Hello everyone, ztrot here with some exciting new news!

From today on, there will be a new format in which mapping beatmap sets will work. This falls in line with our goals to make as many of the maps here at osu accessible to all players of many skill types! This new rule might seem scary at first but, fear not as we don't want to forget our professional osu! players either!
The new restructure will not be retroactive as there a lot of maps with icons so far though the modding process. Therefore, if your map has any type of icon set - be it bubble pop, disqualification or bubble - it will not need to follow the new restructure. However, all new maps or maps without icons will be asked to make changes to their existing sets.

We would recommend reading the reworked section in the Ranking Criteria, reflecting the changes we pushed through. To make every have an overview of what changes we have done, we created a few fancy pictures for you:

First of all, we reworded the current spread rule. All difficulties in each game mode have to align in a linear and progressive spread. You can add one Ultra difficulty past an Expert difficulty that does not have to increase linearly in difficulty with the rest of the spread. Keep in mind, that Ultra is a placeholder term, used to reflect a high end difficulty that has not been specified with a name yet. We put that name in place, so you guys know what we are talking about when we want to refer to the high end difficulties of a mapset.


Secondly, we limited the amount of difficulties of the same level per game mode. Every mapset is limited to one of each difficulty level per game mode. While this appears very limiting at the beginning, the hybrid set rules stay intact. Don't forget that every keycount in osu!mania is considered as individual game mode, too! If you wish to get your mapsets with multiple difficulties of the same level ranked, we advise you to split it off into a new mapset.



At last, we altered the requirements for Approval beatmaps. Approval mapsets must have 1 difficulty that is either an Easy, Normal, Hard or Insane. Your mapset must contain an Insane difficulty if an Expert or Ultra difficulty is present. This means that every Approval containing only an Expert or Ultra difficulty must receive a second difficulty. If you do not wish to map more than one difficulty for your Approval sets, we would advise you to keep the single difficulty at Insane level or below.




The difficulty is not dependent on the star rating. The mapping techniques used within the difficulty and the spread to the surrounding difficulties define the category each difficulty level falls into. Difficulties must be named to reflect that.

Keep in mind that this change affects all full spread and approval difficuly sets across all game modes. Despite using Standard as an example in our infographics, we want to make clear that the rule goes for everyone. However, the hybrid set rules stay the same way as they are.

If you wish to discuss this change, you are free to post here. We are aware that these are quite some big changes and it might be upsetting for a bunch of people, but the change reflects something we see as urgent and something that needed to happen.

This completely ignored the current mapping meta.

The reason that many beatmap sets are top heavy is because they use multiple insanes to cater to different skill levels, limiting it to one for the sake of spread will not do anyone any good.

This change is terrible and disallows contest sets where people mapped multiple insanes to be ranked, ever.

The reason for people having sets with multiple insanes is because they are the difficulty level where mappers can express most creativity and people included multiple insanes for the sake of having different styles within their set. Doing such a change without discussing with the community is a weird choice because the community is the one who pushes out mapsets and appreciates them.

So, does it count for difficulty icons only? What if my mapset has an Easy and a Normal which both have an Easy icon or Hard and Insane with a Hard icon which is like REALLY common especially in slow songs for the latter. (e.g. https://osu.ppy.sh/s/389179)
Also, this makes it impossible to rank contest sets where the top 5 or so is included within the set (e.g. https://osu.ppy.sh/s/351828) even though all mappers already put great effort into it and also many of the modders took their time to mod all the 10 difficulties within the set.
Moreover what about sets with Advanced or Hyper difficulties which are inbetween others? My sets often have like an Advanced diff which is neither an Easy nor a Normal but a completely different thing itself. Is this forbidden just because it has the Normal or Hard icon?
I would be totally fine with this if we are still allowed to do at least the first thing as it is also determined by the song's speed whether we have a rather hard Easy which gets a Normal icon or a simple Easy with an actual Easy icon.

I can understand the changes, but there are 2 things which bother and worry me.

1.) A spread of 1*, 2.2*, 3.4*, 4.6*, 5.8* and 8.9* would be fine. Isn't that a bit weird?
2.) Why should there be a cap of the amount of "Insert diffname" difficulties? This limits the amount of difficulties one can have to 6 per mode. I'd say it'd be better if you can at least have multiple higher end difficulties

First rule (Ultra):

How does this make any sense? Extra difficulties will rarely be > 5.5 stars, Ultras will often be 7 or more stars. So no more 6* maps?

Second rule (Spread):

How do more difficulties hurt anyone? This is the worst part. More difficulties mean more variety for players and more fun for the mappers. This is the worst idea that I read in a long time, and now it's official without even discussing with the QATs?

Third rule (Approval):

I'm fine with it.

↑：this is the most I cant agree with

Desperate-kun wrote:

Second rule (Spread):
How do more difficulties hurt anyone? This is the worst part. More difficulties mean more variety for players and more fun for the mappers. This is the worst idea that I read in a long time, and now it's official without even discussing with the QATs?

yep i agree with desperate-kun, multi diffs with same mode are always used in most mapsets, there are always some songs many mapper love so they have to map their own sets by themself? it would make bns and qats have more and more works, to check the same song. omg

edit: haha, yes, you are always right.

ztrot wrote:

Secondly, we limited the amount of difficulties of the same level per game mode. Every mapset is limited to one of each difficulty level per game mode. While this appears very limiting at the beginning, the hybrid set rules stay intact. Don't forget that every keycount in osu!mania is considered as individual game mode, too! If you wish to get your mapsets with multiple difficulties of the same level ranked, we advise you to split it off into a new mapset.

I'm afraid I can't agree with this. In the Taiko game mode, the range of difficulty level of Oni can be very broad. It's very common that multiple Oni difficulties can be found in a single mapset for the sake of a better bridging between Muzukashii and Oni.

If this becomes a rule, I think it is really hard to maintain the relatively constant difficulty gaps from Kantan to Oni if the only Oni is relatively harder.

WHY R THER DIFFICULTY AMOUNT RESTRICTIONS OMG

Edit: was there even discussion witht he community or qats hOLY

I cannot agree to limiting 1 difficulty for each level per mapset, there is benefit of having levels between them, like Light Insane for example, or an Advanced in between Normal and Hard.

I'm fine with the Approval rule

I cannot agree to Ultra.

I have adjusted the main post there was one thing that wasn't added should clear up some confusion.
The difficulty is not dependent on the star rating. The mapping techniques used within the difficulty and the spread to the surrounding difficulties define the category each difficulty level falls into. Difficulties must be named to reflect that.

that is the section that was missing

How about, we don't do this.

Uh so I agree with the approval category change

But not with the limit number per icon

For example, I have my situation were my spread looks like:

Easy (E icon) Normal (N icon) Hard (H icon) Hyper ( H icon around 4,20 stars for better spread) Insane (I icon 5, 2) Extra (6 stars)

with this new current rule my set its unrankable? if so I can't agree with this, because it will hurt well done spread, instead of limiting the number of spreads you should encourage/force a well balanced spreads, lets be honest icons doesn't reflect the lvl of difficulty at any mapset, for example a 4 stars insane play totally different at 5 stars insane.

basically we are telling bye bye to 6 star diffs and jumping to 7 or 8 stars..

Just my 2 cents

@ztrot can you please give a reasoning to us for

Every mapset is limited to one of each difficulty level per game mode.

there should be one, right?

Honestly, this is compeltely stupid and limitating. This ruins like, so many maps. You shouldnt have to limit the amount of maps going into a ranking because you have too many of them! What in the world does that accomplish? It doesnt make it better for noobs, they still are going to get the SAME amount of maps they had before, now its just the higher up that will be debilitated. I hope this is an early april fools joke because im not laughing.

ALSO RIP pretty much all GDs in osu.

ALSO this RIPS fort's map https://osu.ppy.sh/b/838211

-1

The approval rule is dumb and doesn't make sense. Easy, Normal, and Hard level players almost never have the amount of focus and stamina it takes to play really long maps. It doesn't even accomplish what you said you're trying to do: If my set has an Insane and an Ultra, Expert players still won't get to enjoy it properly. All that is going to lead from this is a bunch of Approval maps having a half-assed Easy tacked on that 99% of the community won't play. It's just a waste of the mapper's time.

And yeah the difficulty limitation is 80 kinds of awful.

VINXIS wrote:

Edit: was there even discussion witht he community or qats hOLY

We went through that change with these people t/420229

Ranking Criteria Council wrote:

This replaces the current method of proposing and amending new rules. Rules and Guidelines are from now on solely pushed by the Council and their discussions.

What happened to the community driven nature of this game?
Why did the ranking criteria amending process rolled back as the previous closed-discussion form that is secretly done?
Did this "Mapset and Spread Restructure" criteria even made a consensus among RC council members?

____________________

As I've understood correctly, it seems that mapsets from now on only allows only one E, N, H, I per mapset.

First of all, I'd like to ask why additional difficulties for lower ones should be considered unrankable. In the newly proposed criteria, it strongly discourages mappers to make potential diversity of lower diffs. Slow or calm song could demand a various ammount of high difficulties, but this rule is prohibiting "E-N-H-H-H-H" mapset, isn't it?

True that the proposed criteria encourages mappers to focus more on game designs, and make them focus more on a balanced spread design without a need of an additional difficulty. However, it is always possible to narrow the design of a spread by adding a balanced additional difficulty, such as an extra diff between Normal and Hard which is normally refered as "Advanced" these days.

Diverse gameplay benefits more of the players, and isn't that what is being mostly done these days?

Wouldn't making that criteria to prevent a "same level of difficulty" being contained in one mapset better in warranting a structured mapset design, than preventing diffs which do not suit in an "E, N, H, I category"?

<Easy - Normal - Light Hard - Light Hard2 - Hard> is definitely silly since it contains two light hards which shows a same level of difficulty.
On the other hand, should <Easy - Normal - Hard - Light Hard - Insane> be also considered unrankble???
I really hope not, since Hard, Light Hard, and Insane are all different in difficulty level.


____________________


osu! is a user-based game. Perhaps a guideline for an abstract "ENHI" could exist, but isn't it the mappers and the community who determines where the diff belongs in ENHI?

Loctav wrote:

VINXIS wrote:

Edit: was there even discussion witht he community or qats hOLY

We went through that change with these people t/420229

Well now we can get pissed at these people too.

...please that doesn't even make sense anymore.

you can't limit the chance of making difference on different diffs. There are more than one way to represent a song, though they might have similar sr, it doesn't mean that they are totally the similar thing.

And that Ultra rule will ruin the mapping/playing course. I believe a "7 star map everywhere" game is definitely not friendly.

tbh the rule can even conflict like half of the maps in pending

ztrot wrote:

I have adjusted the main post there was one thing that wasn't added should clear up some confusion.
The difficulty is not dependent on the star rating. The mapping techniques used within the difficulty and the spread to the surrounding difficulties define the category each difficulty level falls into. Difficulties must be named to reflect that.

that is the section that was missing

So does it mean you can do a set with Insane and Another, or they're both considered as Insane ?
And even if they're not, limit that much spread is bad for all players imo.

Probably one of the worst rule ever.

1st rule: that means Inner Oni (Extra/Expert) must now be on the spread? rip those difficulties then

2nd rule: what? huge NO to this. Variety is beauty and if I want multiple difficulties because I want different style on a same level, I can't now? This seems extremely forced

3rd rule: this will mean an incredible downfall of approval maps, specially on longer (10+ mins) ones

So yeah basically the 3 rules have more downsides than anything and seem like REALLY forced (according to Desp it wasn't even discussed with anyone???)

Loctav wrote:

VINXIS wrote:

Edit: was there even discussion witht he community or qats hOLY

We went through that change with these people t/420229

There was a plan of moddingV2 which would make everything more community based. Now there is only a select few who will choose this? This is absolute bullshit

I'm still unsure about something: A "decent" spread for standard only can be?

1. Easy
2. Normal
3. Hard
4. Insane
5. Extra

So we can't add the well famous Advanced diffs because they're considered now as Hard diffs too? or Hyper for an easier insane?

ahhhh

I agree with the approval rule though. Now it seems to be more approachable to play those approval maps which have "Uncompressed Fury of a Raging Japanese God" as a diff name with an insane diff. xd

87
^This exists, you know.

Approval Rule: Seems acceptable.

About the rest, I have one important question: All these diffs will most likely go into a new mapset, which will obviously get ranked too. Where are the benefits, for anyone?

1) More BNs time is needed, and if you haven't noticed by now, there's a BN crisis.
2) Checking takes more time, as more metadata stuff can be wrong
3) There are more mapsets of one song, which causes a 7 days delay at max, so after these, you'll be at the same point again.

If you pull off such ridiculous restrictions, please give at least some reasons WHY you do that. Otherwise, I can totally understand the communities and my own reaction.

Squigly wrote:

How about, we don't do this.

best comment on this thread

https://osu.ppy.sh/b/801333

Asphyxia is crying right now.

neonat wrote:

I cannot agree to limiting 1 difficulty for each level per mapset, there is benefit of having levels between them, like Light Insane for example, or an Advanced in between Normal and Hard.

I'm fine with the Approval rule

^
especially for light insane, i think at least please allow one, if light insane is forbidden, we will see many many mapsets with the same song, and most of the mappers just want to make an insane diff for the song, multiple ranked versions of a same song are kind of waste. Light insane can give mappers the chance to map what they like when they meet a great song and don't want to make a full spread, it's reasonable, and it's not called laziness.

the Approval rule is good, i support.

each bpm increase the star rating at different way, for example an extra difficulty in high bpm will be play different to a low bpm extra. so basically will be really hard to have an extra difficulty in high bpm map. because, we need to start the spread from a 2.00 star diff. so with a limited number of difficulties will be impossible to archive a good spread.

Yuii- wrote:

https://osu.ppy.sh/b/801333

Asphyxia is crying right now.

it's ok since this rule only applies at new map

Sieg wrote:

@ztrot can you please give a reasoning to us for

Every mapset is limited to one of each difficulty level per game mode.

there should be one, right?

"but the change reflects something we see as urgent and something that needed to happen"

as a community member, that "something" is really curious

Loctav wrote:

VINXIS wrote:

Edit: was there even discussion witht he community or qats hOLY

We went through that change with these people t/420229

Then why is Mao, the council member, showing a disagreement?


You guys might have expected this bunch of complaints; we are really anticipating for a sufficient explanation, or an awesome compromise.
Moreover I really wish this wasn't just something popped up literally a day before, and got urgently announced.

Loctav wrote:

VINXIS wrote:

Edit: was there even discussion witht he community or qats hOLY

We went through that change with these people t/420229

why you exclude the rest of the community and the rest of BNs/QAT from the discussion, a big change like this should be discussed more open, mostly because all the community disagree with this.

All this does is push rigidity where it's not needed. What if someone wants to show different styles of mapping at the same level of difficulty in their map? It only serves to make mapsets less interesting.

Yuii- wrote:

https://osu.ppy.sh/b/801333

Asphyxia is crying right now.

lol...

Rule about not allowing 2 of the same difficulty is literally the stupidest thing I've ever seen. I'm one of those people who always tries his hardest to agree with you guys on everything, but I see literally no fucking logic behind any of that. You're limiting newer players by breaking the bridges between new difficulties, breaking the creativity of mappers, and generally ruining stuff that doesn't need to be restricted.

I'll be honest I'm still unhappy about that maps before this rule are affected
How many GDs will be deleted, how many people that were preparing approval maps have to spend much more time to fit the rule suddenly... etc,.
well.. happens

I've already stated thing above while the discussion for twice, it's here, I won't voice anymore.

Yuii- wrote:

https://osu.ppy.sh/b/801333

Asphyxia is crying right now.

....

I can honestly feel a circlejerk coming up incredibly fast, although it will likely be a protest

Please, no!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

mintong89 wrote:

Yuii- wrote:

https://osu.ppy.sh/b/801333

Asphyxia is crying right now.

it's ok since this rule only applies at new map

it applies to this map since it hasn't been bubbled / iconed in any way before

For the council how do you seriously expect them to get the views of all their peers in their respective community? Do you seriously think 1 person can do it, and do you think he/she will really go out and reach out to every single one of them with differing views? That's just being idealistic and it's not going to become reality.

we need more icons imo, otherwise this new "rule" is way too restrictive.
You prioritize a linear spread but disapprove "in-between" diffs, wtf

Why would you change the amount of difficulties allowed in a set? I really don't get it and you don't really state a reason either.

I like the approval change - I really do.

Sieg wrote:

@ztrot can you please give a reasoning to us for

Every mapset is limited to one of each difficulty level per game mode.

there should be one, right?

it is to streamline the mapping process make things more clear as I have stated

The difficulty is not dependent on the star rating. The mapping techniques used within the difficulty and the spread to the surrounding difficulties define the category each difficulty level falls into. Difficulties must be named to reflect that. That being said as long as there is progression why do you need two insanes in the same set?

Easy Normal Hard Insane Expert < and if you can make a proper spread you are rewarded to break away and test your limits as a mapper and make a ultra diff
There should always be progression from easy to expert.

ok nvm
rippppppppppppppp

The rule of approval is quite great since a single 8 star approval map is really scary. Support this!

But it's quite weird to restrict the amount of difficulties in one level. I guess the entire rule is made here to make all levels pf player could enjoy the game more. Since the style among mappers varies, it's not bad, or rather, better to have multiple difficulties within one level, because the variety of mapping style caters on the need of all kinds of players (Different players enjoy and are good at different beatmap styles.)

i think ENHI only can work for slow/normal bpm only (example below 190) and it will be worse for high bpm (especially above than 200) since if the mapset is forced to be "ENHI" then all of the diffs will be harder than diffs mappers map for them before and it wont be welcome for players who is learning to play high bpm

approval rule seems fine for me so i do agree

omg please no.