Here are all of my mentorship discussions, starting from 2019. Note that these discussions are informal in nature. If you are interested in becoming a mentee, read my mentoring page. If you want a more streamlined learning process, check out my guides.
I think the issue people have with lower diffs is that high diffs appear more interesting at first glance since there's more objects on the screen / the pace is faster
high diffs allow for more expressive mapping than lower difficulties assuming an equal skill level of mapping for all difficulties
more objects appearing at once = more interesting to look at
after I finish my sets I tend to study the high diffs more since they're more interesting to look at, however I always start my sets with the low diffs first so they don't feel like filler diffs
so in essence I'm mapping top each time I create a new diff, versus mapping top and making filler diffs below it
of course it's possible to create a non-expressive low diff similar to how you can create non-expressive high diffs
this relates to the idea of "assuming equal skill level of mapping for all difficulties"
experienced mappers are able to create low difficulties that are just as expressive as their high ones
higher difficulties just leave more room for mapping expression, assuming you actually make use of your mapping freedom there
music videos btw relate very well to song length theory in osu (in particular when you're mapping longer songs with multiple choruses, bridge, etc)
in music videos you should notice how the video director arranges the video in such a way that the different parts of the song have differences but share similarities at the same time
this is just one example of an idea in osu mapping that applies to other fields as well
more on song length theory: when you're mapping a shorter song it's easier to throw experimental patterns at the player since it's easier for them to retry
for longer songs that test endurance you generally want to be more consistent so the player doesn't lose combo at 748x
longer songs can still be hard of course they just tend to be consistently hard so players of that skill level aren't greeted by a difficulty spike 4 minutes in
in my unbreakable machine doll set I mapped the diffs in such a way that the probability of the player losing combo increases as the map progresses (thus rewarding players that actually fc it)
in other words, difficulty progression as a mapping technique
when a song is shorter there is less room for difficulty progression, but when a song is longer, you can do more interesting things as the player progresses through each chorus
put another way: it's easier to listen to music that makes you uncomfortable for 30 seconds than it is to listen to that same music for 4 minutes (talking about the "experimental patterns in shorter maps" idea)
of course you can still make longer maps with experimental patterns but those tend to get less plays unless they're genuinely fun to play (more so than being a pain for the player)
instead of thinking in terms of playability an alternative is thinking in terms of "(fair) level design" and "difficulty control"
difficulty control is particularly important in custom (tournament) mapping since you can't have significant increases in difficulty etc
some older maps have parts that are significantly harder than the rest of the map since the mappers and BATs didn't consider it an issue at the time
an example of difficulty control as a mapping technique would be significantly increasing difficulty for song emphasis
an example of a map that lacks difficulty control would be one that has unintended difficulty elements that make the map harder to play (whether that problem stems from rhythm, pacing, or something else)
the big black is probably a good example of a map that lacks difficulty control since it focuses heavily on traditional structure patterns
I believe drastic changes in difficulty can be used as a mapping technique and it's part of what makes some players prefer older maps over newer ones (which are usually "more streamlined")
found this picture from yaspo, which I think is relevant
also "The general playerbase is large enough that audiences will naturally form around maps that a lot of players can play" which explains why simple maps and old maps with easy parts are so popular
also applies to mapping contests since it's harder for the judge to judge your map if they can't play it (or if they can play it, don't find it enjoyable)
when a map has leaderboards then parts that might suck mapping-wise are seen as a challenge playing-wise
which is part of the reason I believe why older maps with awkward patterns are so popular with players willing to invest the time to fc those patterns
when a map is easier you can get away with more parts that suck since most of the playerbase can play your map
when a map is harder not everyone can play your map so the idea is to make sure that those that can enjoy it
just spent like 20 minutes mapping 2 seconds dont be me
advice I can give is to focus on completing the map and change stuff later if something doesn't work out
the more you map the more patterns you'll develop fast thinking for since you'll know what to do and get it right the first time
so in other words the same way you get better/faster at other stuff (e.g. for Japanese I used to be a slow reader at some point, but once you're familiar with the language you recognize the patterns and develop fast thinking)
some mapping concepts btw: when I follow a different layer of the music that would otherwise be unexpected by the player I tend to use a unique slider shape relative to the rest of the section to help differentiate it
also I use longer combos to help players remember certain parts of the map (since everything isn't the same combo)
longer combos in general allow u to do some cool stuff since if you usually NC every 1 measure then have a part where u NC after 2 measures then you emphasize both measures with one uniform combo
also I tend to use different quadrants of the playing field based on the song (whereas other mappers focus on placing objects in such a way that it fits with the map structure around it, not taking the song into account)
when deciding which quadrant to use I think the cartography pdf is relevant
don't remember if any of u read this but pretty big concept imo
take out the imo since it's part of design in general
going to start a new movement "weight mapping" and "weight mappers"
The movement-weight hypothesis: an object with more weight than the object before it is said to have heavier movement than an object with less weight than the object before it
now all that's left to do is to write a proof and mathematically calculate the heaviness of movements based on angles/slider velocity/x,y coordinates etc
then use the resulting algorithm to create a mapping tool that shows the ideal heaviness in movements for mappers as they're mapping
fun to think about and technically possible, although I don't know if anyone wants to spend their time doing that.... lol
2021-06-10
would be so easy to make this slider go downward to follow the map but I want it to point upward to follow the song
I assume a lot of mappers don't bother with remapping for motion and just do whatever
kinda hard to remap this part since I based it on stacking so I have to change all the stacks
2021-06-23
the reason I've taken a liking to thinking about weights in osu mapping is probably because older mappers used weight as a mapping technique without thinking about it (since the AR was lower and there were more objects on the screen, visual mapping relative to those objects was more relevant, and thus mappers may have used ideas found in design theory for their maps unconsciously)
newer maps tend to ignore this idea of weights and focus more on the experience of playing the objects at a specific moment instead (presumably because of high ar, slider tails no longer being used, etc)
since I have a lot of mapping experience with low diffs (and thus low ar) this could explain why I prefer using weights in my mapping (there are more objects on the screen at once and players spend more time in specific quadrants of the playing field, versus higher diffs that tend to move around the playing field faster
even my 2014 maps show weight theory in action (e.g. for https://osu.ppy.sh/beatmapsets/162996#osu/471782) I intentionally use sliders that point downward/upward and different quadrants of the playing field based on the song)
the art of whether to curve a slider like this
or like this
is something I took seriously since as early as 2014
the map also intentionally uses the lower half of the playing field for 00:58:831 - and goes up during 00:59:998 - before finally reaching the maximum weight at 01:02:664 - which also happens to be the start of the next half of the chorus + NC etc
sucks that so many new mappers are only ranking hard+ sets and never mapping low diffs
you can actually tell that these mapper tend to ignore weight in mapping (probably because they don't know about it from only mapping high ar)
2021-06-27
one of the reasons I like fanzhen's real to me map so much is that I believe it takes weight into account
part of the reason fanzhen's sliders go so well together is from taking visual balance into consideration
also like how fanzhen uses sliders that go up/down depending on the song (like I do lol)
you don't have to restrict this idea to just sliders btw you can also use movements that go up/down depending on the song
in other words, you can use heavier or lighter movements depending on the feeling of the song
sure it's fun/playable/rankable/etc but from a mapping pov weight wasn't considered in the making of it
this is one of the best examples of weight mapping in this diff
mapper isn't thinking in terms of weight though so this cool pattern was kinda rng and the rest of the map doesn't follow any specific weight patterning
flux3on is a new mapper but one of my favorite mappers simply due to how clean her symmetry style is (don't think I've seen anything like it before)
anyway with such a symmetry restriction how you place objects is more important
I think for this reason mappers that focused on symmetry in their mapping take weight into account more and using up/down movements based on the song
when mapping in this style whether or not the start of your NC is above the x-axis or below the x-axis is kinda a big deal
but when mapping became more free-form these ideas of having to care more about such visuals (lower ar = more objects on the screen at once etc) were lost
older mappers like fanzhen were around during this era and thus take weight into account
and since most new mappers/players aren't exposed to maps with weight taken into account (high ar, freeform, etc) their maps tend to ignore weight as well
experienced mappers/artists can spot flaws in works that would otherwise be unnoticed (for players, they might think it's weird just like how normal people can notice weird anatomy in art)
an experienced mapper/artist should be able to tell whether something was done "intentionally weird" for effect (although the extent of which something needs to be weird in order for a normal person to declare it intentionally weird is questionable)
this doesn't apply to just osu btw but anything creative, to what extent does something need to be weird for normal people to mistake an experienced artist's work for something else?
