Musty wrote:

ça serait cool que la map se fasse nuke jpense

edit: drôle je voulais dire

1. 00:27:320 (92) - tu peux le mettre en big note si tu veux emphasis ton build up. tho, en simple d, il est fine
2. 00:37:319 (149,150,151,152,153,154,155) - ce choix me semble ok. Le fait de faire le triplet drum. Puis ensuite le k ddk sur la melody. Si tu veux être un peu plus fidèle à la mélodie. Tu peux ignore le triplet est simplement mapper les notes de mélodies içi : 00:37:683 - 00:38:047 - .
3. 00:40:228 (162,163,164) - Je ressens aucun emphasis sur ce triplet full d (surtout sur cette note : 00:40:410 (164) - ). Il fait aussi fade que celui la 00:41:683 (173,174,175) - (sauf que celui la a rien de spécial). Pourtant, je ressens bien le fait que tu veux suivre la mélodie içi : 00:40:592 (165,166) - . Peut être qu'un ddk ou kkd serait mieux.
4. si t'as fix précédemment, fix celui la : 00:46:047 (204,205,206) -
5. 01:17:683 (382) - Au vu du follow que tu fais, mieux vaut bouger cette note içi 01:17:683 (382) - ?
6. 01:23:865 (409) - Juste moi, mais j'aime bien cette note en big K. Vu que le "ta" du vocal est un peu plus différent du reste.
7. 02:22:228 (780,781,782,783,784) - change en ddkdk , ça passe hyper bien avec le vocal.
8. 02:39:501 (883) - Si t'as fix pour le "ta" mentionné précédemment, fix celui la aussi.
9. 03:52:592 - skip cette note me parait assez louche quand même.
10. 03:52:047 (1288,1289,1290,1291,1292) - J'aurais plutôt vu la dernière note en k, vu la tonalité du synth. Mais du coup, pour pas ruin le flow, autant change le tout en kkddk si tu compte faire en sorte que ça se finisse sur un k.

Kin wrote:

cc lé bb

[Arrival]

1. 00:27:320 (92) - tu peux le mettre en big note si tu veux emphasis ton build up. tho, en simple d, il est fine Je vais leave en simple
2. 00:37:319 (149,150,151,152,153,154,155) - ce choix me semble ok. Le fait de faire le triplet drum. Puis ensuite le k ddk sur la melody. Si tu veux être un peu plus fidèle à la mélodie. Tu peux ignore le triplet est simplement mapper les notes de mélodies içi : 00:37:683 - 00:38:047 - . Ca a un effet que j'aime particulièrement ce triplet d, je vais le garder.
3. 00:40:228 (162,163,164) - Je ressens aucun emphasis sur ce triplet full d (surtout sur cette note : 00:40:410 (164) - ). Il fait aussi fade que celui la 00:41:683 (173,174,175) - (sauf que celui la a rien de spécial). Pourtant, je ressens bien le fait que tu veux suivre la mélodie içi : 00:40:592 (165,166) - . Peut être qu'un ddk ou kkd serait mieux. Pas faux, swap en kkd
4. si t'as fix précédemment, fix celui la : 00:46:047 (204,205,206) - ^
5. 01:17:683 (382) - Au vu du follow que tu fais, mieux vaut bouger cette note içi 01:17:683 (382) - ? T'as mis la même Kappa
6. 01:23:865 (409) - Juste moi, mais j'aime bien cette note en big K. Vu que le "ta" du vocal est un peu plus différent du reste. Applied
7. 02:22:228 (780,781,782,783,784) - change en ddkdk , ça passe hyper bien avec le vocal. Applied
8. 02:39:501 (883) - Si t'as fix pour le "ta" mentionné précédemment, fix celui la aussi. ye
9. 03:52:592 - skip cette note me parait assez louche quand même. Oui, et j'ai rework le passage en quelque chose de plus streamy, qui fit mieux.
10. 03:52:047 (1288,1289,1290,1291,1292) - J'aurais plutôt vu la dernière note en k, vu la tonalité du synth. Mais du coup, pour pas ruin le flow, autant change le tout en kkddk si tu compte faire en sorte que ça se finisse sur un k. Done

voila.
jtm bb t un amour

xfraczynho wrote:

hi! some mod req in-game:p

[Arrival's Inner Oni]
00:36:047 (141) - you should add a note here, i think it breaks the fluent of the song ;; I think it's alright there
00:48:683 (223) - d because pitch I'll try to diversify the map by not using ddk as much as possible.
00:58:410 (274) - k since you're following vocals Done
01:22:592 (407) - I think this is even nicer https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/7786910 Overmapping the vocals here defeat the purpose of this part which is just a build up towards the kiai. But I changed a note to K which differs from what I did before.
you should move 01:29:410 (445) - to 01:29:319 (445) - to not making these breaks during kiai (or making a triplet maybe) These breaks are done by purpose !
01:34:501 (482) - ^
01:35:501 (489) - you can try something like it: https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/7786919 (maybe not these colours) Doing that would break any kind of flow.
01:37:410 (503) - same as above
01:38:138 (508) - ^
same suggests for doubles on second and third kiai, i feel everything nice from here to next comment
03:15:047 (1104) - you should change it to k (main sounds) Sticking the drum sounds here
03:15:774 (1112,1113) - ctrl+g (^) ^
03:27:683 (1172) - maybe from here add some little triplets to make a difference between the first part of this and make this one more fun (03:29:228 (1181) - adding k for example) Done
04:44:773 (57) - personal opinion: i don't like this break :/ you can make it a little harder and fun I'm not aiming at making a hard map !

I think that's all Good luck on your mapset! Thanks ! :)

• DELETE COMBO COLORS HEATHEN.

1. 01:07:138 (324,325,326) - Triplet better placed around 01:12:501 - so that the second happening is tougher, no?
2. 01:25:319 (418) - Kill, and make previous not K for OH! emphasis? Drums don't even hit here, so double k seems odd.
3. 01:38:047 - Kinda just wondering why the break, nothing else has had it and it makes less sense in the middle of kiai.
4. 02:51:865 (971,972,973,974,975,976) - d kkddk? Some emphasis on what vocals do here would be nice.
5. 03:37:683 (1230,1231) - Swap these, I think it seperates the vocals better.
6. 03:52:138 (1296) - d? kdddk makes the kat heavy streams a bit nicer.
7. 03:58:228 - This is a copy of the first happening at 01:13:865 - , which is lame because 02:29:501 - is harder etc.
8. 04:09:531 - SV anything? Underwhelming to keep this the same.
9. 04:15:683 - 04:18:410 (1458,1459) - Swap these, the vocal emphasis switches up here.
10. 04:21:501 - Can't help but feel that this part is mapped cooler in 2nd kiai.

OzzyOzrock wrote:

[A river]

• DELETE COMBO COLORS HEATHEN.

1. 01:07:138 (324,325,326) - Triplet better placed around 01:12:501 - so that the second happening is tougher, no? Okay
2. 01:25:319 (418) - Kill, and make previous not K for OH! emphasis? Drums don't even hit here, so double k seems odd. Done
3. 01:38:047 - Kinda just wondering why the break, nothing else has had it and it makes less sense in the middle of kiai. Tried a sort of rhythm but nvm
4. 02:51:865 (971,972,973,974,975,976) - d kkddk? Some emphasis on what vocals do here would be nice. Done
5. 03:37:683 (1230,1231) - Swap these, I think it seperates the vocals better. Applied
6. 03:52:138 (1296) - d? kdddk makes the kat heavy streams a bit nicer. Alright
7. 03:58:228 - This is a copy of the first happening at 01:13:865 - , which is lame because 02:29:501 - is harder etc. Made the last one harder
8. 04:09:531 - SV anything? Underwhelming to keep this the same. Alright put x1.3
9. 04:15:683 - 04:18:410 (1458,1459) - Swap these, the vocal emphasis switches up here. Done
10. 04:21:501 - Can't help but feel that this part is mapped cooler in 2nd kiai. Changed to be like the 2nd kiai

Rest is fine! yay !

MBmasher wrote:

take control: 01:26:228 (4,6) -
not meant to be blanketed or what?

Realazy wrote:

02:19:047 (6) - lol why is this snapped on 1/3

[Taiga] wrote:

Few questions:

Take controll diff:

Ar9.2 intentional or there is something behind this considering it's a slow song? yes it's intentionnal, and there is a lower diff on the map,
so it's just a spread

01:20:774 (1,2,1,2,1,2) - This could be a one pattern, why "1-2-1-2" when nothing in music/vocals fits this specific pattern?
01:35:683 (1,2,1,2) - ^ - one pattern without "1-2-1-2" fits way better
01:36:411 (1,2,1,2) - ^
02:51:319 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2) - ^ (1-2-3-4-1-2-3-4 works better imo)
04:05:138 (1,2,1,2,1,2) - ^
04:21:501 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2) - ^ (1-2-3-4-1-2-3-4)
04:34:410 (2) - extend with slider, connect to 04:34:956 (1) - ? i don't understand what you mean here
04:46:228 (1,2,1,2) - 1-2-3-4, remove new combo
04:57:138 (1,2,1,2) - one combo, one pattern, inconsistent towards what is earlier i could have but you can see the buildup to the last pattern easily lol
04:58:774 (2,1,2) - could you explain why earlier you either doesn't map this part / make it a slider towards vocals, here make it like that? i mapped it earlier ???? and if you mean here 04:34:410 (2) - then you must listen to the song before please because there is no beats or neither vocals here while there is at the part you mentionned

Sorry for lack of formatting etc, mods in the morning on good song are hard *hides*

Overall besides in my personal opinion abusement of 1-2 it's solid, i definitely see myself farming this.

Irohas wrote:

gratz!!

1. 00:18:956 - clap missing
2. 02:14:228 - Normal hitsound add + clap missing
3. 03:50:956 - ^

1. 00:25:138 (4) - Could this slider have the same shape than 00:24:410 (1) - (right now https://puu.sh/vEcod/defc98452c.png ) ?
2. 01:28:410 - Weird to play drum beat passively when you do exteded sliders like 01:26:592 (3,1) - to make them playable during the same section.

1. 04:14:956 (4) - This slider shouldn't be extended like you did on other kiai (01:29:138 (3) - / 02:44:774 (4) - ) ?
2. 04:36:047 (1) - Why this slider is the only extended one of this section ? Also miss the vocal change at 04:36:228 - .

Nozhomi wrote:

1. 00:18:956 - clap missing
2. 02:14:228 - Normal hitsound add + clap missing
3. 03:50:956 - ^

In addition about more subjective points:
[Kalitarks' Insane :]

1. 00:25:138 (4) - Could this slider have the same shape than 00:24:410 (1) - (right now https://puu.sh/vEcod/defc98452c.png ) ?
2. 01:28:410 - Weird to play drum beat passively when you do exteded sliders like 01:26:592 (3,1) - to make them playable during the same section.

[Take Control! :]

1. 04:14:956 (4) - This slider shouldn't be extended like you did on other kiai (01:29:138 (3) - / 02:44:774 (4) - ) ? ya
2. 04:36:047 (1) - Why this slider is the only extended one of this section ? Also miss the vocal change at 04:36:228 - . i wanted to marks the "yeah" which is 3/4 there,

:/

Mir wrote:

In addition to Noz's post:

[Take Control!]

- 00:40:047 (6,7,8,9,1,2,3,4,5,6) - Why is this so different from 00:45:865 (6,7,8,9,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2) - ? The first one has way fewer circles but the second is just jump-spam. The music hasn't even changed to justify this imo. yeah you're right
- 01:29:865 (1,2,3,4,5,1,2,3,4,1) - The triple here is on the white tick but in 01:41:501 (1,2,3,4,5,1,2,3,4,1,2) - it's before the white tick? The music is still the same so I don't really understand why the triple suddenly shifted a beat. Then at 02:45:501 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1) - you don't even USE a triple. 02:51:138 (6,1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1) - here I can understand because the vocals are different, though. Then suddenly 02:57:138 (1,2,3,4,5,1,2,3,4,1,2) - we have a triple again. Overall the usage of triples in the jumps are very inconsistent and I suggest looking over and making them more consistent. well,
for thoses i've been listening closely with .25% or .50% and there's a 1/4 beat on different spots so
- 00:58:592 - Missing a whistle.
- 02:17:865 - From here you start mapping to the background synths and 1/1 drums which is fine, the vocals here are pretty boring I'll admit, but then why at 02:23:683 - do you switch to following vocals? There's still the synth in the back and it's still at the same intensity. This switch in rhythm focus doesn't feel right imo. i've been following the vocals here for both parts (and the whole map)
- 02:28:956 (1,2,3) - This doesn't feel very transition-y either, it's the same movement, the same pattern, just more spacing and an NC. Something to give it more differentiation would be cool. i've been thinking about swapping 02:28:956 (1,3) - so yeah
- 03:10:228 (1,2,3,4,5) - The song hasn't really changed, there's only more emphasis on 03:10:228 - which can easily be covered with a spacing increase. Suddenly mapping triples after this point and not before when the song again, hasn't really changed, also feels quite inconsistent. 03:29:138 - Same deal here, the song hasn't changed other than a pitch/key increase, but the triples you start mapping already existed before, so they should have been already mapped imo. to be honest i admit there is a mistake of mine, but with the next changes i'll do only vocal without the mentionned 1/4s to highlight more the vocals (which i follow)
- 03:36:774 (2,3,4,5,6,7) - I don't feel like this jump section is really justified because it's practically the same as parts like 03:31:319 (3,4,5,1,2,3,4,1,2) - where you don't map purely jumps like this. Using the excuse "it's transitioning into the next part" doesn't really fit here imo because this part 03:37:865 (1,2,3,4,1,2) - is the transition part, not 03:36:410 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7). to be honest i think that's fine, i had in mind like you said "it's transitioning into the next part", and only 4 circles would feels too little, and introducing a full jumps pattern earlier would feel soo out of place
- 03:53:047 - Doesn't really need to exist because there's no note here in the synth you're following. The song leaves a break here, so maybe make 03:52:956 (6) - a kickslider instead to take off the click but still keep the constant 1/4. theres a note here
- 03:55:683 (3) - You skip a synth at 03:55:774 - you normally would have mapped, no? but i think what i was following here is pretty clear,
if i'd map it with a kickslider or a note on the blue tick it'll feel too out of place imo
- 03:56:774 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - Same thing about transitioning parts, this isn't the place to use a transition imo, it should be at 03:57:138 (5,6,7,1,2,3) - because the rhythm at 03:55:319 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7) - repeats itself at 03:56:774 (1,2,3,4) - but you instead mapped a stream. the melody is clearly different here
- 04:27:319 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - Pretty sure these should be 1>2 jumps considering 04:33:138 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2) - are. Depends on your intention because the last ones are "transitional" ones I suppose. Up to you.
- 04:32:592 (5) - This 5 seems to be in the wrong place consistency-wise considering 01:46:592 (4) - is mapped to the vocals before the snare so it stays --clickable, whereas in 04:32:592 (5) - the snare is not clickable and feels like it should be. yeah
- 04:57:138 (1,2,1,2) - And these shouldn't be 1>2 jumps because you use them for emphasis purposes when the vocal goes up, right? but... they should be 1>2 because i'm emphasizing the vocals xD

Nozhomi wrote:

[Kalitarks' Insane :]

1. 00:25:138 (4) - Could this slider have the same shape than 00:24:410 (1) - (right now https://puu.sh/vEcod/defc98452c.png ) ? i disagree. it's not really noticeable while playing, also not planned to make them same shape. diffirent styles i guess.
2. 01:28:410 - Weird to play drum beat passively when you do exteded sliders like 01:26:592 (3,1) - to make them playable during the same section. ? i just wanted to express vocals in this part of song, as you can see i did the same rhythm in this whole kiai :c