{"content":"\n \n \n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n <\/span>\n <\/div>\n \n Hivie<\/a>\n\n \n osu!taiko Paragon\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n \n <\/i>\n <\/div>\n <\/a>\n\n \n <\/i>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n <\/span>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n <\/span>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n 1,051 posts\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n\n \n ed March 2019<\/strong>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n \n \n \n Topic Starter\n <\/span>\n <\/div>\n \n \n Hivie<\/a>\n\n \n 2022-02-12T22:29:25+00:00<\/time>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n i like ikin's wording too<\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n \ua4b0\u2022 \u032b \u2022\ua4b1<\/span><\/div>\n <\/div>\n \n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n thereal8tsu<\/a>\n\n \n \n \n \n <\/span>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n <\/span>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n 7 posts\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n\n \n ed July 2021<\/strong>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n \n \n \n thereal8tsu<\/a>\n\n \n 2022-02-12T22:32:42+00:00<\/time>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n I think too that's Hivie's wording is better although it might better to precise what \"consecutive break\" with a sentence in the Ranking criteria's glossary.<\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n <\/span>\n <\/div>\n \n Hivie<\/a>\n\n \n osu!taiko Paragon\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n \n <\/i>\n <\/div>\n <\/a>\n\n \n <\/i>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n <\/span>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n <\/span>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n 1,051 posts\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n\n \n ed March 2019<\/strong>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n \n \n \n Topic Starter\n <\/span>\n <\/div>\n \n \n Hivie<\/a>\n\n \n 2022-02-12T22:34:42+00:00<\/time>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n \"consecutive breaks\" seem pretty self-explanatory to me, plus it's gonna be difficult to fully explain it without using pictures, which the RC can't have.<\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n \ua4b0\u2022 \u032b \u2022\ua4b1<\/span><\/div>\n <\/div>\n \n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n Burak<\/a>\n\n \n \n \n \n <\/span>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n <\/span>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n 202 posts\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n\n \n ed October 2018<\/strong>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n \n \n \n Burak<\/a>\n\n \n 2022-02-12T22:37:57+00:00<\/time>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n I think I got your idea. It's fine for me if it will still count as a viable solution for the structure problems as you say. Still think it looks too strict counting it as an \"exception\" to be honest, if it's \"fine\/acceptable\" it should be fine to call it as an alternative method instead of calling it an exception for a condition. Calling it an alternative is already putting the new method under the 3\/2 breaks.<\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n <\/a><\/div>\n <\/div>\n \n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n thereal8tsu<\/a>\n\n \n \n \n \n <\/span>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n <\/span>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n 7 posts\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n\n \n ed July 2021<\/strong>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n \n \n \n thereal8tsu<\/a>\n\n \n 2022-02-12T22:49:32+00:00<\/time>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n Hivie wrote:<\/h4>\"consecutive breaks\" seem pretty self-explanatory to me, plus it's gonna be difficult to fully explain it without using pictures, which the RC can't have.<\/blockquote>Although it probably sounds self explanatory for most of people, some might understand it differently than others which would make this whole guideline way less useful. An example of different understandings that might happen is that some understand consecutive break as break that are contained on the equivalent of 4\/1 while others might understand as break that have less of 2 notes between them<\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n roxorotto<\/a>\n\n \n \n \n \n \n <\/span>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n 70 posts\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n\n \n ed June 2020<\/strong>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n \n \n \n roxorotto<\/a>\n\n \n 2022-02-12T23:00:02+00:00<\/time>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n ikin5050 wrote:<\/h4>suggestion: At least 1 rest moment that is 3\/2 or longer should be inserted after 16\/1 to 20\/1 of continuous mapping.<\/strong> An exception can be made if the song's structure would lead to counter intuitive 3\/2 rest moments. In this case you can use 3 consecutive 1\/1 length rest moments<\/strong> instead as a substitute.<\/blockquote>'exception' implies it should be used rarely under special circumstances, which for newer mappers will not only be misleading but also against what this post is attempting to forward, no? I think something more like 'an alternative break usage could be used' if the song's... rest moments would be more open wording. might also be nitpicking.<\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n <\/span>\n <\/div>\n \n Hivie<\/a>\n\n \n osu!taiko Paragon\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n \n <\/i>\n <\/div>\n <\/a>\n\n \n <\/i>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n <\/span>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n <\/span>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n 1,051 posts\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n\n \n ed March 2019<\/strong>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n \n \n \n Topic Starter\n <\/span>\n <\/div>\n \n \n Hivie<\/a>\n\n \n 2022-02-12T23:04:57+00:00<\/time>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n I still think that 3\/2 breaks are the primary ones you should try going for, and 3x1\/1 just serves as a substitute for when 3\/2 doesn't fit at all.this proposal isn't aiming to remove 3\/2 out of the picture, and I think that making 3\/2 and 3x1\/1 \"equal\" in priority (by making the 3x1\/1 as an alternative instead of an exception) would be a step towards that direction which isn't the goal at all (and frankly shouldn't be).making it an exception seems like the best way forward with this.<\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n Last edited by Hivie<\/a> 2022-02-12T23:05:18+00:00<\/time>, edited 1 time in total.\n <\/div>\n \n \n \ua4b0\u2022 \u032b \u2022\ua4b1<\/span><\/div>\n <\/div>\n \n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n Cynplytholowazy<\/a>\n\n \n \n \n \n <\/span>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n <\/span>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n 364 posts\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n\n \n ed January 2014<\/strong>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n \n \n \n Cynplytholowazy<\/a>\n\n \n 2022-02-12T23:14:52+00:00<\/time>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n Think if the guideline are to be updated to allow 3 consecutive 1\/1 as alternative break that guideline should have a stress on the consecutive 1\/1s only if<\/strong> the primary 3\/2 break is not intuitive in the mapas for what is intuitive and what's not, BNs should be able to figure that out themselvesonly concern is new mappers who look at this guideline and don't understand what is \"counter-intuitive\" and simply just use 1\/1 breaks so you might have to elaborate more on that as well<\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n Last edited by Cynplytholowazy<\/a> 2022-02-12T23:16:55+00:00<\/time>, edited 1 time in total.\n <\/div>\n \n \n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n hac<\/a>\n\n \n \n \n \n \n <\/span>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n 152 posts\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n\n \n ed July 2020<\/strong>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n \n \n \n 3y274k