Quack.
Ziggo wrote:
That'd be awful. I hope this will never happen.
I agree with this. While I do like the idea of having scoring system based on pp, another con to this not yet mentioned is that there are thousands upon thousands of scores right now (based on, well, score) that people would be pretty mad about if they spent so much time trying to get and suddenly weren't top 50 anymore. Having both systems works best IMO, it keeps the old score system for those who prefer it more as well as a new and generally more accurate one.Period wrote:
I wouldn't mind this if both systems were side by side. As in, you could select
Top 50s by Score
or
Top 50s by Performance
the same way you select which gamemode you want to see top 50s in, at least on the web interface for beatmaps. In-game could just work with the dropdown like selecting country and friend ranks does.
I think being able to set a top 50 through your score opens the game up to be a lot more competitive to weaker players (Players who can HD+HR, for example, rather than DT), so it shouldn't be removed completely. If you removed top 50s by score, only the very best players would ever get a top 50s on the popular maps, so in the end, for a lot of maps, it would look very similar to the normal ranking system.
I think including both score systems would be a larger benifit. Maybe Top 50s by Performance could be the default, but I think maybe that would be too big a transition all at once. Including both seems like a better solution.
It would look pretty good on profiles too, imo:
[User] achieved Performance rank #42 on [Map] (osu!)
and
[User] achieved Score rank #14 on [Map] (osu!)
Hopefully you are in the minority and this does happen.Ziggo wrote:
That'd be awful. I hope this will never happen.
I don't see why weaker players should even stand a chance, they're weaker, if they don't improve they will stay weak and die out of the ranking. Think of it like osu! natural selection, the weak die and the strong live on.Period wrote:
I wouldn't mind this if both systems were side by side. As in, you could select
Top 50s by Score
or
Top 50s by Performance
the same way you select which gamemode you want to see top 50s in, at least on the web interface for beatmaps. In-game could just work with the dropdown like selecting country and friend ranks does.
I think being able to set a top 50 through your score opens the game up to be a lot more competitive to weaker players (Players who can HD+HR, for example, rather than DT), so it shouldn't be removed completely. If you removed top 50s by score, only the very best players would ever get a top 50s on the popular maps, so in the end, for a lot of maps, it would look very similar to the normal ranking system.
I think including both score systems would be a larger benifit. Maybe Top 50s by Performance could be the default, but I think maybe that would be too big a transition all at once. Including both seems like a better solution.
It would look pretty good on profiles too, imo:
[User] achieved Performance rank #42 on [Map] (osu!)
and
[User] achieved Score rank #14 on [Map] (osu!)
This argument really just keeps coming back as the biggest slap in the face to things I want to happen honestly. I recall making a thread about nerfing halftime because it's just so strong on hard maps but it got shot down for the reason that people spent a lot of time trying to get their scores and so I had to find an alternative; now the same argument is back again here. If a score is weaker then I don't really care how long you spent getting it, the score is weaker and shouldn't matter in a competitive game. Effort shouldn't be rewarded, performance should be rewarded and that seems to be the direction the ranking system wanted to go with the introduction of pp, ppv2 and tp.Maxis wrote:
I agree with this. While I do like the idea of having scoring system based on pp, another con to this not yet mentioned is that there are thousands upon thousands of scores right now (based on, well, score) that people would be pretty mad about if they spent so much time trying to get and suddenly weren't top 50 anymore. Having both systems works best IMO, it keeps the old score system for those who prefer it more as well as a new and generally more accurate one.
I don't understand why you see this as a bad thing. osu! isn't a game intended to hold your hand and make things easier; if it were, we wouldn't see beatmaps like FREEDOM DiVE and Rainbow Dash Likes Girls getting ranked. If the map is really so popular that most of the top 50 players on the game have tried their best on it, I think it's reasonable to expect that they fill the leaderboards. They are, after all, the best.Period wrote:
I think being able to set a top 50 through your score opens the game up to be a lot more competitive to weaker players (Players who can HD+HR, for example, rather than DT), so it shouldn't be removed completely. If you removed top 50s by score, only the very best players would ever get a top 50s on the popular maps, so in the end, for a lot of maps, it would look very similar to the normal ranking system.
I won't lie, I don't disagree. It's obvious the score system right now is very flawed, e.g. like you said HD is nothing compared to HR, DT is some tough stuff whereas FL is just spam retry until you memorize, and overall the system's a mess. PP right now is a much better system by far and when it comes to actually comparing scores and plays, the amount of pp given is a much better way to go. I worry more about how the rest of the community would react to this kind of change, for example a person who got #1 on a song with HDFL topping HDHR and DT scores by spamming it for hours won't suddenly like to hear they moved to #638 or... something. I dunno, but point is, there's people who spend hours trying to get top scores, not to get #638.jesus1412 wrote:
This argument really just keeps coming back as the biggest slap in the face to things I want to happen honestly. I recall making a thread about nerfing halftime because it's just so strong on hard maps but it got shot down for the reason that people spent a lot of time trying to get their scores and so I had to find an alternative; now the same argument is back again here. If a score is weaker then I don't really care how long you spent getting it, the score is weaker and shouldn't matter in a competitive game. Effort shouldn't be rewarded, performance should be rewarded and that seems to be the direction the ranking system wanted to go with the introduction of pp, ppv2 and tp.
I'll put it really harshly and plainly: I don't care if you spent 6 years trying to FL the unforgiving marathon if someone else double times it. Your score is clearly in my eyes the most well attempted when using flashlight but it's still just pointless now that someone has a DT score. If you want to win by effort then you should doubletime the map with flashlight and prove that you're not only better but willing to try harder.
Another example because flashlight gets bad press. I don't care if you spent 8000 retries trying to halftime fc fourdimensions, you aren't even close to someone who gets a 1000 combo and your score shouldn't even be considered a thing compared to them.
One last example because halftime is another taboo mod. I don't care if you spent 60 hours playing and fcing image material with 98% acc and hd when someone else has a 95% hr fc. Your hd score ISN'T as good no matter what your actual score says.
Those two are actually very big concerns in my opinion. Whenever the algorithm would be updated there would also get even more scores into the top50 which do not have a replay.Kyou-kun wrote:
2. If pp were ever to update its calculations, it could affect (possibly significantly) the placement of scores on the leaderboards. However, as far as I know, no significant changes have been made to either tp or pp in a long time, so I don't think this would be too much of an issue.
3. Any scores which were set in the past which didn't beat their highest score with the current system, but would have with the proposed system, obviously wouldn't be counted. This could cause a lot of issues with players asking that some of their scores be placed into the leaderboard because of the fact that the only reason they currently are not is because they were set before the system was changed.
If a 1000 combo nomod is worth less pp than a 600 combo DT, it means that DT is probably a better score, thus it should rank higher. Why should a score have to be "perfect"? I guarantee that on any map where a 600 combo DT would beat a 1000 combo nomod, the player who did the 600 combo DT could probably also do the 1000 combo nomod, and much more easily at that.xasuma wrote:
I talk for myself here and its just my opinion on it.
I don't want to be tied to the pp system that much to be honest. I think mainly because this would allow you to miss more often with less consequences (but at a higher difficulty, yes I know). For example:
I play 'x' song with no mod, get FC with 1000x combo. , and get no pp from it.
I play 'x' song with DT, get 600x combo, with 3 misses, and get 5 pp from it.
In my eyes, this would be annoying. As it would diminish a full combo, by making a non full combo potentially be much higher in rank. (I understand the difficulty would be a lot higher with dt), Its just the fact that a score wouldn't need to be as "perfect" as it needs to be now.
Why should you be "honored" if your scores suck? Not to be harsh, but it doesn't seem reasonable. You think nobody argues about first places with the current score system? That's just dead wrong. Almost nobody considers a FL or HDHR to be the "true" #1 when it's ahead of a DT FC. People already argue that the score system is far more inaccurate than the pp system ever was.xasuma wrote:
In addition to that, top 50 rank means nothing to be honest. Your real ranking is already measured by the pp system. The top 50 rank is more of a honoring feeling rather than a skill measurer to begin with in my opinion . (You can look at any easy difficulty top 50 to realize this)
And, again, to me , I like that not everything is tied to the pp system. Besides it is more straight forward with scores, because in the end, no one will argue that someone is first on a song if they have the highest score, whether someone could argue that the pp system is inaccurate in some instances (which I am not saying it is, however I don't think its 100% perfect and that would be seemly impossible to accomplish) , and say that 'x' song isn't that hard or blabla with 'this' or 'that' mod.
Why would you lose motivation because of a more accurate ranking system? As a "mid-tier" player myself, I would be more motivated to see my scores get high ranks, since I know they actually mean something.Bauxe wrote:
I think a lot of mid tier players would lose motivation if something like this was introduced. I don't really like the idea at all.
By mid-tier, I'm not talking top few thousand. I mean the range from maybe 5k to 50k. Getting a top 50 score will seem impossible to them.Kyou-kun wrote:
Why would you lose motivation because of a more accurate ranking system? As a "mid-tier" player myself, I would be more motivated to see my scores get high ranks, since I know they actually mean something.Bauxe wrote:
I think a lot of mid tier players would lose motivation if something like this was introduced. I don't really like the idea at all.
The main reason is that I think the current scoring system is more fun. Some examples: There are more ways to get a good rank besides going super fast or having godlike accuracy. Also you don't need to restart a map every time you get some 100s at the start if you want to get into the rankings.Kyou-kun wrote:
Can you offer reasons for why you wouldn't like it? Do you think the pp system is inaccurate, or perhaps the current score system is more accurate? If so, why?
You make it sound like the same 50 people should have rank 1 to 50 on every map...Drezi wrote:
Why should anyone hold ranks they clearly don't deserve? This ain't charity. They can aim for country ranks.
If they set the 50 best scores on the map, then yes, they should. That's sort of the point of an accurate, skill-based ranking system.Bauxe wrote:
You make it sound like the same 50 people should have rank 1 to 50 on every map...
Why should there be more ways to get a good rank besides going super fast or having godlike accuracy? Those are the skills that deserve high ranks, and currently, they often get low ones instead. As for the 100s at the start not mattering as much: Do you really think that makes sense? That a lower accuracy score with the same mods and combo often beats a higher accuracy score because of that?Ziggo wrote:
The main reason is that I think the current scoring system is more fun. Some examples: There are more ways to get a good rank besides going super fast or having godlike accuracy. Also you don't need to restart a map every time you get some 100s at the start if you want to get into the rankings.
Yes, I mentioned this. Why would a consistent but flawed scoring system be better than an evolving but accurate one?Ziggo wrote:
The second point is, that changes in the pp-system would change the scoring system every time. This would result in even less changes to the system. Also, I believe a consistent scoring system is better in general.
Well, if every top50 player achieved the best they are capable of on every map, why should others take their place? It's not like top players care about hards and below anyway as far as I know.Bauxe wrote:
You make it sound like the same 50 people should have rank 1 to 50 on every map...
Flashlight already gives bonus pp, and not an insignificant amount.VioletMaid wrote:
this sounds unfair to flashlight
though i do hate flashlight
Well, guess we have different views about skill then. I think ranks like top HD or FL scores are well desevered.Kyou-kun wrote:
Why should there be more ways to get a good rank besides going super fast or having godlike accuracy? Those are the skills that deserve high ranks, and currently, they often get low ones instead.
Yes, I do. Because you can easily retry over 100s at the start, so they should be way less important than 100s later on.Kyou-kun wrote:
As for the 100s at the start not mattering as much: Do you really think that makes sense? That a lower accuracy score with the same mods and combo often beats a higher accuracy score because of that?
Not sure if serious.dennischan wrote:
ps:FL is much harder than DT. DT is just high speed spamming. (excluding sayo's plays)