Cheesecake wrote:
00:25:297 (1) - Uh I think you got your co-ordinate wrong Oh yeah, I forgot about this.
SuperMICrophone
SuperMICrophone wrote:
m4m thing
---
[Hard]
00:05:168 (1) - Stacking this normally under (3) would look better.
00:17:168 (4) - ^ This comment applies to pretty much all of the same cases throughout the map.
00:20:458 (5,6,1) - These 1/4s are so tightly compacted that they play exactly like a stack, so I'm curious as to why not just use a stack? I like compressed triplets in Hards, but you can definitely space them out a bit more.
01:36:329 (6) - Stack under (4)
01:55:684 (3) - Remove new combo
01:56:458 (3) - ^
03:10:006 (1) - ^
03:10:781 (1) - ^ Eh sure. It's been pointed out a few times already.
very well done and very clean difficulty
[Insane]
00:06:426 - Why not map the 1/4 that starts here? Eh alright.
00:24:135 (1) - remove new combo
00:24:910 (1) - ^
00:47:555 (2,3) - Maybe just stack these.
00:48:813 (2,3) - ^ This goes for most of the 1/4 left in this map, refer to what I said in Hard for why.
01:12:135 (1) - remove new combo
01:12:910 (1) - ^
01:19:103 (1) - remove new combo These NCs have a nice effect for building up the finale for this section of the music, and makes the patterns look nicer in my opinion.
01:19:103 (1,2) - consider ctrl+g; better flow I feel that the flow is better how it is currently, and I prefer this pattern.
01:31:490 (4,5,6,7,1) - should be spaced further away from (3) Changed slightly.
01:38:458 (2,3) - just for reference, i think this looks perfect
01:46:006 - There's a bass beat you miss here. Add a note? This rhythm is intentional for this section.
01:55:684 (1) - RNC
01:56:458 (1) - ^
03:10:007 (1) - ^
03:10:781 (1) - ^ For this difficulty, removing the NCs would make things a lot more confusing to read, since then notes in the same combo and same spacing will have different timings.
[Catharsis]
00:23:555 (4) - Should be spaced further away from (3) and (1) There isn't a significant enough beat on 4 to warrant any higher spacing between 3-4. 4-1 increased slightly.
00:30:329 (1) - RNC
00:35:168 (1) - ^
00:35:942 (1,2) - ^
00:37:490 (1) - ^ Fair enough on this one.
01:55:684 (1) - ^
01:56:458 (1) - ^
01:58:006 (1) - ^ And this.
02:11:942 (1) - ^ Yep.
02:42:910 (1) - ^ Yep.
03:10:006 (1,1,1) - ^^^ Same reason as Insane for the others.
03:23:361 (1,2,3) - Because this is a slow part, I don't think there should be this much space between (1) and (2) Reduced. I'd rather keep these spaced apart without overlaps though.
---
This is mapped so well and there's really nothing important at all to point out. Go find a BN lol.
-SMIC
Prismetical
All of the overlaps you have pointed out are of objects that are far enough apart in the timeline that it doesn't matter if they're overlapped in the editor, because you do not see any overlap in game whatsoever.Prismetical wrote:
From your Modding Queue c:
Advanced
00:06:716 (1,2) - I prefer using the playfield here, kinda boring I'd say stacking has a much better effect for the impact in the music for this part.
01:27:813 (2,5) - blanket Not necessary since these objects are far apart and it will compromise flow slghtly.
02:21:813 (6,1) - blanket: As before.
03:43:490 (1) - storyboard fails here
03:46:587 (1) - ^ It looks off in the editor because the SB editor isn't very good. It's perfect in game.
Hard
00:06:716 (1,2) - use the playfield As before.
00:46:587 (4,5) - stack (4) onto (5) This makes for extremely poor time-spacing and spacing these apart feels best to follow the rhythm of the music. There's no need for these two to stack.
00:47:748 (3) - goes out of playfield, mirror vertically This is fine. The object is still completely visible in game.
00:50:458 (1) - plays weird How? It's a 1/3 slider so it may feel a little different to play, but this doesn't need changing.
00:50:458 (1,2) - DS wrong In what way? SV is reduced here and the notes are snapped to 1/3, so a smaller spacing seems more suitable for playability.
00:57:619 (4,3) - would look better if stacked This would compromise flow slightly, and ruin the blanket pattern that is here.
Best wishes!
All of the stacks that were pointed out were manually placed and 100% intentional. It is my preference to have control over the direction of the stack rather than having every single one follow the default right-down flow. 1/2 stacks are offset for readability purposes.
Thanks for modding.