I think allowing Beatmaps to have decimal values for the Approach Rate, HP drain or the Overall Difficulty would be a good idea.
Sometimes it happens in some maps where, for exemple, Approach Rate 8 is too slow and AR 9 too fast. So 8.5 would be perfect to fix the problem.

+ Support so much

I am exactly experienced the same problem on my new map... AR 9 is too slow and AR 10 is too fast ;___;
I wish I could put 9,5 to get the perfect approach but it's not possible..
Changing it over the .osu makes the map corrupted too T_T

Please add this feature!

+support

+support
Especially useful for Life Drain on Insane maps that have several slow/quiet sections. A drainrate of, say, 9 would be too hard for those slow segments but 8 would make the map too easy overall.

I'm assuming since you're asking for decimals... this should only be accessible in the .osu files alone. Because if I saw 20 notches in the difficulty settings dialog, I think it might be a bit too much. This would definitely be useful in some situations where one setting is too low, and the next is too high, so support from me still.

Support~

Kitsunemimi wrote:

I'm assuming since you're asking for decimals... this should only be accessible in the .osu files alone. Because if I saw 20 notches in the difficulty settings dialog, I think it might be a bit too much. This would definitely be useful in some situations where one setting is too low, and the next is too high, so support from me still.

Use this and support.

An interesting idea

I don't think it would be noticeable most of the time but I suppose it could be useful in certain cases, has my support anyway~
(obviously only if it would be implemented in the .osu file)

no support.

10 notches is more than enough.
The diffrence between 8 or 8.5 will be so little that it's basicly useless imo.

There are 3 viable settings for circle size. Ginormous, kinda big, and sorta small. Personally I think size 5 should be size 8, and we should be able to choose some of the circle sizes in between. Nobody uses anything lower than size 5 anymore (well I did, but that's a special map, and that was only size 6.

The difference between 8 and 8.5 won't be insignificant. The difference between 9 and 10 is pretty small, but it's enough to make it virtually impossible for me to read 10 and very difficult to read 9.

support, and I can't see any reason why this couldn't work, other than if the difficulties are linear/do not fit in a single function.

So, um... I like this~
I'll support, mainly for Circle Size reasons.

Largest circle size is overwhelming.
Next largest is still pretty big.
Middle circle size is a bit small.
Next smallest is just annoying.
The smallest circle size should not exist.
^ In short, ziin's post.

AR 8.5 has been suggested before. I don't remember what became of the thread though.

I don't have a very strong opinion on this, but I don't see harm in adding it, so I'll just nod in the general direction of Kitsunemimi and ziin's posts.

I think the main two reasons someone would use this would be to
A: Select a more appropriate circle size
OR
B: Select AR 8.5

So perhaps we should just be considering those? Or would there be more circumstances in which decimal values would be useful?

I could not have put the first post better myself.

I hate when I'm mapping Insanes especially, and can't decide between AR 8 and 9. One is too slow, the other is a bit too fast. A happy medium between would be very useful. To a lesser extent I think this would be useful for OD and Circle Size. I don't think it would bring much to HP Drain, but meh.

I don't really feel like pointing out the flaws in your post, but.. Almost no one plays AR or OD 10 because few people actually enjoy it. OD10 specifically makes the timing window for a 300 too narrow to usually be worth playing. Also, the max OD/AR is 10, not 11. Anyways, AR/OD 10 is only fun for a select few tier of pros and enthusiasts, and I can't see 11 being viable. Hell, most people don't even like AR/OD9. Besides that, if you see anyone playing AR10 with HR, they're almost assuredly using HD as well to make sightreading easier. HD is much more popular than HR at higher levels of difficulty as shown by pretty much every Insane's scoreboard.

I think you're getting carried away. Maybe come back in 3 years when everyone plays like Cookiezi and re-request such a thing. I dunno, I could be wrong but I don't think this is going to be added, and I think it would actually decrease the already low amount of people who HR maps that have AR/OD9. Plus this isn't really on point with the thread.

I think hardrock should be changed to set AR to 0 like easy since AR0 is way damn harder than AR10 in insane maps (just kidding )

btw support.

And another thing I care about is why AR7 + hardrock becomes near AR10?
Shouldn't the effect of hardrock be AR+2?

This is a good idea. Flexibility is always good.

If I had some votes left, I would put in it

I'm so sick people saying "AR8 is too slow" and other "AR9 is too fast !" or people saying both

That could be interesting for more precision and flexibility for difficulty.

Support

Shinde wrote:

Almost no one plays AR or OD 10 because few people actually enjoy it.

Yes OD10 sucks (because if the map is 5ms or more off it make it really hard and most of the maps are 5~15ms off :/).
But AR10 isn't a problem at all. Actually there's a lot of people who likes AR10. I'm not a pro, just a good player but I play AR10 most of the time and it's easier than AR9 on the fast and hard maps. Also AR10 isn't easier with hidden when you're good at it.
I think AR10,5 isn't really necessary except for the hardest maps maybe but AR11 is just unplayable ;_;
And AR9,5 would be really great yes.
AR8,5 would be really useful for the 150~200bpm maps.

Also Circle size 4,5 for insane maps and 3,5 for the easy maps would be great
I don't really like circle size 5 because with HR---> lol circle size 6, too small most of the time.

it's kind of like how we used to have 10 different circle sizes, but that ended up being a bad idea, so we scaled it back.

This would be like that scenario, except in reverse.

''I'm assuming since you're asking for decimals... this should only be accessible in the .osu files alone''
^KitsuneMimi quote
Also,We can use 3 CZ for easy, 3,5 for Normal , 4,5 for hards and 5 for insanes \:D/

SapphireGhost wrote:

I think the main two reasons someone would use this would be to
A: Select a more appropriate circle size
OR
B: Select AR 8.5

So perhaps we should just be considering those? Or would there be more circumstances in which decimal values would be useful?

Yeah, arbitrarily allowing any value isn't really required and might not be so good (variety may be good, but you don't want it to be too fiddly for mappers and modders... or to lose consistency for the player... adding AR 8.5 to the current set of values is solid enough, no need to allow mappers to throw them an AR 8.37423428472 change up to try and mess with the player's timing). Most of the steps are fine as is, there are only a few steps where it potentially makes sense to have an intermediate, and I don't really see need for more than one new level in any of those gaps.

And I can see where someone might want a DR of 8.5 (to add a third reason).

Thread idea still good, still worth a look and word;

I approve this~

This.

GladiOol wrote:

no support.

10 notches is more than enough.
The diffrence between 8 or 8.5 will be so little that it's basicly useless imo.

Pretty much this. I seriously don't see the point of this. Not supporting.

In addition to making a difficulty setting more fitting to a song, it can also create an AR 9.8 when you HR with AR 7.

Or, as awp suggested in t/86253

awp wrote:

do you mean approach rate/hitcircle size etc? so instead of a sliding scale of 1-9 we'd have a sliding scale of 1-99 or 1-999 or 1-999999 depending on the granularity desired?

This is another way to look at it.

Also:

GladiOol wrote:

The diffrence between 8 or 8.5 will be so little that it's basicly useless imo.

That's similar to saying, "Your mod suggestion may make the map better, but it changes so little that it's basically useless." Talk about a spit in the face.

Your friendly neighborhood support BUMP

hi

+support

Bump with some content:

GladiOol wrote:

10 notches is more than enough.

Actually, that's a fencepost error... there are 11 notches, because 0 is included.

Except for CS, which has 6 notches... and the thing about a straight fence 6 posts long is that it has 5 rails, and 6 + 5 = 11! So adding in all the halves for CS will make it equal to the other parameters.

awp wrote:

it's kind of like how we used to have 10 different circle sizes, but that ended up being a bad idea, so we scaled it back.

This would be like that scenario, except in reverse.

The initial change was due to the range being too large. This increases granularity, which is a different reason. Having 11 different circle sizes itself isn't bad... if they had originally had the current range, they probably would have been left alone.

Arguably, if maintaining 11 notches is so important, the other parameters could have similar changes, lose a couple points that are rarely used and won't be missed much, while increasing the granularity in a range that's highly used. Sure that might not leave things linear (ie removing 0 and 1 to add two half levels near the top), but the perception of things like AR isn't linear either. The ratio between adjacent AR values gets larger as you go up... the difference between 0 and 1 hardly matters, the difference between 8 and 9 and 10 and above is much more noticeable, because each is actually a bigger step percentage wise (it follows 1/x, but backwards (ie heading to zero from right to left)). Which is why it feels like there is more room at high AR for in between values, there actually is more room at higher ARs because the ratio difference gets more and more pronounced until you hit 0ms and things feel infinite. To feel more linear (ie up to the point where humans perception can still tell there's a difference) the ratio between adjacent values should be constant (ie each is 3/4 the length of the previous) which results in a logarithmic curve to the ms values.

+supprot

BUMP and support.

YES please.

glad to see it is requested.

Support.

ykcarrot wrote:

BUMP and support.

duplicated post that I wrote

Sometimes AR7 feels slow in Hard diff, but AR8 feels a bit fast for Hard diff.
Like a instance, some of people feel AR10 is too fast in Insane diff with high BPM song, but AR9 feels a bit slow.

We have 11 levels AR now, so I suggest 21 levels AR to solve this problem.

This would be really nice if added
It'll allow the mappers to choose the best fitting AR according to the map's bpm and style
Also, it may help the players who want to be able to read a higher AR by providing a 'bridge' AR.

For other settings like CS, HP or OD I'm fine with them as they are now, but AR needs this badly

Support.

Bumpin' n Supportin' this.

support.
and i've always thought that could be done by directly editing the beatmap file

Too fast? Learn how to play ar10. It doesn't come over a day. Practice Practice. No Support. 1-10 is good enough.

Yukiteru amano wrote:

Too fast? Learn how to play ar10. It doesn't come over a day. Practice Practice. No Support. 1-10 is good enough.

I'm afraid we're talking about mapping.

Saturnalize wrote:

Yukiteru amano wrote:

Too fast? Learn how to play ar10. It doesn't come over a day. Practice Practice. No Support. 1-10 is good enough.

I'm afraid we're talking about mapping.

Yes, But it will affect the game won't it ?

Support~

So, finally implimented i guess?

Also first map with decimal difficulty settings ^^