Rates higher than 1.0 should record

[choof]

Originally Posted by qqwref

If the main reason you want to record with rates is so you can get your levelrank down in less time, you're basically just demanding the admins let you cheat your way to an accomplishment. What's next, choof, asking for 5x the grandtotal when you AAA stuff, because having to play that much to get 50 billion is just not FUN enough for you?

I'll reiterate what I said earlier, if you won't to spend the time to do the accomplishment the way you're supposed to do it, you don't deserve to have that accomplishment.

i'm at work so i'll also keep this short

firstly, how did you make the step from rates to cheating?
secondly, dat slippery slope fallacy

[Dynam0]

Originally Posted by iironiic

Quite honestly, I find it really silly to add statistics like "1.1x average rank", "1.2x average rank", etc. What do those numbers signify and why do they matter? Even if rates record, it would be really foolish to have 10 separate average ranks for one player.

The numbers matter because it's another way of measuring skills, that being how well a certain player can handle a file on a faster rate. Since raw score will be the determinant for scoring somewhere down the line, it will allow for FFR to accurately judge how well people can handle files outside their comfort zone of FCing/AAAing. I admit that 10 separate pages are a bit much, but some serious thought could be given to how we can integrate a music rates ranking system (this discussion should happen after raw scoring implementation imo).

Originally Posted by iironiic

In my opinion, I also find rates really disrespectful to stepcharts. Rates only emphasize the complexity of the step patterns and nothing more. You can't appreciate the music and the steps if you play the game on 2.0x. I don't think this is what FFR wants to emphasize.

This is a touchy subject just like shuffling and other mods that change the way a file is played so I know there will be mixed emotions for this belief. On this I can agree with you though, music rates serve no purpose other than to blast through easy songs quicker (quite insulting to the notecharter) or as a form of challenge for players (not as bad but still not what notecharter intended).

[iironiic]

Originally Posted by choof

firstly, how did you make the step from rates to cheating?
secondly, dat slippery slope fallacy

Any modification to making the stepfile more accessible to you is cheating. This is obvious for rates less than 1x.

This is less obvious for rates greater than 1x. Someone can abuse the game using higher rates to a) cheat their way to the Top Daily, All Time Statistics tables, b) make it easier for the more skilled to AAA files that are very long and monotonous. A good handful of people mentioned this here.

Originally Posted by Dynam0

The numbers matter because it's another way of measuring skills, that being how well a certain player can handle a file on a faster rate. Since raw score will be the determinant for scoring somewhere down the line, it will allow for FFR to accurately judge how well people can handle files outside their comfort zone of FCing/AAAing. I admit that 10 separate pages are a bit much, but some serious thought could be given to how we can integrate a music rates ranking system (this discussion should happen after raw scoring implementation imo). .

I understand, but is there any necessity to measure skill off of rates? The numbers are meaningless to anyone except to the top 1% of FFR. All of these rankings will only cater them and no one else. I suppose it would be interesting in some aspects to see who scores the best on rates, but I don't think there should be any rankings since there is probably no "objective" way to incorporate that into public ranks.

[leonid]

On an unrelated note, a person once told me that one of my files was very fun on rates and I was offended by that xd

[Izzy]

Originally Posted by SK8R43

yes, not like they are getting easier by being on 1.1, 1.5, 2.0, etc lol

On easier songs it is.

[choof]

Yo if raw scoring is actually going to be implemented, I'd be up for waiting until then to continue this discussion.

[Dynam0]

Originally Posted by iironiic

I understand, but is there any necessity to measure skill off of rates? The numbers are meaningless to anyone except to the top 1% of FFR. All of these rankings will only cater them and no one else. I suppose it would be interesting in some aspects to see who scores the best on rates, but I don't think there should be any rankings since there is probably no "objective" way to incorporate that into public ranks.

There isn't a necessity for this, it would just be a nice add-on and wouldn't hurt anything to have if it isn't hard to implement in the future so why not? *shrugs*. Objectivity is the largest issue I have with this as well so I think this would be something to talk about once FFR has been improved in other areas first.

To the topic at hand though, I still don't see any reason why rates should be included in normal public rankings. I am still torn sometimes about having mirrored scores count to public ranks as well but we can't really go back from that now. Clearly, the modifier being used is to allow the person an advantage when going for a score as stated by a ton of people already. Is choof the only person actually arguing for this still? Kinda ironic when he makes a topic a couple days ago highlighting that he's working on his public ranks lmao

Originally Posted by choof

Yo if raw scoring is actually going to be implemented, I'd be up for waiting until then to continue this discussion.

Now this seems a lot more reasonable

[iironiic]

Originally Posted by Dynam0

I am still torn sometimes about having mirrored scores count to public ranks as well but we can't really go back from that now. Clearly, the modifier being used is to allow the person an advantage when going for a score as stated by a ton of people already.

Mirror doesn't change the structure of the file. Jacks are still jacks, streams are still streams, one-hand anchors are still one-hand anchors, and rolls are still rolls. Yes, one may argue that it's advantageous for someone to AAA Club if one hand is stronger than the other, but at the end of the day, you are essentially executing the same patterns.

Also keep in mind that we worked hard to get a bunch of permissions for the music we offer here on FFR. I don't think many artists would be happy seeing their music disrespected by speeding up the song. It kind of defeat the purpose of getting permissions if we allow rates in the game.

[dAnceguy117]

Originally Posted by iironiic

at the end of the day, you are essentially executing the same patterns.

I would make this same argument in favor of allowing rates higher than 1.0.

Originally Posted by iironiic

Also keep in mind that we worked hard to get a bunch of permissions for the music we offer here on FFR. I don't think many artists would be happy seeing their music disrespected by speeding up the song. It kind of defeat the purpose of getting permissions if we allow rates in the game.

would you also advise removing the restart button and the autofail feature, because the artist did not intend for only the intro to be listened to repeatedly? I feel like you're going a little overboard.

[ssbmchamp]

Here's my two cents (I didn't read every comment so maybe I'm repeating something, but if not then):

-Rates under 1.0 should not count towards levelranks, but rates higher should. I would say increasing the rate makes like 95-98% of the songs harder and it keeps the files (patterns) the exact same.

-To somewhat motivate players of ALL skill levels I think rates above 1.0 should affect your position on the leaderboards for AAA's ONLY, but still keep your rank as if you got it on 1.0 rateand here's an example of what I mean by that:
EXAMPLE 1 -Let's say smartdude has a AAA on Frictional Nevada (so rank 1) from playing it on 1.0 (normal rate) and then let's say samurai plays Frictional Nevada on 1.1 rate and get's a AAA, samurai would then move above smartdude on the leaderboard but they would both have the same rank (1). Also I know that being the last person to AAA a song puts you on top of the leader board but anyone who AAA'd Frictional Nevada on 1.0 rate after samurai got his AAA on 1.1 would still have rank 1, but they would be put under him. So essentially what I'm saying is your position on the leaderboards would be based on your AAA score with the highest rate, but you would still have rank 1 regardless if 10 people had faster rate AAA's above you. For non-AAA scores your rank is what it would normally be without moving in front of people. By doing this it allows the higher tier players to stay involved with FFR rather than saying "I AAA'd this file, I'm never playing it again" and could motivate them to keep pushing themselves. It also doesn't affect the lower tier players because in terms of rank, a 1.8 rate AAA on excite bike has the same value as a 1.0 excite bike AAA.

- I see peoples side with credits/GT and I think if you play on rates higher than 1.0 your score at the end and also your credit count should be reduced by value "X" depending on what rate you used.

-I also don't support the argument "Some players can't play on R^3." It's like anything else, you have to practice. I personally had never played on R3 once and then Badman had his darkness tournament so I had to switch from Velo to R3 and get used to that. Just suck it up and put the time in to practice. I couldn't see it taking anyone longer than a week to get used to it honestly...it took me less than 2 days to make the adjustment.

[omega_grunt666]

On the topic of GTS/Credits, what is the official stance on earning them?

As of right now you cannot earn either from anything that significantly changes the chart from what was approved. Rates, but also Random/Shuffle/Scramble or Reverse (Mod not scroll, in R^3). But is that intentional or just a side effect of not registering to the leaderboards? (All or none in the current system)

Shouldn't anything achieved in an official engine be qualified for both? Even if the settings were to disqualify you from leaderboards (And understandably so), is there a reason it should be treated as though you've played nothing at all? Its still time spent in the official engine playing official charts. With the exception of rates, all the other mods have you hitting the same amount of arrows, pattern difficulty doesn't effect credits directly (just combo scoring). The argument to exclude rates from that treatment is only GTS farming, but it doesn't really make it any easier. You still have to physically hit all of those arrows, spending 24 hours playing songs like vrofl/thinking of you/extratone in a perfect world/etc, or various easier songs on higher rates to match the NPS.

Should the limit be imposed by what the hardest/most efficient charts are that get approved and added to the game, or should it purely be the persons ability and determination?

I wouldn't argue to let any of these count towards leaderboards or level ranks because you are basically playing a different chart all together, but is there any real argument as to why they should be ignored outright? Playing the game should be rewarding, no matter what you choose to do within it.

[iironiic]

Originally Posted by dAnceguy117

I would make this same argument in favor of allowing rates higher than 1.0.

would you also advise removing the restart button and the autofail feature, because the artist did not intend for only the intro to be listened to repeatedly? I feel like you're going a little overboard.

There is a difference between 50 bpm rolls and 5000 bpm rolls. You have to hit patterns differently because of how the engine functions. There's also a difference between changing the speed of a song and merely restarting a song. How are you changing the contents of a song just by restarting it or by putting it on autofail?

I'm just offering my two cents and some food for thought to consider... Sorry if it seemed a bit overwhelming lmfao.

[Izzy]

Originally Posted by ssbmchamp

I would say increasing the rate makes like 95-98% of the songs harder and it keeps the files (patterns) the exact same.

Still not 100%. Annoyingly slow songs and some legacy files would become easier.

[YoshL]

we should have a system where you pay credits to have a certain rate song run recored.

[dAnceguy117]

Originally Posted by iironiic

There is a difference between 50 bpm rolls and 5000 bpm rolls. You have to hit patterns differently because of how the engine functions.

thanks for pointing that one out. I'm not very aware of the technical details.

Originally Posted by iironiic

There's also a difference between changing the speed of a song and merely restarting a song. How are you changing the contents of a song just by restarting it or by putting it on autofail?

you mentioned that using a higher rate would disrespect the music. my guess is that you are assuming that the music artist would not want the music to be sped up and would find it disrespectful. I'm also guessing that this line of thinking is based on the idea that the artist intended for all listeners to hear it exactly as it was composed.

similarly, cutting a track to reduce simfile repetitiveness or stopping the music abruptly after getting a good would probably be outside of the artist's scope they had when creating the music.

[iironiic]

Originally Posted by dAnceguy117

you mentioned that using a higher rate would disrespect the music. my guess is that you are assuming that the music artist would not want the music to be sped up and would find it disrespectful. I'm also guessing that this line of thinking is based on the idea that the artist intended for all listeners to hear it exactly as it was composed.

similarly, cutting a track to reduce simfile repetitiveness or stopping the music abruptly after getting a good would probably be outside of the artist's scope they had when creating the music.

Generally speaking, I dislike cutting tracks for this very reason [bolded statement] when I step a file. bmah can vouch me for this haha. When I am sending permission emails to an artist, I generally make a note asking if I have their permission to cut tracks simply because I really do want to respect their work. Some artists are fine with it, and others aren't. Regardless, I think it's really important to respect and appreciate their work, but putting songs on rates for public enjoyment isn't a step towards that direction (at least in my opinion).

[ssbmchamp]

Originally Posted by Izzy

Still not 100%. Annoyingly slow songs and some legacy files would become easier.

I agree. Not sure if this would be possible to do but what if we had it so rates would only record on songs of difficulty 66 and higher and would still take your final score/credits and reduce them by value "X" based on the rate you used. This way it would make virtually every file applicable harder rather than easier. It would increase the number of songs upper tier players could challenge themselves without affecting the lower tier players.

I think the most important thing to focus on (whether or not my idea would even be possible) is keeping people active on the site. I would rather we allow rates above 1.0 to count fully towards GT and get full credits and see a lot more people playing on the site, since there would essentially be endless difficulties of songs and people wouldn't AAA and never play songs again then get bored of FFR and quit altogether. I get that it alters files and makes some easier than others but like I said I'd rather see the site active with players rather than it dying off because people got bored.

[arcnmx]

Well, I'm just going to point to this:

Originally Posted by dAnceguy117

"the way you're supposed to do it" is defined by however the rules are set. I think the point of this thread is to suggest changing those rules

Personally, I feel like this is all somewhat of a moot discussion. Levelranks are essentially pointless right now, scores below AAAs are meaningless due to combo scoring, and average rank is a terrible way to rank people even when we do transition over to raw scoring. The ranking system needs a complete rehaul IMO, and I feel like that's where the discussion should be heading instead.

Originally Posted by omega_grunt666

On the topic of GTS/Credits, what is the official stance on earning them?

I believe we decided after the last thread that modded/unrecorded scores should still grant GTS/credits, there just isn't a system in place to provide that yet.

[dAnceguy117]

Originally Posted by iironiic

Generally speaking, I dislike cutting tracks for this very reason [bolded statement] when I step a file. bmah can vouch me for this haha. When I am sending permission emails to an artist, I generally make a note asking if I have their permission to cut tracks simply because I really do want to respect their work. Some artists are fine with it, and others aren't. Regardless, I think it's really important to respect and appreciate their work, but putting songs on rates for public enjoyment isn't a step towards that direction (at least in my opinion).

fair enough! point taken. I don't think I fully agree that speeding up or cutting a track reduces appreciation of the artist's work, but I'm absolutely with you that being completely clear with the artist about how the music will be used when trying to obtain permission is the way to go.

Originally Posted by arcnmx

Well, I'm just going to point to this:

Personally, I feel like this is all somewhat of a moot discussion. Levelranks are essentially pointless right now, scores below AAAs are meaningless due to combo scoring, and average rank is a terrible way to rank people even when we do transition over to raw scoring. The ranking system needs a complete rehaul IMO, and I feel like that's where the discussion should be heading instead.