forum

[Proposal-mania] key mode should not be included in diff names for single keymode mapsets

posted
Total Posts
8
Topic Starter
Scotty

rc wrote:

If multiple key modes are present in a single beatmap set, the key mode must be denoted in the difficulty name.


while this rule is clear for the most part, it does not mention anything regarding the case of single keymode mapsets. due to this, mappers can potentially include keymodes in diffnames for single keymode mapsets. this seems to be an unintentional loophole as this mapset was disqualified for this despite it being perfectly fine according to the rule.

since the keymode of any difficulty is shown on the website and in the client, the use of keymodes in the diffnames for single keymode mapsets is redundant. it is also a potential cause of inconsistency in difficulty naming among mapsets since some single keymode mapsets will use this whilst most will not.

proposed change: add a secondary statement to close the loophole. something like below:

rc wrote:

If multiple key modes are present in a single beatmap set, the key mode must be denoted in the difficulty name. Conversely, the key mode must not be denoted in the difficulty name if only a single key mode is present.
Feerum
Yup! That looks good to me!

It was always somewhat of an "unspoken rule" to not include the key-mode in difficult naming when only one is present. Long in the past (some years when QAT was still a thing), beatmaps got disqualified because of this and BNs also said that it's not rankable.

Over the years it got simply established.
It also doesn't make much sense to include them because of the by Scotty stated reasons!

So yeah, support this change.
Unpredictable

Feerum wrote:

So yeah, support this change.


liking this a lot as well. supporting this change as well!
Rivals_7
i'm the one who provoke the discussion

so yes pls
Feerum
https://github.com/ppy/osu-wiki/pull/3108

Created a pull req already but this stays open for more discussion, in case someone is against this change.
clayton
seems like it was just a wording mistake. does this need more discussion? I think it's straightforward enough to change now
Feerum
From my side we could merge it immediately.
Feerum
Update: Rule changed is merged into the RC and in effect immediately!
Please sign in to reply.

New reply