Allow unclear paths for short sliders in osu! ranking criteria

[UberFazz]

Based on overwhelming support from https://osu.ppy.sh/community/forums/topics/1442020.

Mappers have been utilizing sliders that can be interpreted as "unrankable" (under the current RC) for a while now. These sliders have been long accepted by the general community as can be seen by the thread. The most common use for sliders like these are sliders that require no movement to FC, such as sliders present in this map. These are perfectly fair gameplay elements for Hard+ players due to their simplicity — they'll be FC'd no matter which way they're read even if they're technically "unreadable."

Other uses that could be interpreted as "unrankable" would be sliders like in Dialtone, which are a bit more complicated but have similar concepts. These sliders go in on themselves but play exactly like the sliders in the aforementioned map (edited for clarity).

I've moved the original rule from "general" to "difficulty-specific" for Easy and Normal difficulties. For Hard and Insane, the rule now contains an exception. For Expert, the exception is shortened to allow for more leniency.

[AJT127]

Agree

[yaspo]

I feel like some of these changes weren't properly discussed, so I posted on the discussion thread where it's appropriate
would like this pr to stay on hold until things are cleared up

[peppy]

The second slider there is absolutely shocking. It's basically hiding gameplay mechanics from the player. If this is to go ahead I will need to change how sliders are presented to the player, or change such sliders to act like hitcircles internally.

[peppy]

Block

[AJT127]

The second slider there is absolutely shocking. It's basically hiding gameplay mechanics from the player. If this is to go ahead I will need to change how sliders are presented to the player, or change such sliders to act like hitcircles internally.

What's the functional difference between this and something like https://i.imgur.com/KSaeQUJ.png or
https://i.imgur.com/vLnHfw9.png which are already completely allowed?

Also I'm not quite sure what you mean by changing such sliders to act like hitcircles internally - they are held for a while so surely they are more similar to sliders? They're just short.

[peppy]

Neither of those should be allowed.

[AJT127]

Could you elaborate? They both seem pretty playable especially if supported by the map

[Coppertine]

Neither of those should be allowed.

Note, map shown in question is in CS 10, the map is also using the lowest SV possible (0.4x SV with 0.1x). The intention is of a hold slider, the first slider which has no red anchors includes repeats.

[cl8n]

keep this thread to discussion of the proposed rule please. the sliders in #6263 (comment) are not affected by it

[peppy]

I don’t think these kinds of ranking criteria changes are in the best interest of the game with its current progression forward as we are rapidly iterating on game mechanics.

Sliders should be clearly readable as sliders, thus have a minimum track length to signify their object type.

Can we revisit this in six months?

[UberFazz]

I'd like to clarify the aim of this proposal. Under the current RC, any kind of ambiguous slider is disallowed, regardless of gameplay. This works well at prohibiting unreadable sliders, but has the side-effect of prohibiting sliders that are fully covered by the follow circle. These sliders are harmless; no matter which direction you go, you will SS the slider.

Here's a better example as to what kind of sliders this proposal aims to permit:

I've edited the original post for clarity.

I've updated wording as well to reflect this more clearly, but am waiting on more opinions from the forum thread before committing.

[cl8n]

@peppy I think you're misunderstanding what the proposal is for, that second screenshot in OP is showing a slider that's not only short (which is allowed by current RC) but also has a path that goes back and forth across itself before ending (not allowed by current RC).

the idea of the proposal that has wide support is that experienced players can easily read these sliders despite not technically having a clear path, so they should be rankable.

whether or not that particular example would have been mapped as a "hold note" or something given the option hasn't been part of the discussion

e: ok I said same thing as UberFazz lol, posted at same time

[peppy]

I’ll need to read further. But the second example should not be allowed in the first place, so may be good to fix that with a separate change (though I guess it’s pointless if the damage is already done..)

[UberFazz]

I've pushed another commit that clarifies the intention of the rule change after some more discussion.

To sum up the goal: Allow ambiguous sliders that would be unrankable by current definition, but can be sightread SS'd even with the ambiguity in mind. This includes short sliders that fully overlap themselves for Expert difficulties, and short sliders that have ambiguous directions from the slider head — such as triangle sliders — for Hard and Insane difficulties (both pictured in the original post).

We need this to go through because as it stands, people are ranking maps that constantly break this rule even though the rule doesn't account for situations like these.

[peppy]

This stuff is pretty shoddy but I'm going to absolve myself of decision making here, since it's already in a state I disagree with prior to these changes.

Unblocked from me but without approval.

unblocked

resolved

[cl8n]

uberfazz and I tried many ways to make this more technically accurate with the intention but it's kinda a pain to define this movement-related stuff better, and it's also difficult to present good example images/animations given how niche the boundaries of the rule are

may revisit it later but for now uberfazz, yaspo, and I agree this is at least good enough resolve RC thread and most mappers will understand the meaning anyway