I'm really fond of slider accuracy, but the score out of 1 million to me is a huge problem for ScoreV2.

On an average map, it can work, but very drastic changes happen to the scores of the players when you get into longer maps such as the marathons typically used in a tiebreaker. Due to the length of the map, it becomes significantly more difficult for players to hold combo, and as seen even in the tiebreaker of the grand final of OWC last year, if the map is also difficult, accuracy ends up being far more important towards your end score than combo a majority of the time. This is even with the current score ratio of 7:3 combo:accuracy.

I guess having max combo score scale in some way with then length of a map would help? Maybe linearly though, so it doesn't throw off the balance too in favour of combo once again.

Looking nice! But what about the multiplier on difficult reduction mods such as EZ?

^
They discussed about it here. p/5570799

This isn't really a huge problem but I'm going to complain anyway XD

If only 500 points are awarded per tick in a spinner, I don't think I'll feel as satisfied when I do spinners lol.

But I really would love more accuracy contributing to the score over combo because its a rhythm game! Osu is virtually the same as playing a musical instrument; what's the point of playing a piano or a guitar in a consistent rhythm, but playing the wrong notes? And its a real pain to try and beat low-accuracy but high combo scores.

I'm looking forward to score v2. Good luck with it!

Just popping in here to inform everyone that ScoreV2 is now available as an unranked(?) mod on cuttingedge. Might be worth giving a try.

Is there anything somewhere realy explaining how Score v2 works ? I've noticed when trying on Cutting Edge that my score was actualy decreasing when I was doing 100's which feels very unnatural. Score v2 plays seams to be failing to be submitted too but score v2 isn't considered as UNRANKED by the game client.

Slider accuracy is another topic as well, I just know I'll probably lose more than 1% of accuracy once score v2 is the only thing used because of it. Changing a very big game mechanic when the game is almost 10Yo with some players that are active since many years and used to how it works is a bit wierd.

I'm really enjoying the new slider accuracy judgement, it really keeps you on your toes more than the old system. It hits the hardest on wubwub maps like Bassdrop Freaks because now you actually have to pay attention to the slider patterns instead of zxzxzxzing your way through.

But I'm not sure if there's any replacement hitobject for mappers that want to hide a tempo change, other than being able to configure the OD through timing sections I take that back - just played Roze in Scorev2 and trying to account for all the changes in the tempo was actually really fun. Got 10 100s and scored a 606,074

I'm not sure I like how spinners are scored. Spinners add to the maximum score of 1,000,000 points, which means that the 1 million figure is kind of arbitrary. On maps without spinners an SS gets 1 million points, but on maps with lots of spinners you can score more than 1,000,000 points even if you didn't SS, so the 1 million figure loses its meaning.

But I can't think of a better way to score spinners other than making them not count at all, which is dumb. Maybe the difficulty to clear a spinner could be MASSIVELY increased so that it's actually really hard to spin a 300, and then remove spinnerbonus? Although that's an even worse solution. Idk.

quaternary wrote:

But I can't think of a better way to score spinners other than making them not count at all, which is dumb. Maybe the difficulty to clear a spinner could be MASSIVELY increased so that it's actually really hard to spin a 300, and then remove spinnerbonus? Although that's an even worse solution. Idk.

The only thing I could think of would be to count the spinner bonuses toward the 1mil cap (as spinners are capped at 477rpm) and adjust the other values accordingly, but that'd probably make it even more arbitrary, as it'd make it impossible to get 1mil without a spinbot.

What will happen to fallback? Is it going to be implemented to fallback at least at any point in the future?

Probably been pointed out but if you are going to add a judgment to the slider head you should add some immediate feedback. At the moment if I hit a 100 on a sliderhead I won't know until the end. Having feedback on the slider end is still important but less so. Perhaps just having separate judgment/feedback for sliderhead vs sliderbody (includes tail) judgment. While this would further inflate how much of your score is dictated by sliders it seems fairly standard (ie. lazers in KSM are overweighted in terms of score and I'm pretty sure this applies to SDVX too).

I think giving the player feedback (note: feedback =/= actual judgment) on all objects and not just circles will lead to an overall creep in accuracy/consistency as it reduces the feedback bias player currently receive.

Anyways, my post is less about whether SV2 is a good thing and more about implementation so hopefully it's useful.

Serious suggestions:

1. After playing ScoreV2 in several types of map, from simple pp farming with almost no sliders, ending on technical slider spam maps, i would recommend to increase leniency of sliders by around 25-30% in od8 up to 50% in od10.

2. Move slider score indicator (300-100-50-miss) into slider head circle instead of slider-end.

Rest is fine in my opinion, with change like above, this could already rollout into live version.

With regards,
Love ScoreV2, game feels so much better with it, with exceptions like above.

den0saur wrote:

What will happen to fallback? Is it going to be implemented to fallback at least at any point in the future?

I'm pretty sure fallback hasn't realy been updated since 2015 (Copyright notice on fallback still says 2007-2015) hidden already works differently and i'm almost sure score v2 will never be added to fallback. You should switch to stable, honestly the only computer where I saw fallback working and stable not is a Pentium 4 computer that is probably 15 years old.

About score v2 itself, I don't get why sliders has been made much more punishing. Not only you need to accurately hit the slider start, but when sliderbreaking by missing the start of a slider, you get a 50 instead of a 100. Missing ticks still work the same as before it seams
Also I'm all for having a score indicator when clicking the slider start, then another one for slider end. Cause now, if you get a 50, you don't realy know, did you hit the start very innacurately or did you miss the start and sliderbroke. Same for 100's and missed slider ticks. Also seing a 100 at the end of a slider on which you didn't break is very unusual, especialy since the slider end will obviously sound on beat. Having a 100/50/Miss when clicking the slider start to know how accuratly you did hit it, then another indicator at the end if you missed ticks or the slider end whould probably be a good idea.

Other than that, score v2 still seams to rely heavily on combo and some people said it tooday and I agree, it should probably be based on the number of misses, cause why the guy who had 900 combo but 20 misses should have a higher score than the one with a single miss at 500 combo in the middle of the map (With similar accuracy of corse), was not that the biggest problem with score v1 ? Right now I think the adventage to score v2 is when you are doing 100's doesn't matter, but it still rely too heavily on combo probably.

den0saur wrote:

What will happen to fallback? Is it going to be implemented to fallback at least at any point in the future?

Fallback was only meant to be for people who had issues with the big OpenGL update of 2015, and since most of the compatibility issues with the current 'latest' version have been ironed out, I don't think it'd ever be updated. There's a new client on the horizon, and it wouldn't surprise me if the current 'fallback' gets disconnected from online services and the current 'latest' becomes the new 'fallback' when the new client gets released.

I personally think scorev2 is some kind of an joke the game will become boring almost linear it will become harder too so less new players will be playing it. and losing points when u dont get 300 thats bullcrap. so if this becomes the new score system im out. now sorry i need to not write this and enjoy osu while its good.

Edit: And basically the game will become osu!mania in the points way

First off, I have no idea how score in osu!mania is a bad thing when applied to osu! standard. This complaint I get the least, because it changes literally nothing about the core gameplay and is really only a "muh spreadsheets" kind of thing, except replace spreadsheets with numbers. It's the same thing.

The real controversy lies within the slider timing window. Personally, I don't see how this is a big issue, as osu! should've had something like this since the very beginning. As it's advertised, osu! is a rhythm game. Woah. This means that playing the song accurately should reward the player, and with sliders now finally getting timing treatment, players need to actually click to the rhythm of the song as opposed to click whenever. If you don't hit a slider accurately, you deserve less accuracy. Honestly as a rhythm game player fanatic, I'd love to see accuracy showcased more, but because osu! also has aiming and combo as features, I can't take those away. The split right now is good, though a bit more of an increase for accuracy wouldn't hurt at all.

Another thing people need to realize is that this is not the final product. Yes, currently it is implemented in the game as a mod, but this is just to showcase what the future entails and to test the new scoring system for those willing to try it out. When they have constructive criticism against ScoreV2, discussion is raised, and depending on whether other people agree or not, things can be tweaked. No system will ever be perfect, but to get as close to perfection as possible is always the goal, and I believe ScoreV2 honestly is making an attempt at this better than ScoreV1 ever could. Because ScoreV2 isn't complete yet, and can be tweaked (as it has been when large outcries happen such as with Taiko big note hits/mania taking combo more into account were either tweaked or outright removed).

Score V2 is broken right now and SHOULD NOT be put out

If someone is able to do this \/


Then obviously the system should be reworked.... ALOT

I mean how can a .99 star get more score then a song that is near 11 stars.... that is not even logical anymore

Oh and touching on the sliders just a bit...
ima just post what my friend said cause he said it quite well tbh


Now i am not like the other people saying that it just flat out should never come out.... but i mean..... there are clearly some major flaws........

if you do not want people to get triggered do not put on the desc of the mod "try the future scoring system", that lowkey makes it sound final and like NOTHING will be changed, make it something like "Test out the new scoring system". that way people know that its a TEST

The score is supposed to indicate how well you played the map, not indicate how good the play was (that is pp's function).

In A FOOL MOON NIGHT, the play gets all 300s (awarding the base 1 million points + mod bonuses); while in Syrup, it also gets all 300s (awarding the million + mod bonuses), plus score from overspinning.

honestly, i think accuracy is already overrated. the pp difference between 94% and 97% is already huge. i don't enjoy playing a map 200 times to get it around 97% and finally getting a bit of pp. when i get an s, i just want to move on to a different map. not play the same map over and over to get some pp.

Full Tablet wrote:

The score is supposed to indicate how well you played the map, not indicate how good the play was (that is pp's function).

In A FOOL MOON NIGHT, the play gets all 300s (awarding the base 1 million points + mod bonuses); while in Syrup, it also gets all 300s (awarding the million + mod bonuses), plus score from overspinning.

The point with puting those scores was to show how broke the system was. A map with such a low combo and skill requirement should not have a higher score amount (even just getting a 300 on the spinner would give you a higher score).

There should be some kind of score balance for higher maps so you feel like higher maps reward you better then lower maps (aka the higher star maps should NOT be 1m when you can get 1m on a 1 star)

gellandor wrote:

Full Tablet wrote:

The score is supposed to indicate how well you played the map, not indicate how good the play was (that is pp's function).

In A FOOL MOON NIGHT, the play gets all 300s (awarding the base 1 million points + mod bonuses); while in Syrup, it also gets all 300s (awarding the million + mod bonuses), plus score from overspinning.

The point with puting those scores was to show how broke the system was. A map with such a low combo and skill requirement should not have a higher score amount (even just getting a 300 on the spinner would give you a higher score).

There should be some kind of score balance for higher maps so you feel like higher maps reward you better then lower maps (aka the higher star maps should NOT be 1m when you can get 1m on a 1 star)

If you have played a game such as cytus with a max score of 1000000, you should understand this kind of scoring too (although that there's a weighting system between combo and accuracy). Usually a game like that has 3 difficulty level in a song, and each of them maxed out to 1000000. Read the bolded quote words to make sure you understand about what score v2 is.
Otherwise, I think score v2 is pretty good for tournament setting, so that the combo and accuracy balance out. But I won't like to see it in live scoring leaderboard because of:
1. It is sad to remove all the scores from score v1, especially on those old maps where nearly no one wants to play them anymore
2. Score v2 is not really a good score metric in insanely hard map like Mazzerin's, where combo takes near zero role on score v2.

I don't have an idea if a separate leaderboard can be used (without deleting score v1 of course).

I think ScoreV2 is a great idea, I don't understand why so much people are agaisnt it

Please only take the following into account, if i got that 1 Million score limit right:

Just one thing from my position: If you remake the scoring system and actually implement it, would it be possible to "activate" the old system via mods? Just as the new one can be activated right now (or give the possibility to "switch" between UIs that show the different scores and so on)? To me it feels kind of underwhelming when playing long maps (and especially marathon maps), actually managing to more or less FC them and then you get just a bit less than 1M points instead of the 100M+ that some would give with the old (current) system. The ranking and so on could of course be accounted with the new system.

>70% of score comes from combo, the remaining 30% comes from accuracy.
>Spinners award 500 points per tick.
>The mod multipliers are as follows: HR - 1.10x, DT - 1.20x, FL - 1.12x, HD - 1.06x

This great, but what about sliders?
I think that slider accuracy system kill hard maps with sliderstreams and fast mini sliders etc

On the one million point system:
I don't think score will ever be something people compare much among each other, even with ScoreV2.
Just imagine someone saying "Look at this play on >beatmap< I got a score of 900,000!"
I think people will still go off star rating, pp, combobreaks, accuracy and of course, the selected mods.
It's too hard to encompass all these into just score and difficulty of the map, and it just feels less rewarding when score is changed to become generally much lower, while it feels like cheating, almost, when you play a short, easy map, and get over a million score. Also, for instance, a doubletime 800,000 score might still be much more impressive than a nomod 900,000, so just score alone won't do.

On slider accuracy:
I think it's too big a change to implement. Slider leniency has its downsides, in having sliders feel lackluster in terms of acc'ing them, but at the same time, it's the system that allows for many types of maps and things to be playable and rankable. For instance, when you have a sudden, unpredictable shift in the music, or a very slow part, it can be very frustrating with hitcircles given the difficulty of timing, without much of it actually being your fault (to your feeling, at least)
And that's without mention of dubstep and similar maps. They'd take a HUGE hit from this new slider accuracy.

Even so, when I was relatively newer, I did think "why can't sliders have accuracy?" After all, it is a rhythm game, and I myself am generally pretty good at getting good accuracy. But after playing a LOT of maps of all different types, I see it as a positive thing. To remove it seems like pandering to generic, anime mapping, which has enough going for it already.


Anyhow. If scoreV2 was implemented, the entire pp system should probably be overhauled as well... It has some rough edges, as well as probably getting broken by slider accuracy.

I wouldn't worry about the ranking side of things; anything that'd be unrankable with ScoreV2 would also be unrankable under the current system anyways.

I mean, sure, it may make slider-intensive maps more frustrating, but it won't change anything gameplay-wise besides handing you more 100s than before (which isn't too big of a deal IMO, considering how combo still accounts for most of your score). SSes would still be possible on pretty much every ranked map (with the exception of a few incredibly old maps) even after slider-accuracy is added to the game. If anything, this should just cause the PP system to weigh wubwub maps even more than before, which would honestly be a good thing for people that are good at those types of maps.

TakuMii wrote:

I wouldn't worry about the ranking side of things; anything that'd be unrankable with ScoreV2 would also be unrankable under the current system anyways.

I mean, sure, it may make slider-intensive maps more frustrating, but it won't change anything gameplay-wise besides handing you more 100s than before (which isn't too big of a deal IMO, considering how combo still accounts for most of your score). SSes would still be possible on pretty much every ranked map (with the exception of a few incredibly old maps) even after slider-accuracy is added to the game. If anything, this should just cause the PP system to weigh wubwub maps even more than before, which would honestly be a good thing for people that are good at those types of maps.

It's not just "slider-intensive maps becoming more frustrating". It's unpredictable rhythm becoming more frustrating. Specifically BPM increases and decreases.
Mappers often use a lot of sliders in these sections because you'd feel cheated out of your accuracy if they didn't. it's very hard to time something rhythmically when 1. you have only a visual cue, no music one
2. it's at a 'random' moment compared to what was before
3. human error in the mapper's timing sections exist

Also, wubwub maps will never give good pp, or at least, not enough to avoid being completely overshadowed by generic maps, simple rhythm, circular flow, gimmickless maps.

What I meant with the pp system requiring an overhaul: well, changing the amount of pp maps will give, is essentially impossible to do without creating an imbalance between the two systems. And giving sliderheads accuracy necessarily changes how it'll work. PP needs an overhaul for different reasons, that I won't go into in this thread. I might make a video or something about it once... It's a pretty big deal to me, to be honest.

make scorev2 50% combo / 50% acc and remove combo based scoring for acc. ez

I think the fact of having to increase even more the aim to play, after so long being accustomed to the current system, is going to be a headache, at least for a while. Although I think that there will be so many problems for new players, those of old will have a big change when it comes to playing
As for the fact of the spins, I think it's going to be a somewhat similar system, only there will be more score for fewer laps, I wish there were modifications to avoid the abuse of bugs in roulette by some players
The mods if it is a fair way to measure the score, I think it is the only thing that I am in agreement, because the fact that the FL players to make ranks in insane maps require a little less effort than the DT players It makes me a little unfair.
I hope this ScoreV2 ends up not being officially added to the system.

Wait so what's going to happen to the current scores? It's going to be completely disproportional to all the scores that are current. Are all the scores going to be converted to ScoreV2? Is the level system going to be changed? What's going to happen to slider maps, are they going to become almost impossible?

gonna repost something i wrote up during OWC registrations last year on the topic of EZ mod in scoreV2, particularly with a focus on if it was allowed in OWC. it was deemed too late to consider, test and implement before the tournament would start, so i thought it'd be timely to bring it up now, half a year later.

-GN wrote:

Loctav wrote:

Fair question, I would have problems figuring out a proper multiplier for it (given we use scorev2). Would it be a positive one? (it obviously makes things harder) or a negative one? (since it makes you less likely to fail.. ok weak argument)

I am not an EZ player or have much insight in this aspect, so if you have suggestions in how to design it, feel free to propose something!

(without a multiplier, it would sort of lose its tactical purpose, wouldn't it? dunno...)

(i was gonna post this a week ago but forgot.)

It's a good question, actually. I would ideally prefer some kind of dynamic score multiplier(and i really think it should be made for every mod if scoreV2 becomes the official system), judging how difficult a map is to read/understand, but that's a bit too ambitious.

However, you should know that while EZ makes maps very hard to understand for the uninitiated, it also reduces the physical(aim/speed-wise) difficulty by a lot, and those that practice it can in most cases do better on maps with EZ on than they could without, given that they've practiced them. So having it give a positive score multiplier(or no penalty at all) would give those people a great advantage over others who don't play it on the regular, and i don't think that's the kind of skill that should be rewarded in a tournament like this.

I had trouble coming up with a reasonable multiplier for it myself, though. Using the old 0.5x multiplier wouldn't make it very useful for scoreV2 tournaments, i think. So i propose something like this:

Nomod gives 700 000 for combo + 300 000 for accuracy for a max score of 1 000 000.
EZ would give 550 000 for combo + 150 000 for accuracy for a max score of 700 000.

I estimate a 95% FC to be ~850k for nomod and ~625k for EZ with the current scoreV2 accuracy dropoff rate.

Obviously the accuracy part is lowered because of the low OD in comparison, but only reduced it to half the value, as to not devalue scores with high accuracies. Accuracy on EZ is more about the big mistakes you do rather than how well you follow the music, but it can still be hard to get above 99% on very demanding maps - and i think that's where picking EZ would be most helpful. In addition, picking EZ makes it easier to spam through harder parts of a map at the expense of accuracy, so i wanted to still keep it a little rewarding.

For the combo part - EZ consistency is really, REALLY hard to attain. Using it seriously in a tournament can be very risky, so i didn't drop it that much. For a tournament based score system, i think it makes sense. Compared to the accuracy part, i think most of the score should come from your combo when using EZ.

...so that's my proposal. Everyone loves EZ plays, so giving it a chance to be used on freemod picks might be good for entertainment's sake, at least, and with this, it'd retain some tactical value as well. It might be a little late to try to implement right before OWC, and it's not that important for most players, but if it's going to be a possibility, i'd want to see it executed something like this.

As a current casual player and old "kinda good" one, I feel like the new system puts a bit more pressure and I like it as a mod or for tournaments and more "serious" gaming, but definitely wouldn't like it as a casual player and it might even make me quit the game as I love SSing maps and it's almost impossible for me when it keeps giving me worse score. Yes, that might mean I need to be better at acc, but as I said I am a working adult and I play to relax, not to compete. I play a lot of slider maps and I enjoy them, because sliders allow for more unpredictable rhythm.

I also believe it will make maps more boring. I am in no position to argue as I'm not playing that much atm, but I tried it and didn't enjoy it much, so that's my two cents. But if it gets implemented, I'll probably get used to it....

It's great, but it's taking time.

The direction this is going in is probably fine. There's no need to change anything, as it will be confusing when OWC comes.

I'm going to throw in my two cents here where I feel like I actually have something to say.

You should absolutely not implement the slider acc change as currently intended, full stop. I think it is a very bad idea to adjust the fundamental framework of how a game works in a way that dramatically affects the content designed around the old system retrospectively unless there is a critically important reason for doing so.

shortpotato wrote:

It feels to me (correct me if im wrong?) that the staff feel as if removing score V2 (or aspects of it) is a direct attack against all of the work they have done into making it.

As a counterpoint to the statement above, this change would be indiscriminately altering the intent of all the people who designed something around a system working a certain way which is super disrespectful to all the people who made maps depending on those mechanics. The intent of the original work should be preserved unless absolutely necessary.

Let's use an analogy here - imagine we have some kind of community based Mario game where everyone makes maps and competes to get the best times on these maps. Ten years down the line, the developers of this game decide that they don't like the jumping mechanics anymore because they are "too easy" and decide to make Mario only jump 0.9x as high for 0.9x as long. Suddenly, there are tons of maps that no longer function as intended because they were optimized and designed around the old mechanics. Tons of things are now broken for little to no actual material gain.

In addition, I 100% guarantee that there will be a significant portion of the playerbase that will be very pissed off if you make any changes to how the game functions at a base level no matter what they are, and for good reason. Don't be George Lucas going around altering Star Wars and then making sure nobody can ever see the original version again, especially when you only made the framework and tools for everyone else to make Star Wars around, and especially when these changes are not universally agreed upon. Lots of people, myself included, wouldn't consider this change to even be an improvement. Are you just going to tell all these people to suck a sausage?

This isn't to say that I think that slider accuracy is a bad idea per se - just that it should not be applied retrospectively to content not designed for it. Instead...

chainpullz wrote:

Making slider acc into a difficulty increasing mod

I 100% support this idea. Then people are given choice to decide whether they want it or not. Everyone is happy.

EDIT: Oh yeah, not to mention the fact that you will either have to a) wipe ten years worth of scores or b) recalculate them and possibly ruin everyone's top plays. Who here is really itching to see something like rrtyui's The Big Black SS ruined because he got a 100 somewhere in the new system, or wiped entirely off the map? I personally could take a pass on that.

Personally, I'm not a huge fan of ScoreV2 (mainly because of slider acc and max normal score is 1 million). However my complaints are fairly biased so I won't really complain. It's just my opinion, however if/when it becomes the main score mode I'll have to learn it.

Hey there.

I was somewhat disappointed by the new scoring system so I started to look for a topic which deals with it. I finally found it – that's why I'm here – so I have to share my point of view.

First, this system is somewhat discouraging to me. If you rock, it's ok. But if you fail...
I saw there's a sort of one million points limit. It is a huge problem since people might be discouraged to play harder maps. That's what I usually do to improve at osu! Recently, I got something like 90k points on a map rated "insane". 90k under 1000k... Though, my accuracy was about 82% or something. The score means I only cleared 9% of the map. Come on, that's unfair. How could you get some motivation to play & improve if the game tells you "yea, you've got 82% acc but you cleared 9% of the map, you fool". Am I supposed to play easy & normal maps until I get one million points on them...?

Second, the loss of points when you fail a circile, slider, of whatever.
It's about the same issue: progress. When you're on this slippery slope, playing again & again in order to improve, you sometimes get inspired by a divine might or something. It helps you to do a 200 streak combo or else, it shows how much you've improved. Then, a tricky pattern comes and you make some fails. Taadaa! You lost so many points, your last good move has been erased because of this loss combined to the fact there's a 1 million limit. Don't you think it's way too hard to climb back after a few fails? If the map is shorter than 2 minutes, you're screwed at the moment you fail a bit. Sure, it's a good thing for tryharding pros. But think about the little players, those who want to progress. It's pretty unwholesome...

Kyreo wrote:

Hey there.

I was somewhat disappointed by the new scoring system so I started to look for a topic which deals with it. I finally found it – that's why I'm here – so I have to share my point of view.

First, this system is somewhat discouraging to me. If you rock, it's ok. But if you fail...
I saw there's a sort of one million points limit. It is a huge problem since people might be discouraged to play harder maps. That's what I usually do to improve at osu! Recently, I got something like 90k points on a map rated "insane". 90k under 1000k... Though, my accuracy was about 82% or something. The score means I only cleared 9% of the map. Come on, that's unfair. How could you get some motivation to play & improve if the game tells you "yea, you've got 82% acc but you cleared 9% of the map, you fool". Am I supposed to play easy & normal maps until I get one million points on them...?

Second, the loss of points when you fail a circile, slider, of whatever.
It's about the same issue: progress. When you're on this slippery slope, playing again & again in order to improve, you sometimes get inspired by a divine might or something. It helps you to do a 200 streak combo or else, it shows how much you've improved. Then, a tricky pattern comes and you make some fails. Taadaa! You lost so many points, your last good move has been erased because of this loss combined to the fact there's a 1 million limit. Don't you think it's way too hard to climb back after a few fails? If the map is shorter than 2 minutes, you're screwed at the moment you fail a bit. Sure, it's a good thing for tryharding pros. But think about the little players, those who want to progress. It's pretty unwholesome...

The reason a 82%acc score only gives about 9% of the possible score is not because of the score cap, the same thing happens with scorev1 (a SS in a certain map can give you ~27 million, while a 82%acc score with misses can give you ~3 million, for example). In my opinion, this is not a bad thing. Getting through a map with ~80% accuracy usually means you barely passed it, so the amount of score you get from that pass should be close to the minimum possible; that way, scores are distributed more evenly over the possible range of values (instead of most plays be concentrated on the 90%-to-100% range, which would happen if the percentage of score was close to the acc% of the play)

In scorev1, the maximum score a map gives doesn't depend heavily on their difficulty (an Insane map only gives about twice the amount of score for the same amount of notes compared to an Easy map, based on the OD/HP/CS settings), it depends mainly on the amount of objects (the maximum score of a map is approximately proportional to the square of the maximum combo). In the same mapset, harder difficulties tend to give more score mainly because they have more notes, not because they are harder.

When you do poorly in a note (missing, or a bad judgment), the "current" amount of score decreases. In strict rigor, since the accuracy part of the score is not something that is accumulated (acc% is the average of the judgment values of the notes you have played so far), your score does not exist until you finish the map; the number in the corner can be seen just as an indicator of how well you are doing.

The "current" amount of score during play could be modified to be always increasing, by showing the amount of score you would get on the map if you missed every single note you haven't played yet, but that would case some issues (the acc portion of the score would be near 0 for most of the play, then jump quickly to the final value when close to the end of the map; during a multiplayer match or when comparing to previous plays of the same map, the current score value would be a worse predictor of how much score you will get on the map)

Full Tablet wrote:

Kyreo wrote:

[Cut for obvious reasons; readability.]

The reason a 82%acc score only gives about 9% of the possible score is not because of the score cap, the same thing happens with scorev1 (a SS in a certain map can give you ~27 million, while a 82%acc score with misses can give you ~3 million, for example). In my opinion, this is not a bad thing. Getting through a map with ~80% accuracy usually means you barely passed it, so the amount of score you get from that pass should be close to the minimum possible; that way, scores are distributed more evenly over the possible range of values (instead of most plays be concentrated on the 90%-to-100% range, which would happen if the percentage of score was close to the acc% of the play)

In scorev1, the maximum score a map gives doesn't depend heavily on their difficulty (an Insane map only gives about twice the amount of score for the same amount of notes compared to an Easy map, based on the OD/HP/CS settings), it depends mainly on the amount of objects (the maximum score of a map is approximately proportional to the square of the maximum combo). In the same mapset, harder difficulties tend to give more score mainly because they have more notes, not because they are harder.

When you do poorly in a note (missing, or a bad judgment), the "current" amount of score decreases. In strict rigor, since the accuracy part of the score is not something that is accumulated (acc% is the average of the judgment values of the notes you have played so far), your score does not exist until you finish the map; the number in the corner can be seen just as an indicator of how well you are doing.

The "current" amount of score during play could be modified to be always increasing, by showing the amount of score you would get on the map if you missed every single note you haven't played yet, but that would case some issues (the acc portion of the score would be near 0 for most of the play, then jump quickly to the final value when close to the end of the map; during a multiplayer match or when comparing to previous plays of the same map, the current score value would be a worse predictor of how much score you will get on the map)

Thanks for answering.

I have to say I would not leave the game at all if this scoring system was adopted. Though, the combination between the 1 million limit & the loss of points is a bit cruel to me. I do a 82%, it's barely ok. I do not want a 820 000 under 1 000 000 though. I just think that 90 000 is way too little. For instance, Osu!mania has the same limit point. For a 82% acc without changing the number of keys, I can easily get a 500 000 points or somewhat which does not allow you to be seen in the ladder (it's normal; only the bests are in). It is way more encouraging than a 90 000 telling you "you're bad, not even the average". 90 000 under 1 000 000 is something which deserves a D, not a B. Still, a D is not accurate for a 82%. What I am pointing at is this system being way too harsh on scoring.

With scorev1 (in standard only), you could manage to earn some points just by comboing since it was very impactful. A 300 max combo with 80% acc will get more points than a 150 max combo with 90% acc. If you succeeded at comboing well, the score would reward you. With scorev2, it will no longer be possible since you have to be good at everything, or else the score will tell you are nothing. That's why I think the current osu!mania scoring is the best. I did something like 300k points on an easy map as a very first try. My fingers got easily confused and all. Still, I caught most of the notes eventhough the accuracy was bad. I think the 300k points are adapted to my first play since I had something like 60% acc with several misses. Saying that I only cleared 30% of the map is nice. On the other hand, a 9% score for a B with 82% is not only disturbing but also inaccurate.

blame the combo system

You seem to misunderstand the purpose of the score system.

The score system is there to rank people as accurately as possible relative to each other. It is being changed because the current system provides very inconsistent information from map to map and rewards combo disproportionately over accuracy, not to mention the score difference between mediocre and amazing plays is marginal at best.

The score system is not there to make you feel good or encourage you (especially when you didn't actually achieve anything). That burden of motivation is on you and you alone. What you are proposing is essentially a watering down of the system so that everyone gets a participation trophy at the expense of compressing the scores into meaninglessness. You want to take away the impact of working hard for and eventually earning a great score so you don't have to feel bad about not being good at the game after eight whole hours of gameplay.

When everyone gets a reward, the reward is meaningless. Earn your rewards.