Didn't I say 'star difficulty does not work so well with Taiko'? Whether difficulty spread is good or not will be decided manually.
forum
[Suggestion] Taiko maps Difficulty spread
posted
Total Posts
79
Topic Starter
When I said star difficulty I mean't the way authentic taiko songs are ranked in taiko games, not osu!.lepidopodus wrote:
Didn't I say 'star difficulty does not work so well with Taiko'? Whether difficulty spread is good or not will be decided manually.
Well then I need to explain about difficulty system that TnT is using, which we are based on. Judging from those posts I don't think guys are know this accurately.
Can you please do so? Videos would probably help you a lot with explaining this.lepidopodus wrote:
Well then I need to explain about difficulty system that TnT is using, which we are based on. Judging from those posts I don't think guys are know this accurately.
We traditionally followed old TnT scale of difficulty. Since influence of 'authentist' weakens these days, so revised TnT scale wasn't successfully implemented to osu! Taiko community. I can show some sample maps for each difficulty for both scale since they are basically similar, but hard to tell exact principle, I guess. We don't need to strictly follow those scales though.
Some basics about TnT scales
- Basically 4 difficulty level: Kantan/Futsuu/Muzukashii/Oni. Prefix 'Inner' is used when there is one more map for certain difficulty level, and it doesn't need to be more difficult than original one. (But in osu! Taiko community, Inner Oni means maps harder than general Oni maps.)
- Maps are divided into Kantan/Futsuu/Muzukashii/Oni first, then get star difficulty scale. Due to this, even if the two maps which are in different difficulty levels have the same star difficulty scale, actual difficulty of the maps can be quite different. For example, Oni lvl. 8 is usually much more harder than Muzukashii lvl. 8
- Maximum star difficulty scales are:65 for Kantan, 7 for Futsuu, 8 for Muzukashii, 10 for Oni. (Some osu! Taiko mappers are using above this but those are kinda dogmatic.)
- Difference between old TnT scale and revised TnT scale is redistribution of star difficulty scale for Hard maps. For example, Saitama2000 which was Oni lvl. 9 in old TnT scale is lvl. 7 in revised TnT scale. (NBGI did not re-rate every maps though.)
EDIT: Whoops, wrong in maximum star rate in Kantan.
Some basics about TnT scales
- Basically 4 difficulty level: Kantan/Futsuu/Muzukashii/Oni. Prefix 'Inner' is used when there is one more map for certain difficulty level, and it doesn't need to be more difficult than original one. (But in osu! Taiko community, Inner Oni means maps harder than general Oni maps.)
- Maps are divided into Kantan/Futsuu/Muzukashii/Oni first, then get star difficulty scale. Due to this, even if the two maps which are in different difficulty levels have the same star difficulty scale, actual difficulty of the maps can be quite different. For example, Oni lvl. 8 is usually much more harder than Muzukashii lvl. 8
- Maximum star difficulty scales are:
- Difference between old TnT scale and revised TnT scale is redistribution of star difficulty scale for Hard maps. For example, Saitama2000 which was Oni lvl. 9 in old TnT scale is lvl. 7 in revised TnT scale. (NBGI did not re-rate every maps though.)
EDIT: Whoops, wrong in maximum star rate in Kantan.
Never Talked about star rating. In fact it doesn't even work that good in standard (It's rather generic and old). Plus if a difficulty spread is good is decided by modders and MATs or BATs who check, as it is a guideline...
Thank for the explanation, how the rating tech changed? what it rated less difficulty and more difficulty?
Thank for the explanation, how the rating tech changed? what it rated less difficulty and more difficulty?
By the way, the difficulty level names are not necessarily in order of actual map difficulty, it depends on the song and diff star rating (for example, a 8* Muzukashii is WAY harder than a 1* Oni and can even be harder than, say, a 5* Oni)
A bit confusing, but that's how Namco handles those things~
A bit confusing, but that's how Namco handles those things~
Kantan: 1*~10*
Futsuu: 1*~10*
Muzukashii: 1*~10*
Oni: 1*~10*
~ Kantan 10* = Futsuu 1*; Futsuu 10* = Muzukashii 1*; Muzukashii 10* = Oni 1*
Futsuu: 1*~10*
Muzukashii: 1*~10*
Oni: 1*~10*
~ Kantan 10* = Futsuu 1*; Futsuu 10* = Muzukashii 1*; Muzukashii 10* = Oni 1*
^ I never thought about this. After lepidopodus said it I noticed it.
So you say it is like that in Namco or you were not sure?
At least it would make sense why some Muzukashii's are ratet the same like Oni?
No, Kantan only goes up to 5*, Futsuu to 7*, Muzukashii to 8* and Oni to 10*
There is no such thing as a 8* Kantan or a 10* Muzukashii
And, as I mentioned, Oni is not necessarily harder than Muzukashii. Just compare a 8* Muzukashii (like Ridge Racer) to a 1* Oni (Mori no Kumasan)
/E: fix'd Kantan star limit
There is no such thing as a 8* Kantan or a 10* Muzukashii
And, as I mentioned, Oni is not necessarily harder than Muzukashii. Just compare a 8* Muzukashii (like Ridge Racer) to a 1* Oni (Mori no Kumasan)
/E: fix'd Kantan star limit
Topic Starter
Kinda derailing here. We can't judge a taiko difficulty through osu! unless the star rating system gets a much needed overhaul. Namco has not released their rating system formula to us either. I think just judging the spread can be another thing mods/MATs/BATs look for when ranking taiko maps.
@^: We don't follow exact 'formula' or something cause we don't know much about it. (Actually I'm not sure about it's existence, lol. TnT leveling was quite inconsistent through series.) But we followed the form of that rate system traditionally and judging custom difficulties by comparing those with existing authentic maps and that is why I specified that. You mentioned an example before (starting like 'The guideline should be this:') and I thought that you have some incorrect concept of those terms about difficulties, so that is why I said that. When we make some limitations it is important to make the meanings confident, not to make problems of interpretation.
BTW I agree with 'judging the spread can be another thing mods/MATs/BATs'.
BTW I agree with 'judging the spread can be another thing mods/MATs/BATs'.
I have fixed it, it's Kantan up to 5*, not 6. (Correct me if I'm wrong I'm not really following the changes in taiko lol)Luna wrote:
No, Kantan only goes up to 5*, Futsuu to 7*, Muzukashii to 8* and Oni to 10*
@^:
But in osu! Taiko community, Inner Oni means maps harder than general Oni maps.It has been common knowledge in here that Inner Oni maps were way harder, examples are numerous : BRA, Rotter Tarm, Etude Op. 10-4, Angel dream... which note clusters are very insane. However some cases are the contrary : On my side I find Yozakura Ura way easier than Regular.
Difference between old TnT scale and revised TnT scale is redistribution of star difficulty scale for Hard maps. For example, Saitama2000 which was Oni lvl. 9 in old TnT scale is lvl. 7 in revised TnT scale. (NBGI did not re-rate every maps though.)Hoping that the 9* in Family dondon was a pure joke, I still can't FC this, imo it's more of a 10* <_<
About the osu! star rating, it is rated with the number of NPS in the song (I remember having a song so slow that I hit 2,5 stars for Oni)
The difficulty should be in the map itself imo. If you map it as Muzukashii, then it should be.
@^: My mistake. Kantan is up to *5. And just to mention, Family DonDon never included to new AC so there isn't any revised scale for that map.
Topic Starter
Someone who makes an Oni and an Ura Oni who don't get ranked because of this rule could usually change the names so you have muzukashii and an oni then ask a new BAT to rank it. This is why we either need great BATs or a better ranking system. :S
I don't any intention to force that, for now, though, as I previously said. If the mapper wants Oni & Inner Oni even if others said much about difficulty spread, let him/her do it.
What's the basis of ranking and approval with Taiko?
The feeling of a chart can say the difficulty alone, but there is actually no difference between Ura and Regular. What I can say is that Ura name should only be given on the second Taiko diff made/added. (As it is a hidden-like chart)
Currently it depends on whether the mapset is ranked or approved.those wrote:
What's the basis of ranking and approval with Taiko?
Topic Starter
The problem is that many people don't play taiko because the only easy taiko maps are unranked/graveyarded and can only be found in offsite downloads (like your skydrive). If we make it so a difficulty spread is required or atleast suggested, there will be SOME newer taiko diffs that new players can try.lepidopodus wrote:
I don't any intention to force that, for now, though, as I previously said. If the mapper wants Oni & Inner Oni even if others said much about difficulty spread, let him/her do it.
@Mithost:
We shouldn't force mappers to do that now, we are not even enough mappers for this "rule".
If you look at the rank-list, you will quickly noticed that a project with at least two taiko diffs is getting rarely ranked. So there is no use of such a rule yet.
To mention this as a guideline; that it is prefered to have a diff spread with an easy and hard taiko is okay, but no forcing please.
Also, we are able to change this without rules for now: t/85700/start=0
Such projects can be productive when they are getting more support(I wasn't able to be active there yet 'cause of the exams).
Well, as nice as this idea is... as long we have not more mapper who map more then 2 maps at least or are willed to make an easier diff. then the predecessor diff., the rules has no use yet.
So I'm for this description as guideline:
We shouldn't force mappers to do that now, we are not even enough mappers for this "rule".
If you look at the rank-list, you will quickly noticed that a project with at least two taiko diffs is getting rarely ranked. So there is no use of such a rule yet.
To mention this as a guideline; that it is prefered to have a diff spread with an easy and hard taiko is okay, but no forcing please.
Also, we are able to change this without rules for now: t/85700/start=0
Such projects can be productive when they are getting more support(I wasn't able to be active there yet 'cause of the exams).
Well, as nice as this idea is... as long we have not more mapper who map more then 2 maps at least or are willed to make an easier diff. then the predecessor diff., the rules has no use yet.
So I'm for this description as guideline:
If you want to have more than one Taiko specific diff., make sure you have a decent spread. If you have two Taiko diffs, try to have one Taiko Oni and one Taiko Futsuu/Muzukashii, for example. This will permit even Taiko Beginners to play your beatmap.If no one has something agains this description of this guideline, we are able to approve it.
Topic Starter
I went into this assuming it would be a guideline. It shouldn't be forced on anyone. I just think that if you make it a guideline, people will be a bit more willing to follow it. Now, we wait for someone who can change the guidelines to get on board :S
As I had proposed, we can use it for CtB maps too, as the problem is valid for CtB too (this'll be added in the general guidelines)
That would be me I guess. lolMithost wrote:
Now, we wait for someone who can change the guidelines to get on board :S
I will wait a bit, maybe someone has something to add here, then Sakura can approve it and I add it into the guidelines.
@HakuNoKaemi: Well, that can be suggested in the ctb thread.
I like this idea. I'd love to see this implemented. As far as difficulty rating goes for taiko, I've always just based it on feeling and bpm. Higher bpm calls for a slightly higher rating while overall difficulty in patterns/note density accounts for most of my ratings.
I tried to do something like this earlier before here: t/85700
But unfortunately I had a lot of personal issues come up and I haven't been online in a while so it had to be postponed.
I tried to do something like this earlier before here: t/85700
But unfortunately I had a lot of personal issues come up and I haven't been online in a while so it had to be postponed.
So how exactly will the guideline say?OnosakiHito wrote:
That would be me I guess. lolMithost wrote:
Now, we wait for someone who can change the guidelines to get on board :S
I will wait a bit, maybe someone has something to add here, then Sakura can approve it and I add it into the guidelines.
Topic Starter
"If your mapset includes one or more Taiko difficulties, one should be significantly easier to play than the other. For example, an Oni (Insane) would have a Futuu (Normal) or a Muzukashi (Hard) included with it. This makes it so players new to the Taiko gamemode can play your beatmap."Sakura wrote:
So how exactly will the guideline say?
Change what you will.
Needs more talking about exact sentence, I guess. Consensus is needed.
EDIT:
(deleted)
EDIT2:
So, everyone agrees that this should be a guideline level, not rule. Any considerations about making this to recommendation level?
'one or more Taiko difficulties,' --> More than one. There isn't more Taiko maps to make easy if we have one Taiko map in mapset.
'one should be significantly easier to play than the other.' --> The sentence itself is kinda vague, though you gave an example.
EDIT:
(deleted)
EDIT2:
So, everyone agrees that this should be a guideline level, not rule. Any considerations about making this to recommendation level?
'one or more Taiko difficulties,' --> More than one. There isn't more Taiko maps to make easy if we have one Taiko map in mapset.
'one should be significantly easier to play than the other.' --> The sentence itself is kinda vague, though you gave an example.
- If you want to have more than one Taiko difficulty, make sure you have a decent spread. If you have two Taikos, try to have one Oni and one Futsuu/Muzukashii, for example. This will permit Taiko beginners to play your beatmap.
As a guideline is still good:
A guideline is permitted to be broken, but it's just saying "it's better you'll do it"
Topic Starter
If we use the word "Should" instead of "Make sure", it looks like a guideline. If we use "Make sure" over "Should", it looks like a rule. A BAT can easily say "Why aren't you following this guideline?" to make someone follow it. Difficulty should still be a part of the spread section, just so we are clear on what exactly this rule is about. The word "easier" would be nice to keep in, seeing this guideline is based on making sure there are easier taiko maps for people to play.
Should we allow people to make only one map? Can it be an Oni? People could just make less Taiko difficulties if they don't want to make an easy one, and nothing would change.
My current rendition:
If your mapset includes one or more Taiko difficulties, make sure an easier Taiko difficulty is part of the spread. If you have one Taiko, try making it Muzukashii or Fuutuu instead of Oni. If you have more than one, one of them should be a Muzukashi or Fuutuu with the rest being Onis. This allows beginner Taiko players to play your map, not just experts.
Should we allow people to make only one map? Can it be an Oni? People could just make less Taiko difficulties if they don't want to make an easy one, and nothing would change.
My current rendition:
If your mapset includes one or more Taiko difficulties, make sure an easier Taiko difficulty is part of the spread. If you have one Taiko, try making it Muzukashii or Fuutuu instead of Oni. If you have more than one, one of them should be a Muzukashi or Fuutuu with the rest being Onis. This allows beginner Taiko players to play your map, not just experts.
you can still have a "Muzukashii", easier means "Futsuu" or easier, while muzukashii's a decent starting point for hard/insane standard player. It's still better to generalize to "good spread". "Make sure" and "Should" have the same "obligation" level, In a rule I'd use "have to".
other things are that with one Taiko, it's pretty normal to have an Oni (and as so, like you say it's not rule-able), and the problem you said covered maps that had 2 or even 3 oni.... which is pretty much a stupid spread (if I can say it's a spread).7
So with only one Taiko it's preferable to have an Oni (or a Muzukashii).
If a spread is good it's still decided by BATs/MATs.
So, I can substitute the make sure with should not more, as: beginner means player who just started/inexpert player, as so the phrase do flow....
other things are that with one Taiko, it's pretty normal to have an Oni (and as so, like you say it's not rule-able), and the problem you said covered maps that had 2 or even 3 oni.... which is pretty much a stupid spread (if I can say it's a spread).7
So with only one Taiko it's preferable to have an Oni (or a Muzukashii).
If a spread is good it's still decided by BATs/MATs.
So, I can substitute the make sure with should not more, as: beginner means player who just started/inexpert player, as so the phrase do flow....
Just letting you guys know that a Guideline is the same thing as a Rule except it can only be broken in special cases
but in the general guidelines there are no "suggestion" part as now...
So we're gonna add that in general rules/guidelines since it is something about mapset composition? I want to hear some opinion for this to some BATs.
One thing I'm worrying is, if we merely put this into general rule/guideline, Taiko guys might be limited to intervene to that phrase after it is officially added since general guidelines are not administrated by Taiko experts, and since due to fairness between other articles in rules/guidelines, we cannot expect flexibility when applying this. Maybe adding something like 'Taiko difficulty spread should follow regulations about difficulty spread in Taiko ranking criteria' in General ranking criteria then adding limitations or regulations in Taiko ranking criteria would work, but I'm not sure others will agree with thit.
Either adding that in General ranking criteria or Taiko ranking criteria, I'm quite sure about this:
I'm totally disagree with this suggestion of adding difficulty spread-related article in general rules/guidelines or Taiko Ranking Criteria unless wide flexibility of applying this rule/guideline is guaranteed.
EDIT2:
EDIT:
I might agree with regulating Oni + Oni settings if other Taiko mappers agree, but I don't think they will so pleased with that...
One thing I'm worrying is, if we merely put this into general rule/guideline, Taiko guys might be limited to intervene to that phrase after it is officially added since general guidelines are not administrated by Taiko experts, and since due to fairness between other articles in rules/guidelines, we cannot expect flexibility when applying this. Maybe adding something like 'Taiko difficulty spread should follow regulations about difficulty spread in Taiko ranking criteria' in General ranking criteria then adding limitations or regulations in Taiko ranking criteria would work, but I'm not sure others will agree with thit.
Either adding that in General ranking criteria or Taiko ranking criteria, I'm quite sure about this:
I'm totally disagree with this suggestion of adding difficulty spread-related article in general rules/guidelines or Taiko Ranking Criteria unless wide flexibility of applying this rule/guideline is guaranteed.
EDIT2:
You know nothing about troubles that Taiko mappers can have as guest mapper, huh? I think not many mapset owners will give more than one slot to one guest mapper. Lower limit of number of the Taiko guest difficulty should not be exist.Mithost wrote:
Should we allow people to make only one map? Can it be an Oni? People could just make less Taiko difficulties if they don't want to make an easy one, and nothing would change.
EDIT:
Seriously, This is too radical. Currently, one Oni guest Taiko map + osu! standard maps is usual combination and you are trying to abolish those things at once. This isn't acceptable.Mithost wrote:
If you have one Taiko, try making it Muzukashii or Fuutuu instead of Oni. If you have more than one, one of them should be a Muzukashi or Fuutuu with the rest being Onis.
I might agree with regulating Oni + Oni settings if other Taiko mappers agree, but I don't think they will so pleased with that...
I give lepidpodus right, it should go into recommendations. Also what Sakura says is true. Guidelines are still rules and that forces people.
(also tbh, somehow I forgot about the recommendations, don't know how)
Obviously that's where I would like to see it, in the recommendations, as I said > no forcing.
But I wonder why we are discussing that much about it again, guys?
Mh, I also don't understand why this should be implemented into the osu! rules. Because of the mapset composition, as lepidopodus said?
So here where we are at the moment:
Edit: Just a reminder: Please don't make everything so complicated. There is no use for it yet.
(also tbh, somehow I forgot about the recommendations, don't know how)
Obviously that's where I would like to see it, in the recommendations, as I said > no forcing.
But I wonder why we are discussing that much about it again, guys?
^ This is a way too long desciption. I'm still for HakuNoKaemis guidelines/recommendation with some word changes as you guys said, and that's it.Mithost wrote:
If your mapset includes one or more Taiko difficulties, make sure an easier Taiko difficulty is part of the spread. If you have one Taiko, try making it Muzukashii or Fuutuu instead of Oni. If you have more than one, one of them should be a Muzukashi or Fuutuu with the rest being Onis. This allows beginner Taiko players to play your map, not just experts.
Mh, I also don't understand why this should be implemented into the osu! rules. Because of the mapset composition, as lepidopodus said?
So here where we are at the moment:
1.) Should this suggestion be added into recommendations and not into guidelines?
2.)
I changed it allready a bit because:
1.) If your mapset includes one or more Taiko difficulties > this dosen't count for just single taikos because this depends on the song itself then.
2.) For example, an Oni (Insane) would have a Futuu (Normal) or a Muzukashi (Hard) included with it. > I removed the futsuu from description because I don't want to go indanger by seeing sets like "Ura and Kantan"(extrem example).
2.)
^ Should something be changed in this description?Mithost wrote:
"If your mapset includes more than one Taiko specific difficultie, one should be significantly easier to play than the other. For example, an Oni (Insane) would have a Muzukashi (Hard) included with it. This will permit even new taiko players to play your beatmap."
I changed it allready a bit because:
1.) If your mapset includes one or more Taiko difficulties > this dosen't count for just single taikos because this depends on the song itself then.
2.) For example, an Oni (Insane) would have a Futuu (Normal) or a Muzukashi (Hard) included with it. > I removed the futsuu from description because I don't want to go indanger by seeing sets like "Ura and Kantan"(extrem example).
Edit: Just a reminder: Please don't make everything so complicated. There is no use for it yet.
Topic Starter
I agree with you, OnosakiHito. It seemed like some people were starting to discuss wording/phrasing so I went with it because I thought it was the next step in the process.
Lepidopodus, the flexibility is there. If you have an Oni, you have a better chance of getting it ranked if you have an easier taiko difficulty along side it. This is to promote players to start playing Taiko and for players who are interested in playing taiko to be able to get started without extensive searching on the forums/beatmap listing. Nothing says your mapset is unrankable because you decided not to have 2 Taiko diffs. Nothing says your difficulties should be spread between precisely between X difficulty in total score + visible patterns. The guideline/reccomendation/rule/whatever this ends up being is just saying "Be mindful of newer taiko players".
Lepidopodus, the flexibility is there. If you have an Oni, you have a better chance of getting it ranked if you have an easier taiko difficulty along side it. This is to promote players to start playing Taiko and for players who are interested in playing taiko to be able to get started without extensive searching on the forums/beatmap listing. Nothing says your mapset is unrankable because you decided not to have 2 Taiko diffs. Nothing says your difficulties should be spread between precisely between X difficulty in total score + visible patterns. The guideline/reccomendation/rule/whatever this ends up being is just saying "Be mindful of newer taiko players".
Don't forget that Taiko mappers are usually guest mapper who does not have right to change composition of mapset by his/her own will, and lots of mapset owners are quite striving for ranking their maps. Any kind of obstacle or something that can makes delay in ranking process can make Taiko guest mapping suffer.
Also usually MAT/BAT are stubborn and conservative. Don't believe they will act as what you want. Actual applying of the rules/guidelines can be different with original intention of that rules/guidelines. There were quite lots of conflicts between MAT/BAT who wanted to enforce the guideline and osu! standard mappers who wanted more freedom on mapping, saying 'It's just a guideline!' when old guidelines were active. Can you say this won't be happen between MAT/BAT and Taiko mappers?
Also usually MAT/BAT are stubborn and conservative. Don't believe they will act as what you want. Actual applying of the rules/guidelines can be different with original intention of that rules/guidelines. There were quite lots of conflicts between MAT/BAT who wanted to enforce the guideline and osu! standard mappers who wanted more freedom on mapping, saying 'It's just a guideline!' when old guidelines were active. Can you say this won't be happen between MAT/BAT and Taiko mappers?
I agree that this is at most in recommendation.
Recently there are quite a lot of misunderstanding on how guidelines like handling the breaks, and this is not even something that needs to be required in most case so putting this into guideline only creates more problem.
This is somehow related more on mapset instead of technical stuffs, so you can promoting such recommendation by making easier taiko diffs starting from yourself.
Recently there are quite a lot of misunderstanding on how guidelines like handling the breaks, and this is not even something that needs to be required in most case so putting this into guideline only creates more problem.
This is somehow related more on mapset instead of technical stuffs, so you can promoting such recommendation by making easier taiko diffs starting from yourself.
At least I'm doing that since a few days ago... Though yet only one Taiko muzukashii were made, lol.wmfchris wrote:
This is somehow related more on mapset instead of technical stuffs, so you can promoting such recommendation by making easier taiko diffs starting from yourself.
Exactly.wmfchris wrote:
This is somehow related more on mapset instead of technical stuffs, so you can promoting such recommendation by making easier taiko diffs starting from yourself.
and yeah, Im not sure that map owners will leave to a single person make 2 difficulties on his mapset, specially on a mode that they dont use (most of cases), so this will decrease the amount of taiko difficulties on mapsets IMOMithost wrote:
I believe that if Taiko maps are included with a song, they should follow similar difficulty spread rules that osu! uses. This basically means there should be an easy/normal Taiko map if there is an Oni map. Taiko maps has currently taken special rights respect with standard difficulties since a while ago, like having different kiai time, combo colour, etc.
Too many new players lose interest in taiko because they can't play the hard difficulties (labeled Oni, I dont use the label "Oni" on my maps, because of I have no idea about tatsujin criteria, and also there are taiko mappers that dont use this "label"
something most newbies don't translate to "insane"). The Taiko maps made from normal beatmaps suffer from too many rolls, simple patterns, and no training value. so I wonder how current taiko players has learn to play taiko. I think this speak about itself, personally I learned to play taiko with standard [Hard] difficulties, if you wanna learn something you make it, lose interest on something is your choice, and currently I see many new taiko players
aaaaand
this, people that dont know about tatsujin criteria (like me) will be on troubles with this, and only lepi may be not enough for make thisMithost wrote:
When I said star difficulty I mean't the way authentic taiko songs are ranked in taiko games, not osu!.lepidopodus wrote:
Didn't I say 'star difficulty does not work so well with Taiko'? Whether difficulty spread is good or not will be decided manually.
You could say that this is somewhat implemented now.
and with ctb it isn't?
So I guess I should add it into the Taiko rules soon. Anyone else there who has something to say?Sakura wrote:
You could say that this is somewhat implemented now.
We had a suggestion how to discripe the guideline, but now I think it is okay if we take the one from the osu guidelines and change it a bit to fit to taiko.
There is no only-ctb. So you guys need to discuss this in a new ctb-thread.eldnl wrote:
and with ctb it isn't?
Quite unuseful, let's create another thread changing the "taiko" word by "ctb"?OnosakiHito wrote:
There is no only-ctb. So you guys need to discuss this in a new ctb-thread.eldnl wrote:
and with ctb it isn't?
Topic Starter
Although Standard>CtB maps sometimes do have some issues, my sister and I learned how to play CTB off of the large amount of well translated maps we got simply from downloading songs we liked. CtB doesn't suffer from the same issues of no available easy maps as taiko does.
easy difficulties are easy in taiko, isn't that enough?Mithost wrote:
Although Standard>CtB maps sometimes do have some issues, my sister and I learned how to play CTB off of the large amount of well translated maps we got simply from downloading songs we liked. CtB doesn't suffer from the same issues of no available easy maps as taiko does.
Easies in CtB are not 99% drumroll spam
Please don't come up with ctb in a Taiko thread. If you are allowed to open a [Ctb rule] then do so please. If you are not sure, ask a BAT.
That's why the ,,Ranking Criteria Discussion"-place has been made for, to avoid topics in one thread.
It can't be that everytime the taiko community needs to be the indicator for your changes.
That's why the ,,Ranking Criteria Discussion"-place has been made for, to avoid topics in one thread.
It can't be that everytime the taiko community needs to be the indicator for your changes.
but they are 100% no jumpsLuna wrote:
Easies in CtB are not 99% drumroll spam
u mad? I was just asking and you started with the discussion, still waiting for an answer ...OnosakiHito wrote:
Please don't come up with ctb in a Taiko thread. If you are allowed to open a [Ctb rule] then do so please. If you are not sure, ask a BAT.
That's why the ,,Ranking Criteria Discussion"-place has been made for, to avoid topics in one thread.
It can't be that everytime the taiko community needs to be the indicator for your changes.
eldnl: this is a Taiko discussion thread about a rule/guideline for it, if you want a guideline/rule for CTB then make a thread for it.
Okay, an answer like that is not that hard \o/Sakura wrote:
eldnl: this is a Taiko discussion thread about a rule/guideline for it, if you want a guideline/rule for CTB then make a thread for it.