Hi. I'm most likely neutral to this whole topic. After all, it's up to the mapper what he/she is gonna do with the map and what people will think of it as
verto mentioned before. But even so, I will still tackle some concerns I have, by looking at the cost and gain of this change, especially modding wise and how it can effect the freedom in mapping after all.
In most points I can agree with what
Tasha said. But this whole topic works rather when an experienced mapper talks to another experienced mapper. In most cases, these people understand each others idea and concerns since they gained over the years some kind of sense / feeling for it. But this changes once a modder gets confronted with someone who might be new / less experienced to this kind of mapping. I will explain through a .txt I have prepared before:
Now a go for finisher should be given on low BPM maps. I can understand that. It is playable and all.
But if it is allowed on low BPM, why not on high BPM as well? And how we gonna handle cases like
a bundle of doublets with finishers? After all, single one would be allowed as well. All these questions
would appear at once, for good reason. Allowing one thing but banning the other one which is nearly
the exact same thing is a foundation for heated discussions.
Right now it is clear and simple:
Don't use finishers after 4 monotonically notes. That means,
5 plet with finishers are fine. If it gets exeggerated this can be discussed. But, if we change
it to "
Finisher free for low BPM", this will bring up a lot more subjective modding.
We would need to deal with really hard questions:- What is a low BPM? Where do we draw a border?
- When is an overuse of finishers in 1/4 seen as such?
- (What about different playstyles when valuing these patterns in the discussion?)
That's where a lot of differences between the mapper/modder will appear(
DakeDekaane mentioned this
now as well). Probably not from experienced mapper to experienced one, but from experienced to a less
experienced. Especially, when QAT is involved. We have already some disputes about difficulty spread
and such. So I doubt it would be any different with finishers.
I'm for freedom and all that. But after this got approved, another question will be
where the
freedom stops once the BAT or QAT says "no" but mapper "yes"? I see a lot of discussions and
dispute coming ahead once the finisher rule gets changed because the border will be set in
a subjective way. And this could lead quickly to another rephrase of the rule by someone who
sees it in another way again. Even further, it will become a problem when QAT has a say on this.
For the moment, in my opinion the cost of this is higher than what we recieve of it. Especially since it worked all
the years without it as well.
Beside all that, the community is also an important factor. We tried once to change the rule in a similar way,
but it hasn't be accepted by it (
Tasha mentioned it). Though, right now it look a bit better Huh
That's my current stands on the whole situation. In short you could say:
I'm afraid about the way the modding could go. Of course, many rules have fringe cases as
Tasha said before. But saying
what a low BPM map is or
when there is an overuse of patterns is nothing that can be valuated in an objective way. Many rules are based on subjective views from the past, which got accepted
by the community and has become -more or less- objective. But on stuff like BPM, where it varriates a lot from user to user(especially time wise), I'm really unsure.
And that QAT thing... I find it vague. Speaking of a view as QAT, I say, this rather works in a perfect world where people accept the decision of the QAT fully. Which in most cases isn't the case and which leads directly to "he / she took my freedom, (possible rule change!)". Which personally, I don't like either. It's not really a community decision anymore(rule) but more of a QATs decision(gudeline/rule change) who suddenly stays -more or less- above the guideline, since he has the decision to say what's fine and what not. But as rule, the QAT is subordenated to that rule.
Current rule we have now makes no difference with BPM or how mapper map. It doesn't favor one mapping above the other(e.g. one oX or bundeled oX). People have no reason to complain since it is mostly
fair and BAT / QAT can refair to the rule if anything happens. But with current suggestion, it will be more subjective based.
pooooost alwaaaaaays soooo looooooong, I might have forgot something.
