It's less about what is the best solution and what is the least devestating/demanding solution lol, if we stay as is, people will abuse the hybrid system to avoid getting 2 std bns for their standard set (for example).
The 2 nominators per mode rule fixes that issue, and makes the quality and bn punishment or whatever side of things less confusing, but is very demanding for mappers and might cause hybrid mapsets to die out; making them unrankable will fix all issues but might just harm the game in return in other ways (hybrid mapset plays and such), the proposed solution of 1 per extra mode is an all around 'jack of all trades', it still has possible issues and stuff that'd need sorting out (like what'd be the main mode, for example). Thing is IMO no solution is perfect and we'll have to make something and ultimately deal with another problem stemming out of it later.
I believe the correct course of action is to find something that will have the least issues that can most plausibly be dealt with relatively easily in the future, rather than wasting time finding the 'perfect solution' and later risk seeing it in practice providing unexpected results, we'd better stick to predictable things.
For me, I consider the last solution (2 per main gamemode, 1 per extra gamemode) the most balanced and thus that's what I'd say is the right choice; I find stuff such as defining the main mode to be relatively simple discussion wise, and all other issues seem easy to solve to me; so that's what I'd go with, but whatever ya want.
The 2 nominators per mode rule fixes that issue, and makes the quality and bn punishment or whatever side of things less confusing, but is very demanding for mappers and might cause hybrid mapsets to die out; making them unrankable will fix all issues but might just harm the game in return in other ways (hybrid mapset plays and such), the proposed solution of 1 per extra mode is an all around 'jack of all trades', it still has possible issues and stuff that'd need sorting out (like what'd be the main mode, for example). Thing is IMO no solution is perfect and we'll have to make something and ultimately deal with another problem stemming out of it later.
I believe the correct course of action is to find something that will have the least issues that can most plausibly be dealt with relatively easily in the future, rather than wasting time finding the 'perfect solution' and later risk seeing it in practice providing unexpected results, we'd better stick to predictable things.
For me, I consider the last solution (2 per main gamemode, 1 per extra gamemode) the most balanced and thus that's what I'd say is the right choice; I find stuff such as defining the main mode to be relatively simple discussion wise, and all other issues seem easy to solve to me; so that's what I'd go with, but whatever ya want.