Saturos-fangirl wrote:

[Normal]
00:19:04 (3) - stack the end on 2 It's fine. It's in-between (the middle of) the end of 1 and the beginning of 2.
00:20:22 (1) - align vertically with 4 It's fine, in my opinion.
00:25:35 (3) - stack the end on 2 See the first thingie I wrote. :3
00:32:65 (1) - improper stacking Yeah, I know. It stinks. It's as close as I can get to snap it, but thanks to stacking, it's not a problem!
00:33:05 (2) - partly hidden It's fine, in my opinion. The distance snap proves that, which I applied almost throughout the entire beatmap.
a note on inherit sections for changing hitsounds: the section should start a little before the hit so that the people who click early don't hit it while it is still in the previous timing section Meh... I don't know. Maybe I should change, or maybe I shouldn't. Sorry, but I'm not going to go Nazi here.


[Hard]
00:15:48 (3) - align with 2 Ew.
00:17:06 (1) - align with the end of 4 ^
00:23:97 (2) - align with 1 :/
00:32:06 (6) - stack the end under the fading 4? more :/
01:00:48 (6) - is this spaced correctly? it looks strange and out-of-place It's fine. See? It forms an equilateral triangle with the end of 4 and beginning of 5, or at least pretty darned close to it.
01:08:97 (4) - align over the end of 3 Eh...
02:10:94 (3) - align the end under 2 Fine, in my opinion.
02:11:73 (4) - align with 3 ^
02:12:92 (6) - align with 5 ^
02:14:89 (4) - stack the end under the fading 2 Sorry, but I don't feeel like it.



[Insane]
00:15:29 (4,5) - I couldnt tell if this was two sliders or a note on top of a slider. move 4 off of 5 plz ?
00:21:60 (4,5) - ^ ^
00:27:33 (5,6,7) - uneven, unintuitive spacing I didn't see anything wrong.
00:28:11 (7,8,9) - ^ ^
00:29:89 (3,4,5) - ^ and at this point i will stop pointing them out, but you should go find and fix them ^
00:42:52 (4,5,6) - i feel like these could use some hitsounds in them somewhere I don't follow.
00:51:96 (4) - stack end on fading 3 No, thank you.
00:56:53 (6) - align with 5 (move it down a bit) Fine, in my opinion.
00:57:13 (7) - align with 6 ^
01:09:17 (6) - align with 5 ^
01:09:76 (7) - align with 6 ^
01:11:73 (5) - stack under fading 3 Sorry, but no.
01:46:07 (5) - finish Egh...
01:59:69 (6) - align with 5 No.
02:00:29 (7) - align with 6 No.
02:02:26 (5) - stack under fading 3 Denied.
02:12:92 (8) - align with 7 I do not comprehend.
02:15:48 (6) - align with 5 ^

vytalibus wrote:

For some reason, whenever I open up [Normal] in Editor mode, it says [Easy]. Does anyone else get this same thing?

vytalibus wrote:

[Easy/Normal]
01:04:23 (1,2) - Not being too nazi, but if you're going for a straight line, fix (2). Huh? You point that out, but not all of the other sections with this kind of error? Besides, this is one of my "old" maps where I haven't really used 'no-grid' to place my beats exact, nor do I feel like sweeping the entire maps of this preciseness error.

[Insane]
DOOD. Cut out the finish hitsounds on sliders like 00:18:64 (7). ? I thought that was perfectly fine? Is anybody else having issues with this?
I have personal problems involving the unpredictable spacing on the verses part. Can someone back me up on this? Sorry, it's purely a stylistic error, in my opinion. I think I'll leave this. Besides, there are too-many-to-count maps which have this problem times ten. And if I recall correctly, they are pretty current.

Mogsworth wrote:

All difficulties:
-00:51:381 - Set preview point here. Actually, I think two beats prior sounds a lot better.

Normal:
-Remember the whole inherit timing section needing to be a bit early on clicked beats thing, so it can actually be heard the way you want it heard. I've never heard of that rule. And anyway, inherit timing sections really apply about 18 or so milliseconds before (sound-wise, anyway). Notice the way the timing sections are set for 00:55:15 (3) - .
-00:47:85 (1) - Either extend by 1/1 or shorten by 1/1. Honestly, I don't know if this makes a big difference game play -wise, but I extended this by 1/1 anyway. Let's see what others think of it.
-01:19:82 (1) - Add a Finish. Done.

Hard:
-Timing section thing still applies. Read my second comment.
-01:19:82 (1) - Add a Finish. Done.

Insane:
-Timing section thing still applies. Read my second comment.
-Look at your spacing very thoroughly. You can't have multiple distances grid-wise within the same timeline distance in the same combo. You can solve this by respacing or by adding New Combo marks when the spacing is different. Applying either of these methods where you see fit is your decision, though. Oh, come on! Give me a break! I really don't see the big deal about this. First, let me say that I spent hours upon hours of intense consideration on the soft sections, both the sounds (not in debate here) and the spacing alike. I am very contempt and at home with my decisions, and I am not just about to change them. Second, what is with this "New Combo because of different spacing" rule? I think it's been considered waaay too strictly, and it ruins a lot of brilliant beatmaps. Perhaps, it's just based off of personal preferences. Me, I like to keep most of my combos around the same length and just be overall creative with them. No jumps are going to mess with them, unless their something absolutely epic or whatever like 01:15:88 (1,2,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,2) - . I do respect your opinions on the matters, though, but I think these "issues" are being taken a bit too literally.
-01:19:82 (1) - Add a Finish. Done.

So yes. Starred. It may not look like a long list, but Insane needs a lot of fixing. ):

DaRRi MIx wrote:

why not map the rest part in Insane

JarJarJacob wrote:

Move all inherited sections 1/4 back. No, if you played the notes on time rather than not on time, there would be no problem.
Remove those awful single combo markers. HUH?

Hard:

01:04:43 (2,3) - Unsnapped. Okay, I will fix this in the next update.
02:14:10 - Kiai burst should be here instead of the one 1/1 forward. Who are you to tell me what should be or shouldn't be in such a subjective situation as this? I find this to be very appalling.

Insane:

Constant spacing changes within combos. Umm ... thank you?

Alace wrote:

haha try this