did you really finished reading on my post, or just wrote instantly after DQ words?ByBy_ChAn wrote:
DQ for long sliders ? Serious ? This is not a DQ reason _index :/_index wrote:
congratz with new dragonforce map, but i highly suggest to DQ it and fix long slider somewhere near 2300 combo as it pretty much drains all HP with HR on
Q.Q
Implying someone else can fc it with HR.Jenny wrote:
may the pp farm begin
Krah wrote:
Rip the time where people mapped for normal plays.
Say hi to the world where guys ask for a dq to change HP to something ridiculously low cuz a top player can't pp farm it with HR.
Sad day.
I believe that maps should be HR-ableJenny wrote:
Krah wrote:
Rip the time where people mapped for normal plays.
Say hi to the world where guys ask for a dq to change HP to something ridiculously low cuz a top player can't pp farm it with HR.
Sad day.
I don't design my maps for modplay either but if it's just and only HP drain, I am okay with it- keep in mind the slider will still punish you (hard) if you screw up right before it, it's just not gonna kill you 100% on it's own but drag you down to ~25-30% instead; won't change a whole lot for nomod play actually, I believe.
Ahhh sorry I checked the map and I didn't found the long sliders and I was fucked up xp_index wrote:
DQ for long sliders ? Serious ? This is not a DQ reason _index :/ByBy_ChAn wrote:
congratz with new dragonforce map, but i highly suggest to DQ it and fix long slider somewhere near 2300 combo as it pretty much drains all HP with HR on
Q.Q
did you really finished reading on my post, or just wrote instantly after DQ words?
anyway nvm, Jenny already agreed on HP workaround
Woddles wrote:
no dq pls
technically any map is passable with DT, if the skill is there, since it can't increase the HP to a point where even an SS is a failB-] wrote:
Yes I do not think any map should be impassable with hr. That's just stupid. DT is understandable of course.
uhKheldragar wrote:
I think he means humanly passable; you aren't going to pass DT mad machine.
ya just gotta bullshit the streams, its not necessary to do 405 bpm to pass them, just like its not necessary to do 270 to pass the shorter delrio streams :^)Kheldragar wrote:
My god
Okay, I change it to passing DT FD4D
[ Space ] wrote:
waiting for a Tom(tm) pp weight change to HR that makes the pp go down 60pp or something
Riince wrote:
ya just gotta bullshit the streams, its not necessary to do 405 bpm to pass them, just like its not necessary to do 270 to pass the shorter delrio streams :^)Kheldragar wrote:
My god
Okay, I change it to passing DT FD4D
I was so expecting another youtube video after this postKheldragar wrote:
My god
Okay, I change it to passing DT FD4D
pretty sure C 1x missed that with relaxTess wrote:
I was so expecting another youtube video after this postKheldragar wrote:
My god
Okay, I change it to passing DT FD4D
Just stick to DT Rainbow Dash Likes Girls
was that before or after he 4mod fc'd that tag4 map?Riince wrote:
pretty sure C 1x missed that with relaxTess wrote:
I was so expecting another youtube video after this post
Just stick to DT Rainbow Dash Likes Girls
different reasons? first DQ was for too drain being too high on HR (fixed by adjusting HP), second was due to 'abruptness'. the slider being the same has no connection to both DQs.joolomasta wrote:
The map was already DQ'd one time because of that slider. How is it possible that it took the QAT team 6 days to notice that the slider was still the same?
joolomasta wrote:
Also, it doesn't really make sense that the reason for DQ is partly based on an untrue statement (there is a slowdown that uses 0.75x contrary to what the post says). The stack leniency setting has no effect on the map itself so it cannot be a reason for disqualification, neither the white flashes in the storyboard. I haven't heard players complaining about that slider, either. This leaves us with nothing warranting a DQ.
fuel your QAT hate somewhere else.Garven wrote:
Some additional notes:.
handsome wrote:
different reasons? first DQ was for too drain being too high on HR (fixed by adjusting HP), second was due to 'abruptness'. the slider being the same has no connection to both DQs.joolomasta wrote:
The map was already DQ'd one time because of that slider. How is it possible that it took the QAT team 6 days to notice that the slider was still the same?
I had an argument to back my opinion. How you simply dismiss it as "QAT hate" and ignore the argument itself is not how civilised people discuss. You may disagree with me and that's fine but please at least provide a reason you do so instead of trying to play me down. If those points were just additional notes, they should not cause a DQ.handsome wrote:
fuel your QAT hate somewhere else.(quite sure garven meant using more of the playfield for the slider, not SV)
What do you suggest then? Criticizing and not giving any suggestion that would work better considering the comment from the mapper won't help much.Ash Marley wrote:
That slider was ridiculous anyway. You shouldn't need to slider break on a sightread because the mapper made an out of place sudden super slowed down slider after a 2000+ combo. WWW minus 1 because of that unnecessary change in velocity. I'm sure many more messed up by that out of the blue slider.
Hmmmm? Jenny explained her reasoning behind that slider and it makes perfect sense to me.Ash Marley wrote:
That slider was ridiculous anyway. You shouldn't need to slider break on a sightread because the mapper made an out of place sudden super slowed down slider after a 2000+ combo. WWW minus 1 because of that unnecessary change in velocity. I'm sure many more messed up by that out of the blue slider.
It doesn't change that it's too unexpected and inconsistent. The "rhythm" is killed at that point.Lax wrote:
Hmmmm? Jenny explained her reasoning behind that slider and it makes perfect sense to me.Ash Marley wrote:
That slider was ridiculous anyway. You shouldn't need to slider break on a sightread because the mapper made an out of place sudden super slowed down slider after a 2000+ combo. WWW minus 1 because of that unnecessary change in velocity. I'm sure many more messed up by that out of the blue slider.
Go read up on the discussion first dude.
i'm not really on anyone's side but this isn't a very good way to determine SV at all. if you checked ingame the ticks appear slowly after the slider appears, it isn't too reliable as a reading tool. plus the first few points are on the sliderhead itself, not much you can see about that.[ Manoa ] wrote:
There's a skinnable thing called "sliderscorepoint" if you can see a slow slider coming with many of these points, you should change it and learn not only to read circles and sliders but also those tiny circles inside
Jenny wrote:
@Lanturn: 06:42:555 (5) - if this is the slider you mean, sure I can fix that. won't upload for now though, no changes until this entire thing is cleared up.
And good doesn't always mean fun. Would you rather have a map that good well but plays shit, or a map that doesn't look good but plays awesomely?[ S a k u r a ] wrote:
Fun doesn't always means good, please stay on topic and provide map related suggestions that will be helpful for mapper to improve his/her map
Jenny wrote:
Also, #modhelp pointed something out:...
can you please elaborate on this[ S a k u r a ] wrote:
Fun doesn't always means good
and good is subjetive, anyways I really don't see any problem with that slider it fit really well what jenny is trying to do, maybe change the slider shape to a one that let the player know about it (just as suggestion).[ S a k u r a ] wrote:
Fun doesn't always means good, please stay on topic and provide map related suggestions that will be helpful for mapper to improve his/her map
Exactly this.deathmarc4 wrote:
Have people forgotten how to read sv? I've gotten jipped by other maps with "random" slow sliders (cough wahrheit cough) enough times to learn when to expect them and how to deal with them. It's just another aspect of reading the map.
How about 95% of the testplays I requested and watched, then? :pAsh Marley wrote:
Neither is your 1 example of your personal experience then.
Sounds like you don't know who I am - just about everything I touch is "too far for it's times"/"out of the box"/"awkward" and it generally results in a shitstorm or DQ, or at least when I don't pick a very plain song to map :pLitharrale wrote:
With a DQ like this, I'm sure that Jenny won't try anything similar to this in the future which is sad.
She, name and profile should clarify that :VLitharrale wrote:
I dream of a day when I don't open up /r/osugame to "X has been disqualified!". With 11 ranked beatmaps, I'm sure Jenny knows what he/she is doing.
Do not manually edit anything in an .osu file that cannot be changed through the Editor. The only exceptions are .osu-specific storyboards, slider velocity multipliers and skin-related options such as SliderBorder and SliderTrackOverride. If non-standard slider velocity multipliers are used, they must be announced in the beatmap description during the modding process.from https://osu.ppy.sh/wiki/Ranking_Criteria
If non-standard slider velocity multipliers are used, they must be announced in the beatmap description during the modding process.If I might add:
exaggerating e-guitar, it basically goes da-dadada-da da-da (1-234-5 6-7) if that makes any sense; listen for it and you will see :pSailexk wrote:
02:45:667 (3) - is there anything here?
THIS MAP HAS A SLOW SLOW SLIDER BECAUSE TRAINSQUEAKChoo choo!
deetz wrote:
you know you can just give the code for the slider right
yes we can't - wh went through a similar experience, it's been getting ridiculous for awhile now.Litharrale wrote:
It's a real shame that mappers these days are terrified to try anything new because of the looming force with trigger fingers that we call QATs.
It's their choice in the first place to fc a QUALIFIED map. After all it is clearly written that scores can wipe once in a while.Alisson Siri wrote:
People are going to stop trying fcs on recently ranked maps. I can't imagine the frustration of losing that quantity of pps (index).
I know maybe less than 1% of active players have been hardly affected because of this, but I don't think they should be ignored.
DQing a map looks something trivial, it shouldn't be that easy to disqualify a song, it should need at least the mapper agreement, or maybe the top 50 in current global ranking. Yes, I know this would makes DQing harder to happen, but that's the point, so people would think twice before qualifying a map.
DQing a map should be rarity, an exception.
You're right.Midget wrote:
It's their choice in the first place to fc a QUALIFIED map. After all it is clearly written that scores can wipe once in a while.Alisson Siri wrote:
People are going to stop trying fcs on recently ranked maps. I can't imagine the frustration of losing that quantity of pps (index).
I know maybe less than 1% of active players have been hardly affected because of this, but I don't think they should be ignored.
DQing a map looks something trivial, it shouldn't be that easy to disqualify a song, it should need at least the mapper agreement, or maybe the top 50 in current global ranking. Yes, I know this would makes DQing harder to happen, but that's the point, so people would think twice before qualifying a map.
DQing a map should be rarity, an exception.
Blue Dragon wrote:
I'm usually alright with unranking maps but this one was the most unnecessary unrank ever, and you even made up 'additional comments' that wouldn't improve the map in any way just so you could back up the reason that "this map needs improvement"?
geez..
