Star map (Soleily Remix)

We didn't even get a response and instead went straight to a veto...okay.

I don't get the SR concern. This is similar to recent maps in terms of SR bloat like seiran's hana no tou bootleg or ryax's Wolves Standing Toward Enemies - both maps work well for their own reason. We could go over consistency but this is nothing remotely egregious in SR and I think the way LNs are being used here works, I already put my response that no one got back to.

I really don't think this needed a veto at all.

as someone who can comfortably play these maps and even have done them in DT (take a look at my profile), the sr concern is really overlooked. i mean, even you have nominated some pretty inflated maps in the past, and this isnt an egregious case :p

i won't add anything regarding veto reasons, but i personally think there shouldve at the very least been a discussion with the mapper. i disagree with the veto being posted so suddenly when there wasn't (apparently) any discussion between the two parties

Sorry it's my fault now the discussion is not on point.

I didn't see winter had already started a discussion on that. My internet lagged at school so I saved my post and the page. I forget to check the potential new posts so let me link that here.
#4762944

I'd heavily encourage establishing a proper discussion before jumping to mediation or a straight up veto.

The current miscommunication asks for that confusion to be resolved, and I would greatly prefer if we could discuss these points beforehand so at the very least both parties can make their cases.

Keep in mind I'm saying this from a neutral standpoint, with no consideration on the validity of the points risen or my personal thoughts on the matter.

Hello randomelol, my sincere apology for the issue. Actually i considered the past moderator's words 1822176#3277573/8846138 also i've checked the wiki so i thought the discussion is only needed before the mediation. (And I'll make sure it get some discussion before a mediation)

But…… No matter what. Missing Winter7z's post is my fault. Things had already happened. I can't do more but please let me express my apology for the issues.
For the mapper, for winter7z as well as the other modders/moderators who involved into the discussion. I'll take the responsibility if this is necessary, feel free to DM me and let me know what I need to do.

I'll be more than happy if we can move on to discuss the map now if possible.

The first veto has the same comments of not establishing any discussion before veto'ing 🤪
Veto'ing for "uncomfortable pattern" is a joke (especially when your rank indicates that you cant even play this map, how would you know its uncomfortable??), and the SR isnt thaaat bloated (it is a little, but not when compared with so many other already ranked maps).
I see nothing of substance here, stop tormenting the mapper and let them rank a fun map.

SR is just an associated issue based on my main concern --
pattern is unnecessarily complex (for no 'good' reasons) in my opinion

Even Crisper admitted it's slightly bloated. Yea, it's slight, however.. still relevant and caused by my main concern.
In addition, SR is just a perspective for reviewing maps, I feel it's not a big issue to brought it up here with a relative brief content.

We can review the SR thing again after address concern in pattern designs

@Crisper Please refrain from making passive aggressive remark about someone's concern, whether you agree or disagree with the initial concern someone made, please express them in civil manner. Saying that their veto is a joke , pointing about someone's rank in order to nullify their concern, and modding as "tormenting the mapper" are hostile and very far from what we expect out of proper discussion.

And this goes for anyone that want to participate in the discussion. The initial veto procedure concern already been resolved and we hope that moving forward you guys able to conduct the discussion properly, no matter whether you agree or disagree with the opinion.

about LN consistency in the section between 03:57:737 - 04:24:029

I think its a valid concern since its a bit too much freeform compared with what the song calls for, even in my interpretation of it.

• 03:57:737 (237737|3) is clearly a vocal LN, don't see any issues there
• 04:02:456 compared 04:13:242: I agree, there's a progression going on but the density gap between the two patterns is a bit overkill, i've nerfed 04:13:242 a bit and now should be coherent.
• the last transition starting at 04:21:332 I really don't see the point. I've changed a bit to be more fitting of the overall map structure but honestly it was fine before. The break at 04:22:849 now emphasize properly the percussion drum as I intended to do before but now is clearer.

As for 05:04:478, I've arranged to be more fitting of the overall 1/8 structure usage in the map, like the other transitions/bursts.

Now, for the elephant in the room, "Star rating bloating"

"1/4 gaps can work well as 1/8, while 1/8 has a risk to burst the SR, so we rarely seen it in most other maps' design"

1/4 gaps CAN work as well, that's the keyword here. Not the case for this chart, where heavy 1/4 usage is already present in almost every dense section. So, how do I emphasize the prevalent sounds in the music in a already dense as heck section? Messing with release gaps is one of the ways to do it without actively changing the density on the map. But, why 1/8 then?

1/8 gaps work here because I really avoid to use staggered releases with those and the gap itself isnt too strict because of the low bpm. A 6* 178bpm should be able to have a lot of leeway to explore technicalities like 1/8. And about the SR issue, 1/8 gaps arent as abusive and exploitable as other odd release gaps that are really common in ranked maps nowdays like 3/16 or 2/12 and its actually harder than those for the player, so I really don't issue whats your issue here. 1/4 COULD work, but so as 1/8 and so on.

And about the ending burst... As I said, thats nothing new as the ranked section goes, and the patterning is really straightforward, following the extended vocals + exquisite synth pattern that isnt found anywhere else in the song. I really don't see why it could become a issue, but for now I normalized the LN lengths and releases as mentioned in #4763481/12652823. I hope this can clarify your concerns and if its not, please lay down your concerns more clearly in the thread.

Yea yea, here goes my response.

Re: 03:57:737 (237737|3) is clearly a vocal LN, don't see any issues there

Lmao you changed the pattern after my post and now you say that you 'don't see any issues'.

I've taken a ss of your old pattern vs. new pattern
Right: your old pattern | Left: your new pattern.
https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/19467234/e9b2

In case the SS expired, I'll send the old version map (before my veto) to google drive for people to check. https://drive.google.com/file/d/1azgFNVdSMEj_G2-iBW3NyXhlSOqm2oBQ/view?usp=sharing

It used to have consistency issue in expressing but it no longer that much of issue. Though still by any means, because the vocal started at 03:57:821 instead, so should the LN.

Re: 04:02:456 compared 04:13:242: I agree, there's a progression going on but the density gap between the two patterns is a bit overkill, i've nerfed 04:13:242 a bit and now should be coherent.

It's better now yes.

Re: the last transition starting at 04:21:332 I really don't see the point. I've changed a bit to be more fitting of the overall map structure but honestly it was fine before. The break at 04:22:849 now emphasize properly the percussion drum as I intended to do before but now is clearer.

It's a fair explanation to me. I have no more concerns on that. You can keep that.

Re: As for 05:04:478, I've arranged to be more fitting of the overall 1/8 structure usage in the map, like the other transitions/bursts.

It's also better now yes.

Re: I hope this can clarify your concerns and if its not, please lay down your concerns more clearly in the thread.

For SR

' SR inflation isn't necessarily the problem, but a symptom, or an indicator, of a problem ' --- referred from the discussion under another map 1095471#1446669
Again I am not saying SR is always a concern while pushing a map to ranked. It can be, but never as a cause. And why I feel the SR in this map is a problem is because it's caused by unnecessarily complex and unsuitable LNs.

And I also didn't say 05:58:411 is the only pattern lead to SR concern. It's just an extreme example I can found within this map.

Some other 'unnecessarily complex' examples are just like what I mentioned in the original post:
01:30:433 (90433|1,90433|0,90602|0,90602|1) - why emphasize those to complex release gaps there. It's not even the start point of the vocal. Just a random and sudden complex pattern which doesn't fit well.

or I can provide one more for bigger sections:
04:24:029 to 04:45:602 to why in such resting section, you used more harder 1/6 release gap than other more intense sections.
Such design really confusing me, and it's just appear through out the map randomly.

My concern is still the same, I feel the 1/6 and 1/8 LN release is unnecessary complex. Should just nerf all to 1/4. or if you want to keep those, you should make those into a overall more consistent state.

Or can you send a more detailed explanation for the situations when you used 1/8 and 1/6 instead of 1/4 if you feel confident enough of your design?

Thank you!

Sorry for the first bit, I probably just forgot that i've checked your concerns earlier and thought that the map was already like this (ADHD brain goes brr). But moving on:

Your last standing concern is "unnecessarily complex" patterns. It is true that I focused much more in the map structure using the song mostly as a baseline for the patterning, but nowhere I can find, both in RC rules and guidelines that there's a "wrong" way to map a song. To explain it better, lets talk about some exemples of "unnecessarily complex".

"osu://edit/01:30:433%20(90433|1,90433|0,90602|0,90602|1) - why emphasize those to complex release gaps there. It's not even the start point of the vocal. Just a random and sudden complex pattern which doesn't fit well."

• this emphasize the pitch shift in the synth + the snare sounds, which I think is more fit to emphasize here since the vocals are already pretty emphasized by the break that came before it. Every time the pattern repeats is pretty much the same reason, with the consistency in mind.

"04:24:029 to 04:45:602 to why in such resting section, you used more harder 1/6 release gap than other more intense sections.
Such design really confusing me, and it's just appear through out the map randomly."

• that's just low density inverse pattern, the release here is tight as the vocals there follow a swing pattern. Lowering the releases there would make 1/12 mini-lns that would be much more frustrating to play than some 1/6 releases.

Again, you don't need to agree with me and you even may dislike this map getting ranked, I don't mind. But vetoing what you don't like and saying its "unnecessarily complex" feels disrespectful not just for me, but for everyone envolved with this mapset. I shall ask for reconsideration.

Re: this emphasize the pitch shift in the synth + the snare sounds, which I think is more fit to emphasize here since the vocals are already pretty emphasized by the break that came before it. Every time the pattern repeats is pretty much the same reason, with the consistency in mind.

it's consistently expressed between the different phrases where this kind of long transition vocal appear.
But consider the overall structure of the kiai section, the snares are not consistently expressed, you are not emphasized other snares why only here.
Also I don't feel snare is fit-able to be emphasized like this, if it's transition between phases, or have a loud reverse sound like 01:28:242 then I would more agree with the current pattern. Currently a triple is already enough imo, no need to adjust the LN length imo.

Re: that's just low density inverse pattern, the release here is tight as the vocals there follow a swing pattern. Lowering the releases there would make 1/12 mini-lns that would be much more frustrating to play than some 1/6 releases.

I disagree with this again, as the overall structure you are trying to build up the flow by LN gaps. But for such section you didn't build any transition. This doesn't feel right imo. Especially there actually flow in intensity in the original music. One example can be the reverse sound at 04:40:209

Re: But vetoing what you don't like and saying its "unnecessarily complex" feels disrespectful not just for me, but for everyone envolved with this mapset. I shall ask for reconsideration.

I respect you as well as the ppl who involved with this mapset. Veto, however, is just a 'subjective opinion', not targeting on anyone.
I see the map has some improvements, but I am still concern about the LN usage. So I don't feel like to unilateral revoke this veto at the time being.

hi winter o/ I can explain some of the patterns you pointed out. In general, from my view the whole map is meant to be progressive with the LNs, so patterns aren't meant to be 100% consistent as it's meant to show progression :3

To respond to the examples you mentioned:
01:20:321 - 01:25:714 -> From the start the LNs here are meant to emphasize the harmony(?), same with 01:21:164 (81164|0,81206|1,81248|2,81501|2,81543|1,81585|0) - these emphasize the same sound which is fading away, which is why it's dumped and the LNs get shorter.

01:26:051 (86051|2,86051|1,86136|3) - I do not see the issue with LNs like these - from my perspective it's the same as all the other similar patterns where it's emphasizing the harmony - and filler LNs for better flow with the structure is nothing new as we see it in many other LN maps on the higher end, and I think it works here too - i didn't have any problems when playing this.

01:19:310 - This is different as it's focused on the background synth, it's most notable at 01:19:647 (79647|2,79647|3,79815|2,79815|3,79984|2,79984|3) - since the synth from what I'm hearing does fade out, subtly but it does fade out in each beat which is why the LNs get shorter each time. This applies to all the similar patterns after as well

01:39:872 - This is for percussion. Many other LN patterns throughout the chart do the same thing for percussion

01:19:394 (79394|2,79563|1,79731|1) - There are many "ghost" notes in this entire chart, this is one example that's meant for progression and to highlight the music here. We see this in many other charts in ranked that utilize ghost notes in streams - it could be for the vocal and/or the continuous synths which I find both to be valid use of ghost notes here and is fine.

01:30:265 (90265|0,90433|0,90602|0,90770|0,90939|0,91107|0,91276|0,91445|0,91613|0,91782|0,91950|0,92119|0) - Honestly I didn't feel anything intrusive when playing this, the anchor was not that noticeable to me especially since the chart does contain many more anchors throughout, but sure we could fix something like this if needed.

00:24:029 - #4292049/12580048 For the most part it follows a consistent pattern choice apart from occasional LN stacks for pitch

01:15:939 - 01:16:445 - similar and louder sounds compare to 01:14:928 - , but use single ln
These are different sounds, not following the same thing

02:04:478 - I don't understand the issue here..these streams are not meant to be doing something specific, it's simply following the hihats and percussion. I've nominated many maps like this - this has never been an issue for anyone, so why now?

02:34:478 - has a rising harmony here that 02:39:872 doesn't have.

02:46:613 - Could improve this I agree

Overall I can definitely take a look in regards to consistency but a lot of these examples are intended as they do not follow the same sound compared to what you sent, and are often used to emphasize specific portions of the music, like the background synth or the vocals, sometimes through dump, release gaps, or linear LN patterns. It's a logic many LN maps follow with similar intentions and results, so I do not see why it is an issue here apart from inconsistencies that we can definitely address. I think the LN logic and choices here are quite clear with what is being followed.

As mono said, this map is following song expression through various means, like difficulty progression and emphasis through variation, but it is in no way inconsistent in this current state. I honestly don't see any actual problems on your pointed suggestions, so I think its boils down mostly to a mapping preference, since the logic behind the LN usage is clear enough for me. If you want, could you be more especific why you think its feels random?

i'm going to chime in since i played this earlier and have a few thoughts related.

Below i'll mainly focus on the 1/8 LN gap (around 43ms), as that's the thing i feel the most uncomfortable and not natural throughout (it seems mentioned in OP as well, but not being fully responded yet).

i will jump to the 3rd kiai first, as there i can see these patterns 05:16:107 (316107|3,316276|1,316276|3,316445|1,316613|0,316782|0,316782|1,316950|1,316950|3,317119|3) - are seemly consistent to express the same sound (the harmony? idk what sound it is exactly is but i can get it), but they play awkward due to the gap being too tight and interchange between other normal 1/4 gaps.

You can make argument of how other higher level map uses tight release gap sometimes, but with how rest of the pattern's difficulty in this map is, i think these really stand out too much in a not good way.

--

Related but a bit different topic is how these type of things being done really inconsistently in the first 2 kiais, with how the tight gap affect gameplay they just feel really random when playing, i will just list some examples but there might be a lot more:

01:20:321 (80321|3,80490|3,80490|0,80658|0,80827|0) - vs 01:25:714 (85714|2,85714|0,85883|2,85967|0) -
02:58:748 (178748|3,178916|3,179085|3,179254|3) - vs 03:04:141 (184141|1,184310|1,184563|0,184647|1,184815|1,184815|0) -

It feels like the position of these gaps are always changing everytime it appears and no consistent focus, i get it might be progressive purpose for the 3rd kiai to finally have all of them but i think they should be at least organized, and in current way it's just unpredictable.

Proposed solution:

i don't have significant issue with the overall concept as it has been seen in some other maps being ranked as well, but imo the execution could have been much better, in current status it just plays a bit too awkward and inconsistent, here is my suggestion:

• The very tight 1/8 gap can be reduced to somewhere in between 1/4 and 1/8 to make it smoother, i.e. 1/6 or 3/16.
• Make the design more consistent throughout each kiai, especially the first two which seems to be still kinda in chaos now.

01:20:321 - 01:25:714 -> From the start the LNs here are meant to emphasize the harmony(?), same with 01:21:164 (81164|0,81206|1,81248|2,81501|2,81543|1,81585|0) -

can get it, but the problem is that it only follows the 'flow' but don't consider their experience of playing and consistency. I think which is also mentioned in gz's post and muse dash's post, they explained it clearly so I will skip this

01:19:310 - This is different as it's focused on the background synth, it's most notable at 01:19:647 (79647|2,79647|3,79815|2,79815|3,79984|2,79984|3) - since the synth from what I'm hearing does fade out, subtly but it does fade out in each beat which is why the LNs get shorter each time. This applies to all the similar patterns after as well

I could fully understand that but,

first problem is that it feels too mess -- 01:19:647 - synth -> 01:20:321 - harmony -> 01:22:006 - vocal, mapper used three approaches to map in one part, don't think it's a good idea since music is quite unchanged in overall

Another one is that, is it worth emphasizing this with so many details? I don't think this is a very important part of the music, or a part worth emphasizing.
The synth is everywhere and then dropped by mapper at later part, which make it feel like it is overshadowing the main part.
And another factor is that I think part of the listening experience is also affected by the drum at 01:19:647, which makes it sound louder with the drum + melody. In fact, you can hear 01:19:984 faded a little at 25% speed, but I can't clearly notice it at 100% speed, compared to other parts

Additionally LNs plays awkward and don't fit the music, 1/8 gaps feel 'stick' and 'heavy', but synth is more disconnected, if you really want to express i think the better way is 1/4 -> 3/16 -> note or sth etc.

01:39:872 - This is for percussion. Many other LN patterns throughout the chart do the same thing for percussion

If it's for percussion sound then I don't understand why 01:40:377 (100377|3,100461|2) - are not lns

also arrangement of density are not reasonable, compared 01:39:534 - to 01:39:872 - , it looks like progression purpose, but turn to inverse then suddenly stop in the middle

01:19:394 (79394|2,79563|1,79731|1) - There are many "ghost" notes in this entire chart, this is one example that's meant for progression and to highlight the music here. We see this in many other charts in ranked that utilize ghost notes in streams - it could be for the vocal and/or the continuous synths which I find both to be valid use of ghost notes here and is fine.

yeah it's okay, but just as I said there's better way expressing, and the drums sounds are clear so it will be a bit strange to play. these ghost notes are a barrier to better note arrangement and accurately expressing music, if you find hard to deal with anchors and patterns could consider that

00:24:029 - #4292049/12580048 For the most part it follows a consistent pattern choice apart from occasional LN stacks for pitch

00:24:029 (24029|2,24197|2) - 00:25:040 (25040|2,25209|3) - they have same pitch, but different expression

00:24:703 (24703|3,24872|3) - 00:25:714 (25714|1,25883|2) - also

01:15:939 - 01:16:445 - similar and louder sounds compare to 01:14:928 - , but use single ln
These are different sounds, not following the same thing

Two sounds exist at the same time in this case and there is enough space to map, I think they can be expressed at the same time. Moreover, the music gradually increases, and the density becomes lower. It would be very chaotic if it suddenly switches to another expression

02:04:478 - I don't understand the issue here..these streams are not meant to be doing something specific, it's simply following the hihats and percussion. I've nominated many maps like this - this has never been an issue for anyone, so why now?

not said streams is not allowed but they just randomly put. I will just say I'm not saying can't, but this really trying to put down the ranked standard

02:34:478 - has a rising harmony here that 02:39:872 doesn't have.

oh I get it, but I still think they have significantly different density arrangement, 02:39:872 - just without that harmony sounds, can still buffed to reduce that difference

hello! so here again to answer some questions:

"can get it, but the problem is that it only follows the 'flow' but don't consider their experience of playing and consistency. I think which is also mentioned in gz's post and muse dash's post, they explained it clearly so I will skip this"

• consistency wise, it isnt per say consistent with the whole section, but its within the whole map since I repeat this logic every single kiai, with some density increase each kiai. Gameplay wise every single playtester of all different skill levels played it just fine and didnt find the flow awkward, maybe its just a personal thing.

"I could fully understand that but,

first problem is that it feels too mess -- 01:19:647 - synth -> 01:20:321 - harmony -> 01:22:006 - vocal, mapper used three approaches to map in one part, don't think it's a good idea since music is quite unchanged in overall"

• all of this emphasis can be traced back to the extended vocal that repeats after two bars, you can see that after those vocals the rhythm emphasis is pretty consistent. Again, maybe there's a "better" way to do it, but I do think this is fine for this map, and would sure like to see ppl mapping this in another way.

"Another one is that, is it worth emphasizing this with so many details? I don't think this is a very important part of the music, or a part worth emphasizing.
The synth is everywhere and then dropped by mapper at later part, which make it feel like it is overshadowing the main part."

• In my opinion, its worth it because the reasons I mentioned before, emphasizing a highlight in the song doesn't need to be 100% consistent since its a highlight, a section of contrast between the whole section

"Additionally LNs plays awkward and don't fit the music, 1/8 gaps feel 'stick' and 'heavy', but synth is more disconnected, if you really want to express i think the better way is 1/4 -> 3/16 -> note or sth etc."

1/4 to 3/16 plays like the same, breaking the whole meaning of the patterning at using a bigger release, since with those tight releases you can't really cheese the LN without losing accuracy. You need to play those properly and that alone makes a huge emphasis that in my opinion fits the map as a whole.

"If it's for percussion sound then I don't understand why 01:40:377 (100377|3,100461|2) - are not lns"

• fixed, it was a minor inconsistency there

"also arrangement of density are not reasonable, compared 01:39:534 - to 01:39:872 - , it looks like progression purpose, but turn to inverse then suddenly stop in the middle"

• also fixed, made it more consistent within the progression

"00:24:029 (24029|2,24197|2) - 00:25:040 (25040|2,25209|3) - they have same pitch, but different expression"
"00:24:703 (24703|3,24872|3) - 00:25:714 (25714|1,25883|2) - also"

• fixed

"Two sounds exist at the same time in this case and there is enough space to map, I think they can be expressed at the same time. Moreover, the music gradually increases, and the density becomes lower. It would be very chaotic if it suddenly switches to another expression"

• didn't get what you said there, usually if you try to emphasize two sounds at the same time you won't emphasize any imo

"not said streams is not allowed but they just randomly put. I will just say I'm not saying can't, but this really trying to put down the ranked standard"

• again, i'm just following the percussion/hihats, they don't feel random as they just following the song 1 to 1...

"oh I get it, but I still think they have significantly different density arrangement, 02:39:872 - just without that harmony sounds, can still buffed to reduce that difference"

• done ig

sorry for the fragmented text i missclicked the ctrl key when writing it www

yeah, i was experimenting with staggered releases there and it turned out a bit inconsistent. I've normalized the ln lenghts and gaps a bit so there's no more weird occasional long LNs like u mentioned out.

The patterns aren't 100% linear but they are following the same logic, just expressed in slightly different ways

This doesn't answer my concerns as to why patterns just change to whatever whenever it feels like it. As mentioned in #4292051/11480847, the music here is clearly following a linear rhythm. It's okay to not be 100% consistent, but again, the pattern choice here is just going all willy nilly. It feels like this is something only a mapper would understand when it should be something a player can understand and follow, which there isn't a strong foundation to follow and predict, completely throwing off what is being represented and, at worst, is entirely misleading with the music.

nah i agree with it

rearanged to be more clear with the ln usage. releases are all over the place for pitch relevancy but idk if its well done here

I still have concerns about the double inconsistency - they inconsistently appear on either the 1/1 or 1/2 beats despite the instrumental keeping a consistent motif this entire section. I think you should just have the doubles every 1/1 and remove any instance of 1/2, or keep the doubles for the piano chords.

This applies from 00:34:815 - as well except you should just have the doubles/triples stick to the kicks/snares, nothing else.

Same issue applies with 06:30:770 - this to the end regarding using doubles for kicks or not. Would just emphasize the kicks here

I think its mostly fixed now, heads up if more sections have major inconsistencies

00:25:377, 00:25:714, 00:28:411, 00:31:107 - double

00:25:546, 00:25:883, 00:28:242, 00:30:939 - single

done

The kiais arent strictly bound to the sounds, instead I use the song as a platafom to patterning. Trying to find strict reasoning to patterning there isnt what you should do, instead just following the "feeling" of the section for understanding the patterning is more correct. I understand you not getting this type of charting, but just know that is a valid expression as well and both of the BNs that nominated know what they are pushing forward

Wait so if it's not the case why was it so for #4117060 when it's the same issues?

I think trying to go for feeling isn't inherently bad but there still needs to be a cohesive foundation to what you're doing with your patterns. The music here is clearly straightforward and while it's okay to not be 100% strictly consistent, this just feels like the extreme of an opposite end. There's no consistency whatsoever, patterns change to whatever it feels like with no concrete basis behind them when the music does not warrant this kind of structure whatsoever - assuming that there isn't a lack of structure here which is my issue, there isn't a strong and coherent structure.

You still have to show some sort of rule/logic behind your patterns and in how they play even if it's not the typical consistency.

Also saying the two BNs nominated it in its current state is kind of dismissive. We wouldn't have QA if we left it at that, it may be fine to them but in the end the map is meant for the playerbase - not everyone will feel the same way and may find something problematic that the nominators did not.

reworked the ln consistency thing and some other issues, feel free to open again if necessary

It's definitely gotten a lot better but I still think some places are all over the place with following specific rhythms - mainly the melody.

01:20:321 vs 01:25:714 vs 01:41:894, etc..

01:27:063 vs 01:21:669 vs 01:43:242, etc..

01:23:692 vs 01:34:478, etc..

This is just on the first kiai, similar issues persist with the later kiais with their own ideas. It's mainly stuff like those

remap those inconsistencies pointed up and some others in the 2nd and final kiai

looks great!

The talking here is almost 100% unique to this section and suggesting to just follow the echoes at the backvocals is probably the most boring thing you can make in this section. Also following the talking, yet hetic is fine for gameplay and make this section actually interesting and not just a 20s sleeper

Looking back this is fine now, but if you're going to do this I think you should have the LNs only be used for the talking and nothing else. It really throws off the experience when you suddenly use LNs for the background sounds - trying to combine something with rhythm to something that doesn't feels like an incoherent and hard to understand thing to play and it's not fun

Specifically, remove 04:29:422 (269422|1), 04:32:119 (272119|0), 04:34:815 (274815|0), 04:39:310 (279310|0,279422|0)

For everything from 04:42:737 - where the melody comes in, I think you should remove the notes following the melody and only keep them from 04:43:748 as it's more noticeable and plays in a consistent snap.

this kinda contradicts with the other mods you did in the same section, but thats fine for me

just to point out regarding the star rating issue. I want to be clear that it does NOT go from 6.11 > 5.3. The 6.11 rating is only shown on the website, in game it shows 5.66.
So now with that said, having the climax of the song be a little denser resulting in a 0.3 sr increase is not a huge deal imo.

personally I think this section is fine in its current state. we already fixed the patterning to be less awkward overall. see thread here -> #4119153

you are correct that there is more left hand density at 05:58:748 - however, this is balanced with other places that have right hand density like 06:01:107 - . so considering the section overall, i think the hand balance is fine.

in reference to the LN lengths, I dont really think any are that egregious, i had already looked at this and you can see a mention of reducing an LN length in the thread linked above.

overall, in my opinion i think its fine as is. i dont have any issue with this section during play, my accuracy is very similar to other LN sections of the map.

same as crisper, it isnt a huge of a spike gameplay wise and the LN lengths are fine for me too

mkay

remapped

02:07:343 - change to single
02:10:124 - remove, this was never mapped before

okay

remapped as well, hope it fixes it