Pending/Changed in a different way to asked
Confused/No change
Comment
But really dude nice now I have to slap ppl to look more at it
Confused/No change
Comment
KDSFARMERGray Veyron wrote:
[> General <]
- - Are you using normal-whistle.wav? removed
[> Desire <]
- 00:26:331 (1,1) - Great slider, I appreciate your efforts! But nyeh, you broke a flow here just for a single circle being blanketed. I've drew another choice for flowing nicely, so pick on what your heart want. This is meant to be a flow break to separate the sections by adding a snap between the long slider to the next, to make this consistent I added one at 00:31:816 (1,1) - now
- 00:40:731 (4,5) - Wow, this blanket... Is this on purpose? ayy fixed
- 00:58:902 (5,1) - Well, acceptable flow. It's almost the same as 00:26:331 (1,1) -, but not really close. I suggest curving it down, or Ctrl + J, or sth... to improve flow attempted a fix
- 01:06:102 (1,2,3) - Okay, so... I don't think this pattern's distance spacing is appropriate with the others, for pattern consistency or w/e. You can keep it if you have a good reason for it. But hey, you don't wanna try messing this up if you want to underestimate a single disqualification. Might look major to me, but not really to you, so yeah... Spacing is fine here, its almost the same as 01:08:845 (1,2) - but for the sake I'll reduce a little
- 01:19:816 (1) - When I played until this part, I felt a little odd because of the straightness of this slider on the song track's part. It's probably optional if you want to curve it or not. Something like this would do, just an example: I think that plays worse on my end ;-; The line fits with the curve I made flow-wise and it doesn't disrupt the song ;-;
- 01:22:216 (9) - When I saw this slider's spacing, it looked fine to me even though I played this part. Actually, the slider's placement is
shtnot really right. It feels like you've just randomly placed there for nothing... or for a jump, If I can recall? Well ofc, a new track or a song is there, but the placement is not right imo. wtf how is this even a jump? THIS 01:19:474 (8) - is a jump (albeit easy to hit)- 01:25:645 (2) - OH MY VOLKSWAGEN You ended this slider on 1/4 tick, but the next slider on a similar part ended on a simple white tick. Is this a mistake? or purposely doing it? If intentional... GJ! mistake, fixed
- 01:32:159 (1,2) - Likely optional, and... minor. I suggest 2.2x spacing here for consistency with the previous similar part. This, 2.33x spacing, looks pretty much bigger. Or better use lower for this gap to have an indication for players, just my opinion. will try
- 01:33:188 (7,8,1) - This looks pretty fun to play, but wait... WHAT??! Spacing between (7) and (8) has a jump, (8) and (1) don't. I prefer swapping because the new track showed up a little quickly, but it's up to you. this honestly plays fine and doesnt seem obstructful at all, if you snap it (like i do on this bit) they have simlar feels due to angles. ah hell changing a little anyway
- 01:49:645 (6,7,1) - Likely the same as before, it has a good flow similar to a triangle, but wth it's randomly placed. Make a triangle as you did before, here's just an example: that was the old version, but unfortunately due to the weird nature of 01:47:245 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,1,2) - that pattern making the left one higher and the right one lower plays weird as a transition. It was done like this to make the transition easier to move from
- 01:58:216 (1,3) - I almost can't read this stacking while playing, but I suppose I won't have to kill you for making the flow and playstyle good to play. Well... How about trying a manual stacking here? Might look better to me. how can you not read this? ;-; it makes perfect sense there and is... well just not hard to read by like... anyone who has tried it ;-;
- 02:31:474 (2) - This song track is taking a huge emphasis over this kind of pattern density, I mean... 1.65x spacing? That's, kinda, small, for, this, part. So maybe you should extend the spacing to 1.8x or 2x, like the part you did on 02:24:274 (1) - , That one introduces good spacing and makes more sense, so why not here too? MASSIVE JUMP! k not massive but 2x
- 02:34:559 (3,4,5,6,7) - This flow is....... WHY?!?!? Is this on purpose just for a back-and-forth flow or sth? yes it is, and with the previous patterning in the kiai, this isnt weird at allllll
- 03:04:216 (1) - Oh, please this placement blah: whats the problem with that ;-; any more would ruin that glorious momentum loss into those simple sliders
- 03:15:016 (1,2) - This plays great, but the flow is... 'broken'. It's kinda repetitive repeating the same thing again, but just do as you want. leniency makes this simples imo
- 03:23:931 (3,1) - I prefer a manual stacking here, I know it's similar but not really to me. Just because of "aesthetics" doesn't mean it just shows the appreciation of beauty, might be great for the player's playstyle too. But watch it, keep it readable. Uh I don't really what the problem is with this i mean like that touch isnt really visible during play and is easy to hit ;-; (spacing is low and all)
- 03:34:902 (3,4,5,6) - Is this pattern like, "the more density the bigger spacing"? Or... weirdly placed? Because the song is probably a normal intensity chorus. more like, the momentum gained from that quick spaced triplet is perfect to glide along to the next, small spacing would be awkward due to the momentum gain
- 03:53:759 (3,4) - Probably optional; I suggest replace these two circle to a slider, uhh for rhythm consistency ofc, just like what you did on some patterns next to this track. Because I'm pretty sure this might face inconsistency, furthermore. Or maybe 03:53:416 (1,2) - this one also, if possible. rrrrrr rhythm feels fine enough to not be obtrusive... rrrr I'll have to pend this one because fixing it (if i do) would be hell
- 03:56:759 (3,4,5,6,1) - You had a much lower AR on your screenshot, this is fine on normal AR :^)
- 04:08:159 (7) - This looks fine, but the sliding position seems odd, likely random or sth. Try rotating this 40, 50 or 60 for a Cyclone or cycle formation flow... ehh It's might be a little bit, if only you moved it somewhere else better than the current place ofc. Sth like this for example: much prefer my curved flow here sorry
- 04:23:588 (1) - Does this slider, looked like a question mark to me or sth ... "?", This will surely be ... "fun". yes it is a "?" ayy
- 04:52:045 (3,4,5) - I cannot explain repeatable reasons for now, so... uhh balance distance spacing pls. thats like... so minor wtf
- 05:18:445 (1,3) - You just heard people in #modhelp, this overlap
is sikmight be okay, but not really sure if it'd be fine due to it's aethetics. I LOVE IT! But really it doesn't look baddddd to me and rip blanket if change too kill me- 05:35:931 (5) - Almost the same as 01:33:188 (7,8,1) -, try this for this circle (5). No need explanation :^) yee nice c- i kinda broke up this section here like 05:35:588 (3,4) - 05:35:931 (5,6) - and 05:36:274 (1) - in 1/1s because this song is so repetitive like dam it needs a but of spicing up so if i fixed that it would ruin the next one and making them all similar means a weird af curve to fit the flow (which almost goes offscreen if done perfect)
- 05:55:816 (2,3) - Sameme as 04:52:045 (3,4,5) - "changed by making it worse"
- 06:04:388 (3,4,5,6,7,8,1) - Nooooo the floooow!!! It was really cool at start, then you broke it :^(((999 mfw... thats how its meant to be played... and thats how i intended it to be played (to me those patterns are easy af so if i changed that it would be like... no sense to me)
- 06:22:131 (3,4,5,6,8) - Saaaame 05:18:445 (1,3) - HOW DO I FIX THIS? I tried
- - IT'S THE EEEEND OF AN ARPHHIIIIRREE /caps lock breaks.
No need to kds for instance unless I told so.yay 2kds power!!
But really dude nice now I have to slap ppl to look more at it