Ongaku to the rescue
Nice save bud!
Nice save bud!
Okay okay, let me just drop something.Ascendance wrote:
Why would you want to break the rules anyways for any other reason to be an incompetent edgelord? You aren't a god, Shiirn. It's about time you got brought back down to Earth like the rest of us and realize that you have to follow the same rules as the rest of us. No exceptions.
R.I.P. Xexxar: 2016-2016Ascendance wrote:
Won't say anything more then. Good luck to the 3 nominators that you've just plunged into a terrible situation.
Kek.Xexxar wrote:
R.I.P. Xexxar: 2016-2016Ascendance wrote:
Won't say anything more then. Good luck to the 3 nominators that you've just plunged into a terrible situation.
Rules are meant to be broken anyways. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯Ascendance wrote:
Including QATs? I'm not so sure about that one The point is you've NOMINATED AN UNRANKABLE MAP, regardless of how Shiirn wants to put it, the map is unrankable. It's against the rules of the BNG and I'm sure you're 100% aware of that, since you read those rules, right?
methinks that the issue here isnt about the wiggle sliders. i think its because that some sliders such as this one forcibly slows down the slider. isnt that the unrankable one?Stjpa wrote:
Monstrata used a wiggle in Hey kids!! too to slow down a slider even though it's against the RC, isn't it?
Yup, basically this. On this map, the slider is burai and undetectable until after it has happened. The monstrata one is obvious because of the sliderborder and shapeAnxient wrote:
methinks that the issue here isnt about the wiggle sliders. i think its because that some sliders such as this one forcibly slows down the slider. isnt that the unrankable one?
for convenience, i believe that this slider is the one stjpa is talking about.
Hey, that's not even relevant, maps are judged on a case-by-case basis.Stjpa wrote:
Monstrata used a wiggle in Hey kids!! too to slow down a slider even though it's against the RC, isn't it?
But anyway, let's wait for more opinions or a QAT who doesn't want this map to be pushed forward.
i do have to agree that these sliders are perfectly fine and without it the map would feel hollow, but unfortunately in the current state of the ranking criteria, it does remain unrankable. which why i restate ascendance's point, of bringing this up with the criteria council in attempt to move the rule from the criteria to the guidelines. this allows for "case-by-case analysis" to be employed and makes arguments such as "rules are rules" invalid.Guidelines wrote:
Guidelines are important and should be followed in most maps. However, they are NOT rules, so they may be broken in special cases. If you want to break a guideline, ask yourself this: Does what I'm about to do make sense? Is it more fun to play like this compared to sticking to the guidelines? If you answer yes to both these questions, then it is probably okay.
since when o-oStjpa wrote:
/me whispers case-by-case is a thing even when breaking the RC
idk if this was adressed yet but loctav said that there is no point of waiting on others and letting that take over your thinking when we mentioned that we wanted to wait for the new rc to come out to handle thisIrreversible wrote:
I just have one simple question.
If something isn't allowed by the rules, why is this approved? As you said yourself, the new RC isn't in effect yet, so this theoretically is unrankable. 10/10
Irreversible wrote:
I've been talking about several inconsistencies in this map, but never really told you what I mean with that. I decided to spend some time to list some up.
01:20:133 (1,2) - Why have you decided to make this slider, and none of the rest? I do not quite hear anything that supports this in the song - could as well be two circles, right? Honestly, this is grumd's bit. I initially had the idea for vibrations during the bass, grumd made the actual entire section except for the ending, 01:29:845 (4,5,6,1,2,3,1) - is what I did. I was going to change them to circles, but this screwed over the storyboard and Nephroid was unavailable to change it at all, and nobody I knew could change the SB, and I couldn't figure out heads from tails with it, so I left it.
01:48:018 (1,2,1,2,1,2) - Considering that the strong beat is on the white tick here, this is pretty counterintuitive. If you let all the sliders end on red, it still follows what you intended to follow, but it supports the strong beats better. Man you really hate offbeats. This fits better in my mind. If it doesn't fit better in yours, well, that's just unfortunate. I find that consistent offbeats provide the player with a more suiting feeling for the "cascading melody" musical pattern better than following the simply louder beats.
02:17:730 (3,4,5,1) - That spacing is really just something. You have higher spacing on 1/8 than on the 1/4. And then it gets higher again. Why? 02:18:018 (4,5,1) - Is a firm triple. They need to be together, closely. They're individually separate from the held note of 02:17:730 (3) - (which technically ends at the same time as the first beat of the triple, which is why it's 1/8 and doesn't end on the blue tick), as well as 02:18:595 (1) - being the start of a new measure both technically and musically, so the increased spacing between the two sliders is totally normal, if you ask me.
02:25:710 (3,1) - You never really used that kind of antijump, so why have you decided for one here? For the past few measures, and the measures afterwards, there's pretty much always a growl or wub or distortion connecting beats to one another. This the 1/2 duration where they are weakest. you can barely here the distortion on 02:25:710 (3) - 's beat, so I simply made it a circle rather than a slider, and the "anti-jump" just fell into place from there. I don't look at the distance snap of notes to determine where they should go. I simply consider what kind of impact I want the player to feel when they move to the next note - This "anti-jump" is barely noticeable while playing but suits the feeling of it being the weakest beat of the entire section.
02:55:903 (1,2,3,1,2) - What's that increase in spacing? The song literally stays the same. 1/1 spacing at this level, as long as it isn't cross-screen, literally doesn't matter. The heavily increased spacing is also an indicator that "not the entire section is going to be really small movements". The music has 1/1 sections that extend for quite a while, but this one is interposed with various glitchy musical patterns. I'm not going to say that this was a concious choice, but it makes sense in retrospect to have a noticeably bigger bit of spacing that doesn't actually qualify as a jump.
03:03:403 (2,3) - That's pretty much the same as 01:48:018 (1,2,1,2,1,2) - Same response. I prefer using offbeat start sliders to better represent "cascading melodies". The fact that there are both on and off-beat sliders here is due to the "cascading" being a bit more unpredictable and not a straight downwards trend like the previous one.
03:04:749 (1,2,3) - Why are these in one pattern? The piano starts on 2, but it connects with 3 and 1... this is not really correct if you ask me. 03:05:903 (4) - This needs to be alone due to the stick clap, and it's better to connect the nearby three notes into a pattern than to have one and two seperate notes just spilling about randomly.
03:07:056 (3) - According to your logic (03:05:903 (4) -) this should be higher spacing. The whole part can be checked for that. I'm sorry, I don't hear the stick clap at 03:07:057 - . It's also present at 03:12:057 (1) - (which, coincidentally, is already spaced due to it being a new set of three, thanks sakuraburst). The only mistake I might have made here is that I didn't hitsound them with soft claps like I did for the post-lugia area but they'd be excessively loud here anyway.
03:27:890 (1,2,1) - Why 1/6 and 1/4? And the spacing is heavily increased at points, why? Like Monstrata said, sakuraburst just ripped the lugia theme from the movie proper, the timing is going to be iffy no matter what you do. These are good approximations and the flow between the sliders and notes works fine. (This is also mostly Liiraye's contribution. I modified the sliders to play better and abuse OD mechanics. Monstrata is very familiar with using a single bpm on a map that goes slightly off-timed (cough, supercell), and at the time I disagreed but I've come to understand his viewpoint about just making sure it's playable and comfortable by keeping the same BPM so that the player can mentally keep time in their own head as to when they need to click the notes.
03:46:095 (3) - This wiggle now really doesn't make sense. The sound is just as subtle as it could be.. Subtle, but enough for liiraye to put a wiggle there. *shrug* I don't know why you're obsessing over this.
04:05:518 (1,2,3) - Again, this patterning is weird. Slider end of 1 does not go with 2 musically. I felt that the last note should be held in regards to the beginning of a new section. I decided to have it end at the proper place you would have a click because I could not have all three of "Have a click at 04:06:287 - , Have a hold start at 04:05:518 - , and have the slider end at a point that is either suitable or makes sense". So I decided to sacrifice the click at 04:06:287 - so that I could have a hold instead. This was a conscious decision, for sure.
05:40:326 (1) - I mean, so far you've only used smooth sliders how comes that you randomly decide to use a super special slider now? It would be really nice if you could accentuate the same sounds with similar stuff, especially in this part it could become a really nice effect. Right now, there is different sliders for everything which kind of defeats the purpose.. idk what parts you've been looking at but i'm pretty sure it's clear the sliders get progressively weirder over time...
06:08:018 (3) - There is one slider that end on a red tick, but this and some others end on blue, why? I was confused as to what you meant until I actually found the only actual red-tick-ending slider of this relevant beat. It's 06:04:941 (3) - , by the way. 06:06:864 (1) - Is much more subdued and does not have the extremely harsh crash introduction, so it ending later simply makes it distinct. 06:04:941 (3) - can be called a legitimate oversight, it should be a 3/4 slider. Something must have happened to it along the way, I don't remember it being 1/1 nor the sliderpoint extending so far down south. If it was 3/4 at that point, it'd also be close to ending in the crux of the first bend of 06:03:787 (1) - , which is probably what it was going for.
Other issues:
01:01:672 (1,1) - Why does this need two NCs? why not, they're both very significant beats, and are very independent
01:27:057 (3) - Imo that slider would look better if it had the same distance around the starting point. http://puu.sh/qT9Om/5135a73485.jpg (pretty optional) Considering grumd yelled at me for even moving one node of his finished sliders a tiny bit, I'd rather leave them alone.
02:30:566 (1) - I think someone could try fixing the mp3, so this doesn't have to be so weirdly unsnapped. #blamesakuraburst
04:18:980 (2) - A NC would be beneficial here since it's a new part. There was't a new combo at 04:05:518 (1,2,3) - tho and the same concept is used here??? :eyes:
I know, there are a lot of why questions, but this basically should help me understanding why you do these things, because for me and some others it simply doesn't make sense and it's odd to me, that it wasn't pointed out (it seems). I haven't pointed out all things because I want to see how it goes, but this should definitely give you an idea.
Hope we can clear things up.
Okorin wrote:
hi~
Irre raised some points which should be discussed imo.
additionally to that post i can't really tell if 02:30:566 (1) - isnt supposed to be ending on 02:30:550 - #blamesakuraburst, these are accurate
02:17:730 (3) - shouldnt this end on 02:17:954 - ? i'm pretty unsure about this but 1/8 sounds late, additionally agreeing that spacing can be super misleading here as it somehow indicates 02:17:730 (3,4) - are 1/4 apart while they arent Went over this in irre's mod. I'll change it to 1/4 if necessary, but I'm still saying I disagree.
03:27:890 (1) - i think sliderend actually sounds late, a thing around 03:28:435 - sounds more accurate... to me at least but then again it's late so im not too sure on this call. for this issue in particular I'm not confident in my timing skills due to poor hardware, if you want to help me pin it down, I'll be glad to go over it.
06:04:941 (3) - shouldnt this be same length as 06:08:018 (3) - 06:11:095 (3) - 06:14:172 (3) - cuz same sound This is one of the things I mentioned I'd be happy to change.
Shiirn wrote:
Irreversible wrote:
I've been talking about several inconsistencies in this map, but never really told you what I mean with that. I decided to spend some time to list some up.
01:20:133 (1,2) - Why have you decided to make this slider, and none of the rest? I do not quite hear anything that supports this in the song - could as well be two circles, right? Changed to two circles. Will figure out the SB situation before requalification.
01:48:018 (1,2,1,2,1,2) - Considering that the strong beat is on the white tick here, this is pretty counterintuitive. If you let all the sliders end on red, it still follows what you intended to follow, but it supports the strong beats better. Irreversible mentioned that "the only spot i was making sense was on the offbeats" so I'm assuming that means he's okay with me denying these.
02:17:730 (3,4,5,1) - That spacing is really just something. You have higher spacing on 1/8 than on the 1/4. And then it gets higher again. Why? Changed the slider to end on blue tick for relevant consistency. It's not worth decreasing the spacing, as that hampers the independence of the triple, so I figure shortening the slider is a good middle ground.
02:25:710 (3,1) - You never really used that kind of antijump, so why have you decided for one here? Ctrl+G'd 02:25:903 (1) - to increase the spacing, and ctrl+g'd 2 as well to maintain the patterning, just flipped, of the previous combo. This solves any spacing-related issues neatly. I still think the anti-jump was more in line with my original reasoning, but I'll cave under pressure here.
02:55:903 (1,2,3,1,2) - What's that increase in spacing? The song literally stays the same. I still think that the actual spacing used wasn't of any particular negative influence, but this is one of those things where it's like "well yeah fine sure". But that kind of thing isn't something you just go "Well yeah, let's DQ the map and go through the entire process and spend everyone's time again requalifying over this". At least, I don't. Please don't punch me.
03:03:403 (2,3) - That's pretty much the same as 01:48:018 (1,2,1,2,1,2) - Same response as above
03:04:749 (1,2,3) - Why are these in one pattern? The piano starts on 2, but it connects with 3 and 1... this is not really correct if you ask me. I'll figure this out later, it'll probably need a bit more than a "move note five pixels" solution and I don't want to change it haphazardly.
03:07:056 (3) - According to your logic (03:05:903 (4) -) this should be higher spacing. The whole part can be checked for that. This still follows proper in-map logic and consistency, if you're looking at it from the proper way (stick claps being the changing force, rather than basic measure-based pattern changes)
03:27:890 (1,2,1) - Why 1/6 and 1/4? And the spacing is heavily increased at points, why? Will need to go over this later.
03:46:095 (3) - This wiggle now really doesn't make sense. The sound is just as subtle as it could be.. Still don't know what you're exactly saying by this. Should this juts be straight? I think the wiggle is fine.
04:05:518 (1,2,3) - Again, this patterning is weird. Slider end of 1 does not go with 2 musically. Since this choice happens twice, it's internally consistent, even if some people disagree with it. And I honestly like it more this way.
05:40:326 (1) - I mean, so far you've only used smooth sliders how comes that you randomly decide to use a super special slider now? It would be really nice if you could accentuate the same sounds with similar stuff, especially in this part it could become a really nice effect. Right now, there is different sliders for everything which kind of defeats the purpose.. idk what parts you've been looking at but i'm pretty sure it's clear the sliders get progressively weirder over time...
06:08:018 (3) - There is one slider that end on a red tick, but this and some others end on blue, why? This has been fixed.
Other issues:
01:01:672 (1,1) - Why does this need two NCs? See referendum: "Sure, whatever" changes.
01:27:057 (3) - Imo that slider would look better if it had the same distance around the starting point. http://puu.sh/qT9Om/5135a73485.jpg (pretty optional) Still avoiding touching this slider..
02:30:566 (1) - I think someone could try fixing the mp3, so this doesn't have to be so weirdly unsnapped. Still #blamesakuraburst
04:18:980 (2) - A NC would be beneficial here since it's a new part. Still consistent with the other time this happened. New combo is used beforehand. Reasoning can be "Very end has a new combo and the new section doesn't want a new combo start at the red tick after it starts".