haha5957 wrote:

AR is more like preferance imo, especially these days. All people suggest different ARs on same map from 9.0 to even 10.0.(yes I am mapping something 6☆+ though). I'm still the most comfortable with AR9, while others actually say 9.5~10.0 is actually comfortable even on same map.

idk, I honestly think AR should be adjustable and never effect pp at this level. there was a moment where people couldn't AR10 but cookiezi-level players, but nowdays.. Idk, there are people who adds HR just because they can't read 8.0, or even 9.0, and they are more comfortable with higher ARs(Just like how i do best on AR 8.0~9.3, while i can still play bit of 6~7, 9.4~s. their best is AR 9.5 and it starts from there I guess.)

sucks for them because they have to HR or DT most of old-days maps(AR9.0), or even other maps with AR9.0s.
and yeah sucks for those you can't AR9.1+ no matter how good they play.

My examples are slightly exaggerated but it does happen, though.

currently yes AR11 is known to be very hard, but what I do wanna say that AR10 was the same way few years ago. well. AR10 these days? some people actually "prefer" those.

You may have a point. I only agree if you can't change the AR while playing hardrock. It would make no sense.

make the AR freely adjustable, but accordingly rewarded or penalized by pp.

and what would reward or penalize?

Reward what fewer people can play and penalize what more people can play

Mahoganytooth wrote:

Reward what fewer people can play and penalize what more people can play

HRDT buff pls

inb4 Emperorpenguin suddenly #1

Penguin would be #1 if he actually had good accuracy.

Well that depends

Does HR+DT change OD in the same way it changes AR?

Like can you get to OD11 with them or does it put a hard cap at OD10

I wonder what an OD11 SS would be worth

If it is OD11 then poor acc is understandable

@Mahogany

Mahoganytooth wrote:

Reward what fewer people can play and penalize what more people can play

this is what ppv1 tried to do. and it proved to be a horrible approach.

I thought PPV1 just rewarded you based on global score rankings on the songs you played so the best way to get ranks was to 4mod SS easys and normals and spin fast.

Mahoganytooth wrote:

I thought PPV1 just rewarded you based on global score rankings on the songs you played so the best way to get ranks was to 4mod SS easys and normals and spin fast.

If you are #1, then that means you're rewarded for what no one else has done.

maps where you beat high ranked players or maps which had a lot of scores were worth more if you set a high rank.

Kheldragar wrote:

Mahoganytooth wrote:

I thought PPV1 just rewarded you based on global score rankings on the songs you played so the best way to get ranks was to 4mod SS easys and normals and spin fast.

If you are #1, then that means you're rewarded for what no one else has done.

You literally just span faster than anyone else

That's not worth rewarding

silmarilen wrote:

maps where you beat high ranked players or maps which had a lot of scores were worth more if you set a high rank.

That's a poor approach to anything but entirely separate to what we're discussing

Tom doesn't want to add that kind of human factor to the PP calculations, that's why you wont see those "bonuses" anytime soon. Ideally, the algorithm should reflect what you are saying; reward what fewer people can do. Unfortunately that would require a reading difficulty calculator which is very hard to come up with...

Giving more bonuses for note density is the only way I could see to do it, but the problem is EZ being underweighted, and that's more because of the low OD. You'd have to up the bonus from low AR enough to compensate for the low OD, but then you'd have to be careful that you don't end up screwing with actual low AR maps like easies and normals.

Alternatively make OD weighted less heavily.

reward what less people can do = top 20 is all easy mod gang and players like Rucker, ShadowSoul, TTTL,

Only if you overdo the bonuses

reason why DT is bit overrated is well described in barusamiko's post.

Due to DT diffs are also re-calculated by some formula, 5star nomod is farely equal to DT 5star (difficluty of pattern-wise.)

however they generally have high ODs, which is heavily rewarding.

Nature of osu! is a RHYTHM game. +- 20ms from perfect timing even on OD10 doesn't look too hard compared to other rhythm games. Now keep in mind that OD10 is the very highest OD in this game, and it doesnt even exist(yes there are, but i'd say ignorable amount.)

let's be honest, if someone is capable of playing a difficulty pretty well in osu!, they won't have problem 99%+ing map since most of osu! maps have 7~8OD(+-32~38ms).


Now yes OD 8 is definitely harder than OD7, but if you are well skilled enough, honestly OD8 or below pretty much feels the same. OD9 is slightly more challenging, but not even that with appropriate AR(9.5+). maybe OD10? yes probably, but maybe not a huge deal looking at those high scores with DT or HR.

I do think OD is bit overratted at the moment, especially OD 8~9s because they don't feel too different from lower ARs but they get rewarded hecktons with high accuracy. I still think ODs should be rewarded correctly but any OD lower than 8 honestly doesnt mean too much and there aren't much of OD9 or higher maps, and they are somehow popular as a "good pp rewarding map"(detetori- emotional skyscraper, wind god girl. they have OD9 and isn't too hard but rewarded heckton.) I don't think this is right. getting played more and gets more attention just because they have high OD? god, I wanna go change all my maps to OD9 so they can be pp-awarding and maybe they will get more attention.


What I'm trying to say is that OD should be correctly rewarded but situation where people only look for OD8 or higher doesn't look right. I think they should be adjustable, or maybe make a mod that increases OD to 10 no matter what their original OD is(So that maps with similar difficulty, with low OD, doesn't get kicked out indirectly from someone who wants some PP). HR is different story because OD7 maps doesnt even reach OD10 with it, and for some maps HR makes it way too hard to play.

I was kind of guy who plays map that I like, but when it comes to pp farming i have to type OD>7.5 on my search bar just because it's so much easier to farm pp with OD8, OD9 maps. Now if OD becomes adjustable or OD10, or maybe even OD11 mod comes out yes I think I'll start playing all the various maps again.




bit different story, but again, about AR, unlike when AR10s where regarded as super hards they became more like "preferance" these days. Some of my friends say my map sucks because it has AR8 or AR7(which was major trend back in time). I also wanna change the frikkin AR to 9 but meh not possible. old maps are getting some complains just because of AR(which doesn't really mean anything) and also doesn't make sense.

now talking about AR10.3 or 11, yes they are really hard but some people are already getting used to AR10.3 and maybe AR11 eventually. I mean, just make it adjustable and reward same pp. why not? most of ~2012 maps are getting discriminated just because of low OD or low AR. Some gets advantage just because of that OD9. Does it even make sense? You are playing the same map.

haha5957 wrote:

bit different story, but again, about AR, unlike when AR10s where regarded as super hards they became more like "preferance" these days. Some of my friends say my map sucks because it has AR8 or AR7(which was major trend back in time). I also wanna change the frikkin AR to 9 but meh not possible. old maps are getting some complains just because of AR(which doesn't really mean anything) and also doesn't make sense.

now talking about AR10.3 or 11, yes they are really hard but some people are already getting used to AR10.3 and maybe AR11 eventually. I mean, just make it adjustable and reward same pp. why not? most of ~2012 maps are getting discriminated just because of low OD or low AR. Some gets advantage just because of that OD9. Does it even make sense? You are playing the same map.

There are a lot of potential issues with freely adjustable AR. The biggest one would be the effect on the leaderboards. As a player who enjoys older maps (including yours), I think a lot of the people who put in the time to become good at old maps would feel kind of cheated because people would suddenly be able to come in and play the same map with way less note density due to the higher AR and potentially make the top50.

silmarilen wrote:

Mahoganytooth wrote:

Reward what fewer people can play and penalize what more people can play

this is what ppv1 tried to do. and it proved to be a horrible approach.

However that's not the reason why ppv1 was bad. It just had a lot of arbitrary parameters all over the place. A decent map ranking based pp system is definitely possible and shouldn't be rejected because of one failed attempt.

haha5957 wrote:

reason why DT is bit overrated is well described in barusamiko's post.

Due to DT diffs are also re-calculated by some formula, 5star nomod is farely equal to DT 5star (difficluty of pattern-wise.)

Now yes OD 8 is definitely harder than OD7, but if you are well skilled enough, honestly OD8 or below pretty much feels the same. OD9 is slightly more challenging, but not even that with appropriate AR(9.5+). maybe OD10? yes probably, but maybe not a huge deal looking at those high scores with DT or HR.

I do think OD is bit overratted at the moment, especially OD 8~9s because they don't feel too different from lower ARs but they get rewarded hecktons with high accuracy. I still think ODs should be rewarded correctly but any OD lower than 8 honestly doesnt mean too much and there aren't much of OD9 or higher maps, and they are somehow popular as a "good pp rewarding map"(detetori- emotional skyscraper, wind god girl. they have OD9 and isn't too hard but rewarded heckton.) I don't think this is right. getting played more and gets more attention just because they have high OD? god, I wanna go change all my maps to OD9 so they can be pp-awarding and maybe they will get more attention.

I was kind of guy who plays map that I like, but when it comes to pp farming i have to type OD>7.5 on my search bar just because it's so much easier to farm pp with OD8, OD9 maps. Now if OD becomes adjustable or OD10, or maybe even OD11 mod comes out yes I think I'll start playing all the various maps again.

bit different story, but again, about AR, unlike when AR10s where regarded as super hards they became more like "preferance" these days. Some of my friends say my map sucks because it has AR8 or AR7(which was major trend back in time). I also wanna change the frikkin AR to 9 but meh not possible. old maps are getting some complains just because of AR(which doesn't really mean anything) and also doesn't make sense.

I'm absolutely right with all this that I have quoted, but not with the rest. Adjusting settings as player's choice would ruin what osu was meant from 2007 to now. If you can't read or tap properly sincerelly you have no reasson to be on that ranking. There are standarized DT, HR and HT mods to fix some disbalanced maps and give aditional oportunities to more people to rank these maps even if they can't read or tap the original map. You can combine 2 of these 3 mods to obtain more possible oportunities and if you can't still rank this with these mods or combinations of these then the map is not meant for you.

Now yes, we need atleast OD8 to start seing good pp from accuracy and some maps are worth their pp froma accuracy, but the problem IS that there are many cases of pussy patterns that give no opposition to accuracy from their patterns difficulty and so they're free accuracy maps even with their high respective OD. I've noticed that there are many OD7 old maps which are more Accuracy killers than these newer maps with OD8.5 even with the similar amount of stars ... this ressults that the new map gives more pp and with less effort, more people can high accuracy this than the older map which has a lower pp limit but is harder to high accuracy and people avoids it because "too hard pp" ...

These new style maps tends to be more frequently more friendly to gameplay, to be less aggresive patterns (by both aim and tapping) ressulting that there are lots of players that can only play these new styled maps meanwhile if you set them old school maps likely Mutsuhiko Izumi - Red Goose [Another] you fuck up their skill. Hey I have an S of only 95.50% accuracy at TJ.Hangneil - Kamui [dksslqj Style] that is only worth as a little less than 160's pp and I still find this as one of my most epic moments ever in osu, even more epic than most of my 200's pp ranks . Also not any new map is broken of pp's, if you look at Apocalyptica - Ion [Extra] it's a really good map that I'm glad of having it on S at 96.85% accuracy which has a good pp potential from being OD8.6 but being somehow difficult to farm because of considerably hard patterns... not even a fairly "good accuracy" on that map and I'm between the top 200's as shown in this Screenshot.

But hey, I have not that many of these maps in my best performance because there are many more pp efficent and easier maps that I've done with higher accuracy mainly because they were much easier to do, but I still go for these hard and underrated maps because I don't want to be a mere farmer of ppv2.

About Easy it's fine as how it's going, it even needs more difference from low accuracy EZ plays than to higher accuracy EZ plays, but common EZ is a kind of aditional mod and it's not sincerely a useful mod to learn in what general skill means, you will not see it oftenly in a torneun or in OWC, learning this mod doesn't give you general skill just giving you a chance at ranking more maps in a unnusual way.

and who decides what 'patterns' are objectively hard? it varies massively from player to player. hard to make a system that includes everyone single those patterns out.

Overlaps, abrupt spacing changes, polygons, weird sliders with a very high SV...

The more uncomfortable the patterns are to grab and to tap, the more hard to accurate is. For aim, usually these circles that forces you being more time at a determinated place of the screen to then move more sharply will cost you most, if the map is constantly fluid then there is no kind of problem with aim level. About tapping the less variety of tapable patterns there are the more easy to repeat it constantly is, meaning that there should be something that evaluates some kind of "strain" for this ... likely quick changes from duplets to tripletse or a stream that ends with 1/2 of null timed note then slider over THE SAME position, this last one makes lots of sliderbreaks and is proportionally difficult to the more circles had the stream before the slider.

This is what I would consider pattern difficulty, even more if you mix bboth complicated aim + complicated tapping instead of just fast tapping and fast aiming

Mhm, I agree on OD being a too big factor for map selection but I also think that the differences in OD are something that develop with time.
Personally I don't really stand a chance to get a SS on any OD8 map but it's fairly possible on OD7 and below. I think it's reasonable that it's worth a lot more than lower OD.
A possibility to upgrade the OD of the map somehow would be cool for pp-farming but it's also kinda lame as lower OD can have a sense for the map and it would also feel even more unfair for people whose OD is limited by suboptimal input devices.
You could say something like "if 2σ of hit notes are in the σ-environment of the 300-area OD is upgraded by 1 for pp-calculation" to reward very accurate players for a result instead of letting them edit the map-specs beforehand and get higher pp even though it wouldn't even have been that good on the original OD. Or you could make it exclusive to SS-scores/find some new name for this scorecategory.
Imo it's important to put strong limits to how players can influence the maps metadata without mods so it can't get abused.

Riince wrote:

and who decides what 'patterns' are objectively hard? it varies massively from player to player. hard to make a system that includes everyone single those patterns out.

Physics and physiology?

Certain angles are harder to make depending on the momentum from the previous patterns than others. Also, there's a big connection between rhythm and aim pressure. As pressure on either increases, so does the "energy distribution" (which is more of attention) between both, and that means that the other half would undeniably increase in pressure as well.

In other words, let's say I have a map with a really long stream, like 2 minutes. And let's assume I'm not that fast a streamer, but the map is only 160bpm, and the stream starts out with stack spacing, and gradually increases to 1.3x spacing. Now, at fist, streaming this would be easy peasy. However, the longer I stream, the more strain is put on my left hand. Even though the streaming is constant 160bpm, it will take more and more effort to continue streaming uninterruptedly. Now my aim hand has more stamina than my stream hand, but since the stream keeps spacing itself out gradually, I'll experience a roughly equal stamina loss in both hands rather than just my streaming hand.

That's one thing, the affecting of rhythm on aim and vice versa. It'd also work if I had lots of fast jumps - my tapping hand gets a lot more tired playing Nyan Nyan Drive (which I alt) than a map that's 30bpm higher and has mostly alt singles. It's something I call mutual strain. I also find it best to approach mapping under the assumption that the player will use two hands as opposed to mouse-only because that's just the majority of the game.

Another difficulty aspect is angle. And angle is always directly tied to momentum, which is always tied to pressure, which is always tied to the strain caused on the player. I've found that with small momentum any angle seems to work except weird stuff like a 270° turn coming from the bottom right at low speed. Basically, in my experience, I've found that other players (and myself) have more ease with what I call "conventional angles" (mainly 90°, 45°, 120° and 180° turns) and "unconventional angles" which, even if they work as a map, are just not seen commonly. Some popular users of these angles would be Amamiya Yuko, or HanzeR. fanzhen seems to combine conventional angles with unconventional ones in a creative way so he'd kind of fall in a league of his own, in this respect.

I don't know precisely which kinds of angles are preferred on average but it wouldn't be hard to figure that out with some sort of poll. And then it wouldn't be hard (I assume) to determine that x angle at y momentum has z difficulty value (for aim). Momentum is simply the combination of spacing + aim + previous angle. "previous angle" would be same direction the followpoints take (clockwise). So, let's say I make a 4.0x jump at a 90° angle at 220bpm, and the next jump is a 2.0x jump at yet another 90° turn - this jump's difficulty would feel more like a 4.0x jump followed by a 1.0x jump, due to the massive speed you've gained from the initial jump. Whereas if the pattern was reversed, the second jump would feel like a 5.0x jump because the initial jump didn't give much power and then you have to add extra force to make up for the sharp angle too.

These are just two takes on difficulty that I haven't seen yet but they seem pretty relevant to me. I mean, the laws of motion are a thing, they don't hold exemptions for circle clickers.

Tess wrote:

quote

The biggest flaw here is that you assume patterns are all PHYSICALLY difficult, they're not. Certain shapes are simply hard to break down and follow. You listed 90°, 45°, 120° and 180° as the easier angles yet 90 and 45 are imo the hardest angles to follow in the game. It's far too subjective to model using "some sort of poll" and it's far more complex than just calculating hand velocities.

I'm talking about physical strain, not physical difficulty. If you model things by difficulty it gets subjective. It should never be about what's the most difficult for people, but about what causes the most objective strain. I also said that those angles are easier relative to other types of angles, and it's always contextual.

The image I'm trying to draw there is that you can calculate contextual strain objectively by paying attention both to the natural physical strain patterns would give, and the average difficulty of certain patterns for the average player. You mentioned "90 and 45 are the hardest angles to follow in the game" but it always depends on the context of the strain of the previous patterns, the bpm, the rhythm complexity, the note density, and the angle you're coming from. I wasn't talking about "which angle is the hardest", I was talking about "which angles do I see more people being able to complete".

If you look at "what's hard" then you fall into the personal context world of subjectivity and if you look at "what strains" then you're still taking the context of the map and physiology into account with little regard for the player's ideas of what's difficult and easy, since that's different for every player anyway. Physical strain is not, and if you model things that way then you're looking at which player can deal with the most strain in all areas (aim, reading, speed, rhythm, accuracy) rather than "who can do stuff that others can do less".

im not really sure what you mean by strain, it might just be because my fingers are pretty strong from years of pen spinning, but i've never felt strained from aiming, even if i'm going out of my way on crazy jump maps for an extended time. i nofail spammed eighto for like almost an hour once because im stupid and thought it would help, and if anything my hand felt more flexible afterwards.

even for the average player i think the factor of strain for angle snapping is kind of irrelevant unless were talking intense long marathons that have consistent 6+ star difficulty minimum. which don't exist afaik.

I agree that stamina should be a factor. for tapping. but aiming stamina is something that is a far larger variable than tapping stamina. you've got people with smaller/bigger areas, and people who use touchscreens which pretty much completely eliminate any angle-related difficulties...

By strain I mean quite literally the amount of effort (based on an average) it costs to do a certain something. I mean, there's so much available data on maps and scores on those maps, it shouldn't be hard to see what kinds of angles are relatively more intensive to play than others, along with rhythms as well. I'll agree that when it comes to pure aim my stamina between aim and tapping also doesn't compare. But I've noticed that in myself (and other players, I've even seen index mention this) as soon as I start running out of stamina in one hand, I run out of stamina in the other as well.

As for touchscreens, those always seemed to have had an apparent advantage when it comes to aiming. Isn't that why Tom disabled TAG4 pp?

Also, do keep in mind I'm just giving a rough idea of the general direction you could go in when considering how to calculate pp more accurately. I purposefully avoided any specific ideas because, in my experience, people tend to argue or neglect any precise propositions unless they reach them together.

Strain is caused through having to tense your hand to hit small circles or to accelerate or decelerate your hand quickly. I experience way more strain playing 4.5* old cs5 maps compared to maps with jumps that flow well like Senketsu no Chikai.

huh, i guess i just don't think that kind of strain has a noticeable impact on playing, anymore than how hard it is to press a certain type of key down. in my experience if someone messes up on aiming it's reading related.

What is aimif everyone connects misaims to misreads?

Well reading has a strain of its own which is the time it takes for your brain to process what's on the screen and react to it accordingly. I don't get what's so "subjective" about that. The more things on the screen at once, the longer your brain will take to organize everything because it can't rely on reflexes. The less time you have to react, the more trained your reflexes will have to be to react to something. These are both two reading strains determined by the opposite ends of note density, and yet the attention paid to them is rather minimal.

I have an idea, if aim speed and accuracy can be independent, why can't a new subcategory be added for flashlight?

Because most people have no clue what actually makes flashlight difficult. Memorization is the smallest factor, not the only one.

Strain as described by Tess is a real thing. When you have a series of jumps, the algorithm will calculate the aiming difficulty of each individual jump, and then this number is further increased as you have more jumps. That's strain, I think, but of the most simple variety.

If you have a series of jumps end on a spaced stream, that's a different matter. There is clearly a *lot* of effort that you need to put in order to hit all notes on the spaced stream at the end, but the current difficulty algorithm doesn't really take that into consideration, IMO. The effort you have to put to decelerate your cursor like that is definitely real, as B1rd said. I think this is also partly the reason why CS difficulty calculation is flawed and a flat bonus had to be put in place in order to fix star ratings for high CS maps.

That said, I don't think looking at angles alone is the way to implement a reading calculator. There are some good things you can do with it, but I don't think it's enough to fix highly overrated maps like Koigokoro. For that, you would need a pattern detector: an algorithm that looks at mapping patterns as a whole, instead of just calculating the angles from individual jumps. I'd say that if Tom wants to look into that, he should start very small and safe (as is many times the case in software developing), by testing individual patterns that are *for sure* a pain in the ass to everyone who plays this game and are also underrated by the current algorithm. I think that if you add a small batch of those to the current build, you would already be fixing DT farm maps by making everything else give much more PP. Alternatively, you could detect EASY patterns and then add a penalty, but to me that sounds more difficult.

Regarding the angle thing that got mentioned briefly several posts back, I think a lot of underweighted and overweighted aim patterns could be brought more into line just by considering the angle between the current straight line path and the previous straight line path. If you call that angle theta, something as simple as d^(a-cos(theta))/t^(a+cos(theta)) rather than d^a/t^a (where I think right now a=3) would fix a looot of problems. Would need to use a smaller measuring stick for distance in order to make it actually work, but that would be probably easy enough to find a good approximate value for.

Doing that correctly would nerf "slow" DT farm maps relative to faster ones - DT farm maps have lots of jumps with small angles between consecutive paths and the change I'm suggesting would make such jumps more dependent on effective bpm and less dependent on distance between notes. On the other extreme, large spacing with really wide angles would be buffed, but would scale less with effective bpm - things like the ridiculous quintuples in Genryuu Kaiko or any pattern at all in Worldwide Choppers.

I'd just like to drop by to say (and repeat) that I really do think that even simpler and smaller pattern/rhythm complexity evaluation logic could be added, since anything in the right direction would be a step forward and better than not considering these aspects at all. As long as we feel the average error of the algorhythm gets smaller that is.

For rhythm complexity simply considering variability of the rhythm to a small extent would be great, to reward accing stuff that isn't 1/2 spam almost exclusively a bit more.