1. a (7).png
2. b (4).png
3. b.png
4. a (1).png

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/

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.

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.

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

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 :<)

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.

Kurokami wrote:

Sry guys. That was my mistake. q.q Feel free to punish me. /o/

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.

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)

example

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

example

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 :/

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.

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

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.

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.

Equim wrote:

Since you think the SB has problems,
why not say them all at a time?

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.

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.

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.

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.

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)

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

alienflybot wrote:

let's continue?

alienflybot wrote:

let's continue?

Yousei wrote:

翻了遍这番的背景...
有点虐啊