Hello there.
I am making an interesting system that will potentially/hopefully work in parallel with pp (or become a modification of it).
The idea is to give a map some values that will tell "skill requirements" to succesfully play the map. And when you beat the map you gain certain amount of skill points depending on the number of points you already had.
So far I've finished basic skill requirement calculations for streams, stamina and general aim skill.
My next milestone is making calculations for the most subjective one - reading skill.

I made this thread here hoping that you can tell me your views on what's "hard to read".
Please, be as precise as possible. This will help me a lot.

1) Object density. This is the number of hitobjects on screen at once. IMO it's the most important factor, and most of what makes EZ hard.
It's probably more accurate if you don't count 1/4 notes in this calculation, since fast streams can drive up this number without actually affecting the reading difficulty. Also scaling slightly by note distance would be good too, since more eye movement is required to take everything in and react in time.

2) Overlapping notes. If there are two notes on roughly the same spot that are visible at the same time, and you have to move to another spot and back in between hitting them, that's really confusing to read. This isn't such a big deal unless the object density is high enough though.

2.5) Suddenly changing patterns. If you're doing star motions and the star suddenly turns into a pentagon or even reverses direction, it's really easy to trip up if you're not paying close attention. Even so, it's hardly an issue unless #2 is present, in which case it becomes a total nightmare!!

3) Suddenly changing time intervals. If the spacing remains constant (e.g. 100 osupixels between each note) but the pattern suddenly changes from 1/2 to 1/4, 1/4 to 1/2, etc. then that's really tricky to read. (Anything changing from normal beatsnaps to 1/3 is especially hard.) Mappers usually put new combos to fight this.


Just my thoughts for now. Those are the things I find most difficult when playing EZ, so I assume it extrapolates even to higher AR as well.

Add slider clusters and slider speed changes. Sometimes there's no way to tell and you have to either react fast or memorise them.

Ask Tom94, I think he'd know more. Some stuff I'd like to point out as well are:

- Stream spacing (Shuffle Heaven and Okeanos are infamous for this, IMO)
- Reaction reading vs. Focus reading (AR-based, if you get my drift)
- The weird boundary between singletaps and streams (Kyouki Chinden and Worldwide Choppers both have this)

You can break reading difficulty down into a visual component and a non-visual component.

The non-visual component can be summarized as a measure of variation. Between every pair of objects (and every slider start and slider end) there is a minimum speed you must move your cursor to hit both objects. This speed can vary between adjacent pairs of notes, and as the difference increases it becomes more difficult to read. The same thing is true for the angles between notes; if the angle between a pair of objects is substantially different than the angle between the next pair of objects the whole pattern becomes more complex to read.

It's easy to understand if you think of the entire map as a sort of differentiable function; the function itself is just position, but you can differentiate it to get velocity, then again for acceleration, etc.. These derivatives can be aggregated in order to find the map's non-visual complexity.

Visual complexity is a measure of visual obfuscation caused by overlapping stuff; overlapping graphics, obviously, but also things like overlapping cursor paths, overlapping patterns, etc. This is what makes EZ seem difficult; overlaps become more likely as the number of objects on-screen increases. However, the real difficulty isn't in the visual obfuscation itself, but rather its effect on how much time you have to process each note, so visual complexity can come not only from the "noise" of low AR, but also the sheer speed of high AR.

Thanks for the posts!
So far I've managed to detect object overlaps at any point of time and ignoring streams in this calculation
And also object density value.
The idea of considering angles came to my mind before but I never realized it can affect reading and not just difficulty of certain jumps (squares e.t.c) because of "difficult" cursor moves you must do
I'll definetly try this

They say 90 degree angles are the hardest to play, so the amounts of right angles or the proximity of being close to 90 degrees may also play a role in map difficulty. Check out DJPop's maps for that matter.

circles that are arranged in certain ways

skystar with extra pizza

ar >= 9.3

Pattern complexity and AR (note density) are probably the biggest ones, since basic patterns like squares and triangles etc that follow a clockwise rotation are much more easier than squares and triangles that have their order change clockwise and anticlockwise. Note density which is dependent on the AR and bpm translate to readability as the illusion of "more beats" or "less beats" affect your gameplay by making you either go too fast and missing beats or hitting them too fast

buny wrote: 192i2a

Pattern complexity and AR (note density) are probably the biggest ones, since basic patterns like squares and triangles etc that follow a clockwise rotation are much more easier than squares and triangles that have their order change clockwise and anticlockwise.

Are you sure that just doesn't depend on the person

Kheldragar wrote: 3c575d

buny wrote: 192i2a

Pattern complexity and AR (note density) are probably the biggest ones, since basic patterns like squares and triangles etc that follow a clockwise rotation are much more easier than squares and triangles that have their order change clockwise and anticlockwise.

Are you sure that just doesn't depend on the person

readability is a very subjective topic, since it doesn't have an actual metric such as speed, aim (and arguably accuracy)

Readability absolutely does have an actual metric, we just haven't figured out what it is. People tend to get caught up in the whole "not everyone finds the same patterns easy or difficult to read" argument without realizing that readability and reading skill are two different things, just like accuracy as a statistic and accuracy as a skill. Differences in pattern recognition stem from differences in the relative development of all of reading's sub-skills, not from any inherent differences in reading ability, and while it might be absurdly complicated, there absolutely does exist a metric by which readability can be measured.

Yeah, I think the same.
I am not good at making hypotheses, so that's why I am just planning to gather angle+distance data from various difficult map sections and then try to find something common in them.
If only I had a list of them..

Narrill wrote: 2gs1f

Readability absolutely does have an actual metric, we just haven't figured out what it is. People tend to get caught up in the whole "not everyone finds the same patterns easy or difficult to read" argument without realizing that readability and reading skill are two different things, just like accuracy as a statistic and accuracy as a skill. Differences in pattern recognition stem from differences in the relative development of all of reading's sub-skills, not from any inherent differences in reading ability, and while it might be absurdly complicated, there absolutely does exist a metric by which readability can be measured.

when you compare metrics of speed and aim together and then you compare them to readability or reading skill, then readability or reading skill isn't something you simply "measure" and is something you observe and give arbitrary values

like the pp system, where it's insanely complex/impossible to create a system that rates the performances on maps due to different difficulty aspects that are subjective to the player in question, e.g. they may be better playing on the left side than the right side, corners than the centers etc.

basically, I don't think readability can truly be measure, other than artificial values that probably won't even model it correctly (pp anyone? How long did it take for people to figure out what gives the most pp?)

We need Tom94 for this...

And yes, readability is often a very subjective thing IMO. But I'd say variations in note placement beat-wise is what makes a map hard to read as well. Like mixing up pattern's of 1/4s and 1/8s with 1/2s for melodic accentuation, not like techno-style maps with mostly repetitive 1/2s and 1/4 notes.

dagambler999 wrote: 505r69

We need Tom94 for this...

And yes, readability is often a very subjective thing IMO. But I'd say variations in note placement beat-wise is what makes a map hard to read as well. Like mixing up pattern's of 1/4s and 1/8s with 1/2s for melodic accentuation, not like techno-style maps with mostly repetitive 1/2s and 1/4 notes.

Yeah, but stack/density make it even harder. Reading rhythm is all about just listening to the beat, so it's rather intuitive. However, if you've ever played one of those shitmaps where they stack all the notes on top of each other and there are like a million approach circles closing in on a small space at different timings, that's impossible yo.

pandaBee wrote: 5l243j

Yeah, but stack/density make it even harder. Reading rhythm is all about just listening to the beat, so it's rather intuitive. However, if you've ever played one of those shitmaps where they stack all the notes on top of each other and there are like a million approach circles closing in on a small space at different timings, that's impossible yo.

Yep, AR8 Renard is an impossible read. How did those maps even get ranked? (I'm talking Banned Forever w/ lesjuh and co.)

Sentenced to a lifetime in gaol forever*

buny wrote: 192i2a

like the pp system

I don't have an intricate understanding of the pp system, but I doubt it's as complex as you seem to think. And you're missing my point, players playing better in the corners or on one side of the screen is irrelevant to the inherent readability of the map in the same way that some players being better at streams or jumps is irrelevant to Tom's difficulty calculations. The final result might be an aggregation of a large number of variables, but we can absolutely measure things like intramap variation and object overlap, and we could even forgo the concept of general "readability" altogether in favor of separate metrics for all the various components like rhythmic complexity, geometric complexity, visual clutter, etc.

The point isn't to figure out how difficult it will be for the player to read the map, it's to better understand the composition of the map.

So to sum it up:
- Note clustering
- General Pattern Complexity
- Slider patterns & speeds (Hollow Wings, Broccoly, 0108)
- Note Pattern Complexity
- Stream spacing
- Reaction reading vs Focus reading

Did I miss anything in this topic?

dagambler999 wrote: 505r69

So to sum it up:
- Note clustering
- General Pattern Complexity
- Slider patterns & speeds (Hollow Wings, Broccoly, 0108)
- Note Pattern Complexity
- Stream spacing
- Reaction reading vs Focus reading

Did I miss anything in this topic?

If you think about it, most of this can be described by some kind of metric of "chaos", as Narrill mentioned on the previous page
Except the visual part

I like where this is going. Maybe we'll actually come up with some exact definitions

dagambler999 wrote: 505r69

So to sum it up:
- Note clustering
- General Pattern Complexity
- Slider patterns & speeds (Hollow Wings, Broccoly, 0108)
- Note Pattern Complexity
- Stream spacing
- Reaction reading vs Focus reading

Did I miss anything in this topic?

Spaced streams aren't hard to read, they are however very hard to do...

pandaBee wrote: 5l243j

Spaced streams aren't hard to read, they are however very hard to do...

I meant varying stream spacing/accel streams (Shuffle Heaven is a prime example).

stack leniency

dagambler999 wrote: 505r69

So to sum it up:
- Note clustering
- General Pattern Complexity
- Slider patterns & speeds (Hollow Wings, Broccoly, 0108)
- Note Pattern Complexity
- Stream spacing
- Reaction reading vs Focus reading

Did I miss anything in this topic?

-Too much DT?

I can relate!!

Narrill wrote: 2gs1f

Visual complexity is a measure of visual obfuscation caused by overlapping stuff; overlapping graphics, obviously, but also things like overlapping cursor paths, overlapping patterns, etc. This is what makes EZ seem difficult; overlaps become more likely as the number of objects on-screen increases. However, the real difficulty isn't in the visual obfuscation itself, but rather its effect on how much time you have to process each note, so visual complexity can come not only from the "noise" of low AR, but also the sheer speed of high AR.

Any ideas on how to measure the processing time for each note taking overlaps and density into consideration?
I can only think of using objects' fade-in times as a base and altering these somehow depending on the overlap time/percentage

As long noone can explicitly determine the metric and definition of a map's readibility I will remain convinced it is a totally subjective matter.

I agree with the points which were given earlier on and would like to add distance snap aka time/distance relation. More inconsistent DS can constantly mess with your reading. Sudden DS changes can catch a player off guard. Jumps and Anti-Jumps are not merely covered with good aim and acc/timing.

Kert wrote: 6o3b5i

Any ideas on how to measure the processing time for each note taking overlaps and density into consideration?
I can only think of using objects' fade-in times as a base and altering these somehow depending on the overlap time/percentage

Yeah, that sounds like a decent approach. I would work on developing an algorithm that compares all the visual objects at a particular time position and spits out a composite "noise" rating. Once you have that you can just run that algorithm at each object's time position and use the resulting noise rating to come up with a per-object weighted processing time. Obviously the algorithm itself is the real challenge, and you'll likely have to heavily tweak the factor by which the base time is altered to get the weighted time, but that's how I'd start.

Evaluating the non-visual component is the tougher problem I think.

Edit: Just to spitball some ideas for the algorithm...

The most obvious component is the proximity of all the visual objects. Next to that is probably overlapping cursor paths (e.g., the path between the current note and the next note overlaps the path between two notes later in the pattern). Notes fade in over time, so you'll need some way of determining how much each object has faded in at any given time position, and once you can determine that you could probably use that fade-in percentage as a multiplier for the note and its outgoing cursor path. This would make notes closer to the current time position more heavily weighted, which I think is accurate.

However, you won't just need to evaluate the objects that are actually on-screen, you'll need to look at hot spots as well, meaning areas of the screen that tend to have more notes than other areas (the easiest way to understand why this matters is to think of taking all of a map's patterns and putting them in one corner of the screen - the object density in that corner would skyrocket, making everything happening in that corner tougher to read). I can't think of an efficient way to implement this, but I think an ideal implementation would work very similarly to the noise algorithm, but would be localized to a specific point; that is to say, you pick a point and a time position and the algorithm looks through all the objects that occurred before that time and, for each object, adds some value corresponding to the distance, both in a time and screen position, between that object and the given point/time.

Now that I think about it, those two algorithms could actually be combined. Instead of running one to check for hot spots and one to check noise, just give visual objects a higher weighting than non-visual objects, and have that additional weight correspond to how visual the object is.

If I had any familiarity with osu's file formatting I'd put together a prototype for you, but alas...

What do you guys define as "reading"? In my mind, reading an osu! Chart is seeing the circles and processing what motions you have to do to hit them all correctly. Of course you need fundamentals and knowledge to adapt and read new songs but the concept is the same for all songs.

The problem with this thread is that most top players have their reading skill capped. The key elements to reading seems to be circle density and AR, however both of these things are SUPPOSED to be tailored to the song so it flows correctly and can be ranked. The only thing really left are the patterns themselves. If we are talking about ranked songs, when you play thousands and thousands of songs, you can get to a point where any pattern is readable even if it's too fast/hard for you. There are maybe like 1% of songs that will have a gimmick pattern that's unlike any normal pattern and may trip you up but 2-3 replays later you should still be able to understand and adapt.

So when we are talking about making a value for readability, why does it matter when most people can already read and have trouble playing? I agree that rotating squares are haf and maybe specific patterns should have a say but reading in general is the most basic skill. Also as far as ar and density goes, it'd be better for old maps to get unranked then for an arbitrary value be put on something that's supposed to be correct when the map gets ranked in the first place.

-Rinku- wrote: 3z6d5r

The problem with this thread is that most top players have their reading skill capped.

Nope, not even close.

Because the map pool is overwhelmingly populated by simple maps most people don't even consider reading a trainable skill, but the reality is that your ability to decipher the visuals of the beatmap into usable knowledge in a timely fashion is paramount to your ability to actually hit the map's notes, and every extra millisecond you take figuring out what you're looking at is a millisecond you don't get to spend moving your cursor. Good reading skill makes literally everything easier, and I can tell you for a fact that all it takes for a map to go from a full scoreboard of 99%+ HDHR plays to just a handful of HDHR plays is a bit of complexity. Reading is important.

As for why it matters, it's a skill like any other, and people should be rewarded for proficiency. There are tons of skystar/fanzhen/hollow wings/etc. maps out there whose star rating grossly underrates the actual skill required to play the map, and this discrepancy comes entirely from improper handling of complexity and readability. People who manage to FC those maps deserve pp that corresponds to the map's true difficulty.

-Rinku- wrote: 3z6d5r

Also as far as ar and density goes, it'd be better for old maps to get unranked then for an arbitrary value be put on something that's supposed to be correct when the map gets ranked in the first place.

I don't know what purpose this sentence is supposed to serve. When did anyone mention old maps? Why are AR and density relevant to the shoddy quality of old maps? What particular shoddy quality are you even referring to?

Narrill wrote: 2gs1f

However, you won't just need to evaluate the objects that are actually on-screen, you'll need to look at hot spots as well, meaning areas of the screen that tend to have more notes than other areas (the easiest way to understand why this matters is to think of taking all of a map's patterns and putting them in one corner of the screen - the object density in that corner would skyrocket, making everything happening in that corner tougher to read).

Are you sure about hot spots? I think object density will skyrocket because new overlaps will appear (overlaps with objects that appear ontop of previous objects / that haven't faded out yet e.t.c). If they are no new overlaps I don't think the same patterns will become any harder (atleast for reading)
Considering proximity is a must, but I am not sure how to measure that.
I am thinking about taking all object positions at a certain time and applying some bonus for those which have a lot of other objects close to them. Basically like a heatmap. Then again I'd have to figure out which are streams, because this won't really apply to them

Your heatmap is basically what I was describing. The idea is that the weighting of each object would be tied to its temporal proximity to the current time, so only objects within the same region and around the same time would have much effect.

The amount of circles on the screen.
The order of which you need to hit the circles.
The layout/pattern of the circles.
The time of which you need to hit the circles.
The AR (Approach Rate) of the map.

Reading doesn't really have a definite definition in osu!, some people think of the term differently than another.However, most say that it is, as -Rinku- said, is seeing the circles and processing what motions you have to do to hit them all correctly.

Stacks and super high AR are a pain in the ass.

What is harder to read: full overlap or let's say.. half-overlap?

Kert wrote: 6o3b5i

What is harder to read: full overlap or let's say.. half-overlap?

What does this mean? Example?

Kert wrote: 6o3b5i

What is harder to read: full overlap or let's say.. half-overlap?

Depends how long the pattern goes for,
patterns like tornado squares become hard because they require constant "adjusting" to the changing angles

Full


Half

I think full is harder. I've broken a lot of times on maps who do THE FUCKING BULLSHIT of having a fully stacked note at the end of a stream but having a time delay on it to break your combo. Like happy end of the world.

That's a bit different situation. You'd probably broken if it wasn't a full overlap too. Most likely you just stream 1 circle more than needed and since it doesn't have a bigger spacing in the end - it's a surprise

Kert wrote: 6o3b5i

That's a bit different situation. You'd probably broken if it wasn't a full overlap too. Most likely you just stream 1 circle more than needed and since it doesn't have a bigger spacing in the end - it's a surprise

Yeah, and I feel that I wouldn't have streamed an extra note if I had known there was a delayed note at the end of the stream rather than assuming the stream had come to an end. Isn't that a misread?

It's a misread but not exactly because of the overlap - because the distance between last stream note and surprise stacked note does not reflect bigger time interval between them

Kert wrote: 6o3b5i

What is harder to read: full overlap or let's say.. half-overlap?

Full. A better question is whether it's harder to read a half overlap than it is to read an almost-full overlap.

Initially I wanted to set the peak at 50% overlap and gradually decrease bonus for other values, but that's probably not super important right now

So far I can get this data from maps:
- absolute angles between pairs objects (actually between each trio)
- changes in angles between current and previous object
- object density at any point of time
- overlap percentage of a pair of objects
- reaction time for reading an object. For now it implies that you can read an object only when you fully see it - it's not covered by hitbursts or other objects. Can be easily tweaked
- changes in spacing between current and previous object (I call it chaos value)

Stuff not done:
- slider body overlaps
- object density in a certain area at a certain time

I think it's time to start playing around with the data I got by checking a certain set of maps and comparing / making formulas with these values in order to define a single Reading metric value.

Can anyone compile a list of hard and easy to read maps where the reading difficulty difference is very distinguishable between them?

https://osu-ppy-sh.jeuxcrack.net/s/41686

Any hard to read maps... Go with Nogard, Skystar, Rin, Broccoly, HanzeR or Hollow Wings maps.

If you're interested, Full Tablet developed a method of evaluating rhythmic complexity a while ago that might be of use to you.

Narrill wrote: 2gs1f

If you're interested, Full Tablet developed a method of evaluating rhythmic complexity a while ago that might be of use to you.

t/257272
I didn't know this thread existed!
We should combine our powers!

oh, how strange nobody says "play more" it looks like people are growing up

-

Nice necropost.

iderekmc wrote: 653p6z

oh, how strange nobody says "play more" it looks like people are growing up

because this isn't a "how do i improve" thread...

ZenithPhantasm wrote: o4w6s

Nice necropost.

It's not like the thread reached dead end so

Kert wrote: 6o3b5i

ZenithPhantasm wrote: o4w6s

Nice necropost.

It's not like the thread reached dead end so

Considering no one replied for 5 months I would say its dead. Now peppy will take all of our pp for necroing this thread.

wide jump and short sliders and yeah, skystar and fanzhen

-

Different patterns hold different object densities and challenges, however in general 90°angles do tend to be the hardest because you are not moving in a flowing motion as most movements in the game generally follow. This in mind, the difficulty of moving at an angle doesn't contribute to the difficulty of actually reading the note a super large amount. Patterns that change, however, do hold a larger difficulty in reading, and so it would make sense that patterns that are all 90°and change direction and shape would be the hardest to read.

This isn't with any calculations just a question for what people would think so here goes
Would closer notes that greatly increase object density and fill the screen up more, or would notes far away from each other and require more eye movement to do be harder?

Edit: would slider bodies be considered in how difficult they are to move in, such as fast long sliders being harder to read, or would slower bigger sliders be worse?

derminYagami wrote: 4c3k6s

Edit: would slider bodies be considered in how difficult they are to move in, such as fast long sliders being harder to read, or would slower bigger sliders be worse?

A single slider isn't very difficult to read because players can it in some retrys. Also only fast sliders or slow sliders are not difficult to read too imo (e.g. fast sliders in the last kiai).
Frequent sv changes and overlapping sliderbodies could be really difficult for reading I guess. e.g. sv changes

omg imoutosan i love you

imoutosan wrote: 47225o

derminYagami wrote: 4c3k6s

Edit: would slider bodies be considered in how difficult they are to move in, such as fast long sliders being harder to read, or would slower bigger sliders be worse?

A single slider isn't very difficult to read because players can it in some retrys. Also only fast sliders or slow sliders are not difficult to read too imo (e.g. fast sliders in the last kiai).
Frequent sv changes and overlapping sliderbodies could be really difficult for reading I guess. e.g. sv changes

Fast sliders very easy to memorize... https://osu-ppy-sh.jeuxcrack.net/b/821549 >.> <.<

Also, memorizing is the opposite of reading.

chainpullz wrote: j2p6h

Fast sliders very easy to memorize... https://osu-ppy-sh.jeuxcrack.net/b/821549 >.> <.<

Also, memorizing is the opposite of reading.

I I said "A single slider"...
Of course, multiple sliders can be arranged into some really hard patterns (of reading), just like some hw's maps you listed.
And memorizing is the opposite of reading in some respects. But memorizing would affect the scores that players got. Since the topic is about the reading skills in scores, things that could be easily memorized should be somehow eliminated (or recalculated?).

Stacked, temporally unevenly spaced circles on Hidden.

chainpullz wrote: j2p6h

Also, memorizing is the opposite of reading.

memorizing something is a good way to learn to read it and similiar things you might encounter later

when you know how it goes, brains have a better chance of making something out of the jumble on your screen

For me : AR 11, BPM >250, massive jump, and pattern

Im dyslexic so every map difficult waht !!1!1!!1!??

Hmmm...
1. Amount of elements on screen. The lower AR and/or CS and/or higher BPM the harder it is. (EZDT? This is madness!)
2. Suddenly changing patterns/speeds. Those are really hard to catch, the higher AR and/or bigger spacing the harder it is.
3.

Why you do this

vietnam13231 wrote: 6r6j4

Hmmm...
1. Amount of elements on screen. The lower AR and/or CS and/or higher BPM the harder it is. (EZDT? This is madness!)
2. Suddenly changing patterns/speeds. Those are really hard to catch, the higher AR and/or bigger spacing the harder it is.
3.

Dude, you need to stop necroing threads. Not only once but twice wtf

This thread isn't over though
Just saying

Does this mean I can make a post with examples that comes to the same conclusion that's probably already been posted in here before but I can't be arsed to read through this thread.

Because I'm bored enough to do that.

will osu!!skills ever be able to count all your scores? a lot of peoples ez score arent in their top pp, but would be worth huge in reading, the same thing for precision if somone sets a score on cs7 hr, but it isnt worth enough pp it wont be on their top precision, i find that this would be a huge issue for reading considering how low pp for ez is. i know api restrictions but i was just wondering

derminYagami wrote: 4c3k6s

cs7 hr, but it isnt worth enough pp

Good joke.

Maps like https://osu-ppy-sh.jeuxcrack.net/s/33068

derminYagami wrote: 4c3k6s

will osu!!skills ever be able to count all your scores? a lot of peoples ez score arent in their top pp, but would be worth huge in reading, the same thing for precision if somone sets a score on cs7 hr, but it isnt worth enough pp it wont be on their top precision, i find that this would be a huge issue for reading considering how low pp for ez is. i know api restrictions but i was just wondering

I made a request for a feature in osu!api, so hope peppy adds it. If implemented, it would allow us to get ALL plays from the time of implementation, but all past plays are still lost to the void, sorry

Khelly wrote: 2m5eq

Does this mean I can make a post with examples that comes to the same conclusion that's probably already been posted in here before but I can't be arsed to read through this thread.

Because I'm bored enough to do that.

As long you were not the one that came up with the conclusion, sure. Multiple confirmation is a good way to solidify a theory.

Well, I just FC'd a map, and I think this is the hardest map to read I FC'd so far (Even harder because +HD).
https://osu-ppy-sh.jeuxcrack.net/b/824633
Satomi Sato - Le jour [Lost Future] +HD (99.77%)

There are lots of circles behind other circles, circles half behind other circles, there is a slider that I always clicked before I should have clicked, there are 2 sliders that I always clicked after I should have clicked... Lots of hard patterns for reading, and it gets harder because of HD, as I said before.

I'm not exactly a pro player, but I hope this helps with your tests o/

I'm thinking to calculate how cluttered everything is by taking total hitobject area, total overlapped area, and amount of path intersects or close to being an intersect. I'm just not sure yet how to put it all together yet.

abraker wrote: 6cx2d

I'm thinking to calculate how cluttered everything is by taking total hitobject area, total overlapped area, and amount of path intersects or close to being an intersect. I'm just not sure yet how to put it all together yet.

Should toss in slider velocity changes and spacing (distance snap?) changes as well. Probably as a nonlinear function. Also something to for the added rhythmic difficulty of patterns that start and/or end on blue ticks.

chainpullz wrote: j2p6h

Also something to for the added rhythmic difficulty of patterns that start and/or end on blue ticks.

I have actually been debating with myself whether to have timing changes as part of reading or not. I'm thinking to include them in tenacity, changing focus of that skill from how long you can do fast stream to how well you manage to keep the early/late "balance" and for how long. So essentially bpm changes, irregular 1/6 and 1/4 combinations, and fast long streams in a marathon map would produce the highest tenacity value if changed to such.

Another thing to consider is that there are basically 2 very different types of reading - density reading and speed reading. Density reading is pretty self explanatory. Lots of things on screen, have to pick out the order in which to click them.

Speed reading is a bit more nuanced but it includes the other extreme. Where you see so little of the overall picture at a time that you have to guess what is coming next if you want to keep up. Essentially when you take a map that's already technically difficult on ar9 and toss HR into the mix you don't really have the time to simply react to every stack, SV change, etc. Instead you develop a very general sense of what to expect based on how the music sounds (not song specific). Basically before a double even pops up on the screen you have this intuition for, this next part might be doubles. Having a general sense for what will come next is what allows you to recognize patterns at high approach rates.

Of course if the song is just your average ugu map it's pretty easy to know whats going to come next. It will almost always just be a mix of singles/sliders, a triple, or a stream. It doesn't take much reading to be able to do these sorts of maps at higher ar and higher ar also reduces the density reading requirement so overall people get the impression that higher ar is strictly easier to read or something (until they hit the speed where their eyes cant even keep up with simple patterns).

chainpullz wrote: j2p6h

Another thing to consider is that there are basically 2 very different types of reading - density reading and speed reading.

Yes. I'm currently working on the Reaction Skill which takes spareness chaos and then will be working on the Reading Skill which takes clutter chaos.

This is probably going to be useless with explanations but at least it will provide examples.

https://osu-ppy-sh.jeuxcrack.net/b/5528 +DT

The first thing that would make a map like this hard to read is at 00:22:553 (3) - . A lot of these older maps have patterns like this where the notes go back directly ontop of themselves and it's sometimes difficulty to tell where the 4th note is placed. The actual hard part of reading this map comes at times like 01:31:810 (5) - where there's what looks like a clusterfuck of notes. It's actually just a 7 note stream that moves itself around then immediately ends with a singletap right next to it. If it were just a stack of notes it'd be easy, but I always missing this part because I thought it was like some triples or something.

02:00:238 (1) - is also hard to read. Even though the map is slow enough to do this, I originally played it as a double + single and would alt the stacked two and single the last one because the notes aren't all stacked on each other. They're not a double + a single, they're a triple. Very visually misleading.

02:27:003 (5) - This has the same problem as before with the 7 note stream but the timing isn't perfect so you just have to know this is double + quad rather than streaming through the entire thing since they're visually very near.

https://osu-ppy-sh.jeuxcrack.net/b/3990

This isn't a very hard to read map, but I'm not sure where to put this type of thing. It's likely an oversight. Now, everyone that I've shown this map to ALWAYS misses at one part and their acc is usually in the 80's. I have a 97% fc on this, but the one part that is hell to get right is 00:27:173 (4) - because that 4 is stacked AT THE EXACT SAME POINT AS THE END OF THE SLIDERTICK. There's no way in hell you can tell this visually. You just have to look in the editor to get it right.

I guess it's a little hard to read in places like 00:36:456 (4) - because you have to be keenly aware of the timing differences between the doubles since visually there is no difference on the screen. Repeat for 00:38:955 (1) -

For places like 00:55:558 (4) - it's a lot easier.

https://osu-ppy-sh.jeuxcrack.net/b/3556

01:06:806 (1) - Streams like this are a lot harder to get right and I have no clue exactly as to why because it seems you can aim down the middle of them to get it right. Perhaps it's because your aim needs to be half slower than it should be as a single line of notes?

01:14:449 (5) - The timing here is really janky and mapped to some random shit in the foreground of the song. The aim is also really spaced if you're playing this DT. As with 01:21:152 (3) -

The inconsistant timing and weird spacing combined make it difficult for me to do.

https://osu-ppy-sh.jeuxcrack.net/b/26276 +DT

00:06:725 (4) - Streams of doubles are harder because they make your aim have to correlate with each double you press as opposed to one note.
00:19:600 (3) - Like the last map with its timing and spacedness.
00:25:350 (1) - If I wanted to include ability to technically aim these streams as harder to read, I would include such things like this.


https://osu-ppy-sh.jeuxcrack.net/b/4635 +DT

It's harder because it makes you cycle between singletapping and alternating with weird transitions like at 00:22:248 (6) -
00:56:857 (3) - This slider is almost hidden? Seems very hard to discern
01:11:858 (4) - Sliders with no note spacing inbetween are harder to get right. You have to basically stream this and the previous section and end your tapping on the slider exactly.
What this map has going for it is that most of the individual notes are neatly spaced from each other.

https://osu-ppy-sh.jeuxcrack.net/b/193

This map mostly just has an AR issue in relation to its reading.
00:07:146 (2) - Without knowing what's going on you're originally going to be confused as to what's happening in the centre.
00:24:490 (1) - Stacked notes with this kind of weird spacing for them Double single Double are god awful
00:26:271 (2) - Timing change for these stacks is what the hell but I guess it matches the music
00:45:209 (1) - to 00:55:896 (3) - is hard to time right. You have to LOOK at the approach circles very carefully because the sliders won't match your rhythm.
01:23:271 (1) - Timing difference here always broke me until I forcibly learned it
01:39:584 (2) - This aim is hard to get right to sync with your tapping because it's so curvy, but I don't know if that counts as reading.
01:46:709 (1) - as before, this part usually breaks me if I'm not careful because of the space change.
01:50:271 (2) - Another section of triangles to easily miss on from tapping too early. Not sure why.

http://osu-ppy-sh.jeuxcrack.net/b/24315 +DT
00:47:967 (3) - Notes overlapping like this are hard to get right
Repeat for times like 00:59:798 (4) -
Overall not too bad of a map

https://osu-ppy-sh.jeuxcrack.net/b/19012

I fucking LOVE this map nomod. It's great for singletap reading. First of all, it's ar6 220 bpm if you're going to be singletapping it. Hitting every note like in 00:41:147 (4) - basically requires me to semi-snap to every single note individually rather than go through it like a stream. Thus patterns like 00:49:049 (2) - are hard to get right.

Once you've figured out your aim though, the only hard to read patterns become things like 00:51:459 (3) - with the stacking, 01:13:022 (4) - with stacking, 01:19:584 (5) - with overlap, 02:22:263 (1) - with having to aim in more than one direction between each note rather than in one, and 03:41:013 (1) - with making sure you follow the repeat slider to the end. I would always end it too early and sliderbreak. Probably because it's stacked undersomething else and hard to tell when it ends.

https://osu-ppy-sh.jeuxcrack.net/b/20305

Is another AMAZING singletap map. The reading in it boils down like mope where you have to semi snap to each note individually and aim for each of them or else you will miss. Consider this 00:48:563 (7) - where the notes kind of curve or around 00:50:479 (7) - as well. You have to follow the general flow of the "stream" or else you'll misaim for some reason. Same for around 01:54:525 (14) - where they're appearing side by side.

https://osu-ppy-sh.jeuxcrack.net/b/5413 +DT

This is hard to read in a very technical sense. The patterns aren't stacked weirdly on each other and there's hardly any shenangigans. It's just that you have to at 00:14:507 (1) - DOUBLE DOUBLE DOUBLE DOUBLE TRIPLE DOUBLE DOUBLE DOUBLE DOUBLE TRIPLE for many times in a row while having a quad at 00:21:149 (1) -
00:25:436 (4) - shakes things up a bit with some singles before forcing you to double again.

Entire sets of inconsistent amounts to alternate are confusing especially when done in a row like this

https://osu-ppy-sh.jeuxcrack.net/b/27690 +DT

I don't know what to say about this map. I can't even play it. It's like the grandfather of having inconsistant amounts to tap as well as notes stacked ontop of and around each other.

https://osu-ppy-sh.jeuxcrack.net/b/27368+DT

This map proves Wubwoofwolf is basically a scary ass motherfucker that's even better than you previously imagined. The series of doubles at the beginning is hard enough to get right, but you're juggling alternating every slider correctly ontop of very spaced "streams" of notes. It might only be 150 bpm streams, but aiming things like that is hard as hell on its own.

https://osu-ppy-sh.jeuxcrack.net/b/25953

The singletaps in this map are placed weirdly ontop of each other and I can't tell what goes where on sections like 00:27:298 (3) - and I refuse to actually memorise it because I want to be able to sightread it. Notice the 5 repeats ontop of the end of the original triple and not going back towards the beginning.

https://osu-ppy-sh.jeuxcrack.net/b/28286 +DT

Same as 777

https://osu-ppy-sh.jeuxcrack.net/b/19467

This is pretty much a harder version of mope with most of the same qualities. Patterns that are simply hard to read if you have the ability to aim the rest of the map are 00:54:880 (1) - for its repeated use of doubles, 01:02:630 (1) - for repeating exactly upon itself in an already awkward pattern, 01:47:130 (1) - for inconsistent stacking, 02:02:880 (1) - for also repeating on itself, 02:29:130 (1) - being like crocodile symphony's hard part, and 03:03:880 (2) - for doing much the same as some of the others but in a new exciting christmas tree pattern.

https://osu-ppy-sh.jeuxcrack.net/b/26707 +DT

My mate aireu spent time trying to fc this and I still have trouble ing it. At the 00:52:363 (1) - part just trying to hit every note becomes a challenge as I sometimes forget what the hell is even going on. I usually fail by 00:58:099 (3) -
01:02:290 (2) - Is also some timing jankyness.

I'm tired right now so I'll do more later since I'm only 1/3 through my old map collection.