|
|
||
 14,561 posts    |
On to a totally different topic. I am planning on renewing the way the ranking system works early next year. This will see a lot more focus on charts. More detail on this will be provided at a later date, but I would like to get some feedback on one particular detail, which is unranking of maps.
Please don't ask for details on the new system - I don't want to get in a discussion about possible changes just yet, but want to focus on the seriousness of unranking maps for players. So let's do this. Please choose the group you fit into best, and post your comments if you have anything further to add. I'd especially like to know the thoughts of people who answer with the 2nd or 3rd option. Keep in mind an unrank can be for any small changes such as: timing (anything 5ms or more that can't be changed with an online offset), spacing errors that affect gameplay in a negative way, incorrect sliders etc. This is not just for large issues, but anything that would affect the quality of a map to the creator's or a BAT member's eyes. (as an example). |
 Rhythm Incarnate 2,194 posts  |
|
14,561 posts |
Spacing would be in the case where something is so shockingly spaced that an amateur player would fail successive times due to it, not 1-grid-off-at-grid-level-4 problems.
|
 Rhythm Incarnate 1,297 posts  |
I picked the second option. I actually admit I thought a little outside my perspective since I do not play for score, but I am proud when I DO get reasonable scores. I think we should always focus on getting it right the first time around, but there has to be a level of forgiveness in place since anyone can overlook something.
I love Oru <3
I don't find victories. I make victories. You can't win, you can't break even, and you can't get out of the game. |
 Elite Mapper 1,966 posts |
2nd Choice.
Unranking a map is fine if there is a critical error to the map which cannot be played other specific circumstances (*cough* Caramelldansen 0_o' version *cough*) I am confident that if someone unranks a beatmap that they do it for a legitimate reason and rerank it if deemed necessarily fit to do so. We do have to ask ourselves the question. "What does ranking a map mean?" Does it mean that you just want recognition in the community? Do you want to make a decent, spectacular map? Do you want to rank it so it can be online and enjoyed for other people? (Since most people do not look at unranked maps.) Our primary focus for this topic is that. "Would people be frustrated if that had a perfect score or a #1 at the map...to be the top of the world (For the time being)... and then lose it all because of one minor mishap that occurred to the beatmap. Now, people in their right-sided mind would think. "Heck, who cares if you lost the score, if you got #1 in the first place, you can do it again." Well... Could you do it again? I probably don't have much on a say and if this even relates to the topic but... yeah... Last edited by Lilac on , edited 1 time in total.
It seems that it's almost the end... What future you've decided is yours and only yours.
Made by Mafiamaster~ And these images are clickable, they lead you to the member list of each team |
|
14,561 posts |
MarioBros777 wrote: We do have to ask ourselves the question. "What does ranking a map mean?" This is one of the main reasons I want to change the current system, in fact. I'll only talk for myself in saying that a ranked map means it is of a high enough standard to be played and enjoyed by the masses. Regardless of being able to get high scores on a map, the number one driving force behind the decision to rank a map should be enjoyability. Everything that comes as a result of ranking is just a minor benefit. The concept of ranking (and the process behind it) should be the reason osu! has a generally higher standard of quality when compared to any other user-composable rhythm games. Here, we are discussing to what extent we should go to fix misjudgements by those responsible for the ranking of a map. Keep in mind that the ranking process may become slightly more lax with the changes to the system (countered by more flexibility and efficiency). |
 osu! Alumni 682 posts  |
I always have and still do believe that all maps with problems should be fixed, even if it means players losing scores. On the long run it is very important that any ranked map is playable, as new players come all the time and they will still play older maps even if the old players never go back to them "because I already have a good score on it". I'm a stat whore, but I wont shed a tear for any lost scores as long as it results in a better game.
What could be thought about however if all of the cases where maps are fixed really require a score wipe for the map. For example if the timing is fixed, isn't removing the scores a bit unnecessary as the new map is actually easier to score, so the old scores wont have an unfair advantage? In cases where note patterns or spacing is radically changed resetting the scores is necessary of course, as that makes the old and new version so different. < mtmcl|irc> Is Gemi just the guy who comes out of nowhere to disagree with things?
Dance Games European Championships 2009 - Rank #10 Dance Games Finnish Championships 2008 & 2009 - Rank #3 Highest osu! rank so far - Rank #15 |
|
Elite Mapper 1,966 posts |
|
14,561 posts |
Gemi wrote: What could be thought about however if all of the cases where maps are fixed really require a score wipe for the map. For example if the timing is fixed, isn't removing the scores a bit unnecessary as the new map is actually easier to score, so the old scores wont have an unfair advantage? In cases where note patterns or spacing is radically changed resetting the scores is necessary of course, as that makes the old and new version so different. Think replay data  . |
 Rhythm Incarnate 2,284 posts  |
peppy wrote: Gemi wrote: What could be thought about however if all of the cases where maps are fixed really require a score wipe for the map. For example if the timing is fixed, isn't removing the scores a bit unnecessary as the new map is actually easier to score, so the old scores wont have an unfair advantage? In cases where note patterns or spacing is radically changed resetting the scores is necessary of course, as that makes the old and new version so different. Think replay data .Could those replays just be disabled for these cases? I voted for option 1, but I don't have any scores I care about in unrankable maps, so..  AKA any combination of: [face/eye] + [man/guy/bro]
|
|
14,561 posts |
0_o wrote: I voted for option 1, but I don't have any scores I care about in unrankable maps, so.. Well done - you totally failed to read the poll and cast a useless vote. Also no - disabling replays is not an option. |
|
Rhythm Incarnate 2,284 posts |
peppy wrote: 0_o wrote: I voted for option 1, but I don't have any scores I care about in unrankable maps, so.. Well done - you totally failed to read the poll and cast a useless vote. Haha whoops, I knew what I was voting for when I voted for it, but when I came back to comment later I got it a little mixed up (In my defense it's 3 AM)But yeah, if I had a good score on a map has a crucial error like a wrong bpm I wouldn't have any problem with unranking and fixing it; quality comes first. Besides, chances are I would do better once the error is fixed anyway (and pretty much any score I get I can usually beat within one or two month's time). AKA any combination of: [face/eye] + [man/guy/bro]
|
|
Elite Mapper 1,966 posts |
Is there a way we could keep the score of a ranked map that was unranked and ranked again?
I was thinking along the lines off holding all the scores and the top #40 replays into a place and put it in there after it's reranked. Or is that just not possible? I don't know how it works.  It seems that it's almost the end... What future you've decided is yours and only yours.
Made by Mafiamaster~ And these images are clickable, they lead you to the member list of each team |
|
|
I think we need to look at the problem in a slightly different way.
I agree that if a map has a serious playability issue, it should be considered for unranking. Perhaps ask the community on the map's decision, with some discussion and democracy. If, as peppy states, the map should "be played and enjoyed by the masses", shouldn't those same masses have a say in the ranking and unranking process? After an ranked map is unranked, though, I think it needs to be viewed as an unranked, unapproved, WIP, pending map. The map shouldn't be a ranked map which is temporarily unranked. The map should go through the exact same processes as any other map would have to go through to become ranked again (a second time, of course). This will bring the map up to standards. I would much prefer the original mapper to be in charge of ranking the map, but in some cases that's not possible and a community committee perhaps could very critically assess the issues which terminated its status as a ranked map (and nothing more). Perhaps any of the above community-based systems could be integrated with kudosu somehow? Or a BAT-like team with lesser privilege? I don't know; that's certainly up in the air, and I'm just throwing ideas out there. You may ask, "what about a mistimed note? bad BPM? two notes overlapping on the timeline?" Just unrank (critically and objectively) and have it go through the ranking process again. I have doubts this would be a problem because I see no major roadblocks. "But what about le score D=?" Ah, screw you. Although I do play for map rank sometimes, it's mostly competition with friends or things, or just the enjoyment of SSH'ing (or B'ing?) a really difficult map. Overall, my playing improves, not worsens, so scores will generally be more easily obtained later. Same goes for everyone, I hope. Granted, some scores are obtained by luck. Oh well. What would hurt is if I lost a magic score (e.g. 5'555'555'555). However, that can be recovered still. |
|
14,561 posts |
strager wrote: The map should go through the exact same processes as any other map would have to go through to become ranked again (a second time, of course). It does. On top of this only new BAT members can review it the second time around (not the original ones). strager wrote: I would much prefer the original mapper to be in charge of ranking the map WHAT. I'll just ignore that. |
| Users browsing this forum: None |