How does the scaling work? I just did a beatmap on insane:
Dormir - Sayonara Trip [Insane] (87.28%)
5 minutes ago

28pp
weighted 66% (18pp)

and I got 2pp.. :/

Duckpan wrote:

How does the scaling work? I just did a beatmap on insane:
Dormir - Sayonara Trip [Insane] (87.28%)
5 minutes ago

28pp
weighted 66% (18pp)

and I got 2pp.. :/

That map got you ~18pp, but also made 'all maps you played that gave less pp than that' give you 5% less pp.

-

I might one to talk here at all since I've never been good at this game and haven't played so long than you guys. But I have always liked that I get "xp" by improving and getting better scores in maps and therefore getting this "ranked score". In my opinion is fun. But it might be because I know that I'm bad. I guess that what better you get this game that more you want to get and this leads to stress and other not so fun feelings.

I'll bring up a problem with the current system.
It's already happening to top players.

Everytime you get pp, it becomes harder to get more. At some point, getting pp will be so hard, that players will be stuck at a certain pp. You can see this happening to players like hvick225. Where his top scores are so hard that in order to top them, it is extremely extremely hard. What happens when (IF) he gets to 10k pp. How is he (or anyone) goign to gain pp ? Anything below 500 pp will be worth almost nothing.
At that point they will be "stuck" . If it's not at 10k pp, it won't be much more than that. I understand people improve, but honestly no one can ever get to 15k pp or something that high..

What happens then? (soon)


Everyone will just catch up to the first pp's , and the rank will become a big stuck ranking ,where the pp difference is very small between all crazy players. (assuming they get to a level that is very hard to top).

Hopefully I explained it okay.. But anyways, what happens then?

xasuma wrote:

I'll bring up a problem with the current system.
It's already happening to top players.

Everytime you get pp, it becomes harder to get more. At some point, getting pp will be so hard, that players will be stuck at a certain pp. You can see this happening to players like hvick225. Where his top scores are so hard that in order to top them, it is extremely extremely hard. What happens when (IF) he gets to 10k pp. How is he (or anyone) goign to gain pp ? Anything below 500 pp will be worth almost nothing.
At that point they will be "stuck" . If it's not at 10k pp, it won't be much more than that. I understand people improve, but honestly no one can ever get to 15k pp or something that high..

What happens then? (soon)


Everyone will just catch up to the first pp's , and the rank will become a big stuck ranking ,where the pp difference is very small between all crazy players. (assuming they get to a level that is very hard to top).

Hopefully I explained it okay.. But anyways, what happens then?

There are many maps that can give over 500pp with mods, so the amount of pp people can get is limited by their own skill.

If their current top plays were something they can't surpass or match in terms of pp even if they put a lot of effort, then it would suggest the current most pp giving maps are highly overrated (since with similar amount of effort, they should be able to get similar amounts of pp in other maps too).

xasuma wrote:

I'll bring up a problem with the current system.
It's already happening to top players.

Everytime you get pp, it becomes harder to get more. At some point, getting pp will be so hard, that players will be stuck at a certain pp. You can see this happening to players like hvick225. Where his top scores are so hard that in order to top them, it is extremely extremely hard. What happens when (IF) he gets to 10k pp. How is he (or anyone) goign to gain pp ? Anything below 500 pp will be worth almost nothing.
At that point they will be "stuck" . If it's not at 10k pp, it won't be much more than that. I understand people improve, but honestly no one can ever get to 15k pp or something that high..

What happens then? (soon)


Everyone will just catch up to the first pp's , and the rank will become a big stuck ranking ,where the pp difference is very small between all crazy players. (assuming they get to a level that is very hard to top).

Hopefully I explained it okay.. But anyways, what happens then?

I understand what you're saying except the limiting factor would be the players skill, there's still plenty of maps + mod combos available that could get you pp providing you're good enough of a player. A player can hit a wall at any pp, you just need to improve and get better scores. Although imo improving just gets harder and harder the better you are but that isn't a flaw with the system.

xasuma wrote:

I'll bring up a problem with the current system.
It's already happening to top players.

Everytime you get pp, it becomes harder to get more. At some point, getting pp will be so hard, that players will be stuck at a certain pp. You can see this happening to players like hvick225. Where his top scores are so hard that in order to top them, it is extremely extremely hard. What happens when (IF) he gets to 10k pp. How is he (or anyone) goign to gain pp ? Anything below 500 pp will be worth almost nothing.
At that point they will be "stuck" . If it's not at 10k pp, it won't be much more than that. I understand people improve, but honestly no one can ever get to 15k pp or something that high..

What happens then? (soon)


Everyone will just catch up to the first pp's , and the rank will become a big stuck ranking ,where the pp difference is very small between all crazy players. (assuming they get to a level that is very hard to top).

Hopefully I explained it okay.. But anyways, what happens then?

this is never going to happen and you know it

If all the top players were stuck at the same skill then I would see no problem in them being stuck at the same pp. I don't really see that happening though.

Oh another thing (again, I'm pretty sure this has already been discussed)

Higher bpm streams (I'm talking 230+) kinda feels unrewarding when you can play it unless you add a lot of spacing in between the notes.

Is there even a bonus/reward for high bpm that's independent of the aim factor? There's a bonus for AR 8 and map duration, I know that much.

Mad machine the popular 270bpm stream map is 264 base pp. So I think there is pp bonus in high bpm closely spaced streams but only after 250 or something. Don't quote me on it though.

xasuma wrote:

I'll bring up a problem with the current system.
It's already happening to top players.

Everytime you get pp, it becomes harder to get more. At some point, getting pp will be so hard, that players will be stuck at a certain pp. You can see this happening to players like hvick225. Where his top scores are so hard that in order to top them, it is extremely extremely hard. What happens when (IF) he gets to 10k pp. How is he (or anyone) goign to gain pp ? Anything below 500 pp will be worth almost nothing.
At that point they will be "stuck" . If it's not at 10k pp, it won't be much more than that. I understand people improve, but honestly no one can ever get to 15k pp or something that high..

What happens then? (soon)


Everyone will just catch up to the first pp's , and the rank will become a big stuck ranking ,where the pp difference is very small between all crazy players. (assuming they get to a level that is very hard to top).

Hopefully I explained it okay.. But anyways, what happens then?

No need to be top100 to reach that point.

There's definetly a problem here. And I think the old system was more accurate about our current skill. I'm not saying we should go back to the old system, but a balance would be nice.
You FC something you found really hard, and you don't get any PP for it because the rating says it's easy or just because the system thinks you should do better whenever you actually can't.

With the old pp system, the amount of pp were improving at the same time than you, now you need to improve yourself and THEN try to get some PP. I don't think it's something good, especially cause you can't even clear some scores cause you'll lose rank if you have lower accuracy or smthing.
Well personally I don't care, I gave up on PP. But it's a sad thing. Cause now, I'm still playing as I'm used to, I'm improving, but my rank is going down just because I don't play THE ppdtmaps... It's a bit depressing.

So yes, some maps gives a huge amount of pp, but those maps might as well be way too far from our current skill while we can actually play something different pretty well without any reward for it. You could tell me to play what osu! says it's hard and not what you think it's hard. But the gameplay experience of osu is also lowered this way.

And another thing, about the accuracy. If you want to get PP, accuracy is something you HAVE TO have, if you're missing a bit of accuracy you just have 0 pp (if you play recommended maps). It's not considered as something you can improve. It's all or nothing (that's how I feel it at least). Accuracy is important in a rythme game, of course, and accuracy is a huge part of the pp given but od10 is considered the same as od0 (basically, as long as you have your 99% it doesnt matter which od it is, the pp will be the same for the same map) and it's hard to reach the gaps for od10, and fcing something with 94% instead of 95% is probably worth some pp, if only for consolation prize, seriously lol. Once more, yes I could improve my accuracy and try to get some pp, but it would be nice if this improvement was constant with the amount of pp. THERE'S NO FLOW.

The system is good, but you just CAN'T deny every suggestions over here because it NEEDS to be improved.

Tess wrote:

every human being to play this game calling DT overrated

HAHAHA, and people told me over here that was in my head... I didn't quote all of your text Tess (cause too big), but you reflexion is nice and I agree with you.

Yales wrote:

I think the old system was more accurate about our current skill

In what universe?

Yales wrote:

od10 is considered the same as od0 (basically, as long as you have your 99% it doesnt matter which od it is, the pp will be the same for the same map)

Completely wrong. If you get an SS on an od0 5 star map its going to be worth very little, under 100 even, yet od10 would push it probably to around ~220+

Riince wrote:

Yales wrote:

I think the old system was more accurate about our current skill

In what universe?

Sorry I was just trying to communicate with osu! community.

Yales wrote:

od10 is considered the same as od0 (basically, as long as you have your 99% it doesnt matter which od it is, the pp will be the same for the same map)

Riince wrote:

Completely wrong. If you get an SS on an od0 5 star map its going to be worth very little, probably sub 100, yet od10 would push well over 200.

So you get your SS nomod od7. Then you play it od10, if you do the same play, you might get 94% acc or smthing, so you get NO PP for the SAME play. Got it?

i dont get it, do you think people should get PP for a play they already did?

Riince wrote:

i dont get it, do you think people should get PP for a play they already did?

That was just an example... Especially talking about hr. I can get... let's say 97% nomod od8, and 94% with hr cause of the OD (cause this is my current accuracy skill, pretty low, but it doesnt matter for this topic). So I'll get pp for my 97% but probably not for my 94 cause it's under the 95% needed to get pp... But my accuracy is actually the same in both cases. Like my fingers are hitting the notes at the same time in both cases. xD

And in general, could people PLEASE STOP deyning everything, this system isn't perfect, the proof is that this topic is still alive. So this is a topic about feedback and suggestions, not a poll about if you agree or disagree about what people think of the current system. Move on, please.

SO here is a hypothetical scenario:
This is a "What if" story, hence, hypothetical.

-I am rank #1 . It is year 2016 and I have 14000 pp.
If you scroll down all the way on my top scores, you see that the last score that shows (weighted at <1%) is 550pp. And my first score is 780 pp, weighted 100%.

My skills are out of this world, and I have conquered every rank map there is to near perfection within human limitations.
In order for me to get to 14001 pp , I need to get scores worth over 560pp ,which will give me a fraction of 1 pp.
I am able to read ar11 and stream 280 bpm. But from here on, I am stuck. From now on, I will be lucky to gain 100 pp a year, I feel i've hit sort of a human barrier I just can't overcome.

Meanwhile, rank #50 still has 8500pp , and at their level they can still hope to get better within a reasonable effort.
But even If I get better, how much better can I truly get ? Lets face it , my human body will stop me from getting better, this is no science fiction, and I will never read ar13, or stream 350 bpm. What do I do to gain more pp and take advantage of my abilities to get ahead from the other top 5?

End of story.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

All I want, is to prove that the system will stop to function correctly at some point due to this. If you aren't able to see the point right now. Go, find out about how much pp a top player like hvick225 has gained in the past year. Now wait for another year, and compare that number to the one this year, feel free to continue this pattern. You should notice a decrease of pp gained every year, until that pp gain becomes really small.

Everyone will hit a "wall" sooner or later.

Alternative solution:

I recommend, making the ranking system a system of comparison and competition instead.Let me explain. Instead of having a static song you can play 1 million times and get pp out of with the best score, make it player vs player based. Where the only way you go up the ranks is to beat a player who's rank is better than you on a live match (as if you were participating in the owc). You play a best of 3, best of 5 , whatever. This method should more accurately measure your abilities in a more rounded way. You would have to play good under pressure, you can't spam retry, you have to beat a better player to climb the ranks, and you have to lose to go down (or don't play).
You could still play the way it is today, but getting #1 on a song would not give you points. It would only be for the honor and for the practice. In other words, our current scores would be somewhat of an "unranked" , and the "rank" part of the game would be player vs player (as most competitive games out there).

Your "skill" wouldn't be measured in a concrete way anymore. But it would be measured as a comparison.
SO when someone says, "I am bad" , I will say : "Yes , you are bad in comparison to the #1, but good in comparison to #1000000" (Same principle applies to this idea), is a matter of perception and comparison.
------------------------------------------
Thoughts.

xasuma wrote:

SO here is a hypothetical scenario:
This is a "What if" story, hence, hypothetical.

-I am rank #1 . It is year 2016 and I have 14000 pp.
If you scroll down all the way on my top scores, you see that the last score that shows (weighted at <1%) is 550pp. And my first score is 780 pp, weighted 100%.

My skills are out of this world, and I have conquered every rank map there is to near perfection within human limitations.
In order for me to get to 14001 pp , I need to get scores worth over 560pp ,which will give me a fraction of 1 pp.
I am able to read ar11 and stream 280 bpm. But from here on, I am stuck. From now on, I will be lucky to gain 100 pp a year, I feel i've hit sort of a human barrier I just can't overcome.

Meanwhile, rank #50 still has 8500pp , and at their level they can still hope to get better within a reasonable effort.
But even If I get better, how much better can I truly get ? Lets face it , my human body will stop me from getting better, this is no science fiction, and I will never read ar13, or stream 350 bpm. What do I do to gain more pp and take advantage of my abilities to get ahead from the other top 5?

End of story.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

All I want, is to prove that the system will stop to function correctly at some point due to this. If you aren't able to see the point right now. Go, find out about how much pp a top player like hvick225 has gained in the past year. Now wait for another year, and compare that number to the one this year, feel free to continue this pattern. You should notice a decrease of pp gained every year, until that pp gain becomes really small.

Everyone will hit a "wall" sooner or later.

Alternative solution:

I recommend, making the ranking system a system of comparison and competition instead.Let me explain. Instead of having a static song you can play 1 million times and get pp out of with the best score, make it player vs player based. Where the only way you go up the ranks is to beat a player who's rank is better than you on a live match (as if you were participating in the owc). You play a best of 3, best of 5 , whatever. This method should more accurately measure your abilities in a more rounded way. You would have to play good under pressure, you can't spam retry, you have to beat a better player to climb the ranks, and you have to lose to go down (or don't play).
You could still play the way it is today, but getting #1 on a song would not give you points. It would only be for the honor and for the practice. In other words, our current scores would be somewhat of an "unranked" , and the "rank" part of the game would be player vs player (as most competitive games out there).

Your "skill" wouldn't be measured in a concrete way anymore. But it would be measured as a comparison.
SO when someone says, "I am bad" , I will say : "Yes , you are bad in comparison to the #1, but good in comparison to #1000000" (Same principle applies to this idea), is a matter of perception and comparison.
------------------------------------------
Thoughts.

What's so bad about not gaining any pp when not improving? Whether it is a human limit or whatever, pp is supposed to indicate your skill. It's not supposed to move if your skill doesn't change. That being said pp scales up more rapidly with increasing difficulty (which is why things like remote control shoot over 500pp so quickly). As a consequence very minor skill gains at the top end will cause huge pp differences. Just compare the top1-10 to the top11-20. There is a bigger pp difference in the top1-10, isn't it? Doesn't that kind of refute your point already?


Regarding the elo based multiplayer system you are suggesting: There are quite some ways to exploit this such as practicing the maps you are going to pick beforehand and almost certainly winning all the maps you pick while losing all the maps your enemy picks. On top of that such a system would favor an entirely different skillset namely performing under pressure and on very specific plays rather than being able to retry a lot. I'm not saying this is necessarily bad, but it would mean an huge uproar in the ranking. Although I guess I'd profit quite a lot from such a system.

Yales wrote:

words

The way you worded it was terrible but I see what you mean. If you made exactly the same score on a map except one time it was OD9 and the other it was OD7 or whatever, yes, the OD9 play would almost certainly be lower accuracy. Maybe not by much depending on how good the OD7 score was, you could have still hit a lot of the 300's within the 300 timing window at OD9. Without going into your hit windows and calculating every single hit to see what it would be at another OD, you can't say OD7 SS = OD9 95%. You could get approximations though. I imagine it would be balanced so an identical score gives identical pp regardless of OD, maybe Tom can elaborate on that.

Another factor worth noting is that if you're playing at a lower OD, if you play extremely accurately, you won't get fully rewarded for it. You could play at OD9 SS equivalent at OD7 and you'll get no reward from it compared to if you were just playing at OD7 SS level of accuracy. Which is not much there can be done about.

xasuma wrote:

text about hitting wall

Let's be realistic, no one will achieve what is "physically humanly possible". There will always be room to improve provided you play enough and play the right stuff.

xasuma wrote:

Go, find out about how much pp a top player like hvick225 has gained in the past year. Now wait for another year, and compare that number to the one this year, feel free to continue this pattern. You should notice a decrease of pp gained every year, until that pp gain becomes really small.

Yes, pp is going to be harder to get the more you get. Just like improvement, the better you get the harder it gets to get even better. This does not prove your point of eventually "not being able to improve at all" though. Not to mention that a lot of the top players have become less active. Despite this, a lot of them are still getting scores and pp. Look at WWW's recent scores; he's been playing for a very long time.

xasuma wrote:

idea for ladder system

A ladder system where you vs. other players realtime is not really suited for a game such as osu! imo but regardless of this, peppy has talked about wanting to introduce a ladder in the past. There's unofficial ranking systems even now. An idea like this would not replace pp though, it would just be something on the side.

I see what you are saying. It is just the fact of being stuck, makes me feel.. uneasy. It's fine if I am personally stuck with my skill, but to see the pp of top players not go up is a little weird, and it would probably be quite discouraging if you are in their shoes. (But yeah, this is all relative).

With respect to practice the maps you are going to choose; this would only be of effect if players get to pick the songs. Perhaps a randomized system of songs (within the difficulty osu believes is appropriate for the contenders) would be good. This would force people to adapt to all play styles. Older maps, newer maps, no mod, different mods, etc. (For me this would be a lot funner that the current way pp works).

I believe competition drives people, and live competition is even better.
As a note, this would be "the" step to take if osu! would want to grow to the competitive scene as other bigger games.

Discuss all of this people, I will most likely just read from this point on, just wanted to throw it out there. Cheers!

I would actually love to see an official matchmaking-type system although it's somewhat unfitting to the game, it would be fun and give me something new to do with the game. I don't think replacing pp with it would be appropriate, though. Having it from a massive map pool would easily take away from the memorization factor.

xasuma wrote:

All I want, is to prove that the system will stop to function correctly at some point due to this. If you aren't able to see the point right now. Go, find out about how much pp a top player like hvick225 has gained in the past year. Now wait for another year, and compare that number to the one this year, feel free to continue this pattern. You should notice a decrease of pp gained every year, until that pp gain becomes really small.

Everyone will hit a "wall" sooner or later.

I don't see how that would be a problem of the system. If the current #1 hits a wall, then there is no reason he should keep getting points; if other players keep getting closer to the current top player in terms of points, it just means the skill difference is getting smaller.

xasuma wrote:

Elo-like system

Applying this idea would require adding a new multiplayer mode where no individual player can't choose their opponents:
If everyone had a choice in who to play, low skill players would get ranked with other low skill players; and high skill players would get ranked with other high skill players (and their ranks wouldn't be necessarily better than the ranks of the low skill players). High skill players would want to play with low skill players, but since nobody would want to worsen their ranking, low skill players wouldn't accept playing with them. Take for example hvick225: when starting the new system, he would have the same rank as everyone else, since most people know who hvick255 is, most people wouldn't want to play with him, as a consequence, he wouldn't be high ranked; the highest ranked player would be the one who can get the most of the system, instead of the one who is the most skilled.

Also, players shouldn't be able to choose the map and mods to play:
If players had a choice of accepting playing a particular map/mod or not, each player would only accept playing if they can do what they are good at. Players would opt to play competitively only when the conditions are favorable for them.

If the system is applied, then players would have to go out in their way to increase their ranking, instead of playing however they want while increasing their skill in the currently ranked modes. I think that many players would just decide to play Solo (after all, it's the fastest and simplest way to play the maps you want) and would just ignore the new game mode, making the ranking inaccurate (many players would be left out of the system).

Full Tablet wrote:

Applying this idea would require adding a new multiplayer mode where no individual player can't choose their opponents:
If everyone had a choice in who to play, low skill players would get ranked with other low skill players; and high skill players would get ranked with other high skill players (and their ranks wouldn't be necessarily better than the ranks of the low skill players). High skill players would want to play with low skill players, but since nobody would want to worsen their ranking, low skill players wouldn't accept playing with them. Take for example hvick225: when starting the new system, he would have the same rank as everyone else, since most people know who hvick255 is, most people wouldn't want to play with him, as a consequence, he wouldn't be high ranked; the highest ranked player would be the one who can get the most of the system, instead of the one who is the most skilled.

There's many examples of other elo systems where this problem isn't present. You queue up, get an opponent with a similar elo and then play against them. If you recognize their name and no longer wanted to play against them, you could "surrender" or something similar which would have the same affect as a loss. The idea of seeing who you're playing against before you start the game and accept to playing against them can very easily be prevented, simply hide their name until you've accepted.

Full Tablet wrote:

Also, players shouldn't be able to choose the map and mods to play:
If players had a choice of accepting playing a particular map/mod or not, each player would only accept playing if they can do what they are good at. Players would opt to play competitively only when the conditions are favorable for them.

This is looking at it in a simple way, there could be much much more to the system. You could have multiple ladders for different mod usages, the option of using freemod, whatever. You could restrict your searches to only include maps under specific conditions (>220bpm for example) and then get matched against others with the same preferences. After all, the ladder (and the game itself of course) is ultimately for fun and forcing people to play mods they don't want to shouldn't be the way to go. Not choosing maps is definitely a must for the memorization factor, though.

pp wont keep increasing, people will quit and new players will replace them and i doubt the top pp will ever pass 10k

we definitely wont reach a point where all the best players reach the 'pp ceiling' and all end up stuck there. Probably the best players we have now will quit, new names will replace them or should, and the max pp of active players will either be lower or higher depending on the community. maybe in a few years we wont even have anyone over 8k pp playing, maybe we'll have several break 10k, including people we've never seen before. And then a few years after than we could be back down to 9k depending on who quits or replaces them from there. It's a cycle, not a perfect upward trend.

Alternatively: the game dies and everyone we have now in the top 50 stays there with a grayed out name like dungeon as noone else puts in the time to reach that level anymore.

Riince wrote:

pp wont keep increasing, people will quit and new players will replace them and i doubt the top pp will ever pass 10k

we definitely wont reach a point where all the best players reach the 'pp ceiling' and all end up stuck there. Probably the best players we have now will quit, new names will replace them or should, and the max pp of active players will either be lower or higher depending on the community. maybe in a few years we wont even have anyone over 8k pp playing, maybe we'll have several break 10k, including people we've never seen before. And then a few years after than we could be back down to 9k depending on who quits or replaces them from there. It's a cycle, not a perfect upward trend.

Alternatively: the game dies and everyone we have now in the top 50 stays there with a grayed out name like dungeon as noone else puts in the time to reach that level anymore.

A cord please.

And I think you can't based a system on the hypothesis that people will leave. Cause we will reach a point where osu will try to make top players quit, and that's not supposed to happen, the problem is, it's happening (unintentional). But if devs follow your idea, it will be intentional.

Well that's just how it works, Sports aren't based around every single player eventually becoming perfect so that no game can ever be decided as every player is playing at the limit of human ability and so every team is evenly matched. People get old and retire. It's the same for Osu, so it shouldn't be that way either. Top Players will cycle as years go by

I never was presenting this as an idea, more of a refutation to the idea that we'll reach a point where we just have a bunch of pro players all deadlocked at the same pp because they cant improve because human body.

It should also be noted that every person has a different limit to reach, i probably should have just brought that up instead...

Riince wrote:

Well that's just how it works, Sports aren't based around every single player eventually becoming perfect so that no game can ever be decided as every player is playing at the limit of human ability and so every team is evenly matched. People get old and retire. It's the same for Osu, so it shouldn't be that way either. Top Players will cycle as years go by

I never was presenting this as an idea, more of a refutation to the idea that we'll reach a point where we just have a bunch of pro players all deadlocked at the same pp because they cant improve because human body.

It should also be noted that every person has a different limit to reach, i probably should have just brought that up instead...

You're right, but I still think it would be better if we would have a feel of infinite pp. To avoid this kind of thoughts when we're playing a game, even though they're true. -> We want a good rank, so we have to rush pp before we quit. It doesn't feel natural. (It's just a scheme but there's a part of truth)

-

Anyway, for my part, I just miss pp based on perfomances instead of "skill" -> right now, my top performances are clearly not what I think my skill is (not saying, I'm better or worse than those scores, but it's just not the kind of plays I'm even good at, I mean they're not my strong point, just some random plays because I knew those maps would give me a few PP..).

So even if the idea of a rank based on skill is good in theory. "skill" is something too evasive to be good in practice. <- This is my feedback, and I prefer to say I have no suggestion to improve, sorry. Except that I feel that "performance points" would still be better rather than "skill points"

silmarilen wrote:

xasuma wrote:

I'll bring up a problem with the current system.
It's already happening to top players.

Everytime you get pp, it becomes harder to get more. At some point, getting pp will be so hard, that players will be stuck at a certain pp. You can see this happening to players like hvick225. Where his top scores are so hard that in order to top them, it is extremely extremely hard. What happens when (IF) he gets to 10k pp. How is he (or anyone) goign to gain pp ? Anything below 500 pp will be worth almost nothing.
At that point they will be "stuck" . If it's not at 10k pp, it won't be much more than that. I understand people improve, but honestly no one can ever get to 15k pp or something that high..

What happens then? (soon)


Everyone will just catch up to the first pp's , and the rank will become a big stuck ranking ,where the pp difference is very small between all crazy players. (assuming they get to a level that is very hard to top).

Hopefully I explained it okay.. But anyways, what happens then?

this is never going to happen and you know it

Well, if youre that afraid that pp has a cap, then players could always try and reach top score ranking, as long as new maps gets ranked, there's pretty much no cap for this, all it needs is to have he game to make it look more important so people will try to aim for it.

Main problem I see is that people don't really know how to interpret statistical data, which is pretty much the reason why ppv1 died, I still think that the number it provided it¡s interesting, I mean, sure, it doesn't exactly measure how skilled you are, but it measured how good you are to get a top rank in a map, and it somehow could incentive players to achieve a good rank on a map. Maybe peppy could allow the coexistence of ppv1 and ppv2, and would have more numbers to compare each players

Anyways, bottomline is that the current pp works as intended, and I wish osu! would provide more statistical data for comparison like bringing back ppv1, and even maybe create a new one that could represent other interesting stuff about each player.

Xanandra wrote:

Well, if youre that afraid that pp has a cap, then players could always try and reach top score ranking, as long as new maps gets ranked, there's pretty much no cap for this, all it needs is to have he game to make it look more important so people will try to aim for it.

Main problem I see is that people don't really know how to interpret statistical data, which is pretty much the reason why ppv1 died, I still think that the number it provided it¡s interesting, I mean, sure, it doesn't exactly measure how skilled you are, but it measured how good you are to get a top rank in a map, and it somehow could incentive players to achieve a good rank on a map. Maybe peppy could allow the coexistence of ppv1 and ppv2, and would have more numbers to compare each players

Anyways, bottomline is that the current pp works as intended, and I wish osu! would provide more statistical data for comparison like bringing back ppv1, and even maybe create a new one that could represent other interesting stuff about each player.

Except that for some reason, top 50~ doesn't apply to your pp if the system judge that the map is too easy for you (even if it's not) or something like this... And this is the problem. So you can't say people just have to keep grinding maps, since more you're improving more maps are useless for your pp.. That's killing the experience

if you want to look at an increasing number, look at total score.
if you want to look at how good someone is, look at pp.
you should not have a number based on skill increasing when you skill isnt increasing.

silmarilen wrote:

if you want to look at how good someone is, look at pp

No. 1 single score < thousands of maps played.

silmarilen wrote:

you should not have a number based on skill increasing when you skill isnt increasing.

My skill is increasing but if I don't play THE pp maps, my pp isn;t increasing though.

you mean as long as you dont play hard maps?

silmarilen wrote:

you mean as long as you dont play hard maps?

DT maps

Depends on what you call hard maps? Maps I find hard for me or maps that osu finds hard for me? Performance points instead of skill points would answer this question by the amount of good scores I got. Instead of 1 single score. So people can judge by themseleves.

maps that osu finds hard for you obviously.
you cant make a ranking system based on what a person is better at, only what is statistically harder.
if you can jump 250 bpm fullscreen squares, but cant even fc a 150 bpm 5 note stream, it would still be pretty stupid to make that 150 bpm 5 note stream be worth more pp than the 250 bpm fullscreen squares.

silmarilen wrote:

maps that osu finds hard for you obviously.
you cant make a ranking system based on what a person is better at, only what is statistically harder.
if you can jump 250 bpm fullscreen squares, but cant even fc a 150 bpm 5 note stream, it would still be pretty stupid to make that 150 bpm 5 note stream be worth more pp than the 250 bpm fullscreen squares.

So you can play one single map good (the one with squares) but you can't play good the thousands of 150 bpm maps, I'm not sure you're a good player then.

Also,

silmarilen wrote:

maps that osu finds hard for you obviously.

I have nothing to prove to osu! itself

Yales wrote:

silmarilen wrote:

maps that osu finds hard for you obviously.

I have nothing to prove to osu! itself

then why are you even arguing about this?

silmarilen wrote:

maps that osu finds hard for you obviously.

I have nothing to prove to osu! itself
then why are you even arguing about this?

Because I have something to prove to myself? Or to other people? What's harder for you: SS freedom dive nomod or 97% freedom dive with hardrock? Do you need to ask osu to know it? Well... I think it would be better if you don't have to ask osu to know it so you'll have your own opinion about what is hard or not.
About my example, if you SS freddom dive with hardrock you're fully rewarded (as long as you didnt play something that osu? found harder), but what if you don't.

The pro of osu!tp was that each of your top 50 scores were giving you at least a little something. Now even if you top50 on an insane map, you break your a** off for it. you might get nothing AT ALL. People can't even see it in your top perf, even if the map is known to be hard to everyone, except osu! So I just CAN'T agree with you when you say" If you want to know how good is someone check his top performances" There's no way half of my top "pp" are actually my real top perfomances. It might show some good (sometimes) scores, but definetly not my improvement. It's actually not what I'd like to show to show my skill.

Like how the hell my top perf' is full of DT whenever I play DT once every 2 months, whenever I have no top50 with DT... I don't get it. And don't get me wrong, I'm ok with my rank. But I wouldnt get this rank if I didnt play what osu!trainer told me to play with DT even though I have the "skill" for it. Just that my other scores, scores I try to improve everyday, aren't rewarded. I feel like playing pending maps, whenever the maaps are actually ranked.

PS: Sorry that I focused on my own problem but that's the best way I found to show what's bother me in this system.

your top ranks are a reflection of your skill though, the better you are the bigger the pp value of your scores will be end of story, unless you purposely avoid setting top ranks, which maps involved is kind of a moot point since its a comparative thing and everyone has access to the same maps; anyone who wants to participate in the ranking system has the means to do so and compare themselves to others in a way that reflects skill much better than ppv1.

Don't want to play >insert overrated ppv2 farm map here<? Well it's there, you have the option to do so, if you cared about your rank so much you would play it and if you were better than someone else who also farmed on those maps, guess what you will be higher ranked. you have to be lucid with your map choices if you want to rank up that's a given of course.

ppv1 was a mess, people seem to have forgotten already how people could get in the top 2k without even touching anything more difficult than a Hard.

Christs sake they even used the SUCCESS RATE ON MAPS as a metric of difficulty to help calculate how much pp a score was worth in ppv1, that's beyond ridiculous, things like Paul Rosenthal Liquid Remix were worth more than legitimate insanes because new players kept dying on it..

Riince wrote:

your top ranks are a reflection of your skill though, the better you are the bigger the pp value of your scores will be end of story, unless you purposely avoid setting top ranks, which maps involved is kind of a moot point since its a comparative thing and everyone has access to the same maps; anyone who wants to participate in the ranking system has the means to do so and compare themselves to others in a way that reflects skill much better than ppv1.

Don't want to play >insert overrated ppv2 farm map here<? Well it's there, you have the option to do so, if you cared about your rank so much you would play it and if you were better than someone else who also farmed on those maps, guess what you will be higher ranked. you have to be lucid with your map choices if you want to rank up that's a given of course.

ppv1 was a mess, people seem to have forgotten already how people could get in the top 2k without even touching anything more difficult than a Hard.

Christs sake they even used the SUCCESS RATE ON MAPS as a metric of difficulty to help calculate how much pp a score was worth in ppv1, that's beyond ridiculous, things like Paul Rosenthal Liquid Remix were worth more than legitimate insanes because new players kept dying on it..

I took the top 3rd performances of a top player.

Are you really, sincerely, saying that Primastella - Koigokoro [Insane] +HD,DT is a skill reference? (compared to airman and PowerExplosion +99% with hrhd...) Even me, little 3k player I am, I FCed it. And I'm not even mentionning the comments disqus of this same map...
Look at the top50 of airman and primastella... You'll see a real difference, for the same amount of PP...lol

TLDR: ohnoes koigokoro overrated zz