and now people are even starting to use r3 music box extensions to avoid making themthis is the real problem, compilation maps should not be allowed anymore, or at least have reasonable restrictions, like allowing only compilations of the same album/artist/tv show/movie and don't allow compilations of less than 3 songs / less than 7 minutes, only allow compilations to be mapped as the same difficulty level each song ...
This doesn't stop people from making r3 music box extensions. It'd only give them a very small incentive not to do it. Anyone lazy enough will still extend the mp3. What needs to happens is extensions repeating the same song need to be banned. Extensions are the problem. Lazy mappers are the problem. Sure this proposal might encourage 1 or 2 people not to extend their mp3, but other lazy people still will. If a song is 4:30, its 4:30. It shouldn't become 5:00 just because you're too lazy. Another problem is the BNs willing to rank it.Honestly I think this is the wrong way to look at it. The R3 extensions aren't getting popular because all these mappers are super lazy and want to rank the song with no effort, they are getting popular because they want to rank it, but just don't want to put in the effort to make a million diffs for a proper spread leading up to a 7*. Sure they will still exist afterwards, but 1) There will be less of them and 2) tons of maps that would otherwise never get ranked might now have a better chance since they'd just require one or two additional diffs.
Saying people should stop being lazy helps absolutely no one. You can't force people to "not be lazy", and what's being "lazy" or not is in relation to yourself anyway. A new mapper might've spent a week perfecting their tv size 4 diff mapset, meanwhile an experienced mapper could probably mindlessly make that same mapset in a few hours, have a better map in the end, and still have been "lazy" because they didn't spend the time making the best map they can. Decisions to the RC should not be decided on things like "they're lazy so just make them not lazy"; it's not like you're going to change their behavior with that. Rather, it should focus on what it can do to maximize the amount of content for all players, and this includes more experienced players as well.I don't usually do this but
If the concern is new players, then we can be sure that calmer 4:30min songs that would fit a NH spread better than a HX spread would still be ranked. If the details of the current proposal doesn't sound good, then suggesting changes that could work such as you still require a normal, or the spread needs to be 3 diff, or whatever, or maybe you believe the current situation is good as it is because x,y,z, but saying "no because they're just lazy" doesn't actually help the problem (if it is a problem) of less people mapping 4:30~4:59min songs, without extending them.
i don't really have anything to suggest that could make the ranking process better than it currently is for longer songs, but i think this proposal would not fix anything and will create other problems, so yeah, just keep stuff the way it is... or just reduce a bit the minimum length required for approval maybe.fwiw this proposal is basically a way to lower the minimum length requirement of approval, just not as a hard cut-off as it is right now, but instead in a more gradual matter.
if the drain time is <3:30 your set's lowest diff must be normal or lowerif the mapper picks a song that is 3 minutes long, he could easily eliminate the need of a normal difficulty by extending the song by 30 seconds, if he is not skilled enough to make a decent extention using only the original song he could just add harumachi clover to the mp3, there would be nothing preventing him from doing this... same applies for the other lengths to eliminate the need of the hard or insane...
if the drain time is 3:30-4:30 your set's lowest diff must be hard or lower
if the drain time is 4:30-5min your set's lowest diff must be insane or lower
unless more specific rules are added for compilations like i said, the hard cut-off will be the only reasonable way for dividing ranked and approval.But it would remove a lot of the incentive to do so. You can not reasonably regulate extensions because you can then just call it a remix and it's allowed (it could be left up to QAT discretion but that's just a recipe for drama tbh).
any song can be shortened if the mapper wants to do everything alone without guest difficulties.
There's no benefit at having a hard cut off vs. a more gradual one. A hard cut-off makes certain song lengths far less desirable for mapping which is just bad for musical variety.the first sentence is saying that there's no benefit while the second one tells that it has benefits. nice
if the mapper picks a song that is 3 minutes long, he could easily eliminate the need of a normal difficulty by extending the song by 30 secondyea but by then there's less urge to do that. there's a difference between having to map 4 other diffs compared to 1
I don't see how having less variety is a benefit but ok
LwL wrote:There's no benefit at having a hard cut off vs. a more gradual one. A hard cut-off makes certain song lengths far less desirable for mapping which is just bad for musical variety.the first sentence is saying that there's no benefit while the second one tells that it has benefits. nice
because having a spread on every map ranked would be the best for the community in general and especially the new players...I didn't see this before but I disagree with this almost entirely. Better for new players sure, hard to argue against that.