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.
Also, seconding Blue Dragon's entire post.
forum
Guideline: A maximum of three slider velocities should be...
posted
Total Posts
58
This.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.
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.
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.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.
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"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.
Rena-chan
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.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.
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.
I'm not against this kind of stuff, but wouldn't (4) get covered by (2)'s hitburst anyway?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.
EDIT: hurr it's a slider, nevermind
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
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.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...
As with everything, it can be used and abused needlessly, but this is a technique that can be used with reason.
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.
Speed changes should relate only to music intensity.
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.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?
That's why we came up with a possible replacement guideline: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.
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
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.
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.
Yeah, pretty sure they wouldn't.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.
I'd say it's okay to break the guideline in this case, since you have a solid justification for doing so.
*arguably solidEkaru wrote:
solid
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
stacking under sliderends is silly anyway
I use speed changes to fix patterns all the time.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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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?
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.
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.
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.
I'd rather say "Don't abuse~" than "Don't overuse~".
Yeah, I like this version. It's pretty close to perfect.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.
By far, seems all are accepting this version, so it should be accepted?
I like mm201's version. Should I amend it ?
Changing speeds by small amounts to help fit objects is fine.
Please don't change slider speeds more often than the music suggests.
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
Please don't change slider speeds more often than the music suggests.
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
noticeableThe 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.
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
So we all support mm version 
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.
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.
No no no. mm201's version is good. Yours is not. Why are you regressing to the arbitrary number?
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.
I don't see the logic. Spell it out for me.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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:
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.
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:
And sometimes it does have musical backing. (Eternal Damnation difficulty, not sure if the rest do the slider speed thing)
Yes.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.
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.
"Don't be sloppy" can't be a rule.
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.
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.
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:
Mappers suck. It's a well-known fact. A mapper is never a good mapper.
Again, nothing to do with the number of velocities. Three velocities can be used just as stupidly as ten velocities.Shiirn wrote:
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:
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.
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:
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:
And sometimes it does have musical backing. (Eternal Damnation difficulty, not sure if the rest do the slider speed thing)
I wasn't actually going anywhere with this. I was just curious.Shiirn wrote:
Yes.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.
Probably enough of this thread for me. It was fun!
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.
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.
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.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.
Topic Starter
Long story short: mm201's version of the rule is fine, there's no need to change it.
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.
This is a guideline, so I'm cool with it. Is this replacing
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.
?These should be combined into a single guideline if not. Adding a recommendation (under the recommendation section I've been suggesting) for a maximum of 3 unique slider velocities.
Also, we shouldn't use "velocity" in this case, as velocity can be negative. Replace any instance of "velocity" in the rule with "speed".
We arleady discussed that you're giving reasoning to people to use three SVs unintuitively... what's the point in "saying 3 slider velocities" when even using those three should have sense?
No musical backing on 2 SVs is the same as no musical backing on x SVs. The only thing you should say is that they should have sense. You can suggest that you should use a maximum of 3, not guideline it... (ps. your weightening the wrong part)
No musical backing on 2 SVs is the same as no musical backing on x SVs. The only thing you should say is that they should have sense. You can suggest that you should use a maximum of 3, not guideline it... (ps. your weightening the wrong part)
SPOILER
yet I do use more than three SVs in Hard/Insane difficulties usually...
Actually velocity can't be negative, as it is speed in a direction. A negative velocity could always be rewritten as a positive velocity in the opposite direction. We should use velocity because that is what is used in the program, even though its misused. SV is missing the direction part.ziin wrote:
Also, we shouldn't use "velocity" in this case, as velocity can be negative. Replace any instance of "velocity" in the rule with "speed".
lol. I get what you're saying but you're in for a heap of trouble in physics if you can't accept that velocity can be negative.GigaClon wrote:
Actually velocity can't be negative...A negative velocity could always be rewritten
In any case it doesn't matter. Speed is a more accurate description and is used more in the rules. Either one works, just be consistent.
velocity/vector
speed/scalar
Now can we all stop being so pedantic? In osu!, the two are used interchangably. Plus, it's a slider velocity multiplier, a coefficient on the velocity that's tangent to the slider path.
speed/scalar
Now can we all stop being so pedantic? In osu!, the two are used interchangably. Plus, it's a slider velocity multiplier, a coefficient on the velocity that's tangent to the slider path.
when searching for this rule, I couldn't find it because I was searching for "slider speed"mm201 wrote:
In osu!, the two are used interchangably.
in italian, they're translated in the same way
speed → velocità and velocity → velocità
speed → velocità and velocity → velocità