Guest
home
beatmaps
rankings
community
store
help
forum
  1. Forums
  2. osu!
  3. Development
  4. Feature Requests
  5. Completed Requests

Remove Bonus-pp feature

posted
Total Posts
19
This is a feature request. Feature requests can be voted up by supporters.
Current Priority: +929
Juuuuuuuuul
1,283 posts
Joined March 2018
Topic Starter
Juuuuuuuuul
Bonus-pp feature should be removed.
pp are for skill, bonus-pp have nothing related to skill.
Bonus-pp is not helping beginners, they don't even know it exist.
Free pp, undeserved pp, have no place in a competitive environment.

Remove it completely,
or replace it with some medals if you want to keep a feature that makes players
motivated about playing different maps.

That's all, thanks for reading and sorry if this is a duplicate thread.
Phantonym
462 posts
Joined May 2019
Phantonym
how about no
Juuuuuuuuul
1,283 posts
Joined March 2018
Topic Starter
Juuuuuuuuul

Phantonym wrote:

how about no
how about exposing your arguments ?
abraker
Global Moderator
8,327 posts
Joined July 2014
abraker

Juuuuuuuuul wrote:

pp are for skill, bonus-pp have nothing related to skill.
Bonus-pp is not helping beginners, they don't even know it exist.
Free pp, undeserved pp, have no place in a competitive environment.
this
clayton
1,917 posts
Joined November 2013
clayton
might want to comment on https://github.com/ppy/osu-performance/issues/118 ?
Juuuuuuuuul
1,283 posts
Joined March 2018
Topic Starter
Juuuuuuuuul
Thanks for the link,
but this issue on github is about capping the amount of bonus-pp
(and it's already capped).

My point is that the bonus-pp should not exist at all.

Performance points is about performance,
i'm perfectly fine with rewarding players for dedication, playing lots of maps,
but bonus-pp have nothing related with performance.

Actually, the bonus-pp's intention does not work as expected : it's not motivating players.
It's only making rank not accurate. (by A LOT for low rank players)

I don't own a github account, and don't even know how it work,
sorry about that, i'll keep discussing this issue here, on the official forums.
Last edited by Juuuuuuuuul , edited 1 time in total.
clayton
1,917 posts
Joined November 2013
clayton
yeah my github issue is about further capping it and not removing it, but we have the same intention, which is to make it 100% irrelevant at a competitive level. I'd want it entirely removed too but I suggested earlier score# cap (important distinction from just capping the amount of pp) first to field the idea hoping it would go somewhere lol
Last edited by clayton , edited 1 time in total.
Ikira
161 posts
Joined March 2015
Ikira
literally i never knew that bonus pp exists. Wew
So, i agree.
Bonus pp are so useless and unnecessary
Juuuuuuuuul
1,283 posts
Joined March 2018
Topic Starter
Juuuuuuuuul
Bump,
i still think that bonus-pp have no place in the performance point system.
chromb
Global Moderator
757 posts
Joined May 2017
chromb
I'd say that bonus-pp is a sensible addition. It's not like it's uncapped and you can get #1 from just bonus. I think it's a really good way to give motivation to play lots of different maps, instead of just playing the same 14 farm maps over and over again.
kujubuo
1,792 posts
Joined March 2021
kujubuo
I would say bonus pp would be useful if they actually tell people about the feature. Other than that its useless and i learned about it from osu wiki i didnt know it existed
Last edited by kujubuo , edited 1 time in total.
TicClick
Global Moderator
4,422 posts
Joined February 2011
TicClick
under normal circumstances, I see bonus pp as something which allows for competition between people playing equally "difficult" maps in different quantities. in this case, players who clear more maps "perform" better (thankfully, the word performance may be overloaded almost endlessly) and get more pp as a result

on a side note, if "pp are for skill", how come that certain maps yield insane amounts of pp, while requiring less amount of skill for their completion, compared to other maps, less difficult formally, but not practically? I agree that generally the more difficult a map is, the more pp it gives, but that's not a hard rule
Last edited by TicClick , edited 2 times in total.
THAT_otaku
Global Moderator
3,925 posts
Joined February 2018
THAT_otaku

chromb wrote:

I'd say that bonus-pp is a sensible addition. It's not like it's uncapped and you can get #1 from just bonus. I think it's a really good way to give motivation to play lots of different maps, instead of just playing the same 14 farm maps over and over again.
This^ as well as what TicClick said above.

It's not like bonus PP gives an unfair advantage to any type of player either, any one is capable of farming scores, so everyone could get to the bonus pp cap at some point. It encourages people "play more", the thing half the player base underestimates and doesn't do, therefore promoting improvement.

Juuuuuuuuul wrote:

Actually, the bonus-pp's intention does not work as expected : it's not motivating players.
It's only making rank not accurate. (by A LOT for low rank players)
I'd say the main reason for this is only because nobody knows about it :( I'd also say, if anything, its making their ranks more accurate, because the players who have played the game more, who will likely actually be better at the game) will be higher ranked.
clayton
1,917 posts
Joined November 2013
clayton

TicClick wrote:

under normal circumstances, I see bonus pp as something which allows for competition between people playing equally "difficult" maps in different quantities. in this case, players who clear more maps "perform" better [...] and get more pp as a result
this is already how it works without bonus pp

TicClick wrote:

on a side note, if "pp are for skill", how come that certain maps yield insane amounts of pp, while requiring less amount of skill for their completion, compared to other maps, less difficult formally, but not practically? I agree that generally the more difficult a map is, the more pp it gives, but that's not a hard rule
I feel like pointing out pp's other flaws isn't a great justification for keeping a subsystem that also does not work toward the goal of measuring performance...

chromb wrote:

I'd say that bonus-pp is a sensible addition. It's not like it's uncapped and you can get #1 from just bonus. I think it's a really good way to give motivation to play lots of different maps, instead of just playing the same 14 farm maps over and over again.
behavioral incentives unrelated to performance shouldn't come from a system designed to measure performance. even if you don't agree with that, bonus pp is so insignificant at a competitive level (takes 3k scores to go 300->400) that it's never an efficient strategy to work for it specifically.

THAT_otaku wrote:

It's not like bonus PP gives an unfair advantage to any type of player either, any one is capable of farming scores, so everyone could get to the bonus pp cap at some point. It encourages people "play more", the thing half the player base underestimates and doesn't do, therefore promoting improvement.
it's not unfair, just irrelevant to performance. responded to "encourages" part above

THAT_otaku wrote:

I'd also say, if anything, its making their ranks more accurate, because the players who have played the game more, who will likely actually be better at the game) will be higher ranked.
it's a system to measure performance, not infer or extrapolate it from other data. not to mention that's a very bold assumption, considering more bonus pp implies neither more experience nor more variety of maps played
TicClick
Global Moderator
4,422 posts
Joined February 2011
TicClick

clayton wrote:

I feel like pointing out pp's other flaws isn't a great justification for keeping a subsystem that also does not work toward the goal of measuring performance...
I know, that was in response to the opening post which presented it as an argument. as for your first point, is it still relevant even after each of the players gains enough scores? for example, if both players have their first ~200 top scores the same (I admit it's unrealistic, but still), then the long tail doesn't really make a difference regardless of its length (200 vs 1,000 and other cases), no?
abraker
Global Moderator
8,327 posts
Joined July 2014
abraker

TicClick wrote:

clayton wrote:

I feel like pointing out pp's other flaws isn't a great justification for keeping a subsystem that also does not work toward the goal of measuring performance...
I know, that was in response to the opening post which presented it as an argument. as for your first point, is it still relevant even after each of the players gains enough scores? for example, if both players have their first ~200 top scores the same (I admit it's unrealistic, but still), then the long tail doesn't really make a difference regardless of its length (200 vs 1,000 and other cases), no?
Even though it might not make a huge difference, I would appreciate pp if it were to guarantee to be accurate. Removing this bonus is quality of life improvement towards properly representing player skill.
Last edited by abraker , edited 1 time in total.
Juuuuuuuuul
1,283 posts
Joined March 2018
Topic Starter
Juuuuuuuuul
Bump,
i still think bonus-pp should disappear.
Juuuuuuuuul
1,283 posts
Joined March 2018
Topic Starter
Juuuuuuuuul
Hello there,

Since the last update about the changes to Performance Points, Bonus-pp is no longer an issue.
This thread may be marked as resolved and archived.

Thanks to everyone :)
AchsanLovers
988 posts
Joined April 2015
AchsanLovers
we are so back
Please sign in to reply.

New reply

0
1 / 19