U have a point, right.GoldenWolf wrote:
You know, if an element is missing in your skin folder, it will be replaced with the default one. So that doesn't help.
If you want to get rid of your followpoints, use a transparent 1x1 pic named followpoint.png
Its useful when im playing AR9 without actually paying attention.ZenithPhantasm wrote:
Followpoints are just useless clutter unless you play AR10+
things people with useless eyes say :^)ZenithPhantasm wrote:
useless clutter
Only if the mapper sucks.Philosofikal wrote:
"Combos" are meaningless constructs arbitrary determined by whoever mapped the song.
You know, because there is only one honest and true way to set combos in a song, right?GoldenWolf wrote:
Only if the mapper sucks.Philosofikal wrote:
"Combos" are meaningless constructs arbitrary determined by whoever mapped the song.
Indeed. You've got the point.Philosofikal wrote:
I don't see why there needs to be a distinction that followpoints connect combos. What is the point of that? "Combos" are meaningless constructs arbitrary determined by whoever mapped the song. Basically, you just end up with random times where followpoints don't appear when it would be useful.
You are quite wrong about that. Only reason you think you really need it when theres no followpoint is because when it appears on screen it gives you general idea of where you are supposed to look but when its not there you actually have no idea where will it appear and have to look for it.Vesrand wrote:
In fact we have them when we dont need them. But when we need them the most they doesnt show because there is new combo.
Vesrand wrote:
In fact we have them when we dont need them. But when we need them the most they doesnt show because there is new combo.
GoldenWolf wrote:
Only if the mapper sucks.
I can think of a hundred situations where followpoints are more useful connecting the first and last hitcircles in a combo than anywhere else.woqx wrote:
Vesrand wrote:
In fact we have them when we dont need them. But when we need them the most they doesnt show because there is new combo.GoldenWolf wrote:
Only if the mapper sucks.
With such a name you are disappointingly close minded.Philosofikal wrote:
You know, because there is only one honest and true way to set combos in a song, right?
A combo means nothing, other than the mapper going "I like grouping these notes together". What purpose does it serve to not have a followpoint between combos? It would make just as much sense to only have a followpoint between combos.
It's specifically to force the player on using their reaction time instead of relying on the followpoints they do that. Come on that's not even hard to realize if you try thinking about it a bit. You can understand on your own why mappers would use that.Philosofikal wrote:
What happens when you have two combos on the opposite sides of the screen? It would be VEEEERY helpful to have something take you to the first hitcircle of the next combo.
How am I close minded? You're the one rejecting the current way followpoints work, stating it's the worst possible choice without even explaining why yours are better, and barely starting to explain why the current one is an inferior choice.Philosofikal wrote:
Can you be a little less closed minded? You're the one insulting other people and not being open to alternative points of view. You're the one defending the status quo.
The reason you don't mix them is that it undermines the effectiveness of both philosophies. Instead of getting the best of both worlds, you get the shittiest of both worlds. I think the current setup is the least optimal of all, compared to the other reasonable choices (no followpoints / all followpoints / only followpoints between combos).
But why do you keep calling it arbitrary? Combos do follow a purpose, wether it's to divide patterns, emphasizing certains parts of the song, there is a logic behind it, it's not random. Unless in the case of bad mappers, which is why I said "Only if the mapper sucks."Philosofikal wrote:
Haha, are you for real? You're the one being closed minded because all I have done is state my opinion on the matter, and you're trying to fist my dick hole over it like it's some kind of personal matter. Your rudeness is uncalled for, do you think I am uneducated on this matter? I designed a skin for this game! Look at my signature!
The point of followpoints is to connect things that are far away. This is why we don't have followpoints for hitcircles that are right next to each other - not only it's is it unnecessary, it looks bad since followpoints are layered on top of hitcircles. The combination of hitcircles that are on average the farthest away from each other are the end of a combo and the start of a new combo. It's obvious why - things that are in combos, unless you're playing a pure jump map, are usually grouped together on the screen in some kind of sequential format, which is why they are combos. Not having a followpoint to connect combos omits the most useful situation where a followpoint is helpful. It also makes relying on the followpoints a risky, unreliable technique, especially if you do not know the map, because combos are arbitrary and can end at any time. There are no rules as to what constitutes a combo.
It's not a matter of preference since there is no "choice". You get the shitty followpoint system or you get nothing (by skinning them out). If you want to arbitrarily challenge yourself, that's your prerogative - I don't like the system.
Useless overly complicated blocks of textGoldenWolf wrote:
Useless* blocks of text
Don't worry. I'll have the last laugh when I'm better than you. If someone as ridiculous as you can get to 1,200, anyone can. Except for Zenith, who just completely failed on all fronts.GoldenWolf wrote:
Useless* blocks of text
Astrofiziks wrote:
philosofikal is wrong
Your skin says otherwise.KukiMonster wrote:
Combo's are important coz colours, most skins look boring without em.
Combo colors are helpful for low AR and EZ mod too.KukiMonster wrote:
Combo's are important coz colours, most skins look boring without em.
