I would put a note at the end of the guildlines say "These are not an exhaustive list of guildlines, MAT/BAT have the final say as to what gets bubbled/ranked, if you have a problem with a decision, discuss it with the person or find someone else." That would save use from all the trivial matters that get discussed.
forum
[Rule] Slider anchors/nodes...manipulate slider speeds
posted
Total Posts
108
I want to know to...
What BPM*SV*Multiplier do you need to make the sliders glitch?
(It's important, you can actually make some sensed rule like this, as you will prevent bugs)
extending settable SVM from x0.5-x2 to x0.1-x5 seems good
What BPM*SV*Multiplier do you need to make the sliders glitch?
(It's important, you can actually make some sensed rule like this, as you will prevent bugs)
extending settable SVM from x0.5-x2 to x0.1-x5 seems good
Topic Starter
Well, yes.ouranhshc wrote:
Is that important?ziin wrote:
When do sliders glitch? At what BPM * velocity * multiplier do they not work? What glitches?
The whole reason there are lower limits is because sliders start glitching. The function for the actual slider velocity (the rate that the slider ball moves) is based on the BPM, SV, and SV Multiplier. If we put some arbitrary limit on one, then the glitch isn't actually prevented.
I think 0.5x and 2.0x is good enough for anybody, with the understanding that values over or under this limit are acceptable in certain cases. Most of the good mappers know how to use notepad anyway, and if you don't know how to use notepad, you can pretty easily ask for help, or someone will give it.
If we extend it though it needs to be symmetrical, so 0.2x-5x, or 0.25x and 4x. Not that I'm advocating extending it in the actual editor.
This is a legal slider with bpm 15, SV 0.5, SVM 0.5x, Tick rate 4.
Do you know any songs that actually use 15 bpm?
nope, but if the glitch use even lower than 15 x 0.5 x 0.5 ( 3.75 ) than it's really rare, as so there's no need of an anti-glitch rule. As I thought, glitch is the tick rates too.
So a guideline limiting usable SVs it's better
so: now you can do a marathon using legal SVs that use SVs:
0,5-2,0 or 1-4 and so
extending it to 0.2x-5x seems a good idea as you will have the ability to use
0.2-5.0, 0.4-10.0 and so,permitting all marathons
So a guideline limiting usable SVs it's better
so: now you can do a marathon using legal SVs that use SVs:
0,5-2,0 or 1-4 and so
extending it to 0.2x-5x seems a good idea as you will have the ability to use
0.2-5.0, 0.4-10.0 and so,permitting all marathons
Here's an idea: do whatever you want to the slider velocity until it breaks. If it breaks, then it's a sure sign that you're doing something wrongly. Fix the problem by using sliders which actually make sense and are fun to play. If ziin's example happens in a map, then any competent modder's response would be, "Whoa there buddy, you need to fix this."
This is far beyond the original point of the thread anyway, which is about crushing sliders into oblivion. Let's just agree that the easiest way to approach broken sliders is to deal with them when they happen, okay?
This is far beyond the original point of the thread anyway, which is about crushing sliders into oblivion. Let's just agree that the easiest way to approach broken sliders is to deal with them when they happen, okay?
I might know why: the ticks become so near the graphic card glitch while drawing them.
Anyway, rules are better used to prevent bugs.
It only happed with Tick Rate 4 when BPM*SV*SVM < 20 and it happens because of some kind of internal variables, as it happened only coming down. It's something like a random glitch too, as redoing it made me obtain different results.
No need for a rule, neither banning SV-edited velocities as:
-No one, no one use 4 Slider Tick 4
-No one will want to use less than less of SV
-So there's no point in banning them and saying "isn't logical they're banned...?"
So, Hold Sliders are usable
Anyway, rules are better used to prevent bugs.
It only happed with Tick Rate 4 when BPM*SV*SVM < 20 and it happens because of some kind of internal variables, as it happened only coming down. It's something like a random glitch too, as redoing it made me obtain different results.
No need for a rule, neither banning SV-edited velocities as:
-No one, no one use 4 Slider Tick 4
-No one will want to use less than less of SV
-So there's no point in banning them and saying "isn't logical they're banned...?"
So, Hold Sliders are usable
You know what i find funny, how this thread went into talking about the 0.5x ~ 2x slider speed limits instead of crumpled sliders.
Well, it's about manipulating slider speeds...
The rule we were discussing is deletable, completely
The rule we were discussing is deletable, completely
If the spacing between ticks is less than 10 osupixels, it may glitch.
10 osupixels?
2 grid 4 and half?
from what I've seen it's like it'll happen easily, if you pass from a glitched speed to a gliched speed, but... yeah, the distance between ticks centers was like 2 grid 4 or less(not tick borders)
Using a Tick 4 in a slow song doesn't happen that easily, actually...
2 grid 4 and half?
from what I've seen it's like it'll happen easily, if you pass from a glitched speed to a gliched speed, but... yeah, the distance between ticks centers was like 2 grid 4 or less(not tick borders)
Using a Tick 4 in a slow song doesn't happen that easily, actually...
Topic Starter
by glitch, you mean stack the ticks improperly or give up on putting in ticks halfway through?mm201 wrote:
If the spacing between ticks is less than 10 osupixels, it may glitch.
If it's stacking improperly this is a bug that should theoretically be 36/51 osupixels, as that's the size of the default slidertick (or just fix the bug, as custom sliderticks, while stupid, could be bigger than 36x36).
it's when tick centers are 10 osupixel near, so it's when ticks overlap by more than 26/41 pixels from 36/51, so about 72-80%. But it happens randomly. (I tested it for some time) and for the second half there weren't glitches ( seeing a literal white line formed by ticks and all of them sounded )
It also depends on how the slider is broken up into small lines and is complicated. It happens more often with linear sliders.
I'd like to backport the osu!stream slider code which is a million times better and doesn't have such a bug but that might be a ways off.
The bug causes rebounds' times to become misplaced and is really odd.
Sliders look dumb when their ticks are that close together anyway.
I'd like to backport the osu!stream slider code which is a million times better and doesn't have such a bug but that might be a ways off.
The bug causes rebounds' times to become misplaced and is really odd.
Sliders look dumb when their ticks are that close together anyway.
The discussion ended with a general agreement on deleting the rule because of it being included in the other slider rule...
SPOILER
you will port hold circles too?
o!s style holds will be coming whenever.
just be on its right...avoid abusing it and just controlling is good...whethere it is bad or good,,,it should be sure so that no one can get confused..
This is readable to be a crumpled slider, but is picked by AImod to be "abnormal"
Would this be acceptable?
Would this be acceptable?
Topic Starter
it's definitely ugly.
its prolly cause it crumples 3 times at the start then down to another crumple and then to non-crumple
More like 6 times at the beginning.GigaClon wrote:
its prolly cause it crumples 3 times at the start then down to another crumple and then to non-crumple
Large crumple to medium to no.
Start going down-up 6 times, down and then it up-down 7 times. linear after. Semi-readable graphically.
That's why AIMod's not to be taken seriously.
Start going down-up 6 times, down and then it up-down 7 times. linear after. Semi-readable graphically.
That's why AIMod's not to be taken seriously.
I agree.animez15 wrote:
just be on its right...avoid abusing it and just controlling is good...whethere it is bad or good,,,it should be sure so that no one can get confused..
I haven't been here for a while and I am happy to read this; but I still see the rule in here.HakuNoKaemi wrote:
The discussion ended with a general agreement on deleting the rule because of it being included in the other slider rule...
What happened?
the discussion should be signed with a nuke by some BAT/MAT, after that we're free to upgrade the wiki Ranking Criteria page