Totally support this request!
yaaaay 20k pp club~
yaaaay 20k pp club~
Yes, it is true that some modes has a higher player base than others, but at least when you're comparing by ranks, you're comparing them by something consistent which is by how far you are from the #1 in the specified game mode.Catgirl wrote:
rank is also based on how many people play a mode. being #1000 in standard is much more impressive than being #1000 in taiko for example just because so many more people play standard. pp was used in my example earlier as a "skill metric" because it doesn't depend on what anybody else does with regards to ranking up, even though we know it's not the best system for skill.
if you use an extreme rank example, let's say you have 2 players. one of them only plays standard and mania and is #20k in both games. one plays only taiko and ctb and is #20k in both games. which player should be higher ranked? obviously the first player because standard and mania have larger playerbases. it's possible to get to those ranks in taiko and ctb with a double digit playcount, while reaching #20k in standard requires well over 3000pp. but if we just average ranks then both players are seen as equal.
using a pp system would make up for the difference in the number of players that play each gamemode, but it would need some normalizing if we wanted a perfect ranking system. however, that's not what pp is. all of the other rankings use pp so the best we can do for now is use pp in some way to balance all of the modes.
Xanandra wrote:
And here's the amount of pp of players in rank #1000
Standard: 6548
Taiko: 4744
CTB: 3608
Mania: 7132
See how erratic it is? If we were to use pp, the player that is #1000 in taiko and mania will be better than the player that is #1000 in standard and CTB (hey! I thought you said that standard weighted more because of higher player base! guess not).
Xanandra wrote:
On the other hand, if you look at them as being 1k players away from being the top of two modes, then they are ranked the same, which makes more sense to me.
In my opinion, that doesn't work, since the reason one is ranked 2000 in CTB with like 2300 pp and you're 2000 in standard with 5800pp is because there is way less players, I am WAY better at standard than CTB, but I'm 2400 in CTB and 7000 in standard, that woul make more sense to give me more credit for my standard than CTB, since I'm better at it.Xanandra wrote:
Hello.
So, I haven't read the whole posts and discussion so far, only the last page and the first post, and from what I can see at glance is that the usage of pp is flawed if we are to calculate the cumulative ranks through all game modes. The main reason being that pp gained through the four modes are NOT normalized.
I just wanted to point out the the possibility of using the ranks in each mode as the measure instead of pp at each mode, meaning this:
CP (cumulative points) = 1/(rank in standard) + 1/(rank in taiko) + 1/(rank in ctb) + 1/(rank in mania)
If any term results in 0 because of no rank achieved in that mode, it should default to 0
And then rank players based on their CP.
I think this way it will help normalize a bit the parameters as well as rewarding more to those players that has a high rank in a specific mode.
Ex:
I have the following ranks:
standard: 2000 (~5800pp)
ctb: 10000 (~1000pp)
taiko: 30000 (~800pp)
mania: 0
CP = 0.0006333
Total pp = 7600
My friend has the following ranks:
standard: 0
ctb: 2000 (~2300pp)
taiko: 2500 (~3500pp)
mania: 0
CP = 0.0009
Total pp = 5800
This means that my friend should be ranked higher than me in the cumulative rank, which makes sense as having 2 modes ranked at ~2000 is more impressive in my opinion.
Anyways, it should be polished a bit more as people in the top 10 will be weighted too good, etc etc etc. But my point is that using pp as the parameter is not the way to go for this. (Maybe setting it so that it is 1/(100+rank in mode) can help offset a bit, but idk, will require real testings to fine tune it.
LastExceed wrote:
This could actually be done by anyone with the osu!api and wouldn't even take that long, I guess I'll give it a try myself later this day
Yeah I completely agree that using rank wouldn't work. As unbalanced as PP is across different game modes (i.e. Taiko giving way too much at low difficulty maps and mania becoming crazy at high difficulty 7k maps) Rank would be altogether broken. Also if you just averaged ranks no one would ever be #1 as no one is #1 in all 4 Gamesmodes. That and getting the first 10PP in any game mode gains you over a million ranks while at high levels gaining 10PP gains you a coupleCatgirl wrote:
using a pp system would make up for the difference in the number of players that play each gamemode, but it would need some normalizing if we wanted a perfect ranking system. however, that's not what pp is. all of the other rankings use pp so the best we can do for now is use pp in some way to balance all of the modes.
I thought of a slight tweak that might make this cumulative rank a bit more accurate to player skill.This is a really good point you make.
This kinda goes exactly against what I was suggesting in my post as a scaling system like this would favor the player who was skilled in one mode vs multiple. For instance a player who has 10K + 1K +500 + 500 with my system would be given less than a player who had 3000 x 4 compared to a straight add system where they'd be equal. In the system you proposed player 1 would get 11125PP while player 2 would get 7500PP.Swerro wrote:
However what I would suggest is a scaling that is similar to the topranking systems in osu!
Your total pp for your best gamemode weighs 100%*
Your total pp for your second best gamemode weighs 75%*
Your total pp for your third best gamemode weighs 50%*
Your total pp for your fourth best gamemode weighs 25%*
Replays watched by other: "there are less ctb players than std players so you'll have less replays watched on that" . ok yeh that's true I guessbut less people are playing it, so you are more likely to get a higher rank on maps. and higher in ranking -> more likely to be seen by people. i myself mainly am a osu!std player. like 5x as much as all other modes alltogether. and still i have nearly as much replays seen in the other modes because in std i get like place 50 in a map. nobody's interested. no replays watched. in ctb there's less people -> easy to get into top 10 of less played maps -> seen by others.
I still think balancing should be done in some sort of regard so that it recognizes actual all-mode players over 1 mode players. With the most recent change to mania PP, Jhlee currently has more PP in mania than the combined PP of the #1 player in any other 2 modes. If you look at the dawn glare Osu website he is currently in 4th place on cumulative despite having 0PP in the other 3 modes. (seriously hoping they balance mania PP as it's currently over double of the other modes which makes cumulative ranking extremely skewed to heavily favor the mania players)Swerro wrote:
About balances: The individual gamemodes, and so also this cumulative ranking, will never be perfectly balanced, however, everyone has access to all gamemodes, all beatmaps, so the phrase: "I don't play ctb and it's much easier to get pp in ctb than in std" is very invalid, as >"I don't play ctb" and >"caring about their cumulative ranking" is contradicting. Which is also the reason why I now think that pp scalers are unecessary and too subjective/difficult to implement regarding the 'early pp is free' discussion. (then take the easier early pp if you find your allmode rank matters!)
Ignore spelling/grammar mistakes
Oh definitely I am a major proponent for this feature being implemented. I have put many stars into this request. I think out of all the feature requests this is the one I want implemented the most.Swerro wrote:
I dislike the thought: "well it's not completely balanced so we won't implement this yet".
I'm strongly convinced (and you too probably) that this feature will bring way more good than bad
I think it's kind of the opposite - this will be motivating for players to play other mods too! Main division into ranking systems depending on the game mode will remain anyway, so I think that there are no real upsides from having it and it would definitely benefit community and players!Tanomoshii Nekojou wrote:
I think this will be a bad idea for 1-2 mode players... But still a good idea for showing who's the best for all of the gamemodes...
Wow. This one is also a good idea...Scarlet Evans wrote:
But after you said that, I think that Ranking boards could be even more improved, to please 2-3 mode players too, i.e. aside of the Total (Cumultative) Rank, there should be an option to simply "filter" Ranking Boards with some criteria, where the most basic ones we can think of are: game modes.
What I mean here is allowing to choose which modes exactly we want to see, so someone could check top ranks from mania+CTB, taiko+CTB+mania, std+mania etc. Of course, you would be able to check your own rank too.
Nice.Edgar_Figaro wrote:
(Standard PP + Taiko PP + CTB PP + Mania PP) - (standard deviation * 2) = Cumulative PP ranking
Odd that list seems to be missing many people that are listed on http://osu.dawnglare.com/?p=totalpp&n=1Adri wrote:
You can find a leaderboard of best users with all pp combined, doesn't mean much but it's always that.
https://osudaily.net/ranking.php
I don't get why this is necessary to make cumulative ranking work. I guess I can understand making "omnithlon" active on their account so people who don't want to see it don't have to (don't really get why it's a problem but OK) but I don't get why people would need to select it each time they play, FC maps twice, or have a penalty like NF. I completely agree PP needs to be normalized or weighted in some way as the whole point of this would be to showcase players who are good in multiple modes and not just having a ton of PP in a mode that awards alot more than the others (<cough>Mania<cough>)Citremi wrote:
The first option is to, instead of make omnithlon a mode you have to select, just make it an option somewhere that you want to make this score count for your omnithlon score. This would let people who play the game more casually not get frustrated by having to FC the map twice, and I like this option best as it avoids other possible frustrations the players might get if the second option is chosen.
The second option is to stick to the idea of how NF is handled, and give the user a penalty for submitting a score for omnithlon while having a different game mode selected, but give them the option anyway at the score screen. You could go to the extreme with this and just prevent the score for counting for omnithlon if that mode isn't selected, but then you would have to FC a map twice if you like to polish both your main ranking and your omnithlon ranking.