[xXOpkillerXx]

Originally Posted by Dynam0

My main concern with that approach is pattern manipulation and stamina. Getting those right would be a tough ask imo. I still think it is far less tedious to have subjective difficulty assignments and as Rob said we just need to get the decay part correct. It's not incredibly far off at this point.

Can you give me specific examples ? Either from actual files or just made up sections ? It's hard to get into details without concrete examples.

PS: I already have computed the manipulatable sections mostly. That's dealt with by accounting for the number of frames you have to hit singles as jumps (1 frame being harder to manip, 2 frames is most likely a jump). As for stamina, I explained a basic framework for it; what would you disagree with ?

Edit: I also disagree with "it's not incredibly far off"; far off what ? The only thing the current system can hope to reach is optimal subjective consensus (as in the most people who agree with the difficulties). While that isn't a bad metric per se, it is inevitably flawed and biased, and doesnt solve the problem: variable decay is still just a decay, it doesnt fully compensate for chart structure, it just covers cases where the distribution of ordered note difficulty ressembles one unique function with a modifyable decay. The truth is there can be many more shapes to that distribution.