@Aqo You must realize that this isn't a potential skill rankings, it's a ranking based on your performances.
Also, airman isn't even on that spreadsheet.
Also, airman isn't even on that spreadsheet.
spreadsheet is flawed in general, i know of a few hard maps that will be top or near top on many top 100 players that arent on this listJappyBabes wrote:
@Aqo You must realize that this isn't a potential skill rankings, it's a ranking based on your performances.
Also, airman isn't even on that spreadsheet.
Afaik the "best performance" tab isn't ordered. I believe ppy once said something about that.nrii wrote:
spreadsheet is flawed in general, i know of a few hard maps that will be top or near top on many top 100 players that arent on this listJappyBabes wrote:
@Aqo You must realize that this isn't a potential skill rankings, it's a ranking based on your performances.
Also, airman isn't even on that spreadsheet.
edit: equally looking at tom94's tops, he has a hd+hr SS on a map that is 327 on this list, lower ranked than a hd+hr non SS of a map that is 409 on this list. the map weighting is lower, hes rank 1 on both, and his acc is higher on bulletproof, so why does the lower weighted map give more pp?
i've had friends play maps that are my top's and they also appear at the top of their list, it has to be ordered by somethingTom94 wrote:
Afaik the "best performance" tab isn't ordered. I believe ppy once said something about that.
You are basically trying to rank people by using one song. The thing is you really can't do that. Even in a perfect pp calculation world, you still need an average of at least several maps. It doesn't really matter if Player B played a few times, got a good score, got a little less pp than Player A, and moved on to either just take a break or play/rank on other maps. If Player B is truly better, he would then be able to get much better scores than Player A on other maps, in which case his PP would clearly show (though I'm still assuming a perfect pp calculation world). Obviously, right now, that may not be the case, but I'm just saying that you can't attribute this to one map... It doesn't matter if on one map a "worse" player obtains a higher rank than you. Secondly, the computer cannot measure your emotional state, and calculating pp by play count is WAY too unreliable. So much crap happens in the real world that could make your play count skyrocket for certain reasons or another (whether emotional or physical (e.g. you are tired or you are depressed, or your mom is being an ass, not that my mom is )Aqo wrote:
We have Player A and Player B, playing a map.
Player A first played that map with 89% accuracy and a few miss, and then proceeded to retry that map again and again for several hours, having about 50-100 retries on it, until eventually getting an SS on it. Even despite getting that SS, if Player A kept playing that map he would most likely get 95%-97% accuracy on an average run.
Player B played that map and had 98% accuracy on his first try. He thought he might try going for an SS on it, so he played it again, then getting about 98% again, maybe slightly higher. He then decided this map isn't very fun for him, and moved on.
Who do you think is a more skilled player, A or B?
And who is PP going to rate higher?
I don't think someone who can only do 89% can magically get a SS even if playing for 3-5 hoursAqo wrote:
We have Player A and Player B, playing a map.
Player A first played that map with 89% accuracy and a few miss, and then proceeded to retry that map again and again for several hours, having about 50-100 retries on it, until eventually getting an SS on it. Even despite getting that SS, if Player A kept playing that map he would most likely get 95%-97% accuracy on an average run.
Player B played that map and had 98% accuracy on his first try. He thought he might try going for an SS on it, so he played it again, then getting about 98% again, maybe slightly higher. He then decided this map isn't very fun for him, and moved on.
Who do you think is a more skilled player, A or B?
And who is PP going to rate higher?
Just gonna quote this to spare myself some typing. I'm gonna be acting as if the pp algorithm is really simple here, for clarity reasons.winber1 wrote:
The reason it exists is because if a song is popular, a rank #100 will be worth more than a rank#100 on a non-popular song. On non-popular songs it's easier to get higher ranks, and so rank #1 on some map very people like to play is not nearly as hard to achieve then #1 on a very popular map (because a lot more pros start playing the map). With that in mind, a rank #10 on that popular should be worth a lot more than rank #1 on some map no one really cares much about. Removing this will probably cause a lot of weird pp changes, probably for the worse (because there are a lot of maps where not as pro people have #1's or top 10's that could mess up the pp rankings)
Yeah. As long as people act like this I doubt anything good can happen out of all of this. :<Blue Dragon wrote:
lol someone deleted everything
Ok I improved the accuracy now, too and the PP got way higher now.roym899 wrote:
I wonder why it can happen that you improve your score but lose pp? It just happened to me on a song which was in my Best Performance list. I improved my rank and I lost around 20 pp. (I also lost 0,01 accuracy, maybe that's the problem)
Nope, I had the same issue even though I also improved the accuracy of my record. I guess it's some weird bug or something like that.roym899 wrote:
I wonder why it can happen that you improve your score but lose pp? It just happened to me on a song which was in my Best Performance list. I improved my rank and I lost around 20 pp. (I also lost 0,01 accuracy, maybe that's the problem)
Well, that's nice for you then. PP can still decrease even with improved accuracy though.roym899 wrote:
I wonder why it can happen that you improve your score but lose pp? It just happened to me on a song which was in my Best Performance list. I improved my rank and I lost around 20 pp. (I also lost 0,01 accuracy, maybe that's the problem)
Ok I improved the accuracy now, too and the PP got way higher now.
Player C realized that under the new Aqo replay point rewarding system, he should play the map a 1000 times on a machine disconnected from the net until he could do it in his sleep. Then he moved over to the connected machine, played it once and SSed it, scoring beau coup de Aqo-PP.Aqo wrote:
I'd just like to point something out that just occurred to me, which is related to how scoring and the PP system works with taking into account only good plays and not bad ones:
We have Player A and Player B, playing a map.
Player A first played that map with 89% accuracy and a few miss, and then proceeded to retry that map again and again for several hours, having about 50-100 retries on it, until eventually getting an SS on it. Even despite getting that SS, if Player A kept playing that map he would most likely get 95%-97% accuracy on an average run.
Player B played that map and had 98% accuracy on his first try. He thought he might try going for an SS on it, so he played it again, then getting about 98% again, maybe slightly higher. He then decided this map isn't very fun for him, and moved on.
Who do you think is a more skilled player, A or B?
And who is PP going to rate higher?
Only rewarding good plays and not penalizing for bad plays is one of the main factors that lead PP to rate farming over skill on a lot of the maps. While it's understandable that penalizing bad plays might be demoralizing for all of the players who are not used to competitive ranking boards, the system has to work in a way that makes sense when going with the decision of only taking into account good plays (this is related to worth of SS/S/etc, on different levels of OD. An SS on low OD usually means no more than "farming" and not actual "skill" with the current system and the nature of what maps players choose to play. Rewarding extra for high-accuracy on a system that ignores retries basically rewards extra for farming and for playing easier maps).That's not farming. Farming would be if you could just keep playing new maps and have your PP grow without end. You can't do that in the new system, because the weighting curve will cut you off after so many maps, and the only way you can get more PP then is to score higher than your previous plays. It might look like you can farm, because if your PP is built on junk already, playing low level maps can stoke things up a bit and look like farming. But it's ultimately self defeating... eventually you'll need to post better and better plays to advance. Plus, better scores means that you get to add more of them together (because the weighting function won't push them under the threshold until later)... it's bonus squared. Sure there is a bit of an issue with PP being "soft" for lower values... where a player might be able to advance quicker in the short term with lower level maps, but another player playing higher level maps will be actively becoming a better player, and will ultimately be able to score higher.
and what's stopping good players doing the same and beating the "noobs" ranks?Jordan wrote:
ROFL just as expected. Now that everyone knows high weighted maps every noob can go farm good ranks on simple maps and get loads of pp for nothing. Gj publishing the list...
lazinessnrii wrote:
and what's stopping good players doing the same and beating the "noobs" ranks?
i thought the point of online games with rankings WAS competitivityJordan wrote:
ROFL just as expected. Now that everyone knows high weighted maps every noob can go farm good ranks on simple maps and get loads of pp for nothing. Gj publishing the list...
funny, I thought the point of games overall was fun :/Blue Dragon wrote:
i thought the point of online games with rankings WAS competitivityJordan wrote:
ROFL just as expected. Now that everyone knows high weighted maps every noob can go farm good ranks on simple maps and get loads of pp for nothing. Gj publishing the list...
why would anyone do that anyways? the list of highest pp ranks is there.Tanzklaue wrote:
plus some bored cracks could get behind the alggorythm, but that's really unrealistic.
but it is and it isnt, the list goes some way but is flawed imo, either with high rank maps that dont give much, or maps that arent even on it that give a fucking shitloadBlue Dragon wrote:
why would anyone do that anyways? the list of highest pp ranks is there.Tanzklaue wrote:
plus some bored cracks could get behind the alggorythm, but that's really unrealistic.
This is like score farming. Boring. That's what stops at least me from doing it. The original aim of PP was to reward good scores, not a certain set of beatmaps. :>nrii wrote:
and what's stopping good players doing the same and beating the "noobs" ranks?Jordan wrote:
ROFL just as expected. Now that everyone knows high weighted maps every noob can go farm good ranks on simple maps and get loads of pp for nothing. Gj publishing the list...
btw you could already do this by checking people like sette and shadowsouls top ranks, full of hards you could dt for easy pp
Everyone loves playing hards with DT...nrii wrote:
and what's stopping good players doing the same and beating the "noobs" ranks?Jordan wrote:
ROFL just as expected. Now that everyone knows high weighted maps every noob can go farm good ranks on simple maps and get loads of pp for nothing. Gj publishing the list...
btw you could already do this by checking people like sette and shadowsouls top ranks, full of hards you could dt for easy pp
NoJAKANYAN wrote:
Everyone loves playing hards with DT...
I'm not really crying over nothing xD just saying what Tom said: farming is boring. I want to play the hardest diff of a map to gain pp (talking of already high rank) not simple diffs that give me 5 times more pp than some insanes :[nrii wrote:
dont get me wrong im not saying its good this way, just that this guy is crying over nothingTom94 wrote:
This is like score farming. Boring. That's what stops at least me from doing it. The original aim of PP was to reward good scores, not a certain set of beatmaps. :>