Heyo, nice map you got here~
Looking at the general stuff because I don't want to look at whether d or k fits better for all 2.3k notes across 7 minutes lol
I haven't even gone into the actual notes usage yet haha
Please call me back after you've responded and I'll see if I can nitpick it any further
Looking at the general stuff because I don't want to look at whether d or k fits better for all 2.3k notes across 7 minutes lol
Stuff
So the map's a bit messy. In the sense that, on the scale of consistency versus variation you've decided to lean heavily towards the variation side. Of course you could attribute that to being your mapping style, HOWEVER my experience with taiko BNs (in particular Nardo) is that they emphasize heavily on consistency. So just note that you might run into some problems with them about this.
Personally I'd rather lean towards the consistency side, not only because it's easier that way, but also the song itself is basically a bunch of repeats lmao
Of course don't copy and paste everything, just, for me I'd not vary up the patterns as much as you have here across the entire map.
EXAMPLES INCLUDE:
1. The entire beginning section is a brilliant showcase of gradual density increase, but to do that you've decided to freely switch up what you're mapping to in the song, which people may find to be a consistency issue.
00:17:967 (21) - this note's not there in 00:14:657
00:15:071 (8,9,10) vs 00:18:381 (22,23,24) -
00:15:898 (11,12,13) vs 00:22:519 (44,45,46)
00:28:312 (77,78) and 00:29:967 (87,88) - you've decided to go x__x instead of x_xx like previously
00:36:588 to 00:39:898 - a lack of k's compared to 00:30:588
Not saying any of these are wrong, they are just inconsistent. Which may or may not be a bad thing. Consult other modders for advice :p
2. More inconsistency issues later on:
01:21:174 (414,415) vs 01:21:484 (416,417,418,419,420) vs 01:22:105 (421) - trying to match both the bleeps and the electronic drums? You're braver than I am lol, I'd either just go with constant kd or maybe this:
In particular 01:22:312 really deserves a note imo. (But really I'd rather just go simple kd kd kd kd etc.)
(same goes for the rest of this section up to 01:32:036)
3. This part: 01:32:864 to 01:38:657 VS This part: 01:39:484 to 01:45:071
One of the places where I feel like consistency would benefit you more than making varying up the patterns.
like, 01:34:519 (501,502,503,504,505,506,507,508) works well at 01:41:140 too; and 01:43:519 should have a d like 01:36:898 imo
4. Time for 1/6s yay pp
01:59:967 (654,655,656,657) and 02:03:278 (678,679,680,681) and 02:06:588 (703,704,705,706) and 02:09:898 (727,728,729,730) - dddk would be TOO consistent and make this part very boring, but kddk is meh. Try ddkk, see if you like it.
Also 02:00:795 (660) and 02:04:105 (684) and 02:07:416 (709) and 02:10:726 (733) - you could delete these to break up the long run. One reason would be for more variation, another would be to set up a density increase when later at 02:12:588 you have more complex patterns.
02:12:795 (748,749,750,751) - kddk like the others
02:30:381 (875,876) - d d, like 02:27:071 (853,854)
02:37:416 (923) - k to match 02:35:760 (911)
5. 02:45:691 to 03:12:588
This part's good Quite consistent, but a lot of interesting rhythm in between the 1/2 k's to make it not boring to play. Only thing is that 03:02:864 might be too long of a stream in comparison with the rest of this section, so perhaps delete 03:03:174 (1067), idk
6. Time for vocals
03:35:347 (1185,1186,1187,1188,1189,1190,1191,1192,1193) - mono k to be consistent with 03:28:519 works better imo, instead of having 03:34:933 (1183,1184,1185) dkd. Perhaps have 03:37:002 (1190,1191,1192,1193) back to d for the k at 03:38:243
03:45:278 (1218,1219) - hi why is this not dk ._.
03:51:898 to 04:15:898 - I have no idea how you decide when to split up the 1/2s here, I'm just going to ignore it for now lol
7. Bleeps
04:19:622 (1354) - change to k like 04:21:278 (1358) and 04:22:933 (1362), you might want to change 04:21:691 (1359) to k for some variation too if you like it
04:33:691 (1404) and 04:38:657 (1428) and 04:41:967 (1444) - k to match snares, or conversely change the similar places where you've mapped as kd to dd for consistency. 04:48:588 (1480,1481) and 04:50:243 (1489,1490) as well, although those two can be excused since maybe you want more k's for build up?
8. Build-up
04:54:795 to 04:58:105 - add some 1/4s here for a better build-up
05:03:898 (1581,1582,1583,1584,1585,1586) - kkdkkd perhaps
Also: 04:58:519 (1529,1530,1531,1532) vs 05:00:174 (1545,1546,1547,1548) vs 05:01:829 (1561,1562,1563,1564) vs 05:03:484 (1577,1578,1579,1580) - maybe consistency issue again, does it play well? I can't play it, so I can't say whether to change it up or not lol
9. Kiai
Another section where more consistency benefits it. I think you could structure this better, keep the rhythm and how you divide your plets consistent across similar sections, and only change k/d usage.
e.g. 05:29:553 (147,148,149,150,151,152,153,154,155,156,157,158,159) vs 05:54:381 (335,336,337,338,339,340,341,342,343,344,345,346,347,348) - man I really like that syncopated rhythm, why you gotta change it the second time around
e.g. 05:51:071 (307,308,309,310,311,312,313,314) vs 05:37:829 (205,206,207,208,209,210,211,212,213)
e.g. 05:45:691 (272,273,274,275,276) vs 05:58:933 (373,374,375)
etc.
Again, do remember that inconsistency is not necessarily bad, and I really like how interesting you've made the map play out despite the repetitiveness of the song. It's just... a bit messy, that's all. And it might become a problem if you really decide to get this ranked in the future.
Personally I'd rather lean towards the consistency side, not only because it's easier that way, but also the song itself is basically a bunch of repeats lmao
Of course don't copy and paste everything, just, for me I'd not vary up the patterns as much as you have here across the entire map.
EXAMPLES INCLUDE:
1. The entire beginning section is a brilliant showcase of gradual density increase, but to do that you've decided to freely switch up what you're mapping to in the song, which people may find to be a consistency issue.
00:17:967 (21) - this note's not there in 00:14:657
00:15:071 (8,9,10) vs 00:18:381 (22,23,24) -
00:15:898 (11,12,13) vs 00:22:519 (44,45,46)
00:28:312 (77,78) and 00:29:967 (87,88) - you've decided to go x__x instead of x_xx like previously
00:36:588 to 00:39:898 - a lack of k's compared to 00:30:588
Not saying any of these are wrong, they are just inconsistent. Which may or may not be a bad thing. Consult other modders for advice :p
2. More inconsistency issues later on:
01:21:174 (414,415) vs 01:21:484 (416,417,418,419,420) vs 01:22:105 (421) - trying to match both the bleeps and the electronic drums? You're braver than I am lol, I'd either just go with constant kd or maybe this:
In particular 01:22:312 really deserves a note imo. (But really I'd rather just go simple kd kd kd kd etc.)
(same goes for the rest of this section up to 01:32:036)
3. This part: 01:32:864 to 01:38:657 VS This part: 01:39:484 to 01:45:071
One of the places where I feel like consistency would benefit you more than making varying up the patterns.
like, 01:34:519 (501,502,503,504,505,506,507,508) works well at 01:41:140 too; and 01:43:519 should have a d like 01:36:898 imo
4. Time for 1/6s yay pp
01:59:967 (654,655,656,657) and 02:03:278 (678,679,680,681) and 02:06:588 (703,704,705,706) and 02:09:898 (727,728,729,730) - dddk would be TOO consistent and make this part very boring, but kddk is meh. Try ddkk, see if you like it.
Also 02:00:795 (660) and 02:04:105 (684) and 02:07:416 (709) and 02:10:726 (733) - you could delete these to break up the long run. One reason would be for more variation, another would be to set up a density increase when later at 02:12:588 you have more complex patterns.
02:12:795 (748,749,750,751) - kddk like the others
02:30:381 (875,876) - d d, like 02:27:071 (853,854)
02:37:416 (923) - k to match 02:35:760 (911)
5. 02:45:691 to 03:12:588
This part's good Quite consistent, but a lot of interesting rhythm in between the 1/2 k's to make it not boring to play. Only thing is that 03:02:864 might be too long of a stream in comparison with the rest of this section, so perhaps delete 03:03:174 (1067), idk
6. Time for vocals
03:35:347 (1185,1186,1187,1188,1189,1190,1191,1192,1193) - mono k to be consistent with 03:28:519 works better imo, instead of having 03:34:933 (1183,1184,1185) dkd. Perhaps have 03:37:002 (1190,1191,1192,1193) back to d for the k at 03:38:243
03:45:278 (1218,1219) - hi why is this not dk ._.
03:51:898 to 04:15:898 - I have no idea how you decide when to split up the 1/2s here, I'm just going to ignore it for now lol
7. Bleeps
04:19:622 (1354) - change to k like 04:21:278 (1358) and 04:22:933 (1362), you might want to change 04:21:691 (1359) to k for some variation too if you like it
04:33:691 (1404) and 04:38:657 (1428) and 04:41:967 (1444) - k to match snares, or conversely change the similar places where you've mapped as kd to dd for consistency. 04:48:588 (1480,1481) and 04:50:243 (1489,1490) as well, although those two can be excused since maybe you want more k's for build up?
8. Build-up
04:54:795 to 04:58:105 - add some 1/4s here for a better build-up
05:03:898 (1581,1582,1583,1584,1585,1586) - kkdkkd perhaps
Also: 04:58:519 (1529,1530,1531,1532) vs 05:00:174 (1545,1546,1547,1548) vs 05:01:829 (1561,1562,1563,1564) vs 05:03:484 (1577,1578,1579,1580) - maybe consistency issue again, does it play well? I can't play it, so I can't say whether to change it up or not lol
9. Kiai
Another section where more consistency benefits it. I think you could structure this better, keep the rhythm and how you divide your plets consistent across similar sections, and only change k/d usage.
e.g. 05:29:553 (147,148,149,150,151,152,153,154,155,156,157,158,159) vs 05:54:381 (335,336,337,338,339,340,341,342,343,344,345,346,347,348) - man I really like that syncopated rhythm, why you gotta change it the second time around
e.g. 05:51:071 (307,308,309,310,311,312,313,314) vs 05:37:829 (205,206,207,208,209,210,211,212,213)
e.g. 05:45:691 (272,273,274,275,276) vs 05:58:933 (373,374,375)
etc.
Again, do remember that inconsistency is not necessarily bad, and I really like how interesting you've made the map play out despite the repetitiveness of the song. It's just... a bit messy, that's all. And it might become a problem if you really decide to get this ranked in the future.
Side notes
02:31:622 (883,884,885,886,887,888) - I swear this is actually like this:
idk if you like to have any 1/8s in the map though
05:36:174 - kiai fountains are my jam!
Suggestion: end the kiai here at 05:36:174, delete 05:36:588 (202,203)
A longer rest looks better than a shorter one I think
07:10:312 (715,716,717,718) - I don't think this is necessary at the end lmao
idk if you like to have any 1/8s in the map though
05:36:174 - kiai fountains are my jam!
Suggestion: end the kiai here at 05:36:174, delete 05:36:588 (202,203)
A longer rest looks better than a shorter one I think
07:10:312 (715,716,717,718) - I don't think this is necessary at the end lmao
I haven't even gone into the actual notes usage yet haha
Please call me back after you've responded and I'll see if I can nitpick it any further