NewRulerNA wrote:
[Extreme]
02:05:766 (2) - risky object.
IDK acceptable or not.
not, its offscreen
*summons qat*
NewRulerNA wrote:
[Extreme]
02:05:766 (2) - risky object.
IDK acceptable or not.
gg wpAka wrote:
NewRulerNA wrote:
[Extreme]
02:05:766 (2) - risky object.
IDK acceptable or not.
not, its offscreen
*summons qat*
what are you talking about, if a note is offscreen by a pixel it's a trash unplayable map with zero signs of qualitynookls wrote:
Christ I really don't understand all the "perfection" blah blah about the beatmap ranking process. So what if a note is a pixel offscreen, is that really a reason to unrank? If it's fun and doesn't have issues that ruin its playability and/or status as a coherent beatmap i really don't think it matters.
That's why half of the newly ranked beatmaps are TV sizes, and the approved category has been dead since 2013nookls wrote:
Christ I really don't understand all the "perfection" blah blah about the beatmap ranking process. So what if a note is a pixel offscreen, is that really a reason to unrank? If it's fun and doesn't have issues that ruin its playability and/or status as a coherent beatmap i really don't think it matters.
Now FC it at 1024x768nookls wrote:
Christ I really don't understand all the "perfection" blah blah about the beatmap ranking process. So what if a note is a pixel offscreen, is that really a reason to unrank? If it's fun and doesn't have issues that ruin its playability and/or status as a coherent beatmap i really don't think it matters.
Approved isnt dead, approved is for marathon maps with a draintime of +5minDefault wrote:
That's why half of the newly ranked beatmaps are TV sizes, and the approved category has been dead since 2013nookls wrote:
Christ I really don't understand all the "perfection" blah blah about the beatmap ranking process. So what if a note is a pixel offscreen, is that really a reason to unrank? If it's fun and doesn't have issues that ruin its playability and/or status as a coherent beatmap i really don't think it matters.
Which can't get ranked because they have 659559+ notes which need to be moved a pixel to the left/right or whatever. Check the date of the lastest approved map and tell me if it's dead or not.FlobuFlobs wrote:
Approved isnt dead, approved is for marathon maps with a draintime of +5min
Well... Things have changed since 2013, and most people will agree that it didn't change in a good way. So we can somehow say that approval is dead, yes.FlobuFlobs wrote:
Christ I really don't understand all the "perfection" blah blah about the beatmap ranking process. So what if a note is a pixel offscreen, is that really a reason to unrank? If it's fun and doesn't have issues that ruin its playability and/or status as a coherent beatmap i really don't think it matters.
That's why half of the newly ranked beatmaps are TV sizes, and the approved category has been dead since 2013
Approved isnt dead, approved is for marathon maps with a draintime of +5min
There are a couple of approved maps each week. It's just given heart instead of a flame recently, so it shows under ranked rather than approved, as the systems are pretty much the same now excluding that you need 3 nominations rather than 2 to get approved.Default wrote:
Which can't get ranked because they have 659559+ notes which need to be moved a pixel to the left/right or whatever. Check the date of the lastest approved map and tell me if it's dead or not.FlobuFlobs wrote:
Approved isnt dead, approved is for marathon maps with a draintime of +5min
Edit: Damn why am I so whiny anyway t.t I need some sleep, being an active BAT/QAT is probably hard as hell
Uh... Approval now is just for marathon. (as you can see by yourself on the links you posted). They just should have named it "marathon section" instead of giving the old name "approval" to avoid confusion. Because "approval" wasn't always for marathon only.deetz wrote:
[
There are a couple of approved maps each week. It's just given heart instead of a flame recently, so it shows under ranked rather than approved, as the systems are pretty much the same now excluding that you need 3 nominations rather than 2 to get approved.
the ones in qualified right now:
https://osu.ppy.sh/s/270999
https://osu.ppy.sh/s/53342
https://osu.ppy.sh/s/277279
https://osu.ppy.sh/s/253969
yep i understand that lolYales wrote:
Uh... Approval now is just for marathon. (as you can see by yourself on the links you posted). They just should have named it "marathon section" instead of giving the old name "approval" to avoid confusion. Because "approval" wasn't always for marathon only.deetz wrote:
[
There are a couple of approved maps each week. It's just given heart instead of a flame recently, so it shows under ranked rather than approved, as the systems are pretty much the same now excluding that you need 3 nominations rather than 2 to get approved.
the ones in qualified right now:
https://osu.ppy.sh/s/270999
https://osu.ppy.sh/s/53342
https://osu.ppy.sh/s/277279
https://osu.ppy.sh/s/253969
Well, about an offscreen problem it has to be fixed though and I don't get why this talk about marathon for this kind of problem. o.o
lol xd lets rank rabbit jumping styl!!! its fun, playable and coherent 2 me hehe :pnookls wrote:
Christ I really don't understand all the "perfection" blah blah about the beatmap ranking process. So what if a note is a pixel offscreen, is that really a reason to unrank? If it's fun and doesn't have issues that ruin its playability and/or status as a coherent beatmap i really don't think it matters.
I laughed hard.Mazzerin wrote:
what are you talking about, if a note is offscreen by a pixel it's a trash unplayable map with zero signs of quality
or just dont map offscreen. it's not hard.nookls wrote:
Christ I really don't understand all the "perfection" blah blah about the beatmap ranking process. So what if a note is a pixel offscreen, is that really a reason to unrank? If it's fun and doesn't have issues that ruin its playability and/or status as a coherent beatmap i really don't think it matters.
nookls wrote:
Christ I really don't understand all the "perfection" blah blah about the beatmap ranking process. So what if a note is a pixel offscreen, is that really a reason to unrank? If it's fun and doesn't have issues that ruin its playability and/or status as a coherent beatmap i really don't think it matters.
/thread (please?)silmarilen wrote:
or just dont map offscreen. it's not hard.nookls wrote:
Christ I really don't understand all the "perfection" blah blah about the beatmap ranking process. So what if a note is a pixel offscreen, is that really a reason to unrank? If it's fun and doesn't have issues that ruin its playability and/or status as a coherent beatmap i really don't think it matters.
lolaefrogdog wrote:
Why was it unranked?
The gap isn't that huge and this is the peak of the song, don't be silly. Alternatively, make the entire map harder to fix.Asphyxia wrote:
02:14:220 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,5,1,2,3,4,1,2,1,2,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3) - in Second Gonakanau creates a massive difficulty gap within the difficulty itself. You can compare both wkyikawa's Extra and Second Gonkanau from 02:14:220 - to 02:18:584 - , the gap is quite huge. Reducing the spacing to something more suitable is strongly recommended. We don't think it is appropriate in its current state.
Yauxo wrote:
That was to be expected.
Dont even think about mapping objects offscreen, always proof-read (or watch in this case) and dont count on nobody noticing.
Mazzerin wrote:
what are you talking about, if a note is offscreen by a pixel it's a trash unplayable map with zero signs of quality
I agree with changing the jumps to be more intuitive, but how does difficulty effect how well a map goes with the music? It's the hardest part of the map and it's the peak of the song, that's just how it is, obviously a lot of people will break there. Difficulty is only overdone or unfitting when it doesn't fit the rest of the map, in this case the difficulty of those jumps is fitting relative to the rest of the map (in my opinion, and we're talking only in opinions here). I think it's silly to say that if the rest of the map became harder then the map suddenly wouldn't fit with the music, difficulty is a subjective thing and to some people some of the parts simply appear overdone or too hard; but what about the people who think that everything is flowing perfectly while actually being a challenge for once? I know that people who can tackle this map are far and few but there's not much out there for those people, I personally can't do those jumps but if we go on what you and I think then there's no one left to cater for the people beyond us. I don't agree that these jumps are too much compared to the rest of map in the sense that they're the peak of the map and anyone who can consistently maintain combo on the rest of the map can most probably keep combo on those jumps every once in a while (as it should be, the peak of the map is the part people should focus on FCing).Xilver wrote:
tbh I agree with disqualify, the hard part in the 7 star diff really did need a nerf and in general the whole mapset needs a bit more work. Asphyxia the hero
P.S - Awaken why did you get rid of Transparent Wailing's mapping, that version of the difficulty was so good ;w;watjesus1412 wrote:
The gap isn't that huge and this is the peak of the song, don't be silly. Alternatively, make the entire map harder to fix.
You need to understand that you can only make a map that difficult until it just doesn't fit the music anymore, and IMO the peak of the song didn't need overdone jumps like it has right now, so making it harder would just make it even more unfitting.
honestly, imo if you don't go into specifics while saying it this is one of the least helpful things you can say :/Xilver wrote:
in general the whole mapset needs a bit more work