forum
osu!mania ScoreV2 live!
posted
Total Posts
483
lmao yes.Veracion wrote:
only slightly less playing experience than the people developing scorev2 xdVeracion wrote:
only slightly less playing experience than the people developing scorev2 xd
hahaha good one
I have some ideas of how to improve the current scoreV2. Nearly nobody in the mania community likes the direction of this scoring system, and many good arguments have been made for why this scoring system and bad and why another scoring system would be better. However, especially now with the knowledge that osu!lazer will bring custom gamemodes, it makes sense for the osu!mania scoring system to employ a scoring system that fits into the pattern with the scoreV2 in other gamemodes. Those who want to play a gamemode with their favorite scoring system are welcome to.
That being said, here are some of my opinions on how to improve the current iteration of osu!mania scoreV2.
I hope that my suggestions are considered.
That being said, here are some of my opinions on how to improve the current iteration of osu!mania scoreV2.
Combo:
I don't quite understand why hit score is factored into this at all, isn't that the point of the accuracy portion of score? Also, there are the oddities of losing differents amounts of score for a non-perfect judgment, depending on what combo you had at the time. Only taking into account the combo, and not the hit score, would solve this problem.
I think it is too easy to spam through hard sections and hold combo. Making 50s (and maybe 100s) break combo would help. After all, combo is a number that tracks the number of notes that you haven't messed up on, and I would call getting a 50 a mess up.
Lastly, I think that as an anti-spam mechanic, hitting more keys than needed (not between notes, only for notes) should break combo.
I don't quite understand why hit score is factored into this at all, isn't that the point of the accuracy portion of score? Also, there are the oddities of losing differents amounts of score for a non-perfect judgment, depending on what combo you had at the time. Only taking into account the combo, and not the hit score, would solve this problem.
I think it is too easy to spam through hard sections and hold combo. Making 50s (and maybe 100s) break combo would help. After all, combo is a number that tracks the number of notes that you haven't messed up on, and I would call getting a 50 a mess up.
Lastly, I think that as an anti-spam mechanic, hitting more keys than needed (not between notes, only for notes) should break combo.
Misc:
I know this isn't super relevant here, but please make grades based off score, not accuracy. If score is how you assess the performance of a play, use that for the grade.
I know this isn't super relevant here, but please make grades based off score, not accuracy. If score is how you assess the performance of a play, use that for the grade.
I hope that my suggestions are considered.
+1Cuber wrote:
I know this isn't super relevant here, but please make grades based off score, not accuracy. If score is how you assess the performance of a play, use that for the grade.
One of the reasons why SS makes no sense is this
yeah and you can finally use the "sorted by ranking" because now i can use it and have tons of S with 900k+ and 700k+ scores who are worth nothing and i still need to search for bad scores :/
I was so relieved when i read thisSmoogipooo (on reddit) wrote:
Combo scoring: I don't remember if I mentioned this publicly (I thought I did but can't find the post), but I want to try accuracy-only scoring.
source
I went back a few pages in this thread and I haven't seen this yet, so I'm gonna go ahead and try to give an objective opinion about the current scoreV2:
LN change
This part turned out VERY good. I haven't seen a single player who dislikes it yet. The way it is now makes perfectly sense, and I especially like the 1.5x tolerance of releases since those are indeed very hard to time. Even though combo will (hopefully) be meaningless, I do think it was a good idea to remove the crazy amount of combo you get from LNs, especially if HD and FI stay scaling to combo. This brings us to the next topic:
Mods and multipliers
In this topic there's alot of different things to look at: lets start with multipliers. First of all: VMs being back to x1.0 is a good thing. There is too many people who use HD or FL by preference, and even though I am currently the only one doing the same with FI i do think that one should stay x1.0 as well.
Next: DT/NC. I don't quite know how this one works at the moment, but it feels like its simply the same as NoMod except that PP is calculated with the increased StarRating ect. (correct me if im wrong). DT PP brought back alot of players that moved to StepMania/BMS/O2Jam/idkwhatelse because osu!mania didn't have enough hard maps. Yes, the DT scores are currently giving way too much PP, but this actually isn't the fault of DT but the fault of the StarRating system which heavily overrates double trills. (2 days after DT PP was released peppy said it will be nerfed after several 2k+ scores were set. Please dont do that). Nerfing DT PP would therefore be a bad idea since maps that aren't overrated wouldnt give any DT PP at all anymore. If you're planning to change something in here, fix the SR system. Doubletrills need to be nerfed, and rice needs to be buffed (have a look at empress [SC], which is currently the most underrated ranked map).
Idk how osu!standard works in this aspect, but I don't think a multiplier would make sense on DT/NC, since you can't compare NoMod scores with DT scores anyway.
About HR: I interested in why it is currently UNRANKED instead of x1.0 because I can't see how it could be abused. HR is something that should definitely be a thing, though idk which multiplier.
Random/Mirror: Random should stay unranked, because it can be abused (1handed patterns can be turned into 2 handed patterns and vice versa). But a mirror mod (in case it will ever be a thing) would be a blessing to left handed players, because some maps are very right-based (onbeat notes are right hand, offbeat left hand all the time which is very mindblocking). It even goes so far that some players actually switch their scroll direction and rotate their monitor by 180° to achieve the same effect.
Autoconverts and keymodes: Autoconverts never give a noteworthy amount of PP so its pretty irrelevant, but I dislike that changing your amount of keys (no matter if increasing or decreasing) decreases your multiplier. The key modes should be split up into separated rankings instead.
HalfTime: I don't know if this was ever addressed before, but something definitely needs to change in here. First of all: HT gives too much PP. Idk why but it does. I think that instead of halving the score, it should work the same way DT does (identical calcultion with just the decreased SR ect).
NoFail: This is something that in my opinion works with all gamemodes: NoFail should be x1.0, but UNRANKED. You shouldn't be able to be rewarded for blindly mashing through a crazy hard map.
Easy: Just like in osu!standard, this is a difficult topic. The main problem is: atm nobody uses it because instead of EZ you can pick HT which has the same multiplier but is way easier. If my suggestion to HT is applied then it could keep going with simply a multiplier below 1.0, execpt that x0.5 is too extreme. Unlike standard, you can't make up for that by holding combo since mania is acc based and has a linear score curve. i'd try going with something like x0.7 and see how that turns out.
SuddenDeath/Perfect: I don't think these need to be discussed.
Next: DT/NC. I don't quite know how this one works at the moment, but it feels like its simply the same as NoMod except that PP is calculated with the increased StarRating ect. (correct me if im wrong). DT PP brought back alot of players that moved to StepMania/BMS/O2Jam/idkwhatelse because osu!mania didn't have enough hard maps. Yes, the DT scores are currently giving way too much PP, but this actually isn't the fault of DT but the fault of the StarRating system which heavily overrates double trills. (2 days after DT PP was released peppy said it will be nerfed after several 2k+ scores were set. Please dont do that). Nerfing DT PP would therefore be a bad idea since maps that aren't overrated wouldnt give any DT PP at all anymore. If you're planning to change something in here, fix the SR system. Doubletrills need to be nerfed, and rice needs to be buffed (have a look at empress [SC], which is currently the most underrated ranked map).
Idk how osu!standard works in this aspect, but I don't think a multiplier would make sense on DT/NC, since you can't compare NoMod scores with DT scores anyway.
About HR: I interested in why it is currently UNRANKED instead of x1.0 because I can't see how it could be abused. HR is something that should definitely be a thing, though idk which multiplier.
Random/Mirror: Random should stay unranked, because it can be abused (1handed patterns can be turned into 2 handed patterns and vice versa). But a mirror mod (in case it will ever be a thing) would be a blessing to left handed players, because some maps are very right-based (onbeat notes are right hand, offbeat left hand all the time which is very mindblocking). It even goes so far that some players actually switch their scroll direction and rotate their monitor by 180° to achieve the same effect.
Autoconverts and keymodes: Autoconverts never give a noteworthy amount of PP so its pretty irrelevant, but I dislike that changing your amount of keys (no matter if increasing or decreasing) decreases your multiplier. The key modes should be split up into separated rankings instead.
HalfTime: I don't know if this was ever addressed before, but something definitely needs to change in here. First of all: HT gives too much PP. Idk why but it does. I think that instead of halving the score, it should work the same way DT does (identical calcultion with just the decreased SR ect).
NoFail: This is something that in my opinion works with all gamemodes: NoFail should be x1.0, but UNRANKED. You shouldn't be able to be rewarded for blindly mashing through a crazy hard map.
Easy: Just like in osu!standard, this is a difficult topic. The main problem is: atm nobody uses it because instead of EZ you can pick HT which has the same multiplier but is way easier. If my suggestion to HT is applied then it could keep going with simply a multiplier below 1.0, execpt that x0.5 is too extreme. Unlike standard, you can't make up for that by holding combo since mania is acc based and has a linear score curve. i'd try going with something like x0.7 and see how that turns out.
SuddenDeath/Perfect: I don't think these need to be discussed.
300 & 300r
although i have a very bad acc compared to other players on my level (which means i suffer alot from this change), I do think it is a good idea to decrease 300's to 60/61 (~98.36)%. It makes sense and also solves the problem of top tier players having 99.xx % EVERYWHERE. Some players aren't even able to pass a map without getting an S since they are so accurate. Having everything decreased a bit would be a good thing. There's just one thing im afraid of: If the PP system stays unchanged in this aspect then a better performance is required on the same map to gain the same, which would be a big problem to low acc passes. The one thing i like most about mania is the fact that you are rewarded for how good you play in general. Even a barely-pass with horrible acc can be your top score if its done on a map that is very hard for your standards and I really want to keep this.
combo
Here we are, at the most controversial topic of them all. I don't even know what to say about it at this point. I don't want mania to become frustrating like standard. Right now when you miss a note in mania, it drops your acc a little and thats pretty much it. While in standard, if you miss a note then your score is instantly worthless. I'm not going into detail about how stupid i find that since this thread is about mania, but I do want to say: PLEASE DON'T DO THIS TO MANIA! I want mania to be acc only (In my opinion you could even go so far to completely remove score and use acc for scoreboards) and I am sure many players (especially those who came from other VSRGs) will agree with this.
SV changes
Here comes something completely new: Would it be possible to add SVs to the SR calculation system? I know it's going to be hard to make this system unabusable (so that invisible notes ect don't lead to infinite SR ect) but I have faith in the developers to be capable of making it happen. But before that, I'd like to hear some opinions on this.
If SS is based on 1 000 000 score, hardly anyone would get an SS on anything past 4*, and past 5* it would be virtually impossible.Adri wrote:
+1Cuber wrote:
I know this isn't super relevant here, but please make grades based off score, not accuracy. If score is how you assess the performance of a play, use that for the grade.
One of the reasons why SS makes no sense is this
And if it's not based on 1 000 000 (say it's based on 990 000 or something similar), keep in mind that accuracy now decreases with 300 compared to 300g, just as you get less score with 300 as opposed to 300g. Accuracy affects score, so minuscule mistakes would be a lot more punishing than before.
The only way grades based on score would work is if score is 100% based on accuracy (like DDR), and even then the grades would be based on accuracy by extension.
why not just keep the SS requirement at "300 and 300r only" as it is right now?
That's what I'm saying. Cuber's idea would either go with this or completely destroy it, depending on what the SS requirement is.LastExceed wrote:
why not just keep the SS requirement at "300 and 300r only" as it is right now?
But again, you lose accuracy now with 300, so the accuracy SS requirement would have to be adjusted.
you got it wrong. My idea is to make SS completely unrelated to acc. As long as you have 300 and 300r only you get the SS no matter your acc. which means you could theoretically get an SS with 98.36% (everything 300 and no 300r)johnmedina999 wrote:
But again, you lose accuracy now with 300, so the accuracy SS requirement would have to be adjusted.
LastExceed wrote:
you got it wrong. My idea is to make SS completely unrelated to acc. As long as you have 300 and 300r only you get the SS no matter your acc. which means you could theoretically get an SS with 98.36% (everything 300 and no 300r)
Ah, I see. Yeah, that works.
Basically what I mean is that accuracy should be 100% entirely completely fully wholly irrelevant. In everything (except for contributing to score).johnmedina999 wrote:
If SS is based on 1 000 000 score, hardly anyone would get an SS on anything past 4*, and past 5* it would be virtually impossible.
And if it's not based on 1 000 000 (say it's based on 990 000 or something similar), keep in mind that accuracy now decreases with 300 compared to 300g, just as you get less score with 300 as opposed to 300g. Accuracy affects score, so minuscule mistakes would be a lot more punishing than before.
The only way grades based on score would work is if score is 100% based on accuracy (like DDR), and even then the grades would be based on accuracy by extension.
However, everything you guys are talking about is unrelated to ScoreV2. I'd appreciate someone giving their thoughts on my ideas (or any other ideas) on the more relevant aspects of ScoreV2.
please separate SS from 100% and make it reliant on having 100% 300g + 300g; you can keep the reduction of accuracy percentage for getting regular 300s as it stands right now, but having to say "score v2 SS" is absolutely obnoxious
also, add SSS rank for 1m point scores; they are rare and few/far-between, but they do in fact exist
other than that: watching score v2 in tournament play for the past few weeks has shown that it is a much more viable system than it was in the past and I think it's certainly working
i personally like Cuber's idea of making grades related to score, so long as there are no instances where a SS grade can be higher than a S grade using the near impossible example of getting regular 300 judgment for every single note, as i do feel like SS rank should be something that is conditional much like older DDR was for getting AAAs (USA's DDR Extreme CS had a condition that AAs were only possible if you FC'd due to bonus points, that's not as good of an example though)
also, add SSS rank for 1m point scores; they are rare and few/far-between, but they do in fact exist
other than that: watching score v2 in tournament play for the past few weeks has shown that it is a much more viable system than it was in the past and I think it's certainly working
i personally like Cuber's idea of making grades related to score, so long as there are no instances where a SS grade can be higher than a S grade using the near impossible example of getting regular 300 judgment for every single note, as i do feel like SS rank should be something that is conditional much like older DDR was for getting AAAs (USA's DDR Extreme CS had a condition that AAs were only possible if you FC'd due to bonus points, that's not as good of an example though)
Honestly the ratio of combo to accuracy in score should be 0% to 100%. When I get a 96% on a map and its still a lower score than a 91% that's just stupid. Oh yeah and visual mods shouldn't give increased score, I know people who ONLY play with them, and are actually worse without them.
out of curiousity, why do compare the score to accuracy? do you think that accuracy is the perfect scoring system?tatatat wrote:
Honestly the ratio of combo to accuracy in score should be 0% to 100%. When I get a 96% on a map and its still a lower score than a 91% that's just stupid. Oh yeah and visual mods shouldn't give increased score, I know people who ONLY play with them, and are actually worse without them.
Those who prefer accuracy over combo don't care as much for the consistency element. Only frustration comes out of retrying so often to get a perfect run. It's better to just do the same when attempting that 99.9X% whenever you are ready for it instead of retrying it over 1000 times until you get that 80% FC.Cuber wrote:
out of curiousity, why do compare the score to accuracy? do you think that accuracy is the perfect scoring system?tatatat wrote:
Honestly the ratio of combo to accuracy in score should be 0% to 100%. When I get a 96% on a map and its still a lower score than a 91% that's just stupid. Oh yeah and visual mods shouldn't give increased score, I know people who ONLY play with them, and are actually worse without them.
Do we have a date when this is going to roll out? Is it going to roll out with osu laser?
It needs more work tbhjohnmedina999 wrote:
Do we have a date when this is going to roll out? Is it going to roll out with osu laser?
Lol
stop being racist and play the game guys
stop being racist and play the game guys
With MWC being only one month away, can we get our SS's back before that? There have been enough suggestions on how to fix it.
and maybe also a rundown on how scoreV2 currently works while we're at itVeracion wrote:
With MWC being only one month away, can we get our SS's back before that? There have been enough suggestions on how to fix it.
smoogipooo wrote:
Hi all,
You may have noticed the ScoreV2 changes in the changelogs recently, with just over 7 weeks left until MWC begins we've released ScoreV2 for osu!mania in hopes that we can perfect the score system before the tournament. You will need to be on the Cutting Edge release stream to use this for now, but we will propagate it to all release streams (excluding fallback) when it is ready, just before MWC.
You'll be please to know that there are no more hidden multipliers and rounding issues have been eradicated, but that is not all. Let's go through a list of changes in this initial version:THIS IS NOT FINAL
Please, do not discuss Star Rating and PP here.We've had some internal discussions about how LNs should work, but have not reached a definitive conclusion as there are split opinions. We are eager to hear your feedback regarding osu!mania scoring and this new scoring system!
- Score is made up of 20% combo and 80% accuracy.
- We want to value the more accurate players (accuracy) whilst applying a small reward for consistency (combo).
- LN starts and ends are now judged separately.
- Previously LNs considered a joint timing distribution between the start press and end release. This made it unclear as to whether you'd get a MAX after an LN end as you had to take into consideration the LN start. Judging separately should feel more natural, rewarding (as you get instant feedback), and a bit more challenging.
- LN ends are given a 1.5x lenience to the hit windows.
- LN starts were previously given up to 1.2x timing window lenience and LN ends were given up to 2.4x timing window lenience. This reduces the complexity of releasing an LN whilst you're focusing on pressing other notes.
- If an LN is broken but re-pressed, the LN end will not award more than 50 points.
- Works similar to the current system depending on when you release the hold, but is lenient enough to feel rewarding even for newer players (consider that ScoreV2 will be used as the normal ranking in the future).
- LNs do not give combo ticks any more - only one combo tick for the start and end notes.
- Feels more natural rather than displaying a useless number.
- Mods are back! NF/EZ/HT give 0.5x score multipliers and DT/HR/HD/FI/FL give 1.06x score multipliers.
I'll be adding here a list of changes I will consider. Please remember that we are fully intending to break the game with these changes. We will apply any changes necessary to make things work:---- Changelog:
- Make DT adjust to 100%/110%/.../150% with score bonus increments of 0.05x (or something like that).
- Increase the bonus of HR or decrease the tightness of the timing windows.
2016-06-16:Cutting Edge has been updated with changes to ScoreV2 that were proposed by Shoegazer here. I want to stress that the changes are not final and we are still tweaking the system to properly represent a player's skill in a competitive setting.
Please note that HD/FI/FL mod multipliers have not yet been removed. These are slated to be removed in the next iteration of changes.
Edit: Posting this because I've explained it on reddit:
There are two components to the score.
- Accuracy
Essentially as accuracy increases we want you to gain more and more score while accounting for the difficulty of maintaining a 99%+ accuracy over 90%. To do this accuracy is exponentiated so that it is not quite a linear multiplier. In the previous iteration it was raised to the 10th power, in the new iteration it is raised to a factor of the accuracy.
This has the effect of causing lower accuracies to not be so much of dead weight as they were previously, while still providing a steep curve towards 100% accuracy as seen in this graph (red = old, blue = new): https://u-gi.me/sykzM
- Combo
Combo is the harder one to talk about. We want to award holding combo, but at the same time not punish holding 4000 combo and missing once too much. To achieve this your individual hit scores are weighted by the combo you have after hitting the note. In the previous iteration this was a linear relationship, which resulted in punishing for missing after holding 4000 combo. In the new iteration it is logarithmic, with a cap at log_4(400) (meaning combo > 400 will be weighed as if your combo was 400), as shown in this graph (red = old, blue = new): https://u-gi.me/oJ6sa
Don't tell me that 1M SS is reasonable and will be implemented in the final version ... This is the only thing in ScoreV2 that I find not only really bad, but also game breaking (and not in a really good way !!).
You can still say a score is an SS when it's not 100% accuracy if you say that a 300 is only 98%, the same way that in standard you can get a 99,5% A and a 96% S ...
I see it like that :
D: 0 - 69,99%
C: 70% - 79,99%
B: 80% - 89,99%
A: 90% - 94,99%
S: Equal to or Above 95%, only if there are not only 300 and MAX (95,00% - 99,99% range)
SS: There are only 300 and MAX (98,00% - 100% range, more usually around >99,5%) - Depending on OD, all hits are under 30 to 50ms, exactly like in standard mode (which I find fair)
With current Scorev2, SS requires every hit to be under 16,5ms not depending on OD (meaning even new players require insane accuracy to achieve SS). This is harder than Taiko's OD10 (19ms).
Aside from this I really like the whole Gaussian thing, but I think that this would only work for a totally different game. I believe that the four main modes should remain as close as possible to make them more accessible and keep some integrity (that is also why I think that a 1M cap is a bad idea compared to what is in place with Taiko and CtB for example ; Std too but combo is too broken).
If this would be implemented tho, I would be far from complaining (just sad to drift away from fellow gamemodes).
You can still say a score is an SS when it's not 100% accuracy if you say that a 300 is only 98%, the same way that in standard you can get a 99,5% A and a 96% S ...
I see it like that :
D: 0 - 69,99%
C: 70% - 79,99%
B: 80% - 89,99%
A: 90% - 94,99%
S: Equal to or Above 95%, only if there are not only 300 and MAX (95,00% - 99,99% range)
SS: There are only 300 and MAX (98,00% - 100% range, more usually around >99,5%) - Depending on OD, all hits are under 30 to 50ms, exactly like in standard mode (which I find fair)
With current Scorev2, SS requires every hit to be under 16,5ms not depending on OD (meaning even new players require insane accuracy to achieve SS). This is harder than Taiko's OD10 (19ms).
Aside from this I really like the whole Gaussian thing, but I think that this would only work for a totally different game. I believe that the four main modes should remain as close as possible to make them more accessible and keep some integrity (that is also why I think that a 1M cap is a bad idea compared to what is in place with Taiko and CtB for example ; Std too but combo is too broken).
If this would be implemented tho, I would be far from complaining (just sad to drift away from fellow gamemodes
).FrenzyLi wrote:
Out of curiosity, is it possible to post multiple score of different mod combinations on the same beatmap?
e.g. AIAE MX nomod pass (counts as pp), AIAE MX DT pass (counts as pp) ....
and pls nerf HT pp . w .
Apply Gaussian to all gamemodes. I don't see the issue. If you argue it will screw up scores, there are plenty of changes the went into effect before that made some scores impossible to beat on older maps already.Adri wrote:
Aside from this I really like the whole Gaussian thing, but I think that this would only work for a totally different game. I believe that the four main modes should remain as close as possible to make them more accessible and keep some integrity
I'm still of the opinion that the best scoring system would be one that takes into account the instantaneous difficulty of a specific note and the (gaussian) accuracy when finding the total score for that object. I totally agree that all the gamemodes should be similar, which is why I think this should be used for every gamemode (dunno enough about ctb to propose anything for that).
Of course that would need an accurate way to measure difficulty, but apparently, the score is a bigger problem than the star rating...
Of course that would need an accurate way to measure difficulty, but apparently, the score is a bigger problem than the star rating...
I take your side about changing the four gamemodes at once, but this would be a total meta change ! I don't know how all the players would react :/
The way star rating and judge works are bound to osu! and I'm afraid we will have to deal with it, that is why I was focusing on improving score
The way star rating and judge works are bound to osu! and I'm afraid we will have to deal with it, that is why I was focusing on improving score
Just include it as a continuous judgement mod then and let the devs play with whatever discrete scoring method they believe is best while not bothering the rest who see continuous judgement as betterAdri wrote:
I don't know how all the players would react :/
For some time I have been trying to get some information regarding what you guys thought about the score cap in osu!mania, and I finally found this reddit post where smoogipooo tells the scorecap should stay in place (those comments are 7month old so I don't know if they are still valid, but i'd still like to say things about this).
I will only be talking about the score cap in this post
First of all, i'd like to say that a lot of players are waiting for the score cap to be removed ; I don't know if this is true but in the mind of some people this was just a temporary setting, in the waiting of a proper scoring system to not break the game. If this is, well it might be time to seek for a balance ?
What I understand is that currently, the points in mania scorev2 (and scorev1) reflects "How well you did on a 1,000,000 base". From what I know, there is already what we call accuracy ranging from 0,00 to 100,00 and that we can nearly always expect to correlate along with the ranks (D,C,B,A,S,SS).
For example, from 650k to 700k we will be expecting an A and from 800k to 850k an S. The SS will usually stand from 985k (low 300/300g ratio) to 1M (perfectly insane score). This is basic meta and anyone learns it when reaching 2 stars difficulty, if not before.
This system in itself is very good for comparing scores on a map, like you had better accuracy but a lower score so maybe you had some combo breaks etc ..
The problem is that when comparing two scores on different beatmaps, this is quite unfair. Doing 985k FC on a 30sec 0.8* map does really not have the same value as 985k FC on a 4*+ 18minutes map, and still only pp differs. Why would we call "score" something that doesn't reflect how much effort we put on something ? This is more of a "scale" ...
But anyways, I have a solution to put on the table ;
We do not need the logarithmic scoring we see on standard or ctb, this is causing problems, i totally agree. We do not want to lose what is great in the current scoring system, a.k.a comparing scores on a map, having it tied to accuracy somewhat. We just need to give a better meaning to the scores. Peppy said himself in the coffee hour that in lazer, it wouldn't be about compatibility, so why bother keeping this cap that unbalances the scores ?
So, for the score to not be an exponential, we should just keep the combo cap as it is : It is balanced and works well, the meta is in place. But instead of calculating the score on a 1,000,000 scale, why not just give a fixed amount of score for each note depending on the judge and then apply a small combo bonus like there already is?
Each difficulty would still have a fixed maximum score, accuracy would still have a lot of impact and combo wouldn't be a game breaker in tournaments. Nothing great from v1 would be removed but the meaning would be given back to the score. Doing an FC on a 0.8* would give a small amount of points, like maybe 90 000 like in other gamemodes, and the FC of the 18 minutes map would be like 75 millions maybe ? I'm not doing the math, but i'm taking it as a reference since it has one of the (or the?) highest hitobject count in mania, showing that this doesn't go out of control like in standard. After all, this can be balanced to fit what you want to see in scores.
Quick recap of my proposition in (very) short (because it doesn't seem hard to apply), without all the argumentation. I know this might have been thought of but i wanted to express myself as you recommend players with an experience to reach out to you
- Give a fixed amount of score for each note depending on the judge (LN still separated as 2 notes), instead of doing a 1,000,000 scale
- Keep the current combo cap to avoid exponential scoring
What it takes from the game :
- Farming only easy maps to get a lot of ranked score
- Frustration of doing relatively small scores even when FCing a marathon
- Incomprehension of new players "Ahah he did better than you look at the score" ; When you hard cleared a 6* and the other picked some 2* (exagerating)
- A fixed scale from 0 to 1,000,000 that indicates the quality of a score, whatever difficulty it may be
What it adds to the game :
- Rewarding high score when doing a quality score on a hard and long map
- Sense of progression for new players "My scores are starting to weight a lot more, I am doing so much better now !"
- No more fixed scale, but we will still be able to know the quality of a score judging by how other people are clearing it. 90% will roughly have the same score values, as for 95%, 97%, 85% ...
- Some consistency regarding other gamemodes as well, who don't have caps !
I might not be exhaustive and this is a subjective post, but I think that many people think like me (Or closely). If you have anything to add or say, please do it, the more we talk the better it gets ...
I will only be talking about the score cap in this post
First of all, i'd like to say that a lot of players are waiting for the score cap to be removed ; I don't know if this is true but in the mind of some people this was just a temporary setting, in the waiting of a proper scoring system to not break the game. If this is, well it might be time to seek for a balance ?
What I understand is that currently, the points in mania scorev2 (and scorev1) reflects "How well you did on a 1,000,000 base". From what I know, there is already what we call accuracy ranging from 0,00 to 100,00 and that we can nearly always expect to correlate along with the ranks (D,C,B,A,S,SS).
For example, from 650k to 700k we will be expecting an A and from 800k to 850k an S. The SS will usually stand from 985k (low 300/300g ratio) to 1M (perfectly insane score). This is basic meta and anyone learns it when reaching 2 stars difficulty, if not before.
This system in itself is very good for comparing scores on a map, like you had better accuracy but a lower score so maybe you had some combo breaks etc ..
The problem is that when comparing two scores on different beatmaps, this is quite unfair. Doing 985k FC on a 30sec 0.8* map does really not have the same value as 985k FC on a 4*+ 18minutes map, and still only pp differs. Why would we call "score" something that doesn't reflect how much effort we put on something ? This is more of a "scale" ...
But anyways, I have a solution to put on the table ;
We do not need the logarithmic scoring we see on standard or ctb, this is causing problems, i totally agree. We do not want to lose what is great in the current scoring system, a.k.a comparing scores on a map, having it tied to accuracy somewhat. We just need to give a better meaning to the scores. Peppy said himself in the coffee hour that in lazer, it wouldn't be about compatibility, so why bother keeping this cap that unbalances the scores ?
So, for the score to not be an exponential, we should just keep the combo cap as it is : It is balanced and works well, the meta is in place. But instead of calculating the score on a 1,000,000 scale, why not just give a fixed amount of score for each note depending on the judge and then apply a small combo bonus like there already is?
Each difficulty would still have a fixed maximum score, accuracy would still have a lot of impact and combo wouldn't be a game breaker in tournaments. Nothing great from v1 would be removed but the meaning would be given back to the score. Doing an FC on a 0.8* would give a small amount of points, like maybe 90 000 like in other gamemodes, and the FC of the 18 minutes map would be like 75 millions maybe ? I'm not doing the math, but i'm taking it as a reference since it has one of the (or the?) highest hitobject count in mania, showing that this doesn't go out of control like in standard. After all, this can be balanced to fit what you want to see in scores.
Quick recap of my proposition in (very) short (because it doesn't seem hard to apply), without all the argumentation. I know this might have been thought of but i wanted to express myself as you recommend players with an experience to reach out to you
- Give a fixed amount of score for each note depending on the judge (LN still separated as 2 notes), instead of doing a 1,000,000 scale
- Keep the current combo cap to avoid exponential scoring
What it takes from the game :
- Farming only easy maps to get a lot of ranked score
- Frustration of doing relatively small scores even when FCing a marathon
- Incomprehension of new players "Ahah he did better than you look at the score" ; When you hard cleared a 6* and the other picked some 2* (exagerating)
- A fixed scale from 0 to 1,000,000 that indicates the quality of a score, whatever difficulty it may be
What it adds to the game :
- Rewarding high score when doing a quality score on a hard and long map
- Sense of progression for new players "My scores are starting to weight a lot more, I am doing so much better now !"
- No more fixed scale, but we will still be able to know the quality of a score judging by how other people are clearing it. 90% will roughly have the same score values, as for 95%, 97%, 85% ...
- Some consistency regarding other gamemodes as well, who don't have caps !
I might not be exhaustive and this is a subjective post, but I think that many people think like me (Or closely). If you have anything to add or say, please do it, the more we talk the better it gets ...
^ What you don't realize is that the score cap MUST be there because for long enough maps we run into this technical problem called an integer overflow. Exhibit A:
In fact this map would be unrankable, and quite sad that we can't have multi hour long ranked maps in std and ctb just because of this.
In fact this map would be unrankable, and quite sad that we can't have multi hour long ranked maps in std and ctb just because of this.
I am aware about this : I talked about it and this is why I proposed to keep the combo bonus cap as it is. If the scoring is not exponential an integer overflow would only happen on maps lasting hours at consistent speed. The only problem is the combo bonus going nuts ^^
I made this spreadsheet showing basically how I would see this system without cap, that restrains to be lower than 2bil points : https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/ ... sp=sharing
I set the values to something that seems logical to me, but it can be changed by anyone who wants to try some different balances.
on the bottom right i set the maximum scores for some amounts of hitcircles. Keep in mind that the largest map has 9250 hitcircles and that something like 65000 hitobjects crashes the game currently. So if the value for 65000 hitcircles done perfectly is still below the integer value, we should be fine for a looong run ...
I set the values to something that seems logical to me, but it can be changed by anyone who wants to try some different balances.
on the bottom right i set the maximum scores for some amounts of hitcircles. Keep in mind that the largest map has 9250 hitcircles and that something like 65000 hitobjects crashes the game currently. So if the value for 65000 hitcircles done perfectly is still below the integer value, we should be fine for a looong run ...
Uncapped maximum score still doesn't allow for useful comparisons between songs. In standard If someone gets an SS on something easy and gets 3m points, and someone plays a much harder song and gets a low B with 3m points, you can't compare those scores in any useful manner.
The whole idea of comparing scores between songs is silly and pointless to begin with. If there were an objective way to ACTUALLY measure difficulty between 2 songs, then it might make sense because you could use that value to help compare scores, but the current star rating system is woefully inadequate for this. And your solution of effectively setting the maximum number of points based on the number of hitobjects in a song will result in wildly different maximum scores for songs of similar overall difficulty making it useless even over a short difficulty range, let alone a large one. The number of notes in a song can vary greatly depending on the kind of patterns in a song, meaning that an unbound maximum score which only really depends on the number of notes is going to make comparing even scores on similarly difficult maps absolutely painful.
LN heavy maps will tend to have a lower overall density, and thus tend to be underrated in the current system (with exceptions when using mini LNs). BMS style patterns tend to be overrated due to higher average density even though I would argue that they are much easier to hit with a few exceptions.
Score itself is almost meaningless if you actually want to compare how well 2 people did on a map. You ignore the score and look at the actual number of judgements they got. Every rhythm game I've played has ignored the ingame score calculation when comparing actual plays because ingame scoring simply does not do a good job of simplifying a score down to a single overall value.
At least with the 1m score cap you can look at your score at a glance and have some idea of how well you did overall. The moment you introduce a variable maximum score, the ability to gauge how well you did on a song at a glance disappears. I'd say this is way more useful than trying to create a system that allows some way to "compare" scores between songs while removing what small benefits the current system has. It might suck (like every score system I've ever seen in a rhythm game), but the current system is at least useful for something.
The whole idea of comparing scores between songs is silly and pointless to begin with. If there were an objective way to ACTUALLY measure difficulty between 2 songs, then it might make sense because you could use that value to help compare scores, but the current star rating system is woefully inadequate for this. And your solution of effectively setting the maximum number of points based on the number of hitobjects in a song will result in wildly different maximum scores for songs of similar overall difficulty making it useless even over a short difficulty range, let alone a large one. The number of notes in a song can vary greatly depending on the kind of patterns in a song, meaning that an unbound maximum score which only really depends on the number of notes is going to make comparing even scores on similarly difficult maps absolutely painful.
LN heavy maps will tend to have a lower overall density, and thus tend to be underrated in the current system (with exceptions when using mini LNs). BMS style patterns tend to be overrated due to higher average density even though I would argue that they are much easier to hit with a few exceptions.
Score itself is almost meaningless if you actually want to compare how well 2 people did on a map. You ignore the score and look at the actual number of judgements they got. Every rhythm game I've played has ignored the ingame score calculation when comparing actual plays because ingame scoring simply does not do a good job of simplifying a score down to a single overall value.
At least with the 1m score cap you can look at your score at a glance and have some idea of how well you did overall. The moment you introduce a variable maximum score, the ability to gauge how well you did on a song at a glance disappears. I'd say this is way more useful than trying to create a system that allows some way to "compare" scores between songs while removing what small benefits the current system has. It might suck (like every score system I've ever seen in a rhythm game), but the current system is at least useful for something.
Comparing scores between songs is a very silly thing to do, yeah. The only leaderboards that matter on a particular chart are, well, that chart's leaderboards. Getting an SS on some mega-easy chart is of course a lot easier than getting an SS on a super hard chart, anyone can understand this.
With that in mind, "an uncapped score lets you compare between different charts more fairly" isn't a good argument at all. Capped scores have a lot of benefits (consistency in terms of being able to tell how well you're doing on any chart simply by looking at your score) with no arguable downsides.
With that in mind, "an uncapped score lets you compare between different charts more fairly" isn't a good argument at all. Capped scores have a lot of benefits (consistency in terms of being able to tell how well you're doing on any chart simply by looking at your score) with no arguable downsides.
ha. again. someone hit me with a brick plez
[quote="smoogipoo"]Hi all,
You may have noticed the ScoreV2 changes in the changelogs recently, with just over 7 weeks left until MWC begins we've released ScoreV2 for osu!mania in hopes that we can perfect the score system before the tournament. You will need to be on the Cutting Edge release stream to use this for now, but we will propagate it to all release streams (excluding fallback) when it is ready, just before MWC.
You'll be please to know that there are no more hidden multipliers and rounding issues have been eradicated, but that is not all. Let's go through a list of changes in this initial version:
not gud
You may have noticed the ScoreV2 changes in the changelogs recently, with just over 7 weeks left until MWC begins we've released ScoreV2 for osu!mania in hopes that we can perfect the score system before the tournament. You will need to be on the Cutting Edge release stream to use this for now, but we will propagate it to all release streams (excluding fallback) when it is ready, just before MWC.
You'll be please to know that there are no more hidden multipliers and rounding issues have been eradicated, but that is not all. Let's go through a list of changes in this initial version:
not gud
Sry, but i hope its never realised. I started playing mania for lack of combo influence
you picked the entirely wrong game for that one bro[ MasterSpark ] wrote:
Sry, but i hope its never realised. I started playing mania for lack of combo influence
Mucho texto
lets go boi