forum

osu!mania ScoreV2 live!

posted
Total Posts
481
show more
Topic Starter
smoogipoo
Hey all,

Cutting Edge has been updated with changes to ScoreV2 that were proposed by Shoegazer here. I want to stress that the changes are not final and we are still tweaking the system to properly represent a player's skill in a competitive setting.

Please note that HD/FI/FL mod multipliers have not yet been removed. These are slated to be removed in the next iteration of changes.

Edit: Posting this because I've explained it on reddit:

There are two components to the score.
- Accuracy
Essentially as accuracy increases we want you to gain more and more score while accounting for the difficulty of maintaining a 99%+ accuracy over 90%. To do this accuracy is exponentiated so that it is not quite a linear multiplier. In the previous iteration it was raised to the 10th power, in the new iteration it is raised to a factor of the accuracy.
This has the effect of causing lower accuracies to not be so much of dead weight as they were previously, while still providing a steep curve towards 100% accuracy as seen in this graph (red = old, blue = new): https://u-gi.me/sykzM

- Combo
Combo is the harder one to talk about. We want to award holding combo, but at the same time not punish holding 4000 combo and missing once too much. To achieve this your individual hit scores are weighted by the combo you have after hitting the note. In the previous iteration this was a linear relationship, which resulted in punishing for missing after holding 4000 combo. In the new iteration it is logarithmic, with a cap at log_4(400) (meaning combo > 400 will be weighed as if your combo was 400), as shown in this graph (red = old, blue = new): https://u-gi.me/oJ6sa
Einzvern

smoogipooo wrote:

Hey all,

Cutting Edge has been updated with changes to ScoreV2 that were proposed by Shoegazer here. I want to stress that the changes are not final and we are still tweaking the system to properly represent a player's skill in a competitive setting.

Please note that HD/FI/FL mod multipliers have not yet been removed. These are slated to be removed in the next iteration of changes.
Idk what to say '-'
ikzune
Personally i think that being able to hold 400 combo really depends on the song, some songs will have this being easily achievable despite the songs overall difficulty due quiet sections with lighter patterns, at least in 4key i would suggest raising this or having the system account for how hard it is to hold combo in a certain song overall and change judgement slightly based on that however that may just be me ._.

edit* i feel for 7keys 400 seems about right but maybe its because im at a low level and far less consistent
robby250
Here are my irrelevant opinions, I'll keep it short:

Combo: score v1 is fine, Shoegazer's suggestion might make it very slightly better than that.

Accuracy: same as above

LN timings: should be made more lenient than score v1, not tighter. There's a reason LN spam maps are made lower OD by mappers.

Mod multipliers: the only thing actually worth adding, finding the right multiplier for each mod so that pp for mods can be added until per-mod leaderboards get implemented.

EDIT: and yeah visual mods shouldn't have multipliers but that's already sorted.

My verdict: score v1 is probably the smallest of problems in osu!mania, other than adding mod multipliers for DT pp this is a waste of time.
den0saur
So, i suppose, no changes will EVER come to Stable Fallback and no Score v2 to mania?
Topic Starter
smoogipoo
Changes will not be coming to Stable Fallback.
Arras

robby250 wrote:

Here are my irrelevant opinions, I'll keep it short:

Combo: score v1 is fine, Shoegazer's suggestion might make it very slightly better than that.

Accuracy: same as above

LN timings: should be made more lenient than score v1, not tighter. There's a reason LN spam maps are made lower OD by mappers.

Mod multipliers: the only thing actually worth adding, finding the right multiplier for each mod so that pp for mods can be added until per-mod leaderboards get implemented.

EDIT: and yeah visual mods shouldn't have multipliers but that's already sorted.

My verdict: score v1 is probably the smallest of problems in osu!mania, other than adding mod multipliers for DT pp this is a waste of time.
I disagree. Scorev1 frequently has me beating my old scores where the old score has a higher accuracy and a similar combo. Hopefully this can mitigate that sort of thing, as it's really annoying when it happens. While I can't say anything about the release timing leniency as I haven't tried scorev2 (and I assume I can't, since cutting edge can't do multiplayer without supporter), the fact that LNs are split into two notes is a fantastic change imo. This gives the player much better feedback for how well they did on the start of an LN, and you can no longer cheese LN stuff by just holding everything and taking the 200s.
If anything, I'd say the game feeling good to play is far more important than "pp".
Mechanizen
You might make a poll to know how much peoples are playing each mode so you can adjust multipliers properly...
robby250

Arras wrote:

I disagree. Scorev1 frequently has me beating my old scores where the old score has a higher accuracy and a similar combo. Hopefully this can mitigate that sort of thing, as it's really annoying when it happens. While I can't say anything about the release timing leniency as I haven't tried scorev2 (and I assume I can't, since cutting edge can't do multiplayer without supporter), the fact that LNs are split into two notes is a fantastic change imo. This gives the player much better feedback for how well they did on the start of an LN, and you can no longer cheese LN stuff by just holding everything and taking the 200s.
If anything, I'd say the game feeling good to play is far more important than "pp".
I'm all for LNs being split into two parts for better feedback, and yeah I haven't tested scorev2 either because I can't but from what I've read in this thread the LNs were made tighter, when they should be the same or more lenient.

I'm not sure the changes in score v2 would fix the issue you're mentioning as so far it seems to be similar but with the combo cap higher at 400.

Star rating is broken when you look at a per-map basis, but assuming that everyone plays every map (which is the case as there are so few of them), it's fine.

Maybe for you pp isn't important but the complete lack of difficult maps kills the game for higher end players.

Therefore I believe the most important issue remaining is the lack of maps for top players, which also kills competition and activity from top players, and with fewer top players and less competition there's much less attraction for the game mode overall.

Ranking more maps isn't something that can be done as easily as adding mod pp, so just add mod pp faster instead of trying to fix a score system that isn't broken.
Topic Starter
smoogipoo
Star rating and pp is irrelevant to this entire discussion. ScoreV2 will not even be ranked for a long time, and pp/sr calculations are a completely separate matter altogether.
robby250

smoogipooo wrote:

Star rating and pp is irrelevant to this entire discussion. ScoreV2 will not even be ranked for a long time, and pp/sr calculations are a completely separate matter altogether.
Yeah that's fine, sorry for derailing, I did however give my feedback on what I think about score v2 and what should be changed so take it or leave it.
MegaAmoonguss
I tried out ScoreV2 in multiplayer yesterday and one person in the match literally SS'd the song but had one miss in the middle and got 896k for that. It probably would have been around 997-998k without the miss, and probably like 980-990k on regular Score. I'm not really a fan of how insanely the combo affects you score, and I'm personally hoping that it gets changed in some manner. One of the things I always liked about mania better than standard is the fact that in standard, it almost doesn't matter how well you actually do because if you hold a higher combo you get a higher score. I liked that in mania you can miss, but the emphasis is more on getting as many rainbow 300s and 300s as possible. I'm definitely all for some kind of combo system, but not one that punishes as hard as this lol
Topic Starter
smoogipoo

MegaAmoonguss wrote:

I tried out ScoreV2 in multiplayer yesterday and one person in the match literally SS'd the song but had one miss in the middle and got 896k for that. It probably would have been around 997-998k without the miss, and probably like 980-990k on regular Score. I'm not really a fan of how insanely the combo affects you score, and I'm personally hoping that it gets changed in some manner. One of the things I always liked about mania better than standard is the fact that in standard, it almost doesn't matter how well you actually do because if you hold a higher combo you get a higher score. I liked that in mania you can miss, but the emphasis is more on getting as many rainbow 300s and 300s as possible. I'm definitely all for some kind of combo system, but not one that punishes as hard as this lol
We need more information, specifically:

* How long was the map?
* Were they actually using ScoreV2? Or even the updated ScoreV2? Keep in mind they have to be on Cutting Edge to try it.
MegaAmoonguss

smoogipooo wrote:

We need more information, specifically:

* How long was the map?
* Were they actually using ScoreV2? Or even the updated ScoreV2? Keep in mind they have to be on Cutting Edge to try it.
I guess it wasn't an updated version. I just used the ScoreV2 that is available in the latest stable release, which I guess must be an old version. The map was Sakura Mirage [ADVANCED], which is a low 3 star map and is 2 minutes long. I'll definitely check out the Cutting Edge version to see how it compares.
ReTLoM
http://puu.sh/puPSz/42e2a1abb5.jpg

Here i got a Score with old Version of V2 and it feels way to low :) btw im not one of the ACC players so im kinda suck at r300 ratio but still feels low
gamecrashed_old
I think the main problem is that by making combo so important you're encouraging mashing in a mode that already has super lenient windows and a lack of excess press window.
Topic Starter
smoogipoo

MegaAmoonguss wrote:

smoogipooo wrote:

We need more information, specifically:

* How long was the map?
* Were they actually using ScoreV2? Or even the updated ScoreV2? Keep in mind they have to be on Cutting Edge to try it.
I guess it wasn't an updated version. I just used the ScoreV2 that is available in the latest stable release, which I guess must be an old version. The map was Sakura Mirage [ADVANCED], which is a low 3 star map and is 2 minutes long. I'll definitely check out the Cutting Edge version to see how it compares.
osu!mania ScoreV2 does not exist on anything but Cutting Edge at the moment, so it's possible that the player in question was not using it. Likewise you would've seen the old scoring for yourself.
Mathisca
The today's update for ScoreV2 is way better, and properly rewards the combo. The scores are closer to ScoreV1.
I think that we should regain life when we hold sliders, like in ScoreV1.
Kernaus

Mathisca wrote:

I think that we should regain life when we hold sliders, like in ScoreV1.
Iii dont agree with this, the HP rate in o!m is generally very lenient, and we dont have a constant hp drain like in standard, failing in mania is generally because the chart is way way above the player's abilities.
Topic Starter
smoogipoo

Kernaus wrote:

Mathisca wrote:

I think that we should regain life when we hold sliders, like in ScoreV1.
Iii dont agree with this, the HP rate in o!m is generally very lenient, and we dont have a constant hp drain like in standard, failing in mania is generally because the chart is way way above the player's abilities.
Actually just noticed this in a multi I played earlier too. Not sure if HP is fine with LNs atm and want more opinions.

That being said I've also noticed quite a few HP bugs and will begin sorting them out soon.
rohen04
Actually I did notice that people have failed songs with V2 that they have never failed before. Maybe it's part of a bug, or because of the harder LNs. This definitely needs more testing.
Other than that, occasionally it showed me right at the end of the song that I have failed it, even though I had a FC. I haven't tested the newest version yet, maybe it's already fixed.

By the way, thanks for changing the Combo system. This should be more in line of what people expect from such a system.
I do have the suggestion to maybe not make the cap static, but dynamic (i.e. 10-20% of the total notes). This would help to make 4K and 7K equally hard in this regard, since 4K usually has less notes in a similar difficulty level. Also this might avoid problems with songs with less than 400 notes (not relevant for MWC).
ReTLoM
i tried some LN Converts and i think it is fine with no regen cause i cant spam thru the song i have actually to play it l :)
Arras
Yeah, osu!mania's very lenient HP gain on LNs was one of the major things preventing clears from being impressive on songs with a decent amount of LNs. Now that this has changed, perhaps clearing songs can be more of a goal in and of itself.
Topic Starter
smoogipoo

rohen04 wrote:

Actually I did notice that people have failed songs with V2 that they have never failed before. Maybe it's part of a bug, or because of the harder LNs. This definitely needs more testing.
Other than that, occasionally it showed me right at the end of the song that I have failed it, even though I had a FC. I haven't tested the newest version yet, maybe it's already fixed.

By the way, thanks for changing the Combo system. This should be more in line of what people expect from such a system.
I do have the suggestion to maybe not make the cap static, but dynamic (i.e. 10-20% of the total notes). This would help to make 4K and 7K equally hard in this regard, since 4K usually has less notes in a similar difficulty level. Also this might avoid problems with songs with less than 400 notes (not relevant for MWC).
Yeap that's a bug, if they failed instantaneously when the map was completed :p
ReTLoM
okay i think i found a Bug when u start a Song and press only one note Your score hits example 190 and start to grow fast->slowly :)
Kempie

smoogipooo wrote:

- Combo
Combo is the harder one to talk about. We want to award holding combo, but at the same time not punish holding 4000 combo and missing once too much. To achieve this your individual hit scores are weighted by the combo you have after hitting the note. In the previous iteration this was a linear relationship, which resulted in punishing for missing after holding 4000 combo. In the new iteration it is logarithmic, with a cap at log_4(400) (meaning combo > 400 will be weighed as if your combo was 400), as shown in this graph (red = old, blue = new): https://u-gi.me/oJ6sa
This is a lot better, but combo still has some influence on score. I think a purely accuracy based scoring system is what osu!mania really needs:
  1. Inconsistent gameplay is already punished in a 100% accuracy based score. Inconsistent gameplay = missing notes and not timing well, resulting in lower accuracy and score. No need to involve combo at all here.
  2. Gone are the days of beating your personal best score on a song with a lower accuracy, sometimes even resulting in a loss(!) of pp.
  3. A purely accuracy based scoring system is a lot simpler and more predictable. Hit notes = higher score. Good timing = higher score. Right now you need to be mathematically inclined in order to comprehend or do calculations with both ScoreV1 and ScoreV2.
  4. No weird edge cases like '1 miss 10 seconds in' being punished more severely than '1 miss on the last note'.


So basically just Keep It Simple, Stupid. Any thoughts on this?
FelipeLink

smoogipooo wrote:

- Combo
Combo is the harder one to talk about. We want to award holding combo, but at the same time not punish holding 4000 combo and missing once too much. To achieve this your individual hit scores are weighted by the combo you have after hitting the note. In the previous iteration this was a linear relationship, which resulted in punishing for missing after holding 4000 combo. In the new iteration it is logarithmic, with a cap at log_4(400) (meaning combo > 400 will be weighed as if your combo was 400), as shown in this graph (red = old, blue = new): https://u-gi.me/oJ6sa
So, its better than before but still, i dont think the combo cap has to be at log_4(400), we are osu!mania the lair of the TVSAIZUS DESU, but being serious, maybe 200~300 should be fine, need to test to see the differences and see what is best, but i think 400 is kinda high, meaning that taiko is ''2k'' the combo cap is 100, so why osu!mania should be 400? this is my opnion btw.

P.S: Some broken mechanics on that combo cap is that we have 9 keymods(6 can be ranked), to be FAIR i think every Keymod need to has his own combo cap, because more keys= more notes, less keys= less notes, 400 could be fine for 7k, but for 4k maybe not, 200 could be good for 4k but for the other keymods? this is a BIG problem in my opnion.

Still, i dont think the score system needs to be changed, maybe this is the small problem in the osu!mania is the score system, all people say ''i had the same combo and accuracy'' but what about the ''300g'' ? and the ''100,50'' ? you can get a 99,5 with Nx100 or with Nx200, and probably the 99,5 with only 200 will be the higher score(meaning that the two scores has the same amount of 300g)
I want to see some scores like:
Example:
992k 1500x 300g, 3x200, 0x miss
Beating a:
991k 1520x 300g, 3x200, 0x miss) i dont think this will happen.
(considering that the 200s were in the same places on the runs)
Hope thats help, my english is kinda bad )':
Arras

FelipeLink wrote:

smoogipooo wrote:

- Combo
Combo is the harder one to talk about. We want to award holding combo, but at the same time not punish holding 4000 combo and missing once too much. To achieve this your individual hit scores are weighted by the combo you have after hitting the note. In the previous iteration this was a linear relationship, which resulted in punishing for missing after holding 4000 combo. In the new iteration it is logarithmic, with a cap at log_4(400) (meaning combo > 400 will be weighed as if your combo was 400), as shown in this graph (red = old, blue = new): https://u-gi.me/oJ6sa
So, its better than before but still, i dont think the combo cap has to be at log_4(400), we are osu!mania the lair of the TVSAIZUS DESU, but being serious, maybe 200~300 should be fine, need to test to see the differences and see what is best, but i think 400 is kinda high, meaning that taiko is ''2k'' the combo cap is 100, so why osu!mania should be 400? this is my opnion btw.

P.S: Some broken mechanics on that combo cap is that we have 9 keymods(6 can be ranked), to be FAIR i think every Keymod need to has his own combo cap, because more keys= more notes, less keys= less notes, 400 could be fine for 7k, but for 4k maybe not, 200 could be good for 4k but for the other keymods? this is a BIG problem in my opnion.

Still, i dont think the score system needs to be changed, maybe this is the small problem in the osu!mania is the score system, all people say ''i had the same combo and accuracy'' but what about the ''300g'' ? and the ''100,50'' ? you can get a 99,5 with Nx100 or with Nx200, and probably the 99,5 with only 200 will be the higher score(meaning that the two scores has the same amount of 300g)
I want to see some scores like:
Example:
992k 1500x 300g, 3x200, 0x miss
Beating a:
991k 1520x 300g, 3x200, 0x miss) i dont think this will happen.
(considering that the 200s were in the same places on the runs)
Hope thats help, my english is kinda bad )':
Here you go.


Note how I have almost a full 2% higher accuracy, higher max combo, much less HP loss, more MAX, more 300 and less of every other judgement, yet a lower score.
Endaris
Am I dumb or are both scores from 2015, Arras?
FelipeLink

Arras wrote:

Here you go.


Note how I have almost a full 2% higher accuracy, higher max combo, much less HP loss, more MAX, more 300 and less of every other judgement, yet a lower score.
i dont think you understand what i said, mania on score v1 has a combo cap already so ''higher max combo'' dont do anything.
Anyway, i'm talking about High acc scores, not a LOT OF MISS scores, if you miss only in one part and in the other run miss in a lot of parts you score will be different, its not even plausible to debate;
AS i can see in your screenshot you missed a lot on ''bursts'' in the first SS, and in the other you did well compared to the first, but in the middle you can see that in the 2nd SS you were bad its noticeable.
i have B who beats A, A who beats S, but why!?!?! because you did well the Entirely map except the ''Burst'' example of that? Ranked 4k charts: M.A.M.A / Blastix Riots.
This should not happen with >>Full combo<< stuff (FC 97 less 300g Nx200 beating a FC 98 with more 300g and the same amount of 200s)
Remyria
I suggest that the combo cap could be scaled on song at something like 5-6% of max combo as the cap, on short songs it would be WAY less than the 400 you tried, but on longer songs, it can reach over 400, without being over penalizing, since the song is...uh...longer. (I noticed someone suggesting the same)

(and that's just my opinion, but i'd make the accuracy points raising very slightly faster, of a few % only, but I have no justification, I let people like shoegazer give their opinion with an actual justification that makes sense :3)
Arras

Endaris wrote:

Am I dumb or are both scores from 2015, Arras?
They are. I pretty much stopped heavily playing not too long after that anyway. The only reason I picked those was because I remembered that as a score where I had a lower score even though it should be higher looking at the stats.
AncuL
is 300MAX (rainbow) counts on accuracy? or is it only the percentage accuracy thats being counted on "accuracy" ?
Tidek

Drojoke wrote:

smoogipooo wrote:

- Combo
Combo is the harder one to talk about. We want to award holding combo, but at the same time not punish holding 4000 combo and missing once too much. To achieve this your individual hit scores are weighted by the combo you have after hitting the note. In the previous iteration this was a linear relationship, which resulted in punishing for missing after holding 4000 combo. In the new iteration it is logarithmic, with a cap at log_4(400) (meaning combo > 400 will be weighed as if your combo was 400), as shown in this graph (red = old, blue = new): https://u-gi.me/oJ6sa
This is a lot better, but combo still has some influence on score. I think a purely accuracy based scoring system is what osu!mania really needs:
  1. Inconsistent gameplay is already punished in a 100% accuracy based score. Inconsistent gameplay = missing notes and not timing well, resulting in lower accuracy and score. No need to involve combo at all here.
  2. Gone are the days of beating your personal best score on a song with a lower accuracy, sometimes even resulting in a loss(!) of pp.
  3. A purely accuracy based scoring system is a lot simpler and more predictable. Hit notes = higher score. Good timing = higher score. Right now you need to be mathematically inclined in order to comprehend or do calculations with both ScoreV1 and ScoreV2.
  4. No weird edge cases like '1 miss 10 seconds in' being punished more severely than '1 miss on the last note'.


So basically just Keep It Simple, Stupid. Any thoughts on this?
Yeah, and player with 10misses on 1000notes map can still get 990k points, no, thanks
Full Tablet

Tidek wrote:

Yeah, and player with 10misses on 1000notes map can still get 990k points, no, thanks
A pure accuracy system can be based in something else besides the sum of the judgment values (which is not really a very good way to measure accuracy, since the value of each judgment is pretty arbitrary).

The scale of the score system is not really important, for example, you could take the accuracy ratio "r", and change the scale by using:
Scaled_r = r^3
And the meaning of the scale doesn't change (if ra and rb are different accuracy ratios from different plays, and ra>rb, then the scaled valued of ra is also bigger than the scaled value of rb).

The only situation where the scale matters is from team multiplayer matches, since the scores of different players are added together; the solution here is, instead of adding different scores together, make the overall score of the team be a score calculated by adding the judgment counts of the players together.

Another way to calculate accuracy is fitting the Normal Distribution probability curve (with mean 0) that fits the distribution of the hit errors the best.
In this case, for example:
- Play A: OD10 map, no mod, 10,000 judgments, 100 misses (the rest are Rainbows).
- Play B: OD10 map, no mod, 10,000 judgments, 153 50s (the rest are Rainbows).
- Play C: OD10 map, no mod, 10,000 judgments, 308 100s (the rest are Rainbows).
- Play D: OD10 map, no mod, 10,000 judgments, 996 200s (the rest are Rainbows).
- Play E: OD10 map, no mod, 10,000 judgments, 3263 300s (the rest are Rainbows).

All those score would be rated as very similar under the normal distribution fit (the order is C<A<E<D<B, but the differences between plays are very small).

Under the current accuracy percentage formula (scaled linearly so the max is 1,000,000).
- Play E: 1,000,000 (no different as if the play was only rainbows)
- Play D: 966,800
- Play C: 979,467
- Play B: 987,250
- Play A: 990,000
FrenzyLi
My proposal on score composition:
  • 20% combo-based scoring: for each combo achieved, divide it by max combo to get "dimensionless combo". For each dimensionless combo (between 0 and 1), use a function to map it from [0,1]->[0,1]. Sum the function values. The sum, which is still a value within [0,1] will then be scaled to 20% of max score. Refer to my algorithm proposed at the end of page 12, which doesn't use combo cap, and is being discussed by devs and a few members of community (thanks evening on this).

    75% old-acc-based scoring: a curve based on v1 accuracy. (refer to research by shoegazer, et al)

    5% 300g score bonus: linear against 300g ratio. Example: If 80% of all registered score values are 300g, the user gets 1 million * 5% * 80% = 40k score due to 300g.


Note that 300g = 320 = 300 + 20, and 300:20 = 75:5.

So, I'm asking for references and history as to:
Why is 300g considered to be 320?
Damaree
Errrm. . . . . . , well its up to all of you. Well Goodluck.
robby250

Remyria wrote:

I suggest that the combo cap could be scaled on song at something like 5-6% of max combo as the cap
I agree with it being percentage based instead of 400, and I agree with the 5-6% max combo values, but smoogipooo and other combo lovers would probably want a bigger percentage. So I suggest 10% of max combo as a compromise (please note that combo bonus still scales up after the cap but much slower).

Other suggestions, taken from reddit, are:

- Separating 300g and 300, regular 300s should give 95% accuracy. And yeah 300g should probably scale with OD too in that case. Alternatively, make 300g only visual, no effect on the actual game, and tighten up the judgements by a lot.

- Color based timing option like in stepmania

- Adding some kind of anti-mashing system that penalizes HP. I'm fine with the current one, but some find it too lenient and the range for missing/losing HP from hitting too early should be extended. Maybe offset HP up by 1 point too (new HP5 = old HP6, except in the upper values where there should be diminishing returns such as new HP9 = old HP9.2 or so because they're penalizing enough).

- Speed rates. These are mentioned in the OP but I want to enforce that it's a good thing that should be done.

There are other changes I've mentioned on reddit but they're beyond the scope of this thread. I still suggest you try to make them happen if you truly want osu!mania to thrive.

I'm fine with all the score v2 changes tbh, except the combo which should be percentage based as mentioned above.
Kempie

Tidek wrote:

Yeah, and player with 10misses on 1000notes map can still get 990k points, no, thanks
There's always the option of making misses/50s/100s reduce accuracy. Using Stepmania's scoring system (which punishes for misses by reducing score) scaled up to a maximum of 1,000,000 points, you would get a score of 960k when missing 10 notes and hitting 990 r300's.
abraker
smoogipooo, this entire idea is a mess. You are creating a Frankenstein's monster by mashing together accuracy and combo components. I don't know whether you have modeled the possible edge cases or not, but most players are going to be sure this is a bad idea until the edge cases are addressed and solutions are proposed. Until then, this has too many flaws to take seriously.

Here are two cases which I know are an issue:

  1. Suppose there exists a high spike in difficulty in the beginning of the map and the player has a miss there and only there. The player misses in the beginning, and as a result, got one short of an FC. Suppose there is the same spike in difficulty in the middle of the map and has a miss there and only there. The player misses in the middle, and as a result, has half of an FC. The first case would have a higher score than the second case, yet the difficulty spike is the same. Justify this matter.
  2. Players like Bobbias have become accustomed to a visual mod in such that they play worse without it. The player can easily become accustomed to a visual mod like that if they have the will to. How would it make sense for there to be a difficulty multiplier for visual mods then?

smoogipooo wrote:

As maps progress anxiety builds up and you become tired, both of those are indications of how good of a player you are, or otherwise, how consistent of a player you are.
You are forcing more anxiety with the combo based system, actually. Frustration as well. Currently the source of those emotions in mania is primarily when trying to PF a map with nothing but MAX or at least SS for less skillful players, but with this, you are going to extend that further. Having your score screwed for the rest of the play because of these mishaps on a non skillful level doesn't sound like a good gameplay mechanic. Also, a map can be as long as you want to be, but unless a player is being skillfully challenged, the player will get tired only from boredom. The way you made it sound is that you were referring to physical tiredness, which is not always the case.

smoogipooo wrote:

Explain what the "better ways" are? As I mentioned in the OP we are taking feedback, and we have lots of time to make changes.
Gladly! I have my own proposal for a scoring system which should be better than accuracy based scoring and combo based scoring. The concept of this scoring system is influenced by the difficulty of the parts the player is playing.

Let me tell you the main flaws in combo and accuracy first.

  1. Combo: Notes following a poor hit after a point have permanent diminished potential worth. Therefore, the position of the hard part matters to set the worth of every following note following.
  2. Accuracy: Doesn't care about disproportionate difficulty. Map can be mostly easy with one hard part and the player still gets high accuracy.


If you combine those together, what you get is a mechanic in which notes following after a poor hit at a point have permanent diminished potential worth while the player is still able to amount a high score if the easy part is sufficiently long enough. That's why I called it a Frankenstein's monster. You are trying to put life back into something while still creating something sill imperfect and ugly. It doesn't solve the problem, rather it compounds it.

A score might be a pretty number to some players, but to me it is a measure of skill. This number has to reflect how well you are doing against what you are given. As such, this number should be under the influence of two primary things: difficulty and result. When you multiply by the difficulty of that part, easy parts are worth little and hard parts are worth more, and should address the problem accuracy based scoring has. If the player misses on the hard part, tough luck, try harder, and if the player spams the hard part, the missesPunisher will do its job to not reward the player for random hits.

Here is the formula:
Score += (diffScore[t] * accScore[t] * log(t)) / missesPunisher

diffScore take the difficulty of the map at point t

AccScore take the player's score point (50, 100, 200, 300, MAX) at point t

log(t) increases as the map progresses. This has a similar effect like combo, but not quite. It's there to give a bonus for longer maps and how much depends on however you wish to scale it. I think this shouldn't give a noticeable effect unless the map is more than 5 minutes long.

missesPunisher is the number of misses and possibly bad score values in the last X milliseconds. If you want, you can do interesting things with this value such as an exponential increase with every miss or increase X for every miss so that it looks at a broader time period. However, the most important thing is that it doesn't destroy the worth of every proceeding pattern indefinitely if there is a miss. If there are misses, this would result at a temporary reduction in worth unlike your system where the potential worth is permanently reduced.
show more
Please sign in to reply.

New reply