I completely understand that there needs to be a payoff for long combos, but it fucking sucks that when I make ONE miss at 50%, I will be MILES behind someone who hits that note, even though he played tons of 50's otherwise! If we made the percentage the #1 criteria and combo length the #2 criteria, combos would still be important for high end players who don't miss at all, while being A TON less frustrating for the other 90% of the player base.

I know I'm sounding like whiny kid here, but it IS discouraging if the ONE PRIORITY for every map is 'DON'T FUCKING MISS' instead of 'Play the best you can!'

Once that one miss happens, the first thought that shoots into my head is 'whelp, I guess we either waste time now, or retry', when THAT IS SO FUCKING DETRIMENTAL TO ACTUALLY LEARNING THE MAP!!!

As a programmer myself I know that this would mean reranking every. single. map. but the way the ranking works right now, is incredibly punishing for new players and that can't be our agenda!

If I am missing something obvious, please educate me, but right now the rating system is almost as detrimental to helping us become better, as it gets.

The problem, though, is that osu is an aim game, so consistency is the main focus of the game. Your own predisposition to retry is your own fault.

Accuracy isn't difficult in osu, nor is it important for the majority of maps. It makes no sense to make it the main criteria.

You should be focusing on having fun and improving rather than just increasing your rank.

@Mahogany
Thanks for answering so quickly (:

'Focusing on having fun' is easy to say, when the rating system of OSU is completely anti-fun.
You wouldn't say that a piano teacher who yells 'BULLSHIT' every time you hit the right note too late, or even god in heaven a wrong note is easy to have fun with, right? But this is what it effectively comes down to.

Maybe you can manage to not feel pressured when you know that however good you played the rest of the map, it's going to come down to not missing EVERY. SINGLE. coming note, but even if I try to actively stay calm, that shit's just impossible and I will focus on 'JUST HIT IT SOMEHOW' instead of just doing my best. How is that fun?

That pressure might bother different people differently, but it is incredibly detrimental to becoming a better player.

I am absolutely not saying that consistency should not be rewarded, just that it shouldn't be the main focus, because it makes effective practice WAY too hard and puts too much pressure on the very next note, when the main focus should be on playing the WHOLE map better.

I AM focusing on improving, I just know that that process is MUCH harder than it needs to be.

Also if you like accuracy you HAVE to help me with my idea, since hitting 199 200's, 1 miss, then another 199 200's is much harder than hitting 400 50's, but counts as less in the current system.

Pressure affects everybody, but once I stopped caring about ranking up (Look at my performance graph) I started having a lot more fun and just enjoyed myself, and it's made the game a lot more fun.

You're letting your own pressure get to you and affect you, and that's your fault, not the fault of the game.

You can become a better player without focusing on gaining ranks. My biggest weakness for the longest time was my speed and streaming ability. For the past ~4 months I've only lost ranks, but my speed has improved massively. I'm now able to singletap 230bpm, and shortstream up to 200bpm, when 200bpm was my singletap limit prior and 170bpm my shortstream limit. That's a ridiculous improvement, because when I was just farming PP, playing to my strengths, and ranking up, those limits hadn't changed for over 6 months, yet in just 4, I had increased them by a massive amount.

I've also seen rank 15k players that have absolutely trashed me in multi lobbies. That's a 9k rank difference for someone who was way better than I was.

I completely disagree when you say consistency should not be the main focus. If the circles were individual and completely separate from each other, sure, but the entire game is about how you navigate from one circle to the other.

Perfect acc on the majority of maps isn't very hard. Compared to other rhythm games, the hitwindows in standard osu are ridiculously forgiving, only OD10 comes close to being difficult to get accuracy on.

I COMPLETELY agree that my first objective is not to care about my rank; but that doesn't change the fact that the current system makes that HARDER THAN IT NEEDS TO BE.

'Perfect acc on the majority of maps isn't very hard.'

...

You realize that perfect accuracy means 100%, or THE BEST SCORE YOU CAN GET right? You know that automatically means perfect consistency right?

Also yes, consistency should be the main focus, but not the FIRST focus, you see what I'm getting at? Getting 199 200's then ONE miss, then another 200 200's should NOT be ranked worse than somebody who gets 400 50's with luck right?? But that's how it is.

The current system does nothing; you're just being way too influenced by PP and ranking. Stop caring, please. It'll make the game way more fun for you.

Of course I know what perfect accuracy is, my weighted overall accuracy is 99.39% and I have 4 OD10/9.8 SSes. Accuracy is my main strength in this game, so I know what I'm talking about, and I know what perfect consistency is.

Of course the person who misses should be ranked worse; they missed, and the person with 400 50s didn't miss, so the person with 400 50s has better aim, so I believe they deserve to be ranked higher than the person who missed; Because they're better at the game.

pls enjoy game

Accuracy-pp is calculated separately from combo-pp.
That's why you can easily get the same pp with a 1/2-3/4 combo and stellar accuracy compared to a full combo with 2-3% less accuracy.

I was under the impression that accuracy was indeed the most important, due to common sense? Or am I wrong?

One guy gets 499 300s and 1 miss, shouldn't he be more rewarded for being so perfect with only one exception than the guy that gets 500 100s and no misses? The second guy's timing failed, the first was perfect besides for only 1.

Mahogany what you are saying makes absolutely ZERO sense. If I make one miss, that is only one pixel away from a 50, but otherwise only 200's then OF COURSE I am more accurate, yet the ranking system still counts it as less. That is not good!

You are obviously a very good player, so you are like 'meeh, this game is easy, I have no idea what you are whining about'; But do you have any idea how entitled you really are? The system doesn't make mathematical sense, because it ALWAYS rewards consistency over accuracy. It's not about who is the best player, it's be one of the best, or your score basically doesn't matter. And yet you are like 'plz don't be influenced by PP and ranking. plz stop caring'. THE SYSTEM IS INHERENTLY CUT OUT TO ONLY REWARD THE BEST OF THE BEST. SO OF COURSE IT'S FUN AND EASY FOR YOU, SINCE YOU ARE VERY GOOD!! PLEASE DON'T BE SUCH A GOD DAMN NARROW MIND!!

For all new, and intermediate players this system is totally frustrating bullshit to play with; you can say 'don't be bothered by it ))):' all you want, but when workers protest for better conditions, you are not going to say 'Well, nobody is forcing you to work here, just enjoy the chance you have!' RIGHT? That would be stupid, RIGHT? We can improve the system, and so we should do it if there is real sense behind it.

Consistency is reward on it's own, it doesn't need to be an independent factor on scoring. There is absolutely NO reason for it. YOU are way too influenced by PP and ranking; I don't even care about my rank or PP; I just care about the fact that missing once invalidates all the accuracy you've accumulated up until that point; and that is just completely anti-fun - purely gameplay wise; it's a fucking game, who cares about their rank man. It's to be expected that you have difficulties seeing beyond your own small horizon, but can't you at least try??

@Endaris: Can you show me the source to the exact values? Because I don't think it's 50% to 50%, but I am willing to be proven wrong.

@Technoid1: No, combo length is the most important currently. At least it seems like that to me. I wish an admin could tell us how it really is, because I'm not even completely sure I am right.

It's not really 50:50, more like 70:30 in favor of combo but the combo scaling is linear and as you can't get good accuracy without also gaining some combo you can easily gain 75% of the maximum pp the map gives. You can tell from the amount of A's on my topplays^^
Tillerino did some further analysis on this here:
https://www.reddit.com/r/osugame/commen ... combo_and/
I'd recommend to just read through it.

Performance points don't measure your skill, only what you actually achieved. Good accuracy in osu! is something you will just have and it doesn't go away due to the relatively simple tapping concepts if you compare it to the likes of mania or Taiko(you can tap wrong keys in both modes, in osu! you can only tap at the wrong time).
It's more of an aimgame when played at a higher level. That's why it makes sense to give aimconsistency and therefore combo a big value. Sure it can be lame to play for fullcombos but if you're out for competitiveness you should ask yourself if you're playing the correct game. Personally I'm playing for good scores regardless whether they net me pp or not(the pp-system has some flaws when judging certain maptypes).

I'm pretty sure peppy has thought for years now that the current system is flawed. Even back in 2011, he designed a whole new score system for osu!stream on the iPad because he was unsatisfied with osu!'s current system (which, by the way, is only in place due to peppy attempting to emulate the game Osu Tatakae Ouendan on the DS, which was by no means a competitive game). The issue is that osu! has been out for so long that changes to such a fundamental aspect of the game would be a huge undertaking and would cause controversy (people just don't like change, even if it is objectively for the better). Not to mention that something would have to be done about the millions (if not billions) of scores saved on the old scoring system.
But something to keep in mind is that the scoring system currently does nothing aside from deciding what scores get saved on the servers. PP doesn't take score into account when deciding a play's actual worth, but this does mean that many non-full combo scores get excluded before the PP system even gets to calculate them.

I do think there are many things that can be done to improve how scores are calculated (such as sliders actually scored by accuracy instead of being practically free 300s), and in my opinion, there are things (such as non-FC accuracy) that are still hugely underrated in the current system. But again, these things would be fundamental and potentially controversial changes if they were dealt with. There have been plans to rectify many of the issues that the score system currently has, although I doubt you'll see them implemented into the game for a very long while.

Dongep wrote:

Mahogany what you are saying makes absolutely ZERO sense. If I make one miss, that is only one pixel away from a 50, but otherwise only 200's then OF COURSE I am more accurate, yet the ranking system still counts it as less. That is not good!

You're not more accurate, though, because you missed. Combo has always been the decisive factor in these things.

Dongep wrote:

You are obviously a very good player, so you are like 'meeh, this game is easy, I have no idea what you are whining about'; But do you have any idea how entitled you really are?

I don't think this game is easy at all, and I only got to where I am by playing to my extremely narrow field of strengths. I played very hard for a very long time to get to where I am today, and I still remember how I struggled. Please don't degrade my experiences and effort I've put into this game by calling me entitled.

Dongep wrote:

The system doesn't make mathematical sense, because it ALWAYS rewards consistency over accuracy. It's not about who is the best player, it's be one of the best, or your score basically doesn't matter.

Your point being? The same is true of all things in life.

Dongep wrote:

And yet you are like 'plz don't be influenced by PP and ranking. plz stop caring'.

Well, yeah. PP and ranking are, as far as I can tell, causing you a lot of stress, and decreasing your enjoyment of the game. The same thing happened to me. So I stopped playing for ranks. Ever since that moment, I've enjoyed the game far more, which is why I'm trying to encourage you to do the same.

Dongep wrote:

THE SYSTEM IS INHERENTLY CUT OUT TO ONLY REWARD THE BEST OF THE BEST

Reward with what? Are you getting paid to play the game?

Dongep wrote:

For all new, and intermediate players this system is totally frustrating bullshit to play with; you can say 'don't be bothered by it ))):' all you want, but when workers protest for better conditions, you are not going to say 'Well, nobody is forcing you to work here, just enjoy the chance you have!' RIGHT? That would be stupid, RIGHT?

Uh, not really, your analogy is poor, because people work for a living, meanwhile osu! is a game, meant to be enjoyed and have fun with. If you aren't having fun with it, you have no reason to play the game. If you're not having fun at work, tough shit, it's work and you need to deal with it, so complaining makes perfect sense.

Also, when I was new, and intermediate, I found the system to be fun and rewarding, so saying that it's frustrating bullshit for "All" new and intermediate players is blatantly false.

Dongep wrote:

We can improve the system, and so we should do it if there is real sense behind it.

I respect your desire to improve the game, but I think you're making your points far too personal, and it makes it difficult to take your suggestions seriously, and make out what your exact points are.

Dongep wrote:

Consistency is reward on it's own, it doesn't need to be an independent factor on scoring. There is absolutely NO reason for it. YOU are way too influenced by PP and ranking; I don't even care about my rank or PP

Uh, I'd argue the opposite. I quit caring about PP about 5 months ago. And you don't get to decide what needs to be factors on scoring or not. As I said, it's an aim game, so naturally, consistency is the most rewarded factor. Anyone can pass Airman by just hitting circles on one side of the map. Should they be rewarded for that? Really?

Dongep wrote:

I just care about the fact that missing once invalidates all the accuracy you've accumulated up until that point

No, it doesn't.



That's nearly 500 PP for a score where the player missed twice exactly in the middle of the map, and once more at the end.

Dongep wrote:

and that is just completely anti-fun

On the contrary, it makes getting full combos very exciting to achieve. A game is defined by your possibility to fail, and difficulty experienced while playing only makes success more rewarding. Full Combos are difficult to achieve if you're playing properly at your level, which makes them rewarding, fun, and exciting to earn.

Dongep wrote:

it's a fucking game, who cares about their rank man. It's to be expected that you have difficulties seeing beyond your own small horizon, but can't you at least try??

I find it kind of funny that you tell me this, while you've done the very thing you're criticizing towards me. Am I not allowed to post my own opinion on this matter? Is yours the only opinion allowed here?

An important element in the measure of the performance of a play is the notes that break the combo. Whether the aiming performance is more important than the timing accuracy or not is subjective and depends on how people prioritize the distinct aspects of performance (the main difference between Score v1 and Score v2 is the change in priority between those two aspects).

The current scoring system (and performance system) most of the time gives higher values to plays that don't break combo compared to plays that break the combo at some moments; there isn't any problem with this. The results given by the combo system are debatable for plays with combo breaks, for example:

The score of a play with 1 combo break in the middle, compared to the score of a play with a combo break near the end or the start of the map: the first play would receive a greatly reduced amount of score/pp, while the second score would only get a relatively small reduction compared to FC.
The argument some people give to justify this is that the second score is more consistent (since, during the play, a higher combo length was achieved). The problem is that combo length is not a good indicator of consistency ("the achievement of a level of performance that does not vary greatly in quality over time."); the magnitude of the mistakes during the play is important, and using the length of combo assigns weights to mistakes depending on their position on the map in a way that is arbitrary and groundless.

In the simplest case where the map has an constant difficulty through it, the position of a combo break doesn't change how consistent a play is (some people argue that in this case combo would matter since the probability of not making a mistake X times in a row decreases exponentially with X; but, the probability of not making a mistake X times in a row, making a mistake, and then not making a mistake Y times in a row, is the same as of not making a mistake X+Y times in a row, and then making a mistake). The only thing that matters is the amount of combo breaks, not where they are or how long are the combos.

In the case where the difficulty is not constant, the position of the combo breaks matters in a somewhat complex way (it's not as simple as assigning more weight to combo breaks depending on how hard the note where the combo break happened was); the weight of a mistake in this case is related to how sensitive is the change in probability of failing a note with respect to changes in the skill of a player (more sensitive notes are weighted higher than notes where the probability doesn't vary as much with player skill); in this case the length of the combos doesn't matter either, only which were the notes that were missed.

To summerize what Full Tablet said, the problem with the current system is not whether combo based scoring is fair or not, but rather how that combo based scoring is applied. It doesn't make sense that missing in the middle has a more devastating effect on the score than missing at the end. Whether the player missed at the end and not the middle is doesn't say much about how consistent the player is. The map can have the same max pp amount whether the spike in difficulty is in the middle or at the end, but what does doing map with the difficulty spike in the middle rather at the end say about player consistency? Nothing. According to the max pp, the map is as difficult wherever that spike is, but it's most certainly is harder to maintain a higher combo if the spike is in the middle. If scoring is to be fair, there needs to be a system the takes account the difficulty of various spots of the map in relation to probability of missing on those spots based on the player's stats rather than having a flat combo multiplier.

Did I get it correct, Full Tablet?

If you look at the core of this game, it is a rhythm game. Correct me if I'm wrong, but rhythm games are about timing. Timing in this game is measured by accuracy, so the core of the score system should be accuracy. With perfect accuracy comes good combo. With bad accuracy there's bad combo, and with good (not perfect) accuracy, there can be bad combo, but if you never got a 50, only 300s, and a few slider breaks to break the combo, you still did good. This game looks at the combo, sees how it broke, and says you failed. Where is the sense in that?

I personally think combo should be done away with all together. Rhythm, rhythm, RHYTHM!
But that's just me, so chuck a small combo feature in there to please more people. Plus it's good to tell where you messed up your timing.

It makes sense if Peppy thinks it's flawed. Doesn't seem that hard to fix though, you have people complaining now so what's the difference? Simply mark scores saved on the old system as saved on the old system.

Actually osu! is an aim game tho