Greetings
00:36:072 - This is not constant 1/4 in the song, but this is 00:39:822 - , which in turns ruins the coherence of the last stream. There's also the parts that Kisses mentioned. EDIT: Since this was answered, I'll add that reflecting the song itself is more important than making for a good transition. You can always accomplish both goals without resorting to the way it is currently done.
00:37:143 - 00:37:947 - 00:38:215 - 00:38:483 -
Other snares are seemingly ignored between the repeats, 00:37:545 - 00:38:884 - .
Try this instead.00:49:733 (5,6) - 00:51:875 (3,4) - 00:53:483 (3,4) - 00:54:018 (3,4) -
Snare to low-pitched vocal parts look misspaced, in comparison to the notes with actual impacts, 00:53:215 (1,2) - 00:53:884 (2,3) - , for example.
00:58:304 (1,1) - 00:59:375 (1,1) - It was argued that these were a cause for 02:03:661 (3,1) - , yet they their context is very different, and that's what makes it out of place.
00:59:911 - This is placed half a beat too early according to the prior pattern 00:58:840 - 00:57:768 - and should be moved to 01:00:045 - , in which case 01:00:179 (1,2) - can be removed and stream started on 01:00:313 - , where the drum-kicks are initiated, as a way to make the rhythm more recognizable after 00:59:241 - 00:58:170 - .
01:05:268 - Unlike 01:03:527 - 01:04:197 - 01:04:599 - , there's a vocal here which may want to be stressed, since they're being followed so closely anyway. Make the slider a 1/2 and place a circle here. Refer to 01:07:545 (2,3) - . Same goes for 02:21:340 - and any other occurrences.
01:11:563 - Filling this musical gap in with a circle is rather uncalled for. No impact here, but there is at 01:11:295 - , try using that cue to prevent multiple sliders after each other, and to keep this consistent with 01:12:500 (1) - 01:13:572 (1) - .
01:15:179 (1,2) - Since this is so close to 01:15:581 (4,1) - , the latter pattern loses the contrast it was supposed to have, and in turn makes it stand out less. Generally this is solved by using a different type of note, a slider in this case, but that wouldn't follow the vocals as well, right? That's where the spacing concept becomes a problem.
01:29:911 - See no reason to stray from the vocals here. Nothing in the song seems to suggest it. In turn, 01:30:045 (2,3,4,5) -
looks very out of place for this section, considering that the majority or other notes here are sliders.
01:39:822 (5,7) - These are distinct sounds, yet they're just like any other note before and after them. It may be that they have a little more spacing than other notes, but this wouldn't be noticeable, due to the low potential of contrast in spacing we established earlier. Look at 01:39:286 (1,2) - , for example.
02:07:411 (3,4,1) - Every two beats, there's a stronger vocal compared to the rest, indicated by the new combos. However their spacing is questionable when making these comparisons. Preferably it would both be visually indicated as well as accentuated. Applies for 02:07:947 (3,4,1) - 02:08:483 (3,4,1) - etc.
02:09:822 - Considering that every two beats have a new combo, this is probably unintentional.
02:12:902 - This vocal is different, and extends over 02:13:036 (1) - , yet the combo placement and spacing seems to contradict that. Could always turn 02:12:902 (4,1) - into a slider otherwise. Vocals are followed throughout the map, after all.
02:19:063 (2,1) - Similarly to 02:18:527 (1,2) - , this is also a group, and should not be continued nor NCed in this way. In comparison, the spacing of 02:19:465 (1,2) - is not warranted, as the two impacts worked with are actually at 02:19:599 (2,1) - .
02:32:858 -
This is actually 1/3 snapping up until 02:33:929 - , not 1/4, and applies to all difficulties.
03:16:518 - Considering that a vocal beings here, try changing (2) to a 1/2 slider and have (3) start from 03:16:518 - , extending it to 03:16:920 - .
Qualified maps receive a lot of publicity, so it only makes sense that they would also receive more feedback as a result. "No one said anything before it was qualified!", is therefore kind of missing the point. Most of the time, it's not that no one said anything, it's that no one saw the things in question. The post-qualification process allows the community to share their opinions of the map before it reaches the ranked section. A kind of test version, if you will. Should the reasons be sound, valid and important to the quality of the map, as judged by the Quality Assurance Team after being reported to them, it will be disqualified for further processing. It may be difficult to regain a qualification after this, but
that's the whole point. It is necessary to make sure no other issues remain in the mapset before it is, once again, qualified.
Also, Raikozen, please stay calm when responding to mods. It's very rude of you to attack the modder (and other modders at the same time, apparently) for their reasons, rather than the reasons themselves. We're sharing our opinion of the map, in order to help you help yourself improve upon it, so don't take it personally. If you don't agree with something, tell them why, do not insult them for not seeing what you're doing. I would highly suggest you read over the
Code of Conduct before making any more responses.
Raikozen wrote:
if it plays bad for you, that just means you're just not good enough at the game, and that's it
This is also a really bad attitude. Just because a modder can't play the map, does not mean they can't bring valid arguments.