Tom, you should make ppv2 to the same calculation method as tp.

The map of score(50|50|50) is easier than the map of score(100|0|0).

Although I played a map like score(50|50|50) today, it was clearly easy.
Nevertheless, my pp went up considerably.
The ppv2 present ranking goes up, even if everyone plays map like score(50|50|50).
I think, maps only with one high category is more difficult than maps with three average categories.
I think that Tom also understands it, because he performed "Increase pp-value of scores which excel in one category".

Although I can understand, worth of maps like score(50|50|50) will be lost in case of the calculation method of tp.
Nonetheless, Tom should make ppv2 to the same calculation method as tp.
Or increase more pp-value of scores which excel in one category.

I cannot think that the present ranking is good.

Waiting for osuwiki "pp" artilcle...

Me too...
Does anybody know when will the winking article be available

Soon™

­

Greetings all,

I was curious, while I love this new PP system alot, I was wondering if this was working as intended..

I played this 18 days ago and was extremely happy with it, gained a modest amount of PP etc...
I play that same map again a week and a half later (In a middle of a play session, so everything's updated)
After I complete it, I notice I drop alot of PP (relatively) and ~1k ranking positions, for a really minor change in overall accuracy, but better score achieved so it counts the second one. (And getting one off FC might not of helped)

Again, I play this map afew days ago after just downloading it
Happy days, gain alot of PP again.
Play it two days later, get 2 100's and a miss more then last, but hold 2 decent combos for a slightly higher score then above and I drop ~1k places and alot of PP again.

Is this just me being unlucky and playing beatmaps which have a very heavy accuracy rating, so a minor change effects PP gain hugely, or is it something else?

After talking about it with a friend, he seems to think that its my 'leaderboard PP' being recalculated from people beating my scores all over the place, despite having very few scores under 1k on the leaderboard, and im online when this recalculation happens. This would explain it for the second one, because I got rank 44 on a new beatmap 2 days ago (im now 314), but it still doesn't do much to explain the first one.

So. Am I just playing accuracy weighted maps and suffering a huge drop for a small drop in accuracy %, or are the few high-ranking scores I do have just being beaten alot recently thus the (big for me) drop in PP

Note: Rank isn't an issue, I can deal with that. I just feel that getting afew 100's more and getting a better score shouldn't just counteract 1-2+ hours playing, if I knew it'd drop that much, I'd of just reset out.... I have also read the thread (well, 90% of it) but my friend seems to insist that other people ranking higher then you drops your PP score for that song...

Nina_Winlan wrote:

After talking about it with a friend, he seems to think that its my 'leaderboard PP' being recalculated from people beating my scores all over the place, despite having very few scores under 1k on the leaderboard, and im online when this recalculation happens. This would explain it for the second one, because I got rank 44 on a new beatmap 2 days ago (im now 314), but it still doesn't do much to explain the first one.

So. Am I just playing accuracy weighted maps and suffering a huge drop for a small drop in accuracy %, or are the few high-ranking scores I do have just being beaten alot recently thus the (big for me) drop in PP

You lost pp because you replaced your records with worse ones. The score rank you get in each map doesn't matter.
Your maximum combo is the value that matters. One combo of 300 is worth more than 2 combos of 280.

@Tom: The system should only take into account your best performance on each map, not the best score.

Full Tablet wrote:

You lost pp because you replaced your records with worse ones. The score rank you get in each map doesn't matter.
Your maximum combo is the value that matters. One combo of 300 is worth more than 2 combos of 280.

So it was as I thought, that's kinda annoying, but thanks for the clarification.

[AirCoN] wrote:

@Tom: The system should only take into account your best performance on each map, not the best score.

As mentioned like a billion times already ( ) it's not possible to do this at the moment. I wish it was.

I just dont understand why my rank rose before the patch to 41k rank from 53k then after the patch my rank was risen to like 75k wat is this -_-

Kreto wrote:

I just dont understand why my rank rose before the patch to 41k rank from 53k then after the patch my rank was risen to like 75k wat is this -_-

Play Insanes then you understand ...

At your Playcount I was Rank 110k

And ye recalculating ...

Kreto wrote:

I just dont understand why my rank rose before the patch to 41k rank from 53k then after the patch my rank was risen to like 75k wat is this -_-

It was probably recalculating something. Judging by your Performance Graph you were actually at 75K the entire time.

Ekaru wrote:

Kreto wrote:

I just dont understand why my rank rose before the patch to 41k rank from 53k then after the patch my rank was risen to like 75k wat is this -_-

It was probably recalculating something. Judging by your Performance Graph you were actually at 75K the entire time.

i meant before patch V2 came out

Ultrayano wrote:

Kreto wrote:

I just dont understand why my rank rose before the patch to 41k rank from 53k then after the patch my rank was risen to like 75k wat is this -_-

Play Insanes then you understand ...

At your Playcount I was Rank 110k

And ye recalculating ...

my play count yea i know but i was higher rank and stuff just watneed to know why thx for the reply Insanes i do play some but not all plus i only use mouse no keyboard no tablet. Well since ur really good ^-^ gL in your ranking nice uh signature is it ^-^

Kreto wrote:

my play count yea i know but i was higher rank and stuff just watneed to know why thx for the reply Insanes i do play some but not all plus i only use mouse no keyboard no tablet. Well since ur really good ^-^ gL in your ranking nice uh signature is it ^-^

Only Mouse ? o.o Good Luck in your osu! career

And ~thanks~

Ultrayano wrote:

Kreto wrote:

my play count yea i know but i was higher rank and stuff just watneed to know why thx for the reply Insanes i do play some but not all plus i only use mouse no keyboard no tablet. Well since ur really good ^-^ gL in your ranking nice uh signature is it ^-^

Only Mouse ? o.o Good Luck in your osu! career

And ~thanks~

There are mouse only players better than you and I.

Myke B wrote:

There are mouse only players better than you and I.

I know (: Players like ChangE

Ultrayano wrote:

Kreto wrote:

Only Mouse ? o.o Good Luck in your osu! career

And ~thanks~

Mouse is more fun.

rexcannon_iii wrote:

Mouse is more fun.

"Fun" is subjective.

Stay on-topic, please. This thread is for pp feedback.

What kind of modifications are you still looking to do with the ranking system? assuming there are any.

Tom94 wrote:

Stay on-topic, please. This thread is for pp feedback.

Ok then, I'll ask again.

When are you going to implement complex finger work into the pp calculation?

rexcannon_iii wrote:

Tom94 wrote:

Stay on-topic, please. This thread is for pp feedback.

Ok then, I'll ask again.

When are you going to implement complex finger work into the pp calculation?

I can't answer all those "when" questions. Programming and especially coming up with ideas for an algorithm is not something that can be nailed down to Tuesday 14:00.

Myke B wrote:

What kind of modifications are you still looking to do with the ranking system? assuming there are any.

I believe I wrote quite a bit about that kind of stuff in the thread already. I hope I can get pattern difficulty inside, in addition to the obligatory tweaking of weightings of course.

Ultrayano wrote:

Myke B wrote:

There are mouse only players better than you and I.

I know (: Players like ChangE

i added u so u know:) and i will try my best with mouse XD ^-^

Mutual <3

These probably have been answered before somewhere in the thread, but I don't think I would be able to find it in 40+ pages of "mouse is more fun" etc.

-Do you ever intend to display player attributes on profiles or the performance ranking, like the aim/speed/accuracy player ratings shown on the tp rankings?

-What about the aim/speed difficulties of modded maps within the client? For example, I scroll through my maps and choose some map. Then I turn on DT EZ FL (or some obscure mod combination). From what I've heard, there are plans to display aim/speed difficulties of maps on their respective webpages, but covering all mod combinations on the webpage would require some significant modifications. What I'm getting at is a numerical value displayed somewhere in song select (most likely in the top left where the length/# of objects, etc are shown) that changes as you switch mods, much like the Global Ranking (Selected Mods) tab.

-Is there anything planned in the difficulty calculations regarding difficult patterns such as tornadoes?

Thanks again for delivering the justice of skill ranking.

Tom94 wrote:

I believe I wrote quite a bit about that kind of stuff in the thread already.

You might consider updating the first post with answers to commonly asked questions, to hopefully decrease the number of already-answered questions.

Doge wrote:

These probably have been answered before somewhere in the thread, but I don't think I would be able to find it in 40+ pages of "mouse is more fun" etc.

-Do you ever intend to display player attributes on profiles or the performance ranking, like the aim/speed/accuracy player ratings shown on the tp rankings?

It'd be cool to do so, but the way the system works right now (calculating a single pp value per player) those can't be displayed seperately at the moment. It would be cool to have something like that, but the top priority is at least making the system functional for all modes first and integrating it into star difficulty.

Doge wrote:

-What about the aim/speed difficulties of modded maps within the client? For example, I scroll through my maps and choose some map. Then I turn on DT EZ FL (or some obscure mod combination). From what I've heard, there are plans to display aim/speed difficulties of maps on their respective webpages, but covering all mod combinations on the webpage would require some significant modifications. What I'm getting at is a numerical value displayed somewhere in song select (most likely in the top left where the length/# of objects, etc are shown) that changes as you switch mods, much like the Global Ranking (Selected Mods) tab.

I hope I can make star rating change with selected mods. Displaying stuff like aim/speed seperately is probably not going to happen sooo soon, if it happens at all.

Doge wrote:

-Is there anything planned in the difficulty calculations regarding difficult patterns such as tornadoes?

Yup, but that's in the far future.

Doge wrote:

Thanks again for delivering the justice of skill ranking.

You're welcome.

This was probably asked already but I don't feel like reading 40 pages (you could maybe add the most asked questions to the 1st post) so here it goes:

I've heard that old beatmaps don't reward pp anymore, is this true? If so, are you pretending to remove its ranked score/accuracy eventually? Also, what's up with people saying that there's a big possibility of ranked score being removed from the game in the future? (since it doesn't show anymore in-game)

Are we close to the final version of this pp system or are there going to be any big changes incoming?

Last night I gained like 9 pp from a couple of James' old BeForU maps from 2008. That should answer your question regarding old beatmaps.

not sure if I would really consider it a problem, but I find it quite easy to just look at people around my rank and play the beatmaps they have in top ranks. typically they're pretty easy... It racks up some ridiculous amounts of pp though. @_@

Keeby wrote:

not sure if I would really consider it a problem, but I find it quite easy to just look at people around my rank and play the beatmaps they have in top ranks. typically they're pretty easy... It racks up some ridiculous amounts of pp though. @_@

This has always been how it is. If you can beat their top performances then you're better than them (or better than what skill level their top performances dictate).

Keeby wrote:

not sure if I would really consider it a problem, but I find it quite easy to just look at people around my rank and play the beatmaps they have in top ranks. typically they're pretty easy... It racks up some ridiculous amounts of pp though. @_@

That would mean that you actually deserve to be much higher than you actually are, and must've been playing easy maps the whole time.

haven't read the last 10 pages or so yet, but is the "difficulty" sorting option in the beatmap list the same as a list of "what songs give more PP"?

0 miss play on one of the songs on the front page with half-decent accuracy so i'm guessing not, but if it isn't what is it

Gray Pigeon wrote:

Tom, you should make ppv2 to the same calculation method as tp.

The map of score(50|50|50) is easier than the map of score(100|0|0).

While this is very true, I personnaly dislike the way the tp system handles this. Right now getting 100/100/100 on a map or getting 100/0/0 + 0/100/0 + 0/0/100 on three different maps gives exactly the same number of tps, when the former is much harder. I am fairly sure that sorting maps by stats this way is unavoidably flawed.

To avoid the previous problem I think each stat just needs tweaking. I thought of a simple solution - I'm sure there are better ones than mine, though. That involves giving bonuses or maluses depending on which stat is the highest/2nd highest/lowest.

Let's say it gives +75% to the highest stat, +25% to the second highest and -25% to the lowest when calculating the total pp rating (I omitted the digits after the decimal point). I'll illustrate that with a simple example (two scores giving the same amount of pps initially) :

90/85/80 -> 157/106/60 || 255pps -> 323pps (it's relative, so the increase does not matter)
140/70/45 -> 245/87/33 || 255pps -> 365pps (notice how it's now higher than the previous score)

I chose the percentages randomly, but you get the idea.

KaosFR wrote:

Let's say it gives +75% to the highest stat, +25% to the second highest and -25% to the lowest when calculating the total pp rating (I omitted the digits after the decimal point)

90/85/80 -> 157/106/60 || 255pps -> 323pps (it's relative, so the increase does not matter)
140/70/45 -> 245/87/33 || 255pps -> 365pps (notice how it's now higher than the previous score)

Tom94 wrote:

Currently the pp a score is worth is computed by the following formula: (aim^X + speed^X + acc^X)^(1/X)
Where X at the moment is 1.1 and will likely rise a bit in the future.

90/85/80 -> 230.789
140/70/45 -> 233.266
The value of X can be adjusted to change the worth of the highest stat.

Example: X=0.7 (The play gets "punished" for having a low stat).
90/85/80 -> 408.197
140/70/45 -> 395.121


Example: X=1.5 (The highest stat is given even more importance).
90/85/80 -> 176.909
140/70/45 -> 186.358

I see. I didn't know about the formula, thanks for pointing that out.

I'm not saying I like it that much though; even with X>>1 it doesn't seem to make much of a difference, mostly because of the last part of the formula (the ^(1/X)).

KaosFR wrote:

I see. I didn't know about the formula, thanks for pointing that out.

I'm not saying I like it that much though; even with X>>1 it doesn't seem to make much of a difference, mostly because of the last part of the formula (the ^(1/X)).

X>>1 indeed makes a huge difference. The ^(1/X) merely makes sure, that the result is not scaled horribly asymptotically to O(n^X), but remains in the same asymptotic scale.