We'll Be Alright

00:00:500 (1,2,3) - 1 is related to 2 and 3 but is supposed to represent a completely different sound?

00:12:062 I feel this sound matches the vocal a lot better as a circle than a slider end. It could help with sightreading too because the vocal phrase is a change in rhythm, which is tough to figure out when swapping gameplay between vocals and instrument tracks

00:24:875 (5) - based on the way you're mapping rhythm in this section, this long repeat slider just doesn't really fit

would be better to do something similar to 00:23:000 (1,2,3) - imo

00:43:000 (2,1) - ctrl-g would fit the guitar here more

00:43:312 (1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,1,2) - not sure if jumps fit intensity here? but also the flow is kinda weird.

00:44:562 Should be an NC to match 00:37:062

wondering why 00:49:718 (2,3,4) - and 00:50:656 (2,3,4) - for what seems like the same things

00:54:562 (4,5,6,7) - these bursts are really out of place tbh

01:12:375 (3) - maybe move to 383,268 for better blanket

01:16:281 (3,4) - the way the 4 is curved goes against the flow, a wider angle would fix.

01:52:531 (6) - this isn't on anything

01:52:921 (3) - a circle would have more impact here imo cuz at the same time it would give contrast to 01:52:609 (1,2) - which being a stressed, continuing strings sound

02:06:906 could make this vocal clickable for consistency with 02:08:781 (4,5,6) -

02:08:000 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7) - any reason for this combo to be harder than the combos following? I don't think it fits since its not the intense section. mapping like rest of combos would fix.

02:16:437 (4,5,6) The low slider velocity gives this an unnecessary stop-and-go. It might be tough to cross the entire screen, but my recommendation is to lower the spacing and flip the horizontal direction of 5

02:22:531 (1,2,3) - this looks wayy to hard and doesn't flow well well to the next pattern. I think making it more of a triangle pattern will fix.

02:30:187 (10) - move to 431,199 for blanket + better overlap with slider

02:30:500 (1) - i would give this more emphasis in relative to 02:30:031 (9,10,11) - since its playing on a pretty loud crash

02:33:937 (4) - would change to circles tbh

02:47:843 (1,1) - would reduce spacing between these 2 for playability

02:48:000 (1,2,3) - this maybe would be fine but the patterns before make this angle from 2 to 3 wayy to fast and hard. i think moving 3 to left will fix.

03:14:093 (2,3,4,5) - definitely would give this pattern more spacing emphasis because compare to 03:12:218 (2,3,4) - , the song starts getting louder and more intense around 03:13:625 - so it would be more intuitive to have 03:14:093 (2,3,4,5) - spaced out more compare to 03:12:218 (2,3,4,1) - imo

03:14:562 (5) - the slider reverse here feels kinda underwhelming while the song's intensity at this point is pretty high imo. could try a more active rhythm here

03:29:875 (2) - since different sv maybe nc to signal that

03:48:312 (1) - i think this slider relates too much to the previous and the sv change feels wrong

03:52:062 (5) - move to 320,122 for blanket

03:58:937 (2,3,4,5,6) - wide angle into acute plays really weird, would suggest remapping

04:08:859 (6,1) - wtf is this spacing

04:28:937 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - this pattern seems vert comfy and very mouse drifty, tbh some of the combos after this are also the same. i think u can refer to #3401267 to the same with 04:31:437 (1,2,3) - 04:35:187 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7) - and those are the main ones imo

04:40:343 (1,2,3) - nothing in the music really supports a sudden linear pattern when you use it nowhere else in the whole map, change

04:55:031 - it'd be cool if you have a rhythm that has this drum active imo

04:56:750 (5,1,2) 5's tail touches 2. You could space them out or exaggerate the overlap further

04:57:531 (6) - nc this