lolcubes wrote:
While it's understandable that everyone is focusing more on how the converts get converted and how the hard maps get valued, but let's talk about lower maps a little.
We have *** Passionate (TV Size) which is valued the same as Dragons. I FCd Passionate with hard rock where I barely get an A on Dragons, with a low combo. Dragons is so much harder because of really odd rhythms and because it's kinda long compared to the TV Size thing.
Then you have Hades in the Heaven which is valued slightly above but then you have a couple of much easier maps, namely Night of Fire by lepidon which is a lot higher above. Certain pattern chain in the middle of the map make Hades really really hard to FC, while Night of Fire has quite simple patterns and is something I consider a beginner's map. Thank you for playing isn't that difficult either and it's even further above.
Also in the mid class you have Intersect Thunderbolt 7491's Oni which is below Ernst Oni. I highly disagree with this, despite Ernst being a bit more pattern heavy. The patterns in Ernst aren't difficult, it's just slightly a more dense map, but in Intersect Thunderbolt you have high speed pattern changes, namely a quite hard 1/3 stream to perform correctly due to it's bpm which contains multiple hand swaps.
Just some thoughts.
The first issue you mentioned seems to be well fixed in the newest list. Regarding hades in the heaven, the difference between the maps you called and this one seems to have shrunk, but there still is quite a gap.
Pattern difficulty can only be considered to a certain extent due to subjectivity and due to the fact, that for the algorithm there is no way to find out about "1/3" or "1/4". All there is are relative timings, so I can't promise much improvement in that direction without ruining weightings for other maps.
The thunderbolt vs ernst thing is very similar, you even called the 1/3 out... there's not much the algorithm can do in that regard. Also 1/3 can be trained just as easily as 1/4 - the only reason many people are bad at them is because they are so uncommon.
Luna wrote:
Tom, could you possibly add some DT maps to the difficulty list so we can see how those are rated?
Stuff like this maybe:
http://osu.ppy.sh/b/132889&m=1
http://osu.ppy.sh/b/214251&m=1
http://osu.ppy.sh/b/267841&m=1
http://osu.ppy.sh/b/153886&m=1
http://osu.ppy.sh/b/161275&m=1
All of those are hard DT maps, some moreso than others. I'd just like to see what your program thinks of them.
Thanks!
Can't selectively apply mods for some maps for now. That'd require some very unnecessary program loogic for the final purpose if weighting pp and (imho) is a waste of time to implement. If the algorithm works well with the current maps you throw at it, then it should work well with pretty much any map and thus also those DT maps. All it does is create a new map with 1.5 the speed anyway.
lolcubes wrote:
It could be possible if the condition is a full combo though. There is extra score after all.
Could have small calculation issues with sliders though, but they give only a certain amount of score so...
Out of curiosity, how are sliders calculated then? You don't have to hit a slider to full combo, but it should show skill too, there are some maps where sliders become absolutely brutal if you have DT activated. Unreal BPMs and all (above 300).
Sliders can't really be factored in for the same reasons as big notes. There might be one way to do it, though, which is to consider score relative to the maximum possible score instead of things like 300, 100, 50 and miss counts.
Do you guys think the taiko scoring system is good enough to be used as a basis for pp?