ar9 insanes for life
forum
Reading Density Table
posted
Total Posts
30
For those having trouble figuring it out, bpm on the top, ar on the left, and the middle is the density, with ar11+240bpm being 1.0, so all the others are in comparison to ar11 240bpm. I don't think density is a real measurable thing, the guy that made the table just decided to make ar11+240bpm 1.0 density. I could be wrong though.
maybe too much emphasis on AR i dont think it matters much unless its horrifically unfitting.
cool though
so the ideal is around 4 things on the screen at once?
cool though
so the ideal is around 4 things on the screen at once?
Topic Starter
but AR11+240bpm is 2.4 density, it's AR11 with 100bpm that gives you 1cheezstik wrote:
the guy that made the table just decided to make ar11+240bpm 1.0 density
think again, it's not an arbitrary number, it has a logical meaning. Riince got it right.
So from my understanding, a 140 BPM map at AR 9 has about 2.9 objects on the screen at any given time? I guess it sounds about right, looking at my own beatmap right now.
EDIT: This post should be stickied.
EDIT: This post should be stickied.
wow,sounds like interesting .but to be honest,i dont think a number can tell us enough message about the reading difficult
The graph isn't difficulty, but rather the approximate number of notes on screen at any given time.dyh024 wrote:
wow,sounds like interesting .but to be honest,i dont think a number can tell us enough message about the reading difficult
EDIT: This also means we have a decent use for decimal ARs
if you really want a location of ideal reading density, i would personally say you would need a separate highlighting for it. having four notes on the screen at 100 bpm at ar 5 is generally annoying, but that is directed more towards riince than aqo as aqo personally said to make use of this as one pleases.
and anyways, for each person it's going to be slightly different
and anyways, for each person it's going to be slightly different
This is very useful for reading training because now all you have to do is increase the density little by little with appropriate search terms (like AR=8 BPM=200).
Also, I would assume that you've used Single Taps as the representative for BPM?
Also, I would assume that you've used Single Taps as the representative for BPM?
the thing is though that map saturation varies greatly. If the maps don't have continuous sections of half beat circles then this chart is irrelevant.
Just need to expand the table to show what's 'green' for AR9.8 to 11 and then I'd be satisfied with this table. It would be useful for those double bpm maps such as big black and scarlet rose, etc I remember doing big black with ar10.8 (did slower version+dt) and it was easier to read in a sense (less cluttered)
True, but it does still provide some sort of guideline for AR. Besides, generally unique songs like those are mapped by more experienced mappers. It's not like this chart is the end all be all for mapping anyways. You can do whatever you please. I can make an AR 5 200 BPM map if I wanted.B1rd wrote:
the thing is though that map saturation varies greatly. If the maps don't have continuous sections of half beat circles then this chart is irrelevant.
i can even map a map almost no one can read in ar12 without setting any objs at blue tick in lower bpm than 180, and can be played technically
craps above, /me sleep
Irrelevant is way too strong a word.B1rd wrote:
the thing is though that map saturation varies greatly. If the maps don't have continuous sections of half beat circles then this chart is irrelevant.
Big black is 180. It's mapped at 360, but it isn't mapped for 360.Dexus wrote:
big black
big black is 180bpm streams, yes. The slider jumps are 360bpm though and those are what are hard to read/play. With less of them on screen it's easier to see when you're getting off and where you're going.
This right here is a quarter note 180bpm jump. When playing it looks like a 180bpm half note because of the way the sliders are placed and how fast you're moving around. If you had less notes on screen you'd be able to focus more on it. The human brain can only track so much. There's no way in hell you can offhandedly just read that in your first play.
If you put 180bpm quarter notes that spaced throughout a map it would never get ranked. Thankfully though that's the only quarter note jump that large (the rest are sliders but don't really count because hurrdurr od doesn't really count with sliders)
This right here is a quarter note 180bpm jump. When playing it looks like a 180bpm half note because of the way the sliders are placed and how fast you're moving around. If you had less notes on screen you'd be able to focus more on it. The human brain can only track so much. There's no way in hell you can offhandedly just read that in your first play.
If you put 180bpm quarter notes that spaced throughout a map it would never get ranked. Thankfully though that's the only quarter note jump that large (the rest are sliders but don't really count because hurrdurr od doesn't really count with sliders)
Reading difficulty is ralated to:
1. Note density
2. Pattern complexity (random pattern = more complexity; symmetry = less complexity)
3. Reading area (area of a pattern; big jump = more area and folded pattern = less area)
4. Rhythm complexity
and more factors.
This table is like the base line which is usually used (140bpm -> AR8; 180bpm -> AR9; 220bpm -> AR10; for a "typical song"), but it is more accurate. The apropos AR should be decided based on more factors.
1. Note density
2. Pattern complexity (random pattern = more complexity; symmetry = less complexity)
3. Reading area (area of a pattern; big jump = more area and folded pattern = less area)
4. Rhythm complexity
and more factors.
This table is like the base line which is usually used (140bpm -> AR8; 180bpm -> AR9; 220bpm -> AR10; for a "typical song"), but it is more accurate. The apropos AR should be decided based on more factors.
Just play your damn map and get a feel of what the perfect AR is
trying to calculate it using algorithm is stupid, considering the whole thing is preference to begin with
trying to calculate it using algorithm is stupid, considering the whole thing is preference to begin with
Uhm... is that a thing now?Dexus wrote:
The slider jumps are 360bpm though
Depends. It certainly is something to consider though. When these kinds of sliders start ending in different directions, they take a lot more effort to read.Narrill wrote:
Uhm... is that a thing now?Dexus wrote:
The slider jumps are 360bpm though
Useful reference table, thanks. Pity it doesn't go up to 270bpm (no, I can't). Only reason I say that is because image material, which reaches 4.05 at AR10... basically green with a dominant 1/2 note structure between streams. Certainly applicable to the table, if it fitted.
Hmm, I'm gonna make some ar 7 insanes then, never liked ar 9 with low bpm songs way too easy to read.
I don't disagree, but that doesn't mean sliders can be mapped for a certain bpm. Big Black is played like a 180bpm map with some fancy spacing.RaneFire wrote:
Depends. It certainly is something to consider though. When these kinds of sliders start ending in different directions, they take a lot more effort to read.
why? because of the slow parts and the fact that the streams would still handle fine? i still think some parts would actually be a lot harder at lower ar like the trianglesDexus wrote:
In my opinion, I feel AR9.6 is good for Image Material.
yeah, I really don't think anyone capable of doing Image Material is going to have much problem with AR10.Riince wrote:
why? because of the slow parts and the fact that the streams would still handle fine? i still think some parts would actually be a lot harder at lower ar like the trianglesDexus wrote:
In my opinion, I feel AR9.6 is good for Image Material.
...yes? isn't that the point of lowering the ar? If you lowered it to 9.6 the density would be relatively the same as AR9 at 200-180bpm range.Riince wrote:
why? because of the slow parts and the fact that the streams would still handle fine? i still think some parts would actually be a lot harder at lower ar like the triangles
That's beside the point you sperg. I'm talking about making the density at a rate of 4 objects on screen instead of it being 2.something (even lower density on the slow parts).B1rd wrote:
yeah, I really don't think anyone capable of doing Image Material is going to have much problem with AR10.
Stop trying to take this and turn it into a skill discussion, you two, when you don't have anything to bring to the table.