SPOILER
thanks for your honest response, I will try to reply to it adequately.Vayentha wrote:
I agree with NixXSkate. Playcount and stuff could be good information to take into account, but for that you'd need to remove of the playcount (for instance) all of the plays that did not have the endeavor to make you better. Look at me for instance, I have 34k playcount, yet, I spend what, a fifth of my play time playing easy maps to take breaks from tryharding. A fifth of 34k would be 6800, which is a lot of difference. Now, let's imagine that I've been playing for much more time and that I have 200.000 playcount, and that I would always have played easy maps. A fifth of it would be 40k playcount, which is a big lot.
On the other hand, I've noticed that people that play less than me (like, maybe twice or thrice a week, while I'm playing six days out of seven) improve faster playcount-wise, but slower time-wise (one of my friends, for instance, has 2600pp, when I had as much as him, my playcount was twice as high, yet, I went to this amount of pp way faster than he did, he attained this amount in one year and a half while I atteined it in just one year).
Besides, retrying makes a lot of difference playcount wise, as it increases a lot faster, while the total hits doesn't increase as fast.
Railey, let's take you and I as exemple, if you go to my profile, you'll notice that we begun playing (or at least created our accounts) the exact same day.
In those 21 months, my playcount went all the way up to 34k. Yours is 41.5k. Yet I have 110 hours of playcount more than you. I also have half as much total hits as you. My max combo is 3670 while your is 1330.
For all of this I get to the conclusion that you retry a lot more than I do (and I did retry a lot before deciding to get consistent, if I had never retried, maybe I would be at around 25k playcount or something like that).
If we take only playcount and total hits into account, it would seem like you have more talent than me, but if you take into account that a big part of my total hits comes from not retrying, and that another significant part of them comes from playing piss easy maps, we can't say which one of us is the most talented. Or at least I cannot, and I probably couldn't even though if I knew if you were not retrying like me or playing maps just for fun and not for improvement like I do.
I think that playcount, total hits, and play time are influenced by too much variables to discern them from one another, which would make any judgment based on them dubious.
Also, but this is 'total' intuition from my part (which means that it's totally up to you to believe any of it), I looked at your profile and I think that you tend be pessimistic, which could lead you to think that certains things that look impossible indeed are, while they not necessarily are.
As a response to your example: Everyone plays maps that are easier to take a break. Some more, some less. The good thing is, when you compare yourself to an average, you expect these factors to even out a fair bit, meaning the average you compare yourself with also has a good number of plays on easier maps in it. Some of the players that make up the average that you compare yourself to will also have offline-plays.
It only stops working when you, as you correctly pointed out, do some very irregular stuff. Like having 200k playcount and only playing easy maps. Or playing offline for entire 2 years. Then you could certainly get the wrong idea when you compare yourself to the people around you.
If I have 40 less hitcount than you but am still considerably higher in the rankings than you, a natural conclusion would be that I am more talented, yes. Of course there are many, many confounding factors (which I never denied), but thats why the method is only approximate. When I have the same hitcount as you, it is expected that I am well ahead of where you are.
Regarding frequency of play, I've seen it go the other way round too. People that play more in a short time improving faster (with less hitcount/pp). I am unsure if this is really such a big factor.
To sum it up: the confounding factors become less important when you compare yourself to an average, that is the nice thing about big numbers. Individual deviations vanish in statistics. You just have to account for it when the deviation lies with YOU, like you playing offline for 2 years.
SPOILER
You call me salty and yet you tell me to kill myself? Do you not see the hypocrisy here?[Taiga] wrote:
Just few words:
There are 2 meaning of "being pro":
1) You are pro because you are in top100 and you can play whatever majority of players cannot due having talent for "everything"
but
2) You can be pro in one thing which separates you from majority at your own rank range - for example:
https://osu.ppy.sh/u/-GN
Is not in top100, yet holds biggest amount of most crazy plays which nobody in top100 can probably do (or can do with great effort and sacrifice). One of examples of this scores which i think everyone in top100 tried and failed:
https://osu.ppy.sh/s/155691 - HDHR FC.
Not mention amount of TAG4 Solo FC scores.
Next example:
If you are let's say in top5000 but your control and reading is focused into fast complex patterns and you can without much problems FC gimmick maps, anytime when someone throw at you another camellia map you just laugh at it and do another 200pp FC due this map not yelding much of it - you can consider youself as a pro in this one thing - due probably 99% of players around you will strugle hard in this maps.
This kind of examples are a lot and honestly - who gives a fuck, really, top100, top50, top1.... who gives a fuck if you actually can play maps what you enjoy, as far as people produce them and you find new one even unranked.
For me Railey2 post sounds like crying "i cannot be good", dunno if it's just me but really, demotivating people from work to progress and enjoy higher variety of fun maps is just retarded.
Fuck this thread and OP for bunch of salt, my room looks like ocean after reading this, bye.
@Edit: I also put here Thelewa as someone who worked extremely hard to be good and now it's one of best acc players in this game. As he said - he is "untallented".
Really... if you think you cannot do something because you don't have talent - buy a rope and use it properly, here is tutorial:
Railey should do this right now since there is no hope for you bro, pls don't waste precious oxygene.
Anyway, you got it entirely the wrong way around. This post was made to show people that playing to be at the top isn't for everyone, but that there are other ways to play the game. I concluded my post on a positive note even.
I am pretty good at this game. Exceptionally good, even, at least for my own standards. But I can never make it to the very top. It's not called being pessimistic, or giving up on your dreams, it's called being realistic.
I think getting peoples hopes up when there is no chance of them achieving their dreams is the biggest insult. It doesn't only insult their intelligence, it also makes them waste their time on a goal that is unobtainable.
Lastly
this is the exact type of just-world-hypothesis bullshit that rational people try to avoid like the pest. It doesn't get more delusional than that.