Hello
To start with - If you are a new beatmap creator you struggle a lot. You don't know what to do and how to do at first, but with a bit of effort put into it you start to slowly learn (M4M,NM). And at some point of your mapper's career you usually question yourself - Is my mapping rankable? (usually after couple of months the answer is yes, but as we all know ranking criteria fulfilling map ≠ rankable map). There is a lot of stuff like spacing emphasis, visual emphasis, rhythm choices etc.
At this point (or even earlier) people with low mapping knowledge start to flood Nominators with requests, often making it harder for actually good maps to reach the BN's. And because of that BN's have a lot of work explaining basic stuff which can often be pointless as many new mappers give up or deny the mods (the it's my style syndrome). I would like this problem to be fixed because as one of the mappers who try to get to a nominator, I can't reach them because they are overflowed with requests.
I have an idea how to solve this problem and it's fairly simple. New role - Quality Checker (I know the name is sheet but i dont have a better name for this)
Said "Quality Checkers" would receive requests from people and check if maps sent to them don't have basic problems. They won't be able to nominate the map, but the thing they can do is sending maps to beatmap Nominators. This way BN's would actually chcek maps with at least decent quality.
Sounds good right? But here unfortunately comes the hardest part - how to organize this? Well i have a suggestions for that:
Mapper<Checker<Nominator system
visual representation:
1) Mappers intending to get their map Nominated send request to the "Quality Checkers" who check for simple mistakes and flaws. When they are sure that the map they got is good enough, they send "checked" map to the Nominator. This way Nominators which are more expirienced can actually check ready maps for any further flaws, and if there is none they can nominate the map.
2) Nominated maps wouldn't need to be sent again to the quality checkers, instead mapper is free to send the BM right to the Nominator.
3) Quality Checkers would be picked from any player by Nominators (Maximum ammount of checkers would be around 10 for one nominator. So if there is 10 Nominators they can recruit 100 checkers). To get a "Quality Checker" role you would need to be voted for by two Nominators.
There could be a second option for this, that any Nominator can pick 10 qualified mappers for themselves, this would solve a problem of to which nominator checker would send a map to.
Option number 3 proposed in the discussion:
Quality checker would not be an assigned role. Every player with at least 3 ranked beatmaps and 200 kudosu would be able to hype the beatmap (proposed idea: only those players would be able to hype no ranked map players) my proposition is to make something else, better than hypes like "checked" option available for experienced players. This way nominator could be sure that the beatmap is good.
4) Flaw list made by a checker would be sent back to the mapper. Example of a Flaw list:
Hello, your map has been rejected due to this problems:
-Bad spacing emphasis
[Example described by a checker]
-[other flaws]...
If you fix them you are free to send the map again.
Flaw list would be available for every player to see in the beatmap discussion. It could be liked or disliked. And to make sure angry mappers won't spam staff with list rejection, the flaw list would need to be disliked by other Checker, 10 players or 2 players with a ranked beatmap to be sent to the staff to check. Checker would be able to comment and make corrections in the comments
5) To make sure that they won't be resent instantly again, there would be one day rejected map cooldown. Additionaly maximum of sent maps would be around 3. And if you do not agree with flaw list made by a checker you can argue over that with support/nominators. (look point 4)
6) Checkers could lose their role after making a major mistake like rejecting a really good map or sending a really bad map to the nominator.
7) Quality Checker wouldn't be just a replacement for normal modders, their mods would be of a hight quality. Normal mods can provide useful information but mods from random players could also be wrong so if your map was modded by a Checker you could be sure that the mod is useful
8) You would be able to send your map to the Checker only if your BM is fulfilling those criteria:
1- Your BM must be at least week old
2- Your BM must have at least 5 hypes
3- Your beatmap must be modded by at least 10 modders or 2 modders with a ranked beatmap
4- Your beatmap should be fulfilling ranking criteria (You should at least read criteria and be sure that you don't break the rules)
If there is any inconsistency or misunderstanding - point it out (because I'm not native and some stuff can be unclear). Would also like to hear any suggestions to include to this list
To start with - If you are a new beatmap creator you struggle a lot. You don't know what to do and how to do at first, but with a bit of effort put into it you start to slowly learn (M4M,NM). And at some point of your mapper's career you usually question yourself - Is my mapping rankable? (usually after couple of months the answer is yes, but as we all know ranking criteria fulfilling map ≠ rankable map). There is a lot of stuff like spacing emphasis, visual emphasis, rhythm choices etc.
At this point (or even earlier) people with low mapping knowledge start to flood Nominators with requests, often making it harder for actually good maps to reach the BN's. And because of that BN's have a lot of work explaining basic stuff which can often be pointless as many new mappers give up or deny the mods (the it's my style syndrome). I would like this problem to be fixed because as one of the mappers who try to get to a nominator, I can't reach them because they are overflowed with requests.
I have an idea how to solve this problem and it's fairly simple. New role - Quality Checker (I know the name is sheet but i dont have a better name for this)
Said "Quality Checkers" would receive requests from people and check if maps sent to them don't have basic problems. They won't be able to nominate the map, but the thing they can do is sending maps to beatmap Nominators. This way BN's would actually chcek maps with at least decent quality.
Sounds good right? But here unfortunately comes the hardest part - how to organize this? Well i have a suggestions for that:
Mapper<Checker<Nominator system
visual representation:
1) Mappers intending to get their map Nominated send request to the "Quality Checkers" who check for simple mistakes and flaws. When they are sure that the map they got is good enough, they send "checked" map to the Nominator. This way Nominators which are more expirienced can actually check ready maps for any further flaws, and if there is none they can nominate the map.
2) Nominated maps wouldn't need to be sent again to the quality checkers, instead mapper is free to send the BM right to the Nominator.
3) Quality Checkers would be picked from any player by Nominators (Maximum ammount of checkers would be around 10 for one nominator. So if there is 10 Nominators they can recruit 100 checkers). To get a "Quality Checker" role you would need to be voted for by two Nominators.
There could be a second option for this, that any Nominator can pick 10 qualified mappers for themselves, this would solve a problem of to which nominator checker would send a map to.
Option number 3 proposed in the discussion:
Quality checker would not be an assigned role. Every player with at least 3 ranked beatmaps and 200 kudosu would be able to hype the beatmap (proposed idea: only those players would be able to hype no ranked map players) my proposition is to make something else, better than hypes like "checked" option available for experienced players. This way nominator could be sure that the beatmap is good.
4) Flaw list made by a checker would be sent back to the mapper. Example of a Flaw list:
Hello, your map has been rejected due to this problems:
-Bad spacing emphasis
[Example described by a checker]
-[other flaws]...
If you fix them you are free to send the map again.
Flaw list would be available for every player to see in the beatmap discussion. It could be liked or disliked. And to make sure angry mappers won't spam staff with list rejection, the flaw list would need to be disliked by other Checker, 10 players or 2 players with a ranked beatmap to be sent to the staff to check. Checker would be able to comment and make corrections in the comments
5) To make sure that they won't be resent instantly again, there would be one day rejected map cooldown. Additionaly maximum of sent maps would be around 3. And if you do not agree with flaw list made by a checker you can argue over that with support/nominators. (look point 4)
6) Checkers could lose their role after making a major mistake like rejecting a really good map or sending a really bad map to the nominator.
7) Quality Checker wouldn't be just a replacement for normal modders, their mods would be of a hight quality. Normal mods can provide useful information but mods from random players could also be wrong so if your map was modded by a Checker you could be sure that the mod is useful
8) You would be able to send your map to the Checker only if your BM is fulfilling those criteria:
1- Your BM must be at least week old
2- Your BM must have at least 5 hypes
3- Your beatmap must be modded by at least 10 modders or 2 modders with a ranked beatmap
4- Your beatmap should be fulfilling ranking criteria (You should at least read criteria and be sure that you don't break the rules)
If there is any inconsistency or misunderstanding - point it out (because I'm not native and some stuff can be unclear). Would also like to hear any suggestions to include to this list