1. osu! forums
  2. osu!
  3. Feature Requests
This is a feature request. Feature requests can be voted up by supporters.
Current Priority: +1,105
show more
posted

- Lumi - wrote:

The AR change would be from only 1 point or 1,5 maximum !
Like you're having a slider ar8 and the next one has a higher sv (ex. 1,50x) then create an ar9 or 9,5 for this said slider.

Hope you see my point of view.
Make that a ranking criteria, if neccessary. Give the possibility to go all the way through, I'd love to see gimmick maps with heavy AR changes.
posted
I don't play standard that much, but I have to admit I'm not a huge fan of this idea. People say "taiko and mania use it." Well, in taiko, this is easy to read most of the time (not all, just more often than not). And also for the record, when you see this in taiko, that's a change in SV, which standard already allows. As for mania, that's a monster. You can't honestly tell me that when this happens in mania, it never confuses you to the point where you pause wanting to quit :/
posted

BrambleClaw wrote:

You can't honestly tell me that when this happens in mania, it never confuses you to the point where you pause wanting to quit :/
This only ever happens in autoconverted maps lol. Gimmicky mania maps are real fun and pretty much never confuse experienced players.
posted

PyaKura wrote:

BrambleClaw wrote:

You can't honestly tell me that when this happens in mania, it never confuses you to the point where you pause wanting to quit :/
This only ever happens in autoconverted maps lol. Gimmicky mania maps are real fun and pretty much never confuse experienced players.
Oh, well, I guess that makes sense. I don't really play mania, I only have a few mania specific maps lol
posted

HK_ wrote:

1. Changing to lower AR at lower BPM would certainly make map easier to read/play but thats the very problem. Why the heck would you want to make easier something thats supposed to be hard? If you make something hard easy its not hard anymore and that makes no sense at all. Its the best the way it is.

There are other reasons but i wont point them out because probably nobody actually cares them and one i did point out is enough imo.
Are the slow parts of an otherwise fast map supposed to be really hard? Think of Image Material, for example. Do you think the slow slow oh-my-fucking-god-just-fucking-get-to-the-map start of the map would be worse if it wasn't AR10? But hey, there's nothing that says that different AR would NEED to be used in a map anyway. I mean, I really hope that if this was around when Image Material was mapped that it wouldn't have been mapped at all would have been used to make the slow part not be AR10, but if you really wanted to make the start AR10 for some inexplicable reason, then sure, why not?

Your objection to this request is a reason we need better or more specific ranking criteria (and I probably agree about that), not a reason this shouldn't be implemented.




As for the objection in a recent post about this being "confusing", that could mostly be avoided by saying that this can only be used after a break and/or only allowing it to be done via a red line. The AR changing would only be particularly confusing if there were 2 different speeds of approach circles on the map at once. Otherwise, it's just honestly not that difficult to switch between playing different approach rates. Perhaps a change in AR could even be indicated somehow during play so you wouldn't be surprised.
posted

Yauxo wrote:

Youre not mapping a song to make it difficult. You map a song because you probably like the music and would like to create something that you can share with other players.
Im sorry but not everyone thinks of mapping as an art.

GhostFrog wrote:

Are the slow parts of an otherwise fast map supposed to be really hard?
Evary part of a hard map is supposed to be hard.

GhostFrog wrote:

Think of Image Material, for example. Do you think the slow slow oh-my-fucking-god-just-fucking-get-to-the-map start of the map would be worse if it wasn't AR10?
Yes it would because what the heck is ar8/9 doing in a 7 star map?

GhostFrog wrote:

But hey, there's nothing that says that different AR would NEED to be used in a map anyway.
If its not going to be used then why ask for it in the first place?

GhostFrog wrote:

As for the objection in a recent post about this being "confusing", that could mostly be avoided by saying that this can only be used after a break and/or only allowing it to be done via a red line. The AR changing would only be particularly confusing if there were 2 different speeds of approach circles on the map at once. Otherwise, it's just honestly not that difficult to switch between playing different approach rates. Perhaps a change in AR could even be indicated somehow during play so you wouldn't be surprised.
But what about newbies? I mean they have a lot of trouble even with singe ar per map, so why not just throw few more at them anyway?
And no, i dont think that only newbies would find it confusing because i would certainly too.
And what about players like me that dont rely only on their eyesight but on timing and rhythm too? Should i just recalibrate all i got used to in last 30secs just because mapper wanted to put ar9 in some (not so) random part instead of ar10?
posted

HK_ wrote:

Yauxo wrote:

Youre not mapping a song to make it difficult. You map a song because you probably like the music and would like to create something that you can share with other players.
Im sorry but not everyone thinks of mapping as an art.
did he say mapping is an art? No. Also, Yauxo is right, you don't map songs to be difficult, if you do, the map is 100% sure to be a shitmap (unless your name is Scorpiour, Val0108 or Blue Dragon). You map because you want to map the song you like

GhostFrog wrote:

Are the slow parts of an otherwise fast map supposed to be really hard?
Evary part of a hard map is supposed to be hard.
Have you gone insane? This is no way near close. Hey, I have a 260 BPM map full of 1/4 jumps so the star rating is 8 (and still rankable), Oh, here is a slow 28 bpm which is only a violing string, Let's make it a nice slider. Oh wait, that's not allowed, I need to make this a 1/32 stream so the difficulty matches up with the rest.
Uhm, I hope you can see this should NEVER,and I reapeat NEVER be the case in any map


GhostFrog wrote:

Think of Image Material, for example. Do you think the slow slow oh-my-fucking-god-just-fucking-get-to-the-map start of the map would be worse if it wasn't AR10?
Yes it would because what the heck is ar8/9 doing in a 7 star map?
Because it fits. AR 9 is still way to high for a 130 bpm 1/2 slow single part map, let alone that 28 BPM part. AR should follow the BPM + density of the song, NOT the star rating, as that is only an indicator.

GhostFrog wrote:

But hey, there's nothing that says that different AR would NEED to be used in a map anyway.
If its not going to be used then why ask for it in the first place?
Cause ot's a great idea
Every map with big BPM changes, like Image -Material, Alice 2 Alice (one of my current pending maps), Wahrheit, EVERY compilation, and much more would benefit from this a lot. Give 9.5/10 to the faster harder parts, and 8-9 to the slower parts

GhostFrog wrote:

As for the objection in a recent post about this being "confusing", that could mostly be avoided by saying that this can only be used after a break and/or only allowing it to be done via a red line. The AR changing would only be particularly confusing if there were 2 different speeds of approach circles on the map at once. Otherwise, it's just honestly not that difficult to switch between playing different approach rates. Perhaps a change in AR could even be indicated somehow during play so you wouldn't be surprised.
But what about newbies? I mean they have a lot of trouble even with singe ar per map, so why not just throw few more at them anyway? As if newbies would properly play maps like this. I'm new to this game, let's play Image Material. Also, newbies won't even notice a difference between 9-10, as it's both fast for them.
And no, i dont think that only newbies would find it confusing because i would certainly too.
And what about players like me that dont rely only on their eyesight but on timing and rhythm too? Should i just recalibrate all i got used to in last 30secs just because mapper wanted to put ar9 in some (not so) random part instead of ar10?
Yes, if Scorp mapped the last 40-50 seconds of Image material (which is a slow 130 BPM piano) which is really calm AR 10 would be very unfitting, just as the other slow parts
Also, I'd say they should ONLY be changed in BPM changes, nowhere else (as that'll indeed be to confusing)

- Lumi - wrote:

The AR change would be from only 1 point or 1,5 maximum !
Also, this rule is probably a rule which will get added to avoid abuse
posted
Since both of our arguments are purely opinion based further discussion would be pointless.
Bonus: Mappers and non mappers will never view mapping the same. Thats a fact.
posted
I wont speak for baraatje (because Im not him) but yes, mappers and players wont always have the same viewpoint - because mappers have more insight over those, that have never touched the editor before.
You see, we're not only mappers, we're players as well. We play the game (most people every day) and we like to create maps/content for it. In order to improve our content, we have to make sure that what we create is good and fun to play.

-> If we have a relaxing song, then we map a slow/relaxing map.
-> If we have a DnB song, then we can be more creative with many triplets, streams etc.
-> If we have a strong and high BPM song, then we can go crazy, have difficult patterns and create a challenge to the player.
-> If we have a song that is streamy, then we'll map streams.
-> If we have a song that sounds jumpy, then we'll map jumps.

Now, what if there's a slow/relaxing part in the strong and high BPM song (Image Material for example). What should we do? As we know by now, the slow part should be mapped accordingly, so we cant just smash streams into violin sections. That wouldnt be good design.

Skipping forward, we now have a strong and fast AR10 map with a slow section for the slow part of the music. Problem is, that the AR still gives some kind of illusion of speed and "it's still pretty damn fast" to us, even though the part is supposed and mapped to be slow.
This is where the AR change could kick in. It'd make these kinds of things much better and more enjoyable as a whole. There wouldnt be any need to tone the AR of your map down just because half of the song works better in AR8 as compared to AR9.

To you, yes, you might have the opinion that you want difficult maps to be difficult, but no, your point doesnt make too much sense in this case
posted
90% of other games have and allow variable approach rates. Mania and Taiko both allow it. It wouldn't be such a terrible thing. AR is so broken (ar10 is 42% faster than ar9) that it would almost certainly be used incorrectly much like SV changes are used poorly today. Subtle changes are OK unless you make a gimmick map like headlock or a 2B style.

The real limitation here is that it would require a complete revamp of the file format, and I'm not sure the benefits are worth the work.

Finally, anyone who really wants to use different approach rates in a beatmap can already do this. Clearly it will never be ranked, and since 99% of ranking players turn off storyboards and skins, it will go unnoticed. A side effect of this method is that you can use the OSB file to modify the map and play with different rates in multiplayer (one player can use AR9.5, the other can use AR10 or 10.2 or 10.6). The limitation here would be that you could only have one beatmap per set.

So instead of supporting this, provide examples of already created maps which would be made better using a variable approach rate. Nobody cares about hard rock anyway.

I would be willing to do this if someone has a good example of a ranked map which would sincerely benefit from an AR change (and when/where the AR changes happen)
posted

ziin wrote:

The real limitation here is that it would require a complete revamp of the file format, and I'm not sure the benefits are worth the work.
We're already 13 changes in, why not a 14th change if it improves mapping :3?
osu file format v14
posted

Yauxo wrote:

ziin wrote:

The real limitation here is that it would require a complete revamp of the file format, and I'm not sure the benefits are worth the work.
We're already 13 changes in, why not a 14th change if it improves mapping :3?
osu file format v14
On second thought this would be easier than previously thought. It would just work off of timing sections. My other point still stands that this is already possible to do in the current osu format but nobody has done the work.
posted
Via storyboard? It's more work than it's worth for, really. I wouldnt want to skin an universal skin (people use different skins, remember that) and fiddle around with every single object Ive put down. Modding would be hell as well if you have to move objects around.

As you mentioned, most people play with full dim and no video/sb anyway, so there's not much use in that. As a gimmicky map though? Well, yea, maybe. If someone feels like doing that. I know I dont.
posted
By hard being hard i didnt mean putting deathstream into the part that obviously shouldnt be any kind of stream. Since you already picked image material...I think that if you picked ar8/9 for slow part before kiai most of players would be thrown of by sudden change of ar even if warned previously and thus very bad.

And since my opinion obviously wont change until i see the results please stop this pointless whatever it is.
posted

baraatje123 wrote:

- Lumi - wrote:

The AR change would be from only 1 point or 1,5 maximum !
Also, this rule is probably a rule which will get added to avoid abuse
Sure.
posted

Yauxo wrote:

Via storyboard? It's more work than it's worth for, really. I wouldnt want to skin an universal skin (people use different skins, remember that) and fiddle around with every single object Ive put down. Modding would be hell as well if you have to move objects around.

As you mentioned, most people play with full dim and no video/sb anyway, so there's not much use in that. As a gimmicky map though? Well, yea, maybe. If someone feels like doing that. I know I dont.
If making a storyboard is more work than it's worth for, really, then creating a whole new osu format is certainly more work than it's wort for, really.

Storyboards can use your skin. They just usually don't because the easiest way to make a bad storyboard is to have the storyboard interact with the hit objects like 11t does. I could make it work with a few skins, but it's easy to just force a skin and let the player modify the skin like in blythe. Obviously this would be done via SGLE or in excel. It's not a difficult process and would take 2 minutes to make a change via excel or 30 seconds compile time to make a change via SGLE.

Also, I'll just leave this here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hromx6HeN_w
posted
When multiple new things are added for file format 15, this can also be added to it
There is no need ti add it now, but it will be really convenient if it gets added alongside multiple other new tweaks
posted

HK_ wrote:

.I think that if you picked ar8/9 for slow part before kiai most of players would be thrown of by sudden change of ar even if warned previously and thus very bad.

And since my opinion obviously wont change until i see the results please stop this pointless whatever it is.
You'd be suprised how many people can read Taiko AR/Scrollspeed changes without too many problems. Not too different for Std I'd imagine. People are already able to read heavy timing changes on extremely difficult maps (https://osu.ppy.sh/s/280107#), which, if you turn a few things, is basically comparable to an AR change on a steady BPM
Also, you're basically asking for answers and that's what Im doing.

ziin wrote:

If making a storyboard is more work than it's worth for, really, then creating a whole new osu format is certainly more work than it's wort for, really.

Storyboards can use your skin. They just usually don't because the easiest way to make a bad storyboard is to have the storyboard interact with the hit objects like 11t does. I could make it work with a few skins, but it's easy to just force a skin and let the player modify the skin like in blythe. Obviously this would be done via SGLE or in excel. It's not a difficult process and would take 2 minutes to make a change via excel or 30 seconds compile time to make a change via SGLE.

Also, I'll just leave this here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hromx6HeN_w
Shouldve pointed out that I'd probably too much work for me, as I dont know much about storyboard - so I dont have much to object to that (maybe?).
I'd agree on baraatje's post above though.
posted

baraatje123 wrote:

When multiple new things are added for file format 15, this can also be added to it
There is no need ti add it now, but it will be really convenient if it gets added alongside multiple other new tweaks
This is one of those rare "feature requests" that can be proved (like a jubeat mode or a technika mode). Your arguments would carry so much more weight if there were lots of examples of good maps that use different Approach Rates.
posted

HK_ wrote:

By hard being hard i didnt mean putting deathstream into the part that obviously shouldnt be any kind of stream. Since you already picked image material...I think that if you picked ar8/9 for slow part before kiai most of players would be thrown of by sudden change of ar even if warned previously and thus very bad.
I frequently switch between AR4.5 and AR9.66 in consecutive maps I play and it requires no adjustment period at all. It's not difficult to get used to and putting the two approach rates in the same map doesn't add much difficulty to the process if it can only be changed during a break and is properly indicated in some way.

It's interesting to me that you've done some sort of almost 180 here. You were saying before that easy things in hard maps should be made difficult by use of high AR (which, by the way, is completely nonsensical, since anyone who can play the hard parts of the map well will have no issue at all reading the higher AR on the easy part). Now you're saying that we shouldn't add difficulty to maps by changing the AR (which is also pretty nonsensical, since it'll just require a little bit of getting used to). Like...those two things don't directly contradict each other, but I really don't understand what your opinion on approach rate is. Should it be used for difficulty? Should it not be used for difficulty? Should it be whatever the mapper wants to use? None of those answers make this request bad at all, but it looks like you're just jumping around between them to try to find one that supports your side of this.
show more
Please sign in to reply.