Mackenzie wrote:

m4m
plz notice that the mods below just my opinion,its a bit subjective,you dont have to change if you dont want to,and also, if my mods didnt help at all, dont give kd
sry if i mod makes you mad

Pattern

1. I really dont like how you arrange the sliders and the way of putting jumps, and i also dont like how you arrange your patterns according to the song. Well, i see you change sv alot but i dont think your sv changes are legit. For example: 00:09:412 (1,2,3) - ,the violin melody gives me almost the same feeling from 00:03:841 - 00:17:341 , when a cantor command a song, he wont slow down when a melody like this starts, he would command the part in the same speed. But from 00:17:555 i think its the the form using faster sv,it doesnt give me the same feeling as before because the drum sound kinda gave a rhythm feeling the the song, and the beats made the song stronger.also for some thing like 02:32:983 (1) - ,i dont think its any different from parts in kiai.Please dont change ur sv depend on how long your sliders are, sv is based on the song, the feeling of the song is all depend on the sv. 02:32:983 (1) - if the drum stopped here, only the violin is playing, i would see the as a legit sv change, because it gaves me more feeling about the music. I think my SV is accorded to the rhythm, for the start I'm just slowing it down because I'm mapping the second violin. For the kiai part, I just put what I felt the most appropriate - I couldn't put an excessively long 15/8 slider here. Or do you have suggestions ?
2. I think you overused distance space and it give me a feeling that the mapper is lazy and didnt really pay any attention to the patterns of the map. You finished the map pretty fast dont you . your slider arranges are not that good imo, do you really think 00:47:555 (4) - looks nice? wtf man ? I put 4 months to make the whole map and submitted it the day I finished it, then searched and made 12 M4M in 4 days... and I'm lazy ? lol ? Also, I like my slider, or maybe do you have suggestions ?
3. Flow in the map is not that good. I saw you used alot of obtuse angle flow like 00:40:698 (5,6,7,8) - .this kind of jumps is very easy to arrange, and also looks okay, but its not that good for tablet players to play.now days about 75% osu players are tablet players, is easier to draw a accurate star or circle? i think most ppl will choose the second answer. same as your flow I don't care about making my map optimized for a specific kind of player, also I'm a tablet player and it's perfectly fine for me to play this pattern, as my friends (tablet players) plays it. Also, I don't especially like star/other known shapes pattern, because it's easy to make with editor tools and lacks of originality imo (most commonly used by lazy mappers, I suppose?) -- anyway, please find a better argument

I think it needs a lot of work though, try someone else, sry

Neil Watts wrote:

Mackenzie wrote:

m4m
plz notice that the mods below just my opinion,its a bit subjective,you dont have to change if you dont want to,and also, if my mods didnt help at all, dont give kd
sry if i mod makes you mad

Pattern

1. I really dont like how you arrange the sliders and the way of putting jumps, and i also dont like how you arrange your patterns according to the song. Well, i see you change sv alot but i dont think your sv changes are legit. For example: 00:09:412 (1,2,3) - ,the violin melody gives me almost the same feeling from 00:03:841 - 00:17:341 , when a cantor command a song, he wont slow down when a melody like this starts, he would command the part in the same speed. But from 00:17:555 i think its the the form using faster sv,it doesnt give me the same feeling as before because the drum sound kinda gave a rhythm feeling the the song, and the beats made the song stronger.also for some thing like 02:32:983 (1) - ,i dont think its any different from parts in kiai.Please dont change ur sv depend on how long your sliders are, sv is based on the song, the feeling of the song is all depend on the sv. 02:32:983 (1) - if the drum stopped here, only the violin is playing, i would see the as a legit sv change, because it gaves me more feeling about the music. I think my SV is accorded to the rhythm, for the start I'm just slowing it down because I'm mapping the second violin. For the kiai part, I just put what I felt the most appropriate - I couldn't put an excessively long 15/8 slider here. Or do you have suggestions ?
2. I think you overused distance space and it give me a feeling that the mapper is lazy and didnt really pay any attention to the patterns of the map. You finished the map pretty fast dont you . your slider arranges are not that good imo, do you really think 00:47:555 (4) - looks nice? wtf man ? I put 4 months to make the whole map and submitted it the day I finished it, then searched and made 12 M4M in 4 days... and I'm lazy ? lol ? Also, I like my slider, or maybe do you have suggestions ?
3. Flow in the map is not that good. I saw you used alot of obtuse angle flow like 00:40:698 (5,6,7,8) - .this kind of jumps is very easy to arrange, and also looks okay, but its not that good for tablet players to play.now days about 75% osu players are tablet players, is easier to draw a accurate star or circle? i think most ppl will choose the second answer. same as your flow I don't care about making my map optimized for a specific kind of player, also I'm a tablet player and it's perfectly fine for me to play this pattern, as my friends (tablet players) plays it. Also, I don't especially like star/other known shapes pattern, because it's easy to make with editor tools and lacks of originality imo (most commonly used by lazy mappers, I suppose?) -- anyway, please find a better argument

I think it needs a lot of work though, try someone else, sry

Yeah, as you said, your mod makes me mad, because I don't understand what a modder with such silly arguments and who doesn't even respond to his own mods is doing in the BNG.
Anyway, let's avoid dramas here, sorry for the bad words and thanks for your mod.
I give you a kd anyway, you taught me a lesson.

Mackenzie wrote:

Welp, according to your mod to my map was actually very great, i reconsidered my act
I felt guilty for my mod on this map, and for my stupid act
Sry I was very mad and tired because of some life problem when im modding your map

Kotomi

1. 00:09:412 (1,2,3) - imo, you should really hit sound this if u really want do a pattern like this. because in parts you did before you actually followed the piano with the violin, so when the parts like this came, players wouldn't really able to read this(I did 2x100 when i first time play this).acctully, its better if you change your pattern to some thing special and didnt have the same ds as the rest of the part. just makes players easier to read I know the slow parts when I'm reducing the sv is a bit hard to read even with new combos, but I really wanna keep it. I never thought about adding hitsounds on this part, but it's a good idea, I'll search on hitsounds libraries if I can't find a nice custom hitsound fitting for violin (I don't feel adding soft-whistles along with violin) - If I can't find anything, I'll think about reducing the SV with other modders.
2. 00:03:841 - 00:16:269 - i think you should really add more hitsound in this part, for example, you can add whistle at 00:03:841 and 00:04:483 , just to show the tone of the violin, and highlight the higher tones, same for the rest of the part as I said before, I'm unsure about adding soft-whistles on this part, I think it doesn't fit correctly with violin. If I can find a nice custom hitsound to fit with it, I'll use it.
3. 00:25:912 (4) - a bit too curve for here, i see you did all your violin rhythm in this part with some straight sliders, but this is not anything different from any rhythm in this part, sould really do something straght, also same for 00:39:626 (3) - I agree on that, but I still can't think about a long 3/2 slider shape which fits to the flow. I'm still searching.
4. 00:44:341 (6,7) - its actually a 1/4 here, shouldn't avoid important beats like this did I forgot anything here? I don't see what you mean
5. 01:03:841 (1) - well, you asked that do i have any suggestions to this, yes , i do suggest you to change your rhythm to http://puu.sh/ivqMl/b18d29ce28.jpg because the rhythm fits both piano and drum, and also more interesting for the players I don't feel like mapping the drums, because the rhythm is really slowing down starting here. I still made an exception for the end of the last kiai because it was really harder.
6. 01:09:412 - same as the first mod, hitsound same comment
7. 01:14:769 (7) - same as the curve slider reason I'll think about it, but I still think it doesn't really matter. I'll try to arrange this later
8. 01:46:055 (8,9,10,11,12,13,1) - not looking good imo, suggestion: http://puu.sh/ivr6P/7f10e6f207.jpg or some thing simular like 01:46:055 - 01:46:162 small ds and 01:46:269 - 01:46:805 bigger ds, gave you the music feeling too and also for better looking I don't feel like applying your first suggestion because the rhythm is really slow here. For your second suggestion, I think my pattern follows the flow/song better
9. 01:46:698 - imo, 01:46:698 - 01:47:983 did fit the high sv and kiai , but for parts like 01:48:198 - 01:49:912, you can see the music tone is lower and the drum arent dense like before. i do suggest you to use slower ds in the second part and smaller jumps.it just fits the song more, also for highlighting the kiai part The jumps in 01:48:198 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - this part are already much smaller than 01:46:698 (1,2,3,4,5) - this one, so I think it's ok
10. 01:53:555 - 02:00:305 - same as above, this part have really low tone and rare drum beats, and if you use fast sv here, you cant highlight 02:00:412 properly, also cancel the kiai, kiai isnt for here I think the part is intense enough to be considered as kiai. The jumps are also much less intense than the next kiai, so I think it's fine
11. 02:48:412 - should really separate this note from 02:47:983 (9) - , because only this note is a whistle and it has noting related with 02:47:983 (9) - , also its on the white tick, should really use a note that is able to hit to show that I was thinking about it. changed!
12. 03:14:983 (4) - nc for notice the 1/3 yep, forgot it
13. 03:42:948 (11,12) - well i drop the combo here when im test playing, its really confusing to read, it is a 1/8 spacing on the rhythm but it has the same spacing as the steam you did before, i first though this is a 1/4 spacing so i didnt finished the slider and went straight into the next note, the i broke the combo because the slider,i really suggest you do http://puu.sh/ivrTK/eb1f3696b1.jpg just for a better reading well, it doesn't fit the rhythm very well compared to my pattern imo, but it's indeed more readable and will avoid combobreaks. applied

i thought you was a mapper who has 50 ranked maps and doing a map like this according to your amount of posts,i thought you didnt pay any attention to the map and want a speed rank, which i really hates
but i saw your first ranked map and i see your experiences on mapping is about same as me, you are real new mapper
sry i really dont like your style and how you arrange your sliders
welp, forgive for all ive done plz
good luck

Nozhomi wrote:

Petit mod rapide parce que bon c'est pas de moi que t'as besoin.

- Kotomi :

1. 00:13:055 (6,7) - Je pense que le rythme est pas bon, parce que tu loupe le redémarrage du violon à 00:13:269 - . Pour moi tu peux soit faire ainsi -> http://puu.sh/iwoiX/6bd663a98b.jpg ou la même mais sans 00:13:055 (6) - (ce que je préfère). Je vois ce que tu veux dire, mais je trouve que ta première idée sonne vraiment off par rapport au piano, et la seconde sonne carrément undermappée. Je préfère rester sur le piano et ainsi garder un rythme et des patterns constants.
2. 00:30:733 (8) - Déplace le à 235:55 pour ajuster un poil le spacing. AAAAAA comment un nazi des distances tel que moi ait pu commettre une erreur parreille fixed!
3. 00:40:483 (4,5,6,7,8) - Je pense que le plus gros spacing serait plus à appliquer pour 00:40:483 (4,5) - que les autres, parce que la musique est plus stagnante pour 00:40:698 (5,6,7,8) - que 00:39:626 (3,4) - avec le violon. Je veux mettre l'accent sur les drums, qui va rythmer le passage d'après (kiai) au lieu du violon, que j'ai plutôt mappé vers le début.
4. 00:51:626 (7,1) - Je ne saisis pas pourquoi tu ne place pas de jump ici alors que tu en utilise un pour 00:51:198 (5,6) - , qui est fort d'accord mais pas autant que la reprise avec la crash. Donc pour moi tu devrais en placer un ici. I agree!
5. 00:58:698 - Tu manque un beat fort ici, parce que tu le place à la fin d'un slider, alors qu'il vaudrait mieux le jouer. Ça colle au flow, donc je pense que ça ira pour le moment
6. 01:11:126 (5,6,7) - Je trouve que tu kill l'emphasis de ce passage en stackant ces 3 objets ici. Je trouve que ne pas les stack ou en stack que 2 se calque vraiment mieux à la musique et le piano, et correspond plus au schéma de pattern que tu utilises ici. C'était différent au départ, mais pour éviter un problème de rythme suite à un mod j'ai dû changer, mais je vais remettre comme avant, je trouve que c'est beaucoup plus jouable et prévisible comme ça.
7. 01:52:912 (6,7,8,9,10,11) - Un stream plus courbé comme ça -> http://puu.sh/iwyiM/f6e59895e9.jpg permettrait une meilleur transition entre les 2 sliders imo. sexy stream
8. 01:57:733 (4) - Tu casse la dynamique du jeu en stackant comme ça, on a l'habitude d'avoir des stacks sur du 1/2, et la c'est sur un tic bleu, et personnellement j'ai envie de bouger ailleurs plutôt que d'attendre au même endroit pour une durée un peu étrange comme ça. j'aurais besoin de suggestions, je veux accentuer les mêmes notes, peu importe le pattern, mais j'ai pas d'autres idées
9. 02:11:341 (2,3,4,1) - C'est pas un perfect square je me trompe ? Sinon le spacing serait identique pour tous. Je n'essaye pas de faire un perfect square
10. 02:57:841 (3,4,5,6,1) - Fait nous donc un vrai pattern en étoile pls, c'est très très esthétique comme ça. NON
11. 03:24:412 (2,3) - Pourquoi le spacing est subitement différent ? Fait le comme les autre pour bien finir cette partie et ensuite change le pour indiquer une partie différente. wow j'avais même pas remarqué l'erreur de spacing, fixed
12. 03:31:055 (1,2) - Ta fin de slider sonne comme si elle était hors temps et du coup ça rend ce passage très dérangent. Je pense que tu devrais supprimer 03:31:483 (2) - et finir le slider à sa place. je ne trouve pas ça dérangeant et ça ne me paraît pas off, puis c'est le kiai
13. 03:42:948 (11,1) - Je pense que tu devrais revoir ce pattern, parce qu'il est facile de break bêtement du fait que le reverse se fini vers le bas, et on veut bouger rapidement vers le slider suivant, du coup c'est pas très naturel et on break. remappée
14. 03:50:555 (2) - Le flow est très moyen ici, parce que c'est étrange de repartir dans le même sens après une si longue distance avec le slider précédent. Si tu CTRL+G le mouvement de repartir vers le bas se fait plus naturellement. ça me paraît assez jouable malgré tout, je vais laisser

C'est tout. Je pense que t'as abusé sur les jumps dans le dernier kiai mais bon. GL
Mukyu~

Karia wrote:

:3

• General

1. Hmm, isn't it unrankable using the no-sound sliderslide and no-sound slidertick at the same time? It's ok iirc, as long there's an audible beginning/end of slider
2. I don't know the no-sound hitnormal hitsound is rankable even if it is in spinner I don't see any problem with it
3. I recommend change the source to "CLANNAD" and move that katakana to tags hmm, gonna ask a BN for that

• 5 mins

1. OD 8 but I like my od7.5
2. 00:09:412 (1,2) - Not bad with music. But some players(include me) can't read this 3/4 rhythm at first cuz of DS(with sv) .. @3@ I think it's possible at first try if the player is attentive, not gonna change that
3. 00:25:912 (4) - Ctrl g is better flow Indeed, but the distances are broken and if I rearrange them, it will get worser than the actual flow imo
4. 00:30:626 (7,8,9) - Reduce the DS a bit? Nope, this is a warning for the player, and the pattern is easy and readable
5. 00:44:448 - add a note? it is better imo I don't feel like placing a note here
6. 00:54:626 (5) - try (48 || 224) or somewhere for unstack ok
7. 01:12:841 (2,3) - stack for your stack consistency I don't feel like following stack consistency for this part, so much stacks may be boring to play, I think it's ok
8. 01:17:126 (4,5) - ^ same
9. 01:19:912 (2,3,4) - Compared with music, they are a bit far.. They are following distance/jumps consistencies though, gonna leave that
10. 01:46:270 (10,11,12) - nazy, 1ms unsnap aaaaaa indeed
11. 02:01:912 (6) - NC for consistency yep
12. 02:32:983 (1) - give more DS for emphasizing the music and slow-slider indeed
13. 02:56:126 (3) - (276 || 236) is better for me. But it's up to you cuz that is just my style :p I prefer how it is currently
14. 03:00:198 (4) - NC yep
15. 03:06:198 (3) - change to streams ok
16. 03:08:555 (6) - (356 || 44) for same DS? there shouldn't be a 2.0x jump here
17. 03:19:269 (3) - Recommend NC here cuz too long ;w; no, the HP is low enough to let this
18. 03:20:983 (4) - end at 03:22:269 - here. It feels better in-playing inconsistent
19. 04:14:126 (1) - feels weird stack. How about stack this on next (2)? ok

gl

sheela901 wrote:

Hey Neil Watts! Sorry about the late mod! I completely forgot about this map. But anyway, here's my mod!

General

1. After checking the last mod, according to the Ranking Criteria, having silent sliderslides and sliderticks together is unrankable: http://puu.sh/j4mDy/ac61166f0f.png Alright... I tried both and it sounds ugly as firetruck, but I'm gonna use sliderticks with less volume.
   Some of the sliders that have a slidertick can be sounded as a clap. For instance, 01:03:841 (1) and 02:32:983 (1) have their ticks landed on a drum beat. You can use the file you use for this kind of beat (soft-hitclap.wav) and rename it to soft-slidertick<number>.wav. Then you add an inherited point on the tick with the corresponding sampleset. Nice idea, but for the sliders you pointed out, I was mapping the symbal so I don't feel like adding a clap in hitsounds here. It's different in the last kiai, because I made the pattern higher
   While others don't hit anything in the music, and you can adjust the volume using the Timing Setup Panel. The sliders are in the section 03:15:841 to 03:25:483 . seems like I can't adjust the volume or it'll be considered as slient and it's unrankable so sad, because it sounds so ugly
2. About the source, whether the name of something is provided can be put in the field. CLANNAD and クラナド are both fine. ok

Kotomi

1. 00:05:126 (3) - I think if you move this circle out of the head of the slider, and move it next to (2)'s tail, the jump between 00:05:126 (3,4) will emphasize the strong beat where (4) is starting. There are other more like 00:08:555 (3,4) and 00:11:983 (3,4) but may be a pain in the butttock to change every pattern. But this is my preferences, you can apply or not. This is a nice idea and I can understand it, but I think my pattern is a bit more readable and playable. I suppose it's more a matter of preferences/tastes than anything, but anyway, I'm not gonna change them
2. 01:21:412 (5) - In my opinion this jump between both previous and following circles don't fit with the current beats, as they're no strong beats. You can go for x:201 y:27 to get a mini jump between 01:21:412 (5,6) because (6) is slightly higher than (5).
   This also applies to 01:24:841 (5) . Indeed. Adjusted to 1.80x instead of 2.00x. Also applied to 01:28:269 (5) - to fix consistency.
3. 01:29:341 (1) - Currently it doesn't sound very nice. I suggest you start a 1/1 or 1/2 slider on 01:29:555 so the players can click the first beat of the measure. It fits better. Yeah, this slider is a bit annoying, but I wanna keep it because it really fits to the flow imo. I changed the pattern so the slider doesn't end on a downbeat anymore. I hope the pattern will fit.
4. 01:31:912 (7,8,9) - Similar to a point; smaller distance would fit here since there's nothing changing in the music. I don't understand, the normal distances are used here, for normal patterns in this part (=no jumps, 1.40x) so there is no reason to use a lesser distance here imo
   This also applies to 01:39:412 (7,8) - I feel the flow nice here, and the part is a bit more difficult so I'm gonna leave it 01:24:841 (5,6) - Already pointed out before iirc, so fixed 03:28:269 (3,4,5) - nope, because it warns the player for an incoming hard part, and it isn't too hard to catch so I think it's ok
5. 01:35:555 (3) - No beat in the music is landed on the downbeat. The triple should start on 01:35:662 . How about this rhythm? I don't really understand the problem here, and this pattern is consistent towards the other patterns like this one during this part, using your suggestion will break this consistency
   
   SPOILER

   
6. 03:25:698 (3) - The circle is not fitting with the rhythm and music, and it doesn't sound very nice. I'd reduce the length of 03:24:412 (2) to 03:25:055 and add a repeat to get the violin sound. I'm not feeling like changing this pattern, the circle appears indeed suddenly after this slow part and changes significatively the rhythm, but it's here to avert players to the incoming hard part. Also, it fits to the rhythm in background , already mapped before (03:07:055 (1,2,3,4,5) - 03:09:626 (3,4,5,6,7) - etc)
7. 03:28:698 (5) - Add a new combo? The section got intense because of the snap used. indeed
8. 04:05:983 (2) - I'd have a circle on 04:05:983 and on 04:06:198 because the current rhythm doesn't sound nice to me. It may be a bit tricky indeed, but it fits imo, and it's the hardest part of the song
9. 04:58:483 - How about adding a circle on this tick? It feels empty before the spinner comes. nope, the rhythm should slow down at the end because of the song. There's 1/1 between (5) and (6), so 1/1 between (6) and the spinner.

This should be it! Overall I think the patterns could be polished a bit. Not my taste to be honest, but the map still looks good.

If you have any questions, don't hesitate asking them! Good luck with your map!

1. 00:04:483 (2,3) - This jump was really unexpected for me. You don't use this kind of spacing for your other patterns: 00:07:912 (2,3) - 00:11:341 (2,3) - .
2. 00:09:412 (1,2,3) - These were really unexpected too. They are 1/4 in terms of spacing but you've mapped them to seem like 1/2 jumps. This is very misleading xP. P
3. 00:18:198 (2,3,4,5) - Potential for some spacing change here to create emphasis. Having a slightly bigger spacing onto 3 and 5 would play very well imo.
   
   Rough example i made

   
4. 00:25:912 (4) - How about Ctrl+Ging? A jump from 3>4 would make sense, and Ctrl+G'ing would help with flow.
5. 00:30:626 (7,8,9) - This spacing is really large... and it isn't really supported by the song imo. Can you reduce it to something more reasonable? (I understand if you don't want to stack them).
6. 00:36:841 (4,5) - Try Ctrl+G'ing this rhythm. Having 00:37:055 - clickable is better than 00:37:269 - imo.
7. 00:40:698 (5) - This circle doesn't seem very audible for me... I think a 1/2 slider would be better on 00:40:483 (4) -
8. 00:41:983 (2,1) - Ehh, stack them?
9. 00:43:698 (3,4,5) - This rhythm is rather misleading... How about making 3 a 1/2 slider? usually this kind of rhythm helps make these polarity-changing rhythms much more manageable and straightforward.
   
   ~

   
10. 00:44:448 - No triplet here?
11. 00:56:555 (5,1) - Could you make the curve of slider 1 flow a bit better from 5?
12. 00:58:483 (8) - Making this a triplet would play a lot better imo. I really wanted to click on 00:58:698 - xD
13. 01:03:841 (1) - I think 0.75 SV is a bit too big... considering you are using 1.15x SV multiplier not 1.00. Maybe use 0.85x instead? It would also ease with the transition into 01:04:698 (2) - . Right now the sliders look like theyre having seizures cuz there's such a large SV discrepancy.
14. 01:38:983 (4,5,6) - This is actually very feint. I think using 1/4 repeat sliders would be better.
15. 01:47:555 (4,5,1) - There is a nice pitch increase from 4>5>1. So how about moving 5 left a bit. That way theres a smaller jump from 4>5 and a bigger jump from 5>1. It would fit the music very well imo.
16. 01:50:983 (4,5,1) - ^Same idea.
17. 01:59:662 (4) - It's always better to have a directional change mapped to something on a stronger tick (White preferably, and if not, then red ticks). Right now the directional change doesn't reflect anything in the music. Change direction on 3 instead of 4?
18. 02:13:162 (6) - ^Same thing. A directional change on circle 7 would be better
19. 02:17:983 (2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - This spacing was suddenly really big compared to your usual DS...
20. 02:20:555 (5,1) - I think you could increase the DS here for the emphasis onto 1.
21. 02:32:983 (1) - Mentioned this earlier, I think theres still a large DS jump from 1.40 down to 0.8. Maybe try 0.95?
22. 02:53:126 - Ahhh, map this?? It's very audible!
23. 02:56:555 - ^
24. 03:06:198 (3,4,5,6,7) - As pretty as this stream is, it's a very sudden and large diff jump from your previous pattern. If you want to keep the shape at least nerf the spacing :C.
25. 03:14:983 (1,2,3) - Hmm... This rhythm just doesn't work for me because the drums are emphasized only on the white ticks.
    
    Try this

    
26. 03:15:841 (1,2) - Lets improve this blanket? 03:17:341 (2) - Move to 409||99
27. 03:19:269 (3) - 277||48
28. 03:28:698 (1,2,3,4) - Tbh, when playing these kinds of patterns, having a zig-zag kind of arrangement to them makes them really fun to play.
    
    Just something you could try, if you're interested.

    
29. 03:53:341 (7,1,2) - You've been emphasizing the clap on the 2nd white tick a lot so I would reduce spacing from 7>1 and increase the jump from 1>2 to be more consistent with: 03:50:126 (1,2) - and 03:52:055 (2,3) -
30. 04:00:198 (1,2) - Try Ctrl+G'ing this rhythm. 04:00:412 - Clicking here would be nice.
31. 04:10:055 (8) - I guess this is okay for a directional change... but theres a very noticeable beat on 04:09:841 (6) - that would capture the directional change a lot better imo.
32. 04:22:698 (1) - Yaaa still a bit too extreme ahh i keep pointing them out, I know it's your style, and i'm fine with the SV decrease, i just think it could be less drastic haha. Try 1.05 here?
33. 04:33:412 (1,2,3) - Yea tbh this is what i wanted to see, not 00:09:412 (1,2,3) - . xDD
34. 04:54:626 - From here and onward... it sounds like there's some BPM change or something going on... maybe. Did you get this checked out by someone already? If not, could you double check just in case? Its just like the last 6 seconds~

monstrata wrote:

[Kotomi]

1. 00:04:483 (2,3) - This jump was really unexpected for me. You don't use this kind of spacing for your other patterns: 00:07:912 (2,3) - 00:11:341 (2,3) - . ok, arranged
2. 00:09:412 (1,2,3) - These were really unexpected too. They are 1/4 in terms of spacing but you've mapped them to seem like 1/2 jumps. This is very misleading xP. P Reduced the jump a bit. I still wanna keep some distance or there will be no effect
3. 00:18:198 (2,3,4,5) - Potential for some spacing change here to create emphasis. Having a slightly bigger spacing onto 3 and 5 would play very well imo. I think the 0.60x spacing added for jumps is already quite much. Also, I'll have to report these distances into all the same other jumps for consistency, and my other jumps are already big enough imo. Your example looks nice too, but the distances between 3 and 4 are inconsistent towards the other jumps (it should be a jump distance)
   
   Rough example i made

   
4. 00:25:912 (4) - How about Ctrl+Ging? A jump from 3>4 would make sense, and Ctrl+G'ing would help with flow. well... Somebody already pointed this out, but I said no because of jump consistency... The jump will be 3.00x but all the jumps are 2.00x In the other hand, the rhythm is a bit different in the song, so I think an inconsistency shouldn't be a problem... applied
5. 00:30:626 (7,8,9) - This spacing is really large... and it isn't really supported by the song imo. Can you reduce it to something more reasonable? (I understand if you don't want to stack them). can't reduce it much here, the spacing isn't so high and it's largely readable... reduced to 1.00x
6. 00:36:841 (4,5) - Try Ctrl+G'ing this rhythm. Having 00:37:055 - clickable is better than 00:37:269 - imo. >flow >jump consistency >nope :/
7. 00:40:698 (5) - This circle doesn't seem very audible for me... I think a 1/2 slider would be better on 00:40:483 (4) - yep!
8. 00:41:983 (2,1) - Ehh, stack them? nazi oO"
9. 00:43:698 (3,4,5) - This rhythm is rather misleading... How about making 3 a 1/2 slider? usually this kind of rhythm helps make these polarity-changing rhythms much more manageable and straightforward. would fit bad to the rhythm your slider end is mapped on nothing in the song. I like how my current pattern is, and I think it's playable and readable even without these polarity things :I but if you find a better pattern which fits to the song, I still can apply it
   
   ~

   
10. 00:44:448 - No triplet here? nope, I think
11. 00:56:555 (5,1) - Could you make the curve of slider 1 flow a bit better from 5? Improved
12. 00:58:483 (8) - Making this a triplet would play a lot better imo. I really wanted to click on 00:58:698 - xD I think my current pattern fits better with 00:58:055 (7) -, wanna keep it
13. 01:03:841 (1) - I think 0.75 SV is a bit too big... considering you are using 1.15x SV multiplier not 1.00. Maybe use 0.85x instead? It would also ease with the transition into 01:04:698 (2) - . Right now the sliders look like theyre having seizures cuz there's such a large SV discrepancy. I think the player will be able to handle it without problems
14. 01:38:983 (4,5,6) - This is actually very feint. I think using 1/4 repeat sliders would be better. I like this pattern orz - will change it if it's REALLY a problem...
15. 01:47:555 (4,5,1) - There is a nice pitch increase from 4>5>1. So how about moving 5 left a bit. That way theres a smaller jump from 4>5 and a bigger jump from 5>1. It would fit the music very well imo. I agree, but abusing of the jumps would be a bad idea, it's already quite hard... Increased the distances between 5>1 of 0.10x.
16. 01:50:983 (4,5,1) - ^Same idea. same
17. 01:59:662 (4) - It's always better to have a directional change mapped to something on a stronger tick (White preferably, and if not, then red ticks). Right now the directional change doesn't reflect anything in the music. Change direction on 3 instead of 4? ok, changed!
18. 02:13:162 (6) - ^Same thing. A directional change on circle 7 would be better done
19. 02:17:983 (2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - This spacing was suddenly really big compared to your usual DS... nope, 2.00x, the jump distances used during all this kiai - maybe you had this impression because I didn't used jumps for some seconds of mapping before these patterns
20. 02:20:555 (5,1) - I think you could increase the DS here for the emphasis onto 1. 1.00x more distance? what? not sure to understand
21. 02:32:983 (1) - Mentioned this earlier, I think theres still a large DS jump from 1.40 down to 0.8. Maybe try 0.95? same as before
22. 02:53:126 - Ahhh, map this?? It's very audible! nope, I'm mapping the violin here
23. 02:56:555 - ^ same
24. 03:06:198 (3,4,5,6,7) - As pretty as this stream is, it's a very sudden and large diff jump from your previous pattern. If you want to keep the shape at least nerf the spacing :C. ok, spacing - 0.20x, can't make it smaller
25. 03:14:983 (1,2,3) - Hmm... This rhythm just doesn't work for me because the drums are emphasized only on the white ticks. I don't see the problem, and I like my three 1/3 sliders D:
    
    Try this

    
26. 03:15:841 (1,2) - Lets improve this blanket? 03:17:341 (2) - Move to 409||99 ok!
27. 03:19:269 (3) - 277||48 same
28. 03:28:698 (1,2,3,4) - Tbh, when playing these kinds of patterns, having a zig-zag kind of arrangement to them makes them really fun to play. I received a lot of comments about the difficulty of these 1/8 sliders so I reduced the difficulty, I won't change ;w;
    
    Just something you could try, if you're interested.

    
29. 03:53:341 (7,1,2) - You've been emphasizing the clap on the 2nd white tick a lot so I would reduce spacing from 7>1 and increase the jump from 1>2 to be more consistent with: 03:50:126 (1,2) - and 03:52:055 (2,3) - improved!
30. 04:00:198 (1,2) - Try Ctrl+G'ing this rhythm. 04:00:412 - Clicking here would be nice. remapped this part!
31. 04:10:055 (8) - I guess this is okay for a directional change... but theres a very noticeable beat on 04:09:841 (6) - that would capture the directional change a lot better imo. ok imo
32. 04:22:698 (1) - Yaaa still a bit too extreme ahh i keep pointing them out, I know it's your style, and i'm fine with the SV decrease, i just think it could be less drastic haha. Try 1.05 here? nah :[
33. 04:33:412 (1,2,3) - Yea tbh this is what i wanted to see, not 00:09:412 (1,2,3) - . xDD absolutely not the same rhythm in the timeline uwu
34. 04:54:626 - From here and onward... it sounds like there's some BPM change or something going on... maybe. Did you get this checked out by someone already? If not, could you double check just in case? Its just like the last 6 seconds~ Shiro made my timing, and I don't think she's wrong, I checked myself D:

Alright, call me back when everything's sorted out . Poke me in-game please, if you have any concerns .

1. 00:08:769 (4,1,2,3,1) - This spacing is still way too big. Problem here is, your 1/4 jumps like from 00:09:412 (1,2) - look just the same as the spacing from 00:08:769 (4,1) - and 00:10:269 (3,1) - Even though they are 1/2 gaps. This is going to cause readability issues. There is no indication as to what spacing is 1/4 and what spacing is 1/2.
2. 00:43:055 (1,2) - Ctrl+G this rhythm? Nothing really on 00:43:483 -
3. 00:44:448 - There's a triplet here tho, and 00:44:876 - . But meh i guess you don't want to map them?
4. 02:17:126 (6,7,1) - When i pointed out the spacing, i meant, why did you use like 1.40 here and then 02:18:626 (6,7,8) - 2.00 here :S.
5. 02:53:126 - It doesn't sound like you're only mapping the violin... Like, parts like 02:50:555 (2,3,4) - and 02:54:626 (3) - Clearly aren't violin-based. You can afford to map more than just one sound too, instead of just focusing on one instrument. You'll make people click early because you've stacked 02:52:912 (4) - Ontop of a slider so players don't have any spacing reference to think "okay this is spaced really far, its probably 1/1" also, there is clearly a note here, which can make players click early thinking its that note.
6. 03:06:198 (3,4,5,6,7) - Did you change this? :S. This section is really quiet. Tbh a stream shape like this just doesn't fit for me because they are actually very difficult to play because of the amount of motion needed to play them (full circle) instead of just a line, or a simple curve. I really don't think this works
7. 03:15:412 - You don't get to emphasize this part or even make it clickable.
   
8. 01:04:644 - Might want to silence the slider-ends of these sliders since you've extended them even past the blue tick into 1/8... I think leaving them on blue ticks is safer honestly
   
9. About your style:
10. 01:42:841 (7,8,1) - The problem with your consistent spacing style is that places like this, where there is clearly more emphasis onto slider 1 aren't mapped to a larger jump or something so as to create emphasis on that note. Because every note is given the same spacing here, nothing is emphasized. 01:42:841 (7) - Like this note for example, is very soft, almost silent, yet it has the same spacing as 01:43:269 (1) - .
    
11. 01:50:555 (3,4,5) - Stuff like this is good, because you use different DS to create more emphasis onto 5.

monstrata wrote:

[Recheck]

1. 00:08:769 (4,1,2,3,1) - This spacing is still way too big. Problem here is, your 1/4 jumps like from 00:09:412 (1,2) - look just the same as the spacing from 00:08:769 (4,1) - and 00:10:269 (3,1) - Even though they are 1/2 gaps. This is going to cause readability issues. There is no indication as to what spacing is 1/4 and what spacing is 1/2. Ok, let's ruin my mapping... Here's a new pattern, it should fit now... Very ugly though
2. 00:43:055 (1,2) - Ctrl+G this rhythm? Nothing really on 00:43:483 - what, ctrl+g? and the flow?
3. 00:44:448 - There's a triplet here tho, and 00:44:876 - . But meh i guess you don't want to map them? Just noticed when listening at 25%... well...I prefer my current pattern, but i'll remap this
4. 02:17:126 (6,7,1) - When i pointed out the spacing, i meant, why did you use like 1.40 here and then 02:18:626 (6,7,8) - 2.00 here :S. I feel like the first pattern sounds less stronger than the second, and also for consistency (with 02:02:983 (4,1) - and 02:04:912 (6,7,8) - )
5. 02:53:126 - It doesn't sound like you're only mapping the violin... Like, parts like 02:50:555 (2,3,4) - and 02:54:626 (3) - Clearly aren't violin-based. You can afford to map more than just one sound too, instead of just focusing on one instrument. You'll make people click early because you've stacked 02:52:912 (4) - Ontop of a slider so players don't have any spacing reference to think "okay this is spaced really far, its probably 1/1" also, there is clearly a note here, which can make players click early thinking its that note. Indeed, this is not full violin. Basically, I was trying to map only violin because it's inconsistent -> rich to map because the rhythm of the violin isn't the same during all the part ; but the part wasn't difficult enough with only the violin mapped, and it felt empty. So I decided to map a bit of the background sound, which is consistent (just a basic 1/2 sound which is the same during all the part and isn't interesting to map) to fill the blank parts. But I absolutely wanna leave a bit of inconsistency in these patterns, else it will sound boring and uninteresting, because there will be no rhythm variation. Moreover, if you add just a circle stacked here 02:53:126 - and here 02:56:555 - , it will sound overmapped and misplaced... I'll probably have to remap all the part to make a change I won't like... So I'm not gonna change this pattern.
6. 03:06:198 (3,4,5,6,7) - Did you change this? :S. This section is really quiet. Tbh a stream shape like this just doesn't fit for me because they are actually very difficult to play because of the amount of motion needed to play them (full circle) instead of just a line, or a simple curve. I really don't think this works I already reduced the distances of 0.20x. I can't reduce it anymore. I already used courbs in the other patterns, so this is the minimum of originality the Ranking Criteria should allow me. However if you find another original pattern I like which I didn't already used, I'm ready to use it instead of this pattern. But I think this pattern shouldn't be a problem for the players, except the farmers/"2015 only" players, maybe.
7. 03:15:412 - You don't get to emphasize this part or even make it clickable. I don't understand what you're meaning... This pattern is perfectly playable imo, a 1/3 won't kill the players....
   
8. 01:04:644 - Might want to silence the slider-ends of these sliders since you've extended them even past the blue tick into 1/8... I think leaving them on blue ticks is safer honestly won't be an issue for players imo
   
9. About your style:
10. 01:42:841 (7,8,1) - The problem with your consistent spacing style is that places like this, where there is clearly more emphasis onto slider 1 aren't mapped to a larger jump or something so as to create emphasis on that note. Because every note is given the same spacing here, nothing is emphasized. 01:42:841 (7) - Like this note for example, is very soft, almost silent, yet it has the same spacing as 01:43:269 (1) - . I agree on this. Gonna reduce the distances between (6) and (7) and increase between (7) and (8).
    
11. 01:50:555 (3,4,5) - Stuff like this is good, because you use different DS to create more emphasis onto 5. ok :3

I want to hear your thoughts on the point I made about your spacing choice before I consider pushing this forward xPPP. Tbh, the more I look at this map the more I think quality could be improved xPPP. Sorry for giving you this false hope, i feel bad now xP, but our styles as you see, are very different lol. Anyways, let me know what you think.

monstrata wrote:

I don't think you're losing your mapping style. I think your style is still growing. People's mapping styles change even after they've had multiple ranked maps. As you mod more and understand more approaches to mapping, your style also changes even if only a little. At the same time though, I don't want to force you to change your current style, no one should do that. Only you should decide when to change your style and approach to mapping.

If you'd like to make further changes, please let me know so I can recheck. As of right now, after going through your map, I find nothing objectively unrankable, so I will push this forward.

Ranking Criteria wrote:

Hitsounds from notes and sliders must be audible. These provide feedback for the player, and having them silent in a rhythm game doesn't make much sense. If you don't like the default sounds, then find replacements rather than silencing notes. You can use hitsounds from the Custom Hitsound Library or easily find others online. Lowering the volume of a few notes to provide a dampened effect is usually fine, but complete silence is always unacceptable. The end of a spinner (or even the entire spinner) the sliding sound of a slider, and the end of a slider can be silent, but only do it if it makes sense. Finally, you cannot silence both slider ticks and slider slides together.

Cherry Blossom wrote:

00:26:341 -
00:27:198 - and many more...

jonathanlfj wrote:

[General]
what CB said is true, you are safer raising the tick volumes to 20%, this way they are still audible but does not destroy the game play experience done!
I think combo 3 could use a little more greenish colour, given that the majority of the BG is in green Fully remade the combo colors.

your first red line and green line lands on the same place but have different volume settings, you need to make them the same
Alright, placed a new green timing point on the spinner before the red timing point
[Kotomi]
00:17:448 - a circle here to catch the synth would be nice A triplet already? Too early in a calm song and a bit overmapped imo
00:25:698 (3,4) - this angle plays really weird, you might want to rotate the slider counterclockwise a bit ok, just reversed the last ctrl+g
01:03:841 (1) - this slider should end at 01:04:591, you can move the repeat sliders a bit furthur to fix the spacing ok!
01:45:412 (5) - NC ok
02:25:483 (5) - move this up a bit to form a smoother arc with 02:25:698 (6,1) fine
02:32:983 (1) - same as 01:03:841 (1) yep
03:19:269 (3) - NC okay
03:37:912 (1,2,3,4,5) - give it a little more spacing to rid the overlaps added more spacing. Can't increase too much though.
03:42:948 (11,1) - bring these a little closer, i read this as 1/2 and let go of 11 too early alright
04:22:698 (1) - the sudden slow down in sv is a bit unexpected, would be great if you can bump it to 1.0x to have a smoother transition The player should know the rhythm after two kiais, the sv is also a bit superior than in the previous kiais, no changes

yeah let me know afterwards

Raiden wrote:

Uhmm... not to be a party popper or anything but






Might be a bug, idk.

Pereira006 wrote:

Approve

Congtraz

Raiden wrote:

Uhmm... not to be a party popper or anything but






Might be a bug, idk.

Nozhomi wrote:

It happened

Gamu wrote:

Hello!

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

General

Wrong Source:

• 
  "クラナド" is way of reading, so it should not be added as source. Add to tags instead.
  According to the following images and site, the source must be CLANNAD

1. Image: http://puu.sh/jQnUi/c7af7e8853.png
2. Image: http://puu.sh/jQnV3/e4b5635d8f.png
3. Official site: http://www.tbs.co.jp/clannad/clannad1/06special/special.html

Wrong Artist:

• 
  "たむ" is way of reading, and he have been using "TAM".
  According to the following images and site, the artist must be TAM if you want to use his name.
  Otherwise, I would like to recommend that you use the doujin circle name (TAMUSIC).

1. Image: http://puu.sh/jRjzb/ce4ba9cce9.png
2. Image: http://puu.sh/jRjB6/a4cf5f9da0.png
3. Official site: http://tamusic.jp/

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!

###B

Pereira006 wrote:

It's ok Neil, call me when this get bubble

Gamu wrote:

If you are worried about the metadata or would like me to check, feel free to call me anytime via the PM in order to avoid such metadata issue :3

IRC MOD

00:43 -Hakurei-: hi watts
00:43 -Hakurei-: i heard that all chat moderators and support team have changed into GMT
00:43 -Hakurei-: well played
01:03 Neil Watts: hi
01:03 Neil Watts: yep
01:03 -Hakurei-: yep
01:03 -Hakurei-: late for 20 minutes to reply
01:04 Neil Watts: sorry, I was outside
01:04 -Hakurei-: pfftt
01:04 -Hakurei-: btw
01:04 *-Hakurei- is listening to [http://osu.ppy.sh/b/712691 TAM - Megumeru]
01:04 -Hakurei-: i found out that this one is DQ
01:05 Neil Watts: yeah... not for a long time though (I hope)
01:05 -Hakurei-: yeah
01:05 Neil Watts: some metadata issues
01:05 -Hakurei-: ask KwaN or other QATs for that
01:05 *-Hakurei- is editing [http://osu.ppy.sh/b/712691 TAM - Megumeru [Kotomi]]
01:05 -Hakurei-: gonna check hitsounds for in case =w=
01:06 Neil Watts: oh, thanks ^^"
01:06 Neil Watts: well, this time I really think everything is ok
01:06 -Hakurei-: nope
01:06 -Hakurei-: not really
01:06 Neil Watts: (hurr, that's what every mapper thinks before the dq lol)
01:06 -Hakurei-: i found something
01:06 Neil Watts: oh ? :O
01:07 Neil Watts: Is it about hitsounding ?
01:07 -Hakurei-: yes
01:07 -Hakurei-: i told you
01:07 -Hakurei-: "gonna check hitsounds for in case =w="
01:07 Neil Watts: uguu
01:07 -Hakurei-: can you do a fix now?
01:07 -Hakurei-: if not, i'll do a mod in thread
01:08 Neil Watts: yeah, I can go ingame if needed
01:08 -Hakurei-: let's go then
01:08 -Hakurei-: 00:37:698 (7) - remove clap
01:08 Neil Watts: what D:
01:09 Neil Watts: I can hear it
01:09 Neil Watts: same as (6)
01:09 Neil Watts: oh wait
01:09 -Hakurei-: nope
01:09 Neil Watts: no, it's weaker indeed
01:09 -Hakurei-: 00:37:483 (6,8) - only this one is the same :p
01:09 -Hakurei-: not the (7)
01:10 Neil Watts: but it fits quite well with (7)
01:10 -Hakurei-: 00:41:126 (6) - here too
01:10 -Hakurei-: nope, not for me
01:10 -Hakurei-: --> just want to make the hitsound correct
01:11 -Hakurei-: 00:44:126 (5) - here, you need finish
01:12 Neil Watts: oh, yep, indeed
01:12 Neil Watts: gonna lessen the hitsounding volume though
01:12 -Hakurei-: ayy, it'll do
01:12 Neil Watts: because the finish is weaker here
01:13 -Hakurei-: ok
01:14 Neil Watts: hmmmrr sounds inconsistent
01:14 -Hakurei-: welp, you may deny that
01:15 Neil Watts: gonna add the finish because there's really something here
01:15 Neil Watts: but can't reduce the volume, placing a timing point to change the volume would be inconsistent here :[
01:16 -Hakurei-: lol ok
01:16 -Hakurei-: this is weird
01:17 Neil Watts: not gonna change my previous hitsounding pattern though, with "o-o-ooo" claps
01:17 Neil Watts: 'cause I like them =w=
01:17 -Hakurei-: 00:50:876 (3) - remove clap
01:17 -Hakurei-: since on some kiai parts like that, you didn't even add clap
01:18 Neil Watts: oh, I remember I added it after a mod
01:18 Neil Watts: these two claps?
01:18 Neil Watts: or just the (3) ?
01:18 -Hakurei-: (3)
01:18 -Hakurei-: just (3)
01:18 Neil Watts: alright, fixed!
01:19 -Hakurei-: 02:33:412 - well, i would do something on this note if i were you
01:19 Neil Watts: 01:03:841 (1) - like here?
01:19 -Hakurei-: correct
01:19 -Hakurei-: wait
01:19 Neil Watts: Well, I've done something on the last kiai
01:19 -Hakurei-: nvm
01:20 Neil Watts: but not on the two firsts
01:20 -Hakurei-: that's just me lol
01:20 -Hakurei-: didn't even realize
01:20 -Hakurei-: 02:33:841 (2) - 3rd part clap
01:21 -Hakurei-: i think i want to complain something about your song choice on this map
01:22 -Hakurei-: it makes me sleepy ya know D:
01:22 Neil Watts: you don't like violin ?
01:22 -Hakurei-: well i do
01:22 Neil Watts: gonna fix the (2) everywhere, thx
01:22 -Hakurei-: 03:14:983 (1,2,3) - for me...
01:23 -Hakurei-: i think you need additions into "Drum"
01:23 -Hakurei-: ow nvm
01:23 -Hakurei-: didn't realize the hitsound stuff
01:24 Neil Watts: that drum hitsound set idea was interesting
01:24 -Hakurei-: 03:29:126 (3) - first part, clap
01:24 Neil Watts: but I think I prefer my soft custom hitsounds
01:25 -Hakurei-: 03:29:341 (4) - first part, clap (soft)
01:25 Neil Watts: wow, my hitsounding sucks so much lmao
01:25 -Hakurei-: lmao
01:25 -Hakurei-: you should recheck everything on hitsound stuff kawkwkw
01:25 Neil Watts: hmmm not gonna add the last one, sounds like inconsistent on a drum part
01:26 -Hakurei-: i see...
01:26 Neil Watts: I already rechecked some times but idk, I just didn't noticed D:
01:26 -Hakurei-: 03:30:841 (6) - clever idea by adding whistle + clap =w=)b
01:26 Neil Watts:
01:27 -Hakurei-: 03:36:091 (7,9) - umm, did you set this from violin part?
01:27 Neil Watts: yep
01:27 -Hakurei-: ok
01:28 Neil Watts: like here 03:39:841 (1,2,3,4,5) -
01:29 -Hakurei-: 03:42:948 (11) - 3rd part, whistle
01:30 Neil Watts: omg how can you hear that
01:31 Neil Watts: do you have bionic ears ? oO"
01:31 -Hakurei-: wtf hell no
01:31 Neil Watts: ok i'm just deaf :')
01:31 -Hakurei-: i can tell that there is 1 pause part there
01:31 -Hakurei-: so, i can tell that the 4th part doesn't need whistle there
01:32 -Hakurei-: 03:56:769 (11,12) - lel, wrong hitsound
01:32 -Hakurei-: (11) should be whistle, not (12)
01:33 Neil Watts: indeed!
01:33 -Hakurei-: 04:10:483 (12,13) - same thing from what i said before
01:34 -Hakurei-: again lmao
01:34 -Hakurei-: 04:13:698 (6) - remove whistle at tail
01:37 -Hakurei-: 04:16:698 (6,7,8,9) - ohh boy. here i go for the hitsound check
01:38 Neil Watts: sorry, my internet crashed
01:38 Neil Watts: and I have to leave D:
01:38 -Hakurei-: wtf
01:38 Neil Watts: please write me a mod
01:38 Neil Watts: thank you for what you've pointed out
01:39 -Hakurei-: aye ok

1. 00:37:698 (7,9) - remove clap
2. 03:56:769 (11,12) - lel, wrong hitsound. (11) should be whistle, not (12)
3. 04:10:483 (12,13) - same thing from what i said before
4. 04:13:698 (6) - remove whistle at tail
5. 04:16:912 (7) - first part, whistle
6. 04:20:769 (7) - remove whistle
7. 04:24:212 - i'd add a note here (finish) for better and epic if i were you
8. 04:24:412 (1) - clap
9. 04:33:412 (1,2) - what a quite sound from the tail XD
10. 00:31:269 (1) - umm, finish here (with a different custom hitsound)
11. 00:38:126 (1) - ^

1. 00:37:698 (7,9) - remove clap Already said it during our IRC mod, I think I'm gonna keep this because it fits well imo. If I remove hitsounds here it will feel empty.
2. 03:56:769 (11,12) - lel, wrong hitsound. (11) should be whistle, not (12) alright, fixed
3. 04:10:483 (12,13) - same thing from what i said before ^
4. 04:13:698 (6) - remove whistle at tail yep
5. 04:16:912 (7) - first part, whistle alright
6. 04:20:769 (7) - remove whistle ^
7. 04:24:212 - i'd add a note here (finish) for better and epic if i were you hmmm, it doesn't sound like following the rhythm imo
8. 04:24:412 (1) - clap oh, nice idea
9. 04:33:412 (1,2) - what a quite sound from the tail XD Yeah, I muted the slider end for these two sliders to fit with the song.
10. 00:31:269 (1) - umm, finish here (with a different custom hitsound) I don't know which custom hitsound I may use, and honestly I think adding too much finish at the beginning of this song may ruin the calm of the map. Also I don't think the finish in the song here is important enough to be mapped. Gonna stay with my soft hitsounds and use finishes wisely, except on kiai where I can add more sounds
11. 00:38:126 (1) - ^

1. hitvolume tweaking (sliderends should have lower volume than their starts, as they do not represent strong player input, and this makes for a more clear alignment of playing and hitsounding rhythm, helping to make the map more intuitive. a general rule of thumb is to reduce a sliderend's hitvolume by around a third to half the volume of the start, in order to fit it more into the background)
2. passive hitsounding issues (elaborated upon further and in the linked thread, also relates to the previous point)
3. pressure delivery and beat intensity (strong beats should usually be more spaced-out, rather than stacked on top, even if they are just hitsounds or it is the same sound repeating twice - sharp angles and turns can also help with emphasis on these. relates to beat patterning and passive hitsounding)
4. beat patterning (the way you break up beats into patterns, i.e. if you'd be mapping as a triangle what in the song is two pairs of two, then you'd be going against the beat patterning and pairmotion that is given in the song - basically, try to structure your map as the song does it)

hitvolume tweaking (sliderends should have lower volume than their starts, as they do not represent strong player input, and this makes for a more clear alignment of playing and hitsounding rhythm, helping to make the map more intuitive. a general rule of thumb is to reduce a sliderend's hitvolume by around a third to half the volume of the start, in order to fit it more into the background)