omg... what have you done to sliders... my children ;_;
A toggle would be really nice orz
A toggle would be really nice orz
forum
Toggle for the new Implement: ''Algorithm for slider curve'' [invalid]
posted
Total Posts
103
The new method makes it easier to create any slider you could create with the previous placement mode. If you think this is limiting what shapes you can make, you likely haven't spent more than 30s with the tool.
* There will be no toggle.
* The new method is only for three point sliders
* Once you are used to it, it is easier in all cases, as you are guaranteed a trajectory through your control points, rather than relying on brazier guesswork.
* If you need help making a certain slider shape, post in here and someone will show you how to make it.
* There will be no toggle.
* The new method is only for three point sliders
* Once you are used to it, it is easier in all cases, as you are guaranteed a trajectory through your control points, rather than relying on brazier guesswork.
* If you need help making a certain slider shape, post in here and someone will show you how to make it.
the problem here is that you are not changing the way you think. you can still make the exact same shapes as you had before, but you will need to move the middle point to sit on the sliders' curves, rather than "outside" them.haha5957 wrote:
just one moar example
-> This pattern becomes :
-> this pattern.
That makes no sense. This will encourage people to use circles and large arcs more, which is only a good thing--especially large arcs, which should be a standard feature in maps anyway.TheVileOne wrote:
The problem is that it's pressing a certain mapping style over all the others. It just doesn't seem right to me that if you prefer mapping things differently, then you have to work extra hard to map the way you used to map. It might hurt mapping in general to make simple curves so much easier to make compared to every other slider type. It's a dangerous road that I don't think we should be on to begin with. Sure keep it as a feature, but don't hurt other techniques in the process.
People who prefer not to use circles and large arcs will continue to stay away from them. People who were reluctant to use them because of their complexity will now use them more regularly. People who always used them will have a much easier time with it. There are no downsides to this. People are usually likely to abuse something when they're just learned how to do it or how to do it better--I'm included in this.
My signature links to two extensive posts in the slider thread and I urge everybody to read them. That and use your heads. I've even heard of the misconception that anchors now need to be added to the ends of short sliders which barely curve. This is a load of balderdash and is not necessary.
Saw it coming... too bad
Time to get used to the new method or quit, I guess.
I was hoping that for once the majority gets what it wants
Time to get used to the new method or quit, I guess.
I was hoping that for once the majority gets what it wants
We'll get used to it.
Oh, no. A whole five minutes to play with three-point sliders. Seriously, I still fail to realise how this is such a big deal. Even if adding an extra point is necessary, it takes as long as placing a third point.Kite wrote:
Saw it coming... too bad
Time to get used to the new method or quit, I guess.
I was hoping that for once the majority gets what it wants
Well it isn't that bad. But it does discourage using more difficult techniques, which is why I made that post. Before arcs were technical, just like every other aspect. Now one technique is far easier than any other technique, so why should newbies even try to make other types of sliders?
Thats not a problem. But I'm just going to parrot charles again here: Its as if photoshop suddenly changed their draw curve tool
Because they're still possible? If a newbie wants to play with waves, loops and slider art, then they can add more points. It's as straightforward as it's ever been.TheVileOne wrote:
Well it isn't that bad. But it does discourage using more difficult techniques, which is why I made that post. Before arcs were technical, just like every other aspect. Now one technique is far easier than any other technique, so why should newbies even try to make other types of sliders?
Creating almost-flat sliders simply requires aligning the points in a similar fashion. If this feels uncomfortable, then either get used to it, develop your style beyond the most basic techniques or use a higher slider velocity--something which I'd like to see becoming a trend anyway.
Also, please post any sensible and thought-out questions in the slider thread. I check it regularly and will be able to answer anything that's asked. It's better than cluttering other threads or trying to labour a dead horse beyond the grave.
that way is tech unrankable remember your not allowed to alter the osb file in a way that the game doesn't let you just like other circle sizesSaten wrote:
If you change the P to a B in the metadata, it becomes a regular one.108,192,90193,6,0,P|136:232|104:148,1,495
pain-in-the-ass but yeah
But TVO's suggestion might be better
Since peppy said no I'm not trying to say more about adding toggle or whatever but just to make it clear : these sliders aren't possible anymore, at least with one curving point.
difference is that now 1 point slider are ALWAYS symmetrical while most of map doesn't want that. maybe using more curvepoint will solve it, but it requires or more works at least. Well, if we try, we can get used to it(using 2+ curving points) but saying one curving point is superperfect and has no problem is...just not correct.
difference is that now 1 point slider are ALWAYS symmetrical while most of map doesn't want that. maybe using more curvepoint will solve it, but it requires or more works at least. Well, if we try, we can get used to it(using 2+ curving points) but saying one curving point is superperfect and has no problem is...just not correct.
maybe not because there's no way if you could distinguish if it's mapped on old version of osu! or manually edited via text.ztrot wrote:
that way is tech unrankable remember your not allowed to alter the osb file in a way that the game doesn't let you just like other circle sizes
If you don't want symmetrical curves, make the last point a red point and you will get what you are looking for. I don't think "most" maps want these though, and I would call that an outlier case. Manually setting the type to B is acceptable for ranked maps, but it sounds like the wrong (and harder) way to go about doing things.
Here's a video explaining the basics of the new algorithm:
Here's a video explaining the basics of the new algorithm:
Adding a fourth point still isn't hard. It's always been the case that, if you want more control, add more points. This is an extension of that.
Redpoints making sliders inaccurate is moot, because long asymmetrical curves are usually ugly and I doubt that people are really going to care about the end being aligned precisely.
Redpoints making sliders inaccurate is moot, because long asymmetrical curves are usually ugly and I doubt that people are really going to care about the end being aligned precisely.
You mean .osuztrot wrote:
that way is tech unrankable remember your not allowed to alter the osb file in a way that the game doesn't let you just like other circle sizes
Changing circle size manually is silly. No one wanna use CS 10 in ranked maps for example, it's just silly
If it's unrankable as you say, then some of my maps are unrankable
I have my reasons though
Topic Starter
Hey men. Is osu!,
when the Players play a map don't see the ''SliderPoints''.. Only see the SliderForm. Now. With this new implement, all the Sliders will look like circles, SuperCurver and etc.. (The sliders with 3 SliderPoints)
The solutions are simple.. Red Point or 4SliderPoints. But.. Really.. What it costs.. nothing.. What it costs put a Toggle for this Trouble. To make everyone happy.. This new Implement always will have Haters & Lovers...
The uniq solution is that.. I know we can be happy in 5 months more with this Implement.. But we are losing the Original'Mapping'Osu!...
Sometimes it's good to let go of the hierarchy in a online game... To improve the general living in this... Put yourself in the shoes of the mappers who like the older'Slider'Styles... :/ Is more than ''Oh no, why you are discussing about something that you can't change.''
We only express like users... like mappers and like players.
when the Players play a map don't see the ''SliderPoints''.. Only see the SliderForm. Now. With this new implement, all the Sliders will look like circles, SuperCurver and etc.. (The sliders with 3 SliderPoints)
The solutions are simple.. Red Point or 4SliderPoints. But.. Really.. What it costs.. nothing.. What it costs put a Toggle for this Trouble. To make everyone happy.. This new Implement always will have Haters & Lovers...
The uniq solution is that.. I know we can be happy in 5 months more with this Implement.. But we are losing the Original'Mapping'Osu!...
Sometimes it's good to let go of the hierarchy in a online game... To improve the general living in this... Put yourself in the shoes of the mappers who like the older'Slider'Styles... :/ Is more than ''Oh no, why you are discussing about something that you can't change.''
We only express like users... like mappers and like players.
You can still make "older style" sliders. Please read up. The new behaviour is a more sane default, and will result in generally the curves people are looking for. No functionality has been removed. We are not losing "original mapping osu!" unless you consider that to mean uneven sliders.
This same discussion happened when catmull curves were removed, but I don't think we are worse-off without them these days.
Sometimes change is a good thing, you know
.
This same discussion happened when catmull curves were removed, but I don't think we are worse-off without them these days.
Sometimes change is a good thing, you know
.
Topic Starter
What is the change.. an improvement on what was previously ''changed''... This is not an improvement...peppy wrote:
Sometimes change is a good thing, you know
At any rate.. This is not something I can discuss... so.. some mapper will hate this I know.. But.. Will be forget.. And will be ''Normal''.
Thanks for trying guys! We can't fight.
Try use the red point.. Works good for me
But continue.. is not the same.. Edit: We can't get anything \o/ But we can't lost the hope =w= So.. This discuss is a FailDiscuss or OfftopicDiscuss.. All can Give your views
Don't get nowhere but.. Nor lose nothing in tryingSrry for bad english.. huh
There are still sliders you can't make without catmulls FYI.
But that point aside, peppy's right. Learn the new technique.
The only thing maps will be losing is character as there wont be those imperfections that make a map different than others that use similar slider types. but even that is not considered a degradation in quality.
But that point aside, peppy's right. Learn the new technique.
The only thing maps will be losing is character as there wont be those imperfections that make a map different than others that use similar slider types. but even that is not considered a degradation in quality.
Man that video cleared up a lot of the problems I could see coming from this and as long as there is still a way to make old ones for whatever reason you might have is good enough for me I do have to say the new slider creation is really useful for easy diff maps.
So manually changing slider types in the .osu is fine?peppy wrote:
If you don't want symmetrical curves, make the last point a red point and you will get what you are looking for. I don't think "most" maps want these though, and I would call that an outlier case. Manually setting the type to B is acceptable for ranked maps, but it sounds like the wrong (and harder) way to go about doing things.
And for those who want to make the three-point sliders the old way, you can place a red anchor at the end instead of a regular white anchor. That will revert the behavior back to the old one.
The red point in the end of slider is nice and all but this is basically a very poverty way of using a toggle for this feature. In the end you get the same effect as a toggle only with different GUI which is less intuitive. Like, why. If you want to make new sliders the default it's ok but it seems like a very weird way to go about this.
Call it a hack to make imperfect sliders. You can do this if you want, but they will be imperfect.
Marking this thread invalid.
Marking this thread invalid.
Any 3 point bezier can be made with 4 points or more.
If this is too hard, make a 3 point bezier with a redpoint end, followed by another point and the results will be identical to the old 3 point method.
If this is too hard, make a 3 point bezier with a redpoint end, followed by another point and the results will be identical to the old 3 point method.
Topic Starter
Dude'. come on all, we going to hack wwwwwwwww
Obviously about the red point... em.. like combocolourhack..
pd:+130 in almost 1 day.. wwwwwwwwwwwwwww
Obviously about the red point... em.. like combocolourhack..
pd:+130 in almost 1 day.. wwwwwwwwwwwwwww
Can I just say that the very fact that people are still annoyed proves that the transition was really bad. I do not understand at all why there was not phasing period. People would float over to the new algorithm if it is obvious that it is better (and you've made that point pretty well), but this transition is not giving people time at all.
Nothing can be done about this anymore. We'll just have to wait and see and survey the damages later.
Nothing can be done about this anymore. We'll just have to wait and see and survey the damages later.
But for now we can enjoy the circle sliders
I'm actually enjoying the fact I don't have to spend 5 minutes on a single 5 point bezier anymore xDOzzyOzrock wrote:
But for now we can enjoy the circle sliders
Actully，that's a serious problem to make the new toggle as the only way to make slides with 3 points. Cause most of the new mappers don't know how to use 4 points to make a flow slide (even a experienced mapper also can not say it is easy to use this skill), so there will be more and more people prefer to use a slide like this one 
not this one 
. At current time, about 70 per cent of slides are the original kind slides in our ranked maps. only some special maps will use the first kind slides more than second kind slides, but these maps must use speicial mapping style to make the whole map flow. comparing with this two style slides, the first kinds of slides' radian is large than the second one. it means in the futural maps, it will be more difficult follow a slide, more slide misses will happen. the most issue of this toggle is we can not develop more skills with 3 piont slides. all the 3 points slide will be limited into a same style. circle is a betiful shape, but all the things become circles is horrible.
my pesonal suggestion is let the new toggle become a speical way of draw slides. we can turn on it in the menu, it will be helpful for the experienced mappers, and use the original way to make 3 point slides. please give the fresh mappers more chances to create their own first cruved slide.
my pesonal suggestion is let the new toggle become a speical way of draw slides. we can turn on it in the menu, it will be helpful for the experienced mappers, and use the original way to make 3 point slides. please give the fresh mappers more chances to create their own first cruved slide.
@angelfix: both sliders you show are possible using the new method.
The fact remains that any slider meant to be different than the fixed curvature that uses 3 points is sub-optimal. Make it your mission to teach users how to make ones that are >3 points and don't look bad.
The fact remains that any slider meant to be different than the fixed curvature that uses 3 points is sub-optimal. Make it your mission to teach users how to make ones that are >3 points and don't look bad.
I will bear this burden myself with much aplomb. There is no reason to make ugly 1/2 sliders. Symmetrical or not, the flow will be identical and the sliders can be pointed I n the appropriate direction for the creation of good flow.peppy wrote:
@angelfix: both sliders you show are possible using the new method.
The fact remains that any slider meant to be different than the fixed curvature that uses 3 points is sub-optimal. Make it your mission to teach users how to make ones that are >3 points and don't look bad.
i know use new way can make the original slide, just need a bit more works. but there are centenly somthing wrong with this change. i have no interests to explain it. i can make sure that 90 per cent experienced mappers all know this is wrong. why you do not spend 3 min to ask all bat and mat's opinion just insist your opinion？that's is really disappointed.
Topic Starter
We are in a OnlineGame. Not in a ''Country'' with democracy... If peppy says No. Is because he is the most Inteligent Powerful men in this country game. And has a following of valid arguments for this ''No.'' Although 99% of the mappers were in against... Don't change anything.. Srry for bad English.
[you make osu! sad :c]
[you make osu! sad :c]
It is unequivocally better. That is all.angelfix wrote:
i know use new way can make the original slide, just need a bit more works. but there are centenly somthing wrong with this change. i have no interests to explain it. i can make sure that 90 per cent experienced mappers all know this is wrong. why you do not spend 3 min to ask all bat and mat's opinion just insist your opinion？that's is really disappointed.
Topic Starter
we can't says if it is better or not.. There will always be opinions on both sides. only can says is changed. because really is not the same..D33d wrote:
It is unequivocally better. That is all.
Making quadratic beziers requires a bit more work. (Meh, on my own, I wouldn't have taken them out, not that it's a big deal.)
Making circles requires much less work than it did before, which is the whole point of the new method.
@angelfix: Apparently you think quadratic beziers are enough better than circles to merit having this slight boost in efficiency. peppy obviously thinks otherwise.
If all you need is a workhorse slider to get you from A to B, and you were using quadratic beziers before because they were easy and their shape wasn't important, give the new method a try.
Making circles requires much less work than it did before, which is the whole point of the new method.
@angelfix: Apparently you think quadratic beziers are enough better than circles to merit having this slight boost in efficiency. peppy obviously thinks otherwise.
If all you need is a workhorse slider to get you from A to B, and you were using quadratic beziers before because they were easy and their shape wasn't important, give the new method a try.
i am not just stubborn thinking about something, we need explain all things clear. if we should test the new method, please tell us, not just say no and give a blurred reasons. it is hard to understand why not add the toggle if you just say we can do the same works by hand-working.
we should accept a specific reason. i know sometime it is hard to explain, but if it is not clear, we will become confused.
sorry for argue with this topic, hope you are not angry with me. i will not insist it.
we should accept a specific reason. i know sometime it is hard to explain, but if it is not clear, we will become confused.
sorry for argue with this topic, hope you are not angry with me. i will not insist it.
I do think that there should have been a proper announcement to explain the changes. It's not surprising that people became so confused--having said that, I'm still astounded that people have been so incapable of figuring out the new method, although I suppose that some would've thought that it was a bug.
Mercurial
I don't get it, you hate something that makes your sliders prettier?
Mercurial
No, I hate the sudden changes without an advice or a way to turn it back, I'm not a symmetric mapper, I just like the old system as a way to map awesome things (Like Natteke maps).
And let me tell you, add a red point in your slider is not confortable at all (Unless you want or you have to)
And let me tell you, add a red point in your slider is not confortable at all (Unless you want or you have to)
Being a symmetric mapper or not has nothing to do with circular sliders, they do make the job easier for symmetry mappers, but having perfect circles makes them prettier not uglier, and you still dont need to use symmetry, if you want assimetrical sliders use an extra point or a red point end, no big deal, but why would you want that anyways. Most sliders that make unusual or weird shapes use more than 3 slider points to begin with.
I wonder "how could people hate this thing if this thing does make sliders prittier"?
this is kind of a logic paradox
what makes me feel not very satisfied is that the original bezier curve was removed from the editor(although it still can be done by some other relatively hidden measures)
and I do hope the original slider mode won't be determined unrankable utill the end of time
edit: awesome
this is kind of a logic paradox
what makes me feel not very satisfied is that the original bezier curve was removed from the editor(although it still can be done by some other relatively hidden measures)
and I do hope the original slider mode won't be determined unrankable utill the end of time
edit: awesome
In the next patch, sliders will also revert to using bezier algorithm when they would make circles "too big" (triggering the graphical bug). For those of you that like to make ugly sliders, thsi will probably result in being able to make ugly sliders again with less effort.
For the best or worst.
For the best or worst.
I'm not sure if you guys are trolling or just being retarded. Why are you implying that everyone thinks the same way you do and that the statement "these sliders are pretty" is a fact?Sakura wrote:
I don't get it, you hate something that makes your sliders prettier?
From a programming standpoint, I don't like this logic of changing algorithms under complex situations, like the circle being too big. I'd be much more content if, say, on saving and reloading the map, these sliders are turned into the B| formula.
Natteke: You can still make the old sliders by doing this. (There's a bug which causes the slider to become lopsided if that last point isn't present.) peppy's reasoning is that the new method is useful enough to merit the convenience of being used when you make a 3 point slider. Nothing is lost.
Natteke: You can still make the old sliders by doing this. (There's a bug which causes the slider to become lopsided if that last point isn't present.) peppy's reasoning is that the new method is useful enough to merit the convenience of being used when you make a 3 point slider. Nothing is lost.
Mercurial
just realized that he used my mappeppy wrote:
the problem here is that you are not changing the way you think. you can still make the exact same shapes as you had before, but you will need to move the middle point to sit on the sliders' curves, rather than "outside" them.haha5957 wrote:
just one moar example
-> This pattern becomes :
-> this pattern.
For the threads discussion: i dont mind it thaaaat much. like peppy said you can make any slider that you want, just like before, you just need to know how
Well, haters.
I don't know what is the f*cking problem, some people like making things on their own, some people will want to make things easier by using new algorithm. For me, sometimes this algorithm helps very much, but sometimes i like doing things on my own. WHY the hell do you mind HOW people do things? If they look the SAME, then why are you making such a big problem with it? Just add freaking toggle, but making the default for new one, and hide option a little bit, so new mappers will use new algorithm, and old mappers will still do things like they did before.
Just quick example:
Why don't we force people to play on 1,5x osu sensitivity ( and for ex. 3000 dpi mouse only <no tablets here>)? They'll just need to learn how to use it, and it will be the same to play maps, it'll just take longer to learn it.
The same goes for fun spoiler, why did you add it? You can play with and without BG, but one of them is easier (I don't personally prefer dimming BG's so no hate here < I DON'T suggest that dimming BG is making playing easier>).
You are just being hypocritical ...
mmedit (to avoid bumping): looks like someone didn't read up 2 posts. You can already toggle the old method by adding a red point.
I don't know what is the f*cking problem, some people like making things on their own, some people will want to make things easier by using new algorithm. For me, sometimes this algorithm helps very much, but sometimes i like doing things on my own. WHY the hell do you mind HOW people do things? If they look the SAME, then why are you making such a big problem with it? Just add freaking toggle, but making the default for new one, and hide option a little bit, so new mappers will use new algorithm, and old mappers will still do things like they did before.
Just quick example:
Why don't we force people to play on 1,5x osu sensitivity ( and for ex. 3000 dpi mouse only <no tablets here>)? They'll just need to learn how to use it, and it will be the same to play maps, it'll just take longer to learn it.
The same goes for fun spoiler, why did you add it? You can play with and without BG, but one of them is easier (I don't personally prefer dimming BG's so no hate here < I DON'T suggest that dimming BG is making playing easier>).
You are just being hypocritical ...
mmedit (to avoid bumping): looks like someone didn't read up 2 posts. You can already toggle the old method by adding a red point.