{"content":"\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 2018-06-26T13:50:11+00:00<\/time>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n Before tackling the removal of the 2-diff count ruleKibbleru wrote:<\/h4>For non-osu! game modes in hybrid mapsets that feature osu! difficulties, the lowest difficulty cannot be harder than a Hard<\/blockquote>I propose we do something more along the lines ofFor non-osu! game modes in hybrid mapsets that feature osu! difficulties, the lowest difficulty must at least be one difficulty higher than the osu!std requirements<\/strong><\/blockquote><\/blockquote>I think it is really clear that converts, specially for mania and taiko, aren't good enough so that a standard H converts to a proper H in other modes. So having a ENH standard spread + an I taiko is something you won't find much agreement on, IMO. Even for catch, that was considered to have decent converts, we've been recently moving towards converted diffs being less valuable. A few years ago standard spreads + a catch X was rankable. A while back it was changed so you required at least an I catch difficulty. And just a couple months ago we made it so the lowest diff you can need in a hybrid mapset with standard difficulties is a H. This proposed change is a step back. =======Now, onto the 2-diff count rule.UndeadCapulet wrote:<\/h4>\"single diff mapsets wouldnt feel like mapsets\"people are already well accustomed to single diff mapsets because marathon sets get ranked like every day, there will be no difference. its not like the average really think \"mapset = a set of maps\" anyway, they just play diffs they find, no reason to bar this from ing because of a weird pseudo-technicality<\/blockquote>A single player will usually play a single diff from a mapset. But when you take a larger group of players, the same thing doesn't apply.UndeadCapulet wrote:<\/h4>\"i could make just a 1 minute normal and rank it\"yeah and you can make a 1 minute EN set right now and rank that, there's basically 0 difference in effort or value. 2diff requirement doesn't keep people from making stupid sets, and it doesn't even discourage it. changing this to a single diff requirement will not encourage it any further because people don't really like to make stupid sets anyway, or else we'd see a lot more of them rn<\/blockquote>This is assuming a couple things that are just wrong. First, you're calling EN spreads inherently effortless and stupid. From my experience in catch, not many people know how to make a really good N diff from the start (actually, N are the diff my mods are usually the longest). Is that diff effortless? I don't think so. Seconly, requiring only 1 diff won't stop those that want to pull \"stupid\" EE or EN in their attempt to be the next memelord. Those types of \"meme\" spreads won't be affected at all, yet it is one of the reasonings most of you have used in favor of removing the 2-diff count rule.I do understand that there are some songs that are so calm\/slow that you can't make a significant difference between two diffs and that those are affected by the 2-diff count rule. However, that's a really niche case and, as such, removing the rule as a whole is not necessary. I proposed a thing a while back that got swiftly ignored, and which was a pretty decent middleground, which I'll state again at the end of the post.UndeadCapulet wrote:<\/h4>\"2 diffs promotes variety\/appeals to more players\"except EE\/NN\/HH\/II are all rankable and do not promote either of those things. in fact of all the listed sets the ones we have ranked right now are EE and NN....<\/blockquote>As I said a couple paragraphs above, removing the 2-diff rule won't prevent EE\/NN\/HH\/II from happening.I also read that those who want to map more diffs, for whatever reason (they like the song, they want to cater to a larger playerbase, etc.) can do so. That will happen whether the 2-diff rule is there or not. So, basically, the removal of the 2-diff rule just caters to two groups of people: those mapping songs that are so slow\/calm that making 2 noticeably different difficulties is hard or imposible, and those that are lazy. Personally I don't think we should cater to the second group. As for the first group, there is a simple solution:MOVING THE 2-DIFF RULE TO GUIDELINES<\/span><\/strong>MOVING THE 2-DIFF RULE TO GUIDELINES<\/span><\/span><\/strong>MOVING THE 2-DIFF RULE TO GUIDELINES<\/span><\/span><\/strong>MOVING THE 2-DIFF RULE TO GUIDELINES<\/span><\/span><\/strong>MOVING THE 2-DIFF RULE TO GUIDELINES<\/span><\/span><\/strong>If you can judge whether a EE or EN spread is stupid, as you so called them in your post, you're equally capable of judging whether a song really doesn't allow for a 2nd diff.<\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n tatatat<\/a>\n\n \n \n \n \n \n <\/span>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n 923 posts\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n\n \n ed March 2015<\/strong>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n \n \n \n tatatat<\/a>\n\n \n 2018-07-06T21:13:55+00:00<\/time>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n I agree. Requiring at least 2 diffs is perfectly reasonable, thats what sets apart a marathon from a reasonable spread.<\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n ~with peace and love, tata~<\/span><\/div>\n <\/div>\n \n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n Mun<\/a>\n\n \n \n \n \n \n <\/span>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n 469 posts\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n\n \n ed July 2015<\/strong>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n \n \n \n Mun<\/a>\n\n \n 2018-07-09T17:18:58+00:00<\/time>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n I don't see what the case is for exploitation of removal of the 2-diff rule is.\n\nIf you do not want to see stupid single-diff R3 music box ringtone size sets in ranked, then the solution isn't to outlaw them - it's to encourage the BNs and QATs who actually have the privilege and right to decide whether they get to ranked or not to stop the low-effort content that adds nothing from getting into the ranked section. \n\nWe shouldn't be disallowing content we don't like, that's exactly the wrong mentality to have. This is why I somewhat agree with ZiRoX on this one - move it to guidelines - although I disagree that it should only be allowed in clearly defined niche cases.\n\nI'm more concerned that requiring 2 diffs encourages behavior like putting no effort into a secondary diff. Not requiring diffs that are generally unnecessary and don't fill any specific purpose means less work for mappers, less detritus in the ranked section, less work for BNs checking the maps, and quite likely more good content, and a greater variety of good content<\/strong>. Time that is not spent, but wasted on mapping or trying to find a GD for a second difficulty required for no good reason by RC could be better spent making more maps, modding other people's maps, or even just looking for BNs to check and nominate their single diff set.<\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n Last edited by Mun<\/a> 2018-07-10T18:57:59+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 <\/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 2018-07-10T03:38:49+00:00<\/time>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n That's precisely why I'm suggesting that the rule is moved to guidelines instead. For those songs that it is really hard to make a difference between 2 diffs, which is a really edge and niche case, you're still allowed to rank 1-diff mapsets provided you can actually justify that. Allowing 1-diff sets for this sole reason is going completely overboard.<\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n Last edited by ZiRoX<\/a> 2018-07-10T03:40:00+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 <\/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 2018-07-10T04:20:47+00:00<\/time>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n completely agree with ziroxbtw, this spread idea has gone from the diff requirements at different lengths being adjusted, which i ed, to removing the two-diff rule and changing things with hybrids, which i really can't at all. we're taking a step back with the additional proposals being made in my opinion, when we could easily be ing the changes to the length for lowest difficulties like it was originally intended.<\/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 Xinnoh<\/a>\n\n \n Elite Mapper\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n \n <\/span>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n <\/span>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n 1,964 posts\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n\n \n ed April 2014<\/strong>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n \n \n \n Xinnoh<\/a>\n\n \n 2018-07-10T07:52:20+00:00<\/time>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n Regarding why we use minimum drain time, why not just replace it with minimum lengthThere's been plenty of cases where it would be preferable to have a break in a low intensity section, but having one prevents reaching the minimum drain. In some cases, it even feels overdone to map sounds for that section, but there's no way around it.Imo all diffs should be allowed to use breaks since the player's total play time is unaffected,Something like that would let marathons that are 5:01 give players recovery, 5 minutes without breaks is not fun for anyone and is just bad game design.editok so just have at least 80% of time must be mapped, problem solved?<\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n Last edited by Xinnoh<\/a> 2018-07-14T05:35:17+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 tatatat<\/a>\n\n \n \n \n \n \n <\/span>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n 923 posts\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n\n \n ed March 2015<\/strong>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n \n \n \n tatatat<\/a>\n\n \n 2018-07-10T11:36:24+00:00<\/time>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n I don't agree Sinnoh. That could be abused to have less than 10 seconds of actual draintime, like a 1 minute map with 50 seconds of breaks. That'd be horrible. A minimum of 30 seconds of drain time is perfectly reasonable. Also there isn't much use for a break in a 30 second map. Its over very quickly. Also how could you reasonably measure length? From the start of the audio file to the end of it? From the first object to the end of the audio file? From the first sound to the last sound? What if at least 20% of the outro isn't mapped? What if the mapper decides to have 40% of the song be an unmapped intro to beef up the length? It seems abusable.About the 2 diff rule, I still think it should stay. Even with simple r3 music box songs, its always possible to make at least two different diffs if the mapper actually tries. Its also not an issue in any other gamemode besides osu!std. There can be full 3-4 diff spreads out of a r3 music box song in taiko\/ctb\/mania. If the mapper actually tries to represent different rhythms in a song, they can easily make at least 2 diffs. One of you gave an example of a two diff r3 music box spread with only a 1 object difference between the two diffs. Thats just a bad spread because of the mapper.<\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n ~with peace and love, tata~<\/span><\/div>\n <\/div>\n \n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n Mun<\/a>\n\n \n \n \n \n \n <\/span>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n 469 posts\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n\n \n ed July 2015<\/strong>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n \n \n \n Mun<\/a>\n\n \n 2018-07-10T18:59:40+00:00<\/time>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n oh come on tatatat stop saying the same thing over and over again and not even acknowledging anything that's been said to the contrary\n\n\"that could be abused,\" is not a usable argument, nor is \"a mapper can make multiple diffs if they try!\" and the reasons why this is have been explained for you several times.<\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n Last edited by Mun<\/a> 2018-07-10T19:18:11+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 <\/span>\n <\/span>\n <\/div>\n \n Okoayu<\/a>\n\n 68501d