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

[Rule] More than two difficulties in the same difficulty lev

posted
Total Posts
28
RandomJibberish
osu! Alumni
1,833 posts
Joined August 2009
Topic Starter
RandomJibberish
I was sure there was a discussion about this somewhere, but I couldn't find it :<

A mapset must not have more than two difficulties in the same difficulty level (not based on stars, but on how the map "feels"). That is, a map set can have no more than two "Insane" difficulties, etc, so that the diff spread is varied and balanced. Taiko-specific difficulties are an exception to this rule, but a good spread must be retained (e.g. two osu!standard Insanes, two Taiko Insanes, and one or two other difficulties is completely unbalanced and will not get ranked).
The point of this rule was to prevent spreads such as E I I I, which is inappropriate as it doesn't cater to players of a skill level between easy and insane. What this rule hopes the mapper would do is tone one of the insanes down to a hard to make E H I I, which is obviously an improvement to the spread.
However, it has resulted in modders telling people to remove a difficulty to bring it in line with the rule. Removing a difficulty will never improve the spread of a mapset - it's just a waste of a mapper's work.

Another example - an E N H I I I mapset. Assuming all of the easier difficulties are well constructed, where is the issue here? And how does removing one of the insanes improve the mapset in any way?

I say this rule should be removed in favour of rules that prevent large gaps in a spread - all spread related issues come as a result of too large a jump between different difficulties.
ziin
2,632 posts
Joined January 2010
ziin
I think it's ENHIX.

If you have 3 insanes and one of them isn't an expert diff, something's wrong.
Sakura
osu! Alumni
7,979 posts
Joined March 2010
Sakura
The point of the rule is that you dont need more than 1 Insane, let alone 2 (the 2nd slot was generally meant for Taiko, but it's mostly used for a guest Insane, so i guess we can leave it at that) there's no need to map more than one Insane in a mapset, and you can already include 2, why do u want more?
whymeman
osu! Alumni
3,432 posts
Joined November 2008
whymeman
From what I recall, Taiko had the exception. Also, some beatmaps have an issue with their difficulty spread being too far apart per set. I wouldn't say to throw this rule out just yet because if there are beatmaps with multiple amounts of the same difficulty while trying to squeeze in more difficultes, then it's going to hit the cap of 6 difficulties like... EHIIIII. Back then, there was some mapsets that had awkward spreads being ranked more freqently before it then became an issue. Also, this is what has been stated in the Rules and Guidelines.

Each map set must have at least two difficulties, one of which must be below a 3-star difficulty level. This is so that players of all levels of experience are able to enjoy maps of the songs they love. A map set should not have more than two difficulties in the same difficulty level (not based on stars, but on how the map "feels"). That is, a map set can have no more than two "Insane" difficulties, etc. The only exception to this rule is Taiko difficulties. That is, a map set can have two Insane osu!standard difficulties in addition to a Taiko-specific Insane. Finally, no map set should have more than 6 difficulties total.
Luna
2,355 posts
Joined November 2010
Luna

whymeman wrote:

Each map set must have at least two difficulties, one of which must be below a 3-star difficulty level. This is so that players of all levels of experience are able to enjoy maps of the songs they love. A map set should not have more than two difficulties in the same difficulty level (not based on stars, but on how the map "feels"). That is, a map set can have no more than two "Insane" difficulties, etc. The only exception to this rule is Taiko difficulties. That is, a map set can have two Insane osu!standard difficulties in addition to a Taiko-specific Insane. Finally, no map set should have more than 6 difficulties total.
Add a part about consecutive difficulties and it's perfect.
pieguyn
2,020 posts
Joined May 2009
pieguyn

RandomJibberish wrote:

Another example - an E N H I I I mapset. Assuming all of the easier difficulties are well constructed, where is the issue here? And how does removing one of the insanes improve the mapset in any way?

I say this rule should be removed in favour of rules that prevent large gaps in a spread - all spread related issues come as a result of too large a jump between different difficulties.
wow, this is exactly what I wanted to say

I agree with RJ's proposition. There's no real reason for preventing people from having three Insanes as long as there are still easier diffs. It's nice to have variety. Also, in most cases, some Insanes are harder than others, so removing one would just make the diff spread worse.
whymeman
osu! Alumni
3,432 posts
Joined November 2008
whymeman

Luna wrote:

Add a part about consecutive difficulties and it's perfect.
Basically a steady flow from Easy to Hardest?
HakuNoKaemi
3,828 posts
Joined October 2009
HakuNoKaemi
I actually agree with RJ too.
Preventing large gaps is a priority: I do think the consecutitive difficulty rules doesn't have much sense and I do think preventing to add Insane if the Number of difficulties is 2 is better. You may prevent to add many Insane though by saying you have to have the same number of Easy-to-Hard difficulty.
SapphireGhost
osu! Alumni
2,618 posts
Joined June 2010
SapphireGhost

Sakura Hana wrote:

there's no need to map more than one Insane in a mapset, and you can already include 2, why do u want more?
Actually, there are a lot of reasons. For example, an ENHIII spread that consists of a regular Insane, an especially difficult Insane, and an Insane by a guest mapper is fine, because it has difficulties for players of E, N, H, I, crazy stuff, and perhaps people who would rather play the Insane by the guest mapper. In this scenario, there is no need to remove any of the difficulties, because, as Jibbaha said:

RandomJibberish wrote:

However, it has resulted in modders telling people to remove a difficulty to bring it in line with the rule. Removing a difficulty will never improve the spread of a mapset - it's just a waste of a mapper's work.
Sakura
osu! Alumni
7,979 posts
Joined March 2010
Sakura
They wouldnt need to be removed if the mapper didnt map them in the first place, so the one wasting work and time is the mapper him/herself
Ijah_old
Ijah_old
Difficulty rating is bullshit, all my hard maps get labled as Insane.
Soaprman
1,392 posts
Joined January 2008
Soaprman

Sakura Hana wrote:

They wouldnt need to be removed if the mapper didnt map them in the first place, so the one wasting work and time is the mapper him/herself
I think E-N-H-I-I-I spreads are kind of ugly looking with all the red stars and weird difficulty names but that's purely cosmetic and the extent of my problems with such spreads. Adding difficulties only increases the chances that the mapset will find an appreciative audience. I'd like to see a reason with some kind of logical backing why this is anything but a good thing.

Remember also that the size of mapsets is restricted somewhat by the modding system... people aren't as willing to mod long maps or maps with lots of difficulties.
HakuNoKaemi
3,828 posts
Joined October 2009
HakuNoKaemi
plus ENHIII spreads can someway have the last I as X ( so more difficult and challenging than normal I)
Cristian
1,945 posts
Joined November 2009
Cristian
I support this and i am not gona say more.
Natteke
6,538 posts
Joined August 2009
Natteke
I don't support this rule because I think there's no harm having 3 diffs of the, wait, who defines difficulty level? This is subjective and there' no harm having 3 insanes for example by different mappers, it's more fun. Take Tijdmachine for example, there are 3 insanes and they all are completely different, I like to have a variety and see how mappers see the song from their own point of view.

Adding this rule will only generate bullshit like Masterpiece which could perfectly live as a single map.
Last edited by Natteke , edited 1 time in total.
Kite
osu! Alumni
1,372 posts
Joined July 2009
Kite
RJ is so right, I couldn't have used better words to describe what I think about it.

Get rid of this rule
Mashley
2,042 posts
Joined September 2008
Mashley
So long as there is a clear distinction between the difficulties, there's no reason for them to not be there. The one problem I have with difficulty crowding from a player's point of view is that it can be confusing as to which difficulty I'm actually meant to play, which is a little frustrating. But not frustrating enough to waste good difficulties over it; within reason, of course.
Natteke
6,538 posts
Joined August 2009
Natteke
You're not "meant" to play anything. Play whatever you like the most
Love
osu! Alumni
1,267 posts
Joined August 2010
Love
I'm sure this doesn't apply to approval maps?
mm201
osu! Alumni
4,495 posts
Joined August 2008
mm201

Natteke wrote:

You're not "meant" to play anything. Play whatever you like the most
s/meant/able

I support RJ's changes. Yes, making unnecessary difficulties is a waste of time, but throwing them out of the mapset is an even bigger waste. E/N+/I/X should be the widest allowed spread gap. Of course, this is subjective which is why it's up to the BAT to decide if something's okay or not.
Natteke
6,538 posts
Joined August 2009
Natteke
I'm cool with it.
Talvilapsi
189 posts
Joined November 2011
Talvilapsi

Ijah wrote:

Difficulty rating is bullshit, all my hard maps get labled as Insane.
And sometimes "Hard" is easier than "Easy" -.-
Shiro
Global Moderator
4,984 posts
Joined May 2009
Shiro
I think everyone's agreeing with RandomJibberish with the fact that we should remove this rule. There are other rules that are being discussed that prevent too large difficulty gaps.

Giving this a heart. If anyone thinks this needs further discussion, feel free to cancel that.
Sakura
osu! Alumni
7,979 posts
Joined March 2010
Sakura
Wrong icon Odaril: viewtopic.php?p=916671#p916671 Heart is for ammended rules, nuke is for removed rules
ziin
2,632 posts
Joined January 2010
ziin
argh double negatives
Shiro
Global Moderator
4,984 posts
Joined May 2009
Shiro
Derp. I was mistaken with the thread title.
Sakura
osu! Alumni
7,979 posts
Joined March 2010
Sakura
I still disagree with removing this tho, if anything it should be ammended into a guideline
D33d
1,697 posts
Joined April 2011
D33d

Sakura Hana wrote:

I still disagree with removing this tho, if anything it should be ammended into a guideline
I don't think so. As long as there's a clear distinction between three Insanes and because there currently isn't a default [Expert] difficulty, the suggestion of allowance for a guest [Insane] and a harder map is perfectly reasonable.

Mashley's point about clutter is pretty sound. At times, it can be hard to tell which map is supposed to be definitive of the set as a whole--as in, which is the most fully fledged piece of work that is indicative of how the mapping was intended to be approached. It's hardly a crucial point, but it can be extremely off-putting when I wade through several different maps before finding the best one. That's just a subjective thing and it's not a problem, as long as it's clear as to how each difficulty is intended to be. The embodiment of this instance is when a mapset has an [Insane] and [Extra] and [Extra] is just there for the sake of challenge, when the [Insane] would suffice.

Perhaps it should be a guideline that one doesn't include too many difficulties in general, but guest difficulties and maps which add to the spread are fun when they're not overdone and offer a lot of replay value for the mapset as a whole.
Please sign in to reply.

New reply

0
1 / 28