afaik, ppv2 rates how hard it is to FC a map, not to pass it, so I don't think HP drain is consideredTheVileOne wrote:
Is drain even considered at all?
forum
Performance Points feedback and suggestions (Standard)
posted
Total Posts
2,750
Plz, #8 disagrees.TheVileOne wrote:
If you need a certain level of spinning to pass a map that map isn't worth playing. Noone should play maps with high drain because they are good at spinning. That will be a reward not taken by pretty much any player.
http://osu.ppy.sh/s/24611
^Nice find. Although unless he plans to be much more accurate, then that performance isn't worth nearly as much as the Hidden players. It's not worth the effort, especially since they have the same score modifier. He could play with hidden and perform better with less effort. Spinners are worth less in Hard Rock as well making it even less of an incentive to use Hard Rock versus hidden as a spinner).
I think the reason why pro players aren't great spinners is because they conserve their stamina for the streams and other sections of the maps. If there was a pro that was a great spinner and a great streamer and could apply both to a map, then that would be a much more impressive performance than one who did the same thing but barely exerted any effort to complete the spin.
If we had more pro players capable of challenging rrty or cookiezi scores, then I think spinning would become much more important to the pro community, because it actually matters. Why should pros care about spinning if the score they get is determined by the number of 100s in the song rather than how fast they spin? I think a lot of pros treat spinners like break time and a map will instantly become more demanding if they were required to actually exert effort during these periods.
The real question here is how much more energy does a vigorous spin take compare to a non-vigorous spin. How much further can a pro stream by not vigorously spinning? Some pros I question whether they even know of to spin to begin with. I've seen them spin so slow that they get a 100 on the spinner. Is it some sort of contest to see how slow one can spin among the pro community?
I think the reason why pro players aren't great spinners is because they conserve their stamina for the streams and other sections of the maps. If there was a pro that was a great spinner and a great streamer and could apply both to a map, then that would be a much more impressive performance than one who did the same thing but barely exerted any effort to complete the spin.
If we had more pro players capable of challenging rrty or cookiezi scores, then I think spinning would become much more important to the pro community, because it actually matters. Why should pros care about spinning if the score they get is determined by the number of 100s in the song rather than how fast they spin? I think a lot of pros treat spinners like break time and a map will instantly become more demanding if they were required to actually exert effort during these periods.
The real question here is how much more energy does a vigorous spin take compare to a non-vigorous spin. How much further can a pro stream by not vigorously spinning? Some pros I question whether they even know of to spin to begin with. I've seen them spin so slow that they get a 100 on the spinner. Is it some sort of contest to see how slow one can spin among the pro community?
Spinners shouldn't give pp because they don't require rhythm or aim at all, they're pretty much a break time in the map and no cares about them
The purpose of spinners is mainly to untie SS scores, which isn't relevant when players just add more mods to get more impressive scores with high speed, aim and reading demanding skills rather than grabbing a few thousands points from an element that has barely a place in a rhythm game
The purpose of spinners is mainly to untie SS scores, which isn't relevant when players just add more mods to get more impressive scores with high speed, aim and reading demanding skills rather than grabbing a few thousands points from an element that has barely a place in a rhythm game
Stop saying no one. That's like saying no one cares about number 1 once someone SS ranks it with all mods. Most people who care about spinning don't care about streaming. I guess the same is also true, because of your attitude.
Anyways I am hardly arguing for it's inclusion anymore. I've already stated why it is a skill. Skill doesn't necessarily require rhythm. It would hardly affect the ranks, especially for songs that pros play. I don't understand this bias towards how people get pp in songs that pros don't even play. I want my pp system to be affected based on anything that affects gameplay.
If it affects gameplay, then it affects the difficulty. If it does not affect gameplay then it cannot affect the difficulty. All things that affect the difficulty should be considered in a pp related system.
Anyways I am hardly arguing for it's inclusion anymore. I've already stated why it is a skill. Skill doesn't necessarily require rhythm. It would hardly affect the ranks, especially for songs that pros play. I don't understand this bias towards how people get pp in songs that pros don't even play. I want my pp system to be affected based on anything that affects gameplay.
If it affects gameplay, then it affects the difficulty. If it does not affect gameplay then it cannot affect the difficulty. All things that affect the difficulty should be considered in a pp related system.
But spinning is a skill that isn't relevant in a rhythm game
I don't see why it should be considered in the pp calculation, I want pp to rate how good I am at this circle clicking rhythm game, not how good I am at drawing circles as fast as possible without caring about the rhythm aspect
I don't see why it should be considered in the pp calculation, I want pp to rate how good I am at this circle clicking rhythm game, not how good I am at drawing circles as fast as possible without caring about the rhythm aspect
It obviously wouldn't affect you. I mean who is purposefully trying to grind out every last pp a song is worth? I have tried to state that the amount it would award would be small (probably less than 1 pp) unless you are spinning near the bonus that auto is getting for a spin. Add weight to this and the amount added would be barely anything at a pro level rank. When you get down to the casual level rank, fractions of a pp are worth more.
I mean the pp system is already adding pp for each new map completion regardless of performance. Do you think that this aspect of pp is not boosting your rank by an unknown amount based on your playcount? How do you know where you actually stand in terms of people with different play counts. pp is already inaccurate and this would make it slightly more accurate, favoring people who have number 1s and not necessarily in maps that pros care about.
It's going to require per object hit data anyways. If Tom ever implements per object pp calculations then I expect this to be added as well. This may not be for awhile. This would require everyone to have to replay their scores to get the correct amount of pp. This would severely affect some pros.
I mean the pp system is already adding pp for each new map completion regardless of performance. Do you think that this aspect of pp is not boosting your rank by an unknown amount based on your playcount? How do you know where you actually stand in terms of people with different play counts. pp is already inaccurate and this would make it slightly more accurate, favoring people who have number 1s and not necessarily in maps that pros care about.
It's going to require per object hit data anyways. If Tom ever implements per object pp calculations then I expect this to be added as well. This may not be for awhile. This would require everyone to have to replay their scores to get the correct amount of pp. This would severely affect some pros.
It's not boosting anyone's rank since we all have this (very) small bonus
And I don't think/see how this would make the system any more accurate, having a 1st isn't the most accurate representative way of someone's skill when ranked score is already flawed (hello HD FL over HD HR / HD DT)
And I don't think/see how this would make the system any more accurate, having a 1st isn't the most accurate representative way of someone's skill when ranked score is already flawed (hello HD FL over HD HR / HD DT)
Shouldn't HD FL be valued the same as HD DT?
I agree that Hard rock is very underrated in some maps score-wise. I believe that tied scores that are worth more pp should be submitted. It's debatable whether other cases where there is a conflict between how much a play is worth and how much points it has should be considered. I don't think this falls into the same boat as spinning harder requires more effort which reduces ones ability to play the map in general.
Eh... the difference would just be a representation of the extra effort taken to achieve a better score. Spinners were not intended to be treated as break time.
It would be more accurate in that it would consider something that affects gameplay and difficulty. It is not accurate to treat the level of effort required to clear a spinner as static. A person who spins very hard will be more likely to combo break than someone who doesn't. It takes more stamina to take a number 1 rank than it does to just SS in a map where there is an SS all mods. The difference needs to be considered, because just the fact that mods were played is not enough to correctly calculate performance.
I agree that Hard rock is very underrated in some maps score-wise. I believe that tied scores that are worth more pp should be submitted. It's debatable whether other cases where there is a conflict between how much a play is worth and how much points it has should be considered. I don't think this falls into the same boat as spinning harder requires more effort which reduces ones ability to play the map in general.
Eh... the difference would just be a representation of the extra effort taken to achieve a better score. Spinners were not intended to be treated as break time.
It would be more accurate in that it would consider something that affects gameplay and difficulty. It is not accurate to treat the level of effort required to clear a spinner as static. A person who spins very hard will be more likely to combo break than someone who doesn't. It takes more stamina to take a number 1 rank than it does to just SS in a map where there is an SS all mods. The difference needs to be considered, because just the fact that mods were played is not enough to correctly calculate performance.
TheVileOne wrote:
Shouldn't HD FL be valued the same as HD DT?
http://osu.ppy.sh/s/43003
It's easier to FL that map than it is to DT it, that is what he meant.
No I'm pretty sure he means that hd and hd combined give less combo multiplier than fl hd, which I think is true (someone correct me?)Mathsma wrote:
TheVileOne wrote:
Shouldn't HD FL be valued the same as HD DT?
http://osu.ppy.sh/s/43003
It's easier to FL that map than it is to DT it, that is what he meant.
hd and hd? If you meant HD DT then no, the multiplier is the same.jesus1412 wrote:
No I'm pretty sure he means that hd and hd combined give less combo multiplier than fl hd, which I think is true (someone correct me?)
A person who spins very hard will be more likely to combo break than someone who doesn't. It takes more stamina to take a number 1 rank than it does to just SS in a map where there is an SS all mods. The difference needs to be considered, because just the fact that mods were played is not enough to correctly calculate performance.This is pure rubbish right there. Why should it be considered? Because you tried hard spinners and got a bit more sweaty? People still do it even when #1 doesn't matter in PP. As I said, they are #1 (or just the best with given mods) and it's enough of a reward. I'd even say it's exactly what people do want when they engage in a spinner war. It's for sure not a way of saying "I'm better".
Seriously, spinners are not important and everyone, who has some knowledge about the competitive-like side of this game, knows it. Yes, everyone.
Hi. I'm a person who spins 450+. I doubt it takes much more energy than a lazy spin.TheVileOne wrote:
I think the reason why pro players aren't great spinners is because they conserve their stamina for the streams and other sections of the maps. If there was a pro that was a great spinner and a great streamer and could apply both to a map, then that would be a much more impressive performance than one who did the same thing but barely exerted any effort to complete the spin.
If we had more pro players capable of challenging rrty or cookiezi scores, then I think spinning would become much more important to the pro community, because it actually matters. Why should pros care about spinning if the score they get is determined by the number of 100s in the song rather than how fast they spin? I think a lot of pros treat spinners like break time and a map will instantly become more demanding if they were required to actually exert effort during these periods.
The real question here is how much more energy does a vigorous spin take compare to a non-vigorous spin. How much further can a pro stream by not vigorously spinning? Some pros I question whether they even know of to spin to begin with. I've seen them spin so slow that they get a 100 on the spinner. Is it some sort of contest to see how slow one can spin among the pro community?
Even if it does, your aiming hand is not your streaming hand. How much energy you use spinning has zero effect on your streaming stamina.
Spinners are not important. The only situation you should ever care about spinners in is if you want #1s on [easy] difficulties or want to pass this map on HR
Meh. It's true that it wont affect streaming speed, but it does affect aim, especially in high retry maps. Unless you are consistent enough to FC something within a small amount of tries or split your attempts over a longer period of time, there is only so many times you can spin a long spinner in one sitting before you become unable to perform complex movements. This assumes the spinner is not at the end of the map.
There's only so many times I can play https://osu.ppy.sh/s/25 before I need to rest and I'm not even spinning nearly as fast as some spinners. Spinning harder does affect my aim afterwards, because I am a mouse user and my hand gets tense after a fast spin. I could spin more slowly and my hand would not tense up. Stamina certainly becomes an issue on really long spinners.
Also notes close after the spinner make it more risky to spin faster. It's much easier to spin like an average spinner than to go into a tight circle around the center like tablet players do or flying around the corners like mouse players do.
I've told you how I feel pp should be calculated. If Tom agrees that it isn't worth the trouble, then I will not cry fowl. I have a different idea about what it should value and nothing can be said that will change my opinions. I am not going to rally people in support for my ideas. Feel free to critique it as you will. I know what adds difficulty for me and no one is going to tell me that it doesn't add difficulty or affects difficulty positively or negatively. That is simply a wrong statement.
There's only so many times I can play https://osu.ppy.sh/s/25 before I need to rest and I'm not even spinning nearly as fast as some spinners. Spinning harder does affect my aim afterwards, because I am a mouse user and my hand gets tense after a fast spin. I could spin more slowly and my hand would not tense up. Stamina certainly becomes an issue on really long spinners.
Also notes close after the spinner make it more risky to spin faster. It's much easier to spin like an average spinner than to go into a tight circle around the center like tablet players do or flying around the corners like mouse players do.
I've told you how I feel pp should be calculated. If Tom agrees that it isn't worth the trouble, then I will not cry fowl. I have a different idea about what it should value and nothing can be said that will change my opinions. I am not going to rally people in support for my ideas. Feel free to critique it as you will. I know what adds difficulty for me and no one is going to tell me that it doesn't add difficulty or affects difficulty positively or negatively. That is simply a wrong statement.
Topic Starter
It is impossible to find out how good someone has spun without per-hitobject data. If it ever happens there will be a small bonus for spinning well, but it is certain that it will never happen to old scores retroactively. It's simply impossible to recover that data for scores without replays and even the ones with replays would have subtle bugs.
To summarize: A spinner bonus can't possibly happen right now in a fair way, therefore it won't. Sorry.
To summarize: A spinner bonus can't possibly happen right now in a fair way, therefore it won't. Sorry.
i think some maps are harder but the star diff for that is lower, why
Some maps, such as the 0108 maps, rely on reading and difficult patterns. The current system can't rate how difficult patterns are or how hard a map is to read due to some limitations, so the end result is that those maps are undervalued. There are also some other issues with the system, but that is probably the one that is causing the lower star rating for most maps. Tom would like to add that into the rating system but he can't at the moment, whenever he can he will.- D a s z x - wrote:
i think some maps are harder but the star diff for that is lower, why
If it's much easier to do it that way... why not just do it then? You're clearly either making things harder for yourself, or just don't spin enough. Seriously, even if it's something completely useless, you will improve if you practice. People just don't work on spinners as much, so most stay within the 350-450 range because that's enough to pass OD10 spinners. If you're missing the note afterwards, just remember where the note is and start moving there a bit earlier. It's really not as hard as you make it sound.TheVileOne wrote:
There's only so many times I can play https://osu.ppy.sh/s/25 before I need to rest and I'm not even spinning nearly as fast as some spinners. Spinning harder does affect my aim afterwards, because I am a mouse user and my hand gets tense after a fast spin. I could spin more slowly and my hand would not tense up. Stamina certainly becomes an issue on really long spinners.
Also notes close after the spinner make it more risky to spin faster. It's much easier to spin like an average spinner than to go into a tight circle around the center like tablet players do or flying around the corners like mouse players do.
Don't reply with something like "if you're gonna go for 1000 more points". Those 1000 points aren't relevant in high-end maps, and if you have trouble spinning on low-end maps that's just your problem because clearly all the other [Easy] [Normal] players can do it with ease.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
There's what Mathsma said, and there are also maps that are a bit overrated (Koigokoro), but nothing can be perfect. The system is usually pretty darn accurate.- D a s z x - wrote:
i think some maps are harder but the star diff for that is lower, why
It could also be that you find one of streams/jumps easier than the other, so a map filled with the one you find harder would seem more difficult.
koigokoro is overrated as much as any other map is overrated with DT
hd hr on that map kpielak wrote:
you guys obviously haven't seen this map https://osu.ppy.sh/s/42234
So what about this map? It's just a troll for those who somehow can't spin. But bear in mind that 90% of players can spin incredibly fast (enough to past augoeides or desire dream) and nobody apart from newbs finds it really impressive.
In overall, those kinds of maps are more like DRAIN hard, not SPINNER hard. We're talking about situation where player x has better score than player y because of the spinner. And according to Vile player x should gain more PP for that. I don't need to comment on this idea, I guess.
In overall, those kinds of maps are more like DRAIN hard, not SPINNER hard. We're talking about situation where player x has better score than player y because of the spinner. And according to Vile player x should gain more PP for that. I don't need to comment on this idea, I guess.
Drain is a dumb reason to fail a map under any circumstance. I was only saying that anything that affects difficulty negatively or positively should affect pp. If you say it makes it easier then maps should be worth less pp. I just don't feel like they should be considered like they are break time there when they clearly are more than that.
Also when I made the suggestion I thought that you could figure out the bonus that one could get from the map. The cons slightly outweigh the pros now that it absolutely must require new information to submitted instead of existing plays.
Also when I made the suggestion I thought that you could figure out the bonus that one could get from the map. The cons slightly outweigh the pros now that it absolutely must require new information to submitted instead of existing plays.
I don't like how I can lose pp by using a mod and getting higher score but lower accuracy. I wouldn't mind just not getting pp but I don't wanna use mods if I'll lose pp unless I work back up to the same accuracy as before.
This has already been discussed multiple times. There is currently no way around this issue.Jean-Christophe wrote:
I don't like how I can lose pp by using a mod and getting higher score but lower accuracy. I wouldn't mind just not getting pp but I don't wanna use mods if I'll lose pp unless I work back up to the same accuracy as before.
Make mod usage worth more. Easy fix.mcdoomfrag wrote:
This has already been discussed multiple times. There is currently no way around this issue.Jean-Christophe wrote:
I don't like how I can lose pp by using a mod and getting higher score but lower accuracy. I wouldn't mind just not getting pp but I don't wanna use mods if I'll lose pp unless I work back up to the same accuracy as before.
I would say that there's a limit to how much accuracy one should lose though. If you're getting double digit 100s then obviously this will affect your pp count greatly. There is no preventing a terrible performance with an added mod overwriting a good performance.
You know damn well that finding a good balance between not making mods useless without giving them too much reward is a rather complex and subjective solution. Even so, what I meant in that post was aimed more-so towards the notion of being able to disregard your score so that you don't lose PP, or something along those lines. The servers can only store your top score because of the way the system works and has always worked, so Tom94 can only work with that saved score.TheVileOne wrote:
Make mod usage worth more. Easy fix.
Topic Starter
Mod for at least HardRock and DoubleTime will likely never be adjusted manually. That is, because they are literally treated equally to nomod scores, just with the mods' effects applied.TheVileOne wrote:
Make mod usage worth more. Easy fix.
I would say that there's a limit to how much accuracy one should lose though. If you're getting double digit 100s then obviously this will affect your pp count greatly. There is no preventing a terrible performance with an added mod overwriting a good performance.
If anything is at fault, then the algorithm for scaling the wrong way.
Compare previous score's pp with new score's pp and use the higher value???mcdoomfrag wrote:
This has already been discussed multiple times. There is currently no way around this issue.Jean-Christophe wrote:
I don't like how I can lose pp by using a mod and getting higher score but lower accuracy. I wouldn't mind just not getting pp but I don't wanna use mods if I'll lose pp unless I work back up to the same accuracy as before.
If this is supposed to be an indication of skill then there's no reason to assume a player got worse for having his/her score overwritten with one of lower pp value...
If new pp value is smaller than current pp value for some map, don't change the pp. That's one line of code. Seems like common sense to me to make it work that way.
Only data you need is pp obtained and pp for the same map for the same player which looks like it's stored on server.
Maybe there can be a disconnect between pp given for a map and top score saved but that doesn't really matter.
I agree, i feel somewhat dissapointed at being unable to play HR, Hidden, DT or any combination of them, previously a 92% HR HD fc was worth way more than a 98% nomod FC - now it's not only worth less, but it will overwrite the score and take away PP in a way that prevents you from ever getting it back. Everyone that i know who plays the game at a decent level feels somewhat cheated by this - nobody likes to get 150pp and then overwrite it with a 130pp score and be unable to get their 150pp back - at the VERY least, if there is no possible workaround, let us delete the score and re-play to score again!
I think this is a pretty basic and important flaw in one of the key features of the game we all love, so i'm sad to see it unfixed for months
osu plz <3
I think this is a pretty basic and important flaw in one of the key features of the game we all love, so i'm sad to see it unfixed for months
osu plz <3
Topic Starter
No. Please don't just assume things without reading the discussion.Jean-Christophe wrote:
Compare previous score's pp with new score's pp and use the higher value???
If this is supposed to be an indication of skill then there's no reason to assume a player got worse for having his/her score overwritten with one of lower pp value...
If new pp value is smaller than current pp value for some map, don't change the pp. That's one line of code. Seems like common sense to me to make it work that way.
Only data you need is pp obtained and pp for the same map for the same player which looks like it's stored on server.
Maybe there can be a disconnect between pp given for a map and top score saved but that doesn't really matter.
The simple argument against your proposal is, that whenever the algorithm is changed all the scores' pp values need to be recomputed - which is impossible without actually storing all the most giving scores. Before you propose just storing the most-giving pp score per map, please read the discussion about it containing the arguments against it.
The most optimal solution would be storing mod-specific highscores. Until that happens there won't be a feasible fix.
Just gonna drop some feelings out here real quick: I think deathstreams are incredibly overrated. So many maps contain relatively easy long streams and provide insane amounts of pp from them. It'd be nice to see faster streams rewarded more and longer ones rewarded less (hopefully this will balance out for long fast streams). At the moment fast stream provide barely any amount of pp compated to longer streams(say a few 270bpm 12 note streams vs a 40 note 220bpm stream).
To add to this, I find large jumps to be rewarded too greatly while very fast short jumps are underrated. Half screen 300bpm jumps should be valued as much as full screen 230bpm jumps imo, especially when in rapid succession for relatively large periods of time.
It also seems that the difficulty increase/decrease from the size of hit circles is overrated. Large hit circles seem to help more than the current system thinks while smaller hit circles make the map a fair deal harder.
My final point is the scaling of pp with map length. The system currently seems to scale penalties for combo based on how far from a full combo you are and amount of misses in total, this is kinda frustrating because it means that full-combos on a 1200 combo map are worth as much as a slightly easier 500 combo map. There should be a large reward for comboing longer maps and less of a penalty for missing on them (it seems strange to me that a 900 combo on a map with 1200 max combo awards LESS pp than a map of equal difficulty and 500 max combo with an fc).
To add to this, I find large jumps to be rewarded too greatly while very fast short jumps are underrated. Half screen 300bpm jumps should be valued as much as full screen 230bpm jumps imo, especially when in rapid succession for relatively large periods of time.
It also seems that the difficulty increase/decrease from the size of hit circles is overrated. Large hit circles seem to help more than the current system thinks while smaller hit circles make the map a fair deal harder.
My final point is the scaling of pp with map length. The system currently seems to scale penalties for combo based on how far from a full combo you are and amount of misses in total, this is kinda frustrating because it means that full-combos on a 1200 combo map are worth as much as a slightly easier 500 combo map. There should be a large reward for comboing longer maps and less of a penalty for missing on them (it seems strange to me that a 900 combo on a map with 1200 max combo awards LESS pp than a map of equal difficulty and 500 max combo with an fc).
I don't know as much about the long streams vs. fast streams since I'm not much of a speed player, but I definitely think smaller hitcircles and longer maps need to be rewarded much more.
I understand how the pp system currently accounts for smaller hitcircles, and that increasing your area is just like playing larger hitcircles, etc. But I can say in practice, it definitely isn't working like that. With how large the screen is, you can only make your area so big, and playing smaller circles requires more steady hands and better aim than the system makes it out to need due to how players snap. The difficulty gap is much more evident in CS6/CS7 maps + HR where aim is super hard but the aim tp is not very high, but I still think CS5+HR needs to be rewarded much more too. As a HDHR player, I've grown to dismiss CS5 maps as pp maps whenever I see them because they're always so much harder than CS4 maps that give the same amount of pp. I'm not sure exactly how to go about it so that the algorithm for it "makes sense", but I definitely think the scaling for points should be higher than the scaling for the circles themselves.
And as for longer maps, I've found that they generally do give lower pp than they deserve because of how much longer it takes to full combo them if you have some given percentage chance to miss at any point in the map. I mean, if you have a 1/10 chance at FCing a 500 combo map, you would ideally have a 1/100 chance at FCing a 1000 combo map, which means it would take on average 10 times as long. Obviously, if the map is really easy to FC, then it will take on average less than twice as long, but those maps won't give much pp anyway. Nerves are also a much bigger factor on longer maps. I don't think the map length scaling needs to be massive, but I think it should be at least noticeable.
I understand how the pp system currently accounts for smaller hitcircles, and that increasing your area is just like playing larger hitcircles, etc. But I can say in practice, it definitely isn't working like that. With how large the screen is, you can only make your area so big, and playing smaller circles requires more steady hands and better aim than the system makes it out to need due to how players snap. The difficulty gap is much more evident in CS6/CS7 maps + HR where aim is super hard but the aim tp is not very high, but I still think CS5+HR needs to be rewarded much more too. As a HDHR player, I've grown to dismiss CS5 maps as pp maps whenever I see them because they're always so much harder than CS4 maps that give the same amount of pp. I'm not sure exactly how to go about it so that the algorithm for it "makes sense", but I definitely think the scaling for points should be higher than the scaling for the circles themselves.
And as for longer maps, I've found that they generally do give lower pp than they deserve because of how much longer it takes to full combo them if you have some given percentage chance to miss at any point in the map. I mean, if you have a 1/10 chance at FCing a 500 combo map, you would ideally have a 1/100 chance at FCing a 1000 combo map, which means it would take on average 10 times as long. Obviously, if the map is really easy to FC, then it will take on average less than twice as long, but those maps won't give much pp anyway. Nerves are also a much bigger factor on longer maps. I don't think the map length scaling needs to be massive, but I think it should be at least noticeable.
i dont think high cs is that underrated.
this map is worth 80+ aim tp with hd dt only because of the cs, the map itself is a piece of cake
this map is worth 80+ aim tp with hd dt only because of the cs, the map itself is a piece of cake
I agreejesus1412 wrote:
At the very least low cs is overrated.