What do I propose to change about slider tick rate guidelines?
Currently, osu!catch ranking criteria has 2 guidelines on slider tick rates:
Why is this change good?
This new guideline would follow the actual reasoning behind choosing a slider tick rate much better compared to the current guidelines, particularly the guideline: "Use the same slider tick rate on every difficulty as it is a property of the music rather than the mapping", as this is simply wrong: mappers choose slider tick rate to fit the mapping density rather than the song, which is why tick rate 1 is common in lower difficulties yet in a full spread, this almost always rises to tick rate 2.
This change could also improve Ranking Criteria by removing the sentence: "Using high tick rates purely to increase score/combo/difficulty is senseless", as this doesn't match modern catch mapping theory, where harder sliders are commonly and fittingly used in Overdose and sometimes even Rain difficulties to emphasise more intense held notes.
The new guideline would leave much less room for confusion, while only using 18 additional words compared to the current guidelines. Not only does this guideline specify which slider tick rates would be fitting for which types of maps, but it also brings out a couple exceptions, which help make it much clearer when the typical tick rates should be replaced by another tick rate. The wording in current guidelines leave it very vague when certain tick rates should actually be used, as the guideline "Slider tick rate should be set according to the song" only advises to not use a tick rate following a beat snap which is not used in the song, yet leaves it overly unclear which tick rate would actually be suitable from the ones that are used in the song and leaves the very important factor of mapping density out completely.
It could also avoid dividing what is essentially one idea into two guidelines, which helps in making the entire Ranking Criteria more concise, further avoiding confusion and unnecessary additions.
Overall, this change in slider tick rate guidelines would simply be much more accurate to describe how catch mappers actually choose a tick rate. This change wouldn't actually change anything when it comes to choosing a tick rate, yet would simply be a good way to write down the unwritten guideline which is already widely followed by the catch mapping community and remove outdated conceptions in the guidelines, which are not applicable to modern catch mapping.
Alternative solutions
Another way to further simplify this is to write down the most commonly fitting tick rates for each difficulty.
Cup: 0.5 or 1
Salad: 1
Platter: 1 or 2
Rain: 2
Overdose: 2
While this might make it even easier to understand which tick rates should usually be used in most difficulties, it might cause additional confusions when it comes to more unusual tick rates, as this approach doesn't explain why a certain tick rate is picked for each difficulty. It also doesn't consider the very important factor of density, which is used more in picking a tick rate compared to the difficulty itself: for example, a very simple platter with particularly low density, such as a typical Platter in an ENH mapset, would more often use a 0.5 or 1 tick rate similarly to most Cups.
Another solution would be to further simplify this and make a general guideline which only advises to use tick rate 1 on lower difficulties and tick rate 2 on higher difficulties, yet this approach would only have the same issues as specifying tick rates for each difficulty while avoiding the only main pro of that approach, as the idea of clarifying which tick rates are most suitable for each difficulty is lost, making this approach an even worse solution.
Conclusion
While there may be some alternative approaches to my proposed solution, I believe that making a general and detailed, yet concise guideline when it comes to slider tick rates would be the best way to advise mappers to choose the appropriate tick rate for their map. I invite everyone involved in the catch mapping community to voice your opinion here, whether you would agree to this change or not and whether there are any wording changes which could be made to improve the potential new guideline.
Currently, osu!catch ranking criteria has 2 guidelines on slider tick rates:
Slider tick rate should be set according to the song. For example if your song only uses 1/3 snapping, using tick rate 2 or 4 would not be fitting.
Use the same slider tick rate on every difficulty as it is a property of the music rather than the mapping. However, lower difficulties may use lower tick rates to reduce accuracy requirements for newer players, providing they still follow the rhythm of the song. Using high tick rates purely to increase score/combo/difficulty is senseless.I propose removing both of these guidelines and creating a new guideline instead, which could read as follows:
Use a slider tick rate which follows the most common beat snap used in the difficulty or the next most common beat snap slower from it. This means that the tick rate 1 should be used in lower difficulties to follow their typical 1/1 and 1/2 snapping and the tick rate 2 should be used in higher difficulties to follow their typical 1/2 and 1/4 snapping. In difficulties that most commonly follow a different snapping, the tick rate should be set according to that instead, for example the tick rate 0.5 for 2/1 and 1/1 snapping or the tick rate 1 for 1/1 and 1/3 snapping.
Why is this change good?
This new guideline would follow the actual reasoning behind choosing a slider tick rate much better compared to the current guidelines, particularly the guideline: "Use the same slider tick rate on every difficulty as it is a property of the music rather than the mapping", as this is simply wrong: mappers choose slider tick rate to fit the mapping density rather than the song, which is why tick rate 1 is common in lower difficulties yet in a full spread, this almost always rises to tick rate 2.
This change could also improve Ranking Criteria by removing the sentence: "Using high tick rates purely to increase score/combo/difficulty is senseless", as this doesn't match modern catch mapping theory, where harder sliders are commonly and fittingly used in Overdose and sometimes even Rain difficulties to emphasise more intense held notes.
The new guideline would leave much less room for confusion, while only using 18 additional words compared to the current guidelines. Not only does this guideline specify which slider tick rates would be fitting for which types of maps, but it also brings out a couple exceptions, which help make it much clearer when the typical tick rates should be replaced by another tick rate. The wording in current guidelines leave it very vague when certain tick rates should actually be used, as the guideline "Slider tick rate should be set according to the song" only advises to not use a tick rate following a beat snap which is not used in the song, yet leaves it overly unclear which tick rate would actually be suitable from the ones that are used in the song and leaves the very important factor of mapping density out completely.
It could also avoid dividing what is essentially one idea into two guidelines, which helps in making the entire Ranking Criteria more concise, further avoiding confusion and unnecessary additions.
Overall, this change in slider tick rate guidelines would simply be much more accurate to describe how catch mappers actually choose a tick rate. This change wouldn't actually change anything when it comes to choosing a tick rate, yet would simply be a good way to write down the unwritten guideline which is already widely followed by the catch mapping community and remove outdated conceptions in the guidelines, which are not applicable to modern catch mapping.
Alternative solutions
Another way to further simplify this is to write down the most commonly fitting tick rates for each difficulty.
Cup: 0.5 or 1
Salad: 1
Platter: 1 or 2
Rain: 2
Overdose: 2
While this might make it even easier to understand which tick rates should usually be used in most difficulties, it might cause additional confusions when it comes to more unusual tick rates, as this approach doesn't explain why a certain tick rate is picked for each difficulty. It also doesn't consider the very important factor of density, which is used more in picking a tick rate compared to the difficulty itself: for example, a very simple platter with particularly low density, such as a typical Platter in an ENH mapset, would more often use a 0.5 or 1 tick rate similarly to most Cups.
Another solution would be to further simplify this and make a general guideline which only advises to use tick rate 1 on lower difficulties and tick rate 2 on higher difficulties, yet this approach would only have the same issues as specifying tick rates for each difficulty while avoiding the only main pro of that approach, as the idea of clarifying which tick rates are most suitable for each difficulty is lost, making this approach an even worse solution.
Conclusion
While there may be some alternative approaches to my proposed solution, I believe that making a general and detailed, yet concise guideline when it comes to slider tick rates would be the best way to advise mappers to choose the appropriate tick rate for their map. I invite everyone involved in the catch mapping community to voice your opinion here, whether you would agree to this change or not and whether there are any wording changes which could be made to improve the potential new guideline.