I agree with Dynamo, honestly there are far too many variables to deal with to ensure a calculator will work effectively. Manually establishing separate decay formulas for charts that are more accessible to less skilled players will reach higher levels of accuracy and communal consensus without the hassle of dealing with all the intricacies needed to be taken into account for a calculator in a game that encodes charts at 30fps. A 16th roll at 300bpm starting on a quarter note can effectively be jumptrilled because the one frame gaps all coincide between arrows hit with the same hand (1/2 and 3/4), but offset the roll by a 16th and now all the one frame gaps appear at 2/3 and 4/1. Having to account for quite literally the same pattern being variable in difficulty depending on the starting note, on top of everything else that needs to be taken into consideration...I personally wouldn't want to invest any time in that.
What Dynamo was fudging around with in Excel looks interesting and I might mess around with that later.
Tangential to that, I've looked at suggestions and scoreboard data and am interested in feedback for this structure of 98+:
A few notes:
* denotes charts that would benefit from separate equivalency decays. I'm not suggesting they should share identical formulas, but a manipulation of the current formula is required.
La Camp's scoring data after a decade in game suggests it can hang with the 99s. Structurally I may not entirely agree with that shift but it fills out the 99s a bit better for the time being. I know there's more charts queued that will end up in this range so stuff will probably move a bit.
I'd rather move M8BT up than AT down. I don't think a gap of two difficulty points exists between those two charts which is why AT didn't also move down.
Punkture is Punkture. There's players that think it shouldn't even be a 95 but an overwhelming majority thinks otherwise. Scoring data is vomit and nothing else exists to compare it to. 97 at the min works, 98 is likely okay.
_.Pulse isn't here because I'm projecting a shift to 97. If people think 98 is more appropriate then sure.
I wanted to bring some 101s up to lessen how many charts exist in that tier but none of them feel as difficult as what's included in the tier above. I feel there's a hard line between the 101s and 102s. Also considered breaking up the 101s into two tiers and pushing 102+ to 103+ but the 101s truly feel quite similar in difficulty to me, and I don't think there's a two point gap between anything that would be considered a lower end 101 and the current 102s. Think we might just need more charts in the 102/103 range (DZ resubmit Apocynthion..)
Feedback appreciated.