If this is going to be implemented, then does that mean currently qualified maps will remain in that state until ranked, or be immediately disqualified for this rule?
I didn't even notice they released it now. However, this is a good point.Okoratu wrote:
There does exist, however a full version of the song which is 3:27 in length.
then what about songs that are 1:12 but tze actual drain is 0:50 ? Would people then be forced to map 1 minute drain, which could potentially mean that the mapper would have to figure out how to map the intro/outro or possible breaks that have little to no beat density? Or does this only apply to cuts?Loctav wrote:
Let's fix the proposal up to the arguments brought up by others in this thread to the following:The minimum draining (play) time for a map must be 30 seconds. If the full version of a song is longer than 1 minute, the minimum draining (play) time for the map must be 1 minute. This is so each map gives a sufficiently long gameplay experience. It also prevents people to cut songs too short for no reason, thus stopping people from enjoying the song in a proper way.
Does that wording make sense?
Because it's not a cut ver. it should be allowed to have 0:50 drain.Snaggletooth wrote:
then what about songs that are 1:12 but tze actual drain is 0:50 ? Would people then be forced to map 1 minute drain, which could potentially mean that the mapper would have to figure out how to map the intro/outro or possible breaks that have little to no beat density? Or does this only apply to cuts?
Well then it should be worded diffrently. A songs full version can be over 1 minute, dosnt mean the drain is. it should specifically state that this only applies to cuts.Nozhomi wrote:
Because it's not a cut ver. it should be allowed to have 0:50 drain.
This new version of the rule is better yeah, since it just force to avoid cut version. Sounds good.
Yeah, we should mention that it only applies for non-official cuts.Stefan wrote:
Openings are technically correct and legitime versions and not cut versions. It should be noted they do not count as cut version.
this is absolutely, 100% a better idea. cutting a song just promotes laziness amongst mappers and encourages people to enjoy less of the song than the actual song has contentwiseLoctav wrote:
Let's fix the proposal up to the arguments brought up by others in this thread to the following:The minimum draining (play) time for a map must be 30 seconds. If the full version of a song is longer than 1 minute, the minimum draining (play) time for the map must be 1 minute. This is so each map gives a sufficiently long gameplay experience. It also prevents people to cut songs too short for no reason, thus stopping people from enjoying the song in a proper way.
Does that wording make sense?
^ I slightly altered the wording here, feels a tad better from the previous.Loctav wrote:
The minimum draining (play) time for a map must be 30 seconds. If the full version of a song is longer than 1 minute, the minimum draining (play) time for the map must be 1 minute. This is so each map provides a sufficiently long gameplay experience. This also prevents people from cutting songs too short for no reason, thus stopping people from enjoying the song in a proper way.
???? did you even read the thread?xxdeathx wrote:
Chances are nothing I map would be affected by this rule, but that doesn't mean I'm for it.
Kind of sad that enough of the community dislikes short maps to the point that they support disallowing them from being ranked. Please tell me how the existence of short ranked maps affects you, how it causes you grief.
did you read? i was referring to this post, not the OP...if you want my response to that, please see p/4383468silmarilen wrote:
???? did you even read the thread?xxdeathx wrote:
Chances are nothing I map would be affected by this rule, but that doesn't mean I'm for it.
Kind of sad that enough of the community dislikes short maps to the point that they support disallowing them from being ranked. Please tell me how the existence of short ranked maps affects you, how it causes you grief.
there isnt a single person that agreed with the rule...
i dont really like the new suggestion either because it's so arbitrary, why is cutting a song a bad thing because of lazyness when it's still allowed for songs that are already that long in the first place? isn't that lazyness aswell then?
anyway at least it's better than the original suggestion.
Loctav wrote:
Let's fix the proposal up to the arguments brought up by others in this thread to the following:The minimum draining (play) time for a map must be 30 seconds. If the full version of a song is longer than 1 minute, the minimum draining (play) time for the map must be 1 minute. This is so each map gives a sufficiently long gameplay experience. It also prevents people to cut songs too short for no reason, thus stopping people from enjoying the song in a proper way.
Does that wording make sense?
Why? As much as the original rule was silly, we don't explicitly want to encourage short maps. Does a 30 second map being in the same listing affect you in any negative way?CptSqBany wrote:
I would make a NEW category of maps below 1 minute that has their ranking for people who ACTUALLY likes playing these maps -.-
People still want to conquer, who is better in Global, Country, Mods, Friends ranking. So if somebody would map Full PUPA opening, that is 30 seconds long, then it would be thrown to trash?Lach wrote:
Why? As much as the original rule was silly, we don't explicitly want to encourage short maps. Does a 30 second map being in the same listing affect you in any negative way?CptSqBany wrote:
I would make a NEW category of maps below 1 minute that has their ranking for people who ACTUALLY likes playing these maps -.-
?????CptSqBany wrote:
People still want to conquer, who is better in Global, Country, Mods, Friends ranking. So if somebody would map Full PUPA opening, that is 30 seconds long, then it would be thrown to trash?
That wouldn't work. There are some kind of music you can't do too much (Like the one you linked).Umaru-chan wrote:
Well if you try to rank a beatmap which is like 30 seconds it should have atleast 5-6 diffs(with a proper spread ofc) not things like this https://osu.ppy.sh/s/178669 <-- 2 diffs.I personally think this is bs since there are a few gimmicky songs out there that are better in 30 seconds than full 3 minutes. So my suggestion would be: if the map is 45seconds or below you need a bigger spreading with atleast 6 diffs.
Not sure if it fits, but mapping doesn't always mean "to rank"CptSqBany wrote:
People have purpose to map, if somebody wants to map a song he wants this song to be ranked, if a song CANT be ranked because rules, then why would he map it anyways... It would be wasting time
Definitely agree with this one, since allows minimum of 30 seconds but doesn't allow cutting a long song to something below 1 minuteLoctav wrote:
The minimum draining (play) time for a map must be 30 seconds. If the full version of a song is longer than 1 minute, the minimum draining (play) time for the map must be 1 minute. This is so each map gives a sufficiently long gameplay experience. It also prevents people to cut songs too short for no reason, thus stopping people from enjoying the song in a proper way.
This is way too better from the actual rule, it makes justice for true short maps lolLoctav wrote:
The minimum draining (play) time for a map must be 30 seconds. If the full version of a song is longer than 1 minute, the minimum draining (play) time for the map must be 1 minute. This is so each map gives a sufficiently long gameplay experience. It also prevents people to cut songs too short for no reason, thus stopping people from enjoying the song in a proper way.
You do realize that not all beatmaps are "perfect" from the get-go, right? You'll also have maps that take huge amounts of effort from all sides to balance out the ones that slip through with ease. On a personal level, it feels like a waste of time looking through a 30 second beatmap set when there are sets out there that actually have a lot more thought and effort behind them. I would much rather promote a map set like that rather than some throwaway map that people will play once and toss aside. From the more practical end, I'm coming in from the time investment angle - time may be a nearly infinite source for you, but for others it is worth much more and I would prefer to spend time on a mapset that carries more impact than what effectively adds up to a quick jingle.Wafu wrote:
@Garven, I think that's not really thing to consider. Whether it is more work for others is firstly subjective (there might be instantly rankable beatmaps, but absolutely terrible ones and that's what determines whether the job of modders, BNs, QATs is going to be worth it). But why would we even consider that? Respectively, everyone is free to mod, bubble or qualify whatever he likes. For QATs it is more complicated, but that is limited by count and it is not that terrible to check 1 or 2 shorter maps than the others per whole page of qualified maps.
CptSqany, you did not say why would new group of short maps be needed, that's what Lach wanted to hear.Lach wrote:
?????CptSqBany wrote:
People still want to conquer, who is better in Global, Country, Mods, Friends ranking. So if somebody would map Full PUPA opening, that is 30 seconds long, then it would be thrown to trash?
But why?! Is there even a reason to enforce rules like these because of an unrelated poll?neonat wrote:
Am fine with the limit of minimum 1 minute