yeah so lets not do it at all and let any set design be legal regardless of contribution
Mordred wrote:
yes
tatatat wrote:
I think set hosts should map at least double the drain time anyone other guest mapper maps. GDing is lazy. Laziness should be eliminated.
tatatat wrote:
I actually believe that collaboration and guest difficulties shouldn't be allowed period, but most people will think this is too extreme.
This is quite ironic seeing as how your latest ranked map from August has a guest difficulty in there.tatatat wrote:
I actually believe that collaboration and guest difficulties shouldn't be allowed period, but most people will think this is too extreme.
Actually, Kencho helped contribute to finding modders for my Hitorigoto set, so the answer is definitely not 0. There have also been other times where individual mappers have asked for my opinion/feedback on a guest/collab difficulty of theirs: the most recent example I can think of was when Ascendance asked me for feedback on a collab diff he made with Ayyri, with Ayyri being the set host. Getting back to my point, what I was trying to get at with my original post was maybe we should look towards other ideas of determining set contribution, rather than relying on a quantitative measurement.Nao Tomori wrote:
@doormat, how many sets have you been in or hosted where the gders find modders and/or bns? aside from hybrids, probably 0. the responsibility for ranking the thing is the host's - that's why he's the host. but that isn't that important since my point is, as you mentioned, contribution is qualitative and not quantitative, so using a hard set quantitative rule is not a great way to judge it.
as such i still think the best way to do this is just based on full diffs, and whether a diff is a full diff or not can be judged by the nominating bns.
bor wrote:
I think if participants are consenting someone with 0% drain time should be able to host a set
Doormat wrote:
Getting back to my point, what I was trying to get at with my original post was maybe we should look towards other ideas of determining set contribution, rather than relying on a quantitative measurement.
This is what I’m unsure of, but based off what people in favour of changing set contribution requirements seem to want, I assume these are some more of the general ideas we should consider:pishifat wrote:
what other ideas do you/others have in mind for determining set contribution? i agree that they could be worth talking about, but discussion is stuck until those alternatives are brought up
4n3c wrote:
"a beatmapset host must/should have contributed equal or more to the beatmapset than any guest difficulty beatmap creators" as either a rule or a guideline
4n3c wrote:
it doesnt make too much of a difference either way, but for reference "Guidelines may be violated under exceptional circumstances. These exceptional circumstances must be warranted by an exhaustive explanation as of why the guideline has been violated and why not violating it will interfere with the overall quality of the creation."
if that condition is met it's probably not a loophole.
Namki wrote:
ppl are known for not following guidelines, they'll try abusing it for sure, I think we need have it as a rule
Aiseca wrote:
It must be put as a solid rule.
It is already a rule, but the idea of this proposal is to make it less strict because mappers were forced to map or delete certain parts even if they didn't want to. I think it would be enough to change it to a guideline (can also be a rule) where the amount of diffs is used as a metric and the drain time is only considered if a diff has significantly less drain time (for example 20% less than other diffs) or when the host mapped less than other people in a collab, like mentioned before by some people. I don't think it can be "abused" because if someone really mapped a lot less than other diffs it would be pretty obvious anyway and BNs would likely point out that issue.Aiseca wrote:
Namki wrote:
ppl are known for not following guidelines, they'll try abusing it for sure, I think we need have it as a rule
This is what I'm pointing earlier -.-....Aiseca wrote:
It must be put as a solid rule.
Monstrata wrote:
Playing devil's advocate:
Does that mean my irl friend who has no idea how to map can host a set, and then get me to just map all the diffs for him (calling them Monstrata's _____" not ghostmap of course xD) and let him be set owner?
Nao Tomori wrote:
Mapping the most is not a great way to quantify this, that's what this post is about. Number of diffs is more accurate, and is probably the best way to approximate it as there are plenty of qualitative things otherwise (a noob mapper making a normal might have to put more effort than Kibb making an insane or extra gd for him for example).
So yeah I think number of diffs and then a % drain time being mandated for mapping for a diff to qualify as a "full" diff is the best way still.
A beatmapset host must have beatmapped equal or more difficulties than any guest difficulty beatmap creators. This is to provide credit where credit is due. Collab difficulties are only considered partial difficulties, and drain time will be used if necessary to determine the amount of contribution.
Aiseca wrote:
So your proposal for computation be like: Full diff = (diffs made + quality + drain time)? or something else?
isn't that what "This is to provide credit where credit is due." in the rule is already doing?4n3c wrote:
if we are amending the rule, it might be better to integrate what pishi wrote about "mapped by user" on site/profile listingsinstead ofin addition to all the metrics associated with contribution
pishifat wrote:
tehre
pishifat wrote:
so unless someone's been hiding a groundbreaking option, i think we can go forward with the wording proposed near the beginning:A beatmapset host must have beatmapped equal or more difficulties than any guest difficulty beatmap creators. This is to provide credit where credit is due. Collab difficulties are only considered partial difficulties, and drain time will be used if necessary to determine the amount of contribution.
Getting a full mania spread "by accident" is not really possible, it's the mapset host's choice to add difficulties to the map, if he doesn't want certain diffs he can simply decide not to add them. Also, usually people ask for permission before they map a gd. If new mappers are unable to map low difficulties, they can either learn how to map them (since it's probably even easier to map them compared to insane/extra) or they can get a normal and hard gd and map insane and extra and it would be a rankable spread.[ - Jax - ] wrote:
The problem I find with this is that mappers who are trying to push their first map to rank is that they might want a GD for a certain diff (say Hard, if they're bad at mapping Hard difficulties) and put a request in the Mapping Projects subforum, and end up getting a full mania spread by accident (unlikely, but can happen) and has to map more difficulties otherwise it's unrankable.pishifat wrote:
so unless someone's been hiding a groundbreaking option, i think we can go forward with the wording proposed near the beginning:A beatmapset host must have beatmapped equal or more difficulties than any guest difficulty beatmap creators. This is to provide credit where credit is due. Collab difficulties are only considered partial difficulties, and drain time will be used if necessary to determine the amount of contribution.
The rule is a bit unfair, but I think it would be better to have the RC be a bit more lenient, something like: The mapset host's difficulties must have around 80% drain time compared to the biggest contributor. While still giving "credit where credit is due", it provides more leniency for aspiring mappers who can't map low difficulties.
Serizawa Haruki wrote:
I agree with what pishi said about the amount of diffs being the only possible measurement as of right now. The "if necessary" thing could be explained by determining that drain time is only taken into account in collab diffs when the spread is arranged in a way that would make someone else other than the mapset host the biggest contributor, for example: The mapset host mapped Insane, while mapper x made a normal gd. The hard diff is a collab between both of them. In that case, the respective drain time each mapper mapped is considered. If the gd mapper made like 75% of it, it's probably not okay, while something like 50/50 would work.
But in cases where the mapset host has more drain time than the others anyways, for example if he also mapped an extra diff for this map, then the drain time of the collab diff doesn't matter. This is probably hard to word and implement into the rule but it's quite simple to understand I think.
The mapset host must have an equal amount or more difficulties than any other contributor. This is to provide credit where credit is due. If there is a collab difficulty, drain time may be taken into account, depending if the biggest contributor has the same amount of difficulties.
I'd rather use pishi's wording and add something to it because it seems clearer to me.[ - Jax - ] wrote:
The mapset host must have an equal amount or more difficulties than any other contributor. This is to provide credit where credit is due. If there is a collab difficulty, drain time may be taken into account, depending if the biggest contributor has the same amount of difficulties.How about something like this?
Serizawa Haruki wrote:
[ - Jax - ] wrote:
The mapset host must have an equal amount or more difficulties than any other contributor. This is to provide credit where credit is due. If there is a collab difficulty, drain time may be taken into account, depending if the biggest contributor has the same amount of difficulties.
How about something like this?
I'd rather use pishi's wording and add something to it because it seems clearer to me.A beatmapset host must have beatmapped equal or more difficulties than any guest difficulty beatmap creators. This is to provide credit where credit is due. Collab difficulties are only considered partial difficulties, and drain time will be used to determine the amount of contribution if it may cause someone other than the mapset host to be the biggest contributor of the mapset.
[ - Jax - ] wrote:
Serizawa Haruki wrote:
[ - Jax - ] wrote:
The mapset host must have an equal amount or more difficulties than any other contributor. This is to provide credit where credit is due. If there is a collab difficulty, drain time may be taken into account, depending if the biggest contributor has the same amount of difficulties.
How about something like this?
I'd rather use pishi's wording and add something to it because it seems clearer to me.A beatmapset host must have beatmapped equal or more difficulties than any guest difficulty beatmap creators. This is to provide credit where credit is due. Collab difficulties are only considered partial difficulties, and drain time will be used to determine the amount of contribution if it may cause someone other than the mapset host to be the biggest contributor of the mapset.
Yeah, that seems fair.