Hello community ^^
First off ill start by saying that- I hope im not making a duplicate thread/posting in the wrong forum i searched around a while and couldn't find anything relevant.

Okay so, I wanted to say that i think the way how a country's rank against another country is pretty unfair. As i can see it, the total amount of PP calculated by adding up the PP of every user of that country decides what rank a country gets.

As of now, America is #1 since quite a long time, while Japan is #2. The country rank can rarely ever change in this way because a lower country would need enormous amounts of pp to reach an upper rank. And also, if a country has very high amount of active people the country would naturally have higher total PP.


So, my point was, is quantity of active people really worth deserving more recognition than the higher quality of another country?

Top player ranking is decided on total PP by a single player which varies depending upon the effort of the player in collecting PP. If a player more skilled appears, he can easily work for the PP and get a higher rank.

But this cannot happen in country ranking because here, skill doesnt matter as of now....its merely the number of people playing form that location.

It might be of no importance to most people, but I say if it exists, it should be legitimate.

One Possible system change-

-Extending the osu world cup to include all countries by their respective representatives, such that ranking can be decided by the placements of representative players of the country in the tournament. (Or maybe make a new tournament which takes place every 2 or 3 years for the sole purpose of country ranking? not really a good idea i presume.)

-Or something like, country vs country knockout tournament where every representative gets one chance against the opponent country where the one with most losses is placed in the lowest rank and the one with highest is placed on top?

TLDR, country's ranking system is bad because it prefers accumulative quantity over quality.
Method to fix- Measure skills of high ranking representative country candidates.

Im aware my suggestion might be unbalanced, help by suggesting methods maybe? I just want to see a more refined osu in every aspect

Nice idea, but sounds hard to apply :<

How should representatives be elected? Somewhat of hard to ensure the fairness.

I was thinking maybe they could be decided by active top PP players of that country, or maybe by having a in-country tournament and picking the winners.
Top 3 or top 4 people would be more than enough imo. It would get interesting if the representative players would vary which may cause the team to be better or worse.
Ranking in my opinion, should be a very active process which varying results and outcomes!

[ Argon ] wrote:

I was thinking maybe they could be decided by active top PP players of that country, or maybe by having a in-country tournament and picking the winners.
Top 3 or top 4 people would be more than enough imo. It would get interesting if the representative players would vary which may cause the team to be better or worse.
Ranking in my opinion, should be a very active process which varying results and outcomes!

The thing is, why should't the players with low PP not include in the country ranking? Players in every skill levels should be picked to measure a country's ability, I think.

MagicNAT wrote:

[ Argon ] wrote:

I was thinking maybe they could be decided by active top PP players of that country, or maybe by having a in-country tournament and picking the winners.
Top 3 or top 4 people would be more than enough imo. It would get interesting if the representative players would vary which may cause the team to be better or worse.
Ranking in my opinion, should be a very active process which varying results and outcomes!

The thing is, why should't the players with low PP not include in the country ranking? Players in every skill levels should be picked to measure a country's ability, I think.

same reason fatasses like me aren't chosen to represent us at the olympics. low pp players are not really 'competitive' players, so they shouldn't be considered when trying to figure out where a country ranks 'competitively'. see my point? at the moment it's quantity >>>>>>>>>> quality which is absurd and says nothing about how skilled a country is, except in so far that more players means more possibilities for a good one to spawn, and more good players means more possibilities for a great one. we could use the combined pp of the top 100-500 for a country instead, that way we cover a wide range while avoiding all the people who played once and then logged off or play once every 2 weeks and not just purely the owc level players.

also i don't believe country rankings have been updated in many months, although looking at it now much later than i did before the numbers DO look somewhat different, so maybe it did update. If there's finally interest in this metric again things should be done to ensure it's not just a measuring stick of which country downloaded the game more, no, it should be which country is definitely better comparing relevant players, which is more likely to pump out impressive scores, win tournaments, etc.

Other cool metrics to record could be

Highest PP Score like for UK it would be 518, poland 667 etc, and it would encourage people to really push for that next big number as a whole because who doesn't want to be on the pedestal?

Average accuracy it would be neat to see how players in each country prioritize this stat.

Mod preferences, there could be some interesting correlations between culture, diet, climate, and which mods are most used by the top 500 or so. I know here in the USA our vitamin starved flesh is pretty much all HR players, going fast is just too stressful for most of our bodies it seems like.

and such

average pp of top 1000 players or something like that maybe

or like pp is calculated: 1st player is weighted 100%, second 98% and so on

I agree with xxjesus1412fanx, there's no point in considoring players who don't even bother getting skilled enough, or playing atall. But top 100-500 people doesn't cut it for more populated countries where people with 1k pp are around rank 1k in their country. We should considoraybe all the players who have been active within the past month or so...but then total PP of active players can't be used as a base, because numbers may vary from country to country...
Maybe could make a system which takes up the average pp/score of players from playing maps. Using the monthly ranking charts, we can have the map pools to play. And because we are taking an average, it wouldn't matter about the quantity of players.
But the only draw back of this would be a case like this-
Country A has 1 player- he scores 10million points, country score averages to 10m.
Country B has 2 players, they score, 12mil and 4mil. Total 16mil, average 8mil...

In this case, which is supposed to be ranked above?
We can't take it by the highest score only because then it would all depend of the effort of 1 person alone, disregarding the efforts of second....

Houtarou Oreki wrote:

average pp of top 1000 players or something like that maybe



or like pp is calculated: 1st player is weighted 100%, second 98% and so on

Let's say in country A, rank 1 is 1000 pp, rank 2 is 500pp average 1495
Country b, 2 people 900 and 800, 900+792= 1692

Country Ahad a higher skill maximum though....but I agree we are making progress here...

Well then maybe the more people a country has registered the more people from the top would be considered? I don't really like the monthly ranking / taking up only maps from map pools.. I feel like it should include all the scores, whether they've been scored a while ago or long time ago.

How about using 0.95 as a multliplier factor-- the same one which is used for your personal PP calculation?

By this, Japan (as of 11/17/2015) will have 160072.7358 weighted pp for the top 200 players and USA will have 148844.0917 weighted pp for the top 200 players. Click here for a simple spreadsheet.