Performance Points feedback and suggestions (Standard)

posted
Total Posts
2,647
show more
Nyxa

-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.
From the wiki


I disagree.
-Soba-

Tess wrote:

-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.
From the wiki


I disagree.
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.
Vuelo Eluko
personally i get around 99-100% on od7 and around 96-97 on od8 because im no accuracy player so im unsure what 'most people' are, unless its just people much better than me [like you] and obviously there are less of those than the other way around so i dont see why people who are more accurate shouldnt be rewarded for their accuracy.
GhostFrog
In the absence of per-hitobject data, the pp calculation system can't distinguish between someone who SSed an OD7 map by using the entire 300 window and someone who would have SSed the map even if it was OD9 - pp calculations can't assume you're hitting "well within the OD8 window in OD7". If you're capable of SSing OD8 maps, then doing so will get you the extra pp that the lenient timing window of OD7 cheated you out of.

There are definitely people out there who have noticeably worse accuracy on OD8 than on OD7 (Edit: Hi Riince!). They feel the same to you because you find both of them so easy.
Nyxa
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.
-Soba-
Maybe I was assuming too much to say most players, sorry. And sure I'll prove you wrong later Tess if you really want me to.
Nyxa
Make sure to record it and post it here. If you can't record just make a nice collection of images, one showing an in-game timestamp from when you start playing, and then each subsequent SS, and you have to do one OD at a time. So, either 10 OD7 SS first, or 10 OD8. I'd like to see this.
haxsu
or...just go on and spectate him? Why make him go though all that trouble recording stuff or posting screenshots on here?
Woobowiz
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).
GoldenWolf

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.
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.
XGeneral2000

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.
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.
Nyxa

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 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.

I personally adjust how I play depending on the OD. At OD7 I can afford to be "lazier" so I don't have to focus as much to get 300s as I would with OD10. It results in slightly more 100s than at full focus, but it's nice for relaxed, laid back playing which still doesn't cost too much effort for an SS. At OD8 this laziness has to see a significant drop for me to be able to SS anything. Of course it depends on the map you're playing, but it can definitely be noticed regardless.

Also, I like how the FL topic got completely forgotten and replaced by "OD7=OD9" talk.
jesse1412

Tess wrote:

Also, I like how the FL topic got completely forgotten and replaced by "OD7=OD9" talk.
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..
Nyxa
I'm not saying that easy FL plays should be rewarded more, I'm saying that hard ones should. Long maps with large combos should give a significant amount of pp with FL because comboing is the very thing that FL makes hard for you to do. 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?

The aim boost should stay and be accompanied by a combo boost, because those are the two things that are difficult to do with FL.

And no, not anyone can FC a typical map with FL in a week.
Drezi

Tess wrote:

And no, not anyone can FC a typical map with FL in a week.
I sense Tess-challange v2 here ^^
FGSky

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 totally agree !
Ethelon

XGeneral2000 wrote:

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.
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.
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.
XGeneral2000

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.
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.

Even if the scoring system was left unchanged and the client calculated a "highest-pp" score to send, it'd still double the effective server load since there'd still be 2 scores per map per player (one for "highest score" and one for "highest pp"), so unfortunately, I don't think a fix to this issue will come in the near future.
manjumochi

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).
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)

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.
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).
pooptartsonas

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.
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.
show more
Please sign in to reply.

New reply