I can't see this being so strictly enforced. Your 4:35 drain time map is probably fine. Requiring such a map to get two bubbles and go for approval would be downright silly.
forum
Rule: The maximum draining time for a map is 4 1/2 minutes.
posted
Total Posts
56
I can already think of one map that breaks this rule that has no problem: http://osu.ppy.sh/s/23636
In other words, map length doesn't have any effect on quality, and besides most long maps will have too high score anyway so there's no point in putting such a rule...
In other words, map length doesn't have any effect on quality, and besides most long maps will have too high score anyway so there's no point in putting such a rule...
Aitai doesn't even break the rule, draining time =!= total song durationpieguy1372 wrote:
I can already think of one map that breaks this rule that has no problem: http://osu.ppy.sh/s/23636
In other words, map length doesn't have any effect on quality, and besides most long maps will have too high score anyway so there's no point in putting such a rule...
And 4 1/2 minutes of draining time is really generous already, it's pretty hard to make a decently difficult and enjoyable map with 4 1/2 mins drain that doesn't exceed the score limit~
/E: I still think this rule is somewhat redundant because of the score limit.
pieguy1372 wrote:
I can already think of one map that breaks this rule that has no problem: http://osu.ppy.sh/s/23636
In other words, map length doesn't have any effect on quality, and besides most long maps will have too high score anyway so there's no point in putting such a rule...
Draining Time: 3:56actually...
they could make something like the score: 16mil guideline limit, 20mil rules limit.
in that case the draining time: 4:30 guideline limit, 6:00 rules limit
IIRC the rule considers from the first note to the last, which is 4:49 - the first few seconds with no notes, > 4:30... (correct me if I'm wrong)
Such cases are rare, but there is no reason to disallow them.
Such cases are rare, but there is no reason to disallow them.
The rule talks about draining time, which is only the part where life drain actually occurs. So you need to subtract intro, outro and breaks.
Oh oops, sorry.
I still don't see any reason to disallow such cases just based on length, however
I still don't see any reason to disallow such cases just based on length, however
losing a really long song it's like a losing a marathon after having quasi-FCed it. Plus long song could be tiring, is you don't put breaks often
If it has >4 1/2 minutes of draining time and still stays below 18M max score (or whatever the limit will be), it's probably easy/relaxing enough to not be incredibly tiring. Of course it's stupid if the hardest/trickiest parts are all at the end because it wastes a lot of time, but modders could just point out such cases because it falls under the "common sense" catergory.
So yeah, I pretty much see no real need for this rule when we already have the score limit...
So yeah, I pretty much see no real need for this rule when we already have the score limit...
Adding on what Luna said, if you have 4:30+ drain time and you're not exceeding max score, you're probably mapping a difficulty that's already easy enough, if you add harder diffs they will most likely exceed such max score and then your mapset will end up being hybrid anyways, so i dont see why not just map the hardest diff and throw it for Approval rather than going through the even more annoying process of approving 1 map and ranking the rest.
Mashiro Mito
If we are going with the score limit, I think it is fair. I can safely map my hard diff with no worry at all. It is about 1/3 drafted and it is only about 1.5m score 
So hopefully this rule is modified or removed so that it can be more aligned with/lean towards the score limit.
So hopefully this rule is modified or removed so that it can be more aligned with/lean towards the score limit.
How about if the mapper IS mapping the hardest diff for a very relaxing song that is over 4~5 mininutes long but the score doesn't exceed the maximum cap?Sakura Hana wrote:
Adding on what Luna said, if you have 4:30+ drain time and you're not exceeding max score, you're probably mapping a difficulty that's already easy enough, if you add harder diffs they will most likely exceed such max score and then your mapset will end up being hybrid anyways, so i dont see why not just map the hardest diff and throw it for Approval rather than going through the even more annoying process of approving 1 map and ranking the rest.
My point is, deleting this rule while retaining the maximum score cap rule will still work.
Sometimes you already have an easier diff and then while mapping the hardest one (with some fitting jumps/streams that shouldn't be in an Easy/Normal diff) you don't get through the actual 18m max score. Why approve the map then?Sakura Hana wrote:
Adding on what Luna said, if you have 4:30+ drain time and you're not exceeding max score, you're probably mapping a difficulty that's already easy enough, if you add harder diffs they will most likely exceed such max score and then your mapset will end up being hybrid anyways, so i dont see why not just map the hardest diff and throw it for Approval rather than going through the even more annoying process of approving 1 map and ranking the rest.
If you want to map a six minute song and are trying to cut it down to 4:30 when really you'd like to map 5 minutes or more, just map what you're comfortable with and go for approval if necessary. Adding enormous, unnecessary breaks for rankability's sake is silly.
That said, I'm okay with maps that haven't been artificially cut down, go a little over and keep well below the recommended score - this should be okay as a guideline as long as the score rule is strictly enforced.
That said, I'm okay with maps that haven't been artificially cut down, go a little over and keep well below the recommended score - this should be okay as a guideline as long as the score rule is strictly enforced.
Lunah_old
The approve section should be for really long beatmaps, 6+ minutes beatmaps and marathons
the max time should be moved to 5 - 5:30 minutes in my eyes, having a max score of 20.000.000 (or 22.000.000) intead of 18.000.000 does affect the score so much ? you're not going to get 10000000000000 ranks for 2-4 milions.
there are a lot of songs long more than 4:30 minutes, people don't map only anime openings.
the max time should be moved to 5 - 5:30 minutes in my eyes, having a max score of 20.000.000 (or 22.000.000) intead of 18.000.000 does affect the score so much ? you're not going to get 10000000000000 ranks for 2-4 milions.
there are a lot of songs long more than 4:30 minutes, people don't map only anime openings.
Well i was thinking about different options and their pros and cons
Option #1 Force entire mapset for approval if the drain time is over 4 1/2 minutes on a single difficulty.
Pros: - Would encourage mappers to mapping the whole song on all difficulties.
Cons: - Would discourage mappers from making easier difficulties.
Option #2 Force approval only on the diffs that exceed the drain time.
Pros: - Would encourage mappers to get easier diffs to go for ranking (hybrid) since they are generally played more and enjoyed by more players
Cons: - Would discourage mappers from mapping lower tiered difficulties completely
Option #3 - Throw down score rule and focus only on max score:
Pros: - Would encourage mappers to include lower tiered difficulties to aim for a Ranked (Hybrid) mapset
- Would encourage mappers to fully map the lower tiered difficulties
Cons: - None?
So i'd say, yeah probably remove this rule, and focus only on max score.
Option #1 Force entire mapset for approval if the drain time is over 4 1/2 minutes on a single difficulty.
Pros: - Would encourage mappers to mapping the whole song on all difficulties.
Cons: - Would discourage mappers from making easier difficulties.
Option #2 Force approval only on the diffs that exceed the drain time.
Pros: - Would encourage mappers to get easier diffs to go for ranking (hybrid) since they are generally played more and enjoyed by more players
Cons: - Would discourage mappers from mapping lower tiered difficulties completely
Option #3 - Throw down score rule and focus only on max score:
Pros: - Would encourage mappers to include lower tiered difficulties to aim for a Ranked (Hybrid) mapset
- Would encourage mappers to fully map the lower tiered difficulties
Cons: - None?
So i'd say, yeah probably remove this rule, and focus only on max score.
This rule doesn't really make any sense since it's really usual that very long maps have to aim to approval anyways because of max. score. I don't think this rule is necessary and it only would be if the max. score rule was removed. I'm personally against both rules since I fail to see why maps with very high scores MUST be approved or why long maps MUST be approved but w/e.
I think approval should be used to rank maps that just break with pretty much every guideline/rule out there instead of just being the yard used for very long/high scored maps. :c
I think approval should be used to rank maps that just break with pretty much every guideline/rule out there instead of just being the yard used for very long/high scored maps. :c
Mashiro Mito
I think the score was intended to measure how skilled a player is, not how many/long the maps are. Therefore having tiring or long maps which does not involve much skills should not deserve such high score. if you played every single map(hard to not so insane diff) that is on osu! server you would end up in about #500 at least. I think Rank also measures how good the player is.Wishy22 wrote:
This rule doesn't really make any sense since it's really usual that very long maps have to aim to approval anyways because of max. score. I don't think this rule is necessary and it only would be if the max. score rule was removed. I'm personally against both rules since I fail to see why maps with very high scores MUST be approved or why long maps MUST be approved but w/e.
I think approval should be used to rank maps that just break with pretty much every guideline/rule out there instead of just being the yard used for very long/high scored maps. :c
But this definitely contradicts with the approval maps, which does not count towards the ranked score and usually are harder to play. I am quite lost by the definition of the score and rank system. What do they indicate?
rank and score do indicate the "general" level of ability and how much the user played mostly..
You can actually put #1 and #100 on the same level of ability, that's why I mentioned "general".
You can actually put #1 and #100 on the same level of ability, that's why I mentioned "general".
I would say #2 to #100
The last thing you said is what I meant. Marathon maps are exceptions since they aren't even hard but just boring and ridiculously long, but there are maps like those Dragonforce Lesjuh ones that are not only damn good, but really hard and not having that score counted toward your ranked score is ridiculous. I mean marathon maps should not count but extremely hard maps SHOULD count even if they have no easy/normal/hard/insane diff NO MATTER THE SCORE OF THE DURATION, if you can't play them because you're not enough then you can't get the score from that map and that's it.Mashiro Mito wrote:
I think the score was intended to measure how skilled a player is, not how many/long the maps are. Therefore having tiring or long maps which does not involve much skills should not deserve such high score. if you played every single map(hard to not so insane diff) that is on osu! server you would end up in about #500 at least. I think Rank also measures how good the player is.Wishy22 wrote:
This rule doesn't really make any sense since it's really usual that very long maps have to aim to approval anyways because of max. score. I don't think this rule is necessary and it only would be if the max. score rule was removed. I'm personally against both rules since I fail to see why maps with very high scores MUST be approved or why long maps MUST be approved but w/e.
I think approval should be used to rank maps that just break with pretty much every guideline/rule out there instead of just being the yard used for very long/high scored maps. :c
But this definitely contradicts with the approval maps, which does not count towards the ranked score and usually are harder to play. I am quite lost by the definition of the score and rank system. What do they indicate?
Plus there are tons of approved maps that aren't even THAT hard or that long, for examples this: http://osu.ppy.sh/s/22720. That map isn't either very hard (any somewhat good player can FC in one play) or that long, but it is still ranked because "score is too high and not having easy diffs". If score is "too high" it shouldn't really matter at all, I never understood the reason for that. And if the map can't be played by not-good players, I'm sorry for them but they won't be able to get any score or rank from that map until they get good, which would even make the ranking system a little more accurate.
Rank and score mean absolutely NOTHING, you can be ranked over 1k and still be a really good player, and yeah there are tons of low ranked playes that can easily kick top #50 player's ass if not even top #10. There is a reason why there is something called rankwhoring.
Well, it wasn't before.. but now #1 is the real #1 of Osu! (cookiezi)
There's also people who play offline or spun out, which skews the ranking system tremendously.Wishy22 wrote:
There is a reason why there is something called rankwhoring.
It should be easy to make a 7 minute 18 million hard and leave insane as approval, which is why this rule exists.
I do agree with you somewhat on approval. 2B maps project, even broken as it is should be approvable.
Mashiro Mito
I think most of us here agrees the length rule should be removed and focus more on the score system. There are still some good insights here about score systems, but I think it does not belong here anymore.
Although... It is much more easier to talk about the score system after we have reached consensus that this rule should be removed. Then we can combine the length vs diff vs score problem in another(possibly new) thread.
I want to know if there is still someone who disagree removing this rule. If not, then I think we are done here
Although... It is much more easier to talk about the score system after we have reached consensus that this rule should be removed. Then we can combine the length vs diff vs score problem in another(possibly new) thread.
I want to know if there is still someone who disagree removing this rule. If not, then I think we are done here
Iirc, the score limit (which used to be lower) was there to control the length of the beatmaps, whether the score was good enough for the map or not was left at the BAT discression
Old Criteria wrote:
General score guidelines:
<10m = Great!
10-12m = Can the mp3 be cut to make it shorter and more fun? if not, then check with any experienced BAT but not peppy.
12-20m = Same as above, and check difficulty is hard enough that score is not so attainable.
20m+ = rare cases, for insane difficulties which have max attainable scores <=15m
1) I thought that in the old criteria, it was 18mill and not 20mi---- when did that get changed. How does that control the length of a beatmap.Sakura Hana wrote:
Iirc, the score limit (which used to be lower) was there to control the length of the beatmaps, whether the score was good enough for the map or not was left at the BAT discressionOld Criteria wrote:
General score guidelines:
<10m = Great!
10-12m = Can the mp3 be cut to make it shorter and more fun? if not, then check with any experienced BAT but not peppy.
12-20m = Same as above, and check difficulty is hard enough that score is not so attainable.
20m+ = rare cases, for insane difficulties which have max attainable scores <=15m
I think length rules need to considered separately from score too.
It becomes annoying to the player when they try to FC a really long map and combobreak right at the very end. It's already very annoying with 3-minute maps, so there should be some limit placed on that.
It becomes annoying to the player when they try to FC a really long map and combobreak right at the very end. It's already very annoying with 3-minute maps, so there should be some limit placed on that.
I think length rules need to considered separately from score too.Well, this isn't a good reason. actually.
It becomes annoying to the player when they try to FC a really long map and combobreak right at the very end. It's already very annoying with 3-minute maps, so there should be some limit placed on that.
You have possibilities to Combobreak even in 30 seconds song
General score guidelines:it say 18mil in the draft
<10m = Great!
10-12m = Can the mp3 be cut to make it shorter and more fun? if not, then check with any experienced BAT but not peppy.
12-20m = Same as above, and check difficulty is hard enough that score is not so attainable.
20m+ = rare cases, for insane difficulties which have max attainable scores <=15m
Mashiro Mito
I believe that the song should not be played only once and FC it. Playing multiple times and FC it while enjoying the music(or the map) should be the way to go.mm201 wrote:
I think length rules need to considered separately from score too.
It becomes annoying to the player when they try to FC a really long map and combobreak right at the very end. It's already very annoying with 3-minute maps, so there should be some limit placed on that.
I believe osu! should be fun and a relaxing game. I personally do not care about combo-breaking. I think only pro players(or those people want perfection) does that, and they should be focused until the very end of the map if they don't want break to break the combo. Practice makes perfection.
Thing is most decent players can FC almost ever map in the maximum difficulty possible in a single play, and somewhat pro players can even FC with mods in many cases. mm201 means that some maps are maybe 12 minutes long and even when they are not that hard they end up being frustrating since chances are you gonna have some really stupid random miss somewhere. Maps that are extremely long are usually underplayed since they are a pain to FC, there are exceptions but normal very long maps are boring which is why they may be approved.
Mashiro Mito
If a player can FC a map in the maximum difficulty, in a single play, Don't you think they should be able to do it when they have the easy one but only longer? I believe if it is 12 minutes and not exceed the maximum score, the map will be extremely easy. I think 12 minutes is the extreme case. Besides, Random misses are good(well, not for players), since they prevent people from ranking up too fast which is reverent to the score rule.Wishy22 wrote:
Thing is most decent players can FC almost ever map in the maximum difficulty possible in a single play, and somewhat pro players can even FC with mods in many cases. mm201 means that some maps are maybe 12 minutes long and even when they are not that hard they end up being frustrating since chances are you gonna have some really stupid random miss somewhere. Maps that are extremely long are usually underplayed since they are a pain to FC, there are exceptions but normal very long maps are boring which is why they may be approved.
If you do miss, finish playing the song and try again later. I don't think a map's purpose was just to get rank, play once and through it out.
I do not want to get in to details about if a map is boring or not. As our rank gets higher and higher, diffs like hard or sometimes insane may be boring to us. But this does not implies the rest of the osu! community won't find it challenging. I really like how some players uses shortcuts to level up. and I believe this is one of them for mid-level players. While highly skilled player might just ignore this map, but hey, they are not getting those scores! mid-level player might finish them and get the score and rank up
Oh btw, there is an achievement(wink* wink*) is reverent to what I am saying
have fun on that one! (I didn't get it too )Actually I'm sure most people really do just play a map once and FC it. Then they don't play it ever again. (besides the occasional multi or random map when bored)
Plus even if it's easier but longer map, there's a chance of missing still. Maybe boredom, tired, occasional "your mouse/tablet being a bitch"
Plus even if it's easier but longer map, there's a chance of missing still. Maybe boredom, tired, occasional "your mouse/tablet being a bitch"
Mashiro Mito
No wonder I see people just failed when their combo break, even if they are pros in MultiRaging Bull wrote:
Actually I'm sure most people really do just play a map once and FC it. Then they don't play it ever again. (besides the occasional multi or random map when bored)
Plus even if it's easier but longer map, there's a chance of missing still. Maybe boredom, tired, occasional "your mouse/tablet being a bitch"
So we should still keep this rule just to prevent people from having those random things? Isn't that an excuse to avoid long maps just for the sake of FC or I have more random things than you so I hope this map will not get ranked.
Basically it's tiring to play long maps, specially if they wont give you much score, And if they do, they'll probably be over the max score rule anyways, recommendation is to cut down the song and map only until a certain portion, now if the mapper still wants to go with the map and get it ranked, then go ahead... but yeah good luck getting modders for it because modders also hate long maps (As i see from most queues).
Mashiro Mito
That is a nice insight from BATSakura Hana wrote:
now if the mapper still wants to go with the map and get it ranked, then go ahead... but yeah good luck getting modders for it because modders also hate long maps (As i see from most queues).
It is still up the the mapper tho. I just don't want mapper to stop mapping good song just because of this limit(and aim for ranked).
I felt like I'm an enemy of both the modders and BAT now.
I dont mind the length of the maps i modded, and never have, but i know some modders do
we have both a rule and a guideline on this topic. I think we should get rid of the rule and keep the guideline. I feel most of the cases would be met by the max score rule and the others would be up to the BAT/MAT
This needs to be discussed. I'm fine with making this a guideline, as long maps tend to have high max score and that falls under another rule. Your thoughts ?
Wasn't it peppy who said that 4:30 was the absolute maximum? unless im thinking of another ruleOdaril wrote:
This needs to be discussed. I'm fine with making this a guideline, as long maps tend to have high max score and that falls under another rule. Your thoughts ?
Marking this as amended then.
What change did you make then O.oOdaril wrote:
Marking this as amended then.
The old one was 4 minutes.Sakura Hana wrote:
What change did you make then O.oOdaril wrote:
Marking this as amended then.
Weird from the OP It seemed like it had always been 4 1/2.
Mashiro Mito
Just read the draft or the list of Current rules and guidelines on the pending beatmaps forums: viewtopic.php?f=6&t=75882
Mashiro Mito
yeah, since peppy is planning to merge the approved and ranked maps... I don't think it matters anymore... but before that happen...
viewtopic.php?p=946470#p946470
contradiction. but the latter one is 8 month ago and the first one is about 4 month. so...
viewtopic.php?f=4&t=65715&st=0&sk=t&sd=a&start=15peppy wrote:
To clarify, I propose merging approved into ranked. Some exceptions may have to be made, but most could be waived as "previous standards".
viewtopic.php?p=946470#p946470
contradiction. but the latter one is 8 month ago and the first one is about 4 month. so...
I'd actually like peppy to elaborate on that statement (is it actually planned or just an offhand thought? etc.). It's been getting thrown around a lot but it's not really worth much on its own.
I still think it's better to just cap the length insted of the score, considering score doesn't matter much nowadays (and even less in the future) but map length is to make players not get tired from playing long maps.
especially when you're deleting approved cateory? (can't say that word ._.)
Now every mapset will be going for ranking, only the mapsets that had a bubble at any point before this post (including currently bubbled ones) will be excempt from this. As of this the rule of maximum draining time will be changed into a Minimum Marathon Length.
Marathon maps will be able to ignore the difficulty spread rule. Marathon maps are anything that is 6 minutes or longer, you may be given some leniency but ultimately is up to the Ranking BAT
This will not be implemented till the two map types are merged.
Yeah however, the current marathon minimum time will remain, approval maps need to meet >18 max score AND >6 minute time limit to be approved.ztrot wrote:
This will not be implemented till the two map types are merged.
peppy mentioned that if anyone has any complaints about this to forward that to him.