community forum

# Performance Points feedback and suggestions (Taiko)

posted
Total Posts
645
Topic Starter

#### AnFace wrote:

i'm curious about how well it'll work for the really good players that don't have great scores/don't play often or whatever

actually i'd like to know how the current broken temporary system is but we're not allowed to see sadface
Players will still have to get great scores. The metric is called "performance points", not "potential points".
Also the current broken algorithm simply does the following:
1. Multiply accuracy with star rating of the map (up to a maximum of 500)
2. Divide result by 3 if converted
3. Build the diminishing sum of the best scores for every player

That also makes it pretty obvious why it's not working well, heh? Still better than nothing - that's why it exists for now.
There should be a way to convert maps better than it does at the moment and still keep the combo score ratio the same.
Streams might be the biggest obstacle but I believe it is possible. :<

#### AnFace wrote:

i'm curious about how well it'll work for the really good players that don't have great scores
Ehh...
I guess the new pp system should scan the players' brain for skill that he didn't put into a high score?
ideally hell yea

i mean the players that don't specifically have a lot of scores but still have some that are really good blah blah you know what i mean

quality vs quantity how will it play out overall
I have got a question.
Let us assume that y got better score than x on the score board, does that affect the PP or just the rank position or none?

#### Sy[K]es wrote:

I have got a question.
Let us assume that y got better score than x on the score board, does that affect the PP or just the rank position or none?
You are still thinking inside the box, namely that of the old system.

ppv2 has a beatmap difficulty algorithm, meaning this is what needs to be worked out precisely to get accurate results. Your performance is a statistical analysis compared with a perfect performance on the map. Player ranks in comparison to each other on a single map should be irrelevant. That was the problem with the old system for many reasons.

I'm sure there will be a LOT of testing. When tp first came about, it wasn't anything like it is now, and Tom tweaked it a lot, even adding a new variable (aim). I'm not predicting it's initial failure for taiko, but there is only room for improvement upon the algorithm, even if the first results may be completely off.
Topic Starter
I've got some initial difficulty lists to show off here:

This spreadsheet does not contain every single beatmap, only the ones I selected for testing. Please give me feedback and let me know which version of the algorithm works the best.
Hum, for me it seems like the basic algorithm is the most accurate.

The others one still have some weird results like Freedom Dive's oni > Inner oni while it's the contrary or still a duckling > I'm your daddy Fatal oni which is the opposite aswell.

I still need to look at it more closely though.
Yeah, same goes for HIT AND RUN IN 1920 A.D. and NNRT (which should be placed a lot lower normally)
But from first look things don't seem to be very far off, well done so far
With colour changes w/o converts:

sacrifice and chipscape taikosakis are easier than who's your daddy or akasha, also gothic system is much harder than taikosakis not just a little

This is a lengthy post but please bear with me~

Some of these are human some of these are inhuman and some of these are easy, I wanna see what your programm thinks of these maps :3c
Hey, could you include those maps into the difficulty rating ? They have lower bpm but they are actually pretty hard compared to regular 220+ maps, so it would give us a good indication on how you balanced technical vs speed

https://osu.ppy.sh/b/204931
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/2f9ibeu4yk8e ... nsekai.osz
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/2f9ibeu4yk8e ... e%2008.osz
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/k22ut3jyjn9j ... 20Ruby.osz

#### Nashmun wrote:

Hey, could you include those maps into the difficulty rating ? They have lower bpm but they are actually pretty hard compared to regular 220+ maps, so it would give us a good indication on how you balanced technical vs speed
most of the maps listed i've never played because of wtfbpm and me being slowface so i'd like to know this

otherwise goodbye to my rank i'll see you all in hell

#### Nashmun wrote:

https://osu.ppy.sh/b/204931
THIS MAP.
dafuq
Topic Starter
Added another algorithm version, considering rhythm changes, to the end. Will add more versions when I get back home.
I think the pattern difficulty needs to be improved quite a bit - right now chipscape and Broken the Moon have the same rating (45). I could FC chipscape if I actually tried (and I'm really not very good at high BPM), but I'm not even able to pass Broken the Moon.
Even with problems like that, it looks SO much better than what we're used to having, so good job.
I know your algorithm version isn't over but, i'm not sure we talked about "hitting big notes" in the difficulty of the maps. When the bpm is high it becomes harder to hit the big notes even if you alternate. The big notes density inside the map should also be considered as a + in the difficulty. (more the bpm is high and more the big notes density is high more difficult the map is) When there are big notes you are supposed to hit them. And even if you try to avoid them they are a pain for you to read correctly the next part of the map. Imo it's important cause I think it's one of the reasons that makes "Unpleasant Sonata " so hard to FC.
While it's understandable that everyone is focusing more on how the converts get converted and how the hard maps get valued, but let's talk about lower maps a little.

We have *** Passionate (TV Size) which is valued the same as Dragons. I FCd Passionate with hard rock where I barely get an A on Dragons, with a low combo. Dragons is so much harder because of really odd rhythms and because it's kinda long compared to the TV Size thing.

Then you have Hades in the Heaven which is valued slightly above but then you have a couple of much easier maps, namely Night of Fire by lepidon which is a lot higher above. Certain pattern chain in the middle of the map make Hades really really hard to FC, while Night of Fire has quite simple patterns and is something I consider a beginner's map. Thank you for playing isn't that difficult either and it's even further above.

Also in the mid class you have Intersect Thunderbolt 7491's Oni which is below Ernst Oni. I highly disagree with this, despite Ernst being a bit more pattern heavy. The patterns in Ernst aren't difficult, it's just slightly a more dense map, but in Intersect Thunderbolt you have high speed pattern changes, namely a quite hard 1/3 stream to perform correctly due to it's bpm which contains multiple hand swaps.

Just some thoughts.

#### TimmyAkmed wrote:

I know your algorithm version isn't over but, i'm not sure we talked about "hitting big notes" in the difficulty of the maps. When the bpm is high it becomes harder to hit the big notes even if you alternate. The big notes density inside the map should also be considered as a + in the difficulty. (more the bpm is high and more the big notes density is high more difficult the map is) When there are big notes you are supposed to hit them. And even if you try to avoid them they are a pain for you to read correctly the next part of the map. Imo it's important cause I think it's one of the reasons that makes "Unpleasant Sonata " so hard to FC.
No, score is enough of a measure. Consider big notes as a bonus points not increase in diff.

I like this, it's really close to a real difficulty. Though 51 is harder than chipscape.
I gave you the wrong version of one of the maps I suggested, here is the interesting one :

http://puu.sh/72lL2.zip

@lolcubes, you are right, but focusing on high-tier maps (not including Firces forces and cie though) is good to have a global overview of how each aspect are weighted, which is more difficult to see on standards onis and uber-insane ones.

#### EBAWER123 wrote:

No, score is enough of a measure. Consider big notes as a bonus points not increase in diff.
I still think the same, when a mapper put big notes in his map he wants us to hit them like big notes. Being able to FC maps like Distorted Lovesong Taikocalypse DX without hitting the big notes doesn't mean to me that you are able to play the map the way it has been thought for (sorry i'm not sure everybody will know what I mean here) If we avoid to hit the big notes it's because it's obviously harder.

And for example even if it's only on Unrankable stuff i'm sure almost everybody who'll see big notes in patterns will have trouble to read it "normally"
Topic Starter

#### EBAWER123 wrote:

No, score is enough of a measure. Consider big notes as a bonus points not increase in diff.
I still think the same, when a mapper put big notes in his map he wants us to hit them like big notes. Being able to FC maps like Distorted Lovesong Taikocalypse DX without hitting the big notes doesn't mean to me that you are able to play the map the way it has been thought for (sorry i'm not sure everybody will know what I mean here) If we avoid to hit the big notes it's because it's obviously harder.

And for example even if it's only on Unrankable stuff i'm sure almost everybody who'll see big notes in patterns will have trouble to read it "normally"
Since the bonus in score is so small and there are no disadvantages over normal notes when hitting them like normal notes I don't think they should coult as "difficulty". If they'd break combo or reduce accuracy if hit wrong, then I'd agree with you more.

But even if I did agree, it'd be impossible to check scores for having hit big notes with 2 buttons, which in turn makes it impossible to have sensible pp calculations if big notes would be factored in as difficulty.