Will this result in maps with AR10 and a section of 2X approaching circle ~~
forum
Allow to use different Approach Rates in map
posted
Total Posts
313
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
On second thought this would be easier than previously thought. It would just work off of timing sections. My other point still stands that this is already possible to do in the current osu format but nobody has done the work.Yauxo wrote:
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
Via storyboard? It's more work than it's worth for, really. I wouldnt want to skin an universal skin (people use different skins, remember that) and fiddle around with every single object Ive put down. Modding would be hell as well if you have to move objects around.
As you mentioned, most people play with full dim and no video/sb anyway, so there's not much use in that. As a gimmicky map though? Well, yea, maybe. If someone feels like doing that. I know I dont.
As you mentioned, most people play with full dim and no video/sb anyway, so there's not much use in that. As a gimmicky map though? Well, yea, maybe. If someone feels like doing that. I know I dont.
By hard being hard i didnt mean putting deathstream into the part that obviously shouldnt be any kind of stream. Since you already picked image material...I think that if you picked ar8/9 for slow part before kiai most of players would be thrown of by sudden change of ar even if warned previously and thus very bad.
And since my opinion obviously wont change until i see the results please stop this pointless whatever it is.
And since my opinion obviously wont change until i see the results please stop this pointless whatever it is.
Sure.baraatje123 wrote:
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 !
If making a storyboard is more work than it's worth for, really, then creating a whole new osu format is certainly more work than it's wort for, really.Yauxo wrote:
Via storyboard? It's more work than it's worth for, really. I wouldnt want to skin an universal skin (people use different skins, remember that) and fiddle around with every single object Ive put down. Modding would be hell as well if you have to move objects around.
As you mentioned, most people play with full dim and no video/sb anyway, so there's not much use in that. As a gimmicky map though? Well, yea, maybe. If someone feels like doing that. I know I dont.
Storyboards can use your skin. They just usually don't because the easiest way to make a bad storyboard is to have the storyboard interact with the hit objects like 11t does. I could make it work with a few skins, but it's easy to just force a skin and let the player modify the skin like in blythe. Obviously this would be done via SGLE or in excel. It's not a difficult process and would take 2 minutes to make a change via excel or 30 seconds compile time to make a change via SGLE.
Also, I'll just leave this here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hromx6HeN_w
When multiple new things are added for file format 15, this can also be added to it
There is no need ti add it now, but it will be really convenient if it gets added alongside multiple other new tweaks
There is no need ti add it now, but it will be really convenient if it gets added alongside multiple other new tweaks
You'd be suprised how many people can read Taiko AR/Scrollspeed changes without too many problems. Not too different for Std I'd imagine. People are already able to read heavy timing changes on extremely difficult maps (https://osu.ppy.sh/s/280107#), which, if you turn a few things, is basically comparable to an AR change on a steady BPMHK_ wrote:
.I think that if you picked ar8/9 for slow part before kiai most of players would be thrown of by sudden change of ar even if warned previously and thus very bad.
And since my opinion obviously wont change until i see the results please stop this pointless whatever it is.
Also, you're basically asking for answers and that's what Im doing.
Shouldve pointed out that I'd probably too much work for me, as I dont know much about storyboard - so I dont have much to object to that (maybe?).ziin wrote:
If making a storyboard is more work than it's worth for, really, then creating a whole new osu format is certainly more work than it's wort for, really.
Storyboards can use your skin. They just usually don't because the easiest way to make a bad storyboard is to have the storyboard interact with the hit objects like 11t does. I could make it work with a few skins, but it's easy to just force a skin and let the player modify the skin like in blythe. Obviously this would be done via SGLE or in excel. It's not a difficult process and would take 2 minutes to make a change via excel or 30 seconds compile time to make a change via SGLE.
Also, I'll just leave this here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hromx6HeN_w
I'd agree on baraatje's post above though.
This is one of those rare "feature requests" that can be proved (like a jubeat mode or a technika mode). Your arguments would carry so much more weight if there were lots of examples of good maps that use different Approach Rates.baraatje123 wrote:
When multiple new things are added for file format 15, this can also be added to it
There is no need ti add it now, but it will be really convenient if it gets added alongside multiple other new tweaks
I frequently switch between AR4.5 and AR9.66 in consecutive maps I play and it requires no adjustment period at all. It's not difficult to get used to and putting the two approach rates in the same map doesn't add much difficulty to the process if it can only be changed during a break and is properly indicated in some way.HK_ wrote:
By hard being hard i didnt mean putting deathstream into the part that obviously shouldnt be any kind of stream. Since you already picked image material...I think that if you picked ar8/9 for slow part before kiai most of players would be thrown of by sudden change of ar even if warned previously and thus very bad.
It's interesting to me that you've done some sort of almost 180 here. You were saying before that easy things in hard maps should be made difficult by use of high AR (which, by the way, is completely nonsensical, since anyone who can play the hard parts of the map well will have no issue at all reading the higher AR on the easy part). Now you're saying that we shouldn't add difficulty to maps by changing the AR (which is also pretty nonsensical, since it'll just require a little bit of getting used to). Like...those two things don't directly contradict each other, but I really don't understand what your opinion on approach rate is. Should it be used for difficulty? Should it not be used for difficulty? Should it be whatever the mapper wants to use? None of those answers make this request bad at all, but it looks like you're just jumping around between them to try to find one that supports your side of this.
What im trying to say that its good just as it is. Dont fix it if its not broken.
This is not a request for fixing some kind of bug, it's a feature request.
You seem to miss the point
You seem to miss the point
Yeeeeaaaah, Okoratu pretty much hit the nail on the head in their reply. This exact reasoning could be given against ANY feature request. If you don't want new features in osu!, then please stay out of this subforum. You're wasting everyone else's time.HK_ wrote:
What im trying to say that its good just as it is. Dont fix it if its not broken.
Don't knock it until you've tried it.HK_ wrote:
Dont fix it if its not broken.
Bump
Yes.
Yauxo wrote:
Yes.
I think this is a great point you bring up, I'll support your idea.
Kitsunemimi wrote:
No because if we had this, it would be totally disorienting and unnecessary.
How can people in Taiko/Mania play it properly?otoed1 wrote:
Kitsunemimi wrote:
No because if we had this, it would be totally disorienting and unnecessary.
They aren't confused by it
Why aren't people disoriented by huge Sudden SV changes
I agree, this should only be changable in red timing point, and may not be overused
But there'll be new ranking criteria for it
I honestly can't see why people strongly disagree, bad usage will not be tolerated, and it works in otger modes, even excessively
This, but I'd also say that greenlines are fine. Some songs (most utaite songs/Kakushigoto for example) have a slow part in them in which that AR change might come in handy, yet not everyone has a halfbpm redline for these.baraatje123 wrote:
I honestly can't see why people strongly disagree, bad usage will not be tolerated, and it works in otger modes, even excessively
Topic Starter
This idea won't fucking die, I promise to you all 
HOORAY!
I'll also do whatever it takes to keep this thread alive :3
I'll also do whatever it takes to keep this thread alive :3
Topic Starter
Yeah I noticed that, you are doing a good thing, my friend!Baraatje123 wrote:
HOORAY!
I'll also do whatever it takes to keep this thread alive :3
I;m not your friend (yet) 
unless you wanna Mutual :3
Back to topic
I still can't see how people don't want this, it'll only be helpful to make it better readable (AR10 at slow parts just doesn't work), and potential abuse will be blocked by ranking criteria
unless you wanna Mutual :3
Back to topic
I still can't see how people don't want this, it'll only be helpful to make it better readable (AR10 at slow parts just doesn't work), and potential abuse will be blocked by ranking criteria
Please, developers.
Try play image material and you'll notice how akward is it to play AR 10 on calm piano part.
Try play image material and you'll notice how akward is it to play AR 10 on calm piano part.
Although Image Material was made before decimal song settings (i think)Sirade wrote:
Try play image material and you'll notice how akward is it to play AR 10 on calm piano part.
Totally agreeing with this. Songs with massive slowdowns and extremely fast parts don't work well together on high AR (and you can't pick the lower for the whole map or the harder bit will be unreadable)
Yet it does exist
Why not for standard then
Why not for standard then
A little off-topic but I'd also like to see differing CS (not so much about OD/HP) as well as AR if this was implemented
did you even play osu!maniaBaraatje123 wrote:
Yet it does exist
Why not for standard then
like ever
Your point is actually invalid here, because approach rate does not dictate the amount of time that you have to react before hitting a note in mania. VSRGs don't work that way. In effect, AR as a setting means absolutely nothing, because SV rates determine how the maps scroll against a player's speed settings.CelegaS wrote:
Different AR in o!m is actually bullshit so no.
As someone who has actually dabbled in mapping for osu!standard (certainly not my primary as a mania mapper/player), I've actually run into a situation where having a certain approach rate felt inappropriate for a piece of the song because things are quiet. Having the ability to deviate your approach rate adds a whole other level to mapping that hasn't been seen in osu! as a game, and I think that's something worth thinking about.
I've thought in my mind about using a +1 AR for a really intense section that merits a Kiai, but I obviously cannot do that since you can't change things at all, haha. As I've said before though, I'm not a standard mapper under any stretch, but I think that the game's best mappers that are already good at what they do could use another controllable element to add to their arsenal.
MBomb
1) Welcome to TaikoKitsunemimi wrote:
No because if we had this, it would be totally disorienting and unnecessary.
2) You get used to it
3) It takes more skill to be able to. What better way to say "look at how pro I am. I can sight read something that changes between AR 4 and AR 10 in an instant"?
4) Actually would be very necessary for maps that go into half time during a middle section. If done correctly, it would be a very nice touch.
Supporting.
It would be hella useful if used properly.
Yeah, I can already see this abused but I don't think we will be seeing any ranked mapsets abusing this as soon as it comes out.
I mean, what is the ranking process for after all?
It would be hella useful if used properly.
Yeah, I can already see this abused but I don't think we will be seeing any ranked mapsets abusing this as soon as it comes out.
I mean, what is the ranking process for after all?
This would be the best thing ever, like literally. Playing slow songs with high ar is just wrong.
I totally support this idea!
I totally support this idea!
Bump
inb4 people raging about sudden AR5 on a slow part because they can't read slow AR.
While it's evident that players can get used to such stuff(just look at the ridiculous Taiko #1 here) it's not supporting gameplay too well and in most cases a compromise can be found. The only issues come up if there are actual bpm-changes(if 1/1 spacings are suddenly hard to play your AR is obviously too high) so it would be cool if AR-changes get restricted to that somehow.
I don't need this in my life personally.
While it's evident that players can get used to such stuff(just look at the ridiculous Taiko #1 here) it's not supporting gameplay too well and in most cases a compromise can be found. The only issues come up if there are actual bpm-changes(if 1/1 spacings are suddenly hard to play your AR is obviously too high) so it would be cool if AR-changes get restricted to that somehow.
I don't need this in my life personally.
i'd rather not have this because it gives people an excuse to use higher ar in parts of a map, higher ar makes stuff more boring
Can we please move away from the "omg AR10 to AR5 on no bpm change just for the lulz is the worst!!!1!1" and get back to the actual point of why this was requested? This also is a big thing for Standard, not for Mania.
The changable AR would allow us to support specific/special parts of a song that dont make sense to have a high AR on (for example, Image Material). Does AR10 make sense on dense parts of a 260BPM map? Yes. Does it make sense on a 28 BPM part? Not at all.
Lets say that there's a song that is halfbpm for a long time, but then ramps up to doublebpm. Having a lower AR would fit the first, slow part and having a higher AR would fit the later, last part. What to do? Low AR kills the fast part, High AR kills the slow part. Finding something inbetween doesnt work, that would mess up either part.
If someone would make a shitty map with shitty ar changes, then it would never be qualified. If it's unranked, then just revert the AR to a stable one.
The changable AR would allow us to support specific/special parts of a song that dont make sense to have a high AR on (for example, Image Material). Does AR10 make sense on dense parts of a 260BPM map? Yes. Does it make sense on a 28 BPM part? Not at all.
Lets say that there's a song that is halfbpm for a long time, but then ramps up to doublebpm. Having a lower AR would fit the first, slow part and having a higher AR would fit the later, last part. What to do? Low AR kills the fast part, High AR kills the slow part. Finding something inbetween doesnt work, that would mess up either part.
If someone would make a shitty map with shitty ar changes, then it would never be qualified. If it's unranked, then just revert the AR to a stable one.
Don't exaggerate please, that part of Image Material certainly isn't classified as 28bpm, it's just used to get the slow SV without having to manipulate slider velocity via notepad and it is also improperly timed at that whole part regarding modern variable bpm standards(inaccurate offsets, new timing sections don't align in time with the previous one). In fact it would probably be disqualified right away for these issues if you tried to rank it nowadays.Yauxo wrote:
The changable AR would allow us to support specific/special parts of a song that dont make sense to have a high AR on (for example, Image Material). Does AR10 make sense on dense parts of a 260BPM map? Yes. Does it make sense on a 28 BPM part? Not at all.
Lets say that there's a song that is halfbpm for a long time, but then ramps up to doublebpm. Having a lower AR would fit the first, slow part and having a higher AR would fit the later, last part. What to do? Low AR kills the fast part, High AR kills the slow part. Finding something inbetween doesnt work, that would mess up either part.
If someone would make a shitty map with shitty ar changes, then it would never be qualified. If it's unranked, then just revert the AR to a stable one.
At the start of the slow part it's 130bpm which is just half of the original bpm which assumes that Image Material is rather written in 130bpm with 1/8 usage with is very common in actual music anyway or in other words - setting the bpm twice as high as it is is terribly common in osu!.
tl;dr: Image Material(and especially its 28bpm) is a horrible horrible example for this discussion.
I brought Image Material into my post because it has a very clear change of pace and is widely known in the community. It's really fast basically all the time, but then there's this, comparably, extremely slow part. I took the 28 bpm from the ingame information, I didnt actually check what bpm it was at that very time.
It could be any other song, really, as long as it'd have a fast and a slow part.
If the song was fast all the time, you'd give it a fast AR.
If the song was slow all the time, you'd give it a low(er) AR.
If the song is a mix of both, then why arent we allowed to mix the ARs in a well designed manner too?
Edit: I guess songs like DeltaMax and similar would fit the example better. Going from AR9 to AR10 over the course of 2 minutes wouldnt hurt a map on that song at all.
It could be any other song, really, as long as it'd have a fast and a slow part.
If the song was fast all the time, you'd give it a fast AR.
If the song was slow all the time, you'd give it a low(er) AR.
If the song is a mix of both, then why arent we allowed to mix the ARs in a well designed manner too?
Edit: I guess songs like DeltaMax and similar would fit the example better. Going from AR9 to AR10 over the course of 2 minutes wouldnt hurt a map on that song at all.
Sorry if this was mentioned in the thread already (I didn't bother to go through all those pages). Wouldn't the HD mod become a problem with changing AR? I mean like drastic changes could make you miss a note, and even just losing accuracy is annoying in itself. My point is, there isn't a reference for when to hit the hidden notes except for the first Approach Circle at the beginning of the map and trying to see how long the note takes to disappear.
Literally none of this is relevant to whether or not Image Material would benefit from being able to use multiple approach rates or to whether or not there exist maps that would benefit from multiple approach rates, so let me just ask you this directly: do you think there is any approach rate that would be fitting both for the start of Image Material and the rest of Image Material?Endaris wrote:
Don't exaggerate please, that part of Image Material certainly isn't classified as 28bpm, it's just used to get the slow SV without having to manipulate slider velocity via notepad and it is also improperly timed at that whole part regarding modern variable bpm standards(inaccurate offsets, new timing sections don't align in time with the previous one). In fact it would probably be disqualified right away for these issues if you tried to rank it nowadays.Yauxo wrote:
The changable AR would allow us to support specific/special parts of a song that dont make sense to have a high AR on (for example, Image Material). Does AR10 make sense on dense parts of a 260BPM map? Yes. Does it make sense on a 28 BPM part? Not at all.
Lets say that there's a song that is halfbpm for a long time, but then ramps up to doublebpm. Having a lower AR would fit the first, slow part and having a higher AR would fit the later, last part. What to do? Low AR kills the fast part, High AR kills the slow part. Finding something inbetween doesnt work, that would mess up either part.
If someone would make a shitty map with shitty ar changes, then it would never be qualified. If it's unranked, then just revert the AR to a stable one.
At the start of the slow part it's 130bpm which is just half of the original bpm which assumes that Image Material is rather written in 130bpm with 1/8 usage with is very common in actual music anyway or in other words - setting the bpm twice as high as it is is terribly common in osu!.
tl;dr: Image Material(and especially its 28bpm) is a horrible horrible example for this discussion.
AR10 is not bad for it, the actual 130bpm have a relatively decent playability and it's more the fact that the mapper feels like he has to map every drumbeat - even the rather weak ones - as singles instead of sliders that gives the map a density it doesn't need to have to be good. He also goes ham in the 260bpm parts with 1/4 like a LOT while he doesn't use ANY within the 130bpm section. He is literally asking to make it unbalanced. It's more of a design choice than the song forcing it.
I believe that with a different approach on mapping the song the AR could easily be reduced to something like 9,5 to ease up the difference between the parts.
I'm not against this idea in particular(as written in my first post on the topic) but picking on that slider in the 28bpm section is outright stupid and I honestly believe that this spot would play terrible on an AR of 9 or lower as the contradiction in terms of intensity would be greatly missing. I don't think it would benefit a lot if at all. Since AR10 reading is a requirement for playing the map at all, the spots don't pose a problem and the static AR puts a sensible relation between the parts.
It's difficult to be not against it though if the people who want it bring in such stupid arguments like a 28bpm wrongly snapped non-aligned timing section that has absolutely NOTHING to do with the feature.
I believe that with a different approach on mapping the song the AR could easily be reduced to something like 9,5 to ease up the difference between the parts.
I'm not against this idea in particular(as written in my first post on the topic) but picking on that slider in the 28bpm section is outright stupid and I honestly believe that this spot would play terrible on an AR of 9 or lower as the contradiction in terms of intensity would be greatly missing. I don't think it would benefit a lot if at all. Since AR10 reading is a requirement for playing the map at all, the spots don't pose a problem and the static AR puts a sensible relation between the parts.
It's difficult to be not against it though if the people who want it bring in such stupid arguments like a 28bpm wrongly snapped non-aligned timing section that has absolutely NOTHING to do with the feature.
Hey, you managed to get in an actual reply in-between your 3 paragraphs of continued off-topic drivel!Endaris wrote:
AR10 is not bad for it, the actual 130bpm have a relatively decent playability and it's more the fact that the mapper feels like he has to map every drumbeat - even the rather weak ones - as singles instead of sliders that gives the map a density it doesn't need to have to be good. He also goes ham in the 260bpm parts with 1/4 like a LOT while he doesn't use ANY within the 130bpm section. He is literally asking to make it unbalanced. It's more of a design choice than the song forcing it.
I believe that with a different approach on mapping the song the AR could easily be reduced to something like 9,5 to ease up the difference between the parts.
I'm not against this idea in particular(as written in my first post on the topic) but picking on that slider in the 28bpm section is outright stupid and I honestly believe that this spot would play terrible on an AR of 9 or lower as the contradiction in terms of intensity would be greatly missing. I don't think it would benefit a lot if at all. Since AR10 reading is a requirement for playing the map at all, the spots don't pose a problem and the static AR puts a sensible relation between the parts.
It's difficult to be not against it though if the people who want it bring in such stupid arguments like a 28bpm wrongly snapped non-aligned timing section that has absolutely NOTHING to do with the feature.
And...you think that the start of Image Material plays best with AR10. Yikes! I can't help but think you might be biased by your strong opinions on the map itself here, but okay. I do at least agree that changing AR for any change in difficulty within a map would be inappropriate, though I disagree that having a lower AR at the start of Image Material would ruin the intensity difference.
Anyway, I agree with this request more than I did last time I posted my thoughts on it. I used to like this request, but was concerned that it would only lead to people using higher AR where it was unfitting because I didn't trust the QAT's influence on mapping. I think that's settled down a lot and that this request would work just fine as long as some basic rules (and fairly restrictive guidelines) were enforced about when mappers are allowed to change AR in ranked maps. Allowing it only after a break would be the safest way to go about it, but changing AR after a spinner or in some situations in which only one current-AR-object is visible on screen probably wouldn't be bad either, at least in some cases.
I'm gonna side with Endaris on this one. I don't see why AR10 in the slow parts of the song is bad. Changing the AR in a beatmap will only lead to confusion and I don't see a benefit in changing it.GhostFrog wrote:
Hey, you managed to get in an actual reply in-between your 3 paragraphs of continued off-topic drivel!Endaris wrote:
AR10 is not bad for it, the actual 130bpm have a relatively decent playability and it's more the fact that the mapper feels like he has to map every drumbeat - even the rather weak ones - as singles instead of sliders that gives the map a density it doesn't need to have to be good. He also goes ham in the 260bpm parts with 1/4 like a LOT while he doesn't use ANY within the 130bpm section. He is literally asking to make it unbalanced. It's more of a design choice than the song forcing it.
I believe that with a different approach on mapping the song the AR could easily be reduced to something like 9,5 to ease up the difference between the parts.
I'm not against this idea in particular(as written in my first post on the topic) but picking on that slider in the 28bpm section is outright stupid and I honestly believe that this spot would play terrible on an AR of 9 or lower as the contradiction in terms of intensity would be greatly missing. I don't think it would benefit a lot if at all. Since AR10 reading is a requirement for playing the map at all, the spots don't pose a problem and the static AR puts a sensible relation between the parts.
It's difficult to be not against it though if the people who want it bring in such stupid arguments like a 28bpm wrongly snapped non-aligned timing section that has absolutely NOTHING to do with the feature.
And...you think that the start of Image Material plays best with AR10. Yikes! I can't help but think you might be biased by your strong opinions on the map itself here, but okay. I do at least agree that changing AR for any change in difficulty within a map would be inappropriate, though I disagree that having a lower AR at the start of Image Material would ruin the intensity difference.
Anyway, I agree with this request more than I did last time I posted my thoughts on it. I used to like this request, but was concerned that it would only lead to people using higher AR where it was unfitting because I didn't trust the QAT's influence on mapping. I think that's settled down a lot and that this request would work just fine as long as some basic rules (and fairly restrictive guidelines) were enforced about when mappers are allowed to change AR in ranked maps. Allowing it only after a break would be the safest way to go about it, but changing AR after a spinner or in some situations in which only one current-AR-object is visible on screen probably wouldn't be bad either, at least in some cases.