1. 01:41:454 (1,2,3,4,1) - As far as I've seen, there have never been clickable 1/2-chains longer than three notes anywhere, but this is five clickable 1/2s in a row - In a section that is mainly dominated by a lot of larger gaps and sliders, this seems highly unreasonable to me, simply deleting (4) would easily fix this imo. I find the usage of the 1/4-sliders in this section extremely random anyways, I don't see any system behind that at all and I think that bringing some structure into would only benefit the experience, but heyoo Normals don't get cared about much I guess
   (also, have you thought about already NCing those 1/4-sliders when they appear? i.e. swapping NCing on 01:33:545 (5,1) - etc, would imo make a nice effect but ofc that's just taste ^^)
2. 01:20:727 (5) - 02:08:727 (5) - Missing NC; Also unnecessary NC at 01:41:454 (1) - .. ye maybe NCing should be rechecked throughout the whole map again, can't be bothered rn
3. 03:48:000 (2,1) - not properly stacking lulz
4. edit: Maybe you could also make 02:21:818 (1,2,3) be evenly visually spaced from each other ( = something like this)? Same goes for 03:51:273 (1,2,3) versus 03:52:364 (3,4) -, there might be more like those I guess

Aleycks wrote:

community favorite

Shiirn wrote:

Aleycks wrote:

community favorite

fwiw 95% of all players have no fucking idea how to map or how to make good maps. This is why people are encouraged to be able to play their own maps before they spit their opinion all over.


The praise of anyone ranking lower than 10k or so who isn't an experienced mapper or modder is basically worthless other than as a personal pick-me-up. It's completely worthless as a map defense. For this map, at least, given its SR and pointless difficulty, i'd say like top 1-2k... That 10k threshold number changes depending on the difficulty level of the map, obviously.

Yuii- wrote:

You've been patiently waiting for 2 days to use that picture, Bonsai. You've earned my respect.

Shiirn wrote:

and it was still clumsily thrown in since that was about favorites rather than votes

smh bonzai

1. As the lowest diff you may want to fulfill the general things an easy should be doing in its stead. As such I agree with Bonsai that the stub 1/4 sliders should either be reconsidered as a whole or at least in the part bonsai mentioned as they seem to lack a clear structure and actually make that part more intense than the really intense section just before it.
2. If you want a more clear system, you missed the following places for 1/4 sliders: 01:37:909 - 01:40:091 - 01:44:454 - 01:46:636 - 01:48:818 - but as the lowest diff I'd just say you should go with circles in these places. (the timestamps above are used to outline that your system is kind of missing)

1. 01:23:864 (4) - You should explain why you use these sliders so that everyone is on the same page here, Fort. I don't see the need to end them in a spot with this much impact either.
2. 01:30:818 (1) - I agree with Alheak that these could be circles, his explanation makes sense.
3. I agree with Alheak that the hitsounding seems to be trying too hard to be meme, so i'd ask you to reconsider that.

Okorin wrote:

What are the tags "110bpm style" supposed to mean?

Manysi wrote:

Okorin wrote:

What are the tags "110bpm style" supposed to mean?

110bpm means glitch hop

Shiirn wrote:

Aleycks wrote:

community favorite

fwiw 95% of all players have no fucking idea how to map or how to make good maps. This is why people are encouraged to be able to play their own maps before they spit their opinion all over.


The praise of anyone ranking lower than 10k or so who isn't an experienced mapper or modder is basically worthless other than as a personal pick-me-up. It's completely worthless as a map defense. For this map, at least, given its SR and pointless difficulty, i'd say like top 1-2k... That 10k threshold number changes depending on the difficulty level of the map, obviously.

Alheak wrote:

Why do you see DQ as a negative thing? This is supposed to help the mapset, and in this current state it's far from being acceptable for rank.
More than anything, a DQ shows that BNs didn't do their work properly.

Also, a lot of graveyarded maps have a shitton of favorites, that doesn't make them more rankable.

Aleycks wrote:

It has already been disqualified once, so why were these "issues" not adressed the first time ?

Cheesecake wrote:

I don't get why you use hitsounds to add to the song rather than represent it :\

Aleycks wrote:

About Everlasting Memory, this is basically "why is this a slider and not a circle ?" The answer is : why not, I really have nothing else to say about this, and the hitsounds stuff is ridiculous : "too meme"

Enon wrote:

Please people enjoy this game

huono_tuuri wrote:

Thanks based okorin keeping the ranked category clean of aim practise maps! (expect highscore that is..)

Enon wrote:

Please people enjoy this game

OfficialLaw wrote:

Why this isnt ranked? :C

Fyre wrote:

OfficialLaw wrote:

Why this isnt ranked? :C

jump practice maps shouldn't be ranked

Fyre wrote:

OfficialLaw wrote:

Why this isnt ranked? :C

jump practice maps shouldn't be ranked

Alheak wrote:

Sorry I stumble upon this set this late into the qualification process but there are some things I definitely don't agree with, which I think need revision:

Everlasting Memory

1. The map, especially the first two thirds, look particularly bad. You used to map some really nicer things back then, Highscore looked good, this on the other hand feels quite cheap to be honest:
   00:25:091 (2,3) - , 00:48:000 (1,2,3) - and on, overly curved short sliders like 00:52:773 (2,3) - , rushed squares like 01:23:454 (1,2,3,4) -
   The list could go on, but I know what you're capable of and that you're more than capable of applying yourself. is that really matter when i don't have any problem in structure and gameplay for that?
2. The rhythm choices on most parts is really suspicious:
   01:23:454 (1,2,3,4) - why ending your slider on such a powerful note? It'd play much better clicked on. This applies to the whole section i told to everybody this again and again and again im following synth sound, why you forcing me to follow kick and snare for that, it's my custom preference to put some various pattern in that part
   01:30:818 (1) - why is it not two circles like the previous patterns? it's the same sound, it feels really awkward to suddenly play a slider instead
   Whole kiai as well, some note get a special 1/1 slider for no reason, some others get screen length 1/4 jumps subjective suggestion but looks good
   03:16:364 - why is this whole part so calm when it's basically still the chorus? why you don't understand, im sure im follow 1/2 patterns in there, why you forcing me to do 1/4? give me a single statements that mapping that with slow pattern is highly unrankable so QAT can DQ that so easily like throwing this map into the garbage can
3. The flow as well is mostly bad, most of the objects just feel randomly placed across the map without real intent, like the whole section after 01:31:636 - if this flow is mostly bad then you can't do aim well for 7* maps, im doing this intentionally because of song itself and i put my interpretation to that song like that, i feel like it is okay if im doing that sharpy flow for that part as well, i assume you like you should make me remap that part for just your taste of your mapping i guess, no offense
   You often make the cursor stop at awkward moment, like 01:23:864 (4,5) - the previous part was a jump shitfest then you decide here to not only change the rhythm^, but stop the cursor. This would actually be okay if you made the player click on 01:24:000 - since you'd then be landing on a downbeat since the sliders was mapped by sliderends i think it's okay if i keep the cursor stopping in here, im really 100% sure this pattern is a good choices for that mapping parts
   01:32:318 (4,1) - this as well doesn't totally work, you want to stop the cursor but the next slider begins a bit more farther away, which makes the player continue to move the cursor. This ends up feeling more like a slow than a stop, which I don't think is adequate here well i think the anti jump pattern is your biggest problem in here but it doesn't make any senses for me since i put right pattern choices for that one, if you still complain map it your self and give me the good patterning choiches for that, i'll analyze that and i will think about that, please man the mapping is just not for jump jump and jump, i put much variety for that one, no offense
4. NCs are a real mess as well, like 01:31:091 (1) - just why? You also don't need to NC every damn jump patterns, unless you really wanna make them stand out. NCs are a more than aesthetics, they are gameplay elements and reading clues since i fix 01:30:818 (1) - i didnt change the NC because of small sapcing
5. Unlike Highscore, the hitsounding gimmick just doesn't quite work here, and sounds more forced than anything im doing testplays and retries for many times, please this map is my long term mapping, probably you will not understand my hitsounding in 1 or 2 or 3 or 4 tries, you need to learn something for that
6. 02:06:545 - why isn't this part kiai? Moreover, this part has some serious spacing issues, most of the patterns don't work or at least not with the spacing they have, like 02:07:091 (1,2,3,4) - that kind of pattern if you don't like squares then you hate old ranked 2010 mapping with squares
   To be honest the whole map feels terribly unbalanced spacing wise, some very energetic sections like^ feel really underwhelming, whereas some calmer ones are a total jump shitfest like 00:56:727 - 00:56:727 - calmer? with tons of 1/4 synths it's called calmer?, i think your headset is broken, no insulting
7. 03:51:273 - More personnal, but this section feels like it has some serious gameplay potential with those back-and-forth sounds, but nothing is made out of it >serious potential, yeah back and forth is just a flow choiches in common of mapping, but im doing different so why you so serious for this?

In short, the map feels unstructured, cheap, awkward, rushed and I honestly think that if you weren't Fort, this set would never have even got a bubble. please if you can map this song properly, mapped it yourself and ninja'd my favourites, please man im mapping competitively with ajny other mappers and i put several months of working this map and you said it's cheap, awkward, unstructed and etc. how did you said that such rude things to me so easily?, i guess you don't get my interpretation of my mapping based on gameplay itself, and yes you should take a look on other players plays too, and i see lot of testplayers and lot of modders don't have a problem with that while im asking something about that problem

It's a bit late here, plus I am posting from my laptop which makes modding not easy at all, so I am not really able to go deeply into the details. i hope you go to the deep deatails so i can explain everything to make sure you understand more
I hope it'll be enough to make people reconsider this qualification.

Bonsai wrote:

I randomly looked at the Standard bc I'm currently mapping a song of the same BPM and recently asked fellow BNs and/or QATs about 1/4-gaps in the lowest diff of a set, and some of them were already aversed to the idea of only having a 1/4-gap after a slidertail, but this Normal here even has fully clickable 1/4-doubles from 03:03:136 (4,1) on, and even though I consider myself a rather strong advocate for harder Normals, I don't think that's acceptable as lowest diff of a set either;would be cool to hear more opinions about that. it's not a normal diffs, it's standard diff which it has seriously balanced with the Hyper diff with tons of 1/4s, so the doubles should be okay with that one, well i have many of normal diffs with much 1/2 patterns in there, quite hard but yeah its okay

I found some other things in the Standard too:

1. 01:41:454 (1,2,3,4,1) - As far as I've seen, there have never been clickable 1/2-chains longer than three notes anywhere, but this is five clickable 1/2s in a row - In a section that is mainly dominated by a lot of larger gaps and sliders, this seems highly unreasonable to me, simply deleting (4) would easily fix this imo. I find the usage of the 1/4-sliders in this section extremely random anyways, I don't see any system behind that at all and I think that bringing some structure into would only benefit the experience, but heyoo Normals don't get cared about much I guess looks okay
   (also, have you thought about already NCing those 1/4-sliders when they appear? i.e. swapping NCing on 01:33:545 (5,1) - etc, would imo make a nice effect but ofc that's just taste ^^)
2. 01:20:727 (5) - 02:08:727 (5) - Missing NC; Also unnecessary NC at 01:41:454 (1) - .. ye maybe NCing should be rechecked throughout the whole map again, can't be bothered rn
3. 03:48:000 (2,1) - not properly stacking lulz oh haha xD
4. edit: Maybe you could also make 02:21:818 (1,2,3) be evenly visually spaced from each other ( = something like this)? Same goes for 03:51:273 (1,2,3) versus 03:52:364 (3,4) -, there might be more like those I guess

My apologies for being this late too, I just never bothered taking a closer look at this map but I'm procrasting on University-stuff rn so lol okay im trying to be a cool dude for some reason lol

Okorin wrote:

Hi Fort,

I'll pull this out of qualified for now as valid points were raised about both Everlasting Memory and Standard.

[Standard]

1. As the lowest diff you may want to fulfill the general things an easy should be doing in its stead. As such I agree with Bonsai that the stub 1/4 sliders should either be reconsidered as a whole or at least in the part bonsai mentioned as they seem to lack a clear structure and actually make that part more intense than the really intense section just before it. this is really ambigous for me, that should i put more of 1/4s sliders or should i delete the 1/4s pattern in here, it's confusing for me a bit, i'll tell nhawak about this i guess
2. If you want a more clear system, you missed the following places for 1/4 sliders: 01:37:909 - 01:40:091 - 01:44:454 - 01:46:636 - 01:48:818 - but as the lowest diff I'd just say you should go with circles in these places. (the timestamps above are used to outline that your system is kind of missing) looks i missed something there

[Everlasting Memory]

1. 01:23:864 (4) - You should explain why you use these sliders so that everyone is on the same page here, Fort. I don't see the need to end them in a spot with this much impact either. already explained on alheak's mods + for few reference i swap that patterning for first attempt deal with that cursor break pattern, there should be good on first time, im not fix pattern choice but i fix pattern placement and some of note placement
2. 01:30:818 (1) - I agree with Alheak that these could be circles, his explanation makes sense. yeah i agree with that too
3. I agree with Alheak that the hitsounding seems to be trying too hard to be meme, so i'd ask you to reconsider that. i don't agree with that statement because when you realize that i hitsound that map the other hitsounds just an addition for my mapping being fullfilled by experiencing different look of the map itself, so yeah im already considered this for a long time, already structured the hitsounding, and yes it's not forcing, i'd keep my hitsounding not so much as my previous project was and it worked for me, tested by lot of people and lot of them didn't complain so much about that because i want to give different experience for players by putting that custom additional hitsound on that map (and mapset), kinda subjective but i bet this can be okay since hitsounds can be editable without changing .osu file notepad if you don't like some hitsounding parts

What are the tags "110bpm style" supposed to mean? glitch hop as manysi mentioned, im just doing that tags for additional seaching when people forget about Glitch hop songs, they can seach 110bpm style for this map lol
Good luck and answer the rest of the mods properly, not just the parts mentioned here~

MEK wrote:

why didnt i get kudosu for my mod ages ago.

Fyre wrote:

jump practice maps shouldn't be ranked

S A V E R Y wrote:

Oh my gosh...
(Another drama)

Scarlet Evans wrote:

If they comply with the requirements, are nicely mapped and have full diff spread, then why they shouldn't? I don't see the reason for maps like these not being ranked, especially when so many people love them, consider them good and there are no fundamental flaws, other stuff that definitely breaks the rhythm or is mapping to the empty vacuum.

I mean, no offence, but saying something like "I think it's jump practise, thus this shouldn't be ranked" is not a good way to convey someone's personal feeling, because it's a little like a tautological linguistic construct with zero information content. There's completely no argument related to why it shouldn't be ranked in it and for me, it just sounds like an attempt of being mean.

Moreover, the foremost mean to achieve improvement is playing the maps and any map that have jumps could be called by someone a jump practice. Do you mean that every single map ever that had any jumps in it, shouldn't be ranked? I bet not, as I wonder how many maps we would had left, if we were to unrank everything that can be used for jump practising.

Fort wrote:

Bonsai wrote:

I randomly looked at the Standard bc I'm currently mapping a song of the same BPM and recently asked fellow BNs and/or QATs about 1/4-gaps in the lowest diff of a set, and some of them were already aversed to the idea of only having a 1/4-gap after a slidertail, but this Normal here even has fully clickable 1/4-doubles from 03:03:136 (4,1) on, and even though I consider myself a rather strong advocate for harder Normals, I don't think that's acceptable as lowest diff of a set either;would be cool to hear more opinions about that. it's not a normal diffs, it's standard diff which it has seriously balanced with the Hyper diff with tons of 1/4s, so the doubles should be okay with that one, well i have many of normal diffs with much 1/2 patterns in there, quite hard but yeah its okay

Okorin wrote:

[Standard]

1. As the lowest diff you may want to fulfill the general things an easy should be doing in its stead. As such I agree with Bonsai that the stub 1/4 sliders should either be reconsidered as a whole or at least in the part bonsai mentioned as they seem to lack a clear structure and actually make that part more intense than the really intense section just before it. this is really ambigous for me, that should i put more of 1/4s sliders or should i delete the 1/4s pattern in here, it's confusing for me a bit, i'll tell nhawak about this i guess

Guidelines wrote:

If your mapset does not have an Easy difficulty your Normal difficulty should follow the general guidelines for Easy difficulties.

Bonsai wrote:

whoa there

Oko and I did in fact mean that those 1/4-doubles are too much for the lowest difficulty of a mapset, it doesn't matter whether it's called a Normal or a Standard (there is no point in bringing that up anyways bc you are required by RC to have at least a Normal, so if you don't consider this Standard a Normal-diff then you'd have to add another diff anyways)

Guidelines wrote:

If your mapset does not have an Easy difficulty your Normal difficulty should follow the general guidelines for Easy difficulties.

As I said, I asked around previously - 1/4-gaps between two clickable objects do not follow the general guideline for Easy-diffs.

Ranking Criteria wrote:

The difficulties in the mapset must be in a consecutive order. Easy or Normal can be skipped if the gap in the star rating spread allows it. The lowest difficulty must be below 2.0 stars.

Alheak wrote:

Sorry for the harsh remarks Fort but I was really dissatisfied with this map, plus all the recent drama about BNs' circlejerk and poor modding made me quite sour. yeah

First off, yes, bad aesthetics are a big problem. You are a famous mapper with a good mileage, you make quality sets, but all of this got lost and honestly feels quite insulting when you're able to qualify this kind of cheap looking map, though you're not really the one to blame but BNs to icon it this easily.
Try to apply yourself, please, inspire yourself from other quality mappers if you're not sure exactly how to fix the aesthetics.
Be consistent in your design, avoid bending short sliders too much, try to make objects fit together on the map, etc. i can agree with you about that quality mapper but about aestestics, that's highly subjectively suggestion which i should polish all this map while this map already good on gameplay and it has good flow for me, i tested it many times and i don't have problem with aestestics at all, so there is no bad aestestics on my map and i feel like it is good for playing by everyone who play this map, and once again how dare you say my map is cheap when you don't realize i put much effort to create this map in different way than normal (more than normal = special), and yes im gonna not improving the aestestics too much because im really respecting any beatmappers who have standard quality maps, so if you want to make a really good quality map please make your own set, and give me the prove you can map this with 7* with this set with a really good gameplay with amazing aestestics, well yeah once again im focusing on flow and patterning and some directional flow than make a good aestestics maps, so yeah the 2016 maps feels like many aestestics map but it doesnt have amazing gameplay experience in other way, so i create this map in a different way from aestestics, and once again you don't need to say this map aestestics was bad when you can't play this map properly, thanks for reading. np: and im sure im not insulting other mappers since im mapping competitively with the others, waiting for coming BNs and fix any modders suggestion with considering and thinking about it, yeah atleast i respecting the other mappers like that

01:14:727 (1,2,3,4) - You say you're following the synth here , but it is played on 01:15:273 - as well, so there's no reason not to map on this beat instead of the end of a slider. what do you mean about this? 01:14:727 (1,2,3,4) - is a strong synth which i mapped there, so there is no problem when i put that pattern like that, and yes this 01:15:136 (4) - has a slider with a whistle hitsound on the tail, whistle hitsound has low pitch than 01:14:727 (1,2,3) - and 01:15:136 (4) - slider head with high pitch preference, so why you forcing me to do this again and again while i can put better patterning variety for that part? and yes this song is repetitive so im trying to put any various pattern as many as i can without overmapping any rhythm, and any song. and yeah 01:14:182 (1,1,2,3,4) - this part is the first attempt you'll see the pattern like that, there is a probability you will notice the melody synth sound instead focusing on kick and snare sound, because this part 01:05:454 - contains tons of melody synth sound which it's automatically you ignore the kick and snare sound, so as a conclusion i didn't fix this because i think it's follow everything on rhythm without skipping any potential strong rhythm, im just want to put anti boringness pattern which makes the gameplay didnt too repetitive with same patterns

03:16:364 - there are 1/4s in the background which you could map, but I guess i didn't explain myself properly. I think you should put less sliders and more circles with more spacing, principally because this part felt so calm after kiai even though the song is still very powerful. oh man please, i can't hear the 1/4s with my old speaker, this is really forcing me to overmapping while im trying to focus on melody patterning with just only 1/2 beats, please no matter how fast this slider and pattern, the map still fast with High Approach rate and it doesnt feel so easy when you hit every circle there, and yes im doing this really structured with much planning into the beatmap because i really want to calm down players after tons of jumps in kiai time, and yes the kiai time on this map just in there, nothing else like highscore

01:32:318 (4,1) - you didn't get what I was trying to say, the anti-jump is a very good idea, but you poorly executed it, you should overlap the slider's head instead of the end because the cursor has to move after clicking on (4), here's what I suggest: that one makes it really worse, my preference is more better than that because the anti jump flow basically on the flow direction, so it can be good and fine while im keeping my own aestestics and anything else in my way, you just need many tries to adapt with that pattern and you'll be confortable with that, and yes this map is not for first play and you leave it, but this map is for many tries with much effort in gameplaying to have better scores

SPOILER

With this, the player doesn't need to move his cursor so it really feels like a stop well yeah i can prove that pattern makes player do cursor dancing so i won't change this one, nice fact

00:56:727 - Yes, this part is "calmer", this "er" means it's relative. It doesn't mean it's not powerful, but surely less than 02:06:545 - , yet the square patterns and basically most of the spacing feels really weak compared to the spacing of 00:56:727 - i told you to hear the melody sound, my friend, i told you this many time, im following that melody and it's really suitable with the pattern with much jumps and some tecnical hard patterning, instead of 02:06:545 - with less 1/4s melodical melody synth, the directional flow is really hard to because of the squares and ascension pattern

03:51:273 - I said "back and forth sounds", that doesn't mean the mapping has to be back and forth too, but you could have found a better pattern to represent those sounds, like slow sliders going in the opposite direction of the flow or things like that. Also the "serious" in this phrase just meant "great potential", not that you have to do it lol oh okay i see, but yeah i'll keep this thing for my preference in this map because im already liked it and also the others

For the hitsounding, I think what other people (and me) wanted to say is that it's not bad, but it surely doesn't work as well as in Highscore. You don't have to remove it, you can always try to make it better if you can, but it was just mostly feedback. well im sure im doing this hitsound is really better than the Highscore, and yes since the hitsounding is highly can editable without editing any of a single .osu code, im really sure if you want more better hitsounding you can download the alternate link for my alternate hitsounding in different way, so yes i'll keep this hitsounding to make sure i giving my mapping preference and my mapping interpretation to other so people can judge me in a different way about hitsounding, and once again, if i change the hitsounding it's like just changing the structure of the map so yeah it will be more harder than you expected, just learn and pay attention for something in my map (especially in gameplay) because im not really interested in "editor only" beatmapping, but im really appreciate much players who play this map and who can't mapping but they still can judge the map is good or no.

Again I'm sorry if I felt aggressive last time, but please don't take it too personally and try to look at what I am saying from an objective point of view.
Also I wasn't trying to be "rude" or anything, but simply wanted to express my opinion. Praise never helped anybody improve, and I hate hypocrisy. yeah i won't, i can take it seriously but i don't take too personally, i can thinking about you said, and i already answer all your complaints with my own answer before, hope that can answer your problems in this map

You probably put some effort into this, but looking back at some of your maps, we feel like you could have done way better. i hope this can be better and more better than my previous ranked map, you just didn't realize it, same like me haha

1. Switch NCing at: 00:31:091 (4,1) since the new instrumental line starts at 00:31:091 -; 01:27:273 (4,1) - 01:42:000 (1,3) -
2. Remove NC at: 00:36:818 (1) since you only NCd every second measure in the rest of the intro; 01:25:636 (1) -(didn't do that at 01:14:727 (2) - either); 02:55:909 (3,4) bc they never appeared in the rest of this section either and there's nothing new here;
   
3. Missing hitsounds at: 00:58:364 - 01:05:318 (6) - 01:08:182 - 01:20:045 (4) - 02:07:364 - 02:07:500 - 02:09:273 - (wrong one at 01:57:818 -) - 02:22:364 - 03:04:364 (3) - 03:15:273 (3) - 03:25:636 (2) - 03:28:364 (3) - 03:53:454 (5) -
4. 01:58:636 (3) - This being a slider seems out of place, I don't hear anything on the tail or any difference to the next combo at all, why not just a circle?
5. 02:14:727 (5) - Maybe remove the last reverse to differentiate that there is no melody note there? or hitsounds it if you keep it I guess
6. 03:25:091 - 03:29:454 - swap that hitsound lol
7. Why are you only NC every second measure from 03:33:818 - on? I mean the map is slightly denser but the music doesn't change its pace at all or anything like that
8. 01:47:454 (1,2,3,4,5) - Are you sure about this? afaik there is nothing similar in the whole rest of the diff, please tone this one down by either lower spacing or inserting sliders, for the sake of consistency and also for the spread

1. Why is 00:52:364 not even clickable when 00:50:182 (1) is even a 1/1-slider? imo a 1/1-slider would fit there too
2. 00:54:545 (1) - I understand neither the big jump nor the SV-increase, there is a slight increasing whoosh-sound >starting< there but that only becomes noticable after a bit more time; imo raising spacing and SV here already takes away excitement from when the next section starts
   Related to that, it is imo pretty weird that 00:56:182 (1) has higher SV but then it slows down at 00:56:727 (1) - again, if you followed that previous point and not raised the SV at 00:54:545 (1) then raising it to x1,5 at 00:56:182 (1) would already have the same kick-effect but avoid this slow-down-effect
3. 00:57:818 (5,6,7) - is the spacing so broken on purpose? nvm, seems like it is - About the whole section from 00:56:727 on: It is extremely confusing to me why you switch around with the spacing so much - The first two combos play relatively equal, then all of a sudden huge jumps at 01:01:500 (2,3,4,5,6) but then a huge slow-down directly afterwards at 01:02:182 (6,7,8,1) -; or, a really long really slow section at 01:05:454 (1,2,3,4,5,6,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4) - but then suddenly a rather big jump onto 01:10:773 (5) out of nowhere - Along with the seemingly random switching between the different lines of rhythm, I don't get what you try to emphasize at all, the different rhythms contradict each other a lot but on top of that the spacing varies randomly too, all in all this seems extremely messy to me (not even mentioning that the inconstant spacing of the 1/4s makes the aesthetics look really messy too, varying between anything from x2,0 to x3,0 whilst having almost the same gameplay effect doesn't make sense to me at all - Try to have a certain distance for certain types of gaps, don't just place them remotely random, it's extremely weird to sometimes see equal spacing between followpoints, then uneven spacings, then a follow-point being half-hidden under the circle already or one additional follow-point showing a bit)
4. 01:18:273 (7) - Maybe make this two circles since the melody has two notes here? differentiation please
5. 01:21:000 - Missing hitsound? I'm not checking them bc after looking at the Hyper I feel like you should recheck all hitsounds in all diffs yourself again, but this one really sticks out
6. I already find it quite weird that you ignore all minor downbeats from 01:13:909 (7) on, like 01:15:273 - 01:17:454 - etc because that creates basically 3/4-gaps of not doing anything for the player even though there is still much happening, and I guess your reasoning for that is that the melody doesn't have a new note there, and I beg to differ there - The melody doesn't change pitch, but it definitely has a new beat on those - But even following your hypothetical reasoning, why is for example 01:21:818 not clickable, but 01:21:682 - instead? please explain this to me because I don't see any logic behind those rhythm choices at all
   or suddenly 01:28:364 is being mapped, why?
7. 01:22:091 (5,6,7,1) - This is a good example of what I said about aesthetics earlier - These notes have a difference of 0,25 in spacing, which is easily visually noticable and looks not quite good to me, but it doesn't change anything for the gameplay at all because the slider-leniency makes all of those really easy anyways, so I don't see any reason not to space them the same.
   Also, I dislike that pattern, like many others, extremely rhythmically because it doesn't differentiate at all between objects having melody-notes on the or not, here 01:22:773 doesn't have anything at all in the music but gets mapped exactly the same as everything else, or for example 01:24:545 (7,8) - completely ignores the melody bc it maps notes where no melody-notes are, and furthermore this is then mapped exactly the same as 01:26:727 (7,8) even though the melody has more notes there, and this missing differentiation occurs a lot and makes all of it seem so random, because there is literally no clue in the music or anywhere else why you mapped it like that
8. Another consequence of that weird spacing you have going on: 01:30:545 (6,7,8,9,1) this is a slow-down in the music, it leads to the next section which is much calmer, and you mapped it slightly less spaced than the previous combo, but this change in spacing has lost all of its meaning since you randomly do that all the time, for example 01:26:727 (7,8,1,2,3,4,5,6,7) has the exact same spacing even though it is muuch more intense
9. 01:33:545 (7,8) - seems like you wanted to emphasize this with the higher spacing, but since it is just forming a straight line with (6) it doesn't emphasize neither (7) nor (8) at all
10. 01:35:727 (7,8) - to bring more structure into this section, this should be stacked, just as 01:44:454 (7,8) is stacked, otherwise it just seems random again
11. 01:44:182 (6,7) - You always spaced those with at least x2,0 , why such a low spacing here?