Kynan wrote:

Exactly what Jesse said, it's kinda like Tengaku tbh.

jesse1412 wrote:

Look, this map looks like shit and plays like butter. The jumps flow inexplicably well, the only jumps that don't feel like butter to me are - guess what - the hardest jumps in the map; the reason? I'm no where near good enough to play them. Maybe people should keep that in mind when thinking about this map. Worth noting that I even thing the 1/4 sliders play incredibly well too, everything works fine.

The map plays smooth and looks shit. Nothing about this plays/reads badly, if it's unrankable, it's because of a lack of blankets and other redundant aesthetic things that people care about and maybe a few small issues that need to be forked out with a comb.

Personally I could not give two fucks about aesthetics if it the map plays well.

Also please don't compare this map to anything wings has done, this map plays like a fairly standard map in my opinion; relatively easy to read with natural flowing triangle jumps. It's just ugly as fuck and people seem to think ugly mapping is "20XX never before seen shitmapping".

EDIT: AR9.2 was cooler.

Bara- wrote:

The matter of AR is a really subjective one. One can deem a high AR (10) reasonable, since the first 60% of the map is full 280 BPM jumps and such. One can also claim that the AR needs to be lowered (to 9) because of the 2nd part.

In the end, it's all up to the mapper, and people should start respecting his choice of AR

isopaharuntikka wrote:

It's Monstrata's map, he should be the one who decides everything.

isopaharuntikka wrote:

It's Monstrata's map, he should be the one who decides everything.

jesse1412 wrote:

Kynan wrote:

Exactly what Jesse said, it's kinda like Tengaku tbh.

It feels FAR more natural than tengaku too, harder in places but never quite as iffy to follow.

jawns wrote:

I feel like there are two main points people make about this map, and why they don't think it should be ranked:

The first one is, that the map looks ugly, but I haven't seen a single explanation why this is a bad thing. Why is it more fun to click on a good looking slider rather than one that is "ugly"? And on top of that, as has been mentioned a lot of times, the "ugly" sliders fit the "ugly" music.

The other thing is, people say this map was deliberately made to play poorly (even though a lot of other people say that the map plays surprisingly well). The main issue I have with this argument is, that these people forget (or don't realize) that there can be more to a map than "how well it plays". Charles445's podcast talked a bit about it, how maps can have an emotional effect on the player, besides "this feels good to play" or "it felt great that I fc'ed that bit". My point is, that making the map "play worse" is justifiable, if the reason was to make the map fit the song better, or in some other way add to the experience.

Second point: There is no proof of thorough playtesting and player input in the map. If the beatmap is truly directed to its target audience based on star rating, then it's extremely weird to not see any input from top 100 players, and the ones I've asked about, were feeling offended that such a beatmap was ranked in the first place - they didn't feel it was enjoyable to play or a needed map in the ranked section. If you can't even please the small target audience you're directing your map to, then there's something definitely wrong with the map.

Kibbleru wrote:

"wow! i can really feel how ugly this song is through the map!"

Catshy wrote:

I find it kinda funny that map's SR drops to 3.65* if you delete first ~3 minutes.

Spaghetti wrote:

Catshy wrote:

I find it kinda funny that map's SR drops to 3.65* if you delete first ~3 minutes.

i find it kinda funny that water is wet

idke wrote:

Spaghetti wrote:

i find it kinda funny that water is wet

"Water isn't wet. Wetness is a description of our experience of water; what happens to us when we come into contact with water in such a way that it impinges on our state of being. We, or our possessions, 'get wet'."

IamKwaN wrote:

Looking through the map, I find some of the inputs provided by the community valid.

Please have your discussion stick to the map only and anything not constructive would be removed.

EDIT:

hoozimajiget wrote:

But the actual song length noted in the album track listing is 4:46. So how are there 14 seconds of artificially generated length?

I am curious about this.

Akali wrote:

IamKwaN wrote:

Looking through the map, I find some of the inputs provided by the community valid.

Please have your discussion stick to the map only and anything not constructive would be removed.

EDIT:


I hope you are curious. I completely disagree with 5 minutes being bottom limit for approval, but if we have rules let's try not to find iffy ways around them. This way I can record my dog barking for 1 minute and loop it over a drum beat, call it "Super Funny Dog Remix Extension", add it to every 4 minute song and go for approval. The guitar sounds here might be part of the song's performance, but they don't have any rhythmical timing nor contribute to song's composition in any way.

Cubensis wrote:

Maybe peoples doesn't like your map because it's just bad lol

Catshy wrote:

I find it kinda funny that map's SR drops to 3.65* if you delete first ~3 minutes.

Imo if you cut it in half and make two maps out of this song (with full diff spreads) it's actually rankable.

Underforest wrote:

I'll try to help out here

02:50:353 - this red point you should do it 7/4 instead of 4/4 imo
03:11:415 (1) - end this at 03:13:440 - if you're trying to follow vocal
04:42:747 - add 109 BPM redline
04:44:784 - change this to 114 BPM
04:45:311 (1) - you can make this heart slider much better than now

234,109,285311,6,0,B|234:102|203:78|143:78|136:142|109:196|189:209|257:289|257:289|324:209|404:196|377:142|370:78|310:78|277:102|278:116,1,599.999981689454,2|2,0:0|0:2,0:0:0:0:

04:49:426 (1) - at the spinner end you can put a whistle here

even if it's too harder it's a great map, don't let the user rating let winny upload continue his road
if I didn't helped, don't gimme kudosu

Cubensis wrote:

Maybe peoples doesn't like your map because it's just bad lol

Monstrata wrote:

More beautiful version: http://puu.sh/pPbU4/42e16d9b88.osz

Mark101 wrote:

Monstrata wrote:

More beautiful version: http://puu.sh/pPbU4/42e16d9b88.osz

tatoe

Frostwich wrote:

Cubensis wrote:

Maybe peoples doesn't like your map because it's just bad lol

you should $uicideboys - kill yourself part 3

Frostwich wrote:

Cubensis wrote:

Maybe peoples doesn't like your map because it's just bad lol

you should $uicideboys - kill yourself part 3

OzzyOzrock wrote:

i love the song

AchsanLovers wrote:

what is this

Underforest wrote:

a map

GhostZ wrote:

Really Beautiful Map

Ranked when

mvb wrote:

Now that we've seen Monstrata's Aspire, are people going to rethink what they said about this map?

Blue Dragon wrote:

mvb wrote:

Now that we've seen Monstrata's Aspire, are people going to rethink what they said about this map?

Not really. Monstrata's new map is probably one of the best of this year, but this is still a joke.

puxtu wrote:

Mania version soon

Tinosaurus wrote:

puxtu wrote:

Mania version soon

stop pls do it puxtu senpai, daisuki

gamecrashed wrote:

I was told to redirect my salt here

NaCl KCl CaCl2

Stoof wrote:

helo when r u ranking

Bakari wrote:

Removed a few irrelevant posts.

If you have something informative to post, read through the previous posts first. Otherwise, don't post at all.

Monstrata wrote:

It's time.

C00L wrote:

Welcome back Mr.Monstrata

riktoi wrote:

hello no bully pls

a lot of people have probably pointed these out already but here's a list anyway

00:23:986 (5) - i think ctrl+g fits the vocal better (or make it curve like the other crude sliders) since he's yelling harder and stuff
00:25:697 (5) - same

00:27:409 (1) - this slider extends 1/2 after his voice fades away, might want to change that unless you want to keep it longer Nah, longer is better

00:28:709 (4,1) - this transition feels a bit rough but it might just be me Just you

00:29:560 - same sound as in 00:29:347 (5) - , maybe seperate to two repeats?
00:31:262 - ^
00:34:689 - ^
00:48:403 - ^ might be different here Single repeat is better for all 4 ^^^^

00:32:117 (4) - try ctrl+g?
00:33:617 (3) - ^
00:55:793 (2) - ^ dunno don't like this one lol Nah, they all end up messing up my flow xP.

00:38:356 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4) - cool

00:39:852 (6) - this feels a bit like a ghost note as the slider before follows the vocal (don't feel like the pattern is that improvable though)

00:41:771 (1,2,3,4) - this looks surprisingly fine

00:49:081 - 00:55:579 - this section _could_ be toned down with sliders but if you want to keep it as something that builds up to the escalating jumps to come it's fine

01:02:466 - 01:20:292 - these sliders seem quite slow compared to the sliders in the fast part. however, you probably just meant it as a [something i can't explain] part

01:35:915 (4,5) - it's hard to get a perfect pattern for this

01:38:915 (1,2,3,4,5) - shouldn't these be disengaged from the pattern before as they follow different style of vocals

01:39:772 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - wa daa daa daa (shouldn't these be 1/3?) Nope

02:02:564 (2,3,4,5) - this is more of a drum roll than just the same sound being played 4 times (not like it really matters if you change this or not lo)

02:26:362 - 02:33:170 - oh my

02:51:908 (1,1) - hr players will love these (if anyone ever bothers to play this with hr)

02:55:471 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1) - [RUDE AWAKENING]

good luck monstrata

Smoothie World wrote:

[General]

1. All clear.

[Stop! Stop Winny Upload!!]

1. 00:19:271 (4,1) - I feel since you have a jump at 00:18:411 (4,1) it would be fitting to have one here as well, especially due to the fact that it would help emphasize the first kick.
2. 00:21:206 - This whole section is just really boring. There's so much you can do to emphasize the start of certain vocals like at 00:21:419 but it's just the same spacing as everything else. Now, don't get me wrong; I do recognize you are mapping to the guitar here. However, you can do that while also representing the vocals with differing spacing concurrently. The vocals are loud (I mean come on, they are yelling basically) and deserve some form of representation, and I feel it would be best represented via spacing. This applies for the next ~30 seconds.
3. 00:22:489 (1,2,3) - This plays very awkwardly. In 00:24:200 (1,2,3) and 00:25:911 (1,2,3) you have tame flow with even spacing, whereas in this pattern, the flow is very choppy and abstract, and the spacing is seemlingly random.
4. 00:32:546 (2,3) - Spacing here can be increased for emphasis on the guitar-sounding thing like you did at 00:30:943 (4,5) and 00:29:241 (4,5) very well.
5. 00:40:172 (1,2,3,4,5,6,1,2,3,4,5) - Ok, so to begin, I recognize you are mapping to the vocals here, and I agree with that decision. However, in the song, the singer is gaining momentum for the upcoming section which is very intense, and I feel this can be represented with the jumps with slowly increasing spacing, or even just 00:40:918 (1,2,3,4,5) having a definitively larger spacing compared to 00:40:172 (1,2,3,4,5,6) . It feels weird to just have massive jumps off the bat in a measure that is supposed to gain momentum for the upcoming craziness.
6. 00:41:771 - Alright, so in this upcoming section, I like to look at it in 4 parts, each part representing 2 measures each. While there's a few spacing inconsistencies, one I would like to point out is how 00:43:260 (5,1) has a significantly lower spacing than 00:44:984 (6,1) and 00:46:699 (4,1) which I understand because the break in flow is extremely sharp, but the spacing still feels low compared to the other similar sections, and it can be increased to emphasize the downbeat better. Additionally, 00:48:192 (3) is a repeat slider whereas 00:46:484 and the rest of the similar sections in the 4 parts consist of two 1/2 sliders, and it doesn't make sense in my eyes.
7. 00:49:407 (4,1) - The spacing between these two notes should be increased because there is a powerful vocal syllable on the downbeat, which you represented at 00:50:384 and 00:52:986 but not here.
8. 00:55:579 - I like to look at the next 8 measures as the first 4 measures repeated once. Therefor, they should have somewhat similar spacing. However, from 00:59:022 and onwards, your spacing drastically increases which doesn't make sense considering the song hasn't gotten any more intense than the last 4 measures. I think i discussed this enough, but yea, I want it to become more intense through my mapping. Not completely following the song here.
9. 01:22:624 - The suggestions from 00:21:206 apply here as well.
10. 01:41:058 (1,2,1) - The spacing in this pattern doesn't make sense. If anything, it should either be equidistant or have 01:41:058 (1,2) closer together than 01:41:272 (2,1) to emphasize the downbeat and to emphasize a changing of energy in the song. I want to keep this because im emphasizing the slider, not the circle here.
11. 01:41:487 - In this section, I recognize that you mapped the bass/guitar/percussion with sliders. Similar to the previously mentioned sections, the spacing here is really boring, and could be spiced up with increased spacing on percussion hits to emphasize them. You have it in some percussion hits but not all or even most.
12. 02:13:776 (1,2,3,1) - The spacing in this pattern should be lower due to the fact that the timing change make it really difficult to hit to begin with, and the fact that the spacing increases while everything except the percussion going silent doesn't fit the song too well. I get that you need to emphasize the percussion, but currently I find it to be too extreme when coupled with the shift in timing.
13. 02:43:239 (1,2,1,2,1,2) - You had a build-up in spacing at 02:39:686 (1,2,1,2,1,2) which plays lovely because the momentum in the vocals increases over this time period, but you didn't do it here when it's essentially the same thing.
14. 03:31:498 (1) - Spacing can be increased to emphasize the crash better.
15. 04:01:581 (1) - Spacing can be increased to emphasize the introduction of the guitar.

I love the concept, but I feel this needs a fair bit of spacing polishing.

Underforest wrote:

I'll try to help out here

02:50:353 - this red point you should do it 7/4 instead of 4/4 imo No, 4/4 is better...
03:11:415 (1) - end this at 03:13:440 - if you're trying to follow vocal
04:42:747 - add 109 BPM redline Fixed, but used a different offset for instrument
04:44:784 - change this to 114 BPM
04:45:311 (1) - you can make this heart slider much better than now I want the asymmetry because it keeps to the essence of this map better.

234,109,285311,6,0,B|234:102|203:78|143:78|136:142|109:196|189:209|257:289|257:289|324:209|404:196|377:142|370:78|310:78|277:102|278:116,1,599.999981689454,2|2,0:0|0:2,0:0:0:0:

04:49:426 (1) - at the spinner end you can put a whistle here No, whistle doesnt work.

even if it's too harder it's a great map, don't let the user rating let winny upload continue his road
if I didn't helped, don't gimme kudosu

Minifrij wrote:

Smoothie World wrote:

Alright, I want to challenge you to something then. I want you to link all of the patterns that you feel should be changed, why they should be changed, and what you think would be the best pattern you can possibly change them to. If you can't do those three simple things, then you don't deserve to be bashing the map. If you do those 3 things, then cool, you positively impacted the map.

I'll do my best. Not a mapper, but here are some of the things I think are pretty ridiculous.

00:38:356 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4) - For such a gradual increase in the main vocals, I think that the spacing going from |-|-|-|--|--|--|--| is pretty silly. It implies that a massive change has happened in the vocal line, when in fact the vocals had only just began to shout by the end. Perhaps a more gradual increase of spacing would be in order, mainly starting from the second round pattern to map it more closely.
In addition to this, and it may just be personal preference (I'm not too big of a fan of repeated patterns), but I think the pattern should be changed from two pentagons. Perhaps something closer to an S pattern following the screen would be better, as the flow already moving from the cursor could carry round in a more natural movement than jagged circles.

00:40:385 (2,3,4,5,6,1,2,3,4) - I believe that these jumps are simply too spaced out for their BPM. I can understand why they are like that in terms of the feel of the song at that moment, however going from the top left corner to the bottom right by the last jump is personally too much.

00:48:623 (1,2,3,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,5,6,1,2,3,4,5,6,1,2,3,4,5,6,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,5,6,1,2,3,4,5,6,1,2,3,4,5,6,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - When essentially nothing happens here throughout the song to increase the intensity (the vocalist changes, that's about it) I see no reason for the jumps to be increasing in size so dramatically. It seems to just be arbitrarily increasing the difficulty just for a high star rating and to add 'challenge'.

01:38:058 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,5) - This is just slider spam, just like the pattern after it. I can't think of a better way to do this, though I can imagine either replacing the sliders in a way similar to what can be found in this grumd map* or by delaying every second slider and having them repeat once, whilst lowering the space between each slider could be better. Once again, I'm not 100% sure of this, but the way it is currently is is just spam.

02:26:362 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - etc. Same shit as above.

02:33:171 (1) - This completely kills any energy built up in the previous parts of the map. That, and it is essentially impossible to know that it is there without playing the map prior to it, causing an almost definite slider break. Perhaps replacing with a spinner could be better. It kills momentum for good reason, its a super slow screech. Spinner doesn't work because the mechanic causes players to spin really fast.

02:55:471 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1) - Tag 4 jumps. I'm sure you already know why I don't like these; they are stupidly spaced and are most likely impossible to hit without complete luck.

Other than that, the sliders are extremely ugly. Then again, if that's the A E S T H E T I C the map is going for then I suppose I can't particularly question it.

*E:

fieryrage wrote:

it'd work a lot better playability wise if the slider ends / heads were swapped so you don't have to move the cursor as much. i didn't originally post this in my mod because i didn't feel like it was a huge issue, but then i actually played it and i almost always consistently fail here due to how much shit is going on (low ar here doesn't help either).

Yeah essentially what this guy said.

Niko-nyan wrote:

Gladi was mention about this and you replied
01:36:505 (2) - The vocals are 1/3 here. Mapping this on a blue tick to somehow follow a bit of vocals is already pretty silly as it stands, but it's also completely wrong in this occasion. No, its 1/4

i totally disagree with your opinion (monstrata's) it's completely 1/3. On 1/4 section, it's just a drum but you're following the vocals The 1/4's do exist in the percussion though. Both percussion and vocals follow a very similar rhythm here, so integrating both layers in to the rhythm is perfectly fine here imo.

edit : oh well, it 00:00:838 - 05:00:988 -

the break that not mapped is from 00:14:408 - until 00:17:766 - that feels annoying for me It's to keep the player hanging.

i would add more .-. the ending of this map is quite silly when the music finished on 05:00:596 - and monstrata ends the spinner on 05:00:988 - like somehow it's allowed at all for extending the drain time at all. Music is fading out still...

.-.

mithew wrote:

don't know if its been mentioned before but 00:38:356 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,5) - is one of the worst patterns you can introduce here, its such an ugly motion and probably impossible to snap to, causing it to have no intensity, which the song calls for. its also pretty annoying to read for no reason Smoothie World mentioned this too. I changed the pattern a bit

00:41:339 (5) - this slider also feels way too out of place, very annoying to play after hitting the jumps Fixed

Zare wrote:

I'll just leave my 2 cents here as someone who's seen a lot of shit in the past 4 years, has been an avid player, mapped about 100~ different mapsets (not including the maps where I just started the first few seconds only to drop it afterwards), and has modded all kinds of different maps to varying degrees of success.

Looking at this this map, there's one thing no one can deny: It's mapped entirely for the novelty of the speed, slider velocity and erratic movements, as well as ridiculous difficulty.
This is not an inherently bad thing. There have been many people who have done similar things, and there's generally always some kind of backlash, just like with this here.

I think that if this concept is explored and executed properly and with caution, it can result in high quality mapping just like any other.

However I feel that this is not the case here. The concept and idea is fine, but the execution is sloppy. The hitobject placement, the patterns and sliders are deliberately unappealing to make the map has as much of a disjointed feeling as the music. To me, this is rather lazy. Just because the music is fast paced and wild doesn't mean you have to make the mapping ugly to make it fitting. It's not like there's no continuity or consistency in the music, so having the quite literally jumpo around in patterns randomly doesn't seem approppriate to me. Finding the right balance between,clean fast paced jump patterns and literally just putting back and forth fullscreen jumps is something that would increase this maps quality I think.
Then there's the second half of the song, i.e. 02:57:257 - and onward. I feel like going with your idea of mapping you would want this to be much more clean than the previous half because of the contrast in tone and you kiiinda did that by not using those stupid (sorry) sliders anymore, but then you mess up easy blankets like 03:16:894 (5,1) - which feels really offputting, or rather, lazy. Overall it feels like the second half was lacking in concept and just rushed to finish the diff quickly. The beautiful mapping is the concept. But I understand that's a difficult concept to grasp. It's all about the juxtaposition!


Then there's the issue of overmapping. 01:38:058 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,5) - Honestly I have absolutely no idea what you're even trying to do with these. As far as my ears are concerned, there's no 1/4 going on here, and even if you're just going for emphasis on the "vocals", this sounds REALLY awkward, especially since the hitsounds on the slidertails are of the same strength than those on the sliderheads. This literally screams "yeah for the lulz". It isn't supported by the music in any way and should frankly be completely trashed before this map is going for actual ranking. That would apply 02:26:362 - to this entire section of course. These all function as kicksliders. Silenced the slider-ends though.

Generally this map gives off a vibe of "because I can", and I don't think that way of thinking should be encouraged. The modding and ranking process right now is pretty fucking frustrating for people with smaller influence or less popularity, and while I'm usually the last one to tell anyone not to make use of their popularity, because in a community like this that means you have worked hard to achieve that status, I really think this map in in its current state in particular is just equivalent to shoving a giant dick into anyone's face that has trouble moving forward much less controversial maps. (long sentence sorry)
Basically what I'm trying to say, I'd be fine with this going for rank if I felt like it had gotten the effort, time and care it needed to really be of quality, which I think isn't the case right now.

Sonnyc wrote:

00:21:206 (1,2) - aww this nc setting didn't felt cool enough. Starting at (2) would've divided the 1/3 and the 1/2 better, and fit the new vocals better. Didn't spotted that b4.

340 wrote:

well, i'm ok with this map and its ugliness because i understand it somehow lol
but only one thing i want to argue about is an Approach Rate or AR. yeah, i've read your dialogue with broccoly about AR choice (which can be found here btw p/5253277) but you guys seemed to discuss about AR generally, not in the map's context. your map contains many overlaps and crossings and over type of stuff which is may be hard to read. for example, this pattern 02:46:793 (1,2,1,2,1,2) - . it looks like a FUCKING MESS with ar9.7. i tried it with both ARs and yeah, AR10 was the best. same thing applies to 02:55:471 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1) - and maybe a few other patterns.

you also said

Monstrata wrote:

like, i would play this map for fun, but the AR 10 would turn me off cuz i can't read it and neither can a lot of people

man, what fun you were talking about when a few patterns are so damn hard to read? and «i can't read it» argument is invalid as fuck because it's not about what you can read or not read, it's about what other players can read. btw there is no fun when there are some clearly unreadable moments in the map.

and sorry for a few «strong» words, just couldn't find the other proper and emotional words

Airachi wrote:

00:27:409 (1) - http://puu.sh/pPXOn/56248ba69f.jpg this slider looks like it plays terrible, and the slider ticks don't make up for what you removed from the song by having this slider here.
But it's mainly the second half of the slider that feels over extended, http://puu.sh/pPXRP/f890f0e857.jpg
You could make the slide a repeating slider and keep it "ugly" did some stuff

I also feel like if you want to ignore them a little bit but making such a slider, could use a technique for staccato and make a gap in between the music
http://puu.sh/pPY2K/7c3d9f3108.jpg

Same as above applies to this slider 01:33:991 (1) -

I also think the sliders should be a bit more consistent to the music, it really does looks random, but the music is the same, its not like the slider should change shape every single time.. the music does repeat its self, actually so does the lyrics.. quite a bit actually, i think that itself calls for consistency (yeah the sliders being ugly is consistent) but it could be more consistent..

you could map 01:06:090 (1) - all the spinners similar to this, think it would be much more interesting to map the break down rather than provide a spinning feel when playing it. I prefer spinner mechanic here.


I have to work now.. but i can look more in depth when i get home and try to help.. hope could help at all ;w;
(if you have already replied to any of this i am also sorry because i havn't been able to 100% keep up with the thread)

have a nice day/evening

Bara- wrote:

Okay

First, increase the OD to 9.6 Did you check to see if the high bpm sections contained streams? OD 9.4 is fine.
It's currently OD 9.4, which allows Notelocking to happen for maps over BPM of 282,50 (refer to t/334458)
Some parts are 286 BPM. If you set OD to 9.5, BPM of 285 is fine, but 286 is barely out
9.6 would make much more sense (and playability, 9.6 isn't that much harder than 9.4)
[Diff]
00:17:766 (1,2,3,4) - You are aiming at ugly, so why is this perfectly symmetrical... No vocals yet. And players aren't expecting ugly yet. I want to make the effect slowly dawn upon them
00:26:553 (1,2,3,4) - Why not make all of these sliders slightly increase in SV? The music gets much more intense, and deservse those changes No. I like it like this.
00:27:409 (1) - Keeping your mindset, this slider is way too pretty. A blanket? Oh hell no (talking about the end with the red node above it), try something as ugly as this (also gives better flow to the next slider, so yey) I don't think so...

SPOILER

00:32:760 (3,1) - This jump is absolutely nuts. (3) has a reverse at the red tick, so the earliest you can let go of this is after that point. This gives less than 1/2 (at 280 BPM) to hit the slider which moves at high speed, back to (3) Uh no, this jump is perfectly fine....
00:34:903 - I swear I can hear some sounds here... Yep.
00:39:852 (6) - Please, no offbeat sliders (applies to the next slider as well) What? Why not? They fit...
00:40:172 (1) - Fits the music much better if it's a 1/1 slider, due to it being offbeat (from red tick to red tick) No 1/2 is much better
00:43:047 (4) - NC, for the DDEDEDEDE No
00:44:770 (5) - 00:46:484 (3) - 00:48:192 (3) - ^^ ^
00:48:192 (3) - Why on earth is this 1/4 while the other similar sounds are 1/2? I want something different here for the last iteration.
00:53:425 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,1,2,3,4) - This looks... not ugly... Itls ugly now
00:58:150 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - Wait... I thought only Fort would ever do something as this
01:01:580 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - Are you sure you are not Fort?
01:33:991 (1,2) - Seriously...
01:35:915 (4) - NC, refer to above
01:37:630 (5) - ^^
01:39:344 (5) - ^^ No to all.
01:36:505 (2,6,2) - Is it just me, or are these the only triplets in the whole map? Don't you think 1/4 sldiers (with reverses please ) would work better? They are not the only triples int he map wat...
01:41:847 (2) - Please have an NC, to distinguish between "oriental" and "deathmetal" What, why? lol
01:43:163 (2) - 01:44:275 (2) - 01:45:997 (2) - 01:46:857 (2) - 01:47:522 (2) - 01:50:303 (2) - 01:51:166 (2) - 01:51:830 (2) - ^^ No...
01:43:716 (2) - 01:44:794 (2) - 01:48:020 (2,3) - 01:49:098 (2,3) - 01:52:363 (2) - Give them NC, for more emphasis on the metal part No...
01:47:749 (3) - Add a circle (close to the next slider) No, that creates a 1/4 jump basically, which is unfair here.
01:59:570 (1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3,4,5,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,5) - I LOVE how you made this, since it's a "normal" part, so you also mapped it properly ^_^
02:04:045 (1,2) - Since this part is actually pretty, why not blanket this? No, that would make it pretty
02:04:611 (3,1) - ^^ ^
02:13:881 (2,3) - It might be only me, but these sounds shouldt imo all get an NC (though it might fuck up reading, so... up to you) Just you
02:15:026 (1) - OMG WIGGLE
02:26:362 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,1,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,1,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,1,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,1) - Okay what the actual fuck
02:30:599 (9) - You NC slider #9 in the previous 2 patterns, but not here... NC this please No, look at the pattern, its clearly different
02:32:313 (9) - ^^
02:31:028 (1,1) - Please remember what I said about sliderjumps, when the slider has a reverse. Due to the reverse, the leniency goes away, so this is technically a 1/3-1/4 jump (which is like half screen) No its not... whoever told you that is wrong lol.
02:33:171 (1) - This literally calls for an ugly slider, yet you make a boring one... Its supposed to be really slow. slow + bumps doesn't play well imo. The bumps just feel out of place.
02:39:407 (9) - If you listen really carefully, you'll hear that the music is just a triplet, not a quintuplet, please remove this note Quintuplet fits a lot better.
02:42:960 (9) - ^^^
02:53:686 (1) - Can people even follow the slider? Since it's soo long, people are forced to move along with the slider... Thats the point xD.
02:55:471 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1,1,1) - Isn't this a bit overboard...
-----------------------------
03:05:329 (1) - You use a 1/1 slider + 1 circle at the red tick in the previous parts, yet the music is the same, but here you have a 3/2 slider. Why not make it consistent? Consistency with the next slider
03:07:390 (1) - ^^ ^
03:45:634 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - It might be of the rotation, but something's a bit weird if you select them all. They are not properly aligned. (2) is a straight line with a few wiggles, and (4) is in a curve. Just something I found weird when I looked at it Im fine with that. The pattern is a custom stacked + rotational + downscaled square pattern, so with 3 variables, having them all consistent is very difficult if not impossible anyways. As well, its only noticeable in editor by highlight, not in game.

SPOILER

04:06:081 (5) - You Always NC the first slider with "Stop", yet you didn't NC this (while you did NC 04:06:581 (1) - No i dont? And those are different examples.
04:25:863 (2) - Feels a bit forced, and not following the rhythm, please stick to regular 1/2 here, instead of a 1/4 stack There's a drum there for the 1/4
04:33:754 (1,1,1,1) - This is amazing Thanks.

Honestly, the map isn't bad. It really fits with the song. The only issue I'd have are the 1/4 sliderspams (but hey, I can't play this, so who am I to say stuff?)

I'd advise you to get a lot of testplays from the top 100 (top 10 would be even better), since that'd be soooo much more valueable for high-tier difficulties than normal mods

Good luck!

CypCypCyprian wrote:

01:24:363 (1) - why is this slider 1/2 instead of 1/3 like 01:24:145 (4) -? there's no vocal here yet

jesse1412 wrote:

Also some stuff I do think plays a bit crap:

01:33:991 (1) - Way too fast and the slider ticks aren't easy to slide across/follow which makes it really hard to read/follow. Made it slower and gave more leniency to the head section
01:36:344 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3) - These "triples" play like arse, I'd recommend just making them into actual triples or something, tacking them onto slider ends isn't good. Alright, I removed the triplets.

As much as I think ar9 would be cool, I'll add that the current ar is perfectly fine across the map for me. If you can make it to the slow part you won't even second guess what's happening at this ar unless the miracles of jesus himself have carried you past the large jumps. Also regarding those huge jumps, I can't play them properly but they're literally upscaled versions of the other jumps in the map so for an able player they're probably nice and smooth.

grumd wrote:

01:47:749 - i'm pretty sure you need a note here. it's a bit too close to the next sound, but it's existent and it needs to be mapped. good solution is to add a repeat to last slider Keeping this because I think theres too little time between the circle and slider for a jump there to be fair to players.
02:21:185 (3,4) - he keeps screaming here right until the (4), so it would be fitting to keep the same speed between 3 and 4. Fixed
maybe like this http://i.imgur.com/fwZSzwh.png
it looks a bit weird to have only 2 circles stacked, so i'd better do this instead: http://i.imgur.com/DBZfomv.jpg
02:39:407 - this circle needs to be removed, no sound here
02:42:960 (9) - same tbh i want to keep these 5 note streams. They fit really well imo xP
02:49:010 (1) - please ctrl+j (on the same position), just for my enjoyment (and better flow) Ok
02:50:353 (1) - the second sound (all red ticks) is actually a bit earlier than the red tick. it's on the 1/8 tick. i'm pretty sure you already know this. i think it would be quite fun if it was mapped like that: http://i.imgur.com/tbRQzvA.png I prefer the repeat spam since its winding up for the later repeats.

01:36:505 (2,3) - and reminding you about wrong triples which indeed sounds like 1/3 for me http://i.imgur.com/82ESJ0F.png Ended up removing them

FailureAtOsu wrote:

Cubensis wrote:

Maybe peoples doesn't like your map because it's just bad lol

"it's just bad"
Very helpful advice here my friend
Edit:
04:45:311 (1,1) - maybe make the spinner 1/8 away from the slider instead of 1/4? there's kinda a weird pause between the two as it is

Varqaaa wrote:

The triplets around 02:37:015 (2,3,4) feel overmapped to me. Why put them in there? There's nothing corresponding in the song.

In general though, I don't see what all the fuss is about. The spacing and jerkiness is warranted. Have you listened to the song? It thrashes about and shifts gears in a deliberately grotesque and sporadic manner which the map mirrors effectively. "It's hard" "it's bad" "it's different" "I don't like it"... these are not sufficient grounds to write off a map.

Frostt wrote:

04:32:770 (3,1) - These aren't stacked