forum

Anamanaguchi - Pop It

posted
Total Posts
34
Topic Starter
Bonsai
This beatmap was submitted using in-game submission on Freitag, 4. August 2017 at 17:51:00

Artist: Anamanaguchi
Title: Pop It
Tags: Pop_It feat. meesh彡☆ Electro Chiptune Bitpop idk
BPM: 115
Filesize: 32511kb
Play Time: 03:38
Difficulties Available:
  1. Extra (4,69 stars, 780 notes)
  2. Hard (2,62 stars, 370 notes)
  3. Insane (3,76 stars, 645 notes)
  4. Normal (1,85 stars, 255 notes)
Download: Anamanaguchi - Pop It
Download: Anamanaguchi - Pop It (no video)
Information: Scores/Beatmap Listing
---------------

feat. meesh彡☆

If you're playing without video, make sure to deactivate the storyboard too, otherwise you're gonna have a black screen for half of the map!

also check out this great remix by Shirobon!


ZekeyHache
You did it ;w;
Vell
free wifi!
Zectro

Vell wrote:

free wifi!
LOL

great song extremely fun map
Feb
i have no wifi at home
J1NX1337
This took way longer than it should have (blame Vegas for crashing every other second) :lol:

Edited the background video by adding fading effects, as requested. :D

Updated video with editing
Topic Starter
Bonsai
Izzywing
is good

never stop mapping
pkhg
i lied
idk how to mod this gl
Topic Starter
Bonsai
🤔 think again
Irreversible
I thought this was ranked lol
Topic Starter
Bonsai

Irreversible wrote:

I thought this was ranked lol
be the change you want to see in the world :^PP:DDXDD:D:DD;));P
ZekeyHache
ok
Deramok
saw this in modreq, and thought i'd give it a shot as i usually rather like your mapping. didn't find much but it's something

[extra]
  1. 00:44:680 (5) - you usually have all vocals clickable untill here, so i'd just turn this into two singles. also i assume it's supposed to be in the same position as 00:45:985 (1,2) - or am i wrong there? because it's a bit off
  2. 01:02:159 (3) - 01:10:507 (3) - 01:12:594 (4) - these notes lack the emphasis that you give the claps with vocals on all other occasions in the chorus through spacing. two of them because of slider leniency, those two might be worth concidering making a slider plus single out of for the reason of not having the vocal on their ends as well.
  3. 01:08:811 (1) - might also want to ctrl g this one for similar reasons, just with the intrument this time
  4. 01:09:985 (1) - 01:14:159 (1) - also that one is especially heavy but doesn't get any increase in spacing at all like the sounds does in many other places like 01:01:637 (1) - 01:02:680 (1) -
  5. 02:32:259 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7) - you mainly follow the voices in this part if i get that right. so using a rhythm like http://puu.sh/vKDRU/30658a634e.jpg would be more representative of it. epsecially the switched 1 and 2 in the image i would recommend even if you don't want to keep vocal focus for the pattern as it also covers the drums better. the shape of the pattern could really be kept the same except for maybe the last part with the 1/8 tripple, but that can be kept as a slider for convenience too if needed.
  6. 03:18:530 (4) - i don't think this one is quite correct. i assume since the slider doesn't go untill the new meassure, you want to have it on the four sounds that start on the blue tick after the white you have it on now, which are in 1/12. so this could work maybe http://puu.sh/vKEiI/0ed32616ea.jpg
  7. 03:26:666 (4) - and then this one i don't understand at all. there is a 1/8 startig from the blue tick that goes untill the next meassure. i suppose one can cut that short and end it on the vocal on red instead, but starting it early is questionable to me.
[insane]
  1. 01:16:767 (3,4) - since you didn't map this one instrument but on the voice instead 01:18:333 (1,2,3) - this is a bit confusing as it does it the other way around in the same few seconds. these chance occur several times and it's a bit of a guessing game on which will be used each time
[hard]
  1. 00:56:420 (1) - maybe move this to the blue tick before instead to have it on the more prominent sound that you mapped on a lot in the preceeding part
  2. 02:27:810 (7) - since you go out of your way to start this on the blue with a double to catch the vocal, ending it on the next blue rather than on white would be more appropriate as that is where the next vocal comes up. you did it that way on 02:31:878 (6) - too
  3. 02:29:590 (5) - also here i'd shorten the slider and add another note on red instead. both the vocals and the instrument you mapped on with 02:28:954 (2,3,4) - would imply it. there's other similar "issues" like this and the above point in this specific part. those just make it unclear what to follow imo
  4. 03:06:835 (1) - i'd decrease the spacing and/or the sv in general in this part since it just sounds less intense than the previosu kiai with it's duller nature. seems off to map it in the same intensity.
nothing stood out as a problem to me in the normal
hi-mei
from my queue

wtf is this video
jesus

insane:
00:46:507 (1,2,3) - i guess you can make this pattern cleaner like this http://puu.sh/w4nZ7/03d915f904.jpg
00:49:115 (2,3) - ^
00:54:333 - i think theres something wrong with this hitsound
01:06:072 (2,3) - emphasis? huh
01:25:637 (1,3) - fix blanket
01:31:507 (3) - why is this curved?
01:49:115 (3,4) - blanket
01:49:767 (4,5) - ^
LOL are they fucked intentionally?
01:56:550 (7) - theres a white anchor on slider end for some reason
02:09:463 (1) - i honestly dont like the position of this slider, it feels out of place in consideration of following structure, maybe better to make http://puu.sh/w4o7L/2d9801b651.jpg
02:12:072 - 100% volume? its not even a kiai



extra:
00:09:854 (3,4) - maybe these shudnt be stacked? but these instead? 00:10:246 (4,1) -
i think the cursor shudnt be moving during this 00:10:115 - break, its just emphatically bad as it is now
00:18:985 (3,4) - is a good example of how it shud be



00:20:811 (4,4) - maybe it shud be a triplet? 00:20:811 - 00:20:876 - are the same volume wise

00:27:594 (3,4) - ctrl g it? i guess 2,3 is too large
00:35:289 (4,1) - ^^^^^
00:46:507 (4,5,1) - are you sure its shud not be filtered rhythmically? u didnt se 1/8 measures yet, meaybe it shud be a kicksldier idk.
01:03:202 (4,4) - stack?
01:03:072 (3,5) - ^

01:09:854 (6,1) - and 00:28:115 (6,1) - distance issue? huh?
02:05:289 (1,2) - 02:06:854 (6,7) - 02:07:376 (1,2) - im not a fan of stacking under slider ends, considering that you can neglect with ds of the next note, stacking under slider end is a baaaad thing in my opinion, fucks emphasis, fucks structure, fucks aesthetics.

02:37:852 - this sound needs more emphasis
02:39:378 (1,2) - so wide 02:39:632 (3,4) - and this so close? 4 is a drop, it needs more emphasis than 2.
02:41:920 - same emphasis problem
03:02:259 (7) - make it this way? http://puu.sh/w4nIo/221ec85611.png

overall i dont like this song, and its a pain to watch the video
so cringe
Juiceys
Normal:

Beats:

00:19:898 (6) - I think the sliderend should be clickable. Its a powerful note with a strong beat.

00:24:072 (6) - ^ Again because it looks like in this section you were mapping to the lyrics.\

00:53:289 (6) - ^

03:25:141 (4) - 3 circles maybe? The beat on the reverse is stronger than the head and the tail and seems misrepresented to me

Flow:

00:47:941 (3,4) - Don't like the contrast of flow here compared to the good clockwise flow of the previous notes. Maybe change (4) to a curved slider for a better flow?

00:59:550 (3,1) - Every part of this kiai has smooth flow except for this part, the flow takes a quick turn in the opposite direction the slider tail leads too while all of the other notes (and the ncs) don't.

Small nazi blankets:

01:18:333 (5,1) - This one was noticeable when i test played the diff

02:33:276 (2,3) - This one's off

Have a good day!
Smokeman
pop what ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

NM from q

"Extra"


00:11:680 (2,3,4) - yes, dont pop the wifi, ok thanks : )

00:15:463 (5) - ctrl+g'ing this could relive some of the stress of the movement towards and after this repeat slider. It spiked in aim suddenly although it the map mostly featured "reading challanges" so far. (am more concerned about the drop off 00:15:463 (5,1) - tbh)
00:18:724 (2,3) - i know those two are the same sound but they still should feel kinda different.00:18:594 (1,2) - the movement between those feels similar to 00:18:724 (2,3) - .tf you talk about smoke? say the distahnce and movement ebtween 1 and 2 is our standart regarding distance over time, then 2 to 3 has the same proprotion to our standart.
What i am trying to get at is: Even tho 00:18:724 (2,3) - sound identical and mapping them similar is somehwat intuitive. But i think the direction and momentum are not distinct enought to distinguish 00:18:594 (1,2) - from 00:18:724 (2,3) - . Tho the pattern looks clean af, some minor change like could be made like https://puu.sh/w7357/5c9c35a8e2.png which brings me to my next point.
00:18:985 (3,4) - Having 3 be like a cut version of 4 feels more in tune wiht the song, since they emphasise this cut sound. My proposition looks like in the picture above https://puu.sh/w7357/5c9c35a8e2.png
00:30:333 (1,2,3,4) - maybe you could make this funkier like 00:31:246 (1,2,3,4,5) - since it stands out like the vocals do with their percussion-sound-thingies
00:39:854 (2) - could make this a slider aswell. Feels wierd since the sounds of 00:39:594 (1,2) - are so alike and the spinner could start a blue tic later : ) [tbh, i wouldnt worry much about the filler rythm being annoying or smth since the slider ends on nothing while being followed by a slider. Imo the feeling of holding down this particular note it worth the trade-off]
00:45:985 (1,2) - if ind this kinda cool :>
00:49:767 (4,5) - i feel a less stressful transition would create some much needed contrast so 00:50:159 (1,2) - is more impactful. Say a 1/2 slider like https://puu.sh/w7JR3/3f9bdbcb62.png feels nice and brings some chage. (at 00:49:767 - there is this sound which lasts till around 00:50:028 - with a less noticeable backtrack-thingy till 00:50:159 - . 00:49:898 - having this clickable looks less intuitive if I look at it like this :/ )
00:52:767 (3,4) - kinda like this but different
00:56:420 (3,4) - 3 to four could use some contrast in regard to 00:56:159 (1,2) - . The way this pattern looks implies an equal 2-2 rythm but the music does kind of do a 2-2 rythm but the second 2 is not very similar to the first. Maybe like https://puu.sh/w7KvO/9046b56195.png
00:57:985 (1) - since this area is packed already you could instead put it somewhere else :^)
01:02:159 (3) - this a repeat aswell. 01:01:767 (2,3) - these as repeats look kinda cool imo. I also think having the transition stand out by changing the usual double single note pattern into a single one ~*contras~*
01:03:202 (4,1) - This does follow your angle preserving pattern, but the whole chorus is mapped to speedy it looked kind of unintentionally messy to me. Cheat a bit witht he angle maybe so 4 and 1 are further apart from eachother
01:06:333 (4) - maybe a note at 01:06:724 - ? It's kinda unexpected.
03:10:395 (1,2,4) - same <slider-ball fade-off>
01:10:507 (3) - same repeat thing etc. but 01:10:898 (5,1) - is kinda low spaced in mopraison so its kinda chill like this already..
01:11:811 (5,6,1,2,3,4,5) - A patern which would stand out more following the vocal-beats
01:29:941 (2,3) - feelsgoodman
01:30:854 (1,2,3,4) - 4 did feel kind of out of place :/ I can see how you would interpret that sound like this, but i feel like a slow down and smoother slider art fits better.
01:33:594 (8) - change this to a slider like 01:33:202 (6) -. pretty much this https://puu.sh/w7Mjy/a9171ac680.jpg
01:37:767 (7) - https://puu.sh/w7MlR/24fe16c6d0.jpg could be done here aswell but its kinda less cool.
02:11:289 (7) -
02:19:246 (5,6) - make these flow into eachother a bit smoother flow->curveflow. Pretty much move the second white node to the left or 02:19:246 (5) - to the left. This whole section looks crisp af muh dude :weary: :ok_hand:
03:03:276 (3,1) - smh stack?
03:22:471 (2) - ctrl+g could be and option since its kinda packed there.
03:29:208 (1) - some wiggle shit is possible here

bonsai mapping some wierd shit

sry for bad maymay
will be deinstalling after posting this

byebye
: (
Topic Starter
Bonsai
responses to Deramok, hi-mei and Juiceys
ok I guess I should apply all of those some time now lol, thanks everybody <3
I'm getting there!

Deramok wrote:

saw this in modreq, and thought i'd give it a shot as i usually rather like your mapping. didn't find much but it's something whoa, that's nice to hear that, thank you :3

[extra]
  1. 00:44:680 (5) - you usually have all vocals clickable untill here, so i'd just turn this into two singles. also i assume it's supposed to be in the same position as 00:45:985 (1,2) - or am i wrong there? because it's a bit off about the clickable-thing: ideally I'd like to emphasize both vocals and that major downbeat at the same time, but the problem here is that the context doesn't really allow it - Comparing it with 00:19:767 (5,1) you can see that there, the equivalent beat of 00:44:680 is mapped as a slidertail, which means that following it up with two clickable notes works nicely. Here however, 00:44:420 (4) is a very 'punctuated' note where a slider wouldn't fit because it wouldn't represent any holding-sound. Hence, 00:44:680 has to be clickable too (I don't wanna leave it unmapped bc that would break the 'rhythmic flow'), so if I mapped circles there I'd have three clickable notes in a row, which wouldn't emphasize the blue tick either bc it's sandwitched by the others, so I chose to just focus on the downbeat here instead. long explanation but I hope it's understandable lol
    And about it being slightly off that other note, that doesn't matter bc they are too far away from each other time-wise to be noticable, I thing I placed it slightly off bc of Autostacking and Followpoints being vertical and stuff ^^
  2. 01:02:159 (3) - 01:10:507 (3) - 01:12:594 (4) - these notes lack the emphasis that you give the claps with vocals on all other occasions in the chorus through spacing. two of them because of slider leniency, those two might be worth concidering making a slider plus single out of for the reason of not having the vocal on their ends as well. I don't think so, the first two still seem rather emphasized to me bc the previous reverse-slider force you to stop movement and start again for these notes, and for the last one I honestly just didn't feel like emphasizing anything much anymore bc it's the end of the section which got calmer and calmer over time.. It might not make direct sense, and I totally understand where you're coming from, but I don't think emphasizing everything 100% the same every time is always the best way to go ^^
  3. 01:08:811 (1) - might also want to ctrl g this one for similar reasons, just with the intrument this time again I think that's emphaized enough since there is a sharp angle and more movement-speed from (4,5) to (5,1), ctrl-g'ing would seem overdone to me
  4. 01:09:985 (1) - 01:14:159 (1) - also that one is especially heavy but doesn't get any increase in spacing at all like the sounds does in many other places like 01:01:637 (1) - 01:02:680 (1) - Yop those bugged me too already but I haven't found a way to change that yet, will keep trying ;_;
  5. 02:32:259 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7) - you mainly follow the voices in this part if i get that right. so using a rhythm like http://puu.sh/vKDRU/30658a634e.jpg would be more representative of it. epsecially the switched 1 and 2 in the image i would recommend even if you don't want to keep vocal focus for the pattern as it also covers the drums better. the shape of the pattern could really be kept the same except for maybe the last part with the 1/8 tripple, but that can be kept as a slider for convenience too if needed. The drums are something completely new here that hasn't been anywhere else though, so that's why I focus on those; The vocals are repeating the exact same rhythm four times in this section so I use every opportunity to switch to something more interesting lol
  6. 03:18:530 (4) - i don't think this one is quite correct. i assume since the slider doesn't go untill the new meassure, you want to have it on the four sounds that start on the blue tick after the white you have it on now, which are in 1/12. so this could work maybe http://puu.sh/vKEiI/0ed32616ea.jpg technically you're right, I tried to simplify it though because when listening to it in full speed you wouldn't perceive those as distinct beats and wouldn't notice that they only start at the blue tick, those notes are blending in a lot with the "uuah" of the vocals, so I tried to combine them like this bc splitting these up into circle+slider wouldn't emphasize the vocals accordingly anymore :/
  7. 03:26:666 (4) - and then this one i don't understand at all. there is a 1/8 startig from the blue tick that goes untill the next meassure. i suppose one can cut that short and end it on the vocal on red instead, but starting it early is questionable to me. I don't really understand which blue tick you mean, because I start hearing 1/8s from 03:26:602 on which then blend in with the vocals again, so I just did the same thing as before, I don't hear those 1/8s after the slider ends anymore o:
[insane]
  1. 01:16:767 (3,4) - since you didn't map this one instrument but on the voice instead 01:18:333 (1,2,3) - this is a bit confusing as it does it the other way around in the same few seconds. these chance occur several times and it's a bit of a guessing game on which will be used each time I didn't map that instrument at that particular beat, but I try to incorporate it quite often (for example right before that at 01:16:115 (1,2) -), just as much as I don't map 100% of the vocals, I just constantly try to find a nice mix between these two layers - The beat on the head of 01:18:333 is a much more intense one that got more than just the one instrument I didn't map previously, that's why I emphaize that beat in every diff (iirc), and since emphasizing it forced me to ignore the vocals at 01:18:463 I thought it would be more fitting to continue mapping that one instrument instead of the vocals - I blame the song for using a fuckton of different rhythms that are hard to simplify without constantly having the bad feeling of ignoring one aspect of the song too much ;_;
[hard]
  1. 00:56:420 (1) - maybe move this to the blue tick before instead to have it on the more prominent sound that you mapped on a lot in the preceeding part That would be way more difficult to read/play though - 3/4-gaps are generally harder to grasp than 1/2s or 1/1s or 1/4s, so since this is a unique spot here I made it easier to catch. (ofc I use 3/4 quite often in the map, but I try to only use it at spots that are similar to a previous spot where I introduced that rhythm by trying to map around it with 1/2s and 1/4s early - Basically polarity I guess lol)
  2. 02:27:810 (7) - since you go out of your way to start this on the blue with a double to catch the vocal, ending it on the next blue rather than on white would be more appropriate as that is where the next vocal comes up. you did it that way on 02:31:878 (6) - too Here we have the problem of different contexts again: At 02:28:319 there is a strong vocal note that I wanna map. If I shorten that previous slider, the big white tick would either be unmapped, which I heavily dislike bc it's important for the general rhythmic flow, or I map it all by inserting 1/4s like this, which I heavily dislike because it would feel way to dense for this section and don't emphasize anything anymore because there are just too many notes, which left me with this being the only option here. I actually did the same at 02:35:946 (5,1) and 02:40:013 (5,1) too, 02:31:878 (6,1) is the only exception to that because as mentioned in the Extra-mod I definitely want to prioritize the drums here, hence I don't need to map 02:32:386 anymore, hence this spot doesn't become too dense if I shorten the slider. I am aware that this is not an ideal solution, but I simply lack the means to find a solution that I lack better; Always try thinking your advise through to the end because applying it ("ending it earlier") raises other problems ^^
  3. 02:29:590 (5) - also here i'd shorten the slider and add another note on red instead. both the vocals and the instrument you mapped on with 02:28:954 (2,3,4) - would imply it. there's other similar "issues" like this and the above point in this specific part. those just make it unclear what to follow imo Both vocals and instrumentals still have their stronger note on the red tick instead of the blue (due to natural rhythm priority), I just wanted to keep these a bit less dense as that fits better with the rest of the section imo (like for example the sliders from the previous point, as they are leaving out notes too, so I didn't want to leave those as the only left-out beats, if that makes sense)
  4. 03:06:835 (1) - i'd decrease the spacing and/or the sv in general in this part since it just sounds less intense than the previosu kiai with it's duller nature. seems off to map it in the same intensity. Whoa I actually never noticed that, nice catch - I don't think it would make much of a difference though because it is following a very calm section (the break), so in contrast to that it still seems very intense.. I'll think about it!
nothing stood out as a problem to me in the normal
Thanks a lot, even though I denied most of it it was very well-reasoned and made (and continues to make) me think about a lot of stuff again! :D


hi-mei wrote:

from my queue

wtf is this video definitely nothing sexual nah nah
jesus is watching

insane:
00:46:507 (1,2,3) - i guess you can make this pattern cleaner like this http://puu.sh/w4nZ7/03d915f904.jpg doesn't seem unclean to me and I really wanna keep the curved slider to represent the quirkyness of the vocals so nah
00:49:115 (2,3) - ^ ayy taste ahoi, I really love this pattern lol
00:54:333 - i think theres something wrong with this hitsound oh right, nice catch, fixed in all other diffs too
01:06:072 (2,3) - emphasis? huh don'treallyknowwhattheproblemis,maybeyoushouldexplainyourpointsbetter? huh
01:25:637 (1,3) - fix blanket öps
01:31:507 (3) - why is this curved? bc there's a glitchywobbly sound in the song xd
01:49:115 (3,4) - blanket
01:49:767 (4,5) - ^
LOL are they fucked intentionally? there's more than just blankets, this is simply extending sliderpaths
01:56:550 (7) - theres a white anchor on slider end for some reason öps lol
02:09:463 (1) - i honestly dont like the position of this slider, it feels out of place in consideration of following structure, maybe better to make http://puu.sh/w4o7L/2d9801b651.jpg the point of this sorta placement is that I don't wanna stack the following circle under the slidertail because that would make it pmuch impossible to read at this level
02:12:072 - 100% volume? its not even a kiai yeha I wanna have the Finish kicking ass here



extra:
00:09:854 (3,4) - maybe these shudnt be stacked? but these instead? 00:10:246 (4,1) -
i think the cursor shudnt be moving during this 00:10:115 - break, its just emphatically bad as it is now I wanna emphasize (1) though, not (4), so that wouldn't work; I feel like the 'offbeat-gap' is nicely emphasized with that stack and plays nice for me ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
00:18:985 (3,4) - is a good example of how it shud be but that's like a completely different situation xd



00:20:811 (4,4) - maybe it shud be a triplet? 00:20:811 - 00:20:876 - are the same volume wise yeah but having three consecutive clickable 1/8s would be overdoing it here so I just did natural beat prioritizing, you don't just make a low diff full of 1/1-circle-chains just bc every downbeat has the same volume

00:27:594 (3,4) - ctrl g it? i guess 2,3 is too large doesn't feel too large to me, spacing isn't what makes this part hard anyways so doesn't really matter
00:35:289 (4,1) - ^^^^^ nice fence
00:46:507 (4,5,1) - are you sure its shud not be filtered rhythmically? u didnt se 1/8 measures yet, meaybe it shud be a kicksldier idk. I have no clue what you mean lol uh, since this 1/8 is sandwitched between sliders it's really easy to play and so far none of the testplayers 100'd that so idk what the issue should be here
01:03:202 (4,4) - stack? no, why
01:03:072 (3,5) - ^

01:09:854 (6,1) - and 00:28:115 (6,1) - distance issue? huh? ye I'm aware of that already, haven't found a way to smoothly fix that yet ;_;
02:05:289 (1,2) - 02:06:854 (6,7) - 02:07:376 (1,2) - im not a fan of stacking under slider ends, considering that you can neglect with ds of the next note, stacking under slider end is a baaaad thing in my opinion, fucks emphasis, fucks structure, fucks aesthetics. I'm a fan of it though and it plays and looks nice for me

02:37:852 - this sound needs more emphasis why, I'm completely focusing on vocals in these patterns and just mapped that for the hitsound, just as 02:29:717 - etc
02:39:378 (1,2) - so wide 02:39:632 (3,4) - and this so close? 4 is a drop, it needs more emphasis than 2. if you listen to the music you'll hear special sounds being thrown in at (2) and (5) which I emphasized here bc they're special
02:41:920 - same emphasis problem
03:02:259 (7) - make it this way? http://puu.sh/w4nIo/221ec85611.png why, I want to have it play like regular 1/4s, there is nothing special about (8) that would justify higher spacing

overall i dont like this song, and its a pain to watch the video then deactivate it xd
so cringe
Maybe try to provide more reasoning for your points, why stuff is bad or why stuff should be changed; Thanks for checking all of that though and also the Insane even though it's not even 4* :P


Juiceys wrote:

Normal:

Beats:

00:19:898 (6) - I think the sliderend should be clickable. Its a powerful note with a strong beat. Yeah but I wanted to emphasize that holding-sound that lasts until that beat with that slider, if I make it shorter it would be the same as any other 1/1-slider :c

00:24:072 (6) - ^ Again because it looks like in this section you were mapping to the lyrics.\ The lyrics go "pop it", so the slider "pops away" at that spot ;P;P;P jk, it's the same reason as before, I prefer doing that because it creates more variety in the map ^^

00:53:289 (6) - ^

03:25:141 (4) - 3 circles maybe? The beat on the reverse is stronger than the head and the tail and seems misrepresented to me This slider is emphasizing those many 1/4s that are going in the song with all the wiggles, and it also builds a nicer contrast to the short 'break' in the music after this slider by having a 'break' in the map too (gap instead of sliderbody)

Flow:

00:47:941 (3,4) - Don't like the contrast of flow here compared to the good clockwise flow of the previous notes. Maybe change (4) to a curved slider for a better flow? I felt like the 'rhythmic flow' gets kinda broken with the two offbeat-kicks on the head and tail of 00:47:941 (3) so that's why I kinda 'broke' the gameplay-flow too~

00:59:550 (3,1) - Every part of this kiai has smooth flow except for this part, the flow takes a quick turn in the opposite direction the slider tail leads too while all of the other notes (and the ncs) don't. Well there are different types of emphasis, here for example you have to make a turn at (3) but no turn at all at (1); at 01:01:637 (4,1) you have to make no turn at (4) but instead make a very strong turn at (1); to me both of those emphasize it the same amount but in different ways that both work ^^

Small nazi blankets:

01:18:333 (5,1) - This one was noticeable when i test played the diff WHOOPS

02:33:276 (2,3) - This one's off whoops

Have a good day! You too, thank you very much! :D

edit: boxes are a cool thing to maintain a thread navigatable!
Topic Starter
Bonsai
accidental doublepost oops
using it to respond to Schmocki :3
b o x

Smokeman wrote:

popel what ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ew that's nasty

NM from q

"Extra"
"Mod"


00:11:680 (2,3,4) - yes, dont pop the wifi, ok thanks : ) :kermit:

00:15:463 (5) - ctrl+g'ing this could relive some of the stress of the movement towards and after this repeat slider. It spiked in aim suddenly although it the map mostly featured "reading challanges" so far. (am more concerned about the drop off 00:15:463 (5,1) - tbh) well the sound on (1) is one that I extremely want to emphasize and did before too with something much harder, 00:11:420 (3,1) - , so idk why this should be too hard o:
00:18:724 (2,3) - i know those two are the same sound but they still should feel kinda different.00:18:594 (1,2) - the movement between those feels similar to 00:18:724 (2,3) - .tf you talk about smoke? say the distahnce and movement ebtween 1 and 2 is our standart regarding distance over time, then 2 to 3 has the same proprotion to our standart.
What i am trying to get at is: Even tho 00:18:724 (2,3) - sound identical and mapping them similar is somehwat intuitive. But i think the direction and momentum are not distinct enought to distinguish 00:18:594 (1,2) - from 00:18:724 (2,3) - . Tho the pattern looks clean af, some minor change like could be made like https://puu.sh/w7357/5c9c35a8e2.png which brings me to my next point. no need to word it in three different ways, I got it at the first one ^^ honestly I don't feel like it should be different though, I was less focusing on "oh there is the same sound twice" but rather on how this section switches between vocals and instrumentals, and those three objects have in common that they are all vocals, so I don't see a reason to differentiate anything else? idk, also your suggestion would play the exact same but look wonky so that wouldn't help at all lol
00:18:985 (3,4) - Having 3 be like a cut version of 4 feels more in tune wiht the song, since they emphasise this cut sound. My proposition looks like in the picture above https://puu.sh/w7357/5c9c35a8e2.png that doesn't look very smooth though, the only way to make anything smooth outta that would be this I guess and that's hard to incorporate, but again I don't feel that's necessary, the stop-and-go already emphasizes that cut nicely, and there's more than just vocals going on, the previous two sliders were also mapped to bass-beats while the next one is just a kick etc blabla
00:30:333 (1,2,3,4) - maybe you could make this funkier like 00:31:246 (1,2,3,4,5) - since it stands out like the vocals do with their percussion-sound-thingies idk what you mean by percussion-sound-thingies but those two spots are very different, 00:31:246 (1,2) got strong offbeat-bass-beats on their heads while the first one you linked just follows the ordinary rhythm, being very much the same as 00:26:159 (1,2,3,4) which is basically the same pattern lol
00:39:854 (2) - could make this a slider aswell. Feels wierd since the sounds of 00:39:594 (1,2) - are so alike and the spinner could start a blue tic later : ) [tbh, i wouldnt worry much about the filler rythm being annoying or smth since the slider ends on nothing while being followed by a slider. Imo the feeling of holding down this particular note it worth the trade-off] you're right about them being the same sounds, but imo it just feels better having a 'harsh' end of mapped notes and transition into the spinner instead of it going smoothly with a passive slidertail, also the spinner currently appears right at the downbeat, making it appear 1/4 later already feels weird to me too xd also filler-mapping a big white tick feels much better than filler-mapping a random red tick I guess lol
00:45:985 (1,2) - if ind this kinda cool :> le s t a ck
00:49:767 (4,5) - i feel a less stressful transition would create some much needed contrast so 00:50:159 (1,2) - is more impactful. Say a 1/2 slider like https://puu.sh/w7JR3/3f9bdbcb62.png feels nice and brings some chage. (at 00:49:767 - there is this sound which lasts till around 00:50:028 - with a less noticeable backtrack-thingy till 00:50:159 - . 00:49:898 - having this clickable looks less intuitive if I look at it like this :/ ) but the vocals D:D:D: not mapping the red tick clickable would completely kill the rhythm here :( the only way I could see making this easier is stacking, and I feel like this might've orignally been a stack, but that just seems out of place to me too so no thanks
00:52:767 (3,4) - kinda like this but different (what)
00:56:420 (3,4) - 3 to four could use some contrast in regard to 00:56:159 (1,2) - . The way this pattern looks implies an equal 2-2 rythm but the music does kind of do a 2-2 rythm but the second 2 is not very similar to the first. Maybe like https://puu.sh/w7KvO/9046b56195.png I see what you mean, but I feel like this is already outstanding enough - The thing is that previously, this rhythmic pattern has always been mapped ignoring the downbeat while emphasizing the offbeats around it, see 00:43:767 (1,2) - 00:47:941 (1,2) - 00:52:115 (1,2) -, so at this spot it is extremely unexpected to suddenly actually emphasize the downbeat more than the previous downbeat; emphasizing it even more would be a bit 'overdone' imo, and I still wanna keep some emphasis on that first offbeat which would be even less relatively speaking if I made the following circle a jump :|
00:57:985 (1) - since this area is packed already you could instead put it somewhere else :^) actually true lol, put it in the blanket of the other slider now which is really neat bc this way it's like no emphasis at all which fits well bc it's just a "blop" and that's pretty cute owo
01:02:159 (3) - this a repeat aswell. 01:01:767 (2,3) - these as repeats look kinda cool imo. I also think having the transition stand out by changing the usual double single note pattern into a single one ~*contras~* would look neat indeed, but I'd rather keep those circles as they are mapped to the vocals which I don't wanna ignore, and I don't wanna make this spot have like zero movement, one double-reverse-slider is already offputting enough for most players :P
01:03:202 (4,1) - This does follow your angle preserving pattern, but the whole chorus is mapped to speedy it looked kind of unintentionally messy to me. Cheat a bit witht he angle maybe so 4 and 1 are further apart from eachother this is my nobelprize-winning way of representing the lyrics going "you're in my way" in the map xddddddddddddddddddd alsocheatinganglessucksionlydothatinlowerdiffslol
01:06:333 (4) - maybe a note at 01:06:724 - ? It's kinda unexpected. tfw you wanted me to add another double-reverse at the previous point but find it unfitting here aaaaa lol - Here's the deal: The double-reverses are representing that long note that starts at 01:05:811 and goes until the end of the measure, it's a hold-slider for a hold-sounds, but at the same time I don't completely ignore the vocals going "hey" or whatever, so that's why they are always at slightly different spots but always mapped to the same thing
03:10:395 (1,2,4) - same <slider-ball fade-off>
01:10:507 (3) - same repeat thing etc. but 01:10:898 (5,1) - is kinda low spaced in mopraison so its kinda chill like this already..
01:11:811 (5,6,1,2,3,4,5) - A patern which would stand out more following the vocal-beats that's the exact same rhythmic pattern that I use for all those other spots where the vocals have that rhythm too lol, in case you meant that I should put more emphasis here then that's not the case bc the Kiai is getting more and more calm towards the end so that's why I space less
01:29:941 (2,3) - feelsgoodman DE JA VU, I HAVE BEEN IN THIS PLACE BEFORE
01:30:854 (1,2,3,4) - 4 did feel kind of out of place :/ I can see how you would interpret that sound like this, but i feel like a slow down and smoother slider art fits better. nah man, to me that sound sounds like many smol clicky sounds, like something rattling down somewhere, like, a marble rolling down a track that looks exactly like this slider lol xd #art
01:33:594 (8) - change this to a slider like 01:33:202 (6) -. pretty much this https://puu.sh/w7Mjy/a9171ac680.jpg nah I wanna emphasize that silence here, like, you can hear a long atmospheric sound in the background that last during 01:32:420 (4,5,6,7,8) - but stops here and starts again on 01:33:985 (1) - so ya, the silence is what sticks out to me here the most
01:37:767 (7) - https://puu.sh/w7MlR/24fe16c6d0.jpg could be done here aswell but its kinda less cool. if I did this here it would just become a slider-chain that doesn't differentiate to the next slider being mapped to smth very different so nuh
02:11:289 (7) - idk if you wanted to write something here but yes I love this slider too <3 originally mapped it double as fast but that was too offputting LOL
02:19:246 (5,6) - make these flow into eachother a bit smoother flow->curveflow. Pretty much move the second white node to the left or 02:19:246 (5) - to the left. dunno what you mean exactly, but imo this is very smooth due to all the sliderleniency and low spacing so I see no need to change anything :|
This whole section looks crisp af muh dude :weary: :ok_hand: <3
03:03:276 (3,1) - smh stack? I absolutely don't care about stacking notes that are seconds away from each other but this made check whether all notes here were absolutely horizontal/vertical because of followpoints, turns out some weren't, so thanks lol
03:22:471 (2) - ctrl+g could be and option since its kinda packed there. but that would ruin the whole gimmick of the no-movement-gaps here, boo!
03:29:208 (1) - some wiggle shit is possible here eh, didn't do that at any of the other sounds like this either so that wouldn't really fit the section D:

bonsai mapping some wierd shit

sry for bad maymay man I almost forgot how bad it was, luckily remembered now
will be deinstalling after posting this

byebye bye
: (
thanks for that big mod, but most of it seemed like suggestions to me that are kinda cool but don't really fit or are just unnecessary xdd ilu tho <3
whee applied all mods now and I actually found a way to fix that one spot that had been bugging me for a long time, I'M FREE NOW
edit: box
Irreversible
[Normal]

Delete all the green lines at the begin, they're unnecessary ECKS DEE more work for you.
00:29:289 (1,2,3) - This is a bit off DS-wise, you'll see what I mean.
00:47:941 (3) - Hmm, somehow this overlap bothers me. If it was intentional though, keep it lol.
01:52:767 (1,2,3) - This seems way too over the top for this difficulty. Try to unstack it and make it more readable.

02:48:530 (1) - Please don't use double repeaters in the lowest diff, again, I feel like your difficulty suffers from having technical spikes.

Note: The difficulty is excellently done. But I can't push it in it's state, because of the technical spikes it has sometimes, namely the double repeater, the weirdly stacked pattern, and to be honest, as well those stacks: 02:12:072 (2,3,1) - . There was another one earlier in this map. You should get rid off those, to ensure rankability.

[Hard]

Really like it, good job.

[Insane]

00:44:811 (4,1) - Normally, there is a lot of emphasis when you have a spaced doublet like this. I think here this is not the case, so I suggest stacking this to make it play smoother here.
01:01:637 (1) - Hmm, can you elaborate on why you've used a multi reverse here? I don't really see an opportunity to. I'd follow the vocals, like you usually did.
01:09:985 (1) - ^

Plays kind of bad at first, but turns into an interesting challenge.

[Extra]

00:09:854 (3) - Having the slider end on such an intense beat plays really off.. I suggest an alternative rhythm here, where you don't ignore that important beat. I mean, you can still follow the vocals without ignoring the beat like this - if you extended the slider by 1/4, then you would be clearly following the vocals while maintaining the experience of the map. Following the vocals at the start and letting the slider end on a beat just appears to be really off. I'd really advise you to fix that - it occurs multiple times.
00:26:550 (3,4) - I'm not quite happy with how you handled this kind of rhythm any way, here it is completely different (better than above, tho)
01:01:637 (1,2) - Similar to Insane: 1) Why the repeater 2) Why having it end on a vocal, if you started it on one? You could unreverse it once and add a circle.
01:06:333 (4) - ??? As already mentioned.

Good map design wise, but please make sure to take care of the rhythm; i've only mentioned it once, but it occurs all over again - and I feel like you're capable of fixing stuff over the whole map, if you decide to do something against it. If you disagree, then please give proper reasoning as to why you feel it's okay, and I'll see further.
Topic Starter
Bonsai

Irreversible wrote:

[Normal]

Delete all the green lines at the begin, they're unnecessary ECKS DEE more work for you. sorry those are a key element of the map as they represent the strings of the balloons flying up in the air in the video there. 8-)
00:29:289 (1,2,3) - This is a bit off DS-wise, you'll see what I mean. whoopsie, fixed
00:47:941 (3) - Hmm, somehow this overlap bothers me. If it was intentional though, keep it lol. ye it's intentional (and thus centered in an attempt to keep it somewhat clean lol), if I move it somewhere else I'd run out of place for what I wanted to do there :c
01:52:767 (1,2,3) - This seems way too over the top for this difficulty. Try to unstack it and make it more readable. holy shit idk why I did that, changed lol
02:48:530 (1) - Please don't use double repeaters in the lowest diff, again, I feel like your difficulty suffers from having technical spikes.
Tried discussing this in irc but on your wish I'll end that and move my reasoning here: This difficulty is not made to please Beginner-players just because it is the lowest difficulty of the set. Not every song can be made into a meaningful Easy-diff, and this song in particular consists mainly of a mixture of a shitton of offbeat-rhythm-layers that all have 3/4-gaps and all sorts of other stuff that simply doesn't make this difficulty enjoyable for beginners. I am fully aware that this has once been in the RC, but maybe you aren't aware that it has been removed for a reason, because you insisting on keeping it easy just bc it's the lowest diff contradicts the purpose of removing it in the first place. Also, the draft confirming this kinda thing has just been announced, so I guess it would be more meaningful to raise your concerns there instead of here if you want to force lowest diffs to be easier than others.
This difficulty is a Normal in every way, and the pure rhythmic structure of it is already demanding a certain skill-level from the player. I believe that if a player can handle/enjoy the rest of the map so far, they will not struggle with slow 1/1 double-reverses at all. I have formed that belief from most of my mapsets featuring patterns in lower diffs that the nominating people had problems with, which caused me to get a shitton of testplays for various maps by players of the respective skill-level. This applied for example to this map which features the exact same pattern in a lower (lowest) diff at higher BPM, where I already discussed this with other QATs and came to the conclusion that keeping it was fine. That diff was actually aimed at much worse players than this one is, and even there we've reached the consensus of it fitting, so why not here? You stated that my diff already had too many advanced techniques, but I don't see how that's a reason to compensate that by leaving relatively easier techniques out; It's simply forming a coherent and consistent difficulty.


Note: The difficulty is excellently done. But I can't push it in it's state, because of the technical spikes it has sometimes, namely the double repeater, the weirdly stacked pattern, and to be honest, as well those stacks: 02:12:072 (2,3,1) - . There was another one earlier in this map. You should get rid off those, to ensure rankability.As discussed in irc I raised Stack Leniency so that all those 1/1-stacks autostack now and thus ensure rankability, I really want to keep them as stacks though as that's a gimmick(?) that occurs very often in this diff and also in more complex ways in the higher diffs of this set, so I wanted to introduce them right away

[Hard]

Really like it, good job. Thanks owo

[Insane]

00:44:811 (4,1) - Normally, there is a lot of emphasis when you have a spaced doublet like this. I think here this is not the case, so I suggest stacking this to make it play smoother here. This is emphasizing that beat that starts there and stays held until 00:45:985 though, it is spaced out at every other instance of that too (00:11:420 (4,1) - 00:15:463 (1,2) - 00:19:767 (4,1) - 00:28:115 (6,1) - 00:32:289 (5,1) - 00:36:463 (4,1) - and also directly after the one you've poointed out 00:48:985 (1,2) -
01:01:637 (1) - Hmm, can you elaborate on why you've used a multi reverse here? I don't really see an opportunity to. I'd follow the vocals, like you usually did. It's to emphasize the sound that the last point was about too, the vocals would only be one 1/2 after that beat so mapping those wouldn't make it possible to specifially emphasize that holding sound anymore
01:09:985 (1) - ^

Plays kind of bad at first, but turns into an interesting challenge. >summary of my mapping in general

[Extra]

00:09:854 (3) - Having the slider end on such an intense beat plays really off.. I suggest an alternative rhythm here, where you don't ignore that important beat. I mean, you can still follow the vocals without ignoring the beat like this - if you extended the slider by 1/4, then you would be clearly following the vocals while maintaining the experience of the map. Following the vocals at the start and letting the slider end on a beat just appears to be really off. I'd really advise you to fix that - it occurs multiple times. I'm kinda confused by you advising not to ignore that beat first but then suggesting to extend the slider so it's even more ignored lol, anyways - I don't find that beat particularly important, it's just the regular snare that occurs all the time, while my map in general focuses on the vocals and the abundance of individual sounds that occur all the time - Both vocals and one of those special sounds have notes at 00:09:724 and 00:09:854 which is why I emphasized, and the slidertail is there exactly because I don't wanna completely ignore the snare and maintaining the hitsounding-structure of the map.
00:26:550 (3,4) - I'm not quite happy with how you handled this kind of rhythm any way, here it is completely different (better than above, tho) That's because that's a different section than before - Starting from 00:25:115 the song constantly has those snycopations on pmuch every red tick that gives the song a much more steady and and continuous flow, which is why I initially kept the map a bit more on-beat to incorporate that and build a contrast to the previous section.
01:01:637 (1,2) - Similar to Insane: 1) Why the repeater 2) Why having it end on a vocal, if you started it on one? You could unreverse it once and add a circle. 1) as in Insane, 2) because on 01:02:159 there are even stronger vocals that wouldn't get their deserved emphasis if the previous note would already be emphasized more.
01:06:333 (4) - ??? As already mentioned. !!! As already explained.

Good map design wise, but please make sure to take care of the rhythm; i've only mentioned it once, but it occurs all over again - and I feel like you're capable of fixing stuff over the whole map, if you decide to do something against it. If you disagree, then please give proper reasoning as to why you feel it's okay, and I'll see further.
Welp, I'm always in for explaining my reasoning even more detailed, but please tell me if you honestly want it in the first place or if you just wanna push your own views.
submission ain't working rn aaa nvm
Irreversible

Bonsai wrote:

Irreversible wrote:

[Normal]

Delete all the green lines at the begin, they're unnecessary ECKS DEE more work for you. sorry those are a key element of the map as they represent the strings of the balloons flying up in the air in the video there. 8-)
00:29:289 (1,2,3) - This is a bit off DS-wise, you'll see what I mean. whoopsie, fixed
00:47:941 (3) - Hmm, somehow this overlap bothers me. If it was intentional though, keep it lol. ye it's intentional (and thus centered in an attempt to keep it somewhat clean lol), if I move it somewhere else I'd run out of place for what I wanted to do there :c
01:52:767 (1,2,3) - This seems way too over the top for this difficulty. Try to unstack it and make it more readable. holy shit idk why I did that, changed lol
02:48:530 (1) - Please don't use double repeaters in the lowest diff, again, I feel like your difficulty suffers from having technical spikes.
Tried discussing this in irc but on your wish I'll end that and move my reasoning here: This difficulty is not made to please Beginner-players just because it is the lowest difficulty of the set. Not every song can be made into a meaningful Easy-diff, and this song in particular consists mainly of a mixture of a shitton of offbeat-rhythm-layers that all have 3/4-gaps and all sorts of other stuff that simply doesn't make this difficulty enjoyable for beginners. I am fully aware that this has once been in the RC, but maybe you aren't aware that it has been removed for a reason, because you insisting on keeping it easy just bc it's the lowest diff contradicts the purpose of removing it in the first place. Also, the draft confirming this kinda thing has just been announced, so I guess it would be more meaningful to raise your concerns there instead of here if you want to force lowest diffs to be easier than others.
This difficulty is a Normal in every way, and the pure rhythmic structure of it is already demanding a certain skill-level from the player. I believe that if a player can handle/enjoy the rest of the map so far, they will not struggle with slow 1/1 double-reverses at all. I have formed that belief from most of my mapsets featuring patterns in lower diffs that the nominating people had problems with, which caused me to get a shitton of testplays for various maps by players of the respective skill-level. This applied for example to this map which features the exact same pattern in a lower (lowest) diff at higher BPM, where I already discussed this with other QATs and came to the conclusion that keeping it was fine. That diff was actually aimed at much worse players than this one is, and even there we've reached the consensus of it fitting, so why not here? You stated that my diff already had too many advanced techniques, but I don't see how that's a reason to compensate that by leaving relatively easier techniques out; It's simply forming a coherent and consistent difficulty.


Note: The difficulty is excellently done. But I can't push it in it's state, because of the technical spikes it has sometimes, namely the double repeater, the weirdly stacked pattern, and to be honest, as well those stacks: 02:12:072 (2,3,1) - . There was another one earlier in this map. You should get rid off those, to ensure rankability.As discussed in irc I raised Stack Leniency so that all those 1/1-stacks autostack now and thus ensure rankability, I really want to keep them as stacks though as that's a gimmick(?) that occurs very often in this diff and also in more complex ways in the higher diffs of this set, so I wanted to introduce them right away This is fine, but I will not push it if it stays like this - I like your attempt of involving this idea throughout your mapset, but then I think it's not suitable for the lowest diff, as it shows up too many technically difficult patterns.

[Hard]

Really like it, good job. Thanks owo

[Insane]

00:44:811 (4,1) - Normally, there is a lot of emphasis when you have a spaced doublet like this. I think here this is not the case, so I suggest stacking this to make it play smoother here. This is emphasizing that beat that starts there and stays held until 00:45:985 though, it is spaced out at every other instance of that too (00:11:420 (4,1) - 00:15:463 (1,2) - 00:19:767 (4,1) - 00:28:115 (6,1) - 00:32:289 (5,1) - 00:36:463 (4,1) - and also directly after the one you've poointed out 00:48:985 (1,2) -
01:01:637 (1) - Hmm, can you elaborate on why you've used a multi reverse here? I don't really see an opportunity to. I'd follow the vocals, like you usually did. It's to emphasize the sound that the last point was about too, the vocals would only be one 1/2 after that beat so mapping those wouldn't make it possible to specifially emphasize that holding sound anymore
01:09:985 (1) - ^

Plays kind of bad at first, but turns into an interesting challenge. >summary of my mapping in general

[Extra]

00:09:854 (3) - Having the slider end on such an intense beat plays really off.. I suggest an alternative rhythm here, where you don't ignore that important beat. I mean, you can still follow the vocals without ignoring the beat like this - if you extended the slider by 1/4, then you would be clearly following the vocals while maintaining the experience of the map. Following the vocals at the start and letting the slider end on a beat just appears to be really off. I'd really advise you to fix that - it occurs multiple times. I'm kinda confused by you advising not to ignore that beat first but then suggesting to extend the slider so it's even more ignored lol, anyways - I don't find that beat particularly important, it's just the regular snare that occurs all the time, while my map in general focuses on the vocals and the abundance of individual sounds that occur all the time - Both vocals and one of those special sounds have notes at 00:09:724 and 00:09:854 which is why I emphasized, and the slidertail is there exactly because I don't wanna completely ignore the snare and maintaining the hitsounding-structure of the map. I see why you're confused by that, but I think there's a difference between following two different sounds and one sound especially (vocals in this case), hence why I suggested this. If you were to follow the vocals like you say, then you'd not end this slider there - because it extends to the next 1/4. However, not that tragic if you want to keep it - in my opinion it's a rather poor decision though.
00:26:550 (3,4) - I'm not quite happy with how you handled this kind of rhythm any way, here it is completely different (better than above, tho) That's because that's a different section than before - Starting from 00:25:115 the song constantly has those snycopations on pmuch every red tick that gives the song a much more steady and and continuous flow, which is why I initially kept the map a bit more on-beat to incorporate that and build a contrast to the previous section.
01:01:637 (1,2) - Similar to Insane: 1) Why the repeater 2) Why having it end on a vocal, if you started it on one? You could unreverse it once and add a circle. 1) as in Insane, 2) because on 01:02:159 there are even stronger vocals that wouldn't get their deserved emphasis if the previous note would already be emphasized more.
01:06:333 (4) - ??? As already mentioned. !!! As already explained.

Good map design wise, but please make sure to take care of the rhythm; i've only mentioned it once, but it occurs all over again - and I feel like you're capable of fixing stuff over the whole map, if you decide to do something against it. If you disagree, then please give proper reasoning as to why you feel it's okay, and I'll see further.
Welp, I'm always in for explaining my reasoning even more detailed, but please tell me if you honestly want it in the first place or if you just wanna push your own views.
It hasn't anything to do with me wanting to push my own views (basically what you're saying is that if I don't bubble your map after you give arguments, no matter if i agree or not, I'm pushing my own views) - it's just that I disagree with your arguments, based on the ones I have given. You are free to find someone else, but it won't be me who pushes this map, because of said reasons.
submission ain't working rn aaa nvm

Good luck! I'll revert the star, as I'm not intending to bubble it anymore.
Topic Starter
Bonsai
Don't be that guy and interpret into my words that I'm only satisfied if you agree with me, all I want from you is to actually respond to one of the abundance of arguments I've stated in some way other than repeating your original argument without any further reasoning. It's quite frustrating when I try my best to explain why I don't think that that's a reasonable argument here, only to be met with "well we both know our positions now, let's stop the discussion".

One last attempt, this time with an analogy: Say you've got a map that is completely DS-bound and has like 129-note-deathstreams in it. And then at some point of the map there are some teeny tiny jumps bc the music supports it there. Has the map gotten any harder just because a new sort of gameplay-element has been added to it, even though that element is much easier than basically the whole rest of the map? Is that suddenly too much? I don't think so, because I believe that players who can play deathstream can also play tiny jumps, as that requires a far lower skill-level than deathstreaming. And that's the same case here with my Normal requiring a certain skill-level to played in general, and double-1/1-reverses falling into that skill-level. There's nothing more difficult about them than all those other elements used throughout the map, it's just different. And I believe that a four-minute-song like this, where most of the sections differ vastly from each other and never repeat themselves, it is justified to use more than just a very limited amount of gameplay-elements as long as it stays in one difficulty-range.

I don't actually care that much about a potential nomination as I do about having a meaningful discussion, so if you can actually respond to my arguments in some way I'll gladly leave you be afterwards.
Irreversible

Bonsai wrote:

Don't be that guy and interpret into my words that I'm only satisfied if you agree with me I'm solely reading what you've written, then you might want to take better care of how you word things., all I want from you is to actually respond to one of the abundance of arguments I've stated in some way other than repeating your original argument without any further reasoning. It's quite frustrating when I try my best to explain why I don't think that that's a reasonable argument here, only to be met with "well we both know our positions now, let's stop the discussion" But again, I have my point of view, you have yours - basically what you once again intend is that if you don't understand my point of view,
I will have to find my way to your side? I simply disagree with this kind of logic. I have read your arguments, I understand them, but they conflict too much with my way of thinking as I could ultimatively push this map forward. I have explained my point of view as well, but the way you are describing the whole situation is a one-way street which will only be in your favor.
.

One last attempt, this time with an analogy: Say you've got a map that is completely DS-bound and has like 129-note-deathstreams in it. And then at some point of the map there are some teeny tiny jumps bc the music supports it there. Has the map gotten any harder just because a new sort of gameplay-element has been added to it, even though that element is much easier than basically the whole rest of the map? Is that suddenly too much? I don't think so, because I believe that players who can play deathstream can also play tiny jumps, as that requires a far lower skill-level than deathstreaming. And that's the same case here with my Normal requiring a certain skill-level to played in general, and double-1/1-reverses falling into that skill-level. There's nothing more difficult about them than all those other elements used throughout the map, it's just different. And I believe that a four-minute-song like this, where most of the sections differ vastly from each other and never repeat themselves, it is justified to use more than just a very limited amount of gameplay-elements as long as it stays in one difficulty-range. I disagree that this analogy can be applied to your map. What you are describing is that people who can play the stream will be able to play the tiny jumps - yeah, I agree. What I disagree with is that the people who can play the tiny jumps will be able to play the stream - and now please be careful, this should not be mistaken with this Normal difficulty. What you are describing is definitely not a Normal, hence why you can't really apply this analogy to this case.. In your map, you have the double reverse, and different kind of stacks. Sure, if someone can play them, the player won't have trouble to play the rest of the map. However, now the problem: He can play the whole map except those patterns, and this is the keypoint of my arguments. I think that you should not use such techniques in the lowest difficulty - yeah, I've seen the new proposals and all but I can't agree with it in this constellation, because of said reasons. If you use some stacks this is okay as an introduction, but you said you used "few" such gimmicks, but I disagree, you use a lot of them, and a lot of different ones on top of that.

I don't actually care that much about a potential nomination as I do about having a meaningful discussion, so if you can actually respond to my arguments in some way I'll gladly leave you be afterwards. Well, not meaning to offend you, but so far your meaningful discussion is not agreeing with me disagreeing and asking me for X different wordings of my argument, even though there aren't an infinite amount of different wordings..
Krfawy
Stop throwin shade at each other and indulge yourselves in relevancy by qualifying my brilliant set for Krzysztof Krawczyk's song.

Ayways, Bonsayayayayayetti: Is there any chance that you could make this pattern (in Insane) 03:30:606 (7,8) - less cluttered? Now the pattern is quite hard to read because of the overlaps and stacks so I would like to ask you to make it easier in terms of reading like this pattern right there: 03:25:903 (4,5) - like, you know, some unstacking if possible. xD And don't you mind putting 03:38:361 (1) - this circle on X103 Y281? That would be neater and that would flow easier if you ask me. ;-;

OMFG fix the blanket in Normal 00:44:941 (5) - My eyes are bleeding. Also how about a blanket here so it's more readable for noobs you-know-less-overlaps-there 00:47:941 (3) - ? And OMFG x2 02:13:637 (1) - move this one one pixel to the right to achieve the perfect stack (that quality...). And OMFG x3 02:26:158 (1) - I know you can make the blanketing somehow more perfect but this time I can forgive you because that would require a bit too much work on redoing the slow slider instead of placing the slider selected for that long until the blanket is 690% perfect. 03:12:938 (1) - Another blanket to be improved. And personally I'd use AR5.5-6.0 for easier rhythm reading - those odds might be problematic with just plain AR5 if you ask me.

Nice song and set. o/
Doormat
from my queue, what is this video LOL

[Normal]
  1. i'm personally okay with the varying distance snaps cause they aren't super extreme/varied in most cases but some people might get triggered by it so yeah
  2. just my opinion but a lot of the 2/1 sliders you use don't really feel appropriate given the rhythm density of the rest of the map. for example, 00:19:898 (6) - , 00:24:072 (6) - , 00:44:941 (5) - , 00:53:289 (6) - , 01:18:333 (5) - , etc. feel really undermapped compared to the rest of the rhythms used in the same combo
  3. 00:24:072 (6) - is the third red pivot really necessary lol
  4. 00:31:898 (5) - 1.5x distance snap might be a bit extreme though, coming off of a 1.2x distance snap
  5. 00:59:550 (3,1) - not sure about patterns like this for beginner difficulties; at low ARs like this, beginners are likely going to see 01:00:463 (1) - show up and try to click on it only for them to break combo. i'd try to avoid misleading beginners like this
  6. 01:12:985 (1,2) - something something blanket these two because aesthetics something something
  7. 01:22:507 (5,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,1,2,3,4) - this is a pretty long section of 1/2 rhythm density, though i suppose it should be all right given the low bpm of the song
  8. 02:06:202 (2) - 02:08:420 (2) - 02:10:376 (2) - i think it might be better to move these forward to the white tick instead of having these land on the blue tick. the white tick has a louder brass instrument sound that beginners are more likely going to follow the rhythm of. you might have to shorten 02:08:420 (2) - to a 1/2 slider though
[Hard]
  1. 00:44:811 (3,4) - 00:48:985 (4,5) - i don't think combining vocals and drum rhythms here together are the best idea; these doubles feel a bit awkward imo
  2. 00:57:463 (3) - i don't believe there's a sound on this white tick; there's a much more distinct kick on the 00:57:333 (3) - so the rhythm used for 00:56:550 (2,3) - doesn't really feel right with the music. why not try a rhythm like this?
  3. 01:30:854 (3) - what i said in the Normal about some sections feeling undermapped could technically also apply to this diff as well, such as this slider
  4. 01:33:985 (2) - really going to ignore the snare at 01:34:507 - ? :c
  5. 01:35:550 - missing snare here as well :c actually i think shortening 01:34:898 (3) - so that it doesn't repeat and introducing either a triple or a 1/4 repeat slider at this spot would be better for rhythm
  6. 02:43:954 (5) - 03:08:360 (5) - why a double repeat slider for these but then every other part of the kiai uses two 1/4 sliders instead? it feels a bit inconsistent
[Insane]
  1. 00:44:811 (4,1) - 00:48:985 (1,2) - the point i mentioned in the Hard about combining vocal/drum rhythms feeling awkward could also apply for this diff as well
  2. 00:57:463 (1,1) - the off rhythm i mentioned in the Hard about how there's no sound on this white tick could apply to this diff as well
  3. 01:31:507 (3) - 01:39:854 (8) - these should be different slider shapes imo; they're not the same sound so using the same slider shape to associate these more unique sounds in the song doesn't really feel right
  4. 02:06:724 (5) - 02:10:898 (5) - 02:15:072 (5) - 02:19:246 (5,6) - one of these things is not like the other, one of these things just doesn't belong (consistently, that is)
  5. 03:13:191 - sounds like there's a sound here that i don't think you should ignore here
[Extra]
  1. 00:46:833 (1) - sounds a bit early to me; imo it should go on the blue tick at 00:46:898 - like how you mapped it in your lower diffs
higher diffs are kind of uniquel, but i think the lower diffs could be more beginner-friendly with the rhythms
Topic Starter
Bonsai

Krfawy wrote:

Stop throwin shade at each other and indulge yourselves in relevancy by qualifying my brilliant set for Krzysztof Krawczyk's song.

Ayways, Bonsayayayayayetti: Is there any chance that you could make this pattern (in Insane) 03:30:606 (7,8) - less cluttered? Now the pattern is quite hard to read because of the overlaps and stacks so I would like to ask you to make it easier in terms of reading like this pattern right there: 03:25:903 (4,5) - like, you know, some unstacking if possible. xD well the difference here is that 03:30:098 isn't mapped at any of the other spots bc that sound occurs only here, but I turned (4,5) into a slider which should make this a bit easier ^^
And don't you mind putting 03:38:361 (1) - this circle on X103 Y281? That would be neater and that would flow easier if you ask me. ;-; I don't see how 90° don't flow well, and doing your thing would break DS and also just not fit the musical pattern here imo xd

OMFG fix the blanket in Normal 00:44:941 (5) - My eyes are bleeding. I don't see anything wrong with that Also how about a blanket here so it's more readable for noobs you-know-less-overlaps-there 00:47:941 (3) - ? making that curved in order to blanket would destroy the flow bc it continues downwards, and how would such a small overlap be hard to read anyways And OMFG x2 02:13:637 (1) - move this one one pixel to the right to achieve the perfect stack (that quality...). can't get much more irrelevant than this lol And OMFG x3 02:26:158 (1) - I know you can make the blanketing somehow more perfect but this time I can forgive you because that would require a bit too much work on redoing the slow slider instead of placing the slider selected for that long until the blanket is 690% perfect. I don't really get what you're talking about but I moved it one pixel to the left so idk 03:12:938 (1) - Another blanket to be improved. I won't change the slider I copied everywhere just bc it looks sligthly (if at all) off in the editor at one spot lol And personally I'd use AR5.5-6.0 for easier rhythm reading - those odds might be problematic with just plain AR5 if you ask me. Nah, 5.5 would already make objects that are 2/1 away not noticably visible which I heavily dislike, if someone can't read them with DS then I don't think slightly raising the AR will make any difference, it's just a matter of getting that rhythm or not

Nice song and set. o/
thanks, I'll happily not care about the irrelevant blanket- and stacking-points tho xd


Doormat wrote:

from my queue, what is this video LOL ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

[Normal]
  1. i'm personally okay with the varying distance snaps cause they aren't super extreme/varied in most cases but some people might get triggered by it so yeah
  2. just my opinion but a lot of the 2/1 sliders you use don't really feel appropriate given the rhythm density of the rest of the map. for example, 00:19:898 (6) - , 00:24:072 (6) - , 00:44:941 (5) - , 00:53:289 (6) - , 01:18:333 (5) - , etc. feel really undermapped compared to the rest of the rhythms used in the same combo welp, I just really want to emphasize that strong long sound that occurs there, also if I wouldn't do that then in almost every of those instances the same rhythm would pmuch repeat itself four times in a row which doesn't seem cool either :|
  3. 00:24:072 (6) - is the third red pivot really necessary lol turns it into a penis instead
  4. 00:31:898 (5) - 1.5x distance snap might be a bit extreme though, coming off of a 1.2x distance snap oh true, lowered it so that it's x1.2 when you ctrlg (4) too, I think that's what I originally intended to do there lol
  5. 00:59:550 (3,1) - not sure about patterns like this for beginner difficulties; at low ARs like this, beginners are likely going to see 01:00:463 (1) - show up and try to click on it only for them to break combo. i'd try to avoid misleading beginners like this true, mirrored (3) vertically
  6. 01:12:985 (1,2) - something something blanket these two because aesthetics something something nyegh, I guess xd
  7. 01:22:507 (5,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,1,2,3,4) - this is a pretty long section of 1/2 rhythm density, though i suppose it should be all right given the low bpm of the song yeah, I think considering that it's a very simple constant rhythm it's not too hard at all
  8. 02:06:202 (2) - 02:08:420 (2) - 02:10:376 (2) - i think it might be better to move these forward to the white tick instead of having these land on the blue tick. the white tick has a louder brass instrument sound that beginners are more likely going to follow the rhythm of. you might have to shorten 02:08:420 (2) - to a 1/2 slider though but I completely ignore that brass instrument everywhere, starting with 02:05:550 and 02:05:941 -, and the notes that you say they'd follow only come up after what is mapped, so I don't really see that happening o: and following the brass here would also make it much harder to transition to the next section xd
[Hard]
  1. 00:44:811 (3,4) - 00:48:985 (4,5) - i don't think combining vocals and drum rhythms here together are the best idea; these doubles feel a bit awkward imo I mean I could easily leave out 00:44:811 (3) and that would be that, but at the second spot I don't see any other way of mapping that without feeling weird, and the doubles don't feel weird to me anyways :|
  2. 00:57:463 (3) - i don't believe there's a sound on this white tick; there's a much more distinct kick on the 00:57:333 (3) - so the rhythm used for 00:56:550 (2,3) - doesn't really feel right with the music. why not try a rhythm like this? but there is a very strong sound there, basically the same as at 00:24:072 - but stronger o:
  3. 01:30:854 (3) - what i said in the Normal about some sections feeling undermapped could technically also apply to this diff as well, such as this slider I realized I forgot to put a sliderwhistle on that, but other than that see my response in Normal xd less is more
  4. 01:33:985 (2) - really going to ignore the snare at 01:34:507 - ? :c yeppers c:
  5. 01:35:550 - missing snare here as well :c actually i think shortening 01:34:898 (3) - so that it doesn't repeat and introducing either a triple or a 1/4 repeat slider at this spot would be better for rhythm but I don't get why that's so problematic lol, I simply focus on something completely different than the kicks or snares, mapping them too would make this section much denser than it would fit as it's much quieter and calmer than everything else xd
  6. 02:43:954 (5) - 03:08:360 (5) - why a double repeat slider for these but then every other part of the kiai uses two 1/4 sliders instead? it feels a bit inconsistent tbh they just don't feel that significant to me at the first one, hard to put into words but I guess it's bc 02:43:954 and 02:44:208 and 02:44:463 - stay on the same tone which is also the tone of the other synthesizer-layer so it doesn't stick out much, compared to that 02:46:242 and 02:46:496 are different tones, and for 02:52:089 (5,6) I can't really say why it seems like it sticks out so much more to me but it does lol xd
    for the second timestamp I guess it's the same plus it enables better differentiation for 03:10:648 (6) -, I hope this makes sense xd
[Insane]
  1. 00:44:811 (4,1) - 00:48:985 (1,2) - the point i mentioned in the Hard about combining vocal/drum rhythms feeling awkward could also apply for this diff as well same response xd
  2. 00:57:463 (1,1) - the off rhythm i mentioned in the Hard about how there's no sound on this white tick could apply to this diff as well zzz
  3. 01:31:507 (3) - 01:39:854 (8) - these should be different slider shapes imo; they're not the same sound so using the same slider shape to associate these more unique sounds in the song doesn't really feel right but they are the same sounds lol, idk what to say lol, uh maybe you're focusing too much on that descending low sound at the second timestamp but those.. rattling(?) sounds from the first one are there too and stand out more to me xd
  4. 02:06:724 (5) - 02:10:898 (5) - 02:15:072 (5) - 02:19:246 (5,6) - one of these things is not like the other, one of these things just doesn't belong (consistently, that is)
  5. 03:13:191 - sounds like there's a sound here that i don't think you should ignore here the only distinct sound I hear here is the one that is on every other red tick that I left out too, if you mean the synth that is kinda 'starting up' again then I didn't map that there yet bc I think it reaches its strongest point at the blue tick and mapping the red too would also take away the rhythmic emptiness of the synth disappearing between 03:12:556 (2,1) -
[Extra]
  1. 00:46:833 (1) - sounds a bit early to me; imo it should go on the blue tick at 00:46:898 - like how you mapped it in your lower diffs well the vocals there would more accurately be on the 1/16 between those lol, but the thing is that the early 1/8-vocal at 00:46:702 is smth that I really wanted to follow, and mapping any other rhythm following that up would make it weird af to play
higher diffs are kind of uniquel, but i think the lower diffs could be more beginner-friendly with the rhythms there's not much room for compromise between using-3/4s and not-using-3/4s lol, I originally got a Normal-GD that just mapped 1/2 everywhere which obv was easier but didn't relate to the song's actual rhythms at all so rip that
me rn
thanks a lot, I hope my explanations make sense tho xd
Mir
Please don't [title]

Metadata: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zDpudErKQnU

Logs:
SPOILER
14:46 Mir: you literally
14:46 Mir: could have just pmed me
14:46 Mir: LOL
14:46 Bonsai: bbbbbbut your policy
14:46 Bonsai: >///<
14:46 Mir: i said
14:47 Mir: http://i.imgur.com/ZDT7Y1A.png
14:47 Mir: :D
14:47 Bonsai: yeah but I'd rather do the thing you prefer lol
14:47 Mir: well fair enough
14:47 Mir: but not linking the set
14:47 Mir: >:
14:47 Mir: bad bonsai
14:48 Bonsai: ¯\_(:D)_/¯
14:48 Bonsai: wut
14:48 Bonsai: sec
14:48 Mir: o
14:48 Mir: nvm the color fit too well
14:48 Bonsai: xd
14:48 Bonsai: lol
14:48 Mir: see look http://i.imgur.com/42IbRFJ.png
14:48 Mir: can you tell
14:48 Mir: o;
14:48 Bonsai: wth
14:49 Bonsai: does that color mean that you already had a look at it before ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
14:49 Mir: i knew it existed already :D
14:49 Mir: but i didn't look at it
15:24 Mir: oh god
15:24 Mir: this song xD
15:25 Bonsai: this video ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
15:28 Mir: wait the video
15:28 Mir: i didnt dl video
15:29 Bonsai: zzz
15:29 Bonsai: it's just kinda sexual references with balloons lol
15:29 Mir: playing w/ video is hard
15:29 Bonsai: bc that's also kinda the meaning of the lyrics
15:29 Bonsai: idk lol
15:29 Bonsai: just watch it for a sec ^^
15:30 Bonsai: from 00:41:811 - on
15:30 Bonsai: lol
15:33 Mir: who is the girl
15:33 Mir: in the video
15:33 Mir: why is she always covered by a balloon
15:34 Bonsai: that's the singer
15:35 Bonsai: http://66.media.tumblr.com/99a6be544450 ... o1_400.gif
15:35 Mir: ah
15:35 Mir: there's literally nothing to say
15:35 Mir: i can't find anything in the topdiff lol
15:36 Bonsai: owo
15:36 Mir: 02:29:208 (4,5,7,8) - only why are these different
15:36 Mir: wondering cuz they sound the same
15:38 Bonsai: uh pwrf idk, probably bc (8) is on red tick and I wanted to emphasize that a bit more
15:38 Bonsai: and the first one being stacked to introduce rhythm
15:38 Bonsai: idk honestly but it works well lol
15:38 Bonsai: or a c t u a l l y
15:39 Bonsai: bc I wanted to go for symmetry but also keep the notes on the same y-height so stacking them below the slider wouldn't have worked lol
15:39 Bonsai: 8-)
15:39 Mir: not even like [http://i.imgur.com/AmDYqlm.png this]?
15:40 Bonsai: then it wouldn't be symmetrical anymore kek
15:40 Bonsai: all of 02:26:285 (2,3,4,1,2,3,4,5,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - is 100% symmetric heh
15:40 Mir: aaa
15:40 Mir: o
15:40 Mir: i see
15:41 Mir: 03:10:522 (2,3,4) - ow
15:41 Mir: nazi mode activated
15:41 Mir: jk
15:42 Bonsai: hö?
15:42 Bonsai: oh, you mean 1 and 3 not being on the same height? lul
15:42 Mir: that and 03:10:776 (4) - is a couple pixels too far right
15:42 Mir: lul
15:42 Bonsai: never noticed tbh, but I think it's less noticable this way than increasing spacing in (1,2)
15:43 Bonsai: but it's exactly on the same x-coordinate as 03:10:522 (2,1) - o:
15:43 Mir: then probably 3 is too far away
15:43 Mir: but it's not worth talking about lol
15:44 Bonsai: lol
15:44 Bonsai: such is the issue of having consistent spacing that is higher than x1.0 but also having a slider xd
15:44 Bonsai: guess I can move it a few pixels and nobody notices heh
15:50 Mir: LOL
15:50 Mir: oya
15:50 Mir: on insane 01:24:854 (3,4,1) -
15:50 Mir: 01:25:376 - this not being clickable is a bit tilt
15:50 Mir: cuz it's really noticeable, moreso than 01:25:507 (4) -
15:50 Mir: at least the melody
15:51 Bonsai: hmm
15:51 Mir: ik it's a pretty big change but
15:51 Mir: http://i.imgur.com/TAZGfjh.png what about this rhythm?
15:52 Mir: 01:29:289 (3,1,2,3) - or thi
15:52 Bonsai: well that's basically what happens at 01:17:028 (4,1,2) - , but from 01:23:550 - on there's this constant 1/2 going on so I wanted to map it a bit more continuous and avoid emphasizing offbeats too much
15:53 Bonsai: did it at the end there bc the 1/2 ends there lel
15:53 Bonsai: actually not the 1/2 but it gets calmer overall
15:53 Mir: hm but it's not only that being passive but the way that that being passive affects how 01:25:507 (4,1) - sounds
15:54 Mir: cuz 4 being the only clickable melody which usually (if im not mistaken) would be held is then cut off by 01:25:637 (1) -
15:54 Bonsai: yeah bc I want to prioritize the downbeat due to the continous 1/2
15:54 Bonsai: the (4) is just filler
15:54 Mir: o
15:54 Bonsai: and doesn't get much emphasis anyways bc sliderleniency
15:54 Mir: i see
15:55 Mir: 01:49:115 (3,4,5) - ohmygod
15:55 Bonsai: don't tell me to blanket pls
15:55 Mir: i said nothing
15:55 Mir: but ohmygod
15:55 Bonsai: ( ͠° ͟ʖ ͡°)
15:55 Bonsai: ohmygod what lol
15:56 Mir: im trying so hard not to tilt
15:56 Bonsai: lol
15:57 Bonsai: get ready for
15:57 Bonsai: 01:51:854 (4,5) -
15:57 Bonsai: : )
15:57 Mir: thats why i didn't say anything
15:57 Mir: i was like "fuck it's intentional"
15:57 Mir: "FUCK"
15:57 Bonsai: ( :
15:58 Mir: hmm
15:58 Mir: 03:26:666 (7,1) - 1 sounds a lot different than 7 but is a symmetrical flip of it
15:59 Mir: personally i'd make a different shape for it
16:00 Bonsai: but curve fits so good for both, and I really like how the (1) like 'catches' the movement xd
16:00 Bonsai: it's NC'd :^))))))))))
16:01 Mir: i knowwowowwo
16:01 Mir: i like visual differentiation on interesting sounds thats why xd
16:02 Bonsai: I mean I totally get what you mean but I kinda love it this way, and making (1) straight would be nyegh bc that wouldn't fit the sound there, and I can't think of any other shape that would fit the sound while fitting the pattern too xd
16:02 Mir: idk i was thinking make one pointy http://i.imgur.com/a5Cdpkk.png
16:02 Bonsai: if the SV were higher I'd do smth like [http://puu.sh/wGbnM/2e460e32ce.jpg this] probably but alas it's nopt
16:02 Bonsai: but
16:02 Bonsai: BUT
16:02 Bonsai: VOCALS
16:02 Bonsai: WITH EDGES
16:02 Bonsai: ?!°?!?!?!
16:02 Bonsai: HERESY
16:02 Mir: oh
16:03 Mir: 03:27:174 (1) - this with edges? xD
16:03 Mir: it's fine i guess, moving to hard cuz i can't find anything else
16:03 Bonsai: actually
16:03 Bonsai: I think I'll do it with one edge lol
16:03 Mir: o
16:03 Bonsai: yeh
16:03 Mir: okay
16:04 Bonsai: tfw I have no slider of that SV to copy from
16:04 Bonsai: w ö r k
16:04 Bonsai: u g h
16:05 Mir: damn
16:05 Mir: this song is getting catchy
16:05 Mir: this is bad i better hurry
16:05 Bonsai: lol
16:05 Bonsai: once you're done check the remix I linked in the description
16:05 Bonsai: good stuff
16:08 Bonsai: [http://puu.sh/wGbzq/a6d0e8f9f2.jpg owo]
16:08 Bonsai: not 100% perfect but making it even steeper would look cramped xd
16:08 Mir: :ok_hand:
16:08 Bonsai: actually lemme raise SV to make up for that lol
16:08 Bonsai: this style is tedious af
16:08 Mir: hard is fine, nothing to say
16:08 Bonsai: owo
16:09 Mir: oh
16:09 Mir: 00:21:463 (1,2) - oh doubleyou oh
16:10 Bonsai: wuh
16:10 Bonsai: ?
16:10 Mir: bluetick rhythm in a normal isn't something i see often
16:11 Mir: o;
16:11 Bonsai: welp, that's the problem with this song lol
16:11 Mir: yeah
16:11 Bonsai: you can't map it properly without 1/4s bc all the rhythms revolve around 1/4s
16:11 Mir: can't really do anything else without killing the rhythm
16:12 Bonsai: but I mean it gets introduced right away and used permanently
16:12 Mir: yeah
16:12 Bonsai: like idk why you linked there but 00:09:463 (3,4,5) - is first occurrence
16:12 Mir: i think it was the spacing
16:12 Mir: was pretty weird there compared to before
16:12 Bonsai: [http://puu.sh/wGbK5/3cfcc0fd7b.jpg holy] what did I do there
16:12 Mir: hoLY
16:12 Bonsai: oh
16:13 Bonsai: well that's already the lower one of the two spacings I use for that
16:14 Mir: ohh i see the double reverse
16:15 Mir: 00:43:898 (4) - wait shouldn't this start on the previous blue
16:15 Mir: oh no that wouldn't work..
16:16 Bonsai: nah, 00:43:898 - still has the bass-thing
16:16 Bonsai: compare to 00:47:941 -
16:16 Mir: oh
16:16 Mir: 01:00:463 (1) - not?
16:17 Mir: ending on the uhmm blue
16:18 Bonsai: you mean it should end on blue? that's somewhat true, but if you do that the whole rhythm seems choppy, which I don't want it to bc everything in this section is so continuous
16:19 Mir: hmm okay
16:20 Mir: 01:51:463 (5,1) - hmm
16:20 Mir: 01:52:637 - wouldn't this make sense to cover
16:20 Mir: because with 01:51:463 (5) - you followed the vocals
16:20 Mir: 01:53:550 (2,3) - here it was also covered
16:21 Bonsai: that's bc 01:54:724 - got the strong bass again; again I wanted to express the continuousness more xddddd like 01:50:550 - is ignoring it too
16:22 Mir: oh
16:22 Mir: waaah this song ;w;
16:22 Bonsai: i k r
16:22 Bonsai: Normal was by far the hardest diff to map
16:22 Bonsai: originally I was like "I have no clue how to map this"
16:22 Bonsai: and let VINXIS gd
16:22 Bonsai: but he just mapped 1/2 everywhere, making it really boring and not related to the song much
16:23 Mir: honestly liek
16:23 Mir: to even follow this song at this level
16:23 Mir: you need to know at least what you're doing to some degree
16:23 Mir: in play i mean
16:23 Mir: so the reverse sliders at the end shouldn't be a problem
16:23 Mir: the double ones
16:25 Bonsai: if I understand correctly what you said just now, that's what I tried to tell Irre lol
16:25 Bonsai: like, if a player can play all those 3/4s n stuff
16:25 Bonsai: then they can bloody well play double reverses too lol
16:25 Mir: yeah
16:25 Bonsai: ¯\_(:D)_/¯
16:25 Mir: i mean i like the set, i don't mind giving this a shot
16:25 Mir: would probably be the most unorthodox bubble i've ever placed though lol
16:26 Bonsai: Irre didn't seem like he would... P O P I T ..if you're worried about that
16:26 Bonsai: hö?
16:26 Bonsai: my maps are unorthodox 8-)
16:26 Mir: well that's true xd
16:26 Mir: well since you did like, one change just update and i'll post log
16:26 Bonsai: lol
16:26 Bonsai: two iirc !!!
16:27 Mir: i don't remember you probably moved something a pixel
16:27 Bonsai: yeah I'm rereading chat rn lol
16:27 Bonsai: ah yes the pixels
16:27 Bonsai: lol
16:27 Mir: ayy
16:28 Bonsai: asdf getting stuck at 11% again
16:28 Bonsai: brb restarting a few times
16:28 Mir: wtf is this crazy site http://www.anamanaguchi.com/popit/
16:28 Bonsai: rip whatever you just wrote
16:29 Mir: the official site
16:29 Mir: lags my pc
16:29 Mir: https://soundcloud.com/anamanaguchi/sets/wheelie this should be good enough for metadata i guess
16:29 Bonsai: yup
16:29 Bonsai: oh
16:29 Bonsai: uh
16:29 Bonsai: sec
16:30 Bonsai: bc they're all uppercase there lol
16:30 Mir: eyes emoji
16:30 Bonsai: oh my fucking fuck
16:30 Bonsai: http://www.anamanaguchi.com/popit/
16:30 Mir: yea
16:30 Mir: that's what i meant
16:30 Mir: xD
16:30 Bonsai: enjoy
16:30 Bonsai: LOL
16:31 Bonsai: maybe I should use that logo in the description lol
16:31 Mir: what sucks is you can't pop any of those
16:31 Mir: is normal-sliderwhistle used
16:31 Bonsai: I don't understand tho
16:31 Bonsai: yeah
16:31 Bonsai: how 2 pop
16:31 Bonsai: yeah
16:31 Bonsai: sec
16:31 Bonsai: 00:16:767 (1) -
16:32 Mir: add it to insane too
16:32 Bonsai: it's louder than the default one
16:32 Bonsai: hö
16:32 Mir: aaand the rest of the diffs
16:32 Bonsai: oh
16:32 Bonsai: owo
16:32 Mir: if you're gonna change the artist metadata should do that too xd
16:32 Bonsai: yeah sec lol
16:33 Bonsai: FUCK that website irritates me
16:33 Bonsai: why do I have it open in the background lol
16:33 Mir: lmao
16:36 Bonsai: this gonna take a bit bc adding those whistles ain't easy with samplesets n stuff lol
16:36 Mir: ah okay lol
16:38 Bonsai: ok just so you know I'm just finding out that I forgot the whistles in some diffs at places like 00:50:159 - too
16:38 Bonsai: but not doing it in all bc it doesn't fit in all lol
16:39 Mir: remember where you put them so i can check later lol
16:39 Bonsai: ok shit gonna have to write everything down bc I realized that at some spots, normal-sliderslide is better than soft-sldierwhistle with silent sliderslide lol
16:39 Mir: ww
16:52 Bonsai: .....
16:52 Bonsai: 11%
16:52 Bonsai: ...
16:54 Bonsai: ok updated, here's log:
16:54 Bonsai: in Normal I used normal-sliderslide instead of soft-sliderwhistle at 00:11:550 (6) - 00:19:898 (6) - 00:24:072 (6) - 00:44:941 (5) - 00:53:289 (6) - 01:26:680 (7) - 01:30:854 (6) - and also used both at 01:01:637 (4) - 01:05:811 (4) - 01:09:985 (4) - 01:14:159 (3) -
16:54 Bonsai: in Hard I only did that at 00:24:072 (3) - 00:53:289 (3) - 01:26:680 (1) - 01:30:854 (3) -, but also did stuff at 00:19:376 (2) - which is hard to describe but you can see it lol
16:54 Bonsai: in Insane I used it at 00:23:941 (1) -
16:54 Bonsai: in Extra I just added some soft-sliderwhistle at 00:23:941 (1,2) - lol
16:54 Bonsai: gotta prepare myself some food rn. brb
16:54 Mir: kk
16:56 Bonsai: ~
16:56 Mir: changes are confirmed and stuff
16:56 Bonsai: oh metadata is still :???:
16:56 Mir: ya
16:56 Mir: do you wanna use soundcloud?
16:56 Bonsai: ok I mean
16:57 Bonsai: http://puu.sh/wGdjk/299f318c20.png
16:57 Bonsai: does this count lol
16:57 Bonsai: it's official website :P
16:57 Mir: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zDpudErKQnU
16:57 Mir: vevo does it too
16:57 Mir: so it's okay i guess
16:57 Bonsai: zzzzzzzzzzzz why didn't I find that lol
16:57 Bonsai: yesh
16:57 Mir: i literally googled it xD
16:57 Mir: metadata is fine then
16:57 Bonsai: wtf why do they have it twice
16:57 Bonsai: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=scmQ6iN8hKM
16:58 Bonsai: yeah
16:58 Bonsai: I love how that's the only video from the VEVO-channel lol
16:58 Bonsai: ¯\_(:D)_/¯

Kinda agreeing with Bonsai about the Normal diff, if you can follow the weird rhythm you can pretty much play the double reverses, and they pop up several times. Their usage is justified by the change in music which is unique in that section only therefore that element imo is fine to be used there.

Bubbled.

I hope this doesn't get popped lol.
Seijiro
it would be cool to enable epilepsy warning: the video has some strobes in the intro which worry me, so better safe than sorry

01:26:680 (1) - on Hard, this slider has an awful normal slider body sampleset
01:30:854 (3) - his cousin ^
^ this happens on Normal too, is this intentional? It sounds kinda weird to me

To be fair, a lot of sliders on the Normal diff have this normal sampleset slider body which grates my ears. Could it be this is hitsound copier's fault here?
Some fit, like 00:24:072 (6) - , while others feel a bit strange, like 00:19:898 (6) - , which on Hard diff are not even using the same hitsounding, so I am not sure myself here.
00:44:941 (5) - 00:11:550 (6) - 00:24:072 (6) - 00:49:115 (5) - 01:26:680 (7) - some of these are also different on the Hard, that's why I am a bit confused...
Topic Starter
Bonsai
Whoha, hi there :)

I never realized that the epilepsy-warning makes sense for videos too and not just SBs, did that!

For the normal-sliderslides/-whistles, those are all intentional and in the Normal I will definitely keep them bc they are also consistent there; though I just realized thanks to you that it makes barely any sense in the Hard bc it's inconsistent as fuck since I barely ever emphasized that sound in the map itself, so hitsounding that is rather random indeed. I removed them all (I think, if you find any left ones tell me), Mir is definitely okay with deleting those bc I only spontaneously added them during his mod, he would've bubbled it without them too :P

Fun fact: I'm on vacation rn and the internet connection is so bad here that I can't manage to update this bc of the big video, but I will do tomorrow evening! Thanks a lot for passing by and checking :D
Updated!
Seijiro
Aurele
yesss!
defiance
what happens if you pop it
Chalwa
Old Bonsai went back <3. Congratz :D
Please sign in to reply.

New reply