function rainVertical (startTime, endTime){
	startTime = startTime - 945; // Easing has delay, so this is the compensation for that.
	var dropTime = 2526; //How fast rain will go top to bottom
	var startXL = -150; //Left most side (Boundary)
	var startXR = 750; //Right most side (Boundary)
	var startY = -110; //Top  (Boundary)
	var endY = 540; //Bottom  (Boundary)
	var startX = 0; //Variable initialization
	var xAxisRand = 0; //Variable initialization
	var randNegative = 0; //Variable initialization
	var newRainDrop = 19.734375; //How long it takes to make new drop after a drop happens.
	var fadeIn = 315; //Fade in time
	var fadeOut = 630; //Fade out time
	
	for(var i=startTime; i<endTime; i++){
	if(i < 324529){
		var rainDrop = new Sprite ("SB/rain.png");
		startX = rand(startXL, startXR);
		xAxisRand = rand(0,80); //How much movement side to side.
		randNegative = rand(0,1);
		if (randNegative == 1){
			xAxisRand = xAxisRand * (-1);
		}
		rainDrop.move(2, i, i + dropTime, startX, startY, startX + xAxisRand, endY);
		rainDrop.fade(0, i, i + fadeIn, 0, 1);
		if(i < 322318){
			rainDrop.fade(0, i + dropTime - fadeOut, i + dropTime, 1, 0);
		}
		if(i > 322318 && i < 322948){
			rainDrop.fade(0, i + dropTime - fadeOut, 324844, 1, 0);
		}
		if(i > 322948){
			rainDrop.fade(0, 324529, 324844, 1, 0);
		}
		
		i = i + (newRainDrop - 1);
		}
	}
}

rainVertical(304634, 324844); //Enter your start / end time here.

1. I know you didnt hitsound all of it yet, but there are lots of conflicting timing points.
   like 00:00:708 - (different hitsounds/volume). (I'm mentioning this one because you did already hitsound this part)
   The ending has like 10 conflicting green/red lines, please be sure to check and fix those.
   
2. 00:05:760 (1,2,3) - I feel like the DS is too much for this slow build up, maybe try something like x:293, y:198 for (2), would have to change the DS to (3) too though
3. 00:10:813 (1,2,3) - Once again I feel like the DS betweeen (2) and (3) is a bit too big, maybe put (2,3) a bit more up and to the left, like x:342 y:244 for these I'd not change just cuz the timing is incredibly slow and the spacing isn't that far from each other especially when they flow directly to each other.
4. 00:33:234 (6,1) - Fix this blanket Fixed
5. 00:55:023 (1,2,3) - Maybe blanket 3 into 1 and lower 2 to like x:195 y:160 kinda goes against what I was aiming for.
6. 01:16:497 (1) - I really dont like the look of this slider, the entire map is so flowy and nice, and suddenly you have this weird looking slider.
   I feel like it really ruins the beautiful build up you had going. I don't think the slider looks that bad at all but I polished it up just a taaad since I noticed an imbalance. Still the same really tho but yeah. ._.
7. 01:24:076 (1) - Maybe blanket this slider with 01:22:813 (4) - DS wouldn't be high enough.
8. 01:53:444 (7,8,9) - Lower (9) a bit so (8) has a DS of 2,9 to both (7) and (9) Sure..
9. 02:07:971 (5) - While playing this, it felt kinda weird, maybe do something like this: I don't think mines is that weird at all. I tried different alternative but uh, all to no avail.
10. 02:15:550 (4) - Maybe flip this and blanket it into 02:14:602 (1) like so: Prefer my design more, has a more rotational flow that I'm going for.
11. 02:32:286 (1) - Rotate this with like 20 degrees, would make it look nicer imo
12. 03:03:371 (1) - lift the slider end and the point before it a bit, would flow better into the stream like this: maybe..
    
13. 03:12:529 (7,8,9,10) - The turns you are making right here are way too sharp imo, you have to make some akward cursor movements to hit them correctly. I don't know how you should change it though, but right now it's way too sharp.
14. 03:15:371 (6,7,1) - I feel like you should either increase the spacing between (6,7) a bit or decrease between (7,8). Or you could rotate (7) by 20. I really want to emphasize the NC on (1) by keeping them like this.
15. 03:48:529 (5,6) - Fix this blanket meh
16. 03:59:266 (2,3) - Maybe put (2) at x:213 y:37, would make this jump flow a bit nicer. (Would increase DS though and I don't know if it really fits the music right here) DS too big o.o
17. 04:05:266 (3,3) - Feel unjustified, I hear nothing in the music at those (3)'s, I feel like just doing those 1-2 jumps + pause would really create some more buildup. If you remove those (3)'s maybe increase the distance spacing between 04:04:002 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2) . by removing the (3)'s I found with circles or sliders there comes a rhythmic gap that lowers the intensity rather than building it up. Keeping the player active with these is better imo. I already play one gap later but having two in a row is too awkwardly slow.
18. 04:03:371 (1) - Why these kind of weird looking sliders, your entire map has so many nice curvy sliders and suddenly you decide to map a slider like this, think about adding another kind of slider. Adds variety :v
19. 04:29:266 (1) - ^
20. 04:30:529 (1) - ^
21. 04:38:423 (2,3,4,5,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - I feel like this streamjump is too hard too hit, maybe put 04:38:423 (2,3,4,5) - a bit more to the left so 5 flow better into 1 of 04:38:818 (2,3,4,5,6,7,8). It's really not that hard to hit.. but its just a new design thing to keep things interesting. I changed the hitsounding of the latter part to indicate the shift of the piano.
22. 04:41:266 (3,4,5,6,1) - The movement from 6 into the stream requires a really sharp turn, I feel you can fix this by turning the entire triangle by 30 and moving it ~100x to the right. There's a certain flow and design i'm creating with all these notes. the (6) isn't that bad either.
23. 04:49:476 (1) - Maybe add another slider point between the 2 anchor points, would make the slider look nicer. Unnoticeably small alteration lol
24. 05:12:213 (1) - Really dont like the look of this slider Its okay... show me alternatives for when you want to change my sliders tho
25. 05:29:890 - Like I said before, lots of conflicting timing points from here on, but I'm sure you'll fix these while keysounding

1. AR feels a bit off at times for readability, I like 9.5 for the higher BPM parts but 9.4 feels right for the beginning - not entirely sure. I just do 9.4 cuz uh, idk lol.
2. 00:40:813 (7) - Curve this a bit more? It It looks kind of odd as it is now. nazi
3. 01:00:076 (1,2,3) - These flow a bit awkwardly IMO. This can be solved by rotating 1 -7 deg and 3 -15. The way you have it now the angles just feel a bit awkward and I think this smooths those out a bit. This is a triangle thingy with the 120 degree motion stuff with (4) playing as a 90 degree cross between (1,2). SV is pretty slow that this plays fine as is.
4. 02:03:550 (5,6,7,8,9) - Technically with the way the slider is shaped and how close it is to the edge of the playing field, the 6 to 7 jump makes less sense than a 6 to 8 jump would. 6 to 8 also flows better, but it is a more circular playstyle. This isn't necessarily a need-to-change, but moreso a QoL change IMO. literally another triangle + cross design lol. I actually do this a lot in my maps xpppp
5. 03:00:844 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,1) - I feel like you could have done a lot more with this stream. Its building intensity but you keep it at a constant DS. In my opinion a changing DS feels a lot more appropriate for this section, and you honestly have plenty of room to implement that. might change this, but I'd sacrifice some flow thing for it. we'll see.
6. 03:04:950 (2,3,4,5) - Lower the DS on the 2,3,4 and then move the 5 down a bit so that the slider ends form a triangle? probably gonna change this section around
7. 03:11:423 (2,3,4,5,1,2,3,4) - I appreciate the DS change here, as its very fitting, but it looks really ugly. I think either a jump stream is more fitting here, or increasing the ds on the 2,3,4,5 so that the DS between 2,3,4,5,1 is equal. As a note, I prefer the stream jump as it better prepares the player for 03:12:055 (5,6) - that spacing and the future small stream jumps. oh good idea ;oo
8. 03:13:160 (10,11,12,13) - The sharp momentum change a bit by rotating 10 and re-positioning it into the slider head slightly.
9. 03:15:608 (7,1) - I get the spacing based on intensity, but this is a bit exaggerated I believe. I don't really have any suggestions, I just think the DS needs to be nerfed a bit. i'll disagree xd
10. 03:19:160 (5,6,7) - It kind of urks me how straight this feels compared to how curvey and arc-like the rest of the map is. It plays fine and it itself is fine, I just kind of want 'em to be curved a bit.. as you could imagine, this is another triangle cross design i made lol. the straight sliders were very intended.
11. 03:50:739 (9,10,11) - Same thing here. Slight curves would make this much more aesthetically appealing IMO here its a sense with neutrality since curving the sliders would imply a certain flow/direction to be present but with how I placed the NC, none of the curved sliders would flow into it that well.
12. 03:53:660 (21) - Please, never NC any of this, >20 combos are my fetish mines too <33
13. 03:59:739 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,5,6,7) - This is hard as hell on sight read for me. It could just be because I'm crap, but I see some weird design choices here that I think should be changed. Individually, 03:59:897 (2,3,4) - , 04:00:371 (1,2,3,4) - , and 04:00:844 (4,5,6,7) - are straight forward patterns. But together they flow a bit weird. R1 > R2 is a straight jump, R2 > R3 is a sharp angle but it works since you can clearly tell this is a square pattern since the AR isn't too high, the R3 > R4 is the same as R1 > R2, R4 > Y1 is a bit odd since typically my instincts would say to put the next note somewhere around the area of R2 and R3, but you ran out of room so you went up. Then Y4 > Y5 is really unexpected, because I'd typically be expecting Y4 > Y6 since Y6 is blanketed and Y4 is curving towards it. Then once again Y5 > Y6 is unexpected, but then Y6 > Y7 is expected since you've already done Y4 > Y5. I'm not sure if you feel like my reasoning for changing this is justified at all, but I really think you can do something better than here because the actual jumps here just don't seem to flow to me. This is one of the only parts I had trouble sight-reading and in my opinion I play maps that are much harder to read than this. thanks for the really long paragraph but idk man this looks sick af is plays pretty fine if you know how to aim properly lol xD I didn't think I ran out of room, I just spaced more accordingly to the music and yeah, nah this was thought out by me xp
14. 04:11:897 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1) - If you don't add some more stream jumps, I don't really think having these here is justified. Stream jumps are one of those things that in my opinion, have to be consistently spread through the map, because they're difficult as hell to read the first few play-troughs because you forget they're there. reading is a thing. but these play fine too
15. 04:38:423 (2,3,4,5,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - I feel like the 2,3,4,5 on the green combo should just be flipped upside down, because as it is now it seems like a weird transition from 5 > 1.
16. 04:48:055 (11,1) - This transition is a bit of a stretch for me. If anything, the beginning of 1 shoudl be at x444 y180 and then the slider should be rotated -45. It plays better to me that way, because the momentum changes are a bit less extreme.
17. 04:48:844 (6,7,8,9) - Curve all the sliders everywhere man, nothing should be left uncurved :^)
18. 04:54:213 (9) - I think I'd prefer circles here, just because what you have on the slider end is such a strong beat. creating flow, I do similar before.
19. 05:01:792 (8) - ^ (except sliders instead)
20. 05:05:581 (8,9,1) - I actually really think these should be curved, all jokes aside, to better direct the player to the next note, Because while 8>9 makes sense, 9>1 is a bit of a stretch. I like them curved too
21. 05:23:897 (3,4) - Drop these down just a bit lower, I think they're stacked a tiny bit too much atm. Did drop em down a bit, not as much as yours but yeah.

Cryptic wrote:

p l a c e h o l d e r TBH, not a huge fan of the cursor thing in the SB, I think it looks tacky.

[Faded Rays of Sunlight Set Upon the End]

1. 00:19:655 (1,2,3,4) - The patterning is nice and all but the 1>2 should probably have a bigger gap based on the pitch, especially when compared to 00:18:392 (1,2,3,4) - I was actually gonna make it smaller tbh, but my interpretation leaves me to believe they are both equals. 1,2,3,4 -> 3,4,2,1
2. 00:58:339 (6,7,8,1) - Flow here could be improved this was intentional to keep the 4 slider and 1 slider facing in the same direction. the way (1,2,3) play on the nc fits to the music imo.
3. 01:05:444 (7,8,1) - Fairly large jump when theres not really any intense drums in the background, I'd probably rework it to be a bit better suited compared to the rest of the song as a means to build up into the streams.
4. 01:25:655 (5,6) - Not really important, but you could always rotate the 6 slider in place so that it it's slider tail forms a linear path with the 5. sure... nudged by about 10 degrees.
5. 02:21:550 (4,5,6,1) - The rhythm here is much more interesting than what you have, its something more like below. However, if you decide to not go with the interesting rhythm, 5>6 should be less spaced than 3>4 to the declining pitch in the song. I'm trying to end big for the Finish sound. they slowly increase in spacing. slowly decreasing in spacing also works but I chose the former..
6. 04:11:897 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1) - I'm not entirely happy with this sequence. 04:11:897 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - both have the same pitch whereas 04:12:529 (1,2,3,4) - has a pitch that is a step down from the previous two and then the sequence leads in to 04:12:844 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1) - as there really isn't any audible jump in pitch. I think this could do with some tweaking to bring the pattern more in line with other parts of the map. (To clarify, I think the stream jump between the first two combos is fine, as it accurately represents starting back at square 1 audibly, but the other stream jumps and the spacing of the latter two combos seems lackluster.) this is what I'd call a 'loose' decision on my part. because I remember for here I know I wanted to end the last half measure as its own since the last 8 beats decline on their own arpeggio where as the 3rd white tick doesn't really belong to either the first two or the last two. sure there could have been a different alternative to this design but my design isn't wrong either since the ending half measure holds its own ground to lead into the bigger jumps by using smaller spacing.
7. 04:32:266 (2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,1) - The fact that the stream doesn't end on the 10, or the fact that the 10 is not a kick, feels really really awkward. The strongest note in that sequence is still in a stream, and its a strong held note. song is pretty strange in general really. accented reds,white, sometimes blues. 3 instruments all playing together. this is mapped from what i felt the music told me really.
8. 04:38:423 (2,3,4,5,1) - The 2>3 and 4>5 are a bit more separate musically than you have them mapped. I'd recommend making some changes to help this pattern fit the music better (I was gonna make a recommendation but for some reason the SB prevents me from moving notes on this map). lol. but yeah the (4) has a introduced sound so = bigger spacing for that, and the (1) of the following stream holds the 8 beat arpeggio so its like, yeah.
9. 04:41:266 (3,4,5,6,1) - Don't mind me, just nice angles into a casual obtuse angle into a stream. In all seriousness, you should probably rework 5>6>1 to snap better. trust me when I say this pattern is not only easy to read, but easy to hit as well. xd
10. 04:50:423 (5,6,7,8,1) - It happens here again, the 7 is really strong and in the middle of the stream. Wants wrong with more kicksliders? I don't suppose anything is inherently wrong with adding kick sliders but since there's that passive lingering bell sound, those sliders are meant to follow them.
11. 04:54:213 (9) - I have a bone to pick with you. Why is this, a part that you've mapped with circles before, a slider in the arguably most intense repetition of this motif? Sure it looks pretty and plays fine, but you're losing a lot of intensity because of this and thats just downright disappointing. maybe to you but I love the way this plays especially since coming off of the (1) slider has a stream jump at 1/4 it flows as how I wanted it to flow. although, it's true: there are many ways to argue many things in this song. interpretation interpretation~
12. 05:11:739 (7,8,9) - I cry every time a 1/6th or 1/8th that could have been mapped is ignored meh the white tick either gets ignored on intensity or it becomes too intense with added 1/6s.

Call me back. fyi, can't kd cuz I've kd'd once before xd

Sonnyc wrote:

Storyboard images must be at a reasonable filesize and dimension for their usage. For most uses (e.g. full-screen images), the maximum is 1366x768 pixels. For widescreen storyboards 854x480 is preferred as it matches the internal resolution of the SB editor. For 4:3 aspect ratio images 640x480 is preferred.
SB/Burst : 1100x1100 Fixed this one.

02:22:813 (2,3) - 02:24:707 (1,2) - 02:27:234 (1,2,3) - 02:33:865 (3,4) - 02:37:481 (4,1,2,3) - Since there is no base hitsound but only a key sound existing, the hitsounds didn't gave a proper feedback. Make these more audible please. I'll get help on these... >< Edit: okay only aesthetic way to do this without destroying sounds was to add whistles on most of these (I think only one of em didn't need) but now it should be fine >>;
03:43:792 (1,2,3) - This didn't seems nicely patterned. These three are all similar in the song, while (1,2) is overlapped and (2,3) isn't. Considering the way you've done at 03:46:318 (1,2,3), just overlapping all might work better. I made as a 120 degree thingy so it's all balanced now.
03:46:318 (1,2,3) - You may want to add a soft-whistle here to sound nicely along 04:32:897. I don't know if these two have any relevance towards each other? o,o but it is drum sampled with drum-finish already, don't want to add in drum-whistle sounds and making addition whistle doesn't make good for me ^^

Popped over unrankables.