anyone who thinks i sacrifice structure for anything clearly hasn't actually looked at how the patterns tie to eachother and how the notes are connected
Or maybe they did look at it and don't think you did a good job at it? Your patterns look like a mess from a purely aesthetic standpoint, where things are unevenly spaced and notes overlapping with other notes, making one combo bleed into another one and just making everything look like a jumble of notes in general.Shiirn wrote:
anyone who thinks i sacrifice structure for anything clearly hasn't actually looked at how the patterns tie to eachother and how the notes are connected
I never said it was perfect. I've applied many mods just today. Most people I've spoken to like the map a lot, just a vocal minority like to find any reason to dislike the map.Yauxo wrote:
(I dont care if you try to defend your map, just dont act like it's perfect)
Anxient wrote:
boxcomfortablepls no unfriendnot really
things i hope you applied
00:11:228 (2,1) - putting this downwards http://puu.sh/n86KM/77af9d0dc1.jpg, coz its a flowbreak worthy part and has similar rhythm as 00:10:915 (1,2) -
the actual check
00:13:936 (1,2,1,2,1,2,3) - #i_shouldnt_have_shown_xxr_routing
00:15:290 (2) - move this further away from 3 because 3 has a strong beat, so its better to have 2 stick to regular distance and have 3 be extended for emphasis. http://puu.sh/n86UW/c3964ccd29.jpg Sure, why not. If i get people bitching "but muh spacing it should be equal" they can kiss my ass
00:15:707 (5,6) - these notes are nearly touching lol which are an not-ok in my book. to fix this i moved 00:15:499 (4,5) - to 373:367. also grants extra emphasis for 00:15:811 (6) - http://puu.sh/n875y/ddf0baceab.jpg the reason they're close to begin with was because someone was whining "muh equal spacing" but screw those guys. moved over a bit.
00:16:749 (4,1) - stack lol how the hell do you people find these 1-pixel stack issues
00:17:270 (2,1) - maybe fix the blanket on sliderend? http://puu.sh/n878Q/fddeb9667c.jpg i tried
00:20:395 (1,2,3,4) - maybe have these follow the same DS you used for 00:19:353 (1,2) - coz the part isnt very emphasized. like the beats are soft. heck, 00:19:353 (1,2) - this part is more emphasized actually lol. have a really bad fix http://puu.sh/n87mu/2e0d4444c2.jpg lowered the spacing a bit but honestly whatever
00:20:811 (1,2,3) - honestly i cant think of any reason as to why you made the part... like this lol there are no beats to represent those 5/8 sliders. i choose to attack this part coz this a major part (and not minor either lol like those sliderends being hitcircles and shortening sliders). using this rhythm wouldve done just fine http://puu.sh/n87Gy/8a6d140228.jpg. you can do your fancy curve sliders using some SV altering but pls change this part. (incase you dont wanna redo these sliders, using SV 1.5x would do just fine (might be disorienting but hey this map is confusing as it is already LOLOLOL) Not doing this. These three sliders heavily emphasize the wubs and encourage the player to hold the beat very hard, as well as alternate. This map tries very hard to be single-tap friendly while trying to encourage alternating in places like this, where I want to have buttons held down for longer than just short taps. At 25% you might feel like they're not entirely accurate but at any higher speed they fit very well! Also, they're 3/8 buddy :U
00:22:686 (1) - ctrl g this lol i dont see a reason as to why you used a flow break. flow is extremely important in double bpm maps (but im sure you knew that) Gameplay wise there is literally no difference and i wanted the swap in clockwise-counterclockwise to emphasize the wubs, but if people start throwing that scary 'flow' buzz word around i better line the fuck up right?
00:22:686 (1,2) - also fix sliderblanket http://puu.sh/n87U0/41fd3a1ff9.jpg did with zexous' help
00:23:311 (3,4,1) - i was wondering what was wrong with this part lol. use the same DS. i dont see why its different (lower even), especially when it has more sounds in it fiddled a bit
00:24:665 (2) - if i were to put a flow break in this part i wouldve done it in 00:24:561 (1) - instead of 00:24:665 (2) - lol but since you did neither, ill just go ahead and tell you to make this part super flowy http://puu.sh/n888j/0dbde249f9.jpg I mean except for the abuse of the word 'flow' i don't really see the point in this but i should pretend to actually care about this, but since it has no gameplay impact whatever let's do it
00:26:020 (1) - ctrl g this for emphasis (well it players better when i was simulating it) 00:26:228 (1) - also gives this the extra kick :l Nope. One of the stringent rules of this track is that 1/8 = very close, overlapping or almost overlapped spacing. Not going to break it exactly once.
00:27:061 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - i dont understand all the hate in this part lol Haters should just be glad I didn't actually map every individual beat in the music here.
00:28:832 (4,5,6) - 5 is in the wrong spot lol. do this instead http://puu.sh/n892L/d476e3034b.jpg I'll do it but i mean im sure some idiot is going to say 'muh flow' or 'muh spacing'. I think either way works fairly fine due to how the synth and bass work out.
00:31:645 (7) - ctrl g coz it makes the other parts more fun to play imo 00:31:853 (1) - Don't see the point. if it's reversed then we have 'anti-flow' because the cursor has to go even more distance. idk don't ask me to explain what flow is ur just a bad mapper blah blah etc.
00:31:645 (7) - also NC ths i dont know why this is continue combo
00:31:853 (1,1) - same goes for here. why NC :l http://puu.sh/n88AX/4931ca3994.jpg I have always new combod the 3/8 sliders that emphasize the intermittent interjections of interesting instruments.
00:32:686 (1,2,3,4) - if anything i would have this stream go down lol because theres nothing in the song that suggests a upward stream (and the stream is nearly vertical so this would be appropriate with some really strong increasing pitch) The direction really doesn't matter. It really, really doesn't unless it's clear you're using volume as a model for where you're aiming a section. These are four notes and they just happen to go upwards. It's not implying that the pitch or volume go up or down. Not every note or pattern needs to have a deep underlying meaning behind it.
00:40:186 (1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3) - i dont understand why people hate this part too lol i mean it creats pretty good buildup :l I've only ever seen people think it's either "pretty good" or "fucking amazing". I've only seen people whine about it once it got qualified. That's mapping for you.
00:47:374 (3) - i dont think its a good idea to use a sliderend to emphasize a strong beat. It's not emphasizing a strong beat. The strong beat just happens to be on the end because here I am mapping that high pitched unidentifiable instrument rather than purely the bass.
00:57:061 (2,3,4,5) - id prefer if you ctrl g'd (as in reverse the position of slider start coz i dont understand why you put the flowbreak here other than the finishes. if you wanna keep this, okay but this looks really painful to play. what? these bouncy bits play amazing, ive not seen a single person dislike it and that includes the haters, even the most staunch of haters said they liked these
00:59:978 (1,2) - lemao overlap palrevo oamel
01:03:311 (1,2,3,4,5) - this part is fine tho. its cool. this is literally the exact same as the other one except rotated 180 degrees
01:33:103 (5) - ctrl g this lol why flowbreak This is changing direction so that the impulse to leap to the next start doesn't lead to the player 100ing the slider. It's for gameplay. Sliderballs don't need to constantly go in the same general direction. That's not how flow works...
Not that I ever said you had to do any of those things. It's possible to make tasteful overlaps. It's possible to transition between styles without making it feel jarring (not that I even see that much of a style change in your diff in general). Doesn't change the fact that I don't think the map looks good though. But hey, since I dislike the map my input is completely useless anyway I guess? Yeah, I'm not modding it, because from the way you reply to these things I don't think you'd like/want my input anyway nor do I think you would agree with most of them. In the end it would just be me saying a bunch of things, and you rejecting it.Shiirn wrote:
I never said it was perfect. I've applied many mods just today. Most people I've spoken to like the map a lot, just a vocal minority like to find any reason to dislike the map.Yauxo wrote:
(I dont care if you try to defend your map, just dont act like it's perfect)
Most pro player input I have gotten is that it plays very well for the most part and any parts that feel directly unfair as opposed to challenging are being found and weeded out.
The raw aesthetic rule of " you need to make sure no notes overlap and the map has the exact same style the entire map" is not going to happen here. If you want it to happen here, you're looking for the wrong map. Having a stringent rule of "sliders need to point directly at the next note or it is ugly" is just as silly. If you want to say "its all just a god damn mess" then have fun. I won't accept "change it because it looks bad" as a mod.
Most of the input I've gotten since the disqualification has been "shit from the thread, value from in-game". The people that are speaking their mind in this thread without giving specific advice (or are telling me I mapped a section wrong because they'd do it differently and refuse to see any sort of alternative) are completely useless. The people who chat with me in-game and discuss actual pattern shape and flow are far more valuable. As such, I'm going to give them the attention they deserve.
I'm going to go over Comfort with a very fine toothed comb over the next day while seeking (and going over already posted) input from people whom I know aren't just making shit up because they vaguely find the map disagreeable. After that, I'm going to work back towards qualification. If it gets DQ'd again, so be it. I will not be fillibustered out of ranking something I know is not just rankable, but pretty good. And Comfort is pretty good. It's nowhere near perfect, but perfect is unobtainable as there will always be people who think it should be different.
I've replied to every actual mod with thought-out responses and a lot of acceptance. I don't understand where you get the idea that I deny all feedback. I just don't accept feedback that doesn't have actual suggestions. It's easy to say "this is ugly". It takes actual work to say "this is ugly to me because...".CXu wrote:
Still, I don't think writing opinions is useless. Maybe you do, but eh.
Thanks for the mod!phaZ wrote:
[ongakus insane]very consistent
- 00:02:374 (1) - remove NC. compare to 00:08:311 (1,2,3) applied
- 00:08:728 (2) - for same reason as above make this also a repeat slider or the other an antijump-non-repeat-slider Kind of confused here...
- 00:48:520 - 00:49:145 - 00:49:457 - "The Disappearance of whistle-chan". it really hurts, i wold rather remove the drum-hitsounds for that. the normal-whsitles are exclusively for the special synth of this part (while the drum HS are basiclal everywhere) so at least keep it consistent. remade patterns and applied hitsounds for consistency
- 00:54:874 - 00:55:395 - 00:55:603 - same as ^, you could actually put them on the sliderend, sliderbody, sliderbody so why not add them if you can? same here
Yauxo wrote:
Clarification: I just use flow as a word that explains mapinternal intuitive movement (and maybe placement). Not subjective "I like what I do, but yours is bad" flow.
Natsu wrote:
I'd love to see you reply to mod, specially to the ones you ignore (Hula's one for example), to be honest without reply its hard to know what is going on with the map.
Axarious wrote:
General
- when i say the "slider points back towards where it came from" i think it's more of the problem that the slider body is in the way of the sliderhead, which makes it a bit harder to read and aim it (players might hit the sliderbody instead of the actual target)
Comfort
- 00:05:603 (3,4) - looks a bit cramped, perhaps move (4) to 404|281 for a parallelogram and ds fix? Moved and re-positioned the pattern slightly to accurately stack.
- 00:09:561 (1,2) - and 00:10:082 (1,2) - i think these two look kinda out of place, the low ds between them isn't consistent with the rest of the first 12 seconds Blanketted the first (1) and spaced out the second.
- 00:27:582 (6,1,2,1) - this ds is a bit wonky to me, it plays like a stream but it's kinda like a weird square thing, maybe something like this or something? Reworked. This was driving me crazy, this is the best suggestion I've gotten on it ever. thanks.
- 00:32:686 (5) - i think remove nc here and add nc here 00:32:895 (4) - would make it a bit easier to read Done
- 00:33:311 (4,1) - these nc's on the blue ticks are all a bit hard to read, but i'm not sure if you can really do anything else here :v i know right
- 00:52:270 (3,4,5) - this ds increase is really awkward to play reworked it a bit
- 00:52:686 (1,2,3) - the movement for this is doable, but it feels a bit unnatural Reworked a bit, hope it's more readable, the beats here are prime to be rather jerky but i dont want it outright confusing
- 01:05:395 (4,5,6,7,8,9,1) - this also feels quite unnatural/messy to play, it's also hard to hit, i think i get it 1 in 10 tries
- 01:08:520 (2,3) - whoa this is weird to play. additionally, 01:08:832 (4) - this is 1/3 as well, i think this rhythm would be a bit better done
- 01:14:040 (5,6,1,2) - this ds change is kinda weird, but i guess it's okay, it's hittable most of the time I actually fixed this just now after your playtest. Glad we both saw it!
- 01:17:478 (1,2) - not a big fan of this right -> left movement and the slider points towards where it just came from, perhaps something that'll keep the player moving like this? Rotated and turned
- 01:18:520 (1,2,3) - i don't hear a sound on 3, only the pitch raise from (1,2) I clearly hear three sounds even at 100%, although they kind of blend a bit together, it'd be far worse to just have a 1/8 double sitting around where the rest of the map never does that
- 01:20:603 (4,5) - kinda same idea with the slider pointing back towards where it came from, huge loss of momentum
- 01:27:061 (3,4) - ^
- 01:28:103 (3,4) - ^ Not entirely sure what to do with these as there aren't many other ways i can map them without putting them at a completely different location.
- 01:29:874 (4,1) - two things, one is ^, the other is that the following pattern is difficult to read-there's a pause and that stack with the round slider, iunno, not a big fan of that pause there This thing is ridiculously hard to map. I'm going to try to fix it, hold my beer.
- 01:30:915 (5,6,7) - i think (6) should be moved to 341|243 and ctrl j'd to keep momentum in this slider pattern done
- 01:32:374 (7,1) - slider points towards where it came from
- 01:34:353 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,5,6) - this is all very weird, 01:34:874 (4) - and 01:35:395 (4,5) - are probably the hardest to hit out of these Reworked it a little bit.
- 01:45:395 (2,3,4,5) - perhaps HJ 00:05:395 (1,2,3,4) - this thing if you decide to fix the small ds :p Done