I'm talking about physical strain, not physical difficulty. If you model things by difficulty it gets subjective. It should never be about what's the most difficult for people, but about what causes the most objective strain. I also said that those angles are easier relative to other types of angles, and it's always contextual.
The image I'm trying to draw there is that you can calculate contextual strain objectively by paying attention both to the natural physical strain patterns would give, and the average difficulty of certain patterns for the average player. You mentioned "90 and 45 are the hardest angles to follow in the game" but it always depends on the context of the strain of the previous patterns, the bpm, the rhythm complexity, the note density, and the angle you're coming from. I wasn't talking about "which angle is the hardest", I was talking about "which angles do I see more people being able to complete".
If you look at "what's hard" then you fall into the personal context world of subjectivity and if you look at "what strains" then you're still taking the context of the map and physiology into account with little regard for the player's ideas of what's difficult and easy, since that's different for every player anyway. Physical strain is not, and if you model things that way then you're looking at which player can deal with the most strain in all areas (aim, reading, speed, rhythm, accuracy) rather than "who can do stuff that others can do less".
The image I'm trying to draw there is that you can calculate contextual strain objectively by paying attention both to the natural physical strain patterns would give, and the average difficulty of certain patterns for the average player. You mentioned "90 and 45 are the hardest angles to follow in the game" but it always depends on the context of the strain of the previous patterns, the bpm, the rhythm complexity, the note density, and the angle you're coming from. I wasn't talking about "which angle is the hardest", I was talking about "which angles do I see more people being able to complete".
If you look at "what's hard" then you fall into the personal context world of subjectivity and if you look at "what strains" then you're still taking the context of the map and physiology into account with little regard for the player's ideas of what's difficult and easy, since that's different for every player anyway. Physical strain is not, and if you model things that way then you're looking at which player can deal with the most strain in all areas (aim, reading, speed, rhythm, accuracy) rather than "who can do stuff that others can do less".