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

[Proposal] Not all diffs have to have the same timing.

posted
Total Posts
14
Napoca
277 posts
Joined September 2018
Topic Starter
Napoca
Under the Rules section for Timing in the Ranking Criteria:
Uninherited timing points must be the same in every difficulty of a beatmapset. Each point must have the same BPM and offset in each difficulty.
I think that this rule for Timing is a bit restrictive for songs that are multi-bpm and need lower diffs.
Depending on the song chosen, sliders may need to go over timing points which make it unsnapped without experimenting with the SV (personally it feels more like a hack than a solution). And if changes are made to one of these sliders, it automatically unsnaps, which is very annoying and difficult to get back to normal with the same SV.

I propose changing the rule to the following:
Uninherited timing points must be the same for all difficulties of a beatmapset, with the same BPMs and offsets. The only exception would be if the mapper shows that sliders for different difficulties would go over timing points, in which case the different difficulty could have separate timing.

I'm sure it can be worded better, but the idea at least gets across with what I have written.
Dialect
1,535 posts
Joined May 2018
Dialect
ehhh i dunno.. i sort my maps by bpm and this would cause quite a stir
Napoca
277 posts
Joined September 2018
Topic Starter
Napoca
The main reason I brought this up is because of classical music timing.
Songs by bands like Apocalyptica would unlikely need to use this exception if it gets implemented, and timing for their songs also is more consistent overall.
With classical pieces the timing is already a mess so I don't think it would change much when sorting by bpm if at all.
clayton
1,928 posts
Joined November 2013
clayton
hmm... I see how it can be annoying, but I feel like it's more an issue with the editor than RC. offsets and BPMs of timing points semantically should be the same for any map of the same audio file. it just sucks that dealing with sliders in particular for this case is a pain.

I'll take a look at snapping sliderends to the timing section they belong in for lazer, if that's not already a thing
Dialect
1,535 posts
Joined May 2018
Dialect

Napoca wrote:

The main reason I brought this up is because of classical music timing.
Songs by bands like Apocalyptica would unlikely need to use this exception if it gets implemented, and timing for their songs also is more consistent overall.
With classical pieces the timing is already a mess so I don't think it would change much when sorting by bpm if at all.
true but i personally wouldn't really get it. i feel like there should be an exception for classical/variable bpm songs to not follow spread rules. i don't think a newer player would be able to grasp a classical song if timing points are all over the place. so i'd rather have it not follow spread rules than for it to have different timing points.
Napoca
277 posts
Joined September 2018
Topic Starter
Napoca

Li Syaoran wrote:

i don't think a newer player would be able to grasp a classical song if timing points are all over the place. so i'd rather have it not follow spread rules than for it to have different timing points.
Depending on the piece chosen it could work, and I feel like asking to be exempt from spread rules is a bit more than asking to be exempt from a timing rule. I guess it could be a possibility.
Dialect
1,535 posts
Joined May 2018
Dialect

Napoca wrote:

Li Syaoran wrote:

i don't think a newer player would be able to grasp a classical song if timing points are all over the place. so i'd rather have it not follow spread rules than for it to have different timing points.
Depending on the piece chosen it could work, and I feel like asking to be exempt from spread rules is a bit more than asking to be exempt from a timing rule. I guess it could be a possibility.
imo from a players perspective variable bpm songs are harder to grasp. if there's a sudden timing change from 175 bpm to 170 bpm, the player would have to click a bit later, and that could cause misreads. this is a bigger problem with easier diffs in variable bpm songs. as i said, newer players are new to the game, so they should play the map on a perfect metronome. BUT variable bpm songs aren't on a perfect metronome, and if they were, they'd be offbeat and i honestly think that's a worse situation than having it being exempt from spread rules.

the problem is, what would be classified as a variable bpm song?, this song is technically variable bpm, BUT the problem is is that if i were to map this song myself, (well i did but who cares?) i could map an easy/normal diff with no problem. this song, on the other hand, is variable bpm, and if i were to map an easy diff of this, i'd have a really hard time. now this is an unfair comparison, as i'm comparing a kids anime opening to apocalyptica, but imo i think we need to find a way to have variable bpm songs' (like hall of the mountain king, NOT clear) easier diffs easy to play, and i don't think it'd be good to have it be mistimed
Napoca
277 posts
Joined September 2018
Topic Starter
Napoca
They wouldn't be mistimed however, as it would just be different timing for sliders. The offsets for all the objects would still be the same for both when they're clicked and released. And for songs that have small changes like 175 to 170 or just a relatively small change in bpm wouldn't really pose a problem for easier diffs as slider-leniency can be used and they have lower overall difficulties.
IOException
485 posts
Joined May 2013
IOException
please dont map classical songs with wildly varying timing in a rhythm game
Last edited by IOException , edited 1 time in total.
Napoca
277 posts
Joined September 2018
Topic Starter
Napoca

IOException wrote:

please dont map classical songs with wildly varying timing in a rhythm game
too late lol
IOException
485 posts
Joined May 2013
IOException
if you're going to have a red line for each note might as well have a green line for each slider. i don't think it's worth it to make allowances in the ranking criteria around the timing rule
Last edited by IOException , edited 1 time in total.
Napoca
277 posts
Joined September 2018
Topic Starter
Napoca
I'm kind of thinking with GD's however, because a lot of people wouldn't even want to deal with the SV problem, so if I make changes to the timing points for their diff then its easier to get GD's.
-Aku
268 posts
Joined May 2018
-Aku
just fix slidertail snapping for lazer and everyone's lives will be easier

(in a hundred years but still)
Last edited by -Aku , edited 2 times in total.
pishifat
osu! Paragon
3,812 posts
Joined August 2013
pishifat
working around these messy sv/sliderlength sliders on low diffs is more reasonable than changing timing to fit weird rhythms. timing should be consistent because it's a factor of the song, not the way it's mapped. timing being "easier" to adjust than sv/sliderlength shouldn't be a factor

if you're in a situation where simplification can help the a lower diff, it [hopefully] can be applied to upper diffs without sounding incorrect. if it sounds incorrect in upper diffs, it probably shouldn't be done in lower diffs anyway
Please sign in to reply.

New reply

0
1 / 14