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

i'll rather keep the current system with 1 nomination per mode but one extra bn is who are qualified to nominate all the modes of the hybrid set is required to let these maps ranked so there is any problem of what consistues a main/secondary modes

ex:
1 set of std with 7 diffs /taiko with 7 diffs : 1 bn required for std and taiko + 1 bn who can nominate std and taiko
1 marathon set of one unique diff of each mode : 1 bn required for all modes + 1 bn who can nominate all

the main problem of this would be the lack of bn who are qualified for more than 2 modes so alternately, we can merge it with the solution #1 by mao

ex :
1 marathon set of std/taiko/catch with 1 diff : 1 bn required for std/taiko/catch + 1 bn who can nominate std/taiko/catch OR 1 bn who can nominate std/taiko with 1 extra bn who can nominate catch (all the combinaisons like taiko/catch + 1 extra std etc... works) OR do litterally the 2 bn required per modes if any bn who can nominate multiple modes aren't present

for the extra efforts that the multi-mode bn have to do, if he ranks a hybrid set, the score given should be double or even triple than a normal nomination/heart.

realy0_ wrote:

i'll rather keep the current system with 1 nomination per mode but one extra bn is who are qualified to nominate all the modes of the hybrid set is required to let these maps ranked so there is any problem of what consistues a main/secondary modes

ex:
1 set of std with 7 diffs /taiko with 7 diffs : 1 bn required for std and taiko + 1 bn who can nominate std and taiko
1 marathon set of one unique diff of each mode : 1 bn required for all modes + 1 bn who can nominate all

the main problem of this would be the lack of bn who are qualified for more than 2 modes so alternately, we can merge it with the solution #1 by mao

ex :
1 marathon set of std/taiko/catch with 1 diff : 1 bn required for std/taiko/catch + 1 bn who can nominate std/taiko/catch OR 1 bn who can nominate std/taiko with 1 extra bn who can nominate catch (all the combinaisons like taiko/catch + 1 extra std etc... works) OR do litterally the 2 bn required per modes if any bn who can nominate multiple modes aren't present

for the extra efforts that the multi-mode bn have to do, if he ranks a hybrid set, the score given should be double or even triple than a normal nomination/heart.

As you already said, this doesn't work at all due to the lack of multi mode BNs (there are almost none currently). It would basically force the only multi mode BN to check the map which doesn't make sense so this proposal is not really a good solution

can we just go back to something similar to what has been done in the past years?
lets take a look at this map: t/142823/start=0 (4 modes map)
dkun count as std icon & also bubble

You were basically forbidden to bubble if an icon mode were missing. (I am really sure it was a rule back in 2015 & even before 2015)
it actually worked really fine, I have no idea why this rule has been removed.

important edit: stop call desperate-kun dkun for god sake

i'd support the idea of having different nominations for different game modes though you gotta remember that (as far as i remember) the reason why the game mode icons were deprecated was specifically due to that kind of system not being a thing on the so called modding v2.

in my opinion this is one of those topics that you can't talk much about because there is so much stuff planned we don't know about, that is actually difficult to tell if developers would agree with something like this in the first place.

that said, i'm against implementing this as some sort of rules for bns, as it makes everything more complicated and confusing. if it were to be implemented, it needs to be a fixed system that detects the amount of diffs and vary the number of nominations required depending on the spread.

Kin wrote:

You were basically forbidden to bubble if an icon mode were missing. (I am really sure it was a rule back in 2015 & even before 2015)
it actually worked really fine, I have no idea why this rule has been removed.

They had a meaning back in 2013 but it was removed with the QAT/BAT split in 2014 and later stated in the very first BN rules: https://osu.ppy.sh/community/forums/topics/366504

Old BN Rules wrote:

3.5. osu!/osu!taiko/osu!catch/osu!mania Icons
They used to have an actual meaning, but they do not anymore. Using them brings you nothing, expresses nothing and does nothing. So do not use them.

Anyways, as Kagetsu stated implementation into mv2 will be a crucial step. The only band-aid fix I could think of would be that Nominators need to post a Note but that would make nomination resets/pops pretty messy.

Back before I became a triple-mode BN, I wals thought it was my duty as a BN to ensure that the other modes were checked by someone who knew what they were doing, even if they didn't give an official nomination. And as a triple-mode BN, there were plenty of times where even though my main mode was standard, I only checked the ctb / taiko diffs without looking at the standard ones, because I was not responsible for those for that particular case.

I think depending on the issue that the map got disqualified for, the responsibility may or may not lie on the nominators. For example, in a Standard/Taiko/Ctb set, if the map got disqualified for an unused hitsound, or something general, obviously the nominators involved are responsible. You should check that regardless of mode. But if the Mp was nominated by a Standard and Catch BN, but dq'ed for a Taiko-specific reason, I feel like the Standard and Catch BN's should not be punished for that. However, With regards to the nomination process, I think it would be a requirement then, that the map be nominated by a Taiko BN to confirm officially that that mode is good.

I believe that would resolve the issue of BN's being either held responsible or not held responsible, as well as how the map can proceed with requalification.



Caveat:
I don't know about the community now, but it used to be very easy to get quick opinions from BN's of other modes when checking a hybrid set. I don't know if that is still reflected today, since I'm no longer familiar with the BN ecosystem. I used to (and I guess still do) host a lot of hybrid sets, and nominated many of them too. As i see it if you didn't get additional opinions on a hybrid set before nominating, it was clearly your fault. Like, for me it was always an expectation to get opinions. Maybe nowadays people just don't care. If that is the case, perhaps something should change in the BN community instead to make mode-specific opinions like this easier to access, or you should adequately punish BN's for not caring so they'll care more. (Though I feel like nowadays QAT's have completely overdone it, and BN's are too scared for the wrong reasons lol)

Just posting that Hybrid Sets are already rare enough, idk what's the point of making the gate higher. I mean I read the arguments, but it seems silly. This isn't really a problem outside of a specific niche, imo.

I support N+1 bns for N-mode sets as it is easy to operate and resembles v1 hybrid ranking process, which has been proved a success

There is a serious oversight that I just realized, nowhere is it mentioned how more than 2 bns per mapset would affect the time in between nominations, or how the map getting popped/updated will affect nominations. What happens if you have an all gamemode hybrid set with 2 ctb nominations, 2 osu nominations, 2 taiko nominations, and one mania nomnation and then the mapset gets updated? All nominations reset? Now, if all nominations reset does that mean you have to wait at least 24 hours in between each renomination? Imagine waiting over a week for nominations every time you wanted/needed to update your mapset. That sounds horrible. If the argument is that each gamemode is considered its own mapset almost, you would only have to wait 1 day from the first nomination until qualification if each gamemode was actually its own mapset, but if all the gamemodes are in one mapset you'd have to wait about 7 days from first nomination until qualification. That seems like serious discouragement against hybrid sets. I believe this needs to be addressed, thank you!

@tatatat, see "At least 24 hours must pass between a first nomination and a qualification on every mapset", this means all but one bn could nominate at the same time and then 24h later, the last could qualify, for example.

The thing about sets updating causing all nominations to self-pop depends on how things are implemented, devs could check for changes in the individual .osu files and then have bancho post a problem only in the respective mode general tabs (assuming mode-specific nominations/pops are implemented), but that's completely up to them if/how they implement stuff.

Assuming we're just getting more nominations required on hybrid sets, they'd probably all be reset when a problem is posted or similar, but there's not really much we could do about that if devs want to spend their development time elsewhere.

This all would be so much better if maps relating to a certain gamemode in the set could be nominated and ranked. So you could be done with ranking one gamemode in the set and go for ranking another one without holding the other back.

"I have a different opinion that I will post on the thread."

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

What Stefan said.

Of course if a given nominator is proficient in two or more gamemodes, they are allowed to nominate the map once per gamemode.

Whats the status on this?

@QAT

What's the status on this, will move to finalized / denied in a week if there's no other proposal being brought up because the thing just seems to have died out?

no response, archiving without result

How disappointing.