1. osu! forums
  2. osu!
  3. Feature Requests

This is a feature request. Feature requests can be voted up by supporters.
Current Priority: +0
show more
posted
Moved to Feature Requests.
posted

Ephemeral wrote:

strager wrote:

Why?
Alternatively, why not?
Seems like wasted effort for absolutely no gain.
posted
This map has been deleted on the request of its creator. It is no longer available.
posted

MetalMario201 wrote:

eMkay wrote:

So you just add up the rankings and divide them by the number of ranks as most of you should know xD
No. You differentiate the moment generating function and evaluate it at 0.


This is pointless since new users or users who play mainly easys would have an inflated rank.
? I don't think this is what he's after.

Cyclone would have like an average of "3" for example because he gets on average a #3 rank every map he plays. Or something.
posted
That is indeed what is meant.

Say I have a 4, 9, 20, 607, and a 304. Those would be added up, and divided by 5.

That is what he is asking. There wouldn't be a ranking chart or anything; just something in the profile saying what the average rank of the person is.

As opposed to just going by how many maps they've played (total rank).

Still kind of pointless, though. It's just one of those things you might find interesting and can waste hours snooping into other people's beeswax. Kind of fun, actually.

Though I'd rather just go by the monthly charts. I'd say those are more effective than this.
posted
I think average rank on beatmap level. As most people scored a B on a map.
most is not an accurate word, but you get the idea.
posted
I really don't get the point of this statistic since you can calculate it yourself
posted

qlum wrote:

I really don't get the point of this statistic since you can calculate it yourself
You seem to be forgetting that most people play more than 5 maps.
I don't know about you, but I honestly don't feel like taking 300 different maps and averaging that.

Also, I think this would be a great idea, it sounds better than the current ranking system derived from total score.
posted

Nakata Yuji wrote:

Also, I think this would be a great idea, it sounds better than the current ranking system derived from total score.
One person plays one map. Is #1 on that map. Another person plays 10,000 maps, of which they are #1 on 50.

Who wins and why?
posted

peppy wrote:

Nakata Yuji wrote:

Also, I think this would be a great idea, it sounds better than the current ranking system derived from total score.
One person plays one map. Is #1 on that map. Another person plays 10,000 maps, of which they are #1 on 50.

Who wins and why?
Exactly the point of my post.

(Unless, strager, you were talking about the MGF. In which case I was being cheeky. It's true though. :P)

This is by far more abusable than accuracy. There are enough #1 whores on the system as it is.
posted
It definitely wouldn't make any sense as a ranking mechanism.

It would be moderately cool as a miscellaneous statistic on the user's page, with all the other statistics.
posted
Averaging was never really...an accurate method of calculating.

Imagine you get #1 and a #100. The average would roughly be about #50-51.

If we were to further develop on this and you kept on getting #1's after that (Not that it won't/will happen)

2 x #1 + 1 x #100 / 3 = #34

3 x #1 + 1 x #100 / 4 = #26 (Round off)

4 x #1 + 1 x #100 / 5 = #21 (Round off)

No matter how many times you do it. You will never get to #1 unless you completely get #1 for every map you play and stay #1 on the leaderboard.

And if you are wondering... 100 x #1 + 1 x #100 / 101 = #2.

EDIT: There would also be a lot of ties too for #2, #3 and even lower places. Unless you are saying we should have a decimal rank #2.987 blah blah blah.
posted
That's why it's requested not as any sort of ranking thing; it's wanted just as a statistic in the profile for fun.
posted
This map has been deleted on the request of its creator. It is no longer available.
posted

peppy wrote:

Nakata Yuji wrote:

Also, I think this would be a great idea, it sounds better than the current ranking system derived from total score.
One person plays one map. Is #1 on that map. Another person plays 10,000 maps, of which they are #1 on 50.

Who wins and why?
Guess I wasn't thinking that far. But it would be nice as a statistic, however unnecessary.
posted
peppy removed useless stats from ranking/profiles before, so I don't see this happening. Plus, it'd probably be another one of those things that would put load on the database, thus rending it more "harmful" than anything.
posted
I'm with strager on this....i don't see why this is usefull....seems useless really
posted

strager wrote:

Ekaru wrote:

That's why it's requested not as any sort of ranking thing; it's wanted just as a statistic in the profile for fun.
Right.

I still don't see the usefulness, though.
There is no usefulness. That was my point. :P It's just something to waste 30 minutes on then never look at/care about again.
Please sign in to reply.