forum

Performance Points feedback and suggestions (Standard)

posted
Total Posts
2,749
show more
rexcannon
Just another quick question here.

I must have the wrong idea how this works because I look at this score I got here,



Doesn't this mean it's supposed to give me 17% of 106pp (18pp)? Because I 'm pretty sure it didn't give me any pp at all.
Luna
The score did give you 18pp, but you didn't see the full effect because by getting the score, you also pushed down a lot of other scores into lower weightings.
So while this score gave you a bunch of pp, the slightly worse scores you already had previously lost some of their value. It evened out and you probably gained slightly less than a full pp after everything was calculated.
rexcannon
That's not very encouraging honestly.
Luna
It's to avoid people farming pp by getting scores around their average skill all the time. You only really get noticable increases from your absolute top performances.
Horolynn
It's not supposed to encourage you. It's there to reflect your skill level at the current time. The pp amount grows when you keep getting better and better scores, meaning that you are getting better and able to set those scores. Fun gameplay and getting better should be the encouragement and if isn't fun for you, you shouldn't really be playing it cause you will get burnt out and frustrated really quickly.
Topic Starter
Tom94

Luna wrote:

Basically, high note density = hard, low density = easy
10 notes per second is harder than 5 notes per second
Simple stuff like that
That's not what that part of the wiki is supposed to say at all. It should just say, that beatmap length is measured is based on amount of hitobjects, not on time. It has exactly nothing to do with density, since a 5 minute map with 1000 hitobjects would get the same length bonus as a 1 minute map with 1000 hitobjects.

I'll fix the last line of that section of the wiki. No idea what the person who added it was thinking when saying, that shorter beatmaps would be weighted more with the same amount of hitobjects. I didn't put that in originally. :P
Dexus
I made a thread but then realized there was this thread so I nuked the other one. Just going to copy/paste it into here.

So how do you calculate star diffiuclty with mods, or is this a ppv2 wiki/future topic we will have to wait for? I'm curious as to how much it affects the star rating when adding DT / HR / HD so I can gauge more accurately how difficult a map is. Like say someone was to play this map https://osu.ppy.sh/s/132095 [Hard] with DT the star rating would go from 2.05 to ? as compared to playing HR+HD. HD and DT have static multipliers to the difficulty while HR has that ceiling effect (excluding CS) so I'd assume it's not something to be so easily calculated without using a program/the game?
hehe

Dexus wrote:

I made a thread but then realized there was this thread so I nuked the other one. Just going to copy/paste it into here.

So how do you calculate star diffiuclty with mods, or is this a ppv2 wiki/future topic we will have to wait for? I'm curious as to how much it affects the star rating when adding DT / HR / HD so I can gauge more accurately how difficult a map is. Like say someone was to play this map https://osu.ppy.sh/s/132095 [Hard] with DT the star rating would go from 2.05 to ? as compared to playing HR+HD. HD and DT have static multipliers to the difficulty while HR has that ceiling effect (excluding CS) so I'd assume it's not something to be so easily calculated without using a program/the game?
http://osutp.net/beatmaps
Dexus
Those aren't weighted the same due to various difficulty settings actually being factored into the star difficulty.

This will be easier to figure out when the game's internal star system gets updated and to work dynamically with the mods selected.
hehe

Dexus wrote:

Those aren't weighted the same due to various difficulty settings actually being factored into the star difficulty.

This will be easier to figure out when the game's internal star system gets updated and to work dynamically with the mods selected.
basically DT > HR > FL > HD. i'm not exactly sure what you mean by "various difficulty settings actually being factored into the star difficulty" since ppv2 is pretty much based of tp and hence the song's difficulty is the same. if you want to see what the mods do, tick the boxes and you can see how the level goes up. HD and FL just give bonus aim points (there are 3 components, aim(cursor), speed(mostly bpm) and accuracy (self explanatory)). an perfect FC give maximum speed and aim points, and more accuracy gives more accuracy points.

DT: increases OD, AR and BPM. all three stats are increased dramatically.
HR: increases CS, AR, OD, HP. HP does not really matter for FCs. higher OD increase than DT, thus more points given for better accuracy. CS and AR affect aim, but not as much as BPM and AR in DT.
HD and FL: bonus aim points.
EZ: extremely low AR is also awarded bonus acc.
HT: opposite of DT.
Topic Starter
Tom94
tastystew is correct. However there can be edge-cases where DT / HR might have a different ordering or even be below FL or HD. Really depends on the maps. Detailed explanations on how the difficulty is computed are a future wiki topic.
hehe

Tom94 wrote:

tastystew is correct. However there can be edge-cases where DT / HR might have a different ordering or even be below FL or HD. Really depends on the maps. Detailed explanations on how the difficulty is computed are a future wiki topic.
this is good to hear.
Dexus
I know what the mods do in general to aim/speed/etc , you're not really understanding me. I really just want to see how the star rating is affected through mods. From what I can see the "level" in osutp isn't the same as it only seems to factor the aim/speed while "star rating" includes OD, AR, CS, etc. So looking at the lists there are differences in how it is sorted. It's fine for now as I can see in the future the star rating changes due to mod usage on a map may possibly be shown.

It's just weird because two different maps, Map A having a higher star rating while B has a lower star rating (they are relatively close) . Both are done with mods and get the same acc yet map B rewards more. I wanted to see if possibly when mods are on they show that map B may possibly have a higher rating than map A.

I hope that makes sense.
Topic Starter
Tom94

Dexus wrote:

I know what the mods do in general to aim/speed/etc , you're not really understanding me. I really just want to see how the star rating is affected through mods. From what I can see the "level" in osutp isn't the same as it only seems to factor the aim/speed while "star rating" includes OD, AR, CS, etc. So looking at the lists there are differences in how it is sorted. It's fine for now as I can see in the future the star rating changes due to mod usage on a map may possibly be shown.

It's just weird because two different maps, Map A having a higher star rating while B has a lower star rating (they are relatively close) . Both are done with mods and get the same acc yet map B rewards more. I wanted to see if possibly when mods are on they show that map B may possibly have a higher rating than map A.

I hope that makes sense.
The star rating at the moment is pretty much equivalent to the osu!tp level, just scaled in another way. Therefore the same changes through mods apply.
pooptartsonas
So star rating does not currently take OD into account? Also, I know that HP Drain is not relevant to pp calculations due to how they work, but I think it could be relevant for something like star system, especially for newer players who are not worried about full combos? I guess a star system rating how hard maps are to pass would be entirely different, but maybe it could be useful as a very small factor or something.

I may be misremembering, but I seem to recall that you said something about OD eventually being incorporated into the star system. If this is the case, a feature showing star system with different mods (probably best displayed after integration with the client) would be very useful imo, even if that is not the case currently.
electrolytes
I'm curious: the new star system looks like it compresses the previous 1-to-just-below-5 range into maybe a third or less of what it was (perhaps 1 to ~2.2). Is anything planned to allow searching for ranges of difficulty, similarly to with OD, AR, HP, and CS? (ex. "sd>1.9 sd<2.2"). Maybe something like this (other than the difficulty sort, which groups things by a full star apart) already exists and I just don't know about it. If it doesn't though, it seems like it might become much harder to search for beatmaps around the same level of difficulty when the star difficulty changes are brought into the client. This is all assuming the 1-to-5 star range stays around of course.
mcdoomfrag

electrolytes wrote:

I'm curious: the new star system looks like it compresses the previous 1-to-just-below-5 range into maybe a third or less of what it was (perhaps 1 to ~2.2). Is anything planned to allow searching for ranges of difficulty, similarly to with OD, AR, HP, and CS? (ex. "sd>1.9 sd<2.2"). Maybe something like this (other than the difficulty sort, which groups things by a full star apart) already exists and I just don't know about it. If it doesn't though, it seems like it might become much harder to search for beatmaps around the same level of difficulty when the star difficulty changes are brought into the client. This is all assuming the 1-to-5 star range stays around of course.

Tom94 wrote:

Keeby wrote:

It would be nice to implement the star system in-game, if possible.
All planned.
Its in the works.
silmarilen
is this map https://osu.ppy.sh/s/155691 really supposed to be 5.00 stars? tp rates it at lvl 67
Topic Starter
Tom94

silmarilen wrote:

is this map https://osu.ppy.sh/s/155691 really supposed to be 5.00 stars? tp rates it at lvl 67
Fixed. It didn't get updated with its actual difficulty value for some reason. The internal pp difficulties were stored correctly. (rrtyui only got 211 for his #1)
KogureKun
Curious about how much of a bonus is applied when playing at low AR's (sub 4.5/5). Is it possible to use EZ mod on hard+/insane songs and get a higher PP than if you were using nomod? Not sure how EZ mod is calculated for a difficulty and if there's any bonus for the huge clusters of notes
Dexus
How does weighting add up to such a high amount of pp for players when stuff exponentially yields less in comparison to your Top most performance. A mass amount of scores are weighted as 0%. Am I reading the list wrong and the weighting is already applied to the shown pp amount?

If it isn't then I would like for the top performances if possible to show the pp*weighting amount automatically; and then next to the % show the current displayed mount of pp without the percentage affecting it; that way instead of showing a bunch of 400pp, 300pp, 300pp, it would show the right amounts 400pp, 285pp, 270pp, etc.

The way the weighting is displayed and how much you actually have is pretty confusing to me personally.
Topic Starter
Tom94

Dexus wrote:

How does weighting add up to such a high amount of pp for players when stuff exponentially yields less in comparison to your Top most performance. A mass amount of scores are weighted as 0%. Am I reading the list wrong and the weighting is already applied to the shown pp amount?

If it isn't then I would like for the top performances if possible to show the pp*weighting amount automatically; and then next to the % show the current displayed mount of pp without the percentage affecting it; that way instead of showing a bunch of 400pp, 300pp, 300pp, it would show the right amounts 400pp, 285pp, 270pp, etc.
That would mislead many people into thinking the scores were considered "worse" instead of only having a weight applied.

If you want to know how this pp amount adds up just check the math behind it and verify it yourself. It is correct.
Dexus
Well then can you show the weighted amount of pp NEXT to the weight percentage then? Why fool people into thinking pp for a map is worth something when it really isn't worth anything?

Edit:
GoldenWolf

Dexus wrote:

sounds cool, i'm too lazy to do the math most of the time so yeah
nooblet
I was wondering how people had such high PP's when their top scores didn't have many high scores, too. It's most likely due to this

Tom94 wrote:

Every score gives a small base pp amount of 0.25, decreasing by a bit with every new highscore that you make. With 1000 highscores you get around 200pp and with 5000 around 400pp. The cap is 416.666pp at the moment, assuming infinitely many highscores are possible.
(pp gain = 0.25 * sum 0.9994^i, i=0 to amount of highscores)

This gets less and less relevant the higher your pp goes and is meant to both encourage playing more maps for the lower-level players and prevent big rank losses after making a new score at the lower ranks.
In the mid-high ranks it is pretty much irrelevant, since 99% of the people have enough highscores to be less than 50pp away from the cap.
I really like the idea of showing how much PP it's worth after weighing though. Perhaps to a decimal or two for the ones giving base PP? :)
Topic Starter
Tom94
Fair enough, it does show the actual pp it gives now. I'm still against the decimals though, since it clutters things too much.
Dexus
Best solution would probably be title= whatever in the div so you can get a lot more information into a tooltip. That would make it so you could just have the pp numbers listed and then hover over for more detail on weightings, mods, etc.

Thanks for adding the weighted amounts!
MPGHThunder
I'm extremely confused about the ranking system. I mean, take rrtyui for example. He's #1 on The Quick Brown Fox yet it only gave him 275pp. His best performance is Saiya and that gave him 542pp. I mean, like dafaq?
silmarilen
newsflash: big black is not the hardest thing in existence
MPGHThunder

silmarilen wrote:

newsflash: big black is not the hardest thing in existence
Newsflash: That wasn't the point.
silmarilen
so... what else would be the point?
MPGHThunder

silmarilen wrote:

so... what else would be the point?
It's a significantly more difficult map. Not to mention he's got like a 8 million lead...
Zare
That's the point silmarilen addressed tho.
Remote Control on HDDT is harder to FC than Big Black Nomod.
MPGHThunder

Zare wrote:

That's the point silmarilen addressed tho.
Remote Control on HDDT is harder to FC than Big Black Nomod.
165 * 2 = 330 as opposed to 360.3 BPM on The Big Black. If you add in the sudden jumps and hidden it probably is a more difficult map, but that's subjective really. 7,802,730 point lead and 3.80% more accurate than HappyStick. The map has also been played much more than Remote Control. The PP system is horribly vague...
silmarilen
please, if you dont know what you're talking about, dont talk about it. just the fact that you think double time doubles the bpm already shows you dont, not to mention all the other flaws in your argument.
Zare
Yeah no I don't even
lol
mcdoomfrag

MPGHThunder wrote:

Zare wrote:

That's the point silmarilen addressed tho.
Remote Control on HDDT is harder to FC than Big Black Nomod.
165 * 2 = 330 as opposed to 360.3 BPM on The Big Black. If you add in the sudden jumps and hidden it probably is a more difficult map, but that's subjective really. 7,802,730 point lead and 3.80% more accurate than HappyStick. The map has also been played much more than Remote Control. The PP system is horribly vague...
ppv2 doesn't take your lead into consideration .Even if rryui was second, third or last, it wouldn't matter. Also, take into consideration that rrtyui missed 3 times on big black, which greatly reduces his pp gained from the map.
MPGHThunder

silmarilen wrote:

please, if you dont know what you're talking about, dont talk about it. just the fact that you think double time doubles the bpm already shows you dont, not to mention all the other flaws in your argument.
I obviously DON'T have a grasp of what I'm talking about, but that was apparent from the first post. So instead of giving me half-baked answers, how about you stop for a second and actually give me a concise answer instead of acting like I'm an idiot. OK? Thanks.
silmarilen
ok then very well.
first of all, big black may be mapped at 360 bpm, but it plays like a 180 bpm map, so for all intents and purposes it is considered 180 bpm.
second of all, DT multiplies the bpm by 1.5x, not by 2x, so remote control DT would be 247.5.
ok now that that's out of the way lets move on to the next point

the score rrtyui got compared to someone else doesnt matter, all that matters is how difficult the map is according to the difficulty algorithm and rrtyui's combo/accuracy/amount of misses. so even if #2 had only 5 combo it still wouldnt make a difference to the amount of pp rrtyui would get. even if rrtyui was rank 4.000.000/4.000.000 it still wouldnt influence his pp at all

and then lets get on to the difficulty of the maps. as i already said, big black is not the hardest thing there is, i would look at it as an easier version of this map if it wasnt for the sliders
remote control has some fullscreen jumps (which are bigger than the ones on big black aswell) and adding DT makes it 247.5 bpm (thats a whole 67.5 more than big black, since we already agreed on that it's just 180 bpm). it also has a lot of triples and 1/2 notes at the start with difficult movement without much time for breathing. so yes, remote control is harder than big black
Zare
You have to understand that Big Black is effectively mapped like a 180 BPM map, not a 360 BPM map. The streams and sliderjumps are mapped 1/2 beats instead of 1/4 beats, which is usually the case. This is way easier to play than the Fullscreen circle jumps on Remote Control, which is 248 BPM with DT.
Just compare the replays and ask yourself which looks more impressive
Mathsma

MPGHThunder wrote:

silmarilen wrote:

please, if you dont know what you're talking about, dont talk about it. just the fact that you think double time doubles the bpm already shows you dont, not to mention all the other flaws in your argument.
I obviously DON'T have a grasp of what I'm talking about, but that was apparent from the first post. So instead of giving me half-baked answers, how about you stop for a second and actually give me a concise answer instead of acting like I'm an idiot. OK? Thanks.
The Big Black is slower than Remote Control DT and has less aim strain than Remote Control DT. The Big Black doesn't play like a 360 bpm, it plays more like a 180 bpm. Score has nothing to do with how much pp you get also. The amount of contenders a map has (total map plays) has nothing to do with the amount of pp it gives either. Those are old methods to find how much pp a map gives. Remote Control DT is also 10.3 which gives a small bonus because it is over ar10, I don't know what the value for the bonus is. Remote Control DT is also OD10.3 which requires you to be more accurate than typical hardrock (od10). All of these things make Remote Control DT give more pp than The Big Black.
Clyine
And Remote control DT has a much higher OD than big black.
And big black has lots of sliders compared to remote control.
And sliders are not used to calculate accuracy.
MPGHThunder

silmarilen wrote:

ok then very well.
first of all, big black may be mapped at 360 bpm, but it plays like a 180 bpm map, so for all intents and purposes it is considered 180 bpm.
second of all, DT multiplies the bpm by 1.5x, not by 2x, so remote control DT would be 247.5.
ok now that that's out of the way lets move on to the next point

the score rrtyui got compared to someone else doesnt matter, all that matters is how difficult the map is according to the difficulty algorithm and rrtyui's combo/accuracy/amount of misses. so even if #2 had only 5 combo it still wouldnt make a difference to the amount of pp rrtyui would get. even if rrtyui was rank 4.000.000/4.000.000 it still wouldnt influence his pp at all

and then lets get on to the difficulty of the maps. as i already said, big black is not the hardest thing there is, i would look at it as an easier version of this map if it wasnt for the sliders
remote control has some fullscreen jumps (which are bigger than the ones on big black aswell) and adding DT makes it 247.5 bpm (thats a whole 67.5 more than big black, since we already agreed on that it's just 180 bpm). it also has a lot of triples and 1/2 notes at the start with difficult movement without much time for breathing. so yes, remote control is harder than big black
Thanks, that's all I needed to know.
Cooikezi
Hello, are sliderbreaks counted when calculating pp? Because i got a -1 run (with 2? sliderbreaks) on this map http://osu.ppy.sh/b/285549 with 98.5%, and I expected that play to be worth more than nothing..
Full Tablet
Is the length bonus factor, when calculating the accuracy pp of a play, independent from the accuracy percentage?

For SS, the expected probability of hitting each hit correctly tends to 100% (perfection) when increasing the amount of circles
[expected in the sense that the (probability of hitting each circle correctly) makes it so the (probability of getting a rate of correctly hit circles equal or higher than the rate of correctly hit circles in the score calculated) is equal to a predetermined probability],
while for 95% rate of 300s, the probability tends to be only 95% (and the value comes closer to 95% more quickly than in the SS case).

Because of that, accuracy-wise, there isn't much difference between getting 96%acc in 200 circles and 300 circles, while the difference is more notable between a SS in 200 circles and 300 circles.

As a way to quantify the difference, here is a set of graphs comparing how much the Expected Unstable Rate changes when changing the amount of circles (with a formula based on the expected unstable rate formula I showed months ago, but this time accounting for the probability of getting 50's and MISSES; this new formula shows similar values with high accuracy, but more accurate values with low accuracy, the downside is that it takes a ridiculous amount of time to calculate: calculating only 140 points for the graphs took about 1 hour Made a new algorithm to calculate it's value much faster). Here is a sample of the 2 formulas in a graph varying accuracy with the other variables constant: http://i.imgur.com/6LdrKIg.png (The one with the lower values on low accuracy is the new formula).

All the graphs are calculated with OD10 (changing the OD doesn't make much difference in the graphs with high accuracy, since with high accuracy the prevalent hit window is the one for 300s, so changing from OD7 to OD10 just roughly halves the expected unstable rate).

In the X axis is the amount of circles, and in the Y axis is (Expected UR with 100 circles) / (Expected UR with X circles) (that way the influence of accuracy alone and OD is discarded from the graph). That way, a Y value of "2" means half the expected unstable rate compared to 100 circles.

The 2 sets have the following difference:
The first set sets the (probability of getting the accuracy inputted in the formula, or more) with the (expected UR calculated) to 50% (that way, the accuracy corresponds to the median accuracy with only 1 try).

The second set tries to model the amount of expected retries a map would get based on the amount of circles: A map with 100 circles would be retried 108 times, with 200 circles half that amount, etc... (this assumes the player has the patience to play each map only a set amount of time, and that the amount of circles is directly proportional to the time each retry takes) This way maps that are more likely to get "fluke" accuracies caused by a lot of retries would give less (for example, a player who only has the skill needed to get 90% chance of hitting a 300 would eventually get a SS in a map with 30 circles if he retries a lot of times, but that would be practically impossible if the map has over 100 circles). If a map is replayed 50 times all with the same Unstable Rate, then the (probability of getting the accuracy inputted in the formula, or more) with the (expected UR calculated) is equal to 1/(1+50) (this corresponds to the formula of the expected value of the lowest value obtained in a perfect die with infinite sides with values that range from 0 to 1). I know this is not the best way to model the amount of retries, but it is something.

First Set:
http://i.imgur.com/SaWoo9P.png
http://i.imgur.com/jPIsZa6.png
Second Set:
http://i.imgur.com/hgVcl5O.png
http://i.imgur.com/OrmhWu2.png

Blue: Graph for SS.
Purple: Graph for 99%acc
Brown: Graph for 95%acc
Green: Graph for 85%acc (95% and 85% graph lines overlap each other since they have very similar values)

As you can see, in the SS case, the amount of circles has a bigger impact compared to the other cases with lower accuracy. Also, the point where increasing the amount of circles doesn't change significantly the expected unstable rate anymore is set farther to the right of the X axis when the accuracy increases. For any accuracy inferior to 100%, there is an horizontal asymptote of the graphs, but for 100%accuracy, the Y value goes to infinity (since, with an infinite amount of circles, the expected UR to get 100%accuracy is 0).

For high accuracy on circles (Acc > 0.7, so the hit window of the 300 judgment is predominant), the value of the asymptote for the expected unstable rate is approximately: (The asymptote is the same both for the cases with only 1 retry and several expected retries).
[SilknoHearto]

Full Tablet wrote:

Is the length bonus factor, when calculating the accuracy pp of a play, independent from the accuracy percentage?

For SS, the expected probability of hitting each hit correctly tends to 100% (perfection) when increasing the amount of circles
[expected in the sense that the (probability of hitting each circle correctly) makes it so the (probability of getting a rate of correctly hit circles equal or higher than the rate of correctly hit circles in the score calculated) is equal to a predetermined probability],
while for 95% rate of 300s, the probability tends to be only 95% (and the value comes closer to 95% more quickly than in the SS case).

Because of that, accuracy-wise, there isn't much difference between getting 96%acc in 200 circles and 300 circles, while the difference is more notable between a SS in 200 circles and 300 circles.

As a way to quantify the difference, here is a set of graphs comparing how much the Expected Unstable Rate changes when changing the amount of circles (with a formula based on the expected unstable rate formula I showed months ago, but this time accounting for the probability of getting 50's and MISSES; this new formula shows similar values with high accuracy, but more accurate values with low accuracy, the downside is that it takes a ridiculous amount of time to calculate: calculating only 140 points for the graphs took about 1 hour). Here is a sample of the 2 formulas in a graph varying accuracy with the other variables constant: http://i.imgur.com/6LdrKIg.png (The one with the lower values on low accuracy is the new formula).

All the graphs are calculated with OD10 (changing the OD doesn't make much difference in the graphs with high accuracy, since with high accuracy the prevalent hit window is the one for 300s, so changing from OD7 to OD10 just roughly halves the expected unstable rate).

In the X axis is the amount of circles, and in the Y axis is (Expected UR with 100 circles) / (Expected UR with X circles) (that way the influence of accuracy alone and OD is discarded from the graph). That way, a Y value of "2" means half the expected unstable rate compared to 100 circles.

The 2 sets have the following difference:
The first set sets the (probability of getting the accuracy inputted in the formula, or more) with the (expected UR calculated) to 50% (that way, the accuracy corresponds to the median accuracy with only 1 try).

The second set tries to model the amount of expected retries a map would get based on the amount of circles: A map with 100 circles would be retried 108 times, with 200 circles half that amount, etc... (this assumes the player has the patience to play each map only a set amount of time, and that the amount of circles is directly proportional to the time each retry takes) This way maps that are more likely to get "fluke" accuracies caused by a lot of retries would give less (for example, a player who only has the skill needed to get 90% chance of hitting a 300 would eventually get a SS in a map with 30 circles if he retries a lot of times, but that would be practically impossible if the map has over 100 circles). If a map is replayed 50 times all with the same Unstable Rate, then the (probability of getting the accuracy inputted in the formula, or more) with the (expected UR calculated) is equal to 1/(1+50) (this corresponds to the formula of the expected value of the lowest value obtained in a perfect die with infinite sides with values that range from 0 to 1). I know this is not the best way to model the amount of retries, but it is something.

First Set:
http://i.imgur.com/SaWoo9P.png
http://i.imgur.com/jPIsZa6.png
Second Set:
http://i.imgur.com/hgVcl5O.png
http://i.imgur.com/OrmhWu2.png

Blue: Graph for SS.
Purple: Graph for 99%acc
Brown: Graph for 95%acc
Green: Graph for 85%acc (95% and 85% graph lines overlap each other since they have very similar values)

As you can see, in the SS case, the amount of circles has a bigger impact compared to the other cases with lower accuracy. Also, the point where increasing the amount of circles doesn't change significantly the expected unstable rate anymore is set farther to the right of the X axis when the accuracy increases. For any accuracy inferior to 100%, there is an horizontal asymptote of the graphs, but for 100%accuracy, the Y value goes to infinity (since, with an infinite amount of circles, the expected UR to get 100%accuracy is 0).

For high accuracy on circles (Acc > 0.7, so the hit window of the 300 judgment is predominant), the value of the asymptote for the expected unstable rate is approximately: (The asymptote is the same both for the cases with only 1 retry and several expected retries).
dat information tho.
Oskur
http://osu.ppy.sh/b/161787?m=0

I just want to ask to see whether or not this map gives a bit too much pp; CS4 AR9 OD7 with circle streams and triples, but is relatively short.
IMO it's giving a bit more than what is deserved, given that the circular streams only require a couple tries to get correct if you are already capable of doing 180BPM streams.

EDIT: I just want to add that I got 157pp with one missing combo (slider 100) and 96.34% acc. I would have thought that the extensively longer jump maps that have the same CS, OD, AR which I landed 99%+ acc on would be scored higher.
GoldenWolf

I always felt like this map gave a little bit too much pp, I guess it's because of the long-ish spaced streams?
Oskur
That's probably the reason, but I feel that it's still too short and too easy to get used to for the amount that it gives.
silmarilen
map length should not be an indicator for how much pp a map gives, perfect example being this map https://osu.ppy.sh/s/20328
i personally think the map is you linked pretty hard to fc and worth the pp it gives.
Soarezi

GoldenWolf wrote:


I always felt like this map gave a little bit too much pp, I guess it's because of the long-ish spaced streams?
THIS gives a bit too much PP :D
Oskur

silmarilen wrote:

map length should not be an indicator for how much pp a map gives, perfect example being this map https://osu.ppy.sh/s/20328
i personally think the map is you linked pretty hard to fc and worth the pp it gives.
I guess you're right, that was probably a poor thing to add on my part.
Rewben2

GoldenWolf wrote:


I always felt like this map gave a little bit too much pp, I guess it's because of the long-ish spaced streams?
Yeah, I've noticed spaced stream maps are worth a ton of pp. Two more maps I've noticed along with that one are:
https://osu.ppy.sh/s/46218
https://osu.ppy.sh/s/28751

Look at the star ratings, they are definitely worth more than they should.
GoldenWolf
Gimme nightcore seems a little bit overrated yeah, but there are no spaced stream in rog-unlimitation though, the star rating there is fine because it has two 64 circles streams at 220bpm...
Aqo
am I the only one who finds both of those maps incredibly hard compared to other maps worth more points simply because of jumps which are super easy?
GoldenWolf

Aqo wrote:

am I the only one who finds both of those maps incredibly hard compared to other maps worth more points simply because of jumps which are super easy?
Probably because you're 2gud at jumps
Ziggo
I have seen rog-unlimitation in a lot of Top Performances, so it probably is overrated. Except for the 220bpm mashing there's no skill involved in fc'ing it anyway.
Rewben2

GoldenWolf wrote:

Gimme nightcore seems a little bit overrated yeah, but there are no spaced stream in rog-unlimitation though, the star rating there is fine because it has two 64 circles streams at 220bpm...
I know it's hard, but it has a star rating on par with like kokou no sousei and other maps that I think are more difficult without a doubt.
GoldenWolf

Rewben2 wrote:

I know it's hard, but it has a star rating on par with like kokou no sousei and other maps that I think are more difficult without a doubt.
They're not the same, kokou no sousei has fullscreen squares at 240bpm, rog-unlimitation deathstreams at 220.. not the same kind of difficulty at all
Rewben2

GoldenWolf wrote:

Rewben2 wrote:

I know it's hard, but it has a star rating on par with like kokou no sousei and other maps that I think are more difficult without a doubt.
They're not the same, kokou no sousei has fullscreen squares at 240bpm, rog-unlimitation deathstreams at 220.. not the same kind of difficulty at all
I see what you mean, they are difficult in their own ways, do you really think unlimitation is nearly as hard as sousei? Sousei has no fc's (apart from you know who) and unlimitation has multiple HDHR scores, lol. I think there are very little players that would actually find unlimitation harder despite having a higher star rating.
GoldenWolf
who?

I guess it's because it's easy to mash rog-unlimitation, and since people care more about speed than 240BPM AR9 fullscreen squares, teehee
mcdoomfrag
On the topic of map length: https://osu.ppy.sh/b/339058 <- This map with DT is 22 seconds long, and gives 134 pp at 100% accuracy, which is way too farmable. Sure it has some decent-ish jumps, but you get used to them in a few retries. Is the pp gained from a map affected by the amount of hit objects logarithmically?
silmarilen
134pp is nothing, the map is star rating 2.23, i know maps with similar star rating that give close to 200pp *cough* https://osu.ppy.sh/b/112645 *cough*
mcdoomfrag

silmarilen wrote:

134pp is nothing, the map is star rating 2.23, i know maps with similar star rating that give close to 200pp *cough* https://osu.ppy.sh/b/112645 *cough*
Damn ponies and their pp. It seems as though shorter maps have way too much emphasis on accuracy, considering how easy it is to retry them until you get a better percentage.
GoldenWolf

mcdoomfrag wrote:

Damn ponies and their pp. It seems as though shorter maps have way too much emphasis on accuracy, considering how easy it is to retry them until you get a better percentage.
I suggest you to read the pp wiki about accuracy
mcdoomfrag

GoldenWolf wrote:

mcdoomfrag wrote:

Damn ponies and their pp. It seems as though shorter maps have way too much emphasis on accuracy, considering how easy it is to retry them until you get a better percentage.
I suggest you to read the pp wiki about accuracy
Mind elaborating? I feel as though I'm missing something.
GoldenWolf
accuracy points is calculated on the number of circles of a map and how high the OD is, it has nothing to do with the actual length of the map
Zare
http://osu.ppy.sh/b/227061

This map and similar ones are extremely underrated by the current system because what's the main challenge of the map is reading. I mean, the top 50 isn't even all FC (granted that's because of the 1/6 at the end but still).
Is there any chance of this getting improved at some point?
silmarilen

GoldenWolf wrote:

accuracy points is calculated on the number of circles of a map and how high the OD is, it has nothing to do with the actual length of the map
almost half of the pp from the map i linked comes from accuracy, purely because it's od8+dt, there are other sub 300combo maps that give similar acc score, boosting them up by tons when they arent actually hard maps
Rewben2

Zare wrote:

http://osu.ppy.sh/b/227061

This map and similar ones are extremely underrated by the current system because what's the main challenge of the map is reading. I mean, the top 50 isn't even all FC (granted that's because of the 1/6 at the end but still).
Is there any chance of this getting improved at some point?
Other examples of this are https://osu.ppy.sh/b/27737&m=0 and https://osu.ppy.sh/s/155691m, a lot of the difficulty is reading which the current system doesn't recognize at the moment. Tom said that he's still working on creating a satisfying algorithm for maps like these.
pielak213
­
Oskur
peppy's defense for making FL not give as much pp (at start of ppv2, granted, dunno how it's going to work now Tom behind the reigns) is because FL has to do more with memorization, which he thinks defeats the purpose of a rhythm game.
GoldenWolf

TMoI wrote:

peppy's defense for making FL not give as much pp (during ppv2, granted, dunno how it's going to work now Tom behind the reigns) is because FL has to do more with memorization, which he thinks defeats the purpose of a rhythm game.
But current pp version IS v2
Oskur

GoldenWolf wrote:

TMoI wrote:

peppy's defense for making FL not give as much pp (during ppv2, granted, dunno how it's going to work now Tom behind the reigns) is because FL has to do more with memorization, which he thinks defeats the purpose of a rhythm game.
But current pp version IS v2
oops
I kinda meant prior to Tom's getting on board, that's just misinfo on my part ;-; will word properly
Zare
http://osu.ppy.sh/b/256819
this is fucking brutal to get good Acc on.
Frostmourne's 99% score on the map only gives him 117 pp. Acc difficulty isn't only determined by OD and amount of circles. When a song is this slow and still has so many friggin circles as opposed to sliders, it should get a huge bonus on acc pp imo.
Aqo
Silynn's score on that song is the best
tfg50

Tom94 wrote:

I forgot to mention this on the wiki-page:

Every score gives a small base pp amount of 0.25, decreasing by a bit with every new highscore that you make. With 1000 highscores you get around 200pp and with 5000 around 400pp. The cap is 416.666pp at the moment, assuming infinitely many highscores are possible.
(pp gain = 0.25 * sum 0.9994^i, i=0 to amount of highscores)

This gets less and less relevant the higher your pp goes and is meant to both encourage playing more maps for the lower-level players and prevent big rank losses after making a new score at the lower ranks.
In the mid-high ranks it is pretty much irrelevant, since 99% of the people have enough highscores to be less than 50pp away from the cap.
I know this may be kinda selfish to ask, but can someone put this on the wiki? I'm not 100% sure of where to put it. I was thinking about this and the only way to find it was to go back quite a bit of pages. This piece of info can be interesting to some players.

And also, that small base pp can amount to way too many ranks. In my case, I need to click 18 times to show all my scores on my page and you have 50 scores showing when you first open it + 50 more from each click. That means I have 900-950 scores. If i just played easy/normal maps until I got closer to the cap I would jump from rank 2757 to 2050 or lower as of right now (something between 235 and 242 pp). I feel like this kind of jump is too huge, maybe you could put a hard cap on a lower amount of scores.
Luna

tfg50 wrote:

And also, that small base pp can amount to way too many ranks. In my case, I need to click 18 times to show all my scores on my page and you have 50 scores showing when you first open it + 50 more from each click. That means I have 900-950 scores. If i just played easy/normal maps until I got closer to the cap I would jump from rank 2757 to 2050 or lower as of right now (something between 235 and 242 pp). I feel like this kind of jump is too huge, maybe you could put a hard cap on a lower amount of scores.
I'll just quickly do the math for you to show you just how inefficient that kind of "farming" would be:

Bonus pp at 950 scores (you): 0.25*(1-0.9994^950)/(1-0.9994) = 181 (rounded of course)
Bonus pp at 2000 scores (please imagine how long farming 1050 easy/normal scores would take): 0.25*(1-0.9994^2000)/(1-0.9994) = 291 (again, rounded)

So for ~1050 additional plays you would only get 110pp. Doesn't sound worth it to me. In fact, in the time it takes for you to farm that many scores, others will get actual good scores and surpass you again.
iderekmc
why do these 0108 songs give so little PP like only 160 more or less if only a few people can fc with 1 mod..? i think they should give like 250 or something lol
the accuracy is over 98% in case
silmarilen
p/2913128/

there is a topic for pp related questions, use it. (there is also a search button)
Ichi
I believe It´s because:

1) They Were FC´d with 93% accuracy which lowers the amount of pp gain by alot, meaning that if it would have been a 99% acc score then the pp would probably be around 220 something.
2) probably most accurate guess... that wasn´t a full combo just an S with a decent accuracy. Probably got slider break at half song with 95% acc is my best guess.

I believe any questions on pp will be cleared further when the wiki is updated, until then we can just speculate(?
TheVileOne
Merged topic in case there is any confusion
jesse1412

iderekmc wrote:

why do these 0108 songs give so little PP like only 160 more or less if only a few people can fc with 1 mod..? i think they should give like 250 or something lol
the accuracy is over 98% in case
Because the only hard part about them is the length.
TheVileOne
I am curious if there is any plans to give a spin bonus at all. There are several maps where spinning fast is more important than accuracy and these performances should be awarded something. The faster you spin the harder it is to find you cursor when you come out of the spin. There is also the cases where there are notes very closely after the spinner which would make getting bonuses more risky.

Would anyone disagree that spinning fast is a skill and should be rewarded as such?
Mathsma

TheVileOne wrote:

I am curious if there is any plans to give a spin bonus at all. There are several maps where spinning fast is more important than accuracy and these performances should be awarded something. The faster you spin the harder it is to find you cursor when you come out of the spin. There is also the cases where there are notes very closely after the spinner which would make getting bonuses more risky.

Would anyone disagree that spinning fast is a skill and should be rewarded as such?
I don't know any maps where you actually have to spin very fast to complete them with the exception of a Demetori song and that AugoEidEs song (dumb super long spinners). Also, losing your cursor during a spinner really only affects mouse users because of cursor drift, tablet users can use their muscle memory to hit the note with no issue. I may be wrong on this part, but isn't it against the mapping rules to put a note too soon after the spinner?

I do think spinning fast is a skill, I know I don't have that skill because I can't spin faster than 400 even at my best, but I don't agree that it should be rewarded. Going past completion is a bonus in score, that should be enough. Going past completion should not award more pp just like being more accurate than OD10 requires will not award more pp.
TheVileOne
It would be a minor bonus. I don't think it would hardly affect the map's overall rating in comparison with other maps. Consider scores where the only difference between them is the spinner bonus points. I think people that can spin faster should be given more points. They got a higher score with same accuracy/ mods. Their play should be considered more highly performed. It would also counteract small changes in accuracy due to the player getting a better score from a spinner bonus. For the sake of accuracy it must be counted.
silmarilen
all that matters for spinners is being able to get a 300, you already get punished with a 100 (and thus lower pp) if you cant spin fast enough.
being able to get more spinner bonus is like being able to get 60 unstable rate on an od6 map. it's cool and all but pointless and it shouldnt give you more pp.
Mathsma

TheVileOne wrote:

It would be a minor bonus. I don't think it would hardly affect the map's overall rating in comparison with other maps. Consider scores where the only difference between them is the spinner bonus points. I think people that can spin faster should be given more points. They got a higher score with same accuracy/ mods. Their play should be considered more highly performed. It would also counteract small changes in accuracy due to the player getting a better score from a spinner bonus. For the sake of accuracy it must be counted.
What about unstable rates? I've seen people get SS's on maps with 120 unstable rates, and others SS with 70. Should the player with the 70 unstable rate be awarded more pp? They both did what was required of the map and achieved the SS, but one player did better and was not rewarded for it.
TheVileOne
In a perfect world I would agree that would be considered as well. But in reality pp must be consider for the OD of a map. Also unstable rate doesn't affect score. Obviously peppy felt spinners deserved to have bonuses. Taiko doesn't allow you to get a bonus off the spinners. CTB should certainly deserve a small bonus as well.

There are many maps with tied mod combinations that only differ due to spinner bonus. We should be differentiating each tied play, because some people can get bonuses many thousands more than other players, especially on longer spinners where endurance is concerned. Why should a deserved number 1 play on a map not be considered the best performance compared to the several dozen other people who got less points?
Mathsma

TheVileOne wrote:

In a perfect world I would agree that would be considered as well. But in reality pp must be consider for the OD of a map. Also unstable rate doesn't affect score. Obviously peppy felt spinners deserved to have bonuses. Taiko doesn't allow you to get a bonus off the spinners. CTB should certainly deserve a small bonus as well.

There are many maps with tied mod combinations that only differ due to spinner bonus. We should be differentiating each tied play, because some people can get bonuses many thousands more than other players, especially on longer spinners where endurance is concerned. Why should a deserved number 1 play on a map not be considered the best performance compared to the several dozen other people who got less points?
Just because peppy felt that spinners should have score bonus doesn't mean they should be given pp also. Unless unstable rates are accounted for I cannot agree that spinners should be given a bonus. In my opinion, a lower unstable rate play is much better than a higher scoring song because of a spinner bonus.
TheVileOne
It should be given pp because of several reasons.

1. It's a skill, and an integrated part of playing. There is no argument that can be made that will make me believe otherwise that someone spinning at 470 SPM is performing equally well to someone spinning at 300 SPM.

2. It affects score. A player with a higher score due to something that requires skill should be awarded something even if that something is very marginal. I don't see this value being very high, at least for sane spinning SPMs. If someone averages near what osu! can get for a max spin, then a point given per spinner is reasonable. Given that 1 mod added gives more than that, it would work out. (Obviously the value would change based on length of spinner).

3. At the rate most players spin the bonus would probably be less than 1 pp per spinner and close to nothing near the SPM considered easy to obtain given the OD.

4. Makes beating a score with a better spin rewarding.

5. Gives more points to Incognito, one of the best spinners in osu! Check this map. Adding HardRock isn't enough to take the number one spot. There are people in top 50 who get more points than four mod plays. Spinning ability is certainly more impressive in this map than playing it with all mods.

6. Removes point ceiling on maps. An SS can be worth more points with a better spin.
iderekmc

jesus1412 wrote:

iderekmc wrote:

why do these 0108 songs give so little PP like only 160 more or less if only a few people can fc with 1 mod..? i think they should give like 250 or something lol
the accuracy is over 98% in case
Because the only hard part about them is the length.
mmmmm thats what i was thinking
pielak213
­
TheVileOne
Separate points gained from hitobjects and average the remaining points based on total points possible off the spinners. It wouldn't be as accurate as per spinner data, but those who spin large spin large on all the spinners and would still get some form of a bonus. It would be unfortunate if you could not separate score associated with spinner bonus from score associated with regular hitobjects.
Luna
That is impossible. The system can only read how many 300/100/50/miss you got, but not at which part of the map those actually happened - so there is no way to calculate hit object score. A 1x100 score that had its 100 right at the beginning will beat a 1x100 score where you messed up at the end even if the latter score had way superior spinning.
TheVileOne
peppy is all about future proofing his game. This sure was an oversight.

Anyways even if it only affects newer plays it would be good. ._.
Honza
I have one question. How can I get bigger rank after I've improved my old record? I mean yes if the map is easy I shouldn't get anything but how can I get worse by improving my plays?
tfg50

Honza wrote:

I have one question. How can I get bigger rank after I've improved my old record? I mean yes if the map is easy I shouldn't get anything but how can I get worse by improving my plays?
That means that people passed your rank and when you beat one of your personal bests your rank updates. If you spend 30 seconds looking on the other threads about ranking you can find that answer. You don't even need to use the seach thingy.

Also, keep in mind that sometimes when you get a higher combo (which is the same as more score) but end up messing on the acc, that play might be worth less pp depending on the acc/map. Higher OD = Acc means more.
jesse1412

TheVileOne wrote:

It should be given pp because of several reasons.

1. It's a skill, and an integrated part of playing. There is no argument that can be made that will make me believe otherwise that someone spinning at 470 SPM is performing equally well to someone spinning at 300 SPM.

2. It affects score. A player with a higher score due to something that requires skill should be awarded something even if that something is very marginal. I don't see this value being very high, at least for sane spinning SPMs. If someone averages near what osu! can get for a max spin, then a point given per spinner is reasonable. Given that 1 mod added gives more than that, it would work out. (Obviously the value would change based on length of spinner).

3. At the rate most players spin the bonus would probably be less than 1 pp per spinner and close to nothing near the SPM considered easy to obtain given the OD.

4. Makes beating a score with a better spin rewarding.

5. Gives more points to Incognito, one of the best spinners in osu! Check this map. Adding HardRock isn't enough to take the number one spot. There are people in top 50 who get more points than four mod plays. Spinning ability is certainly more impressive in this map than playing it with all mods.

6. Removes point ceiling on maps. An SS can be worth more points with a better spin.
No one cares about spinning. It's really a shitty skill and it shouldn't be rewarded much, any random crap player can outspin a lot of top players if they try.
AmaiHachimitsu
I think being higher in scoreboard + ability to pass some high drain maps is enough of an award.
show more
Please sign in to reply.

New reply