I think the main issue is not bloating and stressing BNs/Modders with large mapsets, but rather that it doesn't feel rewarding modding them.
ErunamoJAZZ wrote:
I propose make this a guideline, where if any mapper wanna broke the guide, must to justify this very well
Shadowland had a really good suggestion imo, but it got ignored (page 4 if you are curious)Default wrote:
I would love to see something that makes ranking 4:00-4:59 min songs a little easier. They are almost non existent in the game.
How is a rule that makes it harder for these songs from getting ranked any friendlier for the player base? It just ends up discouraging mappers from trying to rank them and reducing song diversity as a result, which many players find quite frustrating. It's also better to have a few high quality difficulties than a thousand uninspired ones.Sieg wrote:
When people trying to pass their shit to the ranked status they should think about how to be more friendly to the player base. Ranking system is all about this and shouldn't be adjusted to encourage laziness or whatever you talking about.
There is no way to define it, but that's definitely a better alternative than having a hard limit.Naotoshi wrote:
How do you define extremely similar? That's way too subjective.
I guess if difficulties in a spread are similar in difficulty.Naotoshi wrote:
How do you define extremely similar? That's way too subjective.
Top diff being exempt means that its a 9 diff spread instead of 8 diffs, hardly a difference.
Agree that number 3 is an absolute necessity if this rule is forced through despite the fact that there is massive community backlash against it.
for those songs that range from 3:59 until 4:59 songs no one wants to map,Akali wrote:
Agreed on ban on editing the mp3s (but could give people some slack on 4:58-4:59 drain time, judged case by case).
No point in making "in-between" rules - when does it stop? If you make a special case for 4:55 to 4:59, then the losers with 4:59 songs become the losers with 4:54 songs, so on and so forth. There's a cutoff, and as with all cutoffs, inevitably some people are gonna just barely miss it. That's just how it is, no matter where you put the cutoff.zev wrote:
for those 3:59 4:59ish songs no one wants to map,
I feel like you kinda need an in-between rule for those?
I meant from songs which length are from 3:59 until 4:59.Zexous wrote:
No point in making "in-between" rules - when does it stop? If you make a special case for 4:55 to 4:59, then the losers with 4:59 songs become the losers with 4:54 songs, so on and so forth. There's a cutoff, and as with all cutoffs, inevitably some people are gonna just barely miss it. That's just how it is, no matter where you put the cutoff.zev wrote:
for those 3:59 4:59ish songs no one wants to map,
I feel like you kinda need an in-between rule for those?
What is questionable about the Toyko spread, lol... musical elements are represented as different mapping elements in pretty much every difficulty, ranging from patterning, flow, and even the CS lmfao. Those difficulties are comparable, sure, but not the same at all. Every mapper designed their own landscape of the map, and they each play differently enough to bring new elements to the spread, so what's wrong with that?Californian wrote:
There has been large ranked mapsets out there with reasonable diff spreads (sweet dreams, hitorigoto) and some semi questionable (tokyo).
I think this wording is confusing, it should clarify that it doesn't apply to marathon maps - as it is now, it's implied elsewhere, but not clearly stated which could be confusing to new mappers and/or players.pishifat wrote:
[*]Single-mode mapsets must include a reasonable spread of at least two difficulties. The lowest difficulty must be at least a Normal which complies with their respective mode’s difficulty-specific ranking criteria.
[*]Hybrid mapsets without osu!standard difficulties must include a reasonable spread of at least two difficulties per mode. The lowest difficulty must be at least a Normal which does not break any difficulty-specific guidelines.
This is much more reasonable than the last time something similar was proposed, but I still disagree with it. I can see some merit in it for one reason - lack of quality assurance due to large overall drain time.pishifat wrote:
[*]Mapsets cannot include more than 8 total difficulties of a single game-mode. The highest difficulty of a game-mode is not required to fit within a reasonable spread, so long as no levels of difficulty are skipped.
I agree with this. You could even require it to have at least one E/N difficulty and one H/I difficulty if you really wanted to and still reduce the workload for creating sets of 4-5 minute long hard songs by a ton while always providing some spread to be worked with by players. I like disallowing mp3 edits and other shenanigans for the sake of abusing the 5 minute rule, but I feel like many good maps wouldn't be ranked without it, so some alternative solution should be put into place. Doubly so since the primary valid reason I can see for limiting the amount of difficulties in a set is that it's harder to assure its quality, but a 4:30 set with 5 difficulties has vastly more drain time than a tv size set with 10.zev wrote:
If you are going to prevent people to edit their mp3 and avoid making a fullspread, you will need to provide a solution for them, just restricting more will lead to nothing.
give those the possibility to go approved with an additional difficulty that must somewhat lower than the top difficulty and always be under 5.25
-There will be people naturally will making Easy diffs cause that's the easiest and quickest to make if they are tired of making the top diff already, or they'll just go with normal or hard if the song is too complicated for that, or they will want more freedom and don't mind mapping an Insane.
-songs like UNDEAD CORPORATION - The Empress would actually be a decent choice to go for rank, and Frederic - oddloop would be cool to map!!!!
-You will naturally overall get more variety in length of songs to pick from in all kinds of difficulties.
Also, someone probably already pointed that out, but there's a typo there.pishifat wrote:
[*]A mapset host must have equal or more drain time mapped than any guest difficulty mappers. This is to provide credit where credit is due. Drain times for collaborative difficulties must be listed in the creator’s wordsfor via storyboarding.[/list]
Loctav wrote:
In my personal opinion, either way is bad, cutting and extending alike. Extending stuff by a few seconds just to adhere to personal laziness to avoid mapping a fullspread and making the set accessible to the entire playerbase (instead of just to a small minority that can even play most Approvals, which are mostly Extreme level) is contradicting some core philosophy we have been trying to defend for years (make stuff accessible and enjoyable for the majority, not just to only the top players). Like it or not, but those who play Extreme level maps are in the sheer minority. Encouraging to circumvent the necessity to produce content for the majority of our playerbase is unwanted, because with that new people will eventually not find content they like and they can play.
Loctav wrote:
While the argument usually pops up that there are "already loads of mid level content to play", don't forget that newcomers to this game usually look for music they already know. And as time goes on, new music gets produced and therefore new osu beatmaps on these tracks. If these tracks are all available but only for the top tier player segment, it discourages newcomers to actually stay in osu! and enjoy it with us together. (because if you are into the hottest newest Trash Metal album and beatmaps exists of that in osu!, I doubt you can be bothered to play 500 Anime opening maps first before you can even remotely play what you actually came for)
There's actually a point and it's to make the difference between each step more reasonable. A single step is the worst possible option in my opinion, because there's a massive difference in the effort required to make a mapset for a 4:54 song and a marathon. We have 50s, 100s, and 300s in the game instead of just hit or miss for the same reason.Zexous wrote:
No point in making "in-between" rules - when does it stop? If you make a special case for 4:55 to 4:59, then the losers with 4:59 songs become the losers with 4:54 songs, so on and so forth. There's a cutoff, and as with all cutoffs, inevitably some people are gonna just barely miss it. That's just how it is, no matter where you put the cutoff.