I personally think a nomod SS is often better than a HD 99%
(Depends on the map, but unless it gets really hard to even FC nomod, I don't personally value HD much)

Myke B wrote:

I often find myself not wanting to try and beat my score on a high acc score. For example: if I have 100% on a song that I know I can beat with HD - I often won't do it, in fear that that I will lose PP :/

Don't fear, just keep improving. If you keep playing it safe, you take longer to improve. I still can't play HD properly either, but I just retry a few more times to make up for it, and eventually beat my non-HD accuracies after another 5 FC's or so with HD on.

That said I do feel there is too much pp to be gained expontentially for getting closer to 100%. Unless the map is really difficult in aim and speed, accuracy should not be weighted as heavily because retrying is a relatively easy thing to do if those are not a problem, which then just tests patience. Maybe that's just me, but DT'ing maps which are relatively easy to FC, because they're short, gives way too much pp for getting better accuracy from retrying.

well tbh.. 100% no mod is more valuable to me than getting that 90 w/e % with HD anyways :/

If Acc of map which you played is high, Aim and Acc are increased somewhat. (If Acc is low, they will decrease. ）

As for HD, Aim is increased. and Acc is increased very slightly.

I am extremely happy with the new pp system, it puts those pp farmers that don't play anything but normal or hard in their place while giving those of us that actually take time to be good at the game a chance to earn appropriate rank. Thank you to Tom and peppy for making this new system that is all shiny and wonderful.

it's ok

My problem with hidden is that it doesn't match the scores. I understand why it happens, but the way the system is now I need to decide if I want to have better PP or better map score every time I get decent at a map. Since I am not good at accuracy I know that by playing hidden I will not get the same accuracy I do without it.

To those who said that their highest scores were C's; check how many misses you got in them, percentage does not matter nearly as much as how many misses or 50s you got.

Also, I just want to make sure; does pp directly correlate with ranking? I feel like it doesn't, and I want to know what else factors into ranking.

TMoI wrote:

To those who said that their highest scores were C's; check how many misses you got in them, percentage does not matter nearly as much as how many misses or 50s you got.

Also, I just want to make sure; does pp directly correlate with ranking? I feel like it doesn't, and I want to know what else factors into ranking.

Ranking has nothing to do with pp gained.

TMoI wrote:

To those who said that their highest scores were C's; check how many misses you got in them, percentage does not matter nearly as much as how many misses or 50s you got.

Also, I just want to make sure; does pp directly correlate with ranking? I feel like it doesn't, and I want to know what else factors into ranking.

pp is just a quantity rewarded for completing maps depending on their difficulty

other peoples ranking doesn't affect you at all, so your pp should NEVER go down unless you replace a score with a lower valued pp score

So Tom said it takes into account all scores, not just top 50 - so does that mean if I get a 99% with HDDT and another score on the same map with 100% DT, does it count them both or just the HDDT one? if they don't, would it be a good idea to? Like what if you can beat a map with DT and you can also beat it with FL but not together, should that person get PP for both or would that be a bad idea.

obviously when he said all scores, he meant all your online scores, regardless of rank...

Myke B wrote:

So Tom said it takes into account all scores, not just top 50 - so does that mean if I get a 99% with HDDT and another score on the same map with 100% DT, does it count them both or just the HDDT one? if they don't, would it be a good idea to? Like what if you can beat a map with DT and you can also beat it with FL but not together, should that person get PP for both or would that be a bad idea.

only the highest rank is used for each beatmap.

buny wrote:

obviously when he said all scores, he meant all your online scores, regardless of rank...

what? that doesn't answer what I asked lol. whether the score is online or offline has nothing to do what I asked. I asked if multiple scores on the same map are considered, and if not, would it be a bad idea (which now I obviously would say yeah, because of farming the same map).

The server only stores your highest score points-wise at any given moment so that's the only scores that can be used.

Does missing 5 notes at the same time penalize you as much as missing 5 notes in 5 different places throughout the map? (Same acc)

Novixion wrote:

Does missing 5 notes at the same time penalize you as much as missing 5 notes in 5 different places throughout the map? (Same acc)

depends on what combo you are holding at the time, and acc. Generally speaking, it doesn't matter where you miss the notes specifically.

Myke B wrote:

buny wrote:

obviously when he said all scores, he meant all your online scores, regardless of rank...

what? that doesn't answer what I asked lol. whether the score is online or offline has nothing to do what I asked. I asked if multiple scores on the same map are considered, and if not, would it be a bad idea (which now I obviously would say yeah, because of farming the same map).

you do realise that the only online scores are your best scores, right?

I actually didn't. I wasn't sure if when Tom said that it was all scores, that he meant "all top scores of yours" or all scores literally. Looking back at it now though, it seems dumb for me to think that it was possible for literally all scores. My b.

Tom, you should make ppv2 to the same calculation method as tp.

The map of score(50|50|50) is easier than the map of score(100|0|0).

Although I played a map like score(50|50|50) today, it was clearly easy.
Nevertheless, my pp went up considerably.
The ppv2 present ranking goes up, even if everyone plays map like score(50|50|50).
I think, maps only with one high category is more difficult than maps with three average categories.
I think that Tom also understands it, because he performed "Increase pp-value of scores which excel in one category".

Although I can understand, worth of maps like score(50|50|50) will be lost in case of the calculation method of tp.
Nonetheless, Tom should make ppv2 to the same calculation method as tp.
Or increase more pp-value of scores which excel in one category.

I cannot think that the present ranking is good.

Waiting for osuwiki "pp" artilcle...

Me too...
Does anybody know when will the winking article be available

Soon™

­

Greetings all,

I was curious, while I love this new PP system alot, I was wondering if this was working as intended..

I played this 18 days ago and was extremely happy with it, gained a modest amount of PP etc...
I play that same map again a week and a half later (In a middle of a play session, so everything's updated)
After I complete it, I notice I drop alot of PP (relatively) and ~1k ranking positions, for a really minor change in overall accuracy, but better score achieved so it counts the second one. (And getting one off FC might not of helped)

Again, I play this map afew days ago after just downloading it
Happy days, gain alot of PP again.
Play it two days later, get 2 100's and a miss more then last, but hold 2 decent combos for a slightly higher score then above and I drop ~1k places and alot of PP again.

Is this just me being unlucky and playing beatmaps which have a very heavy accuracy rating, so a minor change effects PP gain hugely, or is it something else?

After talking about it with a friend, he seems to think that its my 'leaderboard PP' being recalculated from people beating my scores all over the place, despite having very few scores under 1k on the leaderboard, and im online when this recalculation happens. This would explain it for the second one, because I got rank 44 on a new beatmap 2 days ago (im now 314), but it still doesn't do much to explain the first one.

So. Am I just playing accuracy weighted maps and suffering a huge drop for a small drop in accuracy %, or are the few high-ranking scores I do have just being beaten alot recently thus the (big for me) drop in PP

Note: Rank isn't an issue, I can deal with that. I just feel that getting afew 100's more and getting a better score shouldn't just counteract 1-2+ hours playing, if I knew it'd drop that much, I'd of just reset out.... I have also read the thread (well, 90% of it) but my friend seems to insist that other people ranking higher then you drops your PP score for that song...

Nina_Winlan wrote:

After talking about it with a friend, he seems to think that its my 'leaderboard PP' being recalculated from people beating my scores all over the place, despite having very few scores under 1k on the leaderboard, and im online when this recalculation happens. This would explain it for the second one, because I got rank 44 on a new beatmap 2 days ago (im now 314), but it still doesn't do much to explain the first one.

So. Am I just playing accuracy weighted maps and suffering a huge drop for a small drop in accuracy %, or are the few high-ranking scores I do have just being beaten alot recently thus the (big for me) drop in PP

You lost pp because you replaced your records with worse ones. The score rank you get in each map doesn't matter.
Your maximum combo is the value that matters. One combo of 300 is worth more than 2 combos of 280.

@Tom: The system should only take into account your best performance on each map, not the best score.

Full Tablet wrote:

You lost pp because you replaced your records with worse ones. The score rank you get in each map doesn't matter.
Your maximum combo is the value that matters. One combo of 300 is worth more than 2 combos of 280.

So it was as I thought, that's kinda annoying, but thanks for the clarification.

[AirCoN] wrote:

@Tom: The system should only take into account your best performance on each map, not the best score.

As mentioned like a billion times already ( ) it's not possible to do this at the moment. I wish it was.

I just dont understand why my rank rose before the patch to 41k rank from 53k then after the patch my rank was risen to like 75k wat is this -_-

Kreto wrote:

I just dont understand why my rank rose before the patch to 41k rank from 53k then after the patch my rank was risen to like 75k wat is this -_-

Play Insanes then you understand ...

At your Playcount I was Rank 110k

And ye recalculating ...

Kreto wrote:

I just dont understand why my rank rose before the patch to 41k rank from 53k then after the patch my rank was risen to like 75k wat is this -_-

It was probably recalculating something. Judging by your Performance Graph you were actually at 75K the entire time.

Ekaru wrote:

Kreto wrote:

I just dont understand why my rank rose before the patch to 41k rank from 53k then after the patch my rank was risen to like 75k wat is this -_-

It was probably recalculating something. Judging by your Performance Graph you were actually at 75K the entire time.

i meant before patch V2 came out

Ultrayano wrote:

Kreto wrote:

I just dont understand why my rank rose before the patch to 41k rank from 53k then after the patch my rank was risen to like 75k wat is this -_-

Play Insanes then you understand ...

At your Playcount I was Rank 110k

And ye recalculating ...

my play count yea i know but i was higher rank and stuff just watneed to know why thx for the reply Insanes i do play some but not all plus i only use mouse no keyboard no tablet. Well since ur really good ^-^ gL in your ranking nice uh signature is it ^-^

Kreto wrote:

my play count yea i know but i was higher rank and stuff just watneed to know why thx for the reply Insanes i do play some but not all plus i only use mouse no keyboard no tablet. Well since ur really good ^-^ gL in your ranking nice uh signature is it ^-^

Only Mouse ? o.o Good Luck in your osu! career

And ~thanks~

Ultrayano wrote:

Kreto wrote:

my play count yea i know but i was higher rank and stuff just watneed to know why thx for the reply Insanes i do play some but not all plus i only use mouse no keyboard no tablet. Well since ur really good ^-^ gL in your ranking nice uh signature is it ^-^

Only Mouse ? o.o Good Luck in your osu! career

And ~thanks~

There are mouse only players better than you and I.

Myke B wrote:

There are mouse only players better than you and I.

I know (: Players like ChangE

Ultrayano wrote:

Kreto wrote:

Only Mouse ? o.o Good Luck in your osu! career

And ~thanks~

Mouse is more fun.

rexcannon_iii wrote:

Mouse is more fun.

"Fun" is subjective.

Stay on-topic, please. This thread is for pp feedback.

What kind of modifications are you still looking to do with the ranking system? assuming there are any.

Tom94 wrote:

Stay on-topic, please. This thread is for pp feedback.

Ok then, I'll ask again.

When are you going to implement complex finger work into the pp calculation?

rexcannon_iii wrote:

Tom94 wrote:

Stay on-topic, please. This thread is for pp feedback.

Ok then, I'll ask again.

When are you going to implement complex finger work into the pp calculation?

I can't answer all those "when" questions. Programming and especially coming up with ideas for an algorithm is not something that can be nailed down to Tuesday 14:00.

Myke B wrote:

What kind of modifications are you still looking to do with the ranking system? assuming there are any.

I believe I wrote quite a bit about that kind of stuff in the thread already. I hope I can get pattern difficulty inside, in addition to the obligatory tweaking of weightings of course.

Ultrayano wrote:

Myke B wrote:

There are mouse only players better than you and I.

I know (: Players like ChangE

i added u so u know:) and i will try my best with mouse XD ^-^

Mutual <3

These probably have been answered before somewhere in the thread, but I don't think I would be able to find it in 40+ pages of "mouse is more fun" etc.

-Do you ever intend to display player attributes on profiles or the performance ranking, like the aim/speed/accuracy player ratings shown on the tp rankings?

-What about the aim/speed difficulties of modded maps within the client? For example, I scroll through my maps and choose some map. Then I turn on DT EZ FL (or some obscure mod combination). From what I've heard, there are plans to display aim/speed difficulties of maps on their respective webpages, but covering all mod combinations on the webpage would require some significant modifications. What I'm getting at is a numerical value displayed somewhere in song select (most likely in the top left where the length/# of objects, etc are shown) that changes as you switch mods, much like the Global Ranking (Selected Mods) tab.

-Is there anything planned in the difficulty calculations regarding difficult patterns such as tornadoes?

Thanks again for delivering the justice of skill ranking.

Tom94 wrote:

I believe I wrote quite a bit about that kind of stuff in the thread already.

You might consider updating the first post with answers to commonly asked questions, to hopefully decrease the number of already-answered questions.

Doge wrote:

These probably have been answered before somewhere in the thread, but I don't think I would be able to find it in 40+ pages of "mouse is more fun" etc.

-Do you ever intend to display player attributes on profiles or the performance ranking, like the aim/speed/accuracy player ratings shown on the tp rankings?

It'd be cool to do so, but the way the system works right now (calculating a single pp value per player) those can't be displayed seperately at the moment. It would be cool to have something like that, but the top priority is at least making the system functional for all modes first and integrating it into star difficulty.

Doge wrote:

-What about the aim/speed difficulties of modded maps within the client? For example, I scroll through my maps and choose some map. Then I turn on DT EZ FL (or some obscure mod combination). From what I've heard, there are plans to display aim/speed difficulties of maps on their respective webpages, but covering all mod combinations on the webpage would require some significant modifications. What I'm getting at is a numerical value displayed somewhere in song select (most likely in the top left where the length/# of objects, etc are shown) that changes as you switch mods, much like the Global Ranking (Selected Mods) tab.

I hope I can make star rating change with selected mods. Displaying stuff like aim/speed seperately is probably not going to happen sooo soon, if it happens at all.

Doge wrote:

-Is there anything planned in the difficulty calculations regarding difficult patterns such as tornadoes?

Yup, but that's in the far future.

Doge wrote:

Thanks again for delivering the justice of skill ranking.

You're welcome.

This was probably asked already but I don't feel like reading 40 pages (you could maybe add the most asked questions to the 1st post) so here it goes:

I've heard that old beatmaps don't reward pp anymore, is this true? If so, are you pretending to remove its ranked score/accuracy eventually? Also, what's up with people saying that there's a big possibility of ranked score being removed from the game in the future? (since it doesn't show anymore in-game)

Are we close to the final version of this pp system or are there going to be any big changes incoming?

Last night I gained like 9 pp from a couple of James' old BeForU maps from 2008. That should answer your question regarding old beatmaps.

not sure if I would really consider it a problem, but I find it quite easy to just look at people around my rank and play the beatmaps they have in top ranks. typically they're pretty easy... It racks up some ridiculous amounts of pp though. @_@

Keeby wrote:

not sure if I would really consider it a problem, but I find it quite easy to just look at people around my rank and play the beatmaps they have in top ranks. typically they're pretty easy... It racks up some ridiculous amounts of pp though. @_@

This has always been how it is. If you can beat their top performances then you're better than them (or better than what skill level their top performances dictate).

Keeby wrote:

not sure if I would really consider it a problem, but I find it quite easy to just look at people around my rank and play the beatmaps they have in top ranks. typically they're pretty easy... It racks up some ridiculous amounts of pp though. @_@

That would mean that you actually deserve to be much higher than you actually are, and must've been playing easy maps the whole time.

haven't read the last 10 pages or so yet, but is the "difficulty" sorting option in the beatmap list the same as a list of "what songs give more PP"?

0 miss play on one of the songs on the front page with half-decent accuracy so i'm guessing not, but if it isn't what is it

Gray Pigeon wrote:

Tom, you should make ppv2 to the same calculation method as tp.

The map of score(50|50|50) is easier than the map of score(100|0|0).

While this is very true, I personnaly dislike the way the tp system handles this. Right now getting 100/100/100 on a map or getting 100/0/0 + 0/100/0 + 0/0/100 on three different maps gives exactly the same number of tps, when the former is much harder. I am fairly sure that sorting maps by stats this way is unavoidably flawed.

To avoid the previous problem I think each stat just needs tweaking. I thought of a simple solution - I'm sure there are better ones than mine, though. That involves giving bonuses or maluses depending on which stat is the highest/2nd highest/lowest.

Let's say it gives +75% to the highest stat, +25% to the second highest and -25% to the lowest when calculating the total pp rating (I omitted the digits after the decimal point). I'll illustrate that with a simple example (two scores giving the same amount of pps initially) :

90/85/80 -> 157/106/60 || 255pps -> 323pps (it's relative, so the increase does not matter)
140/70/45 -> 245/87/33 || 255pps -> 365pps (notice how it's now higher than the previous score)

I chose the percentages randomly, but you get the idea.

KaosFR wrote:

Let's say it gives +75% to the highest stat, +25% to the second highest and -25% to the lowest when calculating the total pp rating (I omitted the digits after the decimal point)

90/85/80 -> 157/106/60 || 255pps -> 323pps (it's relative, so the increase does not matter)
140/70/45 -> 245/87/33 || 255pps -> 365pps (notice how it's now higher than the previous score)

Tom94 wrote:

Currently the pp a score is worth is computed by the following formula: (aim^X + speed^X + acc^X)^(1/X)
Where X at the moment is 1.1 and will likely rise a bit in the future.

90/85/80 -> 230.789
140/70/45 -> 233.266
The value of X can be adjusted to change the worth of the highest stat.

Example: X=0.7 (The play gets "punished" for having a low stat).
90/85/80 -> 408.197
140/70/45 -> 395.121


Example: X=1.5 (The highest stat is given even more importance).
90/85/80 -> 176.909
140/70/45 -> 186.358

I see. I didn't know about the formula, thanks for pointing that out.

I'm not saying I like it that much though; even with X>>1 it doesn't seem to make much of a difference, mostly because of the last part of the formula (the ^(1/X)).

KaosFR wrote:

I see. I didn't know about the formula, thanks for pointing that out.

I'm not saying I like it that much though; even with X>>1 it doesn't seem to make much of a difference, mostly because of the last part of the formula (the ^(1/X)).

X>>1 indeed makes a huge difference. The ^(1/X) merely makes sure, that the result is not scaled horribly asymptotically to O(n^X), but remains in the same asymptotic scale.

KaosFR wrote:

I see. I didn't know about the formula, thanks for pointing that out.

I'm not saying I like it that much though; even with X>>1 it doesn't seem to make much of a difference, mostly because of the last part of the formula (the ^(1/X)).

The value X can be changed to adjust how much "extra" bonus or penalty there is when a stats is considerably better or worse than the rest:
(aim^X + speed^X + acc^X)^(1/X) * (3)^((X-1)/X)
(The (3)^((x-1)/x) part of the formula isn't really needed, since it is just a constant when the performance stats change, it is just there so the magnitudes remain more easily comparable when changing x)
So:
X =1
Then the formula is just the sum of the 3 stats (the arithmetic mean, multiplied by 3)
X -> Infinity
The formula comes close to the maximum stat, multiplied by 3. That way, if X is a big number, only the best stat matters.
X -> 0
The formula comes close to the geometric mean of the stats, multiplied by 3. The geometric mean gives smaller values if one of the stats is considerably lower
X = -1
The formula is equal to the harmonic mean, multiplied by 3. It gives relatively even smaller values if one of the stats is considerably lower (compared to the geometric mean).
X-> -Infinity
The formula comes close to the minimum stat, multiplied by 3. In that case, the worth of a score is determined only by it's worst stat.

Thanks for you answers. Somehow I still feel scores with one or two big stats don't get rewarded enough, have you thought of using something exponential instead of just polynomial ? This kind of formula :

logx(x^aim+x^speed+x^accuracy)

Still scaled down to O(n) but gives high stats a bigger impact (and still tends to the highest stat)

Full Tablet wrote:

KaosFR wrote:

I see. I didn't know about the formula, thanks for pointing that out.

I'm not saying I like it that much though; even with X>>1 it doesn't seem to make much of a difference, mostly because of the last part of the formula (the ^(1/X)).

The value X can be changed to adjust how much "extra" bonus or penalty there is when a stats is considerably better or worse than the rest:
(aim^X + speed^X + acc^X)^(1/X) * (3)^((X-1)/X)
(The (3)^((x-1)/x) part of the formula isn't really needed, since it is just a constant when the performance stats change, it is just there so the magnitudes remain more easily comparable when changing x)
So:
X =1
Then the formula is just the sum of the 3 stats (the arithmetic mean, multiplied by 3)
X -> Infinity
The formula comes close to the maximum stat, multiplied by 3. That way, if X is a big number, only the best stat matters.
X -> 0
The formula comes close to the geometric mean of the stats, multiplied by 3. The geometric mean gives smaller values if one of the stats is considerably lower
X = -1
The formula is equal to the harmonic mean, multiplied by 3. It gives relatively even smaller values if one of the stats is considerably lower (compared to the geometric mean).
X-> -Infinity
The formula comes close to the minimum stat, multiplied by 3. In that case, the worth of a score is determined only by it's worst stat.

For X -> Infinity the fomula comes close to the maximum stat, not multiplied by 3. Even with the other stats having the optimal weight, that is the same value as the highest stat, it would still converge to the highest stat. For instance (100, 100, 100). If we let X go to infinity we will have (abusing notation)

(100^inf * 3)^(1/inf) = 100 * 3^(1/inf) = 100

Since with (100, 0, 0) we get the same limit it is clear that everything lying inbetween also yield this limit.

Didn't give your other statements much thought since they're not very relevant in this context.

KaosFR wrote:

Thanks for you answers. Somehow I still feel scores with one or two big stats don't get rewarded enough, have you thought of using something exponential instead of just polynomial ? This kind of formula :

logx(x^aim+x^speed+x^accuracy)

Still scaled down to O(n) but gives high stats a bigger impact (and still tends to the highest stat)

Exponential scaling would not work out very well, firstly due to it only working with very small X, because the intermediate results would be come too big otherwise and rounding issues would arise, and secondly, because it'd rise too rapidly. For small aim, speed and acc the effect would be small while for big the effect would be ridiculous while with the polynomial method the effect always is the same.

(100, 50, 50) would yield half of (200, 100, 100) for any X using the polynomial method in contrast to what you proposed.

When the new algorithm is used to calculate star rating, will OD be somehow factored in? Since it plays a big part in determining the pp a score gives (from accuracy), but it isn't reflected in the osu!tp map difficulty, which is solely aim/speed.

Tom94 wrote:

For X -> Infinity the fomula comes close to the maximum stat, not multiplied by 3. Even with the other stats having the optimal weight, that is the same value as the highest stat, it would still converge to the highest stat. For instance (100, 100, 100). If we let X go to infinity we will have (abusing notation)

(100^inf * 3)^(1/inf) = 100 * 3^(1/inf) = 100

Since with (100, 0, 0) we get the same limit it is clear that everything lying in-between also yield this limit.

Didn't give your other statements much thought since they're not very relevant in this context.

I was referring to the formula if you multiplied it by (3)^((X-1)/X). While that factor isn't needed (since it's a constant when varying only the performance stats), it put it there so the magnitude of the values didn't change so much when changing X. With that, scores with equal amount of Acc-Speed-Aim don't change in magnitude, while, scores where one of the stats is better always get a bonus when increasing X.

Kytoxid wrote:

When the new algorithm is used to calculate star rating, will OD be somehow factored in? Since it plays a big part in determining the pp a score gives (from accuracy), but it isn't reflected in the osu!tp map difficulty, which is solely aim/speed.

I most likely will be in the future, but I can't promise it for the initial iteration.

Full Tablet wrote:

Tom94 wrote:

For X -> Infinity the fomula comes close to the maximum stat, not multiplied by 3. Even with the other stats having the optimal weight, that is the same value as the highest stat, it would still converge to the highest stat. For instance (100, 100, 100). If we let X go to infinity we will have (abusing notation)

(100^inf * 3)^(1/inf) = 100 * 3^(1/inf) = 100

Since with (100, 0, 0) we get the same limit it is clear that everything lying in-between also yield this limit.

Didn't give your other statements much thought since they're not very relevant in this context.

I was referring to the formula if you multiplied it by (3)^((X-1)/X). While that factor isn't needed (since it's a constant when varying only the performance stats), it put it there so the magnitude of the values didn't change so much when changing X. With that, scores with equal amount of Acc-Speed-Aim don't change in magnitude, while, scores where one of the stats is better always get a bonus when increasing X.

Oh yeah, I completely overlooked that. My bad. D:

I think I've read before that OD isn't weighted into the pp calculations. Is this true? Let's say I have an Insane SS, and I top that score with HR 97% accuracy, would this mean I would lose pp because my accuracy is lower? This would be imbalanced, since getting >95% accuracy with HR is much harder than getting an SS nomods, or with Hidden. Some Insanes I've SS'd but can not even FC with HR, and it feels like it's not even worth trying, because the 3-4% drop in accuracy would just make me lose pp for a much better performance. I like HR, but I don't try ranking with it purely because I end up losing pp.

Personally, I think HR should give more of a bonus than HD, since it is much harder to do a good performance with. I feel like HR is underrated (and was, even before ppv2) and considered to be about as difficult as HD. Play a map with DTHD, and then with DTHR and it should be obvious why I'm stating this. In my opinion, the order of mod difficulty is: DT > HR >>> HD, excluding FL since it requires an entirely different form of gameplay than the other three. However, to me it seems like pp looks at mods like: DT > HD > HR, which isn't balanced, since a 98% HR FC is much more impressive than an HD SS.

Also, sometimes I'm reluctant to try improving my accuracy on a map, since I've improved my accuracy by 5% on some maps and still lost pp. At first I thought it just happened because I dropped in ranks, not pp, but it keeps happening consistently. Now it feels like unless I FC something I will lose pp, regardless of my accuracy. Or maybe I'm wrong, but I would like to understand why this happens.

I like ppv2, I think the major issues are just some imbalances here and there and a lack of compact information on how it works. I understand that you can't work on the latter yet, though. My apologies if the things I've said have been answered before, but I've read about 75% of the thread and the only thing I've seen about HR was thelewa saying that HR is pretty much pointless below 99% accuracy, which sounds like a heavy imbalance to me.

-Scylla- wrote:

I think I've read before that OD isn't weighted into the pp calculations. Is this true? Let's say I have an Insane SS, and I top that score with HR 97% accuracy, would this mean I would lose pp because my accuracy is lower? This would be imbalanced, since getting >95% accuracy with HR is much harder than getting an SS nomods, or with Hidden. Some Insanes I've SS'd but can not even FC with HR, and it feels like it's not even worth trying, because the 3-4% drop in accuracy would just make me lose pp for a much better performance. I like HR, but I don't try ranking with it purely because I end up losing pp.

Personally, I think HR should give more of a bonus than HD, since it is much harder to do a good performance with. I feel like HR is underrated (and was, even before ppv2) and considered to be about as difficult as HD. Play a map with DTHD, and then with DTHR and it should be obvious why I'm stating this. In my opinion, the order of mod difficulty is: DT > HR >>> HD, excluding FL since it requires an entirely different form of gameplay than the other three. However, to me it seems like pp looks at mods like: DT > HD > HR, which isn't balanced, since a 98% HR FC is much more impressive than an HD SS.

Also, sometimes I'm reluctant to try improving my accuracy on a map, since I've improved my accuracy by 5% on some maps and still lost pp. At first I thought it just happened because I dropped in ranks, not pp, but it keeps happening consistently. Now it feels like unless I FC something I will lose pp, regardless of my accuracy. Or maybe I'm wrong, but I would like to understand why this happens.

I like ppv2, I think the major issues are just some imbalances here and there and a lack of compact information on how it works. I understand that you can't work on the latter yet, though. My apologies if the things I've said have been answered before, but I've read about 75% of the thread and the only thing I've seen about HR was thelewa saying that HR is pretty much pointless below 99% accuracy, which sounds like a heavy imbalance to me.

OD is factored in by a huge margin. And HR below 99% is not pointless. It is pointless for a top-tier player like thelewa, because he already has such good scores.
There will be a wiki article when pp got added for all modes.

Alright, thanks. That's relieving to hear.

Does accuracy play a huge role in the amount of points you gain or is it based on maps (because of the specific weightings)?
Like one map: https://osu.ppy.sh/s/62263
I have an FC with 94% accuracy that gave me fewer points then a play with a miss (the max combo is 30 less then the FC but with 96% accuracy). I also noticed this between some of my other 95->96% plays.


Also, do qualified maps scores count or does the calculations wait until they are ranked?

Novixion wrote:

Does accuracy play a huge role in the amount of points you gain or is it based on maps (because of the specific weightings)?

From what I've seen, it does. I think Tom mentioned earlier in the thread that ppv2 is almost entirely accuracy-based, which would make sense. Map difficulty is factored into it as well, obviously. I've noticed that harder maps give me more pp with lower accuracies (if I were to get equal accuracy on an easier map), and the amount of pp I gain grows exponentially with higher accuracy on the same map. I think the basic idea is that the harder the map you do a good performance on is, the more pp you will get. "Harder map" here including mods.

Novixion wrote:

Also, do qualified maps scores count or does the calculations wait until they are ranked?

I'd like to know this as well.

i really dont unerstand the new system, i've played a lot of insane songs with mods (hidden and/or dt) and my pp didnt change, for exapmpel i just played athe song o2Jam (Brandy) - Cross Time [Relaxing] , which would be a "hard", DT, 99.00% acc, rank 40 and i didnt even get 1 point.. im rank 13500.

I love what you've done in ppv2, really livened up my desire to play Osu!.

Here's my suggestion:


Allow sorting maps by Level as found on the osu!tp site. This level sorting should also factor in the currently selected mods.
In addition the aim and speed stats should be presented.
Thirdly the TP, or unmodified PP value should be displayed along with score.

We've all been in the position where we felt we had just scored a really good play but didn't get as much PP for it as we expected, and these changes should alleviate this problem.

End play:


This small change would give players insight as to the worth of their last play.

Didn't make a picture for it but the on the website, the user page should include modified PP rewards and perhaps also unmodified TP scores for best plays, and potentially include more than 10 maps as well.

I understand the reluctance to add a second 'scoring' method in addition to the already implemented scores, but to some extent I think it's not necessarily a bad thing. I'm sure many players already sneak peek at osu!tp website to get an idea of which maps to play and what they can expect from maps in terms of PP. These changes just integrate them into the Osu! client, with even more information.

hoolas wrote:

i really dont unerstand the new system, i've played a lot of insane songs with mods (hidden and/or dt) and my pp didnt change, for exapmpel i just played athe song o2Jam (Brandy) - Cross Time [Relaxing] , which would be a "hard", DT, 99.00% acc, rank 40 and i didnt even get 1 point.. im rank 13500.

Play harder stuff.

hoolas wrote:

i really dont unerstand the new system, i've played a lot of insane songs with mods (hidden and/or dt) and my pp didnt change, for exapmpel i just played athe song o2Jam (Brandy) - Cross Time [Relaxing] , which would be a "hard", DT, 99.00% acc, rank 40 and i didnt even get 1 point.. im rank 13500.

stop playing easy maps then

hoolas wrote:

i've played a lot of insane songs [...] for exapmpel i just played athe song o2Jam (Brandy) - Cross Time [Relaxing] , which would be a "hard".

Make up your mind. To make it easy on you, I'll tell you a secret. This map is not hard.

Draxuss wrote:

hoolas wrote:

i've played a lot of insane songs [...] for exapmpel i just played athe song o2Jam (Brandy) - Cross Time [Relaxing] , which would be a "hard".

Make up your mind. To make it easy on you, I'll tell you a secret. This map is not hard.

I actually found it harder than most Insane songs (The [Relaxing] map with DT)... and also harder than several songs in his top performance list.

Full Tablet wrote:

I actually found it harder than most Insane songs (The [Relaxing] map with DT)... and also harder than several songs in his top performance list.

That's kind of weird since it has DTHDHR scores on it.

Draxuss wrote:

Full Tablet wrote:

I actually found it harder than most Insane songs (The [Relaxing] map with DT)... and also harder than several songs in his top performance list.

That's kind of weird since it has DTHDHR scores on it.

Well, I say it's relatively hard because of the spaced 240bpm 1/2 streams. The map has very low OD and AR, so HR doesn't do much.

Just so we're all on the same page, the map in question is a Normal. This is why its AR and OD are 5 and why it has a tp level of only 7. It's an NH set.

Carry on.

NotThat wrote:

SPOILER

I love what you've done in ppv2, really livened up my desire to play Osu!.

Here's my suggestion:


Allow sorting maps by Level as found on the osu!tp site. This level sorting should also factor in the currently selected mods.
In addition the aim and speed stats should be presented.
Thirdly the TP, or unmodified PP value should be displayed along with score.

We've all been in the position where we felt we had just scored a really good play but didn't get as much PP for it as we expected, and these changes should alleviate this problem.

End play:


This small change would give players insight as to the worth of their last play.

Didn't make a picture for it but the on the website, the user page should include modified PP rewards and perhaps also unmodified TP scores for best plays, and potentially include more than 10 maps as well.

I understand the reluctance to add a second 'scoring' method in addition to the already implemented scores, but to some extent I think it's not necessarily a bad thing. I'm sure many players already sneak peek at osu!tp website to get an idea of which maps to play and what they can expect from maps in terms of PP. These changes just integrate them into the Osu! client, with even more information.

It is planned to incorporate the difficulty algorithm into the star rating. Displaying the actual pp value of a score is also a possibility, that will be looked into.
Currently the focus is on getting pp to run in all gamemodes, but afterwards you can expect such changes.

Draxuss wrote:

hoolas wrote:

i've played a lot of insane songs [...] for exapmpel i just played athe song o2Jam (Brandy) - Cross Time [Relaxing] , which would be a "hard".

Make up your mind. To make it easy on you, I'll tell you a secret. This map is not hard.

-__- that was just an example of what i just had played at the moment of writing the post, i've played insane songs with DT, like i said, and still my pp didnt change, im not WWW of course i cant play the hardest songs. and what i see is that being 13.500, you have to pass extremely hard songs (extremely hard for my level, probably normal songs for a top 100 rank) to go up, and thats just not right.. im not saying that i wanna be top 100 in 1 week playing this kinds of songs but at least give me 1 freaking point.., do i need to pass scarlet rose with DT HD to get ponts?'...

maybe im wrong and i deserve to be stuck in 13.500 cause i just suck, but i dont see it that way..

hoolas wrote:

-__- that was just an example of what i just had played at the moment of writing the post, i've played insane songs with DT, like i said, and still my pp didnt change, im not WWW of course i cant play the hardest songs. and what i see is that being 13.500, you have to pass extremely hard songs (extremely hard for my level, probably normal songs for a top 100 rank) to go up, and thats just not right.. im not saying that i wanna be top 100 in 1 week playing this kinds of songs but at least give me 1 freaking point.., do i need to pass scarlet rose with DT HD to get ponts?'...

maybe im wrong and i deserve to be stuck in 13.500 cause i just suck, but i dont see it that way..

Go dt that kesha song you recently ss'd with hd and see if you get any pp. I'm pretty sure you will.

For the most part I like this new system, except for one thing, though I'm not sure if it's fixable. The "problem" would be that the system seems to factor in combo the most when calculating score. This means that breaking in the middle of a song, let's say on a slow slider, is much, much worse than breaking at the end of a song, let's say on some full screen jumps. In those cases, the smaller mistake is being punished more and pp would be distributed unfairly.

For a solution I, I noticed on the osutp site (http://osutp.net/info) there was a graph of speed/aim vs. time for the map Freedom Dive. My solution would be to relate pp to the area under the graph. The reasoning behind this is because to make the graph, there obviously must be points. The points should correlate to the difficulty of hitting the next note. Thus, when one fails to hit the next note the point on the graph should then go to 0 (or something like that) which would decrease the area of the graph. In this case, missing higher difficulty notes (higher points on the graph) will result in bigger pp losses than messing up on an easy note (lower point on the graph). Thus, pp distribution should be more fair with that system.

The only problem I see here is the computing power it would take to do those sorts of calculations (is it too much?). Otherwise, I feel like that would be a much more accurate calculation on a players performance in a map. Feel free to point out any flaws in my logic.

hoolas wrote:

-__- that was just an example of what i just had played at the moment of writing the post, i've played insane songs with DT, like i said, and still my pp didnt change, im not WWW of course i cant play the hardest songs. and what i see is that being 13.500, you have to pass extremely hard songs (extremely hard for my level, probably normal songs for a top 100 rank) to go up, and thats just not right.. im not saying that i wanna be top 100 in 1 week playing this kinds of songs but at least give me 1 freaking point.

Some insane songs are relatively easy and passing does not guarantee you will get points.
To earn points at around rank 13k, you either need to FC stuff in the tp lvl 50+ range or score with accuracies higher then 96% and FC songs in the lvl 40 range (99% for best results, accuracy is weighted a little much from 97->99).

hoolas wrote:

do i need to pass scarlet rose with DT HD to get ponts?'...

Probably not even physically possible because of the 480 BPM, plus stuff that is actually possible give more points: e.g. killer song.
You can get points from Scarlet Rose at rank 13k because it is about lvl 60 but you have to FC it or break only once with high accuracy.

IamNotgod wrote:

quote

For the most part I like this new system, except for one thing, though I'm not sure if it's fixable. The "problem" would be that the system seems to factor in combo the most when calculating score. This means that breaking in the middle of a song, let's say on a slow slider, is much, much worse than breaking at the end of a song, let's say on some full screen jumps. In those cases, the smaller mistake is being punished more and pp would be distributed unfairly.

For a solution I, I noticed on the osutp site (http://osutp.net/info) there was a graph of speed/aim vs. time for the map Freedom Dive. My solution would be to relate pp to the area under the graph. The reasoning behind this is because to make the graph, there obviously must be points. The points should correlate to the difficulty of hitting the next note. Thus, when one fails to hit the next note the point on the graph should then go to 0 (or something like that) which would decrease the area of the graph. In this case, missing higher difficulty notes (higher points on the graph) will result in bigger pp losses than messing up on an easy note (lower point on the graph). Thus, pp distribution should be more fair with that system.

The only problem I see here is the computing power it would take to do those sorts of calculations (is it too much?). Otherwise, I feel like that would be a much more accurate calculation on a players performance in a map. Feel free to point out any flaws in my logic.

The "Highest score is the only score that gets considered" issue has been mentioned more than just several times already. The problem is that the current infrastructure of the server won't allow consideration of other scores, so there is no current workaround that can be done within the pp algorithm. It is to be fixed, I believe. It just doesn't have the highest priority at this moment.

I'm dumb

IamNotgod was referring to a different issue (equal weighting of all parts of the map, despite inconsistent difficulty). Last I heard, Tom was interested in having pp consider "per-Hitobject" data in order to solve that, but it's not currently possible (and I don't see how it would be possible to get accurate data on that from old scores).

Personally, I think HD is the biggest "issue" right now. HD does deserve a bonus, but it doesn't belong in aim and it doesn't belong in accuracy (it also doesn't belong in speed, but it doesn't give a bonus to speed right now). The accuracy bonus in particular seems silly to me - HD gives a 2% (or something like that) bonus to accuracy under the assumption that people will mess up at reading a map when playing with it. Apparently playing with HD means we're supposed to be playing maps we can't read well and playing nomod means we're supposed to be playing maps we can read perfectly. I don't get it. The 18% bonus to aim...well, that's just really misplaced and inflated and it's even more egregious on slider-heavy maps. If and when pp incorporates pattern/reading difficulty, all of that should be solvable by just throwing the HD bonus into that instead. That could also help with flashlight - flashlight is crazy hard, but the primary difficulty with it has nothing to do with aim, speed, or accuracy.

Speaking of flashlight, its bonus should probably scale with the player's max combo instead of being a flat 36%. Flashlighting a 50 combo map is easy. Flashlighting a 1000 combo map is very difficult.

In fact, maps with high max combos feel underweighted in general. I don't know by how much or what exactly should be done about that, but long maps that are difficult throughout could use some love imo.

Overall, I really like pp right now. I feel like it for the most part rewards good plays - exactly what a ranking system should do. It makes it feel worthwhile to sometimes play specifically for ranks, which always felt worthless with ppv1.

Something that happened earlier seemed very wrong to me. I had the following plays in order:


Seemed really strange to me, especially considering what osu!tp has to say about the relative values of aim, speed, and accuracy in that map. Is combo weighted considerably lower in pp than in tp or is there some other factor pp takes into account that I'm not considering? Or did my pp for it not calculate immediately (as of 2 hours later, it still hadn't changed, so that makes this a bit less likely)? It would be convenient if there could be some sort of indicator on the score screen that tells you if your pp for the play has been computed and added to your total (or, better yet, as has been suggested, something that tells you exactly how much raw pp your play was worth).

GhostFrog wrote:

Something that happened earlier seemed very wrong to me. I had the following plays in order:

Play #1 (worth 2pp)

Play #2 (worth 3 additional pp)

Play #3 (worth no additional pp)

I actually got penalized for having 1% lower accuracy yet a much higher combo. I also agree that combo is not weighted enough and it seems accuracy is still heavily weighted.

I like how combo isn't weighted so hard! I really suck at FC for some reason and always miss one note at the end. (Yay for A rank best performances!) I still find it shocking how many players have [Blackhole - Lagomorphic] on their top ranks, it really isn't that hard....

Overall I really like the system. It really motivates you to play harder songs, even though some beatmaps are weighted properly. To be honest, I really don't think I deserve to be at my rank (Currently 3,131pp #3106). Most of my top ranks aren't even that difficult. Like my 3rd best pp was A rank on Krewella - Come & Get it [Insane no-mod]... Wut?

HoboEater wrote:

I still find it shocking how many players have [Blackhole - Lagomorphic] on their top ranks, it really isn't that hard....

Everyone considers different things hard. I personally find [Blackhole - Lagomorphic] extremely hard and needed like 100 tries to fc it once. On the other hand I have scores in my top performances list that I don't consider to be hard at all.

HoboEater wrote:

To be honest, I really don't think I deserve to be at my rank (Currently 3,131pp #3106)

This just means that you are capable of doing scores that others can't, so your rank is well deserved.

GhostFrog wrote:

SPOILER

Personally, I think HD is the biggest "issue" right now. HD does deserve a bonus, but it doesn't belong in aim and it doesn't belong in accuracy (it also doesn't belong in speed, but it doesn't give a bonus to speed right now). The accuracy bonus in particular seems silly to me - HD gives a 2% (or something like that) bonus to accuracy under the assumption that people will mess up at reading a map when playing with it. Apparently playing with HD means we're supposed to be playing maps we can't read well and playing nomod means we're supposed to be playing maps we can read perfectly. I don't get it. The 18% bonus to aim...well, that's just really misplaced and inflated and it's even more egregious on slider-heavy maps. If and when pp incorporates pattern/reading difficulty, all of that should be solvable by just throwing the HD bonus into that instead. That could also help with flashlight - flashlight is crazy hard, but the primary difficulty with it has nothing to do with aim, speed, or accuracy.

Speaking of flashlight, its bonus should probably scale with the player's max combo instead of being a flat 36%. Flashlighting a 50 combo map is easy. Flashlighting a 1000 combo map is very difficult.

In fact, maps with high max combos feel underweighted in general. I don't know by how much or what exactly should be done about that, but long maps that are difficult throughout could use some love imo.

Very good point and probably the biggest issue with pp right now!

HoboEater wrote:

I still find it shocking how many players have [Blackhole - Lagomorphic] on their top ranks, it really isn't that hard....

I've noticed very frequently appearing songs on the best performances of people that are a similar rank to me. I've seen that song around a little bit, it's probably more common among higher ranks.
Examples:
http://osu.ppy.sh/b/161611?m=0
http://osu.ppy.sh/b/290581?m=0
http://osu.ppy.sh/b/211697?m=0
http://osu.ppy.sh/b/114446?m=0
and yes they are all in mine because muh pp's

Some songs are just worth lots for their difficulty. The ratio of people who have nomod insanes in their best performance compared to DT/HD is also very high (for rank 5k-8k).

have often the same problem. Im a low acc player.
a small example
Sometimes i play a map with 90% acc (2mio points)
next try then 82% acc (2,5mio poiints ) = the reason -10pp

i hate this..

zitekyo wrote:

have often the same problem. Im a low acc player.
a small example
Sometimes i play a map with 90% acc (2mio points)
next try then 82% acc (2,5mio poiints ) = the reason -10pp

i hate this..

The simple solution to this problem: get better accuracy. Accuracy is probably the easiest aspect of this game to improve in...

i know that acc is important , but i love to play harder maps , on this maps i dont get "s" "ss" or high acc.
in my opinion,
Jumps/fast singletaps.. all is much easier then hit a circle on the right moment =D
now i play slowerer maps .I focus only on acc/fc ,i hope this training will work =)

zitekyo wrote:

i know that acc is important , but i love to play harder maps , on this maps i dont get "s" "ss" or high acc.
in my opinion,
Jumps/fast singletaps.. all is much easier then hit a circle on the right moment =D
now i play slowerer maps .I focus only on acc/fc ,i hope this training will work =)

I wouldn't focus on accuracy too much. Instead, focus on being comfortable with harder songs. If you can play difficult songs with a calm attitude, you will notice accuracy comes naturally. Also, you will improve much faster compared to practicing slow songs. For some reason, I actually get much lower accuracy on easier songs because of my play style.

Ziggo wrote:

This just means that you are capable of doing scores that others can't, so your rank is well deserved.

I would disagree since most of my top performances are swiped from players close to my rank. In other words, I just took all the easy maps worth high amounts of performance with high accuracy, which isn't what most players would do.

As Rewben2 suggests, similar songs appear in best performances due to their high performance to difficulty ratio. Therefore its much easier to gain ranks if you know which songs to play.

This system is probably more accurate, and i dont think there's any arguing that. BUt the problem is that it isnt rewarding AT ALL. Full Combo'ing things isnt particularly rewarding if i dont like the song, which seem to be the only ones worth anything. Streams are also worth next to no pp, even for giant combos or full combos. Double time is vastly over-weighted, and top 50'ing hards, much harder to do than full combo'ing insanes with no mod, are worth nothing. The system doesnt make me want to play, it makes me grind rather than enjoy myself while improving rank.

StratoPulse wrote:

This system is probably more accurate, and i dont think there's any arguing that. BUt the problem is that it isnt rewarding AT ALL. Full Combo'ing things isnt particularly rewarding if i dont like the song, which seem to be the only ones worth anything. Streams are also worth next to no pp, even for giant combos or full combos. Double time is vastly over-weighted, and top 50'ing hards, much harder to do than full combo'ing insanes with no mod, are worth nothing. The system doesnt make me want to play, it makes me grind rather than enjoy myself while improving rank.

Wtf? The whole point of the system is to be less reliant on scoring top 50. People could grind normal songs with FL and get in to 10k rank on the old System . Streams are worth huge amounts of pp in the new system .

StratoPulse wrote:

This system is probably more accurate, and i dont think there's any arguing that. BUt the problem is that it isnt rewarding AT ALL. Full Combo'ing things isnt particularly rewarding if i dont like the song, which seem to be the only ones worth anything. Streams are also worth next to no pp, even for giant combos or full combos. Double time is vastly over-weighted, and top 50'ing hards, much harder to do than full combo'ing insanes with no mod, are worth nothing. The system doesnt make me want to play, it makes me grind rather than enjoy myself while improving rank.

Streams seem to only become relevant in calculations on a higher level of play (arguably over rated at this level too). Also top 50ing hards means you're probably doing high accuracy scores which is harder to do. If low accuracy scores gave high pp on average tier insane full combos a lot of players would farm the system insanely easily.

StratoPulse wrote:

This system is probably more accurate, and i dont think there's any arguing that. BUt the problem is that it isnt rewarding AT ALL. Full Combo'ing things isnt particularly rewarding if i dont like the song, which seem to be the only ones worth anything. Streams are also worth next to no pp, even for giant combos or full combos. Double time is vastly over-weighted, and top 50'ing hards, much harder to do than full combo'ing insanes with no mod, are worth nothing. The system doesnt make me want to play, it makes me grind rather than enjoy myself while improving rank.

You only feel this way because you're caring too much about what other people do. Checking the people around my rank, I find most of them play DT, but I probably have a grand total of... 1 map that has a DT high score? Don't let what others do affect you. Find maps with higher difficulty and do them with good accuracy, you're not getting any less pp than they are unless they DT the maps you're doing, you can just get them through other aspects like aim and accuracy.

Also, from my understanding, DT is actually not overweighted because it's calculated the exact same way a map made at 1.5x of its speed would be (someone confirm or correct?). It does, however, ruin songs .

Streams are worth PP if it's actually streamy and has high bpm. Having a few 7-note or 15-note streams in a beatmap is pretty much expected nowadays, so you can't really give pp for a few of those. Low bpm streams aren't be worth anything. Just look at the "speed" value on osutp, streamy maps at high bpm like mytho, unlimitation, calamity fortune, etc. have a very high speed value.

nooblet wrote:

StratoPulse wrote:

This system is probably more accurate, and i dont think there's any arguing that. BUt the problem is that it isnt rewarding AT ALL. Full Combo'ing things isnt particularly rewarding if i dont like the song, which seem to be the only ones worth anything. Streams are also worth next to no pp, even for giant combos or full combos. Double time is vastly over-weighted, and top 50'ing hards, much harder to do than full combo'ing insanes with no mod, are worth nothing. The system doesnt make me want to play, it makes me grind rather than enjoy myself while improving rank.

You only feel this way because you're caring too much about what other people do. Checking the people around my rank, I find most of them play DT, but I probably have a grand total of... 1 map that has a DT high score? Don't let what others do affect you. Find maps with higher difficulty and do them with good accuracy, you're not getting any less pp than they are unless they DT the maps you're doing, you can just get them through other aspects like aim and accuracy.

Also, from my understanding, DT is actually not overweighted because it's calculated the exact same way a map made at 1.5x of its speed would be (someone confirm or correct?). It does, however, ruin songs .

Streams are worth PP if it's actually streamy and has high bpm. Having a few 7-note or 15-note streams in a beatmap is pretty much expected nowadays, so you can't really give pp for a few of those. Low bpm streams aren't be worth anything. Just look at the "speed" value on osutp, streamy maps at high bpm like mytho, unlimitation, calamity fortune, etc. have a very high speed value.

From my experience, DT can be slightly overweighted since some maps are shorter with easier patterns compared to harder maps, but they should be calculated the same way (Tom?).

My example of DT and streams being overweighted is insane DT on http://osu.ppy.sh/b/105265?m=0

nooblet wrote:

StratoPulse wrote:

[...]
Also, from my understanding, DT is actually not overweighted because it's calculated the exact same way a map made at 1.5x of its speed would be (someone confirm or correct?). [...]

I confirm. Same goes for HalfTime, HardRock and Easy.
The only mods giving some arbitrary bonus are Hidden and FlashLight.

Also, FlashLight is giving a 50% aim bonus since the last update (you can find it in the changelog somewhere, it's been a week or two), not a 36% one anymore. I do also agree with making FlashLight scale with MaxCombo, it does make a lot of sense. You can expect that to be the case in the near future.