Beta Engine: R^3 [Updated 6/5/14]

[foxfire667]

Re: Beta Engine: R^3 [Updated 6/18/13]

Still opposed to it because it removes the challenge/boredom of higher level players taking on really easy/long songs.

Honestly though, I feel that boredom should not be a "challenge aspect" of FFR. If people want to improve their ranks (which is a main point of this game technically) it should only be limited by the player's skill level at accurately hitting notes. These processes are supposed to be enjoyable, or at the very least feel tolerable and more enticing to complete. I'm sure a big reason of why a lot of others haven't bothered to improve their level ranks is because of such tedium. If there is a way to make improving average ranks more tolerable without undermining actual skill, I don't really feel opposed to it.

A selling point of actually improving FFR ranks shouldn't be "you MUST sit around and be bored out of your mind for several hours barely hitting notes" if this can be avoided.

[qqwref]

Re: Beta Engine: R^3 [Updated 6/18/13]

It'll be a bunch of work, but maybe we should figure out a ranking system that doesn't depend on how much time you've spent playing scores way below your skill level.

Edit: No, I don't mean tier points, I still wanna have an average-rank type thing. But how about something like this: let X be the difficulty (out of 100) of your 10th hardest AAA. Then, when we calculate avrank, we credit the player with a AAA on every song of difficulty at least (X - 20). They do not actually get those scores recorded but avrank is calculated as if they did.

[HalfStep]

Re: Beta Engine: R^3 [Updated 6/18/13]

@ qqwref
That's kinda what the tier point system is I would say.

Edit: ninja'd by your edit

[RagedBerserker]

Re: Beta Engine: R^3 [Updated 6/18/13]

Don't get me wrong, the idea of making ALL of the FFR songs worthwhile is very enticing. But yes, manipulating patterns from what they originally were made to be can screw up some song scoring. I'm thinking patterns in Kono Spoon even... with that going faster I could see jumptrilling those patterns becoming much easier.

I just really don't like the fact that rate changes really kind of effect how the file and chart were made.

[Xx{Fallen}xX]

Re: Beta Engine: R^3 [Updated 6/18/13]

Don't get me wrong, the idea of making ALL of the FFR songs worthwhile is very enticing. But yes, manipulating patterns from what they originally were made to be can screw up some song scoring. I'm thinking patterns in Kono Spoon even... with that going faster I could see jumptrilling those patterns becoming much easier.

I just really don't like the fact that rate changes really kind of effect how the file and chart were made.

So do you have any issues with players using mirror?

[YoshL]

Re: Beta Engine: R^3 [Updated 6/18/13]

I just really don't like the fact that rate changes really kind of effect how the file and chart were made.

Please don't forget, when you're making alot of these points, you still would retain the option to /not use rates at all/

That being said, if you choose to give yourself a more "cheatable" song, at the price of making it faster, I think that option should be given. If you don't want to change the rate to keep the integrity of the original file, so be it. It's not like you're going to be forced to use rates for the rest of your life

Edit: and adding on to fallen's post:
mirror, speedmods, downscroll, even key setups and offsets have changed the way FFR has been played. And all of the above mentioned are basically optional. You don't need to use any of it if you don't actually want to.

double edit:
press start. all the rolls were /meant/ to be semi-jump trillable. rates would actually aid my purpose in that case

[foxfire667]

Re: Beta Engine: R^3 [Updated 6/18/13]

I just really don't like the fact that rate changes really kind of effect how the file and chart were made.

Well it's more so that it changes the speed at which the patterns come, potentially allowing for more room to get better judgements on files which have already potentially cheat-able patterns within them. It actually doesn't change the patterns themselves at all really.

I'm not exactly sure how I feel about allowing rates universally (though I personally wouldn't object to someone getting an AAA on a file at a higher rate, even if it makes certain sections seemingly slightly easier). I should point out the person talking about using them for super easy files, requested putting the rate at 1.5x or higher before leader-board scoring can occur, so that potential pattern manipulation on harder files would be pretty much impossible (and if they pulled it off, they probably deserve the AAA). So before outright rejecting the idea based on potential additional help with rolls / trills, would you approve of a mechanic like that?

[TC_Halogen]

Re: Beta Engine: R^3 [Updated 6/18/13]

Personally...I honestly don't see this as a bad thing at all?

Idk, basically, making FFR more fun to play, rather than disable features that could really help out.

And it's not like a player's integrity is totally harmed by playing on rates to get a song over with. Because at a point, cleaning up lower level ranks stops being fun and ends up being a chore. Even in like, real life, getting chores out of the way with quicker, more innovative methods feels better in my opinion

besides, level 3/100s aren't supposed to be tailored to high level players. Why not let the higher level players tailor their experience to themselves?

The way that I see it, it removes a meta-game aspect that forces users to have patience on lower level files. I personally don't find it fair that users can now utilize rates to their advantage if a song is too slow for them to be patient on.

EDIT: as mentioned before, it also adds an unfair advantage to players that can't do rolls and utilize jumptrills and gives them the opportunity to do well on songs that they shouldn't be -- Skeletor is a huge example of this.

[YoshL]

Re: Beta Engine: R^3 [Updated 6/18/13]

basically, what I see this argument is at this point is kinda fruitless atm

both sides have actually fairly balanced points objectively, e.g. pattern cheating potential vs. song speed up difficulty, but most of the big points are all up to opinion. Whether something or not is "fair" is pretty much subjective, because I can say something like "It's not fair that people can record their scores at anything above 1x scroll rate, because it makes it alot easier to read patterns. everyone should have the patience to learn how to read clusters of arrows, because that's how it was intended". However, everyone will be like "nope". Although yeah, my point is completely valid, it's subjective. my opinion, which is "everyone should have the patience to learn how to read clusters of arrows, because that's how it was intended" equates to "everyone should have patience to play long songs or else it's not fair". however, there's objective proof through "reading clusters of arrows" and "cheating patterns". again though, the objective points mostly balance eachother out: for the speedmod example, you are actually having to read much faster than before, and with our current dillemma, you do indeed have to hit arrows much faster.

TL : DR; vote, cause it's opinions

EDIT: as mentioned before, it also adds an unfair advantage to players that can't do rolls and utilize jumptrills and gives them the opportunity to do well on songs that they shouldn't be -- Skeletor is a huge example of this.

unfair how so? when everyone else can also utilize the system to do the same exact thing?
I personally don't agree with your usage of "unfair", because that implies that only some people will get to take advantage of the mechanic, which is definitely not the case here

also, is anyone forgetting those split jumptrills that will start to become hell on rates lol (for skeletor)

[TC_Halogen]

Re: Beta Engine: R^3 [Updated 6/18/13]

Fair enough -- truly a catch 22...

[One Winged Angel]

Re: Beta Engine: R^3 [Updated 6/18/13]

About to grab lunch in like two seconds so can't really elaborate. Will just say I'm highly against having non-1.0 rates reflected in the same scoreboard.

[XXXsmittyXXX]

Re: Beta Engine: R^3 [Updated 6/18/13]

Rate scoring? Sounds like a calling for separate scoreboards to me as well.

Also, i'm getting kind of bad lag using flash10. When i turn off my volume on my speakers manually
and turn them back on, the lag disappears. What could that be coming from?

& accuracy calculations are boggling my mind. If you set a custom judge using the calculation, do scores record?
Wouldn't that make getting amazings way too easy?

[justin_ator]

Re: Beta Engine: R^3 [Updated 6/18/13]

& accuracy calculations are boggling my mind. If you set a custom judge using the calculation, do scores record?
Wouldn't that make getting amazings way too easy?

Custom judge offset* Same thing as a music offset, just moves the timing windows. Doesn't lengthen them

[HalfStep]

Re: Beta Engine: R^3 [Updated 6/18/13]

No, when you put a custom judge your scores don't submit lol

Unless you mean standard judge offsets, which has been available for a while.

[XXXsmittyXXX]

Re: Beta Engine: R^3 [Updated 6/18/13]

Thanks.