Xilver wrote:

hello o/ m4m from my queue heya

[Extra]

00:21:969 (1) - would NC this personally yes
00:24:244 (1) - same here to differentiate between the 2 squares ^
01:44:313 (1,2,3,4) - don't think the guitar notes call for such a drastic spacing change true, but this helps contrasting with the previous notes, and those streams are only 1/3s so i don't think spacing is a bit problem here
01:48:865 (3) - this is kinda random, maybe add a similar slider to 01:48:451 (1,2) - ? actually im gonna change the shape because it looks like ass
01:51:762 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2) - mazz wtf this type of flow at 290 bpm isn't very playable LOL pls change back to straight line stream, line singletaps aren't that diffiicult and really i dont think many people are going to singletap this section anyways WELP
https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/5450976
02:25:693 (1,2) - i dont think curving these is very necessary, could always make them straight to fit with the others i like a bit of diversity, it's not too exotic either, it fits and makes the map a bit more fresh imo
02:29:831 (1,2) - also following the logic of your last 2 sets of sliders, i'd curve these to be consistent here yes
02:45:348 (3,4) - 02:46:175 (3,4) - i dont see a reason to make these not spaced like 02:45:123 (1,2) - changed this section a bit, should look better and more consistent
02:46:796 (1,2) - why not make the same spacing as the ones before? ^

here you go, gl c:

1. 00:40:589 (1,2,3,4,5) - That's some lame blanketing

1. Won't QATs kill you for having two diffs with custom names.
2. 00:00:503 (2) - Same as with what I said for Ekoro, I dunno if it's my earphones being shitty, but I don't hear a sound here and I think it's probably fine to map this part without the extra note.
3. 00:00:917 (7) - ^
4. 00:03:348 (1,2) - Stack (or well almost stack) these like you do for like every instance later for consistency. + It works nice with the repeated beat in the music.
5. 00:04:900 (6) - Make this 2 notes. It's consistent with what you do later, and you don't get a stupid sliderend on the downbeat. And then you can make a stackthing.
6. 00:13:072 (1,3) - I guess you're NCing like this for the pattern and whatnot.
7. 00:16:175 (4,5,6,1) - Maybe it's just me, but the way this whole thing is kinda on a curve makes 00:16:382 (5,6) - less defined(?) or whatever you'd say, which makes them feel less powerful than the guitar is compared to the music, if that makes any sense.
8. 00:23:831 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - Maybe make minijumps and arrange these in groups of 2 notes?
9. 00:27:038 (2,3) - For these parts it looks like you've mapped almost everything with spaced out notes, so these stacks create some awkward pauses and kills cursor movement imo.
10. 00:35:624 (1,2) - Stack? xd
11. 00:50:520 - 00:52:175 - I find it odd you decided to do 3 +1 with circles and sliders here, while doing 2 + 2 at 00:57:141 - 00:58:796 - , and I also think 2 + 2, or just 4 rounds of circles work better than having the last two as sliders for this section, since the music is increasing in intensity, and sliders are more lenient and whatnot.
12. 00:53:830 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1) - You can do something similar as you did at 02:16:589 - , tho what you have now is fine as well.
13. 01:00:658 - Isn't there a drumbeat here? You could probably get away with adding a note at 01:00:710 - if you think the 1/2 is kinda awkward or you want that stack effect.
14. 01:01:692 - should have a note here and 01:01:744 - I guess.
15. 01:15:658 (2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22) - Uneven curve that people probably won't notice when they're playing.
16. 01:18:969 (2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22) - ^
17. 01:34:381 (1,2,3,4) - I think something like this would follow the guitar better, and also help keeping momentum through this part.
18. 01:37:072 (2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,5) - Huh, why aren't you NCing on downbeats here? I don't quite see anything specific you need to divide up in terms of patterns, and it's hard to tell when there's an NC anyway due to the combo colors.
19. 01:46:175 (3,4,5,6,7,8,9) - I mean I know these are like part of separate patterns, but that still looks dumb xd.
20. 02:13:279 - Same as earlier.

1. Overall, I feel like this isn't mapped as "cleanly" as the other two diffs. Like there's a lot of things that probably plays fine and whatnot, but at least imo doesn't look like they work together to form patterns with each other, if that makes any sense. It could just be because of the high bpm and high CS though. It's mostly just how much there seems to be accidental overlaps like 00:13:175 (6,3) - , 00:08:624 (3,1) - , or how for example 00:16:072 (3) - is closer to 00:15:555 (5) - than 00:15:865 (2) - . It's also not quite as easy to make out any clear patterns from 00:03:348 - 00:21:348 - , I think. I mean I see them when I'm looking for them in the editor, but overall I think the map feels a bit rough around the edges. I'll mostly focus on gameplay stuff in the mod, and it's not a lot, but I think the map itself could need some further polish in terms of aesthetics.
   
2. 00:04:900 (6,1) - I think it'd make sense to space these out considering the strong downbeat, but if you do do that, you'll have to do it for a lot of similar parts in the map, which is a lot of work
3. 00:32:107 (1,2,3,4,5) - For the most part you have curvy motions for these parts, like 00:28:693 (2,3,4,5) - , and the curves work better right after the 00:31:900 (6,7) - jumps imo. The pattern right now feels kinda sharp instead but yeah.
4. 01:04:175 (3) - Why is this like the only triangle within squares xd.
5. 01:04:589 (1,2,3,4) - Maybe you could increase the spacing of these sliders a bit to kind of simulate a bit of buildup like the song does. They're sliderjumps anyway so it won't increase the difficulty by much anyway.
6. 01:26:106 (1) - Imo, placing this on the other side of the rotating pattern so that 01:26:003 (7) - leads directly into this slider would play much better than it does right now. You would have to rearrange some stuff though.
7. 01:32:934 (2,3) - It's a bit odd you don't add the jump to the (2) like you do earlier.
8. 01:34:693 (3) - Move this further down-right and closer to 01:34:589 (2) - to create a jump to 01:34:796 (4) - ? It's the stronger beat, so the minijump makes more sense there.
9. 02:26:934 (3,4,5,6) - Same as the other triangle

CXu wrote:

[Ekoro's Fever]

1. 00:40:589 (1,2,3,4,5) - That's some lame blanketing qsdqdqsqsdqssq

CXu wrote:

Continuation of my mod, so no kds on this post for obvious reasons.

[Extra]

1. Overall, I feel like this isn't mapped as "cleanly" as the other two diffs. Like there's a lot of things that probably plays fine and whatnot, but at least imo doesn't look like they work together to form patterns with each other, if that makes any sense. It could just be because of the high bpm and high CS though. It's mostly just how much there seems to be accidental overlaps like 00:13:175 (6,3) - , 00:08:624 (3,1) - , or how for example 00:16:072 (3) - is closer to 00:15:555 (5) - than 00:15:865 (2) - . It's also not quite as easy to make out any clear patterns from 00:03:348 - 00:21:348 - , I think. I mean I see them when I'm looking for them in the editor, but overall I think the map feels a bit rough around the edges. I'll mostly focus on gameplay stuff in the mod, and it's not a lot, but I think the map itself could need some further polish in terms of aesthetics. yes, mostly agree here, this set has been made quite some time ago already and looking back on it it could use some reworking, unfortunately a lot of overlaps will have to stay for the gameplay
   
2. 00:04:900 (6,1) - I think it'd make sense to space these out considering the strong downbeat, but if you do do that, you'll have to do it for a lot of similar parts in the map, which is a lot of work good point, changed
3. 00:32:107 (1,2,3,4,5) - For the most part you have curvy motions for these parts, like 00:28:693 (2,3,4,5) - , and the curves work better right after the 00:31:900 (6,7) - jumps imo. The pattern right now feels kinda sharp instead but yeah. left it like that because i couldn't find a right way to do it until now for some reason ._. inspiration works in weird ways
4. 01:04:175 (3) - Why is this like the only triangle within squares xd. to make it fit in the corner and for diversity i guess, tho i can understand it'd feel misplaced, meh, fixed, have a
5. 01:04:589 (1,2,3,4) - Maybe you could increase the spacing of these sliders a bit to kind of simulate a bit of buildup like the song does. They're sliderjumps anyway so it won't increase the difficulty by much anyway. yes
6. 01:26:106 (1) - Imo, placing this on the other side of the rotating pattern so that 01:26:003 (7) - leads directly into this slider would play much better than it does right now. You would have to rearrange some stuff though. changed
7. 01:32:934 (2,3) - It's a bit odd you don't add the jump to the (2) like you do earlier. indeed, changed
8. 01:34:693 (3) - Move this further down-right and closer to 01:34:589 (2) - to create a jump to 01:34:796 (4) - ? It's the stronger beat, so the minijump makes more sense there. the "strong beat rhythm" here is actually 3/4, so this is appropriate
9. 02:26:934 (3,4,5,6) - Same as the other triangle same

Xilver wrote:

[woof]

00:44:210 (4,6,2) - 00:44:210 (4,6,2) - these could look better imo, i'd personally move the red anchor a little bit towards the sliderend Probably yeah
00:53:934 (2,2,2,2) - i think you should replace these with repeat sliders as you didn't seem the ignore the drum rhythm on this pattern 00:48:865 (1) - (also to be consistent with the second time where you did use repeats) Well, that's because of some reasons. First being that the 1/4s do start from there 00:54:141 (1) - only, so a repeat slider would be pretty meh since the snare would be on a sliderend, second is because the second time, the drum pattern is more dense, it's basically full 1/4s there, so yeah.
01:00:761 (2) - why not start the stream at 01:00:658 - instead? Because it's one tom hit, and that would make starting the next stream kinda awkward, especially with that stop n go I want to use there. Also it gives a slightly longer break to the player
01:15:348 (1) - i'd reduce the SVs here down to 0.8 to accommodate for the spacing decrease you do here 01:15:658 (2) - I'm not convinced that would help reading the incoming 1/2s though, nor that it would play better. As far as fitting the song, well I do like the slightly faster sliders when I use them, to emphasis more the guitar notes, so I don't think it's a good enough reason to change the SV there
01:18:658 (1) - i think ctrlg would be cool on this one since the guitar notes are going down the scale (also has a better lead to 01:18:969 (2) - ) True, but it doesn't flow nicely from 01:18:452 (5) - though, which I think counterbalance the positive side of it imo. That said, I do like this idea more so I've made some changes on the previous pattern to make it nicely
01:23:624 (1) - personal thing but i'd ctrlj this since 01:23:417 (5) - is leading for the slider to be concaving down, not up Mhhh... Not sure about that imo, but I ended changing the slidershapes because I didn't really like the old ones anyway xd
01:31:899 (1,2,3,4) - i know you rejected it but i kinda have to second what mazzerin said about this perhaps remaking that part of the stream to make it more spaced? Fine, I spaced the circles a bit more. I still think it looks meh tho but whatever.
01:32:175 (1) - i'd nc this because major spacing change I guess yeah
01:33:555 (1,2) - not a fan of this overlap especially for a map this intense, i'd kinda move this up and curve to the left (kind of a rough draft, excuse if its not perfect) https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/5450879 Am not a fan of the change you propose either :p I wouldn't have done that if the stream was in 1/4 snapping, but since it's 1/3 I like being a bit wilder with the shapes and flow/direction
01:54:726 (2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12) - unsnapped 1/3? woops
01:58:382 (1) - i'd move the bottommost red anchor a bit more down to emphasize the guitar sound better Mh yeah why not
02:14:934 (1) - i dont think 2 anchors are necessary Uh I'm not sure why that slider is there... it's like it's screaming "kill meeeee" .-.
02:23:210 (1) - maybe shortening this to the red tick and adding a note at 02:24:390 - ? would be better emphasis nah, because I don't want the player to click that snare, but to end on it. Agreed that tapping on it would maybe feel better, but ending the slider before when there is nothing in the song that suggests does not, so nah.

CXu wrote:

[Wolf's Night]

1. Won't QATs kill you for having two diffs with custom names. I dunno, but I wus here furst!!!!
2. 00:00:503 (2) - Same as with what I said for Ekoro, I dunno if it's my earphones being shitty, but I don't hear a sound here and I think it's probably fine to map this part without the extra note. There are notes there. It's a light snare roll with an accent on the first and 4th + 5th hit, kind of like a paradiddle, except with an extra hit at the end
3. 00:00:917 (7) - ^
4. 00:03:348 (1,2) - Stack (or well almost stack) these like you do for like every instance later for consistency. + It works nice with the repeated beat in the music. Sounds good to me
5. 00:04:900 (6) - Make this 2 notes. It's consistent with what you do later, and you don't get a stupid sliderend on the downbeat. And then you can make a stackthing. Indeed
6. 00:13:072 (1,3) - I guess you're NCing like this for the pattern and whatnot. Yup
7. 00:16:175 (4,5,6,1) - Maybe it's just me, but the way this whole thing is kinda on a curve makes 00:16:382 (5,6) - less defined(?) or whatever you'd say, which makes them feel less powerful than the guitar is compared to the music, if that makes any sense. I think I get what you mean, and I think the problem is that 00:16:382 (5) - is too close from the previous slider end, so I put it down a bit more and it seems to be better now, at least for me.
8. 00:23:831 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - Maybe make minijumps and arrange these in groups of 2 notes? That wouldn't fit imo, maybe it currently looks simple or whatnot, but it fits better than having a whole pattern for it. 00:34:382 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - This works because of the previous flow going on + they're tom hits, and it leads into the next pattern better, the one you pointed out are just bass hits so making a whole special pattern for it feels kinda overdone, if that makes any sense.
9. 00:27:038 (2,3) - For these parts it looks like you've mapped almost everything with spaced out notes, so these stacks create some awkward pauses and kills cursor movement imo. Which is kind of the intent behind it, altough not to the point of being annoying. I wanted to break the flow going on so to prepare the player for the long stream coming.. i'm still not quite sure it's a good/strong reason, so still wondering if I should really change those for a spaced out pattern like the rest
10. 00:35:624 (1,2) - Stack? xd For that one I did think about stacking it, but with the squares before it really seemed like a better idea to just square it, plays better imo.
11. 00:50:520 - 00:52:175 - I find it odd you decided to do 3 +1 with circles and sliders here, while doing 2 + 2 at 00:57:141 - 00:58:796 - , and I also think 2 + 2, or just 4 rounds of circles work better than having the last two as sliders for this section, since the music is increasing in intensity, and sliders are more lenient and whatnot. Sliders are more lenient, but they allow for much larger spacing too, which goes well with the increasing guitars. As for why I did 3+1 then 2+2 is just because I like varying things slightly in short parts like these where it would otherwise just repeat itself. I tend to avoid doing that for longer parts because it would just be confusing, but I found that it is okay for shorter parts, since you don't really expect a long consistent row of patterns to come
12. 00:53:830 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1) - You can do something similar as you did at 02:16:589 - , tho what you have now is fine as well. I know why you say that, and I'll redirect you to what I told Xilver about it (tl;dr - drums are denser the second time)
13. 01:00:658 - Isn't there a drumbeat here? You could probably get away with adding a note at 01:00:710 - if you think the 1/2 is kinda awkward or you want that stack effect. Yeah, and I purposefully skipped it (Xilver did point it out too, basically I want to make a longer break there before that streamy part, which I think is OK, considering it's 290bpm)
14. 01:01:692 - should have a note here and 01:01:744 - I guess. These are sooo light I can barely hear them, I prefered skipping them to only map the loud bass hits instead
15. 01:15:658 (2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22) - Uneven curve that people probably won't notice when they're playing.
16. 01:18:969 (2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22) - ^ Only the real ones will know c:
17. 01:34:381 (1,2,3,4) - I think something like this would follow the guitar better, and also help keeping momentum through this part. Mhhh I disagree. Where the sliders start actually goes with the guitar's pitch (high = sliderstart, low = sliderend) and that would also kill the 1/1 stop n go after it too, I don't really like that suggestion sorry :c
18. 01:37:072 (2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,5) - Huh, why aren't you NCing on downbeats here? I don't quite see anything specific you need to divide up in terms of patterns, and it's hard to tell when there's an NC anyway due to the combo colors. I didn't NC on the measures but on the guitar's arpeggios, the 3rd one being cut in the middle
19. 01:46:175 (3,4,5,6,7,8,9) - I mean I know these are like part of separate patterns, but that still looks dumb xd. dats cuz i sat on it 4 2 long so i brok it xd

Raediaufar wrote:

[Ono Oni]

click

00:03:865 (2) - k ? I think it's fit I changed the overall enviorment of the patterns, but this note turned to become a kat anyway.

00:24:244 (4) - k, I think it's better than just straight kddddd.. over there whole patterns has become a kat 1/2 instead. But you are right if you felt odd about this pattern.

01:08:106 (2) - big D Intentional use of K to emphasize these notes more. Using D would draw the attention on it.

02:17:520 - you're missing a d here Didn't miss it. Intentionally removed for a little break. This is consistent to every other pattern of this kind.

• 
  Hi Mod Request
  
  1ㅣ2ㅣ3ㅣ4

1. offset :: Perfect!
   
   [Harby's MX]
2. 00:00:606 - add 1 note to 1 line (if you want!)
3. 00:01:020 - ^
   
4. 00:07:175 - add 1 note to 2 line (crash sound)
5. 00:07:796 - ^
   
6. 00:21:968 - add 1 note (crash)
   
7. 01:45:348 (105348|0,105761|3,106175|0,106589|0) -
   i think this long note is no need..
   01:46:796 (106796|3,106796|2,107003|2,107003|3,107210|3,107210|2) - This compares with
   
8. 01:51:761 - add 1 note? (00:21:968)
   
9. 02:03:348 - add 1 note (crash)
10. 02:06:658 - ^

Niks wrote:

• 
  Hi Mod Request
  
  1ㅣ2ㅣ3ㅣ4

1. offset :: Perfect!
   
   [Harby's MX]
2. 00:00:606 - add 1 note to 1 line (if you want!)
3. 00:01:020 - ^ prfeer to avoid this pattern at the start of the song,is quite unconfortable while playing
   
4. 00:07:175 - add 1 note to 2 line (crash sound)
5. 00:07:796 - ^ actually the note that you can find at those points are for the crashes
   
6. 00:21:968 - add 1 note (crash) i want to avoid triples in this diff x.x
   
7. 01:45:348 (105348|0,105761|3,106175|0,106589|0) -
   i think this long note is no need..
   01:46:796 (106796|3,106796|2,107003|2,107003|3,107210|3,107210|2) - This compares with keep, since the guitar it's very intense at this point those double LN suits pretty well while playing too
   
8. 01:51:761 - add 1 note? (00:21:968)
   
9. 02:03:348 - add 1 note (crash) same reason, want to avoid triples
10. 02:06:658 - ^ at this section i'm only focusing the guitar precussor with the doubles

GOOD LUCK

Alheak wrote:

tfw no drama to get free BN mods

Anxient wrote:

it has been bugging me for quite awhile now, but for the top diff,

00:01:692 (9) - and for all similar sections, ekoro, youre not gonna NC this because of downbeat?

;l

Alheak wrote:

If people have a problem with it, they should just come and say it here and now, I believe this set has gotten enough attention for mappers and modders to know about it already.
Any post-qualification drama would just prove that those people have nothing better to do than to piss people off.

We know this set is quite edgy, and we are ready to make some sacrifices to rank it. We just want people to speak their mind about it now so we can change things accordingly.
If nothing is said officially here, we'll assume nothing is wrong with it and go on with the ranking process.

TheOnlyLeon wrote:

Alright, I'm here with my week late M4M, sorry just some bullshit IRL problems, moving on.

EXTRA

00:21:968 - (1) This note should be in a very different location from my perspective, like around ctrl+J area. I think this would work better if the strong note was reflected to where the curve of the previous notes highlights, Also having an increase in distance would make a lot of sense here where as right now, it just sits still more or less. I think the "break" in the curved flow is enough emphasis for this beat, I want to keep a constant spacing because of the very high BPM, and also because this small part is quite "calm" relatively speaking, we're strongly losing in intensity for the small break coming right after

00:34:382 - (5,1,2,3,4,5,6) This sounds kinda broken since it goes against what all the leading patterns have followed, I'm not entirely sure what I can suggest here, but I don't like how the first note of the heavy drums here is mapped by the tail of slider 5, it ends up feeling like you're going into the pattern with a delay. I dont understand what you're finding wrong here, the pattern begins like the previous ones on a strong downbeat (big white tick), which helps keeping the rhythm intuitive

01:14:313 - (5,6,7) This sharp turn honestly kinda hides the stream because of appearance, at a quick glace it appears that the slider is two ticks longer than it actually is, and the song doesn't help the case either, since at this point the drums are relatively background white noise and it wouldn't be a stretch to assume that you didn't map to the drums here. what kind of skin are you using, I really don't see how this turn can be confounded for anything else than a stream, so I can't really fix that

01:31:899 - This section feels counter-intuitive, since at this point, is when the guitar section of the song starts kicking in, and is very dominant over any other track, yet you don't start paying attention to this track until 01:33:296 - And even then it's relatively minor. It'd feel much more intuitive and graphically fit the song better if you mapped out this piece rather than sticking with the drums that're relatively quiet and have been maintained for pretty well the entire track since the drums are not what makes the song interesting. The thing is the guitar track is way too complex and imprecise to be properly map, you have to consider the fact that for the difficulty spread, this has to fit properly between the quite "easy" Lunatic and the quite hard Wolf's Night. This difficulty has to be both intuitive and easy to read while still being challenging to play in a practical way, so I need to map following the most easily recognizable rhythmical patterns. Try to listen closely to the guitar track and try to make sense of it rhythmically, it's just not possible and even if I tried really hard, I'd just be an absolute mess to map and play

01:42:244 - (1,2,3,4,5,6,7) This entire stack doesn't make a lot of sense to me, I find even at 25% speed I have trouble lining up any of the tracks to this exact timing, and the dynamics of the stream change halfway through, while I can't tell the difference as to what's happened. You could keep the timing as it works alright in the high bpm since most people wouldn't be able to tell at that speed, but the dynamics should be consistent since there is little to no change musically here. the guitar is shredding 1/3s notes constantly for the whole section. Sometimes imprecisely I agree, but it's a fairly recognizable rhythmical pattern and relatively easy/intuitive to play

02:19:434 - (4-12) I feel like this stream kills any consistency in rhythm here, I get that there is in fact drums there, but they're incredibly quiet and frankly I could only tell they were there on 25% speed and even then I had to go back and double check cause I still wasn't confident. I'd recommend either getting rid of this stream since it doesn't fit, or at least give it some loud hitsounds so that it SOUNDS like there is an actual stream there, cause there is, you just can't hear it at full speed. you have a point here, I may change this but I want to break the repetitiveness here since the previous patterns are quite dull to play

INSANE

00:30:555 - (2,3,4) The spacing of this stack is really close together compared to the previous slow streams, which would make me inclined to think that this was a full speed stack, I'd try to space this out more, make it a bit less deceptive in appearance. changed

00:34:072 - (2,3,4) ^^^^^^ same

01:41:830 - (1,2,3,4,5,6) I can't quite figure it out, but somehow this sounds offtime, I slowed it down and it still sounds wrong, although I'm not sure what the correct answer would be, I feel like this is a case where it starts slower and speeds up however, while you have it at a uniform pace. Just take some time to look at this one yourself. As I said for Extra, this is all 1/3s, the illusion of acceleration comes from the impreciseness of the guitar and the raise in intensity and tone. I did change some things here

Well, that's all I have for that diff, I have much less to say about the lower diffs, and frankly I don't feel comfortable dealing with the upper diffs at the current time. I hope I was able to say something of value, GL with ranking this one.

• Rules:

1. Pick one of the maps above
2. You mod first
3. Total drain time < 15 minutes
4. No diffs above 6.5*

Chaoslitz wrote:

M4M (Sorry for delay)

well as i have said...

• Rules:

1. Pick one of the maps above
2. You mod first
3. Total drain time < 15 minutes
4. No diffs above 6.5*

[Normal]

1. 00:30:244 (3,1) - The angle of flow here is really sharp, also the overlap doesn't look well, it would be better if 00:30:244 (3) is curved in opposite direction (give up the blanket) fixed
2. 00:30:865 (1,1) - ^ as well, the angle same
3. Yea i know all of the reverse sliders you used in kiai time have 2 reverse, but I am afraid if beginners can react it well will with this high bpm removed one repeat from all repeat sliders and rearranged them
4. 02:36:451 (1,2) - Same as 00:30:244 (3,1), you can just have the same solution fixed
5. 02:39:761 (1,2) - 02:45:555 (3,4) - 02:48:865 (3,4) - ^ same
6. As the lowest diff and considering about the bpm, I would suggest you to decrease in the rhythm for a bit, rhythm in stanza like 00:35:624 or those kiai are too intense which is not good for the lowest diff of a mapset, leaving gaps like what you have done in 01:35:210 are nice well i understand this, but this would widen the diff spread to unwanted proportions, and i don't want to denature the song too song, keeping a minimal level of difficulty and diversity in rhythmical patterns

[Advanced]

1. 00:06:658 (1,2,3,4) - This is the only combo which is not following the guitar in the first stanza become really confusing (as well as to have consistent with 00:13:279 (1,2,3) ) changed all those patterns with more appropriate and intuitive ones
2. 00:40:589 (1,2,3,4) - ^, don't really know what it is following to be honest
3. yea same as in Easy those reverse..... I am not sure if this is allowed to use or not in this case, you may have to find others to confirm well it's Advanced, it should be mid-way between normal and hard, and even if unexpected, those repeat sliders are not hard to play and players of this level should naturally wait before releasing completely
4. 01:33:555 - Try something clickable on downbeat? i dont think they are any note or beat strong enough to justify this, but I do understand that it'd be more intuitive to play on the downbeat. For the sake of fitting to the song while keeping the rhythm/pattern simple, I believe the current setup is ideal
5. 02:03:348 (3,4) - Same as 00:06:658 (1,2,3,4), also 02:03:348 (3,1) - switch NC fixed

[Hard]

1. It is weird when you follow guitar at 01:22:796 (3,4) but not 01:23:624 (1,2) the guitar is a bit unprecise here and i want to keep it clean instead of bloating the map of repeat sliders
2. 01:34:175 (4,5,6) - It is better to avoid overlaps fixed

[Insane]

1. 02:16:589 (1,1,1,1) - Using 1/2 sliders will be fine, like what you have done in 00:53:830 (1,1,1,1) the drum beats are more pronounced on 02:16:589 (1,1,1,1) - , so I believe those repeat sliders are appropriate

[pishi's Lunatic]

1. 00:16:692 (2) - You don't need this finish
2. 02:01:486 (4) - Ctrl+g this I guess..? only this reverse slider is in opposite direction

Good Luck!

Kisses wrote:

Change SV of all taiko diffs to 1.4

At first I thought I had HR on when I first tested the Oni diff xdddd

Ayyri wrote:

ok fr call me sometime soon

k3v227 wrote:

SPOILER

Kisses wrote:

Change SV of all taiko diffs to 1.4

At first I thought I had HR on when I first tested the Oni diff xdddd

this^^^^^^^ Those are just bugs from the editor which appear when checking the AImod. It's not an attribute from the map itself.

-------------------------------------------

From my mod queue

Preface: There are many issues with both taiko diffs. Both aren't rankable yet and still need a lot of work IMO. A lot of patterns need to be reworked, and I will try my best to suggest changes. Nevertheless, this mod may seem harsh at some points, but I am just being honest and serious. Enjoy :3

[Ono's Oni]

General: SV1.4 and resnap all notes.

Proposals:

00:03:348 (1) - Finisher. changed

00:05:003 (1) - Finisher. changed

00:41:210 (1) - Finisher. changed

00:48:865 (1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1) - Change to k. dons are very fitting here due to the song, but did it also intentionally so 00:52:175 (1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1) - has more impact instead.

00:54:761 - Add d. rest moment purpose, so people can rest for a moment

01:36:865 (1) - No finisher. Those are very fitting pattern and song wise, so I see no reason that would justify to delete those.

02:23:210 - 02:24:348 - Add spinner. It's fine without one as resembles the decay of sound.

02:38:106 - 02:49:692 - Replace a lot of 1/3 with 1/2 similar to earlier kiai patterns. This could be discussed about, but since this part is very 1/3 heavy, I would rather stick to 1/3 for now.

02:47:348 (1) - Delete. Instead, I used a d.

[Ono's Ura Oni]

General: SV1.4 and resnap all notes. Some of the PP mapping is really obvious for this map and it doesn't fit at all.

Proposals:


00:25:072 - Remove x1.10SV There is no reason to remove these. This part is still emphasized but is losing a bit of impact due to the 1/2. The SV change prevents that by having aproximately SV 1.4. Changed it to x0.9 tho, since this is closer to SV 1.4.

00:28:589 - Remove x1.10SV ^

00:28:900 (4,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1) - Ctrl + g Oh, you are right. Changed.

00:30:969 - Add k. It makes hitting the finishers just unreasonable harder on a BPM of 290.

00:31:072 - 00:32:003 - Change to this: https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/5927445 Higher pitch is on the down beat, so I mapped accordingly to this. But beside that, using ths pattern is rather unforgiving than the one I have since it is naturally pretty odd when starting off with ddk... .

00:35:727 - Add k. Adding one isn't beneficial as I want to acchieve clear disticntion between previous and upcoming part. Break can give their own impact as well and make hence upcoming part have a slight higher emphasis.

00:46:382 - 00:47:210 - Change to this: https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/5927561 Doing so contradicts the don placement I had before and make the last stanza inconsistent.

00:48:037 - 00:48:555 (12) - Change to this: https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/5927540 Another pattern which is harder than current one as you need to have a steady acc on a monoton stream while suddenly switching once to a single note. But beside that, I'm not agreeing to switch suddenly the main snapping which carries on every down beat a don.

00:59:624 - 01:00:348 (15) - Change to this: https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/5927636 Current dons (even if improvised) resemble the current drums in the background in a fine way and make the lower the emphasis of this part to give upcoming one a higher impact. Beside that, it's another pattern you make harder while you critzised this to be a pp map.

01:04:589 (1,2,3,4,1,2,1,2,3,4,1) - Remove 1/4. Did some own changes here and for the rest.

01:31:899 - 01:34:382 - Remap to a 1/3 stream for the guitar. As I am mostly improvising with following the drums at the background, going suddenly mainly with the guitar would be very odd.

01:51:348 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - Remove 1/4. Done.

02:36:348 (2,1) - Change to ddk and remove finisher on k. But what about the consistency?

02:44:038 (1,2,3,1,1,1) - Change to 1/1 K D K finishers: https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/5927823 Hm, this isn't actually bad. Will think about it.

02:49:692 - 02:50:934 - Change to this: https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/5927854 Here is pretty much nothing beside the significant drum sounds.

02:51:451 - 03:00:451 - Add spinner. Possible, but I prefer to have none.

Hopefully this is helpful

-Kev

_DT3 wrote:

Ok, will someone tell me when Fever was bumped up to 9*

Ekoro wrote:

_DT3 wrote:

Ok, will someone tell me when Fever was bumped up to 9*

2 days ago, i decided to change some parts a little bit because it didn't fit the real intensity of the track.
I had to hold back a little bit (by using less spacing on streams) so it could still be suitable

now i feel like the track really needs this, the 1/2 had boring spacing and didn't fit totally the track, etcetc
overall, in my opinion my diff really describes how powerful this music is

and i actually wouldn't mind if my diff was less difficult "star-wise" than mazzerin's map, i mapped exactly what i wanted
he got a 9,32* diff anyway

EphemeralFetish wrote:

You need an 8* difficulty now. :^)

Ekoro wrote:

overall, in my opinion my diff really describes how powerful this music is

Alheak wrote:

I'm afraid no.

I don't want to have to deal with any more GDs.

Eraser wrote:

>_> rip pp

LastExceed wrote:

Eraser wrote:

>_> rip pp

loved maps can still move to ranked

Alheak wrote:

We're going for Loved to gain some attention and to see what works and what doesn't especially in the highest difficulties so that BN can more easily mod the set.

Alheak wrote:

We're going for Loved to gain some attention and to see what works and what doesn't especially in the highest difficulties so that BN can more easily mod the set.

LastExceed wrote:

Eraser wrote:

>_> rip pp

loved maps can still move to ranked

Sliderr wrote:

so as expected, this set is in loved forever. rip another fun set