1. Evolution (4.65 stars, 1131 notes)

Halfslashed wrote:

[Evolution]
00:28:908 (2) - If this was supposed to be mapped to the vocal, then it should start on 00:28:855. For playability purposes, I just recommend skipping this beat completely. - made a double, we'll see how this goes
00:31:908 (7) - Currently doesn't really have as much emphasis as it should since it's spaced the same way as 00:31:480 (4,5). I recommend using some sort of increasing spacing concept to highlight the difference between this vocal and the ones before. - spaced it more
00:39:837 (3,4) - Since you're following vocals I recommend a 1/2 slider here since 4 makes it less clear that you're following vocals after this point due to mixing the instruments together. - i actually want 00:40:051 - to be clickable and 00:39:837 - seems to me more like a stop than a continuous vocal
00:45:194 (3,4,5,6) - This equal spacing doesn't really put emphasis on the strong vocal on 00:45:408 (5). Try stacking 3 and 4 onto 5.
01:02:551 (1,2,3) - Clever. - hehe
01:16:051 (2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - I'd recommend 1/4 sliders instead of a stream here honestly, since you were following the melody at 01:12:409 (1,2,3,4,5). - agreed, changed
02:04:694 (1,2,3,4,1) - These don't have the same strength as stuff like 02:04:265 (1,2,3,4), so I recommend lowering spacing here. - done
02:43:265 (3,4,5,6,7,8,9) - I cannot tell what this rhythm is intended to follow, since the sliders skip over strong melody beats. - the little drum stuff in the back since i wanted to have the melody at 02:45:408 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1) - mapped to stand out
03:20:551 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1) - 03:23:980 (1,2,3,4,1) - These have very similar intensities but the first one is extremely overdone for this intensity. I recommend making the first rhythm more consistent with the second one, since the second one captures the feeling a lot better here. - actually the first one is mapped to the melody and the second is mapped to the vocals where the intensity actually drops - i'll get more opinions on this anyhow
03:46:265 - Just going to point out that I hate that you ignore the 3/4 basis for the rhythm here for this section. - im sorry but i map more of it later
04:22:480 (2,3) - Increased spacing would enhance the effect you're trying to provide here, since right now I don't think this spacing does too good of a job. - i tried
04:24:301 - Considering this is part of the rhythm you're following, there isn't much of a reason to leave this unmapped. - agreed but i had to redo this pattern lol
04:25:051 (1,2,1,2,1,2) - Increase spacing since these are way more intense than your other iterations of this pattern. - done
04:25:801 - Try incorporating a buzz slider here, then have a 1/4 jump to 04:26:122 (2). - i'd rather have the pause because after a jumpstream section of that length it's a bit wew
04:26:122 (2,3,4) - Lower spacing to emphasize the hold effect here. - done
04:37:694 - Honestly the gap after this object kind of kills the pace here, and you're skipping a bunch of 1/4 that you later decide to follow. For some intensity contrast, I recommend adding some 1/4 repeats. - hmmm nah i think i'll just have kicksliders

Good luck!

Bubblun wrote:

From the Black Vultures Modding Queue doing m4m

Background is too large. At maximum it can be 1920x1200 - fuck

Up until 00:28:908 - there's a lack of hitsounds. Yea there are hitsounds, but the feedback could be better. Notes like 00:11:980 (1) - and 00:01:694 (1) - could use additional hitsounds for better feedback. - added a hitsound on the first but generally i think that the whistlespam is good enough here, i don't want to add anything super complicated to the map x.x
00:05:122 (1) - I'd bring this closer to 3 since there's really no emphasis, just a shift. - there's that synth thing that comes on there
00:28:801 (2) - That's not a clickable sound. That's just the echo of 1. - vocal tho
00:32:551 (1,2) - 2 isn't as prominent as 1, so I think you should replace these 2 notes with a 1/4 slider instead. - still mapping the hihats
00:42:301 (4,5) - The priority is on 5, so I'd move 4 under the head of 3 instead - and put a 1/4 jump of that size? not so early lol this also sets up the movement at 04:04:480 (2,3) -
00:50:551 (4) - It's awkward having no feedback on an expected downbeat like this. - that's not a downbeat
00:53:980 (4) - ^ - ^
01:21:515 (8) - This isn't supported. I'd delete it - I'm following the hihats in the back here and do consistently throughout the map
01:38:980 (3) - Unsnapped - why. fixed xd
01:52:265 (1,1) - The music doesn't stop here, so I don't understand this anti jump. I think you should move the first note somewhere else so the player is still moving along with the song. - nah i think this fits because it sets up the slider at 01:53:122 (1) - which has way more movement to emphasize the wub sound, and the pause emphasizes the snare
03:24:837 (3) - Unsnapped - again how, fixed
03:35:980 (1,2) - It'd make more sense to put 2 here because this spot is stronger. - I think the 1 is stronger here so no change ;-;
04:15:408 (1) - Offscreen - unlucky

Good Map. Good luck

1. "monstercat" in Tags should seems fine.
2. Very strange BG-resolution... it looks not like 16:9 or even 16:10.
3. Coultdown is 2010, uncheck it.

1. 00:11:980 (1) - shape doesn't looks really polished, what about this? If you really want to overlap here - fix it, otherwise it's looks odd.
2. Almost all your blankets are messy.
3. 00:28:694 (1,2) - as for me this double is hard to read, better to change 00:28:801 (2) - for slider.
4. 00:59:122 (4,1,2,3) - jump between this two sliders is so high, i think you should to make intermediate pattern like this, or somehow differently.
5. 01:34:265 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16) - 0.2x DS for this streams seems so low for further jump to 01:35:980 (1) which requires some aim-skills, what about skaling to 0.3x at least?
6. 01:52:265 (1,1,3) - pattern for the smartest people lol. As for me 01:52:587 (2,3) - this jump gives an idea about jump between 01:52:265 (1,1) - is identical (or conversely?), so 01:52:265 (1,1) - this 1/2 jump is unnoticeable and stream is passed immediately after jump. NC is smooths out it, but not so high.
7. 01:56:980 (2,3,4) - i think this sounds are relate to one pattern so strange that you make so small jump between 01:56:980 (2,3) (usually you use the same between spaced streams like 02:03:944 (2,1) ) and so high between 01:57:194 (3,4) . Sound here is high, yep, but no so high for this big jump.
8. 02:17:122 (1,2,3) - LOL, i think that jumping between should reversed
9. 04:48:837 (3,4,1) - :thinking:
   Nah, i stopped to mod this because map is so strange.
   At first, blankets. As i wrote, almost all blankets are messy.
   At second, spacing. You didn't follow your style, in some moments which have identical sounds you have different jumps, i don't see any structure of map because at the same jumps in music you make another patterns (like 02:00:730 (3,4) - 01:55:480 (4,1) have clap but it's highlighted by different methods :thinking:), and 04:13:051 (1,2,1,2,3) - looks overmapped without any reason, usually this jumps used for 1/3 snapping.
   At third, density of objects. Having a lot of streams/triples/something another in a row (like 02:40:265 (3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,1,2,3) what the...) looks very boring, it's should be diluted by sliders. Try to diversify your patterns but don't forget about reasonable boundaries.

100bit wrote:

Mir is sounds like "world" in Russian.
===
Heyo from my queue. i hate wubs
[General]

1. "monstercat" in Tags should seems fine.
2. Very strange BG-resolution... it looks not like 16:9 or even 16:10.
3. Coultdown is 2010, uncheck it.

[Revolution]

1. 00:11:980 (1) - shape doesn't looks really polished, what about this? If you really want to overlap here - fix it, otherwise it's looks odd. - that looks worse tbh
2. Almost all your blankets are messy. - fixing the ones that matter
3. 00:28:694 (1,2) - as for me this double is hard to read, better to change 00:28:801 (2) - for slider. - removed 2
4. 00:59:122 (4,1,2,3) - jump between this two sliders is so high, i think you should to make intermediate pattern like this, or somehow differently. - what? lol this is really easy to play i don't get the problem
5. 01:34:265 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16) - 0.2x DS for this streams seems so low for further jump to 01:35:980 (1) which requires some aim-skills, what about skaling to 0.3x at least? - but... that's the whole point. to aim this well because it's a very noticeable change in the song
6. 01:52:265 (1,1,3) - pattern for the smartest people lol. As for me 01:52:587 (2,3) - this jump gives an idea about jump between 01:52:265 (1,1) - is identical (or conversely?), so 01:52:265 (1,1) - this 1/2 jump is unnoticeable and stream is passed immediately after jump. NC is smooths out it, but not so high. - okay removed it cuz got more opinions
7. 01:56:980 (2,3,4) - i think this sounds are relate to one pattern so strange that you make so small jump between 01:56:980 (2,3) (usually you use the same between spaced streams like 02:03:944 (2,1) ) and so high between 01:57:194 (3,4) . Sound here is high, yep, but no so high for this big jump. - ok nerfed it
8. 02:17:122 (1,2,3) - LOL, i think that jumping between should reversed - why?
9. 04:48:837 (3,4,1) - :thinking: - what's wrong with this exactly? Considering the local structure of this area this makes perfect sense and isn't hard to play at all
   Nah, i stopped to mod this because map is so strange.
   At first, blankets. As i wrote, almost all blankets are messy.
   At second, spacing. You didn't follow your style, in some moments which have identical sounds you have different jumps, i don't see any structure of map because at the same jumps in music you make another patterns (like 02:00:730 (3,4) - 01:55:480 (4,1) have clap but it's highlighted by different methods :thinking:), and 04:13:051 (1,2,1,2,3) - looks overmapped without any reason, usually this jumps used for 1/3 snapping.
   At third, density of objects. Having a lot of streams/triples/something another in a row (like 02:40:265 (3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,1,2,3) what the...) looks very boring, it's should be diluted by sliders. Try to diversify your patterns but don't forget about reasonable boundaries.

Good luck!
{end of the mod}

-Roz wrote:

From my queue.
Everything is mostly fine. I'll pick out visual things that might make the map look more structured/organized!

[Evolution]00:02:551 (3) - Move to x:80 y:122, It fits better with the overlap just before - too minor for me tbh

00:06:194 (4) - Move to x:429 y:155, looks better - looks fine as it is imo

00:11:337 (2) - Make this a repeating slider instead of the next hitcircle? Might just be me, but it makes the rhythm simpler, but better - actually agree with this, changed

00:38:551 (3,4,5) - Minor, but move to x:135 y:117 - just say "make a triangle" next time coordinates give me no information lol

00:41:765 (2,3) - These don't flow that well, maybe move the slider up and move the next one accordingly? - not supposed to flow well because later on in the map i use this concept too so at least i introduce it early. it also fits the sound imo

00:56:551 (1,2,3,4) - Maybe change these to http://puu.sh/vfZvk/7c1479d920.png instead? - it's okay as it is

01:03:408 (1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3) - These could all be lined up better, just visual though - it's so minor tho i can barely see how it's misaligned

01:10:051 (7) - Overlap this with 01:09:408 (4) - it's already overlapped?

01:16:694 (5) - Increase Slider Velocity on this to match the snare - why? I don't use slider velocity to emphasize drums

01:30:837 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - These jumps are fine, but I'd rather make them go from top to bottom like http://puu.sh/vfZSO/36a4d5922f.png it fits the build up feel to me - as long as the spacing increases it fits the buildup for me

01:39:194 (1,2) - Move these two to x:394 y:42, looks less messy - made it a triple-ish thing instead i intended to change this to begin with

01:47:980 (1) - Not a fan of this slider, I'd say make this more like the ones before - fits for me since the first part of the kiai is different the slider can be too

01:56:551 (1) - This is a little messy, just messing with the points in the slider could help :3 - it's good enough for me it's really minor

02:19:908 (7,8,9) - Space these closer to the slider before - why exactly? it's fine as it is tbh

03:22:908 (2) - Move to x:297 y:42, and move the next jump closer to compensate. Might flow better! - i think it flows fine, little deviation for the vocal

03:35:980 (1,2) - This is really odd rhythm, possibly make it an extended slider then another short one? - following the 1/4 in the back that has a clickable sound on that blue, and since i used a lot of blue tick rhythm so far anyways i think this is okay

03:40:908 (9) - Move to x:469 y:31 - why?

04:13:051 (1,2,1,2,3) - This could be made a little less brutal, plus timeline gap makes the rhythm hard toooo - it's fine because these are all extremely strong beats and i introduce spaced 1/4 already so this kind of thing shouldn't be too unexpected especially considering 04:12:194 (6,7,1) -

04:22:480 (2) - Make this repeat once, there's a small sound on the white tick - i think the pause is better for emphasis

04:24:194 (2,3,4,5) - These double's and the ones after don't fit the sounds to me... I'd switch with normal streams - i think these are okay because the ones after are much more intense = higher spacing

04:30:194 (5) - Repeat once, another sound on the white tick - same

04:54:837 to 05:08:551 - These notes could be placed a lot better, feels cluttered - what do you mean it feels clutted lmao it's like 3/1 rhythm with like 1 circle per beat there's literally nothing on the screen

Overall this map is really good. There's a lot of polish that you could do, but it's not THAT important. I absolutely love the kiai's, their rhythm and feel are perfect, and honestly if this wasn't a marathon I'd be begging to make a guest diff!

-Fluffy wrote:

Hi!,
From my modding queue
Insert self advertisement here:https://osu.ppy.sh/forum/p/5951466#p5951466

00:01:694 (1,2) - Stack the note right on top of the sldier, makes for a cleaner look and feel. - ? it's fine as it is
Like this:

SPOILER

00:18:837 (1,2) - ^
00:23:980 (5,1) - ^ Avoid overlap like this, makes the map look unfinished. - no it doesn't lol this is stylistic
00:28:051 (1,1) - Make it more spaced from 00:26:980 (4,5,1) since there's a longer pause between the notes. - nc should help this anyway
00:31:051 (2,3) - Make into two kicksliders, it will go with the lyrics. - not really necessary for a calmer part here, too much filler rhythm
Like this:

SPOILER

00:45:622 (7,8) - don't put random 1/6th sliders when you mapped the entire song in 1/4. Also, the random change of speed is bad. - there's no random change in speed, these are 1/8 and are fine to emphasize lyrics
Something more like this maybe if you want to emphasize the lyrics:

SPOILER

00:49:051 (7,8) - ^
00:52:480 (5,6) - ^ Seems you did this a lot, make the same change for all of them. - same reply
00:55:265 (1,2,1,2) - Change into 2 kick sliders - no thanks i want the emphasis on the ringing sound in the back
Like this:

SPOILER

01:02:551 (1,2,3) - make this same as 01:00:837 (1,2,3) - don't you hear the slight difference in the piano, this is fine to show that difference in volume
01:10:265 (1) - space out this entire combo more, emphasize music through distance. This section can also be hit-sounded. - it is hitsounded and it's fine as it is it's 1/1 I don't want to make it super emphasized. it i wanted emphasis i'd have used sliders
01:12:409 (1) - Lower the volume for these notes - why? these are okay to me
01:15:837 (1) - ^, also consider mapping it the same way as ^ too. - there's 1/4 in the back so it's different and I'll express it differently
01:21:515 (8) - Delete, there's no sound here. - there's a sound here, just like the rest of this stream
01:34:693 (5) - New combo
01:35:122 (9) - ^
01:35:550 (13) - ^ - this is intentional to show the monotony of the voice
01:34:265 (1) - Consider making this into a shape instead of just stacking the entire thing. ᑕᖇᙓᗩTᓰᐯᓰT૪. - kills emphasis due to contrast of spacing relevant to the next notes
The following section is well mapped, I like it. - thanks
01:50:551 (2,3,4) - Change into 2 1/4 sliders. Like 01:55:694 (1) - the sound is 1/8 though..
02:23:551 (1,2,3) - Change to make it flow better/ look smoother. Something like: - barely noticeable difference in play tbh, no change needed

SPOILER

03:49:587 (9,1) - Make spacing from notes into slider the same. - oh rip fixed
03:51:622 (2,3,4,5) - Make the notes flow into the slider better. Like this: - i think this flows fine into the slider

SPOILER

04:40:480 (7,8,9) - Change to two kicksliders. Like: - not needed, it's to emphasize the vocals like right in the beginning

SPOILER

Most of the problems I saw were at the beginning, I really like the way the mapped the kiai sections. Best of luck! : ^)

- Frontier - wrote:

m4m sorry for bad mod

[General]
xd (i know it's okay)

• The actual name for this song is "Rameses B - Transformations (feat. Laura Brehm) "
  Metadata: (There are a lot so I'll give you only five.)
  

1. iTunes Full Album http://monster.cat/1fsmpQy
2. Bandicamp http://monster.cat/1hpp7oo
3. Amazon http://monster.cat/1dAiMCc
4. iTunes Single http://monster.cat/1eChHeM
5. Youtube https://youtu.be/Fkwtq2uhbmU

Add "016 expedition" in tags because it's an album nameMaybe add a video?I don't think "low bpm" are necessary in tags lol.Your bg isn't 1366x768. - it's under 1920 x 1200 at least which is now rankableMaybe add "Dubstep" in tags too? - already in tagsimo but i think ar9.2 looks a bit too fast with the song which has low bpm. reduce it?Applied everything else.

[Evolution]

1. 00:05:122 (1) - you don't need to make a jump here since the song has no sound to make jump like 00:01:694 (1) - fixed
2. 00:12:622 (2) - this note is kinda lack the flow. maybe move to somewhere like x:237 y:111? It'll give you better movement & circular flow! - i suppose
   
   explanation

   
3. 00:16:265 (3,5) - not perfectly blanket. move (3) to x:219 y:160 for a perfect blanket. (move 00:14:980 (3) too!) - im not gonna reply to any more blanket points, i'll fix them if they matter
4. 00:29:122 (1,2) - ^ move (2) to x:233 y:131
5. 00:55:694 (1) - this one is as the same as 00:48:622 (3,4,5,6,7,8). but you instead make a 1/4th slider. - too many 1/4 circles in a row and i made it to emphasize the kick there since the synth in the back fades out a bit
6. 01:12:409 (1,2,3,4,5) - not a perfect pentagon here. Didn't you use ctrl+shift+d? - no i didn't but i adjusted slightly, i can't be assed to use that stupid tool it's too complicated
7. 01:06:837 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7) - This part havs the same rhythm as 00:59:980 (1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3), but you mapped differently. you should make it same.
8. 01:15:837 (1,2,3,4,5) - this part has the same rhythm as 01:12:409 (1,2,3,4,5), but you mapped differently. - they follow the same sounds so a little bit of variation is fine imo, especially when the piano isn't exactly constant here
9. 01:16:694 (5) - There isn't any snare sound here so maybe remove it? - there is one?
10. 01:19:265 (1,2,3,4,5) - not perfect pentagon shape too xd - same
11. 01:29:765 (4) - maybe nc this? - then the previous nc would be too short
12. 01:47:980 (1) - it's as tall as hp-bar! - but doesn't touch it so it's okay
13. 02:37:480 (10,3) - stack? - intentionally off
14. 03:18:837 (1,2,3) - not perfectly blanket. move (2) to x:150 y:288 for a perfect blanket
15. 03:55:051 (3,1) - (1)'s slider-tail doesn't stack properly. move (1) to x:491 y:20 - fixed this part
16. 04:24:622 (6,1) - too low! - not offscreen so~
17. 04:27:194 (5,1) - not perfectly blanket. move 04:27:087 (4,5) to x:198 y:205

Mir next wub mapper?
GL~

1. 02:49:908 - A 25 second break is quite long even for a marathon map. This is made worse by the fact that there are 2 pretty long spinners at either end of the break
2. Similarly, the spinner at 05:18:944 (1) - feels excessively long. Shortening it to 05:25:694 - would be appropriate as that would form 4 whole beats, a pretty standard length. If you need more drain time then put stuff in the break I mentioned above
3. The whole section from 00:00:408 - to 00:28:694 (1) - has way too may whistles. There's basically a whistle on every single note and sliderhead. Try only whistling on really important notes and not just on every vocal note. For example, you could try following the piano notes in the background as it would make for an interesting counter rhythm to the 1212 rhythm of the sliders
4. 00:27:408 (1,1,1) - maybe make these 3 notes follow the same line as the previous 2 notes?
5. 00:32:551 (1,2,3) - I would make the notes on the same line of the slider. As it is right now the slider is at a slightly tilted angle compared to the notes
6. 00:34:908 (3,4) - lower the volume on the slider tails of these 2 if they aren't mapped to anything
7. 01:00:408 (2,3) - 01:01:265 (2,3) - 01:02:122 (2,3) - 01:02:979 (2,3) - The distance feels uncomfortably close for half beats. Maybe try spacing them a bit further from the slider?
8. 01:15:837 (1,2,3,4,5) - Volume on slidertails should also be lowered here
9. 01:35:122 (9) - NC here
10. 01:43:480 (1) - I think this slider should have lower SV, as the music is still calm until the note right after the slider. The SV change could be moved to 01:43:694 (2) - or even on the slider tail. (For example, the SV is low at 01:48:622 (1) - , and I suggest you do the same here)
11. 02:32:122 (2,3) - I would turn this into 1 repeating 1/4 slider starting on 02:32:122 (2) - . I feel that all 3 beats have about the same importance so putting an unclickable slider tail on one of them really throws off the rhythm of the play. Or you could turn 02:32:122 (2,3,4) - into 2 sliders or 4 notes. The way you have it right now puts way too much emphasis on the slider head at 02:32:230 (3) -
12. 02:43:372 (4,5) - I would put more spacing between these 2 notes, and maybe between 02:43:801 (6,7) - as well. In the map there are a lot of cases of large ds between 1/4ths after a slider, so it wouldn't be unprecedented. Also spacing them out would make it easier to read.
13. 02:44:980 (2,3) - Don't whistle on every note here, just the slider heads are fine. The slight delay in the hitsound can make it sound off if you overuse whistle
14. 03:20:551 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - Don't whistle all of these either, in general overusing the same hitsound can get annoying or tiring to listen to. There are other cases in the map where this happens (mainly the soft slow sections) but I'll leave it to you to fix those if you choose to (I highly recommend it)
15. 04:05:765 (2,3,1) - and 04:12:194 (6,7,1) - and 04:13:051 (1,2,1,2,3) - you never use spaced streams with such high DS anywhere else in the map so it's weird to see it introduced so late and have it only appear right here. I recommend using lower DS for consistency, but you can put in high DS between groups of notes in 04:13:051 (1,2,1,2,3) - (something like what you do at 04:25:051 (1,2,1,2,1,2) - ). You could also use 1/4th sliders instead
16. I would remove the note at 00:42:301 (4) - a huge 1/4th jump in a slower section is really unintuitive to read even if it follows a slider. It's also not mapped to anything substantial in the music which can trick people into thinking it starts on the white instead of the blue tick
17. 01:48:408 (2) - either NC here or shorten the previous slider to the red tick
18. Sliders in soft sections whose tails aren't mapped to anything (such as 02:05:980 (3,4) - and 02:08:551 (1,2) - and 02:11:980 (1) - ) should have their tail volume lowered

30201102 wrote:

[Evolution]

1. 02:49:908 - A 25 second break is quite long even for a marathon map. This is made worse by the fact that there are 2 pretty long spinners at either end of the break - there's really nothing i can do about this. there's nothing in the song other than ambience and if i mapped it it would ruin that ambience
2. Similarly, the spinner at 05:18:944 (1) - feels excessively long. Shortening it to 05:25:694 - would be appropriate as that would form 4 whole beats, a pretty standard length. If you need more drain time then put stuff in the break I mentioned above - shortened it a bit
3. The whole section from 00:00:408 - to 00:28:694 (1) - has way too may whistles. There's basically a whistle on every single note and sliderhead. Try only whistling on really important notes and not just on every vocal note. For example, you could try following the piano notes in the background as it would make for an interesting counter rhythm to the 1212 rhythm of the sliders - removed some
4. 00:27:408 (1,1,1) - maybe make these 3 notes follow the same line as the previous 2 notes? - tried
5. 00:32:551 (1,2,3) - I would make the notes on the same line of the slider. As it is right now the slider is at a slightly tilted angle compared to the notes - adjusted but i won't reply to any more slight changes like this, consider them dealt with
6. 00:34:908 (3,4) - lower the volume on the slider tails of these 2 if they aren't mapped to anything - only did 4
7. 01:00:408 (2,3) - 01:01:265 (2,3) - 01:02:122 (2,3) - 01:02:979 (2,3) - The distance feels uncomfortably close for half beats. Maybe try spacing them a bit further from the slider? - you get used to it and it fits the calmness
8. 01:15:837 (1,2,3,4,5) - Volume on slidertails should also be lowered here - there's 1/4 in the back so no
9. 01:35:122 (9) - NC here - not needed, i want the single combo
10. 01:43:480 (1) - I think this slider should have lower SV, as the music is still calm until the note right after the slider. The SV change could be moved to 01:43:694 (2) - or even on the slider tail. (For example, the SV is low at 01:48:622 (1) - , and I suggest you do the same here) - i like the contrast it gives to the previous slow slider, if they're both slow it takes away the emphasis from the kick and the movement to the stream won't be as fast
11. 02:32:122 (2,3) - I would turn this into 1 repeating 1/4 slider starting on 02:32:122 (2) - . I feel that all 3 beats have about the same importance so putting an unclickable slider tail on one of them really throws off the rhythm of the play. Or you could turn 02:32:122 (2,3,4) - into 2 sliders or 4 notes. The way you have it right now puts way too much emphasis on the slider head at 02:32:230 (3) - a reverse seems okay to me
12. 02:43:372 (4,5) - I would put more spacing between these 2 notes, and maybe between 02:43:801 (6,7) - as well. In the map there are a lot of cases of large ds between 1/4ths after a slider, so it wouldn't be unprecedented. Also spacing them out would make it easier to read. - it's fairly easy to read as it is and the lowering of the stream spacing fits the decline of the song
13. 02:44:980 (2,3) - Don't whistle on every note here, just the slider heads are fine. The slight delay in the hitsound can make it sound off if you overuse whistle - removed
14. 03:20:551 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - Don't whistle all of these either, in general overusing the same hitsound can get annoying or tiring to listen to. There are other cases in the map where this happens (mainly the soft slow sections) but I'll leave it to you to fix those if you choose to (I highly recommend it) - reduced density
15. 04:05:765 (2,3,1) - and 04:12:194 (6,7,1) - and 04:13:051 (1,2,1,2,3) - you never use spaced streams with such high DS anywhere else in the map so it's weird to see it introduced so late and have it only appear right here. I recommend using lower DS for consistency, but you can put in high DS between groups of notes in 04:13:051 (1,2,1,2,3) - (something like what you do at 04:25:051 (1,2,1,2,1,2) - ). You could also use 1/4th sliders instead - the thing is the song up until this point never gets this intense, and i use 1/4 jumps so a spaced stream i don't think is too unexpected. I also introduce it at the beginning-ish part of this kiai 04:05:765 (2,3,1) - and this is a very easy spaced stream to hit considering it's only 3 notes and goes off of a slider end 04:13:051 (1,2,1,2,3) - this is kind of a stretch but this is probably the most intense part of the song so i want to keep this if possible
16. I would remove the note at 00:42:301 (4) - a huge 1/4th jump in a slower section is really unintuitive to read even if it follows a slider. It's also not mapped to anything substantial in the music which can trick people into thinking it starts on the white instead of the blue tick - it's mapped to a funny little sound in the back and sets up the fact that i will be closely following the 1/4 in the back of the song pretty much throughout the map so i'd like to keep this
17. 01:48:408 (2) - either NC here or shorten the previous slider to the red tick - not necessary imo
18. Sliders in soft sections whose tails aren't mapped to anything (such as 02:05:980 (3,4) - and 02:08:551 (1,2) - and 02:11:980 (1) - ) should have their tail volume lowered - done

Mitkoff wrote:

Hello
from q
i will not mention too minor things because i think its pretty good as it is,
so some thoughts

[Evolution]
really 2 hours?
00:55:051 (3,4) - except strong drums, there are chanhing instruments like 00:55:479 (1) - .For me it quite noticeable and i was confused when You
emphasized 00:55:480 - beat and 00:55:051 - made this one common. Suggest rework it. - I'm not following the drums, i'm following the synth which has emphasis on the 1
01:01:694 (1,2,3,1,2,3) - why did You change pattern? - emphasis on 2 which is louder
01:21:408 (7) - I think better to make it as kickslider: 1st reason - noone will expect this note so playability will be lack, 2nd - your current variant make too much attention on last clicable beat 01:21:515 - wich make your rythm inconsistant with 01:20:765 (2,3,4) - 3rd clicable 01:21:515 - make shadow on consitansy of strong beat following 01:21:408 - 01:20:980 - 01:20:551 - 01:21:837 - this 3/4 feels really uncomfortable.. - alright since so many complained i changed it
01:34:265 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16) - did You make it on purpose as reading chalenge? Because actually in music i hear emphasis on each white tick. Suggestion: https://puu.sh/vtHqJ.jpg - that actually looks really good and keeps the concept, kills the NCing but it was really only cuz there was no emphasis on mine.
01:48:837 (1,2,3,1) - for flow -> https://puu.sh/vtHuh.jpg - i've never missed this so i think the flow is fine as it is
02:21:408 (6,8) - avoid overlap - done
03:47:230 (4) - it's overmapped imo, You ignored lasers befere or at least did them unclicable, no sense to make extra etention on it now.
Actually i don't like this section at all i have no idea what You are prioritize... like You are ignor lasers 03:46:265 (1,1,7) - fuck i fixed this actually or ehpharsize it weakly like 03:49:480 (8) - also You did weak emphasized claps 03:48:194 (2) - 03:50:122 (3) - 03:50:980 (7) - sometimes and sometimes made big jumps on them...
tbh 03:46:694 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - all this part is random or at least i did't see idea - i'm not following the drums, in fact i rarely ever give 100% focus to the drums in this song, so the claps being underemphasized is going to happen, it's more the complex rhythm of the lazer sound im trying to show off
04:26:337 (4) - too many claps - it's in the song xD
rest good

[]
If You care about my opinin.
I think it's mainly good map with fun streams and stream-jumps but still have a lot of potential... to 5 min i was a bit bored with a large number of the same forms of streams but yeah... overall good.
P.s. 03:49:480 - map it based on lasers please - i am, but i'm incorporating other parts of the song into it too~
P.s. x2 Good track

Osuology wrote:

alright cool map

01:47:015 (4,1) - I started here because I was literally just enjoying the song and map and then I remembered I need to be looking xd. So, the jump here doesn't really emphasize anything. It's a small streamjump compared to others and considering how strong it is, it clashes with other information you feed to the player. Contrast that with the next snare noise which gets a lot of emphasis and it's rather strange when there's no emphasis in this case.

04:16:265 (1) - Here's another snare doing this. This really disconnects the player from seeing distance as emphasis, since it no longer emphasizes things as it should. Looking for other emphasis techniques you use, I don't see many really. Other than NC, SV, and rhythm, that is, but those are often default emphasis techniques to mapping.



Look for these throughout your map, I was getting distracted by song and BG often, as is proved by my next statement.

Why does the sign on the left say sour? LOL

• 
  [General]

1. For metadata, refer to this. Bandcamp, iTunes, and other music stores are neither reliable nor valid for metadata. Would be more accurate to use the artist's own metadata rather than the record label's.
   
   1. Title: Transformations Ft. Laura Brehm
2. Combo color 1 is going beyond the 220 luminosity, which means it's going to become a pain to look at in conjunction with kiai flashes. Try lowering it while keeping it different from combo color 2, or just don't have 1 and 2 right after each other (would also match the song better like that, considering that it's all going 1212, in terms of when instruments kick in and stuff).
   
   [Evolution]
3. 00:11:337 - Would have this be curved similarly to 00:10:694 (1) - , where you also have the opportunity to blanket it with 00:11:980 (1) - . Could move them depending on how far you want the jump between (2) and (1) to be. You can start relying more on flow breaks and jumps at 00:14:122 - , as it's getting more intense.
4. 00:23:980 (5) - Would've NCed this instead of 00:24:408 (1) - , like was done for 00:01:694 - 00:18:837 - etc.
5. 00:39:622 - Skipping this but covering 00:39:730 - seems a bit odd. Could try shortening the slider or just making it a triple like the others around here.
6. 00:40:051 (4) - Would be nice to keep vocals and other layers differentiated more, for example by stacking this on 00:40:265 (5) - , contrasting it from the other sounds here in accordance to the song.
7. 00:43:265 - Only using circles here seems pretty boring, both in rhythm and in structure. Could turn 00:43:480 - into a 1/2 slider to keep rhythmical variation going. Same reasoning goes for 00:53:980 - . Would have turned 00:54:408 - into a 1/2 slider in this case, placing them something along these lines for instance, purposefully ending the slider on a vocal to indicate that we're temporarily switching instrumental layer for 00:54:837 - , making it easier to transition into.
8. 00:59:980 - The new combo concept going on here seems kind of contradictory considering that 00:56:551 (1,2,3,4) - are all the same combo, but the same thing at 00:59:980 (1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3) - has each instance as it's own combo. I realize that you may use a different pattern in the latter example, but they shouldn't be so different to the point where they actually need different NCing if they're the same parts of the song, right?
9. 01:02:979 (2,3) - 01:05:551 (2,3) - I noticed these are different, and are supported by the song in being different, but they don't really stand out. It sort of just looks like a mistake atm, even though I don't believe it is. To solve this, make it seem more intentional by having it contrast the rest of these patterns, and not just be moved slightly or have slightly larger DS.
10. 01:10:265 (1,2,3,4,5) - 01:13:694 (1,2,3,4,5) - 01:17:122 (1,2,3,4,5) - All the same sounds and same pitch, but their spacing differs quite noticeably, especially the first and last (5). Try keeping the spacing relatively same and/or in a recognizable pattern. I'd also suggest you keep all instances similar in terms of how large the spacing should be, to keep things consistent.
11. 01:36:622 - No need to be spamming NC all over, it's not really going to make things any easier to read, as it doesn't stand out in context. Could solve this in at least two ways: either remove NC from 01:36:408 - and 01:36:837 - , or remove NC from 01:36:622 - alone. Would go for the first way since the metal-ish sounds start at 01:36:622 - .
12. Well, either way, might want to see to how NCing is used. Wouldn't recommend pattern-based NCing, as this is basically relying on something that in turn relies on the song, rather than directly relying on the song itself.
13. 02:35:551 (8,9,10) - This is awfully curved, doesn't look very visually pleasing. Something like this would look less cramped.
14. 02:46:265 (1) - Try giving this an offset similarly to how 02:45:730 (4,1) - was arranged, to make the end more visible.
15. 03:20:551 - Having all clickable here sort of kills the accentuation that the vocals later in this pattern would otherwise hold. Better to keep the density different to bring about that contrast. Try turning 03:20:551 - and 03:20:980 - into 1/2 sliders. 03:20:122 - 03:20:551 - 03:20:980 - are more similar than 03:21:837 - , for instance.
16. 03:54:837 - This is pretty much the only part that skips this beat. Additionally it does it by placing stress on weaker beats, 03:54:730 - 03:54:944 - . Try swapping the rhythm. This way you'll keep the transition between how snares are emphasized smoother, as the following pattern would make that clear.
17. 04:03:622 (2,3) - Having these right before 04:03:837 (4) - , will make it seem like the previous two, hence being misleading. Instead, make those two different from the note on (4) to make it stand out more, for example by making them a 1/4 slider instead.
18. 04:12:730 - This isn't as strong as 04:12:622 - , so having both in the same stream would similarly be misleading. In my opinion it is more important to map sounds from how strong they are rather than whether there is a sound or not, so expressing that is something I'd say is important. In this case you could remove the 1/4 note and utilize the 1/2 gap as an anti-jump like this, to avoid confusion with patterns like 04:07:694 (1,2,3,4,5) - 04:14:551 (1,2,3,4,5) - . Could otherwise try stacking them like was done at 04:34:480 (2,3,4) - .
19. 04:22:694 - Not mapping this makes the gap between 04:22:480 (2,3) - pretty awkward due to the 1/4 snapping into 1/2 snapping, when there's a sound in the song that would bridge this gap better being covered.
20. 04:24:194 (2,3,4,5) - 04:25:051 (1,2,1,2,1,2) - Covering different sounds with the same pattern isn't something I'd recommend, as it makes it seem like the two places are the same in the song, hence being misleading. A few NCs isn't really going to change that, as they still play the same way and are positioned in the same way equally. Would try a different pattern instead, however you want to express it.
21. 04:53:551 (2) - This is curved way too much imo, could do something along these lines, or this, or this,
    you get the idea.
22. 05:01:265 (3,1) - Don't really see why this would stray from the pattern of spacing these. 04:56:122 (2,1) - 04:57:837 (2,1) - 04:59:551 (2,1) - etc. Was spaced at 05:13:694 (1,2,1) - , for example, or at least in context.
23. 05:17:122 (1,1) - Might've wanted to stack these.

Nokashi wrote:

Hello There!

[ Evolution]

1. 00:04:265 (2,3) - Definitely should be spaced more so you are consistent with your spacing on these vocal holds. As it is, there is a ~ 0.50x DS Difference with 00:03:837 (1,2) - and it really shows when all 3 sliders express a held vocal that is similar. 00:08:980 (2,3) - Similar point here - foxed
2. 00:16:051 (2) - I dont really see why this is directly stacked under the slider. I understand why you want to emphasize the bass with the extended slider but the fact that no movement is offered between the slider and the following circle kills the purpose of all previous sliders that also expressed the sound. Also it feels odd, since 1/1 gaps are relatively more spaced from each other, as seen here for example 00:01:694 (1,2) - yeah
3. 00:19:694 (3,4,5) - The vocal gradually increases in strength but these circles dont really express that, 00:19:908 (4,5) - these are less spaced, when in my opinion, 00:19:694 (3,4) - this should have been the jump with less spacing - yeah
4. 00:23:980 (5) - Better as a 1/2 slider since this is what u used for vocal hold, theres nothing here for me that directly correlates with the 1/1 gap - 00:18:837 (1,2) - I do it here too though, it's for the click sound
5. 00:38:551 (3,4,5) - Why is this more spaced than other triples before like 00:33:837 (7,8,9) - ( which is even more intense in my opinion ) . Again, nothing in the music correlates with the spacing increase here - nerfed the previous ones since i use .5x more often
6. 00:39:408 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - Alright so, since you are playing around with vocals mostly ( even more so here 00:39:408 (1,2,3) - where all ticks with choppy distorted vocals are made cickable) it would seem like a logical approach for this 00:39:837 (3,4) - to be a slider so the principle of clickable vocals in this section, since only these 00:40:265 (5,6) - would be clickable. I Feel like this is the most consistent choice - yeah
7. 00:41:015 - I guess silence this to be consistent? - done
8. 00:44:122 (6,1) - I dont get why this is more spaced than the jump that ends in a gunshot of a snare. Maybe a nerf is order here - changed spacing
9. 00:53:122 (1) - Maybe curve it so the entry point to the 1/4 cirle afterwards is more lenient - Tis already lenient my friend and would clash with the previous curved slider
10. 00:55:265 (1,2,1,2) - wewlads. Cool idea but at least work with consistent spacing 00:55:158 (4,1) - is 1.41x DS while the following stream jump is 1.00x DS. This is something unexpected so it should be made more lenient by evening out the spacings - yeah did that
11. 01:21:837 (8) - Continuity would be nice here, so placing 1/2 slider instead would do the trick - yeah agreed
12. 01:36:622 (1,2) - 1/4 slider would work better since there isnt anything thats different from 01:36:408 (1) - which is a 1/4 slider - drums come in here o.o
13. 01:36:408 (1) - Would represent the music quite better if you placed focus on the snares in this section when mapping 1/4 sliders. For example these 2 01:36:837 (1,4) - utilize this by being made clickable on the snare. yet here 01:37:158 (2,3) - it is not the case. Emphasis is completely removed and placed on the following white tick when, in my ears it would work so much better if there was a 1/4 slider starting here 01:37:158 (2) - it would be really consistent - oh yeah, weird how i missed that
14. 01:43:265 (2) - taking into consideration how you play with 1/4 sliders, a 1/4 slider here would have done the trick - changed to stream instead
15. 01:56:980 (2,3,4) - I Would balance this out a bit, spacing wise. its super uneven. 02:05:122 (1,2,3) - Similar point here - tried
16. 02:28:480 (7,8) - Cant say im fan of this really sharp angled jump when all of your jump streams were structured a lenient angle placement - yea
17. 03:20:551 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1) - MUUUHH HEXAGONS
18. 03:38:337 (7,8) - The sheer density of the streams makes this really hard to see in my opinion, maybe because im not a seasoned std player, but you should look into this issue nontheless - should be fine but i changed the rhythm
19. 03:52:265 (6) - Why the sudden flowbreak? I Would expect a 1/1 slider for the hold here
20. tfw preview point snapped on 1/1024 - haha
21. 04:02:551 (4,5) - Should be made consistent with 04:02:444 (3,4) - changed things
22. 04:03:622 (2,3) - Could work as a 1/4 slider to better highlight the double next - yeah
23. 04:11:980 (5,6,7,1) - This is a pretty edgy pattern that i was originally against but due to the sheer strength of the beat i decided to let it pass and not mention it initially, but.... here its super overdone in my opinion, i would at least expect even spacing like 04:05:551 (1,2,3,1) - nerfed spacing?
24. 04:53:122 (1,2,3) - You could silence slider ends here - yeah
25. + some stuff we fixed on VC

Good Luck~

Naxess wrote:

Greetings

• 
  [General]

1. For metadata, refer to this. Bandcamp, iTunes, and other music stores are neither reliable nor valid for metadata. Would be more accurate to use the artist's own metadata rather than the record label's.
   
   1. Title: Transformations Ft. Laura Brehm
2. Combo color 1 is going beyond the 220 luminosity, which means it's going to become a pain to look at in conjunction with kiai flashes. Try lowering it while keeping it different from combo color 2, or just don't have 1 and 2 right after each other (would also match the song better like that, considering that it's all going 1212, in terms of when instruments kick in and stuff).
   
   [Evolution]
3. 00:11:337 - Would have this be curved similarly to 00:10:694 (1) - , where you also have the opportunity to blanket it with 00:11:980 (1) - . Could move them depending on how far you want the jump between (2) and (1) to be. You can start relying more on flow breaks and jumps at 00:14:122 - , as it's getting more intense. - sure
4. 00:23:980 (5) - Would've NCed this instead of 00:24:408 (1) - , like was done for 00:01:694 - 00:18:837 - etc. - done
5. 00:39:622 - Skipping this but covering 00:39:730 - seems a bit odd. Could try shortening the slider or just making it a triple like the others around here. - vocal is held imo here so I think I'll keep it a slider
6. 00:40:051 (4) - Would be nice to keep vocals and other layers differentiated more, for example by stacking this on 00:40:265 (5) - , contrasting it from the other sounds here in accordance to the song. - fixed previously
7. 00:43:265 - Only using circles here seems pretty boring, both in rhythm and in structure. Could turn 00:43:480 - into a 1/2 slider to keep rhythmical variation going. Same reasoning goes for 00:53:980 - . Would have turned 00:54:408 - into a 1/2 slider in this case, placing them something along these lines for instance, purposefully ending the slider on a vocal to indicate that we're temporarily switching instrumental layer for 00:54:837 - , making it easier to transition into. - did both things
8. 00:59:980 - The new combo concept going on here seems kind of contradictory considering that 00:56:551 (1,2,3,4) - are all the same combo, but the same thing at 00:59:980 (1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3) - has each instance as it's own combo. I realize that you may use a different pattern in the latter example, but they shouldn't be so different to the point where they actually need different NCing if they're the same parts of the song, right? - nc'd them all accordingly (i hope that's what you meant)
9. 01:02:979 (2,3) - 01:05:551 (2,3) - I noticed these are different, and are supported by the song in being different, but they don't really stand out. It sort of just looks like a mistake atm, even though I don't believe it is. To solve this, make it seem more intentional by having it contrast the rest of these patterns, and not just be moved slightly or have slightly larger DS. - done
10. 01:10:265 (1,2,3,4,5) - 01:13:694 (1,2,3,4,5) - 01:17:122 (1,2,3,4,5) - All the same sounds and same pitch, but their spacing differs quite noticeably, especially the first and last (5). Try keeping the spacing relatively same and/or in a recognizable pattern. I'd also suggest you keep all instances similar in terms of how large the spacing should be, to keep things consistent. - done this
11. 01:36:622 - No need to be spamming NC all over, it's not really going to make things any easier to read, as it doesn't stand out in context. Could solve this in at least two ways: either remove NC from 01:36:408 - and 01:36:837 - , or remove NC from 01:36:622 - alone. Would go for the first way since the metal-ish sounds start at 01:36:622 - . - done
12. Well, either way, might want to see to how NCing is used. Wouldn't recommend pattern-based NCing, as this is basically relying on something that in turn relies on the song, rather than directly relying on the song itself. - gonna redo kiai stuff to address this
13. 02:35:551 (8,9,10) - This is awfully curved, doesn't look very visually pleasing. Something like this would look less cramped. - mhm
14. 02:46:265 (1) - Try giving this an offset similarly to how 02:45:730 (4,1) - was arranged, to make the end more visible. - did
15. 03:20:551 - Having all clickable here sort of kills the accentuation that the vocals later in this pattern would otherwise hold. Better to keep the density different to bring about that contrast. Try turning 03:20:551 - and 03:20:980 - into 1/2 sliders. 03:20:122 - 03:20:551 - 03:20:980 - are more similar than 03:21:837 - , for instance. - changed stuff
16. 03:54:837 - This is pretty much the only part that skips this beat. Additionally it does it by placing stress on weaker beats, 03:54:730 - 03:54:944 - . Try swapping the rhythm. This way you'll keep the transition between how snares are emphasized smoother, as the following pattern would make that clear. - yeah
17. 04:03:622 (2,3) - Having these right before 04:03:837 (4) - , will make it seem like the previous two, hence being misleading. Instead, make those two different from the note on (4) to make it stand out more, for example by making them a 1/4 slider instead. - changed previously
18. 04:12:730 - This isn't as strong as 04:12:622 - , so having both in the same stream would similarly be misleading. In my opinion it is more important to map sounds from how strong they are rather than whether there is a sound or not, so expressing that is something I'd say is important. In this case you could remove the 1/4 note and utilize the 1/2 gap as an anti-jump like this, to avoid confusion with patterns like 04:07:694 (1,2,3,4,5) - 04:14:551 (1,2,3,4,5) - . Could otherwise try stacking them like was done at 04:34:480 (2,3,4) - . - agreed
19. 04:22:694 - Not mapping this makes the gap between 04:22:480 (2,3) - pretty awkward due to the 1/4 snapping into 1/2 snapping, when there's a sound in the song that would bridge this gap better being covered. - done
20. 04:24:194 (2,3,4,5) - 04:25:051 (1,2,1,2,1,2) - Covering different sounds with the same pattern isn't something I'd recommend, as it makes it seem like the two places are the same in the song, hence being misleading. A few NCs isn't really going to change that, as they still play the same way and are positioned in the same way equally. Would try a different pattern instead, however you want to express it.
21. 04:53:551 (2) - This is curved way too much imo, could do something along these lines, or this, or this,
    you get the idea. - i do xd
22. 05:01:265 (3,1) - Don't really see why this would stray from the pattern of spacing these. 04:56:122 (2,1) - 04:57:837 (2,1) - 04:59:551 (2,1) - etc. Was spaced at 05:13:694 (1,2,1) - , for example, or at least in context. - yeah
23. 05:17:122 (1,1) - Might've wanted to stack these. - indeed

Something feels iffy about the map though. Can't quite put my finger on it, but I'd assume it's got something to do with the lack of consistency between whether streams are disconnected or not in some cases compared to that of other cases. Could also have to do with that the spacing between streams is sometimes smaller and sometimes larger, not sure tbh. Will probably want to check that stuff either way.

C00L wrote:

Its not ranked yet?

Where the real Mir wtf

Spork Lover wrote:

Heya Mir - Let's do that M4M thing we talked about, shall we?

Since there's not really too many straight up "issues" with the map from first glance, a lot of it is either gonna be nitpicky or purely subjective, so take the suggestions with a grain of salt If there's a suggestion that I feel is a problem, I'll color it differently ^^

Color coding:

Color coding

Unrankable if unchanged
Normal Suggestion/Comment
Strong Suggestion

General

Image dimensions are a little funny xd You could try for a 1920x1200 thingy if you find one, but it shouldn't be a problem if you can't xd

For the kiai sections, you can add some more clear colors when strong SV changes come up to signal them a little bit more (aka color hax). - not really necessary imo

Tfw drain time is 05:00:XXX lol xd

From primate to memester

00:07:694 (2,3,1) - This transition is a little meh imo - It's technically fine, but it's somewhat linear, and you do mostly circular flow for this section - idea that's a little more curvy: https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/7996851 - It's supposed to be linear because it's transition tho o-o.. plus it's barely noticeable

00:23:551 (4,1) - somewhat jarring movement here, since (again), you mainly lead into the notes with the slider movement you've been doing before this xd another random idea https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/7996871 - can agree with this, it's not super jarring but it does look a bit weird

01:05:122 (1,2,3) - :thinking: (it's kinda weird compared to the others isn't it xd)
Sidenote: ascending spacing (tiny ascension) would be cool from 01:03:408 (1) - to 01:06:623 (3) - if you wanna be edgy. - nah just doing different stuff for the stronger piano notes are fine I think

01:35:872 (4,1) - Momentum isn't really too high, so the DC feels a little odd. I'd probably space the 16-note stream a tad more (something similar to the 5-note right after https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/7997171 ) - spaced it a bit more but I want the change in DS

01:43:480 (1,2) - Switch NC - cause 2 is the strong sound here - right

01:43:694 (2,3,4,5) - same kinda applies here, but yeah, tiny DS things to make it similar to the spacing of the doubles and stuff - https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/7997204 - this one I wanna keep the change in DS

--
01:47:015 (6,1,2,3) - changing rotation on 6,1 will make this flow better - https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/7997195 & https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/7997214 - this flow doesn't really seem all that bad to me tho

01:50:980 (1,2,1) - same sort of thing with rotational flow that you could do, if you REALLY wanna throw the emphasis in the player's face - https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/7997233 - mmm it seems fine as is

^ keep in mind that the previous two things are suggestions applied to something that is already fine - This is just a way to make the emphasis clearer, but if that isn't your intention, feel free to keep it like that

01:52:694 (3) - stronger sound than 01:52:480 (1) - , so (1) could either be a double with a DC or rotation change, or a kickslider xd - made a double instead

02:03:837 (1,2,1,2,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - this flow makes me happy af

02:17:765 (2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1) - technically fine, but the flow doesn't feel too good from 02:18:194 (5,6) - , to which I'd suggest making it a little more circular considering 02:17:122 (1,2,3,4,5) - is fairly "round" movement https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/7997307 - it's for the snare

02:35:765 (10,1) - xd, you could make the curve more clean on 10 (also rotated the triple a bit) https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/7997322 - fair enough lol

02:43:694 (5) - I'd NC this, 'cause the rhythm is pretty tough to read atm with the blue tick slider on 02:43:801 (6) - sure I suppose

02:45:408 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1) - same thing with momentum like I mentioned at like 1:30 ish xd https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/7997353 That could help prevent awkward movement a bit. - was considering changing this anyways

03:35:980 (1,2) - Hmm, maybe end slider on 03:36:301 - and do two notes under instead? Can feel fairly deceiving - should be okay as is I think, rhythm is quite weird here so I made it a bit weird too

03:40:480 (7,8,9) - small aesthetic thing: https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/7997398 - yo

03:44:872 (4,1,4,1) - I'd personally make the DC's the same distance (I prefer the un-stacked ones, since it fits better with the momentum) - yeah weird, did that

04:13:480 (3,1) - Only part that I felt was deceiving when I played through it. The movement makes it so the 3,1 feels like a 1/4 as well, even though it isn't - I also thought it was 1/3 actually because the pattern here is a lot different from everything else that you've mapped, as well as going in a triangle :p - moved away the slider but im keeping the triangle because it is a very intense set of sounds compared to other places in the song

04:24:194 (2,3,4,5,6) - 4,5,6 in ziggy-zaggy too maybe? :p https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/7997422 - okay

04:56:122 (2,1,2,1) - even if not too noticeable in-game, it should be easy enough to make the first note here play part in some way too in the aesthetics (triangle or something else)

04:58:265 (1,2,1) - https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/7997447 for aesthetics like before (in retrospect it might look nicer even if all notes aren't present at the same time) - did both

05:00:837 (2,3,1) - technically 3,1 should be different from 2,3 'cause the sounds are different (again, I'm being super nitpicky 'cause the map is already good, but it could definitely give a little more to the slow section here) Idea: https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/7997469 - eeeeeeeeeeeehhh it's fine I think, it's not a huge difference

05:13:265 (2,1) - could look a tad cleaner: https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/7997473 - right

wubwub

Good luck buddy Just poke me if you have some questions, you know where to find me lol xd

Lasse wrote:

hp6? current seemed too low to me when playing
would silence soft-sliderslide cause you have lots of sliders that don't map held sounds
00:00:408 (1,2,3) - think this would be nice as 3 circles instead cause bavkground melody only really starts on 00:01:694 -
or maybe http://lasse.s-ul.eu/0uy2maQg.jpg for the fading in sound there
00:11:337 (2,1) - how about rotating things a bit here to get sopmething like http://lasse.s-ul.eu/K0S5UpOn.jpg ? think that would look cute - this looks fine to me tbh :3

00:17:122 - 00:18:837 (1) - 00:20:551 - 00:22:265 - etc. I think the kick things here should really be hitsounded
just use s:c2 here and add a clap with a fitting sound cause this part has no snares? something like http://puu.sh/vV8BY/dccb3a7e73.wav could work - i tried really hard to make it nice x.x
00:26:980 (4,5,1) - :eyes: - excuse me i did this first :eyes:
00:32:658 (2) - I don't think a circle here makes much sense, even with the slight bavkground sound a 1/2 gaps fits the song better
00:49:587 (10,1,2,3) - I'd reduce 1/4 gaps here a bit to introduce this stuff better, maybe like http://lasse.s-ul.eu/KCQQ1Eb4.jpg
00:50:551 (4) - this feels so disconnected from all surrounding objects with this implied movement, why not http://lasse.s-ul.eu/JildRARz.jpg ?
00:54:837 (1,2,3,4,1,2,1,2) - 2x repeating pretty similar thing so idk why you mapped it so inconsistently
01:38:551 (1,2,3,1,2) - these extreme sv changes + similar overlapping makes stuff like this a bit gross to read cause you pretty much have to guess if you singletap or stream that lol
01:44:122 (1,1) - things like this really could use whistles
01:53:122 (1) - fix the ending curve it's so unbalanced
01:56:980 (2) - would look much better if aligned with slider path http://lasse.s-ul.eu/6jThx6ml.jpg
02:02:122 (3,4,5) - why the fuck is this so undermapped lol sth like 01:48:408 (2,3,4,1,2,3,1,2,3,4,1) - or even more intense would make sense - okay lemme explain, the wubs here are very unique in the sense that they are extremely prominent like... the 1/4 in the back kinda gets overshadowed by them, and I did create somewhat interesting flow (I hope) to show this uniqueness. I don't wanna map the 1/4 because I mapped it literally everywhere in the kiai and the streams right after map the 1/4 anyways. Had I mapped that 1/4 instead of the wub sliders it would lose impact cuz it would just all be 1/4.
02:04:586 (4,1) - streamjump angle here is so gross to play, think doing at least something like http://lasse.s-ul.eu/99rC4Pkk.jpg would be nicer
02:16:265 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1) - why is this harder than most patterns in the more intense parts
02:42:837 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,5,1) - sounds like it should be filled with 1/4 rhythm cause the 1/4 melody synth stuff is so noticeable
03:48:194 (2,3,4,5) - double patterns are so much more intuitive if you click the first note of them => make 03:48:408 - clickable
03:59:230 - would reduce volume + spacing here cause most instruments stop
04:01:908 (2,5) - nice stack
04:02:980 (1) - looks a bit weird to me cause you combine sharp and curved visuals http://lasse.s-ul.eu/IqVaAk5J.jpg or http://lasse.s-ul.eu/BXeN45kK.jpg would be cute
04:06:408 (1,1) - whistles
04:13:694 (1) - offscreen
04:38:872 (4,1) - either overlap or space, not this gross thing
04:45:408 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - just make these repeats it seems way too quiet for circles
04:46:908 (2,3,4) - 1/4 jump is a bit overdone in this part

seems alright overall, poke me when you got bubbles or something

Monstrata wrote:

Evolution

00:06:408 (5) - Missing whistle on the head I think. Compare it with 00:02:980 - .
00:09:837 (4) - ^
01:06:837 (1,1,1) - Not really getting why you switch back to 1/2 repeats. 01:09:408 (1,2,3,4,1) - stand out but not in a good way because theyre so different despite being part of the same phrase (4 measure component).
01:17:122 (1,2,3,4,5) - Seem rather random in placement unnecessarily - not really, it's kind of a trapezoid thing but changing the stars made me move this around a bit so we'll see
01:19:265 (1,2,3,4,5) - And your stars are kinda off... are you rotating by 70 degrees instead of 72? lol (wait was that you or someone else).
01:30:837 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,5,1,2,3,4,5,6,1,2) - Pretty awesome.
01:53:765 (1,2,3) - Stuff like this, I think using an gle change in tandem with a 1/4 jump will feel more impactful. Here the linear flow makes it seem a bit awkward in movement for me.

I tried ctrl+g'ing 1+2 and restacking. it felt better to play for me since it created some circular flow as opposed to nothing

http://puu.sh/vZLpE.jpg

01:59:122 (4) - Weird placement imo... it causes your structure to look kinda bad cuz of the overlap being next to clean symmetry and blanket patterns,

It's calling for a placement like this tbh xD

02:11:980 (1,2) - Make 2 perfectly centered? It's slightly too far to the left.
02:23:551 (1,2,3) - The miniscule flow shift here isn't necessary imo. stick with either continuing the clockwise movement, or breaking into counterclockwise. The shift is occuring at a weird location imo.
02:43:265 (3,4,1,2) - I don't think this rhythm is appripriate xP/ It doesn't feel like it needs doublet clicking rhythm. Like right now the rhythm im clicking just feels too different from the rhythm i'm hearing, and that's not a good thing ;w;

[]

Modding half of it. It looks promising but I think theres still some room for improvements, particularly in placement. I feel you could also use more cohesion in your slider designs. There are combo's where you use like 3 different slider shapes in the same combo and it causes your visual design to feel a bit too detached.

Good luck! You can maybe poke me again down the road for a recheck since this definitely has the potential.