{"content":"\n \n \n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n UndeadCapulet<\/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 1,100 posts\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n\n \n ed April 2013<\/strong>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n \n \n \n Topic Starter\n <\/span>\n <\/div>\n \n \n UndeadCapulet<\/a>\n\n \n 2018-06-10T03:03:14+00:00<\/time>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n they apply to non-standard modes, felt it best for spread rules to be consistent across all gamemodes<\/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 Ascendance<\/a>\n\n \n Elite Mapper\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 4,250 posts\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n\n \n ed July 2013<\/strong>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n \n \n \n Ascendance<\/a>\n\n \n 2018-06-10T03:05:08+00:00<\/time>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n alright, cool, was kinda confused on the wording since normally \"the lowest difficulty\" only considered standard-only stuff in the past. dunno how to word it any better tho<\/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 squirrelpascals<\/a>\n\n \n \n \n \n \n <\/span>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n 1,002 posts\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n\n \n ed March 2015<\/strong>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n \n \n \n squirrelpascals<\/a>\n\n \n 2018-06-10T04:04:55+00:00<\/time>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n UndeadCapulet wrote:<\/h4>@squirrel are only defined when they appear in the criteria. the marathon term doesn't ever appear in the new draft so there's no need to keep the definition. it was only defined because there was a rule for it, but now it's better to just standardize everything.<\/blockquote>Thats true. The main reasoning for this was because tha'ts still how the community will refer to those kinds of maps, like its part of a mapper lingo of some sort. I guess its similar to \"bubbles\" in v2 (theyre dead xd).UndeadCapulet wrote:<\/h4>can't combine the single\/hybrid sets the way you suggested bc the wording is very misleading. the current draft\/current rc are how they are for a reason(tho ive now noticed a poor wording in the current draft that'll be fixed)<\/blockquote>dont see why not tbh, both rules exactly say \"This spread must comply with its respective mode's difficulty-specific Ranking Criteria.\" The one change in wording for that elaboration would just be changing \"this spread\" to \"spreads.\" I don't think its a big deal but tbh it would be a lot more efficient and less repetitive so i still dont see why notUndeadCapulet wrote:<\/h4>@squirrelstratathat draft is discussing more than just the technical requirements of compilations, so it's prob best to keep it as its own thing<\/blockquote>If you're saying we should wait to include it (which in that case, I disagree), i think it should be added in as soon as we define \"song compilations\" in the criteria. Song choice and your reasonging for it acts as a backbone for a compilation. <\/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 Neto<\/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 1,310 posts\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n\n \n ed October 2014<\/strong>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n \n \n \n Neto<\/a>\n\n \n 2018-06-10T04:38:00+00:00<\/time>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n This rule proposal was mostly related to spread requirement but somehow is now about how to regulate audio. The matters are related but the second topic needs to be clearer in the way it will handle 4 different case scenarios;1-\tCut versions of original songs.2- Original song editions, such as timing fixes, looping sections, bpm modification, remixes, etc.3-\t2 different songs that are combined together for various reasons into one mp3, in this case, it could be two entire songs combined, or one section of a particular song with another full sized song, etc.4-\tSongs compilation, when three or more songs (or sections) are combined into one mp3.<\/div>For the first case I think the debate about cutting songs is pretty much resolved since peppy already mentioned that it\u2019s fine (still needs discussion imo). The concern about the second case wasn't specifically brought on the proposal, but mixed with the third case. So the discussion should be on the third and fourth case that were brought on the proposal.Song Extensions;<\/strong><\/u>The second case (music extension) in the new rule proposal, will be forbidden<\/u> according to;Song compilations must incorporate 3 or more songs. Using only 2 songs in a compilation is not a sufficient number of tracks to offer a compelling experience for players when compiled together, and should be broken up into separate mapsets.<\/blockquote>And The audio file of a song must not be artificially extended in order to meet a time limitation in the mapset section of this criteria. Illegal extensions include (but are not limited to) looping sections of the audio file, lowering the bpm of the song or section of the song, and adding small amounts of music to the song without incorporating it throughout the entire song.<\/blockquote>But allowed<\/u> according to;If the audio file is extended in such a way, the mapset must still comply with the time limitations of its unaltered audio.<\/blockquote>Leaving the contradiction itself, I don\u2019t really recommend banning the combination of two songs from being rankable since there are good results coming from that idea. Refer to; https:\/\/osu-ppy-sh.tvgratuite.org\/s\/346740<\/a>https:\/\/osu-ppy-sh.tvgratuite.org\/s\/430959<\/a>https:\/\/osu-ppy-sh.tvgratuite.org\/s\/627671<\/a>https:\/\/osu-ppy-sh.tvgratuite.org\/s\/654053<\/a>https:\/\/osu-ppy-sh.tvgratuite.org\/s\/673138<\/a>Using different songs from the same artist that blend well together, using different arranges of the same song to create an intro or outro for the original song, combining part I and part II of the same song, etc. The problem isn\u2019t the extension itself, but people forcing extensions\/song additions to meet a spread requirement, that is what resulted recently in very low quality mixes.To solve this problem we can actually re-word the following rule proposal;The audio file of a song must not be artificially extended in order to meet a time limitation in the mapset section of this criteria.<\/strong><\/blockquote>ToOnly the official song length will be considered in order to meet a time limitation in the mapset section of this criteria.<\/strong>Extensions and song additions are not considered for spread requirements, exception being songs compilation. Extensions include (but are not limited to) looping sections of the audio file, lowering the bpm of the song or section of the song, and adding small amounts of music to the song without incorporating it throughout the entire song are not considered for spread requirements. If the audio file is extended in such a way, the mapset must still comply with the time limitations of its unaltered audio.<\/blockquote><\/div>The intent here is that even if a person loops any part of the song or add another song in the mp3, the spread requirement will consider only the main song being mapped, the only expection being songs compilation.Songs compilation;<\/u><\/strong>Probably the topic with almost no consensus so far and a lot of discussion is happening on t\/756468<\/a> , so I\u2019ll probably just give suggestions regarding the re-wording of some stuff proposed. I agree with the definition brought on the glossary, I just think that it\u2019s slightly inconsistent with the rule proposal; Song compilations must incorporate 3 or more songs.<\/strong><\/blockquote>andSong Compilation:<\/strong> An audio file that features more than 2 different songs or sections of multiple different songs.<\/blockquote>The suggestion is to use the same number in both sections in the RC to make it simpler.Song Compilation:<\/strong> An audio file that features at least 3 songs or sections of multiple different songs.<\/blockquote><\/div>About the rule itself;Song compilations must incorporate 3 or more songs.<\/strong> Using only 2 songs in a compilation is not a sufficient number of tracks to offer a compelling experience for players when compiled together, and should be broken up into separate mapsets.<\/blockquote>We can remove the following explanation since it contradicts allowing the extensions when the rule is about songs compilation. All explanations of rules in the RC are supposed to be related to the first sentence and things like \u201cUsing only 2 songs [\u2026]should be broken up into separate mapsets.\u201d Doesn\u2019t relate to the topic of songs compilation.->while I was editing this a lot of discussion happened and I'm not sure if my concerns were adressed or not, sorry if anything here is doubled and resolved already.<\/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 ZiRoX<\/a>\n\n \n Elite Mapper\n <\/div>\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 1,053 posts\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n\n \n ed November 2009<\/strong>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n \n \n \n ZiRoX<\/a>\n\n \n 2018-06-10T05:08:48+00:00<\/time>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n I know the first rule applies to all modes as Ascendance asked about it, but the current wording doesn't make it clear if it applies to every mode in hybrid mapsets, which I think it should. For this reason, I suggest to change the wording to:\nIf the drain time of a song is...<\/strong>\n(the lower than 3:30 thing remains the same)<\/strong><\/li>...lower than 4:30, the lowest difficulty of each mode cannot be harder than a Hard.<\/strong><\/li>...lower than 5:00, the lowest difficulty of each mode cannot be harder than an Insane.<\/strong><\/li><\/ol><\/li><\/ol>\n\nThis would make it clear that you can't have, for example, a HI standard spread + an IX catch spread on a 3:30-4:30 song, which is what at least us catch people agreed a while ago.<\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n Last edited by ZiRoX<\/a> 2018-06-10T05:10:21+00:00<\/time>, edited 2 times in total.\n <\/div>\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 Ascendance<\/a>\n\n \n Elite Mapper\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 4,250 posts\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n\n \n ed July 2013<\/strong>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n \n \n \n Ascendance<\/a>\n\n \n 2018-06-10T05:10:20+00:00<\/time>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n ZiRoX wrote:<\/h4>I know the first rule applies to all modes as Ascendance asked about it, but the current wording doesn't make it clear if it applies to every mode in hybrid mapsets, which I think it should. For this reason, I suggest to change the wording to:If the drain time of a song is...<\/strong>...lower than 4:30, the lowest difficulty of each mode cannot be harder than a Hard.<\/strong><\/li>...lower than 5:00, the lowest difficulty of each mode cannot be harder than an Insane.<\/strong><\/li><\/ol><\/li><\/ol>This would make it clear that you can't have, for example, a HI standard spread + an IX catch spread on a 3:30-4:30 song, which is what at least us catch people agreed a while ago.<\/blockquote>+1 this, we just had a fiesta about this in #catch over confusing wording, this would help clear things up for those who weren't aware of it<\/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 UndeadCapulet<\/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 1,100 posts\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n\n \n ed April 2013<\/strong>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n \n \n 4pxc