I never said "exact same distance" - you should be aiming to have similar intensity on every reoccurance of a pattern, that's what I'm saying.
You can generate pressure through angles, different ways of utilizing sliders and their hitbox/leniency, note patterning (triangles are more individually pressured than a straight line of notes, for example, since you have strong angles between the notes everytime rather than having to focus on a steady motion) among other things; this, for example, plays entirely differently from this example, even though there's the same distance snap between the two sliders each time.
There, that's one of the things I'm talking about :v
You can generate pressure through angles, different ways of utilizing sliders and their hitbox/leniency, note patterning (triangles are more individually pressured than a straight line of notes, for example, since you have strong angles between the notes everytime rather than having to focus on a steady motion) among other things; this, for example, plays entirely differently from this example, even though there's the same distance snap between the two sliders each time.
this is how they will actually be played
Since the player has no reason to actually complete 1 (as the map is continuing in the other direction) they will slip out of it early as to have more time to snap onto 2; you will notice this in just about any replay you watch, people do that. Effectively, this increases the timeframe the player has to hit 2 by about ~5-20% depending on the map in question (not even so much the OD) and decreases the distance travelled by about 0.7x DS in this example.
Also, the motion in this pattern is devided into three parts: the first curve (1), the snap between the sliders aswell as the second curve in the next slider (2) - things like these are to be considered when you want to deliver pressure and keep your map's level reasonably well-constructed.
Now the other example actually gives the player an incentive to complete the first slider (1) as it leads into the second one in one arcish motion - notice how the sliderpath is aligned with the angle towards 2, allowing the player to keep the same angle of motion between the objects, the only turning point being on top of 2 as it leads into the other direction afterwards.
In this case, the distance spacing is accurate, 4.45x as the editor says since you actually complete the slider, hence leave it at the same point that edit uses to calculate the distance.
Since the player has no reason to actually complete 1 (as the map is continuing in the other direction) they will slip out of it early as to have more time to snap onto 2; you will notice this in just about any replay you watch, people do that. Effectively, this increases the timeframe the player has to hit 2 by about ~5-20% depending on the map in question (not even so much the OD) and decreases the distance travelled by about 0.7x DS in this example.
Also, the motion in this pattern is devided into three parts: the first curve (1), the snap between the sliders aswell as the second curve in the next slider (2) - things like these are to be considered when you want to deliver pressure and keep your map's level reasonably well-constructed.
Now the other example actually gives the player an incentive to complete the first slider (1) as it leads into the second one in one arcish motion - notice how the sliderpath is aligned with the angle towards 2, allowing the player to keep the same angle of motion between the objects, the only turning point being on top of 2 as it leads into the other direction afterwards.
In this case, the distance spacing is accurate, 4.45x as the editor says since you actually complete the slider, hence leave it at the same point that edit uses to calculate the distance.
There, that's one of the things I'm talking about :v