I agree with you here.capeseverywhere wrote:
So, one thing I have to say about the taiko vs. converted argument.
If this is going to be a proper difficulty rating system, it shouldn't weight certain taiko maps based on whether they are converted or not, but on how difficult they are. Put your stance of taiko vs. converted away, because we are trying to sort them as whole, not two separate things. Whether it's full of 1/8 spam like https://osu.ppy.sh/p/beatmap?b=107875&m=1 , or complex patterns like most taiko maps, it's still gotta weigh as if it's still one mode which it is.
Another point I'd like to make is regarding certain patterns being ranked as harder/easier. Let's say we have two players, both ranked around #10000. Where Player X might have problems with ddkdd at 180 BPM, Player Y might not be able to do kkdkk at the same BPM. Neither pattern is necessarily harder than the other, but obviously Player X and Player Y are scoring well on beatmaps the other can't. The players who can do both patterns however, are the ones who should be ranked higher overall.
I believe it would be fairly easy to group certain patterns together based on the logic used in the above example. These groups of patterns would be initially ranked by how tricky they are to play at certain BPMs. After this, we can use a plethora of options to see which ones within the group should be worth more. Some possible options could include popularity of certain patterns over others in the group, overall accuracy/fail~pass rate of songs that include these patterns, etc.
The groups themselves would be something like
(ddd, ddk, dkk, kkk, kkd, kdd)
(ddddd, ddddk, dddkk, ddkkk,dkkkk, kkkkk, kkkkd, kkkdd, kkddd, kdddd)
(dd dd, dd dk, dd kk, dk kk, kk kk, kk kd, kk dd, dk dd, dk kd)
and on and on.
How we would rank the groups would be up for debate.