Guest
home
beatmaps
rankings
community
store
help
forum
  1. Forums
  2. Beatmaps
  3. Mapping Discussion
  4. Ranking Criteria
  5. Finalized/Denied Amendments

[Proposal] Allow beatmap host to indicate possession in a difficulty's name.

posted
Total Posts
10

[Proposal] Allow beatmap host to indicate possession in a difficulty's name.

Change
23
67.65%
Keep
11
32.35%
Total votes: 34
SMOKELIND
466 posts
Joined November 2016
Topic Starter
SMOKELIND
Currently guest/collab difficulties can do almost anything with difficulty name, guest mappers decide if they want to show possession or mention username on their GDs/collabs, but also free to avoid any kind of credit and mentions.
( e.g )

Meanwhile set host must not show possession of their own username which creates unfairness in that regard and allows such naming scheme to exist

but disallows

Changing the rule

A beatmap host cannot indicate possession in a difficulty's name. (e.g. Beatmap Host's Insane). Conflicts caused by beatmapping multiple songs with the same metadata and collaborative difficulties are the only exceptions. Guest difficulties, however, may indicate possession with its creators' username or nickname
and merging it with existing guideline with slight rewording

Difficulties may indicate possession with its creators' username or nickname. Usernames indicating possession of a difficulty should be consistent between multiple beatmaps. Varying nicknames for one user makes interpreting who created a difficulty ambiguous or misleading.
would give more fairness to the situation and there won't be any downside in indication of username. So at the end of all, set hosts and guest mappers would have equal allowances in difficulty naming.

Also on a side note we already have system that shows owners on all difficulties on site which is handled fairly well and additionally i can ASSUME eventually lazer would finally show owners on song selection screen properly, so sooner or later there won't be confusion regarding any kind of naming from player's perspective as well.
Doormat
2,050 posts
Joined September 2013
Doormat
the rule doesn't make sense now that we have new systems in place that allow mapset hosts to assign mapper credits for individual difficulties. it really should be made into a guideline instead.

the ranking criteria has always been pretty loose with how difficulty names are applied so i agree that the rules should be changed to reflect that.

however, i do think it would be tacky if the mapset host included their name onto their difficulty for all their beatmaps so i think the guideline should be more of a "should not do this if not appropriate"

proposed guideline wrote:

A beatmap host should not include their username/nickname in a difficulty's name. (e.g. Beatmap Host's Insane). However, Beatmap hosts may include their username/nickname in the event of conflicting metadata, collaborative difficulties, or when thematically appropriate with respect to the song. Guest difficulties may include its creators' username/nickname.
might be kind of wordy but it can probably be hashed over
Last edited by Doormat , edited 2 times in total.
aceticke
Global Moderator
244 posts
Joined August 2016
aceticke
+1 to Doormat's rephrasing
Ryu Sei
2,898 posts
Joined October 2013
Ryu Sei
Would only consider it if it's collab diff or top diff. Otherwise not really.

22:31 local time: I would consider this to only be allowed if it's top diff because the top diff can be almost anything as you like, ranging from themed difficulty names, related to song, or even beatmapper's signature difficulty name. This allows mappers to shows their uniqueness by upholding such signature diffname.
Last edited by Ryu Sei , edited 1 time in total.
maxie
Beatmap Nominator
121 posts
Joined May 2015
maxie
+2 to doormat
Drum-Hitnormal
Beatmap Nominator
1,724 posts
Joined March 2011
Drum-Hitnormal
players already have some expectations from past 10 years... its gonna confuse them thinking host is a GD.

and causing more unesseary discussions for metadata during ranking process as not everyone will be fully updated with RC changes

honestly feels more trouble than benefit

also doormat wording is better
Renumi
907 posts
Joined July 2012
Renumi

Doormat wrote:

the rule doesn't make sense now that we have new systems in place that allow mapset hosts to assign mapper credits for individual difficulties. it really should be made into a guideline instead.
this says it all. the reword is great too

though one would agree that ideally lazer would add some label or marker since the few logical ways youd know who mapped what (if applicable) is thru discussions or hovering over difficulty info on web (as a sidenote taking players who dont care about ownership into perspective they would know what theyre getting into loosely (!!) based off sr or settings or sth)

+3 to doormat
Last edited by Renumi , edited 1 time in total.
lewski
1,323 posts
Joined September 2014
lewski
don't really care either way for the proposal itself since the use case for the allowance seems super niche (so I guess +1 to Doormat? idk), but...

Ryu Sei wrote:

Would only consider it if it's collab diff or top diff. Otherwise not really.

22:31 local time: I would consider this to only be allowed if it's top diff because the top diff can be almost anything as you like, ranging from themed difficulty names, related to song, or even beatmapper's signature difficulty name. This allows mappers to shows their uniqueness by upholding such signature diffname.
the thing about only allowing special diffnames for top diffs is entirely based on the fact that having special diffnames elsewhere in the spread would make the spread harder to understand because the difficulty levels aren't in the diffnames

indicating possession doesn't hide difficulty levels so I don't think this is a problem at all

(also indicating possession in collab diffs is already allowed, that's not even under discussion)

Drum-Hitnormal wrote:

and causing more unnecessary discussions for metadata during ranking process as not everyone will be fully updated with RC changes
don't really see this as much of an issue, can't you just point any confused modders to the updated rule/guideline and call it a day?

I also don't think diffnames with the host indicating possession would be common enough to cause much unnecessary discussion in the grand scheme of things, even if every single one pushed within a month of the rule change was incorrectly pointed out
niat0004
218 posts
Joined September 2017
niat0004
+5 for Doormat's rule -> guideline amendment.
Okoayu
Nomination Assessment Team / Elite Nominator
4,956 posts
Joined May 2012
Okoayu
imo this can be made more straightforward (somehow) and rc cleanup will probably do this, this thread here is inconclusive, though so i'll move it to finalized for now
Please sign in to reply.

New reply

0
1 / 10