Ticks are in this game for a reason. If they're TOO LOUD UGLY CRUSHING MAPPER SPIRIT, you have the option of using a different slider tick sound, softening or removing certain ticks that really get in the way, and a host of other options.
it removes ticks from most if not all sliders - 1/1 sliders are fine as-is.
Again, see the first point. more ticks doesn't make it sound worse, it often makes it sound more consistent. If you don't like the sound of those ticks, soften them or make them work - you're a mapper, right? You shouldn't flip a table because something doesn't sound right.
Also, Alace is hardly a guru with slider ticks. Just so you know. In fact, as an avid 0.5 user, maybe he's clearly not doing something right with them
EDIT: The only time i can see 0.5 tick rate ever being justified is when the map in question requires doubled bpm (read: 7/8, 13/8, awkward metronomes) or uses doubled BPM as a gimmick (see xi - .357 Magnum for an example)
EDIT#2: You guys all seem to be forgetting that every single one of these rules has exceptions that can be applied and argued for - If you think "0.5 tick rate is NOT AALLOWOOWOWOEEDEDEDED ARRRFGGGHHH *froth mouth*" is what is happening to you, man up. It's far better to argue something like this on a case-by-case basis than "It's not true 100% of the time so let it go for the other 99.5%!"
Making sliders optional. And then, what happens with 1/1 sliders? Will tick rate 1 be disallowed because it makes these optional? What about removing tick rate 2 because it makes 1/2 sliders optional? Besides, even if a slider has no ticks, most players will hold it anyway, because if used properly that's what the song calls for (and because it's more effort to hit twice instead of hitting once and holding)From a gameplay perspective, 0.5 tick rate is unacceptable since it makes most, if not all, sliders in a map "follow-optional". Using shorter duration sliders is a horrible point to prove, as each one literally halves the amount of time between ticks - the difference between 0.5 and 2 is literally 4 times as many ticks in the latter (OMG MATH), which leads to 0.5 having 25% blah blah
it removes ticks from most if not all sliders - 1/1 sliders are fine as-is.
Making drain rate very inconsistent. how? The only thing I can think of is that there's no HP gain from hitting ticks, but this gain is so minor that it's practically negligible.Ticks count as hits in HP Drain calculation. They help balance out the slower areas such that you don't get silly drain sections.
Disrupting flow of a fast-paced beatmap. This comes from your idea of map "flow", others have different ideas.i don't disagree with completely throwing out personal opinions, but that's kind of what this game is.
Weird placement of ticks when they do appear. Tick rate 0 could fix this, as mentioned earlier. Either way, if a tick sounds awkward with 0.5, it will likely sound even worse with 1 or more. Maybe not in your opinion, but definitely in other's opinions...AAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA no.
Again, see the first point. more ticks doesn't make it sound worse, it often makes it sound more consistent. If you don't like the sound of those ticks, soften them or make them work - you're a mapper, right? You shouldn't flip a table because something doesn't sound right.
Readability of speed changes. We already know when reading speed changes, hardly anyone uses ticks, so this is hardly a reason...You're right.
Also, Alace is hardly a guru with slider ticks. Just so you know. In fact, as an avid 0.5 user, maybe he's clearly not doing something right with them
EDIT: The only time i can see 0.5 tick rate ever being justified is when the map in question requires doubled bpm (read: 7/8, 13/8, awkward metronomes) or uses doubled BPM as a gimmick (see xi - .357 Magnum for an example)
EDIT#2: You guys all seem to be forgetting that every single one of these rules has exceptions that can be applied and argued for - If you think "0.5 tick rate is NOT AALLOWOOWOWOEEDEDEDED ARRRFGGGHHH *froth mouth*" is what is happening to you, man up. It's far better to argue something like this on a case-by-case basis than "It's not true 100% of the time so let it go for the other 99.5%!"