I can see an influx in people complaining about not receiving PP with the third option, however I feel it's probably the most appropriate.
Am I one of the rare breeds of players left that really doesn't give two shits about this? Just saying.
jesus1412 wrote:I feel like dumb fucks will complain double about "not getting pp from X map" if the pp is removed.I completely agree.
At the same time, however, if you were to implement this, pp gain needs to be hidden from players somehow, otherwise even if a map does not immediately reward a player pp, they will still assume they have obtain those pp, and this would still create drama should a map get disqualified because players will be "expecting a top play". Basically at the end of the day, if a map is dq'ed, you are still going to get people saying "rip my 300 pp score etc etc" even if they never actually got it added onto their Top Plays (yet). I doubt this can be fully avoided, because players can always estimate about how much pp they would have received...I was thinking the same thing
Players who try the map generally don't report issues with it. It's the actual QAT that do the checking.One reason this may happen is because some may see a person pointing out issues in a qualified map as a malicious act, either against the mapper or BNs involved.
The third option is actually ambiguous - it doesn't specify [in qualification] if pp rewarding will be delayed or not considered at all
To be honest, most of the problems and bitching come from the maps getting DQ'd themselves, not the actual PP loss (though I won't deny there are problems on this end as well sometimes)
That third option is completely stupid though. "hiding" pp isn't going to solve any of the problems. monstrata pretty much sums everything up. People will always complain, even if they don't have a specific number to look at.
One thing I'm going to mention though, is that if scores/pp get disabled, then map ratings should be as well.