(About BLC, i never understood how people couldnt understand the game, it really is fun oo) Yes indeed, that is also the one thing i am really concerned about. Mania shall and hopefully will get plenty of new players.
O2 official use nearly the same algorithm as current star difficulty (density based).Xcrypt wrote:
Interesting. I know that it really depends on what the player spends his time on training, but we also use single diff levels for o2 and BMS right? Same problem there, but I do think the general difficulty is reflected by the level. Also for a ranking system, the difficulty shouldn't be relative to the player, but relative to all players (or one could say objective).xxbidiao wrote:
In one word, to accurately calculate the difficulty of the map using only the patterns with one universal numbers is not fair at all, and to sum up multiple numbers doesn't make sense.
TBH our temporary solution include human work (a lot of them), and use player's past performance data other than patterns itself to determine the difficulty.
1. That's not a big concern of the ranking system. The default mode of a particular map is to be weighted the most. If the amount of hitobjects (and also type, holds and normals that is) stays the same, then they might even be able to get equal treatment.xxbidiao wrote:
1. 4K or 7K, which one is harder? (How do you weight 4k/7k?)
2. Maps which is full of hits or maps which is full of holds, which one is harder? (How do you weight holds?)
3. Stairs or random hits, which is harder?
4. What is the definition of "Hard", anyway?
Yes, exactly. We would have a hard time upon initial release...Xcrypt wrote:
Yeah I agree xxbidiao, to some extent.
With the example of stairs vs random hits. It really depends on the player, I am mainly a RD user so patterns like stairs are not my best thing.
But if we calculate it according to the average of all players, I think this is the best we can do. Ofcourse, we'll have to guess a bit here and there, but let's say stairs vs random hits, they weigh exactly the same? For example.
Maybe only weigh things that are clearly harder for the majority of the playerbase, like density, LN, jacks etc.
In all honesty this is painful guesswork right now. We'll just have to see at the first release of the new scoring system and then we will be able to pinpoint some flaws I think.
Already been suggested and heavily denied. But I cant help but ask, why one or two? If a player is good enough to rank high in all keymodes I don't see why he shouldn't be allowed to :/Karuta-Roromiya wrote:
how about rank of osu!mania separate become 4 (4k player only,5k,6k and 7k) ?
and every player can only choose 1 or 2 of them
Limiting yourself to one hand if you can use both should not be considered by such a system imho. That's like assuming people would use one finger, even for streams, in standard, thus giving people who actually use both an unrealistic bonus.Drace wrote:
Also @tom, checking for single finger strain simply covers for jacks and hand strain is pretty much irrelevant. I mean there's so many different playstyles out there. I personally play 4k with one hand. In 7k some people use left thumb, some right, some both and some none. I don't think a variable that depends on playstyle would be a smart thing to do. And it all depends on the patterns anyways, the value would be pretty irrelevant anyways.
That's the stupidest idea ever. I play all K's and I want to keep playing all of them without having "to choose" any in particular.Karuta-Roromiya wrote:
how about rank of osu!mania separate become 4 (4k player only,5k,6k and 7k) ?
and every player can only choose 1 or 2 of them
how is that different from jacks on any other column? nobody is stopping you from using two fingers or even more for other keys, in fact I've seen people who specifically learn to play certain charts like that with the iidx controller.Tom94 wrote:
Limiting yourself to one hand if you can use both should not be considered by such a system imho. That's like assuming people would use one finger, even for streams, in standard, thus giving people who actually use both an unrealistic bonus.
Sure, algorithm should be as much as possible independent of playstyle, but it should orient itself at the most successful ones. As for space-bar jacks in 7K - it should be common sense to use both thumbs at least in that case.
I'm not limiting myself at all, I actually play better that way due to my 8K background. It's an example to how per hand strain values aren't ideal for determining map difficulty. Actually, one of the best 4k players in the world plays with 3 keys one hand and one key on the other (7k+1 background I suppose).Tom94 wrote:
Limiting yourself to one hand if you can use both should not be considered by such a system imho.
Sorry I believe you misunderstood, what i was referring to as irrelevant is per-hand strain, since it all depends on the pattern difficulties anyways.Tom94 wrote:
The algorithm is supposed to automatically determine pattern difficulty, I don't understand why it would be irrelevant. :p
I completely agree. Far too many people play with different styles. An algorithm forged around one specific style would be unfair.Aqo wrote:
how is that different from jacks on any other column? nobody is stopping you from using two fingers or even more for other keys, in fact I've seen people who specifically learn to play certain charts like that with the iidx controller.
you should assume by default all columns are even. this is not djmax
I believe like Drace said, you have misunderstood something, or you actually have your words contradict each other within your post!Tom94 wrote:
Limiting yourself to one hand if you can use both should not be considered by such a system imho. That's like assuming people would use one finger, even for streams, in standard, thus giving people who actually use both an unrealistic bonus.
Sure, algorithm should be as much as possible independent of playstyle, but it should orient itself at the most successful ones. As for space-bar jacks in 7K - it should be common sense to use both thumbs at least in that case.
The algorithm is supposed to automatically determine pattern difficulty, I don't understand why it would be irrelevant. :p
waa, i can't wait for the changes..! xDTom94 wrote:
I gotta give in. After reading the arguments of you guys, I agree, that it'd make more sense to treat each key individuallly. Will still show experimental results with the additional strain measures just for consideration and comparison.
I would change that by lowering the first two by 100K and putting a replacement 500-600 as 'know what you're meant to be doing (so not mashing) but just not able to pull it off properly'. 'Controlled mashing' will usually end up giving a score in the mid-high 400ks.Aqo wrote:
Accuracy shouldn't be looked at at all. Use score.
I tested on many maps now and it seems like score is FAR more credible for how well you can play a map than accuracy% (honestly accuracies are completely random, who doesn't have a million stories of beating an A with a B and so on); it's also pretty much immune to mapper-selected OD values which is cool.
Below 500,000 score = pure mash
500-600 = controlled mashing
600-700 = playing maps just outside of your reading limits. this is the main thing that should give performance.
700-800 = playing maps on the border of your reading limits. this is usually where you start to get S rank.
800-900 = the map is easy for you
900-999 = farming accuracy
I can't agree any more.milky228 wrote:
I would prefer it if PP was decided by score not accuracy. This is because when you hit a 300perfect and a 300 they are considered as the same accuracy even though they aren't.
spamspamspamspam \:D/PyaKura wrote:
It's common for me to get B's of 470k ~ 500k huehue
quoting again for great justice. accuracy is practically meaningless (not really, it gives a general impression, but still random and inaccurate/inconsistent) in mania, go with score.milky228 wrote:
I would prefer it if PP was decided by score not accuracy. This is because when you hit a 300perfect and a 300 they are considered as the same accuracy even though they aren't.
Except when you get a high nomod score, and then a slightly lower DT score (which obviously needs more skill), you won't get pp for it because only the highest score matters. Once you do well without mods, you're screwed.Cozzzy wrote:
Even if the 0* modifier is unintuitive, I don't see why players shouldn't be rewarded for playing more difficult maps well. It's the same as osu!standard, where (for example) rrtyui will sometimes barely get in the top 50, but is also the only player who was capable of playing it with DT.