ok lol
Loved members can move maps from Pending or Graveyard to the Loved section. The issue like I said though, is stemming from us having to wait if that mapper already has their Pending slots filled. We've tried telling mappers ahead of time to leave a slot open for a future viable pick of theirs that we need updated but, things don't always work out that smoothly. It would be much nicer if we didn't have to jump through hoops just to try and work around the less-than-ideal system.Nao Tomori wrote:
do loved maps currently expand the amount of pending slots available? if not, that would be a good place to start (assuming the system is kept in place). ranked maps also increase it by 1, up to 8 (20 for supporter). uploading straight to graveyard is a good idea as well. though really the solution here is to let loved captains move things straight from graveyard to loved instead. the issue is that the whole back end of that is still using the old forum system with pending / wip / ranked / graveyard all being different forums, so it might be hard to implement.
Is there a reason you aren't intending to push your maps through to ranked as per the standard osu! systems? If they are already well established beatmaps, it seems like you could quite quickly expand your maximum slots while also getting your beatmaps in a permanent state on osu!.IcyWorld wrote:
This was in due part to this limitation that I had of 4 maps per month when I had at that point in time roughly 300 completed maps from Stepmania (etterna didn't exist at the time). Now I have 500+ maps I have created, if I were to start uploading from scratch today and had the limitation of 4, it would take me 125 months to upload all of my content, which is a little greater than 10 years just to put this in to perspective.
Mappers have their own visions for what they create and are not willing to alter their maps from those visions no matter what the ranked rules say or any few modders may request. Hence, ranking maps would not be an option. Well despite not satisfying ranked criteria, these maps can still be popular.peppy wrote:
Let's keep this thread about slots and why getting ranked maps and increasing slot count (as most mappers do) is not feasible.
it's changed now. Even short maps can have only 1 difficulty, but only if the lowest difficulty meets the one in each respective drain time. Spread issue isn't a good argument for this anymore.Playboi Carti wrote:
Basically forcing a mapper to create a difficulty spread of easy/hard/insane or whatever is kind of meaningless since the star rating is useless to a certain extent. Also tying into that is the time constraint, I don't really know if it's changed now, but I remember the difficulty spread being forced if the map was shorter than 5m.
I think you are in the wrong thread. Please read my last post once more, and please stay on topic, thanks!Adri wrote:
The glaring issue to me is that you're effectively removing user content that is possibly still used and appreciated. The biggest example would be that the tournament scene does not use ranked maps, and in extremely specialized skillsets the amount of maps to exist in the first place is barely enough. Maps from 2016 and also way earlier are used to this day, and will continue to be used in the years forward.
Is there a reason you aren't intending to push your maps through to ranked as per the standard osu! systems? If they are already well established beatmaps, it seems like you could quite quickly expand your maximum slots while also getting your beatmaps in a permanent state on osu!.Really, really want to forgive me when I say this, but this statement holds quite a huge disconnection with... a lot of stuff. And I want to explain some of them here, both as a person involved in the Ranking process of these maps, as a player in the osu!mania community, as an avid VSRG fan and player, but most importantly as someone who wants to get the point across.
In your 1st reply on the thread you mention beatmaps' purge. In his post, Adri replies to you mentioning the purge. I think that he isn't in the wrong thread at all.peppy wrote:
I think you are in the wrong thread. Please read my last post once more, and please stay on topic, thanks!Adri wrote:
The glaring issue to me is that you're effectively removing user content that is possibly still used and appreciated. The biggest example would be that the tournament scene does not use ranked maps, and in extremely specialized skillsets the amount of maps to exist in the first place is barely enough. Maps from 2016 and also way earlier are used to this day, and will continue to be used in the years forward.
I really like this idea. It would be possible to automate to a point, for example by a map's playcount, and it would provide a viable alternative to... somewhat-known, often played maps in the graveyard getting deleted.RandomeLoL wrote:
This is a fairly, fairly wild suggestion out of the blue. But creating a new category similar to Graveyard that wouldn't delete maps could be an option. And you could even add a way to encourage mappers to get their maps Ranked/Loved! The suggestion at hand would let mappers "store" maps based on the amount of maps they have contributed to the Ranking/Loved section. It doesn't have to be linear as going to mention, but if every time a mapper's map got Loved/Ranked if they could permanently gain a spot on this "Storage" category that would reassure them that it will not be deleted, could be quite a good middle point for everyone.
This system would encourage mappers to try bringing and officialize their stuff in the osu! community, while offering them the advantage of displaying more of their charts in return. This would only make more people get access to those charts, which means more chances of getting Loved or more reception by the BNs who'd be willing to rank those maps, making a vicious cycle.
That would be great. I can speak for me and many others who I know that there are some specific big turn-offs regarding ranking criteria, and in this context for Mania specifically. Two of these things I can mention are:peppy wrote:
I'm asking if maybe there's a middle ground where we can alter certain criteria to allow even a subset of mappers to get a subset of their maps ranked, increasing their slots to where it would no longer be a bottleneck.
This one rule was actually set up by the mapping community itself tho, which involved quite a lot of mappers across multiple backgrounds and game modes in the process : http://osu.ppy.sh/community/forums/topics/726474Penguinosity wrote:
As for difficulty spreads, we have been constricted by an arbitrary system, based on arbitrary difficulty measurements.
I'm sure there was plenty of deliberation and reasoning that was put into these guidelines. However, they couldn't be further from what the majority of the mapping community feels is fair or sensible. I could make suggestions here to how they could be changed, but for now I will just say that the inclusion of these requirements have felt forced at best. A preference of difficulty spread should be left up to the mappers discretion, and not up to whether the song they chart fits within a predetermined time and difficulty range.
I'm asking if maybe there's a middle ground where we can alter certain criteria to allow even a subset of mappers to get a subset of their maps ranked, increasing their slots to where it would no longer be a bottleneck.Thanks for the hasty response. It's quite alleviating we're open to make changes for this non-marginal part of the VSRG community, and I personally appreciate that!
That would be great. I can speak for me and many others who I know that there are some specific big turn-offs regarding ranking criteria, and in this context for Mania specifically. Two of these things I can mention are:After speaking with plenty of mappers, half of the reason they do not want to rank maps is based around the Ranking System as a whole (The tedious process to get maps ranked), but the other half is without a doubt dissuaded by some aspects of the Criteria. I'll primarily focus on the latter here and discuss the two points in fair detail:
1. The requirement of hitsounding
2. Difficulty spread requirements
Current ranking criterias aren't representative of what makes a map a good map. Following perfectly the ranking criterias doesn't guarantee that the map is on a higher quality level, and a map can be very good while not following the RC. So I think changing the RC to something that would be more playability-oriented would be a could thing and that I will only improve the quality of the ranked beatmapsRandomeLoL wrote:
Other than that, all other changes would affect Core values of the game or not help solving the issue and potentially reduce the quality of maps as a whole.
Unsure about this suggestion personally — although yes playability is something that a lot of mappers nowadays consider within their charts (Simple or complex), I wouldn't say that it is entirely the way to go for when it comes to making maps in Osu!Mania as sometimes you might limit yourself on when it comes to expressing a song well and you tend to map some complex sounds in a way that is oversimplified and not really representative for the sound which is something i'm not really a fan of, especially for this gamemode's mapping meta.Ventilo le vrai wrote:
Current ranking criterias aren't representative of what makes a map a good map. Following perfectly the ranking criterias doesn't guarantee that the map is on a higher quality level, and a map can be very good while not following the RC. So I think changing the RC to something that would be more playability-oriented would be a could thing and that I will only improve the quality of the ranked beatmaps
Greatly appreciated. I'll contribute to either of those once conversations start happeningabraker wrote:
All, I made a RC proposal for hitsounds and discussion thread for difficulty spread where we can take the next steps:
It just seemed odd to specify that the suggestions have some bias with o!m in mind, when that's the basis of what the post stemmed from. Being a VSRG, mania comes with all of the history and connections that these games have built over the years. Many of these games go back before the creation of osu!. The content migration concerns stated in my original post and in a few others can obviously only be applied to Mania, but that doesn't make it any less important to be addressed.Niva wrote:
Also one thing that I noticed that all the issues and suggestions thrown here so far appear to be... very heavily slanted towards the osu!mania demographics of sorts I guess? Concerns such as "there are mappers who have a backlog of hundreds of charts that they have made in other game(s)" and many others seem to be never (or, at best, very very very rarely) present in the three other game mode(s) if any to my knowledge.
The point here (and the reason for changing direction of this thread) is that as a mapper, it is rare that 100% of your maps are non-rankable. By ranking *some* maps, you can increase your slot count up to 6 (non-supporter) and 20 (supporter). In fact let me up the stakes - non-supporters can now upload up to 8 (2 + 6 bonus from ranked map count).Ventilo le vrai wrote:
I think that this thread moved off topic...