If its major, like timing or unrankable beats, I wouldn't mind, but "spacing"?

Spacing would be in the case where something is so shockingly spaced that an amateur player would fail successive times due to it, not 1-grid-off-at-grid-level-4 problems.

I picked the second option. I actually admit I thought a little outside my perspective since I do not play for score, but I am proud when I DO get reasonable scores. I think we should always focus on getting it right the first time around, but there has to be a level of forgiveness in place since anyone can overlook something.

2nd Choice.

Unranking a map is fine if there is a critical error to the map which cannot be played other specific circumstances (*cough* Caramelldansen 0_o' version *cough*)

I am confident that if someone unranks a beatmap that they do it for a legitimate reason and rerank it if deemed necessarily fit to do so.

We do have to ask ourselves the question. "What does ranking a map mean?" Does it mean that you just want recognition in the community? Do you want to make a decent, spectacular map? Do you want to rank it so it can be online and enjoyed for other people? (Since most people do not look at unranked maps.)

Our primary focus for this topic is that. "Would people be frustrated if that had a perfect score or a #1 at the map...to be the top of the world (For the time being)... and then lose it all because of one minor mishap that occurred to the beatmap. Now, people in their right-sided mind would think. "Heck, who cares if you lost the score, if you got #1 in the first place, you can do it again." Well... Could you do it again?

I probably don't have much on a say and if this even relates to the topic but... yeah...

MarioBros777 wrote:

We do have to ask ourselves the question. "What does ranking a map mean?"

This is one of the main reasons I want to change the current system, in fact.

I'll only talk for myself in saying that a ranked map means it is of a high enough standard to be played and enjoyed by the masses. Regardless of being able to get high scores on a map, the number one driving force behind the decision to rank a map should be enjoyability. Everything that comes as a result of ranking is just a minor benefit.

The concept of ranking (and the process behind it) should be the reason osu! has a generally higher standard of quality when compared to any other user-composable rhythm games. Here, we are discussing to what extent we should go to fix misjudgements by those responsible for the ranking of a map.

Keep in mind that the ranking process may become slightly more lax with the changes to the system (countered by more flexibility and efficiency).

I always have and still do believe that all maps with problems should be fixed, even if it means players losing scores. On the long run it is very important that any ranked map is playable, as new players come all the time and they will still play older maps even if the old players never go back to them "because I already have a good score on it". I'm a stat whore, but I wont shed a tear for any lost scores as long as it results in a better game.

What could be thought about however if all of the cases where maps are fixed really require a score wipe for the map. For example if the timing is fixed, isn't removing the scores a bit unnecessary as the new map is actually easier to score, so the old scores wont have an unfair advantage? In cases where note patterns or spacing is radically changed resetting the scores is necessary of course, as that makes the old and new version so different.

What would this mean for the older maps in the osu! community then?

Gemi wrote:

What could be thought about however if all of the cases where maps are fixed really require a score wipe for the map. For example if the timing is fixed, isn't removing the scores a bit unnecessary as the new map is actually easier to score, so the old scores wont have an unfair advantage? In cases where note patterns or spacing is radically changed resetting the scores is necessary of course, as that makes the old and new version so different.

Think replay data .

peppy wrote:

Gemi wrote:

What could be thought about however if all of the cases where maps are fixed really require a score wipe for the map. For example if the timing is fixed, isn't removing the scores a bit unnecessary as the new map is actually easier to score, so the old scores wont have an unfair advantage? In cases where note patterns or spacing is radically changed resetting the scores is necessary of course, as that makes the old and new version so different.

Think replay data .

Could those replays just be disabled for these cases?

I voted for option 1, but I don't have any scores I care about in unrankable maps, so..

0_o wrote:

I voted for option 1, but I don't have any scores I care about in unrankable maps, so..

Well done - you totally failed to read the poll and cast a useless vote.

Also no - disabling replays is not an option.

peppy wrote:

0_o wrote:

I voted for option 1, but I don't have any scores I care about in unrankable maps, so..

Well done - you totally failed to read the poll and cast a useless vote.

Haha whoops, I knew what I was voting for when I voted for it, but when I came back to comment later I got it a little mixed up (In my defense it's 3 AM)

But yeah, if I had a good score on a map has a crucial error like a wrong bpm I wouldn't have any problem with unranking and fixing it; quality comes first. Besides, chances are I would do better once the error is fixed anyway (and pretty much any score I get I can usually beat within one or two month's time).

This map has been deleted on the request of its creator. It is no longer available.

I think we need to look at the problem in a slightly different way.

I agree that if a map has a serious playability issue, it should be considered for unranking. Perhaps ask the community on the map's decision, with some discussion and democracy. If, as peppy states, the map should "be played and enjoyed by the masses", shouldn't those same masses have a say in the ranking and unranking process?

After an ranked map is unranked, though, I think it needs to be viewed as an unranked, unapproved, WIP, pending map. The map shouldn't be a ranked map which is temporarily unranked. The map should go through the exact same processes as any other map would have to go through to become ranked again (a second time, of course). This will bring the map up to standards. I would much prefer the original mapper to be in charge of ranking the map, but in some cases that's not possible and a community committee perhaps could very critically assess the issues which terminated its status as a ranked map (and nothing more).

Perhaps any of the above community-based systems could be integrated with kudosu somehow? Or a BAT-like team with lesser privilege? I don't know; that's certainly up in the air, and I'm just throwing ideas out there.

You may ask, "what about a mistimed note? bad BPM? two notes overlapping on the timeline?" Just unrank (critically and objectively) and have it go through the ranking process again. I have doubts this would be a problem because I see no major roadblocks.

"But what about le score D=?" Ah, screw you. Although I do play for map rank sometimes, it's mostly competition with friends or things, or just the enjoyment of SSH'ing (or B'ing?) a really difficult map. Overall, my playing improves, not worsens, so scores will generally be more easily obtained later. Same goes for everyone, I hope.

Granted, some scores are obtained by luck. Oh well.

What would hurt is if I lost a magic score (e.g. 5'555'555'555). However, that can be recovered still.

strager wrote:

The map should go through the exact same processes as any other map would have to go through to become ranked again (a second time, of course).

It does. On top of this only new BAT members can review it the second time around (not the original ones).

strager wrote:

I would much prefer the original mapper to be in charge of ranking the map

WHAT. I'll just ignore that.

peppy wrote:

strager wrote:

I would much prefer the original mapper to be in charge of ranking the map

WHAT. I'll just ignore that.

I mean, the mapper should push it to being looked at. A map which was unranked shouldn't get special attention over other pending maps, is what I'm trying to say.

From what peppy is saying,
I really hope the new ranking system pulls through.

I voted option 2, score doesn't matter to me but it probably does to many people who play competitively and to improve their rank.

I agree that maps should be automatically unranked if there is a major issue with the map, poor timing, unsnapped notes, overlapping notes etc. But on purely gameplay issues, for example a change spacing, an unreasonable slider velocity, I think the community should be consulted before the unrank. Obviously if a map is extremely popular, has a high playcount, and the rankings show that people are able to pass it, then there should be no reason to unrank it if the complaints are minor.

Though one potential problem is that "major" and "minor" issues are subjective. A slight offset fluctuation might be a minor issue for one person yet a major issue for another, for cases like this I think specific guidelines should be set and agreed by the community of when it is acceptable to unrank a map.

Also, I probably wouldn't want to see lots of unranked maps in pending as it implies the original modding process failed. But when a map is unranked and ranked again I think it should be displayed as a newly ranked map especially when months might have elapsed since the original unranking (at present I think the maps are ranked but not displayed in the ranked beatmaps as a newly ranked map ~ correct me if I'm wrong.)

peppy wrote:

Think replay data .

I thought about it before and disregarded it as a minor issue, hence not mentioning it. Apparently our views clash on this one as I'd be happy with disabled replays for any old entries in maps that are re-ranked after fixes.

This map has been deleted on the request of its creator. It is no longer available.

Lybydose wrote:

Also there should be a limited time period in which maps can be unranked with score reset. If someone finds a map several months old map with a BPM that's slightly off or something, let it stay. On the other hand, if this problem is found within around a week of ranking, it should be fixed.

I have to disagree with this. There are loads of old maps that need fixing, and it's better to do it late than never. Osu! has a long way ahead and on the long run it's much better to have quality content than to save a few scores (especially as a dozen maps doesn't make a difference when people have thousands of maps under their belts).

MarioBros777 wrote:

What would this mean for the older maps in the osu! community then?

My thought, exactly. I suppose I agree with Gemi that it would be better in the long run to fix timing problems on old maps. Since maps can be reuploaded/fixed without needing the old creators (most of which no longer visit osu!), then it shouldn't be a problem to fix them. (Right?)

For new(er) maps (or any maps in general, actually), I really wouldn't mind losing scores in order for them to be fixed.

This map has been deleted on the request of its creator. It is no longer available.

Option 1 definately. I'd happily forfeit a score i had on a map to fix the map/make the map better.

With that said though, Unranking shouldn't really need to be done at all. People should fix these issues before it is ranked in the first place.

Despite not having played for a while, I do remember when I used to spend hours on maps in order to get S/S/H ranks. Those are hours I would prefer not to have gone wasted.

This map has been deleted on the request of its creator. It is no longer available.

I picked option 2, because on occasion I do try to get a high score on something that's not trivial. Overall, though, on a broader spectrum, I'd be somewhere in between 1 and 2. 1.7?

I don't mind losing my score, but I wouldn't want it to happen too often.

Cuz... I do games as enjoy :3
I don't mind tha things but...
I'm also sad as unranked maps :3

I voted for #1 because the only maps I bother to get a high score in are generally the ones I really enjoy playing, anyway.

awp wrote:

I voted for #1 because the only maps I bother to get a high score in are generally the ones I really enjoy playing, anyway.

Mmm, I think I noticed this too.

Though most maps I enjoy playing I can't even FC because I love them for the challenge.

Echo wrote:

spend hours on maps in order to get S/S/H ranks. Those are hours I would prefer not to have gone wasted.

3. Unless the error is really bad, for a REALLY bad map. Like Timebomb. Or a map that got ranked very recently so that players haven't managed to get so much score yet.

I voted for option 2 as I find most of the time when a map needs to be unranked, it should be unranked. Although, I don't like how scores get cleared off of difficulties in a map that had no problems at all just cause one of the diffs had a problem.

In my opinion, the unranking process should change. I agree and don't agree at the same time how peppy would like if two or more BATs look at a map. I think that if was a major issue that should've been seen such has overlapping notes or a blatant spacing error, then yes, two more BATs should look at it, as more then likely the two BATs who ranked it missed other crucial errors. But say it was a small error that could've been overlooked, such as a minor spacing error or a few(not all) unsnapped notes or a slight change in BPM, then the map should be unranked, let the mapper fix the error, and then reranked preserving scores in diffs that has no problems.

At least that what I think would work best.

rust45 wrote:

But say it was a small error that could've been overlooked, such as a minor spacing error or a few(not all) unsnapped notes or a slight change in BPM, then the map should be unranked, let the mapper fix the error, and then reranked preserving scores in diffs that has no problems.

Most of the time one problem is overlooked, more are found. Like 9/10 times. Just sayin'

This map has been deleted on the request of its creator. It is no longer available.

Project Renewal is baack?

I voted option 2. I believe a loss of scores is a small price to pay to fix a seriously broken map. (I feel dirty getting ranked points for the original Caramelldansen anyway. ) But don't derank a map for minor trivia like rare, one-off spacing errors. It's just not worth it, especially if the map is of quality.

Maps with a wrong BPM like Never Gonna Give You Up need to be fixed.

Also, the mapper should be allowed to request a de/re-ranking of their map to fix mistakes if either the map in question does reasonably need a rework or if it's only something like hitsounds or skinning and can be done without requiring a score reset.

Scores should only be wiped if something affecting gameplay has been changed. I suppose the BAT would need to check for this.

MetalMario201 wrote:

Scores should only be wiped if something affecting gameplay has been changed. I suppose the BAT would need to check for this.

This would be automated.

i don't mind to lose scores if the map need changes. osu! is relaxing, play and mod maps for killing time.

3.
Playing the same map is really annoying.

But
Nowadays, timing/spacing error can be found easily so we can make player's damage to minimum ^^

i went 2nd option..i don't mind losing my score...not really that big of a deal..but if a map needs unranking...then why was it ranked in the first place

if by voting the first option i only think of maps that has gotten ranked recently (year 2009) should be fixed, but only if it has major issues like timing or several hidden sliders. i don't mind loosing score, however i do mind all the effort it takes to re-rank the map(by that i mean score fixing/purging and the whole process of getting it ranked again). it's annoying for both the mappers, the players and the Admins.

PS: don't unrank anymaps now or i might loose my perfect score

the ranking system is tricky.

I chose option 2, due to the fact that - Yes, some maps WILL need editing, and yes, they will be needed so that they can go online for others to enjoy and attempt at beating one another at scores.

Along with that, I don't mind having to get the score again, as you can always better your self at something, but if it IS an often occurrence, then a LOT of people would be annoyed.

My2cents.

I definitely want quality maps to be pushed over scores. I don't mind losing my score at all.
If I ever have to play something again because it was unranked, I would of course try again as much as I need to (I'd be better at it, since I'd know the map by then).

The map quality is most important. I am happy to forfeit my score and achieve it again.

>:-)

My 2 maps got slider issues...

In my opinion if there's space error then just let it be. Most of the ranked maps with this error were ranked long time ago. Treat that as a "feature" of old maps. The most important things is, this won't happen too often now
If this is timing error, then....um.... just unrank them lol

I feel it depends a lot on the amount of time since the ranking. If it's so minor that nobody's noticed it in, say, a month or two, it's probably not worth it. But if people are consistently noticing the error, especially if the map is new, every effort should be made to correct it.

I have no high scores. Except for in CtB. But those are easy to get back for the most part, and plus, my score could get knocked off/it's generally a temporary thing, etc. The map quality will be around to annoy people everytime they play, plus, once it gets fixed it may be easier to achieve higher scores.

I see no issues with maps getting unranked or losing some score, I think it should be done within a reasonable manner.
So far unranks are rare, if not present most of the time.
Btw you say the new system will be more lax?/ I think I understand now.

Ofcourse unrank shouldn't be happening due to all approvals the map have got but if it is neccessary, it should be unrank as quick as possible.

Don't care about score at all. I'd rather the map be enjoyable and have to play it again than small timing errors, etc.

So long as BATs are reviewing maps, and can honestly say it was an oversight and not laziness or favoritism at the time or something, I don't think unranking a map's that big of a deal. Mistakes happen y'know. Just do your best, and if someone points something out later, take care of it and rerank it after it's fixed.

Obviously the less unrankings the better, but ah well.

I would be happy to reachieve any score I have if a map were to unranked, but this shouldn't happen in the first place. I know this often happens as a mistake, and human beings have this constant tic of erring. Still, it takes two to rank, and two BATs overlooking the same flaw means that something went wrong.

ok firstly i think a large collection of perfect beatmaps is FAR more important than ranked score. i do however think that users who passed the map should be notifed by pm.

secondly does anyone know why Eeee's version of TiK ToK was unranked because imsure itwas ranked then one day it wasnt? now there is only agent spin here's version. are multiple beatmaps not allowed?

Search for Pokemon Theme and Hirari.

That should answer your question.

I see the poll is closed, but I would have voted for the second option.
One question: how can I see the map is unranked and my score gone? Will it show up again in the new maps when it is re-ranked?

This depends on the change the beatmap is facing. If the difficulty has something within the map that changes (e.g. snapping error fixed), then it's going to have a score wipe. Otherwise, the score should be safe and sound.

i agree at # 1 and 2...IT WAS REALLY FUN THOUGH!