Guest
home
beatmaps
rankings
community
store
help
forum
  1. Forums
  2. Beatmaps
  3. Mapping Discussion
  4. Ranking Criteria
  5. Finalized/Denied Amendments

Single Difficulty Mapsets and Spread Removal

posted
Total Posts
150
Charles445
Elite Mapper II: Aspirant / osu! Paragon
2,881 posts
Joined March 2009
Topic Starter
Charles445
From discussion in modhelp.

Chatlog
15:51 Charles445: honestly though what I'd like to see in mapping is a relaxation on the process
15:51 Maddy: LOL
15:51 Charles445: a lot of the really good mappers are getting frustrated with the regulations and whatnot, that's why so many people quit
15:51 mm201: we need to frame ranking in the right context
15:51 Maddy: charles pls add rule
15:51 Charles445: the main issue I see is that, you have ppl who work REALLY hard on 1 difficulty, and people who work pretty hard on 4 diffs
15:51 Maddy: DONT USE different spacing on streams
15:51 mm201: ranking is freezing the map from additional changes so that it can be given a scoreboard
15:51 Maddy: best rule ever
15:52 Charles445: it takes the same amount of work, but only the 4 diff map with the pretty ok diffs is pushed forwards
15:52 Blue Dragon: Maddy: oh god YES
15:52 Maddy: aka no stream jumps i mean
15:52 Maddy: pls
15:52 Charles445: that's why honestly we should support single diff good stuff
15:52 mm201: quality control is an extra bonus
15:52 *Blue Dragon is listening to [http://osu.ppy.sh/b/224770 DM Ashura - Classical Insanity]
15:52 Blue Dragon: i don't wanna play stuff like this anymore
15:52 mm201: but not central to the process
15:52 Charles445: restricting the good from doing their thing is detrimental
15:52 Alumetorz: lol@charles story of my life
15:52 Maddy: classical insanity is not that bad
15:52 Makyu: Hello
15:52 mm201: we help mappers fix mistakes before the map is frozen and they can't any more
15:52 Blue Dragon: most of the patterns are cool
15:52 Charles445: I wish we did that
15:52 Alumetorz: my <another diffs are so bad
15:52 Blue Dragon: but the differently spaced streams
15:52 Blue Dragon: are lol
15:52 Maddy: yeah lulz
15:52 Charles445: every bubble I check is either unrankable or just bd
15:52 Charles445: bad*
15:52 Charles445: not BD LOL
15:53 Blue Dragon: kinda like upertreff-
15:53 Maddy: or just bd
15:53 Maddy: LOL
15:53 Blue Dragon: wow i'm offended
15:53 Blue Dragon: again
15:53 Charles445: LOL
15:53 mm201: we also try to mentor mappers so that they can make better maps later
15:53 Blue Dragon: I have a problem with mentoring
15:53 Charles445: mm201 though, thoughts on allowing for single diff things ever?
15:53 Charles445: It'd make so many players and mappers happy it's crazy
15:53 Blue Dragon: every mapper I try teaching about stuff
15:53 Blue Dragon: ends up mapping better than me
15:53 Alumetorz: lol
15:53 mm201: Charles445: sure why not
15:53 Charles445: Let's do this shit
15:53 Alumetorz: isnt it a good thing bd?
15:54 Blue Dragon: not really because i see how it's easy to map better than me
15:54 mm201: more maps != less good maps
15:54 Maddy: allowing single diffs , what
15:54 Shiro: I actually agree with Charles on that one
15:54 Blue Dragon: Charles445: oh god yes
15:54 mm201: but it's not up to me
15:54 Charles445: Let's make a thread somewhere mm201
15:54 *Blue Dragon is listening to [http://osu.ppy.sh/b/166599 Wyvern's Spirit - Force Zero]
15:54 Charles445: we can discuss this
15:54 Blue Dragon: oh god yes
15:54 Shiro: Charles: ML first ?
15:54 Charles445: idk
15:54 Charles445: NR seems the better place
15:54 Maddy: what are you talking about
15:54 Charles445: newrules
15:55 Maddy: :o
15:55 Nafar: just a little thingy about ranking criteria n things like that: Maybe try and add a way to encourage mappers trying out new stuff
15:55 mm201: I would probably be annoyed by single-difficulty expert-only sets but I can ignore them
15:55 Blue Dragon: Nafar: the problem with that is that most people go WAY too far
15:55 Blue Dragon: when trying new stuff
15:55 Maddy: wow are you talking about single diff ranks or what
15:55 Maddy: i dont get it
15:55 Charles445: yes we are
15:55 Maddy: oh my god
15:55 Charles445: mm201 actually a place for them to stay would be good
15:55 Charles445: yknow, like how approval once was
15:55 Blue Dragon: also please make easy-only maps rankable or remove them from gray area
15:55 Nafar: BD: I know, because when they do they mostly do not go for approval/ranking anyways
15:55 Blue Dragon: because mapping songs like this is sad
15:55 mm201: BD yes
15:55 Nafar: since with new stuff its usually rather hard getting things ranked
15:55 *Blue Dragon is listening to [http://osu.ppy.sh/b/118586 Enya - China Roses]
15:56 Charles445: mm201 should I make a thread in newrules or are you going to do that?
15:56 Maddy: but short songs too? 
15:56 Maddy: or like approved
15:56 those: With the new system
15:56 mm201: charles: you should
15:56 Charles445: Alright here goes
15:56 Blue Dragon: I don't get the new system

The basic idea of this proposed rule is to support single difficulty mapsets or mapsets without proper spread.

A mapset can be ranked or approved with one difficulty or more, ignoring the 6 minute requirement, the minimum difficulty requirement, and the difficulty spread requirement.

Currently there is a large issue with the ranking system and the effect it has on the quality of beatmaps.

A beatmapper can work on a three minute map and polish a single difficulty to perfection, while another mapper can make four unpolished, 'acceptable' difficulties in the same time window.

Both have spent the same amount of time and effort into the map.
Only one gets ranked.

This cuts off that extra polished difficulty from the ranking pool, leaving only the 'okay' stuff for the playerbase.
An example of an extremely polished map restricted by the rules in place.

Maps with a single difficulty or ones that don't have a proper spread would still follow the same ranking/approving methods in place. Two / three people to push the maps forward depending on mapset length.

Mappers are losing motivation to finish their sets, and a lot of amazing maps are winding up in the graveyard.
They have worked hard to get the maps that good.

No reason to hold them back any longer.


Thoughts on this? I personally think a relaxation on ranking and approval is what this game needs to usher back in the high quality content it once had. Of course, the occasional bad map will be created that tries to go through this new process, but that's what the approval team is for, to slow that down.
Kodora
Kodora
Good point, i support this.
Also, for now approval for non-marathon maps in special cases is already allowed, isnt it?

Btw, it will resolve problem with maps what have leight like 5:50 or close to it.
D33d
1,697 posts
Joined April 2011
D33d
I doubt that the sloppy mapset would have the same amount of effort as one polished map. If somebody's too lazy to finish a set, or doesn't have the time, then I don't see why they're even bothering. The least that they could do is offer to make a guest difficulty for somebody, or otherwise have one or two guests to share the load.

It's important that there's a fair difficulty spread, because if one can make three or four amazing maps, then just about anybody could enjoy their work. 3:48 isn't an unreasonable amount of time to fill with something that's had effort put into it. If somebody's already proved that they can work hard, then couldn't they go the extra mile to bring more difficulties up to scratch?

Excuse me if I'm missing the point of this, but it seems to me that this falls under "mapper laziness."
Azer
World Cup Organiser
1,107 posts
Joined December 2012
Azer
I approve of this.
Cyclohexane
osu! Alumni
4,568 posts
Joined May 2009
Cyclohexane
Support so hard I might rename to Sona, holy crap.

Apply this for Taiko too. God does it ever need it.
Charles445
Elite Mapper II: Aspirant / osu! Paragon
2,881 posts
Joined March 2009
Topic Starter
Charles445

D33d wrote:

If somebody's too lazy to finish a set, or doesn't have the time, then I don't see why they're even bothering.

Excuse me if I'm missing the point of this, but it seems to me that this falls under "mapper laziness."
Yes, you missed the idea.
The idea is that the mapper is in fact not being lazy when making a single difficulty, as putting massive amounts into a single difficulty is comparable to making a mediocre spread map.

It's absolutely not mapper laziness.
Mirage
627 posts
Joined May 2011
Mirage
I do approve too, I try really hard usually in doing my maps, and I lose interest when it comes to making a full spread, usually making the quality lower.
Kuro
836 posts
Joined July 2012
Kuro

Mr Color wrote:

Apply this for Taiko too. God does it ever need it.
I support this statement
Nyquill
osu! Alumni
1,781 posts
Joined February 2011
Nyquill
I absolutely agree, and I also think that the minimum line for such maps should not be based on time, but note density. Stamina is consumed moreso based on how many notes you hit as opposed to how long you're holding your mouse/pen for.

It also really defeats the purpose of the marathon rule when people are just going for the bare minimum of 6 minutes. It feels like a rule to work around as opposed to a rule to maintain quality.

If a really large amount of effort is put into polishing a map like that, I don't really see why it should be held back.
TheVileOne
osu! Alumni
8,431 posts
Joined March 2010
TheVileOne
If they cannot make a difficulty focused towards the easier players, then their map should not be ranked period. It's not about how long it takes to make a map, it's about fairness. I would consider this a step back in mapping rules. It will just promote people to make single level difficulties, and will completely invalidate the rule requiring two taiko difficulties which is aimed towards letting newer players get into taiko.

This would just make a mockery out of the consistent difficulty spread rule, because you cannot have a good spread without a spread. It really makes no sense to me to say you must follow this, this, and this rule unless you're lazy and only map one difficulty. why should people even map a second difficulty if they can ignore all the rules by having only one?
D33d
1,697 posts
Joined April 2011
D33d

Charles445 wrote:

D33d wrote:

If somebody's too lazy to finish a set, or doesn't have the time, then I don't see why they're even bothering.

Excuse me if I'm missing the point of this, but it seems to me that this falls under "mapper laziness."
Yes, you missed the idea.
The idea is that the mapper is in fact not being lazy when making a single difficulty, as putting massive amounts into a single difficulty is comparable to making a mediocre spread map.

It's absolutely not mapper laziness.
That's actually my point entirely. Why not put the same amount of effort into a whole mapset? Better yet, why not focus first on making something that simply works and then take a few weeks to improve everything?

Mapping and remapping one difficulty over and over again, or otherwise spending months on it, seems to me like it would become increasingly wasteful. LC spent nine months on making one map (this is from reading the dates of the submission and the last upload), during which time it's had one or two mods--nothing was even changed from one of them. Besides, if LC really is the best mapper on osu!, then I imagine that she'd have little trouble with making an entire spread that's polished, within maybe a couple of months. All you're implying is that she, or other highly-regarded mappers, don't have the competence to make a good mapset within a reasonable timeframe.

If anything, I believe that the problem lies more with people who try to get something ranked quickly. They shouldn't even be given the time of day via a comparison. If somebody spends a month or two on making a mapset excellent, then it shouldn't be too hard to rank it. Besides, some of the polish comes from the modding process. It's up to mappers to make a decent effort, modders to suggest improvements which will actually benefit the map and staff to choose what they deem to be good enough.
[Luanny]
8,248 posts
Joined April 2011
[Luanny]

TheVileOne wrote:

If they cannot make a difficulty focused towards the easier players, then their map should not be ranked period. It's not about how long it takes to make a map, it's about fairness. I would consider this a step back in mapping rules. It will just promote people to make single level difficulties, and will completely invalidate the rule requiring two taiko difficulties which is aimed towards letting newer players get into taiko.

This would just make a mockery out of the consistent difficulty spread rule, because you cannot have a good spread without a spread. It really makes no sense to me to say you must follow this, this, and this rule unless you're lazy and only map one difficulty. why should people even map a second difficulty if they can ignore all the rules by having only one?
Ok so having acceptable maps > having quality maps?
It's not like every mapset with only one diff will be ranked, only the ones where you can NOTICE the mapper really put effort on it and it is a really good map
When you map because you want it to be GOOD for yourself you put effort, make it perfect and you can finally say "this is a great map".
But YOU HAVE TO MAKE MORE DIFFS! Yes, to be fair, so everyone can play this map! Who said you WANT to do it? Do you really want to map something you won't even bother to play?
This is selfish but this is the true. You already made the perfect map. You wasted your creativity on it. You gave your best. Now you need to do it for 3 more diffs. Tiring, right? What if the song is repetitive?
That's easy, let it graveyarded. It is still great, right? People will still play it, right? WRONG. I know many players who only bother to play ranked maps.
Once your map is graved you won't get the attention you deserve for making such an awesome map unless you are a famous map and SOMEONE FOUND YOUR MAP AND SHARED IT TO OTHERS. Still, you won't get enough attention.
It's not the "OMG I WANNA BE FAMOUS" attention, it is like "Omg I made an art and everyone should check it!"
Awesome maps MUST get more attention.
Solution: make them approved AS LONG AS the mapper really puts effort on it and makes a great map.
This isn't hard, c'mom
Oh yeah, they are lazy... really?
Being tired =/= being lazy
Run a marathon, be tired as fuck. I tell you to run it again. Oh you won't? LAZY!!!
^pretty much this
Nothing to say about taiko.

Approve this, please.

edit: if you can make THE WHOLE SPREAD an amazing thing, you are my hero lol
I'm sure someone is actually able to do it, but maybe only 2 out of 10?
Mismagius
9,239 posts
Joined July 2008
Mismagius
It's amazing how many people that aren't supporting this find very bad ways to make their spreads perfect, having badly mapped difficulties just to fill the spread.

I fully support this and there are many maps that can't have easier/harder difficulties that cant be ranked because some people want to be "fair for everyone" and aren't being fair to the mappers.
Teara
osu! Alumni
814 posts
Joined June 2009
Teara

TheVileOne wrote:

If they cannot make a difficulty focused towards the easier players, then their map should not be ranked period. It's not about how long it takes to make a map, it's about fairness. I would consider this a step back in mapping rules. It will just promote people to make single level difficulties, and will completely invalidate the rule requiring two taiko difficulties which is aimed towards letting newer players get into taiko.

This would just make a mockery out of the consistent difficulty spread rule, because you cannot have a good spread without a spread. It really makes no sense to me to say you must follow this, this, and this rule unless you're lazy and only map one difficulty. why should people even map a second difficulty if they can ignore all the rules by having only one?
I pretty much agree with the above.

While the mapper puts in lots of work to polish one difficulty to perfection, he is can still ask for guest difficulties to help cover the the rest of the gap. There is no shortage of good mappers.

If the mapper really isn't lazy and strives for perfection but doesn't want quest difficulties in the mapset, nothing is stopping him from mapping one diff at a time, till he his perfectly happy with it, then move on the the next difficulty in the set. Sure, this might make take a lot lot longer, but I think personal satisfaction would be gather in the end. He is going for quality, not speedranking right?

There is no excuse to ignore a huge player base to favor a smaller one. Even if the map is perfect.
TheVileOne
osu! Alumni
8,431 posts
Joined March 2010
TheVileOne
Teara ninjad me. It's not that difficulty to ask people to help out. People have too much of an ego to ask for help these days. And you do not need 4 difficulties and can get away with 2 with the proper spread, but it is recommended that you have at least 3. You could just as easily ask someone who is willing to make a thoughtful easier difficulty.
Last edited by TheVileOne , edited 1 time in total.
Mismagius
9,239 posts
Joined July 2008
Mismagius

TheVileOne wrote:

Ask someone to make a guest difficulty. You would only need to make two difficulties and the third will be a guest mapper. I don't know where you're getting 4 difficulties from. Even if you needed 4 difficulties, you could have 3 guest mappers. Andrea gets away with that all the time. You should take notes.
Sure, let's ask for people to make CS7 overmapped difficulties on 100BPM songs, just because "pro'er players should have the right to play this as well".
Remember, we're focusing on GOOD quality here, not forcing something bad to be considered "of enough quality to be ranked".
Nyquill
osu! Alumni
1,781 posts
Joined February 2011
Nyquill
Needless to say, single diff sets must have a good reason for being a single diffuculty set (high bpm, length, high density of notes to map). It also is not uncommon for songs in other rhythm games to only have one diffuculty (ffr, seriously do I need to say more) and they all have very good reason for only having one diffuculty as well.

I feel that I'd rather have one high quality map for a lot of people to enjoy thoroughly rather than a set full of lower quality maps which ends up getting ranked anyw- oh wait charles already said that.

This isn't a step backwards, its a huge step fowards for player enjoyment. Maps which exist to teach and allow people learning the game to enjoy the game will still exist, its simply that better maps for people who have reached a point to appreciate polish will also come into light.
[Luanny]
8,248 posts
Joined April 2011
[Luanny]
Ok, implying that finding guest mappers for non-anime songs is easy.
Please I know the ranking system wasn't supposed to be "easy" but lol this is too much
If the song isn't something people are "used to", your map will be dead forever because no guests :/
This is the case where you rank it without more diffs.
Teara
osu! Alumni
814 posts
Joined June 2009
Teara
Maybe if its handled on a careful select basis, where like 5 bats agree to it.

Otherwise I can see a lot of 1diff mapsets coming out and they will be pointing fingers, that guy can do it, so why cant I?

Remember, perfect is very subjective term

A map might be perfect for one player, but utter garbage for another.
Last edited by Teara , edited 2 times in total.
Mythol
1,420 posts
Joined March 2011
Mythol
Maybe the approval rules should be changed instead. BATs can decide whether a map can be approved with a single difficulty by how well its mapped/how hard the map is/etc. Something like a free pass for the truly amazing mappers to be able to rank maps without having to worry about spread.
This would probably allow whoever has the most BAT friends to approve their maps so maybe there has to be a minimum favorite or star priority requirement (not counting ones from yourself) on top of the multiple BATs approval since great maps will naturally attract attention so this shouldn't be too hard.

I don't think there's anything wrong with the ranked maps but approval maps are really messed up right now with its 6min+ rule bs
Last edited by Mythol , edited 1 time in total.
show more
Please sign in to reply.

New reply

0
1 / 150