-
|
This is a design document of sorts for the feature floated today on discord (see discussion here and then continued in thread). Most things below have already been brought up in the discussions above but some of it is explicitly my proposal. Assume everything in here is negotiable / up for debate. Basic premise
Ideas for future expansion
Tentative UI mockupsVery makeshift, cobbled together using various scraps from @arflyte's various figmas over the years. Please ignore the fonts being all over the place. I can't be bothered with figma bullshit. And please don't focus on this too much to begin with, the details of appearance are secondary to what this system is supposed to be doing. How to execute this
How to actually decompose this
Open questions
|
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
Replies: 6 comments 11 replies
-
|
I do like how this proposal will encourage players to engage in the competitive side of osu more regularly and in more varied ways, however I worry that having the playlists only be open for 24 hours will make it impossible for a lot of players to participate as consistently as they would like to. Because of this, instead of a "beatmap of the day" system, I think it would be better to have a "beatmaps of the week" system. Instead of picking a map every day and encouraging players to compete on that map for only 24 hours, we could pick 5 (or so) maps every week and keep the playlist of those maps open for the whole week. This way players who are only able to play the game on the weekends will still be able to participate and compete just about as much as players who have the time to play daily. I understand that this will create something of similar appeal to the current Beatmap Spotlights system, so maybe the Spotlights project should just be merged into the hypothetical "beatmaps of the week" system so that the players who enjoy the Spotlights have something to look forward to each week consistently and the people running the Spotlights project no longer have to deal the the constant issues of trying to make a 9 week competition flow smoothly in a client that is rapidly changing. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
I don't think this creates the same kind of dynamic I'm hoping for – maps-per-week just feels very.. static? Having one a day means there's something new at the main menu each day, and something to look forward to. Maybe just me though. Users don't need to play every day, and they can always go back and look at previous days they missed after the fact. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Overall, I like the idea and how it was proposed here. My only concern for now is about the individual rewards. As it is described, the idea is to give some kind of reward to the top N players. As I see it, it could be a problem, especially if you want to have less skilled players competing for it, as it could turn the lower star rating days into a competition between more skilled players for who gets the maximum score first as soon as the playlist starts. So maybe the individual rewards should be limited to temporary things only visible that day, as it would be less likely for something like this to happen this way. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
I was hoping for rewards which aren't necessarily "top x" – maybe something for getting a certain rank (maybe for chaining over multiple days?) |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
Yeah, I would have no problem with that. Just to be clear, I don't think it's something bad to give top players a reward, I was just worried about the impact it could have in the lower star rating days if the individual rewards were limited to that, as the purpose of those days would be to let less skilled players to have some fun with this new system. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
This needs more thought put behind how it will run before an implementation is attempted - if a map has multiple difficulties, should a player get an S rank on each before being able to set a score on the next one up? Are mods allowed, restricted, enforced or fully disallowed, and does this change per mapset per day? Is a leaderboard open for 24 hours, or are people given half an hour to set the best score at set times of the day (similar-ish to cup of the day)? That said, I and others would prefer to see the song select redesign prioritised before anything new is added to the game, as well as a results screen redesign and a rework to the first-time setup. These three things currently are the biggest barriers to use presented to stable players. I have a further roadmap I've written up past these initial points if it's possible to present it to devs and discuss the reasonings. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
In discussion, we were proposing one difficulty only per day. Potentially ramping up over the week from easy (say 3 stars) to hard (say 6 stars).
These would be mixed up to create more diversity.
Likely 24 hours or something close to it (maybe 18 to give a break before the next one).
The questions you've raised are things that can be tweaked as we go based on reception. The important part here is getting the basics in place so we can run the event in the first place 😄
Well aware of these points, and work is continuing on those (in theory). This is a proposal for the next new thing in lazer, which will run in parallel to other efforts. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
Idea: prioritize "Fun" type mods over normal ones to give people with "strange" talents to shine. This idea is based on my fear of having the same players on the top always |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
I think that the average player is not going to play one beatmap for a day, and I'll wager that even a player capable of getting top-1 on any beatmap will not play one for a day. osu! players fall in two categories: either they're motivated to achieve something in which case they'll retry-spam, or they're pretty short-attention-spanned/playing for fun in which case they'll prefer variety. Let's say a beatmap is picked that the average player can play and doesn't mind listening to on repeat, which is the best case scenario. A top player comes along and easily gets 1,000,000 points (max score). What:
I think that it's crucial to answer for these two questions with the initial implementation, as not doing so will take the fun out of the system.
I see this being done more by the multiplayer server than playlists. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
I'd definitely consider this as a follow-up effort because there's a lot more moving pieces (mentioned in the original thread that any realtime mode would be a separate effort). Let's start with the simple version because we can get it live quickly and iterate based on how much people like it.
I don't think there necessarily needs to be motivation. It would be fine if the community goals only counted one play per person – the idea would be to get more people in there, imagine people sharing with friends or in public chat to try and get to the goal.
In the thread on discord we discussed having some kind of little star on the profile for just participating, or getting a certain (lower) grade like an A. And potentially a "streak" mechanism for the longest you've gotten the star in a row. I want to keep this really really simple and get it out. This worked really well in yesteryear and means we can more more quickly. We can add more things to the system like tiers, qualifiers, multiplayer realtime addons depending on reception (or lack of).
I know I would for one, and I hardly play osu!. It's something which would motivate me, so I see other casuals also being interested. The only catch is it needs to be in my skill range (but I'd be happy to skip days that aren't) 😉 |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Yeah I sort of gathered that it was totally different from your intentions about 3/4 of the way through, but the initial proposal did start at CoTD. My worry is still that without a solid motivation structure, it'll just become a system that exists out-of-sight out-of-mind. Perhaps I leaned too far into CoTD, for which I'll delegate to the rest of the discussion above. To answer your questions:
This is going to be a ballpark just to illustrate, but could be adjusted:
The entire thing would last for around 1 - 1.5 hours, and I think it's important for the knockout stage to directly follow. Some players will inevitably get "timezoned", or have IRL commitments, or perhaps even have other commitments within osu!. I think that's fine but we'd also have to play that by ear - I've never scheduled tournaments so I can't talk from experience. Perhaps we can do even-odd weeks but I think it's important to have some sort of schedule. The goal shouldn't be to have everyone playing every day, but a consistent schedule that a player and their friends can look forward to.
It's more like group stages? See my above example. You could have as many divisions as you have reward levels. I kinda like TM's model of different trophy levels, that you could display on the profile as a list of trophy level + number of times achieved combo. I wanna point out also that TM's divisions aren't top-8, top-16, etc, but top X%. I think that's perfectly fine. It pretty much follows what a division is in traditional matchmaking systems - those that have bronze/silver/gold/platinum/diamond/master/grandmaster for example.
I'd really want to use a single room. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Smoogi has the right idea here, the format should be a timed competitive experience that everyone can take part in as a community, but focusing on a map of the day and then building towards cup of the day should probably be the focus.
Qualifiers could be hosted in one room with one leaderboard, where the top 64 and each subsequent group then get moved into their own room once knockouts start - To prevent repetition, I played around and landed with 64 - 48 - 36 - 24 - 16 - 10 - 6 - 4 - 2 - 1 as the progression, with spectator being forced on for those players who are knocked out to prevent them from playing again. Given a 3 minute map, this is 9 runs, meaning 27 minutes of play (with maybe a 30-60 second break between rounds?). I think a 30 minute qualification would be a good middle ground between having time to set a score and improve it, and having time to rest before the knockouts. Divisions could also be handled with lower star rating beatmaps, perhaps requiring a player to play up the difficulties on a mapset on their first time playing MotD, needing an S rank to move up to the next difficulty on a map and being restricted from moving back down - this comes with the caveat that it could promote sandbagging but I'd hope that issue doesn't come up or can be solved by someone who expands this idea. Players could then be allowed to skip to the highest difficulty that is below their peak star rating FC on a previous day's map. I also don't think picking only unique maps is the way to go - picking a 'generic' but well made map will appeal to casual players who don't lean towards unique technical experiences.
TM does use a top 64 division 1, with each subsequent 64 being 2, 3 etc. Having a player play the hardest map on a set that they can could work in a similar way, where top 64 on the hardest difficulty are division 1, which when a division isn't completely filled progresses to the top 64 on the 2nd hardest difficulty starting off the next division down. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
The more time limited and the more of a time commitment this becomes, fewer and fewer players will have the ability to compete. If fewer players compete, the project will become less competitive. The less competitive the project is, the motivation for players to regularly put in the time necessary to participate will go way down. Maybe I'm wrong about all of this since there isn't any large scale precedent for this kind of project in the osu community that I know of, but I really can't see a "cup of the day" system being much more than a novelty that the average player might engage with a few times before simply ignoring since the level of competition likely won't be too high on average and taking part would require both scheduling and a time commitment on their part. At least with the basic "map of the day" system, players will be regularly encouraged to at least casually participate in the competitive side of the game because lots of other players will likely take part and all someone has to do to compete is open the game and play the map once.
True, but that's not what the vast majority players would be doing anyway. The vast majority of players would just play the map until they get a score they are satisfied with and then move on.
They don't need motivation to keep playing after getting the max score, they can just move on to the rest of the game. Plus, if we allow all score increasing mods, it would be very rare for someone to get the max score unless maps under 3 stars are picked frequently.
If two players get the max score on a map, they could just tie for first place, meaning the motivation to get first place would still be in effect. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
I like the idea of the divisions in the first iteration of the beatmap of the day. Me, as a 5 digit player, would love to compete only with 5 digit players (or even low-5-digits). If I were to compete with everyone, I think I would not be motivated to play in any day. It's just me, though. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Some additional notes/thoughts:
I'd hope that we don't need to resort to automatic selection of future beatmaps. I do think in place of any automation, there should be some kind of alerting when the queue is empty for the next week period so someone can jump in and fill it up. I've raised this requirement internally and there is initial interest in taking on this role, so that's good.
I think osu-web is more suited for this task. It has the ability to message us on discord ops channels if things go wrong, and has a cron system in place already which (in most cases) works reliably.
It'll be good to have some kind of records of participation on user profiles (probably using a new display style since existing medals/badges don't allow for more-than-one achievement of same thing). I'm more interested in participation and streaks than winners, because i think people will get more enjoyment from that (but we won't forget winners either). Regarding play statistics – while we will initially use them for this special mode, I see no harm in recording stats for all playlist rooms. It's something we can potentially display on user playlists in the future and have them benefit from more "flavour" displayed on the playlist interface. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Further work on this will be tracked in #28136. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
Further work on this will be tracked in #28136.