Guest
home
beatmaps
rankings
community
store
help
forum
  1. Forums
  2. osu!
  3. Gameplay & Rankings

osu! ScoreV2 Discussion

posted
Total Posts
174
show more
Kite
osu! Alumni
1,372 posts
Joined July 2009
Kite
I am split on the slider accuracy, on non techincal maps it's beneficial and a fun change but on strict and ever changing rythmns that use sliders for simplification it's a disaster.
Not a fan of the overly weighed combo either, I consider accuracy to be just as important if not more important.

_________________________________________________________________________________________

This was written some time ago and never knew what to do with it, maybe you can get some ideas out of it.
http://puu.sh/qPhYM/cd5b043393.txt

It goes more into the direction of score/pp interaction though.
ac8129464363
1,566 posts
Joined October 2013
ac8129464363

Kite wrote:

but on strict and ever changing rythmns that use sliders for simplification it's a disaster.
(this is regarding main game more than tourney play but)

basically my thoughts on this as well. if a mapper doesn't want stuff like that to be the focus of the difficulty in his map he shouldn't be forced to. over the past 9 years it's just become another tool in the mapper's toolbox to make certain things not pains in the ass and I don't think it's fair to throw away 9 years of development in mapping. i realize this argument comes up every time but i've yet to see a compelling defense to it that's not something along the lines of "we need to move forward"
Kaifin
745 posts
Joined April 2013
Kaifin
as both a player who might be playing in the tournament and a mapper, i have to agree that slider acc is something that feels out of place and out of touch to throw randomly into the biggest tournament of the entire game

its like if you randomly changed a vital aspect of the game for the most important competition of said game, if you're gonna make a change like score v2 it shouldn't be trialed in the biggest tourney of the entire game

as for the other aspects of score v2, i think that the acc vs combo weighting is just about right, especially if slider acc is removed, because its actually slightly more than 70/30 when you think about it because 100s/50s also detract from your score

if the 50 slider break thing is still in score v2, please remove it, it doesnt make any sense, hitting a 50 should give you a 50, not a miss (that is if you even keep slider acc)

the mod balancing is good! i think its very good that HR is worth more than HD and adds an interesting dynamic to freemod

also, the score system is kinda lame from both a player and spectator perspective, is it more exciting to see 100k point totals on both sides during a tense long tiebreaker, or 4 million? i understand the difficulties and limitations that come with implementing the old score system with the new 70/30 acc weighting, but in my opinion that is the most imperative thing that needs to change

to clarify, i think score v2 is a good idea and a step in the right direction for osu, but needs a couple tweaks before its fully tested on the world stage in like THE most important tournament for standard players

i like score v1 more personally, but i know that this is the future and there's no real stopping score v2, but i think that score v2 takes away from the unique feeling and niche of osu as a rhythm game. right now, osu is much more of an aim game than a rhythm game, but that's because its pretty faithful to its source material (Osu! Tatakae! Ouendan)! Now, i know that you've all heard this a million times, but the entire basis of mapping rhythm has centered about using this system that allows sliders to be a more lenient means of hitting notes

now, you may say: mapping have evolved to that point! just let it evolve again! to which i will pose the question: what exactly are the BENEFITS of score v2 that couldn't just be added to score v1? what does slider acc bring to the game exactly? because as of right now, it not only ruins an entire genre of technical mapping (as someone who mainly plays technical maps this is a huge huge huge concern) such as slider heavy wub maps, but also DETRACTS from most, if not all current maps

and to gain what? a sense of superiority when stepmania players say "LOL osu thats not a real rhythm game!1!!!11!"

it feels as if in each staff statement regarding score v2 and slider acc, the argument always boils down to: "its a rhythm game so it should be as rhythmic as possible." but to that, i'd point out that osu has a component that no other "REAL rhythm game" has, an aim component

like gee i wonder why the hit judges aren't brutal like in other rhythm games, probably because you have to aim complex patterns while tapping to the rhythm of the song! it's what makes osu unique, and taking away the lenient nature of sliders by adding accuracy goes against the inherent design of the game and how its played

thats just my two cents about the issue, i hope you consider these points before implementing it for OWC and more importantly the game as a whole

again i think its wrong to use the biggest osu tourney to test out your new score system experiment but that happened last year so :)
Kite
osu! Alumni
1,372 posts
Joined July 2009
Kite
I'd like to add that scorev2 should be kept for tournament purposes only.
In the current state of the game it makes no sense to introduce a new score system to the main game as everything revolves around PP.
Scoreboards currently only matter very little.
Last edited by Kite , edited 1 time in total.
Endaris
5,282 posts
Joined June 2010
Endaris
I would cite my most recent suggestion from the old thread but apparently you moved it to the wastelands or some other non-public area so I will just rewrite it here with a higher degree of elaboration:

Change the hitwindows of circles for the sake of reducing notelock.
In OWC we are very likely to see maps with spaced streams that heavily punish the occurence of notelock.
At the same time it can be expected from our elite players that they will only hit something that is currently a 50 when they committed a rather grave mistake. I feel that missing instead due to a lowered hit area is a legitimate punishment for entirely mistimed hits and the benefits of reduced notelock weigh more than that.
Personally I can just say that I feel cheated by the game when I hit a single as a 50 (on OD8) because I obviously messed up so hard that I do not deserve to keep combo. While I can't guarantee it, I think many good players share this experience.

So we got this sweet OD-table on the wiki:
For the sake of not breaking the format

As easy to determine the hitarea of 50s will go down about 1.66 times the value of the 300 hitarea while it is 1.25 times for the 100s area.
For casual OD this isn't that grave but especially at peak-OD (above 8) it really starts to show as the 50/100 area becomes bigger and bigger relative to the 300 hitarea.

I made this little table to elaborate the issue (picked "common" OD-values in OWC and lower for comparison):
collapsed image

(the units on the relative values are obviously nonsense)


As you can see easily, the hitarea of 300s relative to the total hitarea shrinks by a whole 9,4% from OD7 to OD10 (more than it does from OD7 to OD3).
On top of it the 300 area almost halves when comparing OD10 with OD7 while there is only a moderate change for the 100/50 hitarea.

Now this is a very big discrepancy imo. The system is very lenient regarding hitting stuff offtime while it becomes very strict for hitting on time.
The problem with this is that there is no value in having a great leniency for somehow hitting stuff when the actual sweet area is that small (20%).
On the opposite, the great leniency causes problems on certain maps with notelock and timeshifting on streams
timeshifting
timeshifting is when you misaim in a stream but can't click the next note due to notelock and have to wait for the misaimed note to register as a miss so you can hit the next one without notelock occuring. However there is no way to not hit it off-time (depending on how much the notelock overlaps the next note) and you will often time end up hitting perfectly on time but being shifted by one note against the stream, causing you to hit only 50s unless you purposely overstream (which feels stupid because you were actually streaming perfectly on time).

The result:
When you missed one note in a stream you get heavily punished and can only soften the punishment by hitting off-time and faster to nullify the shift - basically it's everyone's favorite way to die on maps such as Freedom Dive where the notes in streams are 67ms apart from each other. Once you missed a note in the stream you can't hit the next one before being at least 53ms late which means that the minimum time difference to the next note's sweetspot is only 14ms. In the usual case you will fall one note behind and as notelock likes to induces further notelock you will most likely die.

Especially in cases such as Freedom Dive (OWC'15 finals) where the overlap is so big that you're forced to hit 50s in order to not notelock more and die it is extremely difficult to compensate for something that is only ONE miss. Now it's obvious that even with a reduction of the hitareas you can't remove the possibility of notelock on 222bpm streams but it is possible to get it down to a degree where you're not bound to automatically hit 50s and/or die and most of all it significantly reduces the mental effort you have to do in order to not trigger a sequence of notelocks off of one notelock.
tl;dr
Notelock occurs less frequently and is easier to deal with if 50/100 area is reduced.

For reference on notelock also read [Guide] Avoiding "notelock" at high BPM.
According to the values here pretty much everything at 150bpm and above is prone to notelock within streams at OD10.

I don't see any reason to not introduce a new OD-table that reduces the size of the lower judgements in order to raise this notelockborder to a bpm where a significant range of the relevant bpm is unlikely to cause notelock.
Like this for example (I just cut the areas of 100/50 by 10ms on each side):
collapsed image

(the units on the relative values are obviously nonsense)


With the 50s area being down to 80ms you are already very unlikely to notelock on 170bpm and below making misses actual misses and not timeshifting notelock-bullshit. Reducing it even further to 70ms would cover for streams up to 190bpm.
I think having such timewindows is very fair to the quality of our top 5k players.
It can significantly reduce the occurence of relatively random deaths on maps like PUPA+HR (OWC '15 Finals Freemod) where notelocking on one specific stream will cost you the map regardless of your performance in the other 110 seconds of playtime. (that being said, a 80ms window would still cause notelocking with perfect timing while 70ms wouldn't but notelocking is still likely to occur/being randomly avoided on both).
It will slightly raise the significancy of the accuracy-score as 50s will be more likely to occur and also make a performance that consistently strays far from optimal accuracy more likely for death from drain as you're more likely to miss out on the bonus-health from Katus as well.

In such a context the bonus on HR might have to get increased. As a fun spice you could keep the old judgementareas for sliders as people won't like the sliders that are delicate to hit on time being even harder.

If I messed up the sheets somehow, tell me where because I threw them together rather quickly. Also feel free to come up with different values. I just wanted to outline this problem and propose a solution, details adjustable.


-----

Another thing I'm not sure of is the drain.
With slider acc you lose out on free health from properly aiming sliders and makes the occurence of Geki more rare as well.
As far as I can see the health lost from missing sliders/sliderbreaks or rather the health gained from 100s wasn't ever adjusted to keep the maps about as hard to pass as without slideraccuracy.
Since the health is set by the mapper with v1 in mind this seems only fair for me and would also make absolutely stupid deaths on maps such as Clumsy Thoughts+HR (OWC '15 Group Stage) a less significant factor. Playing for "who survives?" just isn't that fun when you could look at a more nuanced performance of each player to determine the result instead.
The reasoning here is obviously similar to the one for notelock+PUPA. I don't want to see people not having their score counted when their performance on the map was actually good.

/edit: fixed one typo, one not-so-significant semantic and commented on the nonsense-units in my screenshots
/edit 3years later: reuploaded broken image links
Last edited by Endaris , edited 4 times in total.
hehe
1,975 posts
Joined November 2012
hehe
are there any changes to the multipliers of difficulty-reduction mods?
7ambda
2,599 posts
Joined January 2015
7ambda
Regarding combo and acc percentages, I honestly think they should be changed so that acc is 60% while combo is 40%.
TakuMii
1,874 posts
Joined October 2009
TakuMii
I think the most important thing that anyone could ask for is to be able to test out the scoreV2 system freely. It's kinda difficult to judge how well a system will work without actually using it first-hand. And it may be just a pipe dream, but I'd be willing to see the new scores calculated alongside the old scores instead of replacing them (a la Beatmania IIDX) once this metric becomes good enough to become the primary score system.

As for an actual suggestion: Maybe implement a score cap that scales off of max combo count rather than simply capping every single map to 1 million? As far as I'm aware, the score cap was the biggest concern with the original scorev2 implementation, so this might be a decent way to address the psychological issue without deviating too much from the original calculations.
Halfslashed
Global Moderator
438 posts
Joined July 2014
Halfslashed
As someone who has played and staffed many tournaments with score v2, team based and not, my biggest concern (slider acc aside) is combo:score scaling.

Currently, it is actually possible for someone with 98% and a 500-600 combo on a 2400 combo map to narrowly beat out someone with a 1200 combo and 90% accuracy. The problem with this is that the score difference between the 500-600 combo and 1200 combo isn't enough to justify the consistency involved in getting the higher combo. It turns out that for a good few people, it's much harder to maintain higher combos than accuracy, even if you're heavily trained in the area of skill the map requires for you to get a higher combo.

I can't discount the fact that players can tank accuracy in a tournament, but I see the accuracy percentage as a factor of how much a player has spent their time developing their skill up to their point, while combo is represented by not only skill, but how stable they can remain during play, how familiar they are with the maps, etc.

Now, this actually isn't as much of a problem for maps in the 1000 combo range or below, since a player will have a much easier time obtaining a higher proportion of the combo, and accuracy will still play a role, just not as big of one.

My suggestion to this is to make the combo portion of score v2 linear, and decrease the scaling each time there is a combo break (preferrably after 20-40 combo or so, since when players miss, they can sometimes do it in rapid succession due to a tricky part). Some math would have to be played around with, but the concept would be something like 1x scaling to start, 0.7x after first break, 0.5x after second, etc. Also, have this scaling apply and change depending on the biggest combo, as to not punish early breaks. Ex (assumes above proportions): On a 1000 combo map, I broke 3 times and got combos of 50x, 850x, and 100x. The 850x would have normal weight, the 100x would have 0.7x weight, and the 50x wold have 0.5 weight towards my total combo score weight.

The other issue is more of a show thing, but one of the other complaints I've heard about score v2 is that it's boring to watch. People miss the big numbers of score v1, and it's not as enjoyable to see someone FC a 2k combo map to get a score less than 1 mil. My suggestion here is to just multiply the 1 mill by the max combo of the map and some constant. Ex (here I used a constant of 0.03): https://osu.ppy.sh/b/221777 would have a score of 71,640,000 for a nomod SS. This may seem silly, but I think it would make the audience as well as maybe even the players happier overall.

That's pretty much it, the weights are fine at lower combo lengths, but the combo:score ratio is messed up at higher ones.
Enon
Beatmap Nominator
2,719 posts
Joined November 2012
Enon
OWC is osu!standard world cup.

it dosen't need to input a characteristic of other game modes like slider-acc stuff since that is breaking originality of osu!standard mode.

that stuff would be acutally kinda not good if you have been played osu!standard without the stuff in my opinion...

I also have tried that and felt kinda not good from the stuff.....


it's fine system though if there is no slider-acc stuff :)
MiruHong
92 posts
Joined June 2013
MiruHong
Circle
44 posts
Joined May 2016
Circle
If we have the slider acc to be the same as circle acc, that would make the difference between sliders and circles less noticeable. This would impair mappers' ability to create contrast in song components using sliders and circles.

However, I also think that as a rhythm game, it is important for the sliders to be clicked somewhat on time. Therefore, I propose having a separate OD for sliders in which the timing window for sliders is 2x longer than the timing window for circles. For example, a map has OD10. There would be +- 19.5 ms leniency for circles and +- 39 ms leniency for sliders (effectively OD 6.66~). The multiplier may be adjusted based on testing of the score system in the future.

For other components of the scoreV2 system:
I agree and second Halfslashed's idea for combo scaling. Implementation of Halfslashed's idea would further differentiate and reward high combos. This change still would make team carry (which scoreV2 tries to prevent) difficult to do as the difference between full combo score and half combo score (one miss in the middle and assume same accuracy) would be 8.75% of the score cap.
hehe
1,975 posts
Joined November 2012
hehe

MiruHong wrote:

with this in mind maybe a change in the percentages of combo and accuracy, while adding a final multiplier for # of misses. this avoids unnecessary complication and all data can be pulled from the results screen. something like 50/50 and 0.98 or 0.99 score per miss. 0.97 would feel a little too punishing for misaiming a stream etc.
Endie-
784 posts
Joined March 2015
Endie-

Spaghetti wrote:

i love it, seems like its going in the right direction
TakuMii
1,874 posts
Joined October 2009
TakuMii

handsome wrote:

with this in mind maybe a change in the percentages of combo and accuracy, while adding a final multiplier for # of misses. this avoids unnecessary complication and all data can be pulled from the results screen. something like 50/50 and 0.98 or 0.99 score per miss. 0.97 would feel a little too punishing for misaiming a stream etc.
The problem with adding a final multiplier for misses is that it won't affect the score during gameplay, and if it did, it would cause sudden score decreases. I don't think this makes sense, especially in a competitive environment, as it'd only make the teams' performance during gameplay more ambiguous to the viewers. Misses have always counted as zero, and I believe they should be kept that way.
If anything, misses could be handled as Halfslashed has suggested, with a decreasing combo multiplier each time a miss occurs. I somewhat agree with the concept, but the numbers and scaling would have to be tweaked significantly as to avoid punishing early misses more than late misses.
Hollow Delta
793 posts
Joined March 2015
Hollow Delta
When this new scoring system is implemented, will the leader boards reset? Will there be a separate leader board altogether? Or will we continue off of the leader boards we have now, making it unfair for new players? Because if we add the new scoring system, which is obviously harder, new players won't be able to progress as fast as the veteran players did.
Remyria
366 posts
Joined June 2012
Remyria
Only thing I'm against is slider accuracy. I agree with Kaifin about it.
Omnipotence -
7 posts
Joined June 2016
Omnipotence -
Might be because I'm too new, but am I the only one who thinks that losing a match bc you broke you combo at a different, maybe even harder point than your opponent, is a really stupid experience? To put to perspective: When 2 players play the same map and make only one mistake. One who make a mistake at the beginning where it feels like an entire easier difficulty but then keeps his combo until the end. And one who makes a mistake in a long hard stream near the end. To me it looks like the very foundation with combos is unfair, then again I'm very new here x)
TakuMii
1,874 posts
Joined October 2009
TakuMii
Honestly, I think the timing of combo breaks should matter. I mean, a player that can combo during the more difficult parts should be rewarded more than someone who can only remain consistent during the slower parts of a map, but I'm not sure how something like that would be handled, aside from punishing multiple successive misses more than they currently are.
l1mi
335 posts
Joined July 2011
l1mi

Loctav wrote:

StarrStyx: Define "slider acc". You mean hitting the slider start with correct precision? While most maps are not designed around it specifically, I feel like it actually should be a thing, given this is a rhythm game (and it is enforced in many other games of the same genre in a comparable fashion as well)

Smoothie World: we are open to any kind of suggestions. It has been a year since OWC passed and in order to fresh up things a little, maybe you or others have ideas in how to balance it any further to be a proper scoring for competitive environements.

Sliders are perfect to use on parts of songs that has wierd or unreadable timings because the way they are now. If that changes in score V2 it will be pretty annoying. For me it will be hell because I often press down both keys on sliders.

The game already has an unlimited difficulty why make it harder for everyone? because it should be correct? correct is not the same as better. Make it better instead and change the PP system so we get more interesting maps. Maybe increase the value of hitting notes on blue/yellow tics (except sliders ofcourse) that might change how PP maps look alot. Give increased PP for maps with multiple BPM/beatmap divisor,s and note density as well.

And then its rip Santa san.
Endaris
5,282 posts
Joined June 2010
Endaris

smoogipooo wrote:

Hey all,
We're just over two months away from OWC and I want to know what the community likes/dislikes about the current ScoreV2 system so we can get it perfected before OWC comes a-knocking.
THIS IS NOT FINAL
Please, do not discuss Star Rating and PP here.

smoogipooo wrote:

THIS IS NOT FINAL
Please, do not discuss Star Rating and PP here.

smoogipooo wrote:

Please, do not discuss Star Rating and PP here.
It's been a year since v2 has been introduced and to me it looks like it has become a sideproject that is exclusively used for tournament scoring until osu!next is out. So please look at the topic in regards to how it affects tournaments and specifically OWC 2016, not how it affects pp/worse players/whatever.
tfg50
149 posts
Joined September 2013
tfg50
Slider acc is easy. learn how to acc.

I think something like a cap (either a hard or a soft one) on the combo multiplier would work great, why don't people suggest this more?
B1rd
2,974 posts
Joined December 2013
B1rd
I don't like it. Multiplayer used to be distinct and unique from singleplayer because it used a different skillset that relied on players' consistency and mental condition. Getting high combos isn't due to 'luck', it's due to a player exercising a massive amount of attention and skill to not make a single mistake over a long period. And sacrificing acc to maintain a combo was a skill in itself. But now all that is being discarded in favour of a system that strives to reflect skill as judged singleplayer ranks. Last OWC teams who were holding really high combos on long maps were losing to the other teams just because they had higher acc. I don't care if you can get 98%, 92% and 1000 combo in a tournament is much more impressive. Give accuracy a small boost but keep it about combos.

And having slider acc should be got rid of, there is no reason to change how the game plays in such a significant aspect, especially for a tournament.
chainpullz
2,335 posts
Joined June 2013
chainpullz
Making slider acc into a difficulty increasing mod and allocating a part of the map pool to this like you do with all the other mods would be more interesting imo. It would allow a lot more freedom when it comes to map pool selection since some maps can go from being reasonable technical maps to complete shitfests when you add slider acc. Having this as a mod would allow you to include it as either a complete shitfest or a reasonable technical map.

It would also provide further depth to the freemod pool since you'd essentially have more options. IDK what a good score multiplier would be but considering it doesn't even add much difficulty to some maps probably a smaller multiplier than hidden (1.04x? or smth maybe?).

I know players (such as Cxu iirc) have made similar suggestions in the past. Even if slider accuracy is "as this game was originally intended to be played" or w/e bullshit you want to spout, I personally think adding more depth as opposed to removing depth is usually the correct design decision.

To clarify I'm not even saying to make Sv2 as a whole a mod, just the slider accuracy portion of it.
Musty
2,254 posts
Joined February 2010
Musty
The only thing that i think should be definetly changed is the spinner bonus points weight which is to me right now just way too OP. There are maps right now where you can win simply because you can do 420rpm with like 97% and someone on SS with 370rpm might lose.. this is bullshit to me lol
PinkNightmares
211 posts
Joined September 2014
PinkNightmares
The mod multipliers are as follows: HR - 1.10x, DT - 1.20x, FL - 1.12x, HD - 1.06x
Right now you can HD or HR to beat your nomod and (HD)DT to beat your (HD)HR which feels like a natural progression. You also get a chance to compete with DT scores when using FL. The above change will break this delicate balance. In my opinion the whole ScoreV2 concept is flawed and I don't understand why you want to touch ScoreV1.
Toy
Former osu! Champion: 2019 / Grilled Dodongo
1,513 posts
Joined June 2013
Toy
scorev2 is nice as long as it stays a purely competitive/tourney system and not used for singleplayer. As stated before by Kaifin, adding slider accuracy can really throw off the dynamic of some maps as theyre intended to be played with slider leniency, though at least for the OWC2015 mappool, it wasn't a huge issue.

The mod balancing is very nice, it gives incentive to use HR for freemod and makes matches a tad more interesting.

Spinner bonus does seem a tad broken but it's not a massive issue for a 4v4 tourney like OWC since it'll mostly only make a difference in stupidly close matches.

The balance between combo and acc is nice as well, it seems pretty fair and is overall a pretty good system for gauging which team is better than the other rather than which team has the better all-star carry player.

I like what's been done but I want to highly stress it working only for the sort of competitive/tourney environment of OWC and similar tourneys and is simply not fit for use in singleplayer mode.
Endaris
5,282 posts
Joined June 2010
Endaris
17 days since this thread was opened so OWC is really close already I assume?
You said that you wouldn't answer every comment which I can respect but I wonder what this discussion is for when it receives no feedback at all? Except for "slideracc will stay" which we knew before.
shortpotato
312 posts
Joined December 2011
shortpotato
I'd just to just make a plea to PLEASE remove slider accuracy judgement

Other people have already explained in detail the many reasons why slider acc is not a good addition to the game, so I won't be repeating them again in this post. However, I'd like to point out that the majority of active players and mappers actually don't support slider acc, and that most people who support slider acc don't even play the game actively. Because of this, the informed minority are bashing their heads in because there's simply nothing they can do about it. I don't have any proof of this; you'll just have to take my word for it.

Firstly, I'd like to say the most skilled players will win in either system, score V1 or score V2, but that's no reason not to have the best system in place. Score V1 has been the best system for years and years, and there have been no complaints about it's use in tournaments or single player. It's a classic case: 'If it ain't broke, don't fix it". It feels to me (correct me if im wrong?) that the staff feel as if removing score V2 (or aspects of it) is a direct attack against all of the work they have done into making it. Really, all the work you have done wouldn't have been a waste because even if score V2 is removed, you've still shown to the community you care about improving the game, offered them a choice, and also reaffirmed score V1 as the best scoring system! I'd actually like to give props to the dev's for continuing to develop and update the game because that's not something you get in every community!

The problem is that when the community doesn't agree with certain changes, and the change is pushed anyway, (or vice versa, when the overwhelming majority of the community wants something changed (IMO SLIDER ACC) and it's not) then you get general dissatisfaction. Take into account the current state of CS:GO for example, that's a prime example of how the dev's have made people hate the game with their poor management of changes and updates. I won't go into depth here either because it's off topic - but the point remains that the community is here for a reason. We legitimately want to improve the game albeit all the trolling and rage that I admit comes out at times.

There's a lot of people who were strongly against slider acc in last year's discussion, but now they've given up posting on this forum (or even have quit the game) because they feel like nothing will change anyway. It's been a year since the discussions of last year on score V2 and the staff haven't taken any suggestions from the community at all. It's incredibly frustrating to have these discussions with the agenda being that nothing will happen as a result, especially when the staff are the ones who create the thread themselves for 'community input'.

This might be getting a little rant-y, so I'll cut it short. If removing slider acc is something the staff isn't even going to consider, then that's fine, just don't say something like this to get my hopes up because it's incredibly hypocritical.

Loctav wrote:

Smoothie World: we are open to any kind of suggestions. It has been a year since OWC passed and in order to fresh up things a little, maybe you or others have ideas in how to balance it any further to be a proper scoring for competitive environements.
I'd like to finish on some of the past experiences that have occurred during my (5 years yay!) stay in Osu! It's really no secret that the Osu! staff have a bad reputation, so I don't see a problem with saying it explicitly here, but there really needs to be some change if you want to satisfy the players as it is. I know people who hate the staff so much that they have quit the game, and that's not really something you want if you want your game to grow. For the past two years frustration has peaked during the OWC period as people get more and more disillusioned with their management of the tournament. I'd like to stay optimistic that things aren't as bad as I've described, because there's still time before this years OWC! Maybe it can start with some changes being made after this thread's discussion. Good luck!

If you made it through all of this, thanks for reading. I hope something can be made out of this post, it took me many hours
Endaris
5,282 posts
Joined June 2010
Endaris
I hope you realise shortpotato that score v2 wouldve replaced score v1 months ago if the management or in this case peppy was really that ignorant.
Many players and mappers also felt positive about having slider accuracy in general but were concerned about the negative effects on maps where slider accuracy is not appropriate (also see Toy's post in this thread).
The answer of Loctav you quoted clearly indicates that the changes on score v2 discussed here will be "for competitive environments" aka tournaments. And tbh as a tournament scoring system I got no massive complaints about score v2 when comparing it to v1.

I'd also like to correct you in one point: There are complaints about score v1, for example the occurences of same combo different acc when the lower acc play has more score.
TakuMii
1,874 posts
Joined October 2009
TakuMii
Just a question to all the people opposing slider accuracy: What if good accuracy was implemented as a small score bonus rather than penalizing bad accuracy?

I know it's effectively the same thing, but I feel like psychologically it would be better for the game to provide incentive for going the extra mile, rather than punishing players for playing the sliders the way they always have. (not to mention it could be balanced and adjusted more compared to simply slapping players with a 100 or a 50).

Yeah, I'm aware that many maps aren't quite designed with slider accuracy in mind, but just remember that slider accuracy implementation has been an idea for the developers even as far back as 2011. There's several reasons why it hasn't happened yet, but with all of the evolution to the game happening behind the scenes recently, I think it's the perfect time for the developers to finally try to make things work. I'm all for adding more depth to the game, as long as it doesn't cause more frustration with the people who prefer the status quo.
Railey2
515 posts
Joined February 2015
Railey2

TakuMii wrote:

Just a question to all the people opposing slider accuracy: What if good accuracy was implemented as a small score bonus rather than penalizing bad accuracy?

I know it's effectively the same thing, but I feel like psychologically it would be better for the game to provide incentive for going the extra mile, rather than punishing players for playing the sliders the way they always have. (not to mention it could be balanced and adjusted more compared to simply slapping players with a 100 or a 50).

Yeah, I'm aware that many maps aren't quite designed with slider accuracy in mind, but just remember that slider accuracy implementation has been an idea for the developers even as far back as 2011. There's several reasons why it hasn't happened yet, but with all of the evolution to the game happening behind the scenes recently, I think it's the perfect time for the developers to finally try to make things work. I'm all for adding more depth to the game, as long as it doesn't cause more frustration with the people who prefer the status quo.
Missing out on that bonus when not hitting them correctly will feel like a penalty for players that care about acc.


Just introduce 2 different sorts of sliders, the ones with slideracc and the ones without. The ones without can be used in parts where they are essential for the player because of unexpected rhythm changes, or because it'd be unfair to make them acc'd ones (for whatever reason). I don't know why the staff is so stubborn about this issue.

Leave it up to the mappers. Old maps can be kept the way they are. Their leaderboards shall remain untouched.
TakuMii
1,874 posts
Joined October 2009
TakuMii

Railey2 wrote:

Missing out on that bonus when not hitting them correctly will feel like a penalty for players that care about acc.
What I meant was to keep accuracy calculation as it is now, and give only score bonuses to accurate slider hits, similar to how rainbow 300s differ from standard 300s in mania (as in, you can still get 100% accuracy/SS without the bonuses, but with a lower score). I know a lot of other rhythm games take an approach like this too, so it might be a compromise worth thinking about.

...I'm just trying to come up with ways that they could implement slider accuracy without making it frustrating for people. And I highly doubt they'd want to cause a divide in the community by forcing the mappers to make the decision for them.
Railey2
515 posts
Joined February 2015
Railey2

TakuMii wrote:

Railey2 wrote:

Missing out on that bonus when not hitting them correctly will feel like a penalty for players that care about acc.
What I meant was to keep accuracy calculation as it is now, and give only score bonuses to accurate slider hits, similar to how rainbow 300s differ from standard 300s in mania (as in, you can still get 100% accuracy/SS without the bonuses, but with a lower score). I know a lot of other rhythm games take an approach like this too, so it might be a compromise worth thinking about.

...I'm just trying to come up with ways that they could implement slider accuracy without making it frustrating for people. And I highly doubt they'd want to cause a divide in the community by forcing the mappers to make the decision for them.
hmmm

I don't think score provides enough of an incentive to care about slider acc. Personally, I don't give a shit about my score, I just want acc and combo. I know many players think the same. I think if they handle it this way, there is not much of a point in implementing it. I think slideracc should affect the pp-system.

Why do you think that giving acc'd sliders as a tool to mappers would divide the community? If some mappers want to map "old style", they can do that by just mapping old sliders.
Endaris
5,282 posts
Joined June 2010
Endaris
Problem would be that new maps with new acc sliders would get a higher judgement for good accuracy, meaning that maps with simple rhythms will be even more overrated due to inflated pp from OD.
As the community is already heavily leaning towards pp-efficient maps this would probably discourage players to play "old" maps even more.
Railey2
515 posts
Joined February 2015
Railey2

Endaris wrote:

Problem would be that new maps with new acc sliders would get a higher judgment for good accuracy, meaning that maps with simple rhythms will be even more overrated due to inflated pp from OD.
As the community is already heavily leaning towards pp-efficient maps this would probably discourage players to play "old" maps even more.
Yes, it would

unless someone thinks up an algorithm that can differentiate between rhythmically complex patterns and the ones that aren't, this will always be a problem.
just look at this mess:


Personally, I don't think that acc sliders will make it much worse than it already is.
chainpullz
2,335 posts
Joined June 2013
chainpullz

Endaris wrote:

smoogipooo wrote:

Please, do not discuss Star Rating and PP here.
It's been a year since v2 has been introduced and to me it looks like it has become a sideproject that is exclusively used for tournament scoring until osu!next is out. So please look at the topic in regards to how it affects tournaments and specifically OWC 2016, not how it affects pp/worse players/whatever.
TakuMii
1,874 posts
Joined October 2009
TakuMii

Railey2 wrote:

Personally, I don't give a shit about my score, I just want acc and combo. I know many players think the same. I think if they handle it this way, there is not much of a point in implementing it. I think slideracc should affect the pp-system.
That's the entire issue with Score V1. Outside of tournaments and multiplayer, there's really no reason to care about score, and even in those environments, it is still pretty flawed. V2 is meant to address that, even if for the moment it only applies to tournaments. Score V2 should make people care about score, so there's no reason to brush off score-only changes.
...And honestly, even if it has 1/10th of the effect on score than it did last year, I still think it could be a possible solution for OWC. It'll provide room for adjustments, anyways.

That being said, if they did make slider accuracy affect PP, I'd still think they'd be better off implementing it as a bonus metric and giving it its own values. It'll allow it to be separately balanced from normal accuracy (allowing a greater degree of control over its effects on the PP meta), while reducing potential issues with calculating old scores (i.e. accuracy and combo percentage will stay the same, old scores with replays can be reanalyzed, old scores without replays remain the same PP value but can be easily replaced). I'm not sure how well it'd would actually work in practice, but it'd likely work better than penalizing players with 100s for not adapting.

Railey2 wrote:

Why do you think that giving acc'd sliders as a tool to mappers would divide the community? If some mappers want to map "old style", they can do that by just mapping old sliders.
The fact you're calling it an "old style" is exactly why it'd divide the community. All it would do is give players less of an incentive to play old maps while causing inconsistency with the design of new maps. I'd rather have it apply to all maps, or not at all.
Railey2
515 posts
Joined February 2015
Railey2
I doubt that people will start to care about score if it is not related to pp. People in this game mostly care about their rank. Score isn't really important unless you play for the leaderboards, but only a very small fraction of people is able to do that.
TakuMii
1,874 posts
Joined October 2009
TakuMii
This entire thread is about improving the score system, not for complaining about the fact that it's not related to PP. Score V1 has nothing to do with PP for a very good reason, and that's because it's fundamentally flawed.
Score already plays a role in PP within osu!mania, so I can see the same happening to standard mode if ScoreV2 ever becomes good enough to become a permanent part of the game. But I digress.

besides, my point earlier doesn't really have anything to do with the fact that score and PP aren't related
Endaris
5,282 posts
Joined June 2010
Endaris

TakuMii wrote:

This entire thread is about improving the score system, not for complaining about the fact that it's not related to PP. Score V1 has nothing to do with PP for a very good reason, and that's because it's fundamentally flawed.
This doesn't make sense.
If score v1 had something to do with pp then it would be fundamentally flawed because it wouldn't make sense to look at it as a second metric.
Anyway...still no feedback from smoogi/Loctav on the topic so I assume that just >something< will happen to score v2 and none knows what until it's ready.
TakuMii
1,874 posts
Joined October 2009
TakuMii
What I meant was that the issues with Score V1 have been known long before PPv2 was conceived, and this was the reason they decided not to let it influence PP in any way. Considering that osu! still uses the score system to determine your "best score", there's no other reason to exclude it if it weren't for its flaws.
i lov feet
i lov feet
:?: So Do you prefer ScoreV1 or ScoreV2 ?? :?:

Vote here :P : https://goo.gl/rkPSDM

Result here :P : https://goo.gl/OQo1Wa
Endaris
5,282 posts
Joined June 2010
Endaris

Seijiku wrote:

:?: So Do you prefer ScoreV1 or ScoreV2 ?? :?:

Vote here :P : https://goo.gl/rkPSDM

Result here :P : https://goo.gl/OQo1Wa
And this is what we call absolutely pointless
TakuMii
1,874 posts
Joined October 2009
TakuMii

Seijiku wrote:

:?: So Do you hate change or do you blindly accept the future ?? :?:
fixed

...Seriously though, we have no idea how ScoreV2 is actually going to be. This is pretty pointless.
JTF195
6 posts
Joined September 2014
JTF195
I think slider ends should break combo like slider ticks do.

AFAIK, they're the only gameplay element that adds to combo but doesn't break combo. That isn't consistent.

It doesn't make sense that you can play through a song without a combo break OR full combo
Cuber
29 posts
Joined April 2014
Cuber

JTF195 wrote:

I think slider ends should break combo like slider ticks do.
AFAIK, they're the only gameplay element that adds to combo but doesn't break combo. That isn't consistent.
It doesn't make sense that you can play through a song without a combo break OR full combo


Objectively, I think you're right, but good luck convincing people to change that lol
7ambda
2,599 posts
Joined January 2015
7ambda

JTF195 wrote:

I think slider ends should break combo like slider ticks do.

AFAIK, they're the only gameplay element that adds to combo but doesn't break combo. That isn't consistent.

It doesn't make sense that you can play through a song without a combo break OR full combo
I like leniency-abusive slider maps the way they are.
JTF195
6 posts
Joined September 2014
JTF195

JTF195 wrote:

I think slider ends should break combo like slider ticks do.

AFAIK, they're the only gameplay element that adds to combo but doesn't break combo. That isn't consistent.

It doesn't make sense that you can play through a song without a combo break OR full combo
According to this recent reddit thread: https://www.reddit.com/r/osugame/comments/518xwg/since_notch_hell_is_getting_ranked_slider_ends there's also the fact that slider ends are apparently checked 36ms early. I'm sure there's a reason for that, but I'm not sure what it might be, or if it might be worth revisiting


To clarify, I'm not saying that either of those mechanics should be changed in standard gameplay anytime soon, or ever.

But, ScoreV2 and/or osu!next present an opportunity to fix those inconsistencies without affecting the existing experience.
Franc[e]sco
189 posts
Joined August 2009
Franc[e]sco
Except for maybe spinners being worth too much, I think scorev2 is vastly superior to scorev1 for both tournaments and singleplayer. Consistency is not only maintaining combo. I consider a player who can SS everything and get a shitmiss in the middle of the map more consistent than someone who just full combos with very low acc, and scorev2 rewards that much more than scorev1. It's just way more logical. Scorev2 can also create more hype for tournaments as there's always the chance for a comeback unlike combo-based scoring, especially for 1v1 (which IMO makes more sense than team-based tournaments).

And no, scorev2 doesn't overrate accuracy in my opinion. Low acc does not only come from being bad at acc. Barely aiming, running out of stamina, misreading etc can all lower your accuracy.
Nerova Riuz GX
1,413 posts
Joined April 2012
Nerova Riuz GX
I might not be against any of the changes except those which are about sliders.

The current slider settings make the maps nowadays varied, so if any of the changes is about to make it more strict, I'll definitely disagree. (loosen it is dumb af too but I know you won't do that.)

should better check the forum page here and I think it's definitely worth to be discussed as well: t/427264
jesse1412
1,457 posts
Joined January 2010
jesse1412
I would rather use pp over scorev2. On the same map, pp can distinguish the value of scores well.

As someone who has played watched my team play in many tournaments, I can say that seeing scorev2 in a tournament made most of us roll our eyes. It just seems like random points pulled out of thin air. For spectators it may seem more intense because the scores are generally much closer throughout the match, in reality you could attain the same thing by dividing scorev1 by 10. The added appeal of scorev2 to spectators is the "hype" when two teams are closely tied. The issue with scorev2 is that the scores aren't really close, it's just a clusterfuck of confusion over who will win because it doesn't make any sense half the time. It's just misleading to spectators and annoying.

Much prefer scores v1 over score v2. You should consider using pp based scoring and see how that looks.
Last edited by jesse1412 , edited 1 time in total.
TakuMii
1,874 posts
Joined October 2009
TakuMii
^ The thing is, I'm pretty sure that PP functions more like a post-play calculation, so I don't know how well something like that would fare in a real-time environment. If anyone found a way to implement a score system that used it while still keeping scores cumulative (as in, misses count as 0 rather than causing players to lose points), I could see something like that working out.
Endaris
5,282 posts
Joined June 2010
Endaris
The difference is that pp only looks at your highest combo while in score v2 you will still receive some score for additional lower combos.
I think it would look like bullshit if players would suddenly stop getting points because they have to get back to their highest combo to have the multiplier roll out again.
Full Tablet
2,544 posts
Joined September 2011
Full Tablet
To use the pp formula for score:
1) During play, use the pp formula assuming everything not played yet is a Miss.
2) Modify the formula so the values go up more linearly during play (or another kind of growth that is easier to follow during play).

The pp formula is (with ScoreV2 Slider mechanics):
Length = Amount of notes in the map.
Acc% = Accuracy percentage, range: [0,1]. (6 * Count300 + 2 * Count100 + Count50) / 6 / (Length)
AimBase = A map constant that depends on the Aim Difficulty, Length, AR, OD, Visual Mods.
SpeedBase = A map constant that depends on the Speed Difficulty, Length, OD.

ODBase = A map constant that depends on OD.
AccBase = A map constant that depends on Length and Visual Mods (not OD)

MaxComboRatio = The maximum combo achieved divided by the maximum combo possible on the map.

pp = Constant * (AimValue^1.1 + SpeedValue^1.1 + AccValue^1.1)^(1/1.1)

AimValue = AimBase * 0.97^CountMiss * MaxComboRatio^0.8 * (0.5 + Acc% / 2)
SpeedValue = SpeedBase * 0.97^CountMiss * MaxComboRatio^0.8 * (0.5 + Acc% / 2)
AccValue = AccBase * ODBase^(Acc%^24)


If all Values (Aim, Speed and Acc) have roughly the same magnitude (they should with end-of-play values), and each one increases linearly during play, then score increases linearly during play. So we have to modify each of the Value formulas in a way they have the same magnitude at the end of play, and scale linearly during play.

ProgressRatio = Amount of played notes divided by the total amount of notes.


Note: While using those formulas, assume every note not played is a miss, for example: CountMiss = Number of missed notes so far plus number of notes remaining. MaxComboRatio = Longest combo so far divided by Length. The values increase linearly as long as the performance through the map is consistent.

FAimValue = AimBase * ProgressRatio^(1/5) * 0.97^( (CountMiss + Length * (ProgressRatio - 1) ) / ProgressRatio) * MaxComboRatio^0.8 * ( 0.5 + Acc% / (2 * ProgressRatio) )

FSpeedValue has the same form as FAimValue.

FAccValue = AccBase * ProgressRatio * ODBase^( (Acc% / ProgressRatio)^24 )

Then, the Constant of the pp formula can be raised so the values shown on score are higher.
Franc[e]sco
189 posts
Joined August 2009
Franc[e]sco
sure, pp scoring is fine too and it's also pretty trivial to implement as Full Tablet pointed out. ScoreV2's slider acc would also nicely punish people who are sloppy on slider maps.
ncuh
185 posts
Joined July 2013
ncuh
Only thing I'm against is slider accuracy
Franc[e]sco
189 posts
Joined August 2009
Franc[e]sco
oh, as for the slider changes, I think they're great! with the current system a lot of accuracy is wasted on slider heavy maps and it's a real shame. players are less sloppy than you might think on sliders. it pains me to see bad unstable rate scores getting the same acc % as actually accurate plays. it will also prevent the development of bad slider habits in new players.
JTF195
6 posts
Joined September 2014
JTF195

Franc[e]sco wrote:

it will also prevent the development of bad slider habits in new players.

Pretty much this. Sliders should never have ignored accuracy to begin with, IMO. It just promotes bad habits.
ConsumerOfBean
453 posts
Joined April 2015
ConsumerOfBean
The only problem with slider acc to me is that, right now, they are great for BPM changes as you do not have to be nearly as close, which would feel awkward and ruin acc if sliders had accuracy. Imo, the best way to handle this is make sliders 1.5x or even 2x as lenient as circles so things such as BPM changes would still require acc without being unfair.
Also, if you add slider acc, rip all maps with variable timing


Edit: Another solution would, as stated before (I don't remember who said it tho :P), make slider acc a diff-increasing mod. That way, if there are variable timing maps, you aren't forced into extremely difficult acc due to timing changes.
TrickMirror
44 posts
Joined November 2012
TrickMirror
I'm really fond of slider accuracy, but the score out of 1 million to me is a huge problem for ScoreV2.

On an average map, it can work, but very drastic changes happen to the scores of the players when you get into longer maps such as the marathons typically used in a tiebreaker. Due to the length of the map, it becomes significantly more difficult for players to hold combo, and as seen even in the tiebreaker of the grand final of OWC last year, if the map is also difficult, accuracy ends up being far more important towards your end score than combo a majority of the time. This is even with the current score ratio of 7:3 combo:accuracy.

I guess having max combo score scale in some way with then length of a map would help? Maybe linearly though, so it doesn't throw off the balance too in favour of combo once again.
Tynamo
15 posts
Joined March 2016
Tynamo
Looking nice! But what about the multiplier on difficult reduction mods such as EZ?
Caput Mortuum
1,854 posts
Joined March 2016
Caput Mortuum
^
They discussed about it here. p/5570799
My Angel Raphi
114 posts
Joined July 2015
My Angel Raphi
This isn't really a huge problem but I'm going to complain anyway XD

If only 500 points are awarded per tick in a spinner, I don't think I'll feel as satisfied when I do spinners lol.

But I really would love more accuracy contributing to the score over combo because its a rhythm game! Osu is virtually the same as playing a musical instrument; what's the point of playing a piano or a guitar in a consistent rhythm, but playing the wrong notes? And its a real pain to try and beat low-accuracy but high combo scores.

I'm looking forward to score v2. Good luck with it!
Last edited by My Angel Raphi , edited 1 time in total.
TakuMii
1,874 posts
Joined October 2009
TakuMii
Just popping in here to inform everyone that ScoreV2 is now available as an unranked(?) mod on cuttingedge. Might be worth giving a try.
Arnold0
1,675 posts
Joined February 2012
Arnold0
Is there anything somewhere realy explaining how Score v2 works ? I've noticed when trying on Cutting Edge that my score was actualy decreasing when I was doing 100's which feels very unnatural. Score v2 plays seams to be failing to be submitted too but score v2 isn't considered as UNRANKED by the game client.

Slider accuracy is another topic as well, I just know I'll probably lose more than 1% of accuracy once score v2 is the only thing used because of it. Changing a very big game mechanic when the game is almost 10Yo with some players that are active since many years and used to how it works is a bit wierd.
quaternary
321 posts
Joined February 2013
quaternary
I'm really enjoying the new slider accuracy judgement, it really keeps you on your toes more than the old system. It hits the hardest on wubwub maps like Bassdrop Freaks because now you actually have to pay attention to the slider patterns instead of zxzxzxzing your way through.

But I'm not sure if there's any replacement hitobject for mappers that want to hide a tempo change, other than being able to configure the OD through timing sections I take that back - just played Roze in Scorev2 and trying to account for all the changes in the tempo was actually really fun. Got 10 100s and scored a 606,074

I'm not sure I like how spinners are scored. Spinners add to the maximum score of 1,000,000 points, which means that the 1 million figure is kind of arbitrary. On maps without spinners an SS gets 1 million points, but on maps with lots of spinners you can score more than 1,000,000 points even if you didn't SS, so the 1 million figure loses its meaning.

But I can't think of a better way to score spinners other than making them not count at all, which is dumb. Maybe the difficulty to clear a spinner could be MASSIVELY increased so that it's actually really hard to spin a 300, and then remove spinnerbonus? Although that's an even worse solution. Idk.
TakuMii
1,874 posts
Joined October 2009
TakuMii

quaternary wrote:

But I can't think of a better way to score spinners other than making them not count at all, which is dumb. Maybe the difficulty to clear a spinner could be MASSIVELY increased so that it's actually really hard to spin a 300, and then remove spinnerbonus? Although that's an even worse solution. Idk.
The only thing I could think of would be to count the spinner bonuses toward the 1mil cap (as spinners are capped at 477rpm) and adjust the other values accordingly, but that'd probably make it even more arbitrary, as it'd make it impossible to get 1mil without a spinbot.
den0saur
216 posts
Joined December 2014
den0saur
What will happen to fallback? Is it going to be implemented to fallback at least at any point in the future?
chainpullz
2,335 posts
Joined June 2013
chainpullz
Probably been pointed out but if you are going to add a judgment to the slider head you should add some immediate feedback. At the moment if I hit a 100 on a sliderhead I won't know until the end. Having feedback on the slider end is still important but less so. Perhaps just having separate judgment/feedback for sliderhead vs sliderbody (includes tail) judgment. While this would further inflate how much of your score is dictated by sliders it seems fairly standard (ie. lazers in KSM are overweighted in terms of score and I'm pretty sure this applies to SDVX too).

I think giving the player feedback (note: feedback =/= actual judgment) on all objects and not just circles will lead to an overall creep in accuracy/consistency as it reduces the feedback bias player currently receive.

Anyways, my post is less about whether SV2 is a good thing and more about implementation so hopefully it's useful.
-Makishima S-
2,434 posts
Joined August 2013
-Makishima S-
Serious suggestions:

1. After playing ScoreV2 in several types of map, from simple pp farming with almost no sliders, ending on technical slider spam maps, i would recommend to increase leniency of sliders by around 25-30% in od8 up to 50% in od10.

2. Move slider score indicator (300-100-50-miss) into slider head circle instead of slider-end.

Rest is fine in my opinion, with change like above, this could already rollout into live version.

With regards,
Love ScoreV2, game feels so much better with it, with exceptions like above.
Arnold0
1,675 posts
Joined February 2012
Arnold0

den0saur wrote:

What will happen to fallback? Is it going to be implemented to fallback at least at any point in the future?
I'm pretty sure fallback hasn't realy been updated since 2015 (Copyright notice on fallback still says 2007-2015) hidden already works differently and i'm almost sure score v2 will never be added to fallback. You should switch to stable, honestly the only computer where I saw fallback working and stable not is a Pentium 4 computer that is probably 15 years old.

About score v2 itself, I don't get why sliders has been made much more punishing. Not only you need to accurately hit the slider start, but when sliderbreaking by missing the start of a slider, you get a 50 instead of a 100. Missing ticks still work the same as before it seams
Also I'm all for having a score indicator when clicking the slider start, then another one for slider end. Cause now, if you get a 50, you don't realy know, did you hit the start very innacurately or did you miss the start and sliderbroke. Same for 100's and missed slider ticks. Also seing a 100 at the end of a slider on which you didn't break is very unusual, especialy since the slider end will obviously sound on beat. Having a 100/50/Miss when clicking the slider start to know how accuratly you did hit it, then another indicator at the end if you missed ticks or the slider end whould probably be a good idea.

Other than that, score v2 still seams to rely heavily on combo and some people said it tooday and I agree, it should probably be based on the number of misses, cause why the guy who had 900 combo but 20 misses should have a higher score than the one with a single miss at 500 combo in the middle of the map (With similar accuracy of corse), was not that the biggest problem with score v1 ? Right now I think the adventage to score v2 is when you are doing 100's doesn't matter, but it still rely too heavily on combo probably.
TakuMii
1,874 posts
Joined October 2009
TakuMii

den0saur wrote:

What will happen to fallback? Is it going to be implemented to fallback at least at any point in the future?
Fallback was only meant to be for people who had issues with the big OpenGL update of 2015, and since most of the compatibility issues with the current 'latest' version have been ironed out, I don't think it'd ever be updated. There's a new client on the horizon, and it wouldn't surprise me if the current 'fallback' gets disconnected from online services and the current 'latest' becomes the new 'fallback' when the new client gets released.
Alib234
28 posts
Joined May 2014
Alib234
I personally think scorev2 is some kind of an joke the game will become boring almost linear it will become harder too so less new players will be playing it. and losing points when u dont get 300 thats bullcrap. so if this becomes the new score system im out. now sorry i need to not write this and enjoy osu while its good.

Edit: And basically the game will become osu!mania in the points way
FlamingRok
306 posts
Joined October 2012
FlamingRok
First off, I have no idea how score in osu!mania is a bad thing when applied to osu! standard. This complaint I get the least, because it changes literally nothing about the core gameplay and is really only a "muh spreadsheets" kind of thing, except replace spreadsheets with numbers. It's the same thing.

The real controversy lies within the slider timing window. Personally, I don't see how this is a big issue, as osu! should've had something like this since the very beginning. As it's advertised, osu! is a rhythm game. Woah. This means that playing the song accurately should reward the player, and with sliders now finally getting timing treatment, players need to actually click to the rhythm of the song as opposed to click whenever. If you don't hit a slider accurately, you deserve less accuracy. Honestly as a rhythm game player fanatic, I'd love to see accuracy showcased more, but because osu! also has aiming and combo as features, I can't take those away. The split right now is good, though a bit more of an increase for accuracy wouldn't hurt at all.

Another thing people need to realize is that this is not the final product. Yes, currently it is implemented in the game as a mod, but this is just to showcase what the future entails and to test the new scoring system for those willing to try it out. When they have constructive criticism against ScoreV2, discussion is raised, and depending on whether other people agree or not, things can be tweaked. No system will ever be perfect, but to get as close to perfection as possible is always the goal, and I believe ScoreV2 honestly is making an attempt at this better than ScoreV1 ever could. Because ScoreV2 isn't complete yet, and can be tweaked (as it has been when large outcries happen such as with Taiko big note hits/mania taking combo more into account were either tweaked or outright removed).
gellandor
2 posts
Joined March 2015
gellandor
Score V2 is broken right now and SHOULD NOT be put out

If someone is able to do this \/

Dumb Stuff
[/color]






Then obviously the system should be reworked.... ALOT

I mean how can a .99 star get more score then a song that is near 11 stars.... that is not even logical anymore

Oh and touching on the sliders just a bit...
ima just post what my friend said cause he said it quite well tbh
Image


Now i am not like the other people saying that it just flat out should never come out.... but i mean..... there are clearly some major flaws........

if you do not want people to get triggered do not put on the desc of the mod "try the future scoring system", that lowkey makes it sound final and like NOTHING will be changed, make it something like "Test out the new scoring system". that way people know that its a TEST
Full Tablet
2,544 posts
Joined September 2011
Full Tablet
The score is supposed to indicate how well you played the map, not indicate how good the play was (that is pp's function).

In A FOOL MOON NIGHT, the play gets all 300s (awarding the base 1 million points + mod bonuses); while in Syrup, it also gets all 300s (awarding the million + mod bonuses), plus score from overspinning.
PoepiePeppie
18 posts
Joined September 2014
PoepiePeppie
honestly, i think accuracy is already overrated. the pp difference between 94% and 97% is already huge. i don't enjoy playing a map 200 times to get it around 97% and finally getting a bit of pp. when i get an s, i just want to move on to a different map. not play the same map over and over to get some pp.
gellandor
2 posts
Joined March 2015
gellandor

Full Tablet wrote:

The score is supposed to indicate how well you played the map, not indicate how good the play was (that is pp's function).

In A FOOL MOON NIGHT, the play gets all 300s (awarding the base 1 million points + mod bonuses); while in Syrup, it also gets all 300s (awarding the million + mod bonuses), plus score from overspinning.
The point with puting those scores was to show how broke the system was. A map with such a low combo and skill requirement should not have a higher score amount (even just getting a 300 on the spinner would give you a higher score).

There should be some kind of score balance for higher maps so you feel like higher maps reward you better then lower maps (aka the higher star maps should NOT be 1m when you can get 1m on a 1 star)
nya10
979 posts
Joined February 2012
nya10

gellandor wrote:

Full Tablet wrote:

The score is supposed to indicate how well you played the map, not indicate how good the play was (that is pp's function).

In A FOOL MOON NIGHT, the play gets all 300s (awarding the base 1 million points + mod bonuses); while in Syrup, it also gets all 300s (awarding the million + mod bonuses), plus score from overspinning.
The point with puting those scores was to show how broke the system was. A map with such a low combo and skill requirement should not have a higher score amount (even just getting a 300 on the spinner would give you a higher score).

There should be some kind of score balance for higher maps so you feel like higher maps reward you better then lower maps (aka the higher star maps should NOT be 1m when you can get 1m on a 1 star)
If you have played a game such as cytus with a max score of 1000000, you should understand this kind of scoring too (although that there's a weighting system between combo and accuracy). Usually a game like that has 3 difficulty level in a song, and each of them maxed out to 1000000. Read the bolded quote words to make sure you understand about what score v2 is.
Otherwise, I think score v2 is pretty good for tournament setting, so that the combo and accuracy balance out. But I won't like to see it in live scoring leaderboard because of:
1. It is sad to remove all the scores from score v1, especially on those old maps where nearly no one wants to play them anymore
2. Score v2 is not really a good score metric in insanely hard map like Mazzerin's, where combo takes near zero role on score v2.

I don't have an idea if a separate leaderboard can be used (without deleting score v1 of course).
Veross
177 posts
Joined December 2014
Veross
I think ScoreV2 is a great idea, I don't understand why so much people are agaisnt it
TheRetenor
16 posts
Joined November 2013
TheRetenor
Please only take the following into account, if i got that 1 Million score limit right:

Just one thing from my position: If you remake the scoring system and actually implement it, would it be possible to "activate" the old system via mods? Just as the new one can be activated right now (or give the possibility to "switch" between UIs that show the different scores and so on)? To me it feels kind of underwhelming when playing long maps (and especially marathon maps), actually managing to more or less FC them and then you get just a bit less than 1M points instead of the 100M+ that some would give with the old (current) system. The ranking and so on could of course be accounted with the new system.
Tsukikolover
38 posts
Joined April 2014
Tsukikolover
>70% of score comes from combo, the remaining 30% comes from accuracy.
>Spinners award 500 points per tick.
>The mod multipliers are as follows: HR - 1.10x, DT - 1.20x, FL - 1.12x, HD - 1.06x

This great, but what about sliders?
I think that slider accuracy system kill hard maps with sliderstreams and fast mini sliders etc :roll:
AllieBork
83 posts
Joined August 2010
AllieBork
On the one million point system:
I don't think score will ever be something people compare much among each other, even with ScoreV2.
Just imagine someone saying "Look at this play on >beatmap< I got a score of 900,000!"
I think people will still go off star rating, pp, combobreaks, accuracy and of course, the selected mods.
It's too hard to encompass all these into just score and difficulty of the map, and it just feels less rewarding when score is changed to become generally much lower, while it feels like cheating, almost, when you play a short, easy map, and get over a million score. Also, for instance, a doubletime 800,000 score might still be much more impressive than a nomod 900,000, so just score alone won't do.

On slider accuracy:
I think it's too big a change to implement. Slider leniency has its downsides, in having sliders feel lackluster in terms of acc'ing them, but at the same time, it's the system that allows for many types of maps and things to be playable and rankable. For instance, when you have a sudden, unpredictable shift in the music, or a very slow part, it can be very frustrating with hitcircles given the difficulty of timing, without much of it actually being your fault (to your feeling, at least)
And that's without mention of dubstep and similar maps. They'd take a HUGE hit from this new slider accuracy.

Even so, when I was relatively newer, I did think "why can't sliders have accuracy?" After all, it is a rhythm game, and I myself am generally pretty good at getting good accuracy. But after playing a LOT of maps of all different types, I see it as a positive thing. To remove it seems like pandering to generic, anime mapping, which has enough going for it already.


Anyhow. If scoreV2 was implemented, the entire pp system should probably be overhauled as well... It has some rough edges, as well as probably getting broken by slider accuracy.
TakuMii
1,874 posts
Joined October 2009
TakuMii
I wouldn't worry about the ranking side of things; anything that'd be unrankable with ScoreV2 would also be unrankable under the current system anyways.

I mean, sure, it may make slider-intensive maps more frustrating, but it won't change anything gameplay-wise besides handing you more 100s than before (which isn't too big of a deal IMO, considering how combo still accounts for most of your score). SSes would still be possible on pretty much every ranked map (with the exception of a few incredibly old maps) even after slider-accuracy is added to the game. If anything, this should just cause the PP system to weigh wubwub maps even more than before, which would honestly be a good thing for people that are good at those types of maps.
AllieBork
83 posts
Joined August 2010
AllieBork

TakuMii wrote:

I wouldn't worry about the ranking side of things; anything that'd be unrankable with ScoreV2 would also be unrankable under the current system anyways.

I mean, sure, it may make slider-intensive maps more frustrating, but it won't change anything gameplay-wise besides handing you more 100s than before (which isn't too big of a deal IMO, considering how combo still accounts for most of your score). SSes would still be possible on pretty much every ranked map (with the exception of a few incredibly old maps) even after slider-accuracy is added to the game. If anything, this should just cause the PP system to weigh wubwub maps even more than before, which would honestly be a good thing for people that are good at those types of maps.
It's not just "slider-intensive maps becoming more frustrating". It's unpredictable rhythm becoming more frustrating. Specifically BPM increases and decreases.
Mappers often use a lot of sliders in these sections because you'd feel cheated out of your accuracy if they didn't. it's very hard to time something rhythmically when 1. you have only a visual cue, no music one
2. it's at a 'random' moment compared to what was before
3. human error in the mapper's timing sections exist

Also, wubwub maps will never give good pp, or at least, not enough to avoid being completely overshadowed by generic maps, simple rhythm, circular flow, gimmickless maps.

What I meant with the pp system requiring an overhaul: well, changing the amount of pp maps will give, is essentially impossible to do without creating an imbalance between the two systems. And giving sliderheads accuracy necessarily changes how it'll work. PP needs an overhaul for different reasons, that I won't go into in this thread. I might make a video or something about it once... It's a pretty big deal to me, to be honest.
Ritzeh
Former osu! Champion: 2016
283 posts
Joined August 2011
Ritzeh
make scorev2 50% combo / 50% acc and remove combo based scoring for acc. ez
Motteke
261 posts
Joined March 2016
Motteke
I think the fact of having to increase even more the aim to play, after so long being accustomed to the current system, is going to be a headache, at least for a while. Although I think that there will be so many problems for new players, those of old will have a big change when it comes to playing
As for the fact of the spins, I think it's going to be a somewhat similar system, only there will be more score for fewer laps, I wish there were modifications to avoid the abuse of bugs in roulette by some players
The mods if it is a fair way to measure the score, I think it is the only thing that I am in agreement, because the fact that the FL players to make ranks in insane maps require a little less effort than the DT players It makes me a little unfair.
I hope this ScoreV2 ends up not being officially added to the system.
Zard0Z
48 posts
Joined April 2016
Zard0Z
Wait so what's going to happen to the current scores? It's going to be completely disproportional to all the scores that are current. Are all the scores going to be converted to ScoreV2? Is the level system going to be changed? What's going to happen to slider maps, are they going to become almost impossible?
-GN
Champion Above Champions
734 posts
Joined June 2011
-GN
gonna repost something i wrote up during OWC registrations last year on the topic of EZ mod in scoreV2, particularly with a focus on if it was allowed in OWC. it was deemed too late to consider, test and implement before the tournament would start, so i thought it'd be timely to bring it up now, half a year later.

-GN wrote:

Loctav wrote:

Fair question, I would have problems figuring out a proper multiplier for it (given we use scorev2). Would it be a positive one? (it obviously makes things harder) or a negative one? (since it makes you less likely to fail.. ok weak argument)

I am not an EZ player or have much insight in this aspect, so if you have suggestions in how to design it, feel free to propose something!

(without a multiplier, it would sort of lose its tactical purpose, wouldn't it? dunno...)
(i was gonna post this a week ago but forgot.)

It's a good question, actually. I would ideally prefer some kind of dynamic score multiplier(and i really think it should be made for every mod if scoreV2 becomes the official system), judging how difficult a map is to read/understand, but that's a bit too ambitious.

However, you should know that while EZ makes maps very hard to understand for the uninitiated, it also reduces the physical(aim/speed-wise) difficulty by a lot, and those that practice it can in most cases do better on maps with EZ on than they could without, given that they've practiced them. So having it give a positive score multiplier(or no penalty at all) would give those people a great advantage over others who don't play it on the regular, and i don't think that's the kind of skill that should be rewarded in a tournament like this.

:idea: I had trouble coming up with a reasonable multiplier for it myself, though. Using the old 0.5x multiplier wouldn't make it very useful for scoreV2 tournaments, i think. So i propose something like this:

Nomod gives 700 000 for combo + 300 000 for accuracy for a max score of 1 000 000.
EZ would give 550 000 for combo + 150 000 for accuracy for a max score of 700 000.

I estimate a 95% FC to be ~850k for nomod and ~625k for EZ with the current scoreV2 accuracy dropoff rate.

Obviously the accuracy part is lowered because of the low OD in comparison, but only reduced it to half the value, as to not devalue scores with high accuracies. Accuracy on EZ is more about the big mistakes you do rather than how well you follow the music, but it can still be hard to get above 99% on very demanding maps - and i think that's where picking EZ would be most helpful. In addition, picking EZ makes it easier to spam through harder parts of a map at the expense of accuracy, so i wanted to still keep it a little rewarding.

For the combo part - EZ consistency is really, REALLY hard to attain. Using it seriously in a tournament can be very risky, so i didn't drop it that much. For a tournament based score system, i think it makes sense. Compared to the accuracy part, i think most of the score should come from your combo when using EZ.

...so that's my proposal. Everyone loves EZ plays, so giving it a chance to be used on freemod picks might be good for entertainment's sake, at least, and with this, it'd retain some tactical value as well. It might be a little late to try to implement right before OWC, and it's not that important for most players, but if it's going to be a possibility, i'd want to see it executed something like this.
Flauen
1 post
Joined February 2015
Flauen
As a current casual player and old "kinda good" one, I feel like the new system puts a bit more pressure and I like it as a mod or for tournaments and more "serious" gaming, but definitely wouldn't like it as a casual player and it might even make me quit the game as I love SSing maps and it's almost impossible for me when it keeps giving me worse score. Yes, that might mean I need to be better at acc, but as I said I am a working adult and I play to relax, not to compete. I play a lot of slider maps and I enjoy them, because sliders allow for more unpredictable rhythm.

I also believe it will make maps more boring. I am in no position to argue as I'm not playing that much atm, but I tried it and didn't enjoy it much, so that's my two cents. But if it gets implemented, I'll probably get used to it....
Denzuto
6 posts
Joined July 2013
Denzuto
It's great, but it's taking time.
RokkaAstrea
98 posts
Joined July 2016
RokkaAstrea
The direction this is going in is probably fine. There's no need to change anything, as it will be confusing when OWC comes.
autoteleology
763 posts
Joined October 2014
autoteleology
I'm going to throw in my two cents here where I feel like I actually have something to say.

You should absolutely not implement the slider acc change as currently intended, full stop. I think it is a very bad idea to adjust the fundamental framework of how a game works in a way that dramatically affects the content designed around the old system retrospectively unless there is a critically important reason for doing so.

shortpotato wrote:

It feels to me (correct me if im wrong?) that the staff feel as if removing score V2 (or aspects of it) is a direct attack against all of the work they have done into making it.
As a counterpoint to the statement above, this change would be indiscriminately altering the intent of all the people who designed something around a system working a certain way which is super disrespectful to all the people who made maps depending on those mechanics. The intent of the original work should be preserved unless absolutely necessary.

Let's use an analogy here - imagine we have some kind of community based Mario game where everyone makes maps and competes to get the best times on these maps. Ten years down the line, the developers of this game decide that they don't like the jumping mechanics anymore because they are "too easy" and decide to make Mario only jump 0.9x as high for 0.9x as long. Suddenly, there are tons of maps that no longer function as intended because they were optimized and designed around the old mechanics. Tons of things are now broken for little to no actual material gain.

In addition, I 100% guarantee that there will be a significant portion of the playerbase that will be very pissed off if you make any changes to how the game functions at a base level no matter what they are, and for good reason. Don't be George Lucas going around altering Star Wars and then making sure nobody can ever see the original version again, especially when you only made the framework and tools for everyone else to make Star Wars around, and especially when these changes are not universally agreed upon. Lots of people, myself included, wouldn't consider this change to even be an improvement. Are you just going to tell all these people to suck a sausage?

This isn't to say that I think that slider accuracy is a bad idea per se - just that it should not be applied retrospectively to content not designed for it. Instead...

chainpullz wrote:

Making slider acc into a difficulty increasing mod
I 100% support this idea. Then people are given choice to decide whether they want it or not. Everyone is happy.

EDIT: Oh yeah, not to mention the fact that you will either have to a) wipe ten years worth of scores or b) recalculate them and possibly ruin everyone's top plays. Who here is really itching to see something like rrtyui's The Big Black SS ruined because he got a 100 somewhere in the new system, or wiped entirely off the map? I personally could take a pass on that.
[ Scarlet Red ]
379 posts
Joined September 2013
[ Scarlet Red ]
Personally, I'm not a huge fan of ScoreV2 (mainly because of slider acc and max normal score is 1 million). However my complaints are fairly biased so I won't really complain. It's just my opinion, however if/when it becomes the main score mode I'll have to learn it.
Kyreo
3 posts
Joined January 2017
Kyreo
Hey there.

I was somewhat disappointed by the new scoring system so I started to look for a topic which deals with it. I finally found it – that's why I'm here – so I have to share my point of view.

First, this system is somewhat discouraging to me. If you rock, it's ok. But if you fail...
I saw there's a sort of one million points limit. It is a huge problem since people might be discouraged to play harder maps. That's what I usually do to improve at osu! Recently, I got something like 90k points on a map rated "insane". 90k under 1000k... Though, my accuracy was about 82% or something. The score means I only cleared 9% of the map. Come on, that's unfair. How could you get some motivation to play & improve if the game tells you "yea, you've got 82% acc but you cleared 9% of the map, you fool". Am I supposed to play easy & normal maps until I get one million points on them...?

Second, the loss of points when you fail a circile, slider, of whatever.
It's about the same issue: progress. When you're on this slippery slope, playing again & again in order to improve, you sometimes get inspired by a divine might or something. It helps you to do a 200 streak combo or else, it shows how much you've improved. Then, a tricky pattern comes and you make some fails. Taadaa! You lost so many points, your last good move has been erased because of this loss combined to the fact there's a 1 million limit. Don't you think it's way too hard to climb back after a few fails? If the map is shorter than 2 minutes, you're screwed at the moment you fail a bit. Sure, it's a good thing for tryharding pros. But think about the little players, those who want to progress. It's pretty unwholesome...
Full Tablet
2,544 posts
Joined September 2011
Full Tablet

Kyreo wrote:

Hey there.

I was somewhat disappointed by the new scoring system so I started to look for a topic which deals with it. I finally found it – that's why I'm here – so I have to share my point of view.

First, this system is somewhat discouraging to me. If you rock, it's ok. But if you fail...
I saw there's a sort of one million points limit. It is a huge problem since people might be discouraged to play harder maps. That's what I usually do to improve at osu! Recently, I got something like 90k points on a map rated "insane". 90k under 1000k... Though, my accuracy was about 82% or something. The score means I only cleared 9% of the map. Come on, that's unfair. How could you get some motivation to play & improve if the game tells you "yea, you've got 82% acc but you cleared 9% of the map, you fool". Am I supposed to play easy & normal maps until I get one million points on them...?

Second, the loss of points when you fail a circile, slider, of whatever.
It's about the same issue: progress. When you're on this slippery slope, playing again & again in order to improve, you sometimes get inspired by a divine might or something. It helps you to do a 200 streak combo or else, it shows how much you've improved. Then, a tricky pattern comes and you make some fails. Taadaa! You lost so many points, your last good move has been erased because of this loss combined to the fact there's a 1 million limit. Don't you think it's way too hard to climb back after a few fails? If the map is shorter than 2 minutes, you're screwed at the moment you fail a bit. Sure, it's a good thing for tryharding pros. But think about the little players, those who want to progress. It's pretty unwholesome...
The reason a 82%acc score only gives about 9% of the possible score is not because of the score cap, the same thing happens with scorev1 (a SS in a certain map can give you ~27 million, while a 82%acc score with misses can give you ~3 million, for example). In my opinion, this is not a bad thing. Getting through a map with ~80% accuracy usually means you barely passed it, so the amount of score you get from that pass should be close to the minimum possible; that way, scores are distributed more evenly over the possible range of values (instead of most plays be concentrated on the 90%-to-100% range, which would happen if the percentage of score was close to the acc% of the play)

In scorev1, the maximum score a map gives doesn't depend heavily on their difficulty (an Insane map only gives about twice the amount of score for the same amount of notes compared to an Easy map, based on the OD/HP/CS settings), it depends mainly on the amount of objects (the maximum score of a map is approximately proportional to the square of the maximum combo). In the same mapset, harder difficulties tend to give more score mainly because they have more notes, not because they are harder.

When you do poorly in a note (missing, or a bad judgment), the "current" amount of score decreases. In strict rigor, since the accuracy part of the score is not something that is accumulated (acc% is the average of the judgment values of the notes you have played so far), your score does not exist until you finish the map; the number in the corner can be seen just as an indicator of how well you are doing.

The "current" amount of score during play could be modified to be always increasing, by showing the amount of score you would get on the map if you missed every single note you haven't played yet, but that would case some issues (the acc portion of the score would be near 0 for most of the play, then jump quickly to the final value when close to the end of the map; during a multiplayer match or when comparing to previous plays of the same map, the current score value would be a worse predictor of how much score you will get on the map)
Kyreo
3 posts
Joined January 2017
Kyreo

Full Tablet wrote:

Kyreo wrote:

[Cut for obvious reasons; readability.]
The reason a 82%acc score only gives about 9% of the possible score is not because of the score cap, the same thing happens with scorev1 (a SS in a certain map can give you ~27 million, while a 82%acc score with misses can give you ~3 million, for example). In my opinion, this is not a bad thing. Getting through a map with ~80% accuracy usually means you barely passed it, so the amount of score you get from that pass should be close to the minimum possible; that way, scores are distributed more evenly over the possible range of values (instead of most plays be concentrated on the 90%-to-100% range, which would happen if the percentage of score was close to the acc% of the play)

In scorev1, the maximum score a map gives doesn't depend heavily on their difficulty (an Insane map only gives about twice the amount of score for the same amount of notes compared to an Easy map, based on the OD/HP/CS settings), it depends mainly on the amount of objects (the maximum score of a map is approximately proportional to the square of the maximum combo). In the same mapset, harder difficulties tend to give more score mainly because they have more notes, not because they are harder.

When you do poorly in a note (missing, or a bad judgment), the "current" amount of score decreases. In strict rigor, since the accuracy part of the score is not something that is accumulated (acc% is the average of the judgment values of the notes you have played so far), your score does not exist until you finish the map; the number in the corner can be seen just as an indicator of how well you are doing.

The "current" amount of score during play could be modified to be always increasing, by showing the amount of score you would get on the map if you missed every single note you haven't played yet, but that would case some issues (the acc portion of the score would be near 0 for most of the play, then jump quickly to the final value when close to the end of the map; during a multiplayer match or when comparing to previous plays of the same map, the current score value would be a worse predictor of how much score you will get on the map)
Thanks for answering.

I have to say I would not leave the game at all if this scoring system was adopted. Though, the combination between the 1 million limit & the loss of points is a bit cruel to me. I do a 82%, it's barely ok. I do not want a 820 000 under 1 000 000 though. I just think that 90 000 is way too little. For instance, Osu!mania has the same limit point. For a 82% acc without changing the number of keys, I can easily get a 500 000 points or somewhat which does not allow you to be seen in the ladder (it's normal; only the bests are in). It is way more encouraging than a 90 000 telling you "you're bad, not even the average". 90 000 under 1 000 000 is something which deserves a D, not a B. Still, a D is not accurate for a 82%. What I am pointing at is this system being way too harsh on scoring.

With scorev1 (in standard only), you could manage to earn some points just by comboing since it was very impactful. A 300 max combo with 80% acc will get more points than a 150 max combo with 90% acc. If you succeeded at comboing well, the score would reward you. With scorev2, it will no longer be possible since you have to be good at everything, or else the score will tell you are nothing. That's why I think the current osu!mania scoring is the best. I did something like 300k points on an easy map as a very first try. My fingers got easily confused and all. Still, I caught most of the notes eventhough the accuracy was bad. I think the 300k points are adapted to my first play since I had something like 60% acc with several misses. Saying that I only cleared 30% of the map is nice. On the other hand, a 9% score for a B with 82% is not only disturbing but also inaccurate.
Caput Mortuum
1,854 posts
Joined March 2016
Caput Mortuum
blame the combo system
autoteleology
763 posts
Joined October 2014
autoteleology
You seem to misunderstand the purpose of the score system.

The score system is there to rank people as accurately as possible relative to each other. It is being changed because the current system provides very inconsistent information from map to map and rewards combo disproportionately over accuracy, not to mention the score difference between mediocre and amazing plays is marginal at best.

The score system is not there to make you feel good or encourage you (especially when you didn't actually achieve anything). That burden of motivation is on you and you alone. What you are proposing is essentially a watering down of the system so that everyone gets a participation trophy at the expense of compressing the scores into meaninglessness. You want to take away the impact of working hard for and eventually earning a great score so you don't have to feel bad about not being good at the game after eight whole hours of gameplay.

When everyone gets a reward, the reward is meaningless. Earn your rewards.
show more
Please sign in to reply.

New reply

0
11 / 174