Hydria wrote:

If one diff is too easy and one diff is too hard, train more until that too hard diff becomes easier, like a long reaching goal.

juankristal wrote:

I mean, the diff gap from the now called Normal diff and the Hard diff is quite big. If I have to judge it I would say it doesnt fit the "Well designed" spread that the RC asks for. Adding a difficulty in between both of the problematic ones isnt a huge deal. So does the Hard and Insane diff, The increase is linear and be expressed in obvious same gaps.

The fact that this song is 30 seconds doesnt matter at all, the RC asks for a well designed spread and "This is so that players of all levels of experience are able to enjoy maps of the songs they love.". The gap between normal and hard being that big makes it so you would have to spend a long time if you want to enjoy the song you love. Being it 30 seconds or 300 doesnt really change anything there since the key word is enjoy and not just pass. This point is too subjective, how do you know what is the thing that player enjoy? I can easily reverse that statement by saying "the thing that player enjoy is something that's challenging for them, because enjoy equates to fun, and fun equates to challenging. No one would find something safe to be interesting and fun either". Bringing too subjective thing from RC to be masked into objective point seems quite detrimental on its own.

And I keep hearing that short song doesn't matter, Now can someone explain to me why? Shorter song require less focus and less pattern adaptation because They don't require to hold much concentration and having too much muscle memory to comprehend many things consistently. That's one thing mapper and modder also need to consider in general either way.

So my first point is, why is this spread not a well designed one? Well:

1. The map goes from normal to hard with: 50 bpm streams with eventually 100bpm triplets (and no doubles at all) to 100 bpm constant streams with high density, a good portion of jacks, eventually 200 bpm minibursts and sometimes even polys. The jump between this two is insane at least. It's 100 BPM stream in normal because they already introduce many 1/2 pattern already.. and Hard difficulty feature double note but still within 1/2 pattern which only differences in density, the 1/6 only occurs at few places with the double being on either 34 on 12 to give much easier patterning. and the kiai features broke 1/4, which is from normal diff which having broken 1/2 too. (1/2 to 1/4 is normal tbh) if it's problem, honestly idk what to say.
   
2. For the Hard-Insane jump: Higher density (+1 note on every chord), LNs and a bigger amount of polys. Even though I think its a bigger gap than average its still not far off it, given that the density increase doesnt involve any other sort of technicallity other than just a better finger coordination, the gap mostly stands above the average due to the LN anchors and the bursts. If I have to give this a rating I would say the gap between this two diffs is higher than normal but not insane. Would say just a big gap.

The main theme is technicality though, the music has complex snap and sound and so does the map have complex patterning. I will say this is the very start of the mapping idea to having equally large gap to reflect on how the instrument actually being composed, and i will say it's really fitting theme and have acceptable gap due to mapping design choices.

So because of that I think the gap needs to be filled with a -higher than usual- gap between the normal difficulty and the hard difficulty and the best way for it would likely be add a new one, as both of this difficulties are quite good at their own.

And my second point is that the RC states that "A difficulty's name must indicate its level of difficulty, with the exception of the hardest level of difficulty in a set" which means the easier diff should likely be renamed to Easy instead. They didn't say "A difficulty's name must indicate its Icon level of difficulty" btw, so i don't think there's anywhere that stated that Star Rating must indicate the icon diff, but rather on more case on case basis.

That being said, its only my opinion on it and the RC isnt really clear with it. Another diff for this would be nice and fairly easy to achieve and even Weber offered to do so. Feerum is a QAT and he is the one in charge of this hitting the qualified section so I guess we just see if you (hydria) consider any of my points valid or at least my explanation is good enough for you. As Weber offered, I wouldnt mind doing such difficulty in case your problem is just a time issue (wanting to get the map ranked asap). If thats not an issue then I dont really see why you wouldnt do such thing, I am sure that you can get this set back to ranked in an instant with the new difficulty (and in case that you dont find any BN for it call me).

PD:

Hydria wrote:

1. There are worse ranked spreads out there

Please just dont use that argument, you should be one of the people who leads to a better ranked place, not a worse one. Dont use that as an excuse to do it wrong, use it as an excuse to make things better. However, It raises question on how much issue is actually an issue, or is it not an issue in the first place and just personal preference instead?

juankristal wrote:

I mean, the diff gap from the now called Normal diff and the Hard diff is quite big. If I have to judge it I would say it doesnt fit the "Well designed" spread that the RC asks for. Adding a difficulty in between both of the problematic ones isnt a huge deal.

The fact that this song is 30 seconds doesnt matter at all, the RC asks for a well designed spread and "This is so that players of all levels of experience are able to enjoy maps of the songs they love.". The gap between normal and hard being that big makes it so you would have to spend a long time if you want to enjoy the song you love. Being it 30 seconds or 300 doesnt really change anything there since the key word is enjoy and not just pass. don't know why time is a factor here but w/e idc

So my first point is, why is this spread not a well designed one? Well:

1. The map goes from normal to hard with: 50 bpm streams with eventually 100bpm triplets there's 4-5 note 100bpm streams in there(and no doubles at all) to 100 bpm constant streams you mean chords with high density, a good portion of jacks minijacks, it's designed in a way that a player never hats to hit more than one jack pattern at a time, eventually 200 bpm minibursts broken streams and sometimes even polys there's like 4 1/6 notes if that's what you define as "polyrhythms" if not then show me where they are. The jump between this two is insane at least. actually it's normal->hard not insane xd
2. For the Hard-Insane jump: Higher density (+1 note on every chord), LNs and a bigger amount of polys bursts increasing to 1/8, LN shields,
   and then 200bpm awkward broken js. Even though I think its a bigger gap than average its still not far off it, given that the density increase doesnt involve any other sort of technicallity other than just a better finger coordination isn't that true for every gap in every map, the gap mostly stands above the average due to the LN anchors and the bursts. If I have to give this a rating I would say the gap between this two diffs is higher than normal but not insane but this is hard -> insane xd. Would say just a big gap.

So because of that I think the gap needs to be filled with a -higher than usual- gap between the normal difficulty and the hard difficulty and the best way for it would likely be add a new one, as both of this difficulties are quite good at their own.

And my second point is that the RC states that "A difficulty's name must indicate its level of difficulty, with the exception of the hardest level of difficulty in a set" which means the easier diff should likely be renamed to Easy instead.

1
2
3
4
no hate dude just following the standard

That being said, its only my opinion on it and the RC isnt really clear with it. Another diff for this would be nice and fairly easy to achieve and even Weber offered to do so. Feerum is a QAT and he is the one in charge of this hitting the qualified section so I guess we just see if you (hydria) consider any of my points valid or at least my explanation is good enough for you. As Weber offered, I wouldnt mind doing such difficulty in case your problem is just a time issue (wanting to get the map ranked asap). If thats not an issue then I dont really see why you wouldnt do such thing, I am sure that you can get this set back to ranked in an instant with the new difficulty (and in case that you dont find any BN for it call me). it isn't an issue I just don't want to include a 4th diff in this set but you know who am I to judge call along blocko the independent qat to see what he says

PD:

Hydria wrote:

1. There are worse ranked spreads out there

Please just dont use that argument, you should be one of the people who leads to a better ranked place, not a worse one. Dont use that as an excuse to do it wrong, use it as an excuse to make things better.

one of my own maps has a worse spread than this but I guess the community only works on reactionary complaints so w/e

juankristal wrote:

you should be one of the people who leads to a better ranked place, not a worse one

I just want to address this one point on it's own as it seems better that way.

(edited due to expected community overreaction and therefore swaying away from the original point which is a mod)
I do me, you do you, I have my own goals, expectations, commitments and visions, and so do you.
Don't try to push your ideals onto me. The last thing I want to do is work on trying to fix the collection of ranked maps.

juankristal wrote:

Maxus, if you truly believe this Normal diff is a Normal diff and not an easy then well, we just disagree. I say this normal is even easier than a "usual" easy that you are claiming other sets to be worse at. I fail to understand where I claim and compared this with other set.
Each case stands on its own and that's why i pull off the argument solely based on this map. Saying it's easier than other usual easy just simply untrue and doesn't really correlate with the issue being talked about anyway.

Introduction of 1/2 is fine, sure, but the normal diff is nowhere near to the hard and you cant deny that. Sure, they are built in an easier way that it could been with similar structures but that doesnt justify that the gap is still insane. It doesn't need extremely strict gap to be effective, we can go around having really friendly gap but in the end it'd just be detrimental with the overall spread balance and pattern music expresses in anyway and it's up to how the mapper focused on catering. I will say that it's not that insane if it's from broken 1/2 to more dense 1/2, and 1/2 to 1/4, it's normal.

Tho sure, the normal diff isnt just 50 bpm streaming with eventually 100 bpm triplets, is a more tech oriented structure but the main thing is still the same, you never have more than 3 notes in 1/2 in a row besides like one or two parts. 00:03:300 - 00:14:100 - 00:14:100 - etc wanna have a word here, 4 notes 5 notes 1/2 are already common in this normal diff.


Edit: And about the 30 seconds or whatever problem is that its not about a player being bad but yet able to pass something just because its shorter, a song being shorter doesnt justify it being a worse set than anything else. If the spread is poor, it will take the player a higher amount of time to actually enjoy a harder difficulty that what its intended, which is why lenght doesnt matter. Sure, a 5 minutes easy song will likely be a bigger problem for players to tank than a 30 seconds one but the time they have to invest to be able to enjoy, pass or whatever a 5 minutes normal song besides being longer is comparable to learning a 5 mintues easy one. If that makes sense. And I will repeat myself again, that enjoy is subjective things, Just from what i know alone, people find challenging thing to be more enjoyable even if they are just started. I don't know if people would enjoy something more safe compared with more challenging. that's just common sense if you want to pull that "enjoy" thing as the reasoning

"Doesn't justify being a worse set"? now you try to talk as the spread gap is an objective things, and unfortunately here, it's really completely subjective. if 30 seconds require people to have less muscle memory and less focus to hold the pattern consistently (which is the keyplay in osu mania either) , then it means it already caters the player by itself, and fulfill the gap purposes in the first place.

do you even realize you are following a standard of 2013-2014? This is just an exaggeration at this point, 2013-2014 map have 2-3* gap with uneven spread, while this map is even lower gap with even spread and factoring the music technicalities and complexity, I can't believe you even try to compared them in the first place.

And of course, you can be you, I can be me. I was just saying that last thing as someone who did believe that you actually cared about stuff being done properly which apparently is not the case a single bit. Again, I can say the properly balance gap factored with music compromise and pattern technicality is a "properly done thing", this map actually have nice linear gap, i just think people try to see only based on their preference and not on what mappers try to do here.

If you dont care about this set anymore then why you even rank it on the first place, for me it looks like you just wanted to rank this as a "i can do whatever and you cant stop me" thing (even tho it probably isnt). He need to pass BN and QAT though for this map case, and I already provide all the essay I could on why I actually thought it's alright and allowed it.


And sure, you ranking this map will set another precedent of dumb spreads, exactly as the old 2013-2014 ones. Also, you are using SR as a base to judge spread, there are just many things that are just wrong there. again , the 2013-2014 is exaggerating, why you would even compared them with this in the first place is just proof of not even trying to see the whole picture of the map in the first place, just saying. and that "dumb spread" and "exactly as the old" doesn't really help other than being offensive, I hope we can remain civil here.

juankristal wrote:

Maxus, have you ever seen Hydrias responce? I am reffering to his examples which are all 2013-2014.

juankristal wrote:

Yeah, you don't read at all.

hydria wrote:

1
2
3
4
no hate dude just following the standard

juankristal wrote:

hydria wrote:

1
2
3
4
no hate dude just following the standard

@Maxus ^

vipto wrote:

reply right the fuck now what are you thinking