Considering patterns and notes density too, it is far more easy to differentiate Easy-Normal-Hard rather than Insane/Expert maps.
MEGAtive wrote: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.
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.
In my opinion, it should be consulted with QAT members, or together with community.
Lenfried- wrote:If I have a severely underrated 4.8* chart being pushed as a single diff for 4:15, would it be considered an insane or an expert? Where do you draw the line? Should the QAT be consulted with these things? The same could be said for 3:30 H single H diffs that may be underrated. If these said underrated diffs would be subject to QAT rulings, would overrated charts be treated in the same manner?
The main problem is one: how does one define Insane/Expert?
The main difference is the note density and pattern complexity/difficulty. Still the definition of Insane/Expert maps should be discussed further with moderators and experienced players. And, yes, despite the same note count, patterns should be taken look at. However, quoting MEGAtive that every players have different skill sets and experience, one can look a pattern as "slightly hard" while other could look at it as "piece of cake".
One of severe case is "swingy" patterns, which involves "rainbow" snapping (combination between general 1/4~1/16 snap and triplets). I already experimented with some maps, and mostly (in my test) "Star Rating" doesn't always reflect the actual difficulty of a map.
That's why discussing about the difficulty definition in a map is important.
Another example is (as MEGAtive said after discussing privately with me), a 10 notes/sec double trills and double-jacks (or even one-handed jacks) has entirely different difficulty. Though, on slower density, 2 notes/sec double trills and double-jacks has slight (or even no distinguish) difference on difficulty.
From what am I thinking, underrated and overrated charts should be treated evenly; look through the patterns, analyze it, and check playability difficulty. The most concerning problem (I think) is "PP maps".