It can and theres work being done for this; in the future you'll have multiple "ranked" plays for each mod but only your highest PP one contributes to your PP total. (if i remember correctly)
forum
Performance Points feedback and suggestions (Standard)
posted
Total Posts
2,749
my only complain is that I've been correcting some songs that I had in C because I couldnt play them properly at that moment, but it has happened that I get a better rank and accuracy in the song and my global accuracy drops...I dont get it...
The accuracy on your profile is weighted by the accuracy of your top plays.
The worse a play is the less influence it has.
Therefore a C without any combo and trash acc has no influence on your weighted accuracy but a B with mediocre acc and high combo does have influence and will therefore lower your weighted accuracy.
The worse a play is the less influence it has.
Therefore a C without any combo and trash acc has no influence on your weighted accuracy but a B with mediocre acc and high combo does have influence and will therefore lower your weighted accuracy.
double time weighting
I believe the reason it gives more pp than it should (difficulty-wise) is because it gives a bonus for higher OD despite not increasing OD at all.
Higher OD decreases the time window in which you need to hit to score a 300. It therefor increases the time window between those 300 hit windows which is where the difficulty/accuracy challenge comes from.
This is not the case for double time. Double time merely decreases the time window required for a 300 but evenly decreases the time window between hits (instead of increasing it).
Double time makes you need to play faster, not more accurate than no-mod at all.
I believe the reason it gives more pp than it should (difficulty-wise) is because it gives a bonus for higher OD despite not increasing OD at all.
Higher OD decreases the time window in which you need to hit to score a 300. It therefor increases the time window between those 300 hit windows which is where the difficulty/accuracy challenge comes from.
This is not the case for double time. Double time merely decreases the time window required for a 300 but evenly decreases the time window between hits (instead of increasing it).
Double time makes you need to play faster, not more accurate than no-mod at all.
E m i
pp bonus for more time interval between hits (lower bpm, pauses) would be nice, because it's tuff
To keep the same relative accuracy with DT, you need to have a higher absolute accuracy.julchiar wrote:
double time weighting
I believe the reason it gives more pp than it should (difficulty-wise) is because it gives a bonus for higher OD despite not increasing OD at all.
Higher OD decreases the time window in which you need to hit to score a 300. It therefor increases the time window between those 300 hit windows which is where the difficulty/accuracy challenge comes from.
This is not the case for double time. Double time merely decreases the time window required for a 300 but evenly decreases the time window between hits (instead of increasing it).
Double time makes you need to play faster, not more accurate than no-mod at all.
While it's true that relative accuracy is
The relative vs absolute problem comes up in reading too, with density. DT keeps the relative reading difficulty (density) the same, but the absolute reading diffficulty (same density, higher AR) is higher.
More of a question than feedback, but regardless.
Does Hidden mod by itself affect the PP gained from the map or does it only increase score? Asking Tillerino while playing with both nomod and hidden seem to result in it guessing the same PP
Does Hidden mod by itself affect the PP gained from the map or does it only increase score? Asking Tillerino while playing with both nomod and hidden seem to result in it guessing the same PP
Hidden gives a fixed amount to the aim value and accuracy bonus of a score. If I'm not mistaken it's an 18% boost to aim and a 2% boost to accuracy, so it's best used in jump/small circle maps with high OD.
I feel alive
The lack of PP you get for doing a HD play. I think a couple years back HD was actually rewarding and now it's not. Basically you have no incentive to learn HD anymore because the lack of performance points you get.
The way things are currently, HD is very rewarding if you learn to play it well and likely to be harmful if you don't play it well and just use it on random plays. It gives a 20% boost to aim pp, which can be huge, and a 2% (I think) boost to accuracy pp, which is basically nothing. If you can use it on aim-heavy maps without dropping accuracy for it, it's very rewarding. However, if you use it on less aim-heavy maps with high OD and lose accuracy for it, you very well might find yourself losing pp for using it. And don't even try to play hard-to-read, easy-to-aim maps with HD. Not worth. There are fewer of those after the recent HD change though.
It basically suffers from the same issue as flashlight. Making it feel rewarding for individual maps would make it insanely OP overall. It's a bigger issue for flashlight because being able to play HD on most maps isn't a problem for most people who try to learn it (everyone except me b/c i suck at reading). The system could definitely be better, but I don't know how tom would make this particular aspect of the system smoother within the current framework.
It basically suffers from the same issue as flashlight. Making it feel rewarding for individual maps would make it insanely OP overall. It's a bigger issue for flashlight because being able to play HD on most maps isn't a problem for most people who try to learn it (everyone except me b/c i suck at reading). The system could definitely be better, but I don't know how tom would make this particular aspect of the system smoother within the current framework.
Why use anything? The pp algorithm is primarily rewarding aim and people use devices like touch screens where aim doesn't matter in the slightest. So eventually, people get rewarded for the slickest aiming skills they don't have.ZenithPhantasm wrote:
Why use pp when you can use percentiles?
Suggestions:
1. Remove the aim component from the algorithm completely
or
2. Delete or unrank touch screen scores or at least don't give pp for respective plays.
or
3. Remove pp from the game if you really believe touch screen is a legit playstyle
If you consider no.2 but really argue with the complexity of the algorithm becomming too demanding for the servers then make clear using touch screens is a punishable offense like using aim hacks and ban the cheaters. Simple but effective.
The whole concept is broken and doesn't work with touch screen scores being submitted.
T R I G G E R E D
Sure it has the potential to be broken but as of right now not a single top player uses touchscreen. Not sure if your puppy choked on a touchscreen or something but honestly it's not a big issue until it actually causes any problems.Infevo wrote:
Why use anything? The pp algorithm is primarily rewarding aim and people use devices like touch screens where aim doesn't matter in the slightest. So eventually, people get rewarded for the slickest aiming skills they don't have.ZenithPhantasm wrote:
Why use pp when you can use percentiles?
Suggestions:
1. Remove the aim component from the algorithm completely
or
2. Delete or unrank touch screen scores or at least don't give pp for respective plays.
or
3. Remove pp from the game if you really believe touch screen is a legit playstyle
If you consider no.2 but really argue with the complexity of the algorithm becomming too demanding for the servers then make clear using touch screens is a punishable offense like using aim hacks and ban the cheaters. Simple but effective.
The whole concept is broken and doesn't work with touch screen scores being submitted.
on topic: Is there really no way to calculate angles in maps? I feel like the aim component would be complete with a correctly added weighting for awkward angles
^^uberpancake wrote:
but honestly it's not a big issue until it actually causes any problems.
Maybe it's just me but I'd like to think of it as a problem when a 25k rank player craps out a <100 rank score with 400pp+ and gains 6k rank for a 80% acc play in the process. And considering >50% of the rewarded pp being aim based and touch doesn't require any aim skill whatsoever it is dazzling to see people play it down and claim it was just another legit playstyle.
I really should start caring less... facing an absolute absence of reason and logic here on the forums makes my brain bleed.
I agree that touch screen has no place in this game. It's such an inherently different way to play the game that it's essentially a different game alltogether. Every single other playstyle is about moving your cursor on your screen by using some peripheral. With a touch screen you just touch the screen (as the name already suggests), you don't move a cursor. You can easily use 4 (or more) fingers, removing the aim aspect of the game completely. Exgon's kanojo score is the perfect example of this. Those jumps are pretty much impossible for any normal player, yet with a touch screen he can just put 4 fingers over the positions and press them in the right order, essentially trivializing what would otherwise have been the most impressive fc in the game so far. You can argue that tag4 maps don't give pp so it doesn't matter, but the same thing happens in highscore (and other maps) but in a less severe way. He may be a good player, but he's definitely not good enough to fc one of the hardest jumpmaps that is currently ranked without cheezing his way through the jumps with a touch screen.
one possible last resort fix that would work for certain is invalidate plays that have any cursor teleportation. this would hurt tablet players too but might be for the best if touchscreen becomes mainstream.
aren't tablets pretty much touchscreens but you need to touch with a pen
Not even close. First of all, with a tablet you're not directly aiming on the screen (unless you're using a tablet pc, which is probably even less common than touch screen). Second, you still need to hold and move something. You can only use up to 2 pens properly because you only have 2 hands (and how many people are ambidextrous enough to do that?), and then i don't even know if that works. And if it does, it's sure going to be hard as hell coordinating 2 pens without looking at them directly.jaaakb wrote:
aren't tablets pretty much touchscreens but you need to touch with a pen
holy moly that's a lot of salt, calm down people
i guess people have different thoughts, but generally you are right
i was gunna ask this question, but sometimes i think my tablet is another computer that you can adjust the size of the areasilmarilen wrote:
Not even close. First of all, with a tablet you're not directly aiming on the screen (unless you're using a tablet pc, which is probably even less common than touch screen). Second, you still need to hold and move something. You can only use up to 2 pens properly because you only have 2 hands (and how many people are ambidextrous enough to do that?), and then i don't even know if that works. And if it does, it's sure going to be hard as hell coordinating 2 pens without looking at them directly.jaaakb wrote:
aren't tablets pretty much touchscreens but you need to touch with a pen
i guess people have different thoughts, but generally you are right
Touchscreen plays do look broken on jump maps but I don't think they're that bad, mainly considering that it seems like a pain to read (fast) stuff with your hands in front of the screen, most maps have streams and fast streams also seem like they'd require skill to do on a touchscreen consistently, and on top of that maps with crazy slider magic might also be a problem for touchscreen players. Yeah, it looks stupidly easy on maps like Kanojo and Helix but I don't think they're as broken as people think they are. That said, they do trivialize jumps, and using a touchscreen is pretty much the only way to legally trivialize any aspect of osu! gameplay right now. That in itself is good enough an argument against it.
On another note, have any solutions or reasonable suggestions been provided yet for sliders being underweighted? I was working on a very slider-heavy Extreme earlier, and even though it plays like a 5.5 star it was only rated 4.72 stars. The star rating actually started going closer to 5 once I started mapping the calm section which had more circles in it. I mean, slider angles aside, it seems wrong to me that a legitimately difficult map with big jumps gives far less pp/gets rated far lower than some map with moderate sized jumps that simply has more circles.
Which reminds me, somehow World's End DT (happy's version) is rated lower than Toumei Elegy's hardest diff. I can't imagine a player who can FC World's End DT that wouldn't be able to FC Toumei Elegy unless their speed is way way above their aim. But that seems rather unreasonable to me, considering the hardest parts on Toumei for me are the streams. I guess Jesse's point about fast streams with low spacing being underrated still hasn't been addressed.
On another note, have any solutions or reasonable suggestions been provided yet for sliders being underweighted? I was working on a very slider-heavy Extreme earlier, and even though it plays like a 5.5 star it was only rated 4.72 stars. The star rating actually started going closer to 5 once I started mapping the calm section which had more circles in it. I mean, slider angles aside, it seems wrong to me that a legitimately difficult map with big jumps gives far less pp/gets rated far lower than some map with moderate sized jumps that simply has more circles.
Which reminds me, somehow World's End DT (happy's version) is rated lower than Toumei Elegy's hardest diff. I can't imagine a player who can FC World's End DT that wouldn't be able to FC Toumei Elegy unless their speed is way way above their aim. But that seems rather unreasonable to me, considering the hardest parts on Toumei for me are the streams. I guess Jesse's point about fast streams with low spacing being underrated still hasn't been addressed.
they do need a massive buff, but it's hard to do that with the nature of acc pp. assuming very fast streams get the buff, plays that have abysmally low acc, like mouse buttons enabled + hitting both keys at once low yet didn't break combo because they were easy to aim will be heavily overrated even after losing all acc pp.
with a huge buff, plays that achieve high accuracy (relative to the bpm of course, even 90% can be high in some cases), will be rewarded appropriately. If there were some way to make it so that if the difficulty of a map comes from low spacing high bpm streams, that having non-existent acc like 60% or something that shows they didnt even really play the map does more than just forego all acc pp, it reduces the overall pp of the score by a lot. Of course, being able to hold a ridiculously low acc combo on a map with ultra high bpm streams due to double tapping or some other mash tech is not possible on every map that falls under the category, but this contingency shouldn't really hurt any of them.
Acc curves should also be rescaled for these maps, because the whole 98%-100% mega curve is utterly pointless on something with 285 bpm streams or whatever. However i'm not sure what would be a fair place to start the curves, maybe tom should get all the top speed players together to discuss it. Note im not saying acc bonus should cap out, it will still increase up to 100% as always, I'm just proposing that it starts ramping up sooner than 98-99% since on a lot of these maps these accuracies are simply not possible yet. If it's done right as speed players improve even more and get higher acc the reward will be appropriate and allow the maps to stay relevant and keep up with typical farm maps.
i dont know, i just want the relatively few players who put themselves through more physical strain than any standard hr/dt farmer to achieve stamina at high speeds to get what they deserve, but it's so hard to think of solutions that don't involve splitting up aim/acc/speed entirely.
with a huge buff, plays that achieve high accuracy (relative to the bpm of course, even 90% can be high in some cases), will be rewarded appropriately. If there were some way to make it so that if the difficulty of a map comes from low spacing high bpm streams, that having non-existent acc like 60% or something that shows they didnt even really play the map does more than just forego all acc pp, it reduces the overall pp of the score by a lot. Of course, being able to hold a ridiculously low acc combo on a map with ultra high bpm streams due to double tapping or some other mash tech is not possible on every map that falls under the category, but this contingency shouldn't really hurt any of them.
Acc curves should also be rescaled for these maps, because the whole 98%-100% mega curve is utterly pointless on something with 285 bpm streams or whatever. However i'm not sure what would be a fair place to start the curves, maybe tom should get all the top speed players together to discuss it. Note im not saying acc bonus should cap out, it will still increase up to 100% as always, I'm just proposing that it starts ramping up sooner than 98-99% since on a lot of these maps these accuracies are simply not possible yet. If it's done right as speed players improve even more and get higher acc the reward will be appropriate and allow the maps to stay relevant and keep up with typical farm maps.
i dont know, i just want the relatively few players who put themselves through more physical strain than any standard hr/dt farmer to achieve stamina at high speeds to get what they deserve, but it's so hard to think of solutions that don't involve splitting up aim/acc/speed entirely.
That was mostly talking about 270+ bpm tho. World's end doesn't reach that.Tess wrote:
I guess Jesse's point about fast streams with low spacing being underrated still hasn't been addressed.
I do believe that extremely low accuracy already lowers your total pp beyond what you could lose from just having bad acc, at least tp did. It was not a lot (like 10% or something? random number i pulled out of my ass) but it did certainly happen.xxjesus1412fanx wrote:
that having non-existent acc like 60% or something that shows they didnt even really play the map does more than just forego all acc pp, it reduces the overall pp of the score by a lot.
On Wiki page, accuracy is said to make up for just a small margin of the "Speed" and "Aim" PP score sections, but is this really true?
How would you define the "small margin"?
Maybe 0%-5%? Or 0%-10%? In pharmacology, sometimes even 0.1% chance for medicine to poison people can be unacceptable. However, in osu!, this "small margin" can be much, much higher than 5% or 10%, comprising quite a big part of "Speed" and "Aim" score sections.
I don't want to give exact examples and numbers, but how big this {small margin} is? Should it be really called the {small margin}?
I understand that it can help in preventing people from farming PP from a long "lucky streams" on parts of very hard maps, but they would still need to deal with misses, which can wreck your overall score pretty badly.
It's just that small margin sounds as it really is small margin, while it doesn't necessarily need to be. Maybe we could get some more explanation on this matter, or the formula's sketch could be just more precise in wording? Even if something can be near negligible on high accuracy, it can be a major thing at lower ones.
How would you define the "small margin"?
Maybe 0%-5%? Or 0%-10%? In pharmacology, sometimes even 0.1% chance for medicine to poison people can be unacceptable. However, in osu!, this "small margin" can be much, much higher than 5% or 10%, comprising quite a big part of "Speed" and "Aim" score sections.
I don't want to give exact examples and numbers, but how big this {small margin} is? Should it be really called the {small margin}?
I understand that it can help in preventing people from farming PP from a long "lucky streams" on parts of very hard maps, but they would still need to deal with misses, which can wreck your overall score pretty badly.
It's just that small margin sounds as it really is small margin, while it doesn't necessarily need to be. Maybe we could get some more explanation on this matter, or the formula's sketch could be just more precise in wording? Even if something can be near negligible on high accuracy, it can be a major thing at lower ones.
If those parameters haven't changed since TP, the accuracy percentage determines a factor in the Speed and Aim values.Scarlet Evans wrote:
On Wiki page, accuracy is said to make up for just a small margin of the "Speed" and "Aim" PP score sections, but is this really true?
How would you define the "small margin"?
Maybe 0%-5%? Or 0%-10%? In pharmacology, sometimes even 0.1% chance for medicine to poison people can be unacceptable. However, in osu!, this "small margin" can be much, much higher than 5% or 10%, comprising quite a big part of "Speed" and "Aim" score sections.
I don't want to give exact examples and numbers, but how big this {small margin} is? Should it be really called the {small margin}?
I understand that it can help in preventing people from farming PP from a long "lucky streams" on parts of very hard maps, but they would still need to deal with misses, which can wreck your overall score pretty badly.
It's just that small margin sounds as it really is small margin, while it doesn't necessarily need to be. Maybe we could get some more explanation on this matter, or the formula's sketch could be just more precise in wording? Even if something can be near negligible on high accuracy, it can be a major thing at lower ones.
Accuracy Factor = 0.5 + (Acc%)/200%
So a 100% accuracy play has a factor of 100%, a 80% accuracy play has a factor of 90% (if there are no misses)
Not as easy as you're thinking, pressing K1 locks M1, so you must have a godlike technique to mash keyboard and mouse/tablet at the same time without having this issue.xxjesus1412fanx wrote:
snip
By now I reached the point where I would prefer ppv1 above ppv2.
ppv2 has an extreme influence on how osu! is received and played by new players(kind of including myself).
With some delay it also spread into maps so that we can "enjoy" some ridiculously stupid maps for tons of pp and close to 0 original value.
I'm sure Tom and peppy had the best intentions but the influence of pp on the development of the game looks very negative for me.
ppv2 has an extreme influence on how osu! is received and played by new players(kind of including myself).
With some delay it also spread into maps so that we can "enjoy" some ridiculously stupid maps for tons of pp and close to 0 original value.
I'm sure Tom and peppy had the best intentions but the influence of pp on the development of the game looks very negative for me.
I think you're projecting your percievement of enjoyment onto others
Has nothing to do with my perceivement of enjoyment. Whether it is the enjoyment to climb ranks or get good scores on harder and harder maps, ppv2 is not a necessity to enjoy either of these and it would work with ppv1 just as well.
There's no doubt that ppv2 has a severe influence on how the community and its content develops. That's what I dislike about it, not ppv2 itself.
There's no doubt that ppv2 has a severe influence on how the community and its content develops. That's what I dislike about it, not ppv2 itself.
But what's wrong with that? Why should people have to create content in some way that you won't that may not may not be for a specific purpose? In my opinion people can be free to create what they want for whatever reason. If someone makes a pp map, fine. If someone makes a map that doesn't give pp but is fun, fine.
If a map is only played for pp then abandoned, so what? If someone really actually likes a map, they'll play it regardless of pp or whatever and play it fairly often. And that doesn't need to be every or even the majority of maps.
There's also some opinion that maps that give pp are somehow inferior just because of this aspect, but I think that that's the complainers not able to divorce the actual map from the idea of pp.
If a map is only played for pp then abandoned, so what? If someone really actually likes a map, they'll play it regardless of pp or whatever and play it fairly often. And that doesn't need to be every or even the majority of maps.
There's also some opinion that maps that give pp are somehow inferior just because of this aspect, but I think that that's the complainers not able to divorce the actual map from the idea of pp.
GhostFrog wrote:
perceivementIt's perception, dammit
I'm sorry. I'll try to do better next time.GhostFrog wrote:
perceivementIt's perception, dammit
@Khelly: Players are preselecting maps based on the pp they give. Good maps might not get as much recognition due to a low reward while Tillerino keeps leading players into a one-way road of pp-maps. The problem is not that pp-maps are bad, the problem is that maps that don't follow a style that favors pp will see significantly less plays in favor of pp-maps for that reason.
On the other hand new players will grow up with exactly that maptype in mind and guess what happens if they map something - they will replicate exactly that type of map without ever seeing something else. Over time diversity in maps will die.
While this is more of a worst-case-scenario I'm 100% sure that this happens on a smaller scale and the longer it happens the larger the effect.
I lost PP and rank after I improved my combo + acc on a map. Peppy pls
E m i
Ehm after tryharding this map for a week I got only 188 pp from this play S3RL - Bass Slut (Original Mix) at Fort's light insane. It's a way too inappropriate considering it requies some 263 bpm single tapping/alternating and tricky patterns but with small spacing between them.
Just as skillful as it should be.
PP gain is based on accuracy, combo, and diff, but also on your ranking.
great job :^)
PP gain is based on accuracy, combo, and diff, but also on your ranking.
great job :^)
nonexistent accReynBolt wrote:
Ehm after tryharding this map for a week I got only 188 pp from this play S3RL - Bass Slut (Original Mix) at Fort's light insane. It's a way too inappropriate considering it requies some 263 bpm single tapping/alternating and tricky patterns but with small spacing between them.
I had a song with no full combo complete but with high acc , then I did it with full combo but with a little bit less of accuracy than before, and I lost pp and ranks ..
I'm done .. why ?
I'm done .. why ?
Combo has a linear scaling with pp but acc scales exponentially. Just look at Tillerino's pp-graphs on reddit.
What happened? whether the performance pp has been obtained may be reduced by the osu? I experienced it, pp perfomance i somehow reduced because of what?? 
Probably because you set a higher-score lower-pp score on a map you already had a score on
combo should have a scaling based on map difficulty spread of the map on a combo axis.
you can calculate what combo is required to guarantee a guy fcd a hard part in a map for sure.
calculate the easiest part he could have fcd for 10, 20, 30, 40, --- , 100% combo, make the combo pp scale based on that
this would only result in profit, unless you look at replay data for the specific points at which combo was lost.
so this would make getting 75% combo on a map with the hard part in the middle worht more than 75% combo in a map with the hard part in the end. makes sense. it was suggested earlier but i just wrote it again
you can calculate what combo is required to guarantee a guy fcd a hard part in a map for sure.
calculate the easiest part he could have fcd for 10, 20, 30, 40, --- , 100% combo, make the combo pp scale based on that
this would only result in profit, unless you look at replay data for the specific points at which combo was lost.
so this would make getting 75% combo on a map with the hard part in the middle worht more than 75% combo in a map with the hard part in the end. makes sense. it was suggested earlier but i just wrote it again
No.-Zayto wrote:
DT is over rated
OD 9.75 is difficult so no, it's not.
Judging from your level of play of DT being Suklapallit or lower, I'd say yes.-Zayto wrote:
DT is over rated
Just wonderin why do some of my scores have a star next to them?
Because your score is top 500 on that map. People can download your replay of that map just by clicking the stardGeist wrote:
Just wonderin why do some of my scores have a star next to them?
I just lost some pp, because I got a HR-Score (94.32% accuracy with FC) which replaced a DT-Score (86.62%, not FC).
The HR-play had a higher score and therefore was submitted. But the pp-rating of the HR-play was so low, that it doesn't even show up in my top ranks.
Kind of frustrating, even if the pp-rating is just a number on the screen.
I just wish, that there was a way to select a previous score and resubmit it again.
Otherwise I always have to be worried for my pp, if I play a map with a different mod.
The HR-play had a higher score and therefore was submitted. But the pp-rating of the HR-play was so low, that it doesn't even show up in my top ranks.
Kind of frustrating, even if the pp-rating is just a number on the screen.
I just wish, that there was a way to select a previous score and resubmit it again.
Otherwise I always have to be worried for my pp, if I play a map with a different mod.
The fix for this is underway.mrburns123 wrote:
I just lost some pp, because I got a HR-Score (94.32% accuracy with FC) which replaced a DT-Score (86.62%, not FC).
The HR-play had a higher score and therefore was submitted. But the pp-rating of the HR-play was so low, that it doesn't even show up in my top ranks.
Kind of frustrating, even if the pp-rating is just a number on the screen.
I just wish, that there was a way to select a previous score and resubmit it again.
Otherwise I always have to be worried for my pp, if I play a map with a different mod.
E m i
For years.uberpancake wrote:
The fix for this is underway.mrburns123 wrote:
I just lost some pp, because I got a HR-Score (94.32% accuracy with FC) which replaced a DT-Score (86.62%, not FC).
The HR-play had a higher score and therefore was submitted. But the pp-rating of the HR-play was so low, that it doesn't even show up in my top ranks.
Kind of frustrating, even if the pp-rating is just a number on the screen.
I just wish, that there was a way to select a previous score and resubmit it again.
Otherwise I always have to be worried for my pp, if I play a map with a different mod.
osu!next will never come out
@Khelly: Players are preselecting maps based on the pp they give. Good maps might not get as much recognition due to a low reward while Tillerino keeps leading players into a one-way road of pp-maps. The problem is not that pp-maps are bad, the problem is that maps that don't follow a style that favors pp will see significantly less plays in favor of pp-maps for that reason.you are overthinking this way too hard, people will always come up with new ideas to make new sorts of maps and everyone maps in his own way.
On the other hand new players will grow up with exactly that maptype in mind and guess what happens if they map something - they will replicate exactly that type of map without ever seeing something else. Over time diversity in maps will die.
While this is more of a worst-case-scenario I'm 100% sure that this happens on a smaller scale and the longer it happens the larger the effect.
there will always be pp maps because some maps are just easier to fc with high diff (in terms of pp system) then others, but nonetheless people will keep making bad ass maps in the future
Idea about changing OD and therefore pp gained.
First of all, let me explain what I think OD is and why it's needed. OD (Overall Difficulty) is a numerical value which dictates how accurately one has to press the circles and sliders. OD for sliders is more lenient, as you can press the slider beginning in the whole time window, and still receive a 300 for it, assuming you don't miss the ending and/or the slider ticks. OD is necessary so we can calculate accuracy and through it a miss can be defined (not hitting in time/hitting to early).
Now that's cleared, I'll explain how I see OD working at the moment. Currently, no matter how accurately you click the circles, if OD is 7, there really is no distinction even if you click as if OD was 9. What I mean is, with OD 7 one can press quite sloppily, and still gets the same amount of pp as one, who clicks very accurately.
What I want to change is that base OD of a map will remain, to keep calculating scores as is, but change the way pp is gained depending on how accurately you can click. Also, make OD user definable (for their convenience, so they can see when they start messing up), but OD can only be set as the what the mapper has set it, or above that. So basically, when a map gives 100 pp with OD 7 and 100% accuracy, when a user FCs the map with 100% accuracy and OD 9, they get 110 pp (random pp values). So if two players FC SS the map, but one does it with OD 7, the other with OD 9, they will get the same score, but the OD 9 player gets higher pp for it.
However, I don't want to calculate pp from user set OD, but rather the timing standard of their clicks. By timing standard I mean the absolute value of time difference between each click and time when it's supposed to be clicked added up and then divided by the amount of circles.
Basically Timing Standard = abs(real time - click time) *clicks / circles.
I used circles because currently sliders don't depend much on timing, but could be added as well.
And that Timing Standard would be used to calculate pp instead of accuracy based on OD. Minimum PP gained from FC SSing a map with mapper set OD will stay the same, just that the more accurate one clicks, the more pp they will get.
Sorry for the sloppy English, just wanted to get the idea across.
First of all, let me explain what I think OD is and why it's needed. OD (Overall Difficulty) is a numerical value which dictates how accurately one has to press the circles and sliders. OD for sliders is more lenient, as you can press the slider beginning in the whole time window, and still receive a 300 for it, assuming you don't miss the ending and/or the slider ticks. OD is necessary so we can calculate accuracy and through it a miss can be defined (not hitting in time/hitting to early).
Now that's cleared, I'll explain how I see OD working at the moment. Currently, no matter how accurately you click the circles, if OD is 7, there really is no distinction even if you click as if OD was 9. What I mean is, with OD 7 one can press quite sloppily, and still gets the same amount of pp as one, who clicks very accurately.
What I want to change is that base OD of a map will remain, to keep calculating scores as is, but change the way pp is gained depending on how accurately you can click. Also, make OD user definable (for their convenience, so they can see when they start messing up), but OD can only be set as the what the mapper has set it, or above that. So basically, when a map gives 100 pp with OD 7 and 100% accuracy, when a user FCs the map with 100% accuracy and OD 9, they get 110 pp (random pp values). So if two players FC SS the map, but one does it with OD 7, the other with OD 9, they will get the same score, but the OD 9 player gets higher pp for it.
However, I don't want to calculate pp from user set OD, but rather the timing standard of their clicks. By timing standard I mean the absolute value of time difference between each click and time when it's supposed to be clicked added up and then divided by the amount of circles.
Basically Timing Standard = abs(real time - click time) *clicks / circles.
I used circles because currently sliders don't depend much on timing, but could be added as well.
And that Timing Standard would be used to calculate pp instead of accuracy based on OD. Minimum PP gained from FC SSing a map with mapper set OD will stay the same, just that the more accurate one clicks, the more pp they will get.
Sorry for the sloppy English, just wanted to get the idea across.
I'm just a simpuru guy that likes rhythm games and doesn't take ranks and mis-rhythms toooooooo seriously... but I wish I could keep my (-) 50,000 rank going above the (+) 50,000 rank Q _ Q
Well yeah, I'm pretty much the same. All I want is to stay in country #50, anything else is just a bonus. I just thought that the high level players would find that a nice change, since it's actually there where it would matter.bunnyluvr3000 wrote:
I'm just a simpuru guy that likes rhythm games and doesn't take ranks and mis-rhythms toooooooo seriously... but I wish I could keep my (-) 50,000 rank going above the (+) 50,000 rank Q _ Q
That's a long wall of text for asking acc to be determined by unstable rate instead of accuracy %. It's been suggested/asked before, and i believe UR isn't saved anywhere (that's why you have to rewatch a replay to check it) so it can't be used right now.Hedgeturtle wrote:
Idea about changing OD and therefore pp gained.
First of all, let me explain what I think OD is and why it's needed. OD (Overall Difficulty) is a numerical value which dictates how accurately one has to press the circles and sliders. OD for sliders is more lenient, as you can press the slider beginning in the whole time window, and still receive a 300 for it, assuming you don't miss the ending and/or the slider ticks. OD is necessary so we can calculate accuracy and through it a miss can be defined (not hitting in time/hitting to early).
Now that's cleared, I'll explain how I see OD working at the moment. Currently, no matter how accurately you click the circles, if OD is 7, there really is no distinction even if you click as if OD was 9. What I mean is, with OD 7 one can press quite sloppily, and still gets the same amount of pp as one, who clicks very accurately.
What I want to change is that base OD of a map will remain, to keep calculating scores as is, but change the way pp is gained depending on how accurately you can click. Also, make OD user definable (for their convenience, so they can see when they start messing up), but OD can only be set as the what the mapper has set it, or above that. So basically, when a map gives 100 pp with OD 7 and 100% accuracy, when a user FCs the map with 100% accuracy and OD 9, they get 110 pp (random pp values). So if two players FC SS the map, but one does it with OD 7, the other with OD 9, they will get the same score, but the OD 9 player gets higher pp for it.
However, I don't want to calculate pp from user set OD, but rather the timing standard of their clicks. By timing standard I mean the absolute value of time difference between each click and time when it's supposed to be clicked added up and then divided by the amount of circles.
Basically Timing Standard = abs(real time - click time) *clicks / circles.
I used circles because currently sliders don't depend much on timing, but could be added as well.
And that Timing Standard would be used to calculate pp instead of accuracy based on OD. Minimum PP gained from FC SSing a map with mapper set OD will stay the same, just that the more accurate one clicks, the more pp they will get.
Sorry for the sloppy English, just wanted to get the idea across.
Sorry if this is not really related to Performance Points but I will submit it anyway... I was looking on https://web.archive.org at old osu! sites out of pure curiosity, I selected the earliest date I could find, which was 11th October 2008, and I obviously saw the site had changed a massive amount. Although once looking through the site in its entirety I realized there was no sort of ranking system or PP system as a matter of fact. I continued to a random date, 13th September 2008, and looked at the player ranking. I saw the usual people like Saturos, tobebuta and Cyclone e.t.c But one thing I realized straight away is there are tiny red or green arrow's and a number next to a players name, surely indicating whether they have gone down or up in ranks recently. Go too https://web.archive.org/web/20080913014 ... yerranking for the example I am looking at here.
Conclusion
I would really think it would be a good idea too reintroduce those rank down/upscale arrows and the amount of ranks they have down/up-scaled because it might not seem like it but It really does interest people like me who wants an easy way too view a players progress (without going on to https://web.archive.org and doing it manually)
Thanks ^_^ xxx
Conclusion
I would really think it would be a good idea too reintroduce those rank down/upscale arrows and the amount of ranks they have down/up-scaled because it might not seem like it but It really does interest people like me who wants an easy way too view a players progress (without going on to https://web.archive.org and doing it manually)
Thanks ^_^ xxx
Quick overral suggestions here...
Increase PP gained with Lower AR +HD.
Drastically increase AR 9,8+ PP on easier beatmaps when player gets lower accuracy (being able to FC HR at that level is impressive).
Decrease PP gained by lower BPM DT beatmaps, increase PP gained by higher BPM DT beatmaps.
Either Increase PP gained with flashlight, or decrease its score multiplier (I dislike the fact that there are a lot of #1 players with lower PP gained from that beatmap).
Drastically increase DT score multiplier, to something like x2,5 (I did a few calculations about PP gained for that), increase HR score multiplier to x1,2, increase HT multiplier to x0,45, increase EZ multiplier to x0,65, and increase NF multiplier to x0,7 to match PP gained (Except for NF).
(I'm aware of Score v2 current multipliers)
Increase PP gained with Lower AR +HD.
Drastically increase AR 9,8+ PP on easier beatmaps when player gets lower accuracy (being able to FC HR at that level is impressive).
Decrease PP gained by lower BPM DT beatmaps, increase PP gained by higher BPM DT beatmaps.
Either Increase PP gained with flashlight, or decrease its score multiplier (I dislike the fact that there are a lot of #1 players with lower PP gained from that beatmap).
Drastically increase DT score multiplier, to something like x2,5 (I did a few calculations about PP gained for that), increase HR score multiplier to x1,2, increase HT multiplier to x0,45, increase EZ multiplier to x0,65, and increase NF multiplier to x0,7 to match PP gained (Except for NF).
(I'm aware of Score v2 current multipliers)
The ppv2 system works fine, but in my opinion in some sense it doesn't cooperate with current score system very well.
The thing is: on a same map, a play with much higher pp is highly possible to be blocked by a play with lower pp because of the score if the higher pp play isn't a fc one.
For example, Totori (aka rustbell)'s score on Remote Control [Max Control] HDDT: 608pp, 1563/1774 combo, 54,566,762 score.
Meanwhile, another friend of mine has a score like this: Remote Control [Max Control] No mod: 285pp, 1774/1774 combo(fc), 61,293,280 score (MUCH higher than Totori's score, but significantly less pp).
Which means, if Totori fced that map in no mod or even in just hd somet ime earlier, his brilliant HDDT score NEVER has a chance to be uploaded and added to his pp. In other words, a 280pp performance blocks a 600+pp performance. That totally doesn't make sense to me (and I believe to many others as well).
My recommendation will be, either modify current score (or pp) system to make sure that a play with higher pp can always beat another play with lower pp, or make we players be able to alter our own plays on bp list so that the rising players don't have to worry that their possible 2mod/3mod plays that worth 500+/600+ pps will be blocked by current 100/200 pp no mod fcs.
I know that I'm not the first one who come up with this opinion, but up to now I haven't seen much progress on this (or there actually is, in that case it'll be my bad XD). Right before I send this post, some tell me that "Just get used to it, it's common." But common doesn't mean reasonable. I love this game, and since it's becoming more and more confusing to me and some of my friends, I feel that I need to bring this topic to light again. I will be extremely happy if the update is on the way
The thing is: on a same map, a play with much higher pp is highly possible to be blocked by a play with lower pp because of the score if the higher pp play isn't a fc one.
For example, Totori (aka rustbell)'s score on Remote Control [Max Control] HDDT: 608pp, 1563/1774 combo, 54,566,762 score.
Meanwhile, another friend of mine has a score like this: Remote Control [Max Control] No mod: 285pp, 1774/1774 combo(fc), 61,293,280 score (MUCH higher than Totori's score, but significantly less pp).
Which means, if Totori fced that map in no mod or even in just hd somet ime earlier, his brilliant HDDT score NEVER has a chance to be uploaded and added to his pp. In other words, a 280pp performance blocks a 600+pp performance. That totally doesn't make sense to me (and I believe to many others as well).
My recommendation will be, either modify current score (or pp) system to make sure that a play with higher pp can always beat another play with lower pp, or make we players be able to alter our own plays on bp list so that the rising players don't have to worry that their possible 2mod/3mod plays that worth 500+/600+ pps will be blocked by current 100/200 pp no mod fcs.
I know that I'm not the first one who come up with this opinion, but up to now I haven't seen much progress on this (or there actually is, in that case it'll be my bad XD). Right before I send this post, some tell me that "Just get used to it, it's common." But common doesn't mean reasonable. I love this game, and since it's becoming more and more confusing to me and some of my friends, I feel that I need to bring this topic to light again. I will be extremely happy if the update is on the way
The harder the mods , the more pp it gives. thats how i see it
Well, maybe someone already asked this, so, sorry but i will re-ask it.
Why, when i score a 98% acc in a 3,5/4,3 song, im not earning any pp? and, the "weight" i recieve is of 1% when i strike those scores in MY FIRST TRY.
Here is a ss
https://gyazo.com/ddbbe7d0d09affcd4926f1fec0bb6994
Thanks for reading, i want to know why im not weigthing normal. Cause, for example, "Tranquility "In my room" <- that one is a 3,7 stars difficulty and i weigthed it in a 100%, i dont really understand the system :l
Why, when i score a 98% acc in a 3,5/4,3 song, im not earning any pp? and, the "weight" i recieve is of 1% when i strike those scores in MY FIRST TRY.
Here is a ss
https://gyazo.com/ddbbe7d0d09affcd4926f1fec0bb6994
Thanks for reading, i want to know why im not weigthing normal. Cause, for example, "Tranquility "In my room" <- that one is a 3,7 stars difficulty and i weigthed it in a 100%, i dont really understand the system :l
https://osu.ppy.sh/wiki/Performance_Points check "Weightage system".Lugli wrote:
... i dont really understand the system :l
I was thinking about why old map is not high pp enough, and I concluded that's because it doesn't apply changing the shape
For example
linear shape is easier than
bending shape
(Ignore the difficulty from distance between the circle, I can't find the different shape with same distance)
It also can make slider hard with adding tick
For example
linear slider is easier than
bending shape
I wonder does pp already apply this concept
For example
linear shape is easier than
bending shape
(Ignore the difficulty from distance between the circle, I can't find the different shape with same distance)
It also can make slider hard with adding tick
For example
linear slider is easier than
bending shape
I wonder does pp already apply this concept
I think that your rank placement should have some effect on your PP gained, not a lot of an effect, but maybe like 5-10% difference. that might also encourage players to play levels that are new or less popular. I also hear FL has the same PP multiplier as hidden... obviously, flashlight is much harder than hidden, i think it should be a little bit higher
E m i
destroyerwilly wrote:
I think that your rank placement should have some effect on your PP gained, not a lot of an effect, but maybe like 5-10% difference. that might also encourage players to play levels that are new or less popular. I also hear FL has the same PP multiplier as hidden... obviously, flashlight is much harder than hidden, i think it should be a little bit higher
Posted: 2 years agoMomiji wrote:
Hidden bonus = 18% aim, 2% accuracy
Flashlight bonus = 50% aim, 2% accuracy
Why do you lose what looks like to be around a thousand points for hitting 100s and 50s now? For newbies, at least, that doesn't look promising at all, to me.
Maybe make it so you can still get an S after like 1 or 2 misses? Like, every other game mode is just as forgiving :/ I have had this complaint from long time players before
Is there a minimum required acc to even get pp? I got a 96.92% S on a 2.8 star map that I've never played before and didn't gain a single point...
There is no minimum accuracy required. However, if the map is easier then your top plays, you may not receive as much or any significant amount of pp. In your case though, because of your rank, you probably didn't receive the pp because of your connection to Bancho
I've never had any issues with my connection to Bancho that I'm aware ofSandy Hoey wrote:
There is no minimum accuracy required. However, if the map is easier then your top plays, you may not receive as much or any significant amount of pp. In your case though, because of your rank, you probably didn't receive the pp because of your connection to Bancho
am I just playing maps that are considered "too easy"? It seems like 1/2 the maps I've been playing (including ones recommended from Tillerino) I just don't get pp for at all, and if I do it's like, 5 pp tops...It could also be that you aren't donig as well as you think you are. Just because you have decent acc and an S doesn't mean that you didn't break your combo somewhere and didn't get the FC.
It makes me sad to see people having a full list of top plays barely reaching over 1 minute in length. In most online games I know, when there is one thing that trumps every other form of play, they will nerf said method in a way. I would love to see something similar happen to osu!.
At the moment a lot of mappers know how to optimize their maps for maximum pp gains. This has both positive and negative effects. I personally believe we should take a closer look and define what a healthy meta should be. Before the optimisation of mapping, doubletime used to be somewhat healthy iirc. I noticed that nowadays, you will get looked down upon when you only have dubbeltime in your top plays.
Personally, my logic tells me that this meta can't be right. Hopefully we won't have to spam 1 minute maps in order to climb the rankings. (Sure, git gut may be a response for this. But climbing becomes really hard and demotivating if everybody around you only plays 1 minute maps for easy 500 pp plays). I'm not sure if I'm the only one that feels this way though.
At the moment a lot of mappers know how to optimize their maps for maximum pp gains. This has both positive and negative effects. I personally believe we should take a closer look and define what a healthy meta should be. Before the optimisation of mapping, doubletime used to be somewhat healthy iirc. I noticed that nowadays, you will get looked down upon when you only have dubbeltime in your top plays.
Personally, my logic tells me that this meta can't be right. Hopefully we won't have to spam 1 minute maps in order to climb the rankings. (Sure, git gut may be a response for this. But climbing becomes really hard and demotivating if everybody around you only plays 1 minute maps for easy 500 pp plays). I'm not sure if I'm the only one that feels this way though.
To be fairly honest usually those 1 minute high pp play maps are usually played with mods and at least to me are super difficult to get high accuracy onPittigbaasje wrote:
It makes me sad to see people having a full list of top plays barely reaching over 1 minute in length. In most online games I know, when there is one thing that trumps every other form of play, they will nerf said method in a way. I would love to see something similar happen to osu!.
At the moment a lot of mappers know how to optimize their maps for maximum pp gains. This has both positive and negative effects. I personally believe we should take a closer look and define what a healthy meta should be. Before the optimisation of mapping, doubletime used to be somewhat healthy iirc. I noticed that nowadays, you will get looked down upon when you only have dubbeltime in your top plays.
Personally, my logic tells me that this meta can't be right. Hopefully we won't have to spam 1 minute maps in order to climb the rankings. (Sure, git gut may be a response for this. But climbing becomes really hard and demotivating if everybody around you only plays 1 minute maps for easy 500 pp plays). I'm not sure if I'm the only one that feels this way though.
I want to say that I do not mean to disrespect whatsoever.Fanboy wrote:
To be fairly honest usually those 1 minute high pp play maps are usually played with mods and at least to me are super difficult to get high accuracy onPittigbaasje wrote:
It makes me sad to see people having a full list of top plays barely reaching over 1 minute in length. In most online games I know, when there is one thing that trumps every other form of play, they will nerf said method in a way. I would love to see something similar happen to osu!.
At the moment a lot of mappers know how to optimize their maps for maximum pp gains. This has both positive and negative effects. I personally believe we should take a closer look and define what a healthy meta should be. Before the optimisation of mapping, doubletime used to be somewhat healthy iirc. I noticed that nowadays, you will get looked down upon when you only have dubbeltime in your top plays.
Personally, my logic tells me that this meta can't be right. Hopefully we won't have to spam 1 minute maps in order to climb the rankings. (Sure, git gut may be a response for this. But climbing becomes really hard and demotivating if everybody around you only plays 1 minute maps for easy 500 pp plays). I'm not sure if I'm the only one that feels this way though.
From my experience, there seemed to be a huge variety of maps you can efficiently gain ranks from at the lower amounts of total performance points. However once you reach those borders of difficulty (ar10+, od10) alternatives are becoming more and more scarce. Furthermore, by no means did I say all 1 minute maps are easy, nor irrelevant. I'm sure people enjoy actually listening the music in there. (so do I, from time to time)
What bothers me is that they are picked deliberately to be mapped in a certain way so they yield the maximum amount they can give. And with the way pp is calculated at the moment, they are just too easy for the amount of performance points they give.
Performance points are the only true in game reward you get for playing the game. Players of any game will always try to optimise the way they get their rewards. Mappers feed the community with what they want. So neither are to blame. I feel like the only thing that can restore balance is to adjust the pp calculations.
It's very hard or impossible to balance the pp system to the point where there is no imbalanced mapping styles. The best solution would be to get rid of it altogether.
I agree that it is very hard. Impossible, perhaps. However, I don't think that it has to be perfect in order for it to be fun and inviting to climb. Players will find the best way again eventually, and when that time comes, a small tweak can yet again solve the new problem with ease. Leaving the formula almost unchanged for years just doesn't seem right to me.B1rd wrote:
It's very hard or impossible to balance the pp system to the point where there is no imbalanced mapping styles. The best solution would be to get rid of it altogether.
Sometimes I get better scores and lose PP... Otherwise everything's fine!
yeah i came back from a long break and noticed that theres mappers who straight up make metronome ar9.1-9.5 jump maps with high OD. its actually really gross some of these maps even get ranked, i think theres some serious circlejerk going on in this games mapping community and severely damaging this kind of mapping would do wonders for the game in the long run
https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/7954422
Looks about right - perfect pp formula, perfect pp system, everything is in place
:thinking:
Looks about right - perfect pp formula, perfect pp system, everything is in place
:thinking:
Caradine
Hello... Where I can know about pp formula for definite map? If it possible at all.
Short rant... yet again... how pp formula is complete horseshit garbage:
All 3 maps are over 5 min long. Marathon size maps.
Now sit tight:
"Los" - around 1:40, NOT EVEN 5*
haitai - 40 seconds
OD is same for all of them.
Wish incoming osu!lazer brings complete rework of this bullshit.
All 3 maps are over 5 min long. Marathon size maps.
Now sit tight:
"Los" - around 1:40, NOT EVEN 5*
haitai - 40 seconds
OD is same for all of them.
Wish incoming osu!lazer brings complete rework of this bullshit.
Los is higher OD, higher accuracy and with HD so it gives more pp. haitai is higher star rating but significantly shorter so it gives less pp.
What is the problem?
What is the problem?
Weighting of map length = 30s or 5 min... doesn't matter for formula.
Sliders are non-existent for pp formula - main fucking issue.
Pretty much everything with pp formula.
https://osu.ppy.sh/b/1226973 - 99,40% acc FC with HD gives 374pp (amount of players able to pull this - can count on 2 hands)
https://osu.ppy.sh/s/591987 - 100% HDDT gives 363pp (amount of players able to pull this - A LOT)
Please, if someone tell me that 20s harumachi HDDT is harder than 5min USAO... must visit mental doctor asap.
Sliders are non-existent for pp formula - main fucking issue.
Pretty much everything with pp formula.
https://osu.ppy.sh/b/1226973 - 99,40% acc FC with HD gives 374pp (amount of players able to pull this - can count on 2 hands)
https://osu.ppy.sh/s/591987 - 100% HDDT gives 363pp (amount of players able to pull this - A LOT)
Please, if someone tell me that 20s harumachi HDDT is harder than 5min USAO... must visit mental doctor asap.
Length is absolutely involved in pp values of a map, just not as much as you seem to want it.
Sliders are existent in pp formula. It looks at the shortest possible path you can take. The problem is that 1: it doesnt take into account that you have to follow the sliderball and 2: a jump will always be faster than a slider.
Map length is a difficult subject because how are you going to accurately use it in pp calculation? Should a map that's twice as long give twice as much pp? Then you will soon end up with superinflated pp ratings just because that 4* map is 20 minutes. Should a map that's similar star rating but longer always be worth more pp, even if the od is lower? When length weighting was first added people complained that it was too strong so it got nerfed, now you think it's not strong enough. It's not just something where you change 1 number and be done with it.
Also you could work on your attitude.
Sliders are existent in pp formula. It looks at the shortest possible path you can take. The problem is that 1: it doesnt take into account that you have to follow the sliderball and 2: a jump will always be faster than a slider.
Map length is a difficult subject because how are you going to accurately use it in pp calculation? Should a map that's twice as long give twice as much pp? Then you will soon end up with superinflated pp ratings just because that 4* map is 20 minutes. Should a map that's similar star rating but longer always be worth more pp, even if the od is lower? When length weighting was first added people complained that it was too strong so it got nerfed, now you think it's not strong enough. It's not just something where you change 1 number and be done with it.
Also you could work on your attitude.
Map length is just weighted too little in comparison to how aim and speed values are weighted. Consistency is... lets be honest, one of harder skills to maintain because human nature of nerves and stress has his role in it. How many people out of all players in rank range from 50 to 10k are able to consistently play with high accuracy and FC in 10-20 tires marathon size maps and how many are able to do this to 1 min maps. While rank going up, more people starting to be able to play longer maps but it is still an issue if you gained your ranks by playing exclusively TV-Size maps.
Map length should have bigger impact for pp just because it is way easier to pull out 200pp score from daidai dt spamming it over and over than from for example this map: https://osu.ppy.sh/b/53554?m=0 - OD9 7 min vs OD 9.7 2 min map.
Here is one thing:
https://osu.ppy.sh/b/53554?m=0 - 99% = ~220pp
daidai genome DT only 93% acc fc = ~223pp
Now, difficulty wise - pulling 99% on Emotional Skyscraper ~ World's End is wayyy harder than pulling 93% fc on daidai genome.
Sorry for my attitude, issues with pp formula still driving me out, even that I don't play actively anymore due this particular issue.
Map length should have bigger impact for pp just because it is way easier to pull out 200pp score from daidai dt spamming it over and over than from for example this map: https://osu.ppy.sh/b/53554?m=0 - OD9 7 min vs OD 9.7 2 min map.
Here is one thing:
https://osu.ppy.sh/b/53554?m=0 - 99% = ~220pp
daidai genome DT only 93% acc fc = ~223pp
Now, difficulty wise - pulling 99% on Emotional Skyscraper ~ World's End is wayyy harder than pulling 93% fc on daidai genome.
Sorry for my attitude, issues with pp formula still driving me out, even that I don't play actively anymore due this particular issue.
so far so good until the PerformancePlus launched.
Here is an example: https://osu.ppy.sh/s/38235 I have 94.46% on DTFC and got 262pp, but the same score there are more than 310pp in the PP+
Now I'm in meditation, why the beatmap contains TONS of streams still gives less pp than a many stupid jumps like daidai gonome?
I'm really really care about the streams take up how many percentage weight in the pp system, to fc a beatmap with many high speed streams is not easy for most people, but many people can jump easily even with the touchscreen.
Here is an example: https://osu.ppy.sh/s/38235 I have 94.46% on DTFC and got 262pp, but the same score there are more than 310pp in the PP+
Now I'm in meditation, why the beatmap contains TONS of streams still gives less pp than a many stupid jumps like daidai gonome?
I'm really really care about the streams take up how many percentage weight in the pp system, to fc a beatmap with many high speed streams is not easy for most people, but many people can jump easily even with the touchscreen.
Because distance spacing on streams is short and for pp formula "it is worth nothing".
Yet, getting good acc on stream heavy map like River styx is super hard in comparison to 1-3x 100 daidai HDDT.
99% acc fc river styx gives same pp as HDDT 1 x 100 on daidai.
Amount of people able to pull out 99% acc fc on river styx - not many...
1 x 100 HDDT daidai - well... every single 4-digit pp farmer.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Yet, getting good acc on stream heavy map like River styx is super hard in comparison to 1-3x 100 daidai HDDT.
99% acc fc river styx gives same pp as HDDT 1 x 100 on daidai.
Amount of people able to pull out 99% acc fc on river styx - not many...
1 x 100 HDDT daidai - well... every single 4-digit pp farmer.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
I know it was changed before ppv2 was implemented but wouldn't it be good to have a percentage of the pp gained come from the actual rank achieved on leader board of a map? I see a couple of problems that my young brain can't find solutions for, like people constantly refreshing the new ranked maps page. I thought that maybe some sort of proportion could be set for players played and time the map has been out or something but then that would make people wait for everyone else to play it. If someone does find a solution to solve this issue, would this idea still be nice?
This is how ppv1 worked and it was shit.Tilt on English wrote:
I know it was changed before ppv2 was implemented but wouldn't it be good to have a percentage of the pp gained come from the actual rank achieved on leader board of a map? I see a couple of problems that my young brain can't find solutions for, like people constantly refreshing the new ranked maps page. I thought that maybe some sort of proportion could be set for players played and time the map has been out or something but then that would make people wait for everyone else to play it. If someone does find a solution to solve this issue, would this idea still be nice?
ppv2 is also shit.
Only autistics who mindlessly play 99%+ always FC get pp.
rest is screwed.
Only autistics who mindlessly play 99%+ always FC get pp.
rest is screwed.