VelperK wrote:

Is this the same in standard?

And if so, how come?

Luna wrote:

I'm by no means a good CtB player, so I can't really give feedback on the current difficulty ranking, but I'd be interested in seeing your alogrithm's opinions on these two maps:
https://osu.ppy.sh/p/beatmap?b=25580&m=2
https://osu.ppy.sh/p/beatmap?b=93893&m=2

Both of these use a special kind of pattern that is extremely hard to play but doesn't rely on big or fast jumps, so I think your difficulty calculation method might possibly underrate these?

Kitokofox wrote:

So, I ended up sharing this to Tom94. I want to see everyone's honest and unbiased opinions.

Kitokofox wrote:

Catch The Beat calculation methods

Catch The Beat is different in multiple ways, by how jumps work and how streams work, mostly. Playing on a 2D plane is a lot diffrent from standard osu!, along with the predefined movement speeds of the catcher. Thus, skill based calculations based on the limitations of Ryuuta among other things must be taken in account for.

There are some main factors which determine how difficult a map is for Catch The Beat:
Map Settings This goes back to the basics.
- Approach rate: This should be documented in difficulty by the actual drop rate of the fruits. This also gives AR10 the much needed skill requirement it actually calls for.
- Fruit Size: This is pretty obvious. The smaller the fruits, the harder they are to catch accurately. Skill requirement is based on the field in which you can actually catch the fruit, rather than the size itself.
- Overall Difficulty: I don't know how this is handled in the map, but as far as I know it only affects the HP loss when missing. I don't think that applies too much to skill, but for players who can just barely pass a song, this would come into play.
- HP Drain Rate: Same as above, only comes into play for those barely making a map.
Beat Placement Factors based on the placement of sliders and circles themselves
- Movement: How much the catcher needs to move to catch the fruits. In stream maps like Marisa Stole the Precious Thing, this would become classified as less difficult since you don't have to click and simply inch the catcher, where in the system used for standard, it would be classified as difficult otherwise.
- Jumpiness: This is the general distance between beats, based on how fast the catcher must move. This also applied to sliders and their slider ticks. This also heightens more based on the general theta of jumps in a row (especially hyperdashes in a row) What I mean by theta of jumps in a row, as in a map with periodic jumps is probably more difficult than one with one part of it having multiple in a row (This sort of compares and contrasts between kinds of jumps and what kind of skill and perseverance is required to acquire a good score) Also, generally, faster hyperdashes are harder to chain off of, e.g. Can't Defeat Airman!.
- Speed: This is how fast the catcher needs to move around in succession. This would rate maps like val0108's Talent Shredder or With A Dance Number as high skill examples for this sector, mainly because of how fast the catcher needs to switch one direction to another and how fast of fingers the player needs.
- Long jumps: Originally pixel jumps, these are jumps that are enough for the catcher to reach with the new hyperdash system, but still require precision placement to catch, as well as timing. An example can be seen in Wild Eyes [JAMES DIFFICULTY!!!] As it has long but viable jumps.
Mode Specifics and Other Stuff
- Mode Specific Maps: Don't need to be buffed. They are probably already difficult as it is with the algorithm that's in place. Plus, it was set this way to entice players to play those maps. This pp system focuses on the player's skill, and tries to measure the skill needed for each beatmap, so making bonuses of that sort is incorrect to ranking..
- Fruits before and after spinners: The time before spinners and after spinners doesn't need to be checked because of how bananas aren't necessary to a full combo.
- Accuracy: In general, accuracy is easier to come by in Catch The Beat, and as such, changes may be made accordingly.

Tom94 wrote:

TheVileOne wrote:

I have major issues with this. Big Black and Kokou no sousei are not even close to being equal in difficulty. The difference between 360 BPM and 240 BPM is huge. Big black is also AR 10 and Kokou no sousei maps (Chaos and Collab) are AR 9. Jump intensity is also a huge factor.

This issue affects both models.

I can't beat Chaos. Someone else could evaluate that difficulty and have a more accurate opinion .

Referring to the "Chaos" diff:
First of all, simply taking the BPM does not work well. The big black mostly has 1/1 and 1/2 notes while kokou no sousei mostly consists of 1/2 and 1/4 notes, essentially making it closer to 480 BPM if you want to directly compare it to the big black.

Secondly AR is not factored into the difficulty algorithm. It will play a big role when computing pp, but it is not considered for beatmap difficulty / star rating.

My last point is, that the scoreboards indicate, that kokou no sousei is not very much easier than the big black.


The "Collab" diff of kokou no sousei definitely is a lot easier than the big black and should not be on par. It has a few hard parts but is mostly easy. Will look into that one.

-Ryuujii- wrote:

Why can't you guys just be patient lol xD

alienflybot wrote:

IMO, just DON'T make ctb diffs give too many pp.

VelperK wrote:

Seph wrote:

I'm totally fine with Airman (jumpy) and No Pain, No gain aho diff (insanely long sliders, jumpy that makes it hard to fc) on top performance but astrosexy? and Illumiscape and Ridorii aren't even FCs, yet they are there.

-Ryuujii- wrote:

Seph wrote:

I'm totally fine with Airman (jumpy) and No Pain, No gain aho diff (insanely long sliders, jumpy that makes it hard to fc) on top performance but astrosexy? and Illumiscape and Ridorii aren't even FCs, yet they are there.

So ar10 maps > lower ar maps? Hm..

petiskacang wrote:

priority seems more legit this time lol

why does non FC map appear on top ranks?
Also for normal diff with HR, and FL (1 miss)

Then another hard

pls

Edit: i guess FC doesn't matter

best performance is marked base on your stability and "performance", thought some maps is still not FC-able / Hard to FC, like Rainbow Dash or Kirby mix Deluxe.

-PM- wrote:

There are need to be more change.
Only so few maps are big pp maps. Standard of giving pp is too much towards on few factors. Accordingly, if we just played the pp maps, we can farming many pp even though not FCed or cleared with Easy mods (EZ, HT, NF). If you want, i can post the examples of the maps too! It is worst than ppv1...
And still many CTB maps are overrated in performances!
Skills to Minority Extra map or CTB maps is not skill of all. There are lot of variations.
But i know this ppv2 is not finally decided yet. So i hope to renewing ppv2 consistently.

Zak wrote:

This system may not be perfect yet, but it's at least starting to go in the right direction, you guys need to chill and give it time to improve.

DakkyChan wrote:

How can be Zak rank 8 XDDDDD

[Super Shock] wrote:

DakkyChan wrote:

How can be Zak rank 8 XDDDDD

How can DakkyChan rang 15....

DakkyChan wrote:

How can be Zak rank 8 XDDDDD

119410501 wrote:

DakkyChan wrote:

How can be Zak rank 8 XDDDDD

do you even ask

119410501 wrote:

DakkyChan wrote:

How can be Zak rank 8 XDDDDD

do you even ask

[Super Shock] wrote:

DakkyChan wrote:

How can be Zak rank 8 XDDDDD

How can DakkyChan rang 13....

Kitokofox wrote:

FC shouldn't have to matter too much (Although, it does give a tiny boost) It's more based on score and accuracy than anything now, mostly because of the fact that the only thing that slowly increases when you get better is the accuracy itself. (I feel combo has a somewhat important saying matter in there too)

FC only mattered because often FC means getting good rankings. It's more of "This is the difficulty, how much of the difficulty can you do?" And that's pretty much how pp goes.

It no longer focuses on other players. It tallies up how well YOU do, then compares that tally to others.

Minky wrote:

to reply onto the farming case, there are some songs that indeed give a lot of pp with little effort from above average players:

https://osu.ppy.sh/b/161980?m=2 is one case, getting top 200 nets you quite a lot of pp, even when you're at 4.6k pp.

https://osu.ppy.sh/b/55474?m=2 is another example, the intro may be annoying, but its a straight shot to 300 combo, I see why it would give pp because the spacing between the jumps are huge and its pure hypers, but like I said any above average player can easily get accustomed to those jumps and either fc, or even miss once near the end and nets you still some good pp.

https://osu.ppy.sh/b/84485?m=2 the jumps may be annoying but it is definitely doable, only thing I found hard on this is some jump at 369, like I said it gives a lot of pp as well.

although these songs were me experimenting to get under rank 100 with not so much effort, I did in fact move a lot of ranks so far from a few maps. And I'm considering these songs farmable since like I said above average players can do, or fc the songs that I listed with few retries

it does seem massively spaced maps gives a lot of pp too which may be concerning, since some of the maps have a few spots that are considered hard to pass, but require a few attempts to actually get used to it and pass massively large spaced notes.

Tom94 wrote:

Zak wrote:

This system may not be perfect yet, but it's at least starting to go in the right direction, you guys need to chill and give it time to improve.

Don't worry, the only way for me to know what to improve is listening to the complaints. I don't play CtB myself after all.

Seph wrote:

Well you really can't change the fact that this version of pp still counts map hoarding though.

TenguKing9 wrote:

I've been looking around top 50 player's profiles and I see that most of their top performances are basically No mod and HD records. DT, HR, and FL records doesn't seem to have an effect on PP which concerns me. I mean sure the top 5 might have one or two HR records but the vast majority doesn't have theirs shown on their top. Could be a bug?

P.S- Compiling a list of hard maps for CTB would be really helpful to determine which maps should give more than others.

Tom94 wrote:

TenguKing9 wrote:

I've been looking around top 50 player's profiles and I see that most of their top performances are basically No mod and HD records. DT, HR, and FL records doesn't seem to have an effect on PP which concerns me. I mean sure the top 5 might have one or two HR records but the vast majority doesn't have theirs shown on their top. Could be a bug?

P.S- Compiling a list of hard maps for CTB would be really helpful to determine which maps should give more than others.

Such a list is in the opening post of this thread.
When did you look through top performances? A bug regarding some nomod weightings has been fixed this morning.

Seph wrote:

A player who focuses on heavily weighted maps can still be outranked by a player who has played more not-so-hard maps than him.

Like, 50 regular maps > 1 super hard map when it comes to pp gain

DakkyChan wrote:

nothing changed on pp v2 in ctb only new farming maps XDDDDDDDDD

TheVileOne wrote:

I have this growing concern that the CTB pros are going to keep complaining about every remotely non-crazy maps giving pp until the only way you can get pp in maps is to FC hyper filled songs that only the top percentiles can play. I agree that it should require effort to be rewarding, but grinding isn't fun. It doesn't show that you're skillful. It only shows that you've played a song enough time to complete it without missing.

119410501 wrote:

TheVileOne wrote:

I have this growing concern that the CTB pros are going to keep complaining about every remotely non-crazy maps giving pp until the only way you can get pp in maps is to FC hyper filled songs that only the top percentiles can play. I agree that it should require effort to be rewarding, but grinding isn't fun. It doesn't show that you're skillful. It only shows that you've played a song enough time to complete it without missing.

I'm not saying I complain about HOW PP IS, I complain about PP.

There's no way to improve pp, make pp a real skills portrait, balance pp maps amounts with pp really hard maps.
PP will never work.

Once again I say it was so pleasant to see players' stats without ranks.

And what I and Dakky said, is just a fact, the unchangeable nature of PP, until it'll exist.

seicHmsc wrote:

119410501 wrote:

I'm not saying I complain about HOW PP IS, I complain about PP.

There's no way to improve pp, make pp a real skills portrait, balance pp maps amounts with pp really hard maps.
PP will never work.

Once again I say it was so pleasant to see players' stats without ranks.

And what I and Dakky said, is just a fact, the unchangeable nature of PP, until it'll exist.

If you don't care about pp what are you doing here andrea, give me some pizza and pasta for jesuschrist.

Seph wrote:

The only way to remove PP farming is to not include easy/normals/hards (unless those hards really do give some challenge, besides adding HR/DT)

simply put, manually adding maps, but that would be a pain in the ass

Seph wrote:

Well ppv2 is SKILL based, so that just makes sense.

Seph wrote:

The only way to remove PP farming is to not include easy/normals/hards (unless those hards really do give some challenge, besides adding HR/DT)

simply put, manually adding maps, but that would be a pain in the ass

Full Tablet wrote:

If maps are too easy, then they won't give much pp at all (unless the difficulty calculation algorithm goes horribly wrong).

Example:
A player plays 5000 easy maps, each play worth 100pp. Then it's total pp would be ~1000pp.
Another player plays 1 hard map (worth 300pp), and also has about about 20 plays worth about 200pp. Then it's total would be about ~2100pp

TheVileOne wrote:

Awarding pp should still be based on relative rank and your relative performances. I believe it still is even with the new changes. It is incorrect to say that removing the value of Easy/Normal/Hard modes will resolve this problem. Noone is saying that Easy/Normal/Hards can be farmed under the new system and unless it is a bug with the system, they shouldn't be able to be farmed under the new system for people who have not moved on to maps far above that skill range.

Think of the ranking system as having invisible tiers. In order to get to the next tier your average performance needs to be at a certain bar. This ensures that noone can farm into ranks they do not deserve. The fact that there are farmable maps (given that these maps are not below the player's assumed skill level for his rank) is a non-issue. A player can farm maps within his skill level all he wants, and his rank will always stay within his invisible tier in which every player around him shares a similar skill level.

The presence of maps that are easier than the average skill level required for a map to give x number of pp are the rogue maps. These maps are the ones that allow players from a lower tier to work their way into a higher tier with a lower degree of effort. These maps should be reduced as much as possible.

Seph wrote:

Full Tablet wrote:

If maps are too easy, then they won't give much pp at all (unless the difficulty calculation algorithm goes horribly wrong).

Example:
A player plays 5000 easy maps, each play worth 100pp. Then it's total pp would be ~1000pp.
Another player plays 1 hard map (worth 300pp), and also has about about 20 plays worth about 200pp. Then it's total would be about ~2100pp

how did that become 2100pp when 300+200=500 wat

and who knows, the calculation MIGHT go wrong, and I'm only not referring to easy maps, some okayhard diffs (not insanes okay) gives insane amounts of pp, you just gotta look for them. anyhow this still doesn't change the fact that you can still pp hoard so w/e

I think you both don't quite understand how pp works. The total pp of a player isn't just his 20 best plays added up or something. The plays are individually weighted by how far up they are.
A player's best play is weighted the most, the second best play a little bit less, the third best play a bit less again, and so on. The exact formula is:
Total pp = (1st Score's pp) * X^0 + (2nd Score's pp) * X^1 + (3rd Score's pp) * X^2 + ... + (nth Score's pp) * X^(n-1)
where is slightly below 1. For instance 0.95.

This way only the best scores of a player are relevant.

If hards, normals or easys are worth too much, then please let me know. It probably is connected to a bug in the algorithm.

TheVileOne wrote:

I was aware with how pp is weighted. I have to deal with many issues concerning pp. My concept of invisible tiers still applies if the pp system is truly worth its salt. If pp does not indicate that player A is performing better than player B, then I don't see the point to having pp at all. There needs to be invisible bars in which a player must have a baseline level of skill/performance to reach such a rank.

The high end of the player's performance list should be a representation of a player's skill level. That way only similarly skilled players will be grouped together on the ranking list. It doesn't matter where on the ranking list you are among this group of people, because all of you share very similar skill ranges. For example I am ranked within the 1500-~2800 ranking tier in CTB. Most players within this rank are at or above my skill level. There shouldn't be very many below my general skill level at my rank.

-Tachibana- wrote:

TheVileOne wrote:

I was aware with how pp is weighted. I have to deal with many issues concerning pp. My concept of invisible tiers still applies if the pp system is truly worth its salt. If pp does not indicate that player A is performing better than player B, then I don't see the point to having pp at all. There needs to be invisible bars in which a player must have a baseline level of skill/performance to reach such a rank.

The high end of the player's performance list should be a representation of a player's skill level. That way only similarly skilled players will be grouped together on the ranking list. It doesn't matter where on the ranking list you are among this group of people, because all of you share very similar skill ranges. For example I am ranked within the 1500-~2800 ranking tier in CTB. Most players within this rank are at or above my skill level. There shouldn't be very many below my general skill level at my rank.

theres a very simple reason as to why we need pp, osu was and should always be considered competitive, having fun is just part of the game, we need some form of ranking system or a significant portion of the players (myself included, and quite a bit of people i know) will stop playing out of boredom, i stopped playing osu after the pp system went down because it was boring, i didnt feel i was getting better (simply being able to beat a map i couldnt beat before does not mean i got better, it just means ive played the song enough to not miss on it (someone else in this thread agrees with me on this aspect)

TheVileOne wrote:

I was aware with how pp is weighted. I have to deal with many issues concerning pp. My concept of invisible tiers still applies if the pp system is truly worth its salt. If pp does not indicate that player A is performing better than player B, then I don't see the point to having pp at all. There needs to be invisible bars in which a player must have a baseline level of skill/performance to reach such a rank.

The high end of the player's performance list should be a representation of a player's skill level. That way only similarly skilled players will be grouped together on the ranking list. It doesn't matter where on the ranking list you are among this group of people, because all of you share very similar skill ranges. For example I am ranked within the 1500-~2800 ranking tier in CTB. Most players within this rank are at or above my skill level. There shouldn't be very many below my general skill level at my rank.

-Tachibana- wrote:

i know this isnt a big deal, but do you think you can make it so pp shows up to the 2nd decimal? right now if you have 3000.05 pp it only shows up as 3000 pp, would make tracking pp easier for players especially since most people are probably only getting a fragment of 1 pp per map

TheVileOne wrote:

FYI I was not making a suggestion. I was only making a response addresses to those who are thinking that farming is an issue with the new system. There should be no way to farm your way into a rank that doesn't reflect your capable level of play compared to those around your rank, at least when you get into the top 5000. If you find maps that constantly give you pp, then these maps should be considered more difficult than maps that were rated as giving less pp in your list of performances (before weighting).

There is usually some wiggle room as you move into the next tier of play. Someone who mysteriously one day starts playing songs with more proficiency, and starts performing well at songs he could not previously compete will find himself rapidly moving up the ranks, because each one of these plays will be better than plays he previously acquired. He/she is moving towards the next tier of skill/performance in the ranking. You could call this rapid gain of pp by playing better as farming. Farming is not a bad thing if it is because the player is truly getting better at playing or just playing better.

There is no amount of farming I could do to get me to rank 1500 from where I am at. It would take many many tries to get to the next tier. I am probably underestimating how much pp it takes to progress x number of ranks. I am curious about what percentile of plays in your performance list have considerable impact on your rank. What range is the bulk of your pp located? At what point is the worth of a performance is greatly diminished or doesn't have a very high impact on rank?

Will you and do you collect data on performance trends? Maybe it would be useful to analyze such data in order to determine problems with the system, and just for statistics reasons. I guess it doesn't have to be publicly available to prevent people from maximizing their pp, by filling their lists with similarly valued songs within their skill level, but some data might be safe to release.

You could allow us to view how our pp is distributed amongst our top 1000 performances. (Is it still only 1000 or did you happen to include more plays?) We could then infer things about our own true skill levels based on whether our pp values are based on a few songs or the culmination of many songs. We could have an average performance that will tell us where we are in terms of skill level. Are we better at aim, or accuracy? Do we prefer a certain mod? What mods do other player prefer at x rank? There is a ton of data that can plotted into graphs that could be used to evaluate one person's skill level to another person's and not only one facet of skill, but several different facets.

TheVileOne wrote:

I think you should be giving extra weight for keeping combo in longer maps. Even if most of it is streams instead of aim intensive patterns, it's easier to make a mistake and it ruins your chance at a top ranking. You can't easily perform well on these maps, because of how much time it takes to get consistent at them

-Tachibana- wrote:

i agree with vile, stamina (or concentration, what ever you wanna call it) is definitely a skill that should be thrown into the equation, clearly if no one has ever gotten a FC on the song, even if it isnt ar10 it shows that the song is hard enough to warrant more pp

which brings me to another suggestion on top of the showing decimal points for pp

you should make it so pp is weighted based on performance (like it is now) but also based on the other players who played the map, for example if i fc a song as a rank 2000 that even a rank 100 couldnt fc (with the same mods) i should get more pp (because at the very least, in this map i am better than the rank 100 player)

-Ryuujii- wrote:

-Tachibana- wrote:

i agree with vile, stamina (or concentration, what ever you wanna call it) is definitely a skill that should be thrown into the equation, clearly if no one has ever gotten a FC on the song, even if it isnt ar10 it shows that the song is hard enough to warrant more pp

which brings me to another suggestion on top of the showing decimal points for pp

you should make it so pp is weighted based on performance (like it is now) but also based on the other players who played the map, for example if i fc a song as a rank 2000 that even a rank 100 couldnt fc (with the same mods) i should get more pp (because at the very least, in this map i am better than the rank 100 player)

what......lol. i completely disagree with this,no point.

-Tachibana- wrote:

ill give you an example, are you saying that marathon runners are not equally if not more fit than sprinters?

Full Tablet wrote:

-Tachibana- wrote:

ill give you an example, are you saying that marathon runners are not equally if not more fit than sprinters?

Sprinters are more muscular.

-Kurisu- wrote:

Are CTB diffs still weighted more heavily than converts just because they have a ctb tag on them? I'm wondering because most of my best performance are still ctb rain diffs, which aren't all that hard at all compared to other maps I've fc'ed/performed well on. Also, I think the 'jumpiness' contribution towards ctb pp needs to be reevaluated, as hyperdases alter the difficulty of a jump (usually makes it easier). So just because a map has back and forth jumps across the edge of the screen (ex: https://osu.ppy.sh/b/55474?m=2), that does not necessarily mean it should be weighted as more difficult than jumps that are closer together (ex: https://osu.ppy.sh/p/beatmap?b=108021&m=2). The second example is significantly more difficult and I think most players would agree, yet the first gives a ton of pp despite the hyperdashes which assist in the jumps.

TheVileOne wrote:

I'm referring to stream related marathons. I'm thinking that in this particular cases and perhaps others that difficulty is being downgraded, because of all the streams in between each jumpy pattern. We're talking about a map that literally has no one person on the list who has not missed a fruit (fruit, not droplet). The streams require constant left and right adjustments to hit. It's not like all the fruits are in straight lines for most of the time.

Maybe it's not an issue. It's hard to say until I know what level the song is. Anyways I think that getting over 3000 combo is this song in CTB is impressive. It may not be top tier, super omg difficult to do, but it shows that you can play long bouts of constant gameplay sections without missing.

Seph wrote:

ranked 8 on image material and it never even gave anything :v actually ranked down after that lmao

-Ryuujii- wrote:

i have a question, are the ranks we have now going to stay the way they are, is the system already done and finished or ranks will change again?

119410501 wrote:

-Ryuujii- wrote:

i have a question, are the ranks we have now going to stay the way they are, is the system already done and finished or ranks will change again?

I'm pretty sure they'll change again, since many of my best performance are still noob diffs.

-PM- wrote:

119410501 wrote:

I'm pretty sure they'll change again, since many of my best performance are still noob diffs.

It must be change because still there are many problems i think.
1. Some many not difficult maps in best performance.
2. Still big pp is too concentrated to many CTB diffs or jumping maps. It must be dispersed to other hard standard maps and balance maps (Ex : http://osu.ppy.sh/p/beatmap?b=93893&m=2, http://osu.ppy.sh/p/beatmap?b=25580&m=2), old maps
3. If you "just clear" big pp map (Ex : http://osu.ppy.sh/p/beatmap?b=104229&m=2, http://osu.ppy.sh/p/beatmap?b=55474&m=2, etc...), you can receive big pp "unconditional" (Although cleared with Easy mods (EZ,HT,NF) or not rank in #50 Scoreboard)
4. Still there are no bonus for HR, in high CS and DT, FL in high AR

Tom94 wrote:

HardRock _is_ considered by quite a bit. All maps are weighted equally, CTB maps don't get any bonus just because they're CTB-specific.

seicHmsc wrote:

then try to focus on jumps complexity instead of jumps distance, it's true that my map, romaji voice is not that hard, because the jumps are big but not complicated.

seicHmsc wrote:

give examples of complex jumps, i can't do it now

The point it isn't if you can do a jump or not, the point is if you can compute it mathematically to do a formula.... understand me?