Complete leniency would be quite silly imo. Supporting for the partial allowance in custom diff name though.
Score is connected with star as I know,If I get it right,New star system will make whole osu a mess.Blue Dragon wrote:
What we're trying to set here isn't a perfect situation: it's just so we get things with a standard while the new star system doesn't come out. Right now we're having a few maps unranked because of this and other maps get ranked with no problem and have the exact same issues. Double standards are unacceptable and we should get rid of them.
Why should we allow such a inaccurate difficulty name? We should try to find a better solution instead this one. In the best case this never should have exist but the mapper of this difficulty should be pointed out of the issue that the Difficulty is too hard and complicated for the Normal Difficulty category.lolcubes wrote:
I mean, with the current unclear proposal, what can stop me from naming my Insane "Normal+"? It's really stupid and obvious why it shouldn't be allowed, but the current rule would allow it haha.
+1[CSGA]Ar3sgice wrote:
Tom said he was working to add TP in star rating. If it gets added, diff names wouldn't be a problem anymore.
Nope. It got finalized, but with completely different wording.Stefan wrote:
Oh well this topic again, okay: Since the amount of Non-Insane Difficulties with no clear Difficulty names increases this rule has been set. And with very good reason, because this is decided since two years ago. Many just ignored that.
I thought this was okay? @_@_Gezo_ wrote:
A small question: Is mixing up the guestmapper's name and the difficulty name allowed under current conditions ? As in, puns or other neat naming.
for example, let a mapper called Noru-Da and he wants to make an hard. is Noru-Dhard allowed ? It gives hard, and his name. or, I make a Crazy diff (which could be allowed as Crazy is clear enough), and I call it CraZyoda. Is it ok ?
I already thought about this idea but then people don't want that Insane and Expert Difficulties should be treated specially.Sieg wrote:
Why not only to Insane+(Extras)? It would make more sense imo.
That seems to be the most logical and the best solution.SapphireGhost wrote:
Alright, looking over the thread, here is another possible compromise to address the "why only Insane" point:A difficulty's name must indicate its level of difficulty, with the exception of the mapper's hardest difficulty. Guest difficulties must be labelled with the mapper's name and their level of difficulty. Marathon maps with a single difficulty are allowed free naming.
To address _Gezo_'s question, combining a mapper and difficulty's name is currently allowed and still will be under the new proposed rules.
Don't agree with this as much, I think it should be kept as it is now, so the mapper can choose between leaving it in the diff name or in the map description. Rest is perfect to me.SapphireGhost wrote:
Guest difficulties must be labelled with the mapper's name and their level of difficulty.
whoops..sorry XDSapphireGhost wrote:
Difficulty spread naming such as "Blue / Red / White" is still unacceptable
Case 1. [o0o] [o1o] [o2o] [o3o] <- one of my favourite diffname sets!
Case 2. [Easy] [Easy^2] [Easy^3] [Easy^4] <- Obvious enough and nice!
Case 3. [orz] [boring] [relaxing] [xxx](e.g. DaRRi MIx / Kirby Mix / Remix / 0108 Style / NTR(rin) / Skystar / ... )
I honestly find orz unfitting compared to the rest of the Spread. But.. it's a single case. However as long the Name spread makes sense and fits together - I find it's a extreme mess if you decide to call your Difficulties as Easy > Medium > Hyper > Crazy because it's a mix of various Name sets which looks extremly stupid and nonsense - the examples which 384059043 has named can be used well.384059043 wrote:
Case 3. [orz] [boring] [relaxing] [xxx](e.g. DaRRi MIx / Kirby Mix / Remix / 0108 Style / NTR(rin) / Skystar / ... )
It's an issue by the Star Rating that things like these happen. In the normal case, the own Insane/Expert Difficulty would be set as the last Difficulty by the creator to shown it as the toughest challenge. This of course doesn't goes to every Mapset but I guess you understand what I want to say.DakeDekaane wrote:
And about restricting the custom name to the mapper is silly imo, as Easy>A's Normal>Hard>B's Insane>Custom Name>C's Extra, just looks inconsistent and unprofessional in some way. Either you allow custom for guests, or none at all.
The mapper appears! Good song choice and map though.captin1 wrote:
whoops..sorry XDSapphireGhost wrote:
Difficulty spread naming such as "Blue / Red / White" is still unacceptable
Is this an artistic statement or might I be missing something?those wrote:
Isn't that just the same as
?
Can we clarify this statement a bit? "can be understood by the player" is quite ambiguous.SapphireGhost wrote:
Mapsets with a complete set of custom difficulty names that can be understood by the player are also acceptable.
Doesn't this also allow mapsets such as Easy / Normal / Hard / Rin / RLC / Skystar / 0108 / Nogard / Lesjuh / Nold? I thought that's what we were trying to avoid.SapphireGhost wrote:
So now Easy / Normal / Hard / Special / RLC is acceptable, and the two specially named difficulties are assumed to be Insane/Extra level. This allows guest difficulties to also use custom names without confusing the player.
My thoughts exactly.Blue Dragon wrote:
Doesn't this also allow mapsets such as Easy / Normal / Hard / Rin / RLC / Skystar / 0108 / Nogard / Lesjuh / Nold? I thought that's what we were trying to avoid.SapphireGhost wrote:
So now Easy / Normal / Hard / Special / RLC is acceptable, and the two specially named difficulties are assumed to be Insane/Extra level. This allows guest difficulties to also use custom names without confusing the player.
I'd restrict it to one difficulty, whether it's the mapper's or a GDSapphireGhost wrote:
Okay, let's try revising again with the new feedback.A difficulty's name must indicate its level of difficulty, with the exception of the hardest level of difficulty in the set. The mapper's hardest difficulty and guest difficulties of a similar level may use custom difficulty names. Mapsets with a complete set of custom difficulty names that can be understood by the player are also acceptable. Marathon maps with a single difficulty are allowed free naming.So now Easy / Normal / Hard / Special / RLC is acceptable, and the two specially named difficulties are assumed to be Insane/Extra level. This allows guest difficulties to also use custom names without confusing the player.
tbh who can always tell exactly which of the Insane diffs are harder and should be marked with harder names?Blue Dragon wrote:
Doesn't this also allow mapsets such as Easy / Normal / Hard / Rin / RLC / Skystar / 0108 / Nogard / Lesjuh / Nold? I thought that's what we were trying to avoid.SapphireGhost wrote:
So now Easy / Normal / Hard / Special / RLC is acceptable, and the two specially named difficulties are assumed to be Insane/Extra level. This allows guest difficulties to also use custom names without confusing the player.
Why should this be not allowed, though? I think it looks a lot better than Easy / Normal / Hard / Rin's Insane / RLC's Insane / Skystar's Insane / 0108's Insane / Nogard's Insane / Lesjuh's Insane / Nold's Insane mapset, which is just as confusing. The rule only allows special naming for the hardest level, so anyone can easily tell that the special name means the hardest difficulty level, with different mappers mapping them. And by removing the repetitive "Insane" or "Extra" in the difficulty name, the difficulty names looks a lot cleaner and easier to read.Blue Dragon wrote:
Doesn't this also allow mapsets such as Easy / Normal / Hard / Rin / RLC / Skystar / 0108 / Nogard / Lesjuh / Nold? I thought that's what we were trying to avoid.SapphireGhost wrote:
So now Easy / Normal / Hard / Special / RLC is acceptable, and the two specially named difficulties are assumed to be Insane/Extra level. This allows guest difficulties to also use custom names without confusing the player.
Should be finalized already, isn't it?SapphireGhost wrote:
February 26, 2014 Edit: Since the tentative deadline has been reached, the rule will be set to go into the Ranking Criteria in about a week should no groundbreaking counterarguments arise. For the time being, difficulty naming that follows this pending rule should be deemed as acceptable. Lastly and as always, everything is up for discussion again once the new star system is implemented and its accuracy can be determined.
dkun wrote:
has anyone notified peppy about this?