I think it's probably better to look at high AR reading as a requirement rather than a skill in itself. So you should start with ar10 once insanes are too easy aim and accuracy wise, and learn AR10.33 once the majority of AR8+DT maps are too slow for you. If you're rank 20K there's not much benefit from being able to read AR10.
forum
Should I be trying to read AR9.8 yet?
posted
Total Posts
81
Agree.
Honestly how many players can you name read 10.3? There must be a reason to why 10 is the limit for the majority of better players
Subjective. I feel that the gap between 9.6 and 10 is quite huge. However the gap between 10 and 10.3 feels about the same (hugeness), so I can only play 10 on easier-to-read maps, and 10.3 on easier-to-read-and-slower maps, which means map complexity plays an important part, as Goldenwolf mentioned earlier.Loves wrote:
Literally yes, but the feel of 10.3 is much quicker than 10 thus why maybe only a couple of hundred of players can actually effecctively read ar10.33.
The reason 10.3 feels so much harder is because of the maps which use AR9 already. Most of them become way too fast to read, let alone tap to, and can carry an OD just as high or higher than HR sometimes, while there are plenty of slower and easier AR8 insanes to slap HR onto.
You should start doing it when you're getting 99% on your typical insanes (excluding physical challenges such as maximising finger-speed, aim-speed or stamina). So IMO, your ability to read and be accurate is foremost important before you move onto playing AR10. If you don't "master" both of these, on ultimately easier settings, you'll quite likely lose your ability to play low AR, since - in speculation - you'll attach your accuracy to your reaction time, instead of reading patterns in advance to determine their timing.B1rd wrote:
I think it's probably better to look at high AR reading as a requirement rather than a skill in itself. So you should start with ar10 once insanes are too easy aim and accuracy wise, and learn AR10.33 once the majority of AR8+DT maps are too slow for you. If you're rank 20K there's not much benefit from being able to read AR10.
I don't even know why people think this is a statistical game based on map settings. To use myself as an example (since I'm slow), the slowest AR10.3 I've even come close to FC'ing is Vidro Moyou (DT). The rest are too fast for my fingers and for my reading. I can't say I can read 10.3, because there are practically no maps I can actually play with it. The majority of players are also slow too... FYI.Loves wrote:
Honestly how many players can you name read 10.3? There must be a reason to why 10 is the limit for the majority of better players
ZenithPhantasm
What makes you think 10 is the limit? You don't see a whole lot of 10.3 FCs, but that's because DTing AR9 insanes is really tough, not necessarily because people can't read 10.3.Loves wrote:
Honestly how many players can you name read 10.3? There must be a reason to why 10 is the limit for the majority of better players
Thats the same as saying 10.3 is hard to read because I'm pretty sure there's no correlation between map difficulty and AR (at least up until 9). Most hards and insanes hang around 8-9.NarrillNezzurh wrote:
What makes you think 10 is the limit? You don't see a whole lot of 10.3 FCs, but that's because DTing AR9 insanes is really tough, not necessarily because people can't read 10.3.Loves wrote:
Honestly how many players can you name read 10.3? There must be a reason to why 10 is the limit for the majority of better players
I personally believe 10.3 is hard to read because purely, it's just faster. After my first good AR10.3 FC last night, I'm more inclined to say 10.3 is harder than 10 period. It's not so much as reading as reaction/reflex. If you blink at the wrong time, you could miss 2-3 notes easily.
Okay, but for that logic to work you have to be able to extend it back to 9.6/10. Is 10 harder than 9.6, period? Or is it only harder if you don't have the reflexes for it?
When you get right down to it, there just aren't that many AR9 maps that are both easy and slow, but there are plenty of AR8 maps that are. Yeah, you can bliink at the wrong time and miss 2-3 notes easy, but you can do (and I have done) the same thing at 9.6 if you don't know when and how quickly to blink. AR10.3 is difficult because of the map selection in the same way no-mod AR10 is.
When you get right down to it, there just aren't that many AR9 maps that are both easy and slow, but there are plenty of AR8 maps that are. Yeah, you can bliink at the wrong time and miss 2-3 notes easy, but you can do (and I have done) the same thing at 9.6 if you don't know when and how quickly to blink. AR10.3 is difficult because of the map selection in the same way no-mod AR10 is.
i actually find ar10 harder when the maps are lower bpm which includes hard rock on typical easy insanes because it's so nerve wracking to pretty much only have one or two notes on the screen at once at any time. there's just no flow it's like snap pause snap pause snap pause wheres the fun? ar10 doesnt even become comfortably flowable until like 220 bpm
I was with you until you said 220. You might be doing it wrong.
well thats more the point where ar9 doesnt feel sufficient than where ar10 starts i guess
Idk how many maps you have but I have at least 50 or so ar10.3 which arent too hard to fc all around 4.5-5.25 stars. Tom also said ar10.3 isnt implemented in the star difficulty so there you go..NarrillNezzurh wrote:
Okay, but for that logic to work you have to be able to extend it back to 9.6/10. Is 10 harder than 9.6, period? Or is it only harder if you don't have the reflexes for it?
When you get right down to it, there just aren't that many AR9 maps that are both easy and slow, but there are plenty of AR8 maps that are. Yeah, you can bliink at the wrong time and miss 2-3 notes easy, but you can do (and I have done) the same thing at 9.6 if you don't know when and how quickly to blink. AR10.3 is difficult because of the map selection in the same way no-mod AR10 is.
Lots of players can read 10.3ar.Loves wrote:
Idk how many maps you have but I have at least 50 or so ar10.3 which arent too hard to fc all around 4.5-5.25 stars. Tom also said ar10.3 isnt implemented in the star difficulty so there you go..NarrillNezzurh wrote:
Okay, but for that logic to work you have to be able to extend it back to 9.6/10. Is 10 harder than 9.6, period? Or is it only harder if you don't have the reflexes for it?
When you get right down to it, there just aren't that many AR9 maps that are both easy and slow, but there are plenty of AR8 maps that are. Yeah, you can bliink at the wrong time and miss 2-3 notes easy, but you can do (and I have done) the same thing at 9.6 if you don't know when and how quickly to blink. AR10.3 is difficult because of the map selection in the same way no-mod AR10 is.
I have at least 500 or so ar9.6 that aren't hard to FC, and it isn't about the AR, it's about the AR combined with the tempo. I learned both AR9.6 and AR10 around 160 bpm, but unless you want to spam a handful of maps you have to learn 10.3 at a much higher tempo. Even without considering the actual difficulty of the maps it's difficult a difficult map set to break into.Loves wrote:
Idk how many maps you have but I have at least 50 or so ar10.3 which arent too hard to fc all around 4.5-5.25 stars. Tom also said ar10.3 isnt implemented in the star difficulty so there you go..
this is why I don't like ar9 till at least 160bpm.Riince wrote:
i actually find ar10 harder when the maps are lower bpm which includes hard rock on typical easy insanes because it's so nerve wracking to pretty much only have one or two notes on the screen at once at any time. there's just no flow it's like snap pause snap pause snap pause wheres the fun? ar10 doesnt even become comfortably flowable until like 220 bpm
It affects pp though, it just doesn't work on a star difficulty levelLoves wrote:
Tom also said ar10.3 isnt implemented in the star difficulty so there you go..
Yeah exactly, this means that higher AR is harder to play. Suppose the same 5 star map was changed into AR9 or 10, much easier to play rather than 10.3Rewben2 wrote:
It affects pp though, it just doesn't work on a star difficulty levelLoves wrote:
Tom also said ar10.3 isnt implemented in the star difficulty so there you go..
No it doesn't, you can't work backwards like that. That's not how logic works.
Logic:NarrillNezzurh wrote:
No it doesn't, you can't work backwards like that. That's not how logic works.
Same map, lets say it's worth 5.0 stars. AR9 version gives 160pp SS, AR10 version gives 180pp SS. That's basically what Tom meant by saying he hasn't implemented AR into the difficulty rating yet, it's all done at the PP-level which means high/very low (?) AR gives more PP because.. well it's harder than 8-9AR.
So basically, that same 5.0 map with AR9 is technically something like 5.2 stars etc with AR10 or AR6 (not sure about low AR), but it just doesn't show yet, kind of like HD atm where it isn't incorporated into the star difficulty but it's actually harder and DOES give more PP.
First, 8-10 is the normal range; you don't get extra pp for AR until you break 10. Second, you can't claim that 10.3 is harder because it gives more pp. That's what's backwards about what you're saying; it gives more pp because Tom assumes it's harder, and it isn't necessary for the implementation that this assumption be true.
Not many AR10 maps out there bro. Thats my first point.NarrillNezzurh wrote:
First, 8-10 is the normal range; you don't get extra pp for AR until you break 10. Second, you can't claim that 10.3 is harder because it gives more pp. That's what's backwards about what you're saying; it gives more pp because Tom assumes it's harder, and it isn't necessary for the implementation that this assumption be true.
Second point, I'm lost. It gives more pp because high AR is harder to play. This isn't an assumption, it's a fact. The human brain can only do so much.
I dunno why this is relevant. Are you trying to say that because there are so few AR10 maps because AR10 is inherently harder than AR9/9.6? HR essentially turns 90% of your library into AR10, so that can't be right.Loves wrote:
Not many AR10 maps out there bro. Thats my first point.
The fact that it gives more pp is a non sequitur, Tom has total control over the difficulty calculations. You've claimed that the jump from 10 to 10.3 is not only harder than the jump from 9.6 to 10, but that it's for some reason even harder than a proportional loss in reaction time would be.Loves wrote:
Second point, I'm lost. It gives more pp because high AR is harder to play. This isn't an assumption, it's a fact. The human brain can only do so much.
I'll explain that last bit, because it's complicated.
You lose 50ms going from 9.6 to 10. I don't have the numbers on hand, but that 50ms is some percent of the total approach time at 9.6. You also lose 50ms going from 10 to 10.3, but because you started at a lower approach time that 50ms represents a larger percent than it did in the previous jump. So right off the bat, 10 to 10.3 is harder than 9.6 to 10, but you've taken it a step further and argued that for the vast majority of players AR10 is the absolute limit, and that these players will have no hope of ever playing 10.3 because reasons.
You've yet to give any reasons.
very below average reaction times
NarrillNezzurh wrote:
I dunno why this is relevant. Are you trying to say that because there are so few AR10 maps because AR10 is inherently harder than AR9/9.6? HR essentially turns 90% of your library into AR10, so that can't be right.Loves wrote:
Not many AR10 maps out there bro. Thats my first point.The fact that it gives more pp is a non sequitur, Tom has total control over the difficulty calculations. You've claimed that the jump from 10 to 10.3 is not only harder than the jump from 9.6 to 10, but that it's for some reason even harder than a proportional loss in reaction time would be.Loves wrote:
Second point, I'm lost. It gives more pp because high AR is harder to play. This isn't an assumption, it's a fact. The human brain can only do so much.
I'll explain that last bit, because it's complicated.
You lose 50ms going from 9.6 to 10. I don't have the numbers on hand, but that 50ms is some percent of the total approach time at 9.6. You also lose 50ms going from 10 to 10.3, but because you started at a lower approach time that 50ms represents a larger percent than it did in the previous jump. So right off the bat, 10 to 10.3 is harder than 9.6 to 10, but you've taken it a step further and argued that for the vast majority of players AR10 is the absolute limit, and that these players will have no hope of ever playing 10.3 because reasons.
You've yet to give any reasons.
When did I ever say the said "ar10" players could never play 10.3 (stop putting words in my mouth)? The vast majority of players view AR10 as their limit, not because they can't go further but because maybe they can't be bothered because a), it's proportionally harder to read as AR goes up and b) you can still be pro at this game by not reading 10.3. Limit doesn't equate to "omg AR10.3 is my absolute limit, I cannot and will not ever play AR10.3".
And for your first point, yes HR turns (not 90%) around 60% of all maps into AR10 which is why it's called "hard rock". Because there are so few base AR10 maps, it's sensible to conclude that AR10 isn't targeted towards every player, such as AR 8 or 9. Playing HR is a choice, a choice to make a map harder so I don't understand what you're trying to say.
What you're basically telling everyone is that AR10 is easy or no? I'm really lost. You mentioned that HR turns 90% of maps into AR10 but what has that got to do with AR10 being hard or not? That's just like saying FL or DT will make a map hard.... well no s7it?
I don't know how you've managed to confuse yourself so hard. You stated that 10 -> 10.3 is substantially more difficult than 9.6 -> 10, and now you have to prove it. The rest is me attempting to follow the various things you've said in an attempt to do so.
You proved it yourself. 50ms gets proportionally larger as you go up in AR. Low MS is also hard for humans to read.NarrillNezzurh wrote:
I don't know how you've managed to confuse yourself so hard. You stated that 10 -> 10.3 is substantially more difficult than 9.6 -> 10, and now you have to prove it. The rest is me attempting to follow the various things you've said in an attempt to do so.
Yes, but the difference is on the order of a few percent (read "not substantial"), and we're still talking almost double the average human reaction time.
Hard Rock on AR7 FTW!
Don't attempt anything that is much too far from your capabilities.
If you can read ar9 perfectly, then go ahead and learn how to play higher ar. If you can't, then don't try to take shortcuts. Shortcuts are detrimental to learning and tend to be counter productive.
If you can read ar9 perfectly, then go ahead and learn how to play higher ar. If you can't, then don't try to take shortcuts. Shortcuts are detrimental to learning and tend to be counter productive.
The jump from ar9.6 to ar10 is from 500ms to 450ms. Therefore you only have 90% as much time to react. From ar10 to ar10.3 we go from 450ms to 400ms. That is to say you have ~89% as much time to react. While these percentages look very close keep in mind that looks at things relatively it is roughly a 10% increase in the difference in time to react when compared to ar9.6 to ar10. I would hardly call 10% "not substantial" but do as you see fit. I feel more comfortable claiming that its 10% more difficult to make the jump from ar10 to ar10.3 and that many people are too lazy to make custom ar9 difficulties for all the dt maps they used to learn ar9.6.Narrill wrote:
Yes, but the difference is on the order of a few percent (read "not substantial"), and we're still talking almost double the average human reaction time.
You'll have to explain that 10% figure, I'm not entirely sure where you're getting it from.
11% response decrease time is pretty substantial in an already extremely fast reaction timed AR...Narrill wrote:
Yes, but the difference is on the order of a few percent (read "not substantial"), and we're still talking almost double the average human reaction time.
I meant the proportional difference of the two intervals. You drop 10% going from 9 to 9.6, but you only drop 11% going from 10 to 10.3. I I never argued that 10 to 10.3 was insubstantial, just that it isn't much more substantial than 9 to 9.6.
Hly crap you changed your name ..Narrill wrote:
I meant the proportional difference of the two intervals. You drop 10% going from 9 to 9.6, but you only drop 11% going from 10 to 10.3. I I never argued that 10 to 10.3 was insubstantial, just that it isn't much more substantial than 9 to 9.6.
Yes.
hes top 1k now so hes super important and needs a shorter name
i just wanted it shorter pls dont hurt me
So for simplicity of argument I'm going to refer to the 11% and 10% as increases in speed.Narrill wrote:
You'll have to explain that 10% figure, I'm not entirely sure where you're getting it from.
So the speed going from 9.6 to 10 is a 10% increase in speed.
The speed going from 10 to 10.3 is an 11% increase in speed.
We have a 1% difference but the actual increase itself is only a 10% increase in speed. Thus we have that the relative difference in the increase of speed is 10% (.01/.1).
Thus, the overall speed increase is only 1% more but relative to the original speed increase it is a 10% increase to this increase.
If we take a function from Integers to Time mapping AR value to approach time then f'(9.6)/3 is roughly 10% of f(9.6), f'(10)/3 is roughly 11% of f(10) and f"(9.6)/3 is roughly 10% of f'(9.6)/3 (note that we are dividing by 3 since our increment is 1/3).