Regarding combo and acc percentages, I honestly think they should be changed so that acc is 60% while combo is 40%.
forum
osu! ScoreV2 Discussion
posted
Total Posts
174
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
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
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.
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.
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.MiruHong wrote:
Spaghetti wrote:
i love it, seems like its going in the right direction
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.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.
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.
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.
Only thing I'm against is slider accuracy. I agree with Kaifin about it.
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)
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.
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.
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.
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.smoogipooo wrote:
Please, do not discuss Star Rating and PP here.
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?
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?
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
The mod multipliers are as follows: HR - 1.10x, DT - 1.20x, FL - 1.12x, HD - 1.06xRight 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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
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.
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!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.
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
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.
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.
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.
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.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.
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.
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.Railey2 wrote:
Missing out on that bonus when not hitting them correctly will feel like a penalty for players that care about acc.
...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.
hmmmTakuMii wrote:
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.Railey2 wrote:
Missing out on that bonus when not hitting them correctly will feel like a penalty for players that care about acc.
...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.
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.
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.
As the community is already heavily leaning towards pp-efficient maps this would probably discourage players to play "old" maps even more.
Yes, it wouldEndaris 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.
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.
Endaris wrote:
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.smoogipooo wrote:
Please, do not discuss Star Rating and PP here.
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.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.
...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.
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 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.
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.
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
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
This doesn't make sense.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.
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.
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
So Do you prefer ScoreV1 or ScoreV2 ?? Vote here
: https://goo.gl/rkPSDMResult here
: https://goo.gl/OQo1WaAnd this is what we call absolutely pointlessSeijiku wrote:
:?: So Do you prefer ScoreV1 or ScoreV2 ??
Vote here
Result here
fixedSeijiku wrote:
:?: So Do you hate change or do you blindly accept the future ??
...Seriously though, we have no idea how ScoreV2 is actually going to be. This is pretty pointless.
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
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
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
I like leniency-abusive slider maps the way they are.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 revisitingJTF195 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
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.
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.
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.
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
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
I would rather use pp over scorev2. On the same map, pp can distinguish the value of scores well.
As someone who hasplayed 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.
As someone who has
Much prefer scores v1 over score v2. You should consider using pp based scoring and see how that looks.
^ 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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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), 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.
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
), 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.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.
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.
Looking nice! But what about the multiplier on difficult reduction mods such as EZ?
^
They discussed about it here. p/5570799
They discussed about it here. p/5570799
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!
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!
Just popping in here to inform everyone that ScoreV2 is now available as an unranked(?) mod on cuttingedge. Might be worth giving a try.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.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.
What will happen to fallback? Is it going to be implemented to fallback at least at any point in the future?
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.den0saur wrote:
What will happen to fallback? Is it going to be implemented to fallback at least at any point in the future?
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.
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.den0saur wrote:
What will happen to fallback? Is it going to be implemented to fallback at least at any point in the future?
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
Edit: And basically the game will become osu!mania in the points way
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).
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).
Score V2 is broken right now and SHOULD NOT be put out
If someone is able to do this \/
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
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
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
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
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.
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.
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.
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).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.
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.gellandor wrote:
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).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.
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)
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).
I think ScoreV2 is a great idea, I don't understand why so much people are agaisnt it
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.
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.
>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
>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
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.
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.
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.
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.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.
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.
make scorev2 50% combo / 50% acc and remove combo based scoring for acc. ez
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.
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.
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?
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:
(i was gonna post this a week ago but forgot.)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...)
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.
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.
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....
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....
The direction this is going in is probably fine. There's no need to change anything, as it will be confusing when OWC comes.
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.
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...
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.
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.
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.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.
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...
I 100% support this idea. Then people are given choice to decide whether they want it or not. Everyone is happy.chainpullz wrote:
Making slider acc into a difficulty increasing mod
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.
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.
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...
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)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...
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.Full Tablet wrote:
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)Kyreo wrote:
[Cut for obvious reasons; readability.]
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)
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.
blame the combo system
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.
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.
I'm not saying we should reward anyone, just that people need to be encouraged to play. The difference between what you call a mediocre and an amazing play will still exist whatever it takes. A very good player will do something like 980 000 to 1 000 000 points, that is to say an average achievement of 98% to 100% of the map while a "mediocre" (you're somewhat condescending just by saying so) with 500 000 points will have an average achievement of 50% of the map. It is totally legit to me. Besides, I'm not for "earning a great score", just something coherent with the true achievement. Having a 90k under 1000k is not representative of what I've done, clearly. It's representative of what I could have done a few days before when I was less experienced.Philosofikal wrote:
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.
And yea, the scoring system is here to rank people. Still, it is more than possible while being logic at the same time. Scorev2 will not help e sport & competition at all. Why? Imagine a second: there's a 1 million limit. If someone already did the maximum score, then someone else, & again... How are these people ranked? Who will be displayed as the first? With the "limitless" system of scorev1, you could manage to surpass the first of the ladder by adding mods, doing better at accuracy or combos or by spinning faster. The limitless system is the one rewarding the best players who always manage to be in the ladder. With a one million limit, how many maps do you think we will have with numerous rank 1? Scorev1 already ranks the best players on top of the ladder.
Ps: I've a question; what about the leveling system? Since you progress thanks to the scores you make, will it be changed aswell?
The scale used for scores is completely arbitrary, changing it doesn't affect the balance of the rankings (For example, you could change it so all values become the logarithm of their previous values, and nothing would change in terms of relative rankings). That said, I consider 9% of the maximum score for a play like that not a bad representation of the worth of the play. If someone managed to get 9% score in some map after about 8 hours of practice, it wouldn't be strange they only managed to achieve a 90% score after over 100 hours of practice.Kyreo wrote:
I'm not saying we should reward anyone, just that people need to be encouraged to play. The difference between what you call a mediocre and an amazing play will still exist whatever it takes. A very good player will do something like 980 000 to 1 000 000 points, that is to say an average achievement of 98% to 100% of the map while a "mediocre" (you're somewhat condescending just by saying so) with 500 000 points will have an average achievement of 50% of the map. It is totally legit to me. Besides, I'm not for "earning a great score", just something coherent with the true achievement. Having a 90k under 1000k is not representative of what I've done, clearly. It's representative of what I could have done a few days before when I was less experienced.
And yea, the scoring system is here to rank people. Still, it is more than possible while being logic at the same time. Scorev2 will not help e sport & competition at all. Why? Imagine a second: there's a 1 million limit. If someone already did the maximum score, then someone else, & again... How are these people ranked? Who will be displayed as the first? With the "limitless" system of scorev1, you could manage to surpass the first of the ladder by adding mods, doing better at accuracy or combos or by spinning faster. The limitless system is the one rewarding the best players who always manage to be in the ladder. With a one million limit, how many maps do you think we will have with numerous rank 1? Scorev1 already ranks the best players on top of the ladder.
Ps: I've a question; what about the leveling system? Since you progress thanks to the scores you make, will it be changed aswell?
The score limit doesn't actually have any effect on the score ranks, it is just a linear scaling to make the maximum 1 million. For example, if doing "perfectly" (all 300s with no combo breaks) on a map would give 8 million without the score limit, and a some other play gives 4 million, then the scores become 1 million and 0.5 million respectively with the score limit. The only effect the score limit has on balance is indirectly affecting the worth of spinners (the longer the map, the more important it becomes to overspin), but that is an issue that should be addressed (though, I haven't tested this recently, and I don't know where to look for the exact current formula of scorev2)
The leveling system doesn't have much importance. They could keep it the way it is currently (using a calculated scorev1 in the background for the experience), or change it (maybe giving experience per play proportional to the score and the length of the map).
Kyreo wrote:
I'm not saying we should reward anyone, just that people need to be encouraged to play. The difference between what you call a mediocre and an amazing play will still exist whatever it takes. A very good player will do something like 980 000 to 1 000 000 points, that is to say an average achievement of 98% to 100% of the map while a "mediocre" (you're somewhat condescending just by saying so) with 500 000 points will have an average achievement of 50% of the map.
I can't see how ScoreV2 is a good idea.
If you want to put on emphasis on accuracy which is undervalued in the present score system, you could just make the 300s be worth like 1k-1,5k points and make 100 / 50s still be the same. That way you can still surpass someone with a way higher combo than you by being way more accurate, while players that can hold both accuracy and combo will be rewarded with the maximum amount of points.
Slider accuracy maybe SHOULD have been a thing from the start, but changing such a fundemental thing now that the game is 10 years old is not a very good idea.
Look at the many ways you can fail a slider as compared to how you can fail a note. The only way to "fail" a note is to miss it, while (with slider acc) you can not only sliderbreak or miss a sliderend, now you can also get a ridiculously low score for hitting it too early while still having the risk of breaking it.
I don't see why you'd want to compress score down to 1 million either, getting the really high scores is what makes the game fun for some people (like me) and being forced to the never-changing 1million top score feels boring to me.
If slideracc comes, you can be absolutely sure that the mapping-meta will change towards way less sliders than what we're used to. Players will want to avoid to sliders when this change gets live, therefor mappers start catering towards those players by tailoring maps toward that preference.
Most maps will probably have very little passages with sliders and the popular slider methods that we got to see this and last year will vanish as probably noone really wants to play them anymore since sliders (again) have so many more ways of killing your combo now than a regular note would ever have.
Again, if you want to reward accuracy more, than just increase the score for perfectly hitting a note. The discrepancy in points between a high-acc low combo player and someone who has bad acc but holds a big combo will shrink, but will still be favored toward combo, but not to the degree it is now (hitting 100 more combo than someone is already a huge lead right now)
Yes, I know hitting a 100 in the beginning is neglible right now as opposed to getting a 100 at the end. Score V2 MAY BE a good fix for tournaments, but I really don't think it's the right way for solo play, nor the mapping meta.
If you want to put on emphasis on accuracy which is undervalued in the present score system, you could just make the 300s be worth like 1k-1,5k points and make 100 / 50s still be the same. That way you can still surpass someone with a way higher combo than you by being way more accurate, while players that can hold both accuracy and combo will be rewarded with the maximum amount of points.
Slider accuracy maybe SHOULD have been a thing from the start, but changing such a fundemental thing now that the game is 10 years old is not a very good idea.
Look at the many ways you can fail a slider as compared to how you can fail a note. The only way to "fail" a note is to miss it, while (with slider acc) you can not only sliderbreak or miss a sliderend, now you can also get a ridiculously low score for hitting it too early while still having the risk of breaking it.
I don't see why you'd want to compress score down to 1 million either, getting the really high scores is what makes the game fun for some people (like me) and being forced to the never-changing 1million top score feels boring to me.
If slideracc comes, you can be absolutely sure that the mapping-meta will change towards way less sliders than what we're used to. Players will want to avoid to sliders when this change gets live, therefor mappers start catering towards those players by tailoring maps toward that preference.
Most maps will probably have very little passages with sliders and the popular slider methods that we got to see this and last year will vanish as probably noone really wants to play them anymore since sliders (again) have so many more ways of killing your combo now than a regular note would ever have.
Again, if you want to reward accuracy more, than just increase the score for perfectly hitting a note. The discrepancy in points between a high-acc low combo player and someone who has bad acc but holds a big combo will shrink, but will still be favored toward combo, but not to the degree it is now (hitting 100 more combo than someone is already a huge lead right now)
Yes, I know hitting a 100 in the beginning is neglible right now as opposed to getting a 100 at the end. Score V2 MAY BE a good fix for tournaments, but I really don't think it's the right way for solo play, nor the mapping meta.
That wouldn't actually change things much.Rayne wrote:
If you want to put on emphasis on accuracy which is undervalued in the present score system, you could just make the 300s be worth like 1k-1,5k points and make 100 / 50s still be the same. That way you can still surpass someone with a way higher combo than you by being way more accurate, while players that can hold both accuracy and combo will be rewarded with the maximum amount of points.
With the current judgment values, accuracy percentages usually range from 80% to 100%, if you changed the value of 300s to 1500 (which is equivalent to changing 100-to-20 and 50-to-10 while keeping 300s constant), that range would only change to from 72% to 100% (if you changed it so 100s and 50s are worth 0 points, it would only change to from 70% to 100%). Combo would still heavily outweigh accuracy, since numerically there is little difference between a very low accuracy percentage and a high accuracy percentage, compared to how much score varies because of combos.
In my opinion, combo lengths shouldn't even be considered in the score formula. For the aim portion of score, the amount of combo breaks is a much better indicator than the lengths of the combos.
What will happen to the preexisting scores on maps when ScoreV2 hits? Will they automatically be tweaked to fit the new ScoreV2 rules? (i.e Score limit at 1mil)