show more
Sieg
3,981 posts
Joined February 2012
Sieg

ztrot wrote:

it is to streamline the mapping process make things more clear as I have stated

The difficulty is not dependent on the star rating. The mapping techniques used within the difficulty and the spread to the surrounding difficulties define the category each difficulty level falls into. Difficulties must be named to reflect that. That being said as long as there is progression why do you need two insanes in the same set?

Easy Normal Hard Insane Expert < and if you can make a proper spread you are rewarded to break away and test your limits as a mapper and make a ultra diff
There should always be progression from easy to expert.
streamline mapping process? great, and who will benefit from this?

1. mappers with 2+ same level diffs in their sets, obviously - nope
2. players - nope, less difficulties to choose from
3. BN's who checks sets - nope, since they are not obligated to check sets with a lot diffs and can spend their time voluntary
4. QATs - nope, considering how system is driven right now
Suisei Hosimati
3,049 posts
Joined March 2013
Suisei Hosimati




Explain this plz, doesn't it broke the criteria itself too

OT: please no, that's gonna waste almost all mapper's works, some mappers might put GDs because people might hatred this style

Take this map as example

https://osu.ppy.sh/s/281721

The description said: "gds included so that people irritated by my mapping style can still enjoy the map"
Last edited by Suisei Hosimati , edited 1 time in total.
Doyak
osu! Alumni
2,623 posts
Joined November 2012
Doyak

ztrot wrote:

There should always be progression from easy to expert.
So my question is, why is the "ENHIXU" the only proper spread? Why not having some smaller progression between those diffs is bad? I really don't understand this.

Also I'm basically against the thing that all maps should have linear difficulty spread. Having two different styled-map with similar difficulty is bad? Why? Players get more maps to choose. If they disliked Insane 1 then they can try Insane 2. Why is this bad? If you don't like Skystar's Expert then wouldn't it be good if there's RLC's Expert? If I tell you my personal experience, I really liked to play like 10 different Insanes if I liked the song. I don't see a reason to have more diffs only if the map's quality is good.

I am totally against with this rule. Do you want this game to be strictly-optimized? Who make the maps? Do they work with this game to earn money? We're doing it FREE to contribute to the game by ranking maps. Why do we need such a restriction that disallows having many difficulties by more mappers? Not even too few diffs.
Irreversible
osu! Alumni
4,317 posts
Joined December 2011
Irreversible
I don't want to know how many things went wrong while discussing this.
shionelove
1,522 posts
Joined September 2010
shionelove
this rule is depend on SD? current mania SD is broken.and if the song has few sounds and i can't make N icon diff even,what to do?spamming LNs to increase SD?
Hpocks
445 posts
Joined January 2015
Hpocks

KuranteMelodii wrote:





Explain this plz, doesn't it broke the criteria itself too
I think the heart is propganda to make people think this is a great idea 10/10 government is always right.
Yuii-
2,501 posts
Joined July 2013
Yuii-

fuyuyu- wrote:

if your map has any type of icon set - be it bubble pop, disqualification or bubble - it will not need to follow the new restructure.
is star icon okay?
t/314308
I would say it's not, star icons don't mean too much. Besides, he specified it's only for bubbles / pops / dqs.
Anxient
1,573 posts
Joined June 2014
Anxient
please tell me that this is just a big prank
Chaoslitz
Elite Mapper / Elite Storyboarder
2,325 posts
Joined November 2013
Chaoslitz

Irreversible wrote:

About the rest, I have one important question: All these diffs will most likely go into a new mapset, which will obviously get ranked too. Where are the benefits, for anyone?
^

Honestly it will only force mappers to delete their GDs and GDers can only create their own mapsets to get it ranked. While different mappers show their own style on mapping, I don't see any reason why such rules is amended to restrict mapsets having same difficulties.

Also about the approval rule, I believe it discourage people from mapping Extra difficulties in Marathon maps (eg: https://osu.ppy.sh/s/324047), spending far more time on mapping an easier difficulties to fulfill the requirement of the new Ranking Criteria, other than cases like this I am fine with map with has ~5mins long
Mikii
393 posts
Joined August 2013
Mikii
This is dumb.
What good comes from restricting the number of difficulties when the general consensus of mapping spreads has always been decided by the situational factors and by the mapper and modders themselves. There has always been a good system towards map spreads and doing this would just make us want tobend the rules in order to fit the spread. uncomfortably bend the spread in order to fit the rules

What good comes from this when 10 councilmen agreed and now you're going to get unhappy responses by the hundreds
Last edited by Mikii , edited 2 times in total.
ouranhshc
2,338 posts
Joined July 2009
ouranhshc
RIP guest diffs
XiMerx
384 posts
Joined March 2014
XiMerx
THE OSU!HOOD - CHANGING THE BEATMAP RANKING CRITERIA PRANK (SOCIAL EXPERIMENT)(GONE WRONG)(GUN PULLED)
Last edited by XiMerx , edited 1 time in total.
Hpocks
445 posts
Joined January 2015
Hpocks

Chaoslitz wrote:

Irreversible wrote:

About the rest, I have one important question: All these diffs will most likely go into a new mapset, which will obviously get ranked too. Where are the benefits, for anyone?
^

Honestly it will only force mappers to delete their GDs and GDers can only create their own mapsets to get it ranked. While different mappers show their own style on mapping, I don't see any reason why such rules is amended to restrict mapsets having same difficulties.

Also about the approval rule, I believe it discourage people from mapping Extra difficulties in Marathon maps (eg: https://osu.ppy.sh/s/324047), spending far more time on mapping an easier difficulties to fulfill the requirement of the new Ranking Criteria, other than cases like this I am fine with map with has ~5mins long

INB4 you can only have one mapset per song. Once a song has a set, you cant map it.
Side
1,127 posts
Joined October 2013
Side
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
Prophecy
1,794 posts
Joined December 2013
Prophecy
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.
Histoire
482 posts
Joined December 2013
Histoire
There is such a large backlash to this new restructure, lets be real and actually take a moment to reconsider all this.
Spy
Beatmap Nominator
2,557 posts
Joined November 2011
Spy
lmfao
Doormat
2,050 posts
Joined September 2013
Doormat
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-
Last edited by Doormat , edited 1 time in total.
Ninmi
16 posts
Joined November 2013
Ninmi
"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...
Last edited by Ninmi , edited 1 time in total.
Ayako
212 posts
Joined December 2014
Ayako
the whole ranking system is fine as it is right now, why the hell do we need a restructure
-Mo-
Nomination Assessment Team
959 posts
Joined December 2012
-Mo-
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.
Last edited by -Mo- , edited 1 time in total.
Anxient
1,573 posts
Joined June 2014
Anxient
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.
Last edited by Anxient , edited 1 time in total.
Ayako
212 posts
Joined December 2014
Ayako

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
Seijiro
osu! Alumni
3,438 posts
Joined April 2013
Seijiro
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
Stjpa
899 posts
Joined July 2013
Stjpa

Anxient wrote:

please tell me that this is just a big prank
lit120
3,272 posts
Joined August 2013
lit120
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
Last edited by lit120 , edited 1 time in total.
Lust
osu! Alumni
2,667 posts
Joined January 2013
Lust
changes like this reminds me why i dont want to be involved with the ranking process anymore
Cheesecake
729 posts
Joined December 2013
Cheesecake
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
Rido
812 posts
Joined April 2014
Rido
mati gih
Len
Beatmap Nominator
2,834 posts
Joined June 2012
Len
lets make 10star ultra

we
can
fly
Meg
1,622 posts
Joined August 2012
Meg

Len wrote:

lets make 10star ultra

we
can
fly
mulraf
1,067 posts
Joined January 2012
mulraf
Let me rephrase that.

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

seriously (i'm sorry for that rather rough introduction btw :x), 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!
Akasha-
Nomination Assessment Team
4,420 posts
Joined April 2013
Akasha-
Thanks for increasing more maps which need to overmapped to surepassed this rules
Kellan
2 posts
Joined October 2014
Kellan
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?
bibilicu
3,578 posts
Joined October 2013
bibilicu
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.
stal
210 posts
Joined December 2013
stal

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.
Yuii-
2,501 posts
Joined July 2013
Yuii-
Happy Valentine's Day to people on Asia.
Sonnyc
7,764 posts
Joined June 2008
Sonnyc
#BestAprilFoolsDay

oh wait, it's Valentines Day! Enjoy chocolate everyone <3
Ayako
212 posts
Joined December 2014
Ayako
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_wldE_4xjVQ
Cellina
Beatmap Nominator
1,004 posts
Joined March 2013
Cellina
Come on, this completely ruined and ignored current mapping stuffs.
Rave-up
302 posts
Joined December 2014
Rave-up
this shit is pretty entertaining to watch i can't even lie
Nozhomi
Global Moderator
4,575 posts
Joined May 2013
Nozhomi

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.
Ascendance
Elite Mapper
4,249 posts
Joined July 2013
Ascendance

Spy wrote:

lmfao
Asahina Momoko
1,008 posts
Joined November 2013
Asahina Momoko

ztrot wrote:

Hello everyone, ztrot here with some exciting new news!
the best ironic phrase 2k16
Anxient
1,573 posts
Joined June 2014
Anxient
this is put in the beatmaps section

so please

QATs

DQ this rule map im begging you
Last edited by Anxient , edited 1 time in total.
Ayako
212 posts
Joined December 2014
Ayako
is this when strawpoll comes in handy? or is it too hard to make one
KaedekaShizuru
625 posts
Joined January 2013
KaedekaShizuru
0.2 1.69 3.74 5.24 10.0 best spread
Fia
Fia
So that means I can't rank two Insane of different styles just because they got same stars?
Noffy
Nomination Assessment Team
1,718 posts
Joined April 2012
Noffy

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?
Fezu
41 posts
Joined November 2012
Fezu
All I see here is someone having OCD and needed a ruleset to calm themselves down from it.
Shirona
45 posts
Joined February 2015
Shirona
RIP TOKYO
I LOVE IT
Last edited by Shirona , edited 1 time in total.
Garden
osu! Alumni
1,347 posts
Joined June 2013
Garden

Yuii- wrote:

Happy Valentine's Day to people on Asia.
Nyari
328 posts
Joined January 2012
Nyari
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.
kisata
521 posts
Joined September 2012
kisata
Zero community discussion. Even before considering how awful some of these new rules are - to have this simply rammed down our throats is a joke. At least we know how you really feel about this "community" now.
Azer
World Cup Organiser
1,108 posts
Joined December 2012
Azer
This is way too limiting and it's obvious the negatives of this change far outweigh the sole positive.. It's clear by the levels of backlash this post has received and I hope there is consideration to compensate for or revert these changes..
Last edited by Azer , edited 1 time in total.
XiMerx
384 posts
Joined March 2014
XiMerx
how about putting this into guidelines thank
Agka
680 posts
Joined January 2009
Agka
posting in epic thread
Enkidu
97 posts
Joined May 2014
Enkidu
RIP my two hour long undertale marathon
Poi Panda
87 posts
Joined July 2014
Poi Panda

XiMerx wrote:

how about putting this into guidelines thank
or just completely removing
that would be good
Shulin
1,189 posts
Joined August 2009
Shulin
Rules and Guidelines are from now on solely pushed by the Council and their discussions.
osu! dictatorship :P
CXu
osu! Alumni
3,560 posts
Joined March 2009
CXu
Mint
1,611 posts
Joined February 2013
Mint
This Spread™ isn't really a good thing I guess after reading the thread lol...

I really hope you guys can reconsider that diff limitation tho. What's wrong with having more options for the player?
XII
259 posts
Joined November 2013
XII
How about....No
Last edited by XII , edited 1 time in total.
Anxient
1,573 posts
Joined June 2014
Anxient
itll be soon until peppy comes in and tells everyone to wank wank dick dicks shut the fuck up
Last edited by Anxient , edited 1 time in total.
Kyouren
5,690 posts
Joined October 2012
Kyouren
https://osu.ppy.sh/s/413877
R.I.P ;w;
sadly ;_;
Rumia-
Beatmap Nominator
2,538 posts
Joined July 2012
Rumia-
2015 was great
Aricin
Former osu! Champion: 2021
7 posts
Joined February 2012
Aricin
this reeks of autism
Nyari
328 posts
Joined January 2012
Nyari

CXu wrote:

-Genesis
124 posts
Joined December 2012
-Genesis
holy. the limiting to 1 diff per difficulty level will ruin good spreads NotLikeThis
XII
259 posts
Joined November 2013
XII

Homestuck wrote:

RIP my two hour long undertale marathon
Don't worry, just make a 1 star diff of it :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
Reillia
1,164 posts
Joined August 2014
Reillia
Nice. This completely ruined current mapping theories.
Nerova Riuz GX
1,413 posts
Joined April 2012
Nerova Riuz GX
Oh god, i have to do something for this community.

Let's change the rule!

But i won't make any real discussion and poll because people won't agree with this nonsense
sionKotori
648 posts
Joined September 2011
sionKotori

Side wrote:

PLz n0 k1ll m4pp3r sp1r17 kthx
BAldoTridentE
117 posts
Joined November 2013
BAldoTridentE
xd
Poi Panda
87 posts
Joined July 2014
Poi Panda
This is absurd.

Goodbye guest difficulties.

Goodbye long, difficult marathon maps.

Goodbye big mapsets with a variety of difficulties to play.
Last edited by Poi Panda , edited 1 time in total.
SpectorDG
1,167 posts
Joined June 2014
SpectorDG
quit is better
Yuii-
2,501 posts
Joined July 2013
Yuii-

Asahina Momoko wrote:

ztrot wrote:

Hello everyone, ztrot here with some exciting new news!
the best ironic phrase 2k16
How come we don't have a "+1" button? Because this comment is PERFECT.
Hard Rock
8 posts
Joined June 2013
Hard Rock

PinkHeart wrote:

So that means I can't rank two Insane of different styles just because they got same stars?
Yes. I seriously don't understand what good this could possibly accomplish.

As solely a player and not a mapper I think this is completely stupid. I love the variety that multiple insanes/extras and guest diffs bring. PP weights need to be fixed(technical/sliders worth more, jump patterns less), we DON'T need to be limiting variety and creativity in mapsets. That is one of the GOOD things about mapping right now.
Xiraen
1 post
Joined February 2012
Xiraen
After checking my calendar, I am now certain it ain't april fools' yet. Can't say any of the changes would be good in my opinion. If a beatmap is good, why should it not be ranked just because it lacks lower difficulties? Why shouldn't two good insanes be ranked in the same map set?

tldr; imo the changes are fucking retarded
Surono
7,197 posts
Joined November 2013
Surono
I need remap my GDs, or own mapper need improve his diff. or idk, oke. I just a flow river~
Kitami Erika
Kitami Erika
Literally some exciting new news!
Nozhomi
Global Moderator
4,575 posts
Joined May 2013
Nozhomi

CXu wrote:

I love you CXu, you resume it perfectly ♥
xLolicore-
636 posts
Joined June 2014
xLolicore-

PoisonPanda wrote:

This is absurd.

Goodbye guest difficulties.

Goodbye long, difficult marathon maps.

Goodbye big mapsets with a variety of difficulties to play.
I feel discouraged at trying to map now :'(
Len
Beatmap Nominator
2,834 posts
Joined June 2012
Len
calm down moe ppls

we can make 1903280192380912star diff and can get ranke now
its very interesting rule
Starfy
1,046 posts
Joined November 2012
Starfy
The more the restriction on mappers, the more the frustration and pressure they have
To be honest, these rules are terrible since it limits the freedom of creating a map
I don't see any reason that mapsets are needed to be limited to one of each difficulty level per game mode
More difficulties can provide a larger variety for players to play, and allow them to experience different kinds of mapping style in one map
Is this a fault?
More difficulties can provide a more perfect diff-spread for the map, players can select a appropriate difficulty to play and have fun
Is this a fault?
Stop limiting our creativity please
We are black and blue because of the higher restriction of ranking criteria
Alheak
910 posts
Joined November 2013
Alheak
fuk
Last edited by Alheak , edited 1 time in total.
Bursthammy
1,254 posts
Joined May 2015
Bursthammy
well this is truly the worst idea, ever

it's been said multiple times, but having limitations on the amount of difficult maps is something that absolutely no one asked for, why was this even thought of in the first place? what the fuck?

secondly, FORCING difficult marathon maps to have insanes is just

god

how did you guys come up with this

imagine if this rule came out earlier and furioso melodia or tengaku was forced to have an insane difficulty

the reason these maps are so special is BECAUSE THEY ONLY HAVE ONE DIFFICULTY AND ITS HARD AS SHIT and it's the mapper's vision on what he wanted to make with the map, difficulty-wise

this is the exact same kind of logic mappers would use to "hit a certain difficulty star rating" through the use of very intense sections, not fitting the song, except opposite

you are forcing mappers to make something easier than their intended vision of the song and thats ridiculous AND time consuming
Makeli
932 posts
Joined October 2013
Makeli
Guess I'll go map a 5* CS6 Insane for my approval map then
PureFallen
14 posts
Joined June 2014
PureFallen

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.


Well, i can already smell that this will crash some currently pending beatmaps.

Also this "restrictions" (i don´t call it restructure) may decrease the amount of maps instead of rebalance the difficulty for all players.
Last edited by PureFallen , edited 1 time in total.
Bara-
11,979 posts
Joined April 2013
Bara-
Can;t there be a "cummunity's voice" poll about it?
mintong89
3,698 posts
Joined July 2011
mintong89
This is ridiculous then how we can balance the gap the hard is too hard or something like that? make more easier? that is not a solution
pregnant_man
2,494 posts
Joined August 2012
pregnant_man

Anxient wrote:

itll be soon until peppy comes in and tells everyone to wank wank dick dicks shut the fuck up
fuck a donkey™
Doyak
osu! Alumni
2,623 posts
Joined November 2012
Doyak

ztrot wrote:

Easy Normal Hard Insane Expert < and if you can make a proper spread you are rewarded to break away and test your limits as a mapper and make a ultra diff
So you're stating that easier diffs require much less effort than Ultras so it's an unimportant thing? Is this game exist only for the 8 star maps?

ztrot wrote:

it is to streamline the mapping process make things more clear as I have stated
I don't know why is that even need to be more clear. Good mapsets with good difficulties and spread should be ranked. No? How does having more diffs would even hurt it?

ztrot wrote:

That being said as long as there is progression why do you need two insanes in the same set?
Actually I think that Easy Normal Hard Insane Expert Ultra nameset is nothing but a name. So the community already knows that what fits to each difficulty, so they know that Light Insane is easier than Insane and harder than Hard. Why having this kind of difficulty is bad? Who decided that "next to Hard should be always harder as much as the Insane - Hard gap"? Is (Insane - Hard)/2 gap bad? Why?
Last edited by Doyak , edited 1 time in total.
Ascendance
Elite Mapper
4,249 posts
Joined July 2013
Ascendance

Len wrote:

its very interesting rule
Poi Panda
87 posts
Joined July 2014
Poi Panda

Len wrote:

calm down moe ppls

we can make 1903280192380912star diff and can get ranke now
its very interesting rule
Waiting for this!!
Cheesecake
729 posts
Joined December 2013
Cheesecake
Democratic People's Republic of osu!
Sylvette
332 posts
Joined July 2015
Sylvette
Clearly, nobody likes these new changes.
PLEASE, CHANGE THESE. THEY ARE COMPLETELY RETARDED.
Zone
9 posts
Joined January 2014
Zone
Please dont actually make this a thing. Rip guest diffs...
unko
521 posts
Joined March 2014
unko
I was gonna voice my opinion on this but then realized this thread is getting 3 pages of said opinion every minute.

says something doesn't it hehe
Poi Panda
87 posts
Joined July 2014
Poi Panda

Bara- wrote:

Can;t there be a "cummunity's voice" poll about it?
Don't be ridiculous. Of course you don't get a choice in what happens.
show more
Please sign in to reply.

New reply

0
122 / 614
/