forum

[Rule Change] Marathon map length requirement

posted
Total Posts
167
show more
Wishy

Jenny wrote:

Grabbing and putting something to Wishy's post on page 3 here:

Wishy wrote:

Maybe make the total mapped time has to be over X to get the map ranked?

If you make something like "you must map at least 5 minutes" you could solve this. To make this clear with an example:

3:30 minutes long song. 3:30 + 3:30 = 7 minutes, therefore you can get it ranked with just two difficulties.
2:00 minutes long song. 2+2+2 = 6 minutes, meaning to get this mapset ranked you need at least three difficulties.

This should of course apply to each game mod, you can't just add osu!mania with standard.

Of course this kind of gets tricky with, for instance, a 4:30 minutes long song. You could get this ranked with a full insane diff and some normal which only plays for half the song or something but I don't know.

Just dropping the idea.

If we're going to stick to the whole length-for-approval thing (which is sad for songs like EX-Termination and alikes, really, but well...), I'd say set the bar to around 5 mins for one-diff sets, then raise it by 2-3 min or smth for each diff in the set in total or smth (-> 5 min mapping length for one-diff sets, 7/8 mins for two-diff etc.); I've got quite a few sons I'd love to map but wouldn't be able to pull of a whole interesting and nice to play spread for due to the songs being 3:30 to 5:50 minutes long, and I can't get them approved either at the current stand.
This sounds good.
Lust

Liiraye wrote:

Yet no one feel like addressing this. I'd love to hear what bats think of us mappers as well.
This argument is ridiculous. You are level designers for a video game. You aren't doing this for the enjoyment of yourself (well you might like mapping maps), but for the fun of the players. I think people are losing sight of having a ranked map is a privilege rather than something that is given (Hence why people congratulate you when you get a map ranked, because you put hard work and effort in to it). If you are unable to put in the work that is required for a spread like that, then be like me and not map one at all.
Wafu
I think we should make it 5 minutes. 5 minutes is enough long for approved beatmap and also there is not so a lot of 6+ minutes songs, while 5 minute songs are easier to find.
I think 5+ minutes is already overaverage song length so marathons should be approvable on 5 minutes.

Fully supporting this~
Topic Starter
karterfreak
Had to remove some posts that were attacking a post here. I'm not going to tolerate the thread turning into an argument. Either debate in a way that doesn't lead to you attacking the person or keep it to yourself.

Lust wrote:

Liiraye wrote:

Yet no one feel like addressing this. I'd love to hear what bats think of us mappers as well.
This argument is ridiculous. You are level designers for a video game. You aren't doing this for the enjoyment of yourself (well you might like mapping maps), but for the fun of the players. I think people are losing sight of having a ranked map is a privilege rather than something that is given (Hence why people congratulate you when you get a map ranked, because you put hard work and effort in to it). If you are unable to put in the work that is required for a spread like that, then be like me and not map one at all.
This is true, we are level designers for this game in all senses of the word. We must however take into consideration that we are very rarely seeing maps in the 5-6 minute mark being ranked right now, which indicates to me that we should try to open up some options for more songs of these lengths to be mapped. Some of the posts here have given good insight as to why lowering the criteria to 5 minutes would be beneficial and not harm beginning players as much as everyone is afraid of (and this is coming from an advocate of good spread in maps so that they can be beginner friendly).
Liiraye
So I don't get to defend myself when he says I don't work hard enough on my own maps, yet his comment is OK? :s

I might've gone a little overboard but I recon I did bring up valuable points to debate his post in general... Whatever.
[Luanny]
So, the only argument left against it is the "laziness"?
Oh also the "privilege" thing. Right

Laziness: If we (mappers) want to bring more variety (as in more songs from the 5~6 mins range) that's because absolutely are NOT lazy. We would just map short songs and Tv Sizes like most mappers do :D but we're not. Not everyone maps long songs like this and it's pretty obvious why. It takes time, creativity and effort to fulfill 5 minutes of music and 5 minutes of a song IS NOT SHORT. 5 minutes waiting for a bus is a short time but mapping a 5 minutes song or playing a long map is not so short. I mapped an almost 5 mins song once and man that was tiring. Way more tiring than making a simple 3 diffs set for a short song.

Go check what's ranked for this year and find many 2 mins (max) songs. So making two diffs (or 3 in some cases) for a tv size is NOT lazy but trying to approve good 5 mins maps IS lazy? Everyone knows that mapping low diffs is faster and way easier than spending a lot of creativity on high diffs (at least for most mappers), so anyone who makes a TV Size spread is mapping "less" than someone mapping a 5 mins song. Lets not forget this, please.

Privilege: Of course it is a privilege. Not an OMG I GOT A RANKED MAP!!!! kind of privilege since, cmon, anyone can get a ranked map nowadays just by having the average rankable quality with an average amount of mods and star priority and average spread. It's more like "make a rankable set and it's ranked" privilege tbh. Sure it takes time and effort but it's not even that hard to rank maps if you know how to make rankable stuff.
Why is an average set rankable and a GOOD 5 mins 1 diff set not? Why the average owns the privilege more than the different and good?
That makes no sense, both deserves to get ranked because BOTH needs effort to make it happen.
Ranking is not like getting a Nobel prize.

On a side note:
Marathons are even harder to rank, did you know? We need 3 BATs. Most people refuse to mod long songs, you can check many queues and there's this draintime limit rule or "no approval maps" rule. Maps like this (not talking about only 5 mins maps, but any marathon) hardly get mods.
It's not a privilege anymore, it's making those maps rare to find.
Limiting it to 6 minutes makes them even more rare.
We find more songs with 5 mins than 6 mins but no one wants to map them for rank because making 4 diffs for a 5 mins song is like mapping a 10 mins song (considering that mapping easy and normal doesn't take much time so 10 mins is more accurate than 20).
Even if it's still hard to get mods for those at least we will have MAPS for those, which we DON'T HAVE RIGHT NOW. It's like the first step.

Edit about mappers being level designers:

Just because we are level designers we must be restricted by what we can rank?
Again, doesn't make sense.
If we don't map 5 mins songs the community is losing more than the mappers, really. Mappers make levels without getting anything in return because they like to map. This game would be nothing without mappers. If mappers can't rank something, the community will have less to play.
That's the problem, we don't have many 5~6 mins maps and the community loses variety because of this
A mapper being sad because can't rank their map is one person. Players are many people.
People on this thread are not doing this just for their own pleasure, yknow.
Raging Bull
Not to mention that many rhythm music/TV sizes are having quite a good amount of GD since they also don't want to map a full mapset.
Rei Hakurei
i remember old marathons are 5 minutes... and changed onto 6 minutes... and ... ?
[Luanny]

Raging Bull wrote:

Not to mention that many rhythm music/TV sizes are having quite a good amount of GD since they also don't want to map a full mapset.
Yeah and many don't even bother to make an [Easy]
Wishy
Aaaand Luanny just explained why most good maps remain forever unranked. Tho your argument doesn't completely apply to this case, think about this:

3 minute long song with 10 different high level insanes, all highly original and fun to play, they can't get ranked because no diff spread. I think you are focusing on something way bigger than the time limit thing. You are talking about how mappers who actually do original stuff are required to do both good and bad maps (you can say whatever you want, easy and normals don't allow you to do anything because it's gotta be playable for people who play with their feet, hards are so-so, when you get to insanes you can actually do something interesting) and how mappers doing 3 average boring difficulties for a 1:10 long song get their map ranked while the other good ones never get it because they are forced to do a bad work to get it etc etc.
[Luanny]
But this is also on the length topic
If you could actually "measure" the effort it's unfair to judge if a map may be ranked or not with 1 diff just because of the length.

Mappers who make original stuff for 5 mins songs will never get their stuff ranked unless they are forced to make long ass boring diffs, that's what I meant.
I actually think almost nobody is making 5 mins maps because they KNOW they won't go anywhere with it.

This can be easily fixed by changing the approval time from 6 to 5 and then everyone is happy.
Wishy
I think what you propose is good yet it doesn't really solve anything since the same thing happening now with 5 minutes map will happen with 4 minutes maps, and the argument is gonna be exactly the same, 4 min long easy = epicly boring pointlessly long map.
Soaprman

Garven wrote:

I'm still thinking the spirit of the rule is to make sure that more map sets have a spread that is more accessible to all ranges of players, along with bringing the Approval category back to it's original intent - to highlight special/gimmicky maps that otherwise don't fit the standard mold - not just a single Difficulty for a song. After a quick glace at the ranking criteria, it seems the only mention about the approval category is the length - did the gimmick inclusion change on me while I wasn't looking?
I don't believe it was ever explicitly mentioned in the rules. Believe me, I've tried to get it in there; I have a mapset that's been waiting for almost three years for the day to come. Unfortunately, all my posts on the matter either fell into a black hole or got nothing back but vague non-answers so I basically quit trying.

As for the matter at hand, I guess all I really have to say is that anything that lessens the overlap between good maps and unrankable maps is a thing that should be made to happen. And most of that overlap is in the form of maps that can't be ranked because of the map length rule.
[Luanny]

Wishy wrote:

I think what you propose is good yet it doesn't really solve anything since the same thing happening now with 5 minutes map will happen with 4 minutes maps, and the argument is gonna be exactly the same, 4 min long easy = epicly boring pointlessly long map.
That would be something for another topic allowing not so long low diffs
BUT atm for the >marathon< case it's a good solution and easier to happen than allowing low diffs to have like half of the length
Alarido
No matter the world tells me, I'll never make half-song diffs (i.e.: shorter Easys/Normals that have their length like 1/2~2/3 of the Hard/Insane diffs in the same mapset...like that Not Afraid map I mentioned earlier) It goes against my personal principles and values of right and wrong.
I'll never trade my values for anything world offers to me, no matter how wild pressure C.'. D.'. does on me.
[Luanny]
so what? o_o
HanzeR
If you want to see how badly the current approval rules are hurting mapping in osu, just take a look at the top maps from the best of 2012 voting

https://osu.ppy.sh/wiki/History_of_osu!/Best_of_2012

Half (5/10) of the maps in the top 10 of 2012 were approval sets, yet none would have been ranked under the current approval rules. Even going in to 2014 they remain some of the most memorable and influential maps in osu! history.

Other fun fact: In 2013 there were more beatmaps submitted to the BSS than the previous 5 years of osu! combined, yet in 2012 there were about twice as many osu!standard maps ranked under the approved category than there were in 2013.
Laurier
Too short in 6 min.I feel that marathon is over 10 minutes .
app rule needs more long time.
mapping(E N H I )/modding of 6 min is easy.
keep the quality of course.
and everyone can choose long song or short song.
Saturnalize

Laurier wrote:

mapping(E N H I )/modding of 6 min is easy.
http://osu.ppy.sh/s/95563

Anyway

Are we talking about marathon length requirement or approval?

If both are same then this thing is getting hopeless time by time.

As what I believe is Approval =/= Marathon
Topic Starter
karterfreak

Loli Cjj wrote:

Laurier wrote:

mapping(E N H I )/modding of 6 min is easy.
http://osu.ppy.sh/s/95563

Anyway

Are we talking about marathon length requirement or approval?

If both are same then this thing is getting hopeless time by time.

As what I believe is Approval =/= Marathon
Right now the discussion is explicitly about Marathon... also like it or not, Approval and Marathon under current rules for it are pretty much the same. As mentioned that is for a different topic though.
Luvdic
Im sorry, I dont see why we should consider 5 min long map as a marathon, imo, marathon maps should be at the very least 8 mins, in any case, it should be increased from the current 6 min.

In any case, I think that what we should be discussing about is to ask for leniency in the diff spread for mapsets that are over 3 mins long, instead of asking to reduce the requirement for a map to be considered as marathon.

Something that I also believe is that each mapset should have at least 2 diffs, the diff on which it was intended to be played as (aka the hardest diff) and an easier one, and as for the leniency thing, I think that if the map is already over 4 mins long and is a very hard insane, imo, just having an easier diff in the hard category should be enough, instead of asking the mapper to add an easy or normal diff for a full spread.
Wishy

HanzeR wrote:

If you want to see how badly the current approval rules are hurting mapping in osu, just take a look at the top maps from the best of 2012 voting

https://osu.ppy.sh/wiki/History_of_osu!/Best_of_2012

Half (5/10) of the maps in the top 10 of 2012 were approval sets, yet none would have been ranked under the current approval rules. Even going in to 2014 they remain some of the most memorable and influential maps in osu! history.

Other fun fact: In 2013 there were more beatmaps submitted to the BSS than the previous 5 years of osu! combined, yet in 2012 there were about twice as many osu!standard maps ranked under the approved category than there were in 2013.
That's why unranked maps are the best, well they always were but now it is more noticeable.
HanzeR
Is there any reason why total score cant be used as a metric for approval, like it was before? Sure, total score has very little relevance to actual rankings anymore, however having a higher total score generally means that there are more objects in the map, and more objects means it takes more time to place every object.

I think total score is more than accurate enough as a measurement of the time and effort it takes to map a song. I can pretty much guarantee that a 30,000,000 score complex insane map takes just as much, if not more time to map than mapping 4 diffs for your generic TV anime opening (or more often than not, mapping 1 diff and finding other people to do the rest of the work for you). Not to mention the much much much more laborious modding and ranking process that comes with mapping harder/longer maps. People might abuse this system by artificially increasing score (overmapping, tick rates etc.) but this can be modded out on a case by case basis just like it was done before the marathon rule was added.
Kodora
t/4936

Just leaving it here. Actual reason why approval category exist.
Garven
Kodora: I don't see the correlation. That was when maps couldn't get ranked period. They had no option. Now they do: they can get ranked or they can get approved and get the scoreboard.

Score is a poor way to measure eligibility for approval. Maybe you weren't involved much when we had to deal with that before, Hanzer, but it led to bad design decisions because of the score requirements to avoid making a hybrid approval/rank set.
Soaprman
Ah, the glory days when lowering the tick rate to fall from approval into ranked was common enough that a mention was actually written into the ranking criteria not to do it.
quaternary
I really like that total length rule.

Some random drain time counts from newly ranked/app maps:
TV Sizes - (85 sec * 4 diffs = 328 sec) (88 sec * 4 diffs = 352 sec) (86 sec * 3 diffs = 258 sec)
Standard - (191 sec * 4 diffs = 764 sec) (120 sec * 4 diffs = 480 sec) (120 sec * 9 diffs! = 1080 sec)
Approved - (421 sec * 1 diff = 421 sec) (351 sec * 2 diffs = 702 sec) (380 sec * 1 diff = 380 sec)

Standard length songs (~2 or 3 minutes) seem to have the most mapping done for them, except for 2 diff marathons. I kind of like that. How about 350 seconds to be considered?

Anyway, opinions.

Songs over 5 minutes could be a one diff. Songs over 4 minutes a two diff. Songs over 3 minutes cannot be approved, must be 3 diffs. Songs over 1 minute must have 4+ diffs. Modes other than the "main" chosen mode can have half this requirement, rounded up.
HTTkeion
this is really confusing :cry:
neonat
A Hard or above difficult mapset for songs above 4mins? Making a difficulty so simple for long songs might not be too entertaining, but if there are a few difficulties, starting from Hard, I think it might be better.
Raging Bull

Soaprman wrote:

Ah, the glory days when lowering the tick rate to fall from approval into ranked was common enough that a mention was actually written into the ranking criteria not to do it.
I always wanted to do that with my first map.
Alarido

neonat wrote:

A Hard or above difficult mapset for songs above 4mins? Making a difficulty so simple for long songs might not be too entertaining, but if there are a few difficulties, starting from Hard, I think it might be better.
For applying this, these Hards should be Singletappable with a regular mouse; otherwise, a Normal diff must be provided. Because the most of us aim entertainment and fun, not (necessarily) challenge and lustful proudness on human strength.
Kodora

Garven wrote:

it led to bad design decisions because of the score requirements to avoid making a hybrid approval/rank set.
we can simply made guidelines/rules against that.

In fact using drain time as onliest approval metric isn't really stopped that: removing all breaks, for example,to achieve approve-able drain time isn't really better design choise.

Alarido wrote:

For applying this, these Hards should be Singletappable with a regular mouse; otherwise, a Normal diff must be provided.
what o_o
Garven
That never works, Kodora. Everyone loves pushing the envelope to the furthest possible to the point where the guideline is wasted breath. I still don't think score is a good metric regardless. Having the length is a nice and simple metric that works well.
lolcubes
To be honest, we could just make a compromise.

<old suggestions>
SPOILER
For example:

Below 4 minutes, you need a full set (includes Easy though).
Between 4 and 5 minutes, Easy is not required, but a normal is.
Above 5 minutes only Hard and Insane are required (or a Hard and another difficulty which goes either way), because playing normals for 5 minutes is not challenging for almost anyone. It gets tedious (same with Easy for 4+ mins).
Above 6 minutes, we leave it as it is.

This way we still go towards somewhere and it's not too sudden.

Editing this for clarity.
What I suggest:

0~4 minutes : ENHI required (or ENH depending on the song ofc)
4~5 minutes: NHI required (or NH)
5~6 minutes: HI required (if insane is really not appripriate NH required)
6+ minutes: anything (preferably a H or an I)

Star ratings for Normals don't have to be around 3 for NHI spread, but the normal diff needs to feel like a normal diff. Star ratings blow anyway.

Also this is just the minimum required. People can still map a full set for a 5 or 6 minute songs if they want to.
Mismagius

lolcubes wrote:

To be honest, we could just make a compromise.

For example:

Below 4 minutes, you need a full set (includes Easy though).
Between 4 and 5 minutes, Easy is not required, but a normal is.
Above 5 minutes only Hard and Insane are required (or a Hard and another difficulty which goes either way), because playing normals for 5 minutes is not challenging for almost anyone. It gets tedious (same with Easy for 4+ mins).
Above 6 minutes, we leave it as it is.

This way we still go towards somewhere and it's not too sudden.
We're using draining time here, right?
In that case, I agree completely with this.
Tidek
I thought that easy isnt necessary when normal has around 3,0 star difficulty, lol.
Ekaru

Kodora wrote:

http://osu.ppy.sh/forum/t/4936

Just leaving it here. Actual reason why approval category exist.
Ah, I remember that! That was when I was just a newbie. I was also there for the hilarious day of 1.18x Flashlight.

Which was like 5.5 years ago. Things are a lot different now so that's not really worth mentioning.
Alarido

lolcubes wrote:

To be honest, we could just make a compromise.

For example:

Below 4 minutes, you need a full set (includes Easy though).
Between 4 and 5 minutes, Easy is not required, but a normal is.
Above 5 minutes only Hard and Insane are required (or a Hard and another difficulty which goes either way), because playing normals for 5 minutes is not challenging for almost anyone. It gets tedious (same with Easy for 4+ mins).
Above 6 minutes, we leave it as it is.

This way we still go towards somewhere and it's not too sudden.
Fully agree :D as a minimum required for Ranking since people ask me for map the Hard GD for +5 min songs (:
DakeDekaane

Blue Dragon wrote:

lolcubes wrote:

To be honest, we could just make a compromise.

For example:

Below 4 minutes, you need a full set (includes Easy though).
Between 4 and 5 minutes, Easy is not required, but a normal is.
Above 5 minutes only Hard and Insane are required (or a Hard and another difficulty which goes either way), because playing normals for 5 minutes is not challenging for almost anyone. It gets tedious (same with Easy for 4+ mins).
Above 6 minutes, we leave it as it is.

This way we still go towards somewhere and it's not too sudden.
We're using draining time here, right?
In that case, I agree completely with this.
I agree on this too, as we'll be able to see better spreads in <4 min song, so yeah.

But in the bolded part maybe the Normal we could increase the star rating limit from 3.0 stars or lower to 3.5 stars or lower? (or no limit at all?). This would be better for some songs where the 3 stars Normal falls between the Easy and Normal difficulty, because this implies to simplify a lot, which can hurt the spread (this is more in mapper side but well).
lolcubes
Yes, no star limit, just a difficulty that feels and plays like a normal.
As I said, no new player will have the patience to click slow beats for 5 minutes. Well maybe some will, but Easy is there for the new players to learn the game. Not to play the game (well, thats the general idea, but some people enjoy playing Easy lol).
(it's still possible to include easy if the mapper wants it, in my idea at least)

Tidek wrote:

I thought that easy isnt necessary when normal has around 3,0 star difficulty, lol.
It's not currently. But my version of the rule would change that. The reason is people actually map easier normals as much as possible which creates a gap between a normal and a hard which is hard to close in. I'd call it "cheesing the difficulty" just to make the mapset rankable.
This way you really have no reason to do that and you can just map quality normals like you're normally supposed to.
show more
Please sign in to reply.

New reply