Low wrote:

[cheesiest's Expert]
00:30:025 (1,2) - i don't see why these objects are so close together. it feels like i'm holding back to have to play this. i recommend making it a tad more spaced out ok
00:36:110 (5,6,7,8) - making this a bit more curvy would look a bit better. try this nah, tbh i think the way i have both rn are cool yeah

SPOILER

00:38:853 (5,6,7,8) - ^
00:50:253 (4) - two grids down to avoid an overlap with the previous (2) alternative fix of flipping 2 vertically
01:20:767 (9) - the flow here would be improved by quite a lot to me if you reversed this. ya

skinnyjimmy wrote:

[Yoeri's Insane]

00:03:625 (5,6) - Consider switching these notes on the timeline, I think it plays a lot better this way I disagree.

00:03:967 (7) - If you do this ^ make 7 stack on top of 5, it flows very nicely here. Here's an example https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/1903995

00:08:082 (5) - I really like this at 276, 28 but it's your call if you want to move it or not Not really, it's a bit far.

00:09:110 (5) - Consider moving this to 172, 164 just so it stacks with the shape made by 00:09:625 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - also i think it flows better For the flow it doesn't make a difference, and the stack can't be seen.

01:31:567 (3,4) - I suggest you switch these notes on the timeline, it plays really well because of the circular motion that it creates. It feels really nice to play I can't really do that due to consistency.

Really fun map, GJ on it! Thanks!

Low wrote:

[Yoeri's Normal]
- you should use tick rate 2. it fits better with lower leveled diffs and fills in beats that are missed on account of the fact that normal difficulties generally aren't supposed to have complicated rhythms. Tick rate 2 is too dense compared to the hitsounding.
00:16:825 (4) - a finish doesn't belong here. there's no finish sound in the music, therefore making this sound very out of place. Changed to a soft whistle.
00:25:225 (4) - ^ There's definitely a finish here.
01:37:396 (1,2) - the ends of these sliders are unsnapped Oh what the hell
01:57:453 (2,3) - this rhythm would be slightly off-putting to newer players. i'd assume that a player of that skill level would be expecting the same rhythm as previously ( 01:51:110 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) ) and would mess up around this area because of that. this issue isn't really your fault (it's just the nature of the song), so i recommend moving 01:57:453 (2) forward to the next white tick and spacing it accordingly. Done.
[Yoeri's Insane]
00:16:825 (3) - finish doesn't belong here for the same reason as the normal difficulty. Fixed.
01:28:139 (3) - ^ ^

nothing much to mention in this difficulty on account of the fact that it's mapped very, for the lack of a better term, safely Yes I'm a scrub who uses Distance Snap in Insanes.

Aqo wrote:

no posts yet?

beautiful map. gogo speedrank

Estellia- wrote:

cheesiest

00:01:396 (1,2,3,4,5,6,1,2,3,4,5,6,1,2,3,4,5,6,1,2,3,4,5,6) - I hate you just for this. elaborate
00:16:053 (5,6) - Distance is too great !??!! seems fine
00:22:653 (8,9,10,11,12) - ^ !?!?! kind of fits song lol and tbh ........... ..... .... it's fine
00:50:767 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,1,2,3,4,5,6,7) - This part can have more beats to it it could but it will not
01:16:825 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16) - Holy shit elaborate

I can only mod this overall, because if I did go into detail this page would be loaded. First off, your beginning contains too many squares, try to utilize other patterns. Also, with only hitcircles at the start will make the map boring. Spaced streams are a horror to play, so try to not have too many of those. An Extra would be more jumpy than it is streamy, so take note of that. Quite some copied patterns as well. I also cannot emphasize enough on distance snapping, distance snapping and distance snapping. Flow is also a major problem. Although streamy Extras are fine IMO, your streams somehow feel wrong and placed wrong. Not your best work if I had to judge.

ok cool, im gonna map a streamy song w/ !!!!!!!!!!!!!! jumps HAHHAHA yeah YEAH just jumps
what are you talking about distance snap? i have consistent spacing throughout the diff +the patterns are varied but you can't see that since you don't really understand how my structure mapping works lmao. and i don't get how my streams are placed wrong and feel wrong or where the flow is a problem. please elaborate

Estellia- wrote:

YoeriN

Oh my, this is the actual first time I couldn't find even a little bit of mistake in a map. Only certain flow problems such as:
00:13:053 (1,2,3) - This formation may seem boring (There are a few more) I disagree.
00:26:082 (1,2) - More flowy It is.
00:48:710 (3,4) - ^ ^
01:42:882 (1,2) - ^ ^

Good distance snapping BTW. Good normal overall~

YoerI

00:03:967 (7) - The jump distance from 5 to 6 doesn't fit 6 to 7 What do you mean it doesn't fit?
00:27:625 (2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,1) - I suggest making the stream curve more Don't see why.
00:52:139 (1,2,3,4,5) - Flow looks weird The flow is great.
00:56:253 (1,3) - Make them curve more Why?
00:57:625 (1,2,3,4,5) - Flow seems weird Not really.
01:24:625 (7) - Blanket 1? Ah, fixed.

Honestly, nothing to say about Insane. It's rather plain, and there were many reused patterns. You should also make the chorus more jumpy than the other parts because the chorus is where the song goes HYPE HYPE HYPE. As the Insane should be more stylized, yours will seem much more plain. I like how it's stream-based though.

Low wrote:

[Zexous' Hard]
00:01:396 (1) - finish for emphasis uh...ok
00:16:825 (3) - add a whistle here like you did for the previous two circles? it sounds off not to have a whistle due to the higher pitch in the music whoops, yeah
00:20:253 (4) - remove the finish here. the sound isn't in the music ok
00:23:339 (1) - finish; it's in the music. ok
00:58:653 (7,1) - you should make this a small jump. i think it'd work well with the one note combo. o-okay...
01:16:825 (1,2,3,4,1) - these almost-overlapping sliders are kind of ugly. please space them out by a grid or two so they don't overlap ok
01:22:139 (1,2) - i don't think it's a good idea to have such a sudden, large jump, especially in a hard difficulty. i strongly recommend doing something such as this that gives players more leniency in terms of hitting the notes deal

SPOILER

01:23:167 (5) - this should be snapped to 1/6 fixed
01:28:139 (3) - add a whistle here for the same reason as previously mentioned.
02:00:710 (1) - remove the finish from the end of this slider. it ruins the emphasis of the next finish okay

Estellia- wrote:

00:15:796 (3,4) - Rather forced ? This feels very natural to me
00:23:339 (1,2,3,4,5) - Feels weird I don't see the problem
00:24:367 (5,1) - Looks weird with broken flow Intentional
01:07:225 (1,2) - Fix this I quite like it
01:18:539 (2,3) - Transition of the sliders seem awkward, maybe curve slider 3 to resemble 00:47:339 (4) - Doesn't work as well
01:26:425 (1,2,3,4) - Feels weird Moved pattern a bit away
01:29:167 (1,2) - Fix this I still quite like it
01:52:825 (2,3) - Looks unnatural How?
01:55:225 (1,2,3) - Looks awkward Tried several things, in the end all I could do was just curve it more

I like the beat placement and blanketting thing, its been fun modding your map because there were only flow and pattern problems. I like it~

1. 01:12:710 (1) - I don't really get why do you tend to skip finish at the times like this one. A normal addition would work just fine

1. You may want to lower normal claps' volume in the very beginning (00:00:025 ~ 00:09:282). Also, I'd add them to 00:09:967 (3,7) (or soft ones at the very least, although none of these samplesets represent the actual "techno" clap)
2. 02:01:567 (4) - whistle is correct but still sounds wrong

1. 00:18:539 (4) and 00:21:282 (4) and 00:26:767 (5) - (sorry, commas will break the timestamps) the clap sounds unnecessary
2. 00:28:482 (1) and 00:31:225 (1) - and 00:36:710 (1) - I think patten combos are incorrect and therefore should be changed; you can use Yoeri's Insane as an example of everything
3. 00:30:025 (4) - a new combo would be cool
4. 01:18:539 (2) - how about you start adding claps again?
5. 01:22:139 (1,2) - this is Hard, not Insane. Reduce the jump
6. 01:59:682 (2,3) - ^
7. You forgot to add NORMAL finish on these

   1. 00:01:396 (1) -
   2. 00:12:367 (1) -
   3. 00:39:796 (1) - ?
   4. 00:50:767 (1) -
   5. 00:56:253 (1) -
   6. 01:01:739 (1) -
   7. 01:04:482 (1) -
   8. 01:05:853 (1) -
   9. 01:07:225 (1) -
   10. 01:12:710 (1) -
   11. 01:23:682 (1) -
   12. 01:29:167 (1) -
   13. 01:31:910 (1) -
   14. 01:33:282 (1) -
   15. 01:34:653 (1) -
   16. 01:37:396 (1,2,3) -
   17. 01:40:482 (1) -
   18. 01:42:882 (1) -
   19. 01:44:253 (1) -
   20. 01:45:625 (1) -
   21. 01:48:367 (1,2,3) -
   22. 01:59:339 (1) -

   Why?

1. 00:29:853 (2) - a normal finish would fit that whooosh sound way more than a soft one (not speaking of the horrible soft clap you set here for some weird reason)
2. 00:32:253 (2) and 00:35:339 (2) - see above
3. 00:50:767 (4) - should be a bit further from the slider like (2) in 00:49:053 (2,3) -
4. 00:56:253 (1) - soft clap sounds poor with soft finish
5. 00:58:996 (1) - this drum whistle is, uh, beyond poor, like, it doesn't fit the music at all

TicClick wrote:

Yoeri's Insane

1. You may want to lower normal claps' volume in the very beginning (00:00:025 ~ 00:09:282). Also, I'd add them to 00:09:967 (3,7) (or soft ones at the very least, although none of these samplesets represent the actual "techno" clap) I did add those claps, but I don't think it's necessary to lower the volume, since the percussion itself is not lower in volume than later in the song.
2. 02:01:567 (4) - whistle is correct but still sounds wrong Sounds better with whistle than without. :/

TicClick wrote:

cheesiest's Expert

1. 01:12:710 (1) - I don't really get why do you tend to skip finish at the times like this one. A normal addition would work just fine added whistle since idk what u want lmao

cheesiest wrote:

TicClick wrote:

cheesiest's Expert

1. 01:12:710 (1) - I don't really get why do you tend to skip finish at the times like this one. A normal addition would work just fine added whistle since idk what u want lmao

TicClick wrote:

[Zexous' Hard]

1. 00:18:539 (4) and 00:21:282 (4) and 00:26:767 (5) - (sorry, commas will break the timestamps) the clap sounds unnecessary I hear three equal beats there, it sounds imbalanced with claps on only 2. Keeping
2. 00:28:482 (1) and 00:31:225 (1) - and 00:36:710 (1) - I think patten combos are incorrect and therefore should be changed; you can use Yoeri's Insane as an example of everything RUDE and I revised combos but not really using Yoeri's
3. 00:30:025 (4) - a new combo would be cool HEY NICE THAT'S WHAT I THOUGHT TO DO IN PREVIOUS SUGGESTION
4. 01:18:539 (2) - how about you start adding claps again? I...I don't like your sass...
5. 01:22:139 (1,2) - this is Hard, not Insane. Reduce the jump O-..o-okay...
6. 01:59:682 (2,3) - ^ C-...can I actually keep this?..
7. You forgot to add NORMAL finish on these

   1. 00:01:396 (1) -
   2. 00:12:367 (1) -
   3. 00:39:796 (1) - ?
   4. 00:50:767 (1) -
   5. 00:56:253 (1) -
   6. 01:01:739 (1) -
   7. 01:04:482 (1) -
   8. 01:05:853 (1) -
   9. 01:07:225 (1) -
   10. 01:12:710 (1) -
   11. 01:23:682 (1) -
   12. 01:29:167 (1) -
   13. 01:31:910 (1) -
   14. 01:33:282 (1) -
   15. 01:34:653 (1) -
   16. 01:37:396 (1,2,3) -
   17. 01:40:482 (1) -
   18. 01:42:882 (1) -
   19. 01:44:253 (1) -
   20. 01:45:625 (1) -
   21. 01:48:367 (1,2,3) -
   22. 01:59:339 (1) -

   Why?
   Sorry, my headset is not top notch quality, thank you

1. by TicClick
2. by OnosakiHito
3. by [Shi-Ra]

Priti wrote:

#BlameZexous2014

1. What makes the gap big exactly?
2. Why is the hard->insane gap acceptable when it's just 0.1 smaller?
3. What diffs should be modified?
4. This is a mania mapset, standard is the secondary mode here. Historically, secondary modes were allowed to have HUGE gaps, even very recently.

Tear wrote:

This is about the least helpful you could possibly be.

1. 00:51:452 (5,1) -
2. 01:22:139 (1,2) -
3. 01:24:882 (5,1) -
4. 01:46:310 (3,4) - ?
5. 01:48:367 (1,2,3,4) -
   
   (EDIT: other BATs also mention spaced 1/4 repeating sliders could use less distance in between (doesn't matter if they appear in a row or with tiny pauses, like these))
   
   
6. 01:59:682 (2,3) -

1. The following patterns do not follow the music, as it contains nothing that sounds like 4 1/4th notes:
   
   1. 00:13:053 (4,5,6,7) -
   2. 00:14:425 (4,5,6,7) -
   3. 00:15:796 (4,5,6,7) -
   4. 01:24:367 (4,5,6,7) -
   5. 01:25:739 (4,5,6,7) -
   6. 01:27:110 (4,5,6,7) -
   What they should be instead: http://puu.sh/bpk6a/22da804d42.jpg

TicClick wrote:

1. The following patterns do not follow the music, as it contains nothing that sounds like 4 1/4th notes:
   
   1. 00:13:053 (4,5,6,7) -
   2. 00:14:425 (4,5,6,7) -
   3. 00:15:796 (4,5,6,7) -
   4. 01:24:367 (4,5,6,7) -
   5. 01:25:739 (4,5,6,7) -
   6. 01:27:110 (4,5,6,7) -
   What they should be instead: http://puu.sh/bpk6a/22da804d42.jpg

TicClick wrote:

[Zexous' Hard]
The gap is created by a high (in comparsion to Normal) slider velocity. The overall spacing (including random slider to slider jumps) is also a problem. Finally, you could use less 1/4 (not really necessary, though). These jumps also only make the situation worse:

1. 00:51:452 (5,1) -
2. 01:22:139 (1,2) -
3. 01:24:882 (5,1) -
4. 01:46:310 (3,4) - ?
5. 01:48:367 (1,2,3,4) -
   
   (EDIT: other BATs also mention spaced 1/4 repeating sliders could use less distance in between (doesn't matter if they appear in a row or with tiny pauses, like these))
   
   
6. 01:59:682 (2,3) -

In other words: reduce SV, reduce spacing a bit, re-map most of random jumps and fix all the jumps listed.

1. 00:04:139 (1) - Might as well make this a 3/2 slider with a repeat to accomodate the cymbal at 00:04:653? I don't know if it's just me, but it feels... awkward to skip it.
2. 00:17:167 - Why not use a finish alongside the whistle? The music here is very strong, you know.
3. 00:21:282 (2) - Not a must, but a slight curve like this would create a better flow.
4. 01:10:996 (2,3) - Try this; goes way better with the instruments here.
5. 01:38:939 (2) - Try making it look like this? Makes for a better flow and 01:38:939 (2,3,1) looks better too. Or change the rhythm to this if you want; goes along with the song nicely.

1. 00:07:739 (2,3) - Try this so you can emphasize the cymbal at 00:08:253? Feels weird to skip that.
2. 00:39:796 - 00:50:253 - I believe you can utilize more whistles here. Try adding one at 00:40:482, 00:43:053, 00:43:739, and places with similar instrument sounds.
3. 01:22:996 (4) - Might as well move to (351,158) so it'll follow 01:22:139 (3)'s flow? No need to worry about this not stacked with 01:20:939 (1); it won't affect anything while playing.

1. 01:22:139 (1,2) - Uh. Please make the spacing consistent, or at least make a jump that would be readable and easy enough for a typical Hard player. You should know why am I saying this.

1. 00:49:053 (3,4,1) - ...I don't know why but I personally find the rhythm change here to be very confusing to the point where it borders on being unreadable. Might want to take a more thorough look at this.
2. 01:50:424 (1,2,3) - The flow feels a bit weird here due to the linear nature of the pattern; just saying.
3. 01:58:825 (5,6,7) - ^

TicClick wrote:

if you feel like mapping, do so
there are still two huge jumps I'd strongly recommend you to reduce: 01:22:139 (1,2) and 01:59:682 (2,3)

Hinsvar wrote:

>Zexous' Hard

1. 01:22:139 (1,2) - Uh. Please make the spacing consistent, or at least make a jump that would be readable and easy enough for a typical Hard player. You should know why am I saying this.

Hinsvar wrote:

>Yoeri's Normal

1. 00:07:739 (2,3) - Try this so you can emphasize the cymbal at 00:08:253? Feels weird to skip that. Instead did the same thing I did at 01:57:625
2. 00:39:796 - 00:50:253 - I believe you can utilize more whistles here. Try adding one at 00:40:482, 00:43:053, 00:43:739, and places with similar instrument sounds. It'd be too much.
3. 01:22:996 (4) - Might as well move to (351,158) so it'll follow 01:22:139 (3)'s flow? No need to worry about this not stacked with 01:20:939 (1); it won't affect anything while playing. I don't think I understand? You want me to put it near (1)? I don't want to break distance snap.

>Yoeri's Insane

1. 00:49:053 (3,4,1) - ...I don't know why but I personally find the rhythm change here to be very confusing to the point where it borders on being unreadable. Might want to take a more thorough look at this. Rhythm change? I'm not having any reading issues here at all.
2. 01:50:424 (1,2,3) - The flow feels a bit weird here due to the linear nature of the pattern; just saying. I don't understand what's wrong with having linear patterns every once in a while.
3. 01:58:825 (5,6,7) - ^ ^

Seikatu wrote:

Hi, TicClick's request. Just suggestions.

Normal:

00:32:767 (1,2,3,4) - you can try something like this: good idea, and that combo makes sense

00:35:510 (1) - and maybe here: it seems hard to make that work, and I like how it is now

00:40:996 (1) - and here, like here 00:46:482 (1,2,3,4) - (But it will be repetitive a bit, lol) they way it is now makes sense to me, I think the 3/2 sliders add variety D:
01:29:167 (1,2,3,4,5) - suggestion: I like offbeat sliders and they follow a sound in music... but it's the first kiai, the 1/4 just appears and that part might be too confusing. changed

01:37:396 (1,1,1,1) - since it's normal, this part may confuse new players.i'm trying really hard to come up with an argument to defend this precious thing but i can't... you win ;_;
01:43:396 - maybe fill this gap? done
01:44:082 - ^ ^
02:00:710 (1,1) - try to stack with 02:00:539 (2) - , or you can make 01:59:339 (1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2) - with double stacks. (dat triple stacks confused me at first play) changed to double stacks

Good luck!

1. 00:28:825 (3) - I would put a new combo here and also there 00:31:567 (3) - and there 00:34:310 (2) -
2. 00:56:253 (1) - use normal finish
3. 01:16:825 (1) - slider would fit that whoosh sound
4. 01:21:796 (3) - I recommend you to remove a repeat and put a note after the slider to emphasize the sound that is currently mapped to slider's tail

Yoeri wrote:

There is definitely something there if you listen closely.