Blocko wrote:

Hydria wrote:

Yo thanks for this birthday present, I really appreciate it.

This DQ does not have anything to do with you personally, so don't take this the wrong way.

Hydria wrote:

they're not mapped under the same sound though, there's a sparkle noise for me and the voice for pope

I'm talking about Pope's diff here. Those two snaps are mapped under the same sound (vocal). It's just that the snapping is inconsistent among each other.
It'd be fine if both of those patterns are either in 1/6 or 1/8, but mixing them together is what causes a problem.

Hydria wrote:

ok look, this whole map is based around it's uniqueness, from the majority of minijacks to overall snapping, and even the density of some sections is all designed to be something fresh and original, this one section here is no different, and remains as a staple of difficulty throughout even the easier sections, it also gives the maps some uniqueness to themselves with each part mapped to something different, plus all the snaps aren't the same so it makes no sense to put them all "on one snap" because it doesn't work.

To be fair, this map is already unique to begin with. Like you mentioned, it already has minijacks, complex snaps and unorthodox patterns, but it's just this one section that doesn't seem to fare well with others. Making it overly complex so it's 'fresh' and 'unique' when it doesn't even warrant anything that much doesn't really make it unique, but exaggerated. Simplicity does work when one part of the song is already simple.

Hydria wrote:

you're making it hard to do so, but I will.

You're making it harder for yourself because you're taking the whole qualification process way too personally.

Hydria wrote:

ok can we get this ranked again then
next time post your reasons before the DQ so I don't have to waste even more time in qualified

That's not how it works. Someone posts their concerns in a qualified map, and if there's a discussion going on about them or if the QAT thinks it's a valid report, it will get DQ'd so the map can go through further adjustments.
If you think the whole ranking process is a big waste of time (which includes the map being qualified for a week where people can post their concerns at any time during the week before it gets ranked), you should probably think about why you're ranking something in the first place.

No hard feelings, birthday dude. I'm just trying to do my thing around here.

If any BN is gonna qualify this map, please come speak to me first about it.

Blocko wrote:

To be fair, this map is already unique to begin with. Like you mentioned, it already has minijacks, complex snaps and unorthodox patterns, but it's just this one section that doesn't seem to fare well with others. Making it overly complex so it's 'fresh' and 'unique' when it doesn't even warrant anything that much doesn't really make it unique, but exaggerated. Simplicity does work when one part of the song is already simple.

Hydria wrote:

There seems to be a snapping conflict in Pope's Insane on 00:26:479 (26479|0,26524|1,26568|2,26613|3,26658|1) - and 00:26:836 (26836|2,26896|3,26955|2,27015|1) - . They're mapped under the same sounds, but they're in different snaps. It's better to stick to one particular snap for consistency with said snaps. they're not mapped under the same sound though, there's a sparkle noise for me and the voice for pope

Hydria wrote:

ok can we get this ranked again then
next time post your reasons before the DQ so I don't have to waste even more time in qualified

Feerum wrote:

ok I hate to start on a sour note but

Also:

Hydria wrote:

ok can we get this ranked again then
next time post your reasons before the DQ so I don't have to waste even more time in qualified

This issue was resolved 4 days ago with blocko. There was no reason to bring this back up again. Everything below this line was ignored (aka not read)

Hydria wrote:

There seems to be a snapping conflict in Pope's Insane on 00:26:479 (26479|0,26524|1,26568|2,26613|3,26658|1) - and 00:26:836 (26836|2,26896|3,26955|2,27015|1) - . They're mapped under the same sounds, but they're in different snaps. It's better to stick to one particular snap for consistency with said snaps. they're not mapped under the same sound though, there's a sparkle noise for me and the voice for pope

You have there on 100% the same sound.
No one does play the Beatmap on 25% or 50% Speed. Do you can clearly hear on 100% that these sounds are different because me not and i'm pretty sure 98% of all Mania player too.
Why do you map this as different snap then when it's the same?
Like Blocko, i highly recommend to use here the same snap simply for consistency because like i said, on 100% the sounds are absolute identical.

Man what's this BS about "you can't hear the different sounds at 100% speed" I'm pretty sure there's a decent chunk of mania maps out there where you can't really tell the difference at 100% speed but the notes still exist, there's a reason we have 25%/50% available in the editor and that's to make sure snaps on maps are correct otherwise what's the point in lowering the speed, idc if they sound the same at 100% speed, as it goes, they are technically snapped correctly and therefore don't need to be fixed.

Also, for the record, I can hear the two sounds at 100% speed, but that's because I know what I'm listening out for.

I also would like to give my opinion to the whole Mapset.
We did go through the "Please Enjoy~" difficult already through IRC and i am pretty sure you know a bit what i think about your Map, but here again:

This Beatmap is beyond of that what we have for now in the ranked section in case of the snapping. Yes, we do allow use approximations in snapping for playability but this Beatmap is already beyond of it. We allow it in cases where it would simply be weird to use the correct snapping when it would be a weird mix of 1/4, 1/6, 1/8 and above.
This means as example, when a long Guitar part in a Beatmap has such a weird snapping but on 100% it all sounds same, we allow to use 1/4 or 1/6, in case what is near to the correct one.
Good examples where we did allow this are Bad Apple's Installation and sherrysina's Our Faith

Kamikaze also said this was discussed in the old Criteria Council and this may be right, i wasn't there but everything what get discussed in the Criteria Council have simply to go first into the Ranking Criteria Forums.
There it will be discussed by the community and as soon a Staff Member does approve this change we can Map following to this new "Rule".
That means everything what was discussed in the old and in the new Ranking Criteria Council is for now not valid

You can Map whatever you wan't but it's a difference if this what you mapped can get into the Ranked section and what not. In the past something like this wasn't allowed, i am pretty sure and i don't see the point when this was changed.
Maybe with the new Ranking Criteria this will change but for now i have to tell you it is in my eyes simply overdone and not for the Ranked section of Beatmaps. I'm sorry that you share the opinion of a very minor group of people (note: the only people that have complained about the rankability of this map are QATs or previous QATs, no one else) but you know, if you don't want to help advance the possibilities of mapping then sure w/e I guess I'll go to stepmania

Now let me list some mod for the highest difficult. for something you said isn't rankable you're still going to mod okay

[Please Enjoy]

It starts here:
00:19:515 (19515|2,19574|1) - This is actually just one sound. Why do you map it with two notes? pitch shift
On 100% there is absolut nothing else to hear on 00:19:574 (19574|1) - not accepting any "on 100%" reasoning because that's not how modding works

00:33:741 (33741|1) - This note should be on a 1/16 beat. When you start at 00:33:741 - you can clearly hear that the 2nd sound comes slightly later. 1. I can't tell the difference at 100% 2. It's 1/8 3.I'll change it for the 15ms it's worth

00:36:702 (36702|3,36866|1,37045|0) - The Marked notes here can be deleted because they have no own sound. On 100% You can't hear there any 2nd sound and it makes the map just unneeded more complicated and overdone. ok, to note, that first note DOES have a sound attached to it, I checked over that about 20+ times to make sure it did, also the other two notes are for when the vocals because hearable from the loud banging noise before it

00:38:934 (38934|3) - Clearly a Ghost Note. There is no sound on it, it's just the vocal which already started at 00:38:920 - . ending pitch shift

01:22:550 (82550|3,82573|2,82580|1,82729|0,82751|3,82759|1) - Again. You mapped like 100 sounds at once and all with different snap. What is the sense of this? 01:22:550 (82550|3,82729|0) - These notes are more than enough here. yo wait holdup what do you mean those singles are more than enough? are you sure you know what you're talking about, it would be mapped as normal 3-note chords if I was boring, but seeing as that loud whatever noise it is lasts 30ms, that's what the snapping variances are for, it covers the entire sound.

01:23:979 (83979|3) - The Long sound on this note continues actually until 01:25:050 - . purposefully cut short for consistency with pope's diff

01:42:908 - From here i have to agree with Blocko. Your notes makes really not much sense and it looks just overdone. Why do you map actually just one sound with 3 different snaps? I did not spend over 2 and 1/2 hours with this in two different mapping engines just to be told that it should all be snapped the same, the snaps for the echo effects are fine and add variance, just read what I put to blocko I'm not repeating myself

01:45:795 (105795|1) - Ghost. No sound. grace note

01:45:854 (105854|0,105854|3) - Actually too but this are notes where it would be possible to discuss since they have a very very quiet echo, what actually is not worth to map because it's simply inaudible. the sound exists therefore it is mapped

01:46:896 (106896|3,106955|2,106955|0) - same thing like above. But when you would like to have some "variety" or what ever you could try to follow the vocal samples which would still make way more sense then this. I did it's in the hard

01:48:652 (108652|1) - Should be on 01:48:644 - means the 1/16 line.for the 8ms it's worth, sure

01:48:741 (108741|3,108741|0) - Delete. Ghost note. It has no own sound. grace notes following the sound below

01:52:580 (112580|2,112640|1,112640|3) - Like above. Actually Ghost but a good place to follow the vocals again. they're not ghost notes

01:53:652 (113652|1,113652|2,113652|3) - I think these notes should be on the 1/16 beat 01:53:644 - . I'm even pretty sure because they sound too late. there's a delay on 1/16

01:54:158 (114158|3) - For what is this note? There is no own sound. You have a hihat at 01:54:113 - but where the note currently is there is actually no sound pitch shift.

Well i think this is all for the "Please Enjoy" difficult.
Also the same things count for Pope's difficult. I guess I'll contact pope to come reply to the mod as well

I also would like to mention this here:
p/5326570 Pope. This is not a Mod reply and therefore this Map should never get qualified because of the Rule that all Mods have to be replied properly. As example a "what" is not a proper answer for a suggestion which an other player gives to you. If you don't understand what the modder means you can always ask him via Forum PM or simply ingame IRC to explain it. If you reject a suggestion please avoid in the future to write a one word answers. I think the "what" in this case was because the point made no sense as what was already mapped was more correct than what was suggested but yeah I guess talk to him about that

Feerum wrote:

Well i think this is all for the "Please Enjoy" difficult.
Also the same things count for Pope's difficult.

Feerum wrote:

I also would like to mention this here:
p/5326570 Pope. This is not a Mod reply and therefore this Map should never get qualified because of the Rule that all Mods have to be replied properly. As example a "what" is not a proper answer for a suggestion which an other player gives to you. If you don't understand what the modder means you can always ask him via Forum PM or simply ingame IRC to explain it. If you reject a suggestion please avoid in the future to write a one word answers.

Pope Gadget wrote:

I'm new to modding mate

Pope Gadget wrote:

honestly don't see the issue here. the part's a fluid method but apparently every single nook and cranny has to be damn well concrete for it to be acceptable. I refuse to sacrifice entertainment value for what is essentially a barely distinguishable consistency check.

Hydria wrote:

it just doesn't suit in with the way the rest of the mapset feels though, it's not a unique and technical mapset if there's some point where they're all just the same 2 notes for 8/16 bars before getting into the most intense section of the song, plus the snaps aren't even difficult to play if that was an issue, I've tested each one multiple times and they all feel fine in relation to the sing so I don't see what the big complaint is

Hydria wrote:

I'm sorry that you share the opinion of a very minor group of people (note: the only people that have complained about the rankability of this map are QATs or previous QATs, no one else) but you know, if you don't want to help advance the possibilities of mapping then sure w/e I guess I'll go to stepmania

Blocko wrote:

Hydria wrote:

it just doesn't suit in with the way the rest of the mapset feels though, it's not a unique and technical mapset if there's some point where they're all just the same 2 notes for 8/16 bars before getting into the most intense section of the song, plus the snaps aren't even difficult to play if that was an issue, I've tested each one multiple times and they all feel fine in relation to the sing so I don't see what the big complaint is

Even though those snaps are not difficult to play, it's just simply overdone. Sure, you can layer every sound that you can hear right off the track, but there's a limit to how much you can layer on here without it becoming too cluttered to play through and to even look at. Those almost-inaudible sounds may be present, but that doesn't mean you have to layer everything in there expecting that kind of mapping to get ranked, and that's exactly where we (QATs) come in.

Hell, you even have a slowjam at this part. Even then, it doesn't change the fact that this part doesn't justify anything that convoluted.

Hydria wrote:

Final post:

To start, for the players, I'd like to apologize for all the people that were looking forward to seeing this map ranked, I put in more work than what goes into 95% of mania maps, but apparently that's not what is acceptable to the QAT these days, as their standards are too strict (not too high, the standards are low enough, just too strict). If, for any reason, the "rules" for mania maps get a bit more lenient, I'll reconsider ranking this, but for now, it's over, since I'm not sacrificing the quality of the map to fit in with what the QAT wants.

For the QAT, I'm actually deeply disappointed in the way you handled this map. My attitude towards your ideas wasn't ideal, I get that, but your responses and reasoning towards why this shouldn't be ranked were, quite frankly, idiotic. Before you think that this is just one person's opinion btw, I talked to some highly respected players and mappers (names remaining anonymous) after the announcement that this was going to graveyard, and they brought up the point that the points you guys brought up made little sense compared to the quality of the map, and that the entire QAT mindset is essentially incorrect. Your job here is to help mappers with issues that might be seen as unrankable alongside listening to the community's view on the map as a whole, and I don't think you even talked to another member of the community about this map whatsoever. Your vision of "Rules > Enjoyability" is just one that doesn't work for an evolving mania community, and seems to be the thing holding this community back from a brighter future. Yes, it's you guys, no one else, and I think a change in mindset is at hand unless you want copy-paste SDVX maps for the rest of your life, which, in turn, it looks like you do. If you want any help with this, go install Stepmania, play it for a week non-stop, and think to yourself why people that come from osu!mania don't stick with osu!mania and go and play Stepmania instead, since there must be some reason.

Finalizing this post, I'm announcing that I'm going inactive from mapping since, from the events I've witnessed in here, the osu!mania "community" isn't ready for what the future holds. I guess look out for my charts in SM in the future until something changes in this community, to which I highly doubt it with the current higher members in charge.

Good luck for the future to all the people that actually helped the mapset in a positive way, and to everyone else I've taken inspiration from in the past.

-Hydria

If you want any help with this, go install Stepmania, play it for a week non-stop, and think to yourself why people that come from osu!mania don't stick with osu!mania and go and play Stepmania instead, since there must be some reason.

Finalizing this post, I'm announcing that I'm going inactive from mapping since, from the events I've witnessed in here, the osu!mania "community" isn't ready for what the future holds. I guess look out for my charts in SM in the future until something changes in this community, to which I highly doubt it with the current higher members in charge.

Harbyter wrote:

The snapping are pretty a mess, how can you say that you used correct snaps???Using random 1/8 - 1/12 - 1/16 for anonymous sounds do you really think those are correct snaps??Can you provide some proof that those sounds are actually snapped correctly??? NO

ok lets clarify a few things here, I can do this but
1. not once has anyone actually asked me to prove the snapping
2. it's too late for me to go and actually get proof now, I've lost interest

Feerum and Blocko already said what i think about those snaps, they are overdone and the concept of ''snaps simplification'' is applied in a wrong way here.

Also readed here and there that this mapset is unique but personally i don't see anything that can be called unique . so this looks like another standard mania map? okay then . _. (I highly disagree with you but w/e)

If you want any help with this, go install Stepmania, play it for a week non-stop, and think to yourself why people that come from osu!mania don't stick with osu!mania and go and play Stepmania instead, since there must be some reason.

why people have to install stepmania to understand your chart ?_? Why are you bringing up SM??This isn't stepmania get out from here , we don't need overjoy charts it's not for the overjoy charts, it's for the wide variety in mapping styles and designs they have

EDIT: if you don't want to go through that hassle, think: Why is mania the only game mode where ranked maps are barely used from quarter finals onwards? And no, it's not because people are lazy or this game mode is new. That's incorrect.

Finalizing this post, I'm announcing that I'm going inactive from mapping since, from the events I've witnessed in here, the osu!mania "community" isn't ready for what the future holds. I guess look out for my charts in SM in the future until something changes in this community, to which I highly doubt it with the current higher members in charge.

oh wow it's like you're the victim lol .You can just go inactive in peace , i don't think it will change something . I'm just the voice for what others think, that's all. Also, it's a post I can point to for reasons why I've got inactive.

-Harbyter

sorry if my post seems to be a little aggressive but it was mean to be like this yeah w/e dude

juankristal wrote:

Even tho this map might be unique or not it doesnt change the fact that the Ranking Criteria does exist and then we have to follow it. Its up to you to map for ranking or not, sadly or not, thats how it works.

Hydria wrote:

juankristal wrote:

Even tho this map might be unique or not it doesnt change the fact that the Ranking Criteria does exist and then we have to follow it. Its up to you to map for ranking or not, sadly or not, thats how it works.

but 99.96% of this map follows the current ranking criteria, and the 0.04% that doesn't, no one is talking about, they're talking about something which completely fits into the way the criteria is set atm.

juankristal wrote:

Like I said, I am not aware about the state of the map and I am not going to say anything about it. Thats something you can keep talking with the QAT or whoever is in charge of it (BNs maybe).

Wh1teh wrote:

Who watches the watchmen?