It would be easier to create consistency in highly spaced jumps if we could use values greater than 2.0x. It would be nice to see this value changed to about 5.0x as that is about the limit for 1/3rd spacing and roughly the limit for slider velocity transition areas, and edge case 1/4th spaced jumps. 3.0x will account for most spacings currently not supported by distance snap.
forum
[added] Increase Distance Snap Limit to 3.0x
posted
Total Posts
25
Topic Starter
In most situations, such a high DS will make placing objects impossible. I think it's sufficiently an edge case that just using the top right indicator should be enough.
Topic Starter
5.0x is a round estimate to cover the edge cases for all scenarios for spacing. 2.0-3.0x is most useful to be given distance snap. It takes time to keep spacing consistent when creating symmetry. If you have grid snap off, then maintaining perfect spacing above 2.0x is a nightmare. I'm the type of mapper who likes to use nice solid numbers for my spacings and when it goes over 2.0x it takes more time to keep spacing at a consistent snap.
Increasing distance snap to 3.0x would be sufficient.
Increasing distance snap to 3.0x would be sufficient.
Bumping to 3.0 is reasonable.
is it possible to make it some kind of unlimited, like the video offset 0,0
Increase the slider velocity that you're using and you'll get the jumps that you want and it will be "consistent". Use slider velocity more as movement speed of the map. 1/2 note jumps can be placed pretty far apart at 2.0x with certain slider velocities. Really though, most of the time 1.0x distance snap should be used so it maintains a consistent flow of the map. Reducing that distance snap to like 0.8x for streams is reasonable.
You do know how inherited sections work as well, right? They can multiply the slider velocity to give it a speed up or slow down depending on how intense or relaxed the song gets.
There is no need for 3.0x, just look at slider velocity as the movement speed of the map and you'll understand better.
You do know how inherited sections work as well, right? They can multiply the slider velocity to give it a speed up or slow down depending on how intense or relaxed the song gets.
There is no need for 3.0x, just look at slider velocity as the movement speed of the map and you'll understand better.
Topic Starter
3.0x is a rounded number. There's little sense stopping the distance snap on a number that doesn't end in 0 or 5. 1.0-2.0-3.0 Also I've seen jumps that exceed 3.2 distance snap. Technically 3.5 would be more reasonable. Changing the slider velocity each time there is a large jump is silly.
<-Requires manually placement (useful to have distance snap)
...disable Distance Snap when you need higher spacing?
Use grid3 and the indicator. At that distance, slight spacing inconsistencies aren't really noticeable, so there isn't as much need for distance snap as there is for regular spacing.
As for the examples, the huge symmetry jump would be made via flipping or rotating, while the likes of the second example wouldn't benefit from distance snap at all. For shapes like that, achieving the right shape would require other methods, such as copying (1,3) to align (3) with (5). That, or doing it by eye.
I suppose that 3x would be reasonable, but at that point, it'd require grid3 and manual placement for tidiness. There wouldn't be much benefit from the change.
As for the examples, the huge symmetry jump would be made via flipping or rotating, while the likes of the second example wouldn't benefit from distance snap at all. For shapes like that, achieving the right shape would require other methods, such as copying (1,3) to align (3) with (5). That, or doing it by eye.
I suppose that 3x would be reasonable, but at that point, it'd require grid3 and manual placement for tidiness. There wouldn't be much benefit from the change.
Big jump patterns rarely if ever keep spacing for more than a few objects, and the productivity gains of Distance Snap only become apparent when you use it for lots of objects to create whole spaced patterns.
Topic Starter
I'm not saying I need it. I can create spacings the old fashion way, but it's very sloppy. A lot of other maps that use large distances have sloppy and inconsistent spacing for their jumps. You could see similar patterns throughout their maps, but the spacing between the objects can differ as much as 0.2! It would take less time to check whether such spacings would work as a slightly lower snap if I can pick the desired snap to test and it will automatically adjust. Otherwise it wastes way too much time to test different snaps for jumps while modding and i will generally tell the mapper to just lower the jump distance by some degree.
It doesn't need to go over 3.0x, but as long as people use values above the distance snap, they will be inclined to pick a random spot on the playing field to end the jump.
It doesn't need to go over 3.0x, but as long as people use values above the distance snap, they will be inclined to pick a random spot on the playing field to end the jump.
Ask this yourself:
How hard is this to change this limit?
After getting the answer of that question:
Does changing this have any bad consequences?
How hard is this to change this limit?
After getting the answer of that question:
Does changing this have any bad consequences?
....disable ds?
as said before, on such distance, some broken numbers don't really matter
as said before, on such distance, some broken numbers don't really matter
@TVO's second last post: Sigh.. my Map.
Anyway, I am bifid about the Request.
Anyway, I am bifid about the Request.
What I'd really want is to have 0.0x back.
See, guys. Jumps are defined by spacing changes that exceed normal distance snap. hence, changing DS for jumps is a silly thing to do in the first place, we are pretty much fine with what we have.
Of course Wishy is right, this would not hurt anyone and maybe it's a nice thing to have to get some patterns done faster, but I'd say this is pretty low priority.
Of course Wishy is right, this would not hurt anyone and maybe it's a nice thing to have to get some patterns done faster, but I'd say this is pretty low priority.
if anything, this (even tho this can also be done by just stacking a note and moving it on the timeline to where it's supposed to be)those wrote:
What I'd really want is to have 0.0x back.
That was even removed? I don't miss it now, but I'm not a grid-disabling Satanist. I guess that it's useful when objects absolutely have to be taken out of snap.those wrote:
What I'd really want is to have 0.0x back.
Having said that, local overlaps will stack anyway and sort of have to for the sake of readability. Anything that's aligned by less than a grid4 will autostack. I wouldn't worry about it too much.
Oh yeah, I agree about the amount of effort versus usefulness, although I see any amount of effort as not being worthwhile. Again, extreme spacing is ridiculously hard to align in the first place, so distance snap is kind of useless when there are more efficient ways to align jumps.
As for sloppy spacing, that will happen regardless of a higher snap being there. It's also easy enough to move circles around freely for the sake of making something rough to prove a point, but there's only so much anality that's needed when modding out spacing issues.
Hmm... Make it 5! It may not be necessary, but it's better to have more than less just in case. Peppy should make it so that the value of the DS can be changed in the options menu preferably from 2-5 so people who don't want the extra DS can just scroll the DS meter to the right to get that 2 DS instead of getting the extended value because it could be a pain to find and scroll the meter in the middle to find that 2 DS.
Irreversible wrote:
Hello everyone, I'd like to suggest to increase the possible amount of distance snap you can get with the tool being offered by the editor to 4.0x (more or less, or more)
I'll just put two pictures to explain what I want to suggest:
That's it already, have a nice day/afternoon/evening/whatever!
It'll make it easier to make larger structured jumps and give less excuse for people turning off DS entirely when they map which often turns out dumb.
I agree with this.
When mapping low-bpm(in my case 94bpm) even with 2.0 DS and 1.82 SV I have to disable DS if I want to make some cross-screen 1/1 spacing. SR still considers this as relatively easy, around 3* I think and now imagine what happens if I try to make a 1/2 jumppattern on 4.5* level that shouldn't be completely cluttered. This is the maximum I can get without further manipulation of SV for 1/2:
When mapping low-bpm(in my case 94bpm) even with 2.0 DS and 1.82 SV I have to disable DS if I want to make some cross-screen 1/1 spacing. SR still considers this as relatively easy, around 3* I think and now imagine what happens if I try to make a 1/2 jumppattern on 4.5* level that shouldn't be completely cluttered. This is the maximum I can get without further manipulation of SV for 1/2:
Issue(s) in this thread have been addressed by the following changes:
Please follow up in this thread if you believe more work needs to be done to fix the mentioned issues. If they have not yet been resolved, please provide any new details that may have arisen after this build.
- Increase the maximum distance snapping. (Damnae)
Please follow up in this thread if you believe more work needs to be done to fix the mentioned issues. If they have not yet been resolved, please provide any new details that may have arisen after this build.
Done 
Wishy wrote:
Ask this yourself:
How hard is this to change this limit?
After getting the answer of that question:
Does changing this have any bad consequences?
OMG
AWESOME!
AWESOME!