Hey so Im just now a little bit confused about my rank and I feel like being stuck at it. Im now for over like a year and nearly 2 Rank #145k-130k and I have a feeling I cant get belower (im not getting enough + to get down 130). Do you guys have some tips how I can maybe finally get below this 130k?
forum
A Little Question to the Ranking System
posted
Total Posts
38
Have you tried getting full combos on reasonably difficult maps
DT hard maps gg.Samuel97 wrote:
Hey so Im just now a little bit confused about my rank and I feel like being stuck at it. Im now for over like a year and nearly 2 Rank #145k-130k and I have a feeling I cant get belower (im not getting enough + to get down 130). Do you guys have some tips how I can maybe finally get below this 130k?
On Topic: Have you tried playing some decent pp farm maps that you can FC with one try?
Just keep clearing 2 star maps with DT and high accuracy like you've been doing, trying out some harder maps as you go along, or FC some more 3 star maps without DT.
So long as you get a Full Combo and have at least 97% accuracy, you can just farm PP by taking on maps that are worth more and getting good scores on them.
So long as you get a Full Combo and have at least 97% accuracy, you can just farm PP by taking on maps that are worth more and getting good scores on them.
Actually don't play DT for ranks because it may give you an inflated sense of your own ability and then it becomes discouraging when you try to play equivalent nomod maps only to see no gains and have far more difficulties
Try fcing (full combo) hards / normals with DT/HR/HD and easy pp all while still maintaining a healthy sense of progression to insane and boom profit
"Actually don't play DT for ranks because it may give you an inflated sense of your own ability" eh not really I mean if you spam 10.3 all day then we have a discussion but I don't and many others don't not even 10.3 but ar 8 dt, DT shows alot of stamina and speed imo even at normal level thats still saying much cause it will be the same speed as lets say a hard or a light insane making it a bit easier on the eyes for that player when they get there.
"Actually don't play DT for ranks because it may give you an inflated sense of your own ability" eh not really I mean if you spam 10.3 all day then we have a discussion but I don't and many others don't not even 10.3 but ar 8 dt, DT shows alot of stamina and speed imo even at normal level thats still saying much cause it will be the same speed as lets say a hard or a light insane making it a bit easier on the eyes for that player when they get there.
I completely disagreeWrite wrote:
DT shows alot of stamina and speed imo even at normal level
DT maps at a medium-low level are literally just nomod maps that give more PP. Just as HR doesn't really become HR until it starts making stuff AR10 OD10, DT doesn't really become DT until it pushes speed requirements past those of normal maps. Both are awful to use on anything below insanes, because you won't actually learn anything yet it'll still reward disproportionate PP.
Mahogany wrote:
I completely disagreeWrite wrote:
DT shows alot of stamina and speed imo even at normal level
DT maps at a medium-low level are literally just nomod maps that give more PP. Just as HR doesn't really become HR until it starts making stuff AR10 OD10, DT doesn't really become DT until it pushes speed requirements past those of normal maps. Both are awful to use on anything below insanes, because you won't actually learn anything yet it'll still reward disproportionate PP.
This
The only redeeming quality about DTHR/DT/HR on easier diffs is that it usually brings it up to ar9. While this means you will probably never learn how to play lower AR's and are fucked if you can't make the leap from normal+mods to hards+mods or insanes+nomod, you will be accustomed to probably the most common AR for your average player.
how the fuck is a new player supposed to know all this stuff?
(btw im not saying you are a new player)
(btw im not saying you are a new player)
Topic Starter
lol as a person with his top 3 ranks from DT I would say no, with same SD, drain time, and bpm, DT maps are just easier cause the pattern in normal - insane is just simple in comparison, and for it you get inflated PP which is also why I should be at 50k rankWrite wrote:
DT shows alot of stamina and speed imo even at normal level.
your at the stage where literally all you have to do is play more and you will get better. You havnt really been playing for a year because you have like a 7k playcount. Literally just play more, and dont play super easy shit
With the same SD, drain time, and bpm, nomod maps are the same as DT too. The extra pp comes from the higher od which tends to be 9 or 9.6 after DT. Your top play is OD8+DT which has HD on it. If the nomods were higher OD like 9.5, you'd see them give what you like to call "inflated" pp.N0thingSpecial wrote:
lol as a person with his top 3 ranks from DT I would say no, with same SD, drain time, and bpm, DT maps are just easier cause the pattern in normal - insane is just simple in comparison, and for it you get inflated PP which is also why I should be at 50k rankWrite wrote:
DT shows alot of stamina and speed imo even at normal level.
Please come back when you have played 4.00*+ nomod with DT and it's above 230 bpm, though. DT below that level isn't actual DT for you or Write.
I was saying the inflated PP comes from the simpler rhythmatic pattern and actual pattern of the map, of course I know higher OD + high acc = more pp
A simpler actual pattern of a map won't give more pp - it'd give less. The OD is pulling all the weight.N0thingSpecial wrote:
I was saying the inflated PP comes from the simpler rhythmatic pattern and actual pattern of the map, of course I know higher OD + high acc = more pp
No, because the game doesn't take pattern difficult into account at all. All it does is calculate bpm and spacing.Khelly wrote:
A simpler actual pattern of a map won't give more pp - it'd give less. The OD is pulling all the weight.N0thingSpecial wrote:
I was saying the inflated PP comes from the simpler rhythmatic pattern and actual pattern of the map, of course I know higher OD + high acc = more pp
*cough* that is the type of pattern difficulty I was talking about *cough*B1rd wrote:
No, because the game doesn't take pattern difficult into account at all. All it does is calculate bpm and spacing.
Well you don't have good reading comprehension, seeing as in this context 'simpler rhythmic patterns' is obviously referring to objects arranged in a way that is easier to hit despite being of similar star rating.Khelly wrote:
*cough* that is the type of pattern difficulty I was talking about *cough*
I don't think I was referring to "simpler rhythmic pattern" at all. It seems to be also an entirely distinct object from "And actual pattern difficulty of the map." that I was talking about.B1rd wrote:
Well you don't have good reading comprehension, seeing as in this context 'simpler rhythmic patterns' is obviously referring to objects arranged in a way that is easier to hit despite being of similar star rating.Khelly wrote:
*cough* that is the type of pattern difficulty I was talking about *cough*
Maybe it's you who has bad reading comprehension.
What i meant was 'simpler patterns', not just 'simpler 'rhythmic patterns'.
He was referring to 'simpler rhythmic pattern and actual pattern' because that's literally what he said. And that obviously means objects arranged in a way that is easier to hit despite being of similar star rating..
He was referring to 'simpler rhythmic pattern and actual pattern' because that's literally what he said. And that obviously means objects arranged in a way that is easier to hit despite being of similar star rating..
They're two different objects where "simpler rhythmic pattern" obviously refers to maps that are easier to get accuracy on due to how the song is made/timed and "simpler actual pattern" refers to actual patterns being easier to hit. How the highest difficult's of No title are harder patterns than the easier difficulties.
While Setting Sail Insane + DT is like 4,8* AR9.6 and let's be honest, this map should get HUGE nerf due giving way too much pp for this patterns where i can easiely find a 3,5-4* nomod map being like 100% more difficult than this.B1rd wrote:
What i meant was 'simpler patterns', not just 'simpler 'rhythmic patterns'.
He was referring to 'simpler rhythmic pattern and actual pattern' because that's literally what he said. And that obviously means objects arranged in a way that is easier to hit despite being of similar star rating..
Simple patterns welcome - there are maps like this which require literally zero skill to play them and inflate a lot of pp.
Blame ranking criteria for giving opportunity for mapping for pp.
It doesn't matter how often or easily you can fc setting sail. What matters is if you can get 99%+ on it which imo was pretty fucking hard when I tried to do it.[Taiga] wrote:
While Setting Sail Insane + DT is like 4,8* AR9.6 and let's be honest, this map should get HUGE nerf due giving way too much pp for this patterns where i can easiely find a 3,5-4* nomod map being like 100% more difficult than this.B1rd wrote:
What i meant was 'simpler patterns', not just 'simpler 'rhythmic patterns'.
He was referring to 'simpler rhythmic pattern and actual pattern' because that's literally what he said. And that obviously means objects arranged in a way that is easier to hit despite being of similar star rating..
I could 95% fc it 9 times out of 10 back then, but who cares? 95% on that map isn't worth shit.
I agree, OD is actually only one thing what hold this map as some kind of difficulty.Khelly wrote:
It doesn't matter how often or easily you can fc setting sail. What matters is if you can get 99%+ on it which imo was pretty fucking hard when I tried to do it.
I could 95% fc it 9 times out of 10 back then, but who cares? 95% on that map isn't worth shit.
To be honest, i think getting around 98% acc should be fairly easy.
From my own experience as someone who don't play DT at all, i didn't had much problems with FCing this with 98% acc, despite i cannot read AR9.6 properly. Patterns are not challenging at all, acc this may be difficult for people not used to constant 180 bpm.
98% is still actually not worth very much on this map - it's only in the 150's. 99% according to tillerino is actually in the 180's which is on the level of a 92% fc of https://osu.ppy.sh/b/482147
I like this. People without good acc but better physical skills for maps can get the same pp for people with good acc that can't possibly fc harder to jump/stream/physically play/whatever maps. And the people that could get good acc on swing it are obviously beyond the level of the last two examples of people I gave.
My 3x100 run had a DT UR of about 135 which is about 90 real UR. In terms of someone who can't acc, that's really hard.
I like this. People without good acc but better physical skills for maps can get the same pp for people with good acc that can't possibly fc harder to jump/stream/physically play/whatever maps. And the people that could get good acc on swing it are obviously beyond the level of the last two examples of people I gave.
My 3x100 run had a DT UR of about 135 which is about 90 real UR. In terms of someone who can't acc, that's really hard.
Whether 'rhythmic difficulty' is different to 'actual difficulty' is besides the point, which was that DT is easier to acc and to FC than nomod.
Acc is quite overweighed on maps like Setting Sail, I average around 97-98% on 5* od8 nomod, and even though that's od9.6 I could get over 99% pretty easily. Same with Diasy [Blossom], I got 98% on that at OD10 because it's all 1/2 jumps with no streams, any other 5* map with HR and I'd get 90%.
Setting Sail is objectively easier to get pp from than Swing It because the difficulty of getting high acc on relatively easy high OD maps that are all 1/2 jumps is much easier than getting low acc FCs on harder nomod maps.
Acc is quite overweighed on maps like Setting Sail, I average around 97-98% on 5* od8 nomod, and even though that's od9.6 I could get over 99% pretty easily. Same with Diasy [Blossom], I got 98% on that at OD10 because it's all 1/2 jumps with no streams, any other 5* map with HR and I'd get 90%.
Setting Sail is objectively easier to get pp from than Swing It because the difficulty of getting high acc on relatively easy high OD maps that are all 1/2 jumps is much easier than getting low acc FCs on harder nomod maps.
You're a satire of yourself.B1rd wrote:
objectively easier to get pp from
I'd say the same about you. Would you like me to look up some statistics of how highly Setting Sail is weighed in the farm map scale compared to Swing It?
Using terms like objectively together with subjective terms like easier.
You're hilarious
You're hilarious
Easier isn't a 'subjective term'.
I don't love getting into retarded semantic arguments because there are extremely few people here that can have an intelligent debate that actually has some substance.
I don't love getting into retarded semantic arguments because there are extremely few people here that can have an intelligent debate that actually has some substance.
I don't actually treat you seriously like a person. I just like getting +1 posts
But I like to laugh when you try to say "easier" isn't subjective.
But I like to laugh when you try to say "easier" isn't subjective.
To be fair, in addition to not taking readability into account the difficulty system only looks at the metric speed and not the vector velocity. As a result, the additional acceleration required as interior angle decreases is ignored (think squares vs triangles, straight streams vs jagged curves etc.).
Though straight lines for jumps are technically easier to aim, they are in practice more difficult but this is due to reading/synchronization issues. To be more precise, any pattern where you don't come to a halt over each circle has added reading difficulty.
On a less technical note Box says aiming lines is actually really easy once you get used to it. This statement provides credence that the difficulty is reading based and not physical in this special case.
Though straight lines for jumps are technically easier to aim, they are in practice more difficult but this is due to reading/synchronization issues. To be more precise, any pattern where you don't come to a halt over each circle has added reading difficulty.
On a less technical note Box says aiming lines is actually really easy once you get used to it. This statement provides credence that the difficulty is reading based and not physical in this special case.
Easier is a subjective term, the word easy already subject itself to interpretation therefore it is subjective.
I couldn't care less about postcount, I reply to stuff you say to try and prove you wrong. Which is completely futile since you are incapable of properly acknowledging any points in a debate and will constantly use convoluted semantic points to try and wriggle out of admitting you're wrong no matter how infallible the argument you're presented with is. Don't think I reply to you because I actually take you seriously, I haven't for a long time.Khelly wrote:
I don't actually treat you seriously like a person. I just like getting +1 posts
But I like to laugh when you try to say "easier" isn't subjective.
>>Ignores all the other responses calling BS on your "subjective" response because it can't admit it was wrong
Oh yes, allow me to rebut another stupid semantic point.
Nothing is objective. Nothing can be proven to be the objective truth. So when someone uses the word 'objective', it's actually means 'really likely considering the available evidence', because otherwise no one could use any absolute terms. You say you're 'definitely' coming to the party tomorrow? How do you know you're not gonna get hit by an asteroid and die first? Therefore you can't say definitely.
So I say 'it's objectively easier to get pp from a certain map' in the same sense that one would say 'it's objectively easier to touch your toes than jump from earth's crust to the moon'. Maybe someone has some super space suit or something that allows them to jump to the moon rather than touch their toes, but chances are for most people, touching their toes will be easier.
Nothing is objective. Nothing can be proven to be the objective truth. So when someone uses the word 'objective', it's actually means 'really likely considering the available evidence', because otherwise no one could use any absolute terms. You say you're 'definitely' coming to the party tomorrow? How do you know you're not gonna get hit by an asteroid and die first? Therefore you can't say definitely.
So I say 'it's objectively easier to get pp from a certain map' in the same sense that one would say 'it's objectively easier to touch your toes than jump from earth's crust to the moon'. Maybe someone has some super space suit or something that allows them to jump to the moon rather than touch their toes, but chances are for most people, touching their toes will be easier.
Move it to a PM please.
The OP of the thread got his answer already so there's no point in arguing any further.
The OP of the thread got his answer already so there's no point in arguing any further.