You don't get TP at all from easy/hards so it's not farmable.Ultrayano wrote:
Only my Opinion, but I think, that Osu!tp is only the small form from the PPv1 System ... in PPv1 you gained Points for Ranks under 1000 and it was Easy to Farm with Easy-HardsSoarezi wrote:
Peppy, why don't you do work with tom and make TP the main ranking system? I'm pretty sure TP would be even better if you'd participate in it.
In Osu!tp you gain tp for be in the Top 50 in a Map ...
All Skilled Players will play normal, but all not so good Players (The Players who can't reach Top 50 in a Insane (Like me)) will farm Easy's and Normal's, maybe Hards
PPv1 was Easy to farm and Osu!tp would it be also if it would be the primary System
^Yeah, my English is bad
---------------------------------------
Haha PP are Hidden ... i laughed so hard, when I saw this
forum
As a reply to the previously locked thread
posted
Total Posts
152
Soarezi
Soarezi wrote:
You don't get TP at all from easy/hards so it's not farmable.
Touhosu?peppy wrote:
Let's just leave it at this: Introducing change is *hard*. Even if you are making completely forward and beneficial progress, you are still going to piss a group off. people will still get pissed off when I restore the ranking later this week (roughly half of you, who had your rank decreased). I don't really have anything for you in this situation except to persevere as Rewben2 says. Learn and adapt; it's a very good skill to have.
Also be goddamn excited. I have some interesting stuff planned and you should lighten up, calm down, and osu! on.
i believe
Easy/normal top 50s are only effective for getting your first few tp points. After you get to around the 1500~ tp points at least, getting a top 50 score is pretty easy and it's more about how hard it is to actually get the score.Ultrayano wrote:
I don't think tp is a good system because it only works for anyone higher than rank 1000 and isn't optimized for lower ranks.
It would be easier to get tp for low ranked players but it wouldn't be much easier for high ranked players since most scores are in the top 50 and even if you got a sub rank 50 score, other people would also get sub rank 50 scores which would equalize all the ranks.Ultrayano wrote:
Soarezi wrote:
PPv1 was Easy to farm and Osu!tp would it be also if it would be the primary System
There are pros and cons to many different sorts of ranking systems, and developing a solid one is an extremely difficult affair. TP seems promising, certainly, but it has serious issues with lower-level players, as stated above.
I've seen the backend of ppv2 being worked on and I personally felt it was a lot more accurate than ppv1, which was flawed in a number of ways (specifically regarding mod weighting). I've looked at the code for both, and ppv2 is much better, much more fluid, and makes a lot more sense. Trust me, when it's finished and comes into general use, I can see a lot of people enjoying it a lot more over than simply farming Hard difficulties for pp, even if a lot of people do take a fairly huge initial ranking hit from the reconfiguration.
ppv2 is just overall a lot better than I think a lot of people can readily gauge at this point, given that the public was only given a tiny, tiny glimpse into a half-finished system that was kind of ass-backwards at the time. Have some faith!
I've seen the backend of ppv2 being worked on and I personally felt it was a lot more accurate than ppv1, which was flawed in a number of ways (specifically regarding mod weighting). I've looked at the code for both, and ppv2 is much better, much more fluid, and makes a lot more sense. Trust me, when it's finished and comes into general use, I can see a lot of people enjoying it a lot more over than simply farming Hard difficulties for pp, even if a lot of people do take a fairly huge initial ranking hit from the reconfiguration.
ppv2 is just overall a lot better than I think a lot of people can readily gauge at this point, given that the public was only given a tiny, tiny glimpse into a half-finished system that was kind of ass-backwards at the time. Have some faith!
Sorry but you have to play this game to make a system that's goodEphemeral wrote:
There are pros and cons to many different sorts of ranking systems, and developing a solid one is an extremely difficult affair. TP seems promising, certainly, but it has serious issues with lower-level players, as stated above.
I've seen the backend of ppv2 being worked on and I personally felt it was a lot more accurate than ppv1, which was flawed in a number of ways (specifically regarding mod weighting). I've looked at the code for both, and ppv2 is much better, much more fluid, and makes a lot more sense. Trust me, when it's finished and comes into general use, I can see a lot of people enjoying it a lot more over than simply farming Hard difficulties for pp, even if a lot of people do take a fairly huge initial ranking hit from the reconfiguration.
ppv2 is just overall a lot better than I think a lot of people can readily gauge at this point, given that the public was only given a tiny, tiny glimpse into a half-finished system that was kind of ass-backwards at the time. Have some faith!
/s
I have to say, that those issues rise pretty much completely from only having top50 scores to work with. Lower level players don't get any tp for 99.9% of their scores, sadly.Ephemeral wrote:
There are pros and cons to many different sorts of ranking systems, and developing a solid one is an extremely difficult affair. TP seems promising, certainly, but it has serious issues with lower-level players, as stated above.
EDIT: And on a side note most inaccuracies could be fixed if per-hitobject data was available (which peppy stated he plans on doing in the api github, looking forward!
).Rewben2 wrote:
Sorry but you have to play this game to make a system that's good
/s
What Ephemeral said is really reassuring to me that ppv2 will be good.Ephemeral wrote:
Have some faith!
And due to the obvious top50 problem, lower level players can also rank higher than mediocre players just by playing all the new maps as they come out to get their scores on tp. The degree to which this is done varies between players and it's what makes anyone other than high-ranked players inaccurate.Pancake wrote:
I have to say, that those issues rise pretty much completely from only having top50 scores to work with. Lower level players don't get any tp for 99.9% of their scores, sadly.
the "obvious top50 problem" could be easily solved and make TP way more viable than pp or ranked score ever were. too bad. ^^
Zeraph wrote:
the "obvious top50 problem" could be easily solved and make TP way more viable than pp or ranked score ever were. too bad. ^^
I don't really agree with the premise that properly creating a ranking for your own game requires you to play it at a quasi-professional level. The rulesets are clear and ranking assessments can be made objectively on raw data alone without introducing arbitrary multipliers and other shonky things that are based purely on "experience" over any tangible representation in the game's mechanics.
Playing the game to that degree certainly infers a degree of knowledge about said mechanics, but it's not everything. I think you should rest assured that peppy does have your best interests at heart in this new ranking system that's on the way and is not doing it purely to ruin your day, but rather to improve the nature of competitive play overall - even if it seems a bit unfair or shaky during its initial implementation.
Playing the game to that degree certainly infers a degree of knowledge about said mechanics, but it's not everything. I think you should rest assured that peppy does have your best interests at heart in this new ranking system that's on the way and is not doing it purely to ruin your day, but rather to improve the nature of competitive play overall - even if it seems a bit unfair or shaky during its initial implementation.
Let's wait on PPv2 and see how it is 
It's the same with the Designs of YT ...
At the begin all said "What a shit Design" then it change again and then "No, we want the old back" xD
It's the same with the Designs of YT ...
At the begin all said "What a shit Design" then it change again and then "No, we want the old back" xD
Bad example, I still want the old 2007 design back, everything past that was shit hahaUltrayano wrote:
Let's wait on PPv2 and see how it is
It's the same with the Designs of YT ...
At the begin all said "What a shit Design" then it change again and then "No, we want the old back" xD
But yeah, just give ppv2 a chance.
The problem is, that what most players consider "skill" is not represented very well in an objective way within the game's mechanics. People often talk about aim, speed, jumps and so on, yet the only objective data available are the amount of 300s, 100s, 50s and misses... and score. Accuracy can be inferred.Ephemeral wrote:
I don't really agree with the premise that properly creating a ranking for your own game requires you to play it at a quasi-professional level. The rulesets are clear and ranking assessments can be made objectively on raw data alone without introducing arbitrary multipliers and other shonky things that are based purely on "experience" over any tangible representation in the game's mechanics.
Reverse engineering the performance out of said amounts of 300s, 100s, 50s and misses is impossible to do without error, due to the fact, that per-hitobject information is lost and you can therefore not know whether for instance most 300s come from a hard part of a map or from an easy part.
That's where "arbitrary multipliers and other shonky things that are based purely on "experience"" come into play for somehow approximating what many people call skill.
To make things worse, often aim and speed are considered different skills, making it even harder to properly extract them from a score, if one wishes to do so.
I personally wish tp would work without arbitrary multipliers and such - even without seperating skills into "aim" or "speed" or whatever -, but so far I have failed to build such an algorithm, that would even remotely satisfy most people.
Regarding ppv2, from what I have read on how it works it indeed sounds very promising to me. I'm not trying to badmouth it or anything.
True but a lot of ppl who said Google+ is shit, like it now ... it's the same ... all have different opinionsLuna wrote:
Bad example, I still want the old 2007 design back, everything past that was shit hahaUltrayano wrote:
Let's wait on PPv2 and see how it is
It's the same with the Designs of YT ...
At the begin all said "What a shit Design" then it change again and then "No, we want the old back" xD
But yeah, just give ppv2 a chance.
But yeah let's give a chance
I still think input from those higher ranked players is valuable. As a player who plays mostly with Hard Rock, I can tell you that the increase in difficulty with respect to accuracy is beyond what I could have imagined when I was a new player. Yes, you can look at data, but it's really hard to understand some of the finer parts of the game without some experience. This showed up to some extent in the iterations of ppv2 that have been publicized so far: the HD+HR players consistently took a big hit in rank. During the iteration where it showed the top ranks, none of my HD+HR scores were in there despite almost all of my best scores using that particular mod combination.Ephemeral wrote:
I don't really agree with the premise that properly creating a ranking for your own game requires you to play it at a quasi-professional level. The rulesets are clear and ranking assessments can be made objectively on raw data alone without introducing arbitrary multipliers and other shonky things that are based purely on "experience" over any tangible representation in the game's mechanics.
Playing the game to that degree certainly infers a degree of knowledge about said mechanics, but it's not everything. I think you should rest assured that peppy does have your best interests at heart in this new ranking system that's on the way and is not doing it purely to ruin your day, but rather to improve the nature of competitive play overall - even if it seems a bit unfair or shaky during its initial implementation.
With that said, the fact that the current calculations are only a glimpse of what is to come does give me a lot more confidence in the new system. If the mod multipliers and map difficulty issues can get sorted out, hopefully it truly can be an improvement on pp. I'll withhold any further criticism until the rankings are made final.
No one cares of pp anyway so no need for a ruckus. Most people only care of (and I agree that they only should care of) tp as it is.
This post is interesting to me, because I gained many pp from new maps that were ranked within these last months...peppy wrote:
If they play for competition, they should have quite over the last few months. There was no way to make pp on new maps, after all.
I know someone who lost all motivation to play because pp was removed because he was close to top 50. Not me.blahpy wrote:
No one cares of pp anyway so no need for a ruckus. Most people only care of (and I agree that they only should care of) tp as it is.This post is interesting to me, because I gained many pp from new maps that were ranked within these last months...peppy wrote:
If they play for competition, they should have quite over the last few months. There was no way to make pp on new maps, after all.
Osu!tp is good, but if it is truly accurate, we should see jappy in top 20 of 2013. I hopped over to the voting thread, and couldnt see any votes for him.
I again suggest allowing TP rank to count more than just top 50 (how about top 300?500? w/e) via once-a-week (2 weeks?) updates as not to kill the database, server or w/e related to the scores. Then those who prefer TP rank will just go with it and not complain about PP so much, we can see the points of view differ totally (I also don't agree with ppy). I think this is a win-win situation unless you find TP rank a threat to outrun PP in terms of popularity.
Also I voted for Jappy :<
Osu!tp is good, but if it is truly accurate, we should see jappy in top 20 of 2013. I hopped over to the voting thread, and couldnt see any votes for him.Lemme quote the key phrase lewa said in the first post of the voting thread. (It's now deleted)
The community voice
COMMUNITYPeople there were voting for SiLviA even though his 2013 playcount is under 100. I'd say the voting is more inaccurate than the TP lol
Also I voted for Jappy :<
heil mouseAmaiHachimitsu wrote:
People there were voting for SiLviA even though his 2013 playcount is under 100. I'd say the voting is more inaccurate than the TP lol
Also I voted for Jappy :<
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wisdom_of_the_crowdAmaiHachimitsu wrote:
People there were voting for SiLviA even though his 2013 playcount is under 100. I'd say the voting is more inaccurate than the TP lol
Also I voted for Jappy :<
learn it, love it
i also voted for jappy
To be honest i'd be happy if PPV2 took some influence from osu!tp's way of calucating difficulty and giving points based on that. The whole problem with PPV1 is that difficulty wasn't relevant. A ranking system that gives out points based on map popularity and other factors that aren't relevant to the actual difficulty of the beatmap is not how you calculate the rank of a player. It was very inaccurate for calculating the actual skill of a player.
AmaiHachimitsu wrote:
I again suggest allowing TP rank to count more than just top 50 (how about top 300?500? w/e)
It would make it more appealing and easier to climb for casuals/worse players (who can't get top 50 in songs) though.
Edit: the hammer of stupidity has struck
please learn how a system works before assuming things. oh wait, this whole topic's existance is based on assuming things before knowing how a system works, oh wellRewben2 wrote:
Ehh, one of the reasons I think it's good being top 50 is because it takes skill to get top 50 in most songs (easy/norms are pretty easy but they are also toned down in terms of how much tp they give). That being said, turning it up to 300-500 would make it quite easy for a lot of people to get osutp for songs, and it would become farmable in a way. Instead of working hard to get ranks that take time to get, you can just play tons of different songs a few times, get rank 400~ and earn a lot of tp, hence getting a high rank. This would put you ahead of the people who work hard for getting lower ranks, because getting a lot of easier ranks is easier (and less time consuming for some) than getting a single good score.AmaiHachimitsu wrote:
I again suggest allowing TP rank to count more than just top 50 (how about top 300?500? w/e)
It would make it more appealing and easier to climb for casuals/worse players (who can't get top 50 in songs) though.
tp scores are weighted, by the time you get to score #20 its worth like 1tp, so farming hundreds of maps all worth 20 tp still wont get you past someone who only has 5 scores worth 100 each
Lolwut? One of the problems with tp is that it's difficult for low ranked players.Rewben2 wrote:
Ehh, one of the reasons I think it's good being top 50 is because it takes skill to get top 50 in most songs (easy/norms are pretty easy but they are also toned down in terms of how much tp they give). That being said, turning it up to 300-500 would make it quite easy for a lot of people to get osutp for songs, and it would become farmable in a way. Instead of working hard to get ranks that take time to get, you can just play tons of different songs a few times, get rank 400~ and earn a lot of tp, hence getting a high rank. This would put you ahead of the people who work hard for getting lower ranks, because getting a lot of easier ranks is easier (and less time consuming for some) than getting a single good score.AmaiHachimitsu wrote:
I again suggest allowing TP rank to count more than just top 50 (how about top 300?500? w/e)
It would make it more appealing and easier to climb for casuals/worse players (who can't get top 50 in songs) though.
My bad, I'm just working with what I know.silmarilen wrote:
please learn how a system works before assuming things. oh wait, this whole topic's existance is based on assuming things before knowing how a system works, oh well
tp scores are weighted, by the time you get to score #20 its worth like 1tp, so farming hundreds of maps all worth 20 tp still wont get you past someone who only has 5 scores worth 100 each
So for clarification, the amount of tp you get from a map goes down the more maps you have? Sorry, the way you explained it doesn't make sense to me.
As he rightfully should.Zeraph wrote:
silmarilen bringing down the hammer on stupidity.
I said that?Almost wrote:
Lolwut? One of the problems with tp is that it's difficult for low ranked players.
http://osutp.net/info http://osutp.net/info http://osutp.net/info http://osutp.net/info http://osutp.net/info http://osutp.net/info http://osutp.net/infoRewben2 wrote:
My bad, I'm just working with what I know.silmarilen wrote:
please learn how a system works before assuming things. oh wait, this whole topic's existance is based on assuming things before knowing how a system works, oh well
tp scores are weighted, by the time you get to score #20 its worth like 1tp, so farming hundreds of maps all worth 20 tp still wont get you past someone who only has 5 scores worth 100 each
So for clarification, the amount of tp you get from a map goes down the more maps you have? Sorry, the way you explained it doesn't make sense to me.
http://osutp.net/info http://osutp.net/info http://osutp.net/info http://osutp.net/info http://osutp.net/info http://osutp.net/info http://osutp.net/info
http://osutp.net/info http://osutp.net/info http://osutp.net/info http://osutp.net/info http://osutp.net/info http://osutp.net/info http://osutp.net/info
lets say you have some scoresRewben2 wrote:
My bad, I'm just working with what I know.silmarilen wrote:
please learn how a system works before assuming things. oh wait, this whole topic's existance is based on assuming things before knowing how a system works, oh well
tp scores are weighted, by the time you get to score #20 its worth like 1tp, so farming hundreds of maps all worth 20 tp still wont get you past someone who only has 5 scores worth 100 each
So for clarification, the amount of tp you get from a map goes down the more maps you have? Sorry, the way you explained it doesn't make sense to me.
first giving 90 aim, 2nd 80 aim
and so on
what happens now is that the tp each of the maps gives is (actual tp)*0.85^(rank-1) (i think, could also just be rank)
so that means the 2nd score only gives 80*0.85^1m or 80*0.85 tp to each stat, by the time you get to rank 20 (lets assume its worth 30 in each stat) it would be 30*0.85^19, which is 1.36, so its pretty much worthless already.
if your 200th rank had 20tp, it would be 20*0.85^199 which is less than 1 billionth.
It says it adds the aim/speed/accuracy for a score. Ok yeah, I follow.Zeraph wrote:
http://osutp.net/info http://osutp.net/info http://osutp.net/info http://osutp.net/info http://osutp.net/info http://osutp.net/info http://osutp.net/info
http://osutp.net/info http://osutp.net/info http://osutp.net/info http://osutp.net/info http://osutp.net/info http://osutp.net/info http://osutp.net/info
http://osutp.net/info http://osutp.net/info http://osutp.net/info http://osutp.net/info http://osutp.net/info http://osutp.net/info http://osutp.net/info
The last step after computing score rating is to collect all of the aim, speed and accuracy scores from every player. The scores are then sorted decreasingly by their value and the best ones form each player's tp rating in aim, speed or accuracy respectively. To make it clear: aim, speed and accuracy ratings are calculated separately.It gets the scores from all players and sorts them decreasingly, so whoever does better has a higher score. So that means that that if people were ranked #300 or so in osutp, they would have to be getting little points?
Each player's total tp rating is simply the sum of his/her aim, speed and accuracy rating.
Yeah, the link doesn't explain how its weighted, which is what I don't know.
No you didn't?Rewben2 wrote:
I said that?Almost wrote:
Lolwut? One of the problems with tp is that it's difficult for low ranked players.
Thankyou, a response that actually explains why you would be getting so little points. The link http://osutp.net/info doesn't explain that anywhere, all it says is "we add them together to get a score and whoever did better gets more", which really doesn't explain the weighted thing at all.silmarilen wrote:
lets say you have some scores
rating in aim speed and acc
90 90 90
80 80 80
and so on
what happens now is that the tp each of the maps gives is (actual tp)*0.85^(rank-1) (i think, could also just be rank)
so that means the 2nd score only gives 80*0.85^1m or 80*0.85 tp to each stat, by the time you get to rank 20 (lets assume its worth 30 in each stat) it would be 30*0.85^19, which is 1.36, so its pretty much worthless already.
if your 200th rank had 20tp, it would be 20*0.85^199 which is less than 1 billionth.
Almost wrote:
No you didn't?
Rewben2 wrote:
It would make it more appealing and easier to climb for casuals/worse players (who can't get top 50 in songs) though.
I'm implying that it's harder for low ranked players...Rewben2 wrote:
it takes skill to get top 50 in most songs
As much as I'm sure ppv2 system will be one very bad system when released(hope I am wrong), you guys should hold your complaints for when it's actually released.I don't know how to say it, there is a really high chance it will suck but at least give it a try and then complain about it, please.Also don't make up facts like "every next release is bad and it just doesn't feel like it's worth it", I don't remember peppy saying anything about different releases, there is just going to be one release, hopefully by the end of the week.
at least the topic is on tp and not children whining that their numbers are getting replaced with different numbers
Rewben2 wrote:
Almost wrote:
No you didn't?Rewben2 wrote:
It would make it more appealing and easier to climb for casuals/worse players (who can't get top 50 in songs) though.I'm implying that it's harder for low ranked players...Rewben2 wrote:
it takes skill to get top 50 in most songs
Read what I wrote...Almost wrote:
One of the problems with tp is that it's difficult for low ranked players.