forum

[Proposal] Spread requirements based on song length

posted
Total Posts
360
show more
Nozhomi
From what I read on the draft, we authorize people to be even more lazy when they could already rank mapset with only 1 difficulty done and the rest from GDs. So maybe we could include the idea about having a minimum amount of participation on a set (like 50% of it done by the original mapper) to be sure this won't lead to the opposite direction that draft is supposed to go.

And about the drain time of a song :
… lower than 4:30, the lowest difficulty cannot be harder than a Hard.
… lower than 5:00, the lowest difficulty cannot be harder than an Insane.

There's some songs who don't support difficulties above Hard or Insane (depending of their BPM / density / etc...) who will lead this to mappers having forced difficulties who won't fit the song at all to have a spread as rules expect (example : https://osu.ppy.sh/b/481272 / https://osu.ppy.sh/b/550579). So I don't think than you should force people do to a Hard / Insane in case of the songs can't support it, or allow them to fall under Marathon rule.
Lasse

Monstrata wrote:

1. Take out mp3 editing as a rule. Optionally you can make it a guideline that artificially edited mp3 extensions must sound natural/unnoticeable in order to be acceptable.

2. Remove the crossfade rule, and put it in as a guideline so people have the option to call a map out for its low quality crossfading, but not the ability to completely prevent it from being ranked. It is far too subjective to be an objective rule anyways.

agree with both of these, mainly the bold part

agree with Halfslashed's point about combining two songs, since there are a lot of cases where songs work much better if you combine them, just look at https://osu.ppy.sh/s/100348 which would be affected by this change since it technically combines two songs, it's split like this https://i.imgur.com/3fhDLNU.jpg on the album. where the actual kanshou no matenrou starts at 00:43:271 -


also with how this change is currently, if you're mapping a song that is just slightly above 3:30 you wouldn't be allowed to put breaks on your hard diff because then it wouldn't reach the drain minimum to not need a normal.
For example https://osu.ppy.sh/b/1072897 higher diffs on this are ~3:40, so lowest diff could be a hard, but then diffs below another are <3:30.
Or https://osu.ppy.sh/b/1590239 where Insane+ diffs are all above 3:30, but hard is 3:29 due to breaks.
Breaks can be very important on <Insane diffs of this length and this would discourage using them, so I think this should somehow be accounted for, but I can't really come up with a nice solution right now.

Other drain time related spread changes look nice to me
TheKingHenry

Nozhomi wrote:

There's some songs who don't support difficulties above Hard or Insane (depending of their BPM / density / etc...) who will lead this to mappers having forced difficulties who won't fit the song at all to have a spread as rules expect (example : https://osu.ppy.sh/b/481272 / https://osu.ppy.sh/b/550579). So I don't think than you should force people do to a Hard / Insane in case of the songs can't support it, or allow them to fall under Marathon rule.
Maybe I misunderstood something in your post, but I'm pretty sure this ain't forcing anyone to map those diffs or over them, but rather those diffs and under (for atleast the lowest diff); and thus in case of calmer songs having all diffs under those shouldn't be contradicting the idea of the wording there.

Halfslashed wrote:

I think an exception should be made for using two songs that were composed to transition into each other.
Same but not restricted to two, considering there's compositions consisting of more parts than that still working as one whole. Basically restricting this with any number shouldn't really be necessary. In most cases songs ain't so short that you'd need like half dozen to get to the 5 min mark (so it ain't really abusable anyways), so putting the max amount for this will only end up forbidding mapping some pieces as whole, while their length would be over the 5 mins for single-diff-mapset even without all parts.
Nozhomi
[quote="TheKingHenry"]Maybe I misunderstood something in your post, but I'm pretty sure this ain't forcing anyone to map those diffs or over them, but rather those diffs and under (for atleast the lowest diff); and thus in case of calmer songs having all diffs under those shouldn't be contradicting the idea of the wording there.

I see what you mean, and yeah agree I'm retarded.
Tho my first point is still something we should considerate.
moonlightleaf
Happy ! but if do this , e E&N diff will decrease ? (just imo

so i suggest if do TV size(<2min?) , should be map E N at least ?
-Arche

Lasse wrote:

Monstrata wrote:

1. Take out mp3 editing as a rule. Optionally you can make it a guideline that artificially edited mp3 extensions must sound natural/unnoticeable in order to be acceptable.

2. Remove the crossfade rule, and put it in as a guideline so people have the option to call a map out for its low quality crossfading, but not the ability to completely prevent it from being ranked. It is far too subjective to be an objective rule anyways.
agree with both of these, mainly the bold part

agree with Halfslashed's point about combining two songs, since there are a lot of cases where songs work much better if you combine them, just look at https://osu.ppy.sh/s/100348 which would be affected by this change since it technically combines two songs, it's split like this https://i.imgur.com/3fhDLNU.jpg on the album. where the actual kanshou no matenrou starts at 00:43:271 -


also with how this change is currently, if you're mapping a song that is just slightly above 3:30 you wouldn't be allowed to put breaks on your hard diff because then it wouldn't reach the drain minimum to not need a normal.
For example https://osu.ppy.sh/b/1072897 higher diffs on this are ~3:40, so lowest diff could be a hard, but then diffs below another are <3:30.
Or https://osu.ppy.sh/b/1590239 where Insane+ diffs are all above 3:30, but hard is 3:29 due to breaks.
Breaks can be very important on <Insane diffs of this length and this would discourage using them, so I think this should somehow be accounted for, but I can't really come up with a nice solution right now.

Other drain time related spread changes look nice to me
-Arche
When there is a loop in the song, or the album have an intro, and your song is 4:55, it's really bad to not been able anymore to extend it. R3 music box are really autistic way to extend because it have basically nothing to see with the original song, and an extend of 30 secondes aka 1/10 of the map, is not an extend anymore. Adding a loop in the song to reach 5 minutes is maybe lazy, but when its inaudible, this rules is just bad and wont help beginners mappers to rank there stuff. Making it more like a guideslines as said Monstrata or Lasse would be much better.
-Arche

peppy wrote:

Cutting shorter is done to make it more playable/suited to a rhythm game. Making longer is done to avoid mapping certain difficulties with basically no exception.
No, cutting a full version of a song to make it "tv size" is basically just been lazy to map a spread of 1:30 minutes for each diff despite a spread of 4:30 for each diff lol
pimp

moonlightleaf wrote:

Happy ! but if do this , e E&N diff will decrease ? (just imo

so i suggest if do TV size(<2min?) , should be map E N at least ?
shorter songs will not be affected, anything shorter than 3:30 minutes will still have to follow the current spread rules
Mir

timemon wrote:

I've only read the spread proposal. I quite like it, though 3:30 drain time is very hard to reach.

1) full ver maps have lots of break (because they don't have to care about drain time)
2) some full ver songs can be quite short (3:30 to 4:00) so they might even fail to hit the rules designed to help them.

Maybe adjust the drain time a bit? I think 3:00 is good for the lowest point.


I actually agree with this, full version songs are more likely to have breaks in them so having slight leeway for breaks in longer songs would be nice. Instead of 3:30 -> 4:30 -> 5:00, I would prefer 3:00 -> 4:00 -> 5:00. Not only is it more linear (there's a lot of room between 3:30-4:30 to require a hard but half that from 4:30-5:00 to require an insane) but it could also allow more breaks in 3:00+ songs.

This pretty much solves Lasse's concern I think?

Lasse wrote:

Breaks can be very important on <Insane diffs of this length and this would discourage using them, so I think this should somehow be accounted for, but I can't really come up with a nice solution right now.


The rest of the proposal I pretty much agree with.

The matter of Songs Compilation is kinda iffy. I think I agree most with what Monstrata wrote:

Monstrata wrote:

1. Take out mp3 editing as a rule. Optionally you can make it a guideline that artificially edited mp3 extensions must sound natural/unnoticeable in order to be acceptable.

2. Remove the crossfade rule, and put it in as a guideline so people have the option to call a map out for its low quality crossfading, but not the ability to completely prevent it from being ranked. It is far too subjective to be an objective rule anyways.


I wouldn't say mp3 extensions are always bad, because sometimes songs are literally milliseconds away from being 5 minutes long, and a small extension would be fine in that case if it's natural or unnoticeable. I also think crossfades can vary in quality so I agree having it as a guideline works much better than as a rule.

As for "EN diffs will decrease" nobody is forcing people not to make difficulties lower than a hard/insane for songs that don't require them, if mappers want to continue mapping low diffs for those songs they are free to do so. Most newer players don't play long songs and don't stay around Easy/Normal level for too long anyways so for mappers that like to do less work I view this more as a QOL option.

Regarding Nozhomi's concern about participation, I think having the spread rules more lenient would encourage mappers to make more diffs themselves since they don't have to map as much. At least, that's how it would affect me most likely. Getting GDs wouldn't be so high priority if you only had to map two difficulties as opposed to 4 perhaps.

That's about all that's on my mind right now... :?
-Mo-
Had a chance to play around with map data now thanks to x86's TSV. I personally think that there should be some adjustments to the proposal.

I just finished gathering the research and writing the script for my next video on song length (relevant polls here and here), and the conclusion is that most players when it comes to enjoyment prefer full length songs over shortened versions. A lot of the time full length songs do go above 3:30 in length.

Fancy graphs

Figure 1: Scatter plots of plays against song length for each difficulty. Red line is the current proposal's cut-off point for the respective difficulty.


Figure 2: Single scatter plot of plays against song length for Normal difficulties between 0 to 6 minutes and up to 6 million plays.


Figure 3: Same, but for Hard diff.


Looking at figure 1, it is true that the longer the map length, the less likely that the map becomes super popular, but keep in mind that this could be due to there being less maps in the 4 minute range compared to maps in the 1:30-2 minute range (see: these). It's unreasonable to say that lower level difficulties in the 4 minute range don't get played at all, because they clearly do. In figure 2 you can see that there are still a good handful of normal diffs with at least 250k plays in to 3:30 to 4, with a few being above 1 million plays.

The main concern for me is locking out those 3:30-4:00 songs from the newbie players, since they still do play them, and the jump from normal to hard can be difficult for some players because of how large that gap can be compared to other difficulty gaps.

You could say that we already have a large number of ranked normal difficulties in the game already, but this is a long-term change for the game, and mapping standards and quality change over time. Most of us would recommend a newbie player to play something ranked within the last few years rather than something from say 2009, for example.

Suggestions:

- Move the cut-off point for Normal difficulties up to 4:00. I think this is a more reasonable place to put it given the demand for full length songs.

- Add a new guideline that relaxes what a reasonable spread is for maps above 3:00. This is my compromise for raising the normal diff cut-off. One of the problems mappers face is having a low level normal diff and a high level hard diff, and requiring either remaps of the current diffs or the addition of an advanced diff to fill the gap. This problem is amplified for longer maps because more effort etc etc. This new guideline would allow spreads with wider gaps between each difficulty, lowering the workload on the mapper by not having to worry about spread too much and having less drain time to map whilst keeping maps accessible for lower level players.

- An (unwritten) guideline should be added/agreed for bundled maps or maps of featured artists to require normal spreads. It's probably no surprise that the most played maps in the game are the bundled default maps, and more specifically the lower level difficulties of those maps, since those are usually the first maps one plays when they first download the game. To me it wouldn't make sense to add official/bundled content into the game that isn't accessible to newbies.

I should say that I'm all for the general direction of this proposal. I just want to be weary about this sort of change since it's going to have a long term effect on the content we get in this game.
LwL

-Mo- wrote:

Suggestions:

- Move the cut-off point for Normal difficulties up to 4:00. I think this is a more reasonable place to put it given the demand for full length songs.

- Add a new guideline that relaxes what a reasonable spread is for maps above 3:00. This is my compromise for raising the normal diff cut-off. One of the problems mappers face is having a low level normal diff and a high level hard diff, and requiring either remaps of the current diffs or the addition of an advanced diff to fill the gap. This problem is amplified for longer maps because more effort etc etc. This new guideline would allow spreads with wider gaps between each difficulty, lowering the workload on the mapper by not having to worry about spread too much and having less drain time to map whilst keeping maps accessible for lower level players.


I like this solution a lot. The main problem would be how to relax something that is already somewhat subjective. My idea would be to perhaps for each star level of top difficulty define a minimum number of difficulties, which need to make a somewhat even spread down to the required minimum difficulty. Final judgement would still be done by BN/QAT as it is now, and that way we could also a bit more objectively define what constitutes a reasonable spread in the current RC. Everyone knows a hard limit on SR would be garbage because of how flawed SR is, but I think just saying "spread requirements are laxer" would be rather meaningless.
ac8129464363
dunno if this already got resolved but I just wanna say that I support two song compilations if they were intended to be listened to together
Nevo

Monstrata wrote:

1. Take out mp3 editing as a rule. Optionally you can make it a guideline that artificially edited mp3 extensions must sound natural/unnoticeable in order to be acceptable.

2. Remove the crossfade rule, and put it in as a guideline so people have the option to call a map out for its low quality crossfading, but not the ability to completely prevent it from being ranked. It is far too subjective to be an objective rule anyways.
I completely agree with these since I dont even see what can make a crossfade low quality and mp3 extensions that are done well you cant tell are extended.
Nevo

pimpG wrote:

not really looking forward to see the beginner difficulties decreasing but the boss has spoken and he doesn't really mind that...

"only allow compilations to be mapped as the same difficulty level each song..."
^ I think this should be considered
Problem with this is not all songs will be the same difficulty example being https://osu.ppy.sh/s/744238 which has a 206bpm song and a 86bpm which are completely related as its part of the same album project so its a completely logical compilation
Stack
also agree on what Halfslashed said a few pages back as 2 songs are sometimes even advertised as bundled together and this would make them unrankable.
For example https://osu.ppy.sh/s/710305 and http://akatsuki-records.com/drcd0013_2.html, these 2 songs clearly belong together and even the album title hints to it.
Halfslashed's version already covers this and seems quite good so I would honestly just use that one
jas
hi im too lazy to read thru the entire thread and im not sure if this is mentioned but ima mention it anyways~~

i think it would be better if the times were changed from

- 3:30 to 3:00
- 4:30 to 4:00

just for consistency reasons, idk ab you guys but 3:30>4:30>5:00 doesnt make a lot of sense if theres a 1 min gap and then a 30 sec gap.
timemon
I'm thinking about the drain time rule things.
How about we allow some leniency on lower difficulties.
For example, The insane diff drain time is 4:10 it is qualified for the 4:00 rule, however due to the gameplay elements of Normal and Hard the maps drain time are 3:40 and 3:50 instead which I would like to extend the rule back to help those lower diffs.

The difference in drain time has to be reasonable and relative to the top diff and the overall length of the song. And the extension will only help Hard difficulties or lower.

The issue with this solution is that it is very vague and needs to be handled subjectively case by case by the Beatmap Nominators to work.

Edit: I might add some people are really concerned about less content on the game which is justified, but I think it might even add more content with this change. Think about all the full ver maps that never got ranked because of the mappers giving up/spread issues. And remember mappers can still opt to ignore this rules and map full spread should they wish to.
Kibbleru
the only exception i could make with the 3 song rule is red like roses 1 and 2 from rwby. but iirc that was an official track released by the artist?
Okoratu
very good list kibb



on a different note we'll be collecting feedback until the weekend (so probs around this sunday) and then change the draft accordingly to the consensus of this thread
squirrelpascals

Mir wrote:

timemon wrote:

I've only read the spread proposal. I quite like it, though 3:30 drain time is very hard to reach.

1) full ver maps have lots of break (because they don't have to care about drain time)
2) some full ver songs can be quite short (3:30 to 4:00) so they might even fail to hit the rules designed to help them.

Maybe adjust the drain time a bit? I think 3:00 is good for the lowest point.
I actually agree with this, full version songs are more likely to have breaks in them so having slight leeway for breaks in longer songs would be nice. Instead of 3:30 -> 4:30 -> 5:00, I would prefer 3:00 -> 4:00 -> 5:00. Not only is it more linear (there's a lot of room between 3:30-4:30 to require a hard but half that from 4:30-5:00 to require an insane) but it could also allow more breaks in 3:00+ songs.

This pretty much solves Lasse's concern I think?

Lasse wrote:

Breaks can be very important on <Insane diffs of this length and this would discourage using them, so I think this should somehow be accounted for, but I can't really come up with a nice solution right now.
This is what I also suggested here https://osu.ppy.sh/forum/p/6655193

UndeadCapulet wrote:

@squirrel

please read the first few pages for why we can't do 3/4/5 for time limits. it was almost exclusively seen as too lenient.
That was the very beginning of the thread though. Since we have a lot more people in on this discussion now and we're approaching spreading from different perspectives, I think we should reconsider a linear 3:00 -> 4:00 -> 5:00 draintime spread.
Teky
Don't have much to add here, but I'd like to remind everyone of what demographic we're dealing with and how the mapping scene deals with these time factors currently. If we make the cutoff 4:00, A significant portion of full anime OP's and ED's are going to make the cutoff (things the demographics like), which I believe will make them appear more in the mapping scene, unlike how I believe they are currently neglected a bit (not in the literal sense). If we make the cutoff 4:30, not so much. I wouldn't want to talk much because I don't really know the more technical or obscure stuff, but I agree with -Mo-'s proposal here. Even in that case, remember that we don't exactly have to settle for 3:00/4:00/5:00 or 3:30/4:30/5:00. We can do stuff like 2:30/3:30/5:00 (While I know may seem unreasonable, but this is just a reminder).
TheKingHenry

Okoratu wrote:

very good list kibb
Tfw tried looking the previous pages like where the hell's this, only to realize in the end it's prob just sarcastic remark for

Kibbleru wrote:

the only exception i could make with the 3 song rule is red like roses 1 and 2 from rwby. but iirc that was an official track released by the artist?
FeelsBadMan

EDIT: wdym with that tho kibb? You wanting red like roses to be exception to song compilations needing 3 but it having 2 (not like it should be song compilation anyways, doesn't it work as one track?) or does it have 3 parts and you want it to not be song compilation cuz it works as one or whaaaaat (in which case it shouldn't be the only exception obviously) ( ̄ー ̄;
Halfslashed

-Mo- wrote:

Suggestions:

- Move the cut-off point for Normal difficulties up to 4:00. I think this is a more reasonable place to put it given the demand for full length songs.

- Add a new guideline that relaxes what a reasonable spread is for maps above 3:00. This is my compromise for raising the normal diff cut-off. One of the problems mappers face is having a low level normal diff and a high level hard diff, and requiring either remaps of the current diffs or the addition of an advanced diff to fill the gap. This problem is amplified for longer maps because more effort etc etc. This new guideline would allow spreads with wider gaps between each difficulty, lowering the workload on the mapper by not having to worry about spread too much and having less drain time to map whilst keeping maps accessible for lower level players.
The problem with the graphs shown as well as the data via twitter poll is that it does not take into account that people wanting full length songs are invested in the game. The purpose of the proposal is to incentivize mapping more songs of that length for that audience, as opposed to the newer audience that tires out. Given that, I still think 3:30 for a minimum difficulty of hard is a good place to put the cutoff.

The other point would be much harder to define in a way that mappers would be able to use it, since usually those remaps and creating additional difficulties is not understanding how to keep a linear spread while avoiding massive jumps between difficulties. A guideline that "relaxes" this would just allow poor spread design through to ranked.
Nao Tomori
if you people want linear just go with 3:30 - 4:15 - 5. that both avoids the "issue" of non linearity while also keeping fairly normal standards for drain time per set; for a 3 minute nhix set, that's 12 minutes and about the max amount ever needed for a set, which is perfectly fine imo... at 3:30 hix that becomes 10:30 which isn't a huge reduction and then 4:15 ix is 8:30 which is also not a big difference.
h3oCharles
plz move to completed
pimp

Nevo wrote:

pimpG wrote:

not really looking forward to see the beginner difficulties decreasing but the boss has spoken and he doesn't really mind that...

"only allow compilations to be mapped as the same difficulty level each song..."
^ I think this should be considered
Problem with this is not all songs will be the same difficulty example being https://osu.ppy.sh/s/744238 which has a 206bpm song and a 86bpm which are completely related as its part of the same album project so its a completely logical compilation
sure but what if the songs have similar bpm and intensity, shouldn't the RC at least discourage mappers from mapping them inconsistently?
Nevo

pimpG wrote:

sure but what if the songs have similar bpm and intensity, shouldn't the RC at least discourage mappers from mapping them inconsistently?
I personally haven't seen a compilation which maps 2 slimiler bpm/intensity songs in completely different levels of difficulty. So i dont really see what making people stay consistent would do since its like their interpretation of the songs and stuff.
tatatat
I think the wording of the proposal could be fixed to somehow uhh.. deal with the "at least two difficulties" part of the current ranking criteria. Not that I support this proposal. I'm just saying. Also I'm not really a fan of the "Song compilations must incorporate 3 or more songs. " thing. If I want to make a compilation of two 4:30 length songs from the same artist and album into a 9 minute map, I can't? No more Artist - Song1 / Song2 ? that seems silly.
pimp
the proposal is to make the ranking process easier to get long songs ranked without the need of extending them, allowing people to pick two random songs from an artist/album would be a contradiction in the proposal. making an exception for songs like the ones kibbleru mentioned should be fine.

Nevo wrote:

I personally haven't seen a compilation which maps 2 slimiler bpm/intensity songs in completely different levels of difficulty. So i dont really see what making people stay consistent would do since its like their interpretation of the songs and stuff.
if the songs have similar bpm and intensity then I don't see how the interpretation could be different. i'm talking about obvious SR differences... what if the mapper decides to have the compilation mapped as (Extra ~ Easy ~ Hard) when all songs in the compilation supports the same level. That's subjective so what are the chances that you will be able to convince him that this is a bad idea if not even the RC mentions anything about it. sure I don't remember seeing anyone doing this so far but it doesn't means it won't happen in the future.

there is some maps that have increasing difficulty level like https://osu.ppy.sh/s/69076 but this concept wouldn't make sense in a compilation of songs with similar intensity and bpm imo

Proposal wrote:

Guidelines
  1. Each song in a song compilation should be similar in audio quality, volume, and length.
could be something like:

Proposal wrote:

Guidelines
  1. Each song in a song compilation should be similar in audio quality, volume, length and difficulty level.
Nao Tomori
that should not need to be a rule. it's like saying, your extra diff should not be mapped like a normal then have random fullscreen jumps somewhere randomly. that is simply something that would be considered low quality by BNG and should not be nominated. even if it isn't a hard set guideline people still do not support it, so there isn't a reason to suspect they would do it in a marathon form...
pimp
one of the main reasons why we are discussing this changes is because some BN nominated bad stuff
Nevo
Well it's because it's subjective since not everyone thinks the same way about mapping songs you shouldn't create a rule to force people to do things the way you think it right if they think it's wrong. At least that's how I feel about it.
pimp
I believe that the majority would agree with it but I only suggested a few more words for the guideline, not a rule.
tatatat
So instead of combining two 4:30 songs from the same artist and album into one 9 minute diff, I'd have to combine three 4:30 songs into 13:30 length diff? that just seems absurdly dumb. Why should there be any restrictions of what songs can be mapped. I do agree that just patching together two random songs from two random artists isn't okay, but why not from the same artist and same album? Why map two diffs of a 4:30 length song when you can map one diff of 9 minutes of two song? There is much more variety. If I can't combine two 4:30 length songs from the same album, I'd just be... inclined to extend the compilation with a r3 music box to fit the 3 song requirement. and thats even dumber? right?

Two songs from the same artist should be perfectly acceptable, such as https://osu.ppy.sh/b/1639326 . I see nothing wrong with the way two songs were combined.

Also I'm still not entirely sure whether or not the rule of requiring a "spread of at least two difficulties." is required for maps shorter than 5:00 in drain time. Can you please clarify?
Vacuous

tatatat wrote:

So instead of combining two 4:30 songs from the same artist and album into one 9 minute diff, I'd have to combine three 4:30 songs into 13:30 length diff? that just seems absurdly dumb. Why should there be any restrictions of what songs can be mapped. I do agree that just patching together two random songs from two random artists isn't okay, but why not from the same artist and same album? Why map two diffs of a 4:30 length song when you can map one diff of 9 minutes of two song? There is much more variety. If I can't combine two 4:30 length songs from the same album, I'd just be... inclined to extend the compilation with a r3 music box to fit the 3 song requirement. and thats even dumber? right?

Two songs from the same artist should be perfectly acceptable, such as https://osu.ppy.sh/b/1639326 . I see nothing wrong with the way two songs were combined.

Also I'm still not entirely sure whether or not the rule of requiring a "spread of at least two difficulties." is required for maps shorter than 5:00 in drain time. Can you please clarify?
From what I understand, they're working on rewording it so that 2 song mashes are ok with reasonable justification rather than just extending drain time.
Also, any map under 5:00 still wouldn't be considered a marathon so yes, they would need at least two difficulties.
Irreversible
Does the spread also have to remain linear?

Example:
if the drain time is 3:30-4:30 your set's lowest diff must be hard or lower (excuse me if that is outdated, just took it from the first post)

Let's say I still want to make an Easy for this diff- is a normal still required then?
kwk

Irreversible wrote:

Does the spread also have to remain linear?

Example:
if the drain time is 3:30-4:30 your set's lowest diff must be hard or lower (excuse me if that is outdated, just took it from the first post)

Let's say I still want to make an Easy for this diff- is a normal still required then?
I'd assume so, the reasonable spread rule is still in place.
Topic Starter
UndeadCapulet
nah the reasonable spread would only have to start at the hard
so you could do EHIX or w/ev if you wanted
pimp
one last thing that i'm concerned

there should be some limitation to what songs can be combined into a rankable compilation
the way the Proposal right now basically you can put songs from 6ix9ine, BABY METAL, and Beethoven in the same compilation
show more
Please sign in to reply.

New reply