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.
forum
Allow to use different Approach Rates in map
posted
Total Posts
313
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.
hell no
one of the few cues you can still rely on for playing a map is the rate of the approach circles. I've seen some viciously hard to read patterns, but you throw in the ability to vary the approach rate? forget about it.
one of the few cues you can still rely on for playing a map is the rate of the approach circles. I've seen some viciously hard to read patterns, but you throw in the ability to vary the approach rate? forget about it.
FurukawaPan wrote:
hell no
one of the few cues you can still rely on for playing a map is the rate of the approach circles. I've seen some viciously hard to read patterns, but you throw in the ability to vary the approach rate? forget about it.
Which is where restrictions come in. I'm not sure what restrictions but I'm pretty sure if this gets implemented, it's going to be a very strict one...
this is why I want AR to be set by the player. Screw Hard rock and easy (they do other things too).
Note that I know this is never going to happen, and I don't think anyone else wants it to happen. It's just some people suck at low AR but are superb at high AR. It's easier for them to FC a HR song than a non HR song.
Note that I know this is never going to happen, and I don't think anyone else wants it to happen. It's just some people suck at low AR but are superb at high AR. It's easier for them to FC a HR song than a non HR song.
...which is exactly why it SHOULDN'T be player-controllable. It's a difficulty modifier, like any other, and it would be unfair to allow them to make the map easier without any score multiplier.ziin wrote:
Note that I know this is never going to happen, and I don't think anyone else wants it to happen. It's just some people suck at low AR but are superb at high AR. It's easier for them to FC a HR song than a non HR song.
So strict it's already implemented~jockeytiyan wrote:
Which is where restrictions come in. I'm not sure what restrictions but I'm pretty sure if this gets implemented, it's going to be a very strict one...
Waryas
I suck at anything below AR9. I just can't do it.ziin wrote:
this is why I want AR to be set by the player. Screw Hard rock and easy (they do other things too).
Note that I know this is never going to happen, and I don't think anyone else wants it to happen. It's just some people suck at low AR but are superb at high AR. It's easier for them to FC a HR song than a non HR song.
So hard rock makes the map easier and gives you a score bonus. HR also makes the map easier by flipping it.MetalMario201 wrote:
...which is exactly why it SHOULDN'T be player-controllable. It's a difficulty modifier, like any other, and it would be unfair to allow them to make the map easier without any score multiplier.
If you let players choose their own AR, it is taken out of the difficulty equation (it's already not in the star difficulty equation anyway), letting players rely on their skill in playing osu, not on their ability to sift their way through circle clusterfucks. Virtually every other rhythm game lets you control the AR in some way.
This is a skill in itselfziin wrote:
not on their ability to sift their way through circle clusterfucks.
You should read the arguments in the request thread for splitting AR from OD. The exact difficulty impact of AR is complicated and depends on the style of mapping. Nevertheless, it DOES alter difficulty, so it shouldn't be user changeable without some penalty.
Your request amounts to splitting HardRock mod into two separate mods: higher AR mod and higher OD/CS + flip mod. (Apply the same logic to lower AR and Easy mod.) This is silly.
Learn to? How can you call yourself an expert when some very common, "easier" difficulty settings destroy you?JesusYamato wrote:
I suck at anything below AR9. I just can't do it.
What if I were to say I suck at anything below CS7. Should that be player controllable too?
Here's a somewhat cool example of not needing this: http://osu.ppy.sh/s/19554
I just don't think we need this.. Maybe when there's a extreme change of bpm like from 120 to 240 or something. But a change of 70 to 140 bpm is unmindable.
I just don't think we need this.. Maybe when there's a extreme change of bpm like from 120 to 240 or something. But a change of 70 to 140 bpm is unmindable.
Actually my request would remove the AR aspects of Easy and Hard Rock and replace it with a way to edit AR in the same way we can change the offset while playing.MetalMario201 wrote:
Your request amounts to splitting HardRock mod into two separate mods: higher AR mod and higher OD/CS + flip mod. (Apply the same logic to lower AR and Easy mod.) This is silly.
You're the one deciding that AR increases difficulty on a linear/generally positive direction rather than on a bell curve custom fit to the person. Everyone has their own optimal AR which they can play best at, much like mouse speed. If it's set too high, it gets very hard. If it's set too low, it gets harder and harder. Thus, hard rock makes things a lot easier for a lot of people, provided the OD and CS don't make it impossible. How does it make sense to give people a score bonus for using a mod which makes it easier to play?
I'm afraid many mappers will abuse this and make the map full of traps 
I never said anything of the sort. I said the difficulty of AR depends on a lot of different factors, including mapping style, music, and the player's abilities. Allowing the player to adjust the difficulty of maps to suit their own convenience isn't fair. Whether this is higher or lower doesn't matter in the slightest.
There could always be warnings for it like how there are warnings for x2 sliders and spacing incre-- (adding jumps + anti-jumps to this)
We still have those right?
( Also, if this is abused. I'll totally fall in love with it either way. )
Then again, I don't know if changing AR in the middle of a map is possible or not.
We still have those right?
( Also, if this is abused. I'll totally fall in love with it either way. )
Then again, I don't know if changing AR in the middle of a map is possible or not.
ziin wrote:
or you know, taiko.MetalMario201 wrote:
I totally despise when this happens on rhythm games like DDR.
Lesjuh wrote:
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.
These are the 2 strongest feelings I have for it.
On one end there's taiko's system of handling slider/BPM changes where the note simply comes in faster or slower, just as the suggested different AR would cause for standard osu. While this is something that can be used really well to make a map look and feel better, there are also a lot of times in which it makes the map nearly unplayable without already knowing what's coming. I imagine there are plenty of mappers who would abuse the hell out different approach rates and will only cause the maps to be more difficult and/or annoying, rather than artistic. On the positive, this could cause more strict modding/ranking which is always a good thing, and it would raise the potential of maps.
With the case of mods, hidden would be pretty much destroyed. With some cases of HR/DT notes could come in fast enough that it would be, like above, impossible to hit without knowing what's coming already.
I think negatives outweigh the positives
lol, only for players who play by eye like you.JesusYamato wrote:
Now that I think about it, it'll make hidden unplayable.
But yeah, I think it's a bad idea.
Topic Starter
You don't understand,people,that this thing will be very useful. You say that it will be hard to know where to increase or decrease approach rate. Then what can you say about 2x sections and 0,5 x sections? Is it hard to know where to use them? It depends of mappers will. But there are no problems with it - then why can be problems with different ARs? Experienced mappers can use it right,and what about newbies : moddings are created for this,to help to understand where can you use it right.
Lol yes there are. Large speed changes are used well so rarely...Giorgos wrote:
You don't understand,people,that this thing will be very useful. You say that it will be hard to know where to increase or decrease approach rate. Then what can you say about 2x sections and 0,5 x sections? Is it hard to know where to use them? It depends of mappers will. But there are no problems with it...
Also 2x and 0.5x sections SHOULD be readable becuase of tick rate. They aren't becuase people keep using tick 0.5, but that's a separate issue
Certainly could be exploited to make a trolololo map, but that is why maps have to be of high enough quality to be ranked, useful if done right and if not they don't get ranked simple enough.
But such a map will certainly have its legions of fans who love how it just successfully assfucked the osu! beatmapping paradigm, and riot until it is ranked.
This could never work well enough IMO.
lol this on CTB ._.
I could see this wo-OzzyOzrock wrote:
lol this on CTB ._.
>7AR
>final stream in 9AR
Yeah no.
What he said.Mashley wrote:
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 support this idea, but only make it configurable to "per song", not "per map". And make sure it follows the music, not for adding challenge. There shouldn't be any difference for the same interval between different mapsets because music is the same (so you can expect the slow approach rate when the music is on the slow part)
I think that solve the problem with hidden mod too because you can actually know it. (and it's not random)
Update: Apparently I didn't consider about the different approach rates among easy/normal/hard maps when making this post...
I'd rather have it set to "per timing section"
It would not only allow AR changes based on BPM changes, but would also deny AR changes if the BPM doesnt change between timing sections
Simple logic, if the BPM doesnt change, AR isnt allowed to change
Support, no star (for now)
It would not only allow AR changes based on BPM changes, but would also deny AR changes if the BPM doesnt change between timing sections
Simple logic, if the BPM doesnt change, AR isnt allowed to change
Support, no star (for now)
You know this would destroy Hardrock's ability to change AR.
Oh and if it did work I do agree that red lines should only be allowed to change AR. That way the rankability of a map comes into question if someone wants to change the AR.
Oh and if it did work I do agree that red lines should only be allowed to change AR. That way the rankability of a map comes into question if someone wants to change the AR.
This idea is good for let's say, maps where the BPM changes heavily, or any Compalation of maps (since the songs of the Compilation have differenty AR's in general~)
I like the idea that math mentioned, that you can change the AR when the BPM changes...~
This way, there's some kind of restriction to the usage of different AR's....
The only problem is, that this is still abusable then...
I guess I expand the idea from math, while stating the same idea he already had:
I like the idea that math mentioned, that you can change the AR when the BPM changes...~
This way, there's some kind of restriction to the usage of different AR's....
The only problem is, that this is still abusable then...
I guess I expand the idea from math, while stating the same idea he already had:
- Mappers should just be allowed to change the AR, when the BPM of the song changes. (math's idea~)
- If the BPM of the song changes just by "1", you can't change the AR. there should be a minimum of what the change in BPM has to be, so you can change the AR of a song.
- If the same BPM is used again in a map (let's say, 1st BPM: 150, 2nd: 125), then the AR you choosed for that kind of BPM is applied automatically.
DDR and taiko do things this way. I've always hated it because it makes patterns near BPM changes extremely messy and hard to read. If osu! were to do something like this, it would have to do it all the time. Doing it only sometimes at mapper discretion would make things EVEN MORE confusing, since it becomes a guessing game. Doing it all the time is something that can't be changed now, something I disagree with (see above), and something that breaks authenticity with the Ouendan titles.
Topic Starter
well,experienced players can play well with different AR's ,I think.
Maybe mappers just should use different AR's only in "Hard" and "Insane" difficulty,because this will be hard to play for newbies in 'Easy' or in 'Normal' with different AR's. Or mappers should use different AR's on all diffs : newbies can adapt to this - this won't take a lot of time!
The second option sounds much better to me. So,I think it's good.
Maybe mappers just should use different AR's only in "Hard" and "Insane" difficulty,because this will be hard to play for newbies in 'Easy' or in 'Normal' with different AR's. Or mappers should use different AR's on all diffs : newbies can adapt to this - this won't take a lot of time!
The second option sounds much better to me. So,I think it's good.
BPM changes should be apparent in the music and I can only see this being confusing/messy. At that point, you're invalidating several visual cues (this is a bad thing) such as placing hitobject order based on when the approach circles appear.
If you're going from a fast to a slow BPM, some slow BPM objects' approach rates will appear before some of the fast BPM objects' approach rates
that sentence may have been hard to understand, but the gameplay would be even worse
If you're going from a fast to a slow BPM, some slow BPM objects' approach rates will appear before some of the fast BPM objects' approach rates
that sentence may have been hard to understand, but the gameplay would be even worse
Topic Starter
Well,every man has it's own opinion) I don't agree with you guys - maybe you are right,but maybe you are not.
We should just test this ability and see how it works - If the gameplay will become worse,then it will be possible to put this option away,I think..?
We should just test this ability and see how it works - If the gameplay will become worse,then it will be possible to put this option away,I think..?
if its THAT extreme^^^^^, then it will be caught when modded
I just want to say, I really hope this never gets added.
I really don't ever want to see changing approach rates in any map, God forbid it be a ranked map.
I would only expect a drastic increase in the number of Insanes which become *completely* unplayable to anyone who hasn't simply memorized every move in that map. And if you're looking for a memorization challenge, use hidden or flashlight.
I really don't ever want to see changing approach rates in any map, God forbid it be a ranked map.
I would only expect a drastic increase in the number of Insanes which become *completely* unplayable to anyone who hasn't simply memorized every move in that map. And if you're looking for a memorization challenge, use hidden or flashlight.
you could put a restriction on this feature that requires a break section to change it. Being able to change Approach Rate on the fly during active gameplay is destructive to the map's readability. Forcing changes to only occur during break sections would mitigate that nicely. Adding a limit to the delta Approach Rate would also be a good idea.
A few hard-coded limitations would prevent users from being stupid with it. I've had a mild change of heart about the request: when a song is notably faster in one section than another, a faster approach rate makes a degree of sense.
A few hard-coded limitations would prevent users from being stupid with it. I've had a mild change of heart about the request: when a song is notably faster in one section than another, a faster approach rate makes a degree of sense.
^FurukawaPan wrote:
I just want to say, I really hope this never gets added.
I really don't ever want to see changing approach rates in any map, God forbid it be a ranked map.
I would only expect a drastic increase in the number of Insanes which become *completely* unplayable to anyone who hasn't simply memorized every move in that map. And if you're looking for a memorization challenge, use hidden or flashlight.
Topic Starter
Oh God,I waited when you will come!!! Now all I can do - is to give up with this idea and quit.Ussuru wrote:
No thank you
I support this idea~>w<
I support this, as I can see at least a couple of uses for it. If a track slows down, then a slower approach rate would feel better. Irrespective of difficulty, a slow section where the beats appear quickly feels wrong. Conversely, a fast section with a clusterfuck of slow approaches also feels wrong, unless honeycomb puzzles are the desired effect. This brings me to my next point: for added difficulty, an [Insane] map could go from breakneck to puzzling. It would certainly offer an interesting challenge.
^Metro wrote:
^FurukawaPan wrote:
I just want to say, I really hope this never gets added.
I really don't ever want to see changing approach rates in any map, God forbid it be a ranked map.
I would only expect a drastic increase in the number of Insanes which become *completely* unplayable to anyone who hasn't simply memorized every move in that map. And if you're looking for a memorization challenge, use hidden or flashlight.
I'm honestly not sure I like this idea, because it would look odd, be somewhat confusing, and IMO AR is something that should be consistent throughout the whole map...
i dunno D:
I support this idea, because I do believe that there are many songs which switch from very fast-paced, hardcore sections to calmer ones. Well known examples would be System of a Down - B.Y.O.B., La Roux - Bulletproof, Florence + The Machine - Drumming Song, Rise Against - Prayer of the Refugee, System of a Down - Vicinity of Obscenity, and many many more. Just go through your osu! library and you'll quickly find many songs which could probably have used this feature. But, then again, I can understand that larger changes, like from 9 to 5 would already be confusing as fuck while playing. That's why I suggest limiting by how much you can change it. I'd say by 2 points at max. So, if you have AR 7, you can use 9, 8, 6 or 5, but not more in any direction. I'd like that, slight changes like those can already influence how fitting the Approach Rate for a section is. I for example would have liked -1 on the slow sections in Drumming Song and Bulletproof. -2 would only be necessary in really extreme cases like Vicinity of Obscenity. We obviously don't need to go from 9 to 2.
EDIT: And at best, there should be a break between the approach rate changes, but this is understandably not always possible, so the AR-2-Limit must do. And I'd say that if there is a break, you should have a larger limit, like 3, which could be very useful when mapping medleys or other marathons.
EDIT: And at best, there should be a break between the approach rate changes, but this is understandably not always possible, so the AR-2-Limit must do. And I'd say that if there is a break, you should have a larger limit, like 3, which could be very useful when mapping medleys or other marathons.
Topic Starter
sounds pretty nice,I like itLarto wrote:
I support this idea, because I do believe that there are many songs which switch from very fast-paced, hardcore sections to calmer ones. Well known examples would be System of a Down - B.Y.O.B., La Roux - Bulletproof, Florence + The Machine - Drumming Song, Rise Against - Prayer of the Refugee, System of a Down - Vicinity of Obscenity, and many many more. Just go through your osu! library and you'll quickly find many songs which could probably have used this feature. But, then again, I can understand that larger changes, like from 9 to 5 would already be confusing as fuck while playing. That's why I suggest limiting by how much you can change it. I'd say by 2 points at max. So, if you have AR 7, you can use 9, 8, 6 or 5, but not more in any direction. I'd like that, slight changes like those can already influence how fitting the Approach Rate for a section is. I for example would have liked -1 on the slow sections in Drumming Song and Bulletproof. -2 would only be necessary in really extreme cases like Vicinity of Obscenity. We obviously don't need to go from 9 to 2.
EDIT: And at best, there should be a break between the approach rate changes, but this is understandably not always possible, so the AR-2-Limit must do. And I'd say that if there is a break, you should have a larger limit, like 3, which could be very useful when mapping medleys or other marathons.
I seriously don't see this idea working out well at all. This idea is potentially great but I don't see it being used correctly. Plus it would make maps pretty hard to read/predict, like you come from some AR 9 fast map and suddenly in a slow part you get AR 7, it would be just awful. And, plus again, try understanding that applying different ARs in easy diffs may be confusing for those who play them (I think), and AR 7 on insanes looks horrible (on super insanes AR 7 just makes them unplayable), so I would only really be OK if the possible margin would be +1 -1, since with that you get hard insanes to get 8 as minimum, and normal insane maps (or even hards) can get some "good enough" AR variation, but if this is going like +2 -2 I'm totally against it.
Just as everything ever can be abused, this idea also can be, of course. But that doesn't mean it's not a good idea and cannot be used well. Besides, if it IS abused, that should be pointed out during the modding process.Wishy22 wrote:
I seriously don't see this idea working out well at all. This idea is potentially great but I don't see it being used correctly.
Which is why +2 and -2 should only be used in rare cases where it really really really fits. Those exist, but are unlikely. +2/-2 was only an example anyways, we can keep it at +1/-1, that's not for me to decide, I was just talking about the general idea.Wishy22 wrote:
Plus it would make maps pretty hard to read/predict, like you come from some AR 9 fast map and suddenly in a slow part you get AR 7, it would be just awful.
The ARs would also have to be applied fittingly to every difficulty, obviously. +1/-1 should even in Easies not be that awfully confusing to follow, if it does fit the song. And you wouldn't go from AR 8 to AR 7 in an Insane if the map didn't also become slightly easier at that point. That'd be ruining the point.Wishy22 wrote:
And, plus again, try understanding that applying different ARs in easy diffs may be confusing for those who play them (I think), and AR 7 on insanes looks horrible (on super insanes AR 7 just makes them unplayable),
Well, +2 -2 is only a suggestion, like I said, it'd only ever be needed in very rare, very extreme cases. +1 -1 is more likely to ever be needed.Wishy22 wrote:
so I would only really be OK if the possible margin would be +1 -1, since with that you get hard insanes to get 8 as minimum, and normal insane maps (or even hards) can get some "good enough" AR variation, but if this is going like +2 -2 I'm totally against it.
Then we both think the same about this. I was just pointing out that I can already see this being troublesome, since the fact that some players consider some AR unplayable or horrible to play with and others are the opposite is a reality, so maybe in some maps you lower the AR for a slow part and while some players gonna find it ok, some others gonna hate it and bash the map. I just think a feature like this could bear up some problems that can't really be solved since each player has it's own perspective of what AR fits and what doesn't. But of course it could work, guess the best solution for this would be to apply it to some maps so everyone can actually try it and feel how it'd play.
You know, the point of supporting a feature is to show why it's needed; not to say that it's rarely needed hence like saying that it doesn't need to be implemented due to it's rare use.Larto wrote:
it'd only ever be needed in very rare, very extreme cases.
Other than that, i pretty much agree since im used to associate approach rate with the general speed of the map, and when the map slows down, high AR just feels awkward.
I'm only talking about +2 and -2. Not +1 and -1, which would be useful fairly commonly.Larto wrote:
+2 -2 is only a suggestion, like I said, it'd only ever be needed in very rare, very extreme cases. +1 -1 is more likely to ever be needed.
oops i missed that :p sorry Larto
@Wishy22: Players already bash maps for plenty other unreasonable reasons i dont see how this would make it any different =/
@Wishy22: Players already bash maps for plenty other unreasonable reasons i dont see how this would make it any different =/
More than 2 unique approach rates are being used in this map.
More than 1 unique approach rates are being used in this map. For this reason, I have taken the courtesy of deleting it from your hard drive along with all remote copies. Have a nice day, buzz click.
If you want to be like that, do that with Nightcore already. ;p
I agree, simply because im just mapping a song with different timing sections, im pending between two ARs and can't decide, it would fit much better to the map if i could use both
modders should take a look on it carefully so it shouldn't be abused right ?
about the players...well there are also maps which map style I don't like, however I play them till I can pass it and its the same with AR imo. if you get used to it you can pass the map, it has to be at least to be 2-3 AR points (depending on diff i guess) to be really "disturbing" otherwise i feel sorry for the superficiality of some players to bash a map badly because the AR is wrong by 1 point...
I played enough maps which AR i don't like, mostly to slow AR however sometimes at slow sections high AR fits really horrible...
I think AR +/- 1 is fine, should be only used on bpm changes tho
modders should take a look on it carefully so it shouldn't be abused right ?
about the players...well there are also maps which map style I don't like, however I play them till I can pass it and its the same with AR imo. if you get used to it you can pass the map, it has to be at least to be 2-3 AR points (depending on diff i guess) to be really "disturbing" otherwise i feel sorry for the superficiality of some players to bash a map badly because the AR is wrong by 1 point...
I played enough maps which AR i don't like, mostly to slow AR however sometimes at slow sections high AR fits really horrible...
I think AR +/- 1 is fine, should be only used on bpm changes tho
Bump
Easy difficulty AR 10 for pros
I would make all those shitty ar9 maps into ar8 \;D/
come on,deny this shit already
Topic Starter
5 Graveyard Maps is not a right way to vote here.dNextGen wrote:
come on,let me be smarter and let me get out of here already
I remember when we didn't allow slider speed changes.
ampzz
?_____?Giorgos wrote:
5 Graveyard Maps is not a right way to vote here.dNextGen wrote:
come on,let me be smarter and let me get out of here already
how does my graved maps related to this topic ? please enlighten me with your awesome knowledge
Topic Starter
You don't have any ranked maps,which means,that you are 99% don't understand why does osu needs different AR's in some songs. you are a kind of man who just need to come and talk shit about others without any evidence. Don't try to prove me wrong,because I am right in this situation.dNextGen wrote:
?_____?
how does my graved maps related to this topic ? please enlighten me with your awesome knowledge
Now don't go offtopic here,if you want to tell me something - write a PM.
not going to say anything since i seriously had no idea what the fuck are you talking about
sorry for being too stupid to understand your words tho
sorry for being too stupid to understand your words tho
But then it's unfitting on some maps.
i don't map so please forgive me if i said something wrong (perhaps ill start soon XD)
For experienced mappers who can use this to their advantage then it would be a good thing to allow different AR's
but what about the others? i can already imagine how much more trouble there will be when modding
/me sticks to easy mod with kriers
For experienced mappers who can use this to their advantage then it would be a good thing to allow different AR's
but what about the others? i can already imagine how much more trouble there will be when modding
/me sticks to easy mod with kriers
Players are the ones who play the maps, now stop provoking people or more action will be taken, stay on topic and have a nice discussion.Giorgos wrote:
You don't have any ranked maps,which means,that you are 99% don't understand why does osu needs different AR's in some songs. you are a kind of man who just need to come and talk shit about others without any evidence. Don't try to prove me wrong,because I am right in this situation.dNextGen wrote:
?_____?
how does my graved maps related to this topic ? please enlighten me with your awesome knowledge
Now don't go offtopic here,if you want to tell me something - write a PM.
I just read this and, damn, yeah, it would fit some songs pretty nicely.
If the problem is abuse, we have to prevent it by adding extra guidelines like the one Mashley mentioned earlier but really, I don't see any other problems. And stubborn mappers are stubborn mappers and haters gonna hate, as always.
So yeah, I support this o/
If the problem is abuse, we have to prevent it by adding extra guidelines like the one Mashley mentioned earlier but really, I don't see any other problems. And stubborn mappers are stubborn mappers and haters gonna hate, as always.
So yeah, I support this o/
peppy wrote:
*holds gun to head*
*cringes and pulls trigger*
I think this will never get implemented.
peppy died D: nuuuuuu
Topic Starter
Glad to see like-minded person!narakucrimson wrote:
I just read this and, damn, yeah, it would fit some songs pretty nicely.
If the problem is abuse, we have to prevent it by adding extra guidelines like the one Mashley mentioned earlier but really, I don't see any other problems. And stubborn mappers are stubborn mappers and haters gonna hate, as always.
So yeah, I support this o/
BTW Haters can hate,I don't care
I've always thought approach rates are better if they match up the speed of the song, it would screw hidden players (like me ) tho
) thoI'm surprised that this thread is open. Well, I don't support the idea and here's a reason why. Players can abuse this by setting the custom Approach Rate low and use Hard Rock just to get easy points and get in the leader boards easily. That's a bit unbalanced. :/ Saying "I'm sure players won't do that" is not a good excuse. You don't know that. Just throwing my two cents here.
You're confusing this thread with the other one. This one is about having multiple ARs in a single map... players can't abuse this, because it's set during mapping, never during playing. If anything, players would be abused by this. I'm not a fan of either suggestion... but this one wouldn't be nearly as bad (assuming that the modding process only gets better).Roddie wrote:
I'm surprised that this thread is open. Well, I don't support the idea and here's a reason why. Players can abuse this by setting the custom Approach Rate low and use Hard Rock just to get easy points and get in the leader boards easily. That's a bit unbalanced. :/ Saying "I'm sure players won't do that" is not a good excuse. You don't know that. Just throwing my two cents here.
Oh I see... Well, sorry for the misunderstanding.bwross wrote:
You're confusing this thread with the other one. This one is about having multiple ARs in a single map... players can't abuse this, because it's set during mapping, never during playing. If anything, players would be abused by this. I'm not a fan of either suggestion... but this one wouldn't be nearly as bad (assuming that the modding process only gets better).
I'm against this because abuse might happen but here's a better idea.
How about letting players choose their own Approach Rates before starting a song? I mean not all people can read AR 9 (especially 10) and some players are just fine with AR 8 or even lower.
Most rythm games have this for example DDR, O2jam, DJmax etc.. you can choose different falling speeds on every song.
So yeah having it on osu would let you choose from AR 1 - AR 10.
Well what do you think? I think this feature is pretty good.
How about letting players choose their own Approach Rates before starting a song? I mean not all people can read AR 9 (especially 10) and some players are just fine with AR 8 or even lower.
Most rythm games have this for example DDR, O2jam, DJmax etc.. you can choose different falling speeds on every song.
So yeah having it on osu would let you choose from AR 1 - AR 10.
Well what do you think? I think this feature is pretty good.
well there is already a thread about that idea and i am against that, because you would screw the whole point system up.rickyboi wrote:
I'm against this because abuse might happen but here's a better idea.
How about letting players choose their own Approach Rates before starting a song? I mean not all people can read AR 9 (especially 10) and some players are just fine with AR 8 or even lower.
Most rythm games have this for example DDR, O2jam, DJmax etc.. you can choose different falling speeds on every song.
So yeah having it on osu would let you choose from AR 1 - AR 10.
Well what do you think? I think this feature is pretty good.
also what is the point to have an easier insane diff. then? Or how many beatmaps even have such a high AR from begin with?
I think this could be an unranked mod but not an actual feature for everyone.
Same. Hidden will be awful if Maps contain this.Sakura Hana wrote:
I've always thought approach rates are better if they match up the speed of the song, it would screw hidden players (like me
Like I said this feature is about preference. The target is to make the player most comfortable to whatever AR he/she would prefer on any kind of song. I've seen lots of songs with only 140 - 160bpm but it has already 9 AR which doesn't really fit the bpm and especially songs with 200 - 250bpm but only has AR 7 or 8 .bomber34 wrote:
rickyboi wrote:
You would screw the whole point system up. - Can be easily fixed by removing the AR calculated to multiply the score.
also what is the point to have an easier insane diff. then? Or how many beatmaps even have such a high AR from begin with? - I think you didn't understand what I was trying to point out.
If you've actually played DJmax, IIDX, DDR or O2jam you'll understand what I'm trying to say here.
You cut the most important part of that sentence. There is already a thread for that idea, and it would be best if you make your comments over there so they don't get lost.rickyboi wrote:
bomber34 wrote:
You would screw the whole point system up.
This feature request is stupid and shouldn't even exist.
peppy or someone else, please deny this.
Why? well, let's say someone makes an Insane diff.
If it's insane, it's suppose to have insane beatmap settings. AR9 for example. Not constantly changing to AR8 because suddenly there's a calm part in the song. No, it's one diff and it should only be one approach rate.
Don't be silly. Keep the beatmap settings differently according to the difficulty.
peppy or someone else, please deny this.
Why? well, let's say someone makes an Insane diff.
If it's insane, it's suppose to have insane beatmap settings. AR9 for example. Not constantly changing to AR8 because suddenly there's a calm part in the song. No, it's one diff and it should only be one approach rate.
Don't be silly. Keep the beatmap settings differently according to the difficulty.
Topic Starter
If you had ever played CTB,then you will understand how does it feel to play an Insane diff with AR9 on a calm part of the song with calm music and voice and with omgwtfisthisshit fruits flying everywhere - THAT IS STUPID! Sometimes different AR's on Insane diffs will really fit the songs (not all songs,but some of them exactly!)theowest wrote:
This feature request is stupid and shouldn't even exist.
peppy or someone else, please deny this.
Why? well, let's say someone makes an Insane diff.
If it's insane, it's suppose to have insane beatmap settings. AR9 for example. Not constantly changing to AR8 because suddenly there's a calm part in the song. No, it's one diff and it should only be one approach rate.
Don't be silly. Keep the beatmap settings differently according to the difficulty.
So think before you say something and look how many EXPERIENCED mappers support this idea,not just random guys like idk
I don't play CtB because it sucks but oh well. An osu! beatmap isn't created for CtB. Osu maps are just transferred over to CtB or taiko, which can cause some crazy shit if the osu! beatmap is really hard. Maybe this different AR thing is something for the CtB and taiko players only? I've thought of this very much actually, I've thought of this for over 8 fucking months. I don't care if experienced mappers support this, it doesn't mean they have thought this through just as much as I have.Giorgos wrote:
If you had ever played CTB,then you will understand how does it feel to play an Insane diff with AR9 on a calm part of the song with calm music and voice and with omgwtfisthisshit fruits flying everywhere - THAT IS STUPID! Sometimes different AR's on Insane diffs will really fit the songs (not all songs,but some of them exactly!)theowest wrote:
This feature request is stupid and shouldn't even exist.
peppy or someone else, please deny this.
Why? well, let's say someone makes an Insane diff.
If it's insane, it's suppose to have insane beatmap settings. AR9 for example. Not constantly changing to AR8 because suddenly there's a calm part in the song. No, it's one diff and it should only be one approach rate.
Don't be silly. Keep the beatmap settings differently according to the difficulty.
So think before you say something and look how many EXPERIENCED mappers support this idea,not just random guys like idk
Let's be honest, this will never be implemented.
Topic Starter
CTB difficulties will become rankable soon,and this thing will be very useful for them,so it doesn't matter if it sucks for such a pro like you or not - I will not calm down until this idea WILL become real! So we will see.
So you are telling us that AR10 Maps (e.g. Can't Defeat Airman) could be lowered to AR6 (or whatever) so they become easier to play and still give the same amount of points? That would ruin the whole ranking system, since many of us can't beat hard maps like the one I took for example only because of the AR. With a lowered AR much more players would be able to beat the map and get into the TOP 50 and being in the TOP 50 wouldn't be special anymore.
If you haven't already noticed, I am against this option ._.
If you haven't already noticed, I am against this option ._.
you're talking about me? Didn't you even read what I said? I said that if you use lower AR, you should be given LESS points. It becomes EASIER. Dammit, people need to read before they make stupid statements.TheHaya wrote:
So you are telling us that AR10 Maps (e.g. Can't Defeat Airman) could be lowered to AR6 (or whatever) so they become easier to play and still give the same amount of points? That would ruin the whole ranking system, since many of us can't beat hard maps like the one I took for example only because of the AR. With a lowered AR much more players would be able to beat the map and get into the TOP 50 and being in the TOP 50 wouldn't be special anymore.
If you haven't already noticed, I am against this option ._.
More like people should learn to read thread titles, this is about mappers using different ARs on an individual beatmap.theowest wrote:
you're talking about me? Didn't you even read what I said? I said that if you use lower AR, you should be given LESS points. It becomes EASIER. Dammit, people need to read before they make stupid statements.TheHaya wrote:
So you are telling us that AR10 Maps (e.g. Can't Defeat Airman) could be lowered to AR6 (or whatever) so they become easier to play and still give the same amount of points? That would ruin the whole ranking system, since many of us can't beat hard maps like the one I took for example only because of the AR. With a lowered AR much more players would be able to beat the map and get into the TOP 50 and being in the TOP 50 wouldn't be special anymore.
If you haven't already noticed, I am against this option ._.
yes. But I gave an OPINION on what I think should be the case here. What I think is better than the original idea in this thread.Sakura Hana wrote:
More like people should learn to read thread titles, this is about mappers using different ARs on an individual beatmap.
just burn this with fire already.
Waryas
it would be easier with AR9. Why the hell would you make it 4 steps easier? One step is enough.Waryas wrote:
I know this is offtopic but!
Difficulty is subjective, Airman wouldn't be easier with ar6 but about 100x harder for some people.