i know im saying i'd prefer that over the possibility that there's even more stuff that is inaccessible to new players trying to get into the game or the average player
Ah fair enough. I read that wrong then.Okoratu wrote:
i know im saying i'd prefer that over the possibility that there's even more stuff that is inaccessible to new players trying to get into the game or the average player
pishifat wrote:
if i were running osu and had i an interest in expanding its audience, i'd think this kind of change isnt very good. out of ranked maps selection, there would be a smaller fraction of content available for lowest level of players, alienating the potential future of hte game or something along those lines. the idea that new players are already alienated with 5+min songs, so being lenient with other lengths should be fine sounds more like a reason to remove approval from game dev perspective (which i'm not interested in doing).
yeah this seems the most reasonable at least from the suggestionsAncuL wrote:
I'm thinking more like this. since H is way more accessible than N. IX only is just too small imo. Since we are having problems with 4:30 maps, we don't need to do anything with anything below 4:00
- if the drain time is <4:00 your set's lowest diff must be normal or lower
- if the drain time is 4:00-5:00 your set's lowest diff must be hard or lower
- >5:00 can be anything
AncuL wrote:
- if the drain time is <4:00 your set's lowest diff must be normal or lower
- if the drain time is 4:00-5:00 your set's lowest diff must be hard or lower
- >5:00 can be anything
I'm thinking more like this. since H is way more accessible than N. IX only is just too small imo. Since we are having problems with 4:30 maps, we don't need to do anything with anything below 4:00
i tried to do that it didnt get received wellSaturnalize wrote:
It's only a minimum requirements for a map to get rank. If you really that carz about making a fullspread for 4+mins then there's no ine stopping you. The minimum requirements need to be reworked and the reason are already well stated by many user up there. However, I'm jot against fullspread either, it's harder to find modder for it than to map it after all.
Still on topic, ban mp3 manipulation to loophole duration requirements because it's literally ridiculous
CXu wrote:
I'd say add a minimum amount of diffs required for the spread as well in some way, so say minimum 3 diffs for maps <4:00, and minimum 2 diffs for maps <5:00. (Not sure how this would affect those Easy+Normal sets only though).
If you're mapping a 4min ballad you can get away with only a hard since Insane/Extra might not fit well with the song, and Easy/Normal aren't required.
This should make it so that easier difficulties for newer players are still created whenever slower songs that would fit lower diffs better are mapped as well.
Okoratu wrote:
Saturnalize wrote:
Still on topic, ban mp3 manipulation to loophole duration requirements because it's literally ridiculous
i tried to do that it didnt get received well
I would like to know the final conclusion about this. So you know, I can avoid attempting an Artist / R3 Music Box-map : )Okoratu wrote:
i tried to do that it didnt get received wellSaturnalize wrote:
Still on topic, ban mp3 manipulation to loophole duration requirements because it's literally ridiculous
Stefan wrote:
Okoratu wrote:
Saturnalize wrote:
Still on topic, ban mp3 manipulation to loophole duration requirements because it's literally ridiculous
i tried to do that it didnt get received well
still sad people prefer to put less time on their creations than making it available for a fairly larger audience :/
CXu wrote:
I'd say add a minimum amount of diffs required for the spread as well in some way, so say minimum 3 diffs for maps <4:00, and minimum 2 diffs for maps <5:00. (Not sure how this would affect those Easy+Normal sets only though).
If you're mapping a 4min ballad you can get away with only a hard since Insane/Extra might not fit well with the song, and Easy/Normal aren't required.
This should make it so that easier difficulties for newer players are still created whenever slower songs that would fit lower diffs better are mapped as well.
I know. I'm not talking about the current state of things, I'm saying that it would be good if the difficulty requirement for those lengths were lowered. Currently, if you have a 4:50min song and you have a really difficult map at like 7* or something, you would be required to map at least NHIX, most likely another X and possibly an E too, because people see the spread as not good. What I'd like is basically that something like, say, HX, IX, NX or something along those lines would be okay instead.AncuL wrote:
i don't remember correctly whether there's a rule regarding difficulty count, but i'm sure that the only length appropriate for a one-diff map is 5 minutes and above. 5 minutes of length and below still needs to make at least 2 diffs. therefore it isn't valid and the mapper still needs to map another diff (whether it's normal, another hard, or insane) for the map to be able to be rankableCXu wrote:
I'd say add a minimum amount of diffs required for the spread as well in some way, so say minimum 3 diffs for maps <4:00, and minimum 2 diffs for maps <5:00. (Not sure how this would affect those Easy+Normal sets only though).
If you're mapping a 4min ballad you can get away with only a hard since Insane/Extra might not fit well with the song, and Easy/Normal aren't required.
This should make it so that easier difficulties for newer players are still created whenever slower songs that would fit lower diffs better are mapped as well.
kwk wrote:
Didn't the old approval thing work for years and was only changed cause it was redundant cause of pp leaderboards?
No, I just said that I want the requirements of a spread to be laxer, regardless of if that's based on the gap between diffs, or what the lowest diff required is (which is the proposal in OP). The first "alienates" players inbetween (so H/I players, if the spread is NX), while the other "alienates" new players (if IX), but we already do this at a hard cap at 5min. It's not so much about if someone can or can not map a proper spread, but if enough people are willing to do so that it's worth keeping the current system over changing it to make more people willing to map songs of these lengths. Most 5min+ songs can have a full spread, if people are willing to put the time into it, but as we saw before the approval limit was lowered as well as the trend now, they're not really willing to spend that much time, and we're seeing a similar thing happening for maps around 4:30-4:59min.AncuL wrote:
I kinda disagree about huge diff gaps like NX or HX being okay. If you can map both N and X for a song, there's almost no way you cannot map anything in-between.
But i think you are saying that you want a spread based on star rating instead of difficulty name? Mind you that SR gap issue is already very subjective (with a certain value being the exact limitation), so I wouldn't agree to make it laxer with length as it isn't that necessary, this proposal is already enough to make mapping 4-minute maps rankable easier, and a good spread that isn't skipping a difficulty is good for certain audience who think 3.9* hard is too easy but 5.3* extra is too hard
Can you make graphs with 150- excluded and play count values unified for better visual presentation?x86 wrote:
My interpretation is that the majority of Easy, Normal, and Hard plays are not on long (4+ minute) marathon (5+ minute) maps. Feel free to draw your own conclusions or request other graphs.
Sinnoh wrote:
Seems reasonable to conclude that Normals shouldn't be required for maps that are 4:00 or longer.
Should hards also be required at 4:00, or have that requirement to 4:30