Ingame Song Information

[rushyrulz]

For Hyrogashis Only.

[stavie33]

Didn't I suggest a For Experts Only category like, 30 pages ago and people said no?

[who_cares973]

probably not. people have suggested it well before you did

[qqwref]

It's a solid idea, so I'm not surprised people have suggested it before. It would provide a good place for all those "technical VCs" that are easier than the real FMOs but harder to PA than the real VCs... bleh.

I think we could potentially fit in five real difficulties after VC: current borderlines (FEO), solid FMOs, very high FMOs / low FGOs, higher FGOs, and then the 13s (distinguished by being extremely hard to FC). This sounds like a lot, but if you look at the progression of difficulties in something like Stepmania where a lot more hard files are available, I think it makes a lot of sense. Right now we kinda have too few difficulties at the top, with the result that the songs in each category are very spread out difficulty wise - you don't have people getting way better scores on high 6s than low 6s, but you definitely do when comparing high 11s and low 11s. The individual difficulties would feel a little empty, but that's fine - the point is to have a system that captures how hard songs are without too much fiddling over details.

[kjwkjw]

Originally Posted by qqwref

I think we could potentially fit in five real difficulties after VC: current borderlines (FEO), solid FMOs, very high FMOs / low FGOs, higher FGOs, and then the 13s (distinguished by being extremely hard to FC).

+1, this is a really good idea imo. Especially with so many people these days having more trouble transitioning from VC's to FMO's than any other difficulty, adding FEO would serve well as a preparatory step for getting Oni, etc. Not to mention that there have been a lot of songs recently that could fit this difficulty.

And to go a step further, we could have a few skill tokens for FEO songs so those players have something to work for while they're improving for that solid FMO AAA.

[Xx{Midnight}xX]

Can we please have Southern Cross put back to the spot on the FMO list where it belongs? Or you all gonna continue to be hard headed.

Just asking.

[Coolboyrulez0]

A 1-20 or 1-50 rating system seems to be the way to go.
[1-20, I would assume, is more likely and would most definitely resolve most difficulty disagreements, while 1-50 is unlikely, but optimal for judging difficulty]

Also a half-mechanized & formulaic, half-humanized input system for rating difficulty would be perfect to rate files. I think we really need a "Great Difficulty Reform" since it's been chaotic and unorganized for quite a while now and things really need to happen to reshape and reform the system or even more confusion and uncertainties will spawn.

[qqwref]

CBR: Thing is, while more numbers SOUNDS better, I don't really see any reason to mess with the difficulties of the lower songs (except shifting a few individual songs up or down one). There's just not enough difference between a low 6 and a high 6 (or any other number up to 8 or so) to justify that. Also, changing the system a lot (using a 1-50 or 1-99 system) would mean that a huge amount of work would have to be done to re-rate every single song in the game. Adding some extra difficulty ranges for the higher songs, however, would be less work but also more useful.

Xx{Midnight}xX: Absolutely not, putting Southern Cross as FMO made perfect sense a year ago, but now that there are a lot of significantly harder VCs out there, it doesn't make sense to move it up.

[Plan_Bsk81127]

Originally Posted by Xx{Midnight}xX

Can we please have Southern Cross put back to the spot on the FMO list where it belongs? Or you all gonna continue to be hard headed.

Just asking.

Nope

[HoneyMelonCalibrator]

Originally Posted by kjwkjw

+1, this is a really good idea imo. Especially with so many people these days having more trouble transitioning from VC's to FMO's than any other difficulty, adding FEO would serve well as a preparatory step for getting Oni, etc. Not to mention that there have been a lot of songs recently that could fit this difficulty.

And to go a step further, we could have a few skill tokens for FEO songs so those players have something to work for while they're improving for that solid FMO AAA.

QFT. Plus, being able to say that you AAA'd a 14 as opposed to a 12 wouldn't be so bad either ;P

[Niala]

Originally Posted by Coolboyrulez0

A 1-20 or 1-50 rating system seems to be the way to go.
[1-20, I would assume, is more likely and would most definitely resolve most difficulty disagreements, while 1-50 is unlikely, but optimal for judging difficulty]

Also a half-mechanized & formulaic, half-humanized input system for rating difficulty would be perfect to rate files. I think we really need a "Great Difficulty Reform" since it's been chaotic and unorganized for quite a while now and things really need to happen to reshape and reform the system or even more confusion and uncertainties will spawn.

1-20 sounds both more plausible and more effective. I think having a system for 1-50 would cause more trouble than it would solve. Spreading difficulties that thin would probably make it even tougher to distinguish between each difficulty. As of right now, there's a pretty clear line, albeit, not perfect, between what should be a D or a VD, for instance. Can you imagine, however, trying to distinguish between a song being a 21 or a 22? I feel as though finding a proper mediation between number of difficulties and what each difficulty represents in a file, i.e., around 20, would be a lot more efficient.

Also, attempts have been made in the past to come up with some way to calculate difficulties of a file, but none of them have worked out very well. Not saying that this isn't a good idea, but coming up with a good mathematical formula would be really difficult.

Originally Posted by kjwkjw

And to go a step further, we could have a few skill tokens for FEO songs so those players have something to work for while they're improving for that solid FMO AAA.

EDIT: +1 smart idea. It'll stop players from thinking "omfg must get oni"

[who_cares973]

15 difficulties at the most. Like qqwerf said. No reason to mess with the lower levels

[jimerax]

If we're going with 1-20, difficulties will be like this.
In this case, we don't have to totally change current system I guess.

(new) - (old)
1 - 1 [easiest]
2 - 2 [for beginners]
3 - 3 [very easy]
4 - 4 [easy]
5 - 5 [moderate]
6 - 6 [ordinary]
7 - low-mid 7 [standard]
8 - mid-high 7 [tricky]
9 - low 8 [very tricky]
10 - mid 8 [difficult]
11 - (very)high 8 - (very)low 9 [very difficult]
12 - mid 9 [challenging]
13 - high 9 [very challenging]
14 - low 10 [?????]
15 - mid-high 10 [very ?????]
16 - very high 10 - low 11 [for experts only]
17 - mid - high 11 [for masters only]
18 - very high 11 - low 12 [for gurus only]
19 - mid-high 12 [for stepmen only]
20 - 13 [for ??? only]

[justin_ator]

Not a bad system, but it's getting a lot more complex at that point..do 7s, 8s, and 9s need to be messed with?

[Xx{Midnight}xX]

Please don't use for stepman only it just sounds and looks stupid.

[HammyMcSquirrel]

I'd say 7 would be fine without being split up, and 8 could just be split up from the "very high" end. (Which would go into a group with low 9.) I'm not too sure about 9 being split up three ways. Having a difficulty for mid to high 9 may be enough. Maybe something like this?

 1 - 1 [Easiest]
 2 - 2 [For Beginners]
 3 - 3 [Very Easy]
 4 - 4 [Easy]
 5 - 5 [Moderate]
 6 - 6 [Standard]
 7 - 7 [Tricky]
 8 - low to high 8 [Very Tricky]
 9 - very high 8 to low 9 [Difficult]
 10 - mid to high 9 [Very Difficult]
 11 - low 10 [Challenging]
 12 - mid to high 10 [Very Challenging]
 13 - very high 10 to low 11 [For Experts Only]
 14 - mid to high 11 [For Masters Only]
 15 - very high 11 to low 12 [For Gurus Only]
 16 - mid to high 12 [For Legends Only]
 17 - 13 [For Stepmen Only]

I threw in "For Legends Only" since a lot of people have suggested that in the past and I think it could work. It's tough to think of anything else, though. (All I could think of for other names to go anywhere on this list is "formidable".) Also, "For Stepmen Only" feels a bit out of place on the list to me, but it should be for difficulty 13 if no other name is better, imo.

[Fantasticone]

Originally Posted by jimerax

If we're going with 1-20, difficulties will be like this.
In this case, we don't have to totally change current system I guess.

(new) - (old)
1 - 1 [easiest]
2 - 2 [for beginners]
3 - 3 [very easy]
4 - 4 [easy]
5 - 5 [moderate]
6 - 6 [standard]
7 - low-mid 7 [tricky]
8 - mid-high 7 [very tricky]
9 - low 8 [difficult]
10 - mid 8 [very difficult]
11 - (very)high 8 - (very)low 9 [challenging]
12 - mid 9 [very challenging]
13 - high 9 [advanced]
14 - low 10 [?????]
15 - mid-high 10 [very ?????]
16 - very high 10 - low 11 [for experts only]
17 - mid - high 11 [for masters only]
18 - very high 11 - low 12 [for gurus only]
19 - mid-high 12 [all star]
20 - 13 [for legends only]

Some ideas, but 20 seems a lot though =x

[kjwkjw]

Yeah, I do agree that 20 is a bit too many. Hammy's suggestion could work, but I'd much rather see (current) high 9's be grouped together with (current) low 10's, instead of giving low 10's a separate difficulty. This is because, at least from what I've seen, people have been pointing out a few 9's that could be bumped up to 10's (Over the Frail Dream, for instance).

 1 - 1 [Easiest]
 2 - 2 [For Beginners]
 3 - 3 [Very Easy]
 4 - 4 [Easy]
 5 - 5 [Moderate]
 6 - 6 [Standard]
 7 - 7 [Tricky]
 8 - low 8 to mid 8 [Difficult]
 9 - high 8 to mid 9 [Very Difficult]
 10 - high 9 to low 10 [Challenging]
 11 - mid 10 to high 10 [Very Challenging]
 12 - borderline 10/11 to low 11 [For Experts Only]
 13 - mid to high 11 [For Masters Only]
 14 - low 12 to high 12 [For Gurus Only]
 15 - very high 12 to 13 [For Stepmen Only]

This cuts the scale down to 15 difficulties, and would (hopefully) make difficulty rating a bit easier.

[jimerax]

If we take the trouble to change the difficulty system, 15 looks a bit too few and not effective enough. 17-18 sounds realistic though.

especially volume zone is 8-11, so we need to split these parts evenly.

[kjwkjw]

Could take Hammy's list then, and perhaps group high 7's and low 8's in an additional difficulty between 7 and 8 (which would create 18 difficulties). Maybe use the rating "Demanding" somewhere? Haha... although that might cause some confusion because "Difficult" also starts with D.

Still would like to hear what everyone else thinks of grouping very high 9's together with low 10's.