I agree that the core is definitely good and a remap is not needed.
How many fucking times do I have to say I was giving my side to come to a middle ground if possible, just because I deny and disagree with something doesnt mean I wont go back and apply it after discussion and coming to an agreement.viptwo wrote:
There is no middle ground. The map has been disqualified, that's your answer right there.EphemeralFetish wrote:
And after DQ I said I was gonna take a break then come back and apply stuff. Quit assuming shit. The entire point of waiting on a QAT was to come to a middle ground regarding both sides.
And concerning your willingness to "apply stuff", you flat out denied a lengthy mod of good points with basically "I think it's ok/plays well/I like it better".
You have to work on your attitude.
Which I said I was going to do. Please read the fucking thread holy shit.viptwo wrote:
And again, there is no middle ground.
There is no "let's settle on this and rank it again yeah?"
There however is a "it is your turn to apply mods and take feedback seriously".
I don't think swearing at me is going to make you any more believable. You've already shown how serious you take feedback.EphemeralFetish wrote:
Which I said I was going to do. Please read the fucking thread holy shit.viptwo wrote:
And again, there is no middle ground.
There is no "let's settle on this and rank it again yeah?"
There however is a "it is your turn to apply mods and take feedback seriously".
Well it was 3 points, I didnt apply any, the last one is what Im looking to debate about. Plus I never asked you to mod this so you did it at your own risk of me denying everything.TheOnlyLeon wrote:
Seeing this get qual'd and coming back to it, I also appreciate how my mod was replied to, but mostly discounted, that aside you did agree with a point I made.
Followed by not doing anything to the map and not crediting my mod either.
Really appreciate it.
Gonna go over that again to see about empress stuff since that was the majority of the post.Kibbleru wrote:
i agree with most of nathan's points u shud seriously consider them.
low angle jumps at high bpm plays really awkwardly
handsome wrote:
hello concerned community member
00:18:397 (1,2,3) - there shouldn't be implied emphasis on 1, its just a kick, nothing special. however you've masked two pretty distinct sounds iin 00:18:564 (3) - , which are much more suitable for emphasis. adding on to that, the emphasis created on 00:18:730 (1,2,3,4) - seems odd. the implied pressure is on the reverse slider's head, but there's nothing special on it compared to its reverses. putting those together, i feel that this rhythm would be a much better representation. http://i.imgur.com/PO2hXuG.png - Applied
00:20:064 (1,2,3) - the short 'sound' that comes up is actually audible on 00:20:342 - , i suggest this: http://i.imgur.com/5M0QmjJ.png and to prevent confusion you can do the same to the next repeat (00:20:397 (3) - ). - Applied
00:20:953 (1,2,3,4) - i'm of the opinion that the jumps would be much more comfortable if there was more momentum associated with them, try starting off with slightly lower spacing because this is the first occurance - Tried something else, scaled down a bit so its less harsh.
00:21:397 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - the streamjumps are small enough to feel inconsequential but at the same time they conflict greatly with the design choices put out so far, with no reasonable justification behind it. the only change is the vocals that appear but the streamjumps or the NC patterns don't reflect them. if you were mapping to the drums it'd be cooler if you used increased spacing throughout, rather than grouped 4s. - Got rid of the jumps.
00:26:397 (3,4,5,6) - i don't think staggered spacing works well considering every single drum hit has equal pressure here, a regular star pattern would fit nicely, possibly with lower spacing. - This was actually a mistake I didnt spot.
00:28:064 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11) - similar to jumps previously mentioned, there could be more usage of momentum, its very abrupt now and the spacing/pattern usage seems random. 00:28:397 (5,11) - seems to be the points with higher spacing to give more emphasis, but it doesn't have enough contrast to make a noticeable difference. - I think this one is fine but I did scale it down.
00:31:619 (2,3,4,5) - seems like these have been patterned in a way that doesn't bring emphasis to 00:31:730 (3) - , i suggest doing something a little different along the lines of: http://i.imgur.com/gu8zneC.png apart from the patterning, i think more NCs could be used to show discerning emphasis on the suitable notes, such as 00:32:619 (4) - 00:34:397 (7) - Applied this, but I dont think the NC is needed.
00:37:064 (7) - this feels like a 'i ran out of screenspace' pattern, cuz i encounter this a lot myself when mapping. i think a rework of this whole pattern 00:36:064 (1,2,3,4,5) - would be more suitable. right now the position of 7 is suddenly spaced so far, and under a visible overlap at that point which really ups the difficulty to hit this slider, even though it doesn't have a special emphasis on it. - Rather than redoing the whole thing I fiddled around with the end.
00:37:397 (1,2,3) - it strikes me as odd that this is the outlier in the whole square pattern, but i assume its because it starts on a finish lol - Yeah I dont see a problem with this.
00:38:730 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - in this section, the only tick without an audible sound would be 00:38:897 (3) - and maybe 00:39:230 -. right now i can't find much reasoning behind the rhythm emphasis behind the repeats and 'doubles', or why there was an ignored sound on 00:39:342 - . this would be ideal for simplicity, http://i.imgur.com/epCQWTd.png. but seing as how youd' like to keep it fancy maybe http://i.imgur.com/mKM79AO.png, i actually like this too since theres more emphasis on where the 1/4 sliders are. - Thanks, I had trouble figuring out exactly what was going on here, I might go back to have a gap before the next combo though just because its so hard to hear anything there, and it would make it a bit easier.
00:42:064 (1,2,3,4,5) - http://i.imgur.com/pg6Hp0r.png this could be cool if you were mapping to vocals (i think you were) - Was mapping to guitar, I dont really wanna change this.
00:45:064 (2,3) - really feel like these should be swapped in rhythm. they oppose the vocals and guitar. - Tried something.
00:50:064 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - having higher spaced versions of 00:49:730 (1,2,3,4,5) - would be better fitting, as right now the only emphasis on 00:50:397 (1) - would be 'end of a stream', but you can up that by giving it a large spacing jump. - Increased spacing.
00:50:730 - althought you're not wrong or anything with the current patterns and spacing, i highly suggest reworking this section with the piano to be noticeably different from the previous parts. its a noticeable shift in music. and could be represented differently. there could be more circles and lower spacing (mapped like an alternating map), or possibly more sliders instead. 99% chance you wouldn't bother but i strongly recommend it. - Personally disagree, Wanna stick to drums and guitar and the sliders for those line up with piano well anyways.
01:01:064 (1) - a reverse or a long slider is better fitting, although it 'ignores' the drums but theres a really audible held guitar sound here! - Yeah since the whole pattern is for the drums I dont wanna cover them.
just dropping some stuff first to chum the waters
sukiNathan wrote:
- 04:40:347 (9,1) - Nothing here calls for such a sharp and massive jump following up with a 180 transition into the stream
06:12:124 (2,3,4,5,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,5) - None of this 1/4 is really emphasizing to anything; from what I can tell maybe you were just simplifying the mess of guitar snaps, but I think there are better options. You could just use repeats for 1/3 or 1/6 rhythms while still keeping the 1/4 as circles, even vice versa w/e - Tried to keep this aggressive but Ive moved the stream to allow for a bit less space going from the single into the spaced stream.- 06:14:236 (1,2,3,1,2,3,4) - - Still think this is fine, and Im not sure what could be wrong, the snapping seems good and the slider heads are on the clean guitar notes.
- 02:38:064 (1,2,3,4) - The first 3 circles of this pattern start out super snappy, then switches to a random wide angle on 4... which is the highest pitched guitar note out of these. This could fit the guitar intensity more while still keeping the overall shape. - Yeah this is one of the ones I fixed as you suggested.
- 01:44:064 (1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3) - These angles have the same problem as above. The overall spacing makes sense, but here it's barely significant when the movement is underwhelming. The triangles are sharp individually, but each shift between them is wide angled.
- 02:58:057 (1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3) - aaa same as above
- 02:54:279 (2,3,1,2,1,2,1) - What's with the grouping and NCing of these circles? I don't hear any pitch changes in the guitar up until 02:55:057 (2), and as for percussion, you're actually placing more emphasis on the less intense kicks over the snares.
- 06:18:124 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - I don't see any musical reason behind the large differences in spacing for the two groups of 4. The only note that stands out to me is 06:18:124 (1), but everything else is relatively within the same pitch range. - Since the first of these 4 starts on a higher pitch than the second, Ive gone and swapped them around, so it gets smaller as you go instead of larger, should make a bit more sense now.
- 06:19:902 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - Same thing here; 06:20:347 (1) - should have the largest jump, but instead you have 06:20:124 (3,4) - and 06:20:569 (3,4) - which are more spaced despite being lower intensity. - Re did this to hopefully match your explanation.
- 06:28:680 (4,1) - Another random jump... Actually the entirety of 06:27:902 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1) - is just weird. 06:28:236 (4) - 06:28:569 (3) - 06:28:902 (2) - are guitar notes that stand out, but none of them are emphasized since they're all consistent in spacing and all wide angled. Especially 06:29:680 (1) - which has a crash.
- 06:30:124 (3,4,5,6,1,2,3,4) - So the jump between the two groups is good, but 06:30:569 (1,2,3,4) - uses the same DS as 06:30:124 (3,4,5,6) - which is lower in pitch asdjklgasdl
- 06:31:458 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - This isn't necessarily a problem, but seriously, you could do something at least a little more interesting than this. There are some guitar rhythms you can take advantage of like the 1/2 at 06:32:124 - 06:33:458 - etc. It doesn't even have to be the guitar really. Using circles before the crashes at 06:33:236 (1) - and 06:35:013 (1) - would be much more impactful than just slider spam.
- 06:42:124 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - oh god this is literally a combination of all the spacing/angle problems I've mentioned so far. 06:42:124 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - Starts out zig zagging and then uses a wide angled transition in between the 2 groups. Then 06:43:013 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - here it just completely drops the sharp angles and uses the same ds despite the build up in pitch. 06:43:902 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - So much variation in spacing with no intensity changes. - Im still thinking these last few are fine with the explanations Ive given
no wtf ur basicaly just digging a deeper grave for this map saying this lol.., it gives the mild/indirect impression that this sudnt b ranked cuz "DAE FOLLOW MAPPING CONCEPTS/RULES FOR MAPPING HIGH BPM XDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD"Rohulk wrote:
and let's be honest after a certain difficulty, like this map, it ALL becomes about FUN and improvement and NOT mapping... I think a few mapping ideas and rules go out the window when we are talking about a super high bpm, deathstream justifiable, melodic death metal map. We should all let the players who can enjoy this, enjoy it more by being ranked and let our mapping OCD take a break.
VINXIS wrote:
no wtf ur basicaly just digging a deeper grave for this map saying this lol.., it gives the mild/indirect impression that this sudnt b ranked cuz "DAE FOLLOW MAPPING CONCEPTS/RULES FOR MAPPING HIGH BPM XDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD"Rohulk wrote:
and let's be honest after a certain difficulty, like this map, it ALL becomes about FUN and improvement and NOT mapping... I think a few mapping ideas and rules go out the window when we are talking about a super high bpm, deathstream justifiable, melodic death metal map. We should all let the players who can enjoy this, enjoy it more by being ranked and let our mapping OCD take a break.
rest of that is ok i gues imo,,
inb4 ppl get baited by ths even tho i ltiaerly just said nothing LUL
btw 06:03:458 (9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9) - streamz lik ths play lik shit just look at othr mapz tht do this (gabe power is a gud example) - Nice Meme
07:15:680 (1) - also tak out th nc here - Gonna keep to be safe. Im sure if I took it out someone would want it back because of the sudden direction change.
I didnt even notice. Good spot. KDS Deny inbound :^)[ Emillia ] wrote:
u spelt remilia wrong, u made it rhyme with my name.. double "l" haha...
kds pls ... .... ..
Is it really? Any source?[Hiiro Sakaki] wrote:
Heya~
In the middle of ACTUAL mods, I'll point out that you may add to the tags "The Violation Fleshgod Apocalypse" as The Empress is made as a mix of Flander theme and The Violation by Fleshgod~
Good luck !
Good enough for me, Ill add that in. Thanks.[Hiiro Sakaki] wrote:
https://twitter.com/Ak39everlasting/status/756117954027261952
That's the best I can find so far, but it's a common thing to tell The Empress is based off The Violation (Listen to the intro and the chords progression)
90% 1/4 with a few random notes thrown in. Im still not sure about trying to change this one since this is just as close.Worminators wrote:
06:12:124 (2) - Isn't this whole stream overmapped?
Would a 1/3 fit better here? (or another rythm based on sliders or something?)
edit: Also, shouldn't the background be 1366x768?
Sure thing. My photoshop is broke and had to use a shitty online editor, so that might explain the bad quality. ThanksWorminators wrote:
Can you please change the background image to this one that is actually 1366x768?
http://puu.sh/rgKVA/5aa9bac141.jpg
I resized it from the highest resolution I found and you can see it has a better quality, sharper edges and looks less blurry
(The fact that the image was not exactly 1366x768 was messing with my OCD)
Still need to find 2 replacement BN'sWeriko wrote:
inb4 rank
You lost 2 of the 3? Damn.EphemeralFetish wrote:
Still need to find 2 replacement BN's
Spaghetti didnt really like the map but was just helping out cause I couldnt find anyone. Kagetsu wants to avoid drama.Cryptic wrote:
You lost 2 of the 3? Damn.EphemeralFetish wrote:
Still need to find 2 replacement BN's
Drama in circle clicking game. LUL LUL LULEphemeralFetish wrote:
... avoid drama.
I think its easy to judge. You just need to go about it differently. Rather than looking at the map as a whole you can just break everything down into small parts and judge those. Even looking at each combo. Much easier to judge it that way, and all long as each small section works and fits into the next then the map as a whole is fine.Cherry Blossom wrote:
That's sad but.
Nobody, and i said, NOBODY in this community is able to judge a map like this.
Nobody has BOTH enough playing and modding skills to judge this map.
I didn't say this map is bad, but ranking this map doesn't make sense for now, since nobody can't judge it.
a. its passableCherry Blossom wrote:
That's sad but.
Nobody, and i said, NOBODY in this community is able to judge a map like this.
Nobody has BOTH enough playing and modding skills to judge this map.
I didn't say this map is bad, but ranking this map doesn't make sense for now, since nobody can't judge it.