i guess 't-thanks'Ichi wrote:
to others of your rank
forum
What is considered good or bad for a Osu! player
posted
Total Posts
170
Momiji please you are accuracy goddess.[ Momiji ] wrote:
i'm overranked as shit
E m i
Me = below averageSugoiSheep wrote:
If you have finished a map above 5 stars, you can call yourself above average
heh
People that are saying stuff like 4k, 5k, 6k pp have obviously no idea what rank is an average player in this game.
Just go through the multiplayer lobby, or scroll through online users, and you will find that average player is much closer to top 100k than to top 1k.
And what is "good"? Isn't being above average enough to be considered good at what you're doing?
Saying that top players in the game are just good is quite inadequate in my opinion.
Just go through the multiplayer lobby, or scroll through online users, and you will find that average player is much closer to top 100k than to top 1k.
And what is "good"? Isn't being above average enough to be considered good at what you're doing?
Saying that top players in the game are just good is quite inadequate in my opinion.
no, there is a difference between good and above average. If the average mark on a test in your class is 3 (0-10) and you get a 5, then it's above average but it's not good.Shardzz wrote:
People that are saying stuff like 4k, 5k, 6k pp have obviously no idea what rank is an average player in this game. Just go through the multiplayer lobby, or scroll through online users, and you will find that average player is much closer to top 100k than to top 1k. And what is "good"? Isn't being above average enough to be considered good at what you're doing? Saying that top players in the game are just good is quite inadequate in my opinion.
I would say good = 4000pp+
I can agree with that, however if we can't say that if someone is above average he is good, and if someone is below average than he is bad, we have no objective way of telling it.Syrasu wrote:
no, there is a difference between good and above average. If the average mark on a test in your class is 3 (0-10) and you get a 5, then it's above average but it's not good.Shardzz wrote:
People that are saying stuff like 4k, 5k, 6k pp have obviously no idea what rank is an average player in this game. Just go through the multiplayer lobby, or scroll through online users, and you will find that average player is much closer to top 100k than to top 1k. And what is "good"? Isn't being above average enough to be considered good at what you're doing? Saying that top players in the game are just good is quite inadequate in my opinion.
I would say good = 4000pp+
Most guys in this thread are subjective to the bone (that's what I've been pointing out), and like someone before mentioned it is all about:
you are better than me = you are good
you are worse than me = you are bad.
I am just trying to find some middle ground here.
It is generally agreed upon that it takes 10000 hours of deliberate practice to get to a level where you are an expert at something, do to some handwavy math, you can interpolate good to take roughly 2000-3000 hours to become good at something.
At that number of hours played, we'll assume an average of 2.5 minutes per play due to retries and etc. the lower end for that would be around 48000 plays and the higher end would be around 72000 plays. Furthermore, the ratio of deliberate practice to regular play will vary amongst players, so for the lower bound for good would be around 48000 plays and upper bound somewhere around 90000-100000 plays.
Keep in mind this assume an average level of "talent", and as such people who are really focused, have really efficient practising, or know exactly how to analyze their own play might have a lower lower bound. Thus, as a really rough estimate, to become "good" in an absolute sense requires around 30000-100000 plays, and to become expert, could be anywhere from 50000-infinity plays depending on various variables.
Good in a relative sense can probably be modelled somewhat by a gamma distribution.
Based on this chart
http://paulbourke.net/miscellaneous/fun ... adist4.gif
and with a value of B of perhaps 0.75, let's take the best player as having a 10 on the X axis, to have half of his absolute skill, you'd need to roughly be in the top 2% of the active population.
Basically, this is shitposting done well.
At that number of hours played, we'll assume an average of 2.5 minutes per play due to retries and etc. the lower end for that would be around 48000 plays and the higher end would be around 72000 plays. Furthermore, the ratio of deliberate practice to regular play will vary amongst players, so for the lower bound for good would be around 48000 plays and upper bound somewhere around 90000-100000 plays.
Keep in mind this assume an average level of "talent", and as such people who are really focused, have really efficient practising, or know exactly how to analyze their own play might have a lower lower bound. Thus, as a really rough estimate, to become "good" in an absolute sense requires around 30000-100000 plays, and to become expert, could be anywhere from 50000-infinity plays depending on various variables.
Good in a relative sense can probably be modelled somewhat by a gamma distribution.
Based on this chart
http://paulbourke.net/miscellaneous/fun ... adist4.gif
and with a value of B of perhaps 0.75, let's take the best player as having a 10 on the X axis, to have half of his absolute skill, you'd need to roughly be in the top 2% of the active population.
Basically, this is shitposting done well.
Like what ?? Of course you can compare yourself with other players of different ranks. Maybe i was misunderstood but being overranked literally means you or other people consider you worse player than someone of a lower world ranking, correct me if im wrong but you are comparing to people of a different ranking than you right there. I get your point but in osu is completely different since ranking is just related to how many songs you have fced, a player with less pp than you can play equally or even better than you do so it is good to compare, being higher rank does not put you in a different category since there is no such thing in this game. E.g a player who has been playing for 3 years, now decreasing in rank and not caring much about pp (rank 4000) vs a 1 year player whos been farming his way through the ranks rank (2000). Would you think im comparing a car to a motorbike there ?bigfeh wrote:
how can you be overranked compared to players of other ranks
that's like determining the quality of a car while comparing it to a motorcycle
borderline retarded
yahIchi wrote:
a player who has been playing for 3 years, now decreasing in rank and not caring much about pp (rank 4000) vs a 1 year player whos been farming his way through the ranks rank (2000). Would you think im comparing a car to a motorbike there ?
you're comparing someone who doesn't give a fuck about rank with someone who actually gives a fuck
3 years to 4000 sounds like hell.
The definition of 'good' will always change due to people improving. I believe people are decent at the game when their PP > rank. https://osu.ppy.sh/p/pp/?m=0&s=3&o=1&f=0&page=81
Ichi wrote:
Like what ?? Of course you can compare yourself with other players of different ranks. Maybe i was misunderstood but being overranked literally means you or other people consider you worse player than someone of a lower world ranking, correct me if im wrong but you are comparing to people of a different ranking than you right there. I get your point but in osu is completely different since ranking is just related to how many songs you have fced, a player with less pp than you can play equally or even better than you do so it is good to compare, being higher rank does not put you in a different category since there is no such thing in this game. E.g a player who has been playing for 3 years, now decreasing in rank and not caring much about pp (rank 4000) vs a 1 year player whos been farming his way through the ranks rank (2000). Would you think im comparing a car to a motorbike there ?bigfeh wrote:
how can you be overranked compared to players of other ranks
that's like determining the quality of a car while comparing it to a motorcycle
borderline retarded
ZenithPhantasm
ZenithPhantasm wrote:
My sides are on the moon. We must schedule another Apollo mission to retrieve them.
ZenithPhantasm
If you define good as above average, then sure, that is correct. Now here is where it might get offensive to some lower ranked players, so don't read ahead if you are easily butthurt:Shardzz wrote:
People that are saying stuff like 4k, 5k, 6k pp have obviously no idea what rank is an average player in this game.
Just go through the multiplayer lobby, or scroll through online users, and you will find that average player is much closer to top 100k than to top 1k.
And what is "good"? Isn't being above average enough to be considered good at what you're doing?
Saying that top players in the game are just good is quite inadequate in my opinion.
Just because a fuckload of people that are worse than you exist in the game, it doesn't make you any less shit, it just makes you less shit relative to them. In terms of being absolutely good, it doesn't matter how many others exist that are worse than you (You = talking to anyone in general, not literally you, I also consider myself not good at the game). Who would be proud of being the smartest person at their school if they went to a special school? At the end of the day, that person would still be retarded.
Yeah, I have to agree with being above average not being good.
You wouldn't call someone at rank 3 million good, right?
imho you're only half-decent if you're in the top 50k, and only "good" if you're in the top 10k. Your opinion will vary, but that's what I believe.
You wouldn't call someone at rank 3 million good, right?
imho you're only half-decent if you're in the top 50k, and only "good" if you're in the top 10k. Your opinion will vary, but that's what I believe.
I haven't looked at the list of online users and only had my filter set to friends for the last 4 months. Today, I decided to see if pandabee is right, and when I scrolled 1/4 to the bottom of the list, I was in the 50k rank range.
And I consider about 25,000 and below to be half-decent and 4,000pp (About rank 4k still) to be good.
I remember seeing 3,000pp gradually drift away from rank 9,999 and now 3180pp is about that rank. Yet 4,000pp is still hovering around rank 4k? Really?
And I consider about 25,000 and below to be half-decent and 4,000pp (About rank 4k still) to be good.
I remember seeing 3,000pp gradually drift away from rank 9,999 and now 3180pp is about that rank. Yet 4,000pp is still hovering around rank 4k? Really?
I remember hitting 4 digits at 2700pp, and around that time was when I saw a reddit thread showing a guy at 3700pp and rank 3700, I have around that pp now and I'm like double the rankKheldragar wrote:
I remember seeing 3,000pp gradually drift away from rank 9,999 and now 3180pp is about that rank. Yet 4,000pp is still hovering around rank 4k? Really?
Average usually means shit, so if you're above average you're merely above shit.
And just so we're clear here: between "above shit" and "good" there is a loooong way
And just so we're clear here: between "above shit" and "good" there is a loooong way
Until you posted this I had no idea how correct this isbigfeh wrote:
Average usually means shit
And not just in osu!, in everything.
of course it is correctMahoganytooth wrote:
Until you posted this I had no idea how correct this isbigfeh wrote:
Average usually means shit
And not just in osu!, in everything.
dude the world is doomed. Let me put it this way: the average human being is a retard, by definition
now all you gotta do is realise that roughly half the world is worse than this guy
You're considered good at osu! when you play the game more than you post on the forums
Philantropist wrote:
You're considered good at osu! when you play the game more than you post on the forums
edit: I mean well average
sfw edition (tm)
Actually people who post on the forums are generally in the top 0.01% of people in terms of osu! skill.
E m i
nonono, notice me!!![ Momiji ] wrote:
pls notice me senpai
tell me i'm good
Just poasteLagel wrote:
Khel's pretty good and he seems to post alot
And call me Kelly.
ZenithPhantasm
soz i'm still new to le forums, but i mainly see Kelly everywhere
My 5 DT plays have shamed me.Synpoo wrote:
you're only good at this game if you don't farm DT :^)
cookiezi for president 2016ZenithPhantasm wrote:
You're bad if you're not Obama.
Synpoo wrote:
you're only good at this game if you don't farm DT :^)
My top score is nomod, that means im no longer a dt farmer but now a nomod player right? :^)