M4M[]
General
01:26:401 - The 100%/85%/whatever% hs volume for that feels just too much as the song just basically disappears there. Maybe use something like 60% as that would fit much better to the level of the song while not making the other objects around it significantly stronger
Easy
I think the new comboing is a bit weird since overall the song can be divided into "sections" that last for 2 measures instead of 4 so I think it would be better to fit them according to the song
00:31:201 (5,6) - Maybe the 5 could be curved like the 6? It would fit the way you use flow visually
01:25:029 - You might want to change the volume here to 85% to be consistent with other difficulties
Normal
00:52:115 - 01:03:086 - 01:05:829 - Should be clickables considering that all the other similar sounds on the downbeats are mapped as clickables
01:12:686 (2,3,4) - This kind of placement does not look good as you use the "normal visual flow" basically throughout the map
Armible
Considering you use 8/1 comboes on the first section you should reconsider it here 00:40:458 (1,2,1,2,3) - as there it just does not make sense. Basically the first combo is 5/1 and the second one is 4/1. Imo the most optimal way would be
https://puu.sh/xQLhP/85c8feac51.png as it would hold on to the 2/1 NCing while accurately showing the change in vocals
00:53:315 (3,4) - The spacing should be much less between these two considering the synths on the 4 and 5 are much lower pitched than the spacing would suggest. Overall you two favor 01:04:286 (3,4) - this kind of spacing anyway so i can't find the 2.4x spacing fitting at all
01:52:458 (1,1,1) - 01:49:715 (1,1,1,1) - Why are some of these 1/2 reverse sliders while some are 1/1 sliders? I personally find the 1/2 reverse sliders rhythmically not really working as there is nothing really rhythmically nor vocally that would really directly justify that kind of a slider usage so i'd suggest using either only 1/1 sliders and maybe sets of two 1/2 sliders to cover stuff like this 01:53:829 (1,2) -
Hobbes
00:51:258 (5,6,7) - 00:54:001 (5,6,7) - ect. Maybe you could differentiate the 1/2 and 1/1 spacing atleast a bit (or have some other kind of a indication of the difference) like you have done prior 00:45:772 (5,6,7) - 00:48:515 (5,6,7) - as players might misread them as 1/2s when you have got them used to that the 1/2s and 1/1s have slightly different spacing
01:32:401 (3,4) - Tbh why is this only like ~4* stars with stuff like this xD
02:00:858 (2) - I feel like it's a bit odd when the snare drum is under the slidertail when it seems like you are emphasizing some of the snares when you are emphasizing them when there aren't any kind of vocals in that section 01:53:143 (4,5) - 02:04:115 (4,5) - or most notably here 02:09:258 (3,4) -
Yami
Yes the rhythm choice in the first section does make theoretically sense but while playing it feels really off as some of the synths are next to unaudible with the hitsounds 00:32:057 (5) - and the significantly stronger sounds 00:31:543 - do not get any kind of representation through the mapping which is quite bad for the general rhythm as it basically discounts a lot of the sounds
00:45:086 (3,4) - As some of the following 1/4 gap sliders have basically similar looking spacing that these two sliders have in a similar way of patterning I think it would be better to make a new pattern out of these two or just increase the spacing closer to 2-2.2 as that is what you use most of the time for 1/2 spacing
00:54:858 (1,2,3) - 00:56:915 (6,7) - This kind of overlapping patterning. Is it cool? yeah. Is it different? yeah. But why is it different like that. The part it's mapped on is basically the same as 00:43:886 - and i don't see any kind of a overlapping there so it's not really a concept for a specific part of a song. I just don't get it why is it even there to begin with
02:00:686 - Why does the concept of 1/1 slider | grouped hitcircles | 1/2 slider just stops? There is next to no difference at all between the sections so shouldn't they be similar?
Broken
01:25:715 (1,2,1,2,1) - I feel like this would have much more fitting pattern if it was a sorta build up patterning as the increase is really rough from the tight stream into the huge spacing but the song isn't necessarily like that. I'd recommend something like this
https://puu.sh/xQRtm/3040fbe5be.png to really give a nicer feeling to the increase in movement overall throughout that pattern
01:30:173 (1) - Something cool would be to CTRL G this kind of sliders. It would give some kind of a tension to the hold, it would emphasize the beat on the next slider and on top of those points the back and forth movement of the sliders 01:29:830 (3,1) - would fit with the din-dun sound (tone change in the synthesizer)
01:49:715 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,5,6,7) - 01:52:458 (1,2,3,4,5,6,1,2,3,4,5,6,7) - I understand that the changes in the patterning are consistent and ect but the song doesn't really change between the two measure periods enough that this kind of changes would really be justified imo so I think it'd be better if you chose a single way to do that kind of a rhythm ^^;
[]
Good shit, best of luck to ya all