1. Easy (1.9 stars, 284 notes)
2. Hard (3.47 stars, 601 notes)
3. LCFC's Normal (2.3 stars, 496 notes)
4. Lunatic (4.8 stars, 897 notes)

Bearizm wrote:

that's fucked up

pkhg wrote:

faster than me tbh

CookieBite wrote:

active bn in 2017

LowComboFC wrote:

Qualified! Congrats~

Tomadoi wrote:

add LCFC to tags xd

1. 01:09:743 (1) - Ctrl J for better flow?
2. 03:30:743 (7) - NC this?
3. 03:52:118 (2,4) - These are just slightly overlapping, it would look a bit better if you move 4 a bit

1. 00:09:743 (1,2) - Unusual flow you use here, the sound and the flow don't fit together imo
2. 00:42:743 (1,2) - 01:57:743 (1,2) - These two parts sound similar but you use very different flow for both
3. 02:14:993 (3,4,1) - The triangle is slightly off
4. 02:29:993 (3,4) - i think if you Ctrl J this and move it back to the original spot it would look a little better
5. 03:15:743 (1) - Slightly offscreen
6. 03:40:305 (2) - ^

1. 00:12:368 (4,5,1) - 1 is supposed to be emphasized but you put 5 stacked on top of it. Wouldn't it be better if 5 was equal to both sliders, to emphasize the big finish on 1?
2. 01:12:368 (4,5,1) - Same here
3. 00:53:805 (3) - There's a vocal on the end of this slider which makes it seem more important than the head of it
4. 01:20:243 (1) - I don't think this needs to be emphasized as much, the sound on the downbeat isn't that loud and theres no vocals on it
5. 01:21:743 (1) - And this might need a little more emphasis
6. 01:25:680 (4) - why not make this a triplet with circles like before
7. 01:30:743 (1) - Imo it sounds better if this starts on the vocal here 01:30:555 -
8. 02:53:618 (2,3,4,5,6,7,1) - It'd be nice if you made this into a perfect pentagon
9. 03:03:743 (1) - Emphasis thing about i said earlier
10. 03:54:743 (6) - NC?
11. 02:19:305 (2) - Very minor but rotate this 2 degrees to match the 7 degree angle the rest of the kiai uses

1. 01:19:868 (7) - You skip a note on the red tick in the middle of this slider. There's also a vocal
2. 01:30:743 (1) - Same thing I said about the Hard diff to put the spinner on the vocal (red tick)
3. 01:07:024 (2,3) - Maybe map this like you did before at 01:05:524 (2,3) - with the .5 distance spacing. The double and triplet are very different sounds and you map them with the same stacks
   
   like this

   
4. 01:05:243 (1,2,3) - 01:20:243 (1,2,3) - Map these the same
5. 01:54:555 (6,1) - The spacing between these is quite small, and there's a finish on the 1 so I'd think it should be spaced further
6. 02:02:055 (1) - Idk if it's just me but this could have a tiny bit more curve to it to match the curviness of this one 02:02:618 (2) -
7. 02:08:618 (2,3) - I think the length of the 1/2 slider is too small for you to map it like that :p
8. 02:12:649 - Really noticeable sound here that you didn't map
9. 02:35:524 (2,3) - Might wanna put that .5 distance spacing between these like you usually do
10. 03:08:524 (2) - Wouldn't it be better if this started on the red tick where the vocal is?
11. 03:09:930 (2,3) - Unusual flow here, not sure why you decided to use it
12. 04:10:868 (7) - This angle looks different, I don't think you use 15 degrees in most of the map

_orange wrote:

hi I really want to mod this map

[Easy]

1. 01:09:743 (1) - Ctrl J for better flow? i want it to break, to indicate a new section of the chorus or in simpler words; NC.
2. 03:30:743 (7) - NC this? yea
3. 03:52:118 (2,4) - These are just slightly overlapping, it would look a bit better if you move 4 a bit yep

[Hard]

1. 00:12:368 (4,5,1) - 1 is supposed to be emphasized but you put 5 stacked on top of it. Wouldn't it be better if 5 was equal to both sliders, to emphasize the big finish on 1? it doesnt make a big difference, and i want to make my patterns consistent. throughout this difficulty, all the triples that comes after a slider are stacked.
2. 01:12:368 (4,5,1) - Same here ~
3. 00:53:805 (3) - There's a vocal on the end of this slider which makes it seem more important than the head of it arguable, and while you're right, the way that i map this is heavy on instruments so i didn't even hesitate to skip the vocal. the vocal's not that strong anyways imo.
4. 01:20:243 (1) - I don't think this needs to be emphasized as much, the sound on the downbeat isn't that loud and theres no vocals on it the song has this lullaby thing in the background that sets the rhythm of the whole song and it ends in this particular tick. You can hear it from 01:18:743 - by every 1/1 sound and ends at 01:20:243 - . the ending seems to have the strongest sound so it makes sense to me that i make a jump there, especially when 01:19:493 (5,6) - is also a jump
5. 01:21:743 (1) - And this might need a little more emphasis while i do agree with this, the emphasis comes from the harsh break of flow from how 01:20:805 (3,4,5) - is a fast paced downwards movement to a sharp jump upwards. so I have doubts that I should change this because DS is not the only way to emphasize strong beats imo.
6. 01:25:680 (4) - why not make this a triplet with circles like before yea
7. 01:30:743 (1) - Imo it sounds better if this starts on the vocal here 01:30:555 - not emphasizing the vocal despite it being quite strong sounding.
8. 02:53:618 (2,3,4,5,6,7,1) - It'd be nice if you made this into a perfect pentagon I have no visual references for this so Idk how i can make it to what you're suggesting, sorry!
9. 03:03:743 (1) - Emphasis thing about i said earlier incrteased ds slightly to 1.6x from 1.4x
10. 03:54:743 (6) - NC? a bit picky about this because that belongs to a pattern. it just looks rly ugly if i NC and it doesnt help readability so I have no reason to NC it as of now.
11. 02:19:305 (2) - Very minor but rotate this 2 degrees to match the 7 degree angle the rest of the kiai uses ok changed]

[Lunatic]

1. 01:19:868 (7) - You skip a note on the red tick in the middle of this slider. There's also a vocal instrument emphasis
2. 01:30:743 (1) - Same thing I said about the Hard diff to put the spinner on the vocal (red tick)
3. 01:07:024 (2,3) - Maybe map this like you did before at 01:05:524 (2,3) - with the .5 distance spacing. The double and triplet are very different sounds and you map them with the same stacks that was the point, but i'll change it i guess.
   
   like this

   
4. 01:05:243 (1,2,3) - 01:20:243 (1,2,3) - Map these the same nah this one's ok, the lack of movement from 01:20:524 (2,3) - gives more emphasis on 01:20:805 (4) -
5. 01:54:555 (6,1) - The spacing between these is quite small, and there's a finish on the 1 so I'd think it should be spaced further in theory makes sense, but what i'm about to say to u is pretty meme but i've had this habit of mapping where i make strong beats mapped with low DS for anti jump, and that anti jump is the emphasis.weird, but it's a thing of mine. Plus, there's no vocal here so I thought that's the emphasis of the LACK of vocals because the previous part was emphasizing the vocals. I'll change if more ppl point this out tho.
6. 02:02:055 (1) - Idk if it's just me but this could have a tiny bit more curve to it to match the curviness of this one 02:02:618 (2) - changed, very slightly
7. 02:08:618 (2,3) - I think the length of the 1/2 slider is too small for you to map it like that :p it's alright
8. 02:12:649 - Really noticeable sound here that you didn't map OwO WHAT'S THIS?
9. 02:35:524 (2,3) - Might wanna put that .5 distance spacing between these like you usually do naah xd
10. 03:08:524 (2) - Wouldn't it be better if this started on the red tick where the vocal is? arguable, but i emphasized the instruments here so it's why i mapped it that way, but if more ppl point this out i'll change it. cuz I wasn't sure on how to map this too.
11. 03:09:930 (2,3) - Unusual flow here, not sure why you decided to use it trying things out, plays out nicely with this bpm so i dont mind.
12. 04:10:868 (7) - This angle looks different, I don't think you use 15 degrees in most of the map yep, trying things out again.

nice