as from queue
please keep in mind that i haven't modded in a pretty long while so please bare with me (also i lost my template)
general
overall in the lower diffs, i feel like the need of mapping the beginning isnt there much. currently they feel too overpressured as a difference in spacing can't be made between sections. would delete the beginnings myself (ill still look at it tho)
normal
00:21:631 - feel like this is a sound worth mapping as the other drum beats (00:21:894 - and 00:22:158 - ) have been mapped too. i think making 00:21:894 (1) - into a reverse would work greatly here
00:33:736 (5,6) - usage of flow here seems inconsistent with 00:25:315 (5,6) - . try to make the feeling more similar!
00:33:999 (6,7) - have the same sounds as 00:25:578 (6,7) - but are mapped with a different rhythm?
00:41:236 (3) - consider NC here to help the player read the different timing gap. visual distance from 00:40:315 (2,3) - looks really similar as 00:39:263 (1,2) - and could potentially cause reading problems
00:49:657 (3) - same goes here
01:08:736 (5) - kinda feel like a NC fits here after having a what i feel like musical transaction from 01:07:552 (4) - to 01:08:736 (5) -
01:39:526 (7) - sounds weird imo to go to heavier emphasis here on the drums when the rest of the kiai this far was vocal-based. would be cool if this could get a nice finishing feeling to it with a special slidershape or anything.
01:50:578 (4,5) - movement seems to be broken here for emphasis, however on 01:33:736 (5,6) - the movement is already broken at the earlier note. consider making the movement more similar
01:56:368 (7) - same as before ya
02:13:342 - and 02:13:736 - would be cool to have some emphasis on these notes too as they are also very notable beats from the drums like 02:12:947 (1,2) - . leaving half of it out feels and sounds pretty strange.
advanced
00:08:342 (5) - imo would be cool to have this visually different from 00:07:815 (4) - for some extra emphasis. the sound played at (5) is way more unique and therefor i think deserves to look unique too.
00:14:394 (5) - consider making this a 1/4 slider to catch the sound played on 00:14:526 - . it stands out quite a lot imo and therefor is worth emphasising
00:20:315 (1) - end spinner at 00:21:631 - ? song starts changing here
00:24:526 (1) - not sure whether this really fits or not. the medley is changing however they give off the same visual feeling as 00:23:999 (6) - which doesn't feel right
00:36:894 (1) - can this be 2 circles instead? 00:37:157 - has a major impact in the song but currently feels underemphasised as it is not clickable while it should be. it's stronger than the head cuz of the extra drum additions.
01:04:526 (8,1) - swap NC? major drum impact on 01:04:526 (8) -
01:13:999 (3) - imo would be cool to have this slider be shaped
like this so that it "blankets" with 01:15:052 (4) - . also the slidershape seems inconsistent now as the other red anchor sliders had the anchor in the middle and this one doesnt
01:35:579 (4,1) - natural movement here doesnt fit. due to (1) needing emphasis, the current movement doesn't give the feeling that it has any. consider making a more unusual angle here or reversing movement (like on 01:52:947 (1) - )
01:47:684 (3,4) - can this be a little more different from 01:46:631 (1,2) - to show visually that the song is having a transaction with a special drum rift played here?
02:04:526 (3,4) - same here as before
hyper
shouldnt this be called a hard? hyper is inconsistent with the rest of the diffnames
check aimod for unsnapped objects
00:12:684 (7) - i think you can start making this a 1/8 repeat here. the sound is clearly on 1/8 and to make it somehow different from the rest of the section i think it would be a great option. dont forget to buffer it to blue tick tho!
00:16:894 (6) - samegoeshere
00:20:315 (1) - same point as in advanced diff
00:26:368 (8,1) - increase spacing? i feel like (1) deserves way more emphasis than it is given currently
00:31:499 (1) - seems like an accidental NC
00:34:789 (8) - 2 circles? extra melody that plays here clearly shows off 2 similar strength beats and it'd be cool to see that emphasised too
00:48:868 (4,5) - this looks,,, kinda weird. here i get that it are two different sounds but them being so close together, it makes it look like failed symmetry now. consider upping spacing or changing angle slightly to improve it
01:03:999 (6,7) - 2 buffered 1/8 reverses here? they are in the song and i think this is a great spot to capitalise off of them
01:13:999 (5) - is different in rhythm from 01:18:210 (5,6,7) - while the same drum patterns are playing. mind lining them up a bit?
01:36:499 (2,3,4) - feels weird to have these all aligned after (4) breaking the linearity at 01:32:289 (2,3,4) - . try making it more consistent.
01:39:789 (7,8) - 1/8? :3
01:47:684 (5,6) - can these also differ from 01:47:157 (3,4) - ? the drum changes so why doesnt the map?
01:48:736 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,1,2,3,4,5) - wew no direction changes here? booring. try to implement some to prevent stale gameplay and perhaps improve emphasis for certain notes
02:04:526 (5,6) - to make another point at those, arent the real strong sounds on the blue ticks anyways?
insane
00:12:421 (5,6) - and 00:16:631 (3,4) - have a major tapping emphasis inconsistency. mind choosing one rhythm for both situations?
00:20:315 (1) - yea u know my point
00:21:894 (1) - why not make the tail clickable here? its a way stronger sound than 00:22:289 (2) -
00:25:842 (6,7,8) - feels weird. having 00:25:842 (6,7) - fully clickable but 00:26:105 (8) - not while it being in the same melody? mixed emphasis here, not too nice. would make 00:26:105 (8) - into stacks too
00:33:868 (4) - 1/8 slider to catch the 1/8 here?
00:34:263 (6,7) - only stack in the melody ;w; maybe try something
like this to keep the symmetry that was done here (tail is on original spot of stack)
00:36:631 (7,8) - imo not very clear that its a 1/2 gap since 00:36:105 (5,6) - have visually the same spacing and are in 1/4, thus causes readability issues. try to make the look a little more different!
00:55:578 (6,7) - why not circles here? a strong presence of 1/4 starts here but is currently not visible in the map.
01:00:184 (9,1) - no spacing changes for emphasis ;w;
01:17:552 (2) - isnt in the same angle as 01:17:157 (1,3) - (nazi point but :3)
01:21:105 (8) - this felt better when playing when i had this ctrl+g'd. the linear movement from 01:20:842 (7,8) - isnt done really anywhere else so something circular would come less expected
01:38:473 (1,1) - i really dont like these NCs here. i get that they intensify the reading here quite a bit as the song intensifies a lot too, but i think that this is a bit too much. the movement on them is already really different so it should already give plenty of emphasis
01:55:315 (1,1) - saem
01:59:263 (1) - wish this note could get some more spacing emphasis.
02:04:394 (7,8) - this feels really bad after playing 02:03:473 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - as the movement change is so significant with such little reference to the song that it just becomes... very unusual for the very least. try to make the angle a little more like the rest of the section (or try flipping the position of (7,8))
extra
jump in od from here to ambients diff is quite big, consider upping the od from ambient a bit.
quite unsure about the clickable 1/8 in the beginning. compared to the rest of the note density they felt a little too much. would prefer sliders
00:20:315 (1) - same points as before
00:26:368 (1,2) - would be fun if you were to make these 1/8 sliders. gives a little more emphasis to the notes as the song changes
00:28:605 (9,4) - fix stack thx
00:50:447 (4,5,6) - vs 00:48:210 (3,4,5,6,7) - which rhythm should stay? (also join in 00:52:815 (4) - which should be made more intense by far)
01:11:762 (1,2,3) - would be cool if this were differentiated from the pattern as the drums here are in a different style (so i mean get them out of the overlapping)
01:13:736 (3,4) - not angled the same ;;
01:22:420 (4) - why the sudden major simplification? i dont see the need for it as the song doesnt calm down massively or anything
01:39:394 (1,1) - this being stacked feels wrong. i dont see the reason why all movement has to be killed at 01:39:657 (1) - cause the song intensity doesnt change at all
02:03:868 (4) - i get the aesthetical feeling of this being in the middle and all, but now it has more emphasis than 02:03:605 (2,3) - and thats not something that should happen
02:05:447 (4,1) - no spacing emphasis ;(
got bored of repeating stuff so, i think you can find out some stuff yourself
2/10 unsnapped bookmark ruined the experience
good luck!