{"content":"\n \n \n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n Pennek<\/a>\n\n \n \n \n \n \n <\/span>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n 493 posts\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n\n \n ed December 2013<\/strong>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n \n \n \n Pennek<\/a>\n\n \n 2018-04-27T16:29:29+00:00<\/time>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n As I see itCurrent System: Blatant cut-off --> Alienates a lot of mappers. (makes me not want to rank or map it at all, just because it's 4:30 or 4:50.)New System: Gradual cutoff with a lower\/difficulty spreadIn general , there will be less workload for mappers who want to map long songs, which do not fit with the current Ranking Criteria. This also means that there will be more content for mappers to choose from, because as it is now, it can't be denied that some tracks just are a lot more troublesome to rank. This turns a lot of mappers off from ranking those songs (me included). If the changes are made, this will help introduce more new content to the game in general. BUT, this won't help new players as much, and it is undeniable that there will be less content for them as mappers who in the current system map 2-3 minute songs with a full spread, switch to longer songs that do not require a full spread.This is a trade-off --> More content in general vs. Less content for new players. (how much less content is debatable)Imo. this trade-off is fine. It isn't like everyone is just going to stop mapping their favorite anime TV-openings, their favorite FELT-songs and maps which are less than 3 minutes long. This will just bring more content for mappers to map, bring more new mappers in because they can map their favorite songs easier and bring more content to the game. If anything, not being able to play a song because you can only play Normals at the moment, and you have that one song you really like, which is a HIX-spread, should motivate you to become better at the game. I really don't understand why this has become an 8-page discussion. I fully the proposal.<\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n Akareh<\/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 771 posts\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n\n \n ed February 2010<\/strong>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n \n \n \n Akareh<\/a>\n\n \n 2018-04-30T17:26:45+00:00<\/time>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n I dislike mapping short vers\/TV sizes, so I'm in favor of this, for what that may be worth.As far as the cut goes, AncuL's proposal seems the most reasonable to me. The song length proposal could also work if it was a gradual cut. Having NH be something like 2 minutes while I or X is 4:30 seems pretty unreasonable to me.I could see something like a 2 minute N, a 3:smth H and a full 4:30 I work fine for a spread, though. We could maybe limit that via % of song that has to be mapped or something along those lines. Still, more in favor of less difficulties but everything in the set having same length, personally.<\/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 pimp<\/a>\n\n \n \n \n \n \n <\/span>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n 1,417 posts\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n\n \n ed April 2010<\/strong>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n \n \n \n pimp<\/a>\n\n \n 2018-05-01T16:22:12+00:00<\/time>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n if the drain time is <3:30 your set's lowest diff must be normal or lowerif the drain time is 3:30-4:30 your set's lowest diff must be hard or lowerif the drain time is 4:30-5min your set's lowest diff must be insane or lower<\/blockquote>if the mapper picks a song that is 3 minutes long, he could easily eliminate the need of a normal difficulty by extending the song by 30 seconds, if he is not skilled enough to make a decent extention using only the original song he could just add harumachi clover to the mp3, there would be nothing preventing him from doing this... same applies for the other lengths to eliminate the need of the hard or insane...unless more specific rules are added for compilations like i said, the hard cut-off will be the only reasonable way for dividing ranked and approval.any song can be shortened if the mapper wants to do everything alone without guest difficulties.<\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n Skubi<\/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 865 posts\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n\n \n ed December 2013<\/strong>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n \n \n \n Skubi<\/a>\n\n \n 2018-05-02T10:09:41+00:00<\/time>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n I agree<\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n <\/span>\n <\/span>\n <\/span>\n <\/div>\n \n LwL<\/a>\n\n \n \n \n \n \n <\/span>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n 370 posts\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n\n \n ed November 2013<\/strong>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n \n \n \n LwL<\/a>\n\n \n 2018-05-02T10:30:47+00:00<\/time>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n pimpG wrote:<\/h4>unless more specific rules are added for compilations like i said, the hard cut-off will be the only reasonable way for dividing ranked and approval.\n\nany song can be shortened if the mapper wants to do everything alone without guest difficulties.<\/blockquote>\n\nBut it would remove a lot of the incentive to do so. You can not reasonably regulate extensions because you can then just call it a remix and it's allowed (it could<\/em> be left up to QAT discretion but that's just a recipe for drama tbh).\n\nThere's no benefit at having a hard cut off vs. a more gradual one. A hard cut-off makes certain song lengths far less desirable for mapping which is just bad for musical variety. \n\nThis isn't necessarily about making everything easier to rank (though I think that should be the way this goes), if it was \"3 diffs for >4 mins, 2 diffs for >5 mins, 1 diff for >6mins\" it'd still help with the problem, even though the workload for 5-6 minute maps would increase (by not that much if it just has to be one additional diff that's at least hard or below or something like that).<\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n pimp<\/a>\n\n \n \n \n \n \n <\/span>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n 1,417 posts\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n\n \n ed April 2010<\/strong>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n \n \n \n pimp<\/a>\n\n \n 2018-05-03T01:39:55+00:00<\/time>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n i don't even know why they allow compilations to get approved, osu! is probably the only relevant rhythm game that allows this... at least i don't seeing compilations in the other rhythm games i played. if exploitable rules are added, people will exploit them the weirdest ways as possible. they already exploit the current hard cut-off. we should be thankful that we are even allowed to get maps approved with only one difficulty, because having a spread on every map ranked would be the best for the community in general and especially the new players...<\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n Last edited by pimp<\/a> 2018-06-19T22:25:55+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 AncuL<\/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 1,114 posts\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n\n \n ed March 2013<\/strong>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n \n \n \n AncuL<\/a>\n\n \n 2018-05-03T14:13:05+00:00<\/time>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n LwL wrote:<\/h4>There's no benefit at having a hard cut off vs. a more gradual one. A hard cut-off makes certain song lengths far less desirable for mapping which is just bad for musical variety.<\/blockquote>\nthe first sentence is saying that there's no benefit while the second one tells that it has benefits. nice\n\nPimpG wrote:<\/h4>if the mapper picks a song that is 3 minutes long, he could easily eliminate the need of a normal difficulty by extending the song by 30 second<\/blockquote>\nyea but by then there's less urge to do that. there's a difference between having to map 4 other diffs compared to 1<\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n <\/span>\n <\/span>\n <\/span>\n <\/div>\n \n LwL<\/a>\n\n \n \n \n \n \n <\/span>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n 370 posts\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n\n \n ed November 2013<\/strong>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n \n \n \n LwL<\/a>\n\n \n 2018-05-04T19:08:04+00:00<\/time>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n AncuL wrote:<\/h4>LwL wrote:<\/h4>There's no benefit at having a hard cut off vs. a more gradual one. A hard cut-off makes certain song lengths far less desirable for mapping which is just bad for musical variety.<\/blockquote>\nthe first sentence is saying that there's no benefit while the second one tells that it has benefits. nice<\/blockquote>\n\nI don't see how having less variety is a benefit but ok<\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n Last edited by LwL<\/a> 2018-05-04T19:08:28+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 AncuL<\/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 1,114 posts\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n\n \n ed March 2013<\/strong>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n \n \n \n AncuL<\/a>\n\n \n 2018-05-05T04:55:14+00:00<\/time>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n I misunderstood sry<\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n <\/span>\n <\/span>\n <\/span>\n <\/div>\n \n LwL<\/a>\n\n \n \n \n \n \n <\/span>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n 370 posts\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n\n \n ed November 2013<\/strong>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n \n \n \n LwL<\/a>\n\n \n 2018-05-06T15:11:51+00:00<\/time>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n pimpG wrote:<\/h4>because having a spread on every map ranked would be the best for the community in general and especially the new players...<\/blockquote>\n\nI didn't see this before but I disagree with this almost entirely. Better for new players sure, hard to argue against that.\n\nBut overall? If that happened I can see myself losing interest in the game relatively quickly, it would mean very few long ranked maps, which happen to be the type I enjoy the most. It probably wouldn't even lead to more long difficulties<\/em> ranked overall (making one diff for 5 different songs is a lot less tedious than 5 diffs for the same song), and the number of different songs at that length getting ranked would almost certainly decrease significantly.<\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n Last edited by LwL<\/a> 2018-05-06T15:12:37+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 pimp<\/a>\n\n \n \n \n 1w6g3o