Guest
home
beatmaps
rankings
community
store
help
forum
  1. Forums
  2. Beatmaps
  3. Mapping Discussion
  4. Ranking Criteria
  5. Finalized/Denied Amendments

Guideline: A maximum of three slider velocities should be...

posted
Total Posts
58
pieguyn
2,020 posts
Joined May 2009
Topic Starter
pieguyn
A maximum of three slider velocities should be used (including 1x). For example, you could have a single map using 0.6x, 0.8x, and 1x; or 0.75x, 1x, and 1.5x; etc. If more than three slider velocities are used, then they should make sense and be intuitive. If slider velocity changes are able to be merged (e.g. close values like 0.8x and 0.7x) while still flowing/working correctly, then they should be.
The last sentence in this guideline doesn't make any sense... Why should they have to be merged? There's no problem with having them as separate values as long as they fit.

Suggestion: remove the last sentence :?
Shiirn
2,896 posts
Joined August 2010
Shiirn
This is already functionally a guideline rather than a rule. What the last line is attempting to state is that if you have 0.75 and 0.8, say, in two entirely separate sections of the map, to switch one to the other since it's needlessly strange to have a 0.05x difference in slider velocity.
Larto
4,128 posts
Joined June 2008
Larto
I'm still completely against even having this guideline. Slider velocities can be used terribly even if you only have three different velocities. The amount of slider velocities has nothing in common with how well used they are. You could make a similar guideline about the volume settings per section, and it would make similarily litle sense.

Edit: And how much does it actually matter if you have 0.7x and 0.8x or if you have just 0.75x? Why is this important?
Raging Bull
2,809 posts
Joined June 2010
Raging Bull
.5x 1x 2x within few seconds of each other orz. Perhaps it's a good idea to just remove it or say something like use it intuitively. No one would like to see a slow slider then a fast and then a slow again next to each other. :s
Mismagius
9,259 posts
Joined July 2008
Mismagius
If there is something wrong with different sliderspeeds being abused, please make "Disable Distance Snap" unrankable too because too many people use jumps and abuse it.
Shiirn
2,896 posts
Joined August 2010
Shiirn

Blue Dragon wrote:

If there is something wrong with different sliderspeeds being abused, please make "Disable Distance Snap" unrankable too because too many people use jumps and abuse it.
That's a fucking retarded comparison, namely because the rule isn't about abusing silderspeeds at all, it's about being consistent with your speeds and using one speed where you have two similar (read: functionally identical) ones. iloveyoubd
Mismagius
9,259 posts
Joined July 2008
Mismagius

Shiirn wrote:

the rule isn't about abusing silderspeeds at all
Then why create the rule?

As far as I know there are way more MATs/BATs complaining about sliderspeeds being abused than complaining about 0.77x / 0.8x different sliderspeeds. This rule is a minor part of the "be intuitive" stuff, which is completely unnecessary and common sense would take over it.

If there is no common sense for the mappers in this community, there are the BATs. And they should keep these kind of maps out if they are completely unreadable, and before that, not fun to play.

Same thing that applies to most rules: If it's fun to play, why not?
Soaprman
1,392 posts
Joined January 2008
Soaprman
Focusing on how many speeds are used rather than how they are used does nothing to make a map better. This guideline should be deleted entirely.

Also, seconding Blue Dragon's entire post.
Ekaru
3,617 posts
Joined July 2008
Ekaru

Soaprman wrote:

Focusing on how many speeds are used rather than how they are used does nothing to make a map better. This guideline should be deleted entirely.

Also, seconding Blue Dragon's entire post.
This.

A better guideline would be the following:

Slider velocity changes should fit the music. If the music feels significantly slower or faster, but the BPM doesn't actually change, then it's recommended to use a slider velocity change to reflect this change in the music. It is also not recommended to use slider speed changes as "traps", or just because you feel like it; this is not fun, and will secretly make many people want to kill you in your sleep.
Okay, that will probably have to be rewritten to look more professional, especially that last sentence.
Shiirn
2,896 posts
Joined August 2010
Shiirn
Slider velocity changes should fit the music. If the music feels significantly slower or faster, but the BPM doesn't actually change, then it's recommended to use a slider velocity change to reflect this change in the music. You should avoid over-representing the change in the feel of the music because of using multipliers that are too high or too low (x2 or x0.5). As well, a maximum of three slider velocities should be used in most cases, as situations in which you use more than that would most likely involve actual BPM changes.

Feel free to make it more concise, but in all reality that's probably as close as we're going to get to something that is functionally covering most arguments.
Ekaru
3,617 posts
Joined July 2008
Ekaru

Shiirn wrote:

Slider velocity changes should fit the music. If the music feels significantly slower or faster, but the BPM doesn't actually change, then it's recommended to use a slider velocity change to reflect this change in the music. You should avoid over-representing the change in the feel of the music because of using multipliers that are too high or too low (x2 or x0.5). As well, a maximum of three slider velocities should be used in most cases, as situations in which you use more than that would most likely involve actual BPM changes.

Feel free to make it more concise, but in all reality that's probably as close as we're going to get to something that is functionally covering most arguments.
Yeah, I agree with that.

About the only real situations where more than 3 make sense shouldn't even be attempted by newer mappers anyways, and since it's a guideline, experienced mappers can still use as many changes as they wish. This also gives newbie mappers good advice at the same time that can add more variety to their maps without destroying them by accident. This is pretty close to perfect IMO.
Mismagius
9,259 posts
Joined July 2008
Mismagius

Ekaru wrote:

About the only real situations where more than 3 make sense shouldn't even be attempted by newer mappers anyways, and since it's a guideline, experienced mappers can still use as many changes as they wish. This also gives newbie mappers good advice at the same time that can add more variety to their maps without destroying them by accident. This is pretty close to perfect IMO.
Sad how new mappers will abuse it and say "this map is ranked and it used it so why can't i"
Rena-chan
Rena-chan

Shiirn wrote:

This is already functionally a guideline rather than a rule. What the last line is attempting to state is that if you have 0.75 and 0.8, say, in two entirely separate sections of the map, to switch one to the other since it's needlessly strange to have a 0.05x difference in slider velocity.
Actually, this kind of thing does have a use, though it's mainly in a "fixing sliderends" way. A 0.05x difference won't make a noticeable speedup/slowdown, but it can make a slider end exactly on an osu!pixel instead of being just slightly off, thus allowing a note to be stacked above/below the end of the slider instead of effectively screwing stacking up.

Example:


(2) is made with a 1,20x section instead of 1,25x to make the sliderend land exactly on (4). Without this, it would be slightly off and look ugly.
Mismagius
9,259 posts
Joined July 2008
Mismagius

Rena-chan wrote:



(2) is made with a 1,20x section instead of 1,25x to make the sliderend land exactly on (4). Without this, it would be slightly off and look ugly.
I'm not against this kind of stuff, but wouldn't (4) get covered by (2)'s hitburst anyway?

EDIT: hurr it's a slider, nevermind
Shiirn
2,896 posts
Joined August 2010
Shiirn
Additionally, can't you just re-make (2) so that it still uses 1.2? It's not difficult to make sliders perfect as far as osu!pixels go...
Rena-chan
Rena-chan

Shiirn wrote:

Additionally, can't you just re-make (2) so that it still uses 1.2? It's not difficult to make sliders perfect as far as osu!pixels go...
Dooooooesn't really work, no. While it may not be difficult to do that, I would have to remake every slider in that section due to the change in velocity, which in turn would screw a lot of the curved sliders over (particularly longer sliders). Straight sliders aren't much of a problem, but if I can use a 0.05x difference to make a single slider look better, then why not ? It's a difference of around half an osu!pixel that won't make a noticeable slowdown either in osu! or Taiko, thus a purely cosmetic difference, which is the only use there is for this kind of difference in slider velocity.

As with everything, it can be used and abused needlessly, but this is a technique that can be used with reason.
RandomJibberish
osu! Alumni
1,833 posts
Joined August 2009
RandomJibberish
Using speed changes for prettiness is just no. I'm sure you could have figured out another way around that pattern.

Speed changes should relate only to music intensity.
Shulin
1,189 posts
Joined August 2009
Shulin

Larto wrote:

I'm still completely against even having this guideline. Slider velocities can be used terribly even if you only have three different velocities. The amount of slider velocities has nothing in common with how well used they are. You could make a similar guideline about the volume settings per section, and it would make similarily litle sense.

Edit: And how much does it actually matter if you have 0.7x and 0.8x or if you have just 0.75x? Why is this important?
Agree with this, you could use 1 slider velocity terribly. I think the guideline would be better if it suggested all slider velocity changes should be intuitive rather than focusing on the number used.
Ekaru
3,617 posts
Joined July 2008
Ekaru

Shulin wrote:

Agree with this, you could use 1 slider velocity terribly. I think the guideline would be better if it suggested all slider velocity changes should be intuitive rather than focusing on the number used.
That's why we came up with a possible replacement guideline:

Slider velocity changes should fit the music. If the music feels significantly slower or faster, but the BPM doesn't actually change, then it's recommended to use a slider velocity change to reflect this change in the music. You should avoid over-representing the change in the feel of the music because of using multipliers that are too high or too low (x2 or x0.5). As well, a maximum of three slider velocities should be used in most cases, as situations in which you use more than that would most likely involve actual BPM changes.
The last sentence is arguable, but its aim is overall what you said; to focus on *how* they're used, and not the actual amount used.
Rena-chan
Rena-chan
Using speed changes for prettiness is just no. I'm sure you could have figured out another way around that pattern.

Speed changes should relate only to music intensity.
Such as placing a note on a half osu!pixel ? I think you're missing the fact that a player will not notice the speed change by this example.
Ekaru
3,617 posts
Joined July 2008
Ekaru

Rena-chan wrote:

Such as placing a note on a half osu!pixel ? I think you're missing the fact that a player will not notice the speed change by this example.
Yeah, pretty sure they wouldn't.

I'd say it's okay to break the guideline in this case, since you have a solid justification for doing so.
Shiirn
2,896 posts
Joined August 2010
Shiirn

Ekaru wrote:

solid
*arguably solid
RandomJibberish
osu! Alumni
1,833 posts
Joined August 2009
RandomJibberish
Hit circles snap to slider ends when placed - I believe that although they sometimes may appear a little off in the editor, they still stack properly.

stacking under sliderends is silly anyway
mm201
osu! Alumni
4,495 posts
Joined August 2008
mm201

RandomJibberish wrote:

Using speed changes for prettiness is just no. I'm sure you could have figured out another way around that pattern.

Speed changes should relate only to music intensity.
I use speed changes to fix patterns all the time.
For instance, I have a horizontal slider which needs to extend from the centre towards one side. At default speed, it would go just slightly out of the playfield--possibly just by one grid,. So I slightly lower its speed to 0.97x or something like that so it will fit onscreen and its beginning be aligned.

We do this exact same thing in reverse in osu!stream so that 1/2 sliders' end caps won't overlap.

Another example is I want a slider to have a slight curve but have both endpoints grid aligned. (Grid alignment may be necessary because of the need for alignment with other objects onscreen and having whole patterns out of grid gets messy.) But since I'm a good little dewbie and use a DC slider speed (1.92x, ...), grid aligning the endpoint either leads to a perfectly horizontal slider or, if I end it on the next grid in, a very curved slider. What I'll do is speed it up just slightly so that it has the same length as the straight slider but a slight curve to it.

Another example is a fullscreen slider, like a rainbow, which is just a little too big to fit onscreen or leave room for other objects, but can fit if I slow it down even as much as 0.9x.

The 3 speed rule more or less works if you don't count any of these examples towards your limit, but I feel it's unnecessary anyway. The worst abuses happen when the speed change ratio is too harsh and have nothing to do with the number of speeds used.
HakuNoKaemi
3,828 posts
Joined October 2009
HakuNoKaemi
in that case was silly, there are actually better pattern that could use that

Ekaru's version is just good, because it remove the number-related SVs ( that could even justify using 3 SVs really badly ), with an intesity related SVs.

Well, the only problem could be novice mapper don't knowing what intensity do mean, so another section that say the meaning of "intensity", "readable", "intuitive", like a glossary, could be really useful.
Sakura
osu! Alumni
7,979 posts
Joined March 2010
Sakura
I find most of the harsher slider speed changes is what makes me combo break, however just because a speed jumps from 0.5x to 2.0x is not enough, BPM and slider speed are related as well. for instance a 250 bpm map with 2.0x slider vel has a speed of 500 bpm across sliders, doubling that will make the slider be a 1000 bpm slider +500 bpm, and the change is much much nastier than if u have a 100 bpm map at 1.5 slider velocity and apply a 2.0x speed change +150 bpm.
NatsumeRin
osu! Alumni
4,032 posts
Joined August 2009
NatsumeRin
Personally i think it could be just removed.

The amount of slider velocities doesn't help increase the map quality, it even doesn't help judge a map (unless you don't really look through the map). This guideline is there as a warning for mappers "don't use it too much", so why not just change it like this?

Don't overuse slider speed change Slider speed change should make sense and be intuitive, it's also fine to use hard-to-notice changes to fix your patterns. But use it very sudden just to make the map harder is not allowed.
HakuNoKaemi
3,828 posts
Joined October 2009
HakuNoKaemi
Don't overuse slider speed change. Slider speed change should make sense and be intuitive, it's also fine to use hard-to-notice changes to fix your patterns. But using it suddenly in a rather unintuitive mode only to make the map harder is not allowed.
Fixed a little, as a map can be only made harder as far as the SV change make sense.
mm201
osu! Alumni
4,495 posts
Joined August 2008
mm201
Please don't change slider speeds more often than the music suggests. Changing speeds by small amounts to help fit objects is fine, but don't change the speeds of single stray sliders by noticeable amounts.
Sure
4,220 posts
Joined February 2009
Sure
I'd rather say "Don't abuse~" than "Don't overuse~".
Ekaru
3,617 posts
Joined July 2008
Ekaru

mm201 wrote:

Please don't change slider speeds more often than the music suggests. Changing speeds by small amounts to help fit objects is fine, but don't change the speeds of single stray sliders by noticeable amounts.
Yeah, I like this version. It's pretty close to perfect.
HakuNoKaemi
3,828 posts
Joined October 2009
HakuNoKaemi
By far, seems all are accepting this version, so it should be accepted?
Shiro
Global Moderator
4,984 posts
Joined May 2009
Shiro
I like mm201's version. Should I amend it ?
GladiOol
4,475 posts
Joined August 2008
GladiOol
Changing speeds by small amounts to help fit objects is fine.

Please don't change slider speeds more often than the music suggests.

SPOILER

Changing slider speed just so you can make your pattern more fitting is gay imo. Why? Because it won't follow the music that way. And look what it says in mm201's post \:D/ If it doesn't fit in with the music, it shouldn't be allowed... even for the sake of the pattern. We are not playing beatmaps for patterns, we play this game for the flow it has with the music. The minute you randomly put in speed ups and slow downs ''for the sake of the pattern''... I mean wtf.

Or atleast define ''changing speeds by small ammounts.'' Because 1.1x is already too much imo. I can live with 1.0~1.09x though or 0.91x~1.0x
mm201
osu! Alumni
4,495 posts
Joined August 2008
mm201
noticeable
The point here is for sliders too big to fit on the screen. 1.1 is probably becoming too much. I've had to use things like 0.97 speed to make large sliders fit without forcing them into an ugly box shape, or to stop linear sliders from going beyond the edge of the playfield. Having these kinds of things count as "speed changes" and limiting my mapping because of them is gayer than gay.

Other players and mappers care about eye candy more than you do, apparently.
Sakura
osu! Alumni
7,979 posts
Joined March 2010
Sakura
I don't really see why we need a maximum of 3 slider speeds, when most maps that have more than 3 slider speeds are more intuitive in speed changes than say, a map that goes from 1x to 0.5x to 2x
HakuNoKaemi
3,828 posts
Joined October 2009
HakuNoKaemi
So we all support mm version :D
D33d
1,697 posts
Joined April 2011
D33d
Yeah, using subtle speed changes in order to make sliders fit it pretty much the same as making patterns fit. Incidentally, people get away with using horrific anti-jumps and what appears to be overlapping stacks all of the time. I see no problem with this.
Shiirn
2,896 posts
Joined August 2010
Shiirn
A maximum of 3 distinct slider velocities should be used in your map. "Distinct" implies that small variations (±0.05-7) will not be counted as entirely new slider velocities. Using these slight variations is allowed, but not recommended. Also, more than 3 may be used, but be prepared to make a good argument for your decision.
Soaprman
1,392 posts
Joined January 2008
Soaprman
No no no. mm201's version is good. Yours is not. Why are you regressing to the arbitrary number?
Shiirn
2,896 posts
Joined August 2010
Shiirn
Because the arbitrary number is a good baseline. If you look at it logically, no sensible map without a silly gimmick will pass 3 independent velocities.
Soaprman
1,392 posts
Joined January 2008
Soaprman
I don't see the logic. Spell it out for me.
Shiirn
2,896 posts
Joined August 2010
Shiirn
Songs will generally do direct double or half-bpm sections or highlights (without actually changing the bpm!). This can be represented by changing the slider velocity X amount. What's double and half and normal add up to? Three. Actual speed-up sections in songs require actual bpm changes, and will, more often than not (read: always) be perfectly fine with normal sections.

Doing gimmicky things like having sliders slowly ramp up (or down, heaven forbid) in speed without an actual backbeat accompanying them is retarded as hell since there's no musical backing. It's bad to do because it's bad to do. Pulling it off and making it good is "in spite of" it being a bad idea, not "because" it's a bad idea. Doing increasing spacing works way better than increased slider size. It's more readable too.
Soaprman
1,392 posts
Joined January 2008
Soaprman
You've pointed out that most maps don't use more than three slider speeds. This is true. But your post never addresses the reason for three slider speeds independently... it's always tied with how well those slider speeds are used, which is an independent thing and exactly what mm201's wording addresses.

And sometimes it does have musical backing. (Eternal Damnation difficulty, not sure if the rest do the slider speed thing)

I also have another question: when playing maps, are you aware of the number of slider speeds that are used? Again, independently from how they are used.
ziin
2,632 posts
Joined January 2010
ziin
3 slider speeds has largely been ignored ever since it became a rule. Even though it's more of a guideline now, it's still acceptable at the slightest excuse (mmm, because I felt like it).

We need to write down the rules according to the current feeling as to what the rule should be. mm201's is vague enough to get the point across (use less slider speeds and don't suddenly change slider speeds) without "repressing the freedom of the mapper, gah".

Why people insist on using more than 3 slider speeds is beyond me. It's nothing but annoying when I'm playing and I wish they wouldn't do that stupid stuff, but obviously they care too much about annoying me, so there's no way I can win that argument.
Shiirn
2,896 posts
Joined August 2010
Shiirn

Soaprman wrote:

You've pointed out that most maps don't use more than three slider speeds. This is true. But your post never addresses the reason for three slider speeds independently... it's always tied with how well those slider speeds are used, which is an independent thing and exactly what mm201's wording addresses.
Mappers suck. It's a well-known fact. A mapper is never a good mapper. So theory needs to take over where opinions are wildly different. Especially when newer people fall into the trap of "hey cool i can do slider velcoties other than 0.5/0.75/1/1.5/2!" and we suddenly have 1.1-1.2-1.3 etc when it makes no sense.

Soaprman wrote:

And sometimes it does have musical backing. (Eternal Damnation difficulty, not sure if the rest do the slider speed thing)
You're fucking kidding me, right? Hahahahahahhahahaha, there's absolutely no musical backing for this whatsoever. If you claim it does the increased-slider-speed thing well, you need to claim it does well IN SPITE of there being no musical backing.

Soaprman wrote:

I also have another question: when playing maps, are you aware of the number of slider speeds that are used? Again, independently from how they are used.
Yes.
mm201
osu! Alumni
4,495 posts
Joined August 2008
mm201
If a map used 1.5 for one chorus, then randomly 1.6 for the next chorus, that would be random and sloppy, but hardly any worse than other already prevalent kinds of sloppiness like using randomly different spacing.

"Don't be sloppy" can't be a rule.
HakuNoKaemi
3,828 posts
Joined October 2009
HakuNoKaemi
Well, i hate precise limits in guidelines and rules. Even if I started using multiple SVs on some of my difficulties (guest and not) and they are more than 3 while they DO have sense because there are various reason (like voice getting faster/slower, instrumental part got heavier/lighter or faster/slower,volume got higher/lower) se there are pretty much no reason to pull the "3" reason.
It give a reason to dumbass to use 3 different SVs like this, NO MATTER IT DON'T FIT. You will see idiots reasoning their wrong use of multi-SVs saying they are still respecting the limits.
Soaprman
1,392 posts
Joined January 2008
Soaprman

Shiirn wrote:

Mappers suck. It's a well-known fact. A mapper is never a good mapper.
Pretend I just posted every "the fuck is he talking about" reaction face ever made all at once. Won't discuss further because it has nothing to do with this thread.

Shiirn wrote:

Soaprman wrote:

You've pointed out that most maps don't use more than three slider speeds. This is true. But your post never addresses the reason for three slider speeds independently... it's always tied with how well those slider speeds are used, which is an independent thing and exactly what mm201's wording addresses.
So theory needs to take over where opinions are wildly different. Especially when newer people fall into the trap of "hey cool i can do slider velcoties other than 0.5/0.75/1/1.5/2!" and we suddenly have 1.1-1.2-1.3 etc when it makes no sense.
Again, nothing to do with the number of velocities. Three velocities can be used just as stupidly as ten velocities.

Shiirn wrote:

Soaprman wrote:

And sometimes it does have musical backing. (Eternal Damnation difficulty, not sure if the rest do the slider speed thing)
You're fucking kidding me, right? Hahahahahahhahahaha, there's absolutely no musical backing for this whatsoever. If you claim it does the increased-slider-speed thing well, you need to claim it does well IN SPITE of there being no musical backing.
She screams louder and the sliders get faster. The backing is there. Anyone who listens to the music while they play can tell why those sliders increase in speed.

Shiirn wrote:

Soaprman wrote:

I also have another question: when playing maps, are you aware of the number of slider speeds that are used? Again, independently from how they are used.
Yes.
I wasn't actually going anywhere with this. I was just curious. :P

Probably enough of this thread for me. It was fun!
ziin
2,632 posts
Joined January 2010
ziin
you can defend slider velocities like you can interpret the bible to mean whatever you want. Since there is no limit to the number of slider velocities that can be used in a map by anyone with a decent idea of what they are doing, putting a maximum overrides this so we don't have to deal with the BS associated with it.

for the record I approve of mm's guideline, I'm just pointing out that it is very easy to defend an odd slider speed here and there, and there is really only a need for 3 slider speeds: "slower", "normal", and "faster". The difference between "slowest" and "slower" is negligible. The difference between "normal" and "slightly faster" is negligible. The difference between "faster" and "stupidly fast" might not be negligible, but it is stupid.

Clearly I'm in the minority here.

Soaprman wrote:

She screams louder and the sliders get faster. The backing is there. Anyone who listens to the music while they play can tell why those sliders increase in speed.
I know you're gone, but the sliders get faster in one section. In the same part of the music, the sliders start out fast then get slower. The sliders don't have any musical backing, they have a mapping reason instead (zekira wanted faster sliders). Considering the increase is linear, there's not much of a problem with it imo. The red timing sections are obviously a problem, but that's beside the point.
show more
Please sign in to reply.

New reply

0
1 / 58