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.

pieguy1372 wrote:

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...

This is what leads me to believe you (and tick 0.5 users, more generally) just plain don't like ticks. I've found tick rate 2 is virtually never misused, because the BAT are very good at catching and stopping a too-high tick rate.

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. 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.

If you find it unpleasing when ticks are used in this way, I really think you should set a skin to silence them, 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.

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

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.