Re: Can Song Rates Over 1 Count?
 

if rates were added something like a lvl 1-50 speedrun might be pretty fun

Re: Can Song Rates Over 1 Count?
 

I support rates > 1.0 recording as though they were 1.0

It substantially increases the song pool in terms of "Songs I can play that are fun, and actually a reasonable challenge for me" for all players.

My issue with separate rates leaderboards is that there's either a leaderboard for a couple specific pre-chosen rates, or everybody will be rank 1 on every song on their own particular randomly modified choice of rate, neither of which will make many people happy.

Just letting them record at all is, I think just a positive change. We can worry about other stuff after that.

Re: Can Song Rates Over 1 Count?
 

You can already play the files on rates, no need to change avrank for that.
Like I said, add a metric for it.

What is that assumption based on ? Osu has the former and they're happy, Etterna has the latter and they're happy. We have neither and we're not happy.

You don't care about the "other stuff", but others, like me, do.

Re: Can Song Rates Over 1 Count?
 

change avrank? Hunh?

I mean, sure having them record will let them count towards avrank, but I'm thinking about FC and AAA counts more than avrank.

Re: Can Song Rates Over 1 Count?
 

Well idk if you've read the thread, but counting towards avrank Is an issue for some, including myself, and adding new stuff related to rates fixes that.

Re: Can Song Rates Over 1 Count?
 

I could see having a "highest rate FCed" stat for each song (including rates below 1 for those songs beyond ones current abilities) as being a nice added feature. This would also naturally add something I've wanted for a while which is just a visible FC tag for each song that isn't overwritten by a higher non-FC score.

This obviously would have a corresponding "highest rate AAAed" (which I know matters to other people more than it does to me).

I can't see any real downsides to this though I guess there's the following caveat to the FC version: Since FFR is inherently precision focused compared to SM and such (e.g. boos don't break combos etc.), this would encourage mashing for high rate FCs (and therefore this wouldn't be a skill rating in any meaningful way, just a personal accomplishment indicator). However, since it would be it's own category it wouldn't pollute anything else so I don't see this being a real problem (I guess one could make it FC&Booless if you really wanted to avoid that issue). Additionally, this caveat obviously doesn't apply to the AAA version and there it's a perfectly valid stat for (song by song) skill comparison.

I guess it might drive the completionists nuts having another category (or two) to compete in. Any of them want to chime in?

Edit: This is intended as solution to having higher rates feel like they "count" (which it does) while preserving the sanctity of avgrank (which it leaves untouched). This isn't intended as something to push people into being completionists, but rather as a way to make it more fun to mess around with songs both above and below ones current skill.

The one added point that is missing from this diatribe is that I think it probably makes sense to only store FC (or FC&Booless if people are so inclined) and AAA flags at non-1 rates, as storing (and trying to compare) full scores at alternate rates is what leads to the above cluster****.

Re: Can Song Rates Over 1 Count?
 

This is a good idea in my opinion and brings a lot to the table without requiring too much dev work afaik.

Those aren't real problems; since we have Skill Level as a main skill metric, it doesn't matter much if other metrics might encourage mashing or not, as long as they are different from other metrics and some people like it.

I'm all for this as opposed to messing with the 1.0-only metrics.

Re: Can Song Rates Over 1 Count?
 

On the topic of:

I've always thought FCs in this game were absolutely meaningless given how easily even the hardest charts can be comboed if you just flail on your keyboard at the right times. I would have loved a boo restriction of some sort to give the tag actual value, not necessarily zero or even a static number. Having your score's boo count not exceed 2% of the chart's total notecount for the FC tag to register sounds very fair, so if something like this were to be implemented, that's my suggestion. I'd personally prefer 1% but I realize that's likely stricter than it needs to be.

Just my quick $0.02, that's all carry on :ohyeahwooyeah:

Re: Can Song Rates Over 1 Count?
 

That was my feeling as well.

I guess I should add that one could include a "pass" flag as well. I didn't include that in the above because I've always felt passing a song was such a meaningless accomplishment (yay, I barely hit enough notes to not die on this song that I can't even begin to read in any way).

That's a good idea. Booless feels way too punishing but I could definitely see a percentage requirement being reasonable (and might actually make "pass" flag slightly less meaningless if people wanted that added). I have to say that I personally feel decent about an FC around 1% and still feel like I accomplished something up to around 2% typically (I just glanced at some of my high boo FCs to get a sense).

Re: Can Song Rates Over 1 Count?
 

Neat idea too. Though if it were to change the current FC counts some would likely be annoyed I imagine. It's kind of similar to the argument of making avrank easier, but in that case it would make FCs harder. I'm personally ok with making FCs harder but yeah...

Re: Can Song Rates Over 1 Count?
 

It could start by only affecting the rate tagged FC flag to avoid that issue (though it honestly seems to make sense going forward). i.e. keep the current flag and have "highest rate FCed" once implemented only initialize at 1 if your current FC would pass the boo% bar. Obviously it's impossible to do this in a totally backwards compatible way anyways due to the fact that high-rate plays didn't even get stored previously so it doesn't seem like a huge deal if not all rate 1 FCs carry over to this system.

(Hell, you could just call it FC+ and just leave the old FC as is: FC remains a flag, FC+ is a value based on highest rate accomplished at.)

Re: Can Song Rates Over 1 Count?
 

highest rate FC'd is an insanely bad metric, lmao wtf, oh who can vibro for the longest ecks deee

highest rate AAA'd might be relevant but FFR ends up becoming laggy on higher rates so eh who knows

Re: Can Song Rates Over 1 Count?
 

if highest rated fc becomes a thing, i could meme so hard!

it would give me incentive to fc vrofl lol

Re: Can Song Rates Over 1 Count?
 

For skill, yes, but Skill Level is the metric for that. Guess what, people who are good at vibro may want to have some metric related to it. If you don't like it, you simply don't work on it lmao.

Same idea here too, how "relevant" it is to you doesn't matter much if others like it.

Re: Can Song Rates Over 1 Count?
 

I would love to see a “Highest Rate AAA’d” in the level ranks, then you can sum up the entire column and have a leaderboard for that too.

Re: Can Song Rates Over 1 Count?
 

Good idea, except that it becomes an "avrank v2", which means certain players who have already maximized their avrank as much as possible, yet still interested in maintaining completion of this game would have to play the entirety of ffr's 2000+ files all over again with a twist of rates this time, which is a pain because of the time/effort quantity they might recall putting into avrank. Another problem is that those who don't have the interest/time/capability/whatever to go long-run in this game unlike completionists wont even bother to try, and will result in a leaderboard that rapidly down-slopes with some large value gaps between each rank, even after a couple of months. Years (?)
Lowering the limitation of files needed to AAA on rates for maxing out a leaderboard potential by a considerable amount would solve it, so we don't end up asking someone "hey do u wanna play 90+ hours worth of files again to become best in ______?"

It could be a mix of my idea I've briefly discussed here before, coming up with something like

Re: Can Song Rates Over 1 Count?
 

That would be interesting

Re: Can Song Rates Over 1 Count?
 

pretty sure rates above 1 will never be counted

f

Re: Can Song Rates Over 1 Count?
 

These are non-problems though.

In fact, all your post is basically "I want rates to count in a different way than avrank". It's totally fine that you think that way, but it doesn't mean that the "total rates AAAs" is bad. It is still a very good idea for completionists; however one could debate that it's not a priority in terms of dev work. I do believe that a sum of all rates AAAs isn't much work on the backend AND frontend, so that's pretty hot. So yeah, if some people dont have the time to work on that new avrank, they just dont do it, simple as that.

Your idea, on the other hand, seems fine on paper (I would be interested in it at least) but it become another metric based on the difficulties which have been, well, quite wonky lately and a big source of debate. Your idea will most definitely make it so that only a few select files are played on rates because those would scale very well while others would be way too hard.

Re: Can Song Rates Over 1 Count?
 

I disagree with this, suppose theres a seperate leaderboard for rates etc, and each song has a "highest rate AAAd" on it, if you dont get rating or w/e and theres no benefit like avgrank etc then theres no reason for people to farm it, it would just show a cool baseline for how far a file could be pushed, and would encourage people to push it to further rates

If there arent stats or whatnot that you gain, and it was purely just a metric of how far a song could be pushed speedwise, then imo its fine

With that being said, if "highest AAA'd rate" became a thing, then at that point you might as well credit scores >1.0 with it registering as 1.0 or w/e, i dont see any issue this would make lol, again its just "but i spent so long playing every file!!! god forbid my time is discredited!!!!"