my top scores
wat
Da Nu Nuttah isn't hard, I find lagomorphic's jumps harderRiince wrote:
lagomorph worth same pp as da nu nuttah lol
OD too stronk
even with the same accuracy, those DT scores would give more pp than the Nomod scores, which is just stupidCalignoBot wrote:
Your accuracy being lower in the non-DT scores doesn't exactly help anything.
You'd be surprised how much adding 1% to your score when your accuracy is that high can do to your pp.
You're undervaluing accuracy/overvaluing the difficulty of these maps imoZare wrote:
even with the same accuracy, those DT scores would give more pp than the Nomod scores, which is just stupidCalignoBot wrote:
Your accuracy being lower in the non-DT scores doesn't exactly help anything.
You'd be surprised how much adding 1% to your score when your accuracy is that high can do to your pp.
well i find da nu nuttah harder and thats just my opinionGoldenWolf wrote:
Da Nu Nuttah isn't hard, I find lagomorphic's jumps harderRiince wrote:
lagomorph worth same pp as da nu nuttah lol
OD too stronk
The point of buffing it would be exactly that. Making it worth it to play FL, because right now it is /heavily/ underrated. For a mod where you can not possibly get a sightread FC/SS without cheating, the fact that it isn't the most rewarding mod is ridiculous.-GN wrote:
Who plays FL for pp anyway? It's so ball-bustingly hard to pull off anything above 250pp that it's not worth it in any case. FL is played for interesting scores, not to get points for it, since anyone who wanted the latter would find more effective ways to get it than playing a single map 200 times to get some high rank.
It could probably use a small buff, just to make the FL scores stand even taller compared to HD/nomod plays, but other than that I don't get the point, honestly.
You're underestimating how hard it is to get a 2K+ combo. And, for that matter, anyone saying that World's End is overrated is /completely/ ignoring the ridiculously long spaced streams, the constant jumps that can sometimes get pretty damn big and the fact that it's a 6 minute+ beatmap. It is not overrated at all.pooptartsonas wrote:
However, it causes problems in the extreme case (~2500+ combo). The scaling on long maps continues to increase, meaning that a player can gain a significant amount of pp from a map that they will practically never miss on, given that it is long enough. This is clearly seen in the world's end map that pielak referenced earlier. The pp awarded is pretty clearly too high. With that said, I think the changes worked wonders for anything in the 1000-1500 combo range. The bonus for map length simply needs to begin to taper off around 2k combo, and I think the algorithm will be in an excellent spot in terms of accounting for map length.
this is still not a play-style that should be promoted. it isn't fun or interesting, and because it doesn't make the song harder in any technical aspect it provides a negligible pp bonus like hidden and that's how it should be. there's a difference between a maps difficulty and how hard it is to achieve the score, the second one isn't used in pp calculations.Tess wrote:
The point of buffing it would be exactly that. Making it worth it to play FL, because right now it is /heavily/ underrated. For a mod where you can not possibly get a sightread FC/SS without cheating, the fact that it isn't the most rewarding mod is ridiculous.
and you're underestimating the significance of 350+ PP. that's probably one of the easiest score Rucker has achieved on his top 10 yet it gives more pp than almost all of them.Tess wrote:
You're underestimating how hard it is to get a 2K+ combo. And, for that matter, anyone saying that World's End is overrated is /completely/ ignoring the ridiculously long spaced streams, the constant jumps that can sometimes get pretty damn big and the fact that it's a 6 minute+ beatmap. It is not overrated at all.
This is a really stupid thing to say, though. First of all, whether it's fun or interesting or not depends largely on the player. A lot of things that I find fun other players find unnecessarily hard or tedious, and vice versa. That doesn't change the fact that those maps deserve to be rewarded. Also, it does make the map harder because it makes it harder to read. That a map isn't faster or the map's settings don't change doesn't mean that it's not harder when you make 90% of it fucking invisible. Lastly, this line is particularly dumbRiince wrote:
this is still not a play-style that should be promoted. it isn't fun or interesting, and because it doesn't make the song harder in any technical aspect it provides a negligible pp bonus like hidden and that's how it should be. there's a difference between a maps difficulty and how hard it is to achieve the score, the second one isn't used in pp calculations.
I think you're confusing subjective difficulty with objective difficulty. Yes, if you happen to have trouble with squares, nailing a square jump in an easy map won't give you any pp, despite that score being difficult to achieve for you. But FL is difficult for everyone. Just like DT/HR aren't mods that just anyone can perform well with. So the difficulty in FL should give a significant pp bonus, especially since most players can't even play with it. People only hate FL because they suck at it, because it is hard.Riince wrote:
there's a difference between a maps difficulty and how hard it is to achieve the score
This doesn't nullify my statement, though. I said you're underestimating how hard the map is and you say you're not, but don't really give any reasonable explanation as to why. "It's the easiest score Rucker achieved on his top 10" - but what makes it easier? What about this map is easier than the others he played that gave him equal or less pp? Unless you actually answer that you're not really saying anything at all.Riince wrote:
and you're underestimating the significance of 350+ PP. that's probably one of the easiest score Rucker has achieved on his top 10 yet it gives more pp than almost all of them.
more or less what i meant by "not a play-style that should be promoted", thank you for saying thisDrezi wrote:
You see getting good FL scores requires specific practice on the given map, while learning the other mods gives you the ability to play them on any map, so it would be bad for everyone if getting high ranks would require you to practice individual maps with FL, instead of focusing on improving your general skillset.
From the wiki-Soba- wrote:
I feel like the difference between OD7, OD8, and OD9 for accuracy pp is too large. There's basically no difference between OD7 and OD8, and OD9 isn't that much harder. I don't think high OD's should be worth any more, but I think the lower OD's shouldn't be worth so much less.
even if the windows for getting 300 is smaller, most people are already clicking well within the OD8 window in OD7 anyway is the point I was making. I don't think OD8 maps should give so much more pp for free just because they're OD8.Tess wrote:
From the wiki-Soba- wrote:
I feel like the difference between OD7, OD8, and OD9 for accuracy pp is too large. There's basically no difference between OD7 and OD8, and OD9 isn't that much harder. I don't think high OD's should be worth any more, but I think the lower OD's shouldn't be worth so much less.
I disagree.
I'm pretty sure any actual high accuracy player would notice very little difference with anything below OD9.Tess wrote:
I can get >99% with OD9.8 maps and around 97-98% with OD10 and I still notice a difference between OD7/8/9/10. If you don't notice a difference you're just not paying attention. Even if you're a high accuracy player, if you try SSing 10 OD7 maps and then 10 OD8 maps subsequently, I can guarantee you that the 10 OD8 maps will take longer. Try it and prove me wrong.
pp is calculated only for your highest score because it's the only one the pp calculator actually has access to. Checking for lower-score, higher-pp plays would require storing all of your scores server-side, not just your highest one, which as you can imagine would dramatically increase server load. Tom's mentioned before that using the highest pp play (regardless of score) would be the best way, but is currently impossible for technical reasons.Woobowiz wrote:
I didn't really put much thought into this suggestion, but;
has it been previously suggested that top plays should be determined by more than just score and include accuracy in the equation?
A very crude example would be to multiply the score of the play with the accuracy.
I am aware of this, my point is that the difference is noticeable and it is evident that OD8 is harder than OD7 and OD9 harder than OD8 etc. Unless you can consistently get >99% on almost any OD10 map you should be able to notice the increase in OD. And even if you can't, that doesn't mean it's not there.GoldenWolf wrote:
I'm pretty sure any actual high accuracy player would notice very little difference with anything below OD9.
Also it will depends on the difficulty of the map, which is the first thing that prevents from SSing rather than the OD itself.
I'll sum it up in 1 post. Anyone can learn to FL FC a typical map in a week, throw them freedom dive however and it can take years (most likely forever). Effort shouldn't be rewarded because it's not raw skill, why would something half the population of osu! could do within a week be rewarded more than something less than 1% of the population could do in years..Tess wrote:
Also, I like how the FL topic got completely forgotten and replaced by "OD7=OD9" talk.
I sense Tess-challange v2 here ^^Tess wrote:
And no, not anyone can FC a typical map with FL in a week.
^I totally agree !Tess wrote:
When you play with HR, you get rewarded for the higher CS and OD. When you play with DT, you get rewarded for the higher speed and occasionally AR. When you play with HD, you get rewarded for the slight increase in aim difficulty. Why don't you get rewarded for combos with FL?
I believe Woobowiz is suggesting that the game incorporate accuracy into the score calculator before submitting scores to the server.XGeneral2000 wrote:
pp is calculated only for your highest score because it's the only one the pp calculator actually has access to. Checking for lower-score, higher-pp plays would require storing all of your scores server-side, not just your highest one, which as you can imagine would dramatically increase server load. Tom's mentioned before that using the highest pp play (regardless of score) would be the best way, but is currently impossible for technical reasons.Woobowiz wrote:
I didn't really put much thought into this suggestion, but;
has it been previously suggested that top plays should be determined by more than just score and include accuracy in the equation?
A very crude example would be to multiply the score of the play with the accuracy.
Having score directly scale with accuracy would be very reasonable (and most other rhythm games do this in some manner), but it's far too late to change the scoring system now - almost all of the song rankings would be significantly affected and there would be much angry mobbing. I think peppy's said before that if he could go back in time and make it differently, he would, but unfortunately we've got to deal with what we've got.Ethelon wrote:
I believe Woobowiz is suggesting that the game incorporate accuracy into the score calculator before submitting scores to the server.
Basically it's an attempt at getting the client to submit what's likely a higher pp worth due to accuracy instead of relying only on combo for score submission.
In the example he gives, his lower acc full combo score is higher than his higher acc full combo score (probably due to a spinner). But if you'd multiply the end score by accuracy, then it'd be the other way around.
I have no idea if it'd actually work in all situations.
I agree, but for that we need a change in scoring system (which I'd like to happen, but it's very improbably). BTW, did the stars system change modify the scoring system? (sorry for my bad english)Woobowiz wrote:
I didn't really put much thought into this suggestion, but;
has it been previously suggested that top plays should be determined by more than just score and include accuracy in the equation?
A very crude example would be to multiply the score of the play with the accuracy.
Here's an example.
After the change, the higher accuracy score would have been the top play (as it should be in my opinion).
Spinner is one of probabilities, but I have lots of cases that a 100 in a combo made a lot of difference only just because of the timing (position on combo) of the 100/50 score (and cases of better max combo and accuracy with lower score).Ethelon wrote:
I believe Woobowiz is suggesting that the game incorporate accuracy into the score calculator before submitting scores to the server.
Basically it's an attempt at getting the client to submit what's likely a higher pp worth due to accuracy instead of relying only on combo for score submission.
In the example he gives, his lower acc full combo score is higher than his higher acc full combo score (probably due to a spinner). But if you'd multiply the end score by accuracy, then it'd be the other way around.
I have no idea if it'd actually work in all situations.
The fact that you say you can get >99% on OD9.8 and only 97-98% on OD10 tells me something...the difference between that is pretty negligable. And as an accuracy player, I assure you pretty much the only way I'll get a 100 on OD7 or OD8 is by misreading the map or the map itself being hard. Once your accuracy gets good enough, they're both just free 300s.Tess wrote:
I can get >99% with OD9.8 maps and around 97-98% with OD10 and I still notice a difference between OD7/8/9/10. If you don't notice a difference you're just not paying attention. Even if you're a high accuracy player, if you try SSing 10 OD7 maps and then 10 OD8 maps subsequently, I can guarantee you that the 10 OD8 maps will take longer. Try it and prove me wrong.