[ Space ] wrote:

no kds

[Irre's Scorching Extra]

00:03:559 (5,6,7,8,1,2) - I don't understand this, you just break off and go into what appears to be a random stray note that has no correlation with the preceding and exceeding notes. I don't quite understand what you mean, but let me try explaining : 00:03:559 (5) - I've put this note far away, so the stream (can be slightly heard in the song) gets more interesting, as it is not part of the dominant beats anymore. Lower spaced to give it more contrast to 00:04:370 (1,2,3,4) - this, because it's well hearable. 00:03:964 (1,2) - I used a rather tight angle here to highlight the song again, which softens up to the next objects, because the song appears smoother.

00:09:741 (6,7) - Bad flow. It flows fun to me.

00:16:329 (2,4) - Ctrl+G each one seperately so they go in opposite direction to the others. I have tried it, but it plays horrible to me. Reason for that probably is that the transition 00:16:734 (4,1,2) - here won't work anymore, which I'd like to keep.
00:19:167 (1,2) - Ctrl+G, flow is not good here and is extremely jarring for any player to comprehend. Intentional, as it is the same sound in a short amount of time I will keep this pattern, to highlight its repeating structure. Also, this flows better than Ctrl + G.

baraatje123 wrote:

He already qualified (approved) today, so it'll be tomorrow

baraatje123 wrote:

When I fix it, I think Mackenzie should rebubble^4 (sorry for you having to rebub everytime ;-;)
The ByBy can qualify it

Hinsvar wrote:

I don't really feel like fully modding this map due to laziness (sorry lol), but I gotta say that "Clear/Bright/Sunny" is ambiguous... Consider removing all the adjectives in the diff names, seriously I used to have Drought as insane, spread was ENHI, then I needed to add a Light-insane, so I made the spread ENHIX (Old I got X), called Drought. Then Irre cam and wanted to make a cs 7 X, so I was a little annoyed that I (again) needed to remove a perfectly made up diffname (same as in my ranked map, old Insane was called "Vision") I still wanted to keep something special. I thought about Sunny insane, and then we decided, why not make the whole set that way. Easy is rainy, up until Scorching Hot for Extra

Also, for Irre's diff, you're free to use any CS you want, sure, and I don't want to ruin how you map, but CS7 combined with how you place the objects that are 1/4 beats apart from each other, and additionally, how jumpy the map can get in general, isn't really a good choice (and with OD8.5 too). The combination of CS7 and the jumps also make quite the difficulty jump from baraatje's Extra diff. I would personally use CS6-6.5 here so it won't be that extreme for players (although I believe there are people who love CS7 too). But if you think CS7 is fine, sure, I won't mind. Not my diff, but still replying here, Irre only maps normal maps, or cs7 diffs. I have never seen him map cs 5-6 (unless it's in a collab) CS 7 fits, and it is hard. If it were to be CS 4, IMO it would be even easier then my diff, the only reason it's hard is because of the CS. Does that mean it's bad? No. I think OD 8.5 is there to compensate for the EZ players who have trouble with the CS, so it's at least 4+

For baraatje's Extra, is the spacing change like 00:25:755 (5,1,2) really necessary? I mean, you spaced 00:04:775 (1,2) and 00:05:181 (1,2) normally. Oh, and I have to say that I can't see what necessitates the need of OD9 for this diff, but I will let it be for now. You are right, but IMO it feels better to have it a little different. The map would be a little boring it it uses same pattern over and over again rihgt?
Okay, unless your name is Blue Dragon

Good luck

Hinsvar wrote:

Also, for Irre's diff, you're free to use any CS you want, sure, and I don't want to ruin how you map, but CS7 combined with how you place the objects that are 1/4 beats apart from each other, and additionally, how jumpy the map can get in general, isn't really a good choice (and with OD8.5 too). The combination of CS7 and the jumps also make quite the difficulty jump from baraatje's Extra diff. I would personally use CS6-6.5 here so it won't be that extreme for players (although I believe there are people who love CS7 too). But if you think CS7 is fine, sure, I won't mind.

Irreversible wrote:

Baraatje, I've mapped some CS5 <_<

• 
  Offset is much here, 00:00:518 or 518
  
  [baraatje123 is awesome light insane, i want kill him!][list:1337]
  
  00:01:836 - Have a sound, add a note here!
  00:02:647 (2) - Not really like, change to circle plz!
  00:05:890 (2) - ^
  00:16:025 (2) - No sound, remove it
  00:19:268 (2) - ^ and blanket?
  00:23:728 (2) - Not really like, change to circle plz!
  00:26:971 (2) - ^
  00:28:693 (2) - Blanket?
  00:37:106 (2) - No sound, remove it
  00:40:349 (2) - ^ and blanket?

gokugohan12468 wrote:

Okay, I here because as your request but i just doing a Re-Check! (Sorry for late~ :3)

Legend:
Black: Not to Important
Red: Is Unrankable
Blue: If not change, I'm ask with other BN and QAT

[General]

• 
  Offset is much here, 00:00:518 or 518 Nope, the offset is 721, but then notes would be before it, so I needed to push it back by 4 beats
  
  [baraatje123 is awesome light insane, i want kill him!][list:1337]
  
  00:01:836 - Have a sound, add a note here! Im quite sure there isn't any
  00:02:647 (2) - Not really like, change to circle plz! Kinda intended, as I prefer sliders over circles, same goes for all the same below
  00:05:890 (2) - ^
  00:16:025 (2) - No sound, remove it Wut? It's the strong tada! with the finishes
  00:19:268 (2) - ^ and blanket? It's a perfrect blanket O.o
  00:23:728 (2) - Not really like, change to circle plz!
  00:26:971 (2) - ^
  00:28:693 (2) - Blanket?
  00:37:106 (2) - No sound, remove it Wut? It's the strong tada! with the finishes
  00:40:349 (2) - ^ and blanket? It's a perfrect blanket O.o

Sorry if my mod is bad~ (NO KDS if not change all) I changed 1 thing, so, kudos for you

Good Luck~

Quality Assurance Team wrote:

Disqualification Notice

Hello!

Unfortunately, the Quality Assurance Team has decided to disqualify this beatmap. The following is a list of reasons and examples for the disqualification. We do not outline every issue in detail, so make sure to take the idea behind each reason and apply it to the entire beatmap as issues might be found in more than the spots mentioned below. If you have any questions, please reply to this post and we will do our best to clarify any misunderstandings.

Easy

Mapping Quality

• 
  A few readability issues combining with some rather questionable patterns were wound in this map. These things lower playability of the difficulty and make unfriendly towards low-skilled players.

1. 00:26:667 (1,3) - extreme direction changes make no sense with the music and may appear confusing to beginners I personally have never found these sliders to be weird or unplayable. Yes, they have a "weird" shape, but does that make the user-unfriendly? No. Also, there has been said it makes no sense. If you set slidertickrate to 2, you can clearly see it does fit in, it has the red node, exactly on the 3rd slidertick
2. 00:25:045 (3,1) - unclear transition from (3) to (1) My English may have let me down here a little, as I might have misunderstood this, but in my opinion this is still a good flow. Because of the large circle, the movement is pretty lenient, and you can be off quite a lot (in sliders). This way, the movement from (3) to (1) is still proper, as it follows some sort of figure-8. I personally can't see why this has bad transition, aka bad flow
   

Normal

Mapping Quality

• 
  The amount of overlaps present in this map is too high. It results in low readability and untidy appearance of the difficulty.

1. 00:00:518 (1,1,2,3,4,5,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,5,1,2) - The map is 148 BPM, uses 1.2 SV, 1.2 DS and CS 3
   I believe all these factors (except BPM) talk about overlaps. I'll not make the circles smaller, as cs 3 is done for the spread (2,5-3-3,5-4-4-7)
   Raising the other 2 (either one of them) has to be done then. I know I map with a rather high SV (1.6 for normal, 2 for hard) on fast pitched songs. This song is not fast based, so I'll not increase SV. And then, the only thing left is to increase DS. 1.3 DS is in my opinion really high, and can be confusing, as this map uses 1/3 and 1/2
   
2. 00:21:802 (1,2,3,4,5) - Uhm, Did you select the wrong part? This has no overlaps or whatsoever

Hard

Mapping Quality

• 
  The 1/4 sliders are difficult to understand due to the way this difficulty uses spacing and organises patterns. They all used to be 1/4 doublets, but I got quite some complaints (either BN and QAT) that this was to hard and confusing. So I made some/most of them into sliders so they'd be easier to play. I still kept some 1/4 circles. Mostly in the first loop of the song, they are circles, and in the second loop of the song they are sliders. This is done for variation, with the fourth one in each loop being the other, again for some variation

1. 00:16:127 (1,2) - the jump here makes this pattern really confusing This is probably the only point in the whole disqualification post I can (slightly) agree with. The spacing is rather high here, for being 2 1/4 kicksliders. But things like that are used so much more nowadays. I know, this is "only" the third difficulty in the set, but that doesn't have to say anything. 1/4 is somthing that should be used there. And it does have indeed high spacing, but I personally find this much easier to read then if they are stacked or lowspaced. And on top of that, it's perfect symmetry, as (2) is a ctrl H of (1)
2. 00:19:370 (1,2) - there is no way to read the number of repeats used in these slidres before players hit them Well, it's a kickslider which is 1/4. How are these ever unreadable? If this really is the case, doesn't that mean that ALL maps with a hard with a kickslider should be disqualified? It's only 148 bpm, so I really don't so anything wrong with the usage of 1/4 kicksliders, as they fit the song really good, but this is purely subjective
   

If you happen to have concerns about this disqualification, you can contest the decision with this form. Before using this form, please read the instructions carefully.

The Beatmap Nominators may handle this mapset after the issues have been addressed.

Good luck!

###M

DahplA wrote:

No dude. 00:18:559 (1,2,1,2,1) - This part is very reasonable for DQ. Do you have stacking shown, because if not then now is a good time to activate it. Because 00:18:559 (1,2,1,2) - are all stacked on top, they are positioned above 00:19:370 (1) - a bit up and to the left. It's the result of the game's auto stacking mechanic. This needs to be fixed, although after reading the response it's safe to say the QAT didn't use the best wording. The 148 BPM has nothing to do with it in this case, just to clarify. All you need to do is change the direction of the slider 00:19:370 (1) - to something that does not face up-left.

Quality Assurance Team wrote:

Disqualification Notice

Hello!

Unfortunately, the Quality Assurance Team has decided to disqualify this beatmap. The following is a list of reasons and examples for the disqualification. We do not outline every issue in detail, so make sure to take the idea behind each reason and apply it to the entire beatmap as issues might be found in more than the spots mentioned below. If you have any questions, please reply to this post and we will do our best to clarify any misunderstandings.

Easy

Mapping Quality

• 
  A few readability issues combining with some rather questionable patterns were wound in this map. These things lower playability of the difficulty and make unfriendly towards low-skilled players.

1. 00:26:667 (1,3) - extreme direction changes make no sense with the music and may appear confusing to beginners
2. 00:25:045 (3,1) - unclear transition from (3) to (1) Made it more clear, made it flow better. Still kept the 3/2red node as it follow rhythm, but I reduced the sharp curve

Normal

Mapping Quality

• 
  The amount of overlaps present in this map is too high. It results in low readability and untidy appearance of the difficulty. Slightly increased DS (1.2-->1.26) and they seem fine now

1. 00:00:518 (1,1,2,3,4,5,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,5,1,2) -
2. 00:21:802 (1,2,3,4,5) -

Hard

Mapping Quality

• 
  The 1/4 sliders are difficult to understand due to the way this difficulty uses spacing and organises patterns. Tried to make this as readable as possible

1. 00:16:127 (1,2) - the jump here makes this pattern really confusing Changed distance
2. 00:19:370 (1,2) - there is no way to read the number of repeats used in these slidres before players hit them Moved the first doublet to an other place. Customstacked the other 3 to top right, making the reverses properly visible

If you happen to have concerns about this disqualification, you can contest the decision with this form. Before using this form, please read the instructions carefully.

The Beatmap Nominators may handle this mapset after the issues have been addressed.

Good luck!

###M

Quality Assurance Team wrote:

Hard

Mapping Quality

• 
  The 1/4 sliders are difficult to understand due to the way this difficulty uses spacing and organises patterns.

1. 00:16:127 (1,2) - the jump here makes this pattern really confusing
2. 00:19:370 (1,2) - there is no way to read the number of repeats used in these slidres before players hit them

Mackenzie wrote:

recheck

Quality Assurance Team wrote:

Hard

Mapping Quality

• 
  The 1/4 sliders are difficult to understand due to the way this difficulty uses spacing and organises patterns.

1. 00:16:127 (1,2) - the jump here makes this pattern really confusing
2. 00:19:370 (1,2) - there is no way to read the number of repeats used in these slidres before players hit them

so you should do what you did at 00:16:127 (1,2) - to all of your short sliders,not like ds +++,is the same music on all 3 of them
pls give 00:19:370 (1,2) -
00:37:208 (1,2,1) -
00:40:451 (1,2) -
a smaller distance like 00:16:127 (1,2) -

1. 00:03:762 (1) - are you sure that you want to end the slider on the 1/8 tick and not on the blue 1/4 one? This goes for all those sliders. It feels more comfortable with 1/4 ending imo
2. 00:13:593 (1) - Neither the spacing, nor the NC here really makes sense, because there is nothing in the music that needs to be emphasized at this point
3. 00:15:214 (1) - ^ If you don't agree, then I woud at least delete the NC on those all throughout the song

Baraatje123 wrote:

Yes please
Got no reply from Habi so I don't think he'll requal

Mao wrote:

Hello!

We have found some potential issues that we feel are important enough to address before continuing:

Rainy Easy

Misleading Slider Placement

• 
  The tail of the upcoming slider is too close and as there are no followpoints to guide beginners it is confusing. The best way to resolve this issue is to re-arrange this pattern in a more undestandable way.

1. 00:34:775 (2,1) - Can someone please explain this? I really don't understand it. This distance is even so I don't understand what you mean by too close

Cloudy Normal

Mapping Quality

• 
  Your spacing choice is rather questionable in the following parts as the majority of the hitobjects appear overlapped. The result of this is unpleasant/forced gameplay. Consider increasing spacing to x1.35. That's high O.o

1. from 00:00:518 - up untill 00:05:181 - there are a lot of overlaps, which do not appear intentional and could be easily fixed by setting higher spacing values
2. from 00:24:843 - untill 00:29:775 - same spacing problems

Inappropriate Gameplay Elements

• 
  The following slider uses an extreme slidercurve, which does not really make sense in the difficulty context and feels overdone/random. Making the angle of the curve less agressive should resolve this problem.

1. 00:11:262 (3) -

Fixed all, Star rating skyrocketed up though
Clear Hard

Crowded Object Placement

• 
  This difficulty contains some really crowded pattering after the Kiais.
  Just select all the objects at 00:15:316 (1,2,1,1,2,1,2,1,1,2) - or 00:37:005 (1,1,2,1,1,1,1,2,1,2,1) - and see how everything populates the center of the screen. This combination of really low spacing, stacking and rather complicated rhythm is totally unsuitable for a Hard difficulty and just causes readability issues.
  I recommend you to go with a simpler pattern just like 00:18:559 (1,2,1,2,1,2) - that gives the player more freedom to actually understand what's going on there. Increased overall spacing, removed the doublets for more freedom. In the 2nd part, due to the sliders, most of them feel fine, but I did change it up a bit there

Bright Insane

Uncomfortable stack to stream transitions

• 
  Stack to stream transitions like 00:09:437 (2,3,4,5,6) - for instance play pretty uncomfortable due to the dratic spacing change they provide. I recommend you trying to lower the spacing a bit to make these play much smoother. See below for more examples:
  00:11:060 (2,3,4,5,6) -
  00:30:518 (2,3,4,5,6) -
  00:32:140 (2,3,4,5,6) -

Sunny Extra

Hardly readable patterns

• 
  00:20:721 (1,2,1,2) - and 00:41:802 (1,2,1,2) - These patterns are really hard to understand as they are easily misread as just a normal jump rather than 1/3. I disgaree, how can people ever know whether something is 1/2 or 1/3, and/or how can one properly map to that?

Big 1/4 jumps without any relation to the music

• 
  00:12:681 (4,5) - The following note at 00:13:187 (6) - is even stronger but less emphasized due to smaller spacing which doesn't make much sense in relation to the music.
  00:14:302 (4,5) - Same as above basically. What? There is no strong sound at all at the start of (6) O.o
  00:33:762 (4,5) - Also the same but in these case you have even used a so much smaller spacing into the stronger 6 which is not just unfitting compared to the music but also unfitting to all the others.
  Another thing I would like to state in realtion to this is that in many instances, the 1/2 spacing is so much smaller than even the 1/4. Just compare 00:01:735 (8,1) - to 00:00:518 (1,2,3,4,5) - for example.

If you disagree with these suggestions, please reply to this thread justifying why so we can discuss alternatives.

Otherwise, please reply to this thread when these issues are resolved.

Thanks for working with us towards higher quality beatmaps, we hope to see your beatmap ranked soon!

###EM

Cherry Blossom wrote:

"We were first, better luck next time" literally made my day. Even if the mapper or anyone else couldn't notice those issues, just DQ it after 12 hours because DQing a map after only 2-3 hours is....... not credible for the BNs that were involved in this map's ranking process ?
I won't continue to talk here, have a nice day.

Okoratu wrote:

Irre das ganze gestacke in 00:28:289 (1,1,2,3,4,5) - verdeckt den ganzen repeat arrow D:

Baraatje123 wrote:

Seeing there are a few things unsnapped which is unrankable, can a QAT please DQ the map so I can fix that?