Pentori wrote:

hello!
[Happiness]
00:27:986 (3,4) - 00:29:653 (6,1) - why dont you try giving strong piano notes like these more spacing? it makes them stand out and provides a different playing experience that makes the player feel these strong beats Actually I already did?
00:48:653 - having no hitsounds here in unacceptable imo. the section is pretty quiet, but thats how most of the song plays anyways. adding whistles to every 2nd beat would be the best option imo. 00:48:653 - 00:49:986 - 00:51:320 - 00:52:653 - 00:53:986 - etc. or you could hitsound to the background piano. its up to you alright
01:24:653 (5,6) - vocals raise volume here, this would be a nice place to put a small jump. though, currently 01:25:320 (6,1) - has more spacing than 01:24:653 (5,6) - so i dont think that jump is appropriate pkhg's
01:44:653 (1,2,3) - 01:33:986 (1,2,3) - you need to be consistent with how you do this imo. for one of them you skip over the blue tick vocal 01:35:153 - for the instruments, then later on you follow the vocal 01:45:820 (2) aight, adjusted to a new one
01:52:653 - try 2 beat whistle hitsounding here as well ya
02:04:820 - i would mute the slider end since 02:04:320 (3,4) - uses soft-sampleset there is nothing that sets the hitsounds apart compared to 01:18:653 (2,3) - where you have whistles for clickable things sure
02:09:653 (2,3,1) - ^ i also find the extended slider usage a little "random". if there are held vocals everywhere else, why did you decide choose to do 3 in a row here specifically? also skipping over the downbeat 02:11:320 - is not the best option since there is a pretty significant key change. http://puu.sh/tcAuP/390ee4f189.jpg thanks for the new rhtyhm
02:12:986 (5) - i cant hear anything here, make 02:12:653 (4) - a 1/2 slider? sure
02:16:653 - the section needs some more hitsounds done
02:21:084 - 02:21:425 - 02:22:107 - timing is sub-optimal. these sound more than 80ms early is it?
02:23:471 (2) - the vocals "impact" point sounds closer to the blue tick ya
02:32:450 (2,3,4) - these sound really off from what they should be following it's faint but i'm pretty sure it's following something
03:47:616 (6) - this follows the same pattern as 03:46:949 (3,4,5) - having a 1/4 reverse instead would be nice sure
04:02:283 (2,3,4) - i would keep the same spacing for a pattern like this. especially at this difficulty pkhg's
04:32:860 (3,4,5,6) - really big spacing.. at least in relation to the rest of the map. i would overlap these or sth naah, this one follows the music really well
05:20:833 (1) - seems a bit ridiculous to spin through all that noise past 05:26:000 - since it feels like the spinner is intended for the vocal. i would just end the spinner at 05:26:000 - and have a small break instead good thing
05:43:610 - hitsounds >< ya

well i think the timing in that middle section needs to be looked at again, as well as the addition of more hitsounds for feedback in calmer sections
you can poke me again when you've replied (:

Shurelia wrote:

Actually , we planned to do "something" on this map. 8)

Anyway, I'll check it later and edit this post when I finally went home.

Pentori wrote:

hello!
[Happiness]
01:24:653 (5,6) - vocals raise volume here, this would be a nice place to put a small jump. though, currently 01:25:320 (6,1) - has more spacing than 01:24:653 (5,6) - so i dont think that jump is appropriate pkhg's | shurelia pls thats yours not mine :p
04:02:283 (2,3,4) - i would keep the same spacing for a pattern like this. especially at this difficulty well this is mapped like a insane diff regardless sr
well i think the timing in that middle section needs to be looked at again, as well as the addition of more hitsounds for feedback in calmer sections
you can poke me again when you've replied (:

thanks thanks

I'll contact you again when pkhg's did something.

[TimingPoints]
139387,666.666666666667,4,2,1,20,1,0
140553,789.473684210526,4,2,1,20,1,0
141145,659.340659340659,4,2,1,20,1,0
142170,689.655172413793,4,2,1,20,1,0

Pentori wrote:

re

00:27:986 (3,4) - 00:29:653 (6,1) - by "more spacing" i mean something that can be felt while playing, 0.1-0.3x ds changes are not very significant. doesn't matter tho, this is quite minor aaah, so that's the one that you mean. alright then
00:48:653 - lower the volume of the whistles here, they should be more of a background thing than overriding the music. i found 20% worked quite well did 18% instead
01:44:653 (1,2,3) - 01:33:986 (1,2,3) - sorry but this still isn't consistent. try make the rhythms the similar. i recommend moving 01:45:820 (2) - to the white tick there

timing looks better, copy paste these to ur .osu under TimingPoints and resnap the stuff at 02:19:411

[TimingPoints]
139387,666.666666666667,4,2,1,20,1,0
140553,789.473684210526,4,2,1,20,1,0
141145,659.340659340659,4,2,1,20,1,0
142170,689.655172413793,4,2,1,20,1,0

Garden wrote:

i feel od6 is fairly enough for slow and calm songs like this, especially when it comes to tricky timing I actually feels like OD7 is decent enough cause if i'm trying to do od6 , I might feel like this thing going to be too easy.
01:45:986 - 02:27:687 - missing whistle? woops
02:04:820 - i wonder why only this extended slider volume is muted xd, feels inconsistent aight, aight. I muted 02:10:153 - too
03:00:283 (1,2,3) - 1,2 spacing feels unbalanced compared with other patterns this part pkhg's moved 2 onto 80|204
03:57:616 (3,4,5,6,7) - what about changing 03:58:283 (5) - to auto-clap, keep 2,4 clap pattern and 03:58:616 (7) - to drum-finish cuz drum here sounds lower-pitched, would sound nicer imo agree
04:32:026 (4) - add a whistle to this note? cuz u no longer have 04:16:360 (3,4,5,6) - etc. pattern to whistle on there i missed that
04:54:693 (10,11) - maybe drumfinish instead as i mentioned before ya
05:03:026 (1) - finish ya
05:57:116 (1) - consider whistle for 06:02:639 - the very last sound ya

1. 00:27:653 (2,3,4) - 00:32:986 (2,3,4) - Not sure if the spacing concept difference from 00:38:320 (2,3,4) - 00:43:653 (2,3,4) is intentional but gonna mention this just in case.
2. 00:35:320 (1,2,3) - 00:40:653 (1,2,3) - These too, the spacings in this section should be polished more imo if these things I mentioned so far aren't intended.
3. 00:53:986 (1,4) - These are overlapped but 00:54:986 (3,5) are stacked aaa triggered
4. 01:00:653 (4,5,1) - I don't understand why you have to repeat the flow or even stacking 01:00:653 (4,1) in the first place cuz this came out of nowhere and I'm curious whether this pattern is reflecting anything from the song.
5. 01:04:320 (6,1) - Should have a bigger spacing than 01:03:986 (5,6) considering how 01:05:653 (2,3) - 01:06:986 (5,1) - 01:08:320 (3,4) are spaced.
6. 01:04:653 (1) - 01:05:986 (3,4) - Could've used the same rhythm on these places tbh since vocal played repeatedly here so a repetitive rhythm would reflect that better.
7. 01:13:986 (3,4) - Kinda curious why you decided to make a 1/1 stack here.
8. 01:23:320 (1,2,3,4,5) - Not sure if the placements of these objects are meant to be a star but if yes then you should polish these.
9. 01:25:320 (6) - Personally a rhythm like 01:18:653 (2,3) would work better here cuz 01:25:986 should be clickable with obvious downbeat reasons.
   
   1. 01:26:320 (1,2,3) - Should be changed into sliders too if you applied the suggestion above cuz the rhythm here is not really different from 01:27:320 (4,5) so mapping sliders consistently would express the 1/1 piano sound better.
10. 01:58:986 - Should be clickable cuz vocal and 01:53:653 - 02:04:320 - 02:09:653 are clickable which has the same rhythm so not making 01:58:986 clickable is pretty much the odd one out regardless of who mapped this and other measures.
11. 03:17:616 (3,4) - Aren't these slider shapes supposed to be symmetric?
12. 04:27:026 (3,4,5) - Not sure if this back-and-forth stuff is intentional but the way you made it is emphasizing 04:27:693 (5) despite there's nothing on it zz
13. 05:03:026 (1,2) - Most of stacked stuff in this section are mapped with 1/4 so this could be misleading, should be something different than a stack to indicate the different snap here.
14. 05:35:270 (6,1) - Why the spacing here is so big compared to the rest in this section aa

Electroz wrote:

[Happiness]

1. 00:27:653 (2,3,4) - 00:32:986 (2,3,4) - Not sure if the spacing concept difference from 00:38:320 (2,3,4) - 00:43:653 (2,3,4) is intentional but gonna mention this just in case. It's intentional but these should still play pretty similar
2. 00:35:320 (1,2,3) - 00:40:653 (1,2,3) - These too, the spacings in this section should be polished more imo if these things I mentioned so far aren't intended. We planned to make things "Insane" like map so...
3. 00:53:986 (1,4) - These are overlapped but 00:54:986 (3,5) are stacked aaa triggered pkhg's
4. 01:00:653 (4,5,1) - I don't understand why you have to repeat the flow or even stacking 01:00:653 (4,1) in the first place cuz this came out of nowhere and I'm curious whether this pattern is reflecting anything from the song. pkhg's
5. 01:04:320 (6,1) - Should have a bigger spacing than 01:03:986 (5,6) considering how 01:05:653 (2,3) - 01:06:986 (5,1) - 01:08:320 (3,4) are spaced. pkhg's
6. 01:04:653 (1) - 01:05:986 (3,4) - Could've used the same rhythm on these places tbh since vocal played repeatedly here so a repetitive rhythm would reflect that better. pkhg's
7. 01:13:986 (3,4) - Kinda curious why you decided to make a 1/1 stack here. I like this stop-and-go movement also it play quite well with the song
8. 01:23:320 (1,2,3,4,5) - Not sure if the placements of these objects are meant to be a star but if yes then you should polish these. fixed
9. 01:25:320 (6) - Personally a rhythm like 01:18:653 (2,3) would work better here cuz 01:25:986 should be clickable with obvious downbeat reasons.
   
   1. 01:26:320 (1,2,3) - Should be changed into sliders too if you applied the suggestion above cuz the rhythm here is not really different from 01:27:320 (4,5) so mapping sliders consistently would express the 1/1 piano sound better.
   Did trying to use your suggestion but It plays kinda awkward for me, What I did to fix this downbeat is by shortening 01:25:320 (6) - into a 1/2 slider and add an object on the downbeat since I don't have any supports to map the blue tick at this one
10. 01:58:986 - Should be clickable cuz vocal and 01:53:653 - 02:04:320 - 02:09:653 are clickable which has the same rhythm so not making 01:58:986 clickable is pretty much the odd one out regardless of who mapped this and other measures. sure
11. 03:17:616 (3,4) - Aren't these slider shapes supposed to be symmetric? fix'd
12. 04:27:026 (3,4,5) - Not sure if this back-and-forth stuff is intentional but the way you made it is emphasizing 04:27:693 (5) despite there's nothing on it zz fix'd
13. 05:03:026 (1,2) - Most of stacked stuff in this section are mapped with 1/4 so this could be misleading, should be something different than a stack to indicate the different snap here. pkhg's
14. 05:35:270 (6,1) - Why the spacing here is so big compared to the rest in this section aa already being explained on the first line

Don't know about this tho, probably I'll have to recheck it one more time after this and I'll decide what to do.

Electroz wrote:

[Happiness]

[list]
[*]00:53:986 (1,4) - These are overlapped but 00:54:986 (3,5) are stacked aaa triggered so what
[*]01:00:653 (4,5,1) - I don't understand why you have to repeat the flow or even stacking 01:00:653 (4,1) in the first place cuz this came out of nowhere and I'm curious whether this pattern is reflecting anything from the song. isnt reflecting anything but isnt bad neither
[*]01:04:320 (6,1) - Should have a bigger spacing than 01:03:986 (5,6) considering how 01:05:653 (2,3) - 01:06:986 (5,1) - 01:08:320 (3,4) are spaced. should/b]
[*]01:04:653 (1) - 01:05:986 (3,4) - Could've used the same rhythm on these places tbh since vocal played repeatedly here so a repetitive rhythm would reflect that better. [b]would
[*]05:03:026 (1,2) - Most of stacked stuff in this section are mapped with 1/4 so this could be misleading, should be something different than a stack to indicate the different snap here. thats why 2 is a slider

1. 02:00:320 (5,1) - Could've used a bigger spacing like 02:10:986 (4,1) .
2. 04:32:026 (4,1,2) - Not really readable imo, the way you spaced 04:32:026 (4,1) and 04:32:193 (1,2) is really hard to predict in the first place despite having the same beat spacing, I would just go for a normal distance snapping here to make it more predictable, something like this.
3. 04:32:860 (3,4,5,6) - Doesn't play well as a build up imo, I mean this is the only place in the song where you used big spacings and they aren't really predictable considering how 1/2 objects were spaced on earlier parts in the song, stuff like 03:46:949 (3,4,5) - 04:54:360 (8,9,10,11) would be better in terms of readability.
4. 05:50:943 (5,6) - Could be misread as 1/2 stuff with no bpm changes like 05:48:943 (1,2,3) so either change 05:50:943 (5,6) into a slider or do something with the spacing so it's more noticeable with the bpm change, up to you.

Electroz wrote:

Recheck

[Happiness]

1. 02:00:320 (5,1) - Could've used a bigger spacing like 02:10:986 (4,1) . ya
2. 04:32:026 (4,1,2) - Not really readable imo, the way you spaced 04:32:026 (4,1) and 04:32:193 (1,2) is really hard to predict in the first place despite having the same beat spacing, I would just go for a normal distance snapping here to make it more predictable, something like this. ya
3. 04:32:860 (3,4,5,6) - Doesn't play well as a build up imo, I mean this is the only place in the song where you used big spacings and they aren't really predictable considering how 1/2 objects were spaced on earlier parts in the song, stuff like 03:46:949 (3,4,5) - 04:54:360 (8,9,10,11) would be better in terms of readability. nerfed a bit, I really want to follow the sudden intense that came from the song
4. 05:50:943 (5,6) - Could be misread as 1/2 stuff with no bpm changes like 05:48:943 (1,2,3) so either change 05:50:943 (5,6) into a slider or do something with the spacing so it's more noticeable with the bpm change, up to you. fair enough

Shurelia wrote:

paan seh ini nhak pb yg cuuops :V
maen bomb by 1 sne co op