forum
Proposal to remove requirement for a Normal if a song is sufficiently complex
posted
Total Posts
33
Agree. Songs that support low diffs should have low diffs, and songs that are sufficiently complex where making a low diff is actually hard should be exempt.
there might be a problem of song complexity being subjective (like, there exist people who say 15 red lines is complex timing)
but yeah we need this, id even say starting from insane would be fine enough - one of examples that comes to mind are high bpm deathstream songs, those are hard to make low diff spread work in general
but yeah we need this, id even say starting from insane would be fine enough - one of examples that comes to mind are high bpm deathstream songs, those are hard to make low diff spread work in general
completely agree with this, whether or not it is applicable to certain songs is up to the bns to decide, as with all other guidelines. if a bn makes wrong judgement, as usual, there can be a problem stamp or equivalent veto proposed.
sabaku de is a good example of where this could be applied in practice beatmapsets/1360892#osu/2815973
the solo is basically unmappable in a normal diff and the only reason the spread was able to get ranked was by mapping the intro on the top diff to get it over 3:30 drain
the solo is basically unmappable in a normal diff and the only reason the spread was able to get ranked was by mapping the intro on the top diff to get it over 3:30 drain
since this is my screenshot (lol) ofc i agree
will be left up to BNs to decide what is and isn't "complex" and even in grey area scenarios any possible negative impacts are hugely outweighed by the positives
also should consider the "lowest necessary diff" be left up to BNs as well, im afraid hards could be just as tricky to make a difficulty out of for songs like these (similar to what's mentioned here)
here's my rewritten proposal:
will be left up to BNs to decide what is and isn't "complex" and even in grey area scenarios any possible negative impacts are hugely outweighed by the positives
also should consider the "lowest necessary diff" be left up to BNs as well, im afraid hards could be just as tricky to make a difficulty out of for songs like these (similar to what's mentioned here)
here's my rewritten proposal:
- All game modes within a beatmap must form a spread starting from the lowest difficulty level dictated by the song's drain time. For difficulties above the lowest required difficulty level, the spread cannot skip any difficulty levels and there cannot be any drastically large difficulty gaps between any two difficulties. For songs that are inherently complex (i. e. contain frequent timing signature changes or constantly employ uncommon rhythms), this rule does not apply.
- For songs that are inherently complex (i. e. contain frequent timing signature changes or constantly employ uncommon rhythms), spread may start from an Insane.
i think hard diff is still doable on most of these complex songs. i would suggest starting from hard diff and going up as there are very few songs that truly cannot be simplified to an acceptable hard diff level. even stuff like sputnik the hard isnt that detached from the song that it not existing would be better. plus, the most played diffs tend to be light insanes so getting rid of those potentially has a worse impact than normals would.
that would work too, id just personally prefer to leave judgement to BNs on a case-by-case basis even if the use case for a min insane would be rare
would like to hear more opinions on this specifically
would like to hear more opinions on this specifically
if its kept to normals i think i wouldn't be opposed to this
some normals get really stupid like beatmapsets/1403806#osu/2910203 where i just felt like a normal doesnt even make sense to have
i mean technically you could make a normal for any complex song if you ignored enough of it but that would be pretty bad right? in the interest of not doing that and ending up with a normal that follows nothing and feels arbitrary i think this could be good
some normals get really stupid like beatmapsets/1403806#osu/2910203 where i just felt like a normal doesnt even make sense to have
i mean technically you could make a normal for any complex song if you ignored enough of it but that would be pretty bad right? in the interest of not doing that and ending up with a normal that follows nothing and feels arbitrary i think this could be good
I completely agree with this. I find mapping normals for variable BPM songs almost impossible. It's also the main thing stopping me from finishing my one mapset, as the song has a new red line every measure
+1
should define complex a little more objectively but i think its a good suggestion
should define complex a little more objectively but i think its a good suggestion
agree w/wafer, needs a more concrete definition of "complex" baked in before this should move forward - if it did i could get behind it
There is no target audience for these difficultiesThis is simply not true, new players can enjoy playing these maps even if they can't follow the rhythms perfectly or play the map well. If someone likes the song this already gives them a reason to play it. Also all the higher skilled players who play low diffs with mods typically enjoy more complex rhythms as it gives them a bit more of a challenge, so there's definitely a target audience for it.
Creating a coherent experience is exceptionally difficultFrom a mapping perspective, I don't really think this is a valid concern as all the examples mentioned have either been mapped as Normals or could easily be mapped. Of course songs with complex rhythms/timing are much more difficult to make low diffs for than "regular" songs but any experienced mapper should be able to pull it off (and inexperienced mappers would probably not manage to map higher diffs for these songs either). In order to create a coherent experience, it's necessary to understand the concept of rhythm simplification very well and to know how to choose rhythms that are as intuitive as possible. A lack of experience in this area is probably the main obstacle for mappers but the logical solution is to either practice more and ask for advice or get someone else to make a guest difficulty.
And from a playing perspective, I think it just needs to be accepted that some maps are harder than others despite being on the same difficulty level. This is true regardless of complex rhythm or timing. For example, swing beat songs are generally more difficult than songs with simple 1/2 rhythms, but that's a weak reason not to have a Normal for such songs.
The reason I supported this is because there are certain genres of music that consist entirely of strong sounds with no break for the listener. I'm not talking about popular music, but the kinds of compositions that no one maps.
Looking at SPUTNIK-3 and Biomes (Cut Ver.), I think these low diffs are cool and work because of the dynamic nature of the composition (tension and release, etc.). And having a Normal difficulty allows players to enjoy these sets when they otherwise wouldn't be able to.
I don't have any good examples for the music I'm talking about since I don't listen to it myself, and I'm unsure if mappers will start mapping this kind of music after this change (or if BNs would be willing to nominate them).
TL;DR: Experienced mappers can and should bring value to their sets with low diffs. I wanted to allow mappers to experiment with more advanced compositions that tend to be uncomfortable to listen to (aka not popular music), but the kinds of mappers that are capable of mapping this kind of music may also be able to create low diffs for them.
Looking at SPUTNIK-3 and Biomes (Cut Ver.), I think these low diffs are cool and work because of the dynamic nature of the composition (tension and release, etc.). And having a Normal difficulty allows players to enjoy these sets when they otherwise wouldn't be able to.
I don't have any good examples for the music I'm talking about since I don't listen to it myself, and I'm unsure if mappers will start mapping this kind of music after this change (or if BNs would be willing to nominate them).
TL;DR: Experienced mappers can and should bring value to their sets with low diffs. I wanted to allow mappers to experiment with more advanced compositions that tend to be uncomfortable to listen to (aka not popular music), but the kinds of mappers that are capable of mapping this kind of music may also be able to create low diffs for them.
please understand the argument isn't whether or not mappers can make low diffs for these songs, it's whether or not they should be forced. we could sit here all day long debating whether or not the sputnik normal is a valuable addition to ranked, but i see no reason not to relax requirements for such a niche subset of maps
the arguments presented against spread removal in the related thread do not apply here
arguments near the level of that thread (such as the possibility of a huge change in what the ranked section could look like and/or a noticeable deficit of low diffs) would be the ones most relevant, since what we're talking about here is forcing volunteers to go through extra hoops just to rank a map when they're already inherently jumping through many just by mapping a complex song
just because there's "technically an audience" or "you could make them with enough experience" doesn't mean they should be mandatory
the arguments presented against spread removal in the related thread do not apply here
arguments near the level of that thread (such as the possibility of a huge change in what the ranked section could look like and/or a noticeable deficit of low diffs) would be the ones most relevant, since what we're talking about here is forcing volunteers to go through extra hoops just to rank a map when they're already inherently jumping through many just by mapping a complex song
just because there's "technically an audience" or "you could make them with enough experience" doesn't mean they should be mandatory
The points brought up look valid to me too, even though I'm usually an advocate for making lower diffs.
Some songs are just way too complex to make a Normal out of them, unless you decide to do dumb rhythms which would disregard the song (but then, what are you even mapping?).
I'd still argue it depends on the mapper's skills, though. Even on complex rhythms, good mappers can make something out of it that isn't completely unrelated to the song and still playable/enjoyable.
Not sure how to define the word "complex". Perhaps if the main rhythm is shorter than, say, 4 measures for more than 15 seconds? This wording implies that the main rhythm keeps changing "too fast" (gives less than 4 measures to adjust your focus) for "too long" (it prolongs for more than 15 secs). In such a case you'd be obliged to keep mapping different rhythms, rhythms which may easily overlap in ways that would result in too many beats used for a Normal.
I bet pretty much everyone (or at least BNs) can hear when the main rhythm would require too many objects. (right? RIGHT?)
Regardless, this applies to Normal diffs, not Hard diffs. Those diffs have already enough room to accommodate complex rhythms in intuitive ways imo.
Some songs are just way too complex to make a Normal out of them, unless you decide to do dumb rhythms which would disregard the song (but then, what are you even mapping?).
I'd still argue it depends on the mapper's skills, though. Even on complex rhythms, good mappers can make something out of it that isn't completely unrelated to the song and still playable/enjoyable.
Not sure how to define the word "complex". Perhaps if the main rhythm is shorter than, say, 4 measures for more than 15 seconds? This wording implies that the main rhythm keeps changing "too fast" (gives less than 4 measures to adjust your focus) for "too long" (it prolongs for more than 15 secs). In such a case you'd be obliged to keep mapping different rhythms, rhythms which may easily overlap in ways that would result in too many beats used for a Normal.
I bet pretty much everyone (or at least BNs) can hear when the main rhythm would require too many objects. (right? RIGHT?)
Regardless, this applies to Normal diffs, not Hard diffs. Those diffs have already enough room to accommodate complex rhythms in intuitive ways imo.
I agree that normal difficulties can be infeasible for some songs. I wouldn't be opposed to some allowances for there, but I think there should be some stipulations put in to avoid skirting the rules if possible.
Over everything else, the mapper should always at least attempt to map a Normal difficulty. Finish one, really. At that point they and BNs should be able to judge if the difficulty makes sense for ranked, or if it's not possible to make a decent Normal for the song. What should be avoided is "giving up" before trying to map a Normal.
Over everything else, the mapper should always at least attempt to map a Normal difficulty. Finish one, really. At that point they and BNs should be able to judge if the difficulty makes sense for ranked, or if it's not possible to make a decent Normal for the song. What should be avoided is "giving up" before trying to map a Normal.
I absolutely encourage the idea of not forcing people to make horrible normals. I just dunno what kind of precedence this will make in people trying to argue themselves out of a normal diff.
Until a somewhat solid threshold of complexity can be established, I am not sure if I can agree with this proposal.
Until a somewhat solid threshold of complexity can be established, I am not sure if I can agree with this proposal.
As the mapper myself, I can feel it. Songs that aren't suitable to map the Normal difficulty may be omitted, but this can be rigorously difficult as the staffs should take a look on case-by-case of songs which aren't suitable to map with Normal difficulty.
The clear repeat offender of complex beat is, you know, II-L.
The clear repeat offender of complex beat is, you know, II-L.
I'm agree with this. Also, there should be a clause about discussing it with nominators whether the Normal difficulty is utterly bad to even include with such a complex songs.Sylvarus wrote:
Over everything else, the mapper should always at least attempt to map a Normal difficulty. Finish one, really. At that point they and BNs should be able to judge if the difficulty makes sense for ranked, or if it's not possible to make a decent Normal for the song. What should be avoided is "giving up" before trying to map a Normal.