forum

[Proposal - osu!taiko] Break Time/SV Amendments

posted
Total Posts
34
show more
Topic Starter
Lumenite-

Okoratu wrote:

The scaling thing about rest moments being like typed out doesnt seem to make sense, it doesn't add anything. That's what it's supposed to state right now in the current criteria and is what gezo was saying - the breaks scale depending on tempo, writing out more values doesn't add information it's not written out to avoid running into this "oh my god there's 1500 hard set values in the RC that we have to follow now"


okay, but once again i bring up that the biggest motivation for this proposal is the fact that most people don’t really have any idea of how things scale when higher or lower than 180

that aside, assuming that those specifications were removed, would the new guideline be sufficient enough to accomplish the same sort of idea?
Nofool
I kinda agree with Gezo and Okotaru here, if anything setting more values would lower the "freedom" part of guidelines. The prob here is more about those who apply guidelines as if they were rules without considering the song's settings.

"Rhythm related guidelines and rules apply to approximately 180 BPM maps. If your song is drastically faster or slower, some variables might be different. Apply reasonable judgment in these cases."
This means common sense should be used for bpms that are higher or lower than 180. BNs and QATs exist to prevent the ranking system from being defined by values that can't cover all situations because of subjectivity. Thought from my personnal experience some members of these groups (Nardoxyribonucleic and Aloda, if not more) have a pretty mysterious way of "applying reasonable judgment in these cases".



What i understand from this is that it would be perfectly normal to apply the current values of guidelines for a very high bpm song even thought those guidelines were designed for songs around 180bpm. If i understood this correctly that is.
Topic Starter
Lumenite-
okay, so since most of you have come to the consensus that adding more specific guidelines isn't a great idea, let's just remove those additions from the time being, although the question still remains on how to give mappers a proper idea on how to scale breaks according to much higher or much lower bpms, since that knowledge seems to be lost in general

gezo also said this however:

Gezoda wrote:

Splitting breaks in half-values however is a good idea for some mappers usually use 7+1 beats for the basic skeleton - forcing a 2/1 break after two occurences of this just breaks the structure overall.


is this something we can all agree on?
Nofool
"Splitting breaks in half-values" sounds alright, thought it actually ignores one of the main issue we keep hearing about which is "continuous mapping". Isn't having more shorter breaks instead of less longer breaks like having no breaks at all for our current standards? It would be interesting to get more opinions from those who directly apply that mindset, as-in BNs and QATs. Afaik only 2 BNs answered here.
Topic Starter
Lumenite-
"by current standards" yes, you'd be right, by current standards that idea would be correct-but current standards aren't doing a good job of actually understanding what can be understood as straining for certain players of respective difficulties and instead just throw a guideline as a blanket for what is understood as straining

edit: continuous mapping as defined by the rc is any break shorter than 1/1, which is why that guideline or any variation of it was not applied to the oni
Topic Starter
Lumenite-
let me just clear up what's been changed up to this point:
  1. the addition of the following proposed rule in the general section:
    Use a lower base slider velocity for the Kantan and Futsuu in sets timed in a BPM faster than 300. You may apply a similar slider velocity to the Muzukashii and Oni if necessary.
  2. the revision of the 1.2x sv proposed guideline in kantan and futsuu to state the following:
    Use a lower base slider velocity in a BPM higher than 240.This is simply to ensure the readability of notes for beginners at higher BPMs.
  3. the removal of the following phrase from any proposed guideline:
    This can be adjusted to 8/1 or 12/1 in a BPM higher than 240, or 32/1 or 36/1 in a BPM lower than 140.

    new/possible ideas:
  4. since the biggest problem is the mapper's awareness that the guidelines are set in a 180bpm environment, it may be a good idea to end something along the lines of "Be sure to adjust these values in a BPM much higher or lower than 180." to the end of the break time guidelines. it may be redundant, but at least it is explicitly stated at the end of each guideline, hopefully avoiding the "i didn't know" excuse
  5. addition of a similar alternative break time guideline to the futsuu? i personally don't think it's necessary since finding a 2/1 break is normally very easy, but it does seem a bit weird to offer an alternative for k/m but not futsuu. perhaps using the same structure but "two (or three) 3/2 breaks after no longer than 8/1 of continuous mapping" may be a good idea?


:)

edit: removed one of the edits bc i think i was thinking about it wrong, sorry ab that
hikiko-
seconding the new edit and the two ideas
i'll take a closer look at everything later
DeletedUser_6637817
I agree with the edits although to say:

The Rule about lower base SV in kantans and futsuus should have added: "Or equivalent adjustment via inherited timing points".

Newer mappers should not face a wall like this when people come to them in their kantans saying "screw you make this 1.2 or ill punch you", some should be able to do it with green lines if they want to, people might find that easier to manage.
-Kazu-
I don't really have a clear opinion about the matter tbh, but I'd say the only time the rule is kinda wacky to follow is when the song isn't composed in 4/4 because that ends up making the breaks feel weird on their placements most the time
As for the using a "second ruleset" as you stated (like, instead of doing a 3/2 rest in muzu, doing continuous 1/1 for a while) I think is nice to limit at which point we can appeal to the "guideline" nature of these rules.
Backfire
I will agree with lower SV, that's what I've done in the past anyway lol
Realazy
definitely agree with those new substitutes for break times, as a newish taiko mapper i don't particularly have the reflexes to constantly check for breaks, so this helps out a ton.

also, since i'm only able to play up to muzu diffs at the moment, i find most of them to be really sparse and it doesn't really help with transitioning to oni diffs, so hopefully this'll lead to harder muzukashiis
Topic Starter
Lumenite-

Nepuri wrote:

I agree with the edits although to say:

The Rule about lower base SV in kantans and futsuus should have added: "Or equivalent adjustment via inherited timing points".

Newer mappers should not face a wall like this when people come to them in their kantans saying "screw you make this 1.2 or ill punch you", some should be able to do it with green lines if they want to, people might find that easier to manage.


i think that's a fair addition, though i'm reluctant to add it since newer mappers most likely would think using a greenline to change the sv of the entire diff would be a little bit too complicated (bc imo it is harder than just lowering the value in the timing section lol)

but a fair point nonetheless

-Kazu- wrote:

I don't really have a clear opinion about the matter tbh, but I'd say the only time the rule is kinda wacky to follow is when the song isn't composed in 4/4 because that ends up making the breaks feel weird on their placements most the time
As for the using a "second ruleset" as you stated (like, instead of doing a 3/2 rest in muzu, doing continuous 1/1 for a while) I think is nice to limit at which point we can appeal to the "guideline" nature of these rules.


another good point, but seeing as though the current criteria is set revolving a song in 4/4 (3/4 doesn't divide into 16 or 20, and 5/4 doesn't divide into 16), for 3/4 songs, as an EXAMPLE, it could be changed to 9/1 instead of 8/1 since 1 beat isn't too much extra.

:)
tatatat
Please do not forget that your proposal directly affects the current guideline:

The base slider velocity should be 1.40 throughout all difficulties of a mapset. This is to ensure optimal quantity of notes on the playfield, as well as the optimal distance of separation between different notes.

Please deal with this in your proposal. Thank you c:

Also, can you unnest the lists? its very disorientating to read. The comments at the end seem like they are part of the proposal, but the language used wouldn't be acceptable.
Topic Starter
Lumenite-

tatatat wrote:

Please do not forget that your proposal directly affects the current guideline:

The base slider velocity should be 1.40 throughout all difficulties of a mapset. This is to ensure optimal quantity of notes on the playfield, as well as the optimal distance of separation between different notes.

Please deal with this in your proposal. Thank you c:

Also, can you unnest the lists? its very disorientating to read. The comments at the end seem like they are part of the proposal, but the language used wouldn't be acceptable.


the guideline in question should simply be edited to say:
The base slider velocity should be 1.40 throughout all difficulties of a mapset timed slower than 240 BPM. This is to ensure optimal quantity of notes on the playfield, as well as the optimal distance of separation between different notes.

good thing to bring up, editing it a tiny bit will keep all the proposed sv guidelines coherent.

and uh no the separations are clearly divised by bolded headers, i'm not unnesting the lists lmao
tatatat

incandescence wrote:

tatatat wrote:

Please do not forget that your proposal directly affects the current guideline:

The base slider velocity should be 1.40 throughout all difficulties of a mapset. This is to ensure optimal quantity of notes on the playfield, as well as the optimal distance of separation between different notes.

Please deal with this in your proposal. Thank you c:

Also, can you unnest the lists? its very disorientating to read. The comments at the end seem like they are part of the proposal, but the language used wouldn't be acceptable.
the guideline in question should simply be edited to say:
The base slider velocity should be 1.40 throughout all difficulties of a mapset timed slower than 240 BPM. This is to ensure optimal quantity of notes on the playfield, as well as the optimal distance of separation between different notes.

good thing to bring up, editing it a tiny bit will keep all the proposed sv guidelines coherent.

and uh no the separations are clearly divised by bolded headers, i'm not unnesting the lists lmao
Can you include that change to the guideline in your main post? Thank you c:

(also why are they nested in the first place. its ugly)
Topic Starter
Lumenite-
since discussion has come to a halt for now, i'll restate all changes that have been discussed:

  1. the addition of a new guideline for break times in the kantan and muzukashii that states the following:

    As a substitute for the above guideline, you may insert no less than two 2/1 breaks after no longer than 8/1 of continuous mapping in a BPM equal to or lower than 180. This should give beginner players ample and frequent time to avoid strain. (Kantan)

    As a substitute for the above guideline, you may insert no less than two 1/1 breaks after no longer than 8/1 of continuous mapping in a BPM equal to or lower than 180. This should give intermediate players ample and frequent time to avoid strain. (Muzukashii)
  2. the revision of the of the 1.4x base sv guideline in the general section to state the following:
    The base slider velocity should be 1.40 throughout all difficulties of a mapset timed slower than 240 BPM. This is to ensure optimal quantity of notes on the playfield, as well as the optimal distance of separation between different notes.
  3. the addition of the following proposed rule in the general section:
    Use a lower base slider velocity in the Kantan and Futsuu for sets in a BPM equal to or higher than 300. You may apply a similar slider velocity to the Muzukashii and Oni if necessary.
  4. the revision of the 1.2x sv proposed guideline in kantan and futsuu to state the following:
    Use a lower base slider velocity in a BPM higher than 240. This is simply to ensure the readability of notes for beginners at higher BPMs.
  5. the removal of the following phrase from any proposed guideline:
    This can be adjusted to 8/1 or 12/1 in a BPM higher than 240, or 32/1 or 36/1 in a BPM lower than 140.
  6. the revision of the futsuu guideline not allowing more than 4 notes when the futsuu is the easiest difficulty to state the following:
    1/2 patterns should not be longer than five notes.


along with those discussed edits, the following ideas have yet to be discussed thoroughly:

  1. addition of a similar break time alternative to the futsuu, since one is not present in the current proposal
  2. reiterating that the guidelines are set with a 180bpm song in mind to the end of each break time guideline as oppose to just once throughout the entire RC to eliminate the "i didn't know" excuse
  3. revision of the lower base SV in kantans and futsuus to state that an equivalent adjustment using inherited timing points is allowed as oppose to changing the base SV of the difficulty.

for an easier to read, less cluttered version of the current already discussed edits, feel free to check out the google doc: click here

thank you all :)
tatatat

incandescence wrote:

since discussion has come to a halt for now, i'll restate all changes that have been discussed:

  1. the addition of a new guideline for break times in the kantan and muzukashii that states the following:

    As a substitute for the above guideline, you may insert no less than two 2/1 breaks after no longer than 8/1 of continuous mapping in a BPM equal to or lower than 180. This should give beginner players ample and frequent time to avoid strain. (Kantan)

    As a substitute for the above guideline, you may insert no less than two 1/1 breaks after no longer than 8/1 of continuous mapping in a BPM equal to or lower than 180. This should give intermediate players ample and frequent time to avoid strain. (Muzukashii)
  2. the revision of the of the 1.4x base sv guideline in the general section to state the following:
    The base slider velocity should be 1.40 throughout all difficulties of a mapset timed slower than 240 BPM. This is to ensure optimal quantity of notes on the playfield, as well as the optimal distance of separation between different notes.
  3. the addition of the following proposed rule in the general section:
    Use a lower base slider velocity in the Kantan and Futsuu for sets in a BPM equal to or higher than 300. You may apply a similar slider velocity to the Muzukashii and Oni if necessary.
  4. the revision of the 1.2x sv proposed guideline in kantan and futsuu to state the following:
    Use a lower base slider velocity in a BPM higher than 240. This is simply to ensure the readability of notes for beginners at higher BPMs.
  5. the removal of the following phrase from any proposed guideline:
    This can be adjusted to 8/1 or 12/1 in a BPM higher than 240, or 32/1 or 36/1 in a BPM lower than 140.
  6. the revision of the futsuu guideline not allowing more than 4 notes when the futsuu is the easiest difficulty to state the following:
    1/2 patterns should not be longer than five notes.
along with those discussed edits, the following ideas have yet to be discussed thoroughly:

  1. addition of a similar break time alternative to the futsuu, since one is not present in the current proposal
  2. reiterating that the guidelines are set with a 180bpm song in mind to the end of each break time guideline as oppose to just once throughout the entire RC to eliminate the "i didn't know" excuse
  3. revision of the lower base SV in kantans and futsuus to state that an equivalent adjustment using inherited timing points is allowed as oppose to changing the base SV of the difficulty.
for an easier to read, less cluttered version of the current already discussed edits, feel free to check out the google doc: click here

thank you all :)
Mister tacoman, your suggested guidelines for slider velocity leave a blindspot at 240 bpm. "The base slider velocity should be 1.40 throughout all difficulties of a mapset timed slower than 240 BPM." "Use a lower base slider velocity in a BPM higher than 240." neither one of these suggested guidelines have a "or equal to" one of them should be greater than or equal to/less than or equal to.


Also I think it would be a good idea to somehow combine "The base slider velocity should be 1.40 throughout all difficulties of a mapset timed slower than 240 BPM." and "Use a lower base slider velocity in the Kantan and Futsuu for sets in a BPM equal to or higher than 300."


Also probably my final suggestion, can you please make it more immediately clear what are rules and guidelines? Perhaps with rule and guideline headings? I believe it'll make discussion easier.
Topic Starter
Lumenite-

tatatat wrote:

Mister tacoman, your suggested guidelines for slider velocity leave a blindspot at 240 bpm. "The base slider velocity should be 1.40 throughout all difficulties of a mapset timed slower than 240 BPM." "Use a lower base slider velocity in a BPM higher than 240." neither one of these suggested guidelines have a "or equal to" one of them should be greater than or equal to/less than or equal to.


Also I think it would be a good idea to somehow combine "The base slider velocity should be 1.40 throughout all difficulties of a mapset timed slower than 240 BPM." and "Use a lower base slider velocity in the Kantan and Futsuu for sets in a BPM equal to or higher than 300."


Also probably my final suggestion, can you please make it more immediately clear what are rules and guidelines? Perhaps with rule and guideline headings? I believe it'll make discussion easier.


1st thing: okay, that can easily be edited, but adding that phrase makes things just a little bit more "wordy," and i'm trying to keep most things as simple as possible

2nd thing: yeah, but that'd be one long guideline

3rd: if you're discussing an RC proposal, you should already know what the two is-if this proposal goes as far as to need a final draft, or anything as such that will be published , then the definitions will be added
Nwolf
why is the break guideline for muzukashii so stupidly restrictive? 16/1 is... nothing. Gonna ignore 20/1 cause 5 bars of song is just w/e anyway. Muzukashiis are basically the starting point for maps to slowly being able to follow the music, the melody better, by allowing more consistent usage of 1/4. Not a lot of it, but more than Futsuu. And forcing a break after 16/1 of mapping is just restricting this so much, and the fact you can go for MUCH longer with MUCH shorter breaks in Oni is ridiculous - the jump from Futsuu (2/1 break after 16/1 of mapping) to Muzukashii (3/2 break after 16/1 of mapping - which in a lot of cases also sounds bad so it's not even a change in reality) is small. Is there any reason why a single section of a song - which is normally 32/1 - can't be mapped with 1/1 in Muzukashii when breaks before and afterwards are given?




And yes I'm salty
Okoratu
at one point in the draft it used to be 32/1

and then it wasnt and i forgot why

also the described 3/2 is very close to 1/1, so if a map uses predominantly 1/1 that should be able to compensate the absence of rest moments in comparison to more 1/2 heavy maps for any given section

re: oni - 1/1 is considered a rest there so oni suddenly are full of breaks usually
Topic Starter
Lumenite-

Okoratu wrote:

at one point in the draft it used to be 32/1

and then it wasnt and i forgot why

also the described 3/2 is very close to 1/1, so if a map uses predominantly 1/1 that should be able to compensate the absence of rest moments in comparison to more 1/2 heavy maps for any given section

re: oni - 1/1 is considered a rest there so oni suddenly are full of breaks usually


the hard set values y'all are speaking of were removed because a lot of people had concluded that hard-setting those values even more would just lead to less creative freedom, which is the opposite of what this proposal is trying to do

and unless i'm interpreting Nwolf's post wrong, i agree which is why this proposal is here @_@
Okoratu
archived after talking to incandescence, there'll be a new thread
Please sign in to reply.

New reply