nonexistent accReynBolt wrote:
Ehm after tryharding this map for a week I got only 188 pp from this play S3RL - Bass Slut (Original Mix) at Fort's light insane. It's a way too inappropriate considering it requies some 263 bpm single tapping/alternating and tricky patterns but with small spacing between them.
forum
Performance Points feedback and suggestions (Standard)
posted
Total Posts
2,750
I had a song with no full combo complete but with high acc , then I did it with full combo but with a little bit less of accuracy than before, and I lost pp and ranks ..
I'm done .. why ?
I'm done .. why ?
Combo has a linear scaling with pp but acc scales exponentially. Just look at Tillerino's pp-graphs on reddit.
What happened? whether the performance pp has been obtained may be reduced by the osu? I experienced it, pp perfomance i somehow reduced because of what?? 
Probably because you set a higher-score lower-pp score on a map you already had a score on
combo should have a scaling based on map difficulty spread of the map on a combo axis.
you can calculate what combo is required to guarantee a guy fcd a hard part in a map for sure.
calculate the easiest part he could have fcd for 10, 20, 30, 40, --- , 100% combo, make the combo pp scale based on that
this would only result in profit, unless you look at replay data for the specific points at which combo was lost.
so this would make getting 75% combo on a map with the hard part in the middle worht more than 75% combo in a map with the hard part in the end. makes sense. it was suggested earlier but i just wrote it again
you can calculate what combo is required to guarantee a guy fcd a hard part in a map for sure.
calculate the easiest part he could have fcd for 10, 20, 30, 40, --- , 100% combo, make the combo pp scale based on that
this would only result in profit, unless you look at replay data for the specific points at which combo was lost.
so this would make getting 75% combo on a map with the hard part in the middle worht more than 75% combo in a map with the hard part in the end. makes sense. it was suggested earlier but i just wrote it again
No.-Zayto wrote:
DT is over rated
OD 9.75 is difficult so no, it's not.
Judging from your level of play of DT being Suklapallit or lower, I'd say yes.-Zayto wrote:
DT is over rated
Just wonderin why do some of my scores have a star next to them?
Because your score is top 500 on that map. People can download your replay of that map just by clicking the stardGeist wrote:
Just wonderin why do some of my scores have a star next to them?
I just lost some pp, because I got a HR-Score (94.32% accuracy with FC) which replaced a DT-Score (86.62%, not FC).
The HR-play had a higher score and therefore was submitted. But the pp-rating of the HR-play was so low, that it doesn't even show up in my top ranks.
Kind of frustrating, even if the pp-rating is just a number on the screen.
I just wish, that there was a way to select a previous score and resubmit it again.
Otherwise I always have to be worried for my pp, if I play a map with a different mod.
The HR-play had a higher score and therefore was submitted. But the pp-rating of the HR-play was so low, that it doesn't even show up in my top ranks.
Kind of frustrating, even if the pp-rating is just a number on the screen.
I just wish, that there was a way to select a previous score and resubmit it again.
Otherwise I always have to be worried for my pp, if I play a map with a different mod.
The fix for this is underway.mrburns123 wrote:
I just lost some pp, because I got a HR-Score (94.32% accuracy with FC) which replaced a DT-Score (86.62%, not FC).
The HR-play had a higher score and therefore was submitted. But the pp-rating of the HR-play was so low, that it doesn't even show up in my top ranks.
Kind of frustrating, even if the pp-rating is just a number on the screen.
I just wish, that there was a way to select a previous score and resubmit it again.
Otherwise I always have to be worried for my pp, if I play a map with a different mod.
E m i
For years.uberpancake wrote:
The fix for this is underway.mrburns123 wrote:
I just lost some pp, because I got a HR-Score (94.32% accuracy with FC) which replaced a DT-Score (86.62%, not FC).
The HR-play had a higher score and therefore was submitted. But the pp-rating of the HR-play was so low, that it doesn't even show up in my top ranks.
Kind of frustrating, even if the pp-rating is just a number on the screen.
I just wish, that there was a way to select a previous score and resubmit it again.
Otherwise I always have to be worried for my pp, if I play a map with a different mod.
osu!next will never come out
@Khelly: Players are preselecting maps based on the pp they give. Good maps might not get as much recognition due to a low reward while Tillerino keeps leading players into a one-way road of pp-maps. The problem is not that pp-maps are bad, the problem is that maps that don't follow a style that favors pp will see significantly less plays in favor of pp-maps for that reason.you are overthinking this way too hard, people will always come up with new ideas to make new sorts of maps and everyone maps in his own way.
On the other hand new players will grow up with exactly that maptype in mind and guess what happens if they map something - they will replicate exactly that type of map without ever seeing something else. Over time diversity in maps will die.
While this is more of a worst-case-scenario I'm 100% sure that this happens on a smaller scale and the longer it happens the larger the effect.
there will always be pp maps because some maps are just easier to fc with high diff (in terms of pp system) then others, but nonetheless people will keep making bad ass maps in the future
Idea about changing OD and therefore pp gained.
First of all, let me explain what I think OD is and why it's needed. OD (Overall Difficulty) is a numerical value which dictates how accurately one has to press the circles and sliders. OD for sliders is more lenient, as you can press the slider beginning in the whole time window, and still receive a 300 for it, assuming you don't miss the ending and/or the slider ticks. OD is necessary so we can calculate accuracy and through it a miss can be defined (not hitting in time/hitting to early).
Now that's cleared, I'll explain how I see OD working at the moment. Currently, no matter how accurately you click the circles, if OD is 7, there really is no distinction even if you click as if OD was 9. What I mean is, with OD 7 one can press quite sloppily, and still gets the same amount of pp as one, who clicks very accurately.
What I want to change is that base OD of a map will remain, to keep calculating scores as is, but change the way pp is gained depending on how accurately you can click. Also, make OD user definable (for their convenience, so they can see when they start messing up), but OD can only be set as the what the mapper has set it, or above that. So basically, when a map gives 100 pp with OD 7 and 100% accuracy, when a user FCs the map with 100% accuracy and OD 9, they get 110 pp (random pp values). So if two players FC SS the map, but one does it with OD 7, the other with OD 9, they will get the same score, but the OD 9 player gets higher pp for it.
However, I don't want to calculate pp from user set OD, but rather the timing standard of their clicks. By timing standard I mean the absolute value of time difference between each click and time when it's supposed to be clicked added up and then divided by the amount of circles.
Basically Timing Standard = abs(real time - click time) *clicks / circles.
I used circles because currently sliders don't depend much on timing, but could be added as well.
And that Timing Standard would be used to calculate pp instead of accuracy based on OD. Minimum PP gained from FC SSing a map with mapper set OD will stay the same, just that the more accurate one clicks, the more pp they will get.
Sorry for the sloppy English, just wanted to get the idea across.
First of all, let me explain what I think OD is and why it's needed. OD (Overall Difficulty) is a numerical value which dictates how accurately one has to press the circles and sliders. OD for sliders is more lenient, as you can press the slider beginning in the whole time window, and still receive a 300 for it, assuming you don't miss the ending and/or the slider ticks. OD is necessary so we can calculate accuracy and through it a miss can be defined (not hitting in time/hitting to early).
Now that's cleared, I'll explain how I see OD working at the moment. Currently, no matter how accurately you click the circles, if OD is 7, there really is no distinction even if you click as if OD was 9. What I mean is, with OD 7 one can press quite sloppily, and still gets the same amount of pp as one, who clicks very accurately.
What I want to change is that base OD of a map will remain, to keep calculating scores as is, but change the way pp is gained depending on how accurately you can click. Also, make OD user definable (for their convenience, so they can see when they start messing up), but OD can only be set as the what the mapper has set it, or above that. So basically, when a map gives 100 pp with OD 7 and 100% accuracy, when a user FCs the map with 100% accuracy and OD 9, they get 110 pp (random pp values). So if two players FC SS the map, but one does it with OD 7, the other with OD 9, they will get the same score, but the OD 9 player gets higher pp for it.
However, I don't want to calculate pp from user set OD, but rather the timing standard of their clicks. By timing standard I mean the absolute value of time difference between each click and time when it's supposed to be clicked added up and then divided by the amount of circles.
Basically Timing Standard = abs(real time - click time) *clicks / circles.
I used circles because currently sliders don't depend much on timing, but could be added as well.
And that Timing Standard would be used to calculate pp instead of accuracy based on OD. Minimum PP gained from FC SSing a map with mapper set OD will stay the same, just that the more accurate one clicks, the more pp they will get.
Sorry for the sloppy English, just wanted to get the idea across.
I'm just a simpuru guy that likes rhythm games and doesn't take ranks and mis-rhythms toooooooo seriously... but I wish I could keep my (-) 50,000 rank going above the (+) 50,000 rank Q _ Q
Well yeah, I'm pretty much the same. All I want is to stay in country #50, anything else is just a bonus. I just thought that the high level players would find that a nice change, since it's actually there where it would matter.bunnyluvr3000 wrote:
I'm just a simpuru guy that likes rhythm games and doesn't take ranks and mis-rhythms toooooooo seriously... but I wish I could keep my (-) 50,000 rank going above the (+) 50,000 rank Q _ Q
That's a long wall of text for asking acc to be determined by unstable rate instead of accuracy %. It's been suggested/asked before, and i believe UR isn't saved anywhere (that's why you have to rewatch a replay to check it) so it can't be used right now.Hedgeturtle wrote:
Idea about changing OD and therefore pp gained.
First of all, let me explain what I think OD is and why it's needed. OD (Overall Difficulty) is a numerical value which dictates how accurately one has to press the circles and sliders. OD for sliders is more lenient, as you can press the slider beginning in the whole time window, and still receive a 300 for it, assuming you don't miss the ending and/or the slider ticks. OD is necessary so we can calculate accuracy and through it a miss can be defined (not hitting in time/hitting to early).
Now that's cleared, I'll explain how I see OD working at the moment. Currently, no matter how accurately you click the circles, if OD is 7, there really is no distinction even if you click as if OD was 9. What I mean is, with OD 7 one can press quite sloppily, and still gets the same amount of pp as one, who clicks very accurately.
What I want to change is that base OD of a map will remain, to keep calculating scores as is, but change the way pp is gained depending on how accurately you can click. Also, make OD user definable (for their convenience, so they can see when they start messing up), but OD can only be set as the what the mapper has set it, or above that. So basically, when a map gives 100 pp with OD 7 and 100% accuracy, when a user FCs the map with 100% accuracy and OD 9, they get 110 pp (random pp values). So if two players FC SS the map, but one does it with OD 7, the other with OD 9, they will get the same score, but the OD 9 player gets higher pp for it.
However, I don't want to calculate pp from user set OD, but rather the timing standard of their clicks. By timing standard I mean the absolute value of time difference between each click and time when it's supposed to be clicked added up and then divided by the amount of circles.
Basically Timing Standard = abs(real time - click time) *clicks / circles.
I used circles because currently sliders don't depend much on timing, but could be added as well.
And that Timing Standard would be used to calculate pp instead of accuracy based on OD. Minimum PP gained from FC SSing a map with mapper set OD will stay the same, just that the more accurate one clicks, the more pp they will get.
Sorry for the sloppy English, just wanted to get the idea across.
Sorry if this is not really related to Performance Points but I will submit it anyway... I was looking on https://web.archive.org at old osu! sites out of pure curiosity, I selected the earliest date I could find, which was 11th October 2008, and I obviously saw the site had changed a massive amount. Although once looking through the site in its entirety I realized there was no sort of ranking system or PP system as a matter of fact. I continued to a random date, 13th September 2008, and looked at the player ranking. I saw the usual people like Saturos, tobebuta and Cyclone e.t.c But one thing I realized straight away is there are tiny red or green arrow's and a number next to a players name, surely indicating whether they have gone down or up in ranks recently. Go too https://web.archive.org/web/20080913014 ... yerranking for the example I am looking at here.
Conclusion
I would really think it would be a good idea too reintroduce those rank down/upscale arrows and the amount of ranks they have down/up-scaled because it might not seem like it but It really does interest people like me who wants an easy way too view a players progress (without going on to https://web.archive.org and doing it manually)
Thanks ^_^ xxx
Conclusion
I would really think it would be a good idea too reintroduce those rank down/upscale arrows and the amount of ranks they have down/up-scaled because it might not seem like it but It really does interest people like me who wants an easy way too view a players progress (without going on to https://web.archive.org and doing it manually)
Thanks ^_^ xxx
Quick overral suggestions here...
Increase PP gained with Lower AR +HD.
Drastically increase AR 9,8+ PP on easier beatmaps when player gets lower accuracy (being able to FC HR at that level is impressive).
Decrease PP gained by lower BPM DT beatmaps, increase PP gained by higher BPM DT beatmaps.
Either Increase PP gained with flashlight, or decrease its score multiplier (I dislike the fact that there are a lot of #1 players with lower PP gained from that beatmap).
Drastically increase DT score multiplier, to something like x2,5 (I did a few calculations about PP gained for that), increase HR score multiplier to x1,2, increase HT multiplier to x0,45, increase EZ multiplier to x0,65, and increase NF multiplier to x0,7 to match PP gained (Except for NF).
(I'm aware of Score v2 current multipliers)
Increase PP gained with Lower AR +HD.
Drastically increase AR 9,8+ PP on easier beatmaps when player gets lower accuracy (being able to FC HR at that level is impressive).
Decrease PP gained by lower BPM DT beatmaps, increase PP gained by higher BPM DT beatmaps.
Either Increase PP gained with flashlight, or decrease its score multiplier (I dislike the fact that there are a lot of #1 players with lower PP gained from that beatmap).
Drastically increase DT score multiplier, to something like x2,5 (I did a few calculations about PP gained for that), increase HR score multiplier to x1,2, increase HT multiplier to x0,45, increase EZ multiplier to x0,65, and increase NF multiplier to x0,7 to match PP gained (Except for NF).
(I'm aware of Score v2 current multipliers)
The ppv2 system works fine, but in my opinion in some sense it doesn't cooperate with current score system very well.
The thing is: on a same map, a play with much higher pp is highly possible to be blocked by a play with lower pp because of the score if the higher pp play isn't a fc one.
For example, Totori (aka rustbell)'s score on Remote Control [Max Control] HDDT: 608pp, 1563/1774 combo, 54,566,762 score.
Meanwhile, another friend of mine has a score like this: Remote Control [Max Control] No mod: 285pp, 1774/1774 combo(fc), 61,293,280 score (MUCH higher than Totori's score, but significantly less pp).
Which means, if Totori fced that map in no mod or even in just hd somet ime earlier, his brilliant HDDT score NEVER has a chance to be uploaded and added to his pp. In other words, a 280pp performance blocks a 600+pp performance. That totally doesn't make sense to me (and I believe to many others as well).
My recommendation will be, either modify current score (or pp) system to make sure that a play with higher pp can always beat another play with lower pp, or make we players be able to alter our own plays on bp list so that the rising players don't have to worry that their possible 2mod/3mod plays that worth 500+/600+ pps will be blocked by current 100/200 pp no mod fcs.
I know that I'm not the first one who come up with this opinion, but up to now I haven't seen much progress on this (or there actually is, in that case it'll be my bad XD). Right before I send this post, some tell me that "Just get used to it, it's common." But common doesn't mean reasonable. I love this game, and since it's becoming more and more confusing to me and some of my friends, I feel that I need to bring this topic to light again. I will be extremely happy if the update is on the way
The thing is: on a same map, a play with much higher pp is highly possible to be blocked by a play with lower pp because of the score if the higher pp play isn't a fc one.
For example, Totori (aka rustbell)'s score on Remote Control [Max Control] HDDT: 608pp, 1563/1774 combo, 54,566,762 score.
Meanwhile, another friend of mine has a score like this: Remote Control [Max Control] No mod: 285pp, 1774/1774 combo(fc), 61,293,280 score (MUCH higher than Totori's score, but significantly less pp).
Which means, if Totori fced that map in no mod or even in just hd somet ime earlier, his brilliant HDDT score NEVER has a chance to be uploaded and added to his pp. In other words, a 280pp performance blocks a 600+pp performance. That totally doesn't make sense to me (and I believe to many others as well).
My recommendation will be, either modify current score (or pp) system to make sure that a play with higher pp can always beat another play with lower pp, or make we players be able to alter our own plays on bp list so that the rising players don't have to worry that their possible 2mod/3mod plays that worth 500+/600+ pps will be blocked by current 100/200 pp no mod fcs.
I know that I'm not the first one who come up with this opinion, but up to now I haven't seen much progress on this (or there actually is, in that case it'll be my bad XD). Right before I send this post, some tell me that "Just get used to it, it's common." But common doesn't mean reasonable. I love this game, and since it's becoming more and more confusing to me and some of my friends, I feel that I need to bring this topic to light again. I will be extremely happy if the update is on the way
The harder the mods , the more pp it gives. thats how i see it
Well, maybe someone already asked this, so, sorry but i will re-ask it.
Why, when i score a 98% acc in a 3,5/4,3 song, im not earning any pp? and, the "weight" i recieve is of 1% when i strike those scores in MY FIRST TRY.
Here is a ss
https://gyazo.com/ddbbe7d0d09affcd4926f1fec0bb6994
Thanks for reading, i want to know why im not weigthing normal. Cause, for example, "Tranquility "In my room" <- that one is a 3,7 stars difficulty and i weigthed it in a 100%, i dont really understand the system :l
Why, when i score a 98% acc in a 3,5/4,3 song, im not earning any pp? and, the "weight" i recieve is of 1% when i strike those scores in MY FIRST TRY.
Here is a ss
https://gyazo.com/ddbbe7d0d09affcd4926f1fec0bb6994
Thanks for reading, i want to know why im not weigthing normal. Cause, for example, "Tranquility "In my room" <- that one is a 3,7 stars difficulty and i weigthed it in a 100%, i dont really understand the system :l
https://osu.ppy.sh/wiki/Performance_Points check "Weightage system".Lugli wrote:
... i dont really understand the system :l
I was thinking about why old map is not high pp enough, and I concluded that's because it doesn't apply changing the shape
For example
linear shape is easier than
bending shape
(Ignore the difficulty from distance between the circle, I can't find the different shape with same distance)
It also can make slider hard with adding tick
For example
linear slider is easier than
bending shape
I wonder does pp already apply this concept
For example
linear shape is easier than
bending shape
(Ignore the difficulty from distance between the circle, I can't find the different shape with same distance)
It also can make slider hard with adding tick
For example
linear slider is easier than
bending shape
I wonder does pp already apply this concept
I think that your rank placement should have some effect on your PP gained, not a lot of an effect, but maybe like 5-10% difference. that might also encourage players to play levels that are new or less popular. I also hear FL has the same PP multiplier as hidden... obviously, flashlight is much harder than hidden, i think it should be a little bit higher
E m i
destroyerwilly wrote:
I think that your rank placement should have some effect on your PP gained, not a lot of an effect, but maybe like 5-10% difference. that might also encourage players to play levels that are new or less popular. I also hear FL has the same PP multiplier as hidden... obviously, flashlight is much harder than hidden, i think it should be a little bit higher
Posted: 2 years agoMomiji wrote:
Hidden bonus = 18% aim, 2% accuracy
Flashlight bonus = 50% aim, 2% accuracy
Why do you lose what looks like to be around a thousand points for hitting 100s and 50s now? For newbies, at least, that doesn't look promising at all, to me.
Maybe make it so you can still get an S after like 1 or 2 misses? Like, every other game mode is just as forgiving :/ I have had this complaint from long time players before
Is there a minimum required acc to even get pp? I got a 96.92% S on a 2.8 star map that I've never played before and didn't gain a single point...
There is no minimum accuracy required. However, if the map is easier then your top plays, you may not receive as much or any significant amount of pp. In your case though, because of your rank, you probably didn't receive the pp because of your connection to Bancho
I've never had any issues with my connection to Bancho that I'm aware ofSandy Hoey wrote:
There is no minimum accuracy required. However, if the map is easier then your top plays, you may not receive as much or any significant amount of pp. In your case though, because of your rank, you probably didn't receive the pp because of your connection to Bancho
am I just playing maps that are considered "too easy"? It seems like 1/2 the maps I've been playing (including ones recommended from Tillerino) I just don't get pp for at all, and if I do it's like, 5 pp tops...It could also be that you aren't donig as well as you think you are. Just because you have decent acc and an S doesn't mean that you didn't break your combo somewhere and didn't get the FC.
It makes me sad to see people having a full list of top plays barely reaching over 1 minute in length. In most online games I know, when there is one thing that trumps every other form of play, they will nerf said method in a way. I would love to see something similar happen to osu!.
At the moment a lot of mappers know how to optimize their maps for maximum pp gains. This has both positive and negative effects. I personally believe we should take a closer look and define what a healthy meta should be. Before the optimisation of mapping, doubletime used to be somewhat healthy iirc. I noticed that nowadays, you will get looked down upon when you only have dubbeltime in your top plays.
Personally, my logic tells me that this meta can't be right. Hopefully we won't have to spam 1 minute maps in order to climb the rankings. (Sure, git gut may be a response for this. But climbing becomes really hard and demotivating if everybody around you only plays 1 minute maps for easy 500 pp plays). I'm not sure if I'm the only one that feels this way though.
At the moment a lot of mappers know how to optimize their maps for maximum pp gains. This has both positive and negative effects. I personally believe we should take a closer look and define what a healthy meta should be. Before the optimisation of mapping, doubletime used to be somewhat healthy iirc. I noticed that nowadays, you will get looked down upon when you only have dubbeltime in your top plays.
Personally, my logic tells me that this meta can't be right. Hopefully we won't have to spam 1 minute maps in order to climb the rankings. (Sure, git gut may be a response for this. But climbing becomes really hard and demotivating if everybody around you only plays 1 minute maps for easy 500 pp plays). I'm not sure if I'm the only one that feels this way though.
To be fairly honest usually those 1 minute high pp play maps are usually played with mods and at least to me are super difficult to get high accuracy onPittigbaasje wrote:
It makes me sad to see people having a full list of top plays barely reaching over 1 minute in length. In most online games I know, when there is one thing that trumps every other form of play, they will nerf said method in a way. I would love to see something similar happen to osu!.
At the moment a lot of mappers know how to optimize their maps for maximum pp gains. This has both positive and negative effects. I personally believe we should take a closer look and define what a healthy meta should be. Before the optimisation of mapping, doubletime used to be somewhat healthy iirc. I noticed that nowadays, you will get looked down upon when you only have dubbeltime in your top plays.
Personally, my logic tells me that this meta can't be right. Hopefully we won't have to spam 1 minute maps in order to climb the rankings. (Sure, git gut may be a response for this. But climbing becomes really hard and demotivating if everybody around you only plays 1 minute maps for easy 500 pp plays). I'm not sure if I'm the only one that feels this way though.