I can play just fine with or without them, then again i hardly ever play above ar 9
Community
Forum
Followpoints
posted
Total Posts
41
Topic Starter
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.
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.
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.
Dont dismiss followpoints as useless without even knowing that you use them all the time (consciously or unconsciously i dont really care).
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.
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.
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.
If the goal is to "make players use their reaction time", why do we have followpoints at all? What is the point of having them if you can't rely on them?
Jeez can you try thinking a bit harder
Why can you only see black or white? Why does it have to be only reaction time vs reading follow points? Why can't you mix both?
Why can you only see black or white? Why does it have to be only reaction time vs reading follow points? Why can't you mix both?
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).
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).
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).
None of your choices or the current way makes more sense than the other. Because it's a matter of preferences. Wooh. Spooky word.
You're the one being so close minded you didn't even realize that your opinion isn't worth more than the others. What you took as insults were me teasing you so you'd think and try to come up with possibilites and explanations, consdering other possibilites on your own instead of being spoon-fed answers you'd possibly reject -considering your standpoint so far- because it goes against your opinion.
Followpoints are mostly a preference thing, so there isn't a "best" choice about them, just what would work better for you.
@OP:
It's the phrasing of the music. And yes, as someone pointed out earlier, it's subjective and people can interpret the music differently. So sometimes, you'll be wondering why on earth certain parts are connected and why they seem to split in very strange places but really what's happening is that you're listening to a different part of the music than the mapper. (Unless you're listening to a single instrument playing a single part where there isn't background music, drums or anything like that. In that case, you'd be interpreting the music differently. Possibly because you don't understand the lyrics as they do.)
If. You don't get. It. Think of it like sentences. You wouldn't just. Place periods randomly right? You also wouldn't have a huge lack of them either I mean, it'd be so weird and hard to understand that's why run on sentences suck. But enough about that, I think you got the point now
It's the phrasing of the music. And yes, as someone pointed out earlier, it's subjective and people can interpret the music differently. So sometimes, you'll be wondering why on earth certain parts are connected and why they seem to split in very strange places but really what's happening is that you're listening to a different part of the music than the mapper. (Unless you're listening to a single instrument playing a single part where there isn't background music, drums or anything like that. In that case, you'd be interpreting the music differently. Possibly because you don't understand the lyrics as they do.)
If. You don't get. It. Think of it like sentences. You wouldn't just. Place periods randomly right? You also wouldn't have a huge lack of them either I mean, it'd be so weird and hard to understand that's why run on sentences suck. But enough about that, I think you got the point now
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 for a followpoint. 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, and I want something I consider better.
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 for a followpoint. 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, and I want something I consider better.
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.
Taking what I said again => Dividing patterns. New Combo is used to separate two patterns, combos. They are not meant to be linked together, so why should there be follow points in between? There are meant to be set apart the previous/next combo.
I'm being rude because you came here, exposing your "personal opinion" as being the best choice, or rather, calling the actual game mechanic the worst possible one, based off you opinion (which is fine) but not explaining it (which it isn't) and stating uneducated guesses ("NCs are arbitrary", which they aren't, except in the case of bad mappers). All of that making for an apparent close mind. And that's no good if you want to expose your opinion on a forum.
Useless* blocks of text
ZenithPhantasm
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
plz lok thred drum drm
philosofikal is wrong
The follow points not connecting separate combos often trips me up on ar>9 and I find the inconsistency annoying, but I don't really want it to be changed either b/c it kind of makes sense.
I'm going to try playing with no follow points for a while and see if it helps my consistency on high ar.
I'm going to try playing with no follow points for a while and see if it helps my consistency on high ar.