Okay, so last time the thread regarding this got locked+nuked. However, I'd like to hope we can discuss it again now that the community is involved.

What I'm suggesting is allowing tick rate 0.5 again, or possibly tick rate 0 (or both). I think tick rate 0.5 should be added again because there was no reason to remove it, and as Alace proved in a previous post, it works better than anything else in some cases.

The main reasons I could find for removing it are

1. Making sliders optional.
2. Making drain rate very inconsistent.
3. Disrupting flow of a fast-paced beatmap.
4. Weird placement of ticks when they do appear.
5. Readability of speed changes.

I shall now demonstrate that these reasons are invalid.

1. 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)
2. 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.
3. Disrupting flow of a fast-paced beatmap. This comes from your idea of map "flow", others have different ideas.
4. 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...
5. Readability of speed changes. We already know when reading speed changes, hardly anyone uses ticks, so this is hardly a reason...

Here are some other points I came across, that also are invalid:

Even if a minority of players read speed changes with ticks, having them there doesn't hurt the players who do not. It only helps out players that do. it hurts everyone else because it makes the map less enjoyable, and we already know that people who read ticks are the minority. Thus, it hurts more people than it helps.

My brother pays no attention to spacing and relies on approach circles. Some players are different. We try to make intuitive spacing a ranking guideline to help those players. then make not using tick rate 0.5 a guideline instead of flat-out removing it.

I speculate that these maps that 'work well with tick 0.5' can be split up into 2 categories:
1. Maps that would have worked just as well, possibly a touch better, with tick 1. as Alace proved this is not always the case
2. Maps that would have worked better with creative skinning rather than removing a gameplay element. having a different tick sound doesn't make any difference, some places just don't call for ticks and that's it. Skinning out ticks makes no sense, as then someone will be fooled because it looks like there is no tick, when there is...

I also believe that all such maps would have used tick 0 if it were provided, and that the majority of sliders in these maps have no ticks. adding tick rate 0 as suggested above would be no problem, then

@Alace: In the ocassions where tick 1 doesnt work because of a 1.5 long slider, tick 2 may work. Not trying to destroy your examples down, but you'll need something stronger than that =P nope. As Alace said, tick rate 2 is very loud for most songs and puts a bunch of ticks where they don't fit

Building on this slightly:
If you believe you need to use 0.5 ticks,
a) your BPM is too low; double it.
b) you are not a fan of the tick hitsound. find a replacement you like.
you are implying that there are absolutely no cases where tick rate 0.5 can be used properly, which is not only obviously wrong but your opinion. Changing the sound doesn't work because there are some places that don't call for a slider tick, period, regardless of what it is

Also one little tip: If you think tick rate 1 sounds bad so you need 0.5, try going *upwards* to 2 instead. In many cases it will be more even and sound better than 1. no, Alace proved it wasn't the case

No offense but it seems like this was removed based on your own personal opinions. That's no reason to deny something that the majority of the community would find useful in some cases.

let's see how far I can get before this gets nuked

let's see how far you can get before this gets nuked

Totally remove tick rate 0.5 is based on an assumption: All of the songs fits tick rate 1 or above, or say, 1/1 sounds good in all of the songs. But could you imagine, in a high BPM but an easy difficulty, would 1/1 be too busy for that? (as few of your notes would be 1/1). Also, in a low BPM calm song, would that cause too much extra sound?

I think it's too hard to be 100% sure that no songs fits 0.5, and there's already some examples there, they make sense to some mappers/modders. As it doesn't hurt anyone, it's not musically wrong either, why not just leave it?

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.

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%!"

should replace bpm 1.0+ tick 0.5 by bpm 0.5 + tick 1.0

This is mentioned by peppy and the reason is code level problem.(if I remember correctly)
So as long as osu! use current language and library, we can't change this.

Why do people have so much of a problem with tick rates that are greater than the map's beat density? I use the same tick rate (Usually 2) across all of my difficulties and it sounds fine.

Tick 1 will always sound decent because ticks will sound fine matched up to beats, and if the song doesn't have a beat every white tick your bpm is too high. If tick 1 sounds awkward it's usually because it's too empty and should be upped to 2 or 3, and shouldn't be knee jerk dropped down to 0.5 :/

Either way, peppy's said no so this is highly unlikely to get changed.

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.

I already said it's way more awkward to hit once, let go, and hit again for the sole purpose of breaking a slider, so people will hold it regardless. Plus, people will want to hold if sliders are used properly.

i don't disagree with completely throwing out personal opinions, but that's kind of what this game is.

Except now, we have more opinions, and I claim that most of them will now want to keep tick rate 0.5.

AAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA no.

Again, see the first point. more ticks doesn't make it sound worse, it often makes it sound more consistent.

As I said some parts sound way too busy with ticks, because a tick just doesn't go there. There are many cases where having an increased tick rate puts a tick in a completely wrong position or makes everything sound just wrong.

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.

It's quite hard impossible to make something sound right that is forced into your map with no basis from the song...

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%!"

guideline it then.

Rules apply 100% of the time, so if something is better not breaking a rule, the "rule" should be a guideline.

This is mentioned by peppy and the reason is code level problem.(if I remember correctly)
So as long as osu! use current language and library, we can't change this.

I thought the only reason tick rate 0.5 is now impossible was that peppy changed the minimum value... I don't think there was any glitch involved. If I'm wrong, please correct me

Why do people have so much of a problem with tick rates that are greater than the map's beat density?

because it makes it sound too busy and loud. Especially so if ticks are mapped to nothing in the song...

Tick 1 will always sound decent because ticks will sound fine matched up to beats, and if the song doesn't have a beat every white tick your bpm is too high. If tick 1 sounds awkward it's usually because it's too empty and should be upped to 2 or 3, and shouldn't be knee jerk dropped down to 0.5 :/

This is false. Sometimes, tick rate 1 will put ticks at awkward places on some sliders, that aren't there with tick rate 0.5. Also, for a softer song, tick rate 1 can sometimes sound too loud. Same for easier diffs on most maps.

Either way, peppy's said no so this is highly unlikely to get changed.

let's see how far I can get before this gets nuked

Tick rate 0.5 is pointless. It negates the point of having sliders, especially when 0.5 maps tend to use tiny sliders in the least imaginative fashion. If there are a lot of 0.5 maps with long sliders, then their mappers are morons. For Christ's sake, the tick rate should at least follow the beat. The ticks are there so that the slider can encompass more rhythmic elements and actually give the player a reason to follow the slider.

Also, I believe that ticks are helpful for determining slider velocity. Whether or not it's noticed consciously, a distance change between ticks is an obvious indicator that the slider velocity has changed.

In situations where ticks are too fast for the music, your BPM is double what it should be, so divide it by 2. Tick 1 not lining up with the music is a paradox.
In situations where you want no ticks at all, what you're looking for is tick 0, not 0.5. 0.5 is a workaround because there is no tick 0, and when a slider is longer than a 2/1, there's a really ugly, out-of-place tick I'm sure all you tick 0.5 users would rather do without. For tick 0 to work, the gameplay mechanics would need to be adjusted so that leaving sliders would break your combo. This deviates too much from the Ouendan formula, and leads to two different styles of gameplay which have no reason to be different.

1/1 and 1/2 sliders are so short that leaving them and coming back is impractical and involves MORE WORK than following them normally. This isn't the case for a 2/1 slider. It's already close to impossible to make a 1/1 or 1/2 slider have more than a basic line or slight curve/wave for its shape, all of which can be played by making a line.

Tick 2, or even 1, is enough to counter the HP drain, allowing your HP to rise slightly, rather than lower, during sliders. This creates a dichotomy where your HP rises slightly when hitting a slider correctly, but falls significantly when you're not. This is missing on long, tickless sliders. Again, a 1/1 or 1/2 slider would be too short for this to matter.

pieguy1372 wrote:

We already know when reading speed changes, hardly anyone uses ticks

According to NatsumeRin's troll poll, 58% of players read ticks at least sometimes. This is in spite of the extremely skewed phrasing of the poll and options. I also believe you're grossly overestimating how disruptive tick rate 1 is. (It's not.)

Reading ticks is quite irrelevant unless you're doing a bad job using speed changes. Using them well makes tick reading unnecessary. Using them poorly will force players either to memorize the speed changes or read the ticks. So basically, tick reading is only a factor if the map has bad speed changes anyway.

pieguy1372 wrote:

No offense but it seems like this was removed based on your own personal opinions.

He wrote the game. He could take it off the internet completely based on his personal opinions. People seem to forget that.
peppy added tick rate 2 because, back in the day, the BPM needed to be doubled to create 2x sections. This led to the equivalent of tick rate 2 being used in speedup sections. Tick 0.5 was to remedy this.

I think there must be a "No tick" option. Yeah, why not?
That awkward moment when you add a slow slider and it all goes smooth until that whild ugly TICK sound appears. You can't silence it completely because of 5% minimum hitsound volume. You can't replace it with a blank file either. Shit. I never really look at ticks when playing so I don't see how this can help me read the speed changes. It's not like there's enough time for that anyway since most time you're just sightreading it.

mm201 wrote:

pieguy1372 wrote:

We already know when reading speed changes, hardly anyone uses ticks

According to NatsumeRin's troll poll, 58% of players read ticks at least sometimes. This is in spite of the extremely skewed phrasing of the poll and options. I also believe you're grossly overestimating how disruptive tick rate 1 is. (It's not.)

what's the point to describe it like "more than a half players really use ticks".

In situations where ticks are too fast for the music, your BPM is double what it should be, so divide it by 2. Tick 1 not lining up with the music is a paradox.

So, the music can't have any pauses at all, or not even a general "slow" feeling? This principle is entirely a case-by-case basis and you can't apply it to all songs and maps.

In situations where you want no ticks at all, what you're looking for is tick 0, not 0.5. 0.5 is a workaround because there is no tick 0, and when a slider is longer than a 2/1, there's a really ugly, out-of-place tick I'm sure all you tick 0.5 users would rather do without. For tick 0 to work, the gameplay mechanics would need to be adjusted so that leaving sliders would break your combo. This deviates too much from the Ouendan formula, and leads to two different styles of gameplay which have no reason to be different.

Perhaps it could be so that your HP drain goes down a lot faster if you don't hold the slider (but only with tick rate 0), so it would be like missing

This isn't the case for a 2/1 slider

For me at least it's easier to hold a 2/1 slider than to hit twice.

I also believe you're grossly overestimating how disruptive tick rate 1 is. (It's not.)

so what, you're saying that having a tick is never out of place, ever? There are many cases where tick rate 1 is indeed disruptive and/or puts a tick where one doesn't fit... You just can't say that in all 100% of cases, tick rate 1 will work.

According to NatsumeRin's troll poll, 58% of players read ticks at least sometimes.

Take away the "seldom" category and it's 27%, and I think especially after the next point we can agree that those cases are when speed changes aren't used right...

Reading ticks is quite irrelevant unless you're doing a bad job using speed changes. Using them well makes tick reading unnecessary. Using them poorly will force players either to memorize the speed changes or read the ticks. So basically, tick reading is only a factor if the map has bad speed changes anyway.

the modding system should catch these cases so they don't exist, then. I agree that people should never need to use ticks to read speed changes though.

peppy added tick rate 2 because, back in the day, the BPM needed to be doubled to create 2x sections. This led to the equivalent of tick rate 2 being used in speedup sections. Tick 0.5 was to remedy this.

So tick rate 2 was added for that purpose also, and look how widespread it is now. If we remove tick rate 0.5 purely because it's a workaround that is now obsolete, we might as well do the same for tick rate 2. Tick rate 2 might be used a lot, but I claim that 0.5 also has uses, and thus isn't "just" a workaround.

Can you start providing examples of where you think 0.5 works, and why? I'm sure you have some good points, but they seem to be often based on existing maps (some parts, many cases, etc.), and dropping some names might help. I can see why you would think tick rate 2 might be a bit excessive, but I'm sure that tick 1 will almost always sound better than 0.5, since it is essentially putting a sound where the metronome would be, which is indicative of the timing.

Also, if you find ticks ugly, you're either using an atrocious skin or are scared of tiny circles, and in the latter case, playing osu! isn't a good idea. The default skin's is harmless if the ticks are consistent enough.

NotShinta wrote:

Can you start providing examples of where you think 0.5 works, and why?

can you read my post by few months ago in the tick rate thread XD

EDIT:i think this thread is pointless, because the coders already decide to remove tick 0.5 (even we already showed some samples)
so just let it go and focus on other questionable issues

NotShinta wrote:

Can you start providing examples of where you think 0.5 works, and why? I'm sure you have some good points, but they seem to be often based on existing maps (some parts, many cases, etc.), and dropping some names might help. I can see why you would think tick rate 2 might be a bit excessive, but I'm sure that tick 1 will almost always sound better than 0.5, since it is essentially putting a sound where the metronome would be, which is indicative of the timing.

Also, if you find ticks ugly, you're either using an atrocious skin or are scared of tiny circles, and in the latter case, playing osu! isn't a good idea. The default skin's is harmless if the ticks are consistent enough.

It really depends on the song. I won't bother go finding examples because I know there must exist songs that contains sections which the strong beats of instrument (or vocal) do not land on the metronome.

OK, there are two workarounds here:
1. use slider but with no ticks (similar to Natteke said, a tick sound will just sound awkward in some occasion, and you can't deny that)
2. use circles instead

The reason why slider is preferred can be due to several reasons.
For example attempting to make an easier difficulty by replacing harder rhythm with slider.

Answering D33d, a slider can mean much more to a mapper because it creates a "holding" sensation. For slow maps, yes, mapper can increase tick rate so that the player is forced to follow the slider. But for harder maps where etna sliders are abundant (perhaps also high BPM), the point of having sliders isn't really "follow the slider" but rather "swipe" the slider.

pieguy1372 wrote:

Perhaps it could be so that your HP drain goes down a lot faster if you don't hold the slider (but only with tick rate 0), so it would be like missing

How is this different from silenced ticks? (Which I approve of)

pieguy1372 wrote:

For me at least it's easier to hold a 2/1 slider than to hit twice.

Now that depends on the shape. Consider this:

With tick 0.5, you can just casually move your cursor from one cap to the other rather than going in a circle. What's the point of using a slider like this on a tick 0.5 map?

pieguy1372 wrote:

so what, you're saying that having a tick is never out of place, ever? There are many cases where tick rate 1 is indeed disruptive and/or puts a tick where one doesn't fit... You just can't say that in all 100% of cases, tick rate 1 will work.

Yes I can. Read:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beat_%28music%29
If the music has a beat, it makes sense for a tick to land on it.

pieguy1372 wrote:

Take away the "seldom" category and it's 27%, and I think especially after the next point we can agree that those cases are when speed changes aren't used right...

The seldom category is important because it's representative of what actually makes sense. I would place myself in the seldom category. In a perfect world, ticks are read seldomly because the map offers enough other cues to make them irrelevant.

pieguy1372 wrote:

the modding system should catch these cases so they don't exist, then. I agree that people should never need to use ticks to read speed changes though.

This is exactly why I wrote those 3 rules limiting how speed changes can be used. I wrote them before tick 0.5 was banned in the hopes of targeting specifically unreadable sliders, which appear very frequently in tick 0.5 maps for some reason.

So tick rate 2 was added for that purpose also, and look how widespread it is now. If we remove tick rate 0.5 purely because it's a workaround that is now obsolete, we might as well do the same for tick rate 2. Tick rate 2 might be used a lot, but I claim that 0.5 also has uses, and thus isn't "just" a workaround.

No it wasn't. Tick rate 2 was added based on how sliders are used in Ouendan, which is the reference for this game's design. In Ouendan, ticks are timed according to the fastest consistent rhythm found in the music--that is, the highest possible setting which doesn't clash. This provides the most accurate judgement of sliders and carries the rhythm.

Alace wrote:

can you read my post by few months ago in the tick rate thread XD

Do you really want me to go through that post and find reasons for every map why tick 0.5 is incorrect? That would take hours.
Normally, it breaks down to one of a few reasons:
1. The mapper doesn't like the tick sound. Find a different one or make them silent. If you hate the sound in any map, you probably don't like this part of the Ouendan formula. Consider using a custom skin.
2. The mapper doesn't like the tick sound for this music. Same solution.
3. The music has lots of offbeats and syncopation. If this is the case, tick 2 is probably a better choice. If tick 2 clashes with the rhythms, try placing sliders more carefully, or otherwise learn to accept syncoticks. They're not so bad and can sound cute.
4. The map has some very long sliders which begin on offbeats. This tends to flow poorly anyway. Try beginning the slider on the following downbeat and placing a circle on that offbeat.

yongtw123 wrote:

etna sliders

Etna sliders are identical whether the tick rate is 0.5, 1, or 2. Lowering the tick rate because most of your sliders are 1/2 anyway is a bad reason, and only adds inconsistency when a >1/2 or >1/1 slider does appear.

Having 1/1 sliders without ticks can disrupt the flow in an otherwise 1/2 heavy map.

So are we allowed to add blank wav files to silence ticks?

I support it, but more opinions are needed. I will start a thread for this.

Edit: Forget the thread. The current draft of NewRules already allows this.

The end of a spinner (or even the entire spinner) the sliding sound of a slider, and the end of a slider can be silent, but only do it if it makes sense. Finally, you cannot silence both slider ticks and slider slides together.

Nice, then I have no objections.

Enphasis on "make sense" for isntance i once was making a mapset in which i required the use of 3/4 triplets, since the music holds and enphasizes those 3/4 triplets a slider would work out nicely, however, since for the most part the most constant instrument was going at 1/2 rythm i was using slider tick rate 2, and the 3/4 sliders had a repeat for the triplet, so it would create a tick very close to the repeat as soon as it reached 1/2, to counter this i silenced ONLY those ticks on those sliders so it wouldn't sound awkward.

So yes i do agree with silencing sliderticks as long as they make sense with the song, if they indeed do clash with the way the slider in question is mapped.

3/4 sliders usually sound okay with tick 2, seeing as the ticks all line up to the 1/2 beat, just as if it were a 3/2 slider.
2/3 sliders are where this comes in handy.

mm201 wrote:

3/4 sliders usually sound okay with tick 2, seeing as the ticks all line up to the 1/2 beat, just as if it were a 3/2 slider.
2/3 sliders are where this comes in handy.

Sounds like whenever these particular rhythms are encountered in the future there is always a formula for mapping them.

How is this different from silenced ticks? (Which I approve of)

I thought silenced ticks were unrankable...

Yes I can. Read:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beat_%28music%29
If the music has a beat, it makes sense for a tick to land on it.

>.< Not really, what if there's no emphasis on a certain "beat", but you still need a hold feeling? In that case a tick would be way out of place.

The seldom category is important because it's representative of what actually makes sense. I would place myself in the seldom category. In a perfect world, ticks are read seldomly because the map offers enough other cues to make them irrelevant.

No, in a perfect world, every speed change is read with no regard to ticks because the speed change fits the song well, so ticks would never need to be used.

This is exactly why I wrote those 3 rules limiting how speed changes can be used. I wrote them before tick 0.5 was banned in the hopes of targeting specifically unreadable sliders, which appear very frequently in tick 0.5 maps for some reason.

The problem with your rules is that they were way too strict and prevented too much, especially cases where the only cues were the feeling of the song and map (which is what speed changes should always fit, IMO at least). It seems you and others on staff consider those cases "unreadable", when actually they are very readable and play really well.

No it wasn't. Tick rate 2 was added based on how sliders are used in Ouendan, which is the reference for this game's design. In Ouendan, ticks are timed according to the fastest consistent rhythm found in the music--that is, the highest possible setting which doesn't clash. This provides the most accurate judgement of sliders and carries the rhythm.

Oh. Now that you mention it, I claim that some songs do not even carry a 1/1 rhythm at some points, hence why tick rate 0.5 would work in those parts even by your definition. Saying that a song has something at every 1/1 tick, or 1/2 tick, is a very strong statement to make.

3. The music has lots of offbeats and syncopation. If this is the case, tick 2 is probably a better choice. If tick 2 clashes with the rhythms, try placing sliders more carefully, or otherwise learn to accept syncoticks. They're not so bad and can sound cute.

If a tick clashes with the rhythm, it shouldn't be there. Also, the last sentence is the opposite of your 1 and 2, or someone liking the tick sound, so shouldn't that be banned under your reasoning?

4. The map has some very long sliders which begin on offbeats. This tends to flow poorly anyway. Try beginning the slider on the following downbeat and placing a circle on that offbeat.

What if the song has that rhythm? I have a map myself where this is the case and tick rate 0.5 sounded better than anything.

pieguy1372 wrote:

>.< Not really, what if there's no emphasis on a certain "beat", but you still need a hold feeling? In that case a tick would be way out of place.

That means there's no rhythm, so that moment is unmappable. Consider using a spinner, a break, or just a pause with the object placement.

pieguy1372 wrote:

No, in a perfect world, every speed change is read with no regard to ticks because the speed change fits the song well, so ticks would never need to be used.

That's basically what I said, only I'm more open to the possibility of patterns which aren't necessarily readable given the music, but still make sense in retrospect. These situations depend on tick reading or memorization, but shouldn't necessarily be outright banned.

pieguy1372 wrote:

The problem with your rules is that they were way too strict and prevented too much, especially cases where the only cues were the feeling of the song and map (which is what speed changes should always fit, IMO at least). It seems you and others on staff consider those cases "unreadable", when actually they are very readable and play really well.

If you'll read them carefully, they don't really ban much of anything. One of the options is if it follows a change in the musical texture, which includes everything of what you said.

pieguy1372 wrote:

Oh. Now that you mention it, I claim that some songs do not even carry a 1/1 rhythm at some points, hence why tick rate 0.5 would work in those parts even by your definition. Saying that a song has something at every 1/1 tick, or 1/2 tick, is a very strong statement to make.

Stating a song has a steady 1/2 rhythm is a bold statement to make. Some songs divide into thirds, others don't divide at all. Stating that a song has a steady 1/1 rhythm is a basic concept of music theory. If your song doesn't have a 1/1 rhythm to it, but only a 2/1 rhythm (which corresponds to tick 0.5) then your BPM is double what it should be. Divide your BPM by two, double your slider speed, and enjoy your "tick 0.5" that way.

pieguy1372 wrote:

If a tick clashes with the rhythm, it shouldn't be there. Also, the last sentence is the opposite of your 1 and 2, or someone liking the tick sound, so shouldn't that be banned under your reasoning?

Most if not all songs have exceptions. What matters is that the 1/2 rhythm is stable.

Edit: I think you misunderstood. Allow me to rephrase that one:
If tick 2 clashes, so you opt for tick 1, you may experience "syncoticks" on sliders that begin on 1/2s. This is usually a sign that tick 2 is correct, but if it isn't, try to place objects more carefully. Tick 0.5 has syncoticks too! It even has them with sliders beginning on 1/1 offbeats, which almost always sounds awful. See my screenshot below.

pieguy1372 wrote:

What if the song has that rhythm? I have a map myself where this is the case and tick rate 0.5 sounded better than anything.

I don't see how this is preferable.
Please link me that map and I will look into a better solution.

That means there's no rhythm, so that moment is unmappable. Consider using a spinner, a break, or just a pause with the object placement.

Stating a song has a steady 1/2 rhythm is a bold statement to make. Some songs divide into thirds, others don't divide at all. Stating that a song has a steady 1/1 rhythm is a basic concept of music theory. If your song doesn't have a 1/1 rhythm to it, but only a 2/1 rhythm (which corresponds to tick 0.5) then your BPM is double what it should be. Divide your BPM by two, double your slider speed, and enjoy your "tick 0.5" that way.

I'm not sure exactly what songs you're considering, but there is a whole gray area in between having a lot of emphasis on a beat and having nothing there. Having no emphasis on a beat doesn't mean there's nothing there, there might be a slow vocal there, a sound coming from 1/1 or 1/2 before with no added emphasis, just a really slow, weak sound, or many other things. Tick rate 1 is too busy for those, but those parts would be mappable. Plus, having no emphasis on a beat doesn't mean that the rest of the song doesn't follow a 1/1, it means that one part in the song doesn't, so the faster BPM is still the right BPM.

Also, for easier diffs, as NatsumeRin said, tick rate 1 would sound too busy even if the song follows a 1/1.

That's basically what I said, only I'm more open to the possibility of patterns which aren't necessarily readable given the music, but still make sense in retrospect. These situations depend on tick reading or memorization, but shouldn't necessarily be outright banned.

It's not good practice IMO to force ticks just to "ensure" that everything is readable. Just because some maps would need ticks for speed changes doesn't mean that they should be forced on all the other maps, especially when it doesn't fit

Most if not all songs have exceptions. What matters is that the 1/2 rhythm is stable.

Edit: I think you misunderstood. Allow me to rephrase that one:
If tick 2 clashes, so you opt for tick 1, you may experience "syncoticks" on sliders that begin on 1/2s. This is usually a sign that tick 2 is correct, but if it isn't, try to place objects more carefully. Tick 0.5 has syncoticks too! It even has them with sliders beginning on 1/1 offbeats, which almost always sounds awful. See my screenshot below.

if tick 2 clashes, it sounds really bad because it's too busy and has ticks that fit to nothing. If tick 1 is used with a 3/2 slider and the tick it puts is out of place, then this is one case I mentioned where tick rate 0.5 sounds way better. If tick rate 1 puts an out of place tick, tick rate 2 will sound even worse because the whole rhythm it creates doesn't fit. >.<

If you're using such a long slider (like in that screenshot) that doesn't call for any ticks, then there's nothing to do besides dealing with the tick, but at least it sounds better than if you used tick rate 1 or higher...

What I mean is if there's an out of place tick even with tick rate 1, then tick rate 2 will sound even worse

Please link me that map and I will look into a better solution.

sorry, I misunderstood what you said, so it doesn't fit your example. However, my map had a slider that started on a 1/4 and lasted 5/4 so tick rate 1 put an out of place tick (though looking back on that, I think a 3/4 slider and another beat might have been better)

Personally, I like tick rate 0.5, it works really well in for me. I've been stuck with tick rate 1 for now, which is fine, but I honestly don't understand why tick rate 2 is supposed to sound like OMGEARGASMIC (joking, obviously) or something o_O I'm pretty sure I've played a couple of maps that have had 0.5 tick rate and I thought it fit perfectly

pieguy, even if the music doesn't specifically ephasize every whole beat, tick 1 will still always hit rythm and basically always sound nice. I really can't think of examples where tick 1 would be "too busy" if the BPM is correct. Because it hits the beats. Always. Ticks are not supposed to emphasize musical cues, they are mostly just keeping a stready rythm. Ticks should usually not fall on heavy beats since they are such minor elements, so them hitting "unemphasized" parts is only natural. It's a way of keeping the rythm going without overemphasizing every beat.
It's not even a loud sound or anything, so it really doesn't disrupt anything and if if you use sliders in really quiet parts with mostly vocals or something you can always silence the ticks.

The music doesn't always keep a constant rhythm, though. Most songs have pauses in the rhythm where having a tick just wouldn't fit, but still something to map to

(And I thought silencing ticks was unrankable for no reason = =... Apparently it's not, but I don't understand why this is unrankable:

Finally, you cannot silence both slider ticks and slider slides together.

However, that's a whole new issue that I'd rather not discuss here)

Basically what Luna said. If the map dominantly follows 1/1 patterns, tick 1 has to make sense because ticks are weaker elements than circles. If there is any rhythm of any kind, there should be sliderticks to uphold it. If the concern is that ticks are too powerful, try lowering the volume or choosing a better sound.

The map I prepared that screenshot from normally uses tick 2. On music which uses tick 1, it's rare for a slider to belong on a red tick.

3/4 and 3/2 sliders having ticks inside them creating a hemiola pattern is a part of the game formula. It's supposed to happen.

pieguy1372, please be honest: Do you just not like ticks at all?

Edit: I retitled your thread. Tick 0.5 is dead and gone. 100% of all arguments in here are for "sliders with no ticks, period." Please continue discussion under this context.

Luna wrote:

pieguy, even if the music doesn't specifically ephasize every whole beat, tick 1 will still always hit rythm and basically always sound nice.

What if I don't think it sounds nice? Man, this is so subjective

Natteke wrote:

Luna wrote:

pieguy, even if the music doesn't specifically ephasize every whole beat, tick 1 will still always hit rythm and basically always sound nice.

What if I don't think it sounds nice? Man, this is so subjective

Then you silence the ticks. They still make musical sense, if you just dislike the tick hitsound that's no reason to remove ticks altogether.

Luna wrote:

Natteke wrote:

What if I don't think it sounds nice? Man, this is so subjective

Then you silence the ticks. They still make musical sense, if you just dislike the tick hitsound that's no reason to remove ticks altogether.

Some people say that is unrankable.

In fact, having 0.5 tick rate sometimes works better than 0 and 1 on easier diffs, because they have a slower pace. Removing ticks in those cases entirely would be kind of odd in cases where they still fit something, but where having 1 would be too fast

However, having just tick rate 0 would be fine especially when it got denied before.

pieguy1372, please be honest: Do you just not like ticks at all?

I'm fine with ticks, but I think they're misused most of the time. I made this thread because I figured that the community would be for keeping it so that it could be useful in some cases, and if you consider only normal users it's 5 for, 3 against currently (and I'm quite sure many more would find it to be useful, as well)

If the map dominantly follows 1/1 patterns, tick 1 has to make sense because ticks are weaker elements than circles.

If there is a part that does not follow 1/1, and is slower and softer than the rest of the song, it will seem out of place in that part.

Also I knew I had heard it was unrankable before. Apparently you can silence ticks as long as the rest of the slider isn't silenced, but as I said I would rather not discuss this here = =//

pieguy1372 wrote:

If the map dominantly follows 1/1 patterns, tick 1 has to make sense because ticks are weaker elements than circles.

If there is a part that does not follow 1/1, and is slower and softer than the rest of the song, it will seem out of place in that part.

Add an example here: imagine you're mapping a Easy/Normal for Evans, what would you do for the 3/4 part?

NatsumeRin wrote:

Add an example here: imagine you're mapping a Easy/Normal for Evans, what would you do for the 3/4 part?

Sakura Hana wrote:

Enphasis on "make sense" for isntance i once was making a mapset in which i required the use of 3/4 triplets, since the music holds and enphasizes those 3/4 triplets a slider would work out nicely, however, since for the most part the most constant instrument was going at 1/2 rythm i was using slider tick rate 2, and the 3/4 sliders had a repeat for the triplet, so it would create a tick very close to the repeat as soon as it reached 1/2, to counter this i silenced ONLY those ticks on those sliders so it wouldn't sound awkward.

So yes i do agree with silencing sliderticks as long as they make sense with the song, if they indeed do clash with the way the slider in question is mapped.

That's what i would do

Blue Dragon wrote:

Some people say that is unrankable.

Read up. It's not.

pieguy1372 wrote:

I'm fine with ticks, but I think they're misused most of the time.

Please explain. I have yet to see a map with its tick rate set too high. These almost always get modded and fixed. (For some reason, the reverse isn't true nearly as often.)

pieguy1372 wrote:

and if you consider only normal users it's 5 for, 3 against currently (and I'm quite sure many more would find it to be useful, as well)

Not everyone views this thread. Your tendency to reject MAT/BAT in your counting is worrying, since they are the players which the community has identified as the most capable modders/mappers with the highest standards.

pieguy1372 wrote:

If there is a part that does not follow 1/1, and is slower and softer than the rest of the song, it will seem out of place in that part.

If there is a part that does not follow 1/1, the BPM is wrong. Following a beat is an elementary musical concept which every song has to follow.

pieguy1372 wrote:

Apparently you can silence ticks as long as the rest of the slider isn't silenced, but as I said I would rather not discuss this here = =//

Then stop talking about it in here?? Create a thread if you must.

NatsumeRin wrote:

Add an example here: imagine you're mapping a Easy/Normal for Evans, what would you do for the 3/4 part?

Tick rate being a property of the music, not the map difficulty, you would continue using the tick rate you used on Hard and Expert.

mm201 wrote:

If there is a part that does not follow 1/1, the BPM is wrong. Following a beat is an elementary musical concept which every song has to follow.

This. Often the reason the ticks clash for one specific part is because you didn't halve the BPM for that part when the music supports it. In other words, if the percussion suddenly has a beat on every other white tick instead of every white tick, then you need to halve the BPM for that specific part so the tick rate's correct for that part (remember to also add an inherited timing section to set the right slider velocity!).

And before you ask, yes, this is rankable, as long as the percussion supports halving the BPM for that part.

Please explain. I have yet to see a map with its tick rate set too high. These almost always get modded and fixed. (For some reason, the reverse isn't true nearly as often.)

Often, I see maps with tick rate 2 where IMO it doesn't fit (in fact, I've only seen one map where tick rate 2 was used well IMO). However, that's a different subject entirely, and it's just my opinion...

Not everyone views this thread. Your tendency to reject MAT/BAT in your counting is worrying, since they are the players which the community has identified as the most capable modders/mappers with the highest standards.

MAT/BATs are more likely to view this thread, and we already know that most of them supported removing it, the idea here is to focus on the community's opinions

Also, I'm quite sure there are a lot of people who support tick rate 0.5 (and/or 0), who haven't viewed this thread.

If there is a part that does not follow 1/1, the BPM is wrong. Following a beat is an elementary musical concept which every song has to follow.

So if there's a song that quite obviously has the right BPM, but it has 4 beats with a pause or a whole section that has a slower pace or feeling? Changing the BPM for that really isn't correct...

Tick rate being a property of the music, not the map difficulty, you would continue using the tick rate you used on Hard and Expert.

It really is not a property of just the music... the feeling of the map is also important, having too many ticks can create too much of a fast feeling in easy/normal diffs >.>

There was one map I made that was a 200BPM Demetori song and I used tick rate 2 along with 2/1 sliders to create a fast feeling, even though the "correct" tick rate under your definition was 1, and it played quite nice (though now I would use other methods to create a fast feeling = =) because it gave a fast feeling...

pieguy1372 wrote:

Also, I'm quite sure there are a lot of people who support tick rate 0.5 (and/or 0), who haven't viewed this thread.

My guess is that a lot of people share the same opinion I have - that is, ambivalence. I'm slightly against it personally, not because I think there's very much application to it, but because I think it's silly to remove a feature that's already in and isn't broken. (You can get tick rate 8 via osuhax, why not remove that too while you're at it?) It's not much of an opinion though, I could care less if it was removed.

mm201 wrote:

NatsumeRin wrote:

Add an example here: imagine you're mapping a Easy/Normal for Evans, what would you do for the 3/4 part?

Tick rate being a property of the music, not the map difficulty, you would continue using the tick rate you used on Hard and Expert.

ok then, based on this assumption, let's use tick 1 for all diffs and find what happens.

Evans is a famous song and i just think we should all know it, but still, in case of any misunderstanding, let's put that 3/4 part's beat here, its:

O..O..O..O..O.O.O..O..O..O..O.O.O

in a Hard/Insane diff, it's easy to just avoid using any sliders longer than 1/1, (also the beats calls you to do so naturally), so maybe you all get something like this, it's totally fine with tick rate 1.


But in a Easy/Normal, i'm pretty sure you can't use 3/4 sliders all the way, then 3/2 becomes a nice beat you could choose, and let's say it may like this:


Let's compare them then:

O..O..O..O..O.O.O..O..O..O..O.O.O ---- original beats.
O...o.O.o...O...O...o.O.o...O...O ----o is the tick

It's totally out of place and not musically correct. Also it's easy to imagine tick rate 2, even worse.

So for songs like Evans, especially in Easy/Normal, ticks would be just annoying. Silence them may help a bit, but they still shows in an incorrect place with incorrect beats. Why not let mappers just use tick 0 for such cases and you don't really lose anything plz? Or you mean musical incorrect is just fine with the ticks?

In that example the ticks will still land on 1/1s and not sound too bad. Also, the ticks would even out if you used tick 2

RandomJibberish wrote:

In that example the ticks will still land on 1/1s and not sound too bad

serious?

Yes? The ticks would follow a constant 1/1 beat which is also in or implied by the music at that point.

RandomJibberish wrote:

In that example the ticks will still land on 1/1s and not sound too bad.

You're overmapping now.

I think this whole issue gets down to "pleasant to the ear or not".

NatsumeRin's opinion is correct if you place higher priority on "how the map plays the hitsounds out".
RandomJibberish's opinion is correct if you view solely on the musical theories.

So I think the issue now is: "Should acoustic appeal be overridden by musical theories, or vice versa."

Yes to tick rate 0.5, for the double BPM song that needed tick rate 1 with normal BPM, maybe allow but discourage tick rate 0.25 as i can provide decent in the 0.5 double BPMs cases.

No to 0 tick rate, there are no song that tick rate 0 fit. And if you find using that yourself, you are probeably doung something wrong.

Section Variable tick rates are the best correction to the problem but they don't want to introduce them.

Most map actually fit tick rate 2, actually. a piano,violin or similiar instrument is mostly adapt to follow ticks. (if you think ticks are drum, you're doing something wrong).
I can SUPPORT 0.5, but Won't support 0

mm201 wrote:

Simply put, you have a different understanding of how ticks work than myself and many of the BAT. Specifically, you think ticks must represent some prominent musical pattern. They don't.

1. Many of the BAT? glad to hear some names. honestly saying, in the previous tick rate 0.5 thread, i also find many of the BAT disagree of remove tick rate 0.5 (you could say it works as tick rate 0)

2. You also said "slidertick is an important feedback for players". An important feedback in a music game, however, doesn't represent anything related to the music, things probably go wrong here plz?

Also, increase slidertick for getting more score is unacceptable if i don't remember it wrong.

Let's just put it this way. The only BAT whose tick rate choice I've disagreed with was Alace. Possibly Andrea and Card, but that was always 1 vs 2.
Sliderticks are "important feedback" just like a metronome is important feedback for a piano player, even if the song they're playing isn't purely 1/1s.

Specifically, you think ticks must represent some prominent musical pattern. They don't. If there's a prominent musical pattern, you should use a hitcircle or a slider head/rebound. Ticks specifically go in places where there isn't a prominent beat and they work like a metronome, marking out the smallest recurrent musical division.

Sliderticks are "important feedback" just like a metronome is important feedback for a piano player, even if the song they're playing isn't purely 1/1s.

This is just making a generalization that is about something that is too specific to be generalized. I don't know about you, but I and many others think that maps should be based on the flow and feeling of the song, which has slow parts, soft parts, pauses, etc... You can't force a constant beat (sound, not unit of time) at every point where a slider is used, the song doesn't always call for it. There might be a pause, a hold, or soft or slow feeling there that makes a constant beat too loud, or too fast. A map shouldn't have a "constant beat" if the song doesn't either. When there's something and it doesn't fit the song, there's something seriously wrong.

Before you say about "creating a better gaming experience", if there's something that doesn't fit the song, it creates a worse experience. For most people, hearing something that doesn't fit is worse than not having a constant metronome going.

If the game was designed to use ticks in the way you want to use them, they wouldn't be used for scoring.

That's like saying you should use a beat at every 1/2 for the sake of "keeping a constant metronome" instead of where they fit the song >.>

since many maps will keep on coming out which use ticks in this way, in no small part because it's the way the game was designed.

most maps I play do not use ticks in that way, and they play a lot better than maps that do. You can't just say "it's wrong to use ticks in this way" because a lot of people find it better to use ticks in this way.

CNF: I don't see a reason to remove something that didn't hurt anyone in 4 years.
deepsea: A rule should be no exception and I can't count how many maps work good with 0.5 tick rate.
ztrot: Yeah I agree I really don't see a need to remove tick rate 0.5 but then again I didn't see a reason to remove catmall sliders
Danggard: there is no real problem with keeping 0.5 as option. I really don't get why you want it removed so hardly...
Ephemeral: i've seen nothing conclusive for total removal of 0.5 tick rate from this thread. keep it as it is and address usage of it on a case by case basis.
and Alace and Andrea as you mentioned.

on the other side you could count the amount of people that totally against tick rate 0.5. it's LESS than the "str 0.5 supporters". SO PLZ DON'T SAY MANY, IT'S LIKE YOU'RE TRYING TO FOOL US.

And to some of the songs, it's not "not purely 1/1s", it's "purely not 1/1s", and how could you find that really fit? (still Evans for example?)

"I don't care" != "I use it". Those quotes from ztrot and Ephemeral represent indifference on the issue. ztrot uses the correct tick rate in any maps of his I've modded. I haven't seen an Ephemeral map in ages.

The decision to remove it wasn't mine anyway.
At the time, the opinion I expressed was that it was a useless setting, but not worth the drama removing it would cause. I would have kept Catmull sliders and other useless things as well.

I don't think it suits any songs. You do. Neither of us are peppy, so neither of us can do anything about it. Why not drop this?

What's a "correct tick rate"?

mm201 wrote:

I don't think it suits any songs. You do.

A general solution for such cases is to leave things there and see what would happen.

mm201 wrote:

Neither of us are peppy, so neither of us can do anything about it. Why not drop this?

Because it's useful sometimes, and we would like to show peppy that.

Natteke wrote:

What's a "correct tick rate"?

the one that divides the beat intuitively.

Well here's a little thought:
Technically if a BPM is right, all slider ticks should land in the correct spots due to appearing on each 1/1, musically if there's an instrument that makes you start a slider on a red tick, then the music will "probably" be right for the slidertick on a red tick as well, if it's not, then there's 2 possibilities, 1) Either the slider itself doesnt fit with the music (i see people use sliders for everything instead of what their original intention is for >_>) or 2) The slider feels correct, but the tick feels out of place, then you can go ahead and silence that single slider tick so it doesnt sound out of place.

Another situation is when a whole section, doesnt feel right at all, then go ahead and ask yourself if it's because the beats seem to be landing on red ticks and sounding awkward, if that's the case you might need a metronome reset instead of a 0.5 tick rate, or is the song so soft that you cant hear any beats on 1/1? assuming the song is still at that same bpm, the sliderticks will be correct, and of course low volume on sliderticks should accompany them just like the rest of the hitsounds, otherwise you might as well use a red line to halve the bpm, if the main beat isnt really landing on a 1/1 rythm but rather a 2/1 rythm instead.

Next situation is when there's an instrument that's faster than the main beat, in this case, normally the use of tick rate 2 is correct, with the exception of swing songs, if there are sections in which said instrument isnt faster, you might consider if the instrument goes at a 1/2 rate for a considerably high enough ammount of time compared to not sounding at a 1/2 rate, and then if that's the case, you might be better off silencing some sliderticks for the softer section, otherwise might as well switch to tick rate 1 instead, in this case also all possible options from the previous situations apply, but in this case being 3/4 sliders rather than 3/2 and obv slower bpm sections on the song.

fwiw i dont see any spot where a 0.5 would fit unless you're actually doubling your bpm already, which is already wrong, and if you dont like the sound of sliderticks, just as mm201 mentioned, play with a skin that silences them, but not enforce it onto players that actually do like it.

mm201 wrote:

Let's just put it this way. The only BAT whose tick rate choice I've disagreed with was Alace. Possibly Andrea and Card, but that was always 1 vs 2.
Sliderticks are "important feedback" just like a metronome is important feedback for a piano player, even if the song they're playing isn't purely 1/1s.

0.5 have sense too actually.
Maybe you have a double BPM map that need 0.5?
The nonsense part is the tick rate 0.

By far, tick rate isn't fastidious, but if the song call for a tick rate 2, why use 0.5?, like the inverse, a song call for a tick rate 0.5, why use 2?
The tick rate should be the one more consistent alone the map ( so using less Tick rate for easier or viceversa is nosense, the reason is "i am following alpha/beta/gamma")

otherwise you might as well use a red line to halve the bpm, if the main beat isnt really landing on a 1/1 rythm but rather a 2/1 rythm instead.

It can't be done, Sakura, it contradict

doubling your bpm already, which is already wrong

halving and doubling bpm can't be done by using different red sections, but can be done on all the song

HakuNoKaemi wrote:

otherwise you might as well use a red line to halve the bpm, if the main beat isnt really landing on a 1/1 rythm but rather a 2/1 rythm instead.

It can't be done, Sakura, it contradict

It can, if the BPM really slow down to half you are allowed to use a red line for it, you're only not allowed to alter slider speed with red lines.

Technically if a BPM is right, all slider ticks should land in the correct spots due to appearing on each 1/1, musically if there's an instrument that makes you start a slider on a red tick, then the music will "probably" be right for the slidertick on a red tick as well, if it's not, then there's 2 possibilities, 1) Either the slider itself doesnt fit with the music (i see people use sliders for everything instead of what their original intention is for >_>) or 2) The slider feels correct, but the tick feels out of place, then you can go ahead and silence that single slider tick so it doesnt sound out of place.

1. what's wrong with just having no tick there, if it doesn't fit?
2. if you silence the slider-slide, you can't do that (but I plan to dispute this later too )

Another situation is when a whole section, doesnt feel right at all, then go ahead and ask yourself if it's because the beats seem to be landing on red ticks and sounding awkward, if that's the case you might need a metronome reset instead of a 0.5 tick rate, or is the song so soft that you cant hear any beats on 1/1? assuming the song is still at that same bpm, the sliderticks will be correct, and of course low volume on sliderticks should accompany them just like the rest of the hitsounds, otherwise you might as well use a red line to halve the bpm, if the main beat isnt really landing on a 1/1 rythm but rather a 2/1 rythm instead.

serious? Using a red line to half the BPM even though the rest of the song has the same BPM is not right because it's just one slow part, it's not a whole different section. Using a red line to set a new offset isn't correct because it's just for one section and the song is still following the old offset, and it won't even make a difference because the sliders and thus the ticks will still be placed in the same position.

You, mm201, and others seem to think that a <1 tick rate will only fit in a 0.5x bpm section, when in fact, it will sometimes fit with a 1.0x bpm section. Please just don't assume that your way of using ticks is the only one that makes sense = =

fwiw i dont see any spot where a 0.5 would fit unless you're actually doubling your bpm already, which is already wrong, and if you dont like the sound of sliderticks, just as mm201 mentioned, play with a skin that silences them, but not enforce it onto players that actually do like it.

that's not the problem, and also quit making it seem like we're insane. The problem is that there are some cases where even using tick rate 1 is too high.

It can, if the BPM really slow down to half you are allowed to use a red line for it, you're only not allowed to alter slider speed with red lines.

well then, why are "hold sliders" banned? Technically there's a very slow pace in a part where they are used, so won't a 0.5x bpm + a 0.5x inherited section (or even a 0.25x bpm) fit?

I don't have a problem with changing the BPM using red lines when the BPM changes.

pieguy1372 wrote:

2. if you silence the slider-slide, you can't do that (but I plan to dispute this later too )

Please use the thread I started to discuss this, but stop trying to veer this one off-topic.

pieguy1372 wrote:

serious? Using a red line to half the BPM even though the rest of the song has the same BPM is not right because it's just one slow part, it's not a whole different section. Using a red line to set a new offset isn't correct because it's just for one section and the song is still following the old offset, and it won't even make a difference because the sliders and thus the ticks will still be placed in the same position.

In the case where there isn't a BPM change, there shouldn't be a tick rate change either, since BPM and tick rate are sister concepts.

pieguy1372 wrote:

your way of using ticks is the only one that makes sense = = the Ouendan game concept was designed for

fix'd.

pieguy1372 wrote:

that's not the problem, and also quit making it seem like we're insane. The problem is that there are some cases where even using tick rate 1 is too high.

Examples?

pieguy1372 wrote:

well then, why are "hold sliders" banned? Technically there's a very slow pace in a part where they are used, so won't a 0.5x bpm + a 0.5x inherited section (or even a 0.25x bpm) fit?

I want to bring back hold sliders. Using BPM changes to accomplish them is an error, but using speed changes to accomplish them currently has bugs. I will work on this once time permits.

In the case where there isn't a BPM change, there shouldn't be a tick rate change either, since BPM and tick rate are sister concepts.

the whole point is, they're really not >< As I said, there are other ways of doing things besides your way...

fix'd.

so it was originally designed that way, and we could start that way as a basis for what we should do, but once more fun could be had in other ways there's no point in staying with the original way = =

And don't try to say that tick rate 0.5/0 supporters are insane or the minority, as NatsumeRin said there are more tick rate 0.5/0 supporters than people who want it gone.

Examples?

see Alace's post ages ago, he had a bunch of them >.<

I want to bring back hold sliders. Using BPM changes to accomplish them is an error, but using speed changes to accomplish them currently has bugs. I will work on this once time permits.

awesome out of curiosity will there still be 1/1 ticks or will we be able to lower the tick rate?

pieguy1372 wrote:

And don't try to say that tick rate 0.5/0 supporters are insane or the minority, as NatsumeRin said there are more tick rate 0.5/0 supporters than people who want it gone.

Might i add that i'm all in for keeping 0.5 and that way people that are happy with 0.5 can use it, while the others that prefer tick rate 1/2 can use it? Everyone's happy that way (inb4 nope), i dont even think the removal was really necessary.

pieguy1372 wrote:

so it was originally designed that way, and we could start that way as a basis for what we should do, but once more fun could be had in other ways there's no point in staying with the original way = =

This causes issues with the structuring of the game. See the above points about sliders not requiring any player action, and speed change readability. (Whether you use it or not, it's an offering the game makes for players to use if they wish.)

pieguy1372 wrote:

And don't try to say that tick rate 0.5/0 supporters are insane or the minority, as NatsumeRin said there are more tick rate 0.5/0 supporters than people who want it gone.

I think that tick 0.5 supporters have a different understanding of how the game works. I would like to work out a solution that has balanced gameplay and satisfies everyone.

pieguy1372 wrote:

awesome out of curiosity will there still be 1/1 ticks or will we be able to lower the tick rate?

The tick rate would remain the same. I would probably need to look into doing something to improve the visual appearance of ticks which are too closely spaced--probably hiding every second one or something like that. Silencing the ticks on these sliders would be expected.

Sakura Hana wrote:

Might i add that i'm all in for keeping 0.5 and that way people that are happy with 0.5 can use it, while the others that prefer tick rate 1/2 can use it? Everyone's happy that way (inb4 nope), i dont even think the removal was really necessary.

^ This.
Ultimately, the wrong tick rate is just a minor annoyance. While it makes me sad to see maps reach ranking with a tick rate I find too low, I can still enjoy it if the map itself is good.
The only thing I saw being important was the speed change readability issue, which only shows up in 1% of maps anyway and is easily solved by removing a slider or choosing a less startling speed change.

This causes issues with the structuring of the game. See the above points about sliders not requiring any player action, and speed change readability. (Whether you use it or not, it's an offering the game makes for players to use if they wish.)

About not needing a player action, as I said hitting , releasing, and hitting again is not such a natural movement, so most players won't do it. About your example, I find that such sliders are not so common, and anyone who uses one likely wouldn't have tick rate 0.5 in the first place

About speed change readability, as I said if a speed change is used well it won't need a tick. Just because some people use ticks to read badly used speed changes, that doesn't mean that it should be forced on everything = =

I think that tick 0.5 supporters have a different understanding of how the game works. I would like to work out a solution that has balanced gameplay and satisfies everyone.

You can't just say that your way is better, because many people prefer the other way ><// If you and others want to satisfy everyone, removing an option is not such a good idea, because it leaves many people unsatisfied (though I know you didn't remove this yourself)

Regarding "balanced gameplay"
-I think that 99% of people won't notice any HP drain difference from 0.5 to 1 = = it will hardly matter because it's quite minor and most people would FC it anyway...
-I, and I'm sure others, think that making a map fit the song creates a more balanced experience than having a "constant rhythm" where it doesn't fit or having an out-of-place tick for 0.0001 extra HP which we won't even need. I recall one case where I had 3 new combos and someone told me to remove it because "it screwed up the hp drain", and I tested it myself and found it was the same whether I had new combos or not.

Ultimately, the wrong tick rate is just a minor annoyance. While it makes me sad to see maps reach ranking with a tick rate I find too low, I can still enjoy it if the map itself is good.

then why not add it? Leaving it out causes a lot of people to be unsatisfied just so some people get their way 100% of the time, and leaving it back in will allow it to be used in cases where it is useful and, as you just said yourself, is only a minor thing for the others = =

In other words, having it would satisfy a lot more people than not having it. I also think that almost everyone agrees that it is quite useful in some cases regardless of whether the person prefers it or not, which in itself should be a reason for it to stay...

Btw, Will the Tick Rate be changeable by sections? it'll really fit more... in all senses... (Talking about Section-based Tick Rates)

to pieguy... Well.mm and SakuraHana didn't want the removal of 0.5 anyway.

HakuNoKaemi wrote:

Btw, Will the Tick Rate be changeable by sections? it'll really fit more... in all senses... (Talking about Section-based Tick Rates)

to pieguy... Well.mm and SakuraHana didn't want the removal of 0.5 anyway.

Actually I like the idea of section-based tick rates.

But the problem is that this can be easily abused by mappers.

Well, actually even mapping is abused now, so that actually shouldn't be a problem.
We're making rules and guidelines to fight abuses, and well, one more guideline won't kill us.

HakuNoKaemi wrote:

Well, actually even mapping is abused now, so that actually shouldn't be a problem.
We're making rules and guidelines to fight abuses, and well, one more guideline won't kill us.

I'm sorry, what?

I worry that tick rate changes would get used by mappers for reasons other than a meter/tempo change in the song, which they shouldn't be. Which would lead to another debate much like this one. I think it's better to keep the genie inside the bottle.

mm201 wrote:

I worry that tick rate changes would get used by mappers for reasons other than a meter/tempo change in the song, which they shouldn't be.

For example, how? And I think it's up to mappers to decide how to approach mapping.

I quote Natteke response to mm.

it's up to mapper how to use features, and it's actually good using guidelines, Modders, MATs and BATs to control the use of them.

ykcarrot wrote:

RandomJibberish wrote:

In that example the ticks will still land on 1/1s and not sound too bad.

You're overmapping now.

My God, that is not what overmapping is. You've been in this community for how long now? If a phrase warrants the use of a long slider, then the ticks will work. If silence is more suitable, then nothing should be mapped. I felt like bringing this up, because I scrolled down and nobody seemed to have made a point of it.

Tick rate has no bearing on how over or undermapped a phrase is. I can use tick rate 4 on a Beginner difficulty and it not be overmapped.

If tick rates constitute mapping then SB sounds do too.

HakuNoKaemi wrote:

it's up to mapper how to use features, and it's actually good using guidelines, Modders, MATs and BATs to control the use of them.

As always, this sounds nice on paper, but it rarely goes according to plan. All it takes is one strong-headed mapper and a lax BAT, or simply a BAT whose tired of all the fighting and pestering, to get an abusive map ranked. Once the precedent is set, more abusive maps will become ranked.

The osu!client is an early line of defense in stopping abusive or broken mapping from becoming ranked.
I don't agree with any of the examples provided, and adding a useless feature with high abuse potential would be a very big mistake.

There are 1/0 ( it tend to infinite if you're wondering ) modders to see if the feature has been badly used, and if a feature is badly used is really seeable.
I'm mostly supporting adding of Tick Rate 0.5 and maybe 0.33 plus 0.25, not tick rate 0 and maybe section based tick rates so you can effectively a map that need them better (Just add an Advanced section in the timing setup panel).

Do not permit map to be ranked in less than 4 days and with less than 8 mods and 8 Stars from different people(or even an higher limit) if you're afraid of misusing. It would've been more needed than removing 0.5 tick rates

mm201 wrote:

HakuNoKaemi wrote:

it's up to mapper how to use features, and it's actually good using guidelines, Modders, MATs and BATs to control the use of them.

As always, this sounds nice on paper, but it rarely goes according to plan. All it takes is one strong-headed mapper and a lax BAT, or simply a BAT whose tired of all the fighting and pestering, to get an abusive map ranked. Once the precedent is set, more abusive maps will become ranked.

The osu!client is an early line of defense in stopping abusive or broken mapping from becoming ranked.
I don't agree with any of the examples provided, and adding a useless feature with high abuse potential would be a very big mistake.

Examples of such abusive maps. please?

Just throwing this in... but isn't "Tick Rate 0" the same as not using a slider in its concept? Also, when 0.5 rates was used often back then, there was maps with difficulties or sets with doubled BPM. If you use the right BPM and/or setup of notes, then Tick Rate 1 shouldn't be much of a problem to use like some think. Not trying to say that this way is 100% perfect, but if mappers don't try to adjust to changes when they need to, then it's only going to cause problems when their mapping style is becoming out of date.

whymeman wrote:

Just throwing this in... but isn't "Tick Rate 0" the same as not using a slider in its concept?

no, a slider gives a "hold" feeling while a circle doesn't...

mm201 wrote:

The osu!client is an early line of defense in stopping abusive or broken mapping from becoming ranked.

abusive? examples please

I don't agree with any of the examples provided, and adding a useless feature with high abuse potential would be a very big mistake.

So, even though the majority of the community wants this and finds there's nothing "abusive" about it, you're denying it based on your own personal opinion?

pieguy1372 wrote:

whymeman wrote:

Just throwing this in... but isn't "Tick Rate 0" the same as not using a slider in its concept?

no, a slider gives a "hold" feeling while a circle doesn't...

Of course the slider has to be "held" to the end, but tickless slider is like just having two or so notes without something in the middle. Also, it would actually dumb the difficulty down for beatmaps set with no ticks (especially when there would be cases for not needing to do so) for the sliders since the player could just click the slider, take a sip of soda without holding the sliderball, then catch the cursor on the ball before it ends.

Also, it's better to think of the wider picture than to assume only for yourself "it won't get abused". If you only think for yourself in these kind of topics, it's only going to make it end badly with no conclusion. Got to think about why these things are being said and try to understand it.

Of course the slider has to be "held" to the end, but tickless slider is like just having two or so notes without something in the middle.

...No, not really I guess you don't understand what I mean by feeling.

Also, it would actually dumb the difficulty down for beatmaps set with no ticks (especially when there would be cases for not needing to do so) for the sliders since the player could just click the slider, take a sip of soda without holding the sliderball, then catch the cursor on the ball before it ends.

I already said that in most cases this isn't really a natural movement. Even in cases such as mm201's example, I've never actually seen an example of such a slider with tick rate 0.5. I assume it's because most of the people who use such a slider wouldn't use tick rate 0.5 anyway...

Also, it's better to think of the wider picture than to assume only for yourself "it won't get abused". If you only think for yourself in these kind of topics, it's only going to make it end badly with no conclusion. Got to think about why these things are being said and try to understand it.

...
I'm not thinking for myself here. I'm quite sure that the majority of the community feels that it won't be abused.

Also, you should think about why we're supporting tick rate 0.5 instead of just assuming that your way is the only one that makes sense.

pieguy1372 wrote:

Of course the slider has to be "held" to the end, but tickless slider is like just having two or so notes without something in the middle.

...No, not really I guess you don't understand what I mean by feeling..

Actually whyme is right, even tho you call it feeling, any player can just click the slider start and end if it has no ticks.

"Not trying to say that this way is 100% perfect, but if mappers don't try to adjust to changes when they need to, then it's only going to cause problems when their mapping style is becoming out of date."

Did you just forgot I said that? Also, another problem that may show up is the use of hold sliders on a beatmap. Since the tickrate would be already pretty low (using 0.5 with a not so fast BPM) , plus with a .5 BPM section combined with it, that would make the slider tickless for a longer period of time.

Actually whyme is right, even tho you call it feeling, any player can just click the slider start and end if it has no ticks.

That's not at all what I mean by feeling. It's a gameplay issue, and for examples like mm201's I agree (unless a tick really doesn't fit there), but in most cases it doesn't matter. In most cases, hitting once, letting go, and hitting again is more counterintuitive than just holding.

whymeman wrote:

"Not trying to say that this way is 100% perfect, but if mappers don't try to adjust to changes when they need to, then it's only going to cause problems when their mapping style is becoming out of date."

Except in this case, there's nothing wrong as is and you all are just forcing it. It causes a problem when the general idea of what makes a "good" map changes, not in cases like this.

Did you just forgot I said that? Also, another problem that may show up is the use of hold sliders on a beatmap. Since the tickrate would be already pretty low (using 0.5 with a not so fast BPM) , plus with a .5 BPM section combined with it, that would make the slider tickless for a longer period of time.

What's wrong with hold sliders? And timing sections don't even change the tick rate Even if they did, having ticks on a hold slider generally doesn't fit anyway.

pieguy1372 wrote:

What's wrong with hold sliders? And timing sections don't even change the tick rate Even if they did, having ticks on a hold slider generally doesn't fit anyway.

Don't bring that up here. It's already been discussed to death. Your feelings are the only thing getting in the way.

whymeman wrote:

"Not trying to say that this way is 100% perfect, but if mappers don't try to adjust to changes when they need to, then it's only going to cause problems when their mapping style is becoming out of date."

2009 http://osu.ppy.sh/s/9538
2011 http://osu.ppy.sh/s/24949

No changes at all, both maps are almost the same. Don't say something you have no idea about.

Sakura Hana wrote:

Actually whyme is right, even tho you call it feeling, any player can just click the slider start and end if it has no ticks.

Actually no, he isn't. Haven't seen anyone doing that during my stay on osu.

I hate when people who don't play or map talk for others like they know something. All your "this would cause" "players gonna abuse" is the most retarded reason. Especially when a person isn't really good in mapping or playing.

Sakura Hana wrote:

Actually whyme is right, even tho you call it feeling, any player can just click the slider start and end if it has no ticks.

They could, but they probably wont. Even now I can play a slider by just clicking the start, ticks, and ends, then not clicking on the other parts. Any other player can do that too. Do they? Nope. Why? Because it's easier to actually follow the path, as the sliders are probably adding to the flow of the cursormovement

I've hit so many hold sliders, moved off the track, realized it's a hold slider, go back on it, and get a 300.

Same thing with tick 0 long sliders.

it's only going to cause problems when their mapping style is becoming out of date.

1. I hope some of you guys could know a bit more of current mapping, about what people likes, and, about "what's a good map"
2. I hope rules are made to serve players or say the majority of the community, give them what they really like, not "accept it or get fucked"
3. I hope maps could develop faster than rules, but it becomes impossible if you can't follow ^

It's shit like this when people who push silly rules are usually the ones who are least experienced

whymeman wrote:

Got to think about why these things are being said and try to understand it.

That's what you never do, dude. Whenever someone is trying to make a point, you always sart your "Stop being childish" and "think about it" shit whitout ever listening to anyone.

Sakura Hana wrote:

Actually whyme is right, even tho you call it feeling, any player can just click the slider start and end if it has no ticks.

This is why we can't have nice things!!!!

Like the other said, you're both wrong. If you think a tickless slider is basically just two notes with something in the middle then I know for a fact you two don't even play this game. Much more feeling goes into it than that when actually playing the map.

NatsumeRin wrote:

1. I hope some of you guys could know a bit more of current mapping, about what people likes, and, about "what's a good map"

There's no accounting for taste.

I think it's a good idea to encourage people to use 1.0 tick rate, and the easiest way to do that is to disable 0.5 in the editor. You can't remove 0.5 tick rate from osu, and I bet anyone good enough to make a map with 0.5 or 0 tick rate knows exactly how to do this, and knows how to do it well or else they wouldn't want to use 0.5 tick rate.

I think you wont be able to hax it either, because it will read it as 1.0 whenever it's below 1.0

The only problem I see with tick 0 is that reading speedups or slowdowns gets harder to read. I don't know about others, but I do look at ticks while playing (maybe that's why I'm not that good at this game). This could bring the "sightreading" thing much further into grey area than it already is imo. Just my 2c.

This is starting to turn into another fight than a debate....

Bashing at other people's styles and saying your own is "perfect" isn't going to get anywhere at all. Opinions won't be heard if you're only going to attack people about the issue than to discuss it. Besides that, there are times when you don't actually need a .5 tick rate if you don't double the BPM or could try reducing it by half to where it equalizes with the main beats.

Also, try to debate on the reasons why you feel it is or is not a good idea.

low tick rate can be abused in many ways:
- Unreadable slider speed changes (not really but whatever)
- Not needing to follow the sliderball (mm201's examples are good enough)
- Lowering combo for the sake of lowering score to go into ranking instead of approval.

Now im gonna leave one thing i said some time ago.
"Even tho there are mapping techniques that are unrankable in 100% of the cases, no mapping technique is rankable in 100% of the cases" <- Anything you use, if you dont use it right, doesnt fit, will get your bubble popped, map unranked, whatever, but that also means, that no matter what, anything we allow has abuse potential, it doesn't matter, which is why modders and Staff are here to control the abuse of mapping techniques in beatmaps.
@NatsumeRin: Good maps? Good mappers? it's all opinion and subjective.

Imo, rules should only restrict mapping to a point when something could potentially break the game, or be outright unplayable (like overlapping objects on the timeline), i dont even know why are we fighting over this, it is silly and makes no sense, we should just come to an agreement that favors everyone...