abraker wrote:

goink wrote:

is there any way i can know how much this score would give in precision? i can't submit it due to scorev1

You can run the map through the skill calculator found here https://github.com/Kert/osuSkillsGUI/releases/tag/1.0

I don't know if the issue is noted already, but when HR is applied to a map the CS will always cap out at 7, when in-game it caps out at 10. When calculating nomod on maps with cs>7, it seems to work fine - but adding HR will set the CS on those maps to 7, even if the base CS is higher than 7 (in the case of this screenshot, the base map is cs7.5 and was ranked last week).

The vast majority of worthwhile scores to attempt to gain precision from are cs7.8+, so this is very impractical for that stat in particular

edit: sidenote for what i said before - i ended up fixing the accuracy and submitting that score, so nevermind on that front

@Sebbebro not sure what it was, but after restarting it seems to work correctly now. I am talking about two precision results you weren't able to submit

Kert wrote:

@Sebbebro not sure what it was, but after restarting it seems to work correctly now. I am talking about two precision results you weren't able to submit

It's true, they're on my profile now, tysm! Also since yesterday I've been able to manually submit other plays. Which I couldn't before so it's looking better now I think.

[quote="abraker"]Is the missing score your best score? If it's not it won't register.
I always consider that since I've noticed it happening before. I never try to submit a score unless it's my highest on the map. But the problem has been fixed now so thx to both of you

goink wrote:

I don't know if the issue is noted already, but when HR is applied to a map the CS will always cap out at 7, when in-game it caps out at 10. When calculating nomod on maps with cs>7, it seems to work fine - but adding HR will set the CS on those maps to 7, even if the base CS is higher than 7 (in the case of this screenshot, the base map is cs7.5 and was ranked last week).

If you add HR, you are telling it to change CS and OD. HR is calculated the same as nomod just with increased CS and OD. So if you don't want it changing values on you, set it to nomod and change them manually

abraker wrote:

What do you mean by "adjusted the scores to the rankings"?

I said what I mean, divide every score by the average score of the given skill.

Im having problems with score submission. I set scores on this map beatmapsets/620982#osu/1322221 and this map beatmapsets/652412#osu/1383389 with HTHR (which I guess may or may not be supposed to submit, I have other hthr scores that arent my top on the map but idk) and after trying to manually submit the first one and just doing the second one again neither of them went through.

kingautist wrote:

abraker wrote:

What do you mean by "adjusted the scores to the rankings"?

I said what I mean, divide every score by the average score of the given skill.

You mean to make skills not have high number they do now?

Zerkala_ wrote:

Im having problems with score submission. I set scores on this map beatmapsets/620982#osu/1322221 and this map beatmapsets/652412#osu/1383389 with HTHR (which I guess may or may not be supposed to submit, I have other hthr scores that arent my top on the map but idk) and after trying to manually submit the first one and just doing the second one again neither of them went through.

Are they high scores, top 500, or in your top pp?

abraker wrote:

Are they high scores, top 500, or in your top pp?

the first one isnt so that would be that I guess but this one beatmapsets/620982#osu/1322221 is #44 on the map and isnt showing up

It doesn't work for me.

abraker wrote:

You mean to make skills not have high number they do now?

No. For example, my agility is 209 (rank 300453) and my memory is 16 (rank 20456). My memory should be higher than my agility because my memory is at a higher rank than my agility, same for all the other skills.

I understand that might not appeal to everyone, but I'd love to have an option to remove scores older than a few months. Sometimes I stop playing for a long while and when I come back those old scores no longer reflect my ability.

Hi. I have a question.
What is the difference between
the ambitious and the versatile
describtion?

One is higher skill than the other. Ambitious > versatile

abraker wrote:

One is higher skill than the other. Ambitious > versatile

Alright thx

Manual submission borked? Not working for me.

This feels like something that should've been asked a hundred times before, so I'm sorry if it is, but it isn't in the FAQ and I can't find it in any earlier forum replies (though I can't be assed to look through all 1500):

Has there ever been any plans to add an overall number of the sum of all a player's skills, both on player profiles and on a ranking page?

I feel like it'd really be cool to see a page that shows player ranking in a table showing each individual skill and then sorting by a "total" column.


Also, I really think you should add like a 0.75x multiplier to all the Agility scores. Agility is basically everyone's highest score value regardless of if they are a jump or stream player whereas all the other skills seem to make sense in which ones are higher relative to one another in profiles


Edit: Also, I feel like you should do something to separate flow aim and speed streams. Currently, very high BPM stream players dominate both Stamina and Tenacity with basically exactly the same result, with the best flow aim players being nowhere to be seen. idke, for example, is not even top 200 for tenacity, despite being one of the players most would probably think of when asked who the best stream players are.

I feel like removing one of Stamina and Tenacity to replace with a skill for flow aim would make more sense - currently it feels like the same skill is being accounted for twice with flow aim being a skill not accounted for at all.

Purplegaze wrote:

Has there ever been any plans to add an overall number of the sum of all a player's skills, both on player profiles and on a ranking page?

Nope, added to the list.

How exactly does training work. I see there are presets and you can make certain skills blue and have a 2nd bar to adjust. is this target score? What happens if you don't have any skill selected?

nmi5 wrote:

How exactly does training work. I see there are presets and you can make certain skills blue and have a 2nd bar to adjust. is this target score? What happens if you don't have any skill selected?

Have you tried using it?

abraker wrote:

nmi5 wrote:

How exactly does training work. I see there are presets and you can make certain skills blue and have a 2nd bar to adjust. is this target score? What happens if you don't have any skill selected?

Have you tried using it?

Yes i have. I just want to know how to set it to train streams or acc in particular rather than see some jumpo maps it think i could improve aim with
How do you set certain skills basically.

Presets are enabling just the related skills and disabling others. The +% buttons seem to behave as defaults settings /shrug

Honestly I recommend enabling each skill and using slider to tune it manually. For streams and acc tune Stamina, Tenacity, and Accuracy to your skill level range. You should tune other skills to be a bit lower so those three skill you do care about dominate more.

Something like this:

Purplegaze wrote:

Also, I really think you should add like a 0.75x multiplier to all the Agility scores. Agility is basically everyone's highest score value regardless of if they are a jump or stream player

I proposed that scores be divided by their average value to correct this, but abraker was too dumb to understand.

kingautist wrote:

Purplegaze wrote:

Also, I really think you should add like a 0.75x multiplier to all the Agility scores. Agility is basically everyone's highest score value regardless of if they are a jump or stream player

I proposed that scores be divided by their average value to correct this, but abraker was too dumb to understand.

Dividing by the average wouldn't solve all problems, since also the distribution between different skills is different.

A better solution is having the displayed skill values be a function of the percentile of each value among all players for each individual skill.

kingautist wrote:

Purplegaze wrote:

Also, I really think you should add like a 0.75x multiplier to all the Agility scores. Agility is basically everyone's highest score value regardless of if they are a jump or stream player

I proposed that scores be divided by their average value to correct this, but abraker was too dumb to understand.

Slapping 0.75x or any constant value even for one skill is a bandaid solution that will work for maybe a year. The skill curve for agility shoots up like a damn cliff as you approach top 1000, and gets exponentially steeper as the years go by.



I've been looking to making the skills linear for a few weeks now, but it's not as easy as I thought. Full Tablet, maybe you can give a hand?

abraker wrote:

Slapping 0.75x or any constant value even for one skill is a bandaid solution that will work for maybe a year. The skill curve for agility shoots up like a damn cliff as you approach top 1000, and gets exponentially steeper as the years go by.

I've been looking to making the skills linear for a few weeks now, but it's not as easy as I thought. Full Tablet, maybe you can give a hand?

If any skill goes up in the same nonlinear way that agility does, then it is sensible to adjust those skills to agility with a multiplier.

abraker wrote:

Slapping 0.75x or any constant value even for one skill is a bandaid solution that will work for maybe a year. The skill curve for agility shoots up like a damn cliff as you approach top 1000, and gets exponentially steeper as the years go by.



I've been looking to making the skills linear for a few weeks now, but it's not as easy as I thought. Full Tablet, maybe you can give a hand?

One way is looking at the Rank of each raw value instead of the raw value itself, and redefine the scale based on that. You could, for example, define that the top player has an overall value of 1000, a player in the median has an overall value of 500, and the worst player has an overall value of 0. (Basically, the overall value is just the percentile of the raw stat value of the player multiplied by 10). The problem with this approach is that it makes the values static over time.

One solution to the problem with the previous approach is storing the distribution of raw_values/scaled_values at some point of time, and then applying that same scaling to scores in the future. For example, if someone has a raw value of 600 in the 90th percentile (900 scaled value) at the start of the year 2021, and 2 years later someone has a raw value of 600 which is in the 80th percentile, they would still have a scaled value of 900.

When the values have to be interpolated (for raw values in the range of the population at the time when the scale was set), this is easy. But for extrapolating (for example, assigning a value to someone who has 2000 raw speed when the best player at the start of 2021 had only 1900), we have to have a model of the growth in the extremes of the distribution.

Now, the previous solution might become increasingly unwieldy as the algorithm changes, since new changes should try to keep the distribution of raw scores constant.

Now, with the previous solution, there is still the matter of balancing the individual skill values for each score (and that matters, because of the way the overall value of the skill is calculated). It might be better rescale the skill values of each play instead of the overall skill values. In that case, a way could be using the top 10 plays for each skill from each player, ranking all the plays, and then scaling the same way I suggested with the overall skill values.

Full Tablet wrote:

One way is looking at the Rank of each raw value instead of the raw value itself, and redefine the scale based on that.

Having the correct skill value be dependent on rank value is certainly NOT what we want as that would bind the correction to a specific snapshot in time. It will become as bad as it is now relatively soon after the corrections are made, so it would require to keep making indefinite corrections.

Full Tablet wrote:

One solution to the problem with the previous approach is storing the distribution of raw_values/scaled_values at some point of time, and then applying that same scaling to scores in the future.

This is probably what I have settled on doing as well, but you are probably complicating this with the percentile stuff. This idea sounds the same as modeling the curve via linear spline, and then running that spline through a transformation that changes the modeled function f -> g:



And then correct that linear:



This is what I am planning to do, but it's slightly tedious work. This should be more stable, and only start to falter if the shape of the curve changes. The help I need is with this tedious work, however.

Site is broken again? I improved one of my scores but it didn't update on the site, I manually submitted the map id and it still didn't update

Map is beatmapsets/46084#osu/143798

just took a bit of time

The skill title is bugged, when seeing my profile, it only shows Swift as the main title, but when using the vs function the title Psychic is added

Hello, I have a question, how are the skill points made up? From the best 100 Plays?

Phantonym wrote:

The skill title is bugged, when seeing my profile, it only shows Swift as the main title, but when using the vs function the title Psychic is added

In the profile page

In VS

I recorded the bug. Waiting for kert.

OSaftKiller wrote:

Hello, I have a question, how are the skill points made up? From the best 100 Plays?

It's top 20 iirc

abraker wrote:

OSaftKiller wrote:

Hello, I have a question, how are the skill points made up? From the best 100 Plays?

It's top 20 iirc

wait, so only the top 20 scores for each category matter? what about the 80 scores that are listed following that?

goink wrote:

abraker wrote:

OSaftKiller wrote:

Hello, I have a question, how are the skill points made up? From the best 100 Plays?

It's top 20 iirc

wait, so only the top 20 scores for each category matter? what about the 80 scores that are listed following that?

I can be wrong as I don't have access to the web portion of osu!skills. I said 20 based on things I vaguely remember from 5 years back

abraker wrote:

I can be wrong as I don't have access to the web portion of osu!skills. I said 20 based on things I vaguely remember from 5 years back

ohh, i see .. that doesn't seem right though, because i just set a new 27th best for my precision list and it did bump me up one point in that stat

goink wrote:

abraker wrote:

OSaftKiller wrote:

Hello, I have a question, how are the skill points made up? From the best 100 Plays?

It's top 20 iirc

wait, so only the top 20 scores for each category matter? what about the 80 scores that are listed following that?

It's just that first 20 scores have the most influence on the total number
This is PP weightning
Skill weightning is the same as for PP, except that final sum of skill points is multiplied by (1 - 0.95) which makes it so that player skill never goes above the highest score skill points

I have a question, is it normal that when you put your username the page does not load anything, or will I be doing it wrong?
I tried two browsers but nothing, I put my name or someone else's and nothing happens

TapTei wrote:

I have a question, is it normal that when you put your username the page does not load anything, or will I be doing it wrong?
I tried two browsers but nothing, I put my name or someone else's and nothing happens

You have to click the "Show my skills!" button

I've already done it about 50 times

That's why I highlighted the link above

abraker wrote:

...

Your idea of finding a spline function to rescale the current values is in the end very similar to using percentiles, but with less precision (the percentile idea is the same as the spline idea, but with one piece per data point, instead of having less amount of pieces than data points).

The data looks smooth enough to use generalized linear functions instead of linear splines, so let's see how to do what you are proposing using that instead, for a toy example with random data:

The raw data (blue line) and the goal scaled data (red line) look like this:


So we want to find a function from the raw data to the scaled data that looks like this (because most of the change happens in the smaller values, it is better to use functions that grow slowly, such as logarithms, as the basis, instead of just using polynomials):


To get an isotonic fit, we can express the terms in a scaled Bernstein basis and restrict the coefficients so they are non-decreasing. Then this is a quadratic programming problem, which can be solved by several algorithms.

For example, using powers of Log[1 + x] up to 21, with a Bernstein basis scale that guarantees isotonicity up to 22025.5 (e^10-1) (considerably larger than what we should expect for the raw values in the future; we could increase the range of guaranteed isotonity, but the larger it is, the worse the resulting function fits the data), from the data in the example, we obtain as a function:

-4.2*10^-8 Log[1 + x]^2 + 3.98952*10^-8 Log[1 + x]^3 -
2.39335*10^-8 Log[1 + x]^4 + 1.01701*10^-8 Log[1 + x]^5 +
54.6007 Log[1 + x]^6 - 70.1823 Log[1 + x]^7 + 42.9753 Log[1 + x]^8 -
16.549 Log[1 + x]^9 + 4.46706 Log[1 + x]^10 -
0.893174 Log[1 + x]^11 + 0.136421 Log[1 + x]^12 -
0.0161863 Log[1 + x]^13 + 0.00150262 Log[1 + x]^14 -
0.00010905 Log[1 + x]^15 + 6.13243*10^-6 Log[1 + x]^16 -
2.6228*10^-7 Log[1 + x]^17 + 8.25477*10^-9 Log[1 + x]^18 -
1.80421*10^-10 Log[1 + x]^19 + 2.44792*10^-12 Log[1 + x]^20 -
1.55382*10^-14 Log[1 + x]^21

(The function resulted being isotonic for values up to 167,322)

Which when applied to the raw values (blue line) gives the green line, which is close enough to the goal red line (the more terms we add, the closer they are):


I can give you the scaling function if you give me the data you want to scale this way, or asks me for more details if you want to do this yourself.