beatmap discussion
New Discussion
Please sign in to post or reply
Timestamp
ctrl-c in edit mode and paste in your message to add a timestamp!
PraiseSuggestionProblem
Discussions
Sort by
00:05:346
00:15:942
00:15:942 (15942|1,15942|0) - 01:10:070 (70070|6,70070|5) - 02:07:261 (127261|6,127261|5) - is this double intended? I think 3-2-4 chord is too hard considering hard diff.
00:18:112
00:18:112 - Shouldn't there be quads for cymbal? I'm assuming you simplified to avoid a density spike but you could still use quads outside of 1/2 "streams" imo (00:18:112 (18112|0,19133|2,20155|1) - )
Last edited by Kurisu Makise .
Marked as resolved by Turrim
00:27:304
00:33:431
00:34:453
00:34:453 (34453|3,34453|4,34453|1,34708|1,34708|3,34708|0,34708|4) - 00:36:495 (36495|4,36495|2,36495|0,36750|4,36750|2,36750|0,36750|6) - quad is too much for Hard diff, maybe reduce to triple 1/1 minijack is better for both consistency and playability
Marked as resolved by Turrim
00:34:325 (34325|4,34325|2) - Should still be nerfed to a single imo. The pattern is pretty comfortably arranged but 1/2 chords are at peak density for this diff and there's also 1/4 stream. Too much to handle at once. I'd also move 00:34:453 (34453|3,34580|4,34708|3) - to 5-4-3 then to ensure it's also not too problematic for left thumb users.
Reopened by Kurisu Makise
00:34:325 - changed to single
00:34:453 (34453|3,34580|4,34708|3) - I changed the notes to 5-4-3 and adjusted the final triple's placement from the ring finger to the middle finger
Marked as resolved by Turrim
00:37:516
00:39:559
00:39:559 (39559|2,39559|0) - is it better to change 2-4 col that you made 00:44:410 (44410|3,44410|5,44665|2,44665|4) - ?
00:45:048
00:45:048 (45048|2) - 00:53:219 (53219|1) - I think these note can be removed because you didn't add same cymbal sound at 00:49:133.
Last edited by Rurvker .
00:48:240
00:48:240 (48240|1,48750|0,49261|2) - these notes can be also 1/2 LN that you emphasized at 00:47:729 (47729|0).
00:57:942
00:57:942 (57942|6,57942|5,57942|2,57942|4) - this quad is too big size considering musical phase also breaks consistency that you made 00:53:857 (53857|2,53857|5,53857|0). I think it should be reduced to triple and (this is optional, my subjective idea) made quad at 00:53:857 for big impression.
Last edited by Rurvker .
00:59:857
suggestion - 00:59:857 - I would put a note here since you you emphasize vocals here 00:59:985 (59985|5,59985|6,59985|2) - with a triple, so I would probably put the single note in col 4 and i would move this 00:59:729 (59729|3) - over 1 col to col 5
Marked as resolved by Turrim
Uhhh, sorry but I think this change does more harm than good. It would be more consistent to continue followinig emphasized piano sounds like 00:57:942 (57942|2,58453|3,58963|4,59219|3) - with 3 more LNs at 00:59:474, 00:59:602 (maybe rice here) and 00:59:729. Then the note at 00:59:857 is redundant since there's actually no consistent pattern for vocal around and focusing on it just this one time is confusing.
Reopened by Kurisu Makise
Marked as resolved by Turrim
01:00:750
01:27:559
01:27:559 - Notice that percussion's rhythm in this section changes. It's easy to hear around this pattern 01:28:836 (88836|2,88963|3,89219|2,89346|3) - and it goes like this every measure till 01:39:814, except 01:33:687. I'm not sure if you intentionally focus on melody and ignore some kicks like 01:31:006, or that's just a mistake. But either way consider emphasizing kicks to express song's variety. You also probably need to move hitsounds accordingly, unless it's intentional.
01:35:729
01:35:729 (95729|3,95985|3,96240|3,96495|3,96750|3) - nice anchor chord however it violates RC and also too hard considering Hard diff. Try to avoid with 125 - 367 trill.
Last edited by Rurvker .
01:37:006
01:46:963
this is subjective but i think for 01:46:963 - 01:51:048 - I feel like it plays kinda awkward but like its barely noticable, so I would suggest charting it differently ex: you could do it like this but there probably a better way to arrannge it than this https://youtu.be/RY-KuI8GKoM
Marked as resolved by Turrim
Reopened by Rurvker
Marked as resolved by Turrim
I think, the main reason of this pattern's awkwardness is that you tried too hard to figure out the exact snaps. I'm pretty sure this is just a 1/3 stream not played perfectly. And starting from 01:49:516 it sounds more like 1/4 triplets. More complicated things don't really make sense here, it's not a breakcore. Try approximating with those snaps, it'll make for a much more intuitive patterns (also ignore 1/2 kicks inside 1/3 streams, poly is too hard for this diff).
Reopened by Kurisu Makise
Marked as resolved by Turrim
01:55:133
01:56:027
01:56:027 (116027|2,116091|3) - 01:58:070 (118070|5,118133|4) - these 1/4 notes feel inconsistent; in this structure, you ignored some main piano sound and emphasized with 1/1 snaps where have hitsounds.
02:43:644
02:43:644 (163644|0,163899|1) - 02:45:687 (165687|6,165942|5) - aren't these LNs too low to emphasize with LN? Also it is slightly inconsistent compared with other diffs.
Last edited by Rurvker .
02:49:389
02:49:389 (169389|2) - 02:50:410 (170410|4) - 02:51:431 (171431|4) - 02:52:453 (172453|2) - I think these notes are emphasizing too small kick sound, maybe remove these notes and making 1/1 triple minijack can give more impression for players.
Last edited by Rurvker .