normal-hitfinish6 really doesn't fit this song tbh lmao

03:28:753 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2) - just to up it to 9 stars I suppose, on a serious note, I don't think this huge difficulty spikes should be allowed, you can argue that you feel the music is stronger than other parts, but I don't that justify 12,0 10,0 jumps.

also can you explain me what's the point of making maps that no one can play? I mean, anyone can take songs like this and make 9 stars maps, but I think people don't because no one can enjoy them (without NF or HT), there is a point when maps become physically impossible and they shouldn't be ranked IMO.

About the big difficulty spike what's the point of have it? make your map 9 stars? make it super hard?, if they fit the music or not is subjective, since alot of people would argue they do (personally I don't think they do), but we should take in consideration the playability of the map, having them make the map less enjoyable, I believe you are a decent mapper who can represent the song without the need of those jumps.

There are alot of linear movements 03:25:060 (1,2,3,1) - that don't play good at normal bpms and I guess they are worst at this high bpm, alot of overmapped objects as Xexxar pointed.

Anyways if this get ranked with that difficulty spike, we shouldn't complain at any other as well, since this one is beyond to any other difficulty spike.

I wonder who the target players of this map are. Maybe some of high-ranked players like playing excessive maps they can hardly pass, but we won't call them as 'target players', just like an Insane diff cannot have newbies as target players only because some of them like to struggle to pass it.

to add to natsu's point. This map is the equivalent of if I took my old map https://osu.ppy.sh/s/334050 and mapped 04:54:736 (1) - as entirely streams because "the song justified it"

10* when :<?
Gratz btw xd

this map is so fun! especially the high bpm part (fast is my specialty ). may be hard but still feels great to play! especially since it represents the music so well

This map actually received extensive testplaying from top players before being pushed forward. Just going through the first 3-4 pages, many of the mods were made by players in the top 100. When you map, you rarely consider a "target audience" anyways. Whenever you consider a "target audience" in mapping, it will always be for lower difficulties, such as spinner recovery time on Easy/Normal, or rhythm density, or too many streams on a Hard, etc...

Spacing is very subjective. Will moving a jump 1 pixel closer make it more acceptable to you? How about 2 pixels closer? How about 3? 4? etc... You see, everyone will see "excessive" spacing differently, and everyone will have different opinions towards what's too emphasized, and what they'd consider acceptable. If the star rating system were different, and there wasn't as big of an SR spike, I don't think we'd be as critical about the pattern. Star rating is extremely biased towards high-bpm jumps by the way. The system is set up to slice maps into chunks which I think are 500 ms. They then rate each individual 500 ms based on difficulty. The higher the bpm, the more objects you can fit into any one of these windows. The reason this is unfair is because more objects also contribute to more difficulty, as the rating system has more objects it can add to the calculation. Basically, if you fit 3 objects into a 500 ms window, and then fit 6 objects into a 500 ms window, the 6 object pattern will be more than twice as difficult as the 3 object pattern.

There is a point where the spacing is subjective yes, but once you started to spam cross screen jumps that's going too far, specially a high bpm, we are not discussing the star rating, Monstrata, but the huge spike there, Is totally unnecessary to have these jumps.
Monstrata we are not talking about moving things 1 pixel, we are talking about moving things to the point that they fit the rest of the difficulty of this map. Yes difficulty spikes are fine, but the one at this map is just exaggerated and unnecessary.

It's really unfair to compare difficulty spike in the fast part of the map to the slow part. You don't do that for song compilations and it shouldn't be done here. The jumps, when put in the context of only the rest of the solo, are completely fine. The stream sections at 03:23:214 - 03:25:926 - and 03:50:791 - 03:52:464 - are arguably as hard as the jumps anyway. Star rating is completely useless when comparing jumps to streams or technical patterns

@Natsu this is literally in the god damn map description: p/5515182

What more could you possibly want mazzerin to explain?

LefafeI wrote:

@Natsu this is literally in the god damn map description: p/5515182

What more could you possibly want mazzerin to explain?

Explaining something doesn't make it correct, that's why there are discussions about the issues or questionable things in a map.

Oh. I was trying to be more philosophical haha. Like "What is a huge jump? How many pixels does it take to make it huge?" It's like if you have one piece of paper. Is that a stack of paper? No? What if I add another piece of paper? and another? when does a pile of paper become a stack of paper? Considering that logic, there's no objective way to define a jump as being too big. But I suppose, there's no objective way to say the jump needs to be that big either, so its reciprocal. That was my argument for putting those jumps on Inferno actually, I just thought I'd reference that, since a lot of discussion went into that set regarding the really big jumps. (Quaver also had a lot of discussion, but quaver had a much better spacing concept, so I'll count that as a separate debate).

Natsu wrote:

Explaining something doesn't make it correct, that's why there are discussions about the issues or questionable things in a map.

Oh, so you're here just to tell the mapper that he is incorrect in his interpretation of the music? Despite saying, and this is a direct quote from your OP, that "if they fit the music or not is subjective"?

I'm sorry, but what exactly is the point you're trying to make?

LefafeI wrote:

Natsu wrote:

Explaining something doesn't make it correct, that's why there are discussions about the issues or questionable things in a map.

Oh, so you're here just to tell the mapper that he is incorrect in his interpretation of the music? Despite saying, and this is a direct quote from your OP, that "if they fit the music or not is subjective"?

I'm sorry, but what exactly is the point you're trying to make?

so you failed to read that I'm worry about the difference of difficulty with the rest of the map and also the playability ? I'm not complaining about his interpretation, I'm complaining about the sudden spike and that the map don't have any target audience, did someone passed it without no fail?, reducing the difficulty at that part may open the map for someone to play it properly (maybe).

Natsu wrote:

so you failed to read that I'm worry about the difference of difficulty with the rest of the map and also the playability ? I'm not complaining about his interpretation, I'm complaining about the sudden spike and that the map don't have any target audience, did someone passed it without no fail?, reducing the difficulty at that part may open the map for someone to play it properly (maybe).

Yeah there's a stark spike in the map's star rating, not so stark in the actual difficulty play-wise. It has been explained several times in the thread already.

The map has been extensively playested by a number of experienced players, and has recieved praise from them, so there clearly is an audience for it as well. It might be true that the players that can pass the map without difficulty-decreasing mods can be counted with one hand right now, but how does that devalue the map in any way? For many of us, enjoying a map doesn't require a final score that the game labels as a "pass". Are players not allowed to enjoy and compete on maps just because they can't perform well enough to meet the game's somewhat arbitary standards of what counts as a "passable score" (Or, as you put it, can't "play it properly")? Who even are you to tell what is or isn't "playing properly"?
If the map was HP1, would it suddenly be more worthy of ranking because people could now pass it without no-fail or half time?

Only nerfing the star rating spike would just compromise the map's consistency, since the current map represents the music just about as well as can be expected. (This is subjective, of course, but plenty of people agree with this, including many very experienced mappers and players and of course Mazzerin himself)

All of these issues are so fundamentally subjective, that even bringing them up after them being discussed so many times already just seems very disruptive rather than constructive.

LefafeI wrote:

Yeah there's a stark spike in the map's star rating, not so stark in the actual difficulty play-wise. It has been explained several times in the thread already.

The map has been extensively playested by a number of experienced players, and has recieved praise from them, so there clearly is an audience for it as well. It might be true that the players that can pass the map without difficulty-decreasing mods can be counted with one hand right now, but how does that devalue the map in any way? For many of us, enjoying a map doesn't require a final score that the game labels as a "pass". Are players not allowed to enjoy and compete on maps just because they can't perform well enough to meet the game's somewhat arbitary standards of what counts as a "passable score" (Or, as you put it, can't "play it properly")? Who even are you to tell what is or isn't "playing properly"?
If the map was HP1, would it suddenly be more worthy of ranking because people could now pass it without no-fail or half time?

Only nerfing the star rating spike would just compromise the map's consistency, since the current map represents the music just about as well as can be expected. (This is subjective, of course, but plenty of people agree with this, including many very experienced mappers and players and of course Mazzerin himself)

All of these issues are so fundamentally subjective, that even bringing them up after them being discussed so many times already just seems very disruptive rather than constructive.

Why you keep talking about star rating?

The spike is there, no I'm not complaining about it being 9 stars, I'm complaining about the lvl of difficulty.

Who I'm to complain about a map in the qualify map section, just a member of the community that is concerned about the direction that mapping is going nowadays, if you didn't read that's the purpose of the qualify section, anyone can post their concern, I'm wonder until when people will notice this.



Yes I read all the map thread, there are alot of complains about that diff spike, isn't only me.

Nerfing that part would not compromise anything, let's don't talk about that, i have enough mapping experience to know that nerfing things don't compromise your map in any way, if playability wins then there should not be an excuse for don't do it, anyways I want to know what the QAT think about this.

Edit:

Btw who can pass this map? tbh atm as Doyak said is the same as a new player trying to pass a hard diff, there is no one, if I'm not wrong.

ohhhh now I understand, you think that the opinnions of the nominators that qualified the map are wrong, since they considered the difficulty spike a non-issue and you don't. That would indeed mean that QAT, being the higher administrative party, is the only souce of any relevancy at this point and further discussion before their input about this is pointless.

LefafeI wrote:

ohhhh now I understand, you think that the opinnions of the nominators that qualified the map are wrong, since they considered the difficulty spike a non-issue and you don't. That would indeed mean that QAT, being the higher administrative party, is the only souce of any relevancy at this point and further discussion before their input about this is pointless.

That apply to any map where a discussion is going on, don't take it wrong, just because a map is qualified doesn't mean is ranked, qualified section is to discuss things related to the map, ranked section is the final product of it, don't merge them, and yes, that's why we used this thread: p/5518455 the QAT check if the issues worth a DQ or not.

TL;DR:
1. There are no overmapped objects.
2. There are no linear movements in the 260 part.
3. It's made with me following the song while having the skill of top players in mind as a reference point to what is playable and what is unplayable.

People react as if it's bad that there's discussion about the first qualified 9* map.
Ofcourse there will be opinions that are different to mazzerin's explanation and ofcourse people will try to make their point clear. Just because there's an "because the song is stronger lel" doesnt mean that noones allowed to post anything about it.

I know i sound like a jackass for saying this (because well, I'm me) but I believe that as long as difficulty spikes are justified by the song, it's fine. In this case, it really is justified simply by the guitar. It may seem like the DS is way too high, but it really isn't when you compare it with all those high bpm spaced streams and stream jumps. The intensity and the lack of density in the 1/2 jumps are compensated with very high DS. Also, consider that the base DS of the jumps are fairly high. There has to be a way to make the most intense part of the song noticeably much more difficult.

This qualified section is made to improve maps that lacks quality, not rant about how a 9* map gets qualified and "nobody" can play it.

o3o

Bearizm wrote:

This qualified section is made to improve maps that lacks quality, not rant about how a 9* map gets qualified and "nobody" can play it.

Well, after all "improvements" this map will be moved to ranked section. Exactly for three and a half people, who can play it and other 300-500 people, who will give it one try with NoFail and forget about it. What do you think, does this map deserves to be ranked? Does the whole community need maps like this? Is there any other reason, despite mapper's will, to move it to ranked section? The answer is no.

This map will be forgotten in a month anyway, no matter ranked it or graveyarded. Enjoy your hype, kids.

god bless u mazzerin

Bearizm wrote:

This qualified section is made to improve maps that lacks quality, not rant about how a 9* map gets qualified and "nobody" can play it.

funny thing is that, its totally playable.. the stream before the kickslider jumps is the hardest part about the map, and thats only because the meta focuses on anything but streams, so of course very few people are able to play it. in any way that doesnt mean its impossible though, it just doesnt fit the skill set of all these anime map players

"i don't like it therefore it shouldn't be ranked"
"i can't play it and almost no one can so it shouldn't be ranked"

there's something called technical quality which is required for getting a map ranked... which this map happens to have
maps like galaxy collapse and red like roses may be "fun" to play (smash your keys through random jumps, sure) but don't have technical quality, therefore that's why they aren't ranked while this map is
people just need to deal with the fact that we should be ranking quality maps regardless if they're hard or not
and if you have absolutely no idea about mapping quality then you should probably stay away from the thread
discussing about "forced difficulty" and actual issues in the map is fine, but saying that the map shouldn't be ranked because it's "too hard" is completely stupid

Locked for cleaning

okay, shitpost warning #2, some things on this thread that weren't contributing to anything, really, died.

Please behave

Bearizm wrote:

I know i sound like a jackass for saying this (because well, I'm me) but I believe that as long as difficulty spikes are justified by the song, it's fine. In this case, it really is justified simply by the guitar. It may seem like the DS is way too high, but it really isn't when you compare it with all those high bpm spaced streams and stream jumps. The intensity and the lack of density in the 1/2 jumps are compensated with very high DS. Also, consider that the base DS of the jumps are fairly high. There has to be a way to make the most intense part of the song noticeably much more difficult.

This qualified section is made to improve maps that lacks quality, not rant about how a 9* map gets qualified and "nobody" can play it.

o3o

If you had a slow song that had a 1/8th stream out of nowhere is it okay to map it because the song warrants it? A map should cater consistency in its design and not be excessive for what its trying to be.



Mazzerin you point out maps like timefreeze and airman as examples of controversial high difficulty maps that are "ok now because C has fc'd them." Do you even think bringing those maps up is relevant? They are consistently difficulty and only have slight to moderate noticeable increases in difficulty in them. The problem is not the difficulty, the problem is how the difficulty is unnatural in the presence of the rest of the map. It's excessive and doesn't fit what else you've mapped.

as for overmapping, I'll ask pishifat to listen to those since you seem to believe he is almighty. (which he is)

A map should cater consistency in its design and not be excessive for what its trying to be.

Hmm... If that's the case I must warn you that pretty much all recent mapping should be DQ then, since most of what we see in recent mapping is maps consistently made as 4* hitting 5* by the abuse of jumps on kiais (this also happened a lot in the past maps by abusing streams).

Saying that the map is mainly mapped according to one star rating(or one difficulty range) and say that the kiai abuses difficulty to increase that should be enough reason to never actually got to rank Road of Resistance, but i didn't see you applying the same logic there.

Not a personal attack, just pointing that this line of argument is pretty empty considering the actual meta of mapping :/

Xexxar wrote:

Mazzerin you point out maps like timefreeze and airman as examples of controversial high difficulty maps that are "ok now because C has fc'd them." Do you even think bringing those maps up is relevant? They are consistently difficulty and only have slight to moderate noticeable increases in difficulty in them. The problem is not the difficulty, the problem is how the difficulty is unnatural in the presence of the rest of the map. It's excessive and doesn't fit what else you've mapped.

Xexxar wrote:

It honestly just feels like its trying to be AS HARD AS PHYSICALLY possible for the sake of being it. Almost no one can play it, no one can enjoy it, so why do it?

?

kkk wrote:

Bearizm wrote:

This qualified section is made to improve maps that lacks quality, not rant about how a 9* map gets qualified and "nobody" can play it.

Well, after all "improvements" this map will be moved to ranked section. Exactly for three and a half people, who can play it and other 300-500 people, who will give it one try with NoFail and forget about it. What do you think, does this map deserves to be ranked? Does the whole community need maps like this? Is there any other reason, despite mapper's will, to move it to ranked section? The answer is no.

This map will be forgotten in a month anyway, no matter ranked it or graveyarded. Enjoy your hype, kids.

Impeccable logic! Bravo! It's been over a year of how your miserable comment on Apparition's thread rots, while the map doesn't, yet to this day you remain completely oblivious to what such behavior will lead to. This kind of input doesn't provide anything to me nor the community, it will change nothing, it affects the quality of the map in no way. Neither the map or you will ever be forgotten though - I can assure you of that - it is already inevitable.

Xexxar wrote:

If you had a slow song that had a 1/8th stream out of nowhere is it okay to map it because the song warrants it?

holy shit 1/8 streams on slow maps aren't even close to how different these jumps are in difficulty, by the way they are used sometimes and they don't come out of nowhere, but rather on intense parts of the song. This comparison would imply that putting 1/16 streams (since the song is 'fast' (I think you were implying it's mostly 1/2 by 'slow'?)) in this map would be just as intense as the 1/2 jumps.. which isn't even close, frankly.

Xexxar wrote:

A map should cater consistency in its design and not be excessive for what its trying to be.

what the... what are you talking about? That part literally never repeats again, the song is extremely unrepetitive and every part has unique spacing that is directly related to each part to make it properly emphasize the hard parts. Don't you see that there are other parts even in the 260 bpm part that are just as spaced as the very spike? 03:37:753 (1,2,1) - 03:44:445 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2) - 03:52:522 (1,2) - 03:48:830 (1,2) -
well, you probably don't see them because they don't pop up in your aim strain graph app... If you try to argue that 'it's not the same because there's only 2 or 4 notes this spaced' there, I will disagree again, because that's how the song is. The spike simply has a larger amount of 1/2 high pitch notes so it turns out this way, and everything before the sliders builds up gradually.

Xexxar wrote:

Mazzerin you point out maps like timefreeze and airman as examples of controversial high difficulty maps that are "ok now because C has fc'd them." Do you even think bringing those maps up is relevant? They are consistently difficulty and only have slight to moderate noticeable increases in difficulty in them. The problem is not the difficulty, the problem is how the difficulty is unnatural in the presence of the rest of the map. It's excessive and doesn't fit what else you've mapped.

Man do you actually think airman/everything will freeze are consistently difficult? Maybe airman is consistently spaced, but let's face it, the non-spaced parts with back and forths 2 times are the only hard parts in the map. Time freeze difficulty spikes up at the end, which is why people who can play it get 1k+ combo very consistently, while failing to pass most of the time. It's not about those maps, though, so I'll say it again - blame the song for becoming 260 bpm if you want, because I have even larger jumps in the 178 bpm sections, not to mention the technical stream patterns which actually ARE difficult, talala even said he might fail just because of the second solo after passing the first one because the second one isn't exactly THAT easy and the first one isn't THAT difficult.

Xexxar wrote:

as for overmapping, I'll ask pishifat to listen to those since you seem to believe he is almighty. (which he is)

Fine, but just for fun - keep these in mind: https://osu.ppy.sh/s/336414 https://osu.ppy.sh/b/1049018

03:30:022 (2) - is that offscreen or still ok? https://puu.sh/rwRfp/094608aaa4.png

Xexxar wrote:

If you had a slow song that had a 1/8th stream out of nowhere is it okay to map it because the song warrants it? A map should cater consistency in its design and not be excessive for what its trying to be.

https://osu.ppy.sh/b/1012279
I think it's perfectly fine to map a 1/8 stream on a slow song if it called for it. I also don't think ignoring a certain aspect of a song for the sake of being consistent is a good idea either. If a song suddenly became intense on a single part, you should map it.

-[Koinuri] wrote:

Xexxar wrote:

If you had a slow song that had a 1/8th stream out of nowhere is it okay to map it because the song warrants it? A map should cater consistency in its design and not be excessive for what its trying to be.

https://osu.ppy.sh/b/1012279
I think it's perfectly fine to map a 1/8 stream on a slow song if it called for it. I also don't think ignoring a certain aspect of a song for the sake of being consistent is a good idea either. If a song suddenly became intense on a single part, you should map it.

why not just use a 1/8th slider to avoid an unnecessary spike in difficulty when it might not warrant it, or any other form of sliders to make it reasonable.

as for mazzerin.

aight fine do whatever, no one cares about maps quality anymore anyway so idk why I even make an effort. (i forgot quaver got ranked, this map is fine)

N00dle wrote:

03:30:022 (2) - is that offscreen or still ok? https://puu.sh/rwRfp/094608aaa4.png

Took a look at Autoplay yesterday, looks fine IIRC.

Xexxar wrote:

why not just use a 1/8th slider to avoid an unnecessary spike in difficulty when it might not warrant it, or any other form of sliders to make it reasonable.

Having bunch of 1/8 repeat sliders (essentially making it a long 1/1 or 1/2 section) is just as inconsistent because it'd make the section way too easy, considering it's one of the peak in the song, but oh well, offtopic. My point is having a spike isn't necessarily a bad thing if the song calls for it.

Xexxar wrote:

If you had a slow song that had a 1/8th stream out of nowhere is it okay to map it because the song warrants it? A map should cater consistency in its design and not be excessive for what its trying to be.

If a song calls for it (like really), why not? It's not always good to sacrifice emphasis for consistency. Actually, I don't think there is ever a case where consistency is prioritized over emphasis. If you think of consistency as the higher prior than emphasis then you're playing a target practice. If vice versa; you're playing a circle clicking rhythm game; which is what this game is. xd

I just feel some 260 bpm large space 1/4 jump is funny. But it's just my opinion and this is unrelated to the map quality. No need to reply to this post. The map is good overall, and in my opinion it's good everywhere. And this is not some sarcasm, I mean, man, this map is good.

N00dle wrote:

03:30:022 (2) - is that offscreen or still ok? https://puu.sh/rwRfp/094608aaa4.png

looked through the map with auto at 800x600, nothing should be offscreen (some stuff goes pretty close but it's not close enough for it to be a problem)

for anyone complaining about sharp stream transitions (like this 04:56:597 (1,1,1) - ) you need to understand that mapping is not simply about smooth transitions and flow. I don't really know the name but you can hear the foot pedal (?) kick in here 04:56:765 - which justifies this kind of patterning.

also mazzerin can you tell me about this 05:02:158 (1,2,1,2) - 05:02:833 (1,2,3,4) -