spacing for intense sounds could be improved a lot.
00:23:728 (1) - this is an intense spot, with a kick and vocals, but its just a pause in movement. this isnt inherently wrong, but it doesnt make much sense when you compare it to the spacing of 00:23:572 (2) -, which is significantly more spaced and doesnt have a kick.
00:51:541 (5,1) - this spacing is massive compared to the rest of the section and I dont think the song is intense enough here to justify it.
00:56:384 (1,1) - compare this to 01:06:384 (1,1) - this. its the same part of the chorus rhythm wise but one is significantly harder than the other. 00:56:384 (1,1) - has awkward flow on top of 1.54x spacing, whereas 01:06:384 (1) - has the next slider a third of that distance. not only that, but 01:06:697 (1) - is significantly higher pitch than 00:56:697 (1) -, meaning it should realistically be higher spacing than 00:56:384 (1,1) - for emphasis.
01:10:291 - the groupings of three here are very inconsistent spacing wise despite being very similar in intensity. 01:10:916 (1,2,3) - compared to 01:13:416 (2,3,1) - for example. 01:13:416 (2,3) - is 2x more spaced than 01:10:916 (1,2) -, despite the former having two vocals and the later only having one.
try making sure sounds of similar intensity are spaced the same and that sounds which are more/less intense than others are spaced accordingly.
00:23:728 (1) - i agree with you about intense spot, but i've tried to follow the vocal that she sing, that word which give me thoughts that this note can be really close to the 00:23:572 (2) - because of the sound she sings 00:23:728 (1) - here sounds like it NEED to be low spaced, if you disagree with me feel free to reopen and i will recheck it.
00:51:541 (5,1) - lowered a spacing from 5 to 1 a little, i made that spacing to show a little pause in the rhythm to the players, it also looks good as a player, also this is a similar spacing on the other kiai 01:56:541 (7,1) - , imo all the kiais on song is pretty intense
00:56:697 (1,1) - ye first pattern is really greasy, nerfed it a little as a downed pitch
01:06:697 (2) - this one had a low spacing from 01:06:384 (1) - because i tried to follow the change of her pitch and change of circled flow in other position, also ig its spaced normally and covers a pitch
01:10:291 (1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3) - this three is consistent and had same ds and flow ig, 01:13:572 (2,3) - ye u right, im lowered a spacing of this a little bit, but i'll leave this jump for showing transition to other music in the song
NCs (new combos) should generally be placed on intense sounds but some in this map are incredibly random or inconsistent with previous sections.
00:10:134 (1) - this isnt really more intense than 00:09:509 (1,2) -, no reason to NC.
00:30:603 (1) - same as 00:20:603 (2) - but the first mentioned is NCed whereas the second isnt.
01:12:166 (5,6,1) - this is the same three note sound as 01:10:291 (1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3) -, but for some reason the first note isnt NCed and the last one is? something similarly weird is going on at 01:12:791 (1,2,1,2,3) -. just make it so the first of the notes in the three note pattern are NCed (01:12:166 (5) - 01:13:416 (2) - ).
02:17:478 (7) - theres the same problem in this section as the similar section I pointed out previously, but even if you disagree with my suggestions of NCing for the last section, at least make it consistent. 02:17:478 (7) - has no NC but 01:12:478 (1) - does. also you do 02:17:791 (1,2,3,1,2) - correctly in this section but not the last one.
in general, make sure to have NCs on the most intense sounds and not use them for minor ones unless theres a good reason. and while NCing is subjective, at the very least be consistent with previous NCs.
ye dude its real, its just my phobia about not looking good followpoints
00:10:134 (3) - deleted nc
00:30:603 (1) - im left this nc, but i've removed one from 00:30:134 (3) - and removed one from 00:30:916 (3) -
00:20:603 (2) - its just connected as a pattern with 1 so i will left it like this ig
01:12:166 - 02:17:478 mod fixed too i hope
Also rechecked all through the map and fixed all i have seen and ig it cool now
02:38:406 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2) - думаю парт занадто різко переходить з звичайного спейсінга до прям крутого, пофікси, чи шось придумай, бо це якось спонтанно + дуже складно
01:25:281 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,1,2) - у тебе тута монотонний звук, але ти спейсінг збільшив чогось, гадаю мож зробити його або як перші 1-2-3-4, або як ці 01:29:656 (1,2,1,2)
01:24:656 (2) - цей слайдер доречі я б зробив трішки довшим до синього тіка
00:57:312 (5,1,1,1,2,1,2,1,2) - ось тут змінити б злегка
конкретніше ось це 00:57:312 (5,1)
Зробити слайдер реверсом, і щоб рахунок йшов з білого тіка, а не з червоного.
Сам джамп після цього норм, додумай щось
я не бог модінга але
00:49:812 (10) - я б тут здвинув слайдер на білий тік, а на червоний плюхнув ноту, а бо замуть слайдеренд
01:54:812 (9) - те саме тут
ІМХО
враховуючи що це electronic, я думаю багатьом джампам не вистачає форми, хоча б якоїсь фігури, щоб вони читалися приємніше, і карта сприймалася більш ранкабельною
приклади
00:17:781 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2) -
01:22:781 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1) -
01:26:531 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,1,2) -
03:14:031 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) -
Вони непогано сиділи б на якомусь живому року або альтернатіву, але тут хочеться прям рівні джампи, я думаю ти розумієш про що я
раджу ставити Stack Leniency в вкладці Advanced на 0, щоб самому вручну обирати спейс в оверлапінгу. Бо бувають такі моменти де ти хочеш ноту в ноту, але вони у тебе стакаються і це виглядає не дуже.
Якщо ти це зміниш зараз, тобі прийдеться знову переглянути мапу на наявність помилок