Guest
home
beatmaps
rankings
community
store
help

Sign In To Proceed 2z1z44

I've forgotten my details

Don't have an ? 5p1p6t

osu! to create your own !
forum
  1. Forums
  2. Beatmaps
  3. Mapping Discussion
  4. Ranking Criteria
  5. Finalized/Denied Amendments

[Proposal] Remove spread requirements in mania 6b4169

posted
Total Posts
80
abraker
Global
8,355 posts
ed July 2014
Topic Starter
Coming from osu! wide discussions concerning this topic, the consensus is that removing spreads will only benefit the osu!mania game mode.

Why this is important:
  1. Many good maps by various mappers are being left in graveyard because mappers refuse to map difficulties they don't feel like doing.
  2. Graveyard was never intended to be permanent storage
  3. Loved was never supposed to be a dump of maps that couldn't make it to ranked
  4. There is a concerning number of unranked maps being used in mania tournaments. See first bullet point as to why.
This aims to help solve those problems.

There are concerns that this may leave lower difficulties neglected. There is good reason to believe that will not happen due to the following reasons:
  1. It's still easier to rank lower difficulties than harder difficulties due to complexity. Ranking easy diffs also offers new mappers a good entry point to get into ranked mapping.
  2. There are BN that are concerned that easy diffs will be neglected. Then it begs to reason they would focus to nominate easy difficulties
  3. If you go to beatmap listing, you will be able to find maps that have full spreads and have their highest difficulty something a player would be able to do within the first month.
Now this is meant to be a trial period. This will be a thing for 6 months or so to see how it plays out. If it becomes apparent that this is causing more harm than good, it will be reversed.
___

current RC for reference

current RC wrote: 42k6s

  1. All game modes within a beatmap must form a spread starting from the lowest difficulty level dictated by the song's drain time. For difficulties above the lowest required difficulty level, the spread cannot skip any difficulty levels and there cannot be any drastically large difficulty gaps between any two difficulties.
  2. If the drain time of each difficulty is...
    1. ...lower than 3:30, the lowest difficulty of each included game mode cannot be harder than a Normal.
    2. ...between 3:30 and 4:15, the lowest difficulty of each included game mode cannot be harder than a Hard.
    3. ...between 4:15 and 5:00, the lowest difficulty of each included game mode cannot be harder than an Insane.
____

proposed RC wrote: 412u4c

  1. All game modes within a beatmap must form a spread starting from the lowest difficulty level dictated by the song's drain time. For difficulties above the lowest required difficulty level, the spread cannot skip any difficulty levels and there cannot be any drastically large difficulty gaps between any two difficulties.
    1. osu!mania beatmaps do not require spreads. This is to allow for easier approachability to osu!mania mappers of different upbringings.
  1. If the drain time of each difficulty is...
    1. ...lower than 3:30, the lowest difficulty of each included applicable game mode cannot be harder than a Normal.
    2. ...between 3:30 and 4:15, the lowest difficulty of each included applicable game mode cannot be harder than a Hard.
    3. ...between 4:15 and 5:00, the lowest difficulty of each included applicable game mode cannot be harder than an Insane.
Last edited by abraker , edited 10 times in total.
_underjoy
704 posts
ed January 2013
Please do. That would allow infinitely many more interesting charts to be ranked much smoother and quicker.
Orca-
72 posts
ed February 2016
This won’t effect me or my maps but since I am a caring individual capable of empathy I agree! Honestly it’s long overdue.

(This is 100% shade btw, mapping discourse sucks and y’all know who you are)
Horrifying
237 posts
ed January 2015
yeah i agree with underjoy 1000000%
Sydosys
Featured Artist
95 posts
ed June 2020
PLEASE YES
Xnery
159 posts
ed January 2017
but my low effort obligatory throwaway lower diffs...!
Scotty
Nomination Assessment Team
286 posts
ed October 2017
personally i am still more in favor of relaxing the requirements rather than removing them entirely. besides the reasons mentioned in the original thread, i feel anti-meta keymodes would really suffer from this. anti meta keymodes have accessibility issues as is and i feel this would exacerbate this.
Rivals_7
Beatmap Nominator
2,979 posts
ed July 2014

Scotty wrote: 232h6h

personally i am still more in favor of relaxing the requirements rather than removing them entirely. besides the reasons mentioned in the original thread, i feel anti-meta keymodes would really suffer from this. anti meta keymodes have accessibility issues as is and i feel this would exacerbate this.
should this removal be a thing only for 4K (+ 7K i guess?) then? but still mandatory for others? We already treated separate keymodes as "individual game modes" anyway. The OP sentence should probably add the clause that the spread requirement are for all but 4K.

also there is this sentence in the RC for those unaware:
Beatmap

Note: Each of osu!mania's key counts are considered individual game modes throughout this section.
Quenlla
Beatmap Nominator
124 posts
ed July 2014
A change to spread requirements is more than due so this is highly welcomed.

Removing or relaxing spread requirements will lead to not only more quality higher-end ranked content, but also less throaway lower-end diffs in favor of more carefully crafted content in that part of the difficulty spectrum.

Nevertheless, I'd personally prefer a strong relaxation of the requirements rather than a straight up deletion. This allows to provide a more constant influx of maps that generally hook starting players into the game (anime TVSize, VSRG pools) and just like Scotty says, it helps keymodes that do suffer from more content starvation (anti-meta keymodes), something that does not happen in 4k and 7k. This last point could be solved by treating keymodes separately as Rivals says, though.

But of course, I prefer to remove the requirements completely than to keep them as they are now.
Last edited by Quenlla , edited 4 times in total.
Sydosys
Featured Artist
95 posts
ed June 2020

Scotty wrote: 232h6h

personally i am still more in favor of relaxing the requirements rather than removing them entirely. besides the reasons mentioned in the original thread, i feel anti-meta keymodes would really suffer from this. anti meta keymodes have accessibility issues as is and i feel this would exacerbate this.
I will say this has some merit to it, but I think we should see how this goes first. It could benefit anti-meta keymodes overall cause we could see more anti-meta maps get ranked, or it could possibly harm it, with only harder anti-meta maps getting ranked. However, my opinion is that overall we are severely lacking anti-meta maps in general, and I feel like the spread criteria being removed would lead to an increase in interesting and anti-meta maps overall, which I think is a good thing regardless of the difficulty of the maps.

Overall, I believe in more freedom to rank what you want as long as it's good, and I don't think we should be forcing people to make ez diffs for like Laur songs. I think there's a place for easy and normal diffs, but it should depend on the song itself and the style, not the length. We'll probably see plenty of easy, normal, and hard diffs in anti-meta keymodes, as generally people love to rank short, easy stuff, as it's usually lower effort, so I believe we'll still see a fair amount of easy maps.

Sorry for rambleing lol, didn't really organize my thoughts here and probably repeated a few things. Might revise later ig
AutotelicBrown
66 posts
ed April 2014
Gonna link to my post in the all modes discussion thread but yeah, I'm in favor of relaxing requirements but very against removing spread altogether as I don't see it leading to a net positive for the community at large.

My original and way more elaborated post: community/forums/posts/8313712
Furryswan
Beatmap Nominator
326 posts
ed January 2017
Even if we just remove spread requirements, there will always be some new ranked map like most of the anime TV size, Vtuber music that has 1~3* only for new players.

Requiring lower diff spread for even some intense music just because the drain time won't be enough to EZ/NM/HD diff is absolutely blocking the advantage, I'd say.
[Ping]
499 posts
ed April 2015

[LS]Ham wrote: 565n6y

I will say this has some merit to it, but I think we should see how this goes first. It could benefit anti-meta keymodes overall cause we could see more anti-meta maps get ranked, or it could possibly harm it, with only harder anti-meta maps getting ranked. However, my opinion is that overall we are severely lacking anti-meta maps in general, and I feel like the spread criteria being removed would lead to an increase in interesting and anti-meta maps overall, which I think is a good thing regardless of the difficulty of the maps.
I don't fully agree with this. I think anti-meta won't have any difference considering it is already a norm (from what I've seen in 5k and 10k) to make spreads for the map. The problem with that is lack of BNs capable of checking but that's another topic.

Regarding more interests in anti-meta, sure. I think spread changes would give a little bit of an easier entry barrier / incentive.



About the spread proposal I am always neutral with this. However, I know for a fact that even lowering spread requirements will already encourage a lot more sets to be pushed to ranked.

(For starters we could round of the length - something like 3:00 or more you only need Hard as lowest diff, and then the one for Insane can be 4:00 or even 3:45)

The main problem is Normal diffs and below - which some people barely map them. However, Hard RC is free enough for most mappers to make a Hard diff to push their map in my opinion.

I don't particularly feel like removing it entirely will be a good idea. There will be some really wacky sets being ranked like an Expert/Insane with 1:30 length or something extreme which I think is too much disruption to the current ranking "meta" and to the community (both player and mapper) as a whole.
Last edited by [Ping] , edited 4 times in total.
Ventilo le vrai
138 posts
ed December 2018

Dubstek wrote: 2v5t2m

Even if we just remove spread requirements, there will always be some new ranked map like most of the anime TV size, Vtuber music that has 1~3* only for new players.

Requiring lower diff spread for even some intense music just because the drain time won't be enough to EZ/NM/HD diff is absolutely blocking the advantage, I'd say.
I agree with that, the drain time shouldn't define if the map should have lower difficulties or not because easy maps aren't fitting with some songs
epic man 2
528 posts
ed May 2019
wow i can speedrank all of my 280+ mania maps lol!
abraker
Global
8,355 posts
ed July 2014
Topic Starter

Scotty wrote: 232h6h

personally i am still more in favor of relaxing the requirements rather than removing them entirely. besides the reasons mentioned in the original thread, i feel anti-meta keymodes would really suffer from this. anti meta keymodes have accessibility issues as is and i feel this would exacerbate this.
anti-meta keymodes have content issues. That's even worse than accessibility - it means that there are not enough maps for beginner and experienced players alike. Let the be at least something.

AutotelicBrown wrote: 155uv

I can compile concrete evidence from these games if needed but it's pretty clear the influx of new charts in both FFR and Etterna that would be playable for most of the o!m community is lacking in both quantity and quality. I mention the o!m community specifically because both FFR and Etterna nowadays have skewed demographics due to low influx of fresh beginners (lack of content is not the only reason but it's definitely a big one). On that note, I think even having the 'half-assed' lower level content some people mentioned as a potential negative from spread requirements is still better than the situation those games (FFR/Etterna) are in, not to mention I think any competent mapper who respects their own work would still try to make decent lower diffs even if it's out of obligation (if you disagree you should probably reread the sentence).

Returning to o!m specifically and together with what I mentioned about the general population's skill level**, I think there's strong evidence that difficulty spreads should still exist in some shape or form if ranking criteria wants to keep the general community best interests in mind. This is not to say I don't think there's an issue with good high-end content not being ranked (sorry for the triple negative), at least on o!m, but I think removing spread requirements is not the way to go about it.
Thing about FFR and Etterna is that the games themselves are not as accessible as osu!mania is. I am ofc talking about UI (at least in Etterna), and the fact that I find it hard to imagine someone new to VSRGs would come across Etterna or FFR before they come across DDR, Guitar Hero, osu!, or Friday night Funkin'. Even I searched for guitar hero like games back in late 00's I did not find anything, and wasn't until 2014 when I came across osu! by recommendation. My point is that a beginner would not find those games easily, and if they do it's not beginner friendly from the get go, therefore it makes sense they don't have many easy charts.

As for mania, I and others already debunked the fearmongering regarding easy diffs. Here is my arguement:

abraker wrote: 5u2f3m

Here is a list of recent ranked mania mapsets that have diffs composed out of low skill maps. If there were no spread requirements what would have those mapsets become? I have a hard time believing they would have been maps a new player could not . Even less believable is that there wouldn't be a BN to nominate them.

beatmapsets/1356104#mania/2806609

These examples contradict what you believe will happen. Mappers already create full spread of low diff maps. They are not going away.
Last edited by abraker , edited 9 times in total.
Nao Tomori
osu! Alumni
3,078 posts
ed December 2014
just want to point out that the point of low diffs is that players can play all sorts of songs at their level, not just 2 bpm piano songs. particularly popular rhythm game and anime songs. so to that end linking a bunch of r3-esque sets doesn't really address the issue.
abraker
Global
8,355 posts
ed July 2014
Topic Starter

Nao Tomori wrote: 1f93x

just want to point out that the point of low diffs is that players can play all sorts of songs at their level, not just 2 bpm piano songs. particularly popular rhythm game and anime songs. so to that end linking a bunch of r3-esque sets doesn't really address the issue.
We already established that mania has disproportionate amounts of low diffs for players, in the osu! community meetings as well.
Last edited by abraker , edited 1 time in total.
z0z
521 posts
ed February 2018
since we're considering rule relaxation, i'll copypaste my post from another spread thread because i think this is a good base level to start off with

original location: community/forums/posts/8313743

imo, i think 1:45, 2:45, and 3:30 for minimum ranges would work better

based on what i know:
rhythm game songs are around 2:00 but can deviate a bit, lower or higher
the shorter full-length songs seem to be around 3:00, can also deviate
the regular or longer full length songs are generally 3:30 and above

so i think the ranges of <1:45 for normal minimum, <2:45 for hard minimum, <3:30 for insane minimum, and no limits above 3:30 are more fitting
Scotty
Nomination Assessment Team
286 posts
ed October 2017

abraker wrote: 5u2f3m

anti-meta keymodes have content issues. That's even worse than accessibility - it means that there are not enough maps for beginner and experienced players alike. Let the be at least something.
locking out newer players from playing these keymodes would make it impossible to become an experienced player to begin with (at least via ranked) and i don't think forcing people to play unranked or other games is something ranked should be trying to achieve.

abraker wrote: 5u2f3m

We already established that mania has disproportionate amounts of low diffs for players, in the osu! community meetings as well.
this is something true for all modes, and i'm not sure how this is a problem because this is by design. not all songs higher diffs while at the same time most higher diffs have to be accompanied by lower diffs. this also doesn't counter nao's point regarding song choice which is one of the major factors in attracting newer players to the game.
Paturages
199 posts
ed February 2012
Relax, don't remove.

Spread availability for beginners is beneficial because there are more chances a new player will find music they like and they can actually play.

On the other hand, some sets only providing higher difficulties may also be encouragement for players to get better and actually be able to play those. This has been the case for myself at least.

As long as mappers and people recognize this and know the importance of spreads, I believe spreads will continue to get ranked regardless of whether they're required or just (strongly) recommended.
abraker
Global
8,355 posts
ed July 2014
Topic Starter
I've updated the first post with the issues this trying to solve. Reason I am pushing for spread removal over relaxation is because I highly doubt relaxing spreads will allow those problems be solved.

Again, this change can always be reverted later.

Scotty wrote: 232h6h

this is something true for all modes, and i'm not sure how this is a problem because this is by design. not all songs higher diffs while at the same time most higher diffs have to be accompanied by lower diffs.
That is not the problem. The problem is that many maps are locked out of ranked because mappers refuse to make filler diffs. This "design" is causing issues this proposal aims to fix.

Scotty wrote: 232h6h

this also doesn't counter nao's point regarding song choice which is one of the major factors in attracting newer players to the game.
but there are already plenty of easy diffs to attract newer players to the game. There are plenty of ranked easy diffs that are mapped to songs of popular rhythm games and anime songs.


Patuurages wrote: 1g7a

As long as mappers and people recognize this and know the importance of spreads, I believe spreads will continue to get ranked regardless of whether they're required or just (strongly) recommended.
Then how about moving the rule to guideline?
Last edited by abraker , edited 6 times in total.
m666
60 posts
ed June 2016
Agreed with _underjoy.
Madoka2574
293 posts
ed August 2016
I personally can't agree on this. Easier diffs are necessary for new players. In my opinion having other similar games cannot be a reason to cancel the spread requirement in osu!mania cuz there're still players who just simply start playing rtythm games from osu, and those players will still need eaiser maps for them to play. It is really disappointing when u find a song u love but with no proper maps to play. If the current RC is more lenient for songs of longer duration because of the much exhausting works for the mapper, it should be fair to complete a full spread for shorter maps.

And I think it should be an issue of all modes, plz don't make mania so "unique".
Last edited by Madoka2574 , edited 1 time in total.
abraker
Global
8,355 posts
ed July 2014
Topic Starter

Madoka2574 wrote: 6z3c4m

I personally can't agree on this. Easier diffs are necessary for new players. In my opinion having other similar games cannot be a reason to cancel the spread requirement in osu!mania cuz there're still players who just simply start playing rtythm games from osu, and those players will still need eaiser maps for them to play. It is really disappointing when u find a song u love but with no proper maps to play.
Why so quickly assume there suddenly won't be any easy diffs being made? I gave reasons in the first post why that would not be the case.
  1. It's still easier to rank lower difficulties than harder difficulties due to complexity. Ranking easy diffs also offers new mappers a good entry point to get into ranked mapping.
  2. There are BN that are concerned that easy diffs will be neglected. Then it begs to reason they would focus to nominate easy difficulties
  3. If you go to beatmap listing, you will be able to find maps that have full spreads and have their highest difficulty something a player would be able to do within the first month.

Madoka2574 wrote: 6z3c4m

And I think it should be an issue of all modes, plz don't make mania so "unique".
This proposal was made only for mania because the discussion for applying this to other gamemodes failed.
Mirea
417 posts
ed May 2016

abraker wrote: 5u2f3m

Why so quickly assume there suddenly won't be any easy diffs being made? I gave reasons in the first post why that would not be the case.
  1. It's still easier to rank lower difficulties than harder difficulties due to complexity. Ranking easy diffs also offers new mappers a good entry point to get into ranked mapping.
  2. There are BN that are concerned that easy diffs will be neglected. Then it begs to reason they would focus to nominate easy difficulties
  3. If you go to beatmap listing, you will be able to find maps that have full spreads and have their highest difficulty something a player would be able to do within the first month.
There are counter-reasons why those listed presumptions could go down into opposite outcomes. Having the spread requirements entirely removed inflict way too much leniency in a way we wouldn't be able to maintain the ranked flows within a fine margin we could expect.

Following your points, lower-end files would still be produced upon this condition yet the worst case of scenario needs to be anticipated. I believe a large amount of mappers and/or BNs, including me, don't think a mere set comprising of lower diffs (Easy-Normal primarily) would offer decent satisfaction to the ranked section. Depends on the song potential of how hard a map can be, Insane level has been the main product that mappers would introduce among the other files, it's where the highlights are at steep. At this point people would just neglect creating lower diffs since they'll end up at low profile anyway.

Secondly, I have no idea how many BNs are at your calculation whom genuinely would care about low diffs if the condition proposed is applied. We couldn't rely on blind data, or at least we should not. Most BNs surely have a long list of pending maps about to get worked on, there's no guarantee or predictable outcomes that mapsets consisting of full spread (or only low diffs) appear at decent numbers that the community needs. I myself would consider a full-spread would work better on a set rather just having tedious 1/2 jumpstreams while there's more to dig in. Ranking a low-level mapset would feel half-assed because the result doesn't compensate the effort both BNs and mappers pour on the process.

The last one looks somewhat over-confident to me. There are indeed some maps with full spread that have tight gaps between the difficulties where the top diff wouldn't be by far as the lower one, however that's very occasional and not in a large amount of numbers to see such product in regards where players (particularly beginners to novice players) could cope within a month or so. So it's not a very good reason either.

Spread requirements has been relaxed once for good reasons, I don't think we could afford another one by simply erasing them entirely.
Last edited by Mirea , edited 7 times in total.
AutotelicBrown
66 posts
ed April 2014

abraker wrote: 5u2f3m

post
My argument isn't really that "FFR and Etterna are dying due to lack of low diffs and the same would happen to o!m" or any type of doom posting, following from my original post I'll highlight my main points for ease of discussion:

- After many years interacting with charters/mappers from all 3 games (FFR, Etterna, and o!m), it's pretty clear to me that, left to their own devices, most competent charters/mappers will completely ignore lower level content (or more specifically, content they or their peers don't consume). Obviously there are still exceptions like myself (in fact, you included my own ranked map as an example).
- Playcount statistics on o!m show that the majority of the playerbase is consuming content at the range primarily covered by spread RC (normal~hard). This is actually also valid for FFR and Etterna, but I'll cover those afterwards as response to what you said.
- Completely removing spread RC would act against the best interests of the playerbase at large, and I believe that RC should prioritize acting in favor of those players.

Also some extra points to make my position clear:
- I'm not claiming things are completely fine as they are, which is why I relaxation in the first place.
- I'm not claiming easy diffs will cease to exist or the game mode will die. I am claiming that removing spread RC completely without any other change will impact negatively both the quantity and quality of available lower diffs.
- This is not about making more content for some idealized new player/beginner, current spread RC doesn't even cover Easy which is what most players would start with. This is about making things better for the majority of the community who happens to be playing primarily maps in the normal~hard range.

Anyway, I think the argument that there's already enough content in that range (or even that, assuming an ideal scenario, the influx will stay the same compared to now) is misguided as data suggests that there should be even more if possible.

Considering the benefits of ranking for the mapper (immortalizing your work, leaderboards, exposure), I think the ranking process can and should require mappers to put in some extra potentially undesirable work for the sake of the community. The problem with the current situation is that the currently required extra work is too much for most mappers, which ends up hurting the ranked ecosystem even on the lower end of difficulty as mappers end up doing no extra work at all.

Also in regards to other things you mentioned:

Thing about FFR and Etterna is that the games themselves are not as accessible as osu!mania is.
The fact o!m is more accessible only makes it more important that there are systems in place to provide more content for this segment of the playerbase.

My point is that a beginner would not find those games easily, and if they do it's not beginner friendly from the get go, therefore it makes sense they don't have many easy charts.
Following from what I said in my earlier points, I'm not even talking about content for complete beginners, just what covers the bulk of the playerbase. Aside from scale, the core demographic in both Etterna and FFR actually isn't that different from what you observe in o!m, as I'll present next.

lengthier elaboration
Even with skewed demographics, the median player level in EtternaOnline is ~13.5 which corresponds to the MSD rate from roughly 3* o!m rice maps, and you also see playcount/difficulty statistics in etterna packs similar to what I mentioned for o!m.

FFR is a bit harder to present proper evidence because lifetime statistics aren't as useful, but for a long while I've used the Recent Plays to gauge site-wide player behavior by checking it from time to time. For reference, using data from when I was writing this post (image), out of the 25 latest plays, median difficulty of the charts played is 51 (roughly a 2.5* map), 17 of the plays are on files with diff less or equal to 60 (roughly 3*), and only 4 plays are on anything close to a 4* (around 80 on ffr) or higher, with one being a mashed score. While anecdotal evidence like this isn't conclusive by itself, I've been observing similar trends for years on the site.

I'm well aware there are some other confounding variables I didn't cover both in favor and against the data I'm presenting for either game, but my goal isn't to write an academic paper on this topic.

To conclude, if charters in those games aren't making enough content in the difficulty range we are interested for the o!m context, it has nothing to do with a lack of an audience that benefits from it.

And as an extra more off-topic matter:
off-topic
Even I searched for guitar hero like games back in late 00's I did not find anything, and wasn't until 2014 when I came across osu! by recommendation.
It's funny that you mentioned this because in Brazil there was the 2007 game Guitar Flash that filled the gap for people in a similar situation and some of the top br players (Lothus and SillyFangirl) actually played Guitar Flash before o!m. On a similar note, FFR was actually fairly popular in the early/mid 00s serving a similar role during the DDR fad, and died down mainly due to the site going dark for a long period, iirc around late 00s.
Quenlla
Beatmap Nominator
124 posts
ed July 2014
At this point I think it should be fair to try drawing the attention more to the possibility a lot of us have repeated throughout the different discussions: relaxing the requirements instead of removing them, as it seems the middle ground where everyone wins: we maintain a staeady influx of easy content into the game, and mappers have a sensible, increased amount of freedom and can avoid having to make throwaway diffs to a big extent.
Last edited by Quenlla , edited 1 time in total.
RiP46
Beatmap Nominator
512 posts
ed November 2014
so, to put it simply, it's like this:

man, I'm so lazy to do hit sound for this map. I know, let's propose RC to remove hit sound.

man, I'm so lazy to do a full spread for this map. I know, let's propose RC to remove the spread.

very cool

========

"Many good maps by various mappers are being left in graveyard because mappers refuse to map difficulties they don't feel like doing."

=> Mapper is too lazy. Can always ask for GD from someone else.

"Graveyard was never intended to be permanent storage."

=> Just make a pack of your graveyarded map then. Can always update it for new map later.

"Loved was never supposed to be a dump of maps that couldn't make it to ranked"

=> You don't need to all the map to loved section. nobody ask you to all the map too.

"There is a concerning number of unranked maps being used in mania tournaments. See first bullet point as to why."

=> I don't see any problem with this.
Last edited by RiP46 , edited 4 times in total.
AncuL
1,114 posts
ed March 2013

RiP46 wrote: 13666j

so, to put it simply, it's like this:

man, I'm so lazy to do hit sound for this map. I know, let's propose RC to remove hit sound.

man, I'm so lazy to do a full spread for this map. I know, let's propose RC to remove the spread.

very cool
it's not like the ranked section will become better with you posting something like that lol
+ do you really think your ranked ENHI sets require more effort than the one-diff maps currently staying in graveyard
RiP46
Beatmap Nominator
512 posts
ed November 2014

AncuL wrote: 93i4m

it's not like the ranked section will become better with you posting something like that lol
+ do you really think your ranked ENHI sets require more effort than the one-diff maps currently staying in graveyard
why even bother to compare my maps with other map. I push my map to fulfill my own pleasure to have a ranked map of the song that I like not for making the ranked section become better.

Also asking for GD doesn't require much effort. maybe everyone should start asking for one. *shrug*
McEndu
1,274 posts
ed March 2019

abraker wrote: 5u2f3m

There is a concerning number of unranked maps being used in mania tournaments. See first bullet point as to why.
This is not really concerning, especially considering that there are maps made specifically for a tournament (this is true for any mode).

Also statistics:
  1. Out of the 20 maps used in OWC 2020 Grand Finals, 19 maps were not ranked during the tournament.
  2. Out of the 16 maps used in TWC 2021 Grand Finals, 13 maps were not ranked during the tournament.
  3. Out of the 16 maps used in CWC 2021 Grand Finals, 12 maps were not ranked during the tournament, and the rest are converts from osu! (standard).
  4. Out of the 17 maps used in MWC4K 2021 Finals series, all maps were not ranked during the tournament.
Noch Einen
534 posts
ed July 2018
I'd go for relax instead of remove. The stake is quite high on both choices, but im slightly leaning toward relax.

Remove case: (speaking of inexperienced mapper)
Even though BN could reject any of nomination req but they still do brief check about the map. And seeing unpolished map with lot of general issues could be demotivating for them. I dont want it to be 2nd quaver (which is a lot of I - X content, sorry for mentioning), though that is not as worst as quaver ranking pool (again, this is just speaking about inexperienced mapper).
abraker
Global
8,355 posts
ed July 2014
Topic Starter

RiP46 wrote: 13666j

=> Mapper is too lazy. Can always ask for GD from someone else.

"Graveyard was never intended to be permanent storage."

=> Just make a pack of your graveyarded map then. Can always update it for new map later.

"Loved was never supposed to be a dump of maps that couldn't make it to ranked"

=> You don't need to all the map to loved section. nobody ask you to all the map too.

"There is a concerning number of unranked maps being used in mania tournaments. See first bullet point as to why."

=> I don't see any problem with this.
These replies ignore the entirety of the conversation happened in this thread and this github post.

McEndu wrote: 1f1n1k

This is not really concerning, especially considering that there are maps made specifically for a tournament (this is true for any mode).

Also statistics:
Out of the 20 maps used in OWC 2020 Grand Finals, 19 maps were not ranked during the tournament.
Out of the 16 maps used in TWC 2021 Grand Finals, 13 maps were not ranked during the tournament.
Out of the 16 maps used in CWC 2021 Grand Finals, 12 maps were not ranked during the tournament, and the rest are converts from osu! (standard).
Out of the 17 maps used in MWC4K 2021 Finals series, all maps were not ranked during the tournament.
How do these stats make this remotely ok? This is not ok. They are made specifically for tournaments, but they are barred from ranking because the mapper would never bother to make additional diffs to meet the criteria. Otherwise they are quality maps, and it's proven they are quality by being chosen to be used for osu! official tournament.
Last edited by abraker , edited 3 times in total.
Scotty
Nomination Assessment Team
286 posts
ed October 2017

abraker wrote: 5u2f3m

How do these stats make this remotely ok? This is not ok. They are made specifically for tournaments, but they are barred from ranking because the mapper would never bother to make additional diffs to meet the criteria. Otherwise they are quality maps, and it's proven they are quality by being chosen to be used for osu! official tournament.
tournament maps aren't ranked because the mappers simply aren't interested in pushing them for ranked. among these are maps that feature rates (unrankable due to multiple mp3s) and a lot of marathon maps that never got ranked (this has nothing to do with spread requirements either).
Adri
313 posts
ed June 2014

RiP46 wrote: 13666j

"There is a concerning number of unranked maps being used in mania tournaments. See first bullet point as to why."

=> I don't see any problem with this.
The problem is not that tournament maps aren't ranked, it's that by wiping the graveyard we would essentially be wiping tournament content and be left with only the more recent stuff. Picking maps for a tournament is already hard enough as is, and also, willfully wiping quality content is not the right way to go imo.

And you can call mappers lazy, this is sometimes true, but for most of the quality content in unranked, the mappers simply don't share the same points of view as ranked criteria
Ventilo le vrai
138 posts
ed December 2018

Scotty wrote: 232h6h

tournament maps aren't ranked because the mappers simply aren't interested in pushing them for ranked. among these are maps that feature rates (unrankable due to multiple mp3s) and a lot of marathon maps that never got ranked (this has nothing to do with spread requirements either).
Maybe these mappers add those rates and don't try to push it for ranked because they already know that in current circumstances their maps can't be ranked, so at tjis point they don't really care anymore about the RC.

RiP46 wrote: 13666j

so, to put it simply, it's like this:

man, I'm so lazy to do hit sound for this map. I know, let's propose RC to remove hit sound.

man, I'm so lazy to do a full spread for this map. I know, let's propose RC to remove the spread.
If mappers were lazy they wouldn't map at all.
Last edited by Ventilo le vrai , edited 1 time in total.
-mint-
657 posts
ed September 2016

RiP46 wrote: 13666j

so, to put it simply, it's like this:

man, I'm so lazy to do hit sound for this map. I know, let's propose RC to remove hit sound.

man, I'm so lazy to do a full spread for this map. I know, let's propose RC to remove the spread.

very cool

========

"Many good maps by various mappers are being left in graveyard because mappers refuse to map difficulties they don't feel like doing."

=> Mapper is too lazy. Can always ask for GD from someone else.

"Graveyard was never intended to be permanent storage."

=> Just make a pack of your graveyarded map then. Can always update it for new map later.

"Loved was never supposed to be a dump of maps that couldn't make it to ranked"

=> You don't need to all the map to loved section. nobody ask you to all the map too.

"There is a concerning number of unranked maps being used in mania tournaments. See first bullet point as to why."

=> I don't see any problem with this.
ratio


edit: in all seriousness. stop assuming people are doing things in bad faith/"laziness". if people were actually lazy they would just not propose anything in RC lol. these proposals are being made with the benefit in mind for all.

"Mapper is too lazy. Can always ask for GD from someone else."

=> Not everyone is all that comfortable with getting and managing GDs for spread issues etc. Communication is often made to be somewhat consuming as well.

"Just make a pack of your graveyarded map then. Can always update it for new map later."

=> The process of making packs on osu! is made to be stupidly difficult and there are many roadblocks along the way that can break all of your files.

"You don't need to all the map to loved section. nobody ask you to all the map too."

=> There is a huge demand for loved maps, according to the survey that was put out recently. Claiming that "nobody" is asking is at worst an abhorrently bad faith claim, and at best incredulously ignorant to the collective conscience.
Last edited by -mint- , edited 1 time in total.
McEndu
1,274 posts
ed March 2019

AncuL wrote: 93i4m

do you really think your ranked ENHI sets require more effort than the one-diff maps currently staying in graveyard
while the lower diffs don't need as much effort as the top diff, they do need effort to be done
Last edited by McEndu , edited 1 time in total.
AncuL
1,114 posts
ed March 2013
The issue of tournament maps closely relate to my first question on the discussion thread. afaik tournament maps don't get pushed to ranked not because of the lack of spread, but because of how disconnected (the mappers think) they are to the ranked section overall, especially on the higher ends of the tournament pools

Scotty wrote: 232h6h

that feature rates
for now, you can just have a set that's just the diff without rates and the other one with rates. some people regularly do this
Quenlla
Beatmap Nominator
124 posts
ed July 2014
Just as a heads up, we have finally assembled a proper survey with the intention of determining the overall preferences of mappers, players and BNs/NATs. This should make as able to direct a bit the specifics of the final proposal.

We'd be grateful if everyone filled it out:

https://forms.gle/tCoVdkRRXzJgjqML6
Last edited by Quenlla , edited 1 time in total.
[Ping]
499 posts
ed April 2015

abraker wrote: 5u2f3m

McEndu wrote: 1f1n1k

This is not really concerning, especially considering that there are maps made specifically for a tournament (this is true for any mode).

Also statistics:
Out of the 20 maps used in OWC 2020 Grand Finals, 19 maps were not ranked during the tournament.
Out of the 16 maps used in TWC 2021 Grand Finals, 13 maps were not ranked during the tournament.
Out of the 16 maps used in CWC 2021 Grand Finals, 12 maps were not ranked during the tournament, and the rest are converts from osu! (standard).
Out of the 17 maps used in MWC4K 2021 Finals series, all maps were not ranked during the tournament.
How do these stats make this remotely ok? This is not ok. They are made specifically for tournaments, but they are barred from ranking because the mapper would never bother to make additional diffs to meet the criteria. Otherwise they are quality maps, and it's proven they are quality by being chosen to be used for osu! official tournament.
Pretty sure McEndu was showing how tournament maps not being ranked is a problem not only for mania. However, it seems like other modes didn't want this change / it is not beneficial to them as much as ours.


AncuL wrote: 93i4m

The issue of tournament maps closely relate to my first question on the discussion thread. afaik tournament maps don't get pushed to ranked not because of the lack of spread, but because of how disconnected (the mappers think) they are to the ranked section overall, especially on the higher ends of the tournament pools

Scotty wrote: 232h6h

that feature rates
for now, you can just have a set that's just the diff without rates and the other one with rates. some people regularly do this
Also agree with this. I think spread is just a part of the problem (which we can decided on changes based on this discussion). Another part is that we have to show tournament mappers somehow that our environment is willing to help their maps in the ranking process (I think currently Komirin and RandomeLoL are doing a very good job at ing the tournament mappers for pushing their sets to the ranked section. However, community effort is still really needed). But that's another issue to be discussed.

Apart from that regarding tournament maps, if one wants to keep the tournament version, they can have two sets on the site (though I don't think it is a very good idea in the long run still since it would be bad to the server storage) or host only the .osu diff file somewhere else (it's just a text file after all). The first way was already done with HowToPlayLN's Endless (Mameyudoufu Remix) as an example (like I mentioned though I think hosting the original diff files separately might be better for osu! structure).
Last edited by [Ping] , edited 1 time in total.
McEndu
1,274 posts
ed March 2019

[Ping] wrote: 1si

abraker wrote: 5u2f3m

McEndu wrote: 1f1n1k

This is not really concerning, especially considering that there are maps made specifically for a tournament (this is true for any mode).

Also statistics:
Out of the 20 maps used in OWC 2020 Grand Finals, 19 maps were not ranked during the tournament.
Out of the 16 maps used in TWC 2021 Grand Finals, 13 maps were not ranked during the tournament.
Out of the 16 maps used in CWC 2021 Grand Finals, 12 maps were not ranked during the tournament, and the rest are converts from osu! (standard).
Out of the 17 maps used in MWC4K 2021 Finals series, all maps were not ranked during the tournament.
How do these stats make this remotely ok? This is not ok. They are made specifically for tournaments, but they are barred from ranking because the mapper would never bother to make additional diffs to meet the criteria. Otherwise they are quality maps, and it's proven they are quality by being chosen to be used for osu! official tournament.
Pretty sure McEndu was showing how tournament maps not being ranked is a problem not only for mania. However, it seems like other modes didn't want this change / it is not beneficial to them as much as ours.
"Not ranked during the tournament" is not "currently not ranked"; The stats also include maps that are ranked after the tournament concludes.
Last edited by McEndu , edited 1 time in total.
abraker
Global
8,355 posts
ed July 2014
Topic Starter

McEndu wrote: 1f1n1k

[Ping] wrote: 1si

abraker wrote: 5u2f3m

McEndu wrote: 1f1n1k

This is not really concerning, especially considering that there are maps made specifically for a tournament (this is true for any mode).

Also statistics:
Out of the 20 maps used in OWC 2020 Grand Finals, 19 maps were not ranked during the tournament.
Out of the 16 maps used in TWC 2021 Grand Finals, 13 maps were not ranked during the tournament.
Out of the 16 maps used in CWC 2021 Grand Finals, 12 maps were not ranked during the tournament, and the rest are converts from osu! (standard).
Out of the 17 maps used in MWC4K 2021 Finals series, all maps were not ranked during the tournament.
How do these stats make this remotely ok? This is not ok. They are made specifically for tournaments, but they are barred from ranking because the mapper would never bother to make additional diffs to meet the criteria. Otherwise they are quality maps, and it's proven they are quality by being chosen to be used for osu! official tournament.
Pretty sure McEndu was showing how tournament maps not being ranked is a problem not only for mania. However, it seems like other modes didn't want this change / it is not beneficial to them as much as ours.
"Not ranked during the tournament" is not "currently not ranked"; The stats also include maps that are ranked after the tournament concludes.
It is understandable if the maps were not ranked for the tournament. The tragedy is for the maps to be left graveyarded way after the tournament. So here are the current stats, and I'm excluding maps that were loved since in this count:

OWC 2020: 11/20 still unrank
MWC4k 2021: 17/17 still unrank
CWC 2021: 10/16 still unrank
TWC 2021: 9/16 still unrank

One is not like the others.
Last edited by abraker , edited 4 times in total.
-mint-
657 posts
ed September 2016
uh its almost like mwc just finished
abraker
Global
8,355 posts
ed July 2014
Topic Starter

-mint- wrote: 23412l

uh its almost like mwc just finished
Oh had to check the dates oops. Let's use the 2020 one then

OWC 2020: 11/20 still unrank (55%)
MWC4k 2020: 11/17 still unrank (65%)
CWC 2021: 10/16 still unrank (63%)
TWC 2021: 9/16 still unrank (56%)

Not sure I can call 65% good, but it seems all gamemodes are in more or less the same camp.


edit: fixed totals
Last edited by abraker , edited 2 times in total.
-mint-
657 posts
ed September 2016
i dont think a map should be ranked strictly by nature of it being used in the world cup anyways, imo just let it naturally happen, BNs will have a slightly higher incentive to go for those maps anyways bc a lot of them will get popular via being known as a map in the world cup. and its not like a high percentage is bad exactly either, especially when the other modes have similar percentages
[Crz]Alleyne
Beatmap Nominator
275 posts
ed December 2017
Here I want to deliver some of my ideas, having viewed just some of the posts.

osu! is widely played all over the world. Players can be newbies, noobs, skillers, etc. So thinking for the future, if the limiation doesn't exist any longer, the mappers may do what they like and make one single diff which can be as hard as possible at least for my watching of these days. So some of players may only see some easy maps which contain no music that they like, or just see there're some their favorite songs but they cannot play the maps, because of which, these players are not motivated and may have less activily in osu! or just quit. The advantages I can see just belong to mappers. They can do what they like but for players they cannot completely enjoy the game if so.

Rules are still rules and they're reasonable. If you change the reasonable rules for recent disadvantages, this may leave a hole on the road to future. So yes I mean this is reasonable for the spread rules. For some maps for long music, they are only fit for the players who have some skills even how easy it could be. Long maps require endurance which cannot be expressed on newbies. So making single diff for the long music is absolutely alright. And for some short music, there can be various diffs because they are short and friendly to players on different levels. You can see there must be spreads in some other music games such as Arcaea, Deemo, Cytus, Lanota, etc. And they all have one thing in common. That is the music is not so long. The length of most music is not more than 3 minutes. For example, in Arcaea, Tempestissimo is a cut verion actually but uncut version is over 4 minutes. You should understand this.

I don't care what BNs or mappers think (I'm also a mapper). I just speak objectively. Feel free to criticize me.

I may write more but for my personal reasons I want to leave it behind or just go away.
Last edited by [Crz]Alleyne , edited 2 times in total.
Sydosys
Featured Artist
95 posts
ed June 2020
I feel like everyone here is theorizing about what would or wouldn't happen and the only way to really know is to have a test trial for a few months, if there's practically no easy diffs or whatever ranked during that time then we know we should reinstate some spread criteria, albeit likely more relaxed than the current ones, or maybe the trial goes well. I don't see any reason to be against just trying it out.
Arzenvald
4,062 posts
ed July 2013
i don't feel easier difficulty would be neglected if the spread requirements in mania is removed, BN have the liberty to pick maps they feel like to nominate, its weird seeing people freaking out that there will be lack of easier diff if the spread is removed haha

i'm damn sure every map deserve equal amount of attention from players, mappers, and modders, regardless the keymode, duration, difficulty, etc. and i believe there's plenty good map out there that deserved to be ranked. however the current state of ranking criteria for osu!mania hinders certain maps to get that kind of attention & engagement from within the community, prevent certain mappers, players, and modders engage with one to each other.

if the goal is to increase the engagement of these kind of map, making those maps eligible for rank by removing the spread requirement is one good solution, but there should also be different kind of proposal and solution that will help kickstart a much richer, more engaging mapping/modding experience that will benefit more people.

what i wish is to not remove the 'engagement process' between the 3 elements of community (modders, mappers, and players) during the process of ranking a map.

meta maps won't be affected anyways
Last edited by Arzenvald , edited 4 times in total.
vernonlim
13 posts
ed May 2017

[LS]Ham wrote: 565n6y

I feel like everyone here is theorizing about what would or wouldn't happen and the only way to really know is to have a test trial for a few months
This is kind of the main point, from my view. osu! as a game looks to be staying around for an absurdly long time into the future, so even if they turned out to be disasterous, trying out the changes for a mere 1-2 months wouldn't do much harm over the long run. On the flip side, if they turn out to be a success and they are kept, the benefits would last for the many years to come.
Last edited by vernonlim , edited 1 time in total.
Linlime
107 posts
ed May 2019
My opinion on this is that it would be a good change,

I will take the game quaver as an example. Quavers RC would state that a map only needs 2+ diffs if the map is under 2:29. difficulty requirements don't apply.

Even though those requirements are so low the game still gets enough low and high diff maps submitted.

Now if we look at osu!mania. the community is much bigger so there will be much more maps. and this is just one change. It wont mean that the quality of the maps would go down since every other RC would still apply. This just gives opportunity to mappers to more easily rank smaller maps/mapsets
[Ping]
499 posts
ed April 2015

Jawbraiker wrote: 1j4l2f

My opinion on this is that it would be a good change,

I will take the game quaver as an example. Quavers RC would state that a map only needs 2+ diffs if the map is under 2:29. difficulty requirements don't apply.

Even though those requirements are so low the game still gets enough low and high diff maps submitted.

Now if we look at osu!mania. the community is much bigger so there will be much more maps. and this is just one change. It wont mean that the quality of the maps would go down since every other RC would still apply. This just gives opportunity to mappers to more easily rank smaller maps/mapsets
fwiw as someone who dabbles into the Quaver community also, I think it is partially because of what the mappers are trying to appeal to, which is slightly different from mania. However, I think this is still somewhat a pretty good point but we cannot really conclude anything until things are being tried / implemented out
Sydosys
Featured Artist
95 posts
ed June 2020

[Ping] wrote: 1si

Jawbraiker wrote: 1j4l2f

My opinion on this is that it would be a good change,

I will take the game quaver as an example. Quavers RC would state that a map only needs 2+ diffs if the map is under 2:29. difficulty requirements don't apply.

Even though those requirements are so low the game still gets enough low and high diff maps submitted.

Now if we look at osu!mania. the community is much bigger so there will be much more maps. and this is just one change. It wont mean that the quality of the maps would go down since every other RC would still apply. This just gives opportunity to mappers to more easily rank smaller maps/mapsets
fwiw as someone who dabbles into the Quaver community also, I think it is partially because of what the mappers are trying to appeal to, which is slightly different from mania. However, I think this is still somewhat a pretty good point but we cannot really conclude anything until things are being tried / implemented out
also partially because quaver has rates, so if you want a diff to be easier or harder, you just put it on a rate. no need to incentivize different difficulty levels
_VianK_
786 posts
ed August 2015
Actually it's good opinion. But i more like to reject this proposal. I have several reason for this.

1. By removing this rule it would be make the ranked section is less beginner friendly. Altho you're said that isn't easy for a really a beginner player for find this game. But c'mon it just an probability, there is also player who just this game is his first rythm game. I think they deserve more love by us.

2. I strongly agree with Ancul's opinion " it's not like the ranked section will become better with you posting something like that lol
+ do you really think your ranked ENHI sets require more effort than the one-diff maps currently staying in graveyard"
Honestly completing the set is much easier than the modding process LoL. Tbh looking for mod for lower diff is much easier than higher diff.

3. Then the last one from mint's quote
"edit: in all seriousness. stop assuming people are doing things in bad faith/"laziness". if people were actually lazy they would just not propose anything in RC lol. these proposals are being made with the benefit in mind for all.

"Mapper is too lazy. Can always ask for GD from someone else."

=> Not everyone is all that comfortable with getting and managing GDs for spread issues etc. Communication is often made to be somewhat consuming as well.

"Just make a pack of your graveyarded map then. Can always update it for new map later."

=> The process of making packs on osu! is made to be stupidly difficult and there are many roadblocks along the way that can break all of your files.

"You don't need to all the map to loved section. nobody ask you to all the map too."

=> There is a huge demand for loved maps, according to the survey that was put out recently. Claiming that "nobody" is asking is at worst an abhorrently bad faith claim, and at best incredulously ignorant to the collective conscience."

What i want to said for this quote is the ranked section is something osu! Official content for his comunity. If you felt too lazy to do it, Then don't do it. You shouldn't change the rule for coz of your lazinees. If you already felt that was too painfull you too finished one time, then take a break and finish it in next section. As a mapper no one ask US for make a chart first, we just do it coz we love it without any payment.

Honestly i want to ask "what your really reason is?" I felt your reason in the main post and your reply to another player or mapper just like an arguing.
Last edited by _VianK_ , edited 1 time in total.
Rikuka
394 posts
ed November 2012
i kinda agree and disagree with this

agree cause it can be easier for people to ranking maps / no need to modding many diffs

disagree cause look at qualified map , sometimes people with anti meta main still trying on doing it with lower diff / enjoying lower diff

and yeah if no ranking criteria exist , how can you ing 2 same exact songs with only 1 diff and tv size mapsets?

trust me , as an graveyarded mapper , making ultra hard diff is much easier than easy diff
Last edited by Rikuka , edited 3 times in total.
abraker
Global
8,355 posts
ed July 2014
Topic Starter

_VianK_ wrote: 2a5s5j

What i want to said for this quote is the ranked section is something osu! Official content for his comunity. If you felt too lazy to do it, Then don't do it. You shouldn't change the rule for coz of your lazinees. If you already felt that was too painfull you too finished one time, then take a break and finish it in next section. As a mapper no one ask US for make a chart first, we just do it coz we love it without any payment.
You can't call a mapper lazy if they are making over a hundred single difficulty maps. All effort and focus goes into making each difficulty great. Ranked is missing out on many many good maps because of this. osu! is not the only game that has people making maps. Mappers from stepmania made many great maps. Mappers who made those maps might be willing to rank if criteria allowed them to.

Rikuka wrote: 5v115l

trust me , as an graveyarded mapper , making ultra hard diff is much easier than easy diff
As a graveyard mapper you should be concerned that the graveyard section was supposed to be subject to map purging every few years.
Last edited by abraker , edited 2 times in total.
_Stan
Beatmap Nominator
783 posts
ed June 2012
Well, I'll give some of my points here.
-
At first, I wanna say, spread still matter due to those three below
-
1) Contains players of all abilities.
Yeah, there are lots of E-H players I'm sure, you can definitely see the play counts on the statistics bar, so this demand is huge. If we break the spread, cancel them (some easier diffs) will cuz losing those people and hard for new blood come in. (we won't this game just played by old group of people and dead right?)
-
2) Mainstream commercial game difficulty distribution rules
This is an unwritten rule that this kind of rhythm game needs increasing difficulty changes in a range, like E-N-H, H-I-X (osu way).
Cytus (Easy→Normal→Hard/Extra))
太鼓の达人 (かんたん→ふつう→-むずかしい→おに)
beatmania IIDX (BEGINNER→NORMAL→HYPER→ANOTHER→LEGGENDARIA)
-
Even in other games like
The adventure game (tomb raider had Easy-Normal-Hard for experience)
HOTS bots (Easy-Normal-Hard-Expert)
-
so that means a completed set should have a consistent, gradually rising difficulty system, or just feel informal.
-
3) Establish the authority of the rank section (or make the rank section seems more professional)
I can't imagine the future rank section became (E-N-X-X-U) (N-U-U) something like this, so bad like chaos. If the necessary rules and forms are missing, then professionalism and authority are meaningless.

====

However, I agree to lower the standard or cancel some rules for getting spread easier, like we don't actually start from a specific difficulty, but spread needs to be kept (that means the diff between the easiest one and hardest one should be increased gradually as spread looked like).

So my position here doesn't have actually agree or disagree, I hope RC can be more accurate and clear.



edit: something wrong grammar
Last edited by _Stan , edited 4 times in total.
_VianK_
786 posts
ed August 2015

abraker wrote: 5u2f3m

_VianK_ wrote: 2a5s5j

What i want to said for this quote is the ranked section is something osu! Official content for his comunity. If you felt too lazy to do it, Then don't do it. You shouldn't change the rule for coz of your lazinees. If you already felt that was too painfull you too finished one time, then take a break and finish it in next section. As a mapper no one ask US for make a chart first, we just do it coz we love it without any payment.
You can't call a mapper lazy if they are making over a hundred single difficulty maps. All effort and focus goes into making each difficulty great. Ranked is missing out on many many good maps because of this. osu! is not the only game that has people making maps. Mappers from stepmania made many great maps. Mappers who made those maps might be willing to rank if criteria allowed them to.

Who said the RC not allowed them?

If they want to rank their map on here, they have to study before how the system works here, not changing system for them. Actually word "lost" isn't really accurate since you can still play it even that was in the graveyard. Honestly i was really like map from stepmania chart too, but doing this for them (?) I think you go too far.

I guees you got the point.
Last edited by _VianK_ , edited 1 time in total.
epic man 2
528 posts
ed May 2019
damn this discussion has been going for a bit
richardfeder
1,061 posts
ed March 2013
Current RC is way too restrictive, and it tries to enforcing the same spread pattern (E-N-H-I-X, and there are even detailed, but completely out-of-context that specifically define how each diff should look like) on every song and it is just a pure nonsense.

That being said, having a spread should still be a minimum requirement for rank section. We can and I think we should offer more freedom to mappers and let them design a proper spread so that rules are not forcing them to make difficulties that they are uncomfortable to make. Given them the option to start the lowest difficulty in the set/gap among all difficulties can be something. Given them the freedom to use whatever patterns they want in each difficulty and let any justifiable design go to rank section can also be something. There are a lot of ways for us to make constructing multiple difficulties that form a proper spread a lesser burden for mappers; nevertheless, in order to push their map to ranked section they should still at least provide a proper spread. If you want to rank a map you should at the bear minimum work for it, and completing a somewhat proper spread is part of that work.

We need some incentives for mappers who are going to rank their map to cover a spectrum but not only target at a very small, specific group of audiences. That is just unhealthy to the community as any player who are not the targeted audience will be left out, and this is not just about beginners. I think spread rule is good in that sense as it encourage mappers to cover at least a range of players. It doesn't have to be a very wide range that goes from easy to ultra, but it shouldn't be one single difficulty such as a Easy/Insane, and mapper just let everyone who doesn't enjoy Easy/Insane to screw themselves either. Spread is fine. It's just the way how we formulate and enforce it is quite broken.
[Ping]
499 posts
ed April 2015

_VianK_ wrote: 2a5s5j

abraker wrote: 5u2f3m

_VianK_ wrote: 2a5s5j

What i want to said for this quote is the ranked section is something osu! Official content for his comunity. If you felt too lazy to do it, Then don't do it. You shouldn't change the rule for coz of your lazinees. If you already felt that was too painfull you too finished one time, then take a break and finish it in next section. As a mapper no one ask US for make a chart first, we just do it coz we love it without any payment.
You can't call a mapper lazy if they are making over a hundred single difficulty maps. All effort and focus goes into making each difficulty great. Ranked is missing out on many many good maps because of this. osu! is not the only game that has people making maps. Mappers from stepmania made many great maps. Mappers who made those maps might be willing to rank if criteria allowed them to.

Who said the RC not allowed them?

If they want to rank their map on here, they have to study before how the system works here, not changing system for them. Actually word "lost" isn't really accurate since you can still play it even that was in the graveyard. Honestly i was really like map from stepmania chart too, but doing this for them (?) I think you go too far.

I guees you got the point.
The point of this is mainly because this was said by peppy that inactive graveyard maps will slowly being deleted - which is why this discussion is very much needed to preserve charts both ported from stepmania and made in osu! to continue staying on the website.
_VianK_
786 posts
ed August 2015

[Ping] wrote: 1si

_VianK_ wrote: 2a5s5j

abraker wrote: 5u2f3m

_VianK_ wrote: 2a5s5j

What i want to said for this quote is the ranked section is something osu! Official content for his comunity. If you felt too lazy to do it, Then don't do it. You shouldn't change the rule for coz of your lazinees. If you already felt that was too painfull you too finished one time, then take a break and finish it in next section. As a mapper no one ask US for make a chart first, we just do it coz we love it without any payment.
You can't call a mapper lazy if they are making over a hundred single difficulty maps. All effort and focus goes into making each difficulty great. Ranked is missing out on many many good maps because of this. osu! is not the only game that has people making maps. Mappers from stepmania made many great maps. Mappers who made those maps might be willing to rank if criteria allowed them to.

Who said the RC not allowed them?

If they want to rank their map on here, they have to study before how the system works here, not changing system for them. Actually word "lost" isn't really accurate since you can still play it even that was in the graveyard. Honestly i was really like map from stepmania chart too, but doing this for them (?) I think you go too far.

I guees you got the point.
The point of this is mainly because this was said by peppy that inactive graveyard maps will slowly being deleted - which is why this discussion is very much needed to preserve charts both ported from stepmania and made in osu! to continue staying on the website.

I guess this thing is not really the solution it's like this community trying to sacrifice the standard of quality from the ranket set just for save chart from the other VSRG. If that was created for stepmania, that was for stepmania then. But if that was created for osu! Then it was for Osu!. Both of the game have their own standard. You cannot lowering this VSRG standard just coz for saving other converted other VSRG. Tbh allowing for just using hitnormal already drop the ranked section quality for mania dropped so far. So please, don't totally ruin it.

i have more than 100 map in my graveyard. Which just created for this VSRG. But should i Going to change the ranked standard just for saving them? I think it's a big no. Since there is quality criteria between ranked section and graveyard section.

Well, the solution i just can give to you is to back up the chart in somewhere else. chart in stepmania are hosted in 3rd party cloud storage :")







OMG...... I have to back up my Grave map
Last edited by _VianK_ , edited 1 time in total.
abraker
Global
8,355 posts
ed July 2014
Topic Starter

_VianK_ wrote: 2a5s5j

abraker wrote: 5u2f3m

_VianK_ wrote: 2a5s5j

What i want to said for this quote is the ranked section is something osu! Official content for his comunity. If you felt too lazy to do it, Then don't do it. You shouldn't change the rule for coz of your lazinees. If you already felt that was too painfull you too finished one time, then take a break and finish it in next section. As a mapper no one ask US for make a chart first, we just do it coz we love it without any payment.
You can't call a mapper lazy if they are making over a hundred single difficulty maps. All effort and focus goes into making each difficulty great. Ranked is missing out on many many good maps because of this. osu! is not the only game that has people making maps. Mappers from stepmania made many great maps. Mappers who made those maps might be willing to rank if criteria allowed them to.

Who said the RC not allowed them?

If they want to rank their map on here, they have to study before how the system works here, not changing system for them. Actually word "lost" isn't really accurate since you can still play it even that was in the graveyard. Honestly i was really like map from stepmania chart too, but doing this for them (?) I think you go too far.

I guees you got the point.
RC does not allow them because those maps require full spreads. Those creators dont care about creating additional difficulties, so those difficulties will never be made. Even asking for gd wont happen because it's based on principle. Despite this, that doesnt make the maps themselves any worse. There are great maps we are loosing out on only because of this.

They are not "lost" now, but they will be lost in future if maps are left graveyarded. Peppy plans on turning on map purging sometime, and that will wipe a significant portion of those maps. If that wasnt a thing, I suppose they could be left graveyarded, but peppy instead requested to do what can be done to get those ranked instead. So here we are.
Last edited by abraker , edited 2 times in total.
_VianK_
786 posts
ed August 2015

abraker wrote: 5u2f3m

_VianK_ wrote: 2a5s5j

abraker wrote: 5u2f3m

_VianK_ wrote: 2a5s5j

What i want to said for this quote is the ranked section is something osu! Official content for his comunity. If you felt too lazy to do it, Then don't do it. You shouldn't change the rule for coz of your lazinees. If you already felt that was too painfull you too finished one time, then take a break and finish it in next section. As a mapper no one ask US for make a chart first, we just do it coz we love it without any payment.
You can't call a mapper lazy if they are making over a hundred single difficulty maps. All effort and focus goes into making each difficulty great. Ranked is missing out on many many good maps because of this. osu! is not the only game that has people making maps. Mappers from stepmania made many great maps. Mappers who made those maps might be willing to rank if criteria allowed them to.

Who said the RC not allowed them?

If they want to rank their map on here, they have to study before how the system works here, not changing system for them. Actually word "lost" isn't really accurate since you can still play it even that was in the graveyard. Honestly i was really like map from stepmania chart too, but doing this for them (?) I think you go too far.

I guees you got the point.
RC does not allow them because those maps require full spreads. Those creators dont care about creating additional difficulties, so those difficulties will never be made. Even asking for gd wont happen because it's based on principle. Despite this, that doesnt make the maps themselves any worse. There are great maps we are loosing out on only because of this.

They are not "lost" now, but they will be lost in future if maps are left graveyarded. Peppy plans on turning on map purging sometime, and that will wipe a significant portion of those maps.
See?

If the creator it self don't care. Why you have to sacrifice our standard. Isn't really worthed to do.

If they are really care about their map. They have to do more effort than just making proposal.

This reply are making me more believe that this proposal is just about



LAZINESS
Last edited by _VianK_ , edited 2 times in total.
abraker
Global
8,355 posts
ed July 2014
Topic Starter

_VianK_ wrote: 2a5s5j

[Ping] wrote: 1si

_VianK_ wrote: 2a5s5j

abraker wrote: 5u2f3m

_VianK_ wrote: 2a5s5j

What i want to said for this quote is the ranked section is something osu! Official content for his comunity. If you felt too lazy to do it, Then don't do it. You shouldn't change the rule for coz of your lazinees. If you already felt that was too painfull you too finished one time, then take a break and finish it in next section. As a mapper no one ask US for make a chart first, we just do it coz we love it without any payment.
You can't call a mapper lazy if they are making over a hundred single difficulty maps. All effort and focus goes into making each difficulty great. Ranked is missing out on many many good maps because of this. osu! is not the only game that has people making maps. Mappers from stepmania made many great maps. Mappers who made those maps might be willing to rank if criteria allowed them to.

Who said the RC not allowed them?

If they want to rank their map on here, they have to study before how the system works here, not changing system for them. Actually word "lost" isn't really accurate since you can still play it even that was in the graveyard. Honestly i was really like map from stepmania chart too, but doing this for them (?) I think you go too far.

I guees you got the point.
The point of this is mainly because this was said by peppy that inactive graveyard maps will slowly being deleted - which is why this discussion is very much needed to preserve charts both ported from stepmania and made in osu! to continue staying on the website.

I guess this thing is not really the solution it's like this community trying to sacrifice the standard of quality from the ranket set just for save chart from the other VSRG. If that was created for stepmania, that was for stepmania then. But if that was created for osu! Then it was for Osu!. Both of the game have their own standard. You cannot lowering this VSRG standard just coz for saving other converted other VSRG. Tbh allowing for just using hitnormal already drop the ranked section quality for mania dropped so far. So please, don't totally ruin it.
Why the hell are we judging quality by quantity and not by the enjoyability of individual difficulties themselves? Why osu so backwards ??

_VianK_ wrote: 2a5s5j

See? If the creator it self don't care. Why you have to sacrifice our standard. Isn't really worthed to do.
What? Creators care that people enjoy the maps they make. It's a dedicated craft. They dont care making maps to fill some silly criteria.
Last edited by abraker , edited 2 times in total.
_VianK_
786 posts
ed August 2015

abraker wrote: 5u2f3m

_VianK_ wrote: 2a5s5j

[Ping] wrote: 1si

_VianK_ wrote: 2a5s5j

abraker wrote: 5u2f3m

_VianK_ wrote: 2a5s5j

What i want to said for this quote is the ranked section is something osu! Official content for his comunity. If you felt too lazy to do it, Then don't do it. You shouldn't change the rule for coz of your lazinees. If you already felt that was too painfull you too finished one time, then take a break and finish it in next section. As a mapper no one ask US for make a chart first, we just do it coz we love it without any payment.
You can't call a mapper lazy if they are making over a hundred single difficulty maps. All effort and focus goes into making each difficulty great. Ranked is missing out on many many good maps because of this. osu! is not the only game that has people making maps. Mappers from stepmania made many great maps. Mappers who made those maps might be willing to rank if criteria allowed them to.

Who said the RC not allowed them?

If they want to rank their map on here, they have to study before how the system works here, not changing system for them. Actually word "lost" isn't really accurate since you can still play it even that was in the graveyard. Honestly i was really like map from stepmania chart too, but doing this for them (?) I think you go too far.

I guees you got the point.
The point of this is mainly because this was said by peppy that inactive graveyard maps will slowly being deleted - which is why this discussion is very much needed to preserve charts both ported from stepmania and made in osu! to continue staying on the website.

I guess this thing is not really the solution it's like this community trying to sacrifice the standard of quality from the ranket set just for save chart from the other VSRG. If that was created for stepmania, that was for stepmania then. But if that was created for osu! Then it was for Osu!. Both of the game have their own standard. You cannot lowering this VSRG standard just coz for saving other converted other VSRG. Tbh allowing for just using hitnormal already drop the ranked section quality for mania dropped so far. So please, don't totally ruin it.
Why the hell are we judging quality by quantity and not by the enjoyability of individual difficulties themselves? Why osu so backwards ??

_VianK_ wrote: 2a5s5j

See? If the creator it self don't care. Why you have to sacrifice our standard. Isn't really worthed to do.
What? Creators care that people enjoy the maps they make. It's a dedicated craft. They dont care making maps to fill some silly criteria.
Of course not. But don't forget if lower diff also have their own enjoyability, not only insane + + diff, if it cannot enjoyable for insane player, it means thats not for them, but for lower player. Thats why we have modding section. Our modder help to improve that thing (unless your mod just only based on RC). Thats make o!m different with Stepmania, we have modding section. But in stepmania once it done, it just need to submitted in somewhere else.

Fulfill the criteria is the most. Crafting a map for pleasure is the reason why that was mapped. But fulfill the criteria is more like the process for ranked section. That was really different thing.


finally i just wanna said If they are don't want to do it and Don't care about it. Then let it be.


Don't Go too far.....

Edit : i didn't notice this

"but peppy instead requested to do what can be done to get those ranked instead. So here we are."

Why not loved section?? That's perfectly suitable
Last edited by _VianK_ , edited 3 times in total.
richardfeder
1,061 posts
ed March 2013
I think altering RC to salvage chart in graveyard doesn't sound quite right. We have a loved category specifically for maps that doesn't quite fit RC but still deserve to be archived. If we want to quickly put all those maps in a permanent place then we might want to make loved more accessible to those maps, not trying to push them into ranked section. And to be honest I think with the help of lvd team that process might just be way shorter than letting bns who are overwhelmed by requests to manually check maps one by one.

RC is quite broken, but fixing RC isn't a suitable way to address this graveyard issue.
Last edited by richardfeder , edited 1 time in total.
_VianK_
786 posts
ed August 2015

richardfeder wrote: 2y5at

I think altering RC to salvage chart in graveyard doesn't sound quite right. We have a loved cataloger specifically for maps that doesn't quite fit RC but still deserve to be archived. If we want to quickly put all those maps in a permanent place then we might want to make loved more accessible to those maps, not trying to push them into ranked section. And to be honest I think with the help of lvd team that process might just be way shorter than letting bns who are overwhelmed by requests to manually check maps one by one.

RC is quite broken, but fixing RC isn't a suitable way to address this graveyard issue.
Strongly agree with this.
Ventilo le vrai
138 posts
ed December 2018

_VianK_ wrote: 2a5s5j

You cannot lowering this VSRG standard just coz for saving other converted other VSRG. Tbh allowing for just using hitnormal already drop the ranked section quality for mania dropped so far. So please, don't totally ruin it.
Most of RC has no relation to quality, and if you think that the ranked section has high quality standards, you just don't know what is in the ranked section because some ranked maps are... what they are

_VianK_ wrote: 2a5s5j

Why not loved section?? That's perfectly suitable
Hmmmm I wonder if you know that only few maps get loved every months, in October we got 16 new loved maps and that's a huge improvement compared to what we were used to, but we can't put everything into the loved section because there is just to many good classic maps that can't be ranked.
_VianK_
786 posts
ed August 2015

Ventilo le vrai wrote: 3a221z

_VianK_ wrote: 2a5s5j

You cannot lowering this VSRG standard just coz for saving other converted other VSRG. Tbh allowing for just using hitnormal already drop the ranked section quality for mania dropped so far. So please, don't totally ruin it.
Most of RC has no relation to quality, and if you think that the ranked section has high quality standards, you just don't know what is in the ranked section because some ranked maps are... what they are //


_VianK_ wrote: 2a5s5j

Why not loved section?? That's perfectly suitable
Hmmmm I wonder if you know that only few maps get loved every months, in October we got 16 new loved maps and that's a huge improvement compared to what we were used to, but we can't put everything into the loved section because there is just to many good classic maps that can't be ranked.

i know... But thats back to the mapper mapping style, and you cannot blame them coz of that. But at least they care to fulfill the criteria.

Your second argument isn't makes sense tbh. If you can try to do this for ranked section, then put them to the loved section is more easier to do. I i think for this case there is should be special exetion since you're said asked by Peppy too.
Baio
35 posts
ed December 2019
I believe the mania ranking system has some big issues outside of just the requirements. A very giant issue with current system is that there are not enough BNs. Even if you managed to meet the extensive amount of rules and guidelines as well as the unwritten ones, finding a BN is still a massive roadblock. BN queues are closed more often than not. Found one that's open? Cross your fingers because they probably require you have another BN lined up. I think the requirements for becoming a BN should be more lenient so we can get more BNs. This would increase the number of open BN queues so going for ranked is even a possibility. Taiko has more BNs despite the fact mania is much larger. While I don't have as much experience with taiko, I would wager they don't have the same issues with ranking that taiko does.

I think the Quaver system is great example of what the ranking system can be. Quaver ranking has a focus on playability, not a large page a rules and regulations. If a map plays well and has no obvious reason for why it does not fit with the ranked category, why should it not be ranked? Being a BN in mania is a powerful position and it just feels like(from my outsider perspective) BNs are forced to have unreasonably high standards so that they don't lose their BN status. This negatively affects the community's perception of ranking a beatmap.

In my experience with trying to get a map ranked, I was told by other players numerous times to not even try for reasons such as: I don't have the right connections, I don't have enough experience (in other words, a long list of graveyarded beatmaps), and because it is too much work that it is not worth it. The first person I ever met who did not have disdain for the ranking process was a BN. Overall, the ranking community from what I have seen, is considered unapproachable by the average player.

Personally, I now go to Quaver if I want to get a map ranked. I still map and to Osu because I like the engine, the editor, and have more friends on Osu. If Peppy truly intends to purge the graveyard section, mania will take a serious hit, regardless of whether or not ranked gets fixed, although it would still be nice to address the issues with ranked. I agree that relaxed RC is a step in the right direction but I don't think it will solve any problems. Mainly, I think we simply need more BNs.
guden
160 posts
ed January 2018

Baiohazado wrote: 66196r

BNs are forced to have unreasonably high standards so that they don't lose their BN status. This negatively affects the community's perception of ranking a beatmap.
There's a lot to unpack here, but I feel like this is not the appropriate thread to be bringing up these issues. Nonetheless, I think it's important to bring up these claims as it's a popular opinion amongst the community that is so entirely misguided.

Baio

Baiohazado wrote: 66196r

BNs are forced to have unreasonably high standards so that they don't lose their BN status. This negatively affects the community's perception of ranking a beatmap.
This confuses me, what unreasonably high standards are BNs held to? The requirements right now can allow you to easily get through just by having mediocre modding ability and a decent amount of activity. Becoming a BN and staying as one, is not that hard, and I am saying this as someone who recently ed this year. They have even made it more accessible for current BNs to stay IN the BNG or return later. In my and many other's experiences, it is not difficult to ask for on your mods, ask for ways to improve and even seek guidance on learning such. There's even discord channels and entire programs dedicated to teaching mappers how to mod properly and how to improve to "BN quality level." If you think BNs are held to unreasonable standards, I'd like you to take a look at mods half of the BNG makes. I'd also like you to take a look at the ecosystem currently held in qualified -> rank and then reconsider what are these standards you speak of. At best, your claim is misguided and you failed to do much consideration of the current ranked ecosystem.

Baiohazado wrote: 66196r

I think the Quaver system is great example of what the ranking system can be...
This paragraph seems to not take into that Quaver's system has countless faults and a lot of their solutions to "osu!mania problems" are just band-aid fixes. I think it's ironic that you bring up Quaver's "focus on playability" since I've noticed over the years that Quaver's Ranking Supervisor team's goal is extremely inconsistent, even after talking directly with those who were involved with the team. The queue system of Quaver had it's fair share of issues as well, with it being extremely overloaded, charts taking MONTHS to even be looked at. Now imagine pulling that over to osu!mania, it would be even worse especially since there's a wider audience of people that migrate and start on osu!mania. I think it's obvious to tell that it would not end well.

It'd also be great if you could elaborate on the "large page a rules and regulations." This is very vague and I'm not quite sure what you're exactly referring to. The osu!mania specific ranking criteria? What rules specifically? Did you take into that most of the RC is guidelines and these guidelines can be broken if necessary? I feel like a lot of the community shares this misguided opinion on the RC being some sentient being that must be followed, and that it's super strict and long. When that's really not the case whatsoever.

If you're talking about the "high standard of quality" for osu!mania... I'd like you to again comb through what gets ranked each week. I think now, the quality of charts has improved on average... but it's not the standard. It's not even an unwritten rule, since some BNs will nominate extremely low quality charts. (I'd like to add that when I say quality, I'm also including the playablity factor as apart of it. Since mapping is more than just one aspect, it's multiple elements that come together to create a cohesive product).

I am not denying that osu!mania has problems with the current system, and I think there should be a lot more changes beyond this. osu!mania DOES need more BNs, but sacrificing quality over quantity is not the way to go. I'm all for promoting programs and helping mappers attain their goals of becoming a BN. But lowering the already low standards will create more problems, Quaver's history with ranked is a prime example of what we should NOT be doing.

Last thing I'd like to mention, please look at the the statistics before claiming that relaxation of spread will not solve any problems. This data clearly shows that it will create progress towards motivating more mappers to rank their charts. You can already see this with the influx of more well established charters starting to open up to ranking things after the hitsound addition requirement was removed. I'm sure with this, it will open up more charters that BNs want to push into the ranked section and allow BNs to reach a wider audience of whom they could not reach before. Again, one of the original problems is that well established charters did not want to push their charts into the ranked section. These proposals were done to hopefully solve this issue. The problem of it being difficult for new charters to get into the ranked system is an entirely different thread for an entirely different discussion (though these changes will certainly have some sort of impact on that issue).

Clearing up some misconceptions in the thread...

Please stop treating Loved as if it's some dumpster for maps that couldn't make it to rank for XYZ reason. That's literally not the goal of loved, and I'm sure the loved team has reiterated this over and over again. Loved has it's OWN goal separate from Ranked, so treat them that way please.

I think some people in this thread failed to read the original threads as a lot of these topics are being brought up again despite already having previous discussion on such. An example is..

richardfeder wrote: 2y5at

If we want to quickly put all those maps in a permanent place then we might want to make loved more accessible to those maps


Peppy confirmed that this was his original goal for ranked though, and it's something that is still relatively true to this day. And again Loved has it's OWN separate goal aside from ranked, so stop treating them as if they are similar.

As for the overall thread, I think the consensus from both the survey results and the arguments throughout the thread is that there's strong reasonings for relaxation, and also for wanting removal entirely. Sometime in the very near future a new proposal thread should be posted that hopefully reaches a middle ground for this. It has been discussed in the BN server amongst the mania BNG to create a new proposal that is hopefully more guided by the overall community's interests.
Last edited by guden , edited 5 times in total.
_VianK_
786 posts
ed August 2015
if this really applied, i hope it doesn't last longer. I very scary if the beginner player don't have any new ranked diff to play in the future. Thats why i strongly reject this proposal.
Last edited by _VianK_ , edited 1 time in total.
abraker
Global
8,355 posts
ed July 2014
Topic Starter

_VianK_ wrote: 2a5s5j

if this really applied, i hope it doesn't last longer. I very scary if the beginner player don't have any new ranked diff to play in the future. Thats why i strongly reject this proposal.
You can't possibly think that there will not be any new diffs for beginners to play. For that to happen
  1. The BN need collectively agree to reject spreads that have diffs for beginner players. This is like wtf levels of not ever happening.
  2. All mappers need to never map difficulties for beginner players. This is very unlikely to happen. BN can also bias toward ranking easier diffs by prioritizing checks for spreads containing them.
Can we expect less easier difficulties? Yes. That's expected. Will there be a content drought of easier difficulties? Not likely.

there is a content drought of extreme diffs but it seems nobody seems to bat an eye for that
_VianK_
786 posts
ed August 2015

abraker wrote: 5u2f3m

_VianK_ wrote: 2a5s5j

if this really applied, i hope it doesn't last longer. I very scary if the beginner player don't have any new ranked diff to play in the future. Thats why i strongly reject this proposal.
You can't possibly think that there will not be any new diffs for beginners to play. For that to happen
  1. The BN need collectively agree to reject spreads that have diffs for beginner players. This is like wtf levels of not ever happening.
  2. All mappers need to never map difficulties for beginner players. This is very unlikely to happen. BN can also bias toward ranking easier diffs by prioritizing checks for spreads containing them.
Can we expect less easier difficulties? Yes. That's expected. Will there be a content drought of easier difficulties? Not likely.

there is a content drought of extreme diffs but it seems nobody seems to bat an eye for that

I know, but actually happen is the lower diff is created just only for completing the rule since the most of mapper are enjoying to make higher diff only. If this is not exist anymore, they would said "why we should make lower diff? We can just go with single diff or why we should care of lower even we don't enjoy the map, etc." Because of that, the easier diff Will slowly disappeared and make this VSRG Will not beginner any friendly anymore.

Even the BN try to collecting to nominate full spread and single spread map, The ranked section in the future would be just dominated by single insane + diff. Since to find the map with the full of spread would be extremely rare.
abraker
Global
8,355 posts
ed July 2014
Topic Starter

_VianK_ wrote: 2a5s5j

abraker wrote: 5u2f3m

_VianK_ wrote: 2a5s5j

if this really applied, i hope it doesn't last longer. I very scary if the beginner player don't have any new ranked diff to play in the future. Thats why i strongly reject this proposal.
You can't possibly think that there will not be any new diffs for beginners to play. For that to happen
  1. The BN need collectively agree to reject spreads that have diffs for beginner players. This is like wtf levels of not ever happening.
  2. All mappers need to never map difficulties for beginner players. This is very unlikely to happen. BN can also bias toward ranking easier diffs by prioritizing checks for spreads containing them.
Can we expect less easier difficulties? Yes. That's expected. Will there be a content drought of easier difficulties? Not likely.

there is a content drought of extreme diffs but it seems nobody seems to bat an eye for that

I know, but actually happen is the lower diff is created just only for completing the rule since the most of mapper are enjoying to make higher diff only. If this is not exist anymore, they would said "why we should make lower diff? We can just go with single diff or why we should care of lower even we don't enjoy the map, etc." Because of that, the easier diff Will slowly disappeared and make this VSRG Will not beginner any friendly anymore.

Even the BN try to collecting to nominate full spread and single spread map, The ranked section in the future would be just dominated by single insane + diff. Since to find the map with the full of spread would be extremely rare.
This has a lot of assumptions and generalizations. Not all spreads mappers create have lower diffs created solely to satisfy the criteria.
Last edited by abraker , edited 1 time in total.
richardfeder
1,061 posts
ed March 2013

guden wrote: 5k294y

Clearing up some misconceptions in the thread...

Please stop treating Loved as if it's some dumpster for maps that couldn't make it to rank for XYZ reason. That's literally not the goal of loved, and I'm sure the loved team has reiterated this over and over again. Loved has it's OWN goal separate from Ranked, so treat them that way please.

I think some people in this thread failed to read the original threads as a lot of these topics are being brought up again despite already having previous discussion on such. An example is..

richardfeder wrote: 2y5at

If we want to quickly put all those maps in a permanent place then we might want to make loved more accessible to those maps


Peppy confirmed that this was his original goal for ranked though, and it's something that is still relatively true to this day. And again Loved has it's OWN separate goal aside from ranked, so stop treating them as if they are similar.
I am very confused by the direction of where this is going. Nobody treats Loved as some dumpster I don't know where did you get this sentiment. I am merely stating that in my opinion, regarding the whole graveyard issue we have better alternatives other than reshaping RC just to accommodate these specific maps. And I believe that Lvd teams are way more flexible dealing with this type of maps and can act way quicker than BNs who are already very occupied.

And everything above is irrelevant to the discussion in the thread. We are evaluating the potential drawback and aftermath of altering RC here, and while the graveyard issue provides a good starting point for us to reflect on current rules, it is not the only problem that we need to address. There are bigger implications in the changes that we are about to make beyond just getting awesome graveyard maps to ranked section, such as removing incentives for future mappers to provide entertainment to a wider audiences. My whole point of mentioning this in my post is that if we only want to solve the graveyard issue, there might be better options in my opinion, as changing RC affects way beyond just graveyard maps and I am concerned about its aftermath.
Last edited by richardfeder , edited 1 time in total.
_VianK_
786 posts
ed August 2015

abraker wrote: 5u2f3m

_VianK_ wrote: 2a5s5j

abraker wrote: 5u2f3m

_VianK_ wrote: 2a5s5j

if this really applied, i hope it doesn't last longer. I very scary if the beginner player don't have any new ranked diff to play in the future. Thats why i strongly reject this proposal.
You can't possibly think that there will not be any new diffs for beginners to play. For that to happen
  1. The BN need collectively agree to reject spreads that have diffs for beginner players. This is like wtf levels of not ever happening.
  2. All mappers need to never map difficulties for beginner players. This is very unlikely to happen. BN can also bias toward ranking easier diffs by prioritizing checks for spreads containing them.
Can we expect less easier difficulties? Yes. That's expected. Will there be a content drought of easier difficulties? Not likely.

there is a content drought of extreme diffs but it seems nobody seems to bat an eye for that

I know, but actually happen is the lower diff is created just only for completing the rule since the most of mapper are enjoying to make higher diff only. If this is not exist anymore, they would said "why we should make lower diff? We can just go with single diff or why we should care of lower even we don't enjoy the map, etc." Because of that, the easier diff Will slowly disappeared and make this VSRG Will not beginner any friendly anymore.

Even the BN try to collecting to nominate full spread and single spread map, The ranked section in the future would be just dominated by single insane + diff. Since to find the map with the full of spread would be extremely rare.
This has a lot of assumptions and generalizations. Not all spreads mappers create have lower diffs created solely to satisfy the criteria.
Let's see whats happen in the future then.
Last edited by _VianK_ , edited 1 time in total.
abraker
Global
8,355 posts
ed July 2014
Topic Starter
Archiving due to inadequate for the proposal.

Decision is split, but more in favor of not removing spreads completely. Leading argument for why not to remove spreads completely is the lack of easier difficulties it is believed that will cause.

This has been superseded by community/forums/topics/1440933
Please sign in to reply.

New reply 3p1g1j

0
1 / 80