down with kudosu boosting.
Why not to asuume that you have their permisson to move it to the loved until its proven not. I mean is this really different case from people taking copyrighted songs?Ephemeral wrote:
What if the mapper is inactive or has left the game?
This poses a conundrum. What if a mapper does not consent to having their map deemed "complete" enough to have a scoreboard? What if they do not or never intended the map to have one in the first place?
At what point do we assume the mapper's intentions for the map in this process? Is this something we should consider at all?
I have no answers for these questions. It is a complicated topic, and we have deliberately erred away from adding very dated maps from the most part after this issue was raised VERY early on in the community voting for the first round of Loved.
thisMonstrata wrote:
I would recommend a score system where each map must attain a certain "score" to be eligible for qualification.
Let's say,
1 Favorite = 20 points
1 Star Priority = 10 points
To be eligible for Loved, you must get at least 1000 points.
If the player base loves the map, then they usually express this through favoriting the map.
If the mapping community loves a map, then they usually express this through starring the map.
Combining both favorites and star priority into one score system allows mappers more freedom to get their map Loved. They can either get support from the player base, or they can get support from the mapping community, or a mixture of both. Of course, we can shift points around later, or even logarithmatize the point system to have diminishing returns for # of favourites and # of star priority.
THe current SP system only benefits active modders currently. Not all mappers also mod, actually some of the best mappers don't do a lot of modding at all (see RLC Skystar ProBox handsome etc...) so they rely on the mapping community to promote their stuff. I hope we can find a balance through integrating # of favorites into Loved eligibility, not just Loved requirement. Currently # of favorites is useless above 30, while SP is useless above 100. Removing a dual requirement allows mappers to overlook one area (perhaps # of SP, if the mapper is not a known mapper or modder) through a significantly higher value in another (say # of favorites) and vice versa.
Eraser wrote:
You shouldn't be able to make your own map "loved", that is for somebody else to judge.
If you're unknown then your maps aren't loved and they need to gtfo being viable for the category. Such a stupid argument.Ovoui wrote:
Eraser wrote:
You shouldn't be able to make your own map "loved", that is for somebody else to judge.
I do not agree about this, if you're an unknown mapper, love section is a great way to promote your work.
The use of kudosu was interesting because it forced you to mod a lot to have your beatmap loved. I think it's fair because you get rewarded for helping the beatmapping community.
(encouraging modding is great thing tho).
Yeah sorry, I posted before I finished thinking.Ovoui wrote:
Making great map which deserved to be loved by the community and being unknown is compatible.
I didn't see your edit btw
I definitely think this is an issue that needs to be addressed, especially if from now on having favourites on a map will play a bigger role for the loved section and both mappers and players will be encouraged to do so. I usually rarely favourite maps, and I'm already at 81 favs, considering the enourmous amount of maps which are currently submitted 100 is definitely way too low and I can see it being a problem in the long run for the loved section.Yusomi wrote:
This new loved system treats favourites as if they are just freely given out. I think the cap of 100 should be increased, or a new favouriting system is introduced if this new loved system actually happens.
Based on this and the current state of maps in the loved section I would like to ask everyone advocating changes to the current system, especially those that are aiming to raise the map quality in the section by one way or the other:Ephemeral wrote:
Our thoughts in mind when making Loved were not to introduce a listing that contains high-skill, high-acclaim maps that were otherwise unsuitable for ranking, but rather to provide an alternate method for mappers with content that was widely appreciated regardless of what difficulty level or paradigm it was made under.
I'm not sure that pursuing a return to the same curated voting that started off Loved is particularly helpful - though if there is such a high demand for curated content in that regard, we could look at setting up something else to achieve the same end.
Why exactly wouldn't they want their maps to be loved? Take a look at Charles' skeleton map for example, I'm pretty sure he doesn't mind having that map loved even though he drifted away from the community and game itself. The point of loved (or at least as it was suggested by the community before the category existed) was to give the old, classic graved maps that couldn't be ranked in any way get finally the place they deserved (biggest examples would be Groundhog and deltaMAX, and to be honest I don't think Takuma would've been able to submit it for loved as he's been away for quite some time). It feels a bit unfair that maps like Moskau and Konbini can't get loved because of 1. the current requirements; 2. because their respective mappers are inactive, even though the maps were exactly the reason why the section was created in the first place.Ephemeral wrote:
What if the mapper is inactive or has left the game?
This poses a conundrum. What if a mapper does not consent to having their map deemed "complete" enough to have a scoreboard? What if they do not or never intended the map to have one in the first place?
At what point do we assume the mapper's intentions for the map in this process? Is this something we should consider at all?
I have no answers for these questions. It is a complicated topic, and we have deliberately erred away from adding very dated maps from the most part after this issue was raised VERY early on in the community voting for the first round of Loved.
There are maps that I would love to see in the category, but with their creative directors long vanished from the game (Larto is a good example of this), often times with unclear intent for their creations that are left behind, it will likely remain a very difficult issue to resolve fully.
You had me when you said mapping community but lost me when you said modding community. The modding community works to make the ranked section a thing. If a map is getting heavily modded it should be getting ranked not loved. As others have pointed out a lot of the more acclaimed mappers don't even mod much to begin with and hence do not get any benefit from SP being part of the system.Ephemeral wrote:
the mapping and modding community should have some sort of investment in the system themselves given the work they both undertake to make it a thing in the first place.
As mentioned earlier (and in the OP), the crystallization of their time investment (SP) means very little for actually influencing the ranking cycle at the moment. Beyond preparing maps for Ranked itself, they receive very little in the way of reward for essentially providing the rest of the community with content to enjoy.chainpullz wrote:
You had me when you said mapping community but lost me when you said modding community. The modding community works to make the ranked section a thing. If a map is getting heavily modded it should be getting ranked not loved. As others have pointed out a lot of the more acclaimed mappers don't even mod much to begin with and hence do not get any benefit from SP being part of the system.Ephemeral wrote:
the mapping and modding community should have some sort of investment in the system themselves given the work they both undertake to make it a thing in the first place.
Yes, and that is an issue. With the ranked category. The core of the current issue with the loved category is that we are letting major issues with the ranked category spill into the loved category. There needs to be a line drawn and that is what seems to be getting lost in all this fixation about points/voting.Ephemeral wrote:
As mentioned earlier (and in the OP), the crystallization of their time investment (SP) means very little for actually influencing the ranking cycle at the moment.
ha that's a funny joke good onechainpullz wrote:
Due to the more objective nature of the ranked category and the need for strict rules/guidelines