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

[Proposal] Spread requirements for harder maps

posted
Total Posts
7
sytho
1,128 posts
Joined March 2014
Topic Starter
sytho
As you already know, songs that are above 3:30 dont require a normal, and so on. This is so the mapper doesn't have to make many diffs because it's time consuming and the mapper don't get tortured. However, if you got an 8 star or something that's around that 3 min mark, you still have to make a 7*, 6*, 5*, 4*, or even 3* to 2 stars if your map is shorter than 3 mins.

There should be some leniency for harder maps because it defeats the purpose of not having to make diffs. Lets say that maps above 7 or 8 stars that are 3:30 only need 1 diff below that spread
Last edited by sytho , edited 2 times in total.
Serizawa Haruki
1,696 posts
Joined June 2015
Serizawa Haruki
The current spread requirements are already very lenient in terms of map length as lots of full version songs allow you to skip Normal or even Hard. Map difficulty should not be a reason not to map lower diffs because that defeats the purpose of having a spread altogether. Mappers would take advantage of it and just make 7-8* maps so they can skip all the lower diffs. But for the vast majority of players this is unfair because such difficulties are way above their skill level which means they can't play it reasonably. Even if you add 1 lower diff (I'm not sure whether that implies a lower Extra or something else), it would cut out a large portion of the playerbase so I don't see this as a beneficial change.
LowAccuracySS
605 posts
Joined October 2015
LowAccuracySS
-1

just because stuff has been made more lenient in the past doesn't mean we should make it more lenient now for something as arbitrary as SR. huge slippery slope
clayton
1,928 posts
Joined November 2013
clayton
i dont think this is a good way to make an exception, it's not like having difficult maps solves the problem of not having the earlier diffs

that being said I think spread requirements in general are a dated way of ensuring proper progression and giving newbies something to play. these things shouldn't come at the expense of effort from people who probably don't care at all (mappers making very difficult maps). I wonder if there's something better we could do
TheKingHenry
1,665 posts
Joined October 2014
TheKingHenry

Serizawa Haruki wrote:

Map difficulty should not be a reason not to map lower diffs because that defeats the purpose of having a spread altogether. Mappers would take advantage of it and just make 7-8* maps so they can skip all the lower diffs.

yea this.

and kind of related, on what basis would difficulty in this kind of rule be judged anyways? SR has been deemed multiple times relatively subpar accuracy-wise, despite the continuous work on it. Arbitrary difficulty approximation does not necessarily give too much light on what kind of difficulty a map has in the context of what kind of spread it would usually require, which is - or should - be the essence of "difficulty" when discussing spreads like this topic seemingly does.
abraker
Global Moderator
8,327 posts
Joined July 2014
abraker
Maybe make a poll asking how much time mappers spend mapping a minute of each diff Easy/Normal/Hard/Insane/Extra/etc to get a sense of whether the current requirements are properly balanced. Currently there is no convincing argument supporting even more relaxed spread requirements. Even if star rating is erratic, I think it can average out with respect to how mappers assign difficulties to their maps.
Last edited by abraker , edited 3 times in total.
sytho
1,128 posts
Joined March 2014
Topic Starter
sytho
end of discussion
would thought this would be a better idea for longer maps
Please sign in to reply.

New reply

0
1 / 7