Much as I want this, it'd probably end up with some terrible mapper abusing it for 'creativity'.
forum
Allow to use different Approach Rates in map
posted
Total Posts
313
Increase AR to 10 at all kiai time sections, fuck yeah.
Exactly. If people tried to map "I Prefer the Sky (Remix)", they would know what I'm talking about. ;P0_o wrote:
I know there are a lot of people against this, but I really do think this is a good idea. For songs that have both soft and intense parts a changing AR could work very well.
Of course there's potential for abuse, but seeing as we have an approval system I really don't think that's much of an issue.
Well, yes there will be many maps abusing this
but i want this :3
but i want this :3
I totally despise when this happens on rhythm games like DDR.
or you know, taiko.MetalMario201 wrote:
I totally despise when this happens on rhythm games like DDR.
It worries me to think how much this can easily be abused (and will be) and have to deal with mappers refusing to change any of it because "it fits"
However I have seen several maps where this idea could be very helpful...
I guess half support~
However I have seen several maps where this idea could be very helpful...
I guess half support~
Topic Starter
I am surprised that my idea has such a good support.
That is the first time when I do it,so Idk if it is bad or not - that I voted 4 times for this idea by myself
That is the first time when I do it,so Idk if it is bad or not - that I voted 4 times for this idea by myself
*holds gun to head*
*cringes and pulls trigger*
*cringes and pulls trigger*
Topic Starter
Don't laugh,I am kinda new in this topicpeppy wrote:
*holds gun to head*
*cringes and pulls trigger*
My previous ideas vere denied by you,so I don't know how does this system work.NOOOOOO!!! *takes the gun away from ppy*peppy wrote:
*holds gun to head*
*cringes and pulls trigger*
Anyways...i don't support. It would be too much confusing. Kiai is enough for me.
Oh my god
no no no no fucking no
tldr: push button receive even worse osu community division
no no no no fucking no
James2250 wrote:
It worries me to think how much this can easily be abused (and will be) and have to deal with mappers refusing to change any of it because "it fits"
tldr: push button receive even worse osu community division
While I understand that there are some maps where it really fits - this would be incredibly disorienting orz
I mean, I already get enough combobreaks with unexpected 2x slider velocity changes, I don't even wanna imagine how my accuracy would plummet if this gets used D:
I mean, I already get enough combobreaks with unexpected 2x slider velocity changes, I don't even wanna imagine how my accuracy would plummet if this gets used D:
This made me remember when osu didn't refresh Approach Rate when changing Overall Difficulty some time ago and i kinda "tested" some patterns with two different approach rates.
It would be a interesting feature, but it would also kill the biggest element used for reading patterns.
Some cases in which i could see this fit are songs described above, with a break before the AR change.
That would be a really nice touch and not disturbing at all while playing.
I'm neutral about this.
It would be a interesting feature, but it would also kill the biggest element used for reading patterns.
Some cases in which i could see this fit are songs described above, with a break before the AR change.
That would be a really nice touch and not disturbing at all while playing.
I'm neutral about this.
Would a rule of not being able to switch ARs without a break in between be a decent compromise?
Support, it's literally impossible to map progressive songs without this. Just make it an outright rule that this is for songs which vary in tone and not just for added difficulty.
I am very okay with this.Mashley wrote:
Just make it an outright rule that this is for songs which vary in tone and not just for added difficulty.
No, that doesn't help much. I'd say that most songs mapped here change "tone" many times throughout. It really isn't something you can give an easy yes/no rule towards.Larto wrote:
I am very okay with this.Mashley wrote:
Just make it an outright rule that this is for songs which vary in tone and not just for added difficulty.
This feature will make maps absolutely unpredictable, I already see some maps with low AR having suddenly an AR 10 part you don't see coming.
I imagine how itd be if we just have a group of members that can take care about what can be ranked or not~ ohwait.James2250 wrote:
It worries me to think how much this can easily be abused (and will be) and have to deal with mappers refusing to change any of it because "it fits"
But no, i don't support it ._.
it could work if moderated correctly though in some maps it can really be useful to change the approach rate for example when the rythem changes completely in the middle of a map.
YES.
"POKER FACE"'S SLOWDOWN'S APPORACH SPEED IS REAAALLLY STUPID.
But alas, I've no votes.
"POKER FACE"'S SLOWDOWN'S APPORACH SPEED IS REAAALLLY STUPID.
But alas, I've no votes.
support.
but like the slider changes , ''Maximum 3 on map''
but like the slider changes , ''Maximum 3 on map''
This is a very bad idea. There are very few cases (though, strong ones) where this would be useful. If and when it does get implemented, it will only be used appropriately like 2% of the time. And adding another feature like this will just be another thing for people to complain about when somebody else says they are doing it wrong.
Topic Starter
There are not few cases where this could be useful. For example,a lot of songs can start very slow and in the middle they become faster,or the voice is getting louder and maybe it looks good if you add AR +1 or +2. It looks better then.Rolled wrote:
This is a very bad idea. There are very few cases (though, strong ones) where this would be useful. If and when it does get implemented, it will only be used appropriately like 2% of the time. And adding another feature like this will just be another thing for people to complain about when somebody else says they are doing it wrong.
This is exactly when you SHOULDN'T use this, and one of the strongest points against it. There's a wide enough margin of approach rates that will fit a given song, so I don't see why there'd be difficulty in finding an appropriate one. Altering gameplay to achieve a cosmetic effect is inappropriate and will needlessly confuse the player.Giorgos wrote:
or the voice is getting louder and maybe it looks good if you add AR +1 or +2. It looks better then.
The only time something like this could ever be justified is if the music changes to a completely different BPM and texture.
If this ever gets added (none of the devs want this), all of faceman's rules would most certainly be enforced, plus the restriction of being only allowed on red lines.
If anything there should be a way to make approach rate constant in maps like taiko with a varying bpm. Or have approach rate set by the player (but I know that will never happen).
Approach rate is constant in osu! Approach rate isn't constant in Taiko. The Easy and Hard Rock modes change approach rate. I don't see any need to make this more player-configurable. It'll only make mod score multipliers harder to figure.
The only time something like this could ever be justified is if the music changes to a completely different BPM and texture.Black Hole - Pluto
:<
Talked with Lybydose about this the other day. Though, if this were to come alive, it would have to be held super strictly. It shouldn't be used constantly or for small intervals, more so with decent sides slow sections. Maps with like 200BPM with AR9 that have a .5x section for example really benefit from this type of thing. playing .5 at AR9 in a like of cases is just ugh.
DeltaMAX is a really good example.
DeltaMAX is a really good example.
there are really maps that can use it maybe if you make the option only available in the .osu so most inexperienced mappers wont even know it is there (they are most likely to abuse it) or just give an warning in the editor, bats/mats can also be very strict about it. it can easily be undone when someone abuses it.
Why on earth are you using 0.5x sections at all now lesser speed changes are available, let alone on songs you feel deserve AR9 :/yeahyeahyeahhh wrote:
Maps with like 200BPM with AR9 that have a .5x section for example really benefit from this type of thing. playing .5 at AR9 in a like of cases is just ugh.
I suppose poor choice of example. Moreso on maps with multiple BPMs. Example map I have, it is 200 BPM, AR9. Section in the song drops down to 100 BPM for awhile. AR9 just feel so off on that part, multiple approach rates I feel would make that part feel much smoother.RandomJibberish wrote:
Why on earth are you using 0.5x sections at all now lesser speed changes are available, let alone on songs you feel deserve AR9 :/yeahyeahyeahhh wrote:
Maps with like 200BPM with AR9 that have a .5x section for example really benefit from this type of thing. playing .5 at AR9 in a like of cases is just ugh.
Tempted to say this should be done after a map is ranked.
Get a BAT/Dev to alter it before ranking but...
...Probably won't be a great idea.
Get a BAT/Dev to alter it before ranking but...
...Probably won't be a great idea.
This is a very bad idea from my point of view. Approach Rate setting is very personal, one reads map by reaction, someone else by it's structure, etc. A good example would be that map yyy was talking about, he thinks it needs AR 9 and lesser AR for slower parts, I think it look just great with constant AR 8.
I kind of don't feel like stating obvious things here or to list my different rhythm games playing expirience, so the point is: we players already have to deal with hellish number of differents points of view on mapping and how many objects should be there on screen on the same time, adding this feature (sure, sure, there are good uses for this too, but) would cause only more frustration, since AR is only really decided by mapper and approvers of the map and can't be changed client-wise.
I kind of don't feel like stating obvious things here or to list my different rhythm games playing expirience, so the point is: we players already have to deal with hellish number of differents points of view on mapping and how many objects should be there on screen on the same time, adding this feature (sure, sure, there are good uses for this too, but) would cause only more frustration, since AR is only really decided by mapper and approvers of the map and can't be changed client-wise.
yeahyeahyeahhh wrote:
I suppose poor choice of example. Moreso on maps with multiple BPMs. Example map I have, it is 200 BPM, AR9. Section in the song drops down to 100 BPM for awhile. AR9 just feel so off on that part, multiple approach rates I feel would make that part feel much smoother.
Just saying something that would probably give a "possible good" compromise is that if this feature can be allowed for a red timing section that has a BPM change (on one hand, as far as how I see it, this can't be abused with the rule for not placing red timing sections for other stuff not related to BPM/offset issues).
Though on the other hand, it can't solve the issue of creating a disorienting, nauseating map.
I just try to give a good idea but honestly, I don't have a good feeling about this unless problems that may arise can be given solutions beforehand.
What are mods for anyway.jockeytiyan wrote:
Though on the other hand, it can't solve the issue of creating a disorienting, nauseating map.
Well...if you consider this is something that creates more problems than for what it's worth(which is of course, rather plausible), but I'd like to trust the mappers judgment in deciding whether or not to use this function intuitively. It's something that can either be terribly misused or otherwise, but we can take into account that ranking criteria will definitely not allow the former.jockeytiyan wrote:
I just try to give a good idea but honestly, I don't have a good feeling about this unless problems that may arise can be given solutions beforehand.
There is always going to be concern over these sort of things, the problem isn't in the functionality itself(And you should be aware of this), but rather how it can be abused.
I believe being very outrightly clear about the restrictions of this is enough, as with the variable slider-speeds. I'd advise to this being a rule, if anyone is ever going to ultilize it. It's also actually easier to take notice of if usage of this is granted to only Red Timing Sections. It also doesn't necessarily mean more things to check, maybe more things to consider, spacing-wise perhaps.
Maybe I'm desperately piling on a mountain of assurance over this, as the final decision lies in peppy's prudence.
Well, I was merely suggesting a possible compromise. We can't really avoid the issue of this getting abused, but I hightly trust modders to at least be able of good help in solving this part.Faust wrote:
Well...if you consider this is something that creates more problems than for what it's worth(which is of course, rather plausible), but I'd like to trust the mappers judgment in deciding whether or not to use this function intuitively. It's something that can either be terribly misused or otherwise, but we can take into account that ranking criteria will definitely not allow the former.jockeytiyan wrote:
I just try to give a good idea but honestly, I don't have a good feeling about this unless problems that may arise can be given solutions beforehand.
There is always going to be concern over these sort of things, the problem isn't in the functionality itself(And you should be aware of this), but rather how it can be abused.
I believe being very outrightly clear about the restrictions of this is enough, as with the variable slider-speeds. I'd advise to this being a rule, if anyone is ever going to ultilize it. It's also actually easier to take notice of if usage of this is granted to only Red Timing Sections. It also doesn't necessarily mean more things to check, maybe more things to consider, spacing-wise perhaps.
Maybe I'm desperately piling on a mountain of assurance over this, as the final decision lies in peppy's prudence.
I don't consider this feature as entirely something that could cause more problems. However, it would be a good thing that thinking about the problems it may cause and at least be given solution to said problems can give the assurance that the others are looking for.
Also mind how frustrating this could be when playing with mods, especially hidden because the AR has alot influence on that one. And that's just one of many reasons I'm against this.