AR below 8 already does give a bonus. An increased one if hidden is being used. Since forever.

In my opinion, AR8 should also be included in this bonus. The standards nowadays are AR9 and AR10, anything below or over that is hard for people to read. Yes, it depends on the map (more precisely, on object density), but in most cases AR8 is quite difficult.

Gigo wrote:

In my opinion, AR8 should also be included in this bonus. The standards nowadays are AR9 and AR10, anything below or over that is hard for people to read. Yes, it depends on the map (more precisely, on object density), but in most cases AR8 is quite difficult.

Ar8 would give a pp bonus for reading just like od7 does for acc.

I think that low AR / Easy are fine how they are, Easy isn't meant to be for farming, it's to make maps easier (assuming you can read or memorise maps with it).

blahpy wrote:

assuming you can read.....

But reading is the whole reason EZ mod is difficult and should be worth more

[ Momiji ] wrote:

congratulations, now your 60pp easy plays can become 66pp plays
the 'it's still not worth it' and 'there's more to it' effects could be nullified by separating aim, speed and acc, and creating a separate category for reading.

As they find how to separate again Aim and speed then maps like Tsunamaru - Daidai Genome will get massively nerfed on DT because there is not much speed at doing single taps and triplets of 210 bpm at all (not even a single stream). That one is really overrated and very wanted just because the pp it can give... at being overrated from both star system and being OD9.67 q-q

Sincerelly I would like that a day Accuracy becomes not that independant from the map's difficulty. There are many free accuracy high OD maps that are being abused too oftenly, mostly DT ones, maps that even with their OD9 or OD9.67 lots of people rank with +99% accuracy and starting being overrated at rank from free accuracy high OD maps.

+99% accuracy is fine I know, but I mean, if it's from a map that lots of persons can easly do +99% compared to "easier" (less stars) maps that are more difficult to accurate finely and even if they're OD8-OD7 that ISN'T high OD, then I wouldn't like calling these +99% high OD ranks a really good proof of high accuracy.

The only problem I see from OD7 maps with good difficulty and with not so many circles is that their 95% and 100% values aren't that different compared to DT's 95% againist its version but at 100%. Looks weird seing less oftenly good 100% no mod ranks than 100% DT ranks on people's best performance and we see higher accuracy precisely on these OD9-OD9.67 DT maps than on these OD8 harder no mods with similar stars that the same player have ranked.

This needs atention and a counter, affortunaly it's planned a day to consider patterns complexity on the pp that each map gives, thing that should nuke down most DT overrated ranks, that HR would been unharmed and raise no mod potential (if I'm guessing right, sure)

If I learned hd and 2x100'd my top play, that'd be 304pp. Od 9.67 too strong.

Kheldragar wrote:

If I learned hd and 2x100'd my top play, that'd be 304pp. Od 9.67 too strong.

Any pp from skillet hero [Fate] is totally worth, such a beast DT rank man, nice one. The mix of anoying long sliders and circles or sliders between them makes it considerably harder than most DT's of that value, it's even better than my #1 of 252 pp. Also both cases of DT are fairly good DT ranks.

DroidBass wrote:

Kheldragar wrote:

If I learned hd and 2x100'd my top play, that'd be 304pp. Od 9.67 too strong.

Any pp from skillet hero [Fate] is totally worth, such a beast DT rank man, nice one. The mix of anoying long sliders and circles or sliders between them makes it considerably harder than most DT's of that value, it's even better than my #1 of 252 pp. Also both cases of DT are fairly good DT ranks.

I thought the exact opposite; I found sentimental love + DT, seven doors nomod, up all night HR, Miiro [extra] &c. much harder than hero. I don't think the sliders are annoying, they make it easier for me to maintain whatever acc I could as opposed to having all cirlces. Don't most people alternate sliders?

To be honest, I've seen people of higher rank than mine or yours not being capable to FC skillet hero at DT on Fate. Also you should ask it to more players to have a better perspective about that rank, but personally find that map a way too difficult because my aim always sucked xP

Tom94 wrote:

AR below 8 already does give a bonus. An increased one if hidden is being used. Since forever.

I know, but the bonus should be more and it should include ar8. Low AR will never be the meta or farmable but giving it a small boost would be nice. It might encourage people to play the thousands of AR8 maps there are.

Gigo wrote:

In my opinion, AR8 should also be included in this bonus. The standards nowadays are AR9 and AR10, anything below or over that is hard for people to read. Yes, it depends on the map (more precisely, on object density), but in most cases AR8 is quite difficult.

This.

So when are long HR maps gonna be weighted fairly? I have a 97% FC on Let This Go with HDHR which is a >2400 combo map worth 174pp, while Jamaican Love DT at 98.92% (which is like a minute long and the only "difficult" part is a single stream, the rest is just a bunch of triples and sliders) is worth 227pp. That seems like a pretty big gap to me, especially since Jamaican Love was a 2 try map that was absurdly easy (I didn't even think I'd get pp for it and it turned out to be my #5 play) while on Let This Go I'm ranked #16 global, which says for itself that it's not that easy to get a decent HDHR score on. It's just one of many examples where long HR maps are weighted kinda meh while short DT maps with one or maybe two spaced streams are weighted ridiculously high. Isn't there a way to bring some balance to this?

SS is 310 pp. If you have good acc longer maps give a lot of pp. At higher levels at least most of the HR farm maps are long.

edit: I think that long maps + low OD or accuracy are underrated.

Tess wrote:

So when are long HR maps gonna be weighted fairly? I have a 97% FC on Let This Go with HDHR which is a >2400 combo map worth 174pp, while Jamaican Love DT at 98.92% (which is like a minute long and the only "difficult" part is a single stream, the rest is just a bunch of triples and sliders) is worth 227pp. That seems like a pretty big gap to me, especially since Jamaican Love was a 2 try map that was absurdly easy (I didn't even think I'd get pp for it and it turned out to be my #5 play) while on Let This Go I'm ranked #16 global, which says for itself that it's not that easy to get a decent HDHR score on. It's just one of many examples where long HR maps are weighted kinda meh while short DT maps with one or maybe two spaced streams are weighted ridiculously high. Isn't there a way to bring some balance to this?

I disagree, long HR maps are weighted a bit too much for high accuracy lol

Tess wrote:

So when are long HR maps gonna be weighted fairly? I have a 97% FC on Let This Go with HDHR which is a >2400 combo map worth 174pp, while Jamaican Love DT at 98.92% (which is like a minute long and the only "difficult" part is a single stream, the rest is just a bunch of triples and sliders) is worth 227pp. That seems like a pretty big gap to me, especially since Jamaican Love was a 2 try map that was absurdly easy (I didn't even think I'd get pp for it and it turned out to be my #5 play) while on Let This Go I'm ranked #16 global, which says for itself that it's not that easy to get a decent HDHR score on. It's just one of many examples where long HR maps are weighted kinda meh while short DT maps with one or maybe two spaced streams are weighted ridiculously high. Isn't there a way to bring some balance to this?

The problem with HR / HD HR is that 95% values are shit if the map isn't a really crazy map meanwhile SS is ridicully high valued. The problem with ANY high OD map is the absurd distribution of pp meant in high accuracy. JUST see a map named Skrillex & The Doors - Breakn' a Sweat (Original Mix) that on 95% accuracy DT values less than 160 pp but as SS values ABSURD 280 pp ... YESSSSSS it's the same map!! Just so many circles and OD9.67.

Long maps with low OD aren't a real problem at all, sometimes the huge amount of circles at 99% is worth their pp if you are really consistent player it shouldn't be a worry if you're ranking 99% on a 700 of the same difficulty than a 1900 map alike. The REAL problem is the 5 stars OD8.4 HR plays, if you look at Hatsune Miku - Hiatus at HR, you will notice it's an highly chaotic map that is very under-rewarded same as IRON ATTACK! - Future is Undefined that has radical jumps and streams and it's not worth at more than 220's pp on SS at being harder than maps likely SMiLE.dk - Golden Sky that IS one of these free accuracy high OD ranks.

I'm seing that the main problem of this is that this algorythm isn't considering rightly the OD based on how difficult the patterns are and instead accuracy is completely independant of map's patterns complexity/level.

Xilver wrote:

I disagree, long HR maps are weighted a bit too much for high accuracy lol

Considering your accuracy can hit 99% with hardrock... Cause for the same map with the same FC if you end up with 94% you might get nothing. So for a top player who is pretty constant it might sounds right but for an average player... The FC was already something by itself I think... But in any case it would probably give nothing Because you already Fced that Jamaican Love map that give more than 200 pp so for the system the score you just did with hr isn't worth that dt play..

I mean Tess gave the perfect example about why so many maps are underated...it's because some other maps (DT maps) are overated. Something like this?

High accuracy Dragonforce HR should be worth a fuckton.

Assuming that accuracy pp is handled the same way it used to be, your accuracy pp for a play is maximized at the maximum OD at which you could SS the map - in other words, if you were to play two maps that are completely identical aside from the OD, then given that both have OD values that are too high for you to achieve an SS, you'd get more pp from the lower OD map for the same exact play. The result is that people who can get SS or near SS on OD10 get a ton of pp from HR and people who get lower accuracy get unfairly little.

I wouldn't say unfair; od10 is hard to acc and having 99%+ with that should be well reqarded, no? If you can't acc then too bad?

Kheldragar wrote:

I wouldn't say unfair; od10 is hard to acc and having 99%+ with that should be well reqarded, no? If you can't acc then too bad?

I said "unfairly little" and I was mostly talking about people who don't get 99% accuracy. If you can get for example 97% on a map with OD10, you would get more pp from the exact same play if the map had been OD9. In fact, your pp would keep increasing for the same exact play as you lowered the OD until you reached an OD at which you could SS the map, at which point your pp for the play would start decreasing.

So I do think that lower accuracy HR plays get an unfairly low amount of pp compared to what they deserve...and at the very least, they definitely get an unfairly low amount of pp compared to higher accuracy plays on lower OD.

That would also explain why plays such as Gayzmcgee's hdhr fc on Forgotten give such a low pp reward

Mahoganytooth wrote:

blahpy wrote:

assuming you can read.....

But reading is the whole reason EZ mod is difficult and should be worth more

I find AR10.3 much harder (impossible) than AR4 but there is no bonus for reading AR10.3, so I don't see why Easy should give any any more than the small bonus it already gives...

You think Hvick could do Hoshizora DT if it were AR4? I don't think so. AR4 is harder than AR10.3.

The real question is ar11 vs ar 4.

B1rd wrote:

You think Hvick could do Hoshizora DT if it were AR4? I don't think so. AR4 is harder than AR10.3.

start talking in object density instead of approach rate. playing EZ on extra maps is not comparable to normal diffs.

-GN wrote:

start talking in object density instead of approach rate. playing EZ on extra maps is not comparable to normal diffs.

Of course it's object density that is what's difficult, but it would be a lot simpler to implement a buff based on AR instead of object density, and it would pretty much have the same effect. Any serious player would move past the difficulties where there is a very low AR that gives an appropriate object density very quickly.

Can we separate aim/speed/acc yet? Fuq yo servers.

jesus1412 wrote:

Can we separate aim/speed/acc yet? Fuq yo servers.

Bring back tom points

Kheldragar wrote:

jesus1412 wrote:

Can we separate aim/speed/acc yet? Fuq yo servers.

Bring back tom points

Delete puu.sh completely and put it to better use. Hard drives can compute pp right?

sure if they make some kind of rainbow table out of all possible aim/speed/acc pp variables

B1rd wrote:

You think Hvick could do Hoshizora DT if it were AR4? I don't think so. AR4 is harder than AR10.3.

That is why AR shouldn't be considered at all in pp. AR bonus should been only considered from +AR10.33 with notably high spaced patterns and consdering it for low AR HD plays. I can comment you that as +OD8 nomod player and as DT farmer DT player it's easier ranking high accuracy at high OD with higher AR than with AR9, ressulting that AR9 + OD9 is in general harder to accurate than AR9.67 + OD9 exceptly if you have messed up with the aim ... but making the last one easier to read because of less pattern density in the screen.

So from anywhere we talk about how AR10's is more difficult than AR9's or AR9's can be more tricky to play than AR10's at the same map it's just arbitrary. Higher AR forces player to act by impulse instead of waiting a little or fixing your tempo if you had a little misstake at aiming the circle.

Also the fact that makes HR harder than DT isn't the OD10 vs OD9.67/OD9 lol no, it's the circle size that sometimes is VERY underwarded. Just look at how strange/uncommon is seing low OD (7 or lower) cs=5 nomod maps on anyone's best performance againist free accuracy DT farming ... even these 5 stars HR at OD8.4 are very rare to see on best performance list of anyone.

AR should be considered because in all forms i believe the pp system should reward based on how many people can actually play a certain way effectively. there arent many people who can fc 7+ star maps so those plays should be worth 400+ pp, there aren't many people who can do AR4 extras so in the same manner, it should be worth a lot

Riince wrote:

AR should be considered because in all forms i believe the pp system should reward based on how many people can actually play a certain way effectively. there arent many people who can fc 7+ star maps so those plays should be worth 400+ pp, there aren't many people who can do AR4 extras so in the same manner, it should be worth a lot

I'd rather say it should be based on the practice time it requires (estimated) insead but the main idea is here yes.

jesus1412 wrote:

Can we separate aim/speed/acc yet? Fuq yo servers.

Some server performance issues got solved in the recent past, today I optimized the pp calculator accordingly to make use of all the extra power (it's like 10x faster now) and I don't see any reason to not split pp into categories again. It'll require some implementation effort, but obstacles are disappearing one by one.

Can't promise it to happen with the current website, but I do want to get it into the new website for sure.

Tom94 wrote:

Some server performance issues got solved in the recent past, today I optimized the pp calculator accordingly to make use of all the extra power (it's like 10x faster now) and I don't see any reason to not split pp into categories again. It'll require some implementation effort, but obstacles are disappearing one by one.

Can't promise it to happen with the current website, but I do want to get it into the new website for sure.

i love you tom

also how does CS work on pp? I know it raises aim value, but I'm not so sure how that variable works on the pp... does it scale with accuracy? it's a flat value? no idea. I'm seing that CS on what refers to accuracy is harder than OD is (for me) ... by this I mean that I feel that I lose more accuracy from smaller circles than from OD by itself and this is what I say to justificate how I can 99% DT too many stuff meanwhile my average HR accuracy is just 94-97% acc... OD10 is not THAT different to OD9.67 and I have some good ranks out of 98% OD9.67 from DT at CS4 or CS3 meanwhile I just have ONE 98.95% HR rank OD8.4 and I find this a lot harder to accuracy to my OD9.67 from DT...

Sincerelly I would like that some of you could try these 3 maps with the mods I suggest to you and to give your personal toughts about how difficult to accurate are all the 3 maps.

IRON ATTACK! - Future is Undefined [Insane] +HR (OD8.4) I got extremelly lucky at getting +1.25% accuracy than my average plays on a submited try
3OH!3 (feat. Katy Perry) - Starstrukk [FrozenPower's Hard] +DT (OD9.67) It has weird CS3 that makes it easy to aim but sometimes difficulting to accurate because of more chances of hitting an unwished circle (will not cost you a miss, but can cost some accuracy).
DJ Flower - Jamaican Love [Insane] +DT (OD9.67) somehow easy to accurate even at being OD9.67, singles taps, triplets and one unique stream that isn't too long.


I can't study at all by myself how much matters CS on pp because I do not see any notable difference at pp from maps with 1CS of difference because they're not that common appart that most cs=5 maps are differently mapped than standard cs=4 maps.

I have a somehow good idea how OD works on here by raising radically the 99% accuracy values, I never include AR in pp toughts mostly because the most frequent fact is that these maps with highest OD have higher AR (likely these OD9 AR9.67 from DT OR OD10 AR10 HR's).

BOOP

I don't see the problem

Redon wrote:

I don't see the problem

My last brain cell died.

DroidBass wrote:

OD10 is not THAT different to OD9.67

it really is. it's also easier to acc dt because it's faster.

AR is more like preferance imo, especially these days. All people suggest different ARs on same map from 9.0 to even 10.0.(yes I am mapping something 6☆+ though). I'm still the most comfortable with AR9, while others actually say 9.5~10.0 is actually comfortable even on same map.

idk, I honestly think AR should be adjustable and never effect pp at this level. there was a moment where people couldn't AR10 but cookiezi-level players, but nowdays.. Idk, there are people who adds HR just because they can't read 8.0, or even 9.0, and they are more comfortable with higher ARs(Just like how i do best on AR 8.0~9.3, while i can still play bit of 6~7, 9.4~s. their best is AR 9.5 and it starts from there I guess.)

sucks for them because they have to HR or DT most of old-days maps(AR9.0), or even other maps with AR9.0s.
and yeah sucks for those you can't AR9.1+ no matter how good they play.

My examples are slightly exaggerated but it does happen, though.

currently yes AR11 is known to be very hard, but what I do wanna say that AR10 was the same way few years ago. well. AR10 these days? some people actually "prefer" those.

haha5957 wrote:

AR is more like preferance imo, especially these days. All people suggest different ARs on same map from 9.0 to even 10.0.(yes I am mapping something 6☆+ though). I'm still the most comfortable with AR9, while others actually say 9.5~10.0 is actually comfortable even on same map.

idk, I honestly think AR should be adjustable and never effect pp at this level. there was a moment where people couldn't AR10 but cookiezi-level players, but nowdays.. Idk, there are people who adds HR just because they can't read 8.0, or even 9.0, and they are more comfortable with higher ARs(Just like how i do best on AR 8.0~9.3, while i can still play bit of 6~7, 9.4~s. their best is AR 9.5 and it starts from there I guess.)

sucks for them because they have to HR or DT most of old-days maps(AR9.0), or even other maps with AR9.0s.
and yeah sucks for those you can't AR9.1+ no matter how good they play.

My examples are slightly exaggerated but it does happen, though.

currently yes AR11 is known to be very hard, but what I do wanna say that AR10 was the same way few years ago. well. AR10 these days? some people actually "prefer" those.

You may have a point. I only agree if you can't change the AR while playing hardrock. It would make no sense.

make the AR freely adjustable, but accordingly rewarded or penalized by pp.

and what would reward or penalize?

Reward what fewer people can play and penalize what more people can play

Mahoganytooth wrote:

Reward what fewer people can play and penalize what more people can play

HRDT buff pls

inb4 Emperorpenguin suddenly #1

Penguin would be #1 if he actually had good accuracy.

Well that depends

Does HR+DT change OD in the same way it changes AR?

Like can you get to OD11 with them or does it put a hard cap at OD10

I wonder what an OD11 SS would be worth

If it is OD11 then poor acc is understandable

@Mahogany

Mahoganytooth wrote:

Reward what fewer people can play and penalize what more people can play

this is what ppv1 tried to do. and it proved to be a horrible approach.

I thought PPV1 just rewarded you based on global score rankings on the songs you played so the best way to get ranks was to 4mod SS easys and normals and spin fast.

Mahoganytooth wrote:

I thought PPV1 just rewarded you based on global score rankings on the songs you played so the best way to get ranks was to 4mod SS easys and normals and spin fast.

If you are #1, then that means you're rewarded for what no one else has done.

maps where you beat high ranked players or maps which had a lot of scores were worth more if you set a high rank.

Kheldragar wrote:

Mahoganytooth wrote:

I thought PPV1 just rewarded you based on global score rankings on the songs you played so the best way to get ranks was to 4mod SS easys and normals and spin fast.

If you are #1, then that means you're rewarded for what no one else has done.

You literally just span faster than anyone else

That's not worth rewarding

silmarilen wrote:

maps where you beat high ranked players or maps which had a lot of scores were worth more if you set a high rank.

That's a poor approach to anything but entirely separate to what we're discussing

Tom doesn't want to add that kind of human factor to the PP calculations, that's why you wont see those "bonuses" anytime soon. Ideally, the algorithm should reflect what you are saying; reward what fewer people can do. Unfortunately that would require a reading difficulty calculator which is very hard to come up with...

Giving more bonuses for note density is the only way I could see to do it, but the problem is EZ being underweighted, and that's more because of the low OD. You'd have to up the bonus from low AR enough to compensate for the low OD, but then you'd have to be careful that you don't end up screwing with actual low AR maps like easies and normals.

Alternatively make OD weighted less heavily.

reward what less people can do = top 20 is all easy mod gang and players like Rucker, ShadowSoul, TTTL,

Only if you overdo the bonuses

reason why DT is bit overrated is well described in barusamiko's post.

Due to DT diffs are also re-calculated by some formula, 5star nomod is farely equal to DT 5star (difficluty of pattern-wise.)

however they generally have high ODs, which is heavily rewarding.

Nature of osu! is a RHYTHM game. +- 20ms from perfect timing even on OD10 doesn't look too hard compared to other rhythm games. Now keep in mind that OD10 is the very highest OD in this game, and it doesnt even exist(yes there are, but i'd say ignorable amount.)

let's be honest, if someone is capable of playing a difficulty pretty well in osu!, they won't have problem 99%+ing map since most of osu! maps have 7~8OD(+-32~38ms).


Now yes OD 8 is definitely harder than OD7, but if you are well skilled enough, honestly OD8 or below pretty much feels the same. OD9 is slightly more challenging, but not even that with appropriate AR(9.5+). maybe OD10? yes probably, but maybe not a huge deal looking at those high scores with DT or HR.

I do think OD is bit overratted at the moment, especially OD 8~9s because they don't feel too different from lower ARs but they get rewarded hecktons with high accuracy. I still think ODs should be rewarded correctly but any OD lower than 8 honestly doesnt mean too much and there aren't much of OD9 or higher maps, and they are somehow popular as a "good pp rewarding map"(detetori- emotional skyscraper, wind god girl. they have OD9 and isn't too hard but rewarded heckton.) I don't think this is right. getting played more and gets more attention just because they have high OD? god, I wanna go change all my maps to OD9 so they can be pp-awarding and maybe they will get more attention.


What I'm trying to say is that OD should be correctly rewarded but situation where people only look for OD8 or higher doesn't look right. I think they should be adjustable, or maybe make a mod that increases OD to 10 no matter what their original OD is(So that maps with similar difficulty, with low OD, doesn't get kicked out indirectly from someone who wants some PP). HR is different story because OD7 maps doesnt even reach OD10 with it, and for some maps HR makes it way too hard to play.

I was kind of guy who plays map that I like, but when it comes to pp farming i have to type OD>7.5 on my search bar just because it's so much easier to farm pp with OD8, OD9 maps. Now if OD becomes adjustable or OD10, or maybe even OD11 mod comes out yes I think I'll start playing all the various maps again.




bit different story, but again, about AR, unlike when AR10s where regarded as super hards they became more like "preferance" these days. Some of my friends say my map sucks because it has AR8 or AR7(which was major trend back in time). I also wanna change the frikkin AR to 9 but meh not possible. old maps are getting some complains just because of AR(which doesn't really mean anything) and also doesn't make sense.

now talking about AR10.3 or 11, yes they are really hard but some people are already getting used to AR10.3 and maybe AR11 eventually. I mean, just make it adjustable and reward same pp. why not? most of ~2012 maps are getting discriminated just because of low OD or low AR. Some gets advantage just because of that OD9. Does it even make sense? You are playing the same map.

haha5957 wrote:

bit different story, but again, about AR, unlike when AR10s where regarded as super hards they became more like "preferance" these days. Some of my friends say my map sucks because it has AR8 or AR7(which was major trend back in time). I also wanna change the frikkin AR to 9 but meh not possible. old maps are getting some complains just because of AR(which doesn't really mean anything) and also doesn't make sense.

now talking about AR10.3 or 11, yes they are really hard but some people are already getting used to AR10.3 and maybe AR11 eventually. I mean, just make it adjustable and reward same pp. why not? most of ~2012 maps are getting discriminated just because of low OD or low AR. Some gets advantage just because of that OD9. Does it even make sense? You are playing the same map.

There are a lot of potential issues with freely adjustable AR. The biggest one would be the effect on the leaderboards. As a player who enjoys older maps (including yours), I think a lot of the people who put in the time to become good at old maps would feel kind of cheated because people would suddenly be able to come in and play the same map with way less note density due to the higher AR and potentially make the top50.

silmarilen wrote:

Mahoganytooth wrote:

Reward what fewer people can play and penalize what more people can play

this is what ppv1 tried to do. and it proved to be a horrible approach.

However that's not the reason why ppv1 was bad. It just had a lot of arbitrary parameters all over the place. A decent map ranking based pp system is definitely possible and shouldn't be rejected because of one failed attempt.

haha5957 wrote:

reason why DT is bit overrated is well described in barusamiko's post.

Due to DT diffs are also re-calculated by some formula, 5star nomod is farely equal to DT 5star (difficluty of pattern-wise.)

Now yes OD 8 is definitely harder than OD7, but if you are well skilled enough, honestly OD8 or below pretty much feels the same. OD9 is slightly more challenging, but not even that with appropriate AR(9.5+). maybe OD10? yes probably, but maybe not a huge deal looking at those high scores with DT or HR.

I do think OD is bit overratted at the moment, especially OD 8~9s because they don't feel too different from lower ARs but they get rewarded hecktons with high accuracy. I still think ODs should be rewarded correctly but any OD lower than 8 honestly doesnt mean too much and there aren't much of OD9 or higher maps, and they are somehow popular as a "good pp rewarding map"(detetori- emotional skyscraper, wind god girl. they have OD9 and isn't too hard but rewarded heckton.) I don't think this is right. getting played more and gets more attention just because they have high OD? god, I wanna go change all my maps to OD9 so they can be pp-awarding and maybe they will get more attention.

I was kind of guy who plays map that I like, but when it comes to pp farming i have to type OD>7.5 on my search bar just because it's so much easier to farm pp with OD8, OD9 maps. Now if OD becomes adjustable or OD10, or maybe even OD11 mod comes out yes I think I'll start playing all the various maps again.

bit different story, but again, about AR, unlike when AR10s where regarded as super hards they became more like "preferance" these days. Some of my friends say my map sucks because it has AR8 or AR7(which was major trend back in time). I also wanna change the frikkin AR to 9 but meh not possible. old maps are getting some complains just because of AR(which doesn't really mean anything) and also doesn't make sense.

I'm absolutely right with all this that I have quoted, but not with the rest. Adjusting settings as player's choice would ruin what osu was meant from 2007 to now. If you can't read or tap properly sincerelly you have no reasson to be on that ranking. There are standarized DT, HR and HT mods to fix some disbalanced maps and give aditional oportunities to more people to rank these maps even if they can't read or tap the original map. You can combine 2 of these 3 mods to obtain more possible oportunities and if you can't still rank this with these mods or combinations of these then the map is not meant for you.

Now yes, we need atleast OD8 to start seing good pp from accuracy and some maps are worth their pp froma accuracy, but the problem IS that there are many cases of pussy patterns that give no opposition to accuracy from their patterns difficulty and so they're free accuracy maps even with their high respective OD. I've noticed that there are many OD7 old maps which are more Accuracy killers than these newer maps with OD8.5 even with the similar amount of stars ... this ressults that the new map gives more pp and with less effort, more people can high accuracy this than the older map which has a lower pp limit but is harder to high accuracy and people avoids it because "too hard pp" ...

These new style maps tends to be more frequently more friendly to gameplay, to be less aggresive patterns (by both aim and tapping) ressulting that there are lots of players that can only play these new styled maps meanwhile if you set them old school maps likely Mutsuhiko Izumi - Red Goose [Another] you fuck up their skill. Hey I have an S of only 95.50% accuracy at TJ.Hangneil - Kamui [dksslqj Style] that is only worth as a little less than 160's pp and I still find this as one of my most epic moments ever in osu, even more epic than most of my 200's pp ranks . Also not any new map is broken of pp's, if you look at Apocalyptica - Ion [Extra] it's a really good map that I'm glad of having it on S at 96.85% accuracy which has a good pp potential from being OD8.6 but being somehow difficult to farm because of considerably hard patterns... not even a fairly "good accuracy" on that map and I'm between the top 200's as shown in this Screenshot.

But hey, I have not that many of these maps in my best performance because there are many more pp efficent and easier maps that I've done with higher accuracy mainly because they were much easier to do, but I still go for these hard and underrated maps because I don't want to be a mere farmer of ppv2.

About Easy it's fine as how it's going, it even needs more difference from low accuracy EZ plays than to higher accuracy EZ plays, but common EZ is a kind of aditional mod and it's not sincerely a useful mod to learn in what general skill means, you will not see it oftenly in a torneun or in OWC, learning this mod doesn't give you general skill just giving you a chance at ranking more maps in a unnusual way.

and who decides what 'patterns' are objectively hard? it varies massively from player to player. hard to make a system that includes everyone single those patterns out.

Overlaps, abrupt spacing changes, polygons, weird sliders with a very high SV...

The more uncomfortable the patterns are to grab and to tap, the more hard to accurate is. For aim, usually these circles that forces you being more time at a determinated place of the screen to then move more sharply will cost you most, if the map is constantly fluid then there is no kind of problem with aim level. About tapping the less variety of tapable patterns there are the more easy to repeat it constantly is, meaning that there should be something that evaluates some kind of "strain" for this ... likely quick changes from duplets to tripletse or a stream that ends with 1/2 of null timed note then slider over THE SAME position, this last one makes lots of sliderbreaks and is proportionally difficult to the more circles had the stream before the slider.

This is what I would consider pattern difficulty, even more if you mix bboth complicated aim + complicated tapping instead of just fast tapping and fast aiming

Mhm, I agree on OD being a too big factor for map selection but I also think that the differences in OD are something that develop with time.
Personally I don't really stand a chance to get a SS on any OD8 map but it's fairly possible on OD7 and below. I think it's reasonable that it's worth a lot more than lower OD.
A possibility to upgrade the OD of the map somehow would be cool for pp-farming but it's also kinda lame as lower OD can have a sense for the map and it would also feel even more unfair for people whose OD is limited by suboptimal input devices.
You could say something like "if 2σ of hit notes are in the σ-environment of the 300-area OD is upgraded by 1 for pp-calculation" to reward very accurate players for a result instead of letting them edit the map-specs beforehand and get higher pp even though it wouldn't even have been that good on the original OD. Or you could make it exclusive to SS-scores/find some new name for this scorecategory.
Imo it's important to put strong limits to how players can influence the maps metadata without mods so it can't get abused.

Riince wrote:

and who decides what 'patterns' are objectively hard? it varies massively from player to player. hard to make a system that includes everyone single those patterns out.

Physics and physiology?

Certain angles are harder to make depending on the momentum from the previous patterns than others. Also, there's a big connection between rhythm and aim pressure. As pressure on either increases, so does the "energy distribution" (which is more of attention) between both, and that means that the other half would undeniably increase in pressure as well.

In other words, let's say I have a map with a really long stream, like 2 minutes. And let's assume I'm not that fast a streamer, but the map is only 160bpm, and the stream starts out with stack spacing, and gradually increases to 1.3x spacing. Now, at fist, streaming this would be easy peasy. However, the longer I stream, the more strain is put on my left hand. Even though the streaming is constant 160bpm, it will take more and more effort to continue streaming uninterruptedly. Now my aim hand has more stamina than my stream hand, but since the stream keeps spacing itself out gradually, I'll experience a roughly equal stamina loss in both hands rather than just my streaming hand.

That's one thing, the affecting of rhythm on aim and vice versa. It'd also work if I had lots of fast jumps - my tapping hand gets a lot more tired playing Nyan Nyan Drive (which I alt) than a map that's 30bpm higher and has mostly alt singles. It's something I call mutual strain. I also find it best to approach mapping under the assumption that the player will use two hands as opposed to mouse-only because that's just the majority of the game.

Another difficulty aspect is angle. And angle is always directly tied to momentum, which is always tied to pressure, which is always tied to the strain caused on the player. I've found that with small momentum any angle seems to work except weird stuff like a 270° turn coming from the bottom right at low speed. Basically, in my experience, I've found that other players (and myself) have more ease with what I call "conventional angles" (mainly 90°, 45°, 120° and 180° turns) and "unconventional angles" which, even if they work as a map, are just not seen commonly. Some popular users of these angles would be Amamiya Yuko, or HanzeR. fanzhen seems to combine conventional angles with unconventional ones in a creative way so he'd kind of fall in a league of his own, in this respect.

I don't know precisely which kinds of angles are preferred on average but it wouldn't be hard to figure that out with some sort of poll. And then it wouldn't be hard (I assume) to determine that x angle at y momentum has z difficulty value (for aim). Momentum is simply the combination of spacing + aim + previous angle. "previous angle" would be same direction the followpoints take (clockwise). So, let's say I make a 4.0x jump at a 90° angle at 220bpm, and the next jump is a 2.0x jump at yet another 90° turn - this jump's difficulty would feel more like a 4.0x jump followed by a 1.0x jump, due to the massive speed you've gained from the initial jump. Whereas if the pattern was reversed, the second jump would feel like a 5.0x jump because the initial jump didn't give much power and then you have to add extra force to make up for the sharp angle too.

These are just two takes on difficulty that I haven't seen yet but they seem pretty relevant to me. I mean, the laws of motion are a thing, they don't hold exemptions for circle clickers.

Tess wrote:

quote

The biggest flaw here is that you assume patterns are all PHYSICALLY difficult, they're not. Certain shapes are simply hard to break down and follow. You listed 90°, 45°, 120° and 180° as the easier angles yet 90 and 45 are imo the hardest angles to follow in the game. It's far too subjective to model using "some sort of poll" and it's far more complex than just calculating hand velocities.

I'm talking about physical strain, not physical difficulty. If you model things by difficulty it gets subjective. It should never be about what's the most difficult for people, but about what causes the most objective strain. I also said that those angles are easier relative to other types of angles, and it's always contextual.

The image I'm trying to draw there is that you can calculate contextual strain objectively by paying attention both to the natural physical strain patterns would give, and the average difficulty of certain patterns for the average player. You mentioned "90 and 45 are the hardest angles to follow in the game" but it always depends on the context of the strain of the previous patterns, the bpm, the rhythm complexity, the note density, and the angle you're coming from. I wasn't talking about "which angle is the hardest", I was talking about "which angles do I see more people being able to complete".

If you look at "what's hard" then you fall into the personal context world of subjectivity and if you look at "what strains" then you're still taking the context of the map and physiology into account with little regard for the player's ideas of what's difficult and easy, since that's different for every player anyway. Physical strain is not, and if you model things that way then you're looking at which player can deal with the most strain in all areas (aim, reading, speed, rhythm, accuracy) rather than "who can do stuff that others can do less".

im not really sure what you mean by strain, it might just be because my fingers are pretty strong from years of pen spinning, but i've never felt strained from aiming, even if i'm going out of my way on crazy jump maps for an extended time. i nofail spammed eighto for like almost an hour once because im stupid and thought it would help, and if anything my hand felt more flexible afterwards.

even for the average player i think the factor of strain for angle snapping is kind of irrelevant unless were talking intense long marathons that have consistent 6+ star difficulty minimum. which don't exist afaik.

I agree that stamina should be a factor. for tapping. but aiming stamina is something that is a far larger variable than tapping stamina. you've got people with smaller/bigger areas, and people who use touchscreens which pretty much completely eliminate any angle-related difficulties...

By strain I mean quite literally the amount of effort (based on an average) it costs to do a certain something. I mean, there's so much available data on maps and scores on those maps, it shouldn't be hard to see what kinds of angles are relatively more intensive to play than others, along with rhythms as well. I'll agree that when it comes to pure aim my stamina between aim and tapping also doesn't compare. But I've noticed that in myself (and other players, I've even seen index mention this) as soon as I start running out of stamina in one hand, I run out of stamina in the other as well.

As for touchscreens, those always seemed to have had an apparent advantage when it comes to aiming. Isn't that why Tom disabled TAG4 pp?

Also, do keep in mind I'm just giving a rough idea of the general direction you could go in when considering how to calculate pp more accurately. I purposefully avoided any specific ideas because, in my experience, people tend to argue or neglect any precise propositions unless they reach them together.

Strain is caused through having to tense your hand to hit small circles or to accelerate or decelerate your hand quickly. I experience way more strain playing 4.5* old cs5 maps compared to maps with jumps that flow well like Senketsu no Chikai.

huh, i guess i just don't think that kind of strain has a noticeable impact on playing, anymore than how hard it is to press a certain type of key down. in my experience if someone messes up on aiming it's reading related.

What is aimif everyone connects misaims to misreads?

Well reading has a strain of its own which is the time it takes for your brain to process what's on the screen and react to it accordingly. I don't get what's so "subjective" about that. The more things on the screen at once, the longer your brain will take to organize everything because it can't rely on reflexes. The less time you have to react, the more trained your reflexes will have to be to react to something. These are both two reading strains determined by the opposite ends of note density, and yet the attention paid to them is rather minimal.

I have an idea, if aim speed and accuracy can be independent, why can't a new subcategory be added for flashlight?

Because most people have no clue what actually makes flashlight difficult. Memorization is the smallest factor, not the only one.

Strain as described by Tess is a real thing. When you have a series of jumps, the algorithm will calculate the aiming difficulty of each individual jump, and then this number is further increased as you have more jumps. That's strain, I think, but of the most simple variety.

If you have a series of jumps end on a spaced stream, that's a different matter. There is clearly a *lot* of effort that you need to put in order to hit all notes on the spaced stream at the end, but the current difficulty algorithm doesn't really take that into consideration, IMO. The effort you have to put to decelerate your cursor like that is definitely real, as B1rd said. I think this is also partly the reason why CS difficulty calculation is flawed and a flat bonus had to be put in place in order to fix star ratings for high CS maps.

That said, I don't think looking at angles alone is the way to implement a reading calculator. There are some good things you can do with it, but I don't think it's enough to fix highly overrated maps like Koigokoro. For that, you would need a pattern detector: an algorithm that looks at mapping patterns as a whole, instead of just calculating the angles from individual jumps. I'd say that if Tom wants to look into that, he should start very small and safe (as is many times the case in software developing), by testing individual patterns that are *for sure* a pain in the ass to everyone who plays this game and are also underrated by the current algorithm. I think that if you add a small batch of those to the current build, you would already be fixing DT farm maps by making everything else give much more PP. Alternatively, you could detect EASY patterns and then add a penalty, but to me that sounds more difficult.

Regarding the angle thing that got mentioned briefly several posts back, I think a lot of underweighted and overweighted aim patterns could be brought more into line just by considering the angle between the current straight line path and the previous straight line path. If you call that angle theta, something as simple as d^(a-cos(theta))/t^(a+cos(theta)) rather than d^a/t^a (where I think right now a=3) would fix a looot of problems. Would need to use a smaller measuring stick for distance in order to make it actually work, but that would be probably easy enough to find a good approximate value for.

Doing that correctly would nerf "slow" DT farm maps relative to faster ones - DT farm maps have lots of jumps with small angles between consecutive paths and the change I'm suggesting would make such jumps more dependent on effective bpm and less dependent on distance between notes. On the other extreme, large spacing with really wide angles would be buffed, but would scale less with effective bpm - things like the ridiculous quintuples in Genryuu Kaiko or any pattern at all in Worldwide Choppers.

I'd just like to drop by to say (and repeat) that I really do think that even simpler and smaller pattern/rhythm complexity evaluation logic could be added, since anything in the right direction would be a step forward and better than not considering these aspects at all. As long as we feel the average error of the algorhythm gets smaller that is.

For rhythm complexity simply considering variability of the rhythm to a small extent would be great, to reward accing stuff that isn't 1/2 spam almost exclusively a bit more.

now measure the relation between the music and in-game objects, hitsounds...

i suck at this game and I'm a loser lol

Is this intended behaviour?



I'm assuming that perhaps the speed difficulty is being calculated based upon the length of streams based on time, rather than the number of notes? It seems very counterintuitive though.

Here is a spreadsheet of values: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/ ... edit#gid=0

Here is a copy of the mapset I made while testing if you want to inspect it, I only just updated it though so it hasn't calculated the online difficulty ratings yet: https://osu.ppy.sh/s/298070

edit: This is, of course, a very primitive test, but I tried to minimise the effect that could happen due to aim or accuracy by using OD0 and perfect stacks with stack leniency 0. I don't claim to know how the pp/tar diff systems work but I do fine this rather odd

edit2: It was suggested that I also test this with different length streams to see if it changes and perhaps becomes nullified, I may do that at some point soon. 32 was just an arbitrary power of 2 that's a decent stream length in order to make my copying and pasting easier

Now i know why Tom is planning to buff high bpm, since 240 seems to be the highest bpm that is being properly rewarded.

blahpy's post said it all, just check the star rating of Mad Machine DT if you want a ranked map to test on, it's way too low.

Tom pls why would you do this to us.

Nice post count Jesus. Well memed, I know.

With so few notes, this could be another little quirk related to the fact that tom's difficulty algorithm breaks the map into short time intervals and chooses the highest strain from each. Or at least it did back in the days of tp. Probably still does.

Try 64 and 128 notes?

Would been a good idea about considering stream lenght by time instead amount of circles at all. Also both cases of very long streams and really fast stacks (355 bpm likely seen at xi - Breakthrough Atmosphere +DT because streams of 1/6 at 237 bpm) are both cases underrated. Seems that the meta for pp is finding a map full of "streams" 5-9 circles frequently, not complicated stream shape (mainly lineally and fluided ones) with higher spacing between circle and OD equal or over to OD8. Maps with streams of +30 circles and over 4 seconds of tapping aren't that seen in people's best performance, mainly because they're highly underrated compared to easier maps that can give more pp for less effort.

I find confusing that on some cases a 5.1 stars map likely Tristam & Braken - Frame of Mind [Chill] can give more pp than maps with 5.48 stars likely Shounen Radio - neu [Gold]...

Facts to consider
1.- Shounen radio has 821 elements, Tristam has 1042 elements
2.- Shounen radio is OD7, Tristam is OD8
3.- Tristam is much more consistent than Shounen radio is
4.- General ranking on top 50's talks by itself.
Personal tought: Tristam [Chill] is being highly farmed because it gives a way too much pp from accuracy value, instead shounen radio [gold] is avoided due it needs strong constancy at fingers on some parts and being massively underewarded because it's worth as very low accuracy on pp.

What I want to highlight from this?
1.- There should been a star system from "average star level" and "hardest star level", this would allow people to find maps to properly train constancy or instead going ahead for maps with high peaks of difficulty.
2.- General pp obtained from a map SHOULD be based on "average star level" and if this is worked finely, it should been balanced on both cases that requires or constancy or a nuke of skill on atleast a single part. This would take lots of effort, but looks promising.
3.- Accuracy is being overrated (mainly OD+8 with many circles). This makes people to avoid maps that they can't do with really good accuracy and instead they go for free accuracy = free pp maps. Needed of more tries to FC 95.50% Shounen Radio [gold] than to FC Tristam Frame of Mind [Chill] with 98.02% accuracy.

Preffered to not extend on too many topics at the same time, just mentioning one and describing another clearly.

GhostFrog wrote:

With so few notes, this could be another little quirk related to the fact that tom's difficulty algorithm breaks the map into short time intervals and chooses the highest strain from each. Or at least it did back in the days of tp. Probably still does.

Good theory, could be the reason yeah.

Kheldragar wrote:

Try 64 and 128 notes?

Will try some different numbers of notes later today when I have time

Pretty interested for the results. Also, the pp vs. star rating thing DroidBass mentioned is legit. Some star ratings seem really off, and it still feels counterintuitive to me that a map of a certain SR would give less pp than a map of lower SR than the first.

Tess wrote:

it still feels counterintuitive to me that a map of a certain SR would give less pp than a map of lower SR than the first.

This can happen often due to accuracy rating due to OD, length, etc, i'm trying to minimise that effect here though

GhostFrog wrote:

With so few notes, this could be another little quirk related to the fact that tom's difficulty algorithm breaks the map into short time intervals and chooses the highest strain from each. Or at least it did back in the days of tp. Probably still does.

This is probably the reason. In the graph you can see how the amount of BPM difference increases between each of these "steps". Those breakpoints are where the 32 note stream starts being completely contained within one less of these intervals.

If you'd want to compare the difficulties of such streams I suggest you make a map at least 30 seconds long where you just repeat those streams with a short break inbetween. Sadly there could still be aliasing artifacts when the BPM and the time interval share common divisors, but they shouldn't be as bad.

The sudden knack at 300 BPM is by the way currently caused by a hard cap avoiding singularities in maps putting some hitobjects 1ms or even 0ms apart. I should probably make that higher now that some people actually start to pull off 300bpm scores.

DroidBass wrote:

Facts to consider
1.- Shounen radio has 821 elements, Tristam has 1042 elements
2.- Shounen radio is OD7, Tristam is OD8
3.- Tristam is much more consistent than Shounen radio is
4.- General ranking on top 50's talks by itself.

you forgot 1 major thing.
tristam has 923 circles
shounen radio has 652 circles
sliders arent considered for acc, only for beatmap length.

so not only is tristam a higher od, it also has almost 300 circles more.
when aim/speed/acc get divided you will see that tristam most likely gives 30-40pp more in the acc part compared to shounen radio. while shounen radio will give more in the combined aim/speed part.

unfortunately pp cant tell how hard a map actually is to acc, it purely looks at od and amount of circles for that part afaik.

IIRC that's the main reason why HR often feels undervalued. If the map doesn't score high in aim or speed but is still hard to acc (like marathons) it won't give any decent pp below 99%

also because most people don't have high acc.

Tom94 wrote:

GhostFrog wrote:

With so few notes, this could be another little quirk related to the fact that tom's difficulty algorithm breaks the map into short time intervals and chooses the highest strain from each. Or at least it did back in the days of tp. Probably still does.

This is probably the reason. In the graph you can see how the amount of BPM difference increases between each of these "steps". Those breakpoints are where the 32 note stream starts being completely contained within one less of these intervals.

If you'd want to compare the difficulties of such streams I suggest you make a map at least 30 seconds long where you just repeat those streams with a short break inbetween. Sadly there could still be aliasing artifacts when the BPM and the time interval share common divisors, but they shouldn't be as bad.

The sudden knack at 300 BPM is by the way currently caused by a hard cap avoiding singularities in maps putting some hitobjects 1ms or even 0ms apart. I should probably make that higher now that some people actually start to pull off 300bpm scores.

Thanks for the explanation, makes perfect sense now

Riince wrote:

also because most people don't have high acc.

This, the reward curve for HR is incredibly steep so the only way it rewards you is if you get 99+% acc or if you're playing a 3+ minute map.