Bauxe: you made me think this up t/225131
forum
Add pp as a scoring system in standard mode
posted
Total Posts
318
This is 100% subjective since that PP system and that idea of skills was implemented in addition on the basis game.jesus1412 wrote:
Why argue it's subjective when pp is clearly awarding based on skill rather objectively. Neither of us can deny these players are good, if the system was subjective then there would be people who would disagree.
I think you misunderstand what the game is (or was) and what we want it to become.
Even in term of skills (term subjective...), the PP system is not objective.
If it was, it would be perfect but that not the case. I think Tom94 and peppy are working on it yet.
But if it was objective why on earth we would change it ?
You said it yourself, if objective, we can't denny.
It's called balance. We look at the system subjectively and try to make it objective.
It would make every scoreboard on easy - hard maps irelavent seeing how all the top scores will be HDHRDTFLPF.
It objectively places the good players at the top. If you disagree with this then you must be delusional. Maybe the order isn't perfect but it certainly does sort the best from the good from the bad.MiniTokki wrote:
This is 100% subjective since that PP system and that idea of skills was implemented in addition on the basis game.jesus1412 wrote:
Why argue it's subjective when pp is clearly awarding based on skill rather objectively. Neither of us can deny these players are good, if the system was subjective then there would be people who would disagree.
I think you misunderstand what the game is (or was) and what we want it to become.
Even in term of skills (term subjective...), the PP system is not objective.
If it was, it would be perfect but that not the case. I think Tom94 and peppy are working on it yet.
But if it was objective why on earth we would change it ?
You said it yourself, if objective, we can't denny.
It's called balance. We look at the system subjectively and try to make it objective.
Just like the current system wow!Ace3DF wrote:
It would make every scoreboard on easy - hard maps irelavent seeing how all the top scores will be HDHRDTFLPF.
pp = score in this proposal, "Too much people don't understand that and are focused on [the old scoring system]."CelegaS wrote:
Osu is an arcade-like game so performance don't matter, only score is important. Too much people don't understand that and are focused on pp.
I really dont like this idea because pp is way too complicated to be a scoring system. This is like if someone in football made a suggestion that
"The team with most goals should not win, because they are not necersary the team that really played better in my opinion. The team that has the best performance counting in ball posession, passes, hairstyle AND goals (+other stuff) should win."
I love that there is the pp system in this game and it definetly is better for overall player ranking than the old ranked score was. But when you are playing the map, your progress should be shown as a simple score system. Why? Because literally every game and video game ever has it that way, no reason for osu! to be some kind of weird thing that is too complicatedm
Also lol at complaining that hdhr and fl give too much score compared to dt. Alot of top scores use the dt mod, way more are there dt than fl. And if you still think that is a problem, how about just increase the dt multiplier insted of change whole system?
"The team with most goals should not win, because they are not necersary the team that really played better in my opinion. The team that has the best performance counting in ball posession, passes, hairstyle AND goals (+other stuff) should win."
I love that there is the pp system in this game and it definetly is better for overall player ranking than the old ranked score was. But when you are playing the map, your progress should be shown as a simple score system. Why? Because literally every game and video game ever has it that way, no reason for osu! to be some kind of weird thing that is too complicatedm
Also lol at complaining that hdhr and fl give too much score compared to dt. Alot of top scores use the dt mod, way more are there dt than fl. And if you still think that is a problem, how about just increase the dt multiplier insted of change whole system?
Bauxe you monsterDexus wrote:
Bauxe: you made me think this up http://osu.ppy.sh/forum/t/225131
Completely flawed argument, the play of football players is centered around scoring goals, their whole strategy and training revolves around it, so obviously goals matter.Sea_Food wrote:
I really dont like this idea because pp is way too complicated to be a scoring system. This is like if someone in football made a suggestion that
"The team with most goals should not win, because they are not necersary the team that really played better in my opinion. The team that has the best performance counting in ball posession, passes, hairstyle AND goals (+other stuff) should win."
In osu it's not that straightwordard, there's no single simple and clearly defined goal other than generally playing well, maintaining a good combo AND accuracy at the same time, and score isn't straightforward either with 7 digit scores and the combo multiplier etc.
If anything the football analogy would be "goals near the end of the game are worth 10x more" lol.
its not like a pp scoring system avoids the issue. if you could see a live number showing how much pp the play is worth while the map is being played [impossible for more reasons then i want to get into but bare with me] the number would barely move until you get past the halfway point in the song,and it would just go up faster from there.Drezi wrote:
Completely flawed argument, the play of football players is centered around scoring goals, their whole strategy and training revolves around it, so obviously goals matter.Sea_Food wrote:
I really dont like this idea because pp is way too complicated to be a scoring system. This is like if someone in football made a suggestion that
"The team with most goals should not win, because they are not necersary the team that really played better in my opinion. The team that has the best performance counting in ball posession, passes, hairstyle AND goals (+other stuff) should win."
In osu it's not that straightwordard, there's no single simple and clearly defined goal other than generally playing well, maintaining a good combo AND accuracy at the same time, and score isn't straightforward either with 7 digit scores and the combo multiplier etc.
If anything the football analogy would be "goals near the end of the game are worth 10x more" lol.
Acutally this hasn't been confirmed/denied by Tom, and I'm not really convinced that you're an expert regarding the technical possibilities/limitations here, but if you are, please do elaborate. It's a rather important issue and it would be silly to drop the subject just because someone claimed it to be impossible.Bassist Vinyl wrote:
if you could see a live number showing how much pp the play is worth while the map is being played [impossible for more reasons then i want to get into but bare with me]
Ok i admit that the current scoring system is more complicated than in football, but for a video game its okay. Its not nearly as complicated as you make it sound. I actually think that score per note should be:Drezi wrote:
Completely flawed argument, the play of football players is centered around scoring goals, their whole strategy and training revolves around it, so obviously goals matter.Sea_Food wrote:
I really dont like this idea because pp is way too complicated to be a scoring system. This is like if someone in football made a suggestion that
"The team with most goals should not win, because they are not necersary the team that really played better in my opinion. The team that has the best performance counting in ball posession, passes, hairstyle AND goals (+other stuff) should win."
In osu it's not that straightwordard, there's no single simple and clearly defined goal other than generally playing well, maintaining a good combo AND accuracy at the same time, and score isn't straightforward either with 7 digit scores and the combo multiplier etc.
If anything the football analogy would be "goals near the end of the game are worth 10x more" lol.
hit value*combo*mode multipliers
Its actually a little different
Score = Hit Value + Hit Value * (Combo multiplier * Difficulty multiplier * Mod multiplier) / 25But its still pretty simple and actually in a sense the same as the one i think it should be.
Also the reason i dont quite mania is because there the score is calculated this way:
I think i red that through 10 times and I still dont quite understand it. Clearly the most complicated score calculation system I have ever seen in my life. And pp calculation is even more complicated. If this threads suggestion went through, they could change the osu! slogan to "rythm and formulas that you wont understand."
you just need to play well. you don't need to understand the formulas (only to the point that combo and accuracy are the main factors).Sea_Food wrote:
I think i red that through 10 times and I still dont quite understand it. Clearly the most complicated score calculation system I have ever seen in my life. And pp calculation is even more complicated. If this threads suggestion went through, they could change the osu! slogan to "rythm and formulas that you wont understand."
Nah, you still don't get the point.jesus1412 wrote:
It objectively places the good players at the top. If you disagree with this then you must be delusional. Maybe the order isn't perfect but it certainly does sort the best from the good from the bad.
There is a game, with his rules, they are objective, it's what the game is.
There is a scoreboard based on it, he's objective too.
That scoreboard do not pretend to rank skills or anything, just the score with his rules.
If you want to replace scoreboard, add more rules, this will not be the same game.
Everything that you can add gonna be subjective.
Yes, PP places objectively the good players at the top, but that concept don't even exist in the game.
Yes, my friend there is a certain ruleset and a scoreboard based on it, and why would you believe that it's of divine origin, and changing that ruleset to a better one ruins the game? How can you say it's objective, when it's an arbitrarily chosen ruleset, just like pp. But objectively pp does a pretty good job at placing better plays higher.MiniTokki wrote:
Nah, you still don't get the point.
There is a game, with his rules, they are objective, it's what the game is.
There is a scoreboard based on it, he's objective too.
I'm not a believer so this is certainly not a divine origin, just some game developers I guess...Drezi wrote:
Yes, my friend there is a certain ruleset and a scoreboard based on it, and why would you believe that it's of divine origin, and changing that ruleset to a better one ruins the game? How can you say it's objective, when it's an arbitrarily chosen ruleset, just like pp. But objectively pp does a pretty good job at placing better plays higher.
And sorry to tell you that, but yes, when you create a game with rulesset, they are objective. They make what your game is and how you wanted it to become. We can all allow playing with our hands in football but this is not gonna be football anymore. And I didn't say that will ruins (make it bad or something, it does not matter here), I say that gonna change the purpose of the game.
You just misunderstand what the game is, what the devs wanted, what the score does and what we want with PP.
wtf is up with all the horrible football analogies. please use some logic.
this game is about clicking on circles to rythm, and the way you're scored has absolutely nothing to do with this gameplay, and can be changed for the better...
this game is about clicking on circles to rythm, and the way you're scored has absolutely nothing to do with this gameplay, and can be changed for the better...
At least, using analogies is a sort of arguments. Arguments, something that all your post are missing.
Reads some books, things are not that simple.
But above all, when you want to discuss with someone, make sure to read what they write.
Reads some books, things are not that simple.
But above all, when you want to discuss with someone, make sure to read what they write.
Topic Starter
The football analogies don't work for the simple reason that the objective is literally just score goals. Nothing else matters in football. There are rules about how you can use the ball, how many players can be on a team, and what they can do, but the gameplay is literally focused on scoring goals, which in turn scores points. In osu!, the objective is hit all objects as accurately as possible. Hitting the hit objects will, in turn, score you points. However, the method by which these points is given can vary wildly without the gameplay changing at all. In football, you can't change how points are distributed without completely changing how the game is played.
This whole discussion about objective vs. subjective is completely pointless imho. Both the current scoring system and pp are objective in the sense that a computer rates scores based on rock-solid algorithms. At the same time both the scoring system and pp try to objectively rate a score as close as possible to the general subjective meaning of skill the community has.
Showing pp while playing would not be a very good idea I think. The system would have to make assumptions about the rest of the score which has not been played yet.
If it assumed 300s for the rest of the score, then the displayed pp would only go down and your goal would be to have it go down as little as possible.
On the other hand if it assumed misses for the rest of the score, then it would only start showing values above 0 near the end of the map since misses currently reduce pp by quite a lot.
The last option would be to disregard the remainder of the map and only compute pp for the existing part just like accuracy works. This would likely not be possible without making the game lag, because the difficulty of the beatmap would have to be computed up to every existing hitobject once.
Showing pp while playing would not be a very good idea I think. The system would have to make assumptions about the rest of the score which has not been played yet.
If it assumed 300s for the rest of the score, then the displayed pp would only go down and your goal would be to have it go down as little as possible.
On the other hand if it assumed misses for the rest of the score, then it would only start showing values above 0 near the end of the map since misses currently reduce pp by quite a lot.
The last option would be to disregard the remainder of the map and only compute pp for the existing part just like accuracy works. This would likely not be possible without making the game lag, because the difficulty of the beatmap would have to be computed up to every existing hitobject once.
Excuse me that my analogy was not 100% accurate, but my point was that the base score system should be kept simple. As it is done everywhere else.Kyou-kun wrote:
The football analogies don't work for the simple reason that the objective is literally just score goals. Nothing else matters in football. There are rules about how you can use the ball, how many players can be on a team, and what they can do, but the gameplay is literally focused on scoring goals, which in turn scores points. In osu!, the objective is hit all objects as accurately as possible. Hitting the hit objects will, in turn, score you points. However, the method by which these points is given can vary wildly without the gameplay changing at all. In football, you can't change how points are distributed without completely changing how the game is played.
Topic Starter
But the problem is that you can't accurately judge skill based on simple score system in osu!, because of the fact that there are so many different levels which require different skills, while you can accurately judge skill based on a simple score system in football, because there's only one "level", and it always requires the same set of skills to master it.
Football skill is much more like ppv1. Football can ONLY be measured relative to other players and it's a pretty stupid argument. The limit in performance in football is relative to the limit in opposition to test against. osu! has no limit hence why it's completely different. Still I prefer pp to score.
o_0
What am I even reading. Well i wont give a deeper opinion on that because i really dont think its relevant to the suggestion.Kyou-kun wrote:
But the problem is that you can't accurately judge skill based on simple score system in osu!, because of the fact that there are so many different levels which require different skills, while you can accurately judge skill based on a simple score system in football, because there's only one "level", and it always requires the same set of skills to master it.
And what about the thing I suggested - the rest of the map being counted as neither misses nor 300s, but null (same as if you missed the rest of the map, but without the miss penalty for the not yet played objects)?Tom94 wrote:
If it assumed 300s for the rest of the score, then the displayed pp would only go down and your goal would be to have it go down as little as possible.
On the other hand if it assumed misses for the rest of the score, then it would only start showing values above 0 near the end of the map since misses currently reduce pp by quite a lot.
Even if that's impossible, TBH noone really cares about their score while playing (oh yeah I've reached 1,656,565 already!? meh).
The main purpose of it is to allow for a constantly changing ranking mid-game in multiplayer and for that the "assumes 300s for the rest of the map" method would be perfectly fine.
If that's demoralizing, pp wouldn't even have to be displayed while playing, only be used to determine the multiplayer ranking mid-game without displaying the pp value. Seeing 'current combo' plus 'max combo achieved so far' and accuracy (maybe for the others too in multi?) should be enough while playing imo, the end result is what matters really.
I hope that upon closely inspecting my post, even MiniTokki can find faint traces of arguments in it. No offense man, but that comment cracked me up.
Drezi wrote:
And what about the thing I suggested - the rest of the map being counted as neither misses nor 300s, but null (same as if you missed the rest of the map, but without the miss penalty for the not yet played objects)?Tom94 wrote:
If it assumed 300s for the rest of the score, then the displayed pp would only go down and your goal would be to have it go down as little as possible.
On the other hand if it assumed misses for the rest of the score, then it would only start showing values above 0 near the end of the map since misses currently reduce pp by quite a lot.
Tom94 wrote:
The last option would be to disregard the remainder of the map and only compute pp for the existing part just like accuracy works. This would likely not be possible without making the game lag, because the difficulty of the beatmap would have to be computed up to every existing hitobject once.
actually counting the parts of the map played as neither misses nor 300's would still work just fine without lagging since it doesnt have to recalculate the map every hit object. just once. for example, take a 800 combo map, if you have 400 combo currently + 98% acc it shows the pp you'd have in game as though you cleared it with 400 combo +98 acc... and goes up/down from there. PP has to be calculated live yeah but not the difficulty of the map.silmarilen wrote:
Tom94 wrote:
The last option would be to disregard the remainder of the map and only compute pp for the existing part just like accuracy works. This would likely not be possible without making the game lag, because the difficulty of the beatmap would have to be computed up to every existing hitobject once.
that said, its still pointless
yeah, as Bassist Vinyl said, what I mentioned is not the same as recalculating the map as a whole after every note, c'mon i can read what Tom posted just fine lol.
pp calculation isn't really that hard, even, it is simpler to calculate than score, since it doesn't rely on the distribution of the 300s-100s-50s-Misses through the play (just the total amount of each of these and the Max Combo). Also score considers spinners and slider-tick bonuses.Sea_Food wrote:
Excuse me that my analogy was not 100% accurate, but my point was that the base score system should be kept simple. As it is done everywhere else.Kyou-kun wrote:
The football analogies don't work for the simple reason that the objective is literally just score goals. Nothing else matters in football. There are rules about how you can use the ball, how many players can be on a team, and what they can do, but the gameplay is literally focused on scoring goals, which in turn scores points. In osu!, the objective is hit all objects as accurately as possible. Hitting the hit objects will, in turn, score you points. However, the method by which these points is given can vary wildly without the gameplay changing at all. In football, you can't change how points are distributed without completely changing how the game is played.
The calculation is something like this http://pastebin.com/XDDgKEvw (this was for the tp system during September 2013, some values in there have changed, and some parts of the calculation probably have changed by now in ppv2), the hidden variables currently are the Aim Difficulty and Speed Difficulty for each beatmap (which are correlated to the Star Difficulty).
PP doesn't necessarily have to be exactly converted to score. The problem we have right now is that "highscore doesn't mean high pp".
Seems like accuracy change during game is making the problem. Well, I'm not 100% sure how pp works, but I believe Accuracy score and Combo scores are seperated (according to reddit pp analyse.)
Then just make Accuracy as an Bonus score after play, just like how Jubeat and DJMax technika does.
Here's an idea :
1) Make every object has the same basic score. If you hit the object regardless of how accurate you were, you get (let's say) 500 score every object.
2) Seems like combo scores are dependant on the maximum combo you achieved on the map. Every maxcombo you achieve, you get extra score. (for example, you get 500 for every note, and another 500 for your combo score. after you miss, you won't get that extra 500 untill you reach your last maximum combo)
3) If there are any modifiers for # of 50 or 100 or miss, just have them sum up to the bonus score that will be given after the play with the accuracy bonus score.
Since accuracy constantly changes(and most likely to drop after you miss or 100) it would be weird to be counted realtime. However using bonus score can possibly solve this and make score directly reflect PP
pros everything
cons you can't accurately tell if it will beat your highscore or not before you finish the play (However I do think this should be encouraged)
Seems like accuracy change during game is making the problem. Well, I'm not 100% sure how pp works, but I believe Accuracy score and Combo scores are seperated (according to reddit pp analyse.)
Then just make Accuracy as an Bonus score after play, just like how Jubeat and DJMax technika does.
Here's an idea :
1) Make every object has the same basic score. If you hit the object regardless of how accurate you were, you get (let's say) 500 score every object.
2) Seems like combo scores are dependant on the maximum combo you achieved on the map. Every maxcombo you achieve, you get extra score. (for example, you get 500 for every note, and another 500 for your combo score. after you miss, you won't get that extra 500 untill you reach your last maximum combo)
3) If there are any modifiers for # of 50 or 100 or miss, just have them sum up to the bonus score that will be given after the play with the accuracy bonus score.
Since accuracy constantly changes(and most likely to drop after you miss or 100) it would be weird to be counted realtime. However using bonus score can possibly solve this and make score directly reflect PP
pros everything
cons you can't accurately tell if it will beat your highscore or not before you finish the play (However I do think this should be encouraged)
This is a good idea, it is too painful to see you made a better accuracy with the same combo (or almost) and have less score and you have to stick with worse performance as top performance.haha5957 wrote:
PP doesn't necessarily have to be exactly converted to score. The problem we have right now is that "highscore doesn't mean high pp".
Seems like accuracy change during game is making the problem. Well, I'm not 100% sure how pp works, but I believe Accuracy score and Combo scores are seperated (according to reddit pp analyse.)
Then just make Accuracy as an Bonus score after play, just like how Jubeat and DJMax technika does.
Here's an idea :
1) Make every object has the same basic score. If you hit the object regardless of how accurate you were, you get (let's say) 500 score every object.
2) Seems like combo scores are dependant on the maximum combo you achieved on the map. Every maxcombo you achieve, you get extra score. (for example, you get 500 for every note, and another 500 for your combo score. after you miss, you won't get that extra 500 untill you reach your last maximum combo)
3) If there are any modifiers for # of 50 or 100 or miss, just have them sum up to the bonus score that will be given after the play with the accuracy bonus score.
Since accuracy constantly changes(and most likely to drop after you miss or 100) it would be weird to be counted realtime. However using bonus score can possibly solve this and make score directly reflect PP
pros everything
cons you can't accurately tell if it will beat your highscore or not before you finish the play (However I do think this should be encouraged)
The game is dependant on combo and accuracy; yet the reward for accuracy is greatly diminished when combo isnt maximized; the opposite way accuracy can be poor and the combo can be maximized. Thr player with a full combo and way less accuracy shluldnt be rewarded more than a person with really good accuracy and a ranfom miss. The fact a miss means a useless play is only because of the scoring system in its current state. If we switched to pp based ranking then those amaxing plays with a minor miss wouldnt be completely useless
Edit: forgive the terrible spelling; I'm on mobile and its a pain in the ass to type on this new phone
Edit: forgive the terrible spelling; I'm on mobile and its a pain in the ass to type on this new phone
People on this thread keep using this argument but dont you guys know how much a combo affects pp aswell? Much more than accuracy.Dexus wrote:
The game is dependant on combo and accuracy; yet the reward for accuracy is greatly diminished when combo isnt maximized; the opposite way accuracy can be poor and the combo can be maximized. Thr player with a full combo and way less accuracy shluldnt be rewarded more than a person with really good accuracy and a ranfom miss. The fact a miss means a useless play is only because of the scoring system in its current state. If we switched to pp based ranking then those amaxing plays with a minor miss wouldnt be completely useless
In score, the combo increases the total score quadratically Θ(x^2) (A single combo of 1000 is worth roughly 4 times more score than a single combo of 500), if the combo breaks in a play are distributed evenly through the map, the max combo increases the total score linearly Θ(x) (2 times more total score with 1000 combo than two 500 combos in a map). Accuracy percentage affects the score linearly Θ(x^1) (90% accuracy is about 10% less score than 100% accuracy).Sea_Food wrote:
People on this thread keep using this argument but dont you guys know how much a combo affects pp aswell? Much more than accuracy.Dexus wrote:
The game is dependant on combo and accuracy; yet the reward for accuracy is greatly diminished when combo isnt maximized; the opposite way accuracy can be poor and the combo can be maximized. Thr player with a full combo and way less accuracy shluldnt be rewarded more than a person with really good accuracy and a ranfom miss. The fact a miss means a useless play is only because of the scoring system in its current state. If we switched to pp based ranking then those amaxing plays with a minor miss wouldnt be completely useless
In tp (which is similar to the current pp), during September 2013, the total tp is the sum of Speed, Aim and Accuracy values. With Speed and Aim, the accuracy percentage is a factor of: (100%+Acc%)/2 (So 90%accuracy is worth about 5% less than 100% accuracy for Speed and Aim). With Accuracy, the accuracy percentage increases the value with a growth of Θ(x^24) (90% accuracy is worth 99.92% less than 100% accuracy). Max Combo in Speed and Aim increases their values with a growth of Θ(x^0.8) (Slightly slower than linearly), and doesn't affect Accuracy.
Overall, accuracy is much more important than max combo in pp, but since the variance of Max Combo is usually higher than the variance of Accuracy between consecutive plays of the same player (it is common to improve the combo from 400 to 900 in two consecutive plays, but getting from 97%acc to SS is harder unless the map is short), the differences of max combo tend to play a bigger role in increasing the amount of pp a map gives.
haha5957 wrote:
PP doesn't necessarily have to be exactly converted to score. The problem we have right now is that "highscore doesn't mean high pp".
Seems like accuracy change during game is making the problem. Well, I'm not 100% sure how pp works, but I believe Accuracy score and Combo scores are seperated (according to reddit pp analyse.)
Then just make Accuracy as an Bonus score after play, just like how Jubeat and DJMax technika does.
Here's an idea :
1) Make every object has the same basic score. If you hit the object regardless of how accurate you were, you get (let's say) 500 score every object.
2) Seems like combo scores are dependant on the maximum combo you achieved on the map. Every maxcombo you achieve, you get extra score. (for example, you get 500 for every note, and another 500 for your combo score. after you miss, you won't get that extra 500 untill you reach your last maximum combo)
3) If there are any modifiers for # of 50 or 100 or miss, just have them sum up to the bonus score that will be given after the play with the accuracy bonus score.
Since accuracy constantly changes(and most likely to drop after you miss or 100) it would be weird to be counted realtime. However using bonus score can possibly solve this and make score directly reflect PP
pros everything
cons you can't accurately tell if it will beat your highscore or not before you finish the play (However I do think this should be encouraged)
Have you even thought about how you'd even implement this? Like, the whole game up till now has been scored this way, it's not gonna change that easily. How would you deal with the billions of scores set up till now? Start new work ranked maps? Please, let's not be naive, this would make osu a completely different game. I'm not saying it's a bad idea, I completely agree the scores should be based on raw combo/accuracy if that's all the algorithm calculates, in fact I'd have quite a few different personal best scores, but a change like this is pretty unreasonable to the people who scored in the past 7 years.
Edit: The most ideal change would be to score the same way Mania is, but likewise this would be unfair to the billions of scores made up till now.
What Tom means is the difficulty of the map is changed with every note placed, so difficulty would be constantly changing if the rest of the map was considered to be null. Star rating evens out after about half the map as long as there aren't any huge difficulty spikes. Why does it matter if the rest of the map is considered as misses or null anyways? It's not like you'll get PP for combining half of something. The amount of PP you can gain from a map pretty much only starts increasing as you finish 90% of it anyways. It's much easier to assume misses, this way the amount of PP you gain is guaranteed, instead of getting the false hope of getting PP from SSing half of a map then missing a stream or something.Drezi wrote:
yeah, as Bassist Vinyl said, what I mentioned is not the same as recalculating the map as a whole after every note, c'mon i can read what Tom posted just fine lol.
As for this suggestion, I think this is a great idea. It's much more fair to have scores ranked by PP. I'm afraid to play a lot of maps without mods in fear of being unable to beat them on score with mods in the future, so I actually leave a lot of maps in played when I see a scoreboard full of DT's. This addition would be really nice.
at your level would a map with a "scoreboard full of DT's" even be fun without DT? I'm pretty bad but most maps I see with the full DT scoreboard I can at least pass or half-pass. although I do have a lot of no mod fcs on maps like that from many months ago that I wish I didn't have... an easier solution would be to let us delete our scoresnooblet wrote:
As for this suggestion, I think this is a great idea. It's much more fair to have scores ranked by PP. I'm afraid to play a lot of maps without mods in fear of being unable to beat them on score with mods in the future, so I actually leave a lot of maps in played when I see a scoreboard full of DT's. This addition would be really nice.
Topic Starter
Change the score values into their corresponding pp values. I don't see what the problem with this is? That has already been done to give people their overall ranks.nooblet wrote:
Have you even thought about how you'd even implement this? Like, the whole game up till now has been scored this way, it's not gonna change that easily. How would you deal with the billions of scores set up till now?
Full Tablet wrote:
In score, the combo increases the total score quadratically Θ(x^2) (A single combo of 1000 is worth roughly 4 times more score than a single combo of 500), if the combo breaks in a play are distributed evenly through the map, the max combo increases the total score linearly Θ(x) (2 times more total score with 1000 combo than two 500 combos in a map). Accuracy percentage affects the score linearly Θ(x^1) (90% accuracy is about 10% less score than 100% accuracy).Sea_Food wrote:
People on this thread keep using this argument but dont you guys know how much a combo affects pp aswell? Much more than accuracy.
In tp (which is similar to the current pp), during September 2013, the total tp is the sum of Speed, Aim and Accuracy values. With Speed and Aim, the accuracy percentage is a factor of: (100%+Acc%)/2 (So 90%accuracy is worth about 5% less than 100% accuracy for Speed and Aim). With Accuracy, the accuracy percentage increases the value with a growth of Θ(x^24) (90% accuracy is worth 99.92% less than 100% accuracy). Max Combo in Speed and Aim increases their values with a growth of Θ(x^0.8) (Slightly slower than linearly), and doesn't affect Accuracy.
Overall, accuracy is much more important than max combo in pp, but since the variance of Max Combo is usually higher than the variance of Accuracy between consecutive plays of the same player (it is common to improve the combo from 400 to 900 in two consecutive plays, but getting from 97%acc to SS is harder unless the map is short), the differences of max combo tend to play a bigger role in increasing the amount of pp a map gives.
Lol my top rank gives me 62pp with an 88% acc. I dont quite understand how pp works as i said in previous post that its fucking complicated. But i do seem to still understand much better than you do. Because if what you bullshitted about was true, that would mean getting 100% acc from that song, it would give more than eighty thousand pp.
Sea_Food wrote:
Lol my top rank gives me 62pp with an 88% acc. I dont quite understand how pp works as i said in previous post that its fucking complicated. But i do seem to still understand much better than you do. Because if what you bullshitted about was true, that would mean getting 100% acc from that song, it would give more than eighty thousand pp.
The retardation is absolutely apocalyptic. That post may be the catalyst that starts a real life version of the metro 2033 world.
Well atleast the thread is now off topic so was worth
Anyway to explain my post I think i was wrong understanding the "sum" part of what full tablet said. I was just focused on
Anyway to explain my post I think i was wrong understanding the "sum" part of what full tablet said. I was just focused on
(90% accuracy is worth 99.92% less than 100% accuracyWhich reversed means
100% accuracy is worth 125 000% more than 90% accuracy.what ever. the suggestion is still ass
Coffee Hero
if 100% accuracy gave 100pp ~ 90% accuracy would give 0.08pp (keep in mind the pp is also derived from SPEED AND AIM)Sea_Food wrote:
Well atleast the thread is now off topic so was worth
Anyway to explain my post I think i was wrong understanding the "sum" part of what full tablet said. I was just focused on(90% accuracy is worth 99.92% less than 100% accuracyWhich reversed means100% accuracy is worth 125 000% more than 90% accuracy.what ever. the suggestion is still ass
If your top rank gave 62pp with 88% acc, it would have practically zero Accuracy pp, and the the Aim pp and the Speed pp alone would give the 62pp (if they are equal, then each one would be about 32.5, since the total pp is (Aim^X + Speed^X + Accuracy^X)^(1/X) with X=1.1)Sea_Food wrote:
Lol my top rank gives me 62pp with an 88% acc. I dont quite understand how pp works as i said in previous post that its fucking complicated. But i do seem to still understand much better than you do. Because if what you bullshitted about was true, that would mean getting 100% acc from that song, it would give more than eighty thousand pp.
With the same max combo and amount of misses, but with 99% accuracy, Aim and Speed would be about 5.95% higher, and you would get Accuracy pp.
A SS in a OD9.8 map with 72 circles gave 71 accuracy tp IIRC, 99% acc in an OD7 map with 219 circles would give 26.9 accuracy tp. If that value is close to the pp it would give (the formulas aren't the same, I don't know the exact formulas for pp), then the score would give a total of about 87 pp. If the OD was higher, then accuracy would give a higher bonus.
Kyou-kun wrote:
Change the score values into their corresponding pp values. I don't see what the problem with this is? That has already been done to give people their overall ranks.nooblet wrote:
Have you even thought about how you'd even implement this? Like, the whole game up till now has been scored this way, it's not gonna change that easily. How would you deal with the billions of scores set up till now?
Even now, scores were converted into pp with no problemo. If the new scoring system somehow reflects pp directly, why would it be hard to convert old score into new score?
There isn't, i mean, shouldn't be any doubt on how pp is better than old score. This guy is just asking for a new score system that replaces the bad oneblahblah wrote:
All the opposing opinions saying "pp isnt even perfect"
I see no point on you guys who are opposing this. I mean, why? Do you really think past scoring system is whole lot better?
The way I suggested before (changing factors, like accuracy, can be applied after the gameplay) seems like it pretty much evens out the problem of "pp takes accuracy into it, but it is hard to display realtime")
Hopefully this thread changes your view on life and you either: A, become a good poster that doesn't enjoy making a thread go off topic or B, jump off a bridge.Sea_Food wrote:
Well atleast the thread is now off topic so was worth
Anyway to explain my post I think i was wrong understanding the "sum" part of what full tablet said. I was just focused on(90% accuracy is worth 99.92% less than 100% accuracyWhich reversed means100% accuracy is worth 125 000% more than 90% accuracy.what ever. the suggestion is still ass
osu!tp ranking pretty much always put the best replays first. If this could be implemented easily as a 2nd scoreboard I'm sure it would be. Give it time guys.
I like this idea a lot, but I do think that osu!, due to it's high skill level, is in sore need of a league system that puts players of lower and middle skill level against each other in scoreboards. I remember peppy talking about that somewhere and I don't know what ever happened to it.
That'd be awful. I hope this will never happen.
As far as I know, this is a rhythm game, not a speed tester.I think so too
Dislike request
What you describe is assuming misses for the rest of the map which I mentioned as an alternative in my post. I don't see how you would have anywhere near enough information to correct me on the last point.Bassist Vinyl wrote:
actually counting the parts of the map played as neither misses nor 300's would still work just fine without lagging since it doesnt have to recalculate the map every hit object. just once. for example, take a 800 combo map, if you have 400 combo currently + 98% acc it shows the pp you'd have in game as though you cleared it with 400 combo +98 acc... and goes up/down from there. PP has to be calculated live yeah but not the difficulty of the map.
that said, its still pointless
Assuming only 300s maps like tag4 things would first display thousands of pp and then drop to next to nothing at the hard parts. Vice versa assuming misses the pp would only begin raising far into the map. Re-computing the beatmap difficulty up to the current hitobject would ensure a stable amount of pp to play quality ratio.
I want to mention another possibility, that can potentially be good, too. Namely extrapolating the current ratio of misses, 50s, 100s and 300s to the rest of the map and then showing that pp value. This would still have artifacts on maps which have highly varying difficulty (tag4 for instance), but far less than assuming pure 300s or pure misses.
Extrapolation could be nice, one other thing I thought of is that we take the "assume 300s for the rest of the map" approach, but the displayed PP would be simply proportional to your current progress on the drain time of the map, so that there's a sense of progression as you play through the song.
What I mean is that if you SS a song, displayed PP would go from 0% to 100% linearly with drain time, instead of staying the same throughout the whole song, and if you make more and more mistakes, than the overall real PP you can potentially achieve would constantly go down (since we start out assuming 300s for the rest), but this would be offset by the fact that the display of this decreasing value would be weighted from 0% to 100% in proportion to draintime as you play, so overall you could still see an increase in pp over time, reaching your final and real PP at the end of the drain time.
I hope it makes sense and I managed to describe what I was thinking.
Edit: Or it could be in proportion to your progress on the combo total of the map (regardless of breaking combos), instead of drain time, so that the increase is directly linked to the density of objects aswell. Actually this would make more sense, even if PP display updates were linked to hitobjects with the drain time method too.
What I mean is that if you SS a song, displayed PP would go from 0% to 100% linearly with drain time, instead of staying the same throughout the whole song, and if you make more and more mistakes, than the overall real PP you can potentially achieve would constantly go down (since we start out assuming 300s for the rest), but this would be offset by the fact that the display of this decreasing value would be weighted from 0% to 100% in proportion to draintime as you play, so overall you could still see an increase in pp over time, reaching your final and real PP at the end of the drain time.
I hope it makes sense and I managed to describe what I was thinking.
Edit: Or it could be in proportion to your progress on the combo total of the map (regardless of breaking combos), instead of drain time, so that the increase is directly linked to the density of objects aswell. Actually this would make more sense, even if PP display updates were linked to hitobjects with the drain time method too.
Given the current pp algorithm what you suggest wouldn't ensure monotonically increasing pp values.Drezi wrote:
Extrapolation could be nice, one other thing I thought of is that we take the "assume 300s for the rest of the map" approach, but the displayed PP would be simply proportional to your current progress on the drain time of the map, so that there's a sense of progression as you play through the song.
What I mean is that if you SS a song, displayed PP would go from 0% to 100% linearly with drain time, instead of staying the same throughout the whole song, and if you make more and more mistakes, than the overall real PP you can potentially achieve would constantly go down (since we start out assuming 300s for the rest), but this would be offset by the fact that the display of this decreasing value would be weighted from 0% to 100% in proportion to draintime as you play, so overall you could still see an increase in pp over time, reaching your final and real PP at the end of the drain time.
I hope it makes sense and I managed to describe what I was thinking.
Edit: Or it could be in proportion to your progress on the combo total of the map (regardless of breaking combos), instead of drain time, so that the increase is directly linked to the density of objects aswell. Actually this would make more sense, even if PP display updates were linked to hitobjects with the drain time method too.
I almost think it would be better to revamp the scoring system to be in line with pp increase while keeping it simple enough to work as an intuitive scoring system instead of using something as complex as pp. osu!mania or osu!stream's scoring systems are reasonable examples.
Yeah, I just thought that it would feel okey if the drops in PP were not as huge in absolute value compared to the final result, and when you're not making mistakes the displayed pp would be increasing instead of staying level.Tom94 wrote:
Given the current pp algorithm what you suggest wouldn't ensure monotonically increasing pp values.
my assumption was it went off your current progress. for example, if you are currently at halfway into the map and have 100% and a half combo of the full map, your pp displayed would be equivalent to if you had a half combo and 100% and 0 misses play of the entire map. And from there it progresses forward.Tom94 wrote:
What you describe is assuming misses for the rest of the map which I mentioned as an alternative in my post. I don't see how you would have anywhere near enough information to correct me on the last point.Bassist Vinyl wrote:
actually counting the parts of the map played as neither misses nor 300's would still work just fine without lagging since it doesnt have to recalculate the map every hit object. just once. for example, take a 800 combo map, if you have 400 combo currently + 98% acc it shows the pp you'd have in game as though you cleared it with 400 combo +98 acc... and goes up/down from there. PP has to be calculated live yeah but not the difficulty of the map.
that said, its still pointless
Assuming only 300s maps like tag4 things would first display thousands of pp and then drop to next to nothing at the hard parts. Vice versa assuming misses the pp would only begin raising far into the map. Re-computing the beatmap difficulty up to the current hitobject would ensure a stable amount of pp to play quality ratio.
I want to mention another possibility, that can potentially be good, too. Namely extrapolating the current ratio of misses, 50s, 100s and 300s to the rest of the map and then showing that pp value. This would still have artifacts on maps which have highly varying difficulty (tag4 for instance), but far less than assuming pure 300s or pure misses.
yes you pretty much have nowhere to go but down when you mess up and i agree this is one of the many reasons this shouldnt be implemented.
thousands of pp? so lets say a tag4 map with a max combo of 1300 and you're 1% into the map with a combo of 10 or whatever. are you telling me had you finished the map with a 10x combo out of 1300 you're looking at thousands of pp? or even a 100x combo? Just because no misses are weighted? That seems odd.
I think if it's going to show pp scoreboards during the song (which I think is entirely optional, honestly; the scoreboards could be exclusively in song select) that it should show you your potential PP with an SS and selected mods from the very beginning of the song. THEN it could penalize you as you go. I know it doesn't exactly seem accurate to play a tag4 map and see 1200 pp to begin with, but nobody should expect to full combo a tag4 map. PP might be difficult to calculate in realtime but I think however it is calculated shouldn't HAVE to show your progress on a map and should be implemented in the most efficient way possible. If it's not accurate to begin with it's not the end of the world. Plus I'm sure with some testing, any sort of realtime calculations to your potential PP could be cleaned up and made more accurate over time
Would that mean raw pps would be shown instead of the score ? That would be damn cool actually. +5 votes
Kookiezi_old_1
yes plz
hd with 104/106 300's is somehow alot lower pp then ss w/o mods
you basicaly get punished for playing the game
hd with 104/106 300's is somehow alot lower pp then ss w/o mods
you basicaly get punished for playing the game
Seems this thread isn't getting many replies anymore, shame.
I've read the entire thread, and there were quite obviously two very strongly opposing sides - one for, and one against pp as a scoring system. Now, I'm probably biased because I'm for it, but the only person I've seen give reasonable arguments (correct me if I'm wrong) against pp as a scoring system so far was Tom94. The arguments I've seen against pp seemed to be, in short:
- It's not the same
- A lot of people will get mad
- It might be tricky to implement
- Score will be worthless
- FL will be dead
- DT will be placed on a pedestal, and it is overrated
- HD will be useless
- Low/mid tier players won't receive any praise for their achievements, while high tier players will
- The entire game's atmosphere would change
The arguments supporting it were:
- Score is an extremely inaccurate measuring system, and pp is considered more accurate
- A lot of good scores are buried beneath average ones
- Ranks are measured by pp, thus so should the leaderboards
- Good players are supposed to be on top
- Skill should be rewarded, not effort
- pp and score could be set side by side
- Score could be changed to reflect pp
- DT should be rewarded handsomely because there is no harder single mod on any map
Please let me know if I missed out on anything. I've seen both good and bad points from both sides, and I think that the best option for now would be to both have a score and pp scoreboard, and keep working with the current scoring to see how people feel about a pp scoreboard instead of a score scoreboard. This means waiting a bit with making scores that are of higher pp but lower scores gain priority, and instead looking at how people feel about pp scoreboards of themselves, while devising a working method to implement pp scoring in the game. Then maybe set it as an options menu toggle ( "Show pp score instead of classic score during play" ) so that people have the option to play with either, and then those who play with pp scores would have scores that are of higher pp value gain priority over those of lower pp value despite the score, while those who don't would have scores upload the way they do now.
This would ensure that the load on the servers wouldn't increase, or at least not by much, and that people who dislike pp scoring don't have to live with it. I might be overlooking something, but this seems like an option that all of us could live with. There would be two remaining issues - the web leaderboards and implementation. This may all sound nice on paper but I understand that implementing this (realtime pp scoring in particular) might be a bit tricky. Still, I doubt it's impossible, and I think that a lot of people would be content with the option to play with classic or pp scoreboards. The last issue would be multiplayer - but this could be solved with a per-room toggle. Meaning that the "score" option would be removed from the win conditions drop down menu and be replaced with "classic" and "pp", and default to classic.
I hope this helps move the discussion forward any, I'd really like to see in-game pp implemented in some form and I hope this idea doesn't just get buried under the others. Have all my 16 stars.
Also, here is a perfect example of why pp scoring would be a lot less headache-inducing with our current system:
I've read the entire thread, and there were quite obviously two very strongly opposing sides - one for, and one against pp as a scoring system. Now, I'm probably biased because I'm for it, but the only person I've seen give reasonable arguments (correct me if I'm wrong) against pp as a scoring system so far was Tom94. The arguments I've seen against pp seemed to be, in short:
- It's not the same
- A lot of people will get mad
- It might be tricky to implement
- Score will be worthless
- FL will be dead
- DT will be placed on a pedestal, and it is overrated
- HD will be useless
- Low/mid tier players won't receive any praise for their achievements, while high tier players will
- The entire game's atmosphere would change
The arguments supporting it were:
- Score is an extremely inaccurate measuring system, and pp is considered more accurate
- A lot of good scores are buried beneath average ones
- Ranks are measured by pp, thus so should the leaderboards
- Good players are supposed to be on top
- Skill should be rewarded, not effort
- pp and score could be set side by side
- Score could be changed to reflect pp
- DT should be rewarded handsomely because there is no harder single mod on any map
Please let me know if I missed out on anything. I've seen both good and bad points from both sides, and I think that the best option for now would be to both have a score and pp scoreboard, and keep working with the current scoring to see how people feel about a pp scoreboard instead of a score scoreboard. This means waiting a bit with making scores that are of higher pp but lower scores gain priority, and instead looking at how people feel about pp scoreboards of themselves, while devising a working method to implement pp scoring in the game. Then maybe set it as an options menu toggle ( "Show pp score instead of classic score during play" ) so that people have the option to play with either, and then those who play with pp scores would have scores that are of higher pp value gain priority over those of lower pp value despite the score, while those who don't would have scores upload the way they do now.
This would ensure that the load on the servers wouldn't increase, or at least not by much, and that people who dislike pp scoring don't have to live with it. I might be overlooking something, but this seems like an option that all of us could live with. There would be two remaining issues - the web leaderboards and implementation. This may all sound nice on paper but I understand that implementing this (realtime pp scoring in particular) might be a bit tricky. Still, I doubt it's impossible, and I think that a lot of people would be content with the option to play with classic or pp scoreboards. The last issue would be multiplayer - but this could be solved with a per-room toggle. Meaning that the "score" option would be removed from the win conditions drop down menu and be replaced with "classic" and "pp", and default to classic.
I hope this helps move the discussion forward any, I'd really like to see in-game pp implemented in some form and I hope this idea doesn't just get buried under the others. Have all my 16 stars.
Also, here is a perfect example of why pp scoring would be a lot less headache-inducing with our current system:
???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????Tess wrote:
- DT will be placed on a pedestal, and it is overrated
Those were the arguments I've seen against it, pointing them out doesn't necessarily mean I agree with them. DT isn't buttonmashing, I know plenty of players who are very fast streamers and can't play DT at all. Whoever says that is just being ignorant. But I have seen that argument mentioned in this thread, hence why I posted it.
We need more posts like these in large topics, this is a perfect post trying to remove as much bias as possible and stating facts. More summaries like this would be great. The solution provided also seems fair, a good trial to see which scoreboard ends up being more used and hence which should be the default scoreboard.Tess wrote:
SI hope this helps move the discussion forward any, I'd really like to see in-game pp implemented in some form and I hope this idea doesn't just get buried under the others. Have all my 16 stars.
So what about some of the achivements? Pp score would make some impossible
It would be nice if you could actually list the achievements you're referring to, but since you like being vague, I'll list all of them instead:
Hush Hush Achievements: Any hush hush that relates to score could be adapted to fit pp score. If not, then you can just achieve it by playing for score instead of pp. I have a few of those, and I don't see how any of the ones I've achieved couldn't have been achieved with pp score. Of the ones I do not have, only one of those seems to vaguely hint at being related to score - and the way I interpret it, pp-based scoring wouldn't get in the way of it at all.
Dedication Achievements: These aren't relevant to score at all.
Combo Achievements: ^
Beatmap Pack Achievements: ^
I'm sorry, but I don't think your argument is based upon anything you've even looked into. Also, I think that even if it was the case that pp scoring would get in the way of a single achievement, I would be surprised if you could find 10 people who seriously think that that is, on it's own, a valid enough reason to not implement pp scoring. That idea is absurd and you know it.
Hush Hush Achievements: Any hush hush that relates to score could be adapted to fit pp score. If not, then you can just achieve it by playing for score instead of pp. I have a few of those, and I don't see how any of the ones I've achieved couldn't have been achieved with pp score. Of the ones I do not have, only one of those seems to vaguely hint at being related to score - and the way I interpret it, pp-based scoring wouldn't get in the way of it at all.
Dedication Achievements: These aren't relevant to score at all.
Combo Achievements: ^
Beatmap Pack Achievements: ^
I'm sorry, but I don't think your argument is based upon anything you've even looked into. Also, I think that even if it was the case that pp scoring would get in the way of a single achievement, I would be surprised if you could find 10 people who seriously think that that is, on it's own, a valid enough reason to not implement pp scoring. That idea is absurd and you know it.
The reason i dont list them is because im not allowed to. And I really dont see how some of the other achies in addition to the obvious one could be achieved.Tess wrote:
It would be nice if you could actually list the achievements you're referring to, but since you like being vague, I'll list all of them instead:
Also no I dont think that that is the only reason why the suggestion is bad.
Then why don't you give your other reasons? Also, I was able to explain why it's not a problem without giving away anything, it's not impossible. I completely understand that you might have legitimate reasons as to why this shouldn't be implemented, but so far, I don't really see you providing any, or at least not any of substance. Nobody's stopping you from speaking your mind, and it's a forum, so it's not like there's any pressure. You can take all the time you need to word things correctly, and even if you mess up you can edit your post.
So, if you could provide your reasons as to why the suggestion is bad rather than saying "it's bad because it's bad and stuff" or something similar, that might actually help move the discussion forward rather than stagnate it.
So, if you could provide your reasons as to why the suggestion is bad rather than saying "it's bad because it's bad and stuff" or something similar, that might actually help move the discussion forward rather than stagnate it.
The reason you don't list them is because there's only 1. News flash: no one cares about achievements that's just a dead weight argument against this because you haven't got anything else to say anymore. Of course the achievements would still work, score would still be 100% visible it'd be the main metric, the only thing that'd change is what appears in the scoreboards. This is a none existent argument don't even try and push it and even if it was no one cares about achievements anyway.Sea_Food wrote:
The reason i dont list them is because im not allowed to. And I really dont see how some of the other achies in addition to the obvious one could be achieved.Tess wrote:
It would be nice if you could actually list the achievements you're referring to, but since you like being vague, I'll list all of them instead:
Also no I dont think that that is the only reason why the suggestion is bad.
I'm not sure if you know but this is a discussion. You can't just say there are reasons you're right and we're wrong and not state them, lest you be stuck with no argument at all. Argumentation is healthy to support your side of the agenda and if you have nothing to argue your side is pretty weak.
Do pp actually suitable for precise scoring on single and just single play? i mean you don't see any other numeral data then pp
That depends on how it would be implemented, so far the two main ideas are either creating a score formula that relates directly to pp (pp x 100 or whatever) or show a lot of decimals behind your pp value as score, but only show your rounded up value on your profile (200pp = 200.345.122). So, to answer your question, yes, pp is suitable for precise scoring, and even if it isn't, it can be.
Its sounds strange to me that people want ranking system to be implemented as a score system, ranking system that was made to score multple performences insted of jurgeing single play, and it even more suppriced me that people wall of text talks about pros and cons of it without knowing how this suppose to work, all based on saying that pp is superior system to jurge skill, ot knowing much about it. Yes, ofcore everything can be implemented, but without thinking how suppose to work we dont know if it batter or worse, if it even possible to use current system or need to be remade.
I read info page about pp, it mantions that there suppose to be wiki page done with details how that system works, is that was done? If yes then link plz? ; p
Either way i think what you requesting here is not pp replceing scoreing system, but to create new scoreing system based on way pp system works, if it even able to properly jurge single play with enouth scale to do ranking of such scores.
I read info page about pp, it mantions that there suppose to be wiki page done with details how that system works, is that was done? If yes then link plz? ; p
Either way i think what you requesting here is not pp replceing scoreing system, but to create new scoreing system based on way pp system works, if it even able to properly jurge single play with enouth scale to do ranking of such scores.
A system which compares multiple performances across different maps obviously has to be able to judge a single play, and compare plays on the same map aswell, how can you fail to see that. How could it could it compare different plays between different maps if it can't even compare plays on the same map?... Please.Shadowriver wrote:
Its sounds strange to me that people want ranking system to be implemented as a score system, ranking system that was made to score multple performences insted of jurgeing single play
How do you know if the way it jurge produce score with enouth scale so it can create suitable ranking for are single song? In your case you more skilled then i am, so pp produce three digit numbers which even reapets on multiple songs and now look on my pp from my noobish normal plays.... numbers between 1-3, so how this suppose to jurge rank single play of noobs like me, how its gonna work good as scoring system if can produce same numbers for single scores? Something that produce numbers does not mean it a good scoring system, because this system was made to jurge skill based on multiple plays, so it does not case if it produce 3 digit numbers or between 1-3 to accumulate. And besides what basis you guys have for discussion if all you see is pp numbers, or else that mantioned wiki page details exists.Drezi wrote:
A system which compares multiple performances across different maps obviously has to be able to judge a single play, and compare plays on the same map aswell, how can you fail to see that. How could it could it compare different plays between different maps if it can't even compare plays on the same map?... Please.Shadowriver wrote:
Its sounds strange to me that people want ranking system to be implemented as a score system, ranking system that was made to score multple performences insted of jurgeing single play
What basis do YOU have to form a valid opinion when you don't even know if a wiki page exists about pp? You've barely played this game at all, I suggest you get a bit more familiar with the system before you come here to argue on one side or the other.Shadowriver wrote:
what basis you guys have for discussion if all you see is pp numbers, or else that mantioned wiki page details exists.
PP has decimals, but it is not shown for the sake of simplicity. Yeah Easy diffs might still have plenty of tied scores, but what does it matter? If you made the same play, there's no need to differentiate.. There are tons of tied scores currently aswell on easier spinnerless maps.
The other reasons I have gave earlier in this thread\given by other people and i have nothing to add to them. You can read the 17pages of this thread if you are interested. I really see no reason to write same things again that have been discussed before.Tess wrote:
Then why don't you give your other reasons? Also, I was able to explain why it's not a problem without giving away anything, it's not impossible. I completely understand that you might have legitimate reasons as to why this shouldn't be implemented, but so far, I don't really see you providing any, or at least not any of substance. Nobody's stopping you from speaking your mind, and it's a forum, so it's not like there's any pressure. You can take all the time you need to word things correctly, and even if you mess up you can edit your post.
@jesus1412
Score will be 100% visible and the main metric? Only thing will change is scoreboard? I just love how you are picking your own and rare opinion on how this shit would work and complain that my argument would be invalid if things were done that way. Especially since i wasnt even talking to you. Fucking 50% of this thread is discussing how pp would be calculated live while playing, as in not "this will only change scoreboard" and somehow you missed that. You also say nobody carea about achies. Keep acting that everyone thinks same way jesus1412 does
Also the last paragraf of your post pure cacer.
Changing the whole scoring system would be optimal, but that's a lot more work, and not a necessity for PP scoreboards to be implemented. PP scoreboards could still replace the current ones without having to make any changes to the current scoring system. Also the most popular consensus right now is that PP scoreboards could be implemented IN ADDITION to the current score-based scoreboards.Sea_Food wrote:
Score will be 100% visible and the main metric? Only thing will change is scoreboard? I just love how you are picking your own and rare opinion on how this shit would work and complain that my argument would be invalid if things were done that way. Especially since i wasnt even talking to you. Fucking 50% of this thread is discussing how pp would be calculated live while playing, as in not "this will only change scoreboard" and somehow you missed that.
Ok sorry retried searching and i find that wiki page, insted of suggeting me to get fimillier you could help direct me to the link so i can get fimiliar, thats all i wanted to see ; p. But either way pp in current form is imo not suitable, it needs to be scaled diffrently and looking on wiki it can be done in some way or another, so i still belive what you guys wanting is new scoring system based on similar mechanic, pp is made to just accumulate. Also it all about numbers, so it really does not matter how long i playDrezi wrote:
What basis do YOU have to form a valid opinion when you don't even know if a wiki page exists about pp? You've barely played this game at all, I suggest you get a bit more familiar with the system before you come here to argue on one side or the other.Shadowriver wrote:
what basis you guys have for discussion if all you see is pp numbers, or else that mantioned wiki page details exists.
PP has decimals, but it is not shown for the sake of simplicity. Yeah Easy diffs might still have plenty of tied scores, but what does it matter? If you made the same play, there's no need to differentiate.. There are tons of tied scores currently aswell on easier spinnerless maps.
It does because you have no clue about the differences between the two, and this is not the place for us to be guiding you, why are you even posting here omg.
Yes, if pp is able to judge individual plays and assign a value to each play, a higher value meaning a better play, where each map has an absolute cap (HDDTHRFL SS) then we can use that system not only to compare players' different skill levels, but also to compare plays of different performance levels. Since osu is not a game that judges you by your skill, but by all of your performances combined. It takes each individual performance you've had, assigns numbers to each of them, and then compiles them into a total, then compares your total to the total of other players, the player with the highest total being #1. This should be self-evident. I'm only mentioning it because I want you to see this logic:
- Everyone's plays are judged individually
- The total judgment of each player is compared against all the others, and placed into a ladder based on your performance total vs. everyone else's
- This means that we are capable of comparing single players, based on the cumulative total of their individual plays
How can we judge these things and compare them to each other, but not compare individual plays on the same map to each other? That's like saying that you can compare two different cars but not two different car parts. I agree with Drezi, this really shouldn't be that difficult to understand.
- Everyone's plays are judged individually
- The total judgment of each player is compared against all the others, and placed into a ladder based on your performance total vs. everyone else's
- This means that we are capable of comparing single players, based on the cumulative total of their individual plays
How can we judge these things and compare them to each other, but not compare individual plays on the same map to each other? That's like saying that you can compare two different cars but not two different car parts. I agree with Drezi, this really shouldn't be that difficult to understand.
You should probably just stop posting. Let my dissect your post really quickly and show you how you're an idiot and have just admitted that my idea works fine and your argument against it is "the working idea doesn't make my opinion work so I'm going to ignore it".Sea_Food wrote:
The other reasons I have gave earlier in this thread\given by other people and i have nothing to add to them. You can read the 17pages of this thread if you are interested. I really see no reason to write same things again that have been discussed before.
@jesus1412
Score will be 100% visible and the main metric? Only thing will change is scoreboard? I just love how you are picking your own and rare opinion on how this shit would work and complain that my argument would be invalid if things were done that way. Especially since i wasnt even talking to you. Fucking 50% of this thread is discussing how pp would be calculated live while playing, as in not "this will only change scoreboard" and somehow you missed that. You also say nobody carea about achies. Keep acting that everyone thinks same way jesus1412 does
Also the last paragraf of your post pure cacer.
I just love how you are picking your own and rare opinion on how this shit would work and complain that my argument would be invalid if things were done that way.Yes it would work, what's the problem? No where in the OP does it talk about making this system a "generated live" kind of thing. This would be displayed just like score at the end of the map right next to it. It won't hurt you at all, people like you are the reasons we can't have nice things. "One or the other, we can't have both even though having both doesn't effect me in any way" is the mentality that ruins a lot of fun in the world, you are an anit-fun person. No one wants you to exist if you simply want to take enjoyment away from people.
Especially since i wasnt even talking to you.Get off of the forum. You don't have a clue what a forum is evidently. I am pretty convinced you're actually a troll poster at this point.
Fucking 50% of this thread is discussing how pp would be calculated live while playing, as in not "this will only change scoreboard" and somehow you missed that.Trying to enhance the idea is great and all but this is just an extension of the idea which would allow it to COMPLETELY overrule standard scoring. As it stands, this isn't currently possible hence we need to look at other ideas. Obviously those other ideas are viable and go against your ideas so you simply deny them and call my opinion a minority even though more people would want what I'm saying than what you're saying. I can't conclusively say that more people want change, but from what I can see more people DO want change; regardless of how perfect that change is they DO want change. If 33% of people didn't want change, 33% of people wanted this to be the main metric for scoreboards and 33% wanted pp to be the new scoring mechanic completely, are you trying to argue it's evenly split between what people want? 66% OF PEOPLE WANT THE CHANGE IN THIS SCENARIO, NOT 33%; DIFFERENT LEVELS OF CHANGE ARE ALL CHANGE DON'T DIVIDE THEM.
You also say nobody carea about achies. Keep acting that everyone thinks same way jesus1412 doesMost people don't and I already explained that this would only effect ONE acheivment even if it was implemented as a completely new score system and the old one was removed. Here, unlike you I provide evidence to back me up because I'm not a shit poster. Here's the link because the image is too large for the forums: http://jesse1412.s-ul.eu/m0c8ZTuU . Also note that the people who didn't reply are still replying and all of them have said they don't care about acheives (zapy, elysion and shadowsoul so far replied.)
Also the last paragraf of your post pure cacer.You obviously didn't read it otherwise you wouldn't have continued posting. This is a forum but you don't understand that. Spend time constructing your posts. You should have no spelling mistakes on a forum if you're actually trying, it TELLS YOU which words are spelled wrong and then TELLS YOU how to spell them.
Don't need to be aggressive, its not like i come here deny your ideas, just criticly chalange it as any feature request should. I admit i searched wrong and didn't find wiki page, but consideing you guys pushing this idea and trying to convice people to support it, including me even if i played for few days (but i got some longer expirence with SMO, so it not like i know nothing about rythm games), so you could pass me link to help me out.Drezi wrote:
It does because you have no clue about the differences between the two, and this is not the place for us to be guiding you, why are you even posting here omg.
I post here because i played multiplayer a little and noticed how pp workes giving me those 1-3 points sometimes and i can see how it is suitable for ranking system. Then i discovred how osu have frequent updates and i guess there need to be some change log which lead me here, and as someone interested in programing, i really like seeing development of software and it's proggression and discussion about it. And so i see this thread and i become intrigued how this 1-3 points giving system for lower rank player like me, suppose to be superior scoring system, how it suppose rank single session in this state? I didn't have enouth info, but no i got this wiki page, and i link it so everybofy passing here can check it out:
https://osu.ppy.sh/wiki/Performance_Points
...and i can see i could lead to something, but still i belive this system need to be tuned to be good for single session scoring, i mean now it gives me 1-3, it need to give something more precice, also is all aspect of current system is good for something like this? or something could be removed or added? Also how to make this system more streamable so you can see score live? but as long you tuning this system it slowly stoping to become this old pp system and becomes something new, thats why i'm hinting what you guys want is new scoring system based on pp aspects, not pp thrown as replacement. pp in current form was made for ranking of multiple plays, not as a scoring system replacement.
If you ask me, i do aggree that current scoring system is flaw and i might see it diffrently then others, but what i think is a flaw is combo multiplier in game which combo is common thing and you usally break it only few times, which means langth of a combo is a huge factor. Problem is you can miss at any moment for random reason and when that moment happens got a huge factor on final score, so not number of misses counts, but where you did them, which i think is a flaw.
Sea_Food wrote:
The other reasons I have gave earlier in this thread\given by other people and i have nothing to add to them. You can read the 17pages of this thread if you are interested. I really see no reason to write same things again that have been discussed before.
?Tess wrote:
I've read the entire thread, and there were quite obviously two very strongly opposing sides - one for, and one against pp as a scoring system.
This thread wasn't made by jesus and countless other people share the exact same opinion, including myself. There's nothing rare about it.Sea_Food wrote:
@jesus1412
Score will be 100% visible and the main metric? Only thing will change is scoreboard? I just love how you are picking your own and rare opinion on how this shit would work and complain that my argument would be invalid if things were done that way.
???Sea_Food wrote:
Especially since i wasnt even talking to you.
I don't get the first half of your statement, but resorting to personal attacks once your arguments are challenged is just low. As for the second statement - a lot of people do agree with what jesus said, at least in some form, as I've stated before. I also challenged you to find me 10 reasonable people who seriously consider a single achievement more important than the scoring/ranking system, and can give a decent argument for why they think that way. Actually, no, find me two.Sea_Food wrote:
Fucking 50% of this thread is discussing how pp would be calculated live while playing, as in not "this will only change scoreboard" and somehow you missed that. You also say nobody carea about achies. Keep acting that everyone thinks same way jesus1412 does
Fact of the matter is that you aren't able to formulate decent arguments to defend your standpoint and thus resort to fallacies and personal attacks instead. Nobody has been personally attacking you, it's just getting annoying to watch you say "I don't want this because I don't" and then act as if you're giving valid reasons or arguments for your case. You aren't, you act as though we aren't aware of any possible downsides, even though Kyou-kun and myself already listed most of the con arguments earlier in the thread.
I'll be more than willing to see your point if you actually have any.
Sea_Food wrote:
Also the last paragraf of your post pure cacer.
jesus1412 wrote:
I am pretty convinced you're actually a troll poster at this point.
Here. Here is the only thing I wanted to say for this moment in this thread. Either of you two could have simply said:Sea_Food wrote:
So what about some of the achivements? Pp score would make some impossible
This idea does not necessarily mean that current scoring system would be abolished. Also achies are not that important for many people.and we would have had a completed discussion about the issue. Compleated discussions on a subject is a good thing.
Yes informative post are better, but meaningless yabbering does not make your post better just because they make them longer. Turned a really simple issue into a war of "proof" and a quest of "lets teach Sea_Food how to make quality post on the forums." Just because:
1. I couldnt explain which achies would/could get affected. Sorry but there are rules on this game and I dont want go darker on the grey area to tell you which achievementS are them, because again it dosnt even matter and is meaningless yabbering.
2. I wouldnt point out which of the previously discussed subjects (that you know about) are the other things that are heavy enough arguments that I would not want this suggestion to go trough. Because I really think that mentioning them once again would be meaningless yabbering. If what your been trying to do is not to make me think this way, sorry you have failed on your quest.
Since we kinda switched the topic into good forum behavior, here is a tip for you guys. Dont try so hard to "win" arguments.
You're just going in circles, so I'll just skip reading your posts from now on.
To put things back on track, Shadowriver, I think that you and everyone else would have a much easier time discussing this if you did a good amount of research and proper thinking about the subject before posting. A lot of the people discussing here have been monitoring the pp discussion thread from the start, whereas you've only been here for a few days and thus it's highly unlikely that you're as informed as them, unless you've read the entire thread (all ~1400 posts) which I doubt you did in such a short time. I'm not trying to be offensive, just saying that discussing this with you is pretty hard, at least for me, especially because I spend more time trying to decipher what you mean than actually replying to your post, which makes it kind of a chore.
To reply to your points, though;
Drezi wasn't being aggressive as much as fed up with your lack of logic/information, mostly things that should be there but aren't. I don't think it was a personal attack against you as much as disliking your approach to this discussion.
About your other point - we've already discussed the application of pp scoring earlier on in the thread. You really should read the entire thing, though I've already made an attempt at summarizing it a few pages back.
Lastly, the way combo works in scoring with osu will change if pp is adopted as a scoring system - nevertheless, the difference between half combo and max combo will still be huge. Combo is a very important part of osu, it's not comboing that's a flaw but the current score system in itself, at least related to pp.
I couldn't make out any other points, so, if I missed any, I apologize. Hope that clears things up for you, but, for next time - try figuring out as much as you can on your own before posting, it's very frustrating to have to answer the same question over and over again for other users. Also, try working on your English, this is an English forum and you ultimately want to be understood, that's how you move discussion forward. Please don't take this as an insult, it's just something that would benefit you and those around you.
To put things back on track, Shadowriver, I think that you and everyone else would have a much easier time discussing this if you did a good amount of research and proper thinking about the subject before posting. A lot of the people discussing here have been monitoring the pp discussion thread from the start, whereas you've only been here for a few days and thus it's highly unlikely that you're as informed as them, unless you've read the entire thread (all ~1400 posts) which I doubt you did in such a short time. I'm not trying to be offensive, just saying that discussing this with you is pretty hard, at least for me, especially because I spend more time trying to decipher what you mean than actually replying to your post, which makes it kind of a chore.
To reply to your points, though;
Drezi wasn't being aggressive as much as fed up with your lack of logic/information, mostly things that should be there but aren't. I don't think it was a personal attack against you as much as disliking your approach to this discussion.
About your other point - we've already discussed the application of pp scoring earlier on in the thread. You really should read the entire thing, though I've already made an attempt at summarizing it a few pages back.
Lastly, the way combo works in scoring with osu will change if pp is adopted as a scoring system - nevertheless, the difference between half combo and max combo will still be huge. Combo is a very important part of osu, it's not comboing that's a flaw but the current score system in itself, at least related to pp.
I couldn't make out any other points, so, if I missed any, I apologize. Hope that clears things up for you, but, for next time - try figuring out as much as you can on your own before posting, it's very frustrating to have to answer the same question over and over again for other users. Also, try working on your English, this is an English forum and you ultimately want to be understood, that's how you move discussion forward. Please don't take this as an insult, it's just something that would benefit you and those around you.
Someone understands me, you're a good person ;_;Tess wrote:
Drezi wasn't being aggressive as much as fed up with your lack of logic/information, mostly things that should be there but aren't.
This 1000x too. Some people keep making the same nonsense arguments.. best one is "I don't like this because I don't, I hope this doesn't happen."Tess wrote:
Try figuring out as much as you can on your own before posting, it's very frustrating to have to answer the same question over and over again for other users.
i suggest completely ignoring every post by sea_food from now on. it's not like he has ever had a decent forum post anyway, not just in this thread.
Topic Starter
For everyone talking about adjusting things awkwardly to fit the new pp system, and how it wouldn't work well, please note the title is "Add pp as a scoring system in standard mode", not "Add pp to replace score in standard mode".
I'll say it for you, it would effect jackpot. That's all. It's not illegal to say it if you have a good point of discussion but it's a shitty achievement anyway good luck getting it. We listed all the issues and you haven't specified which ones we haven't found a remedy for with this implementation which is why we want you to list them (there are none).Sea_Food wrote:
Here. Here is the only thing I wanted to say for this moment in this thread. Either of you two could have simply said:Sea_Food wrote:
So what about some of the achivements? Pp score would make some impossibleThis idea does not necessarily mean that current scoring system would be abolished. Also achies are not that important for many people.and we would have had a completed discussion about the issue. Compleated discussions on a subject is a good thing.
Yes informative post are better, but meaningless yabbering does not make your post better just because they make them longer. Turned a really simple issue into a war of "proof" and a quest of "lets teach Sea_Food how to make quality post on the forums." Just because:
1. I couldnt explain which achies would/could get affected. Sorry but there are rules on this game and I dont want go darker on the grey area to tell you which achievementS are them, because again it dosnt even matter and is meaningless yabbering.
2. I wouldnt point out which of the previously discussed subjects (that you know about) are the other things that are heavy enough arguments that I would not want this suggestion to go trough. Because I really think that mentioning them once again would be meaningless yabbering. If what your been trying to do is not to make me think this way, sorry you have failed on your quest.
Since we kinda switched the topic into good forum behavior, here is a tip for you guys. Dont try so hard to "win" arguments.
This is feature requests where we share our opinions on implementing features. This is one of the few places where winning an argument actually matters outside of actual politics and betting with friends. Of course we want to "win" arguments, we want good new things to be included in the game.
And there; the OP even said there's no awkward "pp as you play" system needed for this request. It'd be nice but it's probably something for another day.Kyou-kun wrote:
For everyone talking about adjusting things awkwardly to fit the new pp system, and how it wouldn't work well, please note the title is "Add pp as a scoring system in standard mode", not "Add pp to replace score in standard mode".
silmarilen wrote:
i suggest completely ignoring every post by sea_food from now on. it's not like he has ever had a decent forum post anyway, not just in this thread.
Also, it has already been suggested several times to have both pp and classic scoring as optional leaderboards, with classic scoring remaining the default. Nothing gets removed, something only gets added for those who like it (and i'm sure there will be a lot of people who will like it)
The PP system is extremely fickle, and it will lead to the global scoreboards being just as fickle which is not what we want them to be. People should lose their spots on scoreboards when someone else passes them, not when tom decides to pump up the aim or dumb down the value of accuracy or whatever he's going to do in the future in his endeavors to make a more effective and accurate ranking system. This might even discourage him from making changes to this relatively young system that still has a lot of work to go. Peppy hates touching scoreboards. This will involve not only completely re-ordering them but making them incredibly volatile.
This is why it is not going to happen. No way. Not until the system is entirely 100% unquestionably done with no room for improvement... which will probably be never...
instead of investing all this time and post energy into an idea that can't possibly be implemented for a very very long time if at all...
I recommend we try to get jesse senpai's much more practical/reasonable idea implemented.
This is why it is not going to happen. No way. Not until the system is entirely 100% unquestionably done with no room for improvement... which will probably be never...
instead of investing all this time and post energy into an idea that can't possibly be implemented for a very very long time if at all...
I recommend we try to get jesse senpai's much more practical/reasonable idea implemented.
please keep one suggestion per threadsilmarilen wrote:
i suggest completely ignoring every post by sea_food from now on. it's not like he has ever had a decent forum post anyway, not just in this thread.
Topic Starter
Tom already confirmed that it is happening several times. Your arguments are obviously invalid if you read the last post I made on this thread (or just read the title).Riince wrote:
The PP system is extremely fickle, and it will lead to the global scoreboards being just as fickle which is not what we want them to be. People should lose their spots on scoreboards when someone else passes them, not when tom decides to pump up the aim or dumb down the value of accuracy or whatever he's going to do in the future in his endeavors to make a more effective and accurate ranking system. This might even discourage him from making changes to this relatively young system that still has a lot of work to go. Peppy hates touching scoreboards. This will involve not only completely re-ordering them but making them incredibly volatile.
This is why it is not going to happen. No way. Not until the system is entirely 100% unquestionably done with no room for improvement... which will probably be never...
instead of investing all this time and post energy into an idea that can't possibly be implemented for a very very long time if at all...
I recommend we try to get jesse senpai's much more practical/reasonable idea implemented.
If you're going to use that as an argument, Tom might just as well not make adjustments to the pp system at all because people's rankings might change. "Oh no, someone might go back in ranking if I fix this, better leave it broken so we don't have to change."Riince wrote:
People should lose their spots on scoreboards when someone else passes them, not when tom decides to pump up the aim or dumb down the value of accuracy or whatever he's going to do in the future in his endeavors to make a more effective and accurate ranking system.
You're acting like player rankings are irrelevant and only score rankings matter, but the two are very closely related. Why can we rank players by their pp, but not the scores? Where is the logic in that? Most of the arguments against this idea so far were vaguely informed opinions at best, save for one or two reasonable ones. Most of you aren't giving any reason other than "I don't like this because change" and it's really doing nothing for the discussion. If players are ranked by pp, score should be ranked by pp. If doing so causes for a mess - make a separate leaderboard. We've been over this, going in circles won't change it at all.
It'd also be nice if people could stop talking about what peppy loves or hates. I recall seeing someone say that peppy hated tp, and now the ppv2 developer is the same guy who developed tp. Speak for yourselves and let others speak for themselves, saying "peppy hates x" is just stupid. Unless you can pull a direct quote, in which case you still shouldn't speak for him and should post a link to the post you're quoting instead.
Please think about it first.Tess wrote:
If you're going to use that as an argument, Tom might just as well not make adjustments to the pp system at all because people's rankings might change. "Oh no, someone might go back in ranking if I fix this, better leave it broken so we don't have to change."
spots on song scoreboards should not be fickle and subject to constant change. Player A: "oh Player B you think you're hot stuff because your 99.5% DT put you in first over my 99.1% HD DT? just wait until tom buffs hidden nerd and that spot is mine!" see the inherent issues with that? Player A should have to work for his #1 there not feel like he can wait for the system to conform to where he thinks his play should be, and player B shouldn't have to worry about his score being passed because of such a change.
changes to ppv2's effect on global rankings boil down to virtually non-existent in the top 50, completely ineffectual in the top 10. i mention these because they're the only things that matter when you're comparing global to scoreboards even though they're nothing alike in the first place.
Let me expand on this. I don't see lewa mulling around waiting for accuracy to be buffed over aim and speed so he can take #1, because it's not going to happen, but the first scenario i mentioned is quite plausible since everyone is basically ranked on how they did on a single song, of which in most cases all top 50 performances on which are going to be similar enough to change drastically with even small changes to the difficulty algorithm, hence why this shouldn't be subject to constant change. In the top 50 global rankings, people aren't all within 1-2 pp of eachother like they will be on scoreboards. I wonder why?
Yeah, it's so much better to have HDHR scores as 1# when someone actually DT-d the map... and generally just flawed map rankings, due to lower acc scores being able to beat higher acc scores if 100s happened earlier etc.Riince wrote:
Player A: "oh Player B you think you're hot stuff because your 99.5% DT put you in first over my 99.1% HD DT? just wait until tom buffs hidden nerd and that spot is mine!" see the inherent issues with that? Player A should have to work for his #1 there not feel like he can wait for the system to conform to where he thinks his play should be, and player B shouldn't have to worry about his score being passed because of such a change.Tess wrote:
If you're going to use that as an argument, Tom might just as well not make adjustments to the pp system at all because people's rankings might change. "Oh no, someone might go back in ranking if I fix this, better leave it broken so we don't have to change."
Logic.
explain how that relates to what i said. i was drawing a comparison between hd dt and dt, didnt mention hd hr anywhere. obviously hd hr is going to take a nosedive when the system is first implemented but im talking about very similar and very closely related in pp scores changing places with eachother afterwards.Drezi wrote:
Yeah, it's so much better to have HDHR scores as 1# when someone actually DT-d the map... and generally just flawed map rankings, due to lower acc scores being able to beat higher acc scores if 100s happened earlier etc.
Logic.
Constantly
No explaining will help you, if you don't get it by yourself.