Mao wrote:

Arrival wrote:

Just make it so the main mode (the one the official mapper made difficulties for) requires 2 nominations and the other ones just 1, but official nominations, not simple check ups.

What if the host maps the same amount of difficulties for every mode present? That would just make it more confusing than it already is.

https://osu.ppy.sh/s/362534 for example

I'm aware that it's a bit too much to have 1 per game mode, but I agree that the main game mode should have 2 nominators, and 1 for the other. This will be more fair.

That problem still exists, yes having 2 for each makes it 'harder' but as it stands it seems like the best solution we have.

you could go as far to say maybe any mode with + 3 difficulties will need 2 noms from that mode and anything under 1.

Hypothetically a set exists with
4 mania
2 standard
and 2 taiko difficulties

only mania would require 2 nominations with both standard and taiko only needing the one nomination (just a theory)

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.

iYiyo wrote:

Now the question is how you define the main mode of an hybrid set. The one which has more difficulties? The one which has the hardest difficulty? A mix of last two?

We could work with these examples:

x Standard diffs, two Taiko diffs (Muzukashii/Oni), two Mania diffs (NM/HD) = 2 Standard BNs, 1 Taiko BN, 1 Mania BN

x Standard diffs, three Taiko diffs (Futsuu/Muzukashii/Oni), four CTB diffs (Cup~Rain) = 2 Standard BNs, 2 Taiko BN, 2 CTB BN

Three Taiko diffs (Futsuu/Muzukashii/Oni), three Mania diffs (NM/HD/MX) = 2 Taiko BN, 2 Mania BNs

Looks complicated but I think it would take away the stupid question what would be considered as main mode. It'd be all these with a complete set that would be rankable when alone as own mapset.

I don't consider the technical aspect how exactly this should work by the forum/system so idk lo

J1NX1337 wrote:

I would prefer 2 nominators for the main gamemode of the hybrid set, and 1 for every secondary gamemode.

yeah this sounds logical however if a mapset has 3 catch and 3 standard diffs, it would make sense to have 2 nominators for each mode. Theres a large grey area here and as someone who has never made a hybrid set it's hard to understand how difficult it would be to find 4 willing nominators for a set... Imo it would get really out of hand to have 6 nominators for a 3 mode hybrid...

1 nominator per mode. Please not two, imagine getting 8 bns for a 4 gamemode hybrid set? That sounds nearly impossible. If you require 2 nominators per gamemode, you're only going to discourage hybrids even further. I like hybrids, and would like to see more in the future but this really isn't looking good for the future of hybrid sets.

As a main benefactor of hybrid sets and a strong proponent of this change, this is all I have to say.

This solution removes lazy people and abuse from the question. 9 standard diffs + 2 taiko diffs and only one standard nominator is absolutely outrageous. Why should the number of nominators DECREASE when the number of modes on a set INCREASE? You guys are making no sense. If you had two separate sets, you’d need 2 nominators for each set. Why, when you combine them, would you only need 2, or even this 2+1 idea that everyone is throwing around? This will NOT be the death of hybrids, but the death of low quality hybrids or ones only getting used to push outrageous or disliked standard spreads.

Think rationally before you type, reducing the amount of BNs for combining sets together makes no sense and will never make sense.

I think It would be best to just have 2 Nominator for the gamemode with most difficulties, and 1 per other gamemode, Requiring a max of 5 BN's for a 4 gamemode set (Not including the other BN's for other keymodes in Mania)

If 2 or more Gamemodes have same ammount of difficulties, priorize by Mapper of difficulty
(Uploader > GD's). If Uploader made same ammount of Diffs in 2 or more gamemodes, Up to Mapper's Main Mapping Gamemode

If modes are not being checked by a nominator, add the same amount of nominators required per mode at the moment to the remaining modes. Ergo, 3 for three modes, 4 for four. Create a threshold at 2 modes, so that if it happens to be exceeded, fewer BNs are required. Sets with 2 modes or less need 2 bns per mode, sets with more than 2 modes need 1 per mode. This way, ranking hybrids will always require 3 or more people.

Being someone who maps multiple modes, and does like to do hybrid mapsets often, I believe that requiring 4 BNs to rank something like, 5 Standard and 2 Taiko difficulties, is quite uneven. There is much more to be checked on a bigger spread, so it would make more sense to require 2 nominators for the "main" mode. There is the issue of, "What is the main mode" if you have a full spread for each mode, then at that point, it would kind of make sense to have 2 nominators for each mapset. (ie 5 STD, 5 Taiko.) I mainly say this because each spread could exist perfectly fine on their own, unlike a simple Muzukashii and Oni spread. So in that type of a case, yes, 4 nominators makes sense. Otherwise the example that multiple other people have given of having 2 nominators for the main mode and 1 for the secondary mode seems good.

Of course there are mapsets that are bigger (multiple different modes), and requiring at least one BN for those modes would be a good thing to do.

I agree with the idea of having 2 BNs for the main gamemode (the one with the most difficulties) and 1 for the other. And if a map has an equal amount of difficulties on more than 1 game mode (for example 4 std and 4 taiko diffs), 2 BNs are required for each game mode.
Another solution would be that if there are at least 3 diffs on one game mode, 2 BNs are necessary while 2 diffs only require one BN. That would obviously not apply for a set with 2 std diffs and 2 taiko diffs for example.
This way, there would still be at least 3 BNs in total for any hybrid set so it's still more effort than ranking a single game mode map and 1 BN is probably enough for only 2 difficulties.

Sotarks wrote:

I'm aware that it's a bit too much to have 1 per game mode, but I agree that the main game mode should have 2 nominators, and 1 for the other. This will be more fair.

Agree 2 for main game mod and 1 for others. But yeah, we should define what is the main game mode in a mapset, how many std/taiko/CTB/mania diffs? should be discussed a bit imo.

a decrease of BNs from 2 on hybrid sets should only happen if there is an increase in hybrid BNs

otherwise, it feels kind of scummy for people to get away with one BN checking a whole spread in one mode as a minimum

but the hybrid sets that i see that are like Full STD spread + a couple of mania diffs (HD, MX lets say) (also applies to taiko and ctb but i never see those) and that's when i think it should be okay for one BN to check the smaller set. so that would be 2 STD + 1 side (mania, taiko, or ctb) = 3 BNs. not too bad for a large set like that. i think.

i dont think this solution is necessary if and only if there are more BNs who can check more than one mode. for example, in the case above, if one of the STD BNs can check mania on the side too, great, 2 BNs all you need.

Stefan wrote:

iYiyo wrote:

Now the question is how you define the main mode of an hybrid set. The one which has more difficulties? The one which has the hardest difficulty? A mix of last two?

We could work with these examples:

x Standard diffs, two Taiko diffs (Muzukashii/Oni), two Mania diffs (NM/HD) = 2 Standard BNs, 1 Taiko BN, 1 Mania BN

x Standard diffs, three Taiko diffs (Futsuu/Muzukashii/Oni), four CTB diffs (Cup~Rain) = 2 Standard BNs, 2 Taiko BN, 2 CTB BN

Three Taiko diffs (Futsuu/Muzukashii/Oni), three Mania diffs (NM/HD/MX) = 2 Taiko BN, 2 Mania BNs

Looks complicated but I think it would take away the stupid question what would be considered as main mode. It'd be all these with a complete set that would be rankable when alone as own mapset.

I don't consider the technical aspect how exactly this should work by the forum/system so idk lo

I agree with Stefan

I think a viable solution would be to require 2 nominations for the main mode and depending if the additional gamemodes could stand on their own they would require 2 additional nominations.

Ex.
5 STD 2 Taiko === 2 STD Nominations 1 Taiko Nomination

Ex. 2
5 STD 5 Taiko === 2 STD Nominations 2 Taiko Nominations

I just don't think the amount of difficulties requring 2 nominations should be made just a number but instead it would depend amount of effort put into the additional gamemodes.

If the additional gamemode produces a reasonable spread with difficulties for as many types of players as the song allows (ex. Taiko ENHIX+) then the requirement would be 2 nominations for that mode.

If the additional gamemode is just tacked on at the end with minimal effort and as a set would leave the song severly missing higher diffs (ex. Taiko NH) then the requirement would be 1 nomination.

just make it 2 main + 1 secondary, good luck trying to find 2 active BNs per game mode that's willing to check your mapset (someone that they've most likely never heard of) and having them check over anything if it gets DQ'd again having a 4 mode mapset would be event of the year


also BNs should have the skill and knowledge to check a mapset all on their own ready for qualification otherwise they shouldn't be in the role they're given

maybe limit it to 1 main or 2 prob but that sounds stupid up to you

BN should be held accountable when nominating hybrid sets. (Meaning have a secondary mode BN check respective difficulties first. Or to have the skills necessary to check it themselves) Otherwise, rules like "osu! difficulties must convert to other game modes without breaking star rating/performance point." would not be enforced.

Having 2 nominations per game mode is unnecessary time added on to hybrid sets. Rather than punishing the mapper for wanting to map a hybrid set, encourage BNs to learn other game modes.

Also, the note for solution #2:

"Note: If you choose the last option, make sure to explain your point in-depth"

Obvious brain washing. Clearly if these solutions didn't need any more explaining you wouldn't need the community's permission to go through with it. If you don't want this to happen then don't even suggest it at all.

Bubblun wrote:

Having 2 nominations per game mode is unnecessary time added on to hybrid sets. Rather than punishing the mapper for wanting to map a hybrid set, encourage BNs to learn other game modes.

I am not interested in Mania and CTB and it's not my interest if the mapper wants to push their Hybrid set, just because the uploader or the guest mapper are lazy and just want to map one or two diffs max.

Bubblun wrote:

"Note: If you choose the last option, make sure to explain your point in-depth"

Obvious brain washing. Clearly if these solutions didn't need any more explaining you wouldn't need the community's permission to go through with it. If you don't want this to happen then don't even suggest it at all.

What? This is just to avoid unexplained "it's fine, no need to fix" comments and to spark proper discussion.

in my opinion, due to the special spread requirements for hybrid sets (ie u only need 1 ctb diff piggybacking off std)

this causes a confusion with what we should do, obviously it would be ridiculous to ask for two ctb BNs to check one ctb diff.

tbh i would prefer that if we had hybrid diffs, they would all require a full set.

then follow the first proposal.

J1NX1337 wrote:

I would prefer 2 nominators for the main gamemode of the hybrid set, and 1 for every secondary gamemode.

I also agree with this.completely, I feel like getting 2 BNs per mode would be overkill and discourage mappers from making hybrid sets in the long run.

Though, at least 1 BN for each secondary mode is absolutely necessary, to ensure that at least each mode is checked from someone capable of fully understanding that specific mode properly.

Ascendance wrote:

Think rationally before you type, reducing the amount of BNs for combining sets together makes no sense and will never make sense.

Idk why you acting like you're the most rational guy here, a bit rude imo lol. Actually Kibbleru describes pretty well why having 2 nominators for each gamemode isn't the best solution here, because of how RC is right now. ->

Kibbleru wrote:

in my opinion, due to the special spread requirements for hybrid sets (ie u only need 1 ctb diff piggybacking off std)

this causes a confusion with what we should do, obviously it would be ridiculous to ask for two ctb BNs to check one ctb diff.

tbh i would prefer that if we had hybrid diffs, they would all require a full set.

then follow the first proposal.

If ranking criteria about hybrid stays the same:
- 'main gamemode' -> 2 BNs (can have multiple main gamemodes) (Maybe considered for having 3 difficulties or more for that gamemode).
- 'secondary gamemode' -> 1 BN
That's better than what we have now. This will also need implementation from devs, but I guess you guys are aware of that already.

If hybrid sets need full-gamemode-sets, meaning changes in RC:
- every gamemode on hybrid set would need 2 BNs
- ultimately make hybrids unrankables :C

I think having hybrids set incentived mappers to do multiple gamemodes sets, mainly because RC allows them to be a bit easier to do and to rank. Otherwise why do hybrid sets exist? Why not forcing single gamemode sets only from the very beginning of osu? I think this thing about main mode and secondary mode could finally define better the way for hybrid sets.

I sort of like this kind of idea coming out, more eyes on mapsets are good for the quality standards, but I really don't think adding more bns to check is entirely justified nor is removing amount of certain types of bns (current way). This is mostly because of the qualified section, maybe proposals like this try to make the workload in qualified section a bit less but that will never truly happen. DQ modding will occur for a map regardless of how many people support it/push it for ranked.

I think having two bns check any set as a minimum for qualified requirements is already a lot for 95% of people. And adding more bns required per set not only discourages hybrid sets (esp since minigame mode bns are afk way more than std) but it also just adds to workload of everyone imo

e> the most logical thing imo for which game mode is the most is drain time in that game mode, and usually that will encompass the diff with highest SR, and with ties for most would just require 2 per mode within the tie

I didnt read through all of it, but I spotted a bit of talk about two BNs per mode being too much. I dont agree with this.

If you were to rank each mode as a standalone set, you'd still need two of the respective BNs to check each and qualify. I dont know why this would be an issue if a hybrid set followed the same idea, since it kinda is just that - two standalone modes, but as one set. It's always possible that a single BN misses something that a second one could catch. Being lazy about catching another BN isnt really ... uh, too much of a thing when quality becomes more and more important.

Anyway, I think I like the idea that was posted in the Discord the most, where you'd need 5 hype and two seperated nominations per mode. Seems like the most fair method to me.

It's not about laziness tbh, finding 2 BNs is already pretty hard for most mappers, so having to find 2 additional BNs for, let's say, a muzu and a oni is quite hard and would cause the map to go through the ranking process significantly slower or maybe not being ranked at all since there are not many BNs for the non-standard game modes currently.
Also, a hybrid mapset shouldn't be treated exactly in the same way as 2 separate mapsets because then it would be simpler to just make 2 sets and rank them separately, then there's no point in doing a hybrid mapset in the first place.

Yauxo wrote:

If you were to rank each mode as a standalone set, you'd still need two of the respective BNs to check each and qualify. I dont know why this would be an issue if a hybrid set followed the same idea, since it kinda is just that - two standalone modes, but as one set.

This isn't exactly true. Because you cannot rank a Muzukashii/Oni spread if the length of the song is less than 3 minutes. Same goes for the other modes. That's why people have brought up the idea of having 2+1, summing up to 3 BNs check the mapset, based on what the spread is. Because there are significantly different workloads for hybrids sets. They would be checking 2 difficulties verses 4 difficulties. (Obviously there are different cases, but this is an example.)

also think its worth mentioning a number of BNs quite openly say stuff like they don't want to touch hybrid sets lol

so requiring more bns will be pretty annoying

Yauxo wrote:

I didnt read through all of it, but I spotted a bit of talk about two BNs per mode being too much. I dont agree with this.

If you were to rank each mode as a standalone set, you'd still need two of the respective BNs to check each and qualify. I dont know why this would be an issue if a hybrid set followed the same idea, since it kinda is just that - two standalone modes, but as one set. It's always possible that a single BN misses something that a second one could catch. Being lazy about catching another BN isnt really ... uh, too much of a thing when quality becomes more and more important.

Anyway, I think I like the idea that was posted in the Discord the most, where you'd need 5 hype and two seperated nominations per mode. Seems like the most fair method to me.

I agree with the bold part because it's exactly what Ascendance wrote that it makes 100% sense to have the same requirements for the additional modes in the hybrid set they should follow. And I also support the idea that at LEAST one BN exist for every mode that can be made responsible to make sure the respective mode is fine.

See, the example eiri- gave is good: Muzukashii/Oni spreads are 1/2 to 2/3 of what an actual and full mapset usually looks like and unless they meet the drain time requirement they cannot be ranked like that in a standalone set, since they do not follow the RC for Taiko. So they are already an exception in the regular RC.

The general idea to have two BNs is to double check. Meanwhile we have plenty Bns that are proficient in multiple modes but it's the matter of question how much do "half" sets needs to be checked. I wholeheartly support the idea I made some posts above since I think it's by far a much more flexible and fair compromise with the community and the regulations.

bor wrote:

also think its worth mentioning a number of BNs quite openly say stuff like they don't want to touch hybrid sets lol

so requiring more bns will be pretty annoying

that however is because they don't want to be made responsible for the mapset getting potentially dqed for other modes so having seperated nominations for every mode may encourage them to touch hybrid sets.

This poll looks a bit skewed in terms of the options made, would probably be better redoing this later with options for the suggestions given in this thread to fix that, rather than relying on people to do trains in the reply section with "I agree with x". Would make more sense to think of this more as a "give your ideas here so that we can vote on them later" kinda thing, and then vote afterwards.

I can see where everyone is coming from with the 2+1 idea, since generally hybrid sets are a main mode and then another 2-4 other mode diffs, and how hybrids in theory help people discover or transition into other modes making that potential loss of quality worth it in the long run.

However, I can also see where option #1 is coming from, since the only difference between a hybrid and a standalone set is whether or not they're bundled together (spread requirements being the sole exception), and that putting one set onto another set shouldn't mean either mode needs less quality assurance.

Say you've got a 9 diff standard set and a 2 diff taiko set, both their own sets. The taiko set has way less things to check, but it still needs 2 nominators. The standard set has way more things to check, but it also needs 2 nominators. Now let's assume they're put together into one hybrid set. Suddenly taiko needs less checks, simply because the difficulties are in the same set, rather than two separate sets. The content is the same, it's just combined. This is seemingly were people start disagreeing; is difficulties of different modes put together into one set, a good enough thing to have in ranked, to require less checking?

There was this other proposal flying around about adapting it after # of diffs or content, but current rules say even a 30s easy single diff set will need 2 nominators so adapting nominators required after content for hybrids only probably isn't a great idea, would be better making that into it's own proposal in such a case and then applying it to hybrids as well.

From what I can tell the advantages (or at least some of them) of each approach is:

2 nominations per mode
- Handled the same way as standalone sets (except spread), making the process for each mode less confusing.
- Easier to implement since it's always the same, less conditions and complications.
- Maintains the same amount of quality assurance for each mode regardless of hybrid or standalone.
basically: More straightforward and consistent

2 nominations for main mode, 1 for others
- Easier for the creator to find nominators and get the set ranked
- Greater incentive to make hybrid sets, leading to more hybrid sets in ranked
- Makes each mode less separated from one another, leading to potentially more balance and community interaction between player bases.
basically: More balanced and encourages mode diversity

Either could be implemented quickly through just adding more nomination slots depending on mode amount, but the latter is harder to implement properly (like actually separating nomination buttons so hybrid mode nominators can nominate multiple times etc), due to it's arbitrary nature of what constitutes as the main mode. If nothing else it could prioritize one mode over another without exception, for example standard < taiko < catch < mania to decide which one is the main if two have the same amount, in which case it would be more doable.

Naxess wrote:

Would make more sense to think of this more as a "give your ideas here so that we can vote on them later" kinda thing, and then vote afterwards.

Yeah, that's what we will probably go with. Also Naxess basically summed up my opinion on this.

I totally glanced over the possibility of having only two or three difficulties for the minor mode, if you want to call it that. My bad.

I kind of do agree that, in case of the example given by eiri-, if a hybrid set only includes two diffs as opposed to a full spread, there's less workload for that respective BN. I do however also still think that it's a good trait to have multiple people check of the maps anyway. There's never something wrong with getting additional opinions onto possible controversal topics.
Maybe that's just my pre-2018 way of thinking though.

With that said, Im kinda indecisive on that topic. I think quality assurance is still very important and spending a bit more time to make absolutely sure everything is right is time well spent, but I also see the downside of lesser popular gamemodes where it might be a pain to find an additional BN.

personal opinion, I think it's better to add an extra nominations to the more diff mode. more strict checking of modes with more diff is needed to reduce the error rate. (compared to the smaller number of diff mode)

I think hybrid mapsets should be treated as if they were just different mapsets for one song, thus requiring check of 2 BNs for each respective mode and, obviously, following general ranking criteria of each game mode involved including different mania key count modes.

same as Nao Tomori's suggestion (3rd Post or sth)
2 nominations for "main" Mode, 1 for each additional mode

if there are multiple modes with highest difficulty count. the map owner decides what mode is viewed as the main one

alternate solution to hybrids would be voting: https://osu.ppy.sh/community/forums/posts/6779532 into the RC

not my call i'd want to ask how the respective game modes feel about this

i'll rather keep the current system with 1 nomination per mode but one extra bn is who are qualified to nominate all the modes of the hybrid set is required to let these maps ranked so there is any problem of what consistues a main/secondary modes

ex:
1 set of std with 7 diffs /taiko with 7 diffs : 1 bn required for std and taiko + 1 bn who can nominate std and taiko
1 marathon set of one unique diff of each mode : 1 bn required for all modes + 1 bn who can nominate all

the main problem of this would be the lack of bn who are qualified for more than 2 modes so alternately, we can merge it with the solution #1 by mao

ex :
1 marathon set of std/taiko/catch with 1 diff : 1 bn required for std/taiko/catch + 1 bn who can nominate std/taiko/catch OR 1 bn who can nominate std/taiko with 1 extra bn who can nominate catch (all the combinaisons like taiko/catch + 1 extra std etc... works) OR do litterally the 2 bn required per modes if any bn who can nominate multiple modes aren't present

for the extra efforts that the multi-mode bn have to do, if he ranks a hybrid set, the score given should be double or even triple than a normal nomination/heart.

realy0_ wrote:

i'll rather keep the current system with 1 nomination per mode but one extra bn is who are qualified to nominate all the modes of the hybrid set is required to let these maps ranked so there is any problem of what consistues a main/secondary modes

ex:
1 set of std with 7 diffs /taiko with 7 diffs : 1 bn required for std and taiko + 1 bn who can nominate std and taiko
1 marathon set of one unique diff of each mode : 1 bn required for all modes + 1 bn who can nominate all

the main problem of this would be the lack of bn who are qualified for more than 2 modes so alternately, we can merge it with the solution #1 by mao

ex :
1 marathon set of std/taiko/catch with 1 diff : 1 bn required for std/taiko/catch + 1 bn who can nominate std/taiko/catch OR 1 bn who can nominate std/taiko with 1 extra bn who can nominate catch (all the combinaisons like taiko/catch + 1 extra std etc... works) OR do litterally the 2 bn required per modes if any bn who can nominate multiple modes aren't present

for the extra efforts that the multi-mode bn have to do, if he ranks a hybrid set, the score given should be double or even triple than a normal nomination/heart.

As you already said, this doesn't work at all due to the lack of multi mode BNs (there are almost none currently). It would basically force the only multi mode BN to check the map which doesn't make sense so this proposal is not really a good solution

can we just go back to something similar to what has been done in the past years?
lets take a look at this map: t/142823/start=0 (4 modes map)
dkun count as std icon & also bubble

You were basically forbidden to bubble if an icon mode were missing. (I am really sure it was a rule back in 2015 & even before 2015)
it actually worked really fine, I have no idea why this rule has been removed.

important edit: stop call desperate-kun dkun for god sake

i'd support the idea of having different nominations for different game modes though you gotta remember that (as far as i remember) the reason why the game mode icons were deprecated was specifically due to that kind of system not being a thing on the so called modding v2.

in my opinion this is one of those topics that you can't talk much about because there is so much stuff planned we don't know about, that is actually difficult to tell if developers would agree with something like this in the first place.

that said, i'm against implementing this as some sort of rules for bns, as it makes everything more complicated and confusing. if it were to be implemented, it needs to be a fixed system that detects the amount of diffs and vary the number of nominations required depending on the spread.

Kin wrote:

You were basically forbidden to bubble if an icon mode were missing. (I am really sure it was a rule back in 2015 & even before 2015)
it actually worked really fine, I have no idea why this rule has been removed.

They had a meaning back in 2013 but it was removed with the QAT/BAT split in 2014 and later stated in the very first BN rules: https://osu.ppy.sh/community/forums/topics/366504

Old BN Rules wrote:

3.5. osu!/osu!taiko/osu!catch/osu!mania Icons
They used to have an actual meaning, but they do not anymore. Using them brings you nothing, expresses nothing and does nothing. So do not use them.

Anyways, as Kagetsu stated implementation into mv2 will be a crucial step. The only band-aid fix I could think of would be that Nominators need to post a Note but that would make nomination resets/pops pretty messy.

Back before I became a triple-mode BN, I wals thought it was my duty as a BN to ensure that the other modes were checked by someone who knew what they were doing, even if they didn't give an official nomination. And as a triple-mode BN, there were plenty of times where even though my main mode was standard, I only checked the ctb / taiko diffs without looking at the standard ones, because I was not responsible for those for that particular case.

I think depending on the issue that the map got disqualified for, the responsibility may or may not lie on the nominators. For example, in a Standard/Taiko/Ctb set, if the map got disqualified for an unused hitsound, or something general, obviously the nominators involved are responsible. You should check that regardless of mode. But if the Mp was nominated by a Standard and Catch BN, but dq'ed for a Taiko-specific reason, I feel like the Standard and Catch BN's should not be punished for that. However, With regards to the nomination process, I think it would be a requirement then, that the map be nominated by a Taiko BN to confirm officially that that mode is good.

I believe that would resolve the issue of BN's being either held responsible or not held responsible, as well as how the map can proceed with requalification.



Caveat:
I don't know about the community now, but it used to be very easy to get quick opinions from BN's of other modes when checking a hybrid set. I don't know if that is still reflected today, since I'm no longer familiar with the BN ecosystem. I used to (and I guess still do) host a lot of hybrid sets, and nominated many of them too. As i see it if you didn't get additional opinions on a hybrid set before nominating, it was clearly your fault. Like, for me it was always an expectation to get opinions. Maybe nowadays people just don't care. If that is the case, perhaps something should change in the BN community instead to make mode-specific opinions like this easier to access, or you should adequately punish BN's for not caring so they'll care more. (Though I feel like nowadays QAT's have completely overdone it, and BN's are too scared for the wrong reasons lol)

Just posting that Hybrid Sets are already rare enough, idk what's the point of making the gate higher. I mean I read the arguments, but it seems silly. This isn't really a problem outside of a specific niche, imo.

I support N+1 bns for N-mode sets as it is easy to operate and resembles v1 hybrid ranking process, which has been proved a success

There is a serious oversight that I just realized, nowhere is it mentioned how more than 2 bns per mapset would affect the time in between nominations, or how the map getting popped/updated will affect nominations. What happens if you have an all gamemode hybrid set with 2 ctb nominations, 2 osu nominations, 2 taiko nominations, and one mania nomnation and then the mapset gets updated? All nominations reset? Now, if all nominations reset does that mean you have to wait at least 24 hours in between each renomination? Imagine waiting over a week for nominations every time you wanted/needed to update your mapset. That sounds horrible. If the argument is that each gamemode is considered its own mapset almost, you would only have to wait 1 day from the first nomination until qualification if each gamemode was actually its own mapset, but if all the gamemodes are in one mapset you'd have to wait about 7 days from first nomination until qualification. That seems like serious discouragement against hybrid sets. I believe this needs to be addressed, thank you!

@tatatat, see "At least 24 hours must pass between a first nomination and a qualification on every mapset", this means all but one bn could nominate at the same time and then 24h later, the last could qualify, for example.

The thing about sets updating causing all nominations to self-pop depends on how things are implemented, devs could check for changes in the individual .osu files and then have bancho post a problem only in the respective mode general tabs (assuming mode-specific nominations/pops are implemented), but that's completely up to them if/how they implement stuff.

Assuming we're just getting more nominations required on hybrid sets, they'd probably all be reset when a problem is posted or similar, but there's not really much we could do about that if devs want to spend their development time elsewhere.

This all would be so much better if maps relating to a certain gamemode in the set could be nominated and ranked. So you could be done with ranking one gamemode in the set and go for ranking another one without holding the other back.

"I have a different opinion that I will post on the thread."

Stefan wrote:

iYiyo wrote:

Now the question is how you define the main mode of an hybrid set. The one which has more difficulties? The one which has the hardest difficulty? A mix of last two?

We could work with these examples:

x Standard diffs, two Taiko diffs (Muzukashii/Oni), two Mania diffs (NM/HD) = 2 Standard BNs, 1 Taiko BN, 1 Mania BN

x Standard diffs, three Taiko diffs (Futsuu/Muzukashii/Oni), four CTB diffs (Cup~Rain) = 2 Standard BNs, 2 Taiko BN, 2 CTB BN

Three Taiko diffs (Futsuu/Muzukashii/Oni), three Mania diffs (NM/HD/MX) = 2 Taiko BN, 2 Mania BNs

Looks complicated but I think it would take away the stupid question what would be considered as main mode. It'd be all these with a complete set that would be rankable when alone as own mapset.

I don't consider the technical aspect how exactly this should work by the forum/system so idk lo

What Stefan said.

Of course if a given nominator is proficient in two or more gamemodes, they are allowed to nominate the map once per gamemode.

Whats the status on this?

@QAT

What's the status on this, will move to finalized / denied in a week if there's no other proposal being brought up because the thing just seems to have died out?

no response, archiving without result

How disappointing.