https://osu.ppy.sh/p/ppv2/ (not available for now)
forum
ppv2 testing
posted
Total Posts
117
Topic Starter
I assume Game Mode specific ppv2 is coming afterwards, right?
Just want to make sure.
Just want to make sure.
Before posting here, read the text at the top of the ppv2 page. Please. It's five lines.
edit: six now and possibly more later
edit: six now and possibly more later
OnosakiHito wrote:
I assume Game Mode specific ppv2 is coming afterwards, right?
Just want to make sure.
Just want to make sure too this is making me confuse anyways
I LIKE THIS
Shohei Ohtani
Also, I like this :3. How is this calculated differently from regular pp?MillhioreF wrote:
Before posting here, read the text at the top of the ppv2 page. Please. It's five lines.
Also, looking forward to CtB ppv2 rankings :3.
But one thing I'm confused about, is when it says "calculates based on all plays, no matter what rank". Like I'm probably just being 3AM mindset right now, but I'm not sure what this means.
ppv1 was considering scores from ~~#900 rank, ppv2 calculates all ranks (on beatmaps)CDFA wrote:
But one thing I'm confused about, is when it says "calculates based on all plays, no matter what rank". Like I'm probably just being 3AM mindset right now, but I'm not sure what this means.
Where is Cookiezi ?
Why am I on top 100 ?
The first pp system is good why change it ?
Why am I on top 100 ?
The first pp system is good why change it ?
Badis wrote:
Where is Cookiezi ?
Why am I on top 100 ?
MillhioreF wrote:
Before posting here, read the text at the top of the ppv2 page. Please. It's five lines.
farm hards and get high rank yeah... good.Badis wrote:
The first pp system is good why change it ?
I see my ppv2 is 55, and made fc an insane, it is still 55
is this normal? (as it's supposed to base on all plays..?
is this normal? (as it's supposed to base on all plays..?
Badis wrote:
Where is Cookiezi ?
Why am I on top 100 ?
The first pp system is good why change it ?
play once (and set a new personal record) to be listed here.Meaning that the rank you see right now will be different when everyone registeres in ppv2 (by setting new personal record)
It's hard to compare old vs new when everyone isn't listed. Can't you force it to recalculate at least players with a better than 100k rank on ppv1 ?peppy wrote:
play once (and set a new personal record) to be listed here.
Topic Starter
Inactive players will not be listed in ppv2. Anyone who hasn't played in a month will not appear.
I really curious on how this calculates..
My friend who has almost the same ppv1 rank as me (a bit behind me), has suddenly a lot higher ppv2 rank. Also he isn't better than me in many ways yet, he just has the patience to play old maps. On multiplayer I win 90% of time though :/
My friend who has almost the same ppv1 rank as me (a bit behind me), has suddenly a lot higher ppv2 rank. Also he isn't better than me in many ways yet, he just has the patience to play old maps. On multiplayer I win 90% of time though :/
I hope we'll get a better system than the previous one once againSilynn wrote:
Will we be able to see best performances at some point?
i plan on making the calculation method completely open.
i like that 
, if its almost flawless calculated no one will complain anymoreI don't get this new ranking system, I just FC 2 insanes and my PPv2 stays the same while my PPv1 goes up.
Syrus wrote:
I don't get this new ranking system, I just FC 2 insanes and my PPv2 stays the same while my PPv1 goes up.
ppv2 testing
testing
I was giving an example of why I don't get it, not complaining about it...Piotrekol wrote:
Syrus wrote:
I don't get this new ranking system, I just FC 2 insanes and my PPv2 stays the same while my PPv1 goes up.ppv2 testingtestingtesting
I don't really like this, a month is a really short time span. Sure, it's easy enough to get back in by submitting a score, but it still feels wrong.peppy wrote:
Inactive players will not be listed in ppv2. Anyone who hasn't played in a month will not appear.
Feedback on the ranking so far: SnowWhite has like 140ppv2 more than rrtyui, that doesn't seem right to me.
And it would be helpful to force a full import of all players even if inactive ones are not supposed to be shown, makes spotting possible flaws in the system so much easier.
Really excited and looking forward to the mode-specific pp ranking. Thanks for all the work, peppy
i went to country rankings and saw i was #2 then i realized sg wasn't the one above me
is the "change" how much ppv2 points you got in the last play?
is the "change" how much ppv2 points you got in the last play?
One month isn't enough, a full ranking list would be better than a 'active player ranking list' imo, unless it fucks up the pp calculations of active players somehow?
Topic Starter
The inactive players one isn't finalised, as with everything else.
if change is how much your last score changed your pp, i think you should change so that bad scores won't lower your rank...
(more incentive for multi)
(more incentive for multi)
Alternatively --- Can we have a list of our "worst" plays alongside "best" plays too (private list maybe)? Obviously it'll serve as a list of records players should "fix" and "improve" their plays onpielak213- wrote:
if change is how much your last score changed your pp, i think you should change so that bad scores won't lower your rank...
(more incentive for multi)
Topic Starter
top ranks will be available in the near future, as currently provided.
bad scores won't lower your rank. that's just recalculations since last ranked play.
i am in the process of calculating the top 20k players even if they haven't played.
bad scores won't lower your rank. that's just recalculations since last ranked play.
i am in the process of calculating the top 20k players even if they haven't played.
I have the feeling that Insane scores bring far more PPs than Hards now, right? Because I saw many people in the ranking, including me, having a much better rank than with PPv1 and playing regularly Insanes instead of farming Hards. If so, that's good news.
I don't know what, but something is really wrong
This was posted 5 hours ago, but seeing the thread already reached 2nd page makes me feel that I'm late by days... 
At first I didn't understand what "play once (and set a new personal record) to be listed here" means, until I noticed that I'm not in the list. *feels so derp on myself*
Can't wait to set myself a personal best score on a map just to see how I stand up on leaderboard. Does beating previous personal best work though? Because I read that as if it has to be a new score that was never set before.
Since ppv2 now focuses on all ranks per beatmap, won't that means the Accuracy stats counts everything from online score which is the same as the old Accuracy stats? Or is it weighted as well?
At first I didn't understand what "play once (and set a new personal record) to be listed here" means, until I noticed that I'm not in the list. *feels so derp on myself*
Can't wait to set myself a personal best score on a map just to see how I stand up on leaderboard. Does beating previous personal best work though? Because I read that as if it has to be a new score that was never set before.
Since ppv2 now focuses on all ranks per beatmap, won't that means the Accuracy stats counts everything from online score which is the same as the old Accuracy stats? Or is it weighted as well?
Holy! The pp amount is so much lower. It must be much harder to get pp to keep it that low. Granted my rank is technically higher than it was, but that doesn't seem correct.
I was thinking the same. That won't help reduce the load of "Help I still have no rank and PPs" in Technical Support, I supposeTheVileOne wrote:
Holy! The pp amount is so much lower. It must be much harder to get pp to keep it that low. Granted my rank is technically higher than it was, but that doesn't seem correct.
The top ranks look quite off at the moment.
I think almost everyone agrees that the top 3 should be Cookiezi, rrtyui, Niko
Right now, rrtyui is #5 and Niko #14. Niko is almost a thousand (!!!) ppv2 below the current #2, and with numbers being so low in general, that is a HUGE margin (like, literally a pp difference of 25%).
I think almost everyone agrees that the top 3 should be Cookiezi, rrtyui, Niko
Right now, rrtyui is #5 and Niko #14. Niko is almost a thousand (!!!) ppv2 below the current #2, and with numbers being so low in general, that is a HUGE margin (like, literally a pp difference of 25%).
calm down, people
it's in its testing phase
also, it's like he just admitted that the current official ranking system is obsolete :3c
it's in its testing phase
also, it's like he just admitted that the current official ranking system is obsolete :3c
Topic Starter
The raw value is flexible. I'll probably scale it to 10,000 eventually. Where the highest player will always be at 10,000.
peppy, this system is like tp system works? \:D/peppy wrote:
The raw value is flexible. I'll probably scale it to 10,000 eventually. Where the highest player will always be at 10,000.
nice btw
Seems so, yes. Most of my top 50 scores are Hards, some with DT.XPJ38 wrote:
I have the feeling that Insane scores bring far more PPs than Hards now, right?
v1 #2653
v2 #5592 and dropping
I was #2,6k because of the ridiculous amount of PP I got from gangnam style and boulevard of broken dreams, so at least things like that seem to be fixed now.
my rank is still a 3-digit value
i have nothing against this
does this mean farming will get harder?
i have nothing against this
does this mean farming will get harder?
Wouldn't that require complete re-calcs or something if Cookie improves his scores resulting in lowering everyone points due to the scaling nature? Also, losing points for improving 4D acc/combo OP.peppy wrote:
The raw value is flexible. I'll probably scale it to 10,000 eventually. Where the highest player will always be at 10,000.
Topic Starter
Basic things to note about calculation method:
Scores:
* Accuracy based, not score. The main metric here is comparing your accuracy to the average achieved for that map. If you are above average, you will get pp. How far above average decides how much you get.
* Currently does not consider max combo (will likely be factored in).
* DoubleTime +14% (but caps at 100% accuracy), HardRock +8%, Flashlight +6%, Hidden +5%. Please don't bitch about these; subject to change.
* S/SS +2%, Perfect +1%
* Scores are still normalised in a similar fashion to ppv1 – see the wiki for details on that.
Beatmap Weighting:
* Weighted based on days since rank, where anything over than 1 year is worth ~10% of newer maps. Very recent ranks will get an initial low value until enough scores have been set on them. this is a logarithmic scale, more details to come.
* Weighted based on OD (overall difficulty). 70% for 1, 140% for 10, linear.
* Weighted based on CS (circle size). 80% for 1, 120% for 10, linear.
* Weighted based on ratio of perfect plays (no combo break). Kinda complex math, details coming later.
* Weighted based on average accuracy achieved by all plays, excluding outliers, relative to all other maps. This is kind of the telling factor, and works very well in practice.
I urge any criticism of these calculation methods to be based on very general assumptions, as nothing is in stone, and what I have said about is oversimplifying. Though I am trying to keep things as simple as possible.
Also keep in mind that raw pp is still about as useless as before. This is why when passing a map, I hope to show an exact number rather than the overall pp increase. If you have read and understand the pp v1 system and how it weights scores, you will understand how useless watching your raw pp increase is, and will understand why I want to change this. You will be seeing the raw pp obtained for the map on passing it (if anything), not the post-weighted total.
Scores:
* Accuracy based, not score. The main metric here is comparing your accuracy to the average achieved for that map. If you are above average, you will get pp. How far above average decides how much you get.
* Currently does not consider max combo (will likely be factored in).
* DoubleTime +14% (but caps at 100% accuracy), HardRock +8%, Flashlight +6%, Hidden +5%. Please don't bitch about these; subject to change.
* S/SS +2%, Perfect +1%
* Scores are still normalised in a similar fashion to ppv1 – see the wiki for details on that.
Beatmap Weighting:
* Weighted based on days since rank, where anything over than 1 year is worth ~10% of newer maps. Very recent ranks will get an initial low value until enough scores have been set on them. this is a logarithmic scale, more details to come.
* Weighted based on OD (overall difficulty). 70% for 1, 140% for 10, linear.
* Weighted based on CS (circle size). 80% for 1, 120% for 10, linear.
* Weighted based on ratio of perfect plays (no combo break). Kinda complex math, details coming later.
* Weighted based on average accuracy achieved by all plays, excluding outliers, relative to all other maps. This is kind of the telling factor, and works very well in practice.
I urge any criticism of these calculation methods to be based on very general assumptions, as nothing is in stone, and what I have said about is oversimplifying. Though I am trying to keep things as simple as possible.
Also keep in mind that raw pp is still about as useless as before. This is why when passing a map, I hope to show an exact number rather than the overall pp increase. If you have read and understand the pp v1 system and how it weights scores, you will understand how useless watching your raw pp increase is, and will understand why I want to change this. You will be seeing the raw pp obtained for the map on passing it (if anything), not the post-weighted total.
Topic Starter
yes, which is why raw is pointless.JappyBabes wrote:
Wouldn't that require complete re-calcs or something if Cookie improves his scores resulting in lowering everyone points due to the scaling nature?
this is brilliant. FL deserves to diepeppy wrote:
Basic things to note about calculation method:
* DoubleTime +14% (but caps at 100% accuracy), HardRock +8%, Flashlight +6%, Hidden +5%. Please don't bitch about these; subject to change.
wth?peppy wrote:
* Weighted based on CS (circle size). 80% for 1, 120% for 10, linear.
Have you considered AR? AR does increase the overall difficulty of maps.peppy wrote:
Beatmap Weighting:
* Weighted based on days since rank
* Weighted based on OD (overall difficulty)
* Weighted based on CS (circle size)
* Weighted based on ratio of perfect plays (no combo break)
* Weighted based on average accuracy achieved by all plays, excluding outliers, relative to all other maps
Topic Starter
I'm purposely excluding AR for the time being. This may change. We'll see 
.
.Same thing for OD, OD10 is way, way, way more than double the difficulty of OD1.
And scaling map value by age is kinda stupid, they don't get less hard with age. I get that you want to encourage players to play more recent maps, but from the sounds of it, actually hard old maps will soon be worth only marginally more than a newly ranked Insane of average difficulty.
And scaling map value by age is kinda stupid, they don't get less hard with age. I get that you want to encourage players to play more recent maps, but from the sounds of it, actually hard old maps will soon be worth only marginally more than a newly ranked Insane of average difficulty.
the thing about ar is that its incredibly subjective, a lot of people can only play ar9+ while a lot of other people can only play ar 9-XPJ38 wrote:
Have you considered AR? AR does increase the overall difficulty of maps.peppy wrote:
Beatmap Weighting:
* Weighted based on days since rank
* Weighted based on OD (overall difficulty)
* Weighted based on CS (circle size)
* Weighted based on ratio of perfect plays (no combo break)
* Weighted based on average accuracy achieved by all plays, excluding outliers, relative to all other maps
which one would you rate harder? and what about below ar7? where the easy mod difficulty starts to kick in?
im 99% sure its the same as how it is currently, making it like how you think would make no senseLuna wrote:
Same thing for OD, OD10 is way, way, way more than double the difficulty of OD1.
And scaling map value by age is kinda stupid, they don't get less hard with age. I get that you want to encourage players to play more recent maps, but from the sounds of it, actually hard old maps will soon be worth only marginally more than a newly ranked Insane of average difficulty.