After reading this I don't see what this hopes to accomplish. It seems like the reason this system was put in place was simply to have maps that every player of every level can play and while that sounds good on paper it's not quite as easy. The approval rule I can understand since most people go for extras and I'm sure there are many people who are not quite at that level that would love a version they can play but it's still restricting because even insane are usually only well playable by maybe top 80k which is still just a fraction of the playerbase. If this is still restricting to the majority of the playerbase then there is no reason for this to only help out maybe a few more players when the rest are still neglected it's just a patchjob on a broken dam.

More importantly regarding full spread sets this really does not make sense. For one the star difficulty is by no means a good indication of how hard/easy a map really is and this applies even for the easier difficulties. So depending on an "even" spread is pointless. And then to limit difficulties to just one makes it not only so that people are forced to map many more full spreads of the same song for no real reason and even then still restricting higher difficulties from being mapped. There are a LOT of very talented mappers out there that all have a good way of expressing their style onto a song and this is more visible with insane/extras because it's much less restricting on mapping so when you add this system it means if they ever plan to rank their version of a song they will likely need to make another spread just for that.

This also seems to be against the wishes of the mapping community which is, in this case, the most important right now. They are the ones responsible for voluntarily providing content to the oblivious players who are only here to play. No offense to them they are right to just want to play the game of course but since the mapping community already gets little to no love and now are being forced to go through these changes to appease the players even more is like the equivalent of getting forced into work overtime with no extra pay. Add that to the fact that the current ranking system is already a LOT of work to go through because BNs are already overworked and understaffed as it is, they would likely get further demotivated as more people work to rank the same song over and over and over again simply because there were four good insane and extra versions of a 2 minute song that wanted to get ranked.

As I stated above it's a nice idea on paper but as it is being proposed it does not fit both with the current ranking system or with the wishes of the mapping community in general. I highly urge the rule be put on hold so that there can be more discussion and ideas of how this rule can work for both mappers, players and staff alike before it's set in place, much like a map disqualification.

I did not have time nor patience to proofread this and revise this so maybe some things don't sound like what I was trying to say but I hope maybe it makes sense at least. PLz n0 k1ll m4pp3r sp1r17 kthx

I'm afraid I can't agree with this. Honestly it will only force mappers to delete their GDs and It's hard to maintain the spread issue in taiko mode.

There is such a large backlash to this new restructure, lets be real and actually take a moment to reconsider all this.

lmfao

Just throwing my two cents here-

ztrot wrote:

First of all, we reworded the current spread rule. All difficulties in each game mode have to align in a linear and progressive spread. You can add one Ultra difficulty past an Expert difficulty that does not have to increase linearly in difficulty with the rest of the spread. Keep in mind, that Ultra is a placeholder term, used to reflect a high end difficulty that has not been specified with a name yet. We put that name in place, so you guys know what we are talking about when we want to refer to the high end difficulties of a mapset.

I think a forced linear spread could potentially stifle creativity; while it does encourage balance, it also forces the mapper to have to add/remove elements in a difficulty they otherwise may not want to in order to maintain the spread. It could lead to a lot of dumbed down and/or overcomplicated difficulties when they don't have to be.

ztrot wrote:

Secondly, we limited the amount of difficulties of the same level per game mode. Every mapset is limited to one of each difficulty level per game mode. While this appears very limiting at the beginning, the hybrid set rules stay intact. Don't forget that every keycount in osu!mania is considered as individual game mode, too! If you wish to get your mapsets with multiple difficulties of the same level ranked, we advise you to split it off into a new mapset.

This leads to less diversity in my opinion. Many people have different mapping styles (e.g. person A can map an Insane difficulty that is completely different to how person B maps an Insane), and limiting the amount of same difficulties prevents that diversity.

ztrot wrote:

At last, we altered the requirements for Approval beatmaps. Approval mapsets must have 1 difficulty that is either an Easy, Normal, Hard or Insane. Your mapset must contain an Insane difficulty if an Expert or Ultra difficulty is present. This means that every Approval containing only an Expert or Ultra difficulty must receive a second difficulty. If you do not wish to map more than one difficulty for your Approval sets, we would advise you to keep the single difficulty at Insane level or below.

I'm sort of okay with this one actually-

"Secondly, we limited the amount of difficulties of the same level per game mode. Every mapset is limited to one of each difficulty level per game mode..."

I might just be dumb here, but I wish you guys would've provided a reason why this change is necessary. Is it only aesthetic, or is there an actual benefit to this restriction? Why separate maps in to different downloads when you could just pack a bunch of maps in to a single one?

E: I guess the goal is to increase the number of lower tier maps? Not sure how many defferent kinds of easy maps can you make compared to insane/extras, but I guess it's a worthwile goal anyway...

the whole ranking system is fine as it is right now, why the hell do we need a restructure

Sorry, but I really dislike this change.

I personally find that there usually isn't a very good spread between Normal, Hard, and Insane (As a beginner player, the jump from Normal to Hard was a big one, as was Hard to Insane). It is good to have some sort of inbetween difficulty so that the spreading is much more smooth (Advanded and Light Insane difficulties). This change seems to prevent that.

https://osu.ppy.sh/s/347460

I've been working on this for a while, and the fact that I have to remove or completely rework one of the lower and upper difficulties just feels wrong to do in almost every aspect.

wait if i understand this new rule properly, its basically this

as long as we get difficulty icons on set, like easy, normal, hard, insane, extra, its rankable. the spread doesnt matter? so what is the point of the star rating system?
why not just get rid of it? change into

coz if it is like that, then holy shit rip the ranking criteria. again.

Anxient wrote:

wait if i understand this new rule properly, its basically this

as long as we get difficulty icons on set, like easy, normal, hard, insane, extra, so what is the point of the star rating system?
why not just get rid of it? change into

coz if it is like that, then holy shit rip the ranking criteria.

i lol-ed

I realized 2 things while I was reading the flood of comments coming:
- this new RC rule seems to be pointing the finger to some specific mappers who usually make 6*+ maps
- the staff won't change route no matter what we say (as in most cases)


The real discussion is happening here, not on the Discord #modhelp.
Please re-consider this

I really have to disagree with the 1st and the 2nd rule tbh. That will force a mapper to delete many GDs and forcing them to map it and rank it at their own mapsets. It's kinda disappoint to see a new rule like this

For the 3rd rule, what about the "marathon" maps which are likely to have more than 10 mintes long and it is a collab map? It's kinda ridiculous here

Edit: about the 3rd rule, making another diff even that it has extra diff on it is just a wasting of time, really

changes like this reminds me why i dont want to be involved with the ranking process anymore

So if I have a set with three insanes, one by me and two GD's, I have to delete those GD's to fit your new dumbass rule? Hahahahaha no

mati gih

lets make 10star ultra

we
can
fly

Let me rephrase that.

"Hello everyone, ztrot here, destroying your dreams since 2008!"

seriously (i'm sorry for that rather rough introduction btw ), after working for months on my first map, getting mods, starting to mod other maps recently and shoot my kudosu at my own map, i'll have to completely change it i mean i don't even have to change as much as many other mappers. some will have to delete complete difficulties.

"This new rule might seem scary at first but, fear not as we don't want to forget our professional osu! players either!"

yeah, seemingly you don't want to forget the professional osu! players, so let's just forget the mappers instead

Also there's just times when not all difficulties fit to the map. Times when you have something different in mind in terms of the spread.
This will not only significantly increase the work of mappers, moders, BN's and QAT's, it will also erase a part of the mappers freedom. In my opinion we need more freedom instead of more restrictions!

Thanks for increasing more maps which need to overmapped to surepassed this rules

It's worth mentioning that, under these new rules, NONE of the maps currently on the "Most Played Beatmaps" would have gotten ranked.
Isn't that an obvious sign that this is a terrible decision?

I do not really agree with the new structure of the spread I mean for example if the spread between easy and normal is kinda huge,it needs another normal,a new one normal and the old one being renamed to Advanced or if the spread between hard and Insane is too kinda huge it needs a difficulty named hyper or light insane but yes,the difficulties which causes problems with the spread can be tuned down just my though.
Also I agree with the spread for approval mapsets regarding Insane and Extra because there are some players who cannot pass the Extra difficulties let's say or passing the high bpm streams.Just my opinion.

Loctav wrote:

Desperate-kun wrote:

Most of the members of the council were not online when this was discussed.

let me fix that. 10% were not online.

nice to know you guys had the time to proofread your thread etc. but can't even schedule a meeting.

Happy Valentine's Day to people on Asia.

#BestAprilFoolsDay

oh wait, it's Valentines Day! Enjoy chocolate everyone <3

Come on, this completely ruined and ignored current mapping stuffs.

this shit is pretty entertaining to watch i can't even lie

Lust wrote:

changes like this reminds me why i dont want to be involved with the ranking process anymore

I guess no more to add here.

95% of posts here disagree with that new rule, so pls stop that and reconsider your work on this one.

ztrot wrote:

Hello everyone, ztrot here with some exciting new news!

the best ironic phrase 2k16

this is put in the beatmaps section

so please

QATs

DQ this rule map im begging you

is this when strawpoll comes in handy? or is it too hard to make one

0.2 1.69 3.74 5.24 10.0 best spread

So that means I can't rank two Insane of different styles just because they got same stars?

Nozhomi wrote:

Lust wrote:

changes like this reminds me why i dont want to be involved with the ranking process anymore

I guess no more to add here.

95% of posts here disagree with that new rule, so pls stop that and reconsider your work on this one.

Looked through it, it's looking more like 100% from anyone that didn't make this decision. The only place I see agreement is for the approval rule.
Who does this benefit?
Mappers? No, it's incredibly limiting.
Players? No, it gives them less variety to pick from.
..why?

All I see here is someone having OCD and needed a ruleset to calm themselves down from it.

RIP TOKYO
I LOVE IT

I feel like this is one of the issues where you kinda want a consensus when everyone is actually there, even if 10% doesn't agree, the entire structure behind the beatmap shouldnt be able to be changed, as it is arguably the biggest part of the entire video game.