What’s wrong?

1. In our current system hybrid mode sets need the same amount of nominations as any other mapset even though they basically are multiple mapsets in one. This can cause that one or two modes are not checked by a Nominator. This leads to many avoidable disqualifications and pops due to insufficient checking.
2. Mappers abuse this system by adding other mode difficulties to avoid getting one or even two Nominators of their respective mode.
3. The current system leads to massive confusing as to who is to blame when a mapset gets disqualified for unrankables in a mode the Nominators who nominated it were not proficient in.

How to fix it?

Solution #1: Require two Nominations per mode included by mode-specific Beatmap Nominators

1. If we treat every mode as its own individual entity, a mapset will need two nominations for every single mode. For probationary members, the same rules as per usual will apply.
2. The best way to handle this would be to add per-mode Nomination functionality on the new website. Example
3. On the old website, Nominators can just simply post with icons of their mode.

Solution #2: Make them unrankable

1. Making hybrid mode mapsets unrankable would solve the problems presented above but it would take away a part of the game many people enjoy.

Note: If you decide to post, make sure that you explain your point in-depth.

requiring a bunch of extra bn's for hybrids just leads to hybrids becoming rly unpopular since finding all those extra bn's is super timeconsuming, which is how we ended up with the system we have today

but the system we have today leads to sets not being checked thoroughly enough, which is also problematic

i voted to remove hybrids entirely, but if people want to keep them just make it so they only need 1 additional mode-specific bn per mode, not 2.

Two nominators per game mode would be nice, so each mode nominator can take the full responsability for a DQ, tbh even for us nominators is kinda scary to take care of hybrid sets atm.

Make them unrankable also sounds fine, but this can lead to less maps for the other game modes?

I have a different solution. Let me preface this by saying that this solution I am proposing is due to the historically extraordinarily low activity of non-standard mode BNs as a group relative to standard (since there's just many less maps and also the activity standards seem quite a bit more lax to me).

I think that one nomination should be required for each mode, and then one nomination for the mode with the most diffs. So a ENHIX - M O IO spread would need a taiko icon and two standard icons. I say this because finding two nominations for a game mode in which you as a standard mapper do not play and are not part of the community for is really hard - much harder than finding two nominations for your own game mode. That coupled with the activity level of the other game modes would make it very hard for hybrid sets to get ranked in a timely fashion as the host would struggle to find 4, 6 or 8 BNs, the majority of which would be people they don't talk to usually anyway. This can be implemented along side the separate mode nomination counter - each mode needs one nomination then a "capstone" nomination to qualify it.

This solution provides an optimal balance between quality control concerns and difficulty of ranking the set in my opinion. Maps like CBCC or Black Rover or whatever still need the two standard BNs and it doesn't become prohibitively painful to find all the other mode BNs either.

Two per mode is better than making them unrankable, that's just annoying both for people who prefer to GD than to make sets, and for people who map two game modes.

I would prefer 2 nominators for the main gamemode of the hybrid set, and 1 for every secondary gamemode.

J1NX1337 wrote:

I would prefer 2 nominators for the main gamemode of the hybrid set, and 1 for every secondary gamemode.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

I see Hybrid sets dying otherwise. Making them completely unrankable sounds like a poor excuse not to bother about them at all so I am strongly against that. The question would however be: What would be considered as "main gamemode"?

You can claim that Standard with four difficulties is the main mode while you have a full 4-diff mapset for Taiko and three for Mania - both perfectly fine rankable as standalone mapsets. I think it matters what sort of difficulties and how many you have per set. Having an actual confirmation via nomination of the respective mode nominator is good to have but it should make sense lastly.

J1NX1337 wrote:

I would prefer 2 nominators for the main gamemode of the hybrid set, and 1 for every secondary gamemode.

this seems like the most logical solution imo

that solution would be a clusterfuck because if i map two full sets in osu and taiko everyone gets confused and adding more conditionals along those lines seems lol

I'm really hostile to a change of anything related to hybrid sets :

Let's talk about what you think is "wrong"
"In our current system hybrid mode sets need the same amount of nominations as any other mapset even though they basically are multiple mapsets in one. This can cause that one or two modes are not checked by a Nominator." -> BNs, when nominating a hybrid set, always (at least as long as i was in the team as far as i can remember) ask another BN a check up to see if the difficulties they aren't proefficient with are fine, even if there isn't a real nomination behind, i've never ever seen a hybrid set go to ranked without being checked by at least one BN of each mode.

Mappers abuse this system by adding other mode difficulties to avoid getting one or even two Nominators of their respective mode. -> I can understand but then, so what ? The problem is in the ranking system, not the hybrid set itself lol.

The current system leads to massive confusing as to who is to blame when a mapset gets disqualified for unrankables in a mode the Nominators who nominated it were not proficient in.
-> No ? The fault is and has always been always either on the BN of the respective mode, or a problem in communication.

Solution 1 would kill hybrid sets
Solution 2 would kill hybrid sets

-> Just make it so the main mode (the one the official mapper made difficulties for) requires 2 nominations and the other ones just 1, but official nominations, not simple check ups. This would also avoid the thing okorin said above me.
This way you can get rid oof your "#2 Hybrid Abuse problem" and "#1 and #3 Nomination problems"

but like 99%+ hybrid sets are a full spread + 2-3 other game mode diffs. if you map a full spread full mode thing then you would just pick one mode to be the main one or whatever (probably by drain time or just up to you) and then get 2 of those...

Arrival: But you need to agree it's nonsense for bigger Hybrid sets you don't need BNs of every mode to get your map ranked currently, isn't it? Solution 1 is okay if it's altered to have at least one BN for every mode, Solution 2 is indeed not good.

Arrival wrote:

BNs, when nominating a hybrid set, always (at least as long as i was in the team as far as i can remember) ask another BN a check up to see if the difficulties they aren't proefficient with are fine, even if there isn't a real nomination behind, i've never ever seen a hybrid set go to ranked without being checked by at least one BN of each mode.

This is not a requirement and has never been a requirement. Some Nominators do it, some don't. Getting Nominations for every mode would make that a formal procedure.

Arrival wrote:

The problem is in the ranking system, not the hybrid set itself lol.

That's what we are trying to fix with this.

Arrival wrote:

No ? The fault is and has always been always either on the BN of the respective mode, or a problem in communication.

That's actually not true, until a certain point both Nominators, no matter of which mode they were, were responsible for the whole hybrid set. The problem is that the understanding of this has kind of shifted to a point where nobody is really sure who to account for it anymore both amongst BNs and QATs.

Arrival wrote:

Just make it so the main mode (the one the official mapper made difficulties for) requires 2 nominations and the other ones just 1, but official nominations, not simple check ups.

What if the host maps the same amount of difficulties for every mode present? That would just make it more confusing than it already is.

Finding 2 BNs per gamemode means you'll have to find 8 BNs in total to rank a std,taiko,ctb&mania set, which basically means the death to those large hybrids sets.

I think 1 BN for each mode, and one final BN from the main mode would be way better. That way you somehow 'incentive' other gamemode sets which isn't bad at all in my opinion. Also you keep the procedure of checking every gamemode properly.

Now the question is how you define the main mode of an hybrid set. The one which has more difficulties? The one which has the hardest difficulty? A mix of last two?

EDIT: Another idea that came to my mind. What if a 'main mode' on hybrid sets is valid when that gamemode has at least 1 extra difficulty or higher (or maybe ~4.8* +)? That way you can have multiple 'main modes'. That would mean that hybrid sets with a lot of harder diffs for each gamemode will need multiple BNs, but I think it's fair enough because those sets are the ones that most of the times need more attention.

The issue I see with "and one more nomination for every additional mode" is that I do not really get why these sets would need fewer Nominations than if you would try to rank the difficulties from the other mode separately. Especially now with the new spread rules two or even one diff sets are totally rankable and they still require two Nominations of their game mode too.

@iyiyo - most difficulties is the best way, since SR isn't really comparable between game modes (and really SR in minigame modes is pretty awful to begin with)

@mao - it isn't more confusing at all. it's just that the mapper has the choice which mode to get 2 nominations for, much like in the old times when hybrid marathons needed 3 bns and mappers could get 2 taiko 1 std or 2 std one taiko.

the reason for less BNs is what i explained above - it's much harder to find BNs for a mode you don't map or interact with, and making people find that many would just be the same as banning hybrids for most people since they can't gather than amount of manpower in a timely fashion.

in general i still have no idea why it's hard to understand that the person responsible for the map set being dq'd would be the person nominating the mode that caused the dq. why would i, a standard BN, be made responsible for a dq because (example) ayyri didnt put a 3/2 gap in her muzu? it isn't my responsibility, it's the taiko BN's since he judged it to be rankable and it wasn't. holding me responsible for that makes no sense because i nominated the standard side, not the taiko side. under a system with separate nomination counters this becomes easier to visualize since the BN's name would presumably only be attached to that mode's nomination counter on the new site, but there's no reason for it not to be considered that way right now.

Mao wrote:

Arrival wrote:

Just make it so the main mode (the one the official mapper made difficulties for) requires 2 nominations and the other ones just 1, but official nominations, not simple check ups.

What if the host maps the same amount of difficulties for every mode present? That would just make it more confusing than it already is.

https://osu.ppy.sh/s/362534 for example

I'm aware that it's a bit too much to have 1 per game mode, but I agree that the main game mode should have 2 nominators, and 1 for the other. This will be more fair.

That problem still exists, yes having 2 for each makes it 'harder' but as it stands it seems like the best solution we have.

you could go as far to say maybe any mode with + 3 difficulties will need 2 noms from that mode and anything under 1.

Hypothetically a set exists with
4 mania
2 standard
and 2 taiko difficulties

only mania would require 2 nominations with both standard and taiko only needing the one nomination (just a theory)

It's less about what is the best solution and what is the least devestating/demanding solution lol, if we stay as is, people will abuse the hybrid system to avoid getting 2 std bns for their standard set (for example).

The 2 nominators per mode rule fixes that issue, and makes the quality and bn punishment or whatever side of things less confusing, but is very demanding for mappers and might cause hybrid mapsets to die out; making them unrankable will fix all issues but might just harm the game in return in other ways (hybrid mapset plays and such), the proposed solution of 1 per extra mode is an all around 'jack of all trades', it still has possible issues and stuff that'd need sorting out (like what'd be the main mode, for example). Thing is IMO no solution is perfect and we'll have to make something and ultimately deal with another problem stemming out of it later.

I believe the correct course of action is to find something that will have the least issues that can most plausibly be dealt with relatively easily in the future, rather than wasting time finding the 'perfect solution' and later risk seeing it in practice providing unexpected results, we'd better stick to predictable things.

For me, I consider the last solution (2 per main gamemode, 1 per extra gamemode) the most balanced and thus that's what I'd say is the right choice; I find stuff such as defining the main mode to be relatively simple discussion wise, and all other issues seem easy to solve to me; so that's what I'd go with, but whatever ya want.

iYiyo wrote:

Now the question is how you define the main mode of an hybrid set. The one which has more difficulties? The one which has the hardest difficulty? A mix of last two?

We could work with these examples:

x Standard diffs, two Taiko diffs (Muzukashii/Oni), two Mania diffs (NM/HD) = 2 Standard BNs, 1 Taiko BN, 1 Mania BN

x Standard diffs, three Taiko diffs (Futsuu/Muzukashii/Oni), four CTB diffs (Cup~Rain) = 2 Standard BNs, 2 Taiko BN, 2 CTB BN

Three Taiko diffs (Futsuu/Muzukashii/Oni), three Mania diffs (NM/HD/MX) = 2 Taiko BN, 2 Mania BNs

Looks complicated but I think it would take away the stupid question what would be considered as main mode. It'd be all these with a complete set that would be rankable when alone as own mapset.

I don't consider the technical aspect how exactly this should work by the forum/system so idk lo

J1NX1337 wrote:

I would prefer 2 nominators for the main gamemode of the hybrid set, and 1 for every secondary gamemode.

yeah this sounds logical however if a mapset has 3 catch and 3 standard diffs, it would make sense to have 2 nominators for each mode. Theres a large grey area here and as someone who has never made a hybrid set it's hard to understand how difficult it would be to find 4 willing nominators for a set... Imo it would get really out of hand to have 6 nominators for a 3 mode hybrid...

1 nominator per mode. Please not two, imagine getting 8 bns for a 4 gamemode hybrid set? That sounds nearly impossible. If you require 2 nominators per gamemode, you're only going to discourage hybrids even further. I like hybrids, and would like to see more in the future but this really isn't looking good for the future of hybrid sets.

As a main benefactor of hybrid sets and a strong proponent of this change, this is all I have to say.

This solution removes lazy people and abuse from the question. 9 standard diffs + 2 taiko diffs and only one standard nominator is absolutely outrageous. Why should the number of nominators DECREASE when the number of modes on a set INCREASE? You guys are making no sense. If you had two separate sets, you’d need 2 nominators for each set. Why, when you combine them, would you only need 2, or even this 2+1 idea that everyone is throwing around? This will NOT be the death of hybrids, but the death of low quality hybrids or ones only getting used to push outrageous or disliked standard spreads.

Think rationally before you type, reducing the amount of BNs for combining sets together makes no sense and will never make sense.

I think It would be best to just have 2 Nominator for the gamemode with most difficulties, and 1 per other gamemode, Requiring a max of 5 BN's for a 4 gamemode set (Not including the other BN's for other keymodes in Mania)

If 2 or more Gamemodes have same ammount of difficulties, priorize by Mapper of difficulty
(Uploader > GD's). If Uploader made same ammount of Diffs in 2 or more gamemodes, Up to Mapper's Main Mapping Gamemode

If modes are not being checked by a nominator, add the same amount of nominators required per mode at the moment to the remaining modes. Ergo, 3 for three modes, 4 for four. Create a threshold at 2 modes, so that if it happens to be exceeded, fewer BNs are required. Sets with 2 modes or less need 2 bns per mode, sets with more than 2 modes need 1 per mode. This way, ranking hybrids will always require 3 or more people.

Being someone who maps multiple modes, and does like to do hybrid mapsets often, I believe that requiring 4 BNs to rank something like, 5 Standard and 2 Taiko difficulties, is quite uneven. There is much more to be checked on a bigger spread, so it would make more sense to require 2 nominators for the "main" mode. There is the issue of, "What is the main mode" if you have a full spread for each mode, then at that point, it would kind of make sense to have 2 nominators for each mapset. (ie 5 STD, 5 Taiko.) I mainly say this because each spread could exist perfectly fine on their own, unlike a simple Muzukashii and Oni spread. So in that type of a case, yes, 4 nominators makes sense. Otherwise the example that multiple other people have given of having 2 nominators for the main mode and 1 for the secondary mode seems good.

Of course there are mapsets that are bigger (multiple different modes), and requiring at least one BN for those modes would be a good thing to do.

I agree with the idea of having 2 BNs for the main gamemode (the one with the most difficulties) and 1 for the other. And if a map has an equal amount of difficulties on more than 1 game mode (for example 4 std and 4 taiko diffs), 2 BNs are required for each game mode.
Another solution would be that if there are at least 3 diffs on one game mode, 2 BNs are necessary while 2 diffs only require one BN. That would obviously not apply for a set with 2 std diffs and 2 taiko diffs for example.
This way, there would still be at least 3 BNs in total for any hybrid set so it's still more effort than ranking a single game mode map and 1 BN is probably enough for only 2 difficulties.

Sotarks wrote:

I'm aware that it's a bit too much to have 1 per game mode, but I agree that the main game mode should have 2 nominators, and 1 for the other. This will be more fair.

Agree 2 for main game mod and 1 for others. But yeah, we should define what is the main game mode in a mapset, how many std/taiko/CTB/mania diffs? should be discussed a bit imo.

a decrease of BNs from 2 on hybrid sets should only happen if there is an increase in hybrid BNs

otherwise, it feels kind of scummy for people to get away with one BN checking a whole spread in one mode as a minimum

but the hybrid sets that i see that are like Full STD spread + a couple of mania diffs (HD, MX lets say) (also applies to taiko and ctb but i never see those) and that's when i think it should be okay for one BN to check the smaller set. so that would be 2 STD + 1 side (mania, taiko, or ctb) = 3 BNs. not too bad for a large set like that. i think.

i dont think this solution is necessary if and only if there are more BNs who can check more than one mode. for example, in the case above, if one of the STD BNs can check mania on the side too, great, 2 BNs all you need.

Stefan wrote:

iYiyo wrote:

Now the question is how you define the main mode of an hybrid set. The one which has more difficulties? The one which has the hardest difficulty? A mix of last two?

We could work with these examples:

x Standard diffs, two Taiko diffs (Muzukashii/Oni), two Mania diffs (NM/HD) = 2 Standard BNs, 1 Taiko BN, 1 Mania BN

x Standard diffs, three Taiko diffs (Futsuu/Muzukashii/Oni), four CTB diffs (Cup~Rain) = 2 Standard BNs, 2 Taiko BN, 2 CTB BN

Three Taiko diffs (Futsuu/Muzukashii/Oni), three Mania diffs (NM/HD/MX) = 2 Taiko BN, 2 Mania BNs

Looks complicated but I think it would take away the stupid question what would be considered as main mode. It'd be all these with a complete set that would be rankable when alone as own mapset.

I don't consider the technical aspect how exactly this should work by the forum/system so idk lo

I agree with Stefan

I think a viable solution would be to require 2 nominations for the main mode and depending if the additional gamemodes could stand on their own they would require 2 additional nominations.

Ex.
5 STD 2 Taiko === 2 STD Nominations 1 Taiko Nomination

Ex. 2
5 STD 5 Taiko === 2 STD Nominations 2 Taiko Nominations

I just don't think the amount of difficulties requring 2 nominations should be made just a number but instead it would depend amount of effort put into the additional gamemodes.

If the additional gamemode produces a reasonable spread with difficulties for as many types of players as the song allows (ex. Taiko ENHIX+) then the requirement would be 2 nominations for that mode.

If the additional gamemode is just tacked on at the end with minimal effort and as a set would leave the song severly missing higher diffs (ex. Taiko NH) then the requirement would be 1 nomination.

just make it 2 main + 1 secondary, good luck trying to find 2 active BNs per game mode that's willing to check your mapset (someone that they've most likely never heard of) and having them check over anything if it gets DQ'd again having a 4 mode mapset would be event of the year


also BNs should have the skill and knowledge to check a mapset all on their own ready for qualification otherwise they shouldn't be in the role they're given

maybe limit it to 1 main or 2 prob but that sounds stupid up to you

BN should be held accountable when nominating hybrid sets. (Meaning have a secondary mode BN check respective difficulties first. Or to have the skills necessary to check it themselves) Otherwise, rules like "osu! difficulties must convert to other game modes without breaking star rating/performance point." would not be enforced.

Having 2 nominations per game mode is unnecessary time added on to hybrid sets. Rather than punishing the mapper for wanting to map a hybrid set, encourage BNs to learn other game modes.

Also, the note for solution #2:

"Note: If you choose the last option, make sure to explain your point in-depth"

Obvious brain washing. Clearly if these solutions didn't need any more explaining you wouldn't need the community's permission to go through with it. If you don't want this to happen then don't even suggest it at all.

Bubblun wrote:

Having 2 nominations per game mode is unnecessary time added on to hybrid sets. Rather than punishing the mapper for wanting to map a hybrid set, encourage BNs to learn other game modes.

I am not interested in Mania and CTB and it's not my interest if the mapper wants to push their Hybrid set, just because the uploader or the guest mapper are lazy and just want to map one or two diffs max.

Bubblun wrote:

"Note: If you choose the last option, make sure to explain your point in-depth"

Obvious brain washing. Clearly if these solutions didn't need any more explaining you wouldn't need the community's permission to go through with it. If you don't want this to happen then don't even suggest it at all.

What? This is just to avoid unexplained "it's fine, no need to fix" comments and to spark proper discussion.

in my opinion, due to the special spread requirements for hybrid sets (ie u only need 1 ctb diff piggybacking off std)

this causes a confusion with what we should do, obviously it would be ridiculous to ask for two ctb BNs to check one ctb diff.

tbh i would prefer that if we had hybrid diffs, they would all require a full set.

then follow the first proposal.

J1NX1337 wrote:

I would prefer 2 nominators for the main gamemode of the hybrid set, and 1 for every secondary gamemode.

I also agree with this.completely, I feel like getting 2 BNs per mode would be overkill and discourage mappers from making hybrid sets in the long run.

Though, at least 1 BN for each secondary mode is absolutely necessary, to ensure that at least each mode is checked from someone capable of fully understanding that specific mode properly.

Ascendance wrote:

Think rationally before you type, reducing the amount of BNs for combining sets together makes no sense and will never make sense.

Idk why you acting like you're the most rational guy here, a bit rude imo lol. Actually Kibbleru describes pretty well why having 2 nominators for each gamemode isn't the best solution here, because of how RC is right now. ->

Kibbleru wrote:

in my opinion, due to the special spread requirements for hybrid sets (ie u only need 1 ctb diff piggybacking off std)

this causes a confusion with what we should do, obviously it would be ridiculous to ask for two ctb BNs to check one ctb diff.

tbh i would prefer that if we had hybrid diffs, they would all require a full set.

then follow the first proposal.

If ranking criteria about hybrid stays the same:
- 'main gamemode' -> 2 BNs (can have multiple main gamemodes) (Maybe considered for having 3 difficulties or more for that gamemode).
- 'secondary gamemode' -> 1 BN
That's better than what we have now. This will also need implementation from devs, but I guess you guys are aware of that already.

If hybrid sets need full-gamemode-sets, meaning changes in RC:
- every gamemode on hybrid set would need 2 BNs
- ultimately make hybrids unrankables :C

I think having hybrids set incentived mappers to do multiple gamemodes sets, mainly because RC allows them to be a bit easier to do and to rank. Otherwise why do hybrid sets exist? Why not forcing single gamemode sets only from the very beginning of osu? I think this thing about main mode and secondary mode could finally define better the way for hybrid sets.

I sort of like this kind of idea coming out, more eyes on mapsets are good for the quality standards, but I really don't think adding more bns to check is entirely justified nor is removing amount of certain types of bns (current way). This is mostly because of the qualified section, maybe proposals like this try to make the workload in qualified section a bit less but that will never truly happen. DQ modding will occur for a map regardless of how many people support it/push it for ranked.

I think having two bns check any set as a minimum for qualified requirements is already a lot for 95% of people. And adding more bns required per set not only discourages hybrid sets (esp since minigame mode bns are afk way more than std) but it also just adds to workload of everyone imo

e> the most logical thing imo for which game mode is the most is drain time in that game mode, and usually that will encompass the diff with highest SR, and with ties for most would just require 2 per mode within the tie

I didnt read through all of it, but I spotted a bit of talk about two BNs per mode being too much. I dont agree with this.

If you were to rank each mode as a standalone set, you'd still need two of the respective BNs to check each and qualify. I dont know why this would be an issue if a hybrid set followed the same idea, since it kinda is just that - two standalone modes, but as one set. It's always possible that a single BN misses something that a second one could catch. Being lazy about catching another BN isnt really ... uh, too much of a thing when quality becomes more and more important.

Anyway, I think I like the idea that was posted in the Discord the most, where you'd need 5 hype and two seperated nominations per mode. Seems like the most fair method to me.

It's not about laziness tbh, finding 2 BNs is already pretty hard for most mappers, so having to find 2 additional BNs for, let's say, a muzu and a oni is quite hard and would cause the map to go through the ranking process significantly slower or maybe not being ranked at all since there are not many BNs for the non-standard game modes currently.
Also, a hybrid mapset shouldn't be treated exactly in the same way as 2 separate mapsets because then it would be simpler to just make 2 sets and rank them separately, then there's no point in doing a hybrid mapset in the first place.

Yauxo wrote:

If you were to rank each mode as a standalone set, you'd still need two of the respective BNs to check each and qualify. I dont know why this would be an issue if a hybrid set followed the same idea, since it kinda is just that - two standalone modes, but as one set.

This isn't exactly true. Because you cannot rank a Muzukashii/Oni spread if the length of the song is less than 3 minutes. Same goes for the other modes. That's why people have brought up the idea of having 2+1, summing up to 3 BNs check the mapset, based on what the spread is. Because there are significantly different workloads for hybrids sets. They would be checking 2 difficulties verses 4 difficulties. (Obviously there are different cases, but this is an example.)

also think its worth mentioning a number of BNs quite openly say stuff like they don't want to touch hybrid sets lol

so requiring more bns will be pretty annoying

Yauxo wrote:

I didnt read through all of it, but I spotted a bit of talk about two BNs per mode being too much. I dont agree with this.

If you were to rank each mode as a standalone set, you'd still need two of the respective BNs to check each and qualify. I dont know why this would be an issue if a hybrid set followed the same idea, since it kinda is just that - two standalone modes, but as one set. It's always possible that a single BN misses something that a second one could catch. Being lazy about catching another BN isnt really ... uh, too much of a thing when quality becomes more and more important.

Anyway, I think I like the idea that was posted in the Discord the most, where you'd need 5 hype and two seperated nominations per mode. Seems like the most fair method to me.

I agree with the bold part because it's exactly what Ascendance wrote that it makes 100% sense to have the same requirements for the additional modes in the hybrid set they should follow. And I also support the idea that at LEAST one BN exist for every mode that can be made responsible to make sure the respective mode is fine.

See, the example eiri- gave is good: Muzukashii/Oni spreads are 1/2 to 2/3 of what an actual and full mapset usually looks like and unless they meet the drain time requirement they cannot be ranked like that in a standalone set, since they do not follow the RC for Taiko. So they are already an exception in the regular RC.

The general idea to have two BNs is to double check. Meanwhile we have plenty Bns that are proficient in multiple modes but it's the matter of question how much do "half" sets needs to be checked. I wholeheartly support the idea I made some posts above since I think it's by far a much more flexible and fair compromise with the community and the regulations.

bor wrote:

also think its worth mentioning a number of BNs quite openly say stuff like they don't want to touch hybrid sets lol

so requiring more bns will be pretty annoying

that however is because they don't want to be made responsible for the mapset getting potentially dqed for other modes so having seperated nominations for every mode may encourage them to touch hybrid sets.

This poll looks a bit skewed in terms of the options made, would probably be better redoing this later with options for the suggestions given in this thread to fix that, rather than relying on people to do trains in the reply section with "I agree with x". Would make more sense to think of this more as a "give your ideas here so that we can vote on them later" kinda thing, and then vote afterwards.

I can see where everyone is coming from with the 2+1 idea, since generally hybrid sets are a main mode and then another 2-4 other mode diffs, and how hybrids in theory help people discover or transition into other modes making that potential loss of quality worth it in the long run.

However, I can also see where option #1 is coming from, since the only difference between a hybrid and a standalone set is whether or not they're bundled together (spread requirements being the sole exception), and that putting one set onto another set shouldn't mean either mode needs less quality assurance.

Say you've got a 9 diff standard set and a 2 diff taiko set, both their own sets. The taiko set has way less things to check, but it still needs 2 nominators. The standard set has way more things to check, but it also needs 2 nominators. Now let's assume they're put together into one hybrid set. Suddenly taiko needs less checks, simply because the difficulties are in the same set, rather than two separate sets. The content is the same, it's just combined. This is seemingly were people start disagreeing; is difficulties of different modes put together into one set, a good enough thing to have in ranked, to require less checking?

There was this other proposal flying around about adapting it after # of diffs or content, but current rules say even a 30s easy single diff set will need 2 nominators so adapting nominators required after content for hybrids only probably isn't a great idea, would be better making that into it's own proposal in such a case and then applying it to hybrids as well.

From what I can tell the advantages (or at least some of them) of each approach is:

2 nominations per mode
- Handled the same way as standalone sets (except spread), making the process for each mode less confusing.
- Easier to implement since it's always the same, less conditions and complications.
- Maintains the same amount of quality assurance for each mode regardless of hybrid or standalone.
basically: More straightforward and consistent

2 nominations for main mode, 1 for others
- Easier for the creator to find nominators and get the set ranked
- Greater incentive to make hybrid sets, leading to more hybrid sets in ranked
- Makes each mode less separated from one another, leading to potentially more balance and community interaction between player bases.
basically: More balanced and encourages mode diversity

Either could be implemented quickly through just adding more nomination slots depending on mode amount, but the latter is harder to implement properly (like actually separating nomination buttons so hybrid mode nominators can nominate multiple times etc), due to it's arbitrary nature of what constitutes as the main mode. If nothing else it could prioritize one mode over another without exception, for example standard < taiko < catch < mania to decide which one is the main if two have the same amount, in which case it would be more doable.

Naxess wrote:

Would make more sense to think of this more as a "give your ideas here so that we can vote on them later" kinda thing, and then vote afterwards.

Yeah, that's what we will probably go with. Also Naxess basically summed up my opinion on this.

I totally glanced over the possibility of having only two or three difficulties for the minor mode, if you want to call it that. My bad.

I kind of do agree that, in case of the example given by eiri-, if a hybrid set only includes two diffs as opposed to a full spread, there's less workload for that respective BN. I do however also still think that it's a good trait to have multiple people check of the maps anyway. There's never something wrong with getting additional opinions onto possible controversal topics.
Maybe that's just my pre-2018 way of thinking though.

With that said, Im kinda indecisive on that topic. I think quality assurance is still very important and spending a bit more time to make absolutely sure everything is right is time well spent, but I also see the downside of lesser popular gamemodes where it might be a pain to find an additional BN.

personal opinion, I think it's better to add an extra nominations to the more diff mode. more strict checking of modes with more diff is needed to reduce the error rate. (compared to the smaller number of diff mode)

I think hybrid mapsets should be treated as if they were just different mapsets for one song, thus requiring check of 2 BNs for each respective mode and, obviously, following general ranking criteria of each game mode involved including different mania key count modes.

same as Nao Tomori's suggestion (3rd Post or sth)
2 nominations for "main" Mode, 1 for each additional mode

if there are multiple modes with highest difficulty count. the map owner decides what mode is viewed as the main one

alternate solution to hybrids would be voting: https://osu.ppy.sh/community/forums/posts/6779532 into the RC

not my call i'd want to ask how the respective game modes feel about this