Woobowiz wrote:
players could FC easy maps with a really low unstable rate and get stupid amounts of pp for the difficulty of the maps they play.
Woobowiz wrote:
players could FC easy maps with a really low unstable rate and get stupid amounts of pp for the difficulty of the maps they play.
The people who play HR are also the ones who have good acc in the first place.Riince wrote:
point is people get ridiculous pp relative to the difficulty just by being accurate.. i mean i dont see any 80-90% HR fcs worth 300+pp unlike DT...
depends on the map, doesnt even matter about the HP if its 9.8 or 10, drain is mostly determined by how many long spinners or long low density drain parts there are, a map can be hp10 but in reality you lose hp as if its hp6.Kheldragar wrote:
e: Can you even pass a HR song with that acc?
getting <100ur on a 2star map is near impossible, give it a try if you want.Woobowiz wrote:
I'm a little iffy on the whole "Factor in Unstable Rate" thing, on the bright side it provides more maps to farm pp, on the other hand, players could FC easy maps with a really low unstable rate and get stupid amounts of pp for the difficulty of the maps they play.
A lot of people say this, got any example maps?B1rd wrote:
That is a terrible idea, UR should never be factored into pp. I don't mind the thought of low OD getting a small buff, but the reality is the current game meta is high accuracy and not amazing scores (rrtyui), traditional nomod isn't going to be the meta as long as this is the case. But you won't see much od8 in the future, soon nomod will be much more like mods, hard maps will probably be mostly ar/od9.x.
I don't really care that much about OD, FL etc., what really needs buffing is sliders.
There is probably a whole bunch of them but here is onejesus1412 wrote:
A lot of people say this, got any example maps?
Maybe maps like scary rose, big black, adult's toy and talent shredder? I'm sure there are better examples thoughjesus1412 wrote:
A lot of people say this, got any example maps?B1rd wrote:
That is a terrible idea, UR should never be factored into pp. I don't mind the thought of low OD getting a small buff, but the reality is the current game meta is high accuracy and not amazing scores (rrtyui), traditional nomod isn't going to be the meta as long as this is the case. But you won't see much od8 in the future, soon nomod will be much more like mods, hard maps will probably be mostly ar/od9.x.
I don't really care that much about OD, FL etc., what really needs buffing is sliders.
All underrated because of the 1key sections, not the sliders afaik.uberpancake wrote:
Maybe maps like scary rose, big black, adult's toy and talent shredder? I'm sure there are better examples thoughjesus1412 wrote:
A lot of people say this, got any example maps?
Woobowiz wrote:
This may be a stupid suggestion, but is it within reason to "buff" lower OD by weighing the accuracy values of 100's and 50's?
So for OD 6, 100's would be worth 2/5 or 1/2 of a 300 rather than the usual 1/3rd of a 300. Low OD is weak enough for giving less pp even for an SS, why not give it a little push
What do you mean by '1key section'? I think it's safe to say that those maps would be a lot easier if the sliders were circles, I actually tried changing some sliders to circles on Scarlet Rose and the star rating actually increased.jesus1412 wrote:
All underrated because of the 1key sections, not the sliders afaik.uberpancake wrote:
Maybe maps like scary rose, big black, adult's toy and talent shredder? I'm sure there are better examples though
1key sections as in... the entirety of the maps (if you 1key). Very spaced slow streams if that's how you prefer to see them.B1rd wrote:
No one replied because it was a stupid idea, don't just keep posting what you said until someone acknowledges it.What do you mean by '1key section'? I think it's safe to say that those maps would be a lot easier if the sliders were circles, I actually tried changing some sliders to circles on Scarlet Rose and the star rating actually increased.jesus1412 wrote:
All underrated because of the 1key sections, not the sliders afaik.
As for examples, I think you mentioned Neuroncia as one, this would be another example. But I think it's already pretty evident that sliders are underrated, I don't think there is one slider map that gives good pp, every good pp map is almost all circles. They don't give anywhere enough pp for the extra aim and reading you have to do, and of course they give no accuracy pp which is a big deal.
silmarilen wrote:
to give you a better example of underrated sliders: https://osu.ppy.sh/s/128645 or https://osu.ppy.sh/s/102282
i personally think pp doesnt look enough at technical difficulty, it's pretty much only physical ability. https://osu.ppy.sh/s/290040 are easily 5+ stars in terms of difficulty but only 4.32 stars because it's a slow map with pretty much no spacing
Suggested but I still agree with the idea.jaaakb wrote:
Not sure if this has been suggested before.
Maps could analyzed for difficulty on a combo timeline to determine what combo guarantees you fcd the hard parts. Find the lowest difficulty section, that x combo passes for some amount of combos (25%, 50%, 75%, 90%, 100% combo for example).
You could make a simple table for every map to weight the pp/combo% they give and buff nonfcs on maps with hard parts in the middle, lower the pp nonfcs in maps with hard parts in the beginning/end give.
^Drezi wrote:
I think he knows that
Which the part with "average aberration" referred to as UR doesnt measure accuracy as mentioned in the definition.osu! Wiki wrote:
This value represents how consistently you time your hits, with lower numbers being better (top players often score below 150). Note that this measures consistency, and not accuracy, so if you're consistent in hitting 15ms early, you'll get similar results to if you're consistent in hitting on time. The formula is essentially the standard deviation of your hit errors (in milliseconds) multiplied by 10.
My personal UR went down by around 30 INSTANTLY just because i switched to good input-devices before I even got used to them. When cheap setups already have a harder time it'd be unfair to give them less reward for something they already have to put more effort in.Default wrote:
UR weighting would be really unfair for those who have cheap setups, I don't think it's a good idea.
pp: [Tom94] Reduce value of the Easy mod to counterbalance difficulty calculation bugfix.
I think this is a good idea too.jaaakb wrote:
Not sure if this has been suggested before.
Maps could analyzed for difficulty on a combo timeline to determine what combo guarantees you fcd the hard parts. Find the lowest difficulty section, that x combo passes for some amount of combos (25%, 50%, 75%, 90%, 100% combo for example).
You could make a simple table for every map to weight the pp/combo% they give and buff nonfcs on maps with hard parts in the middle, lower the pp nonfcs in maps with hard parts in the beginning/end give.
Imo it doesn't make too much sense to reward for a play where you missed on the easy part. Giving less pp for non fcs on maps with difficulty spikes near the end or beginning does sound like a good idea though.jaaakb wrote:
Not sure if this has been suggested before.
Maps could analyzed for difficulty on a combo timeline to determine what combo guarantees you fcd the hard parts. Find the lowest difficulty section, that x combo passes for some amount of combos (25%, 50%, 75%, 90%, 100% combo for example).
You could make a simple table for every map to weight the pp/combo% they give and buff nonfcs on maps with hard parts in the middle, lower the pp nonfcs in maps with hard parts in the beginning/end give.
You're probably right about number of misses being weighted too little and % max combo being weighted too much in judging how good a play is, but you also found the problem that prevents a more accurate system from being possible: sliderbreaks. It's not possible to get accurate information about them from past plays and they're pretty much the equivalent of misses. I don't think there's a better way to account for the possibility of sliderbreaks than using max combo achieved, though exactly how much pp should scale with combo is debatable.Skyanide wrote:
In my opinion, the number of misses should have a bigger impact on how much PP a non-FC play is worth, and combo% should have a much smaller impact (or no impact at all). To account for slider breaks, perhaps there could be a PP bonus for getting a full combo (or a penalty for not getting a full combo).