Which is why Big Black would've been much nicer to read at 10.3, but that's not exactly possible
You have to focus for every AR not just AR10. AR10 can feel "normal" in speed if you play too much of it.cheezstik wrote:
Even if you have the reaction speed for it, it is still pretty taxing to have to push it to that speed, more than the load that the reduced density lifts off, which is why people that can read AR10 sometimes say stuff like having to focus more when playing AR10, or if they blink then they miss a note, or it hurts their eyes or whatever.Almost wrote:
That's because they don't have the reaction speed for it. If the AR is too fast for you, there is no real reading going on, it's all playing by reaction.
And ironically, he's claiming that everyone should be playing the meta when DT is the current meta not HR.Tess wrote:
This discussion is basically a HR player saying all other mods are invalid and not listening to the several people providing counterarguments
Those replays didn't prove that you have an ability to read, they proved that you're capable of passably reading a wide variety of ARs. This distinction is pretty central to my argument.Tess wrote:
For the record, I linked those replays because you said I had no replays that confirmed my claimed ability to read.
This right here is where you lose me. Object density is absolutely not the main factor of reading difficulty, map complexity is the main factor of reading difficulty. Object density and approach speed, which no one seems to like to talk about, are both secondary factors that simply serve as a lens through which map complexity is presented.Lerq wrote:
This is because object density is the main factor of reading difficulty
Great, now things are getting empirical. Find me a map that has a similar difficulty with HR that this one does with DT and we can compare the two.Lerq wrote:
Actually, I guess I can just leave one: https://osu.ppy.sh/s/21877
There are two arguments here from my perspective:Tess wrote:
It's more like you deny any kind of argument presented with semi-related ignorant reasoning or simply change the topic altogether, either because you don't want to admit to not having a retort or because you can't keep up with forum conversation.
Yeah, I'm not playing the current meta, I don't know why you think that's relevant. This is actually pretty solid evidence for DT being less complex than HR per difficulty point when you consider that the difficulty calcs don't consider complexity at all.Almost wrote:
And ironically, he's claiming that everyone should be playing the meta when DT is the current meta not HR.
This discussion is a bunch of scrubs circlejerking over density while ignoring complexity. Just another day in G&R I guess. I really need to sleep now, so bai.Tess wrote:
This discussion is basically a HR player saying all other mods are invalid and not listening to the several people providing counterarguments
Narrill wrote:
Those replays didn't prove that you have an ability to read, they proved that you're capable of passably reading a wide variety of ARs. This distinction is pretty central to my argument.Tess wrote:
For the record, I linked those replays because you said I had no replays that confirmed my claimed ability to read.
Narrill wrote:
Those replays didn't prove that you have an ability to read, they proved that you're capable of passably reading
Narrill wrote:
Those replays didn't prove that you have an ability to read, they proved that you're capable of reading
Narrill wrote:
they proved that you're capable of reading
The issue here is that map complexity only holds its true difficulty if the object density is at its highest point. At no point does HR offer this, so that only leaves DT/nomod, which are equal in reading difficulty.Narill wrote:
This right here is where you lose me. Object density is absolutely not the main factor of reading difficulty, map complexity is the main factor of reading difficulty. Object density and approach speed, which no one seems to like to talk about, are both secondary factors that simply serve as a lens through which map complexity is presented.Lerq wrote:
This is because object density is the main factor of reading difficulty
Narrill wrote:
Those replays didn't prove that you have an ability to read, they proved that you're capable of passably reading a wide variety of ARs.
Man this thread sucks. Bring back the frogs please.Narrill wrote:
Those replays didn't prove that you have an ability to read, they proved that you're capable of... reading
Angusman wrote:
Man this thread sucks. Bring back the frogs please.
Oh shit, you know a thread is getting hectic when the "welcome to ossssss" guy walks in.pola[r]is wrote:
beep boop farm more beep boop
You seem to assume that using less common words and terminology, and calling others stupid means "intelligent". He didn't redefine the word intelligent at all, he just doesn't fit the definition. If you just read back you can see that a majority of the people either disagreed or misunderstood his points. From the words he was using, I'd gather that he felt misunderstood. Not being capable of making yourself understood in general is the very opposite of intelligence, regardless of how good your verbal skills may be.RaneFire wrote:
I used to like intelligent discussions... But then Narrill came along and redefined the word intelligent... and reading and complexity.
this is ossssssZare wrote:
Wow Tess please, can you guys like stop picking on each other? o_O What is this, elementary school?
Yeah well... that was the point. He didn't actually redefine it by anything he said, but it was implied since he steered the debate to his view only, disregarding any contradiction, thus redefining it in that sense, but only for himself, and argues that we misunderstand the absolute true definition (his).Tess wrote:
...He didn't redefine the word intelligent at all, he just doesn't fit the definition.RaneFire wrote:
I used to like intelligent discussions... But then Narrill came along and redefined the word intelligent... and reading and complexity.
this is so subjective it hurts (for me it's the exact opposite)Riince wrote:
ar10 is the easiest part of playing hard rock followed by circle size then OD
it's objective because i said sosilmarilen wrote:
this is so subjective it hurts (for me it's the exact opposite)Riince wrote:
ar10 is the easiest part of playing hard rock followed by circle size then OD
i have a hard time believing you find ar10 hardsilmarilen wrote:
damn i cant beat your freedom
So we're stooping to misquotes now? Like I said, the difference between AR proficiency and actual reading skill is central to my argument here.Tess wrote:
And that is why analphabetics shouldn't argue definitions~
Again, you're ignoring the fact that density and reading speed have a give and take relationship, and that decreasing the time the player has to read a pattern makes the pattern more difficult to read. The only reason people seem to think reading speed is easy now is because the meta works them into it from day one. Let me remind you once again that just a few years ago people thought AR10 would never be common, and no one even thought it was possible to play at AR11.Lerq wrote:
The issue here is that map complexity only holds its true difficulty if the object density is at its highest point. At no point does HR offer this, so that only leaves DT/nomod, which are equal in reading difficulty.
You make me sad RaneFire. I haven't redefined anything here.RaneFire wrote:
I used to like intelligent discussions... But then Narrill came along and redefined the word intelligent... and reading and complexity.
look at the amount of ar10 scores in my top performanceRiince wrote:
i have a hard time believing you find ar10 hardsilmarilen wrote:
damn i cant beat your freedom
'murican pride, 'murican freedom, 'murican cuisine,silmarilen wrote:
damn i cant beat your freedom
Allow me.Narrill wrote:
You make me sad RaneFire. I haven't redefined anything here.
This "actual reading skill" you are referring to could be better referred to as the transition phase to action, and as a matter of fact, I have argued this point a year ago and been shot down, because this component is mostly your mechanical skill (ability to physically play the game from mental stimuli). A skilled taiko player informed me exactly how this works and that reading has almost nothing to do with it (yes, this applies to other rhythm games). The neuromuscular relationship (brain>nervous system>muscles) plays an important part here, and is developed through practice methods which challenge this relationship specifically. That's what you do to achieve a high rank in few play counts, so congratulations on achieving good mechanical skill.Narrill wrote:
So we're stooping to misquotes now? Like I said, the difference between AR proficiency and actual reading skill is central to my argument here.Tess wrote:
And that is why analphabetics shouldn't argue definitions~
Narrill wrote:
So we're stooping to misquotes now? Like I said, the difference between AR proficiency and actual reading skill is central to my argument here.Tess wrote:
And that is why analphabetics shouldn't argue definitions~Again, you're ignoring the fact that density and reading speed have a give and take relationship, and that decreasing the time the player has to read a pattern makes the pattern more difficult to read. The only reason people seem to think reading speed is easy now is because the meta works them into it from day one. Let me remind you once again that just a few years ago people thought AR10 would never be common, and no one even thought it was possible to play at AR11.Lerq wrote:
The issue here is that map complexity only holds its true difficulty if the object density is at its highest point. At no point does HR offer this, so that only leaves DT/nomod, which are equal in reading difficulty.
And since I have the quote open, DT and no mod being equal is an assertion you can't just throw around without some justification; whether we're assuming constant difficulty or not, the two are far from equal.You make me sad RaneFire. I haven't redefined anything here.RaneFire wrote:
I used to like intelligent discussions... But then Narrill came along and redefined the word intelligent... and reading and complexity.
Can you cite a community-approved definition? I don't really care what the forum hivemind may or may not gravitate towards, I have always defined reading as the process of taking in visual stimuli and determining from that stimuli what movements are necessary. If that broad definition is what's under fire here than we're just gonna continue to disagree, but throughout my entire posting history I can guarantee that definition has remained constant.RaneFire wrote:
as defined by the community
Aww, big bad narrill called someone a big baddie and maybe hurt their feelings, what ever will we do?RaneFire wrote:
Your post on page 8 is where you diverged from the commonly accepted definition of reading by picking on Almost.
Your post on page 10 is where you basically called Almost terrible at the game because he didn't have the same mechanical skill as you, which you define as "actual reading skill" for HR.
I don't play the meta and therefore have no right to give advice to improve in the current meta? Even though I don't play the meta, I know what the meta is and I know of the ways to improve at the meta. It's not like I'm so low rank scrub who has completely no idea about anything about this game. About your point that EZ mod doesn't benefit you at all in this current meta is complete and utter bullshit and you have no real evidence to back up your point on it since you have probably never touched EZ mod in your life. EZ mod helps you decipher patterns a lot better even at higher AR. Example being I was watching a top 50 player playing https://osu.ppy.sh/s/90128 on DT and he couldn't play 1 pattern because he couldn't read it but I knew exactly what was going on even though I'm not a high AR player. EZ mod probably won't benefit a HR player such as yourself because you don't even have object density in HR in the first place but that doesn't mean that it doesn't help you play DT or extremely difficult no mod scores.Narrill wrote:
Aww, big bad narrill called someone a big baddie and maybe hurt their feelings, what ever will we do?RaneFire wrote:
Your post on page 8 is where you diverged from the commonly accepted definition of reading by picking on Almost.
Your post on page 10 is where you basically called Almost terrible at the game because he didn't have the same mechanical skill as you, which you define as "actual reading skill" for HR.
Nothing, because in the context of the current meta Almost is probably bad and should stop trying to tell people how to improve at the current meta. That's really what the rub here is, playing the way you want with no regard for what's in style is admirable until you try to pass it off as beneficial.
You can absolutely give advice. The problem is that you're trying to pass off what you're doing as beneficial when it isn't as beneficial as simply playing into the meta, and it's not. The plain fact of the matter is that while practicing low AR will certainly help you with density interpretation you just don't need density determination enough that low AR training is more beneficial than standard play.Almost wrote:
I don't play the meta and therefore have no right to give advice to improve in the current meta?
Well the "current meta" is really just the current state of the game, a combination of factors including things like current mapping trends and difficulty weightings. The reason DT is favored right now has a lot to do with what I've already discussed regarding the imbalance between perceived difficulty (difficulty from the player's perspective) and evaluated difficulty (difficulty from the pp calculations' perspective) for each mod; complexity isn't evaluated by the current difficulty calculations, and DT offers the lowest complexity per unit of evaluated difficulty by far. This means the best thing for a player to do is train DT, evidenced by the fact that Sayo is ranked near rrtyui and hvick despite not being nearly as skilled as either of them overall.cheezstik wrote:
Can meta really be used like that though? I thought meta meant the highest level or best way to play the game, unless you're playing for PP, is DT necessarily the meta? It seems like DT would be the meta for speed, HR for accuracy / CS in some cases, and EZ for density, but is there really only one meta?