Guest
home
beatmaps
rankings
community
store
help
forum
  1. Forums
  2. Beatmaps
  3. Mapping Discussion

[Guide] Perfectly symmetrical sliders with Scale by

posted
Total Posts
8
happy30
Featured Artist
2,064 posts
Joined August 2008
Topic Starter
happy30
WARNING:
The result of this guide will be a perfectly symmetrical slider which is OFF-GRID. If you strictly map by grid you might not want to use this.


Step 1:
Set Grid level to 2 to make things easier for you and me

Step 2:
Make with the slider nodes an easy concept, don't mind the slidertrack itself at this point:

make sure you center the slider and that the nodes are symmetrical, use ctrl+ h/j to check.

Step 3:
Select the slider and hit ctrl+shift+s to enter scale by

Step 4:
Try to make the slider bigger till you have the desired lenght of your slider
Let's say I want the slider to end on the next white tick. Scale it to the edge where the slider expands.
Example:

1.007x won't expand it

1.008x will expand it, use scale by 1.008x for your perfectly symmetrical slider
Last edited by happy30 , edited 2 times in total.
those
3,136 posts
Joined November 2010
those
p/1664128

This is what I do. However, people complain how the sliders will be off grid (not that it should make a difference).
D33d
1,697 posts
Joined April 2011
D33d
Or, just move the middle of the slider inwards until it can't go any further. If the end doesn't snap properly by then, then it's either a calculation error or it flat out refuses to work. In that case, if the slider's long and it's noticeably off, a slight (SLIGHT) SV multiplier can force it to work. For example, when one wants to restrict their slider to a specific shape:

RandomJibberish
osu! Alumni
1,833 posts
Joined August 2009
RandomJibberish
Pleasepleaseplease don't do this

Your sliderends won't be grid aligned, which makes placing off centre sliders awkward and aligning complex patterns that involve sliders impossible, and rounding errors will move your points slightly off from where they should be. Nudging points may take a little longer, but you can get much more polished results.
D33d
1,697 posts
Joined April 2011
D33d

RandomJibberish wrote:

Pleasepleaseplease don't do this

Your sliderends won't be grid aligned, which makes placing off centre sliders awkward and aligning complex patterns that involve sliders impossible, and rounding errors will move your points slightly off from where they should be. Nudging points may take a little longer, but you can get much more polished results.
This. Fucking this. I used to rely solely on the scale tool, but it will rape sliders. If one is incapable of resizing a sldier manually, then they should use the scale tool as a guide, before adjusting the points to fit.

One can get away with the scale tool on its own if it's for gigantic sliders, for which manual adjustment would be a huge pain. The imperfections would be barely noticeable and long, complicated sliders tend to have alignment problems which don't seem to be fixable. However, I don't want to see people settling on the scale tool for basic arcs, waves et cetera.
mm201
osu! Alumni
4,495 posts
Joined August 2008
mm201
Step 1: Create a messy slider.


Step 2: Make the control points symmetric using Ctrl+H. Move it to the X axis.


Step 3: Open Scale By and deselect Scale X axis


Step 4: Scale until the endpoint aligns with the grid.


Step 5: Jossle the control points by individual pixels until it's perfect when you use Ctrl+H. This also prevents it from changing when you save/load.


With arcs, this is probably more work than skipping steps 3 and 4, but it's useful for making longer wave sliders have the right length.
D33d
1,697 posts
Joined April 2011
D33d
I wouldn't even bother scaling the ends to align with the grid. I prefer to scale a little bit as an approximation and then move every point manually. It makes things so much easier for me.

Speaking of arcs, I have a quick question that's unrelated: Do you find it best to make the points of an arc as close to equidistant as you can, or does that only really work with up to four points?
those
3,136 posts
Joined November 2010
those

D33d wrote:

I wouldn't even bother scaling the ends to align with the grid. I prefer to scale a little bit as an approximation and then move every point manually. It makes things so much easier for me.

Speaking of arcs, I have a quick question that's unrelated: Do you find it best to make the points of an arc as close to equidistant as you can, or does that only really work with up to four points?
Depends on your arclength
Please sign in to reply.

New reply

0
1 / 8