Performance Points feedback and suggestions (Standard)

posted
Total Posts
2,647
show more
PKrab
So ive been playing for quite a while but took a break from playing for a bit and when I just now came back my pp for standard has reset to 0. strange because im level 92 with tons of good plays on my account? some feedback would help, maybe there was an update and im just looking at things wrong
Vuelo Eluko

PKrab wrote:

So ive been playing for quite a while but took a break from playing for a bit and when I just now came back my pp for standard has reset to 0. strange because im level 92 with tons of good plays on my account? some feedback would help, maybe there was an update and im just looking at things wrong
Ratikell
I honestly don't have the skill or capacity to rate this. But I don't really think the system needs to be changed. Its good in itself.
daze16
It seems to me that some of the metrics in the PP system are extremely abuseable, and end up shaping the meta significantly (people play what gives PP, people map what people play, so people map for PP). The 2 main culprits for metrics that affect this are max combo, and misses.

The PP system values misses evenly independantly of the number of objects in a map, using the formula 0.97^m (at least, this is the last value I saw, and what I have seen seems to reflect this fairly closely). If I play a short PP farm map with 150 objects, and miss 10% of them (effectively butchering the map, 15 total for the short map), my PP drops by 63%. A fairly significant loss, but if the base PP is high, retaining 37% of this base value can steal lead to a decent play. If I play a long map such as Yomi Yori Kikoyu, there are 3070 objects. If I miss 10% of them, I am essentially playing the map as well as the above map, which is 307 misses in this case (not even accounting for fatigue, you will likely miss an even higher % of notes in the longer song due to fatigue, yet instead of this being accounted for, it is punished, severely).

In this case, however, instead of retaining 37% of my PP, I retain less than 1% (I believe there ends up being a lower floor, or somthing similar, but this is hit long before 307 misses). In order to have the same effect as the shorter map, I would have to miss only 15 notes here as well. On the short map, hitting 90% of notes is equivalent to a 99.5% hit rate on the longer map.

The solution for this would be to have PP be effected by misses based on percentage misses as opposed to flat number of misses. An example suggestion of an adjusted formula could be:
(1-(30/max notes))^m



The other culprit (combo), is an even more abuseable metric, for 2 seperate reasons (length, and consistency). If a song has difficulty spikes spaced evenly throughout it, you will likely combo break periodically, never retaining a significant combo (significant meaning 50% of a song, as 50% of a song causes you to lose ~43% of your PP, and going below this causes huge losses). This means a PP map with 200 easy notes and 20 hard notes, with the 20 hard notes all at the end will allow players to miss almost all of the hard part, and still retain 90% combo, causing large PP gains, whereas a map that has 20 hard notes in bursts of 5 in 4 separate places a player may hit the same easy notes, and miss the same hard notes, but where the first player would only lose 8% of a songs base PP, the second player would lose 73% of it. This is not even accounting for the second point, length.

If a player hits the same portion of notes on a long song and a short song, you can expect their max combo to increase roughly with the log of the songs length, yet the formula expects this value to increase linearly. (It is way easier to hit a 75 note combo on a 150 note song than a 1500 note combo on a 3000 note song, just from an intuitive perspective, yet these award equal pp).

The solution to combo is to remove it from the PP calculations altogether. I realize that this might seem to be rather poor feedback, but for the above reasons I believe that combo is essentially impossible to gauge as to how it reflects a players performance, and mappers simply end up mapping short songs with 80% of the song being super easy and the last 20% being a massive diff spike to abuse this system.



In addition to the above 2 points, since short maps can be played much more quickly, more attempts in a similar period of time means you get more chances for a good run. I can play a 1 minute map 5 times in the same time I can play a 5 minute map, so it should be expected that a run on a 5 minute map would give more PP than a similar performance run on a 1 minute map (reward to time spend ration should be similar). The PP calculation for song length is shaped sort of like a graph with the formula 1/x^n. I'm not sure the exact values, but this could likely be tweaked a little bit so diminishing returns from extra PP from long songs tapers off a little slower.



The current meta focuses on very short songs with 75-80% easy sections, and short diff spikes at the end. It feels a bad that top 50 plays on the Promethean kings are giving single digit PP (1 play even giving 0 pp), and a DT play on Harumachi Clover where you miss 10 or 15 notes can give triple digit PP with much less skill required, and only takes 20 seconds, and this effects how mappers make their maps. Hopefully with a few tweaks to the system, the formula could better reflect how impressive a play on a given map actually was, which would allow mappers map different styles and lengths of maps without the player base ignoring them as much as they give no PP (unless you are cookiezi and can FC 3000 note maps with tons of jumps and deathstreams).


TLDR:
-change formula for misses to account for song length (ex, (1-(30/notes))^misses
-remove combo from the formula (too hard to account for, too abuseable)
-reward marathon maps slightly higher








EDIT:
Could also add a damping formula to prevent a small number of notes creating all the PP value in a song (ex below of how this can cause issues)

https://youtu.be/Vh15Q9Mdias
https://youtu.be/5iXTTfozN0U
https://youtu.be/CsqMGBJ1m6g (3.5k PP 1 button click)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cjLABPThKuk (after more consideration, a damping formula is really needed to prevent this kind of abuse)
TheAlphaSheep
buff (spaced) streams and high acc plays for touchscreen
mikuosos
the performance point system reform was a good thing.
-Undefined-

Salvage wrote:

What about calculating accuracy with unstable rate? Or is it that hard to calculate on every map played?.
RIP SS
MotoNickel
No complaints from me... 😁👍
- EdgarNitroX
maybe this would be changed in dt players and hr players , so the diff etc.
dcmallo
I'm having trouble raising my PP score, my recommended difficulty is 3 stars but I play 5 star maps, and when I set scores where i combo half the map on really hard maps for me I get 20-40 PP but my overall goes up by ~1-2 pp and I don't under stand it.
Novalogic
Not sure if this was brought up earlier or not. I was wondering, why is it that loved maps can't give pp just like the ranked maps do? I'm not saying that we should just make all loved maps into ranked ones, but since they received a high recognition from the community, why can't they - while still remaining as the separate map category - award performance points just like the ranked ones do? I can't see any reason for maintaining that difference between both map types.
Syluvaine

Novalogic wrote:

Not sure if this was brought up earlier or not. I was wondering, why is it that loved maps can't give pp just like the ranked maps do? I'm not saying that we should just make all loved maps into ranked ones, but since they received a high recognition from the community, why can't they - while still remaining as the separate map category - award performance points just like the ranked ones do? I can't see any reason for maintaining that difference between both map types.
Normally loved maps don't meet the ranking criteria; https://osu.ppy.sh/help/wiki/Ranking_Criteria

I guess that in some rare cases the mapper just didn't want/care to rank the map so it went loved
Novalogic
The question wasn't why loved maps are not ranked ones. I asked why should they be deprived of awarding pp to players. And all the stuff about so called ranking criteria is supposed to be there to maintain sufficient map quality, in order to ensure good playing experience. Loved maps got their rankings because people LOVE them. I can't see why they should be handicapped like that.
ikasu
if you got pp from loved maps there would be no reason to have a loved map category because they would just be ranked maps
Hibaragi
That​ good.
N3ptuNe_MP
Que signifie le nombre de pp qui se situe à gauche du nombre de pp obtus sur une map quand on regarde son profil ?
ItzSlowney
Hi
xScreaMzx
It would be niced to have "loved" pp, that don't add to your normal pp, of course there should be a loved leaderboard aswell to keep things interesting :)
Psyhoren
Hello everyone!

I would like to suggest ranked multiplayer. What's ranked multiplayer you ask, well let me explain. For starters we all know that in multiplayer it is much harder to play, because of pressure and excitement of playing against other people and that enables us to do stupid mistakes, and not get the perfect play you were looking fore. So what if when you fool combo in ranked multiplayer instead of getting pp to your main score you would get pp to your total ranked multiplayer score.
This ranked multiplayer would go something like this. First you and other 8 players enter a lobby and you get a pool of songs of about 20 and they would be from most played songs from you and other players. Each player gets to ban 1 song from the pool, and you play best of 5. Winner is the one who gets most wins in the end, and pp is determined on how you did on all of the maps. so even if you win but you sucked you still get lover points, and if you came in last or fourth you loos points, the third plays gets out dry, 0 pints.
I just had this idea because i was tired of playing alone. I think something like this would drastically improve multiplayer and it would be more exciting to watch it played on twitch or other platforms. This is only my opinion tell me what do you people think what could be improved and if such a thing would be grate or not.

Best regards
Psyhoren
xScreaMzx

Psyhoren wrote:

Hello everyone!

I would like to suggest ranked multiplayer. What's ranked multiplayer you ask, well let me explain. For starters we all know that in multiplayer it is much harder to play, because of pressure and excitement of playing against other people and that enables us to do stupid mistakes, and not get the perfect play you were looking fore. So what if when you fool combo in ranked multiplayer instead of getting pp to your main score you would get pp to your total ranked multiplayer score.
This ranked multiplayer would go something like this. First you and other 8 players enter a lobby and you get a pool of songs of about 20 and they would be from most played songs from you and other players. Each player gets to ban 1 song from the pool, and you play best of 5. Winner is the one who gets most wins in the end, and pp is determined on how you did on all of the maps. so even if you win but you sucked you still get lover points, and if you came in last or fourth you loos points, the third plays gets out dry, 0 pints.
I just had this idea because i was tired of playing alone. I think something like this would drastically improve multiplayer and it would be more exciting to watch it played on twitch or other platforms. This is only my opinion tell me what do you people think what could be improved and if such a thing would be grate or not.

Best regards
Psyhoren
Really like the idea, but i think the mappool system is not necessary, it would be enough to just get a random map out of all the ranked maps to avoid farming maps only :)
show more
Please sign in to reply.

New reply