I would just keep 2 consecutive 1/1 moments, for me is enough to keep the map playable. I agree that 3/2 feels too forced and I had a lot of struggle in finding a good balance every time I had to put the break.
I see. Do note that I'm relatively new to mapping atm.Capu wrote:
That won't work as the goal for this proposal is to make rests more intuitive. By limiting the usage of the alternative you start to force the break to be unintuitive again after some time.op45667 wrote:
Maybe another guideline can be introduced to limit how many times the 3 consecutive 1/1 can be used before a 3/2 break occurs to prevent a long, fatiguing section.
Over Hivie's wordingikin5050 wrote:
At least 1 rest moment that is 3/2 or longer should be inserted after 16/1 to 20/1 of continuous mapping. An exception can be made if the song's structure would lead to counter intuitive 3/2 rest moments. In this case you can use 3 consecutive 1/1 length rest moments instead as a substitute.
Personally the wording highlighting that it is a substitute conveys that you have a choice and should use your judgement about what is best, as well as the subjectivity of this guideline and it being open to interpretation.Hivie wrote:
At least 1 rest moment that is 3/2 or longer, or at least 3 consecutive rest moments that are 1/1 should be inserted after 16/1 to 20/1 of continuous mapping. Using rest moments less frequently is acceptable if either the pace of the music makes rest moments counter-intuitive or if the continuously mapped part is overall more forgiving to the player.
also just saying, I also agree with your wording too, key difference is that mine isn't as assertive, but I'm not completely sure if that's the way forward, so opinions on this matter.Hivie wrote:
At least 1 rest moment that is 3/2 or longer should be inserted after 16/1 to 20/1 of continuous mapping. Using at least 3 consecutive rest moments that are 1/1 is acceptable if either the pace of the music makes rest moments counter-intuitive or if the continuously mapped part is overall more forgiving to the player.
i put little arrows around the thing i changed so u can identify it easily i don't actually want little arrows in the rc.Hivie wrote:
also just saying, I also agree with your wording too, key difference is that mine isn't as assertive, but I'm not completely sure if that's the way forward, so opinions on this matter.Hivie wrote:
At least 1 rest moment that is 3/2 or longer should be inserted after 16/1 to 20/1 of continuous mapping. Using at least 3 consecutive rest moments that are 1/1 is ->an acceptable substitute<- if either the pace of the music makes rest moments counter-intuitive or if the continuously mapped part is overall more forgiving to the player.
so 2 1/1 rests are not acceptable?ikin5050 wrote:
At least 1 rest moment that is 3/2 or longer should be inserted after 16/1 to 20/1 of continuous mapping. Using at least 3 consecutive rest moments that are 1/1 is ->an acceptable substitute<- if either the pace of the music makes rest moments counter-intuitive or if the continuously mapped part is overall more forgiving to the player.
i disagree then.Hivie wrote:
nope, they are not deemed as enough substitute by the majority as they don't lower the density much
? it's not gonna replace 3/2 breaks, it's going to be an alternative and both will be acceptable. that's not making it more strictigorsprite wrote:
i disagree then.Hivie wrote:
nope, they are not deemed as enough substitute by the majority as they don't lower the density much
they are acceptable in the current RC if the overall is more forgiving, especially in lower bpm and i agree with that. changing to at least 3 1/1 rests just make the guideline more strict.
but 3 1/1 rests and 2 1/1 rests is already a valid alternative, the proposal of "at least 3 1/1 rests..." just make the usage of 2 1/1 rests more strict.Idealism wrote:
? it's not gonna replace 3/2 breaks, it's going to be an alternative and both will be acceptable. that's not making it more strict
be creative with these breaks and that will not negatively affect your map. btw, newer mappers have more important concerns to deal with than just "where do i put this 3/2 break?" and veteran mappers already know where to put it or how to find an alternative for it.Hivie wrote:
3/2 is often an unnatural break due to how more common songs are structured, it can easily break the map's structure and affect music representation negatively when you're basically forced to add a break because of the guideline, and sometimes it can feel like you're just poking holes in your map to satisfy the guideline.
Yes but the whole idea of the proposal is clarification, not changing the rules.igorsprite wrote:
this proposal is unnecessary and misleading because the current RC already accepts these different breaks, despite recommending the usage of 3/2 breaks, and i agree with that because isn't every case that 3 1/1 breaks is valid.
Yes BNs are able to identify suitable replacements, but the point of this proposal is clarification for mappers not for BNs.igorsprite wrote:
what i see are people creating a problem to propose a solution. you guys are bns and can easily identify if a different break from 3/2 is acceptable for the situation. i guess, at least xd
Highlighting that substitutes can be made is a clarification of a commonly used alternative interpretation of the guideline.igorsprite wrote:
stating that "Using at least 3 consecutive rest moments that are 1/1 is an acceptable substitute..." is misleading for mappers because this is a guideline so exceptions can be made depending of the situation and you don't need a guideline for the guideline(you create that by saying that B is a substitute for A imo).
Sure, every problem can be fixed by saying "just map better" but that's not how this works.igorsprite wrote:
be creative with these breaks and that will not negatively affect your map. btw, newer mappers have more important concerns to deal with than just "where do i put this 3/2 break?" and veteran mappers already know where to put it or how to find an alternative for it.