{"content":"\n \n \n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n <\/span>\n <\/span>\n <\/div>\n \n Worthlessnut9<\/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 354 posts\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n\n \n ed May 2021<\/strong>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n \n \n \n Worthlessnut9<\/a>\n\n \n 2024-10-24T00:03:00+00:00<\/time>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n I think 4 min is already short for a map to be a single difficulty and now 30 seconds lower I feel this would make spreads even less common, that being said i don't give a plus or a minus<\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n Last edited by Worthlessnut9<\/a> 2024-10-24T00:03:40+00:00<\/time>, edited 1 time in total.\n <\/div>\n \n \n Worthless<\/div>\n <\/div>\n \n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n Ucitysm<\/a>\n\n \n \n \n <\/a>\n\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n <\/span>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n <\/span>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n 156 posts\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n\n \n ed July 2019<\/strong>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n \n \n \n Ucitysm<\/a>\n\n \n 2024-10-24T00:07:10+00:00<\/time>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n need+1<\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n \n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n <\/span>\n <\/span>\n <\/div>\n \n RandomeLoL<\/a>\n\n \n Nomination Assessment Team\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 292 posts\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n\n \n ed September 2015<\/strong>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n \n \n \n RandomeLoL<\/a>\n\n \n 2024-10-24T05:07:07+00:00<\/time>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n I'm going to be as reasonable as I can, unbiased by my personal preferences as a player\/mapper and position in the community.In short, I do (very partially to the point I'm neutral) agree with the change. However<\/strong> I believe it's important to contextualize that we do not have the same problems nor context that we found ourselves on the previous spread rule changes.I'm still not a fan of using the argument that \"low difficulty content already exists\"<\/em> because seeing new interpretations of already mapped songs (hopefully either to more modern standards or with different ideas) is always a net positive. It is also worth adding that the vast majority of the playerbase plays casually. These changes would inadvertently favour more active s. If history taught us anything though, just by reducing the thresholds or removing hitsounds, sets with those are still being made. Knowing that, I'm more willing to see how this pans out.However, if this change were to be put into effect and after some time the number of new content dropped by a substantial amount, I would be inclined to roll it back. All of this is being done under the precondition that there are willing mappers to push for spreads. If these were to stop and new players had a harder time coming by new sets, I'd roll the change.Whataboutisms aside, we can give this a fair shot given the positive traction it has garnered. So I'll endorse it with all of the above in mind.<\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n Last edited by RandomeLoL<\/a> 2024-10-24T11:44:05+00:00<\/time>, edited 1 time in total.\n <\/div>\n \n \n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n \n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n <\/span>\n <\/span>\n <\/div>\n \n gzdongsheng<\/a>\n\n \n Elite Nominator III\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n \n <\/i>\n <\/div>\n <\/a>\n\n \n <\/i>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n \n <\/span>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n 144 posts\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n\n \n ed July 2016<\/strong>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n \n \n \n gzdongsheng<\/a>\n\n \n 2024-10-24T05:56:18+00:00<\/time>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n Overall neutral with this proposal, but to just add a few points that haven't been mentioned\/discussed yet1)<\/strong> While understanding the purpose of making mapper's life easier, i'm trying to understand what's the \"final\" goal of it, since apparently we're not having the issue of in short of ranked map like years ago, and aiming to remove spread rule entirely is both unrealistic and not good for the game's core interestThat is a huge logic jump i know, and we can always just find the balance between those two, but the trend i noticed is that ppl is always trying to reduce it further and further, so hence why this question2)<\/strong> Give it a try and then roll back in the future sounds fine on paper, however it might not be really that smooth to do if community has been used to the \"easy way\", and it might do even more damage than just keeping it as it is now if said thing really happensSo while i'm not necessarily against the proposal, i'd really suggest to be cautious, and ideally some sort of survey like years ago should be done in place to get the general perception (there are already a lot of voice here but still majority of ppl won't even participate in the forum discussion)<\/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 snomi<\/a>\n\n \n Beatmap Nominator\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 150 posts\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n\n \n ed May 2019<\/strong>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n \n \n \n snomi<\/a>\n\n \n 2024-10-24T07:09:09+00:00<\/time>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n +1 but also totally agree with what randome is saying with if this proves to be a negative I see rolling it back as a good move<\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n mroow<\/div>\n <\/div>\n \n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n MJH<\/a>\n\n \n \n \n \n \n <\/span>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n 143 posts\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n\n \n ed January 2013<\/strong>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n \n \n \n MJH<\/a>\n\n \n 2024-10-24T07:09:28+00:00<\/time>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n instead we could apply a lax rule where it is needed really: having to have a reasonable difficulty gap in the spread. you all know this has been, and is barring certain songs so why not make it less of a requirement. beatmap nominators can still suggest a more complete<\/em> spread when it seems achievable.<\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n Last edited by MJH<\/a> 2024-10-24T07:10:45+00:00<\/time>, edited 1 time in total.\n <\/div>\n \n \n eminent physicist, polyglot classicist, prize-winning botanist, hard-biting satirist, talented pianist, good dentist too.<\/div>\n <\/div>\n \n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n lenpai<\/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 1,780 posts\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n\n \n ed December 2014<\/strong>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n \n \n \n lenpai<\/a>\n\n \n 2024-10-24T07:45:54+00:00<\/time>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n there is a rather signifcant amount of mappers on two sides who want to map spreads and those who push specialized \/ more difficult contentin this context, the proposal would be a very positive changethe concern i would raise is how would the change impact the mapping preferences of new \/ mappers? there is a balance to maintain between both preferences. Following this, i randome's idealets not forget, low to medium difficulty charts that make good use of new, in-season tracks makes all the difference for new players to step up and potentially contribute to the game. so just relying on the already existing low level content is counterproductive.sidenote: on the topic of spreading for I-X level diffs, we should open up the discussion of allowing \"spreads\" based on the raw difficulty of the chart rather than how I-X-X+ is coherent as a spread. This makes GDs a much more viable option when mappers at this level tend to have a concrete idea on how the song should be mapped. It can be difficult to scale spreads off certain styles of mapping.<\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n Last edited by lenpai<\/a> 2024-10-24T07:53:49+00:00<\/time>, edited 2 times in total.\n <\/div>\n \n \n \ua4b0\u232f\u0352\u2022 \u032b \u2022\u232f\u0352\ua4b1<\/div>\n <\/div>\n \n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n <\/span>\n <\/div>\n \n Scotty<\/a>\n\n \n Nomination Assessment Team\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n \n <\/i>\n <\/div>\n <\/a>\n\n \n <\/i>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n \n <\/span>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n 286 posts\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n\n \n ed October 2017<\/strong>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n \n \n \n Topic Starter\n <\/span>\n <\/div>\n \n \n Scotty<\/a>\n\n \n 2024-10-24T08:20:58+00:00<\/time>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n Ballistic wrote:<\/h4>As someone who generally maps easier stuff, this proposal would have affected literally half of my sets and knowing me, I would have 100% opted to making them single or 2 diff sets which is just pure laziness on my part so I disagree with the first point being made entirely. I'm happy those sets exist now, but at the time I would have 100% taken the easy road. Not all of us bloat sets with low effort lower diffs.<\/blockquote>the point is that there's nothing wrong with not wanting to make extra diffs, whether that feeling is because of laziness or any other reason. in an ideal scenario mappers would never have to make diffs they don't want to make, but that will not be practical for the health of the game. so this is why the proposal advocates for optimizing the current rules instead of outright removing them 5j5kd