Logic Agent wrote:

hi m4m stuff.

[General]

1. These combo colors with skins like mine are very hard to see on the background. I'm not usually one to complain but I think you should either pick out some different colors or do something in general because without bg dim to 100% paired with the sb the map is very difficult to read correctly. This is a little glitch in the editor. Because the SB uses hitsound trigger, passing one and returning to an earlier point results something like in your screenshot. So don't worry, this is how it looks, and it's perfectly fine to play.
   
   ex

   

[Holystone]

1. 00:07:615 (3) - I think it sounds better here if you use the keysound you used on this click instead of the current one tbh. What do you mean by that.
2. 00:17:433 (1,1,2,3) - I would like it better if you tried to keep the visual distance here more consistent, at least between 00:18:161 (2,3) these two I hope I got it right.
3. 00:19:433 (2,1) - A lack of emphasis here considering the spacing you used 00:21:433 (1,2,1) here All right.
4. 02:34:888 (1) - Should these have the same snap? Yes.
5. 00:38:706 (1) - remove nc or 00:21:251 (3) nc here Removed from 00:38:706 (1) -.
6. 00:45:433 (1,2) - I think it'd be cool if starting here these were even bigger, and the next two kickslider pairs went down in spacing as the kiai ends. Currently they kinda do that but it's not that noticeabe, if you made it noticeable it'd be sick. Very fitting with the music. Applied.
7. 00:49:797 (2) - remove nc? Yes.
8. 00:50:161 (1) - I would silence this slider end personally but it's up to you All right.
9. 01:12:706 (3) - I would either nc this here or remove nc from 01:11:615 (1,2) this Added the NC to follow the piano.
10. 01:13:615 (3,4,5) - Move this over so there's a bit more emphasis on the slider after it? Okay.
    
    ex

    
11. 01:14:888 (3,4) - Again, this should either be nc'd to match with 01:15:979 (1,2) or they should both not be nc'd. Added the NC.
12. 01:15:797 (2,1) - Try something like this instead? The current motion between these two is very underwhelming Good idea; I didn't know what to do here to be honest.
    
    ex

    
13. 01:19:251 (3,1) - Maybe bring the circle up and blanket it better, and then stack 01:19:251 (3,2) it looks a lot cleaner imo I agree.
14. 01:35:070 (1,2) - Make the incread sv kicksliders here farther away from each other than the last ones? You can do this easily by stacking the head on the tail of this slider long gone 01:33:433 (1,2) All right.
15. 01:43:070 (1,2) - swap ncs? Yes, to follow the NC pattern.
16. 02:12:706 (2) - move to the left a bit? visual distance is better this way Not sure how to see a better visual distance; I think the current is fine, to keep the spacing intact.
17. 00:50:161 (1,1) - Are the snaps between these two different on purpose? And again I would silence this slider personally but that's entirely up to you I must of have edit one of the sliders and changed the length without noticing. And I added the silenced tail.
18. 03:05:070 (1,2) - You could make the jump here bigger, feels small compared to the first section in the song like this Ok.
19. 03:07:433 (2) - was the default soft hitnormal here intentional? Nope, it should be a clap hitsound instead.
20. 03:08:342 (1,2,1) - Just an idea, but if you could somehow change this section a bit so that this part could flow like this, I think it'd feel great to help emphasize the piano section winding down. Sure. It's similar to the flow made from 03:05:433 (1,2,1,2,1,2) - which I like.
    
    ex

    
21. 03:17:070 (3) - nc or remove nc 03:15:979 (1,2) here? Added.
22. 04:23:797 (3,1) - don't really like the flow here but I don't really have any ides. If you could come up with something, cool. If not oh well Did some switch-a-roo with 04:23:797 (3,1) -.
23. 04:27:979 (2) - Move to the left some? Visual distance again I still don't see what would improve the visual. Besides currently the spacing is consistent, making the pattern look consistent too.
24. 05:28:342 (1,2,3,4) - I feel like this should be spaced and hitsounded like the combo before it* Ok.
25. 05:56:161 (1,2) - swap nc? Yes.
26. 06:04:888 (1,2) - swap nc again, you did it this way earlier Yes.
27. 06:13:615 (2,3,4,1,1,2,1,2,3) - I feel like this section should still follow the traditional nc structure Ok.
    
    ex

    
28. 06:39:251 (1) - maybe put this around x15 y241? Very comfortable motion and puts emphasis on the last note before the spinner I increased a little the distance, but I still followed the same flow. If there's too much space, there's too much emphasis when the end of the song does not require it as it goes much softer.

maps good and fun, this mod mostly addresses inconsistencies which are super easy to happen in approval length maps. good luck!

1. 00:23:615 (1,2,1) - Based off pitch this should be easier than your previous patterns but its actually harder (since increased 1>2 spacing). Nerf at least the 1,2 spacing?
2. 00:32:342 (1,2,1) - Similar problem here where more spacing is given/harder angles than previous patterns
3. 00:41:070 (1,2,1) - And here, though this is just an awkward angle to play as well coming out of 00:40:888 (2) - .
4. 00:41:979 (1,1,2,1,1,2,1) - Symmetry seems really weird here, any reason why you brought it up here?
5. 01:56:161 (2,1,2) - This is the only perfect stack I've seen thus far in the wub sections so it feels kind of out of place IMO.
6. 02:14:342 (1,2,1,1,2,3) - The angle coming into the triples here makes them catch you offguard on sight read. I'm not quite sure how you'd like to change it but even curving them would make them a bit smoother to play coming from 02:14:706 (1) - and going to 02:15:251 (1) - . The DS itself on them is fine though.
7. 02:26:706 (1,2,3,4) - really loud then 02:30:524 (1) - to 02:32:706 (1) - is really quiet. Volume errors or what?
8. 03:28:888 (1,2,3,1) - Make it perfectly linear to avoid slightly triggering me every time I play this part :p
9. 03:37:615 (1,1) - Increase the spacing here to make it feel less cramped? Not by much, kind of like this:
   
   ^

   
10. 03:42:524 (1) - The wiggle here plays a lot differently than every other part, in particular reason as to why you decided on this shape?
11. 04:19:251 (1,2,1) - Maybe nerf the spacing between these two patterns a bit to bring it more in line with the respective spacing in this section?
12. 04:11:524 (1,2,3,4) - vs 04:28:888 (1,2,3,4,1) - . They're botht he same patterns but the latter only appears in that form here, so maybe make it so that the slider ends touch the heads in 04:28:888 (1,2,3,4,1) - for consistency's sake?
13. 05:48:524 (1,2,3,1) - vs 03:28:888 (1,2,3,1) - vs 01:26:706 (1,2,1) - vs 00:16:888 (1,2,1) - are all different but in music are the same drum roll. I'm fine with variation for leading into unique sections but I think you need to normalize the pattern a bit between sections.

Cryptic wrote:

Ello~

[Liberation]

1. 00:23:615 (1,2,1) - Based off pitch this should be easier than your previous patterns but its actually harder (since increased 1>2 spacing). Nerf at least the 1,2 spacing?
2. 00:32:342 (1,2,1) - Similar problem here where more spacing is given/harder angles than previous patterns
3. 00:41:070 (1,2,1) - And here, though this is just an awkward angle to play as well coming out of 00:40:888 (2) - .
4. 00:41:979 (1,1,2,1,1,2,1) - Symmetry seems really weird here, any reason why you brought it up here? Probably because the part starting from 00:41:979 - repeated on 00:42:524 -, but I broke the symmetry. I agree it looked a bit weird.
5. 01:56:161 (2,1,2) - This is the only perfect stack I've seen thus far in the wub sections so it feels kind of out of place IMO.
6. 02:14:342 (1,2,1,1,2,3) - The angle coming into the triples here makes them catch you offguard on sight read. I'm not quite sure how you'd like to change it but even curving them would make them a bit smoother to play coming from 02:14:706 (1) - and going to 02:15:251 (1) - . The DS itself on them is fine though. I just 90 degrees turned 02:14:888 (1,2,3) - to make a little but crisp (due to the triplets being straight) circular flow.
7. 02:26:706 (1,2,3,4) - really loud then 02:30:524 (1) - to 02:32:706 (1) - is really quiet. Volume errors or what? I think I used the wrong sampleset. I made it the same as 02:09:342 -.
8. 03:28:888 (1,2,3,1) - Make it perfectly linear to avoid slightly triggering me every time I play this part :p
9. 03:37:615 (1,1) - Increase the spacing here to make it feel less cramped? Not by much, kind of like this:
   
   ^

   
10. 03:42:524 (1) - The wiggle here plays a lot differently than every other part, in particular reason as to why you decided on this shape? Tried something new instead of repeating the same slider shapes. But in the end I created at a type of curved slider, less ugly than the wiggle.
11. 04:19:251 (1,2,1) - Maybe nerf the spacing between these two patterns a bit to bring it more in line with the respective spacing in this section?
12. 04:11:524 (1,2,3,4) - vs 04:28:888 (1,2,3,4,1) - . They're botht he same patterns but the latter only appears in that form here, so maybe make it so that the slider ends touch the heads in 04:28:888 (1,2,3,4,1) - for consistency's sake? Yeah, I intended to space them for aesthetic purposes.
13. 05:48:524 (1,2,3,1) - vs 03:28:888 (1,2,3,1) - vs 01:26:706 (1,2,1) - vs 00:16:888 (1,2,1) - are all different but in music are the same drum roll. I'm fine with variation for leading into unique sections but I think you need to normalize the pattern a bit between sections.

Looks good, call me back.

1. 00:17:979 (1) -
2. 00:18:342 (3) -
3. 00:23:797 (2) -
4. 00:32:342 (1) -
5. 00:41:070 (1) -
6. 00:42:706 (1,2) -
7. 01:56:161 (2,1,2,1,1,2) -
8. 02:14:888 (1,2,3) -

Pachiru wrote:

Oh absolutely, sorry for that! My bad ;w;

pishifat wrote:

03:35:796 (3) - snapping (sv isn't right)

Strategas wrote:

re