It's not an issue if it's intentional so this is the correct forum:theowest wrote:
Sounds more like an issue than a feature.
Try this forum: http://osu.ppy.sh/forum/5
Dafuq!Anyways supporting this!Sakura wrote:
Reminds me of that guy that got a map ranked without spinners and wanted to be informed by the BAT when they ranked their map so that he could take place #1 forever.
Only the record with most score counts.BRBP wrote:
is PP only looking at the scores and ranks? For example, I got roughly a 6m score on a song, didn't get any PP, but when I got 5,7m in the same song with Nightcore, it gave me PP.
Back to the real topic: Support
This situation never ever happens.ArmandoR wrote:
But then the system would have to take in account all the tied scores, and not just simple ranks. For this you would have to compare every single score from rank 1 to 500. Lets say that those 500 ranks are tied in 1st place, then the ranks would be #1, #1, #1...#501. I can see this will have issues everywhere... But its fair. However, those cases are rare, except in easy maps that dont give pp at all, but its fair. Anyways i support it...
It does on really easy Easy diffs with no spinners, you get 200+ all-mod SS scores.Kyou-kun wrote:
This situation never ever happens.
I AGREE SO MUCH.... LETS MAKE IT FAIR AND SQUARE...deadbeat wrote:
pretty much this. is someone's score is equal to another. then pp should be given equallyTom69 wrote:
I support this. Seems fair.
http://osu.ppy.sh/s/35952Kyou-kun wrote:
This situation never ever happens.
Is that really adding the feature? He said it awards based on the date achieved. That still doesn't necessarily mean that they are getting equal pp for it, and sounds more like the person who set the score first will gain more pp (as was already in place, though appeared to be glitched), so I think it isn't accurate to say it was added already.deadbeat wrote:
[peppy] Fix pp inaccuracy when tied #1 ranks are involved (now correctly awards based on date achieved).
more or less added
But it isn't what I requesteddeadbeat wrote:
people have all ways been rewarded more for doing something first.
i think its fine like this
You should probably rename performance points then, seeing as you're not willing to give identical pp to identical performances. Also, date is not correct. If a player signs up but ties on a #1 within a few months of playing for example, and the original player in #1 has been playing for 2 years prior, why does the other #1 have less value?peppy wrote:
By date is correct.
deadbeat wrote:
is someone's score is equal to another. then pp should be given equally
loldeadbeat wrote:
people have all ways been rewarded more for doing something first.
i think its fine like this
it was deadbeatMillhioreF wrote:
It's already in the Completed Requests forum, I can't move it back. And besides, I think it was peppy who marked it as added, so there's no going back on his word!
My GAH.... WHY?MillhioreF wrote:
Oh okay, uhhhhhh... hmm. This definitely wasn't added, and it doesn't look like peppy wants to add it, so I'll change it to invalid, I guess? It's the most I can do at this point.
Soooo many stars, eh? 