Thanks a lot Kyubey!!
EDIT: To any BNs, pls no ninja rank!
EDIT: To any BNs, pls no ninja rank!
hmm... good point actuallyOkoratu wrote:
02:43:069 (4) - shouldn't this end better on 1/3 like.... 02:43:273 - cuz you probably extended it for piano??
Ashasaki가 10개월 기다리게 함 -> 계속 물어봐도 한다 한다 하고 진도 존내안나감 -> 어느날 바이러스 걸렸다함 -> 포기상태 -> 자기맵에 개고퀄 sb만드는거 목격 -> 걍 퀄파시키고 언뮤추때림bbj0920 wrote:
생각해보니까 스토리보드가 어디갔나요
Enjoy wrote:
grats moe Broccoly o3o
Zetera wrote:
THERE WE GO
CONGRATS
Thanks guys!Asahina Momoko wrote:
grats so awsome!!
Okoratu wrote:
02:43:069 (4) - shouldn't this end better on 1/3 like.... 02:43:273 - cuz you probably extended it for piano??
Snapped to 1/3.Bakari wrote:
The reason was already mentioned previously. Please take are of that.Okoratu wrote:
02:43:069 (4) - shouldn't this end better on 1/3 like.... 02:43:273 - cuz you probably extended it for piano??
솔직히 스토리보드도 보고싶었는데 ㅜㅠbbj0920 wrote:
생각해보니까 스토리보드가 어디갔나요
No, there are no discussions between QATs before a disqualification anymore. The reason is that we want to include you as the mapper and your fellow mappers into the discussions.Broccoly wrote:
I would really appreciate it if you QAT guys could reach a consensus during the appreciation process and not make separate DQs.
Thanks for the mod though. Will take a look when I get home.
The main point is that before disqualifications mainly happened on the last day because of endless discussions within the QAT. We are now disqualifying maps faster and the discussions happen in public (if even needed), together with the mapper and BNs.Broccoly wrote:
Out of curiosity, what does QATs not having internal discussions have to do with letting mappers into the discussion? I see no relationship there, since you guys can have the discussion and still listen to the mappers' opinions. You're basically saying you guys have to force the mappers into fixing something if QATs communicate with one another but don't have to if you guys DQ on your own. Would love it if you could elaborate on your point a bit more just for clarification.
It has added silence to get the 100+ ms length.Yuii- wrote:
soft-hitclap8.wav lasts for 30 ms, and as far as I know, hitsounds must have a length of 100 ms as a minimum. "Every .wav file must be at least 100ms long to prevent issues with soundcards."
tyvmYuii- wrote:
@Broccoly: This is just a suggestion, but as none of you seem to use the whole .mp3 I'd recommend you to cut the last 30 seconds of it, that will save some space on everyone's disk. I'd like to keep it since that part of the music is beautiful although not really mappable.
soft-hitclap8.wav lasts for 30 ms, and as far as I know, hitsounds must have a length of 100 ms as a minimum. "Every .wav file must be at least 100ms long to prevent issues with soundcards." Last time I checked it was 100ms as Kyubey mentioned but I redl'd now and it actually is 30ms; probably a bug. Should be fixed now. Good catch.
Apparently, soft-hitnormal6.wav; soft-hitnormal7.wav and soft-hitnormal8.wav are silent hitsounds, meaning they have no sound at all. Is that intended? Intended indeed
Good luck!
Thanks for your input nevertheless!Yuii- wrote:
Irre, on a side note, and only looking at what the cool Despe said, you shouldn't map them equally the same (referring to 01:07:864 (1,2) - ). To begin with, 01:07:864 (1) - is beginning on the piano, and for that reason it'd be way more cool if you finish it 01:08:094 - there instead, where the piano hits. Or you could add another note there, of course. And the main reason why I'm telling you to change the shape of them is because they have a complete different rhythm, not to mention that 01:08:171 (2) - starts with a drum sound instead of the piano that lands on 01:08:324 - . As an example of what you can do: http://puu.sh/m6lR8/db699cb810.jpg . I really want to keep a simple rhythm here because well, it's already on the more difficult side of hard difficulties.
That's just my personal opinion on those 2 objects.
Moreover, I would strongly recommend you to finish your difficulty at the same spot everybody else does. Currently, only your difficulty is causing an inconsistency, and lately we've seen a lot of discussions from people saying "your difficulty doesn't make sense, you are ignoring 1 whole minute of the .mp3" and bla blabla ba l. This discussion literally has NO TITLE HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA, what a bad joke, seriously. The climax has been reached at the point where I stopped, and I'd really feel bad to ruin this moment. It's basically why I decided to keep it this way.
Fixed. Good suggestion.Desperate-kun wrote:
Seems like I have to take this down again.
[SCV's Easy]
01:13:987 (1,2,3,4) -
03:04:191 (1,2,3) -
While I see the intention behind these patterns the rhythms are really complicated for an Easy and are a huge difficulty spike for this map. There is also a slight spacing difference here 01:15:518 (3,4) - that has quite a big effect on readability because the spacing looks visually like the 5/4-spacing before.
What would you think about this fix?
http://puu.sh/m66xz/754671bdb0.jpg
It would keep the current beats but make the rhythm easier to play for newbies. There is still an irregular gap but clicking a bit later won't hurt since a slider is coming afterwards.
In case you disagree with any of the above listed issues, I am sure we can find a conclusion together :3
Gotcha, thanks a lot Krah! (btw i love that song)Krah wrote:
Putting Deemo as source seems the most legit here.
Your video is indeed official and song will be a part of the game in the next version http://deemo.wikia.com/wiki/Oceanus
I had +/- the same case with Mili - A Turtle's Heart since I mapped it when it wasn't a part of the game but now it is so changed it.
What come first doesn't really matter, if a song is in a game then this game should be the source (anticipating a bit shouldn't be an issue here)
shit happened.. someone didn't keep his/her promiseKibbleru wrote:
storyboard? :S