00:01:161 (1161|1,1337|3,1337|1) - avoid jacking that high increase the difficulty are they non at higher difficulties. the jack has not used on the top diff. this applied to similar parts.
ping had asked for some other opinions so ima just give my take on some of these mods and how i'd personally respond to them:
for this mod in particular, I wouldn't say this is even a "jack" to begin with, I really don't think that it's that abnormal to have a pattern like this in a hard, nor does it require much coordination. even if the top diff doesn't exactly have it, doesn't mean necessarily that the lower diffs can't incorporate different ideas of their own. i would leave this as is, there's really nothing wrong with this.
Thank you very much Steven!
My only concerns here was people mentioning that the part is relatively (even if only slightly) harder than the top diff, but your comment makes me realized that following how I play the stack here is not wrong because it does not caused more strain than the top diff.
I will leave as is
00:01:337 (1337|1,2043|2) - the chord is a diff spike beside the top diff has no using any kind indicates chords, consider to remove to stability. this applied to similar parts.
Not a proper response yet. Currently this is mapped using additive layering (chords not from kick or snare but from amount of instruments in that part). I knew this would cause spread problems ._.
I'll try to remap and make it the same somehow, but that might be difficult for me cuz I have to find a whole new layering concepts for the chart - that means a lot of changes.
would not say this is a diff spike either, this is barely affecting any sort of playability.
00:10:161 (10161|3) - Consistency issue
Seems this structure is similar or the same as 00:04:161 (4161|1,4337|3,4514|1,4690|2) - here. Therefore, this note needs to be at 3col to work better as you intended.
00:24:631 (24631|3,24631|2,24631|0) - the triple on calm parts is a big jump tbh. consider to adjust it.
i somewhat agree with famoss, but this happens for like multiple instances so i would personally just remove 00:24:631 (24631|2) - this note and other notes similar to it since I don't think it's that impactful in terms of your layering.
eh, optional. i would say mapper's preference here since i don't think the doubles are super impactful in hindsight but personally, i lean towards adding doubles because it indicates a different and heavier tone to the drumroll in comparison to the rest of the drumroll.
I will probably let cocoa still open this. There should be a way to add the chords here without ruining 00:55:426 (55426|0,55514|1,55602|3) - these risers but I can't think of a good way right now. However, if you can come up with one.
"i don't think the doubles are super impactful in hindsight" totally agree with this because the sound is emphasize through hitsounding here and the C in the original isn't really impactful.
However I also have 00:48:631 - this part that might considered harder, but maybe not cuz of the break. But I digress.
TL;DR - If the change shows the intensity better without interfering with the end bit riser LNs, I probably would consider but for now this seems fine in my eyes.
01:11:396 (71396|2,71573|3,71573|1,71749|2)- Using vocal as jack pattern 01:09:455 (69455|1,69631|1)-01:10:337 (70337|2,70514|2)-01:12:102 (72102|2,72279|2)-It is recommended to rearrange this part a little to achieve consistency with. suggest: https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/16518031/2344
01:15:102 (75102|0)-In the same vocal jack pattern below, the same note was not expressed in LN, but expressing only this part in LN is not suitable in terms of consistency. 01:15:631 (75631|1)-As there is no differentiated sound that can be used as an LN, like the melody of, I think it is appropriate to use it as a normal note.