I've no idea how people know HT actually give pp.
Anyways HT should give at least 15-30% pp.
Anyways HT should give at least 15-30% pp.
forum
Performance Points feedback and suggestions (osu!mania)
posted
Total Posts
635
Meanwhile Co-Op Mode is still ranked -w-
Next Up: 50% pp for Autoplay
AiAe [Wafles SHD] (100.00%) +Auto - 389pp
Seriously though, I really dont like the way the ranking is going right now.
Really good players have lower ranks than Co-Op Boosters and at the same time,
people (myself included) get HT-pp for maps they cant even dream of passing. (Which would be fine if DT was ranked, too)
And then theres people who could DT those maps and they dont get shit for what theyre able to play.
We just get random updates and changes to what gives pp and what doesnt, but that wont fix the core problem.
Sadest thing about that; except for (a minor part) the community, noone seems to really care at all.
Well played.
Next Up: 50% pp for Autoplay
AiAe [Wafles SHD] (100.00%) +Auto - 389pp
Seriously though, I really dont like the way the ranking is going right now.
Really good players have lower ranks than Co-Op Boosters and at the same time,
people (myself included) get HT-pp for maps they cant even dream of passing. (Which would be fine if DT was ranked, too)
And then theres people who could DT those maps and they dont get shit for what theyre able to play.
We just get random updates and changes to what gives pp and what doesnt, but that wont fix the core problem.
Sadest thing about that; except for (a minor part) the community, noone seems to really care at all.
Well played.
Wasn't co-op disabled from ranking to avoid confusion with account sharing?
Ovnize wrote:
co-op isn't ranked
Oh lord, didn't know that. Thought it's still ranked since everyone who used Co-Op to boost themselves still has the pp for it.
My bad there, sorry
Is easy mod nerfed?
I kinda saw in the G&R main forum that it was nerfed in osu!mania
I kinda saw in the G&R main forum that it was nerfed in osu!mania
What do you mean nerfed ?
Alright as far as the individual mods go, this is my opinion. The right bracket represents the max PP achievable, while the left brackets represents an arbitrary PP. As far as comparisons go, don't compare a mod's range to another (like hardrock and doubletime), it is intended to compare to no mod only.
No mod:
No Fail:
Easy:
Halftime:
Hardrock:
Doubletime:
The rest of the mods do little to modify difficulty.
No mod:
SPOILER
Not much needs to be said about this, other than improving the difficulty calculation for maps.
<--------------------------------[---------------------o-------------------]---------------------------------------->
<--------------------------------[---------------------o-------------------]---------------------------------------->
No Fail:
SPOILER
It behaves like normal, but allows players to submit maps even if they fail. Players that need to use this will have scores for that are almost most certainly below 500,000. Since the formula for PP is exponential (or so it seems), lower scores will naturally generate low PP. While it is possible to get a higher score and still fail, such map would have high HP with one spam part which raises the map's diff by a whole star or so which kills players that thought could pass it. Then that is straight away not a good map and should not be ranked in the first place. However, perhaps a slight penalty is still needed to justify the safety net by moving the PP range lower, depending on the difficulty of the map.
<------------------------[---------------------o-------------------]------------------------------------------------>
<------------------------[---------------------o-------------------]------------------------------------------------>
Easy:
SPOILER
In a nutshell, the easy mod decreases the OD, making much easier to get perfects and 300's, and the HP is lowered as well. Harder maps overall become much easier to spam through and recover from. I suggest limiting the range as well as moving the PP lower.
<----------------[-------------o-----------]------------------------------------------------------------------------>
<----------------[-------------o-----------]------------------------------------------------------------------------>
Halftime:
SPOILER
This mod slows down the map by 1.5 times. The map becomes more readable and the player doesn't need to play as fast. Personally, I only see a 7%-10% increase in accuracy when using this mod. I think limiting the higher range would justify this. On the higher range, The PP would never be as high as playing normally due to the ease of getting the notes. On the lower range, if a player gets 22pp out of 240pp top players get without mods, I don't think lowering the range on halftime such that the player would get something like 18pp instead would depict the result accurately (horrible explanation, don't know how else to explain)
<--------------------------------[-----------------o---------------]------------------------------------------------>
<--------------------------------[-----------------o---------------]------------------------------------------------>
Hardrock:
SPOILER
The hardrock mod is the direct opposite of the easy mod. So you then shift the range higher and expand it? Close. The only reason the easy mod got shifted lower is to justify spamming. That said, expanding the higher range AND lower range would justify this mod. I see it like this: If you get misses, then those would be penalized towards the lower range. If you get perfects, you would be awarded to the higher range. Since this would expand both ends, a player who gets 10 misses and 990 perfects would be penalized more using this mod than a person that would get same without mods. The reward, however, comes when not having any misses, 50's, 100's and 200's. Simply put, harsher penalty and better reward.
<----------------[-------------------------------------o-----------------------------------]------------------------>
<----------------[-------------------------------------o-----------------------------------]------------------------>
Doubletime:
SPOILER
This mod can get hard really easy by increasing the speed by 1.5 times. The speed it which you need to get the notes increases, making some patterns harder to get. The overall difficulty of the map gets harder. Therefore a suggest having the PP range shifted higher.
<------------------------------------------------[---------------------o-------------------]------------------------->
<------------------------------------------------[---------------------o-------------------]------------------------->
The rest of the mods do little to modify difficulty.
I wouldn't mind DT giving pp. Other than that, it's a no-no for me.
idk, I think DT would be reasonable at least. o!m's PP system is too acc/7k biased imoChoofers wrote:
lol'd
mods should disable pp, regardless of what mod is used
I guess you guys are all for mods that raise difficulty having PP. I understand that there is little to know point on lowering the easy mod's PP, for instance, because odds are the player will wind up with PP that gets weighted to nothing. In my view, however, those mods should be ranked and by doing so penalties/awards should be given accordingly. It just has been unfortunate that however the PP for the HT mod calculated because it's worth quite something under the right circumstances. From what I found, it is worth about 50% the original PP. I have included a comparison of similar accuracy achieved on AiAe:
HT pp is just calculated by the new star rating after HT is set. Which is why aiae ht gives a lot of pp since it's still around 5.5*.abraker wrote:
I guess you guys are all for mods that raise difficulty having PP. I understand that there is little to know point on lowering the easy mod's PP, for instance, because odds are the player will wind up with PP that gets weighted to nothing. In my view, however, those mods should be ranked and by doing so penalties/awards should be given accordingly. It just has been unfortunate that however the PP for the HT mod calculated because it's worth quite something under the right circumstances. From what I found, it is worth about 50% the original PP. I have included a comparison of similar accuracy achieved on AiAe:
Then I guess that's a weird coincidence. I can't find many HT records to compare to, so I could only assume it's around 50%
HT, NF, and EZ should disable pp
mania just needs to have a better star rating system, and the rest will fix itself automatically
I've just noticed loads of players are doing AiAe+HT, for almost 400pp. LOL
i wish LN maps can have a higher star rating..Redon wrote:
mania just needs to have a better star rating system, and the rest will fix itself automatically
maybe mappers can set their own star rating about this
maybe
That's because AiAe SHD's star rating is overrated, not because HT is inherently overrated.Cozzzy wrote:
I've just noticed loads of players are doing AiAe+HT, for almost 400pp. LOL
The SHD, among many other maps, is overrated because easy-to-play but high NPS patterns like this and this are overrated, as all the mania star rating algorithm really seems to take into account is peak note density. If you removed only half the notes on the few spots where these patterns pop up, and left the difficult quadstreams and all in place (which I did to save you the trouble), the diff's rating drops from 6.77 to 5.56 stars. According to Shoegazer, a lot more experienced 4K player than I am, it should realistically be rated around 6 stars. Needless to say, as a 6 star map, AiAe SHD on HT wouldn't be worth nearly as much pp as it is now.
All that is true for the no-mod version of it too, by the way. As I said, all we need is a proper star rating system, and the rest would mostly solve itself. If I was to map a 75% speed version of AiAe, made it the same as SHD on HT, and got it ranked, it would be just as much of a pp farm with the current SR algorithm.
nah, that would ruin it imoElementaires wrote:
maybe mappers can set their own star rating about this
maybe
tho supervising over sr and adjusting it manually is the only way to introduce SV rating in there. something like +0,5* added to algorithm value when SV is ultra-hard (smooooch example)
From what I see, what determines how much (many?) pp you gain is basically accuracy.
If you score lower than previous but have higher accuracy, no pp. Vice versa = lower pp.
I just wish they use persistent scoring, like ones of IIDX where 300g = 2 points, 300 = 1 point, just to make score-to-accuracy look "linear".
Well... it's hard to explain... but I think you get it.
If you score lower than previous but have higher accuracy, no pp. Vice versa = lower pp.
I just wish they use persistent scoring, like ones of IIDX where 300g = 2 points, 300 = 1 point, just to make score-to-accuracy look "linear".
Well... it's hard to explain... but I think you get it.
Eh, I didn't say anything about HT being overrated. AiAe's rating is definitely a bit off, but 400pp HT gives me the impression that some values might have just been scaled down with HT, instead of actually recalculated. That, or something has gone horribly wrong!Redon wrote:
That's because AiAe SHD's star rating is overrated, not because HT is inherently overrated.Cozzzy wrote:
I've just noticed loads of players are doing AiAe+HT, for almost 400pp. LOL
You don't even know how wrong you arestryver12 wrote:
From what I see, what determines how much (many?) pp you gain is basically accuracy.
If you score lower than previous but have higher accuracy, no pp. Vice versa = lower pp.
I just wish they use persistent scoring, like ones of IIDX where 300g = 2 points, 300 = 1 point, just to make score-to-accuracy look "linear".
Well... it's hard to explain... but I think you get it.
sooo can HT mod be unrankable now?
What's really cool is that if you passed it without mods, but got less than 400pp, you can't play HT and get more pp since the score will be lower.Cozzzy wrote:
I've just noticed loads of players are doing AiAe+HT, for almost 400pp. LOL
This is gonna change when per-mod score get implemented, isn't it?xwidghet wrote:
What's really cool is that if you passed it without mods, but got less than 400pp, you can't play HT and get more pp since the score will be lower.Cozzzy wrote:
I've just noticed loads of players are doing AiAe+HT, for almost 400pp. LOL
This also confirmed for EZ mod as wellxwidghet wrote:
What's really cool is that if you passed it without mods, but got less than 400pp, you can't play HT and get more pp since the score will be lower.Cozzzy wrote:
I've just noticed loads of players are doing AiAe+HT, for almost 400pp. LOL
When are the changes going to happen? I'm sick of looking at my 270 BPM beatmap loaded with hard streams that has 4,2 stars and I cant score an A on it (and I almost S'd verse IV)
Star rating is imcredibly broken
Converts give pp
Devs when is it going to change?
Star rating is imcredibly broken
Converts give pp
Devs when is it going to change?
Your map is actually not that hard, but it deserves a bit more stars, maybe 4.8?TheZiemniax wrote:
When are the changes going to happen? I'm sick of looking at my 270 BPM beatmap loaded with hard streams that has 4,2 stars and I cant score an A on it (and I almost S'd verse IV)
Star rating is imcredibly broken
Converts give pp
Devs when is it going to change?
TheZiemniax wrote:
When are the changes going to happen? I'm sick of looking at my 270 BPM beatmap loaded with hard streams that has 4,2 stars and I cant score an A on it (and I almost S'd verse IV)
Star rating is imcredibly broken
Converts give pp
Devs when is it going to change?
sometimes i wonder if devs checked this thread
I don't understand how you can compare absurdly long 270 BPM streams and say that it's just a touch harder than Elemental Creation (rated at 4.72). Verse IV and HAELEQUIN generally have the correct rating (though I'd argue Verse IV is a little higher - 5.5), and I'm pretty certain no one will be able to come close to S'ing The Empress 2D if they're barely S'ing those two maps. I seriously don't see how you can even compare something like 270 BPM stream (and they aren't the easiest patterns, either) for long periods and say that it's comparable to something like Elemental Creation, when it is pretty clear that more people will do substantially worse on TE than on HAELEQUIN or Verse IV.akuma123 wrote:
Your map is actually not that hard, but it deserves a bit more stars, maybe 4.8?TheZiemniax wrote:
When are the changes going to happen? I'm sick of looking at my 270 BPM beatmap loaded with hard streams that has 4,2 stars and I cant score an A on it (and I almost S'd verse IV)
Star rating is imcredibly broken
Converts give pp
Devs when is it going to change?
I am ready to pitch my idea in for the Mania star rating system.
1. SR calculated by adding up points per measure and adjust bonuses/penalties
calculate break time and decrease SR based on length (biggest decrease)
calculate length of low difficulty and decrease SR (lower difficulty = bigger decrease)
if difficulty is >= previous measure, bonus difficulty + .2
2. for every additional note on same time receives .5
ex. 3 note chord highest difficulty = 1 + .5 + .5 = 2, as opposed to 3
this gives chord values less of a difficulty than broken chords, rolls and such
for every chord that is the same as the previous will receive a penalty of difficulty*(.9)
3. for every LN = 1.5x value of a normal note, each additional LN during the duration
will add the difficulty by (1 if only one start/ending point is the same)
or (1.25 if both starting and ending points are different) or (.75 if both start
and end points are the same)
(highest difficulty calculated during the time LN are overlapped)
ex. 3 LN same time = 1.5 + .75 + .75 = 3
ex. 3 LN: 1 pair same start different end, 1 different start and end = 1.5 + 1 + 1.25 = 3.75
ex. 3 LN: 1 same start/end, 1 different start/end = 1.5 + .75 + 1.25 = 3.5
4. tighter jacks deserve exponential difficulty depending on tightness. because repetative notes/chords will decrease difficulty
and jacks that carry over multiple measures receive bonus difficulty due to same level of difficulty, the curve will be more balanced.
difficulty = (1 second/(note distance)*c)^2
c=constant (set to whatever feels right)
lets give c=4
ex. distance between notes = 1 sec: (1/4)^2 = .125 points
ex. distance = .2 sec (5x per sec): 1.5625 points
ex. distance = .1 sec (10x per sec): 6.25 points
5. balancing
part 1:
4k start same as 7k, scales higher
7k start same as 4k, scales lower
reason: as songs become more difficult, stamina will be the key factor in judging this section of difficulty, 4k is easier to maintain stamina at same difficulty
part 2:
4k start higher in this category but will scale lower
7k will start lower but will scale higher
reason: easier to learn low key amounts quickly and recognize positions compared to higher key amounts
part 3:
4k start same as 7k, scale lower
7k start same as 4k, scale higher
reason: beginners will usually be face with 1 or 2 ln's at a time, but due to having more keys = more ln's at a time
part 4:
4k start higher, scales higher
7k start lower, scales lower
reason: less columns = more notes hitting on same lane. that being said, 4k starts to focus on speed earlier and is mostly about speed end game
by combining all calculations into a scaled star rating, I think will represent a much more precise
measurement in every mania beatmap
1. SR calculated by adding up points per measure and adjust bonuses/penalties
calculate break time and decrease SR based on length (biggest decrease)
calculate length of low difficulty and decrease SR (lower difficulty = bigger decrease)
if difficulty is >= previous measure, bonus difficulty + .2
2. for every additional note on same time receives .5
ex. 3 note chord highest difficulty = 1 + .5 + .5 = 2, as opposed to 3
this gives chord values less of a difficulty than broken chords, rolls and such
for every chord that is the same as the previous will receive a penalty of difficulty*(.9)
3. for every LN = 1.5x value of a normal note, each additional LN during the duration
will add the difficulty by (1 if only one start/ending point is the same)
or (1.25 if both starting and ending points are different) or (.75 if both start
and end points are the same)
(highest difficulty calculated during the time LN are overlapped)
ex. 3 LN same time = 1.5 + .75 + .75 = 3
ex. 3 LN: 1 pair same start different end, 1 different start and end = 1.5 + 1 + 1.25 = 3.75
ex. 3 LN: 1 same start/end, 1 different start/end = 1.5 + .75 + 1.25 = 3.5
4. tighter jacks deserve exponential difficulty depending on tightness. because repetative notes/chords will decrease difficulty
and jacks that carry over multiple measures receive bonus difficulty due to same level of difficulty, the curve will be more balanced.
difficulty = (1 second/(note distance)*c)^2
c=constant (set to whatever feels right)
lets give c=4
ex. distance between notes = 1 sec: (1/4)^2 = .125 points
ex. distance = .2 sec (5x per sec): 1.5625 points
ex. distance = .1 sec (10x per sec): 6.25 points
5. balancing
part 1:
4k start same as 7k, scales higher
7k start same as 4k, scales lower
reason: as songs become more difficult, stamina will be the key factor in judging this section of difficulty, 4k is easier to maintain stamina at same difficulty
part 2:
4k start higher in this category but will scale lower
7k will start lower but will scale higher
reason: easier to learn low key amounts quickly and recognize positions compared to higher key amounts
part 3:
4k start same as 7k, scale lower
7k start same as 4k, scale higher
reason: beginners will usually be face with 1 or 2 ln's at a time, but due to having more keys = more ln's at a time
part 4:
4k start higher, scales higher
7k start lower, scales lower
reason: less columns = more notes hitting on same lane. that being said, 4k starts to focus on speed earlier and is mostly about speed end game
by combining all calculations into a scaled star rating, I think will represent a much more precise
measurement in every mania beatmap
Before I start, that was a bit hard to read. Consider some formatting.
The rest I think I can agree. Again, that was a pain to read, so I might have misread something.
Suppose a different offset for a given pattern. Sampling it by measure will result in varied star rating for each offset.Squishykorean wrote:
1. SR calculated by adding up points per measure and adjust bonuses/penalties
Not sure what the learning curve of inverted maps is and how they will be affected by your version of SR.Squishykorean wrote:
3. for every LN = 1.5x value of a normal note, each additional LN during the duration
will add the difficulty by (1 if only one start/ending point is the same)
or (1.25 if both starting and ending points are different) or (.75 if both start
and end points are the same)
The rest I think I can agree. Again, that was a pain to read, so I might have misread something.
abraker wrote:
Before I start, that was a bit hard to read. Consider some formatting.Suppose a different offset for a given pattern. Sampling it by measure will result in varied star rating for each offset.Squishykorean wrote:
1. SR calculated by adding up points per measure and adjust bonuses/penaltiesNot sure what the learning curve of inverted maps is and how they will be affected by your version of SR.Squishykorean wrote:
3. for every LN = 1.5x value of a normal note, each additional LN during the duration
will add the difficulty by (1 if only one start/ending point is the same)
or (1.25 if both starting and ending points are different) or (.75 if both start
and end points are the same)
The rest I think I can agree. Again, that was a pain to read, so I might have misread something.
by measuring the smallest unit, it would yield the most accurate measurement of difficulty, but calculating each beat would be too much. I'm not totally understand what you mean by offset will result in varied star rating, if its starts off late by 1/2 a measure, then it will end 1/2 a measure making no difference to the SR as a whole after it averages out. but then again, with using the bonus/penalty from comparing difficulty of the next measure it could impact the overall SR maybe by an insignificantly small margin.
the LN learning curve will be much more appropriate, usually LNs will start out on same lengths if multiple are present yielding smaller value. as songs become more difficult, there will be various lengths of LN making a higher value of difficulty.
all contain 6 LN in one measure, yet all have a different difficulty which using that formula takes care of that issue
as for the value of a LN to be 1.5 instead of it currently being worth 1 note (the worse of 2 scores: start and end release), it makes sense to increase their worth somehow since the scoring isn't completely fair on this. the scoring should be at least the average of accuracy of hitting and releasing
ex. 300 hold, 100 release would give 200 as opposed to 100
ex. 0 hold, 300 release would give 150 as opposed to 0
How does a 6.00 star map differ from a 6.10 star or a 1.00 star from a 1.10 star using your system? If you are not worried about such accuracy, then go ahead dismiss what I said.Squishykorean wrote:
by an insignificantly small margin.
Fair enough.Squishykorean wrote:
LN
EDIT: I feel like irregular notes deserve a bit bonus as well. For example, a two 1/4th, but between them is a 1/6th. I'm pretty sure adjust to hit something between half as fast or twice as fast depending on what note it is would have some difficulty aspect to it.
I want to hear someone else's opinion, especially Tom94's.
You know what would be really nice? If someone put together a way to actually test ideas like these out. I don't mean a tool that simply applies on specific calculation but one that can be tweaked easily so variations could easily be tested. It's one thing to just think about it and come up with an algorithm, it's a whole other thing to take a working implementation and test it against various maps and variations on the algorithm.
The single largest flaw in the current SR system isn't even the failure of the implementation to account for certain issues. The real problem is that while this feedback thread exists, there's been no way for the community to actively participate beyond making suggestions here. The SR algorithm hasn't had any changes in months. If it's stable enough to last this long, the algorithm should be public so we can actually examine it rather than make assumptions on how it works (and subsequently how to improve it). Certainly a community (or even small group of community members) looking over the algorithm would be better at spotting flaws and coming up with alternatives than a single person.
The single largest flaw in the current SR system isn't even the failure of the implementation to account for certain issues. The real problem is that while this feedback thread exists, there's been no way for the community to actively participate beyond making suggestions here. The SR algorithm hasn't had any changes in months. If it's stable enough to last this long, the algorithm should be public so we can actually examine it rather than make assumptions on how it works (and subsequently how to improve it). Certainly a community (or even small group of community members) looking over the algorithm would be better at spotting flaws and coming up with alternatives than a single person.
I would do that if I wasn't still making the analysis tool I said I was some month ago. Maybe I'll give this some priority a bit later. The best we can do is setup short sample patterns and calculate it ourselves until someone make such a thing.Bobbias wrote:
You know what would be really nice? If someone put together a way to actually test ideas like these out.
THIS ^Bobbias wrote:
The real problem is that while this feedback thread exists, there's been no way for the community to actively participate beyond making suggestions here.
just wanted to ask...
Is the pp still at work or is it finished?
This thread hasn't been updated for 4 months already so just thought to bump it a bit.
Is the pp still at work or is it finished?
This thread hasn't been updated for 4 months already so just thought to bump it a bit.
We dont have any clue where Tom94 is with this. My understanding is that he is busy with other stuff. Unless peppy pushes Tom to get something done, I doubt we are going to see something new for a whiledennischan wrote:
just wanted to ask...
Is the pp still at work or is it finished?
This thread hasn't been updated for 4 months already so just thought to bump it a bit.
No idea... This thread seems to be dead
yol oque opino esque nos de mas pp cuando sacomos una s o una a en cualquier dificultad
I'd love to see smthing like a multi mania mode with the 1.000.000 points cap unlocked so we can play player unbalanced matches like 2v5 or smthing. A little addon would change so much 
Pretty please :3
Pretty please :3C18H27NO3Elementaires wrote:
i wish LN maps can have a higher star rating..Redon wrote:
mania just needs to have a better star rating system, and the rest will fix itself automatically
maybe mappers can set their own star rating about this
maybe
)Thanks for info!
Would love mania 4K pp to be balanced with 7K and others. I think mania is the best mode in the game and I prefer it over the other similar rhythm games, so it would be great if you didn't drop the ball.
Regarding the update:
Do not award pp for scores below 50% of the maximum attainable score.Thanks.
There's a problem with this pp system, somehow I got 200 PP on a map where my best for all maps is 100 ish....
let me guess: triumph and regret
> checks
> triumph and regret
Either you randomly got unlucky in multiplayer or you know what you were going for. Either way, stay away from maps like these. They are bad for your mania skill.
> checks
> triumph and regret
Either you randomly got unlucky in multiplayer or you know what you were going for. Either way, stay away from maps like these. They are bad for your mania skill.
I completely agree man, because the max score you can get with 4k mod on is like 770k or something. Its insane!!!!!Riddle96 wrote:
Well, 4k and 7k are like 2 different games in the same rank, i think we need a different ranking, or a way to balance it, imho.
maybe should give a LITTLE bit more pp for 4k, im checking every osu!mania player and their only tops are 7k. that makes me sad because i cant learn 7k. it so damn hard.
Honestly, I fucking hate this. I literally click the keys right one TIME then it gives me 'miss', every fucking time. I want to quit this stupid game, at some point.
locked and unpinned. this is too old, outdated, and Tom94 is no longer lead this anymore.
if you still want to give your feedback, you can join the pp dev discord server here:
https://discord.gg/GFCNNg8bwk
if you still want to give your feedback, you can join the pp dev discord server here:
https://discord.gg/GFCNNg8bwk