Oh no, this silly prejudice again. And ranking is not a bad thing!ziin wrote:
you guys care way too much about ranking rather than making the best possible map you can make.
forum
Tick rate 0.x
posted
Total Posts
174
because none of it matters at all and 0.5x can never be removed, and you can make an effective tick rate 0 map if you want to easily. There's absolutely nothing stopping you except yourself.yongtw123 wrote:
What if it is exactly for making a better beatmap that we argue about the why the and the how of sliders?ziin wrote:
you guys care way too much about ranking rather than making the best possible map you can make.
In situations where tick 0.5 is desired, you should always be able to half the BPM and create the same effect with tick 1.
In situations where tick 0 is desired, the problem is of a cosmetic nature and should be addressed by silencing the ticks.
(I've said this a few times already but I just thought you could use a refresher.)
I've retitled the thread, as the subject has shifted back to include 0.5 and some new variants.
In situations where tick 0 is desired, the problem is of a cosmetic nature and should be addressed by silencing the ticks.
(I've said this a few times already but I just thought you could use a refresher.)
I've retitled the thread, as the subject has shifted back to include 0.5 and some new variants.
Also, unless I'm mistaken, tick rate 0.5x can't be removed completely due to past ranked maps.mm201 wrote:
In situations where tick 0.5 is desired, you should always be able to half the BPM and create the same effect with tick 1.
In situations where tick 0 is desired, the problem is of a cosmetic nature and should be addressed by silencing the ticks.
(I've said this a few times already but I just thought you could use a refresher.)
I've retitled the thread, as the subject has shifted back to include 0.5 and some new variants.
OBJECTION!!!mm201 wrote:
In situations where tick 0.5 is desired, you should always be able to half the BPM and create the same effect with tick 1.
In situations where tick 0 is desired, the problem is of a cosmetic nature and should be addressed by silencing the ticks.
(I've said this a few times already but I just thought you could use a refresher.)
I've retitled the thread, as the subject has shifted back to include 0.5 and some new variants.
This quite much go versus what you said before: you can't just use the wrong timing to use tick rate 0.5 (vividly said by you before).
I saw actually no valid response on why it shouldn't be accepted(that's the discussion i was literally "offtopicking" here)
That's what I'm saying here--if tick 0.5 actually fits, half BPM should also logically make sense.
hey man,mm201 wrote:
That's what I'm saying here--if tick 0.5 actually fits, half BPM should also logically make sense.
you meant just because of a fitting tick rate I should change BPM of a song?
I always think osu! is a game that respects the rules of music more than the rules made by itself ehe
Pretty sure what mm means is that I'd 0.5 does fit, the bpm is double what it should be. 0.5 doesn't make any sense on a correct bpm as there should always be a pulse on white ticks.
there should always be a pulse on white ticks.Always/Rules means 100%, which is NOT TRUE.
Or, let's say, it's not true for the majority.
Pretty much not rofl.RandomJibberish wrote:
there should always be a pulse on white ticks.
Tick Rate 0.5 have a pulse on downbeats or upbeats. So why you are saying that it doesn't fit music?
The entire definition of "Beats Per Minute" implies there are -beats- there. If tick 0.5 makes ticks fit the beat perfectly
well your bpm is doubled.
Of course, many songs have slowdowns and half-cours, but if 0.5 is more accurate to the beat more often than not, then clearly there is some actual bpm changes going on and you'll have a logical reason to halve the bpm during that section.
well your bpm is doubled.
Of course, many songs have slowdowns and half-cours, but if 0.5 is more accurate to the beat more often than not, then clearly there is some actual bpm changes going on and you'll have a logical reason to halve the bpm during that section.
Well, music per se isn simply based on a total of beats-per-second, there can be a syncopated song or even some fast song where you have a majority of pulses on downbeats ( yet some 1/4 notes with that same BPM ) will you just half the BPM and use the wrong BPM?
If someone want to have the tick only on heavier beats, you say him to halve the BPM if he really want to use it, making him fuck up his map and timing for just an idiocy?
Tick Rate 0.5 are really usable in front off the tick rate 0 and yet still treated the same. While that depend on mapping style.
Tick Rate 0 is pretty much usable by SIMPLY silencing the slidertick, moreover a tick rate of 0.5 means he'll only want to use it on downbeats and it actually can make much more sense than anything, as the using depend on Mapper Style and Song.
Can't recall absurd song using Tick Rate 0, can recall song having tick rate 0.5 rhythmn
If someone want to have the tick only on heavier beats, you say him to halve the BPM if he really want to use it, making him fuck up his map and timing for just an idiocy?
Tick Rate 0.5 are really usable in front off the tick rate 0 and yet still treated the same. While that depend on mapping style.
Tick Rate 0 is pretty much usable by SIMPLY silencing the slidertick, moreover a tick rate of 0.5 means he'll only want to use it on downbeats and it actually can make much more sense than anything, as the using depend on Mapper Style and Song.
Can't recall absurd song using Tick Rate 0, can recall song having tick rate 0.5 rhythmn
Topic Starter
This isn't true, and I'm quite sure that the majority agree it's not true.RandomJibberish wrote:
there should always be a pulse on white ticks.
Just no. As I said, the unit of time called a beat is not the same as the sound called a beat.Shiirn wrote:
The entire definition of "Beats Per Minute" implies there are -beats- there. If tick 0.5 makes ticks fit the beat perfectly
well your bpm is doubled.
Our definitions seem to be different, or you're misunderstanding me. (Or vice-versa)
Skipping beats in music is a perfectly normal, if outright common, practice.
Skipping every other "beat" for the next 10 measures isn't skipping beats, it's an outright beat rate change.
Skipping beats in music is a perfectly normal, if outright common, practice.
Skipping every other "beat" for the next 10 measures isn't skipping beats, it's an outright beat rate change.
May I redirect your attention to:
It's not like any of this would convince peppy to bring 0.5 back anyway.
Convincing anyone which of these two things ticks are supposed to represent could very well be impossible. I suggest we drop it.mm201 wrote:
"Sound" and "pulse" are not always the same concept. A song can potentially have no sound on a whole beat, but still have a pulse there.
This whole philosophical argument has to deal with whether ticks represent pulses or sounds.
It's not like any of this would convince peppy to bring 0.5 back anyway.
I think that people need to read the musical theory thread thoroughly, before even touching the editor.
DEEDIT: It has been mentioned already, so I'll say it again: slider ticks are generally timed to the smallest division of music that doesn't sound cluttered. While having ticks on the backbeat or strong beats might seem like a cute idea and one which makes at least a modicum of musical sense, it makes things very sparse. It just doesn't feel right and takes some of the energy out of a beatmap.
This thread has been very circular, so I think that we should be able to agree on tick rate 1 being applicable in pretty much every case, with time halving being usable when necessary. Obviously, there is nothing to prevent dodgy tick rates being hacked into maps, but mappers should prepare to be berated for it.
DEEDIT: It has been mentioned already, so I'll say it again: slider ticks are generally timed to the smallest division of music that doesn't sound cluttered. While having ticks on the backbeat or strong beats might seem like a cute idea and one which makes at least a modicum of musical sense, it makes things very sparse. It just doesn't feel right and takes some of the energy out of a beatmap.
This thread has been very circular, so I think that we should be able to agree on tick rate 1 being applicable in pretty much every case, with time halving being usable when necessary. Obviously, there is nothing to prevent dodgy tick rates being hacked into maps, but mappers should prepare to be berated for it.
May You bring me an example of invisible pulse?mm201 wrote:
May I redirect your attention to:Convincing anyone which of these two things ticks are supposed to represent could very well be impossible. I suggest we drop it.mm201 wrote:
"Sound" and "pulse" are not always the same concept. A song can potentially have no sound on a whole beat, but still have a pulse there.
This whole philosophical argument has to deal with whether ticks represent pulses or sounds.
It's not like any of this would convince peppy to bring 0.5 back anyway.
There's no such thing, and if there were, it was a good reason to bring it on with Tick Rate 0 ( still "invisible" ). If it have no sound and it will have no pulse - still.
Then it goes to 0.5 having an actual pulse-related matter. A pulse every 2/1 it's still related to the mapping style of someone (Using slider in certain places and so). No pulse aren't related to the style of someone.
May You bring me an example of invisible pulse?Again, pulse is related to the music as a fundamental element and is not an arbitrary thing. Just set the tick rate to the beat or quavers and there would be no problem with such a basic issue.
There's no such thing, and if there were, it was a good reason to bring it on with Tick Rate 0 ( still "invisible" ). If it have no sound and it will have no pulse - still.
Then it goes to 0.5 having an actual pulse-related matter. A pulse every 2/1 it's still related to the mapping style of someone (Using slider in certain places and so). No pulse aren't related to the style of someone.
Anyway, Tick Rate is related to mapping style moreover, and depending on have you map and what you want to map, you make a better work using a certain tick rate.
Anyway, there's no such pulse in a song without sounds.
Anyway, there's no such pulse in a song without sounds.
This is why your arguement is fundamentally flawed.HakuNoKaemi wrote:
Tick Rate is related to mapping style moreover
Tick rate should be based off the song, not the mapper. Always.
Besides, you were arguing about how tick rate functionally does not matter in the song, or that there are times where it can be made whatever. Then you pull out the "mapping style" card?
Tick rate 0.5 was removed and tick rate 0.0 will never be added. Ticks are part of the game. This thread has lost its interest.