneFire wrote:

http://osu.ppy.sh/forum/t/157821
http://osu.ppy.sh/forum/t/149146

Read this part: http://osu.ppy.sh/forum/p/2604353
I think this brings up a good point, perhaps combo is a better system for rankings. But I think accuracy would be better for things like the upcoming ladder system or the OWC, because anyone can lose concentration for a moment and miss while someone else, who may be doing much worse in terms of accuracy, would fc and win.
About the point that the combo system gives variation to scores: it is possible to make a combo system at the same time that serves the same purpose, but without making the score so dependent on it:
For example: The current score given per hit is
Hit Value * (1 + Combo multiplier * Difficulty multiplier * Mod multiplier / 25 )
An alternate could be this (I don't say this would be a good formula, it is just a simple one to illustrate the point):
Hit Value * (1 + LOG10(1 + Combo multiplier * Difficulty multiplier * Mod multiplier / 25 ))

With old formula (scores are relative to each other): If anything that is not a combo break is a 300.
1000 combo full combo: ~20million
900combo + 99 combo: ~16million
500combo+ 499 combo: ~10million
300combo+400combo+298combo: ~6.8million
Alternate Formula:
1000 combo full combo: ~0.84million
900combo + 99 combo: ~0.82million
500combo+ 499 combo: ~0.78million
400combo+300combo+298combo: ~0.73million

With combo effect decreased then accuracy becomes more important (while combo still has enough effect to generate variation).

About the fact people can beat other players by ignoring circles in hard to aim maps, then there can be some changes in what misses do. A very simple change would be changing misses so they reduce score by 6000 and break combo instead of just breaking combo.
deletemyaccount
Isn't not missing/keeping a combo an integral part of the game? (aim)
Being consistent in not missing is a skill in itself.
Rewben2

Full Tablet wrote:

I think this brings up a good point, perhaps combo is a better system for rankings. But I think accuracy would be better for things like the upcoming ladder system or the OWC, because anyone can lose concentration for a moment and miss while someone else, who may be doing much worse in terms of accuracy, would fc and win.
About the point that the combo system gives variation to scores: it is possible to make a combo system at the same time that serves the same purpose, but without making the score so dependent on it:
For example: The current score given per hit is
Hit Value * (1 + Combo multiplier * Difficulty multiplier * Mod multiplier / 25 )
An alternate could be this (I don't say this would be a good formula, it is just a simple one to illustrate the point):
Hit Value * (1 + LOG10(1 + Combo multiplier * Difficulty multiplier * Mod multiplier / 25 ))

With old formula (scores are relative to each other): If anything that is not a combo break is a 300.
1000 combo full combo: ~20million
900combo + 99 combo: ~16million
500combo+ 499 combo: ~10million
300combo+400combo+298combo: ~6.8million
Alternate Formula:
1000 combo full combo: ~0.84million
900combo + 99 combo: ~0.82million
500combo+ 499 combo: ~0.78million
400combo+300combo+298combo: ~0.73million

With combo effect decreased then accuracy becomes more important (while combo still has enough effect to generate variation).

About the fact people can beat other players by ignoring circles in hard to aim maps, then there can be some changes in what misses do. A very simple change would be changing misses so they reduce score by 6000 and break combo instead of just breaking combo.[/quote]

Yeah, in another system a miss could just be more penalising than it is now but not so much that it makes or breaks a win/loss.

Philantropist wrote:

Isn't not missing/keeping a combo an integral part of the game? (aim)
Being consistent in not missing is a skill in itself.
I'm aware of that and agree, which is why I think rankings should rely on it. But for tournaments owc etc etc., I think accuracy is better than combo. I think most people would agree that a 99.5% with a miss is more impressive than a 95% fc.
Almost

Rewben2 wrote:

I'm aware of that and agree, which is why I think rankings should rely on it. But for tournaments owc etc etc., I think accuracy is better than combo. I think most people would agree that a 99.5% with a miss is more impressive than a 95% fc.
Your point on scoring for tournaments is debatable really. The players selected would be quite different in an accuracy based tournament since aim type players would lose out to an accuracy based player unless you count really jumpy maps. Also, a low skilled player can beat higher skilled player in this type of match in the IC I managed to beat Shott in an accuracy battle even though I have a lot worse aim and speed then him and would lose to any other type of match.
GoldenWolf

Rewben2 wrote:

I think most people would agree that a 99.5% with a miss is more impressive than a 95% fc.
It totally depends on the map.
Rewben2

GoldenWolf wrote:

Rewben2 wrote:

I think most people would agree that a 99.5% with a miss is more impressive than a 95% fc.
It totally depends on the map.
I guess so for a map like airman with those jumps near the start I don't even know if that's a good example at all but I think generally speaking, if the map is pretty similar difficulty throughout then the higher accuracy would be more impressive. 5% away from an SS is a huge difference compared to .5% away from an SS.

What is "more impressive" is opinion based, but that's my take on it.
Rewben2

Almost wrote:

Rewben2 wrote:

I'm aware of that and agree, which is why I think rankings should rely on it. But for tournaments owc etc etc., I think accuracy is better than combo. I think most people would agree that a 99.5% with a miss is more impressive than a 95% fc.
Your point on scoring for tournaments is debatable really. The players selected would be quite different in an accuracy based tournament since aim type players would lose out to an accuracy based player unless you count really jumpy maps. Also, a low skilled player can beat higher skilled player in this type of match in the IC I managed to beat Shott in an accuracy battle even though I have a lot worse aim and speed then him and would lose to any other type of match.
Yeah, creating a system for a ladder in a rhythm game that is actually accurate and will determine the better player each time is incredibly hard because of inconsistencies. Don't you think the whole "low skilled player can beat higher skilled player" is more present in a combo-based system where a single mistake can determine the game, instead of relying on how well you do throughout the map?
Almost

Rewben2 wrote:

Almost wrote:

Your point on scoring for tournaments is debatable really. The players selected would be quite different in an accuracy based tournament since aim type players would lose out to an accuracy based player unless you count really jumpy maps. Also, a low skilled player can beat higher skilled player in this type of match in the IC I managed to beat Shott in an accuracy battle even though I have a lot worse aim and speed then him and would lose to any other type of match.
Yeah, creating a system for a ladder in a rhythm game that is actually accurate and will determine the better player each time is incredibly hard because of inconsistencies. Don't you think the whole "low skilled player can beat higher skilled player" is more present in a combo-based system where a single mistake can determine the game, instead of relying on how well you do throughout the map?
Having an accuracy based system pretty much removes half the game mechanics. There is more luck involved in tournaments in a combo based system but the most important aspect of the game is aim so it's not worth removing that because there may be worse players in tournaments doing better.
Rewben2

Almost wrote:

Having an accuracy based system pretty much removes half the game mechanics.
What do you mean by "removes half the game mechanics"?
Almost

Rewben2 wrote:

Almost wrote:

Having an accuracy based system pretty much removes half the game mechanics.
What do you mean by "removes half the game mechanics"?
Accuracy is only half the game. Actually having your cursor on the circle is the other. People wouldn't care about aim much in an accuracy based tournament.
Rewben2
It's not like aim isn't required in an accuracy based tournament... Anyways,

Rewben2 wrote:

Don't you think the whole "low skilled player can beat higher skilled player" is more present in a combo-based system where a single mistake can determine the game, instead of relying on how well you do throughout the map?
Full Tablet

Almost wrote:

Accuracy is only half the game. Actually having your cursor on the circle is the other. People wouldn't care about aim much in an accuracy based tournament.
The current scoring system values aim much more than accuracy.
Almost

Rewben2 wrote:

It's not like aim isn't required in an accuracy based tournament... Anyways,

Rewben2 wrote:

Don't you think the whole "low skilled player can beat higher skilled player" is more present in a combo-based system where a single mistake can determine the game, instead of relying on how well you do throughout the map?
It does, but it's not as important and players with better accuracy could do better accuracy even with misses.

Full Tablet wrote:

Almost wrote:

Accuracy is only half the game. Actually having your cursor on the circle is the other. People wouldn't care about aim much in an accuracy based tournament.
The current scoring system values aim much more than accuracy.
I mentioned that in an earlier post.
Soarezi

Full Tablet wrote:

Almost wrote:

Accuracy is only half the game. Actually having your cursor on the circle is the other. People wouldn't care about aim much in an accuracy based tournament.
The current scoring system values aim much more than accuracy.
Aim > Accuracy, i'd rather see remote control 95% DT than HD HR 100%
Rewben2

Almost wrote:

It does, but it's not as important and players with better accuracy could do better accuracy even with misses.
I agree, it's just I don't think that a match should be decided on who misses, because ultimately it is. A player with slightly better aim can beat someone with far better accuracy as a result of this. But when trying to rank in a map, the accuracy player would always get a higher rank because they can just retry until its a fc. Would you agree on an accuracy-based system if the misses were penalised much higher than it is now - but not to the point that it's the decider of a game?
Almost

Rewben2 wrote:

Almost wrote:

It does, but it's not as important and players with better accuracy could do better accuracy even with misses.
I agree, it's just I don't think that a match should be decided on who misses, because ultimately it is. A player with slightly better aim can beat someone with far better accuracy as a result of this. But when trying to rank in a map, the accuracy player would always get a higher rank because they can just retry until its a fc. Would you agree on an accuracy-based system if the misses were penalised much higher than it is now - but not to the point that it's the decider of a game?
I would love to have an accuracy-based mode in a tournament where players play some random OD10 map and the game is decided by highest accuracy (average for a team game). But other than that, I would not support it.
TakuMii

Pelaaja_X wrote:

What you said that scores would be wiped, that's not really true. A rpgram could calculate all the scorse again based on the replays and then re-order the lists. I know it would be a shock a first, but it would work.
The server only keeps track of the replays for the top 50 scores, so that can't work. He could just keep the top 50 scores and rearrange those, but that would be unfair to all of the other players. The only other option would be to completely wipe the score database, which won't happen.

As I said, peppy would change they system if he could, but wiping the scores is unfair to the players and would upset a lot of people.
D33d
:I was watching peppy's presentation that he'd uploaded to his blog and he actually said that he would want to make the scoring more accuracy-based. The game's been going for years with combo-dependent scoring, so it'd be hard to uproot all of that and shift to an accuracy system.

Besides, who's to say that combo-based is wrong? If rewarding the player for managing a consistent playthrough means calculating the combo, then the better players are going to FC a map anyway.



DEEDIT: Just realised that other people had already pointed out the first thing. Besides, the whole point of the scoring system is that it mirrors that in Ouendan. Unfortunately, it's something that people will merely have to put up with for the time being, so they might as well strive to achieve highly based on that system.
RaneFire
pp disappears for 1 week and look what happens
Rewben2

RaneFire wrote:

pp disappears for 1 week and look what happens
You even linked threads of months ago discussing a similar thing - What are you talking about?
strikeR
this is so wrong in many levels... zzz
you have to think that maps have differents difficulties in it so you have to fc the hard part in the map in order to have good scores, look at maps like airman it has like 2 hard parts and that's the difficult.
if this is implemented or something it would be so bad..
RaneFire

Rewben2 wrote:

RaneFire wrote:

pp disappears for 1 week and look what happens
You even linked threads of months ago discussing a similar thing - What are you talking about?
The discussion came back to life.

I dunno, it's not like it couldn't have happened while pp was up... it's just good timing, that's all.
Rewben2

RaneFire wrote:

The discussion came back to life.
I don't see any connections to pp being disabled in this thread, it could have been made 2 weeks ago and nothing would be different. I'm sure the op knows there's no way the system would be so changed in such a major way after the way it has been running for years - peppy has also talked about this exact topic in http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IjuaFiLia6w this vid and said it won't be changed.
Myke B
Combo is more fun imo, and how would mods work with acc multiplier? How the game works right now is completely fine imo. Osu isn't about 1 aspect, it includes all of them: aim, speed, acc, etc. You do your best with all of them to get a high rank on a map.. not 1. and you demonstrate that you meet that map's requirements for speed, acc, aim by fcing it.
GoldenWolf
osu! is about FCing, not getting high accuracy. High acc is a bonus when you FC, else it's useless
SanicHegehog

Rewben2 wrote:

RaneFire wrote:

The discussion came back to life.
I don't see any connections to pp being disabled in this thread, it could have been made 2 weeks ago and nothing would be different. I'm sure the op knows there's no way the system would be so changed in such a major way after the way it has been running for years - peppy has also talked about this exact topic in http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IjuaFiLia6w this vid and said it won't be changed.
He seems to be doing no more than taking note of a coincidence. It may feel far fetched to you, but as I see it, his logic goes some along the lines of this:

1. pp is a ranking system.
2. Scores are ranked.
3. Combos decide scores.
4. pp dissapears.
5. Discussion to do with scoring/ranking/thatkindofmetricidea appears
Icyteru
Because accuracy dictates how well you can play the map better than combo can.
TakuMii
The pp system doesn't use scores to weigh a play's worth. The only thing score was really used for was to limit the amount of scores that the pp system looked at, which was a result of an inefficiency that ppv1 had. In ppv2, score probably won't matter at all (aside from spinner scores and/or the displayed list order), since the system will look at all ranked plays instead of a set amount of ranks.
iWhorse
go make your own game


or play mania instead
GenoClysm
ignore my first post with any informative information

it is how it is, and it won't be changed

Soarezi wrote:

Aim > Accuracy, i'd rather see remote control 95% DT than HD HR 100%




get good scrubs
edit: informative information what
Kareov
lol happy to see that.
MandyJS

iWhorse wrote:

or play mania instead
That's what I did... the whole needing full combos thing was very frustrating for me, so when I discovered you can still do well in mania without having to worry about fc's, I fell in love with mania mode and never looked back :D

Doesn't mean that I don't still try to fc the mania maps, but I don't stress over missing a note in the middle because my keyboard happened to stick or I was daydreaming or whatever the case may be :P
casmith789
Looks like ppv2 won't depend so much on combo - WubWoofWolf has Remote Control HD + DT with 5 misses as his top ppv2 performance (if it doesn't change), and I have an insane with 1 miss early enough to knock me out of top 2000 score in my top 10 list.
JAKACHAN
With the state of the game in terms of ranked maps anyway an accuracy based system wouldn't work as well as many think. It's way to easy to 100% most of the maps ranked nowadays to the point where rank lists are littered with 100%'s and it just becomes a spin war.

It is true that ppv2 is looking to change it a bit as some ranks that aren't full combo but are still ridiculous scores by players are being counted as their best scores (see jesus1412's C ranking best performance.)
Topic Starter
Pelaaja_X

GoldenWolf wrote:

osu! is about FCing, not getting high accuracy. High acc is a bonus when you FC, else it's useless
Are you kidding me? I can't believe someone really thinks like that.

It's like if you said that life isn't about making good decisions but just about seeing how long can you live without making a mistake.

I think everyone agrees that rythm is the point of this game. And it practically means playing those 300's. The combos, ugh how I hate them, are just making this game a panic survival.

Remember: this game is about MUSIC, and real musicians don't calculate combos at all.

Needless to say, I totally disagree with GoldenWolf
Rewben2

Pelaaja_X wrote:

GoldenWolf wrote:

osu! is about FCing, not getting high accuracy. High acc is a bonus when you FC, else it's useless
Are you kidding me? I can't believe someone really thinks like that.

It's like if you said that life isn't about making good decisions but just about seeing how long can you live without making a mistake.

I think everyone agrees that rythm is the point of this game. And it practically means playing those 300's. The combos, ugh how I hate them, are just making this game a panic survival.

Remember: this game is about MUSIC, and real musicians don't calculate combos at all.

Needless to say, I totally disagree with GoldenWolf
Except the ranking system is actually about combo - You can get 50's on every single note but fc and beat someone who got 90%+ with misses, because its so aim dependant. Referring to other rhythm games or actual musicians is dumb because osu! is quite different to a lot of other games in the scoring aspect. Your "real musician" analogy doesn't apply at all... There's no such thing as "combo" in music or 300's/100's. In real music (at least if you were playing an instrument) it would actually be about playing all the correct notes in time/in tune. You can't just skip notes randomly.

The fact you disagree with Goldenwolf doesn't make much sense - In the current state osu! is combo reliant. That is not opinion, it's factual that the current scoring system is combo reliant. If you believe that the system should be changed, this in no way related to Golden's statement about how the current system functions.
Almost

Pelaaja_X wrote:

GoldenWolf wrote:

osu! is about FCing, not getting high accuracy. High acc is a bonus when you FC, else it's useless
Are you kidding me? I can't believe someone really thinks like that.

It's like if you said that life isn't about making good decisions but just about seeing how long can you live without making a mistake.

I think everyone agrees that rythm is the point of this game. And it practically means playing those 300's. The combos, ugh how I hate them, are just making this game a panic survival.

Remember: this game is about MUSIC, and real musicians don't calculate combos at all.

Needless to say, I totally disagree with GoldenWolf
This isn't just a rhythm game but one that involves aiming as another mechanic. I agree that rhythm is 1 point of the game but the game was designed to have aiming as the main mechanic. If you don't like the way the game is played then don't play it, simple as that. You're being too close minded on what a game really is as well. A game can be whatever the fuck the creator wants it to be, not something that has to fit some made-up rule. Also, real musicians play the music while we are hitting buttons to the music, there is a difference.
JappyBabes

Rewben2 wrote:

Except the ranking system is actually about combo - You can get 50's on every single note but fc and beat someone who got 90%+ with misses, because its so aim dependant.
Except that doesn't happen. Please keep your points at least realistic.
Rewben2

JappyBabes wrote:

Rewben2 wrote:

Except the ranking system is actually about combo - You can get 50's on every single note but fc and beat someone who got 90%+ with misses, because its so aim dependant.
Except that doesn't happen. Please keep your points at least realistic.
I know, I was just exaggerating the importance of combo. Although it was definitely unrealistic.
show more
Please sign in to reply.

New reply