CXu wrote:

But sometimes I feel like good players somehow feel entitled to be able to play certain difficult maps, and if those maps happen to have a difficulty spike within (even if it makes sense in context of the song) they start complaining about things being awkward, horrible, bad, whatever.

CXu wrote:

Okay, uh.

Looks fine in editor, I suck at alternating so I probably wouldn't be able to play it well, I don't have the ability/time to test it.

But sometimes I feel like good players somehow feel entitled to be able to play certain difficult maps, and if those maps happen to have a difficulty spike within (even if it makes sense in context of the song) they start complaining about things being awkward, horrible, bad, whatever.

And I'd somewhat agree if this was a single difficulty mapset, since then you'd like to try and accommodate for the most players possible, but this mapset has 5 difficulties at 6 stars or above, mapped in different styles. If one or even several don't fit your tastes, play the one(s) that you like, and let those that enjoy the other ones enjoy those. If those patterns are, in your opinion, easier with tap + x, then make a mental note for yourself that that difficulty is a "tap + x map" and skip it. When the mapset has so many difficulties at the upper part of the difficulty spectrum, I think it's really dumb that people complain about something being too difficult, especially considering different people find different things difficult, and there are so many alternatives to choose from.

If skystar decides to change the pattern, then that's fine, but I really don't see how it helps just saying it's bad, especially when you don't provide an alternate solution.

KuranteMelodii wrote:

The question is, Skystar is a tablet tap + x player, sure it's playable but only you're using a tablet, aiming this pattern with a mouse is a total armageddon

Hollow Wings wrote:

fartownik wrote:

Sry but this shouldn't be bubbled yet. It's gonna get disqualified soon enough if you qualify it now. There's still some major stuff not fixed. extra mod? fine, let's see if there's issue in the map after bubbled.

[HW's Ex]
00:30:400 (1) - The whole part starting from here is pretty bad. You basically try following the streamy beat, but at the same time you follow the other one, leaving spaces like this 00:30:868 where the previous beat is still present. It might've worked with the sliders in the part before, but it surely doesn't work with the streams, especially if you stack them up like you do. Possible solutions: 1. Make it a giant stream. It's the best solution, but I'm pretty sure you won't use it seeing how you wanted to stay consistent to the previous part no matter what, even though a real deathstream would be the most sufficient for this part. 2. Unstack all the streams. Basically everywhere you have a space in-between the streams, have a space on the playfield as well. So: if you really look deep to those streams' rhythm you can understand that every stream is following different tracks even i set them with same 5 notes style, then "inconsistent" ones can express those patterns better. I understand what every stream is following. I still find it pretty bad. It would play much, much better if you fixed it as I mentioned.

00:31:338 (5,1) -
00:32:275 (5,1) -
00:32:837 (5,1) -

You should have a regular 1/2 distance snapping in-between those. You can leave the streamjumps although they're weird as well seeing how inconsitently you put them there.

01:22:056 (1) - New combo why? Just randomly noticed it. stare at this tick: 01:22:806. Fine.
01:23:556 (1) - ^
01:26:275 (3,3) - As much as the two previous repeat sliders (from the previous velocity) play fine because you don't have to shake your cursor like a dancer, these ones don't and they're actually horrible to play. No suggestions here, anything would be better than these fast repeating sliders honestly. shake your cursor like a dancer pls, otherwise i'll set the sv larger to let players do that. What kind of answer is this?
01:32:556 (2,3) - When you decide which beat to follow, please don't randomly change it like this. It's odd. I know there's a sound there, but it's nowhere close to be heard by the player if you follow the sound you were following all this time. Remove (2), move (3) to its place and make it longer so it fills the beat. nope, it's not random in its section. Yes, it is random. The sound is in the section, but the other sound you were following for the entirety of the pattern has been dropped (for no good reason). The slider should start at 01:32:556, even if there's another beat in the music at 01:32:650.
01:34:525 (1,2,1,2) - Toooo huge. You've done this before, but for 1/3s. For 1/4s it's really, really sudden especially considering that this is a slow-paced part of the song. Reduce the spacing. do you even look into the map in detail... ? stare at 01:03:775 (1,2) - 's ticks pls. and also, i can play that full screen jumps myself, it's an easier pattern for me than 01:02:837 (2,3,4,5,6,7,1) - this one. Fine, even though the beat I mentioned follows more of a quiet and non-distinguishable beat than the pattern you've mentioned.

why i map things like this? i got tons of test plays other than yours, and i can tell every detail if you care the so-called answers of "why you set pattern like this?" which just makes me sick, even this map's composing is much more brighter than common ranked ones recently from a mapping view.

yeah "play-ability does not equal quality", then do you guys really looked at the maps' quality without judging the play-ability? to me, the most important part of the quality DO IS play-ability, for a ranked map is made for PLAYING.

the map plays bad to you? good. i've already got 100+ players enjoyed the map and even 3 fc'ed scores.
"the map plays bad to you? good." should be a quote of the year. Some people also enjoyed Big Black, some people have FC'd Big Black, it doesn't instantly make Big Black a good map. Also you mention playability, yes a good map's best feature should be playability, too bad your map doesn't really have that feature at places and you refuse to acknowledge that in the mods you get. Have a good day.

1. 00:26:650 (1,2) - I would make this one Slider and reduce the SV, I dont hear a second sound or any other reason to have it. the sound to me feels like its coming to a halt, and the SV increase at 00:27:400 (1) - would feel more powerful after a slower movement imo ( I hope you can make sense of this w) I might be wrong about there not being a second sound or anything, but if I'm wrong please enlighten me w
   
2. 00:27:118 not mapping this sound? with the way you have it mapped current I can understand your reasoning, Im just curious why its not mapped
   
3. 00:31:338 (5,1) - huge reading trap here imo, I know most people might catch it with the NC but still feels like it could be misread in some cases
   
4. 00:31:806 (4,1) - maybe decrease this distance some
   
5. 00:32:275 (5,1) - same as earlier,could be misread
6. 00:32:837 (5,1) - ^
   
7. 01:19:056 (3,4) - stack 3 on head of 4?

Baraatje123 wrote:

[Easy]
Consider increasing AR to 3.5-3.7, so sliders as 00:01:900 (1,1) - won't overlap anymore
00:45:400 (1,2) - Blanket its done fine enough imo. slightest change may make it worse
Cool diff

[Irre]
00:51:025 (1) - A 1/2 slider with a circle after wards would play much better, as this slider ends on a downbeat (and the sound at the 1/2 is really strong) i doubt that. in this diff, sv is high enough to make the player feel slider end being even harder than slider head
00:56:462 (4) - Why use such rhythm, when at the beat (you skipped) a strong sound exists (which is much stronger then the 1/2)
01:01:900 (1) - Distance!!!
01:14:650 (2,1) - Such low spacing. Make the players more prepared for the higher SV/DS!
01:24:400 (1,1) - Not stacked properly
01:30:400 (1) - <3
01:51:962 (2,2) - Claps?
I like it ^_^

[fanzhen]
00:16:337 (2) - A triplet instead of this would play better. imo 1/4 sliders w/o reverse are rather hard (for hard)
00:19:337 (2) - ^^
00:51:212 (5) - ^^ this one should be fine
00:54:400 (1,2,3,1,2,3) - Quite hard to read. The first 3 might be fine, but 00:55:150 (1,2,3) - are much harder. Consider making those a reverse-kickslider as well
Nice diff

[Hyper]
00:25:900 (1) - End at 00:27:025 sounds better imo not really imo...
<3

[LKs]
01:22:056 (1) - This is just incredibly confusing. Stack it ontop of the next object
01:22:806 (1) - ^^
01:23:556 (1) - ^^
I don't even know what to say. I love it

The next part part of the mod will be 99% based on actual playability. I played all higher diffs 10 times, and some things were problematic for me. There are a few things which were already discussed (like Skystar's stream) so I'll leave them out
[LKs]
00:48:400 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2) - This pattern plays ridiculously hard, and so does the reading, mostly due to 00:48:962 (2,1,2) - where the pattern changes. Every time I played this I missed this treating it as 1/2 circle solves it. I think the flow is fine.
01:26:650 (1,2,1,2,3,4) - Higher spacing is fine, sliderjumps are fine. But this is not. The sliders which are cramped upon eachother create a huge slowdown, which continues in a fast stream with a really harsh flow, because of (2,3,4) which is a triangle, which plays terrible at such high BPM (1/4) just like taketori hishou (lunatic), the pattern is easy be treated by tapping like lunatic. precise solution is certainly a challenge, or it won't be called "another"
01:30:400 (1,2) - This jump is really unexpected and quite hard 01:56:837 (4) - i recon it being fine, as the appr. circle suggests it being 1/4
01:39:400 - Add a circle please as discussed, nah
01:56:931 - ^^, this sound is even more noticable then 01:56:837 (4) - i like the custom rhythm, and its good

[Another]
00:24:306 (10) - This note a hard to hit, as it's hidden under the previous slider. Even if it would require high spacing it would play better, as the sudden stop makes this feel really weird
00:25:900 (1) - Silence end? the reverse ride makes it fit
00:31:900 (1,2,3) - The fact the the sliders start on the blue ticks made this part rather awkward, the harsh curve from (1) to (2) is also not that great. That is actually the biggest problem, as 00:37:900 (1,2,3,4) - plays good this pattern is plainly based on the pitch.
00:49:525 (1,2,3,4) - The gap from here to 00:49:900 (1) - is too low. I for example mash the buttons from streams like this, causing me to miss on the next notes (and therefore the whole stream) cant really understand the concept, but this pattern should not be a problem on playability
01:08:650 (5,6,7,8,1) - I hate patterns as these, but this is just personal opinion. It's too harsh, try to make it flow more smoothly! inherited from my previous maps. i would like to keep it
01:55:900 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12) - This part is too hard to read. It's even harder then the highest diffs which shouldn't happen. Remove 01:56:931 (9) - then move 01:56:181 (2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - 1/4 later, and add a note at 01:56:181. This would make it much easier to read, while not changing the overall gameplay that much i doubt it. it plays fine, as everything gaps 1/4. i can do it without difficulty, can't pass the part between kiai, tho

[Fanzhen]
00:21:118 (5) - The fact that the triplet starts at the blue tick makes this feel awkward. Only now, when I see it in the editor I understand the rhythm. I Always thought it started at the white tick, and that 00:21:400 (1) - started at the blue tick. Consider removing a reverse from 00:20:650 (4) - to make it feel better this is readable, like, uh, moe moe anime song pattern. i would recon keeping it
00:29:462 (3,4,1) - Quite ridiculous movement. The triangle has a harsh flow, and the "doublet-stream" following doesn't justify it much already reduced spacing. i think there should be no problem
00:32:650 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - This is just too much. The first 4 are still doable, but the last rectangle is just over done. Please reduce spacing a little bit (or make the flow a bit better), the straight curves are too harsh for me i call this typical lks pattern, um sorry, we are in fanzhen? imo this is doable, just need a bit more aim.
00:34:150 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - Is there a need for such high spacing? Especially (5) makes this feel really weird the pattern is in regular paradigm. 2nd half of a bar - high spacing; white line - turn
00:50:650 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2) - ERMMMM. Can people FC this? Out of my 10 attempts. I FC'd it once, but I'm just rapidly mashing and moving a freak w'/o any sense of rhythm for this. Slider would fit much better! I also can't hear why the spacing has to be this ridiculous i think this plays fine at this AR rate.
01:17:462 (3,4,5,6,7) - The sharp movements are bad for the flow. Make the vertical movement a bit more so you can flow in a circle-shape, instead of straight lines! this happens in a few previous maps so it should be ok
01:27:025 (1,2,3,4) - I know this is like the clmax of the song, but the flow here is quite bad. why not try this the suggested pattern dowsn't look good. moreover, imo flow isn't everything
01:28:618 (8) - Hidden under 6's reverse its rankable because it is clear where the slider head is, unless you set the skin not to show combo number
01:30:775 (1) - Make it a circle, ther is no sound at the 1/8.
01:31:150 (1,2,1,2,1,2) - Silence ends please
01:57:025 (1) - Make it a bit larger please should be fine

[A_R]
00:31:900 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - Is this even FC'able? It feels way too overdone and has a ridiculous hard flow. This is actually the first place I lost combo (Yes, I FC'ed the whole previous part nomod (NF)) that's the part it becoming hard. i would say it's a challenge.
00:33:962 (5,6) - Reminds me of DA^10. Please Ctrl G, this is really harsh and rather unpredictable it follows the clap i set
00:37:900 (1,2,3,4) - This part is almost impossible to read. Ctrl G (3) and Ctrl G (4) please it is readable because appoach circle is there.
00:54:400 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - See first comment
01:19:618 (4) - Stack with (2) increases flow a lot
01:21:775 (5,5,5) - NC for readability
01:24:025 (5) - ^^ This distance man
01:26:650 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - This part is truly harsh. I couldn't even pass this with HT O.o The spacing from (2,3) is too high some say the previous part is harder. i will keep it as the big boss
01:39:025 (1,2,3) - This is a 240 BPM 4-plet in the middle of 160 BPM 1/4 jumps. A reverse slider would play much better (and be more playable) nah.
01:55:900 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,5,6) - How could I ever FC this? O.o I feel good ^_^ this one should be ok

Nice diff, but I'm not that keen of patterns like 01:51:025 (3,4) - The reverse jump is just too much imo

You know what to do

Baraatje123 wrote:

[HW]
00:16:900 (1,6) - Imperfect stack w... what?
00:25:900 (1,2,3,4) - This is too sudden! Please make an indication for this speed up. Why not make 00:25:243 (1,2,3,4,5) - constantly increasing is spacing, and thus in speed, making the huge SV feel better (or tone the SV down to approx 1.5x) at least it's better than the previous version to people, thou the previous version is much better to me.
00:26:650 (1) - To increase readability, as this is slow, make it a bit curvy/different from the previous ones so people can distinguish it better nope, people won't notice the nc pattern unless they try to.
00:31:338 (5,1) - Increase the spacing. The gap is hard to read. Remember your EX EX on Helix, it had a similar problem and got DQ'd over it. don't make it happen to this map as well, as the map is a really good one ^_^ i think this is quite different from helix's pattern, you can read those approaching circles clearly, that's how you can hit the circle correctly.
00:32:275 (5,1,5,1) - ^^ (Here it's even worse imo) ^
01:09:275 (3,1) - Such low spacing feels out of place it's more like a stack pattern here in aiming view, which is just a kind of ds pattern.
01:22:806 - Add note please, for consistency with the other similar parts! nope, for just following the song.
01:31:150 (1,2,1,2,1,2,3) - Silence the ends please that's ok imo...
01:56:931 (2,1) - This stack creates an unneccessary spike. Make it spaced please, for a better flow people will only focus on note 1, note 2 is just a passing by 1/4 tapping obj when they playing this pattern.
Well done HW! Most definitely your best work so far ^_^ lol... this is made 2 years ago thou www

You know what to do

Hollow Wings wrote:

fartownik wrote:

Sry but this shouldn't be bubbled yet. It's gonna get disqualified soon enough if you qualify it now. There's still some major stuff not fixed. extra mod? fine, let's see if there's issue in the map after bubbled.

[HW's Ex]
00:30:400 (1) - The whole part starting from here is pretty bad. You basically try following the streamy beat, but at the same time you follow the other one, leaving spaces like this 00:30:868 where the previous beat is still present. It might've worked with the sliders in the part before, but it surely doesn't work with the streams, especially if you stack them up like you do. Possible solutions: 1. Make it a giant stream. It's the best solution, but I'm pretty sure you won't use it seeing how you wanted to stay consistent to the previous part no matter what, even though a real deathstream would be the most sufficient for this part. 2. Unstack all the streams. Basically everywhere you have a space in-between the streams, have a space on the playfield as well. So: if you really look deep to those streams' rhythm you can understand that every stream is following different tracks even i set them with same 5 notes style, then "inconsistent" ones can express those patterns better. I understand what every stream is following. I still find it pretty bad. It would play much, much better if you fixed it as I mentioned. i find it worse if i change it as you mentioned.

00:31:338 (5,1) -
00:32:275 (5,1) -
00:32:837 (5,1) -

You should have a regular 1/2 distance snapping in-between those. You can leave the streamjumps although they're weird as well seeing how inconsitently you put them there.

01:22:056 (1) - New combo why? Just randomly noticed it. stare at this tick: 01:22:806. Fine.
01:23:556 (1) - ^
01:26:275 (3,3) - As much as the two previous repeat sliders (from the previous velocity) play fine because you don't have to shake your cursor like a dancer, these ones don't and they're actually horrible to play. No suggestions here, anything would be better than these fast repeating sliders honestly. shake your cursor like a dancer pls, otherwise i'll set the sv larger to let players do that. What kind of answer is this? i'm telling you that you may shake your cursor like a dancer if you played that pattern.
01:32:556 (2,3) - When you decide which beat to follow, please don't randomly change it like this. It's odd. I know there's a sound there, but it's nowhere close to be heard by the player if you follow the sound you were following all this time. Remove (2), move (3) to its place and make it longer so it fills the beat. nope, it's not random in its section. Yes, it is random. The sound is in the section, but the other sound you were following for the entirety of the pattern has been dropped (for no good reason). The slider should start at 01:32:556, even if there's another beat in the music at 01:32:650. then i say the rhythm 01:32:650 (3) - is following is the better choice, i prefer emphasis the same beats every sliders' head are following at this part, rather than just simply following the string track. even the tick already has a note.
01:34:525 (1,2,1,2) - Toooo huge. You've done this before, but for 1/3s. For 1/4s it's really, really sudden especially considering that this is a slow-paced part of the song. Reduce the spacing. do you even look into the map in detail... ? stare at 01:03:775 (1,2) - 's ticks pls. and also, i can play that full screen jumps myself, it's an easier pattern for me than 01:02:837 (2,3,4,5,6,7,1) - this one. Fine, even though the beat I mentioned follows more of a quiet and non-distinguishable beat than the pattern you've mentioned. they are distinguished clearly.

why i map things like this? i got tons of test plays other than yours, and i can tell every detail if you care the so-called answers of "why you set pattern like this?" which just makes me sick, even this map's composing is much more brighter than common ranked ones recently from a mapping view.

yeah "play-ability does not equal quality", then do you guys really looked at the maps' quality without judging the play-ability? to me, the most important part of the quality DO IS play-ability, for a ranked map is made for PLAYING.

the map plays bad to you? good. i've already got 100+ players enjoyed the map and even 3 fc'ed scores.
"the map plays bad to you? good." should be a quote of the year. Some people also enjoyed Big Black, some people have FC'd Big Black, it doesn't instantly make Big Black a good map. Also you mention playability, yes a good map's best feature should be playability, too bad your map doesn't really have that feature at places and you refuse to acknowledge that in the mods you get. Have a good day. thou eventually that big black is one of the best maps in the year 2012, and it do is a really great map even you can't play it well. too bad if you can't play this map well, too. and also, i always replying to mods, any mods are welcomed, i know what i'm acknowledging and refusing.

Depths wrote:

[HW nya~]

1. 00:26:650 (1,2) - I would make this one Slider and reduce the SV, I dont hear a second sound or any other reason to have it. the sound to me feels like its coming to a halt, and the SV increase at 00:27:400 (1) - would feel more powerful after a slower movement imo ( I hope you can make sense of this w) I might be wrong about there not being a second sound or anything, but if I'm wrong please enlighten me w i just wanna say you need to listen to the song carefully.
   
2. 00:27:118 not mapping this sound? with the way you have it mapped current I can understand your reasoning, Im just curious why its not mapped the sound you think in that tick is actually at 00:27:025 which i've already covered with obj.
   
3. 00:31:338 (5,1) - huge reading trap here imo, I know most people might catch it with the NC but still feels like it could be misread in some cases the pattern reads totally fine.
   
4. 00:31:806 (4,1) - maybe decrease this distance some it's easy to combo it even in streams. distanced notes are easier to catch the position and rhythm.
   
5. 00:32:275 (5,1) - same as earlier,could be misread
6. 00:32:837 (5,1) - ^
   
7. 01:19:056 (3,4) - stack 3 on head of 4? w... what? they are not even at same part...

that's all I have to say

Hollow Wings wrote:

thou eventually that big black is one of the best maps in the year 2012, and it do is a really great map even you can't play it well. too bad if you can't play this map well, too. and also, i always replying to mods, any mods are welcomed, i know what i'm acknowledging and refusing.

Baraatje123 wrote:

[General]
In Skystar's diff, take a look at this fixed.
• Object is unsnapped:
01:26:179 {86179} Circle
01:26:277 {86277} Circle
01:26:554 {86554} Circle
01:26:929 {86929} Circle
01:27:304 {87304} Circle

[Skystar]
00:54:775 (1) - Ctrl G would make it flow better mh I prefer current one.
01:02:462 (3) - imo the high spacing should start from here, it follows the song better if 01:01:900 (1,2,3,4,1,2) - have lower spacing alternative, it speeds up as drums emerge, not following melody here.
01:16:056 (5) - Why 1/8? slider leniency, you have more time to deal with high spacing between ones like 01:15:962 (4,5) - , it also gives a stronger emphasis going into next slider 01:16:150 (1) - , same goes for all subsequent 1/8s.
01:17:462 (2) - Ctrl G would make it flow better eh not really..
01:19:056 (5) - I don't hear 1/8
01:25:900 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2) - I really like it, but the curve make it really hard, as you don't only need to move, but also rotate. I don't have problems with it, and saying it was discussed properly it should be fine, but it may be adjusted to make it flow a bit better
01:28:056 (5) - N o 1/8 please
01:30:775 (5) - Make it a circle, ther is no sound at the 1/8.
01:31:150 (1,1,1,1,1) - Silence the ends please, it's rather annoying kay.
I really love this diff. It plays great, is mapped wonderfully and is rather gimmicky, something I really like, as opposed to all thsoe 180-200 BPM jump maps nowadays. ^_^

WORSTPOLACKEU wrote:

Skystar's Expert

01:15:400 (1,2,3,4,5,1,2,3,1,2,1,2,1,2,3,1,2,3,4,5,1) -
This part plays bad and it's not intuitive at all, I played it many times and checked in edit but I have no idea what you are following there. melody, apparently.
01:27:400 (1,2,3,4,5,1,2,3,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3) -
Same here ^

I have tried to listen but I just have no idea what you are mapping too.
I understand it's rhythm variation but it skips strong beats or just adds beats from different sounds and plays really unintuitively.

01:16:525 (2,3) - The slider starts on a weak beat and it's really weird to play it there for example. weak beat? uh there's a snare and a kick that couldn't be more obvious.

http://puu.sh/mFyyV/80b7f0fb22.jpg <- This works
http://puu.sh/mFyC7/fd917579a6.jpg <- This too

01:17:837 (1,2,3) -
Why not 3-2-1 in this order? It plays better, highlights best beats. It's overcomplicated what you did. no idea what you're talking about but reminded me of ctrl+g'ing 01:17:837 (1) - , thanks anyways.
Even further away --> http://puu.sh/mFCX1/3bf72cbca9.jpg
That plays so much better imo.

Mystyk wrote:

Karen wrote:

can you guys stop dropping shit posts and help the map instead.

btw,
in fanzhen's Hard
00:01:900 - there is no sv change on this green line, it should be avoided.

just reminding you about this, it still hasn't been fixed

Ranking Criteria wrote:

An inherited timing section may be placed on an uninherited timing section (but only to change the slider speed)

The problem is not with the volume of the green line (as HappyRocket88 mentioned), the problem is that it has no SV change, that's why 00:01:900 - this green line has to be removed!

Flower wrote:

I can't really understand mappers now day can map X diff with random jumps on a low-bpm dnb song.
现在的mapper怎么做慢如牛的dnb曲也能瞎xx跳个X难度出来 我真的不是很懂

Karen wrote:

can you guys stop dropping shit posts and help the map instead.

btw,
in fanzhen's Hard
00:01:900 - there is no sv change on this green line, it should be avoided.

Ranking Criteria wrote:

An inherited timing section may be placed on an uninherited timing section (but only to change the slider speed)

Baraatje123 wrote:

Call zzh to rebub and I'll qualify

One more thing, can you please lower HP in LKs? None of the diffs surpass 6, except his diff. Even 7 would be fine ^_^

Mystyk wrote:

Karen wrote:

can you guys stop dropping shit posts and help the map instead.

btw,
in fanzhen's Hard
00:01:900 - there is no sv change on this green line, it should be avoided.

just reminding you about this, it still hasn't been fixed

Ranking Criteria wrote:

An inherited timing section may be placed on an uninherited timing section (but only to change the slider speed)

The problem is not with the volume of the green line (as HappyRocket88 mentioned), the problem is that it has no SV change, that's why 00:01:900 - this green line has to be removed!

Baraatje123 wrote:

Those jumps are by no means hard. They seem hard at first, but I can properly play them, despite not being that good of a player

Shiirn wrote:

AXION is not a powerful song.

Shad0w1and wrote:

Shiirn wrote:

AXION is not a powerful song.

excuse me, I have not found a single song that is clearly more intense than AXION, even The Big Black.

Shiirn wrote:

The issue is that the higher difficulties are taking the music's beat patterns and applying patterns that do not belong with the music, do not fit the music's tempo, buildup, or power in any predictable or comfortable way.

Shiirn wrote:

To summarize as simply as possible:

We should really find a good english-> chinese and chinese->english translator to facilitate this. Believe it or not, I want this to get ranked - but as it is right now it is simply a bunch of big name Chinese mappers throwing random patterns that look fancy at a song that cannot withstand the strain.

Shiirn wrote:

The map has patterns and flow that do not belong in a song of this nature. AXION is not a powerful song. It is not a song that implies, when listening to it, fullscreen 1/4 jumps, regardless of whether or not they are playable.

deetz wrote:

What SHOULD be the focus, rather than that, is the gameplay itself. Does it play well and represent the song through its own style/from the mapper's viewpoint? These sorts of questions are what we should ask.

Shiirn wrote:

tl;dr the song choice is much more of an issue than the actual mapping or the patterns within them

Shiirn wrote:

To summarize as simply as possible:

The map has patterns and flow that do not belong in a song of this nature. AXION is not a powerful song. It is not a song that implies, when listening to it, fullscreen 1/4 jumps, regardless of whether or not they are playable.

The issue is that the higher difficulties are taking the music's beat patterns and applying patterns that do not belong with the music, do not fit the music's tempo, buildup, or power in any predictable or comfortable way.

While the individual patterns are possible and playable, the difficulty of them are all over the place and do not fit the theme of the song - which progressively builds up to "max energy" about 50% of the way in, before rapidly declining in the final 1/4th of the song. These patterns do not fit AXION. There are other songs where they can totally fit. Furioso melodia has a lower bpm but much, much, much higher intensity.

Nube wrote:

I'm tired of people getting offended when they are criticized for doing something VERY controversial. Meet the important arguements with your own instead of blaming it on biases. Try to make people understand exactly what you're trying to pull off, because if you can't even explain what you are doing, then how can you claim to know it's even remotely good?

Shiguma wrote:

Nube wrote:

I'm tired of people getting offended when they are criticized for doing something VERY controversial. Meet the important arguements with your own instead of blaming it on biases. Try to make people understand exactly what you're trying to pull off, because if you can't even explain what you are doing, then how can you claim to know it's even remotely good?

While the beatmaps may be controversial, isn't that kind of a good thing? Do we want to see the same exact style of mapping repeated over and over again? This map may be extreme, but many people can play these difficulties. It allows for creativity. HanzeR comes to mind, with his creative mapping style which people initially hated but seem to enjoy elements of now.

Nube wrote:

I never said being controversial is bad, I just said that you have to be able to explain why what you are doing is good. Stop putting words in my mouth and learn to read.

Shiguma wrote:

Isn't this completely subjective? Someone's opinion on this song may be it's not intense, while others think it is very intense.

Shiguma wrote:

I don't understand why it was disqualified for these gimmicky patterns especially when the star difficulty is above 6 stars. Isn't it really the people who can't even play 6* beatmaps the ones who are complaining that these maps are too hard? Isn't that the reason there is a difficulty spread?

Shiguma wrote:

While the beatmaps may be controversial, isn't that kind of a good thing? Do we want to see the same exact style of mapping repeated over and over again? This map may be extreme, but many people can play these difficulties. It allows for creativity. HanzeR comes to mind, with his creative mapping style which people initially hated but seem to enjoy elements of now.

Shiguma wrote:

Didn't the creators respond to the mods that were given on this beatmap?

JappyBabes wrote:

if HW responded to mods that criticize it'd be in osu weekly

Hollow Wings wrote:

why i map things like this? i got tons of test plays other than yours, and i can tell every detail if you care the so-called answers of "why you set pattern like this?" which just makes me sick, even this map's composing is much more brighter than common ranked ones recently from a mapping view.

yeah "play-ability does not equal quality", then do you guys really looked at the maps' quality without judging the play-ability? to me, the most important part of the quality DO IS play-ability, for a ranked map is made for PLAYING.

the map plays bad to you? good. i've already got 100+ players enjoyed the map and even 3 fc'ed scores.

fartownik wrote:

"the map plays bad to you? good." should be a quote of the year. Some people also enjoyed Big Black, some people have FC'd Big Black, it doesn't instantly make Big Black a good map. Also you mention playability, yes a good map's best feature should be playability, too bad your map doesn't really have that feature at places and you refuse to acknowledge that in the mods you get. Have a good day.

thou eventually that big black is one of the best maps in the year 2012, and it do is a really great map even you can't play it well. too bad if you can't play this map well, too. and also, i always replying to mods, any mods are welcomed, i know what i'm acknowledging and refusing.

Shiirn wrote:

We should really find a good english-> chinese and chinese->english translator to facilitate this.

JappyBabes wrote:

if HW responded to mods that criticize it'd be in osu weekly

bananannian wrote:

Shiirn wrote:

We should really find a good english-> chinese and chinese->english translator to facilitate this.

Uh, hang on a sec, how is language barrier an issue? Did someone reply to an English mod with Chinese or something? What needs translating?

Shiirn wrote:

Music is not entirely subjective.
Music is not entirely objective.
Mapping is not entirely subjective.
Mapping is not entirely objective.

...

JappyBabes wrote:

bad or good [...] but that has nothing to do with you being able to like it or not. You're free to like whatever you want

Kitami Erika wrote:

实在是不行了把我难度删了啊 留个Hard挺好 我觉得我现在这个难度实在是坠毁
打嘴仗简直他妈的天花乱坠 论题在以光速绕dq issue飞行但是就是不打在点上 真鸡巴累

KuranteMelodii wrote:

Kitami Erika wrote:

实在是不行了把我难度删了啊 留个Hard挺好 我觉得我现在这个难度实在是坠毁
打嘴仗简直他妈的天花乱坠 论题在以光速绕dq issue飞行但是就是不打在点上 真鸡巴累

今次DQ不是你的問題嗎。。。你的難度沒有問題的為什麼要刪了

Natsu wrote:

Hey guys can you avoid posting if you don't have nothing constructive to add? make suggestions and try to improve the map that's the only way to help the mapper, take your no sense out of here pls, thanks. Maybe gonna take a look later~

Nube wrote:

Natsu wrote:

Hey guys can you avoid posting if you don't have nothing constructive to add? make suggestions and try to improve the map that's the only way to help the mapper, take your no sense out of here pls, thanks. Maybe gonna take a look later~

Thing is, people are afraid their mods will be ignored as shown times before and that's why the discussion is there in the first place. Why bother trying to help someone who doesn't want to change? Before anything it would be nice to get a response from the mapper themself.

[Mahua] wrote: