I believe Easy-Normal-Hard progression is a common sense that need no further breakdown. Patterns used in these diffs are pretty basic. They only need a pattern/rhythmical limitation to shape the structure up.
abraker wrote:Since this is not following SR, this raises a question. There isn't anything in the proposed ranking criteria that establishes what makes easy easier than normal, what makes normal is easier than hard, and so on. The proposed currently acts as categorical checklists will a lot of room for overlap. What prevents mappers from labeling the difficulties arbitrarily and passing them off while technically satisfying the criteria for the difficulty labeled?
What needs to be breakdowned is Insane-Expert as these two in execution may intertwined with each other. As defining difficulty may be subjective and each people skillsets are different which makes some people believe the Expert felt easier than Insane.