forum

Player Reaction Time To a 2 Point Jump

posted
Total Posts
19
Topic Starter
abraker
I ASK MODS/ADMINS TO KEEP THIS THREAD CLEAN OF ANY "get good" and "play more" TYPE OF POSTS. THANK YOU


Previous description: Maximum Speed a Player Can Handle

See the formated Google Doc version here.

This description talks about player reaction time to a 2 point jump from a random point to a hitcircle. This description is an attempt to factor any possible variable that may hinder a player's ability to position from one point to another in the least amount of time. This description will also attempt to estimate the rough minimum and maximum times a player might take to react from the time the note starts fading in to the time the player is over the note.

Time taken to jump from a random point to a hitcircle (C_t)
Suppose the coordinates of the hitcircles A = (x_1, y_1) and B = (x_2, y_2). Let C_t be the time it takes to move the cursor to hit B when going from A. The cursor needs to be on the edge of the hitcircle to be able to hit it. This would make C_t be equal to the time it takes to get from point A to the point on the edge of circle B closest to point A. Therefore, the distance Ctdepends on would be:
d_AB - r_cs - r_cs = d_AB - r_cs

Where d_AB is the distance between point A and circle B and R_CS is the hitcircle radius (dependent on circle size). The formula for distance between 2 points is
sqrt((x_2-x_1)^2 + (y_2-y_1)^2)

And the formula for converting CS to osu!px (diameter) is*
D_cs = 104 - 8*CS

Therefor the entire formula for the min distance the player need to move the cursor from circle A to circle B is:
sqrt((x_2-x_1)^2 + (y_2-y_1)^2) - 52 + 4*cs


The previous description derived the theoretical max speed at which a player can move the cursor. However, it is an unknown value for any given player. For now let it be V_p. Therefore,
C_t = [sqrt((x_2-x_1)^2 + (y_2-y_1)^2) - 52 + 4*cs]/V_p


Reaction to fading in: (f_t)
As the note is fading in, it's hard to notice it in the first several ms. Therefore, there is a time at which the hitcircle becomes noticeable. The non HD modded hitcircle is 100% faded in at:
f_100% = t_0 + min(400, AR_t)*

Then the time interval at which the circle becomes noticeable is
f_t = f_p*min(400, AR_t)

Where f_p is the fade percent (0.0 <= f_p <= 1.0) at which the player starts to notice the hitcircle. That value is unknown due to uncertainties in screen contrast, skin, and the player's ability to differentiate between shades and colors.

Latency: (L_h, L_s)
Hardware and visual latency is another thing to consider. That implies that information in and out of the game has a delay. Hardware latency is usually small, but does impact the amount of time a player has to react. This latency can be anywhere from 8ms to under 1 ms. The screen latency is affected by the monitor's refresh rate and the game's FPS. This value can be anywhere from 5.5 ms to 42 ms (calculated from 180FPS to 24 FPS).

Natural human reaction time: (P_R)
The final thing to consider is the player's natural responce time. This value can be anywhere from 180 ms to 380 ms*. This value is completely unknown, yet affects the full reaction time considerably.

Putting it all together:
The final formula for the reaction time would be all of the time periods added up:
R_t = C_t + f_t + L_h + L_s + P_R
= [sqrt((x_2-x_1)^2 + (y_2-y_1)^2) - 104 + 8*cs]/V_p + f_p*min(400, AR_t) + L_h + L_s + P_R


Setting the limit:
Let t_0 be the point in time at which the note starts fading in and t_H the point in time at which the note needs to be hit. Then t_H-t_0 is the total time the player has to react and move towards the note. There is also some room for the player to hit a bit early or late due to OD. By taking account the left bound OD, the formula becomes the minimal time possible for a perfect hit. Therefore, if the player is to have a chance of hitting the note,
t_0 + R_t < t_H + OD_t

Where the formula for OD_t is*
OD_t = 79.5 - 6*OD


Finding the min and max:
Note that some of these values are guessed and/or estimated. These are to provide a rough idea to where the limit falls within high and low difficulties and considers the player will not miss unless reaction time is more the note duration time (from fading in to hit):

Map independent times:
Hardware Latency: 1ms < L_h < 8ms
Screen Latency: 5.5ms < L_s < 42ms
Player Reaction: 180ms < P_R < 380ms

HARD: CS = 10, AR=11, Distance: 384.19 osu!px, OD = 10
The list for reaction times is as follows:
Cursor Time: 30.28ms < C_t < 93.05ms, assuming 4 osu!px/ms to 12.29 osu!px/ms speed
Fade Time: 40ms < f_t < 100ms, assuming 10% to 25% fade

Total time: 256.78ms < T < 623.05ms
(OD=19.5ms) factoring: 276.28ms < T < 642.55ms
So for the most brutal conditions, for a perfect player, the notes could be 276.28ms apart to barely hit it without accuracy reduction. For a slower player, that number would be 642.55ms.


EASY: CS = 5, AR=8, Distance: 100 osu!px, OD = 6
The list for reaction times is as follows:
Cursor Time: 5.53ms < C_t < 17ms, assuming 4 osu!px/ms to 12.29 osu!px/ms speed
Fade Time: 40ms < f_t < 100ms, assuming 10% to 25% fade

Total time: 232.03ms < T < 547ms
(OD=43.5ms) factoring: 275.53ms < T < 590.5ms
So for the most easier conditions, for a perfect player, the notes could be 275.53ms apart to barely hit it without accuracy reduction. For a slower player, that number would be 590.5ms.

Summary:
An interesting thing to note is that the easy or hard maps for a skilled player barely vary the reaction time by 1 ms despite the C_t having about a 25ms difference. From the estimated results, a skillful player would be able to perform 2.5 to 2.7 faster than a disadvantaged player. As seen, there are a lot of unknown variables which makes finding the difficulty of map problematic. We can only base these value on extremes known to estimate the range in which a player may be able to due the 2 point jump. Therefore the difficulty of the map is very subjective; One difficulty value for a pro player may mean entirely different to another less skilled player. If there is to be a measurement of difficulty, the best way to do it would be through odds of getting a certain performance because otherwise a precise value is not accurate.

CS was not considered within the limits, but would greatly affect the player's performance since hitting 10 CS from the other end of the screen within that time frame is difficult, and would be considered in future descriptions. Future descriptions will also examine the unstable rate due to strain and uncertainty, odds of missing, more complex patterns, hitcircle tracking, etc.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I admit this description doesn't give a lot of interesting things. I was thinking what its actual purpose would be if I posted it. This description just shows you how many uncertainties there are when trying to figure out a map's difficulty. If this is just the reaction time, then there are a lot of other things that will be uncertain and I'll have fun with... yay, joy (=_=)/

Go ahead and comment what you think on the bottom (just note the message on top). I'm sure several errors slipped by, so go ahead and point those out if you catch any.
.
.
.
.
.
.
E m i
Hello
Risa
Just how much freetime do u have...
Topic Starter
abraker

Reset- wrote:

Just how much freetime do u have...
Well the last description was made about 3 weeks ago and I wanted to post this a week after the last one, so not enough.
Endaris
play more
If you're throwing with so much formulas around yourself and especially formulas with many indices you may want to use something like LaTeX to properly format your post as a pdf as it is fucking unreadable right now and I'll not read it in its current state.
dung eater
display latenchy is not just about the refresh rate, http://www.displaylag.com/display-database/ (values are average, lcds have more lag on bottom screen)

if you use a crt there's pretty much none at all


also reaction times, you could go down to 100ms (people do get close to it)
-Makishima S-
Interesting article - props.

Could you make a PDF with LATEX formula formating? It's a bit annoying to read it like this, i was fine tho.

also reaction times, you could go down to 100ms (people do get close to it)
Average human reaction time is ~150-300ms (according to several web sources), in my opinion it can be set @ 200 ms.
100ms is trained human brain, without any training and placing focus on reaction time, there is almost no chance to get this score in test.
ZenithPhantasm
100ms is only for the hackers on HMB 8-)
Anyways play more
Topic Starter
abraker

Endaris wrote:

If you're throwing with so much formulas around yourself and especially formulas with many indices you may want to use something like LaTeX to properly format your post as a pdf as it is fucking unreadable right now and I'll not read it in its current state.

[Taiga] wrote:

Could you make a PDF with LATEX formula formating? It's a bit annoying to read it like this, i was fine tho.
Alright, I'll make a document in google docs when I get the opportunity to do so today. Just hand in there for a little bit.



also reaction times, you could go down to 100ms (people do get close to it)
Average human reaction time is ~150-300ms (according to several web sources), in my opinion it can be set @ 200 ms.
100ms is trained human brain, without any training and placing focus on reaction time, there is almost no chance to get this score in test.
If you noticed, I cited my sources through those asterisks, and 180ms was the min for the most part. If those asterisks are hard to see, then tell me so I can change them to something more noticeable. Also, if possible, cite the reference to where it says that's it's lower.



jaaakb wrote:

display latenchy is not just about the refresh rate, http://www.displaylag.com/display-database/ (values are average, lcds have more lag on bottom screen)

if you use a crt there's pretty much none at all
I would increase the max max from 42ms to 112ms, but there should be a skin or offset related way to counterbalance that kind of latency. The values I put it are the result from the game running flawlessly on a 240hz screen and a game lagging like shit at 24 fps.
ZenithPhantasm
Hardware latency could range from 8ms (zero buffer CRT) to 200+ms (5 frame pre render+shit tier potato TV with lots of input lag)
dung eater
t/102395/start=195

there's this thread about ppls reaction times on these forums

a lot of people do get ~150ms in the sheep test (audio and visual), some do get below 150 in the color one (zenith wy so fast)

anyway, 180 seems like a really big amount for the bottom limit if you are using a range, if you used an average then it'd be another thing

you can fix hardware delay of stuff appearing on screen with an offset, but your input (cursor) will still be delayed and now will be out of sync with the other objects on screen, tapping like this is really akward (you need to tap when the cursor is not on the circle yet, but you know it really is on the circle from the movement of your arm)
Topic Starter
abraker

jaaakb wrote:

anyway, 180 seems like a really big amount for the bottom limit if you are using a range, if you used an average then it'd be another thing
Yea, I used average.

ZenithPhantasm wrote:

Hardware latency could range from 8ms (zero buffer CRT) to 200+ms (5 frame pre render+shit tier potato TV with lots of input lag)
This made me realize that 240FPS would not give a latency of 0.004ms, but 4 ms... Fixed.

Also does any one here even play on 240FPS screens?
Topic Starter
abraker
The document is up. Go here to view it.
ZenithPhantasm
True 240hz screens do no exist. The fastest you can get atm is an old 180hz CRT (although there is rumors of a 200hz one). Any 240hz LCD is just strobing backlight for black frame insertion, lcd pixels are not fast enough to complete a transition in 4.16 milliseconds. You're also forgetting to account for monitor scanning, the top part of the screen refreshes faster than the bottom part.
Topic Starter
abraker

ZenithPhantasm wrote:

True 240hz screens do no exist. The fastest you can get atm is an old 180hz CRT (although there is rumors of a 200hz one). Any 240hz LCD is just strobing backlight for black frame insertion, lcd pixels are not fast enough to complete a transition in 4.16 seconds. You're also forgetting to account for monitor scanning, the top part of the screen refreshes faster than the bottom part.
I'll adjust to 180hz then, and the refresh rate unbalance falls within the range, so it's technically already accounted in the backround.
TakuMii

ZenithPhantasm wrote:

The fastest you can get atm is an old 180hz CRT (although there is rumors of a 200hz one).
They're not really rumours... There are 2 Iiyama tubes that can actually hit 200Hz (albeit at 800x600).

That being said, it's probably safer to calculate to 144Hz (LCD) or 160Hz (CRT), since those tend to be the more common max refresh rates.
Endaris
The way you look at reaction time makes no sense.
Provided you play a proper beatmap you can assume that there are always 2 circles on the screen, meaning that there's no reactionbased action required, rather a planned one(you can already plan one jump ahead while hitting the previous note) and you're especially not taking follow points into account that may appear way earlier than the hitcircle itself. Your calculations can be at best applied to a low-bpm 3.5* DTHR map with a lot of NCs. Also why the fuck do you look at AR11, there aren't even 100 people who can play that. AR9/9.67/10 and even 10.3 would be way more interesting.
You also forgot to format some C_t/f_t .

All I can take from your little article is that "finding the difficulty of a map [is] problematic" and that players have different skilllevels. Oh well, I already knew that before.
I also think that you should rather look at the actually interesting things. What you're examining are the most basic physical difficulties that are easily to be calculated and determined by a computer - guess why big jumps are the main thing for big pp, they are easy to rate and 100% included in the current star/pp-system which is why it's a waste of time to look at them.
It would be way better to look at handphysics, angles and stuff as these are the things completely different and not taken into account by stars/pp.

To elaborate it further:
The jumps in Koigokoro insane are 214ms apart each and it's even OD7 so your number would increase to like 190ms, yet thousands of players can easily hit them. Apparently I'm a god of gameplay.
Topic Starter
abraker

Endaris wrote:

You also forgot to format some C_t/f_t .
Fixed!

Endaris wrote:

Also why the fuck do you look at AR11, there aren't even 100 people who can play that. AR9/9.67/10 and even 10.3 would be way more interesting.
I as much as you can use the formula provided to calculate values using those parameter. The reason I pick such extreme values is not to show you guys an average player and where you may be on the scale, but to find the boundaries to what a player can physically do. Using those boundaries, I can create a scale of how likely something is doable. That probability can then be used in the difficulty calculations.

Endaris wrote:

All I can take from your little article is that "finding the difficulty of a map [is] problematic" and that players have different skilllevels. Oh well, I already knew that before.
I also think that you should rather look at the actually interesting things. What you're examining are the most basic physical difficulties that are easily to be calculated and determined by a computer - guess why big jumps are the main thing for big pp, they are easy to rate and 100% included in the current star/pp-system which is why it's a waste of time to look at them.
It would be way better to look at handphysics, angles and stuff as these are the things completely different and not taken into account by stars/pp.
I'll get to these eventually. I've been busy trying to figure out the formula for what make certain patterns such as squares hard, where 180 deg jumps would by on the scale, etc for more than a month. So while I am working on the more complex stuff, I thought to push out some of the simpler things first. I hope these articles get more and more interesting as time goes on. If you can help, please do! Working alone, I am likely to get things wrong and I post so I can have people point out the mistakes.

Endaris wrote:

Provided you play a proper beatmap you can assume that there are always 2 circles on the screen, meaning that there's no reactionbased action required, rather a planned one(you can already plan one jump ahead while hitting the previous note). The jumps in Koigokoro insane are 214ms apart each and it's even OD7 so your number would increase to like 190ms, yet thousands of players can easily hit them. Apparently I'm a god of gameplay.
You are right on that part. What this description fails to take account is that the 2nd note starts fading in way before you even hit the 1st note. I will look into this in future descriptions. As for this description, this would be the reaction time for hitting the first circle from a random point. I think this description would best apply to hitting the first note after a spinner. Does correcting the "circle to circle" notion in this description to "first circle from a random point" solve this?

Endaris wrote:

you're especially not taking follow points into account that may appear way earlier than the hitcircle itself.
Another thing I didn't take into account since I was focusing on the "random point to first circle" notion. I will look into figuring out the formula for follow points which will be factored in when doing circle to circle reaction time.

Meanwhile I'll correct any calculations that assume the first point is a circle.
.
.
.
Endaris

abraker wrote:

Does correcting the "circle to circle" notion in this description to "first circle from a random point" solve this?
Yes, but it still doesn't give your current article any sense as there's no way to measure a fix distance you're coming from, therefore not giving any indications about how difficult the move is the player has to make.
As for FCs it's most likely that the player already played the map anyway and stops spinning at 1k/moves to the circle in advance while effectively nullifying any difficulty you might have calculated for that.

I'm not really interested too much in this kind of stuff but I can give you the great tip to check how the result of your calculations is applicable to existing maps, it should be possible to find some for every type of thing like this and if it doesn't fit, stop, sit down and rethink what you've written.
None of what you wrote in your article is wrong but your assumptions for the conditions were and this makes your entire post worthless for the community(not worthless for you, you obviously learned something from this).
Please sign in to reply.

New reply