Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Will it be helpful to decouple aim, speed and accuracy pp? #26

Closed
ghost opened this issue Apr 22, 2018 · 3 comments
Closed

Will it be helpful to decouple aim, speed and accuracy pp? #26

ghost opened this issue Apr 22, 2018 · 3 comments

Comments

@ghost
Copy link

ghost commented Apr 22, 2018

As title.

As any weighting of a specific skill basis set will be under/overweighted in some ways, is it just better to decouple them, and find a "minimum orthogonal basis set" with like 3 to 5 dimensions to describe the performance, with separate leaderboards?

While I think (aim, speed, accuracy) is small and orthogonal enough as a skill basis, and changes can be rolled out quickly while solving some "underweighted" or "overweighted" problems. The overall ranking may be then substituted by ordering the sum of the three dimension rankings, which I considered as a community-scale average rather than a personal-scale average, favoring all-rounded players. So that there will be less flaming in the community on "overweighted" maps.

If it (aim, speed, accuracy) is not suitable, I think Syrin's documentation is great, but it will need the reworking of the whole system and fitting it with suitable parameters.

@ghost
Copy link
Author

ghost commented Apr 22, 2018

And I'm not familliar with C++ or operation on databases, and the modification of pp system is an API-level change, so I opened this issue here rather than working on the code and opening a PR. My proposal may work like:

Player Aim Speed Accuracy Overall rank
Player1 8000pp (rank 3) 6000pp (rank 1) 3000pp (rank 1) 1
Player2 9000pp (rank 1) 5000pp (rank 3) 2900pp (rank 2) 2

@Tom94
Copy link
Collaborator

Tom94 commented Apr 22, 2018

Hi there, the original ranking system ppv2 is based on (osu!tp) did things the exact way you describe. The main reason ppv2 does not already work like this was technical. A separation of the 3 metrics is welcome and I fully agree that the final metric should at least by a large part be comprised of just the sum of the 3 metrics. I say "by a large part" because good scores on single maps with high difficulty in all 3 categories should also be worthwhile.

I'd consider adding further categories and finding suitable bases a different issue which we should investigate only once separation of aim/speed/acc is in.

@ghost
Copy link
Author

ghost commented Apr 23, 2018

Oh I got it. Thanks for the explanation :)

@ghost ghost closed this as completed Apr 23, 2018
This issue was closed.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant