re: Mun's mod.
Because of the way this mod is set up, I think it's more appropriate to respond directly rather than line for line.
First of all, a huge thanks for taking the time and going through the effort of making such a detailed mod! You've given me a lot to work with, and there's a lot that I've learned from this.
I never actually took the general latitudinal/longitudinal nature of slider flow into consideration when I made these maps. They defaulted to that in general because they seemed to flow well to me. But, looking at other ranked maps that I really like, you're definitely right: sliders generally either have a higher curvature, or they hug the longitude and latitude lines by a factor of 5-15 degrees. The example you highlighted (00:03:146 (1,2,3)) actually does have a pattern that I guess I just didn't clearly elicit: it's kind of a back-shuffling of sorts. (1) was supposed to look close to the same as (3), which I'll make clearer in my next update of the map. I haven't committed to completely changing the pattern yet, but knowing how I operate with these maps, they'll probably end up getting modified. In future updates, I'll comb through my maps and consider reconsidering the dubious placement of certain sliders. Thanks.
Overmapping has been a wishy-washy subject for me. I do try and keep myself from placing objects in spots where there's no "dominant" sound, but if I follow this rule to a T, then I always end up preferring what I originally had over the reduction that I had made, even after getting accustomed to the modification. I like to go with what feels right to me. I do take that metric with a grain of salt because what feels right is what I'm used to, and I'm used to the map as it currently stands and any modification will immediately feel awkward. But at the same time, I think it can be a more powerful tool to measure mapping fluidity at times than general convention. The example that you highlighted isn't one that I feel particularly bothered by. For one, there is a sound there: there's a light percussion noise in the background that it's following. Secondly, that pattern is consistent throughout the entire first phrase of the song, so if I modified what you highlighted, I would have to modify all three identical repeats to it as well. Thirdly, I found this after I had finished the beatmap, but there is a ranked beatmap of the short version of this song that uses an pattern to the one I used here. That doesn't make it objectively correct, no, but it gives me enough reason to think that I don't need to modify it. Thanks for the advice, though.
I'm an active watcher of pishifat's video series on beatmapping, and I had an implicit understanding of note emphasis even before then. So I knew what I was doing when I mapped what you highlighted in that way, and I was aware that I was ignoring a dominant beat by following the vocals. I decided to map things the way I did because I thought the vocals were more important: I hear the vocals more clearly, and I think they're the dominant parts of the song in the places where I mapped them. I'm bothered that the strong beat gets ignored as well, but there's not really a way to map both the vocals and the other stuff at the same time without creating disorganized clutter.
I fixed the example you highlighted regarding flow. I try to keep a watchful eye on that, but sometimes things pass through. Thanks for highlighting, and I'll keep an eye out for other violations when I look through the rest of the map (and the others).
I have to admit, I feel a stupid sense of internal guilt if I go too long in a map without adding a mildly complex slider shape. I have no rational reason behind it: it just feels like I'm doing something wrong. That said, since I have no better explanation, and I'm too inexperienced to use an "its just my style" argument, I'll consider making modifications.
The specific example you highlighted with representing sounds kinda strikes a nerve because full-measure slider symmetry is a motif in the "chu chu chu" part of the song everywhere where it occurs. Every time that lyrical idea comes up in the chorus, I use some sort of symmetrical pattern with four consecutive 1/2 sliders, both in Insane and in Bright and Brilliant, and I think I'm justified in doing this because the momentum of the first three beats carry through into the fourth, right before the B part of the chorus.
I'm not the biggest fan of extended sliders, and I prefer to use them sparingly. When I play them in game, they throw off my rhythm if they're not used properly, and I don't trust my abilities to use them properly, except where it's obvious that they're appropriate. Lately I've been trying to open myself up a bit more to them, but eh. Not feeling it quite yet.
Making it a goal to use the space of the entire editor seems a bit petty to me: the positions of each object is placed relative to what's before it, and if things don't venture into the corners, then they won't.
Thank you for all the advice! Good luck modding and mapping.
Because of the way this mod is set up, I think it's more appropriate to respond directly rather than line for line.
First of all, a huge thanks for taking the time and going through the effort of making such a detailed mod! You've given me a lot to work with, and there's a lot that I've learned from this.
I never actually took the general latitudinal/longitudinal nature of slider flow into consideration when I made these maps. They defaulted to that in general because they seemed to flow well to me. But, looking at other ranked maps that I really like, you're definitely right: sliders generally either have a higher curvature, or they hug the longitude and latitude lines by a factor of 5-15 degrees. The example you highlighted (00:03:146 (1,2,3)) actually does have a pattern that I guess I just didn't clearly elicit: it's kind of a back-shuffling of sorts. (1) was supposed to look close to the same as (3), which I'll make clearer in my next update of the map. I haven't committed to completely changing the pattern yet, but knowing how I operate with these maps, they'll probably end up getting modified. In future updates, I'll comb through my maps and consider reconsidering the dubious placement of certain sliders. Thanks.
Overmapping has been a wishy-washy subject for me. I do try and keep myself from placing objects in spots where there's no "dominant" sound, but if I follow this rule to a T, then I always end up preferring what I originally had over the reduction that I had made, even after getting accustomed to the modification. I like to go with what feels right to me. I do take that metric with a grain of salt because what feels right is what I'm used to, and I'm used to the map as it currently stands and any modification will immediately feel awkward. But at the same time, I think it can be a more powerful tool to measure mapping fluidity at times than general convention. The example that you highlighted isn't one that I feel particularly bothered by. For one, there is a sound there: there's a light percussion noise in the background that it's following. Secondly, that pattern is consistent throughout the entire first phrase of the song, so if I modified what you highlighted, I would have to modify all three identical repeats to it as well. Thirdly, I found this after I had finished the beatmap, but there is a ranked beatmap of the short version of this song that uses an pattern to the one I used here. That doesn't make it objectively correct, no, but it gives me enough reason to think that I don't need to modify it. Thanks for the advice, though.
I'm an active watcher of pishifat's video series on beatmapping, and I had an implicit understanding of note emphasis even before then. So I knew what I was doing when I mapped what you highlighted in that way, and I was aware that I was ignoring a dominant beat by following the vocals. I decided to map things the way I did because I thought the vocals were more important: I hear the vocals more clearly, and I think they're the dominant parts of the song in the places where I mapped them. I'm bothered that the strong beat gets ignored as well, but there's not really a way to map both the vocals and the other stuff at the same time without creating disorganized clutter.
I fixed the example you highlighted regarding flow. I try to keep a watchful eye on that, but sometimes things pass through. Thanks for highlighting, and I'll keep an eye out for other violations when I look through the rest of the map (and the others).
I have to admit, I feel a stupid sense of internal guilt if I go too long in a map without adding a mildly complex slider shape. I have no rational reason behind it: it just feels like I'm doing something wrong. That said, since I have no better explanation, and I'm too inexperienced to use an "its just my style" argument, I'll consider making modifications.
The specific example you highlighted with representing sounds kinda strikes a nerve because full-measure slider symmetry is a motif in the "chu chu chu" part of the song everywhere where it occurs. Every time that lyrical idea comes up in the chorus, I use some sort of symmetrical pattern with four consecutive 1/2 sliders, both in Insane and in Bright and Brilliant, and I think I'm justified in doing this because the momentum of the first three beats carry through into the fourth, right before the B part of the chorus.
I'm not the biggest fan of extended sliders, and I prefer to use them sparingly. When I play them in game, they throw off my rhythm if they're not used properly, and I don't trust my abilities to use them properly, except where it's obvious that they're appropriate. Lately I've been trying to open myself up a bit more to them, but eh. Not feeling it quite yet.
Making it a goal to use the space of the entire editor seems a bit petty to me: the positions of each object is placed relative to what's before it, and if things don't venture into the corners, then they won't.
Thank you for all the advice! Good luck modding and mapping.