Ascendance contacted me about whether we could make this difficulty beatmapsets/1889894#fruits/5112182 rankable in any way with the current RC. However, 02:04:321 (3,1) - currently breaks the following rule:

RC wrote:

At least 62 ms must be left between circles/sliders and the start of spinners. This is to ensure readability.

However, in Overdoses, you don't really need readability at the start or end of a spinner, and the main thing you want to avoid is spinner traps, so players don't get random misses.

With that said, I would like to adjust the following:
- Remove the spinner start rule.
- Remove the spinner end rule.
- Add the following guideline: Spinner traps should not be used.

This way, we give the most freedom we can to a mapper, as limiting all kinds of overdoses with this rule is silly, in my opinion.

As someone who loves experimenting with spinners, I fully agree with this proposal and believe this would be a very positive change to allow more variety with spinner gimmicks. +1

yeah I agree :thumbsup: +1

This is a no from me.

1. You *CAN* get reverse trapped by a spin. If the note is too close to the spinner, it is VERY easy to misread and miss the note, going for bananas instead. Anyone who has played lots of converts knows this. This is because in std there is only 10-20 ms needed for a spin>note (maybe less, not 100% sure on RC).

2. Allowing notes inside of spinners is NOT something that we should EVER do. This goes beyond rankable gameplay. This is a gimmick more suited for the graveyard and loved.

3. I do not have faith in our beatmap nominators/community as a whole to be able to apply this "freedom" in acceptable ways. This will DEFINITELY cause more headaches than not. As the main person these headaches fall unto, please spare me the burden.

The amount of tangible benefits this brings is NEAR ZERO. Sure, this one case example of you wanting to use a hyperdash to the final map of the note, that's a fine example. This example is so niche though AND can already be done without breaking the rule in certain instances (dika's DJ Mag). Making this acceptable by RC standards would simply create too much bloat (which we actively tried to reduce not even a few weeks ago..), OR allow a slew of other things that are simply bad.

As writing this, I also realized you suggested removing the rule for the START of spinners aswell. This is even worse and I'm sure you can completely understand why after reading the first three points.

Anyone who agrees with this I'm convinced has never played a convert in their life. As someone who has gotten spun trap hundreds of times, mostly because this rule does not exist in converts, I'm not willing to subject the catch playerbase to the potential of having notes be used within spinners, creating obfuscation.

If you want to try to convince me otherwise the rule for ms for notes after a spinner MUST stay. The rule for ms for notes before a spinner is discussable.

agree with the change

agree with andrew that this would be a mess. would rather reduce the ms required before the spinner only.

Secre wrote:

1. You *CAN* get reverse trapped by a spin. If the note is too close to the spinner, it is VERY easy to misread and miss the note, going for bananas instead. Anyone who has played lots of converts knows this. This is because in std there is only 10-20 ms needed for a spin>note (maybe less, not 100% sure on RC).

Sure, this happens a lot in converts, but in specifics, this would be an easy thing to mod out. If we don't even trust our BNs to do the bare minimum on something like this, then they shouldn't be BN in the first place?

Secre wrote:

2. Allowing notes inside of spinners is NOT something that we should EVER do. This goes beyond rankable gameplay. This is a gimmick more suited for the graveyard and loved.

I actually didn't think about this. This would indeed be an issue with what I proposed.

We could keep the spinner end rule to avoid notes in spinners. But I still think there is room for the mapper to decide what an acceptable spinner gap is. Hence, the reason why I think we should add the spinner trap guideline is to avoid unreasonable cases. We could even move the spinner start to a guideline, but I don't see it as needed.

Secre wrote:

3. I do not have faith in our beatmap nominators/community as a whole to be able to apply this "freedom" in acceptable ways. This will DEFINITELY cause more headaches than not. As the main person these headaches fall unto, please spare me the burden.

I wouldn't say we should think in this way. Sure, you might be the person who does QA checks the most of us. But as I said, if we don't trust someone, then they shouldn't have been BN in the first place.

Hard no, for pretty much the same reasons as Andrew. Notes that are very close to the beginning of the spinner are extremely easy to misread and I do not believe *at all* that modders/BNs will be able to efficiently judge whether their usage is okay in a specific context. If a bad case did happen to pass qualified, it would hinder the map's playability tremendously.

Removing this rule would only allow for some very niche gimmicks and could potentially bring a lot of harm. You can already do a lot with the current spinner limitations, just think creatively.

agree with greaper but if we need to compromise just remove the ms gap from note-spinner at the start rather than at the end. as a side note, basing rc change viability on whether we "trust" the people that we had a hand in promoting is unacceptable and if i were a bn reading that i would be immensely upset at that comment.

anyone home

The rules should be moved to the guidelines.

These rules have been fundamentally unchanged since August 2016. Back then, the only use of spinners was for holding long sounds, it was never used as an active gameplay element.
The first 1/16 spinners were ranked in May 2018 and things have only snowballed. Mapping has evolved well outside the scope of what anyone was thinking about 9 years ago.

Secre wrote:

The amount of tangible benefits this brings is NEAR ZERO.

Here's a few: beatmapsets/2405498
I was planning to propose this discussion once I could upload that map. The spinner gap rules forced many compromises, none of the improved readability.

Three main points:

1: Gap before a spinner
Image: 1/8 snap timeline. Left is what RC requires, right is what I wanted to use.
https://i.imgur.com/JVgNyOH.png
The rhythm at 02:19:485 (1) - uses spinners 1/12 spinners that start on 1/6 and end on 5/12 rhythm. I wanted to use spinners 1/8 that start on 1/8 and end on 1/2 since it makes way more sense, but the minimum time before a spinner prevents this.

2: Gap after a spinner
02:21:360 (1,1,1) - Because of the required gap after a spinner, I could not place circles on either of these sounds, and had to work with spinner only patterns, which don't work 99% of the time unless you have rng control.

There were more pattern compromises here and there, but those two are sufficient examples.

3: If this song was 1bpm higher, everything in that map would be unrankable.
I wasn't aware of this when I picked the song, and was incredibly luck to find that 1/6 is exactly 62ms. Obviously the map doesn't become unreadable if it's 1% faster, but that's what the RC states.

Quick note: The map uses text editor manipulation which should not be rankable in the future, but I've seen another MBC entry that uses a similar concept without text editing. Patterns like this are still on the table in the future


The best solution is to move the rules to the guidelines. Enforce them in most cases, but ignore them when it makes sense to.