large circles
approved| Name | large circles |
| Short Description | Uses larger-than-usual circles. Typically refers to maps with circle sizes below 3. |
| Long Description | |
| Parent descriptor | aim |
| Usable | True |
| Proposer | a bat |
| Type | modify |
| Creation date | 2026-06-29 21:36:03 |
| Last updated | 2026-07-06 10:01:55 |
| Status | approved by moonpoint |
Vote
92.86% voted positivelyyes (13): a bat, moonpoint, piklopedia, chowch, Metal Wings, maxb, [[[[[[, Erikillo, Visionary, wordle, Rita Summers, Dada, Hobbes2
no (0):
hold (1): squirrelpascals
Comments (8)
Comments are disabled for proposals with an outcome.
Comments are disabled for proposals with an outcome.
as per the github post linked below, seems like the plan is potentially to omit low stars when they automate this descriptor so yea seems like that'll likely be the case
Ignoring lower difficulties, I'd vote for this proposal.
Checking star>=3 and adding cs<3 returned around 5 times less maps than with cs<=3 in my collections, which implies a conscious decision from the mapper to make the circles big.
3 and below --> below 3.
means stuff at exactly cs3 would still be invalid under this description, but stuff like 2.5 would count.
i could agree with that
@squirrelpascals tbh that probably is what I'd prefer since I do think cs3 flat is a grey area, but I've been seeing a lot of cs3 maps be voted with the descriptor (and there are plans to automate this descriptor under the cs <= 3 idea https://github.com/apollo-dw/omdb/issues/106 )
i think if verbiage is changed to say "below three" then i'd say sure
3 is a little bit big but not big enough that its remarkable imo. Just like precision is considered cs6 and above
General consensus seems to be that large circles includes maps from 0 to 3. The description currently states circle sizes 2 and below, changing descriptions to 3 and below would better match with how the descriptor is being used atm