After checking some of the last maps, specially on Overdose difficulties, there are some cases where the end point of the hyperjump is at the same border of the play field. That means near x:0 and x:512 respectively. This is the maximum allowed movement of the catcher if there are notes at those places:


In both cases the fruits are falling at the exact centre of the catcher, when this one is placed at the very edges of the screen. What does this mean for this case?

The last formula of how hyperdashes works makes the catcher move with a fixed speed to its objective, and stops when it reaches the middle of that note. In this case, placing the end point of the hyperjump at x:0/512 makes the catcher arrive at the very edge of the play field. That makes the catcher instable in order to get the next objects and therefore not pleasurable to play.

We can try avoiding this issue with the following guideline:


Please discuss~

Let's see, I think i'm agree for this point. in many cases, pixels don't seem occur at that point while the fruit catches right at center is possible

that's what i'm currently thinking and that's my opinion i can't think more because i made this reply at night

First!!!!

Disapprove. I don't think such movement is "uncomfortable". In such HDash, the border works like a damper which stops the catcher in sudden, and that effect is welcome in many kinds of occasions. Also, the current play field for ctb is narrow enough. If this guideline goes into effect, the ctb play field will be even more narrow, especially for low BPM.

Now discuss

Why 16opx?

It's the minimum distance from x:0 with medium grid size.

@Equim: The playfield isn't as limited as you think. This guideline would help improving the flow of many songs where this happen, and also not limit the movement of the catcher. Remember that after the HDash the catcher has already some strenght from the movement and they'll literally hit the wall, which kills the flow in most of the cases.

Deif wrote:

It's the minimum distance from x:0 with medium grid size.

@Equim: The playfield isn't as limited as you think. This guideline would help improving the flow of many songs where this happen, and also not limit the movement of the catcher. Remember that after the HDash the catcher has already some strenght from the movement and they'll literally hit the wall, which kills the flow in most of the cases.

Let's see this case: CLSW's Genryuu Kaiko, 05:01:272 (1) -
It plays perfectly well, and as the last object, we do need a "damper" to eliminate the inertia of the previous series of huge jumps.

That's a nice example where it can be allowed. Being the last object of the mapset and starting as a vertical line of droplets make sense for this one.

The guideline was meant mostly for those patterns that require a sudden direction change afterwards, but as it's just a guideline some cases like this one are allowed and absolutely justifiable.

I think that this is pretty good as most people use hard dashes to screen boarders as a visual thing so that it looks harder whilst it limits movement. I like it as a guideline and not a rule.

not pleasurable to play

this is very subjective, if you dont like it, it doesnt mean that everyone think same

Everyone thinks differently that is true. Thats why this is a guideline and not a rule. If you can justify your patterns feel free to use it.

Actually I think Equim has a very good point o3o

For maps that have rapid end-to-end jumps, the platter limit really helps a lot to stop the player from over-dashing D: In fact from my own experience, hypers that lands Yuzu on the boundaries of the screen makes the next following fruit a lot easier to catch, since no matter how much you over-dash, Yuzu will always remain at the centre of the fruits, therefore the next fruit is always catch-able without hyperdahssh even if you had a small delay in changing direction D:

Essentially it buffers Yuzu so that any hyperdashes too ridiculously abrupt can still be played perfectly without missing the following fruits C:

.
.
.

On a not so related note:

I don't really understand how guidelines work

I don't think mappers have to justify elements that are not flawed. It's like I don't have to justify why I'm not a thief, if you have no evidence of me being a thief in the first place. Unless a considerable flaw is spotted, the mapper then has to rationalise why it's not flawed.

If breaking a guideline equals to instantaneous prosecution, it's rather counter-productive.

What I think of guidelines will be that, if one does or does not follow the guideline, it's fine either ways, but take note that if you stray too far your maps might become un-enjoyable and un-rankable, so take your own risks if you wish to but you are welcomed to do so.

But what it seems to me now it's like, if you ever breach any guidelines you have to explain in detail why you did not follow what is presented, if you cannot explain properly, then you are forced to either follow or to be rejected.

To sum it up, I don't think guidelines need enforcement., otherwise it's just rules. D:

Not always when you can justify your patterns alone it necessarily means they can or even should be used freely.

ITT: I agree with the OP, I see an abuse of border patterns quite frequently and they destroy the experience.

Well, its really easy to move x and y a bit to be able to move z away from the border. But it can be justified by making the following patterns a bit easier or if there is a small break after the hyper.

He Ang Erika wrote:

If breaking a guideline equals to instantaneous prosecution, it's rather counter-productive.

What I think of guidelines will be that, if one does or does not follow the guideline, it's fine either ways, but take note that if you stray too far your maps might become un-enjoyable and un-rankable, so take your own risks if you wish to but you are welcomed to do so.

But what it seems to me now it's like, if you ever breach any guidelines you have to explain in detail why you did not follow what is presented, if you cannot explain properly, then you are forced to either follow or to be rejected.

To sum it up, I don't think guidelines need enforcement., otherwise it's just rules. D:

The guidelines state two caveats that apply in all cases:

1. Does what I'm about to do make sense?
2. Is it more fun to play like this compared to sticking to the guidelines?

There is no "persecution" simply for not adhering to a guideline, but if a modder feels that doing so doesn't make sense or is less fun to play, then of course they will question it. That's why discussion exists, so that mappers and modders can learn from each other. If you see the modding process as "us versus them", it's just counter-productive and doesn't create a friendly environment. Modders don't persecute mappers, they (should) try to understand them and provide an alternative viewpoint if required.

Back on topic, I think this works well as a guideline - unless you have a naturally snappy playstyle, ending a motion forced against the wall by a strong hdash is really destabilizing and can make upcoming patterns uncomfortable, especially if they require delicate movements. I can see it working in some cases, such as right before a break/end of the song, when there's a stationary pattern (e.g. vertical sliders or streams) or when the timeline snap is high enough to make reading and reacting easier, but these can be evaluated on a case by case basis.

Deif wrote:

Hyperdash should not be used when the second object in the hyperjump pair is located on/near the left or right border of the play field. This creates an uncomfortable movement as the catcher is forcibly stopped upon reaching the border/wall. Try to leave at least 16 "pixels" of space between the end point of the hyperjump and the border of the play field.

I agree with this as a whole, except for one thing. The 16 pixels part. Usually, 8 pixels is fine, but actually, it generally depends on the speed of the hyper. If (And of course this is completely hypothetical because I hope this would never happen) someone uses a 1/16 HDash at like, 200 bpm across screen, and it somehow fits the song, it would feel as though you were forcing the catcher against the wall at well above 16 pixels away. However, if it was a very light hyper, such as one that was borderline, 8 pixels away wouldn't even feel like you're being forced against the wall.

Since this is a guideline you can suggest change in case like those or can have different distance if it still feels good. That number is just a basic and optimal distance which applies in most cases. Yes, with low AR and/or BPM, 8 opx is still acceptable since you don't need to react quickly. I think its better to have 16 in the guideline and allow cases like 8 or higher than 16 than having smaller and encounter abusive cases. Well, its just my thoughts. /o/

Considering this is being proposed as a guideline, we can simply agree that the "normal limit" should be set at 16px and review anything else on a case-by-case basis to see whether using less than 16px is acceptable in the specific case.

Yes, 8 pixels can be fine on occasion, maybe to guarantee people understand this as a guideline, 'at least' sounds too strong. Suggestion to reword this a little:
Something like that... Any other/better suggestions?

Sey's wording is good. Let's move this forward.

Okay. Main post edited with this:


Lets try it.