You cut the most important part of that sentence. There is already a thread for that idea, and it would be best if you make your comments over there so they don't get lost.rickyboi wrote:
bomber34 wrote:
You would screw the whole point system up.
forum
Allow to use different Approach Rates in map
posted
Total Posts
313
This feature request is stupid and shouldn't even exist.
peppy or someone else, please deny this.
Why? well, let's say someone makes an Insane diff.
If it's insane, it's suppose to have insane beatmap settings. AR9 for example. Not constantly changing to AR8 because suddenly there's a calm part in the song. No, it's one diff and it should only be one approach rate.
Don't be silly. Keep the beatmap settings differently according to the difficulty.
peppy or someone else, please deny this.
Why? well, let's say someone makes an Insane diff.
If it's insane, it's suppose to have insane beatmap settings. AR9 for example. Not constantly changing to AR8 because suddenly there's a calm part in the song. No, it's one diff and it should only be one approach rate.
Don't be silly. Keep the beatmap settings differently according to the difficulty.
Topic Starter
If you had ever played CTB,then you will understand how does it feel to play an Insane diff with AR9 on a calm part of the song with calm music and voice and with omgwtfisthisshit fruits flying everywhere - THAT IS STUPID! Sometimes different AR's on Insane diffs will really fit the songs (not all songs,but some of them exactly!)theowest wrote:
This feature request is stupid and shouldn't even exist.
peppy or someone else, please deny this.
Why? well, let's say someone makes an Insane diff.
If it's insane, it's suppose to have insane beatmap settings. AR9 for example. Not constantly changing to AR8 because suddenly there's a calm part in the song. No, it's one diff and it should only be one approach rate.
Don't be silly. Keep the beatmap settings differently according to the difficulty.
So think before you say something and look how many EXPERIENCED mappers support this idea,not just random guys like idk
I don't play CtB because it sucks but oh well. An osu! beatmap isn't created for CtB. Osu maps are just transferred over to CtB or taiko, which can cause some crazy shit if the osu! beatmap is really hard. Maybe this different AR thing is something for the CtB and taiko players only? I've thought of this very much actually, I've thought of this for over 8 fucking months. I don't care if experienced mappers support this, it doesn't mean they have thought this through just as much as I have.Giorgos wrote:
If you had ever played CTB,then you will understand how does it feel to play an Insane diff with AR9 on a calm part of the song with calm music and voice and with omgwtfisthisshit fruits flying everywhere - THAT IS STUPID! Sometimes different AR's on Insane diffs will really fit the songs (not all songs,but some of them exactly!)theowest wrote:
This feature request is stupid and shouldn't even exist.
peppy or someone else, please deny this.
Why? well, let's say someone makes an Insane diff.
If it's insane, it's suppose to have insane beatmap settings. AR9 for example. Not constantly changing to AR8 because suddenly there's a calm part in the song. No, it's one diff and it should only be one approach rate.
Don't be silly. Keep the beatmap settings differently according to the difficulty.
So think before you say something and look how many EXPERIENCED mappers support this idea,not just random guys like idk
Let's be honest, this will never be implemented.
Topic Starter
CTB difficulties will become rankable soon,and this thing will be very useful for them,so it doesn't matter if it sucks for such a pro like you or not - I will not calm down until this idea WILL become real! So we will see.
So you are telling us that AR10 Maps (e.g. Can't Defeat Airman) could be lowered to AR6 (or whatever) so they become easier to play and still give the same amount of points? That would ruin the whole ranking system, since many of us can't beat hard maps like the one I took for example only because of the AR. With a lowered AR much more players would be able to beat the map and get into the TOP 50 and being in the TOP 50 wouldn't be special anymore.
If you haven't already noticed, I am against this option ._.
If you haven't already noticed, I am against this option ._.
you're talking about me? Didn't you even read what I said? I said that if you use lower AR, you should be given LESS points. It becomes EASIER. Dammit, people need to read before they make stupid statements.TheHaya wrote:
So you are telling us that AR10 Maps (e.g. Can't Defeat Airman) could be lowered to AR6 (or whatever) so they become easier to play and still give the same amount of points? That would ruin the whole ranking system, since many of us can't beat hard maps like the one I took for example only because of the AR. With a lowered AR much more players would be able to beat the map and get into the TOP 50 and being in the TOP 50 wouldn't be special anymore.
If you haven't already noticed, I am against this option ._.
More like people should learn to read thread titles, this is about mappers using different ARs on an individual beatmap.theowest wrote:
you're talking about me? Didn't you even read what I said? I said that if you use lower AR, you should be given LESS points. It becomes EASIER. Dammit, people need to read before they make stupid statements.TheHaya wrote:
So you are telling us that AR10 Maps (e.g. Can't Defeat Airman) could be lowered to AR6 (or whatever) so they become easier to play and still give the same amount of points? That would ruin the whole ranking system, since many of us can't beat hard maps like the one I took for example only because of the AR. With a lowered AR much more players would be able to beat the map and get into the TOP 50 and being in the TOP 50 wouldn't be special anymore.
If you haven't already noticed, I am against this option ._.
yes. But I gave an OPINION on what I think should be the case here. What I think is better than the original idea in this thread.Sakura Hana wrote:
More like people should learn to read thread titles, this is about mappers using different ARs on an individual beatmap.
just burn this with fire already.
Waryas
it would be easier with AR9. Why the hell would you make it 4 steps easier? One step is enough.Waryas wrote:
I know this is offtopic but!
Difficulty is subjective, Airman wouldn't be easier with ar6 but about 100x harder for some people.
For you maybe, but not for those who can't see that fast.Waryas wrote:
Too clustered. Ar10 is the easiest.to pass
This is all individual.
Waryas
Hence why i say AR difficulty is subjective and you can't give scores based on AR.
Being able to play low AR is a skill, high ar is a skill too, you can't make one give different score than the other.
OD on the other hand is different, low OD is easy for everyone, high OD is hard, hence why it gives more point.
Being able to play low AR is a skill, high ar is a skill too, you can't make one give different score than the other.
OD on the other hand is different, low OD is easy for everyone, high OD is hard, hence why it gives more point.
Excellent point! Somebody write this down, give this to peppy or something.Waryas wrote:
Hence why i say AR difficulty is subjective and you can't give scores based on AR.
Being able to play low AR is a skill, high ar is a skill too, you can't make one give different score than the other.
OD on the other hand is different, low OD is easy for everyone, high OD is hard, hence why it gives more point.
Wait. I just realised that I posted my opinion on the wrong thread. I apologize for the whole misunderstanding .___.
What an awful idea.
Most people who support this don't relaise how bad is this and how confusing will be this.
Most people who support this don't relaise how bad is this and how confusing will be this.
As if the beatmapper knows what's best for the player.. lolTheNutritiousGuy wrote:
What an awful idea.
Most people who support this don't relaise how bad is this and how confusing will be this.
Cheer-no
This is, as much as people are hating it, a pretty good idea. However just letting people pick new difficulty settings mid song sucks so how about a timing section where you adjust the slider speed also adjusts the AR? Create a tickable box like "Inherit timing sections" or "3/4 time" that says "Inherit AR"
That way excessive use becomes tedious to make, and also goes par with an increase in slider speed which makes it generally harder to implement for difficulty alone without the map itself becoming a clusterfuck cesspool, thus ugly, thus unrankable.
Making a new feature hard to work with is not the best solution, but for the one or two maps that need it, REALLY REALLY need it, the change should be big enough for it to not be too jarring to change slider speed at the same time. It's a lazy patch-up solution but it's a solution nonetheless, no?
That way excessive use becomes tedious to make, and also goes par with an increase in slider speed which makes it generally harder to implement for difficulty alone without the map itself becoming a clusterfuck cesspool, thus ugly, thus unrankable.
Making a new feature hard to work with is not the best solution, but for the one or two maps that need it, REALLY REALLY need it, the change should be big enough for it to not be too jarring to change slider speed at the same time. It's a lazy patch-up solution but it's a solution nonetheless, no?
I think it sounds nice, but would be confusing. Mod the HELL out of it, then maybe 
Support.
Personally I think this will put more emphasis on listening for musical cues rather than just spamming circles and relying on ninja reflexes.
This could work, but it needs to come with some sort of filter for people to know what songs have a dynamic AR.
Personally I think this will put more emphasis on listening for musical cues rather than just spamming circles and relying on ninja reflexes.
This could work, but it needs to come with some sort of filter for people to know what songs have a dynamic AR.
I mean, yeah. Why not. Stepmania did it, why wouldn't osu?
The maps would just get a bit more modding if there's any problem.
The maps would just get a bit more modding if there's any problem.
i see this got bumnped.
in my honest opinion, this literally would be used successfully in like less than 1% of maps, unless people started to map really weirdly timed songs and/or songs with extremely extremely dramatic BPM changes or style changes.
Also, using stepmania, and other rhythm games as an example just doesn't work. First of all because I really hate the notion of saying ,"omg well look this other game/person did it, so why can't we do it?" Like I seriously hate that argument; it's those people who say, "well this map did it on osu! why can't why I do the same thing in my map?" It's not really a legitimate argument. But anyways, secondly, stepmania and other rhythm games function differently in that notes come to a certain position, while in osu! the notes are stationary and approach circles move toward the note. It's very clear to see a change in speed in stepmania, but not as easy in osu!
Nevertheless, this could work, but i'm still leaning toward not supporting just because I don't see much of a use. If it does get implemented, I wouldn't have much of a problem with it to be honest. It's kinda hard to explain what i'm thinking. meh
in my honest opinion, this literally would be used successfully in like less than 1% of maps, unless people started to map really weirdly timed songs and/or songs with extremely extremely dramatic BPM changes or style changes.
Also, using stepmania, and other rhythm games as an example just doesn't work. First of all because I really hate the notion of saying ,"omg well look this other game/person did it, so why can't we do it?" Like I seriously hate that argument; it's those people who say, "well this map did it on osu! why can't why I do the same thing in my map?" It's not really a legitimate argument. But anyways, secondly, stepmania and other rhythm games function differently in that notes come to a certain position, while in osu! the notes are stationary and approach circles move toward the note. It's very clear to see a change in speed in stepmania, but not as easy in osu!
Nevertheless, this could work, but i'm still leaning toward not supporting just because I don't see much of a use. If it does get implemented, I wouldn't have much of a problem with it to be honest. It's kinda hard to explain what i'm thinking. meh
I don't see this being useful except in multi-BPM maps with breaks in between the AR changes... very rare, I'd say
Calm the fuck down, I know how stepmania uses it and I could from there imagine how osu! would use it. Is it really that hard to imagine this?winber1 wrote:
Also, using stepmania, and other rhythm games as an example just doesn't work. First of all because I really hate the notion of saying ,"omg well look this other game/person did it, so why can't we do it?" Like I seriously hate that argument; it's those people who say, "well this map did it on osu! why can't why I do the same thing in my map?" It's not really a legitimate argument. But anyways, secondly, stepmania and other rhythm games function differently in that notes come to a certain position, while in osu! the notes are stationary and approach circles move toward the note. It's very clear to see a change in speed in stepmania, but not as easy in osu! h
Even if it's harder to notice the speed changes in osu!, that still wouldn't change much. That's a good thing, right? Melts together better with the beatmap. But I seriously doubt you wouldn't notice the AR changes at all. They're suppose to change for a reason. A new section of the beatmap, a new bpm. There must be some sort of break before you can change the AR. Otherwise it would just cluster-fuck everything.
i think this is a pretty nice idea, if it doesnt play well in a map it will get modded out anyway.
ross53545
ross53545 wrote:
The autism is strong in this one.silmarilen wrote:
i think this is a pretty nice idea, if it doesnt play well in a map it will get modded out anyway.
Topic Starter
Continue to discuss,I won't let this idea go so easy
Cheer-no wrote:
This would be awesome for compilation maps... but that's about it, other than a few other niche cases where the song completely changes rhythm partway through. Not worth implementing for the less than 1% of maps that would use it correctly.
I'd definitely enjoyed this feature, it will add a lot of variety in mapping, also changing CS - just imagine the possibility for new stream and other patterns, especially mixed with the spacing changes.
We already have changing slider velocity and even multi-BPM maps, so why not? People will adapt to this thing too. It could be used in constant BPM maps too, just for the visual design.
Just make it unranked feature like notes on sliders so only fun maps will be noticed and shitmaps ignored anyway, and when mappers learn to use it good enough to fit the map, slowly make some of those ranked.
Again, why not?
We already have changing slider velocity and even multi-BPM maps, so why not? People will adapt to this thing too. It could be used in constant BPM maps too, just for the visual design.
Just make it unranked feature like notes on sliders so only fun maps will be noticed and shitmaps ignored anyway, and when mappers learn to use it good enough to fit the map, slowly make some of those ranked.
Again, why not?
For strong BPM switches: Maybe yes.
For compilations (Marathon Maps): Yes
For the regular use: No. This will be poorly abused and cause just shitstorm.
For compilations (Marathon Maps): Yes
For the regular use: No. This will be poorly abused and cause just shitstorm.
Agree.Stefan wrote:
For strong BPM switches: Maybe yes.
For compilations (Marathon Maps): Yes
For the regular use: No. This will be poorly abused and cause just shitstorm.
Too many people would fuck shit up with this randomly.
Let's unrank sliders, there's a potential for abuse and may cause a shitstorm.
Shohei Ohtani
How different approach rates would work
"This isn't ok you can't just change between AR 9 and 10 every 4 measures"
"wow killing mapper spirit #r00d"
Like it's an ok idea and I'd like to see it get implemented, as there are a lot of instances where maps would benefit from this
However, it would be like SV changes, where people would be like "haha look at this new feature
lets use it
all the time"
He's saying that it would be abused moreso than used correctly. Sliders on the other hand are used correctly moreso than abused :3.
"This isn't ok you can't just change between AR 9 and 10 every 4 measures"
"wow killing mapper spirit #r00d"
Like it's an ok idea and I'd like to see it get implemented, as there are a lot of instances where maps would benefit from this
However, it would be like SV changes, where people would be like "haha look at this new feature
lets use it
all the time"
I think you misunderstood his statementtuddster wrote:
Let's unrank sliders, there's a potential for abuse and may cause a shitstorm.
He's saying that it would be abused moreso than used correctly. Sliders on the other hand are used correctly moreso than abused :3.
There's no point doing it since the circles comes 1 by 1 anyway.
I think this will break the fluidity of the map. Like. Completely. Gosh. No.
I think this will break the fluidity of the map. Like. Completely. Gosh. No.
I was JUST about to request this.
This thread lives for 3 years, why have I NEVVER seen it?
In any case, I strongly support it.
First of all, EVERYTHING I'm saying now is my own opinion. It's based on my own experiences and my own point of view, please respect that and don't insult me right off the bat.
Why do I want it?
a) BPM changes in a map.
You know, compilations made by users, maps like DeltaMAX or even just normal songs with varying AR.
AR >should be< mostly dependant on the density of objects in a map. If you have more objects, you need higher AR to make reading comfortable. And the higher your BPM, the higher your object density. This is why Banned Forever (high BPM => high density) does not seems comfortable to read for many players, we all agree here, yes?
So imagine you have a track that starts off at around 150 BPM, which, in my opinion, would work well with AR7 depending on the stream spacing n stuff, but then speeds up to 180 or 190. The AR would be far too low then. By using different ARs for different sections we could achieve two things.
First, we gain ARs that actually fit the pacing of the map.
Secondly the change of ARs implies the speedup and thus even helps the reading of said speedups. When you, as a player, see that the next approach circles are faster, you intuitively realize something will happen, and will react better.
EXAMPLE BEATMAP: ginkiha - Oriens [Extra] (Deif)
This song starts at 140 BPM and then goes up to 185. Back when I first played it I had a hard time even understanding what was going on since it's not really a sudden change or anything. It just felt off for me. Granted, I wasn't good at reading maps back then, but if there would have been an AR change in the map, I just might have had a better time reading the speedup.
b) SV changes
I know these days SV changes are kind of a controversial issue, if you do anything that exceeds what some people call "reasonable" it's instantly called abused, unreadable and BAD without second thought.
If AR could be changed according to SV, sudden slowdowns would be easier to read. Why is that? As far as I know, the current speed at which Sliderticks appear depends on the AR. Or rather, if the AR is lower, the slider will appear earlier and thus the sliderticks will appear earlier as well. That means: If you have a slowdown slider which would NOT be "readable" (in fact everything not 2B-style is technically readable, but let's just stick to that term for now) alone, using a lower AR for that AR would make the slider appear earlier, thus make the sliderticks accessible for the player to read faster and enable him to play the slider properly without needing to worry about overshooting it.
EXAMPLE BEATMAP: HujuniseikouyuuP - Sayonara Lechenaultia [Lechenaultia] or [Fay] (qq944364487)
This map uses some 0.5x SV multipliers which are kinda hard to get. A described earlier, variable AR might help for those.
c) Gimmicks
I know I'll get hate for this. But yeah I don't even care.
osu! has exceeded the state of being a simple rhythm game ages ago. By now, many mappers use various gimmicks to make their map more interesting, more challenging, more fun, more enjoyable. That includes weird spacing or SV changes, streamjumps etc. Please, guys, this is not a bad thing. You're free to dislike every gimmicky map but don't call it bad just for that reason. It's simply another form of progress.
Some like those. Others don't. It's subjective. Whether it's playable or not depends on the player's skills, NOT on the map.
I see a LOT of potential for multiple ARs to be used as a gimmick. It's possible to emphasize strong beats in the music or force the player adapt to another pace. Unless you don't change the AR with every circle so that the map will be a total mess, I can imagine this to be very fun and take "reading" to a whole new level.
Obviously, players will need to adapt to this. They are not used to adapting to new AR, let alone playing stuff like AR8 or AR10 at all (mappers putting AR9 on 132 BPM maps... *sigh*)
This would require them to learn a new skill in order to play as many maps as possible, and I can imagine that a lot of people, mappers, modders and players, can be afraid of this. But don't you think it just might be better in the long run? If players learn to play differing ARs they will also have less trouble playing maps that have lower or higher AR than they should have, like Banned Forever or Airman (my opinion, don't kill me. thx)
As for the "This will be abused!" argument: Are you sure? I mean, surely, mappers will try to use such a new feature, and maybe it won't work out just as well as planned, but who of you decides where "abuse" starts? Isn't that term too subjective already?
If something really is just stupid in a way that it makes absolutely no sense, rhythmically or gameplay-wise, we still have modders and BATs who have the opportunity and duty to point out such issues and get rid of them. However I expect mappers, at least the experienced ones, to treat this with caution and not overuse it when it's implemented.
So that's why I want multiple ARs in a map.
Just give new stuff a chance. Try new things, adapt, and make progress. You will notice it is not all bad just because it seemed a little bit off at the beginning.
This thread lives for 3 years, why have I NEVVER seen it?
In any case, I strongly support it.
First of all, EVERYTHING I'm saying now is my own opinion. It's based on my own experiences and my own point of view, please respect that and don't insult me right off the bat.
Why do I want it?
a) BPM changes in a map.
You know, compilations made by users, maps like DeltaMAX or even just normal songs with varying AR.
AR >should be< mostly dependant on the density of objects in a map. If you have more objects, you need higher AR to make reading comfortable. And the higher your BPM, the higher your object density. This is why Banned Forever (high BPM => high density) does not seems comfortable to read for many players, we all agree here, yes?
So imagine you have a track that starts off at around 150 BPM, which, in my opinion, would work well with AR7 depending on the stream spacing n stuff, but then speeds up to 180 or 190. The AR would be far too low then. By using different ARs for different sections we could achieve two things.
First, we gain ARs that actually fit the pacing of the map.
Secondly the change of ARs implies the speedup and thus even helps the reading of said speedups. When you, as a player, see that the next approach circles are faster, you intuitively realize something will happen, and will react better.
EXAMPLE BEATMAP: ginkiha - Oriens [Extra] (Deif)
This song starts at 140 BPM and then goes up to 185. Back when I first played it I had a hard time even understanding what was going on since it's not really a sudden change or anything. It just felt off for me. Granted, I wasn't good at reading maps back then, but if there would have been an AR change in the map, I just might have had a better time reading the speedup.
b) SV changes
I know these days SV changes are kind of a controversial issue, if you do anything that exceeds what some people call "reasonable" it's instantly called abused, unreadable and BAD without second thought.
If AR could be changed according to SV, sudden slowdowns would be easier to read. Why is that? As far as I know, the current speed at which Sliderticks appear depends on the AR. Or rather, if the AR is lower, the slider will appear earlier and thus the sliderticks will appear earlier as well. That means: If you have a slowdown slider which would NOT be "readable" (in fact everything not 2B-style is technically readable, but let's just stick to that term for now) alone, using a lower AR for that AR would make the slider appear earlier, thus make the sliderticks accessible for the player to read faster and enable him to play the slider properly without needing to worry about overshooting it.
EXAMPLE BEATMAP: HujuniseikouyuuP - Sayonara Lechenaultia [Lechenaultia] or [Fay] (qq944364487)
This map uses some 0.5x SV multipliers which are kinda hard to get. A described earlier, variable AR might help for those.
c) Gimmicks
I know I'll get hate for this. But yeah I don't even care.
osu! has exceeded the state of being a simple rhythm game ages ago. By now, many mappers use various gimmicks to make their map more interesting, more challenging, more fun, more enjoyable. That includes weird spacing or SV changes, streamjumps etc. Please, guys, this is not a bad thing. You're free to dislike every gimmicky map but don't call it bad just for that reason. It's simply another form of progress.
Some like those. Others don't. It's subjective. Whether it's playable or not depends on the player's skills, NOT on the map.
I see a LOT of potential for multiple ARs to be used as a gimmick. It's possible to emphasize strong beats in the music or force the player adapt to another pace. Unless you don't change the AR with every circle so that the map will be a total mess, I can imagine this to be very fun and take "reading" to a whole new level.
Obviously, players will need to adapt to this. They are not used to adapting to new AR, let alone playing stuff like AR8 or AR10 at all (mappers putting AR9 on 132 BPM maps... *sigh*)
This would require them to learn a new skill in order to play as many maps as possible, and I can imagine that a lot of people, mappers, modders and players, can be afraid of this. But don't you think it just might be better in the long run? If players learn to play differing ARs they will also have less trouble playing maps that have lower or higher AR than they should have, like Banned Forever or Airman (my opinion, don't kill me. thx)
As for the "This will be abused!" argument: Are you sure? I mean, surely, mappers will try to use such a new feature, and maybe it won't work out just as well as planned, but who of you decides where "abuse" starts? Isn't that term too subjective already?
If something really is just stupid in a way that it makes absolutely no sense, rhythmically or gameplay-wise, we still have modders and BATs who have the opportunity and duty to point out such issues and get rid of them. However I expect mappers, at least the experienced ones, to treat this with caution and not overuse it when it's implemented.
So that's why I want multiple ARs in a map.
Just give new stuff a chance. Try new things, adapt, and make progress. You will notice it is not all bad just because it seemed a little bit off at the beginning.
Just making a tl;dr of why I don't give support to this, keep in mind this is my opinion and feel free to disagree...
The idea is awesome, I would love to see it in many maps and think it would be very cool to play, but the thing called Hard Rock make all of this pretty pointless because of the AR10 cap imposed by the system, HR basically makes AR>=7 go up to 10 (or very close to it, in AR7 case) making the whole mapper work pointless. The mapper have all the work to time the song, select a lower AR specifically for that slow part, which probably won't be bellow 7 because of the current mapping meta, then a player do not like that change and just throw the HR mod and everything is AR10 making it somewhat similar to constant BPM speed mods in Stepmania.
HR with the current maps is just a bad designed mod, it basically throws 99% of insane maps to CS5/OD10/AR10, just because there are caps for both AR and OD without the Double Time mod (and even the DT have a cap too), which is pretty ironic because you can have negative AR with the Easy and Half-time mods. And since this mod cannot be removed or redesigned without completely destroying the current ranking/scoring system, this "different Approach Rates in a map" request would be just another bad design piled up into this.
It would be really cool to play a map built like this, like Zarerion said in his post, AR, BPM, SV and snapping distance are mainly what make the feeling of the map, the variable AR could help to build an even better feeling if well executed, but in the end it's just unfair if some people are competing by using a fixed speed (AR10 with HR) the whole map long.
The idea is awesome, I would love to see it in many maps and think it would be very cool to play, but the thing called Hard Rock make all of this pretty pointless because of the AR10 cap imposed by the system, HR basically makes AR>=7 go up to 10 (or very close to it, in AR7 case) making the whole mapper work pointless. The mapper have all the work to time the song, select a lower AR specifically for that slow part, which probably won't be bellow 7 because of the current mapping meta, then a player do not like that change and just throw the HR mod and everything is AR10 making it somewhat similar to constant BPM speed mods in Stepmania.
HR with the current maps is just a bad designed mod, it basically throws 99% of insane maps to CS5/OD10/AR10, just because there are caps for both AR and OD without the Double Time mod (and even the DT have a cap too), which is pretty ironic because you can have negative AR with the Easy and Half-time mods. And since this mod cannot be removed or redesigned without completely destroying the current ranking/scoring system, this "different Approach Rates in a map" request would be just another bad design piled up into this.
It would be really cool to play a map built like this, like Zarerion said in his post, AR, BPM, SV and snapping distance are mainly what make the feeling of the map, the variable AR could help to build an even better feeling if well executed, but in the end it's just unfair if some people are competing by using a fixed speed (AR10 with HR) the whole map long.
Bump!
I was just about to make a request for this, but then I decided to save the mods some time and search for a similar request and what do you know... I found one!
Anyway, i think this feature would be really useful and it will add a new level of variety to maps.
I was just about to make a request for this, but then I decided to save the mods some time and search for a similar request and what do you know... I found one!
Anyway, i think this feature would be really useful and it will add a new level of variety to maps.
bump! please.. this needs some more discussion
^are you serious?
Not so sure about sudden changes, but being able to set a start and end point would work quite well (think - what deltamax does for tempo, you should be able to do to AR)
e.g. in the timing panel, if you set AR7 at 0ms and AR9 at 10000ms, it should be AR8 at 5000ms, AR8.5 at 7500ms, etc.
Oh, I think I made this more confusing. Oops.
e.g. in the timing panel, if you set AR7 at 0ms and AR9 at 10000ms, it should be AR8 at 5000ms, AR8.5 at 7500ms, etc.
Oh, I think I made this more confusing. Oops.
for me i think it could increase when a higher BPM is in effect and/or slider velocity increases/decreases
now I understand why it got kinda denied. The idea is good but your reasons/way to do it are just...
ugh, just not the way to do it.
ugh, just not the way to do it.
Will this result in maps with AR10 and a section of 2X approaching circle ~~
It seems to be a good idea (: but ONLY in real BPM changes. Thus, it would be available just for red lines (that ones that set BPM sections). And such things feels doing work well on drastic BPM changes only. Or in gradual increasing/decreasing BPMs.
i don´t think this may aproved,imagine, 3 hits with diferents ARs,It´s like put a normal and a insane map in the same map,If this go to osu i may be only allowed to Insane maps
I like this
For calm parts you can use 7.5-8, and for faster parts you can use 9-10 (For example Yousei Teikoku - Wahrheit)
Also this would work well for marathoncompilations and such
For calm parts you can use 7.5-8, and for faster parts you can use 9-10 (For example Yousei Teikoku - Wahrheit)
Also this would work well for marathoncompilations and such
now that I look at it again, the only useful thing about this seems to be marathons or songs that heavily change their style.
yeah, especially for song compilations where there is a heavy change in bpm, the ability to change AR to that will be definitely useful.Blue Dragon wrote:
now that I look at it again, the only useful thing about this seems to be marathons or songs that heavily change their style.
although, i CAN see people abusing this function though and there will need to be new set rules in order to prevent that.
I'm rather torn on this one. This could potentially be very bad if it was abused. Should be used very sparingly, and only if very appropriate. Would throw me off even more than SB's suddenly starting to strobe.
4 years...
We could set a rule where it's only allowed to use this for Compilations with at least four different songs. To prevent this being used in normal maps.Kibbleru wrote:
yeah, especially for song compilations where there is a heavy change in bpm, the ability to change AR to that will be definitely useful.Blue Dragon wrote:
now that I look at it again, the only useful thing about this seems to be marathons or songs that heavily change their style.
although, i CAN see people abusing this function though and there will need to be new set rules in order to prevent that.
4 different songs doesnt make sense, it should be min 2 different songs at a BPM difference that calls for different ARs. Or maybe just a high enough BPM change in one beatmap.Stefan wrote:
We could set a rule where it's only allowed to use this for Compilations with at least four different songs. To prevent this being used in normal maps.
Imagine a "compilation" with one 100 BPM song and one 300 BPM song, on the other hand, 4 different songs all within the 200-250 bpm range probably dont need different ARs.
Also speaking only with ctb gameplay in mind, i think various BPMs in one map, for instance a series of stong beats falling faster than other weaker beats would be fun.
That's actually common sense to notice a difference between 200-250 and 100-300 BPM so people probably won't change the AR every 30 seconds in case the song changes after 30 seconds.Granger wrote:
4 different songs doesnt make sense, it should be min 2 different songs at a BPM difference that calls for different ARs. Or maybe just a high enough BPM change in one beatmap.Stefan wrote:
We could set a rule where it's only allowed to use this for Compilations with at least four different songs. To prevent this being used in normal maps.
Imagine a "compilation" with one 100 BPM song and one 300 BPM song, on the other hand, 4 different songs all within the 200-250 bpm range probably dont need different ARs.
Right, however thats not the point i want to make, i am saying that your rule wording wouldnt allow a compilation with 100/300 BPM and 2 songs to use this, while this is one of the few things where different ARs would be usefull.Stefan wrote:
That's actually common sense to notice a difference between 200-250 and 100-300 BPM so people probably won't change the AR every 30 seconds in case the song changes after 30 seconds.Granger wrote:
4 different songs doesnt make sense, it should be min 2 different songs at a BPM difference that calls for different ARs. Or maybe just a high enough BPM change in one beatmap.
Imagine a "compilation" with one 100 BPM song and one 300 BPM song, on the other hand, 4 different songs all within the 200-250 bpm range probably dont need different ARs.
I... don't know about this... it could also be used in osu! mania though, sorta like freezes and slow downs in DDR.
A good example from other game: Tone sphere. The AR-changed note has a special effect to make player distinguish it from normal notes.
The ranking criteria will be very hard to amend according to this change.
The ranking criteria will be very hard to amend according to this change.
Kodora
Dont forget that some songs may have really extreme bpm jumps by themselves.Stefan wrote:
We could set a rule where it's only allowed to use this for Compilations with at least four different songs. To prevent this being used in normal maps.
Example: https://osu.ppy.sh/s/169858
I can't find any single AR working great here.
Mania players get along fine with it.Kitsunemimi wrote:
No because if we had this, it would be totally disorienting and unnecessary.
the way i see it is people make ar the way they want it for a reason when making their map, you dont really need to edit ar for standard osu and ctb mods like that, i think only in mania currently changing ar is something that should remain, this in other modes would be like taking the difficulty out of a map where as in mania its just for different playstyles honestly two ways i belive it should go is either this gets implemented and you get score deduction for using lower ar maybe even a higher score for higher ar or this doesnt get implemented and you can simply edit a song and make it unranked quickly
Lolwut?laishiou wrote:
the way i see it is people make ar the way they want it for a reason when making their map, you dont really need to edit ar for standard osu and ctb mods like that, i think only in mania currently changing ar is something that should remain, this in other modes would be like taking the difficulty out of a map where as in mania its just for different playstyles honestly two ways i belive it should go is either this gets implemented and you get score deduction for using lower ar maybe even a higher score for higher ar or this doesnt get implemented and you can simply edit a song and make it unranked quickly
It's for the mapper ya know?
That they be able to switch AR between parts
Not for a player who wants to get other AR
Also, I think you can only use it in compilations or maps with big changes (Wahrheit, deltaMAX etc.)
Also, limit to 1.5 change to prevent abuse
So for insanes it's between 8 and 9.5. if you set an ar, you can only change it not too much
Would be the best feature for std and ctb to implement.
This will make sight-reading nearly impossible,
please don't make standard maps even more weird!
please don't make standard maps even more weird!
formi wrote:
This will make sight-reading nearly impossible,
please don't make standard maps even more weird!
I don't undersstand, you can already troll with SV and AR10 or whatever you might think, but those kind of maps are just UNRANKABLE and will not be ranked in any future unless it makes sense. Don't add cuz it will make sightreading impossible? well, they will not be ranked if it is not sightreadable.
Don't imagine super random AR changing maps will get ranked, they will not be, but this would be great feature with some maps that have calm moment but 9 or higher AR.
think of begining parts of image material, they honestly feel very terrible untill it gets to actual "hard" parts
honestly it will be interesting, but with that thing RC should be changed(deeply changed immo), moreover, it's a huge chance of overusing or inappropriate using of that. Also player should be warned about ar change for sure (some kind of flashy effect for example) what can be a reason of fps drop and blame
well, as player i'd say no, but as mapper... it will be really cool gear to emphazising things
well, as player i'd say no, but as mapper... it will be really cool gear to emphazising things
...but as a player...EvilElvis wrote:
honestly it will be interesting, but with that thing RC should be changed(deeply changed immo), moreover, it's a huge chance of overusing or inappropriate using of that. Also player should be warned about ar change for sure (some kind of flashy effect for example) what can be a reason of fps drop and blame
well, as player i'd say no, but as mapper... it will be really cool gear to emphazising things
But I guess when the AR is changed, if implemented, the score multiplier must be also. Just like changing the keys on o!m (4K, 5K, 6K...)
Why should the multiplier change if the mapper decides to use different ARs in a map? Whats the point?BlackMidKnight wrote:
But I guess when the AR is changed, if implemented, the score multiplier must be also. Just like changing the keys on o!m (4K, 5K, 6K...)
Bump
I just came across this searching for an other thread
Time to bring this back up
I just came across this searching for an other thread
Time to bring this back up
As nice as this would be (and it really would be nice), I'm afraid of what it would do to ranked maps if implemented. Ever since Toumei Elegy was dq'd because AR9.5 was deemed too low for it, I have no doubts that something like this would just be used as an excuse to force ranked maps to use excessively high AR in unfitting places. So...I *kinda* want this request to be implemented, but tbh I really don't 
As a more clear summary of my feelings about this: Yes, please give this to us, it is a really good thing, but please also fix the ranking system to prevent this from sucking.
As a more clear summary of my feelings about this: Yes, please give this to us, it is a really good thing, but please also fix the ranking system to prevent this from sucking.
I think a change in AR mid-song would be highly disorienting
No!
It can confuse players and give them lack of reactions
It can confuse players and give them lack of reactions
Guys
Isn't it kinda obvious that maps which overuse it and get unreadable can NEVER get ranked?
Also, you disagree with slight changes (8-10), but it's fine for mania. If it's fine there, why can't it be here as well?
Also, huge SV changes are fine, but small AR changes are not? What the heck
Isn't it kinda obvious that maps which overuse it and get unreadable can NEVER get ranked?
Also, you disagree with slight changes (8-10), but it's fine for mania. If it's fine there, why can't it be here as well?
Also, huge SV changes are fine, but small AR changes are not? What the heck
https://osu.ppy.sh/s/48738
God this map sucks. It has multiple approach rates god it's terrible. Totally unplayable. Gah! Too confusing!
</sarcasm>
God this map sucks. It has multiple approach rates god it's terrible. Totally unplayable. Gah! Too confusing!
</sarcasm>
Taiko uses it
Mania uses it
I see no reason why standard couldn't use it, that way you can fit the AR to the note density of each part of the song even better
Mania uses it
I see no reason why standard couldn't use it, that way you can fit the AR to the note density of each part of the song even better
terrible idea. Please never implement.
out of all the ideas in this forum.. not this one devs .
out of all the ideas in this forum.. not this one devs .
No. No. No. Absolutely no. Its a terrible idea. It may seem like a cool idea but its not at all.
Explain why
Example you have a song that changes bpm from 210 to 160 in one section and then back to 210. It would make sense and the map easier to read if the AR for the 160 bpm part went down a bit compared to the 210 bpm part, but right now we are kind of forced to
either map the 210 bpm part in a way that requires not that high AR (the use of AR 9.5ish has become kinda common for that speed)
or map the 160 bpm part with high AR which can be kind of a pain to read.
so basically decimal ARs would solve that problem all that's needed is to block out rooms for abuse as in using this in an unreasonable way.
If you disagree then give me some reasons
Example you have a song that changes bpm from 210 to 160 in one section and then back to 210. It would make sense and the map easier to read if the AR for the 160 bpm part went down a bit compared to the 210 bpm part, but right now we are kind of forced to
either map the 210 bpm part in a way that requires not that high AR (the use of AR 9.5ish has become kinda common for that speed)
or map the 160 bpm part with high AR which can be kind of a pain to read.
so basically decimal ARs would solve that problem all that's needed is to block out rooms for abuse as in using this in an unreasonable way.
If you disagree then give me some reasons
1. Changing to lower AR at lower BPM would certainly make map easier to read/play but thats the very problem. Why the heck would you want to make easier something thats supposed to be hard? If you make something hard easy its not hard anymore and that makes no sense at all. Its the best the way it is.
There are other reasons but i wont point them out because probably nobody actually cares them and one i did point out is enough imo.
There are other reasons but i wont point them out because probably nobody actually cares them and one i did point out is enough imo.
Youre not mapping a song to make it difficult. You map a song because you probably like the music and would like to create something that you can share with other players. If a song is calm/slow at a section, then that section is not meant to be fucking hard. If it was, then the artist wouldnt have made it calm. Easy as that.HK_ wrote:
Why the heck would you want to make easier something thats supposed to be hard? If you make something hard easy its not hard anymore and that makes no sense at all. Its the best the way it is.
If it's a fast song, then it's its nature to be difficult on the highest difficulty.
Relevant for that
2c
The AR change would be from only 1 point or 1,5 maximum !
Like you're having a slider ar8 and the next one has a higher sv (ex. 1,50x) then create an ar9 or 9,5 for this said slider.
Hope you see my point of view.
Like you're having a slider ar8 and the next one has a higher sv (ex. 1,50x) then create an ar9 or 9,5 for this said slider.
Hope you see my point of view.
Make that a ranking criteria, if neccessary. Give the possibility to go all the way through, I'd love to see gimmick maps with heavy AR changes.- Lumi - wrote:
The AR change would be from only 1 point or 1,5 maximum !
Like you're having a slider ar8 and the next one has a higher sv (ex. 1,50x) then create an ar9 or 9,5 for this said slider.
Hope you see my point of view.
I don't play standard that much, but I have to admit I'm not a huge fan of this idea. People say "taiko and mania use it." Well, in taiko, this is easy to read most of the time (not all, just more often than not). And also for the record, when you see this in taiko, that's a change in SV, which standard already allows. As for mania, that's a monster. You can't honestly tell me that when this happens in mania, it never confuses you to the point where you pause wanting to quit :/
This only ever happens in autoconverted maps lol. Gimmicky mania maps are real fun and pretty much never confuse experienced players.BrambleClaw wrote:
You can't honestly tell me that when this happens in mania, it never confuses you to the point where you pause wanting to quit :/
Oh, well, I guess that makes sense. I don't really play mania, I only have a few mania specific maps lolPyaKura wrote:
This only ever happens in autoconverted maps lol. Gimmicky mania maps are real fun and pretty much never confuse experienced players.BrambleClaw wrote:
You can't honestly tell me that when this happens in mania, it never confuses you to the point where you pause wanting to quit :/
Are the slow parts of an otherwise fast map supposed to be really hard? Think of Image Material, for example. Do you think the slow slow oh-my-fucking-god-just-fucking-get-to-the-map start of the map would be worse if it wasn't AR10? But hey, there's nothing that says that different AR would NEED to be used in a map anyway. I mean, I really hope that if this was around when Image Material was mapped that itHK_ wrote:
1. Changing to lower AR at lower BPM would certainly make map easier to read/play but thats the very problem. Why the heck would you want to make easier something thats supposed to be hard? If you make something hard easy its not hard anymore and that makes no sense at all. Its the best the way it is.
There are other reasons but i wont point them out because probably nobody actually cares them and one i did point out is enough imo.
Your objection to this request is a reason we need better or more specific ranking criteria (and I probably agree about that), not a reason this shouldn't be implemented.
As for the objection in a recent post about this being "confusing", that could mostly be avoided by saying that this can only be used after a break and/or only allowing it to be done via a red line. The AR changing would only be particularly confusing if there were 2 different speeds of approach circles on the map at once. Otherwise, it's just honestly not that difficult to switch between playing different approach rates. Perhaps a change in AR could even be indicated somehow during play so you wouldn't be surprised.
Im sorry but not everyone thinks of mapping as an art.Yauxo wrote:
Youre not mapping a song to make it difficult. You map a song because you probably like the music and would like to create something that you can share with other players.
Evary part of a hard map is supposed to be hard.GhostFrog wrote:
Are the slow parts of an otherwise fast map supposed to be really hard?
Yes it would because what the heck is ar8/9 doing in a 7 star map?GhostFrog wrote:
Think of Image Material, for example. Do you think the slow slow oh-my-fucking-god-just-fucking-get-to-the-map start of the map would be worse if it wasn't AR10?
If its not going to be used then why ask for it in the first place?GhostFrog wrote:
But hey, there's nothing that says that different AR would NEED to be used in a map anyway.
But what about newbies? I mean they have a lot of trouble even with singe ar per map, so why not just throw few more at them anyway?GhostFrog wrote:
As for the objection in a recent post about this being "confusing", that could mostly be avoided by saying that this can only be used after a break and/or only allowing it to be done via a red line. The AR changing would only be particularly confusing if there were 2 different speeds of approach circles on the map at once. Otherwise, it's just honestly not that difficult to switch between playing different approach rates. Perhaps a change in AR could even be indicated somehow during play so you wouldn't be surprised.
And no, i dont think that only newbies would find it confusing because i would certainly too.
And what about players like me that dont rely only on their eyesight but on timing and rhythm too? Should i just recalibrate all i got used to in last 30secs just because mapper wanted to put ar9 in some (not so) random part instead of ar10?
Also, I'd say they should ONLY be changed in BPM changes, nowhere else (as that'll indeed be to confusing)HK_ wrote:
Im sorry but not everyone thinks of mapping as an art.Yauxo wrote:
Youre not mapping a song to make it difficult. You map a song because you probably like the music and would like to create something that you can share with other players.
did he say mapping is an art? No. Also, Yauxo is right, you don't map songs to be difficult, if you do, the map is 100% sure to be a shitmap (unless your name is Scorpiour, Val0108 or Blue Dragon). You map because you want to map the song you likeEvary part of a hard map is supposed to be hard.GhostFrog wrote:
Are the slow parts of an otherwise fast map supposed to be really hard?
Have you gone insane? This is no way near close. Hey, I have a 260 BPM map full of 1/4 jumps so the star rating is 8 (and still rankable), Oh, here is a slow 28 bpm which is only a violing string, Let's make it a nice slider. Oh wait, that's not allowed, I need to make this a 1/32 stream so the difficulty matches up with the rest.
Uhm, I hope you can see this should NEVER,and I reapeat NEVER be the case in any mapYes it would because what the heck is ar8/9 doing in a 7 star map?GhostFrog wrote:
Think of Image Material, for example. Do you think the slow slow oh-my-fucking-god-just-fucking-get-to-the-map start of the map would be worse if it wasn't AR10?
Because it fits. AR 9 is still way to high for a 130 bpm 1/2 slow single part map, let alone that 28 BPM part. AR should follow the BPM + density of the song, NOT the star rating, as that is only an indicator.If its not going to be used then why ask for it in the first place?GhostFrog wrote:
But hey, there's nothing that says that different AR would NEED to be used in a map anyway.
Cause ot's a great idea
Every map with big BPM changes, like Image -Material, Alice 2 Alice (one of my current pending maps), Wahrheit, EVERY compilation, and much more would benefit from this a lot. Give 9.5/10 to the faster harder parts, and 8-9 to the slower partsBut what about newbies? I mean they have a lot of trouble even with singe ar per map, so why not just throw few more at them anyway? As if newbies would properly play maps like this. I'm new to this game, let's play Image Material. Also, newbies won't even notice a difference between 9-10, as it's both fast for them.GhostFrog wrote:
As for the objection in a recent post about this being "confusing", that could mostly be avoided by saying that this can only be used after a break and/or only allowing it to be done via a red line. The AR changing would only be particularly confusing if there were 2 different speeds of approach circles on the map at once. Otherwise, it's just honestly not that difficult to switch between playing different approach rates. Perhaps a change in AR could even be indicated somehow during play so you wouldn't be surprised.
And no, i dont think that only newbies would find it confusing because i would certainly too.
And what about players like me that dont rely only on their eyesight but on timing and rhythm too? Should i just recalibrate all i got used to in last 30secs just because mapper wanted to put ar9 in some (not so) random part instead of ar10?
Yes, if Scorp mapped the last 40-50 seconds of Image material (which is a slow 130 BPM piano) which is really calm AR 10 would be very unfitting, just as the other slow parts
Also, this rule is probably a rule which will get added to avoid abuse- Lumi - wrote:
The AR change would be from only 1 point or 1,5 maximum !
Since both of our arguments are purely opinion based further discussion would be pointless.
Bonus: Mappers and non mappers will never view mapping the same. Thats a fact.
Bonus: Mappers and non mappers will never view mapping the same. Thats a fact.
I wont speak for baraatje (because Im not him) but yes, mappers and players wont always have the same viewpoint - because mappers have more insight over those, that have never touched the editor before.
You see, we're not only mappers, we're players as well. We play the game (most people every day) and we like to create maps/content for it. In order to improve our content, we have to make sure that what we create is good and fun to play.
-> If we have a relaxing song, then we map a slow/relaxing map.
-> If we have a DnB song, then we can be more creative with many triplets, streams etc.
-> If we have a strong and high BPM song, then we can go crazy, have difficult patterns and create a challenge to the player.
-> If we have a song that is streamy, then we'll map streams.
-> If we have a song that sounds jumpy, then we'll map jumps.
Now, what if there's a slow/relaxing part in the strong and high BPM song (Image Material for example). What should we do? As we know by now, the slow part should be mapped accordingly, so we cant just smash streams into violin sections. That wouldnt be good design.
Skipping forward, we now have a strong and fast AR10 map with a slow section for the slow part of the music. Problem is, that the AR still gives some kind of illusion of speed and "it's still pretty damn fast" to us, even though the part is supposed and mapped to be slow.
This is where the AR change could kick in. It'd make these kinds of things much better and more enjoyable as a whole. There wouldnt be any need to tone the AR of your map down just because half of the song works better in AR8 as compared to AR9.
To you, yes, you might have the opinion that you want difficult maps to be difficult, but no, your point doesnt make too much sense in this case
You see, we're not only mappers, we're players as well. We play the game (most people every day) and we like to create maps/content for it. In order to improve our content, we have to make sure that what we create is good and fun to play.
-> If we have a relaxing song, then we map a slow/relaxing map.
-> If we have a DnB song, then we can be more creative with many triplets, streams etc.
-> If we have a strong and high BPM song, then we can go crazy, have difficult patterns and create a challenge to the player.
-> If we have a song that is streamy, then we'll map streams.
-> If we have a song that sounds jumpy, then we'll map jumps.
Now, what if there's a slow/relaxing part in the strong and high BPM song (Image Material for example). What should we do? As we know by now, the slow part should be mapped accordingly, so we cant just smash streams into violin sections. That wouldnt be good design.
Skipping forward, we now have a strong and fast AR10 map with a slow section for the slow part of the music. Problem is, that the AR still gives some kind of illusion of speed and "it's still pretty damn fast" to us, even though the part is supposed and mapped to be slow.
This is where the AR change could kick in. It'd make these kinds of things much better and more enjoyable as a whole. There wouldnt be any need to tone the AR of your map down just because half of the song works better in AR8 as compared to AR9.
To you, yes, you might have the opinion that you want difficult maps to be difficult, but no, your point doesnt make too much sense in this case
90% of other games have and allow variable approach rates. Mania and Taiko both allow it. It wouldn't be such a terrible thing. AR is so broken (ar10 is 42% faster than ar9) that it would almost certainly be used incorrectly much like SV changes are used poorly today. Subtle changes are OK unless you make a gimmick map like headlock or a 2B style.
The real limitation here is that it would require a complete revamp of the file format, and I'm not sure the benefits are worth the work.
Finally, anyone who really wants to use different approach rates in a beatmap can already do this. Clearly it will never be ranked, and since 99% of ranking players turn off storyboards and skins, it will go unnoticed. A side effect of this method is that you can use the OSB file to modify the map and play with different rates in multiplayer (one player can use AR9.5, the other can use AR10 or 10.2 or 10.6). The limitation here would be that you could only have one beatmap per set.
So instead of supporting this, provide examples of already created maps which would be made better using a variable approach rate. Nobody cares about hard rock anyway.
I would be willing to do this if someone has a good example of a ranked map which would sincerely benefit from an AR change (and when/where the AR changes happen)
The real limitation here is that it would require a complete revamp of the file format, and I'm not sure the benefits are worth the work.
Finally, anyone who really wants to use different approach rates in a beatmap can already do this. Clearly it will never be ranked, and since 99% of ranking players turn off storyboards and skins, it will go unnoticed. A side effect of this method is that you can use the OSB file to modify the map and play with different rates in multiplayer (one player can use AR9.5, the other can use AR10 or 10.2 or 10.6). The limitation here would be that you could only have one beatmap per set.
So instead of supporting this, provide examples of already created maps which would be made better using a variable approach rate. Nobody cares about hard rock anyway.
I would be willing to do this if someone has a good example of a ranked map which would sincerely benefit from an AR change (and when/where the AR changes happen)
We're already 13 changes in, why not a 14th change if it improves mapping :3?ziin wrote:
The real limitation here is that it would require a complete revamp of the file format, and I'm not sure the benefits are worth the work.
osu file format v14