forum

ikumi - Watashi no 71% <OVA ver.> [CatchTheBeat]

posted
Total Posts
277
show more
Topic Starter
Equim
All updated.
@JBH @Spec
Other changes in Unfettered are:
03:36:061 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - Changed the pattern.
03:24:061 (3) - Put it a bit more right.
Spectator
02:12:767 (1,2) - this jump is pretty tough for platter

Also



I rechecked the frequency after redownloading the map several times and it's still 320kbps
does this happen to only me?
Topic Starter
Equim
fixed with Xinely's authorization.

Spectator wrote:

I rechecked the frequency after redownloading the map several times and it's still 320kbps
does this happen to only me?
I guess so
Spectator
alright then

Fixing bubble
JBHyperion
Beautiful song, great mapset, and a really nice storyboard too. Good work guys

Qualified~
-Sh1n1-
*-*/ Finally, RIP Taiko diffs u.u Gratz, osu need more ctb sets :3
Kagari
congratz on qualify~ \o/
ZiRoX
Congrats!
Shiranai
Hey, dream come true equim, congrats :)
Renka
Congrats~:3
autofanboy
nice
OzzyOzrock
we tried... but this song is better on CTB anyways (●´ω`●) gratz!
Volta
finallyy congratz equim!
Moeruattack
Congratz on Qualified :D
CLSW
There!
Vhy
nice work there :p
koliron
Finallyyy! congratzzzz huuuaahahahaahhh ihfoehdaofchd
Kurokami
I have to disqualify this because of the Storyboard issues.

[Storyboard]

White.png is way too bright and can blind players for a sec which can cause miss easily.
01:02:179 -
01:27:591 -
01:38:885 -
etc

This could be solved easily if you make this image less bright.

Moreover some of your images used as background are too bright compared with the rest, this can also cause some issue at the first few second after it appears. Since its takes a while for the eyes to adjust themselves.
  1. a (7).png
  2. b (4).png
  3. b.png
  4. a (1).png
It would be nice if you could replace these with some less bright image or make them a little bit darker.
[]

Some extra

[Unfettered]

01:43:826 (1,2,3,1,2,3) - Its really easy to get a miss at this point because of the Hypers. I suggest you to move the notes closer in both of these to make the chance smaller.
01:49:825 (2,3,4,5) - Its really hard to get the correct timing at this point as there is a huge distance between (2,3) on the timeline but its small on the playfield while (4,5) is the exact opposite of it. I don't think (4,5) needs to be a Hyper anyway.
02:02:885 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - What a messed up pattern. (2,3) don't need to be a jump while at the same time (5,6) and (7,8) don't need to be Hyper as there is nothing to be highlighted at that point.
03:17:003 (1,2,3,1,2,3) - The exact same problem as before.
[]

This could be moved back to qualified fast after the issues solved. Good luck. o/
JBHyperion
Just giving my two cents.

Kurokami wrote:

I have to disqualify this because of the Storyboard issues.

[Storyboard]

White.png is way too bright and can blind players for a sec which can cause miss easily.
01:02:179 -
01:27:591 -
01:38:885 -
etc

This could be solved easily if you make this image less bright. I have honestly never seen a problem with this during play, the image isn't excessively bright in my opinion and the strain on the eyes is lessened significantly because of the gradual fade-in and out. If you're particularly sensitive to this kind of thing, turn the SB off - there's an epilepsy warning for a reason.

Moreover some of your images used as background are too bright compared with the rest, this can also cause some issue at the first few second after it appears. Since its takes a while for the eyes to adjust themselves.
  1. a (7).png
  2. b (4).png
  3. b.png
  4. a (1).png
It would be nice if you could replace these with some less bright image or make them a little bit darker. Yet a (3).png and b (1).png are fine? They both contain similarly bright regions comparable to those you listed. Again, all of these are faded in really slowly, giving the player plenty of time to adjust to a minimal change. Compared to white.png, which I already feel is used appropriately in a way that should not cause an issue, this is trivial.
[]

Some extra

[Unfettered]

01:43:826 (1,2,3,1,2,3) - Its really easy to get a miss at this point because of the Hypers. I suggest you to move the notes closer in both of these to make the chance smaller. I feel this flows really nicely already tbh; 4-4.25* is at the limit of what I feel I can play comfortably in a CtB specific diff, and I've never had an issue with this pattern in it's current form. We tweaked this pattern significantly during the modding process to perfect the flow and playability, and the result is a nice-flowing and interesting pattern that provides some individuality to the difficulty.
01:49:825 (2,3,4,5) - Its really hard to get the correct timing at this point as there is a huge distance between (2,3) on the timeline but its small on the playfield while (4,5) is the exact opposite of it. I don't think (4,5) needs to be a Hyper anyway. (2,3) needs to be a smaller spacing than expected to reduce the difficulty of catching (3) after the strong hdash from 01:49:296 (1) - after making this jump, 01:49:825 (2,3,4) is a simple walkable pattern. Also, (4,5) needs to be a hyper to maintain consistency with similar patterns such as 01:33:149 (6,1) - 03:06:326 (6,1) - 03:23:179 (4,1) -
02:02:885 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - What a messed up pattern. (2,3) don't need to be a jump while at the same time (5,6) and (7,8) don't need to be Hyper as there is nothing to be highlighted at that point. Have you tried listening to the music here? There's a clear buildup in intensity of the drumroll and vocal sounds which is befitting of increased patterning
03:17:003 (1,2,3,1,2,3) - The exact same problem as before. Exact response as before, there is no problem here imo
[]

This could be moved back to qualified fast after the issues solved. Good luck. o/
I'm open to getting some more discussion going, but I have to say I don't agree with any of this. I feel the storyboard "issues" are exaggerated and the map "issues" are contrived. It's up to Equim on how to address this however - poke me as soon as you're changed whatever you want to change.
Kurokami
Ayy, time to go deeper then.

JBHyperion wrote:

Just giving my two cents.

I have honestly never seen a problem with this during play, the image isn't excessively bright in my opinion and the strain on the eyes is lessened significantly because of the gradual fade-in and out. If you're particularly sensitive to this kind of thing, turn the SB off - there's an epilepsy warning for a reason. Well, not excessively bright? http://bit.ly/1lB52Si Its a full white image with 1x fading. That is a full white image right in the face. The SB in itself is fine, but not along with the hitobjects as they are hard to see while this image is the brightest. Yes, if you play this 5th time, you know what comes next but what matters is the first impression (mainly). You can't suggest someone to "just turn it off". Thats not the reason why that feature added. What if he want to enjoy both at the same time?

Yet a (3).png and b (1).png are fine? They both contain similarly bright regions comparable to those you listed. Again, all of these are faded in really slowly, giving the player plenty of time to adjust to a minimal change. Compared to white.png, which I already feel is used appropriately in a way that should not cause an issue, this is trivial. b (1) has its bright part on the right side while the object are mainly placed in the center and left, that won't cause problems. a (3).png is also fine because its bright part can't be compared with the mentioned ones, this image has a somewhat darker brightness which is actually nice to see. The problem with this images is not the fade in or how they do that, its because during the time they are up, some hitobject is blending inside the bright part.
[]

Some extra

[Unfettered]

01:43:826 (1,2,3,1,2,3) - Its really easy to get a miss at this point because of the Hypers. I suggest you to move the notes closer in both of these to make the chance smaller. I feel this flows really nicely already tbh; 4-4.25* is at the limit of what I feel I can play comfortably in a CtB specific diff, and I've never had an issue with this pattern in it's current form. We tweaked this pattern significantly during the modding process to perfect the flow and playability, and the result is a nice-flowing and interesting pattern that provides some individuality to the difficulty. Nah, I just moved (1) one grid to right and (3) (in the first combo) and the pattern already plays a lot better. The second (1,2,3) can even remain the same with this change.
01:49:825 (2,3,4,5) - Its really hard to get the correct timing at this point as there is a huge distance between (2,3) on the timeline but its small on the playfield while (4,5) is the exact opposite of it. I don't think (4,5) needs to be a Hyper anyway. (2,3) needs to be a smaller spacing than expected to reduce the difficulty of catching (3) after the strong hdash from 01:49:296 (1) - after making this jump, 01:49:825 (2,3,4) is a simple walkable pattern. Also, (4,5) needs to be a hyper to maintain consistency with similar patterns such as 01:33:149 (6,1) - 03:06:326 (6,1) - 03:23:179 (4,1) - Yea, those don't need to be a Hyper as well. They are fine as a simple jump but none of them is strong enough for a Hyper.
02:02:885 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - What a messed up pattern. (2,3) don't need to be a jump while at the same time (5,6) and (7,8) don't need to be Hyper as there is nothing to be highlighted at that point. Have you tried listening to the music here? There's a clear buildup in intensity of the drumroll and vocal sounds which is befitting of increased patterning Buildup? Sure. Then why there are no objects on 1/4 beats, at least at the second part of this combo? There are still clear drumsounds. But answering to you, the buildup contains no strong sounds except 02:03:591 vocal part, it has the same sound all over, which can be followed with higher movement but definitely not with Hypers.
03:17:003 (1,2,3,1,2,3) - The exact same problem as before. Exact response as before, there is no problem here imo
[]
and the map "issues" are contrived.
No one said those are issues to begin with. I just pointed them out because I feel like they could be better. Nothing more nothing less.
Yumeno Himiko
Ok some samples here

https://osu.ppy.sh/s/296724
01:20:496 - 01:20:907
01:46:797 - 01:47:208


https://osu.ppy.sh/s/261911
01:37:545 - 01:41:842


https://osu.ppy.sh/s/186911
02:21:746 - 02:22:255


I guess the transitions in this map are much milder
Topic Starter
Equim

Kurokami wrote:

Ayy, time to go deeper then.

JBHyperion wrote:

Just giving my two cents.

I have honestly never seen a problem with this during play, the image isn't excessively bright in my opinion and the strain on the eyes is lessened significantly because of the gradual fade-in and out. If you're particularly sensitive to this kind of thing, turn the SB off - there's an epilepsy warning for a reason. Well, not excessively bright? http://bit.ly/1lB52Si Its a full white image with 1x fading. That is a full white image right in the face. The SB in itself is fine, but not along with the hitobjects as they are hard to see while this image is the brightest. Yes, if you play this 5th time, you know what comes next but what matters is the first impression (mainly). You can't suggest someone to "just turn it off". Thats not the reason why that feature added. What if he want to enjoy both at the same time? Just one point, are you sure that you are using the default skin? Test it with default skin you will find the fruits are clear enough for players to catch (see this image). Here is another example from MitiS & MaHi - Blu (Speed Up Ver.) [Serena's Overdose], look at 01:38:262 - , which is much brighter than my case.

Yet a (3).png and b (1).png are fine? They both contain similarly bright regions comparable to those you listed. Again, all of these are faded in really slowly, giving the player plenty of time to adjust to a minimal change. Compared to white.png, which I already feel is used appropriately in a way that should not cause an issue, this is trivial. b (1) has its bright part on the right side while the object are mainly placed in the center and left, that won't cause problems. a (3).png is also fine because its bright part can't be compared with the mentioned ones, this image has a somewhat darker brightness which is actually nice to see. The problem with this images is not the fade in or how they do that, its because during the time they are up, some hitobject is blending inside the bright part.
Would you point out such issue if I picked any single of them as the background image? I have never heard of such BG-too-bright-then-dq.

Some extra

[Unfettered]

01:43:826 (1,2,3,1,2,3) - Its really easy to get a miss at this point because of the Hypers. I suggest you to move the notes closer in both of these to make the chance smaller. I feel this flows really nicely already tbh; 4-4.25* is at the limit of what I feel I can play comfortably in a CtB specific diff, and I've never had an issue with this pattern in it's current form. We tweaked this pattern significantly during the modding process to perfect the flow and playability, and the result is a nice-flowing and interesting pattern that provides some individuality to the difficulty. Nah, I just moved (1) one grid to right and (3) (in the first combo) and the pattern already plays a lot better. The second (1,2,3) can even remain the same with this change. 01:44:002 (3,1) - will lose HDash if I do so. This pattern is totally fine. I mapped based on the song and difficulty, since they are more objective. Whether it is hard to play or not is varied from players to players. I misunderstood, fixed.
01:49:825 (2,3,4,5) - Its really hard to get the correct timing at this point as there is a huge distance between (2,3) on the timeline but its small on the playfield while (4,5) is the exact opposite of it. I don't think (4,5) needs to be a Hyper anyway. (2,3) needs to be a smaller spacing than expected to reduce the difficulty of catching (3) after the strong hdash from 01:49:296 (1) - after making this jump, 01:49:825 (2,3,4) is a simple walkable pattern. Also, (4,5) needs to be a hyper to maintain consistency with similar patterns such as 01:33:149 (6,1) - 03:06:326 (6,1) - 03:23:179 (4,1) - Yea, those don't need to be a Hyper as well. They are fine as a simple jump but none of them is strong enough for a Hyper. It's too boring if there's no HDash at those points. Those patterns are at the ends of individual parts of the song and serve as transitions between different parts.
02:02:885 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - What a messed up pattern. (2,3) don't need to be a jump while at the same time (5,6) and (7,8) don't need to be Hyper as there is nothing to be highlighted at that point. Have you tried listening to the music here? There's a clear buildup in intensity of the drumroll and vocal sounds which is befitting of increased patterning Buildup? Sure. Then why there are no objects on 1/4 beats, at least at the second part of this combo? There are still clear drumsounds. But answering to you, the buildup contains no strong sounds except 02:03:591 vocal part, it has the same sound all over, which can be followed with higher movement but definitely not with Hypers. Listen to 02:03:238 - carefully, there's a stronger drumhit. Honestly there are some 1/4 beats but it's not suitable to map them in Rain. As the drumhits and vocal become stronger, the distances get wider as well. What's wrong with it? I'll try to change.
03:17:003 (1,2,3,1,2,3) - The exact same problem as before. Exact response as before, there is no problem here imo
and the map "issues" are contrived.
No one said those are issues to begin with. I just pointed them out because I feel like they could be better. Nothing more nothing less.
Besides 01:43:826 (1,2,3) - and 03:17:003 (1,2,3) - , 02:02:797 - and 03:35:973 - (huge changes). The only change is in 01:53:885 (6,7,8,1,2,3) - (slightly optimized the droplet).
More discussions are welcome.
Riari
I had a quick quick look at this, had a small conversation with JBH and this is my opinion I guess, wording might be a big strong because I've just had an annoying exam.

Bully Log
15:07 Riari: 01:43:826 (1,2,3,1,2,3) - His point makes sense
15:08 Riari: the distance increase from 01:43:120 (5,6) - is sudden, i'd change it to make it thinner. I'd even remove the hypers because the emphasis on 01:44:531 (1) - is reduced in comparison to the screenjumps
15:10 Riari: 01:49:825 (2,3,4,5) - is fine, the only problem with it is the reverse flow comming from 01:49:296 (1) - into 01:49:825 (2) - that even causes a problem for this
15:12 JBHyperion: 01:43:120 (5,6) - can't be much smaller whilst still maintaining a hyper - the vocal sounds are much stronger here than on the previous slider heads
15:12 Riari: 02:02:885 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - is a mess in my opinion, 02:03:414 (4,5) - is the only hyper that should be present, a smaller pattern of 02:02:885 (1,2,3,4) - that has distance increased for 02:03:591 (5,6,7,8) - would work perfectly but it just plays like a mess.
15:13 JBHyperion: I actually find 01:49:120 (3,1,2) - less awkward with the antiflow, I find it easier to overshoot (2) with a more "natural" flow fsr
15:14 JBHyperion: and afaik that last section is being remade
15:14 JBHyperion: speaking to Kuro about it now
15:15 Riari: https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/4071273 quick example of what I meant
15:15 Riari: the distances aren't obviously that, its just a quick example
15:16 Riari: aka a non-dash wiggle that hypers into a dash wiggle of sorts
15:17 Riari: also on the very last point he made, I'd swap 03:17:003 (1,2,3) - around to fit like 03:16:297 (1,2,3,1,2,3) - ,emphasise the pitch change in the vocals for 03:17:356 (1,2,3) - to be reversed only
15:17 Riari: its too much effort to post but there you go I guess
15:18 JBHyperion: just /savelog this and post lol
15:18 JBHyperion: takes like 30 seconds xD
15:18 Riari: my wording seems a bit strong but ok :(

If anything doesn't make sense then just PM me ingame I guess.
Topic Starter
Equim
fixed as much as I can.
Thank you Kuro, JBH and Riari.
Kurokami
Just to make the changes clear enough.

We discussed and made the following changes in the Storyboard:
  1. Moved white.png and k.png back to the .osb with changing the first one to Background
  2. Changed the fade of white.png from 1x to 0.9x to make less prominent and sudden for a few ms
Changes in the patterns:
  1. 01:43:826 (1,2,3) - Changed by moving (1) and (3) closer to (2) which not destroys the pattern, just makes it a bit easier. Same at 03:17:003 (1,2,3) -
  2. 02:02:885 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - Changed to make the buildup more obvious (was not my idea :<)
Feel free to proceed as the majority of the "issues" are fixed, along with the main reason.
JBHyperion
Let's try again

Bubbled~

Also pls upload to Pending lol
-Sh1n1-
so sad :'( I love this map ;w;

WTF Go Go~~
Spectator
let this go
buhei
:)
TinBoy752
Finally! I love the song I'm working on which is done by someone else is qualified!
Despite the storyboard is thematic yet not featuring Aaya or Kiiko in the OVA, I hope this to be ranked before Christmas or New Year's Eve!
Good Luck, Equim! :)
Deif
We'll need to polish that Storyboard a bit more before letting this get ranked:

[SB]
The main issue I see are some of the image transitions that happens a few ms earlier than they should be:
  1. 00:02:885 - "a (8)" appears way too early. You have to make it appear at 2885 and not a few ms ahead, or you'll see something like this: https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/4109403
  2. 01:27:591 - This one is one of the most obvious. The previous image starts dissapearing at about 01:27:326 - , when it should happen at 01:27:591 - . 200 ms is a great difference, noticeable enough to make your SB not that nice. The transition should happen at 01:27:591 - along with the beginning of the kiai (also totally unrelated touhou picture lol).
  3. 01:44:532 - Same with this picture. Try to make the transition at the exact point where the new stanza starts. It looks much more better when the pulse you placed matches with the image transition.
  4. 03:17:708 - On the other hand, this transition happens way too many ms late ._.
  5. 03:37:473 - This one also happens quite late than it should be.
tl;dr all image transitions must be checked and properly adjusted, specially the ones already mentioned, and also 02:38:179 - 03:00:767 - 03:12:061 - 03:29:003 -

[]
I hope I didn't miss any of them. If you need any help, don't hesitate contacting me!
Yuii-
"How to rank a map." By Equim.

Oh, sorry, wrong tutorial. Ok, bye.
JBHyperion
sighs deeply

Equim/Kanari can address whatever needs to be adjusted - call me back (again) when you're ready.
Kurokami
Sry guys. That was my mistake. q.q Feel free to punish me. /o/
JBHyperion

Kurokami wrote:

Sry guys. That was my mistake. q.q Feel free to punish me. /o/
Please it's no more your fault than it is ours, we missed it too xD

Equim, I know you're probably getting fed up with this, but please keep at it, we're almost there!
Kanari
Topic Starter
Equim
我累了,真的累了……

updated the sb, no change to the rest. (15-12-25)
Wafu
I hope it's not dead, anyway, you should fix the metadata to fit official source.

First of all it's not using regular brackets, and second, it is using Japanese numbers as they're spaced.

Title: 私の71%〈OVA ver.〉
Romanized Title: Watashi no 71% <OVA ver.>

Don't refer to unofficial shops unless necessary.
Topic Starter
Equim

Wafu wrote:

I hope it's not dead, anyway, you should fix the metadata to fit official source.

First of all it's not using regular brackets, and second, it is using Japanese numbers as they're spaced.

Title: 私の71%〈OVA ver.〉
Romanized Title: Watashi no 71% <OVA ver.>

Don't refer to unofficial shops unless necessary.
I have also noticed this before, tho..... Only the cover used that title. In the disk it is still labelled as 私の71% (OVA ver.)
I chose to remain.
Wafu
Proof vs. no proof. You need to include proof that your title is official. If you cannot prove you own exactly the original data, then you need to change it according to what I provided. Case is usually 100% reliable, so there's low change you actually have chance for pick.
Topic Starter
Equim
metadata updated.
The only change in pattern is 03:36:061 (1,2,3,4) - at in Unfettered. (tell me if you have better suggetion)
ZHSteven

Equim wrote:

metadata updated.
The only change in pattern is 03:36:061 (1,2,3,4) - at in Unfettered. (tell me if you have better suggetion)
不太明白什麼意思,如果是我的話會做increment

Topic Starter
Equim

ZHSteven wrote:

Equim wrote:

metadata updated.
The only change in pattern is 03:36:061 (1,2,3,4) - at in Unfettered. (tell me if you have better suggetion)
不太明白什麼意思,如果是我的話會做increment

哇哇哇哇哇是山哥!!!!!!
根据你提出的这个概念改了(不过实际上是对称过来的)

updated
JBHyperion
Recheck /o/

no kudosu

SB:
  1. 03:17:708 - This transition still feels late to me, the previous image is still dominant in the transition until around 03:17:885 - the second image isn't even visible at 03:17:797 - almost 100ms after the transition should occur
  2. 03:37:473 - Not sure about this one, centre point of the transition between images is at 03:37:738 but the decrease in intensity of the music does fit nicely with a more gradual fade-in of the next image. I still think it's a little late though :/
Patterns seem fine, but a check over by an experienced SB modder would be helpful before we try again.
arviejhay
hello you requested SB mod from my queue! :D
The problem is a transition problem.

Ok i'm going to provide an auto-fix in case you didn't understand my noob english.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/yq5ulr37p174x ... -.rar?dl=0

Make sure that you have a backup of you old .osb
Put the Ty.png to SB folder and put the ring.png to sb2 folder

blue = didn't add to the fix (its your decision if you want to change, remove or add)

Noob SB mod
change the image ring.png to a new image ring.
crop the SB\Ty.png
Every scenes' end movements stop early, it should be stop as the fade time stops. better take an example in 00:17:002 - notice the movement and the fade doesn't match the time, if they do not match, it will look a little dull or obvious. they should be stop at the same time for better effect. 00:17:355 - put a movement anchor point with the same x and y (dont change anything) then 00:17:002 - remove this previous movement anchor point. Do this in every scene.

To me, the expanding circles in the intro is scalling up really fast on a slow song. i suggest to reduce the scalling.

is it just me or the light particles doesn't have any additive (alpha mode)
K.png (Foreground - line 55) - 00:14:179 - Add easing out on movement for betting effect
SB\Equim.png (Foreground - line 51) - 00:14:179 - ^same
SB\AFB.png (Foreground -line 50) - 00:14:179 - ^^same, apply it to the GD diff
and so on. .
i blue color it because i only focus on the .osb. and they are separate
Kanari

arviejhay wrote:

To me, the expanding circles in the intro is scalling up really fast on a slow song. i suggest to reduce the scalling. i think it's alright o3o

is it just me or the light particles doesn't have any additive (alpha mode) they don't
K.png (Foreground - line 55) - 00:14:179 - Add easing out on movement for betting effect will leave the diff specific stuff for Equim to do
SB\Equim.png (Foreground - line 51) - 00:14:179 - ^same
SB\AFB.png (Foreground -line 50) - 00:14:179 - ^^same, apply it to the GD diff
and so on. .
i blue color it because i only focus on the .osb. and they are separate

JBHyperion wrote:

Recheck /o/

no kudosu

SB:
  1. 03:17:708 - This transition still feels late to me, the previous image is still dominant in the transition until around 03:17:885 - the second image isn't even visible at 03:17:797 - almost 100ms after the transition should occur made b(3) fade out at 03:17:708 and a(3) fades in at that time as well
  2. 03:37:473 - Not sure about this one, centre point of the transition between images is at 03:37:738 but the decrease in intensity of the music does fit nicely with a more gradual fade-in of the next image. I still think it's a little late though :/ made b(4) fade out at 03:37:826 -
Patterns seem fine, but a check over by an experienced SB modder would be helpful before we try again.
i used what arviejhay provided and fixed what JBHyperion said (i think..)
http://puu.sh/mGMgo.zip
Equim take care of the diff specific stuff uguu
Topic Starter
Equim
fixed and updated.

My body is ready.
autofanboy
let's do this
JBHyperion
Discussed some SB concerns with Sey and Deif, we still need to fix up a few more things unfortunately :/

  1. 01:02:179 - Transition here is quite late, 2nd image doesn't appear until 01:02:355 whereas the transition point is at 01:02:179 -. Make the fade out/in for both between 01:02:091 - 01:02:267
  2. 01:38:885 - Same as above, this transition is really late, make the transition between 01:38:796 - 01:38:973
  3. 02:04:297 - Any reason why you decided not to use another image here? You did so for each of the other verses e.g. 01:27:591 - 01:44:532 - etc.
  4. 03:29:003 - Also late, first image is still visible at 03:29:179 when the transition is at 03:29:003 -. Make the transition occur between 03:28:914 - 03:29:091 instead.
  5. 03:37:473 - Been thinking about this one some more, and decided that it's definitely more natural to make the transition point on the downbeat, same as you did for all the others, meaning you'll want to start/end the image fading in/out between 03:37:297 - 03:37:650 - since you have no white bg flash to accompany this transition, and you're moving into a slow section of the song, it can afford to be a little longer
Not really sure what most of the images have to do with the song/anime either, but whatever, stylistic preference I guess.

Sey has some concerns of his own he wishes to voice, so I advise you to wait until he posts before responding to this to allow discussion and prevent unnecessary or potentially wrong changes.
Yumeno Himiko

JBHyperion wrote:

Discussed some SB concerns with Sey and Deif, we still need to fix up a few more things unfortunately :/

  1. 01:02:179 - Transition here is quite late, 2nd image doesn't appear until 01:02:355 whereas the transition point is at 01:02:179 -. Make the fade out/in for both between 01:02:091 - 01:02:267 This is ok and many transitions are done like this, since it's a slow song, slow transitions should work well :) No need to complain about this and I've checked out the code
  2. 01:38:885 - Same as above, this transition is really late, make the transition between 01:38:796 - 01:38:973 ^ same
  3. 02:04:297 - Any reason why you decided not to use another image here? You did so for each of the other verses e.g. 01:27:591 - 01:44:532 - etc. uhh I don't think it's a valid reason... Use or not is out of personal taste XD
  4. 03:29:003 - Also late, first image is still visible at 03:29:179 when the transition is at 03:29:003 -. Make the transition occur between 03:28:914 - 03:29:091 instead. Same as above
  5. 03:37:473 - Been thinking about this one some more, and decided that it's definitely more natural to make the transition point on the downbeat, same as you did for all the others, meaning you'll want to start/end the image fading in/out between 03:37:297 - 03:37:650 - since you have no white bg flash to accompany this transition, and you're moving into a slow section of the song, it can afford to be a little longer :? I don't think it is a really valid point too
Not really sure what most of the images have to do with the song/anime either, but whatever, stylistic preference I guess.

Sey has some concerns of his own he wishes to voice, so I advise you to wait until he posts before responding to this to allow discussion and prevent unnecessary or potentially wrong changes.
I don't think a good modder should find those ambiguous points XD, and all things you mentioned are not that necessary
If you wanna check the transitions well, I suggest you delete White.png and check the whole set again lol

One of the points that I've found
these points are not ready for qualification
codes
Sprite,Foreground,Centre,"sb2\White.png",320,240
V,0,1473,,3.502193,1.974452
F,0,1473,2885,0,1
F,0,2885,4296,1,0.00141844
F,0,14179,17002,0,1
F,0,17002,18061,1,0
F,0,60767,62179,0,1
F,0,62179,63591,1,0.005665722
F,0,86885,87591,0,1
F,0,87591,88296,1,0.02266289
F,0,98179,98885,0,1
F,0,98885,,1
F,0,98885,,1
F,0,98885,,1
F,0,98885,99591,1,0
F,0,103826,104532,0,1
F,0,104532,,1
F,0,104532,105238,1,0
F,0,115120,115826,0,1
F,0,115826,117238,1,0.001416431
F,0,134885,135591,0,1
F,0,135591,137002,1,0.009915014
F,0,157473,158179,0,1
F,0,158179,158885,1,0
F,0,180061,180767,0,1
F,0,180767,181473,1,0
F,0,191355,192061,0,1
F,0,192061,192767,1,0
F,0,197003,197708,0,1
F,0,197708,198414,1,0
F,0,208297,209003,0,1
F,0,209003,210414,1,0

These red points are codes that can lead to unnecessary sb load, please replace these numbers with 0

I guess the other parts of this storyboard is fine. Let's continue the discussion.
Topic Starter
Equim

JBHyperion wrote:

Discussed some SB concerns with Sey and Deif, we still need to fix up a few more things unfortunately :/

  1. 01:02:179 - Transition here is quite late, 2nd image doesn't appear until 01:02:355 whereas the transition point is at 01:02:179 -. Make the fade out/in for both between 01:02:091 - 01:02:267
  2. 01:38:885 - Same as above, this transition is really late, make the transition between 01:38:796 - 01:38:973
  3. 02:04:297 - Any reason why you decided not to use another image here? You did so for each of the other verses e.g. 01:27:591 - 01:44:532 - etc.
  4. 03:29:003 - Also late, first image is still visible at 03:29:179 when the transition is at 03:29:003 -. Make the transition occur between 03:28:914 - 03:29:091 instead.
  5. 03:37:473 - Been thinking about this one some more, and decided that it's definitely more natural to make the transition point on the downbeat, same as you did for all the others, meaning you'll want to start/end the image fading in/out between 03:37:297 - 03:37:650 - since you have no white bg flash to accompany this transition, and you're moving into a slow section of the song, it can afford to be a little longer
Not really sure what most of the images have to do with the song/anime either, but whatever, stylistic preference I guess.

Sey has some concerns of his own he wishes to voice, so I advise you to wait until he posts before responding to this to allow discussion and prevent unnecessary or potentially wrong changes.
Since you think the SB has problems,
why not say them all at a time?

If ever this SB is thrown into doubt again and leads to disqualitification, I will delete it regretfully, though I really don't expect it.

oh, thank you exam! ;_;
exam:红色的都改成0了。不过话说我这边看到的都是0.9,没有1……

updated by exam's check.
Sey
After some internal discussion Equim gave me permission to post the log on this for reference. Thanks a lot for your cooperation btw.

Chat log
12:57 Equim: oh
12:57 Equim: hmm....
13:21 Equim: JBH posted ;_;
13:52 Sey: Yeah I saw
13:53 Equim: and exam posted
13:54 Sey: So has the storyboard been updated?
13:55 Equim: yes
13:55 Equim: but just fixed some bugs
13:55 Equim: generally no change
13:55 Sey: You wrote: "Since you think the SB has problems, why not say them all?"
13:55 Sey: But JBH pointed them out, there were transition issues, right?
13:56 Equim: say them all at a time
13:57 Sey: He did point them out with the timestamps in his mod?
13:57 Equim: SB doesn't need precise timing....
13:57 Sey: Was it not the reason it got disqualified, that some of the transition points were not fully perfect?
13:58 Equim: I mean... this map got disqualified for twice, because of SB
13:58 Sey: Yes, now imagine it gets disqualified a 3rd time because of SB issues
13:58 Sey: We both don't want that, right?
13:59 Equim: I'll either delete the SB, or contest
13:59 Sey: Do you have any valid concerns why JBH's suggestions on the storyboard are bad?
14:01 Equim: In terms of transitions, it is a slow song and it worked fine
14:03 Sey: Why do they work fine and what has it to do with a slow song? JBH has mentioned that the timing of some transitions was false. Is this correct? Can you give me any valid reasons why postponed transitions are valid on this mapset?
14:06 Sey: I ask you this sort of question because I want you to be able to defend your mapset as it is, but you did not bring any valid concern yet. If you have a good reason and can defend the storyboard as it is, I am sure that I can help you. What I want the most less is that you delete the storyboard, because it's a good storyboard. There is nothing fundamentally bad on it. I like it. So I am trying to help you, do you understand?
14:08 Equim: It's hard
14:08 Sey: What is hard?
14:11 Equim: they just follow the trend
14:11 Sey: Can you maybe try to explain a bit better? I am not sure what you are trying to say
14:12 Equim: Most SBs work that way
14:12 Equim: when I asked some other mappers
14:12 Equim: even Fycho said, "I have never heard that an SB needs snap precisely."
(...)
14:14 *Equim is editing [https://osu.ppy.sh/b/472580 Pile - Love Live! Songs Compilation [Scarlet Princess]]
14:15 *Equim is editing [https://osu.ppy.sh/b/714001 Reol - No title [jieusieu's Lemur]]
14:15 Equim: Do you think they are precisely snapped?
14:15 Equim: no
(...)
14:20 Equim: A "transition" takes time to bring out an image
14:21 Equim: in storyboard, the time the images show out are not as precisely controlable as that in mapping
14:22 Equim: a "transition" matches the timing or not is usually varied from person to person, unlike mapping, in addition
14:23 Equim: You simply cannot apply the logic in mapping to storyboarding mechanically

tl;dr Not many changes on the storyboard had been made after JBH's mod. Equim pointed out that a storyboard does not need to be snapped precisely on the rhythm. Since this is a very slow-paced song the transitions take longer and therefore continue in the subsequent rhythm. Is that something unrankable? Seemingly not. There is nothing like that written in the Ranking Criteria under the terms of storyboarding.
First time it got disqualified was because white.png needed to be adjusted, right? This has been fixed already, hasn't it? Deif disqualified again mainly due to badly snapped transitions. The storyboarder already fixed them quite a lot right? Are the current transitions still that fundamentally broken to hold this back from a rebubble? Can this please be discussed?
Topic Starter
Equim
Fixed 03:37:473 - only.
No change to the "transitions"; reasons are in Sey's post.
Updated.
JBHyperion

Equim wrote:

Since you think the SB has problems,
why not say them all at a time?
I am just like any other modder - constantly learning, constantly trying to improve. Before this point, I will admit I didn't understand SB modding very well. Because of the experiences with this and other maps, I have gained more insight and am able to provide more feedback. I'm sorry I couldn't have done this before.

Also note, that the disqualification process is not designed to fix all the flaws or problems in a map, but to generate more discussion. If no-one else is providing feedback, we have nothing to talk about, which is why it's important to take our time and work things through after gaining as much information as possible.

Equim wrote:

If ever this SB is thrown into doubt again and leads to disqualitification, I will delete it regretfully, though I really don't expect it.
This is childish, though not unexpected since it already happened with the taiko diffs in this mapset. The storyboard is great, why would you remove it because it required a few small fixes? Stop rushing things and let's do this properly and professionally.
Topic Starter
Equim

JBHyperion wrote:

Equim wrote:

Since you think the SB has problems,
why not say them all at a time?
I am just like any other modder - constantly learning, constantly trying to improve. Before this point, I will admit I didn't understand SB modding very well. Because of the experiences with this and other maps, I have gained more insight and am able to provide more feedback. I'm sorry I couldn't have done this before.

Also note, that the disqualification process is not designed to fix all the flaws or problems in a map, but to generate more discussion. If no-one else is providing feedback, we have nothing to talk about, which is why it's important to take our time and work things through after gaining as much information as possible.

Equim wrote:

If ever this SB is thrown into doubt again and leads to disqualitification, I will delete it regretfully, though I really don't expect it.
This is childish, though not unexpected since it already happened with the taiko diffs in this mapset. The storyboard is great, why would you remove it because it required a few small fixes? Stop rushing things and let's do this properly and professionally.
You contradicted yourself! You admitted that you can't figure out all the flaws at a time, but then you said "it required a few small fixes". Hence how were you sure that it just required a few small fixes? I remember I've seen such illogic wording before the several bubble/qualification for so many times.

I'm not doubting your skills. Your check is the most critical one I've ever seen. But preciseness doesn't always mean to be good; it has to be at a proper extent.

If it gets disqualified due to the SB again, it shows the SB is "unrankable in nature and unfixable" in a more objective way. It is a good SB, but maybe it's because of some "minor flaws", or maybe it's simply because you don't like it for some reason, no matter what, the concept that "it can't be ranked" is much clearer than before. Then why not make the decision?

Certainly it's a tough decision for me. Kanari was an experienced SB maker, and she knew I was a beginner in mapping, but she accepted my SB request. I am still impressed with how she trusted in me. I can't let down the trust. I feel guilty to delete it, which happened when I deleted the Taikos as well.

Kurokami was wrong at the first dq. I explained my opposite opinion, by giving ranked examples and others' quotes, while I actually fixed them. But this time, it's more unreasonable. I wonder why the more we fix the more picky you are, and why you still seem to be following the wrong trend of judgement towards SB!
JBHyperion

Equim wrote:

You contradicted yourself! You admitted that you can't figure out all the flaws at a time, but then you said "it required a few small fixes". Hence how were you sure that it just required a few small fixes?
You misunderstand me, but my message is really quite simple. Before, I missed some stuff. Now I know more about it, so I found something to comment on. Before.... And now. No contradiction in what I say here. Had I been experienced enough to spot the issues the first time, of course I would have pointed them out. There are issues, of that I am now certain.

But preciseness doesn't always mean to be good; it has to be at a proper extent.
In what world is improving something not a good idea? Do you want a good mapset, or an average one? If you're not prepared to polish your map up to the high standards set to have it become an officialy representative osu! beatmap, then just don't map for rank - simple.

If it gets disqualified due to the SB again, it shows the SB is "unrankable in nature and unfixable" in a more objective way. It is a good SB, but maybe it's because of some "minor flaws", or maybe it's simply because you don't like it for some reason, no matter what, the concept that "it can't be ranked" is much clearer than before. Then why not make the decision?
If it gets disqualified for the SB again it means issues have not been fixed and people are rushing the qualification (I am somewhat guilty of this too - I should have put more effort into understanding Storyboarding before giving this map two icons). It in no way means it is unrankable. Please don't assume that I am suggesting these comments because I "don't like it for some reason" - that would be entirely unprofessional of me and it's extremely rude to assume this is the case here.

Kurokami was wrong at the first dq. I explained my opposite opinion, by giving ranked examples and others' quotes, while I actually fixed them. But this time, it's more unreasonable.
If the first DQ was "wrong" then the map would have been requalified straight away with no changes - which it wasn't. Kurokami was perfectly justified in his decisions to DQ the map (despite my own personal complaints at the time). Giving examples of other ranked maps is irrelevant as we are discussing this map, not those. The concerns are not unreasonable at all - they have been voiced and explained by several BNs and QATs, and should be a relatively simple fix, so I'm not sure why you insist on maintaining this defensive stance.

I wonder why the more we fix the more picky you are, and why you still seem to be following the wrong trend of judgement towards SB!
I will not apologize for holding high standards, nor will I apologize for having an opinion different from your own. If you think I'm wrong, that's fine - feel free to ask another nominator to check this map so that I can focus my attention on other maps.
tl;dr - myself and others are trying to help you, and it's up to you whether you choose to accept that help, but please don't be rude. Good luck getting this requalified.
Kanari
in all honesty, this seems absolutely ridiculous. i've never seen such picky sb mods. it would be nice if you could fix the sb, provide the code and show me what it is you want changed
and i agree with Equim on the idea of discarding the sb if problems continue to occur, because it's tiring for both of us
_koinuri
Hello, here to reply to some sb mods.

JBHyperion wrote:

Discussed some SB concerns with Sey and Deif, we still need to fix up a few more things unfortunately :/

  1. 01:02:179 - Transition here is quite late, 2nd image doesn't appear until 01:02:355 whereas the transition point is at 01:02:179 -. Make the fade out/in for both between 01:02:091 - 01:02:267 Starting the transition before this point will be a bad idea, because the music suddenly change at 01:02:179 - . The storyboard will be spoiling a change in music beforehand, and it won't look as great. I also think half a beat to transition is too short. Right now, it's long enough to show 2 bgs here "mixing" with each other, and I think it's a nice effect, especially in this kind of slow music.
  2. 01:38:885 - Same as above, this transition is really late, make the transition between 01:38:796 - 01:38:973same as #1
  3. 02:04:297 - Any reason why you decided not to use another image here? You did so for each of the other verses e.g. 01:27:591 - 01:44:532 - etc.I agree with this one, makes it more consistent with 03:37:473 . They're both transitions from chorus so should be the same imo.
  4. 03:29:003 - Also late, first image is still visible at 03:29:179 when the transition is at 03:29:003 -. Make the transition occur between 03:28:914 - 03:29:091 instead.same as #1
  5. 03:37:473 - Been thinking about this one some more, and decided that it's definitely more natural to make the transition point on the downbeat, same as you did for all the others, meaning you'll want to start/end the image fading in/out between 03:37:297 - 03:37:650 - since you have no white bg flash to accompany this transition, and you're moving into a slow section of the song, it can afford to be a little longersame as #1
Not really sure what most of the images have to do with the song/anime either, but whatever, stylistic preference I guess.

Sey has some concerns of his own he wishes to voice, so I advise you to wait until he posts before responding to this to allow discussion and prevent unnecessary or potentially wrong changes.
I think the transition is better as it is right now. Transitions usually start after the beat. Starting it before makes the transition feel less significant, because it's easy to tell when the pictures are starting to be visible, but it's difficult to tell when it's 100% done with its fade in.
Sidetail
Kanari asked me to view this in my perspective, so here it is.

JBHyperion wrote:

Discussed some SB concerns with Sey and Deif, we still need to fix up a few more things unfortunately :/

Agree / Maybe / Disagree

  1. 01:02:179 - Transition here is quite late, 2nd image doesn't appear until 01:02:355 whereas the transition point is at 01:02:179 -. Make the fade out/in for both between 01:02:091 - 01:02:267 Slightly late, BUT negligible. It's all upto Kanari for this.
  2. 01:38:885 - Same as above, this transition is really late, make the transition between 01:38:796 - 01:38:973 ^ same.. however, it's not "really late" that is just exaggerating it.
  3. 02:04:297 - Any reason why you decided not to use another image here? You did so for each of the other verses e.g. 01:27:591 - 01:44:532 - etc. No, It's different. The earlier part have vocals on both parts, while 02:04:297 doesn't (only has one first half). I would leave it as is.
  4. 03:29:003 - Also late, first image is still visible at 03:29:179 when the transition is at 03:29:003 -. Make the transition occur between 03:28:914 - 03:29:091 instead. Negligible. More like nitpicking tbh.
  5. 03:37:473 - Been thinking about this one some more, and decided that it's definitely more natural to make the transition point on the downbeat, same as you did for all the others, meaning you'll want to start/end the image fading in/out between 03:37:297 - 03:37:650 - since you have no white bg flash to accompany this transition, and you're moving into a slow section of the song, it can afford to be a little longer Since it doesn't have flash or anything, I would agree for this as current one is visually slightly late.
To be honest. From my perspective, this was quite unnecessary DQ as SBing is mostly up to creator's creativity. With exceptions of what examination has mentioned (arbitrarily close to value of 0, but not 0) there is nothing much to fix. That being said, DQ usually helps on quality of final product, but often in a way that tampers with original intention of the masterpiece.

Overall, this was one INCREDIBLY nit-picky SB mod I've ever seen. (It's disappointing)
Yumeno Himiko
hey guys, don't be so strict at jbh or sey or deif or any other modders
they want to help this map and they are doing what they think is right here

tho some modder is really new at sb modding and not so familiar with it, we can still help him to realize what is sb modding XD ;)

anyway, I support kanari and equim here, if you think the sb is with some bugs, you just point them out and write down once so that they can fix and qualify quickly, instead of being picky and point out again and again.

Hope this set can get qualified again soon quickly.
Topic Starter
Equim
Damnae's view:
The conversation was made three days ago. Although I asked Damnae to make a post here so that it can be more authoritative, he seems to be too busy to do so.
_koinuri

examination wrote:

hey guys, don't be so strict at jbh or sey or deif or any other modders
they want to help this map and they are doing what they think is right here
I wasn't really trying to be mean with my post, sorry if I did sound mean. :(

I understand they're trying to help with the storyboard, I just wanted to give my opinion on this matter.

Good luck with the mapset.
Sidetail
^ Hopefully I didnt sound too mean as well

Anyways, good luck Kanari! \o/
XinCrin
I still don't understand the DQ's reason. Unnecessary points to change

Well . . .
Taeyang
I personally think this storyboard is ok. Of course, there are points where the quality is a little lacking
but I don't believe those issues should interfere with the ranking process
In fact, I think some mods are simply attacking the storyboarder's styles
I really would like this map to be ranked :)

Good luck~!
Professor Gila
to me, pretty rare to see a map compiled with advanced SB, so better let it be :)



don't forget to board some pants to leave a trace :>
MBomb
Sorry, gonna have to agree about the unsnapped transitions, they look weird, and are definitely noticible, even at 100% speed. The storyboard is amazing, don't get me wrong, but these few issues are almost spoiling it, and I imagine you can easily fix them with the storyboarding skill shown in the rest of it.
_koinuri
How are they unsnapped? To me, the suggested fade in and fade out is more unsnapped because the fade in starts on a random blue tick and ends on another random blue tick. The bgs will just be sitting at 50% transparency, middle of transition right at the note.

If we moved it to start in 01:02:091 like in the mod, you'll be able to see the second picture before the note

And that feels weirder than the current transition imo.

I like the slow transition Kanari has right now better. This should be something the storyboarder can decide.
Deif
I can understand why there's such little of Kuttsukiboshi in the SB pics, so I'll let that fact slip for this map.

Here's what you asked in-game. Optimised the transitions by changing the easing of the fade-offs of white.png to "2" (start slow and speed up), also reduced the time of the image transitions to keep the effect "image1 > white fade-in > white fade-out > image2" as visible as possible. Check it out and let me know in game if you have any questions:

http://puu.sh/mQKUW/e190eb8f53.rar
Topic Starter
Equim
To be honest I admire your insistence. What Deif pointed out just now was mainly "another problem" in the transitions that is different from the previous one about the "offset" in the transitions. However, I agree with Deif this time on this aspect. Whereas Deif's post contained the code which may prevent many futher misunderstandings, I think we might end this argument now.
Thank you Deif, JBHyperion, and examination, -[Koinuri], BetaStar, Damnae, XinCrin.


updated.
autofanboy
let's continue?
BoberOfDarkness

alienflybot wrote:

let's continue?
k
Deif

alienflybot wrote:

let's continue?
00:14:157 (2) - Quite a weird snap in [Unfettered]. I'd move the slider to 00:14:135 - in order to create a triplet snapped at 1/8. That would make more sense and also the end of that slider would be snapped at the same point as in the other diffs.

Call me back after fixing this.

Bubbled!
JBHyperion
Third time's the charm, I really don't want to have to icon this again >.>

Requalified~
OzzyOzrock
oooo finally lol gratz
Taeyang
good work, nice map ~!
Misure
ji————
Dea ex machina
Congrats Equim :DDDD
Renka
good:3
-Sh1n1-
Finally ._. Re....Gratz Equim :3
Moeruattack
Great job :)
Yousei
翻了遍这番的背景...
有点虐啊
Topic Starter
Equim

Yousei wrote:

翻了遍这番的背景...
有点虐啊
但终归有个甜美梦幻的结局
Please sign in to reply.

New reply