1. basically the bg prob as mentioned above
2. this is actually optional since it is consistent throughout all the difficulties and it isn't an issue. but two parts that is suggested to be mapped include 01:51:893 - which has similar music intensity throughout the rest of the song except the outro ofc, and the part covered by the spinner 02:30:514 (1) - in which the spinner could actually start at 02:36:031 -

1. minor issues. 00:15:342 (3,4) - they almost collide and it isn't really pleasing tbh so please do something for the a e s t h e t i c s or you could refer to my suggestions https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/6350893 + 01:43:618 (5,6) - and AiMod actually works in distance snap checking
2. 00:44:997 (4) - 01:51:204 (5) - do you want to split up the sliders into 1/1 slider followed by a circle // 2 circles with 2/1 gaps in between? since imo the slider ends represent notes that introduce new music sections, and hence should be clickable instead of brought over by the sliders
3. 01:02:238 (1) - tbh ending the spinner at 01:06:376 - and start mapping at 01:07:755 - should be making more sense and same thing applies to normal diff. but it's up to you anyway
4. 01:29:825 (1) - 02:13:963 (1,2) - clearly the ticks of the sliders should be implemented clickable notes instead of carried over. sth like this https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/6350917 // https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/6350926

1. problem is that you shuffle between two main music parts and you tend to simplify one to emphasize the other. it isn't wrong, it's just that it will be hard for the players to get your ideas in the first play. the struggle is understandable btw since I encounter the same issue lolz but just keep it in mind anyway.
   taking a really great quote from a decent modder:
   
   

   LMT1996 wrote:

   Yeah I think you sometimes tried to deviate from one rhythm for another when you think it's more prominent (which sometimes is a debate which one is more prominent). Interesting idea, but that causes random inconsistencies that players can't really expect and that's what could be considered "unfair". Maybe try this idea as well: if you think there's a rhythm that is a lot more prominent than the other, give it a special treatment, like a fancy shape, or maybe "slider for vocals, circle for drums".

2. 00:22:238 (2,3) - 00:42:928 (1,2) - 01:49:135 (1,2) - personally suggest to avoid reverses >2 times in lower diffs even though it isn't an issue + for the first one, the prominent beats are the bassdrum notes and the claps are relatively less audible, and hence timelines like https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/6351015 // https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/6351019 might work even better + for the latter two replacing each reverse sliders with 3/4 sliders would be much more fitting to emphasize the trumpets
3. 00:25:686 - quite an audible beat for the percussion and ignoring it seems weird during gameplay so maybe implement a circle here or sth
4. 00:41:204 (2,3) - quite a risky pattern anyway since to me it seems clumped even though the flow is good. please at least fix the blanket if you want to keep the pattern
5. shortening the spinner and map at 01:07:756 - as in Hard diff could still work in this difficulty, but well if you want to keep the spinner 01:02:238 (1) - , you could already start mapping at 01:08:100 - anyway. players in this level should be able to adapt the short reaction time (345ms) imo but still not sure btw lo

Bubblun wrote:

From #modreqs doing M4M.

General
The BG needs to be 1366 x 768 or 1024 x 768. You're background isn't either one. You'll have to cut the image to fit properly.

Easy

SPOILER

01:44:997 (6) - Snap this note.
00:04:307 (3,4) - Flow between these 2 notes isn't very good. I'd try this pattern: http://puu.sh/rMo6p/8393cdb015.jpg it does flow and such slider shape should not be introduced in this earlier stage, that kind of slider is preferably used for Advanced+
00:08:445 (2) - I see the swirl pattern, but it doesn't flow very well into 3. You could rotate 1 and 2 by their heads so you keep the pattern while not having to re-snap a bunch of notes. Rotate in a counter-clockwise direction so it aims towards 3. most of the " this flow is not good " statement is currently pointing out at the same pattern of my style and im not gonna reply to the others cos its filling the form
00:09:825 (3,4) - Flow here isn't very good. Try this shape: http://puu.sh/rMolK/a30b65379a.jpg ^
00:15:342 (3) - I see you're trying to avoid an overlap here, but not only does the previous note not flow easily into this note, it doesn't flow good going into the next. You'll need to do a different pattern so the flow is better while avoiding the overlap.
00:20:859 (3,4,5) - Especially in easy, sliders should aim towards the next not so that is has fair flow. You could bring 4 up so that it's above 3, and bring 5 up too. You should flip the curve of 5 horizontally so it blankets and flows better.
00:33:273 (5) - This note is aiming towards the border, while the next note is to the bottom-left of the screen. Flip this note horizontally to fix it. i dont think thats necessary
00:43:618 (3,4) - I'd recommend turning this into red-anchor point curved sliders so they flow better.While they're not aiming at each other, the flow could be improved by adding circular motion. ^
01:27:066 (5,6) - 5 is aiming up while the next note is below it. This flow is too hard for an 'easy' player to play. I'd try a different pattern or see if you can somehow flip it without it going off screen.
01:36:721 (2) - This note aims upwards, while the next note is below it. Again, see if you can flip this slider and re-snap it so it flows better.
01:39:480 (4) - ctrl + g for better flow. finally
01:43:618 (5) - Again, this slider is aiming towards the border while the next note should be pointed at. Try a different pattern or flip it.
01:49:825 (4,5) - Try anchor-point curved sliders for better circular flow.
02:28:101 (4) - Flip this curve so it aims towards the next note.

Normal

SPOILER

00:08:445 (2) - Should flip this slider so it aims towards the next note. like i mention above at easy, you are questioning my mapping style
00:45:687 (1) - I'd bring this note to the front of the slider for better flow. i prefer it blanket
01:10:514 (4) - I'd angle 4 a bit and re-shape and bring up 5 so it flows better.
01:21:549 (1,2) - 1 is aiming forward, while the next note is under it. I noticed you went for symmetry here, so some flipping around could fix it. i prefer it symmetrical
01:39:480 (2) - Bring this up and curve so for better flow.

Hard

SPOILER

00:05:687 (1,2) - The flow here isn't very good. You could flip 1, ctrl + g 1, or try a completely different shape. pls play it first before stating this it really bugs me
00:11:204 (1) - Flip this slider so it aims at 2.
00:14:480 (2) - Bring this note down a bit so it plays better.
00:17:411 (2) - ctrl + g for better flow. Or if you want the spacing, try a different pattern. ctrl g makes the pattern a bit generic
01:08:618 (3) - Flip this slider so it aims at 1.
01:11:549 (3) - Ctrl + g for better flow. woah then where do i emphasize then
01:12:411 (2,3) - Bring this up a bit for better flow.
01:14:135 (3) - Flip so it aims towards the next note.

Insane

SPOILER

00:01:549 (1,2) - Flow here isn't good. You could make 1 and 2 share the same pattern, or angle 1 so it aims at 2. i disagree, it flows well if you play it properly
00:07:066 (1) - Do the pattern you did for 2 in the last mod. i prefer it like this it flows just the same if i change it
00:24:307 (3,4) - I'd ctrl + g each note separately so you have the same concept, but better flow. i like this concept more since i map flows differently
00:25:514 (2) - ctrl + g for better flow. ^
00:36:032 (1) - Flip horizontally so it blankets the next note. currently making the pattern 00:35:342 (3,4,1) - symmetrical
01:13:790 (2) - ctrl + g for better flow. it'll disrupt the flow from the prev note and the current pattern flows perfectly fine
02:05:687 (1) - Flip so it blankets the next note and flows better. the current one flows best if you actually play it
02:22:238 (1) - Make this either curve downwards instead of upwards, or try a straight slider as the flow here isn't good. it flows okay here if you play it

fix something in ez and changed bg

thanks for modding

LMT1996 wrote:

omg how did my line end up here? hahaha

Hobbes2 wrote:

Been listening to this song more, it's so good! Good luck with rank.

1. 00:20:859 (3,4) - You can improve a bit that double blanket
   
   Some screens

   
   
   
   In this screen, 1 is the equivalent of the mid' of the slider
   
2. As you followed that rythm here : 00:30:514 (3) - you should do a 3/2 slider with reverse.
3. 01:09:135 (1) - This slider don't really fits with the sound, just listen with 50% or 25%, you'll see that 2x1/1 slider fits better.
4. 01:27:066 (5,6) - Improve this blanket
5. 01:30:859 (2,3,4) - The flow is a bit weird here...Why not a triangle ?
6. 01:35:342 (1) - Maybe curving a bit the seconf part of that slider will make it look better ?
7. 01:44:997 (6) - With that slider, you are skipping an important beat (01:44:997 (6) - ) so I think a 2/1 slider will fit better to the music
8. 02:04:307 (3,4,5) - Why not a line ? (yeah because this one isn't a line)
9. 02:08:445 (1,2,3) - ^

1. 00:00:859 (2,2) - Make them go in the same direction
2. 00:07:066 (1) - Curving (1) will make it follow the (2) and (3)'s pattern
3. 00:16:721 (2,3) - Why (3) isn't like (2) ? Just copy to and do Ctrl+H & Ctrl+J to your copy of (2) and replace it
4. 00:30:169 - Add circle
5. 00:44:997 (4,1) - Improbe blanket
6. 02:11:032 (5,1) - This line looks weird because the slider (4) (before 5 & 1) is curved. So make 5 & 1 in front of 4 or uncurve 4.

1. 00:11:204 (1,2) - For 2, take 1, copy it and just do Ctrl H & Ctrl J on it, (and replace the slider)
2. 00:38:445 (4,1) - Improve double blanket
3. 00:41:204 (4,1,2,3,4) - Use Ctrl+Shift+D for that pattern, it will look better
4. 01:21:549 (1,2) - Improve blanket
5. 01:31:204 (1,2) - ^^^^^ Double blanket
6. 01:34:480 (2,3) - Improve blanket
7. 01:44:652 (4,1) - ^
8. 02:06:721 (3) - Why not use a slider like here 02:01:204 (3) - to follow the flow ?
9. 02:13:101 (2,1,2) - Make same spacing for these parallel lines
10. 02:20:859 (1,2) - Improve blaket

Lexis wrote:

M4M.

[Easy]

1. 00:20:859 (3,4) - You can improve a bit that double blanket i would like to by chance but its really impractical to do so
   
   Some screens

   
   
   
   In this screen, 1 is the equivalent of the mid' of the slider
   
2. As you followed that rythm here : 00:30:514 (3) - you should do a 3/2 slider with reverse.
3. 01:09:135 (1) - This slider don't really fits with the sound, just listen with 50% or 25%, you'll see that 2x1/1 slider fits better. i did follow the sound and also keeping it consistent
4. 01:27:066 (5,6) - Improve this blanket
5. 01:30:859 (2,3,4) - The flow is a bit weird here...Why not a triangle ? i dont think its that weird and it flows just fine
6. 01:35:342 (1) - Maybe curving a bit the seconf part of that slider will make it look better ? made both part straight rather than curved
7. 01:44:997 (6) - With that slider, you are skipping an important beat (01:44:997 (6) - ) so I think a 2/1 slider will fit better to the music keeping the the pattern consistent, i did the same thing previously
8. 02:04:307 (3,4,5) - Why not a line ? (yeah because this one isn't a line) i didnt intend to make it a line at first
9. 02:08:445 (1,2,3) - ^

[Normal]

1. 00:00:859 (2,2) - Make them go in the same direction i dont think its that necessary unless AR is lowered
2. 00:07:066 (1) - Curving (1) will make it follow the (2) and (3)'s pattern i prefer the current shape and placement
3. 00:16:721 (2,3) - Why (3) isn't like (2) ? Just copy to and do Ctrl+H & Ctrl+J to your copy of (2) and replace it because its for the sake of creativity
4. 00:30:169 - Add circle i mainly follow the sax in this section and i would not want to follow just a hi hat since thats not likely a major sound
5. 00:44:997 (4,1) - Improbe blanket
6. 02:11:032 (5,1) - This line looks weird because the slider (4) (before 5 & 1) is curved. So make 5 & 1 in front of 4 or uncurve 4. either way it still flows straight

[Hard]

1. 00:11:204 (1,2) - For 2, take 1, copy it and just do Ctrl H & Ctrl J on it, (and replace the slider) i mentioned about creativity before and copy pasting everything isnt that fun to map
2. 00:38:445 (4,1) - Improve double blanket i didnt aim for blanket there and if i do, itll look horrid
3. 00:41:204 (4,1,2,3,4) - Use Ctrl+Shift+D for that pattern, it will look better i did lol
4. 01:21:549 (1,2) - Improve blanket
5. 01:31:204 (1,2) - ^^^^^ Double blanket theyre identical and i dont wanna destroy that
6. 01:34:480 (2,3) - Improve blanket blanket is fine
7. 01:44:652 (4,1) - ^ this is fine why are you pointing this
8. 02:06:721 (3) - Why not use a slider like here 02:01:204 (3) - to follow the flow ? it flows fine and i prefer my maps to have various kinds of slider
9. 02:13:101 (2,1,2) - Make same spacing for these parallel lines 02:13:963 (1,2) - section here becomes stronger, thats why this is spaced more than the prev one
10. 02:20:859 (1,2) - Improve blaket (^^^)

Exote wrote:

we discussed some stuff on the Normal diff before with this hottie

1. 00:48:445 - Is it intentional for starting the break here? If yes then please explain why.

1. 00:12:583 (1,2) - You can use the same slider shape here since you already did so at 00:01:549 (1,2) - 00:07:066 (1,2) - etc
2. 01:43:618 (5,6) - DS

1. 00:34:652 (1) - Would end a slider here 00:35:169 instead since it sounds stronger there.
2. 01:07:066 - When I modded your map last time I suggest ending a spinner here and then start mapping on 01:07:756 since it's the beginning of a new section, if you decided not to apply this then I would like to hear your reasoning.
3. 02:25:342 (2,3) - The stack looks random tbh considering you didn't do this anywhere else in this section.

1. 00:00:170 - Isn't the beginning part supposed to have 0.80 SV like 01:57:411 ? I think I already mentioned this before but I just want to make sure this time.

1. 01:23:963 (3,4,1) - The wide angle combined with large spacings plays really uncomfortable, strongly recommend to use less spacing on this or narrow the angle. Something like 01:12:928 (3,4,1) - plays a lot better.
2. 02:09:135 (4,5) - Spacing could be increased a bit imo, at least it should be 1.6 DS or bigger, otherwise it would look really inconsistent with 01:58:101 (4,5) - 02:03:618 (4,5) .

Electoz wrote:

Exote wrote:

we discussed some stuff on the Normal diff before with this hottie

Gonna denied this kudosu for now, it's a common manner to post your chatlog as a proof that you have modded the map so yeah I'll give you back once you do that.

[General]

1. 00:48:445 - Is it intentional for starting the break here? If yes then please explain why.

[Easy]

1. 00:12:583 (1,2) - You can use the same slider shape here since you already did so at 00:01:549 (1,2) - 00:07:066 (1,2) - etc i prefer the original shape where it flows up and then down to the next 4/1 slider
2. 01:43:618 (5,6) - DS

[Normal]

1. 00:34:652 (1) - Would end a slider here 00:35:169 instead since it sounds stronger there. I mainly focus on the sax here and ending the slider to the place that you suggested would create and awkward sound at the end of the slider, I prefer the slider to have a 2/1 length
2. 01:07:066 - When I modded your map last time I suggest ending a spinner here and then start mapping on 01:07:756 since it's the beginning of a new section, if you decided not to apply this then I would like to hear your reasoning. reason was in Easy at th prev mod and after knowing that Normal requires 2/1 of rest time after spinner, ill fix this
3. 02:25:342 (2,3) - The stack looks random tbh considering you didn't do this anywhere else in this section.I introduced the stacks during the kiai section and the pattern here plays similar as the pattern 02:19:480 (1,2,3) - only using a different kind of shape to interpret the section as i prefer my map to have more variety but still plays the same

[Hard]

1. 00:00:170 - Isn't the beginning part supposed to have 0.80 SV like 01:57:411 ? I think I already mentioned this before but I just want to make sure this time.

[Insane]

1. 01:23:963 (3,4,1) - The wide angle combined with large spacings plays really uncomfortable, strongly recommend to use less spacing on this or narrow the angle. Something like 01:12:928 (3,4,1) - plays a lot better. wide angles are easier to play compare to sharp ones as the flow towards the next object is always constant and doesnt change compare to sharp jumps where player needs to change speed depends on the spacing, while wide angle symmetry gives the opportunity for players to just jump and flow at ease towards the next object since the spacings between 01:24:135 (4) - are the same
2. 02:09:135 (4,5) - Spacing could be increased a bit imo, at least it should be 1.6 DS or bigger, otherwise it would look really inconsistent with 01:58:101 (4,5) - 02:03:618 (4,5) .

I'll consider whether I'll nominate this after hearing your reply/reasoning behind these suggestions, call me once you're done.

wide angles are easier to play compare to sharp ones as the flow towards the next object is always constant and doesnt change compare to sharp jumps where player needs to change speed depends on the spacing, while wide angle symmetry gives the opportunity for players to just jump and flow at ease towards the next object since the spacings between 01:24:135 (4) - are the same

Hobbes2 wrote:

wide angles are easier to play compare to sharp ones as the flow towards the next object is always constant and doesnt change compare to sharp jumps where player needs to change speed depends on the spacing, while wide angle symmetry gives the opportunity for players to just jump and flow at ease towards the next object since the spacings between 01:24:135 (4) - are the same

FWIW I disagree with this, sharp angles are generally easier to play than wide ones, because when you snap from one note to another, in a sharp angle that force used to slow your movement down to hit the note can also be applied when moving to the next note. With a wider angle, you have to use a force to slow the cursor down and then another to speed it up again to hit the next note. Pishi talks about it in one of his flow videos if you wan't a more in depth explanation.

Sonnyc wrote:

Easy.
00:05:687 (4,5) - The song is quite similar with 00:11:204 (4,5) - 00:16:721 (4,5) but the rhythm you've expressed is quite different. Since the song hasn't changed so much, this difference felt like an inconsistency rather than a variation. I'd recommend changing the rhythm of 00:11:204 (4,5) - 00:16:721 (4,5) to what you've done at 00:05:687 (4,5) so the strong sound at 00:22:238 (4,5) could get a proper emphasis.
00:44:652 - 01:50:859 - Since there is a strong sound unlike 00:43:273 - 00:41:893 - you can consider adding a note here. I mainly follow the sax here and if I were to add a note 00:44:652 here, it'll confuse the players since I didnt follow the drums from here 00:40:169.

Normal.
01:18:445 (5) - 02:23:273 (3) - Consider replacing this to a circle since the rhythm density around here felt too high without a 1/1 interval inside.
02:01:204 - Clap.

Hard.
00:43:963 (4) - Comparing the slider shape with 00:42:928 (1,2,3), this was slightly different while the music didn't drastically change. Rearranging the sliders so that (4) doesn't feel too off is recommended. Rotating each sliders might work here imo.

Insane.
00:59:049 (4,1) - This 1/2 being the same spacing with 3/4 rhythms in this section was quite tough to read the rhythms properly. Still you've managed to keep a consistency for 1/2s by using the symmetry logic. Since this was the only 1/2 that had a broken consistency, I require you a symmetry for this. didnt make a symmetry but I did make the shape similar
02:13:963 (1) - Since there is a sv decrease, I think you can make the shape more abnormal as you've done at 01:29:825 (1) to create some consistent concept.
02:23:618 (1,2,3) - The sudden jump towards (3) felt inconsistent considering your placement selection for similar music parts of 02:18:101 (1,2,3,4) - 02:29:135 (1,2,3). I recommend a consistent spacing.

Call me back after applying the mod.