[Proposal] Usage of slider anchors must be reasonable

posted
Total Posts
11
Topic Starter
3mplify
9Tbh, I wanted to make this post long time ago...

Rule: Slider anchors which don't affect the slider must de deleted. If the slider has the same shape and movement with and without the same slider anchor, then this slider anchor must be deleted.

Situation with idke's map Imperial Circus Dead Decadence - Fusyoku ressentiment, fushiyoku no sarugakuza. shown us that lack of such rule can lead to this "meme" inappropriate messages.



Futhermore, imaging a beatmap with, for example, 560 sliders (every one has three anchors) and every one will have 1144 extra anchors, which don't affect the slider and a beatmap with the same sliders, but without 1144 extra anchors.

Results:
Load Time of the "beatmap" with 1144 extra anchors: 00:15.77
Size of the "beatmap" with 1144 extra anchors flie: 4,96 Mb

Load Time of the "beatmap" without 1144 extra anchors: 00:00.65
Size of the "beatmap" without 1144 extra anchors flie: 58,6 kb


I think we such prevent such "beatmaps" with this rule + it will increase osu! performance which is good anyway.

Guideline: Usage of slider anchors must be reasonable and optimal. Try to reduce the ammount of slider anchors where it possible without changing shape and movement by reworking this slider with less anchor points.

The same reason as for the Rule. I think if it's possible to save at least 1 Kb of players' disk storage - that's would be excellent.

Example from Halie's map JUNNA - Here
Before "optimization" (16 anchors, file size = 4,78 Kb):


After "optimization" (10 anchors, file size = 4,73):


less = better
Chintam
I don't think this rule should be implemented solely based on the merit of slider end abuse because that doesn't tackle the underlying problem of inappropriate conduct. As people will find other loopholes.

However, from a performance standpoint it makes sense that we would want to optimise the slider to reduce loading times. That said How would you be able to determine whether or not a slider is optimised?
Topic Starter
3mplify

Chintam wrote:

I don't think this rule should be implemented solely based on the merit of slider end abuse because that doesn't tackle the underlying problem of inappropriate conduct. As people will find other loopholes.

However, from a performance standpoint it makes sense that we would want to optimise the slider to reduce loading times. That said How would you be able to determine whether or not a slider is optimised?
1. Where have I said that this is a problem of inappropriate conduct?
2. If it's possible to make the same slider with a way less anchor points than it should be optimised. For instance, extra 5-6 anchors is quite a lot for slider, so if it's possible it should be reduced
Penguin

3mplify wrote:

2. If it's possible to make the same slider with a way less anchor points than it should be optimised. For instance, extra 5-6 anchors is quite a lot for slider, so if it's possible it should be reduced
The thing is, some mappers aren't experienced enough to do such a thing. They shouldn't have to go through a drudging process for a few anchor points when it essentially leads to the same result.
Chintam

3mplify wrote:

1. Where have I said that this is a problem of inappropriate conduct?
I believe putting inappropriate message counts as conduct. Which you wrote in the original post.

3mplify wrote:

2. If it's possible to make the same slider with a way less anchor points than it should be optimised. For instance, extra 5-6 anchors is quite a lot for slider, so if it's possible it should be reduced
I can see one of two things happening, first: The person reviewing the map needs to look and analysis every questionable slider to see whether or not it could be optimised, which would take a lot of time. Or the reviewer makes broad statements like, 'this slider has x anchors, optimise it', Which may or may not be possible. If this happens, as penguin said, it would be a drudging and tedious process.

If there's a better solution or I'm overthinking it then I'm all ears.
Akeruyri
I think a very detailed slider guide should be made. Probox has a short section of a stream highlight, and pishifat's video on slider usage says little of how to efficiently make them. Most people know the simple wave sliders and such, but for anything more complex like a full loop there's very efficient and easy to learn way of making them smooth and controlled. For example you only should need 5 points

Ex:


I guess I could make a video like that, sort of an intro to mapping tools, just so noobs dont spam random white ticks for no reason in most of their maps.

Honestly in Lazer a cool feature would be to have a well thought out interactive tutorial build into the editor that plays if you haven't opened the editor before.
Serizawa Haruki
I agree with Chintam. This proposal would only force people to check every single slider which nobody wants to do and optimizing sliders is not always easy, especially on complex slider shapes with numerous anchors. This seems like an unnecessary process considering it doesn't have any substantial positive result. Most sliders are already optimized because they only consist of 2-3 anchors anyways. Therefore, file size is only minimally affected by it. Also, people should be able to freely choose how they want to make sliders. The inappropriate content thing is a completely different story which should not be addressed here in my opinion.
Aiseca
The intention of the proposal is good but like Serizawa and Chintam said to thier posts, this adds another layer of burden for modders and everyone else to check each slider and find a much more less, simplistic, and optimized anchor count.

Try to apply this change in maps with heavy slider usage and this will be a pain for a modder to do checking each slider and find a solution for a more efficient way to reproduce the same slidershapes with minimal anchors and stuff.

The issue that leads to this proposal in the first place is, I think, can be classified as an isolated case.Like, why would a mapper risk of doing such memes or Easter eggs on his/her map in the first place if he wants his maps be safely ranked and won't cause any problems along the way?

About the slider making tutorials brought up by Akeruyri, I think that is a good idea. Maybe classify each segment or videos with something like: "Basic", "Advance", "Special/Specific" on slider shape making. I can not see any harmful in doing it since most newer mappers is struggling to get a good looking sliders.
pishifat
optimizing slider anchors to an extreme doesn't have enough benefit to be worth it. "meme messages" will be handled as they appear, which i expect to be too rare for ranking criteria restriction
NeXt4r_
Idk, I will say this rule doesn't apply for newer mapper since they haven't figure it out much
Yenmaster

pishifat wrote:

optimizing slider anchors to an extreme doesn't have enough benefit to be worth it. "meme messages" will be handled as they appear, which i expect to be too rare for ranking criteria restriction
I agree with this message, but inappropriate messages can lead to other problems such as NSFW, which I believe is unrankable in most cases. This can also upset many people and offend them in some cases.

It should be more of common sense for mappers and modders instead of a rule.
Please sign in to reply.

New reply