1. Advanced (2,35 stars, 370 notes)
2. Hard (3,31 stars, 628 notes)
3. Insane (4,5 stars, 773 notes)
4. Normal (1,65 stars, 294 notes)
5. RIDE OR DIE (6,03 stars, 792 notes)
6. Syph's Extra (5,66 stars, 742 notes)

Pachiru wrote:

OMG HYPE if you need low diff gd i'm in ;a;

Xiaolin wrote:

I'm cute

Natsu wrote:

wew and wait for hitsounds, it will be better~

1. It looks like your offset should start 2 beats earlier to line up with the downbeat. The downbeat then shifts around 00:46:542 -
2. You should line up your NC scheme to land on strong notes (downbeats or strong lead-in red ticks). Looks like in the beginning you lined it up with the incorrect downbeat. In the chorus you either NC too early (one beat too early before downbeat) or too late (one beat too late after strong red tick). I would look these over

1. Very highly recommend +1 AR: it will make your low-spaced 1/1 gaps and red tick objects easier to read. The low bpm effectively makes the AR a bit lower than average anyways.

1. 00:16:542 (1,2,3,4) - I feel like these patterns are not good for flow or emphasis. I would not recommend stacking before strong notes

1. 00:23:262 (1) - I would remove one reverse on these sliders. I feel the sound on the blue isn't as important as making these feel much more natural
2. 01:03:822 (1,1) - This is quite surprising the first time around, especially since most sliders were 1/2 before. I think an easier lead-in to the chorus would be better

1. 00:20:382 (1,2,1,2) - Same as Hard, except these are harsher because of the faster SV
2. In case you get comments on the spaced streams in this diff, I would say they are fine and play well.

1. 00:16:302 - I would watch the flow here. It's a very extensive circular pattern, and thus not very interesting
2. 00:58:782 (2) - The other 3/4 sliders are fine, but these ones doesn't play very well the first time around since it starts on red and passes over the white tick. On multiple testplays though it plays ok since they're expected.
3. I'd like to mention the choruses and the other highlights of the song are extremely easy compared to some of the patterns you use in the verses. I feel making those difficult patterns easier and ramping up the chorus could have made the map more interesting. Just some food for thought.

• [RIDE OR DIE]

1. 00:17:262 - 00:32:502 - the drum sound here should be clickable, the structure like this https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/8477067 make more sense at this part imo, same applied to all similar patterns
2. 00:27:102 (1) - 00:42:462 (1) - u suddenly change from drum to vocals which make player kinda hard to play, i suggest make 00:27:102 (1) - a 1/2 instead and add a note 00:27:342 - , yea since there are drum sound at 00:27:342 - either, like what uve done at 00:23:262 -
3. 00:57:822 (3,4,5) - ill rather stack with 00:56:862 (5) - sliderend, make the map cleaner
4. 01:00:942 - 02:06:222 - well i think u can make the spacing increased more intense, since the current spacing cant rly express the vocal well imo
5. 01:22:782 - 01:30:462 - well ill say inconsistent NC and sv usage here, they should be the same since the music sound the same, same applied at 2nd kiai and 3rd
6. 01:26:622 (2) - 02:31:902 (2) - 03:21:822 (2) - this should probably be 2 notes instead to express the clap sound, and it gives a great emphasized to the music, like what Syph's Extra done
7. 01:48:462 - well this part is kinda messy, 01:48:702 - the drum sound, which is more intense, u used a sliderreverse to express which is kinda bad, and it seems dat ur following the vocal here, but u make 01:49:182 - a sliderend instead, and 01:50:382 (1) - this isnt following the vocal correctly, is off beat
8. 01:53:982 (4,2) - uhh stack maybe

• [Syph's Extra]

1. 00:34:302 (6) - NC for emphasis
2. 01:08:862 (2) - 01:10:782 (3) - 02:14:142 (2) - 02:16:062 (3) - i think this is unrankable since the slider reverse was overlapped/stacked
3. 01:25:902 (4) - u should NC here either to emphasis the clap sound just like 01:17:262 (1) - 01:32:622 (1) -
4. 01:44:622 - 01:48:462 - NC spam is totally unnecessary, the hp isnt dat high dat need to used nc spam to recover, and these NCs isnt emphasizing anything since its NC everywhere, i suggest just NC every 3 notes is fine, would give a great emphasis on vocal and drum, https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/8481389
5. 02:31:182 (4) - 03:21:102 (3) - same as 01:25:902 (4) -
6. 02:47:982 (3) - NC for consistency
7. 03:05:982 - well these jumps seems inconsistent to me, since in the previous kiai u didnt use the jumps 02:15:942 - 01:10:782 - , instead u just used a 1/1 reverse

• [Insane]

1. 00:23:262 (1) - 00:38:622 (1) - reverse should stop at 00:23:502 - instead, 00:23:622 - isnt following anything, and it express better to the sound (idk what sound is dat lol
2. 01:47:982 (1) - this should be ctrl + g to follow the flow, suddenly break the flow from anti-clockwise to clockwise isnt a good choice since is kinda hard to play

• [Hard]

1. 00:23:262 (1) - 00:38:622 (1) - same as insane
2. 01:24:342 (2) - i dont think this kinda kicks is the greatest choice in hard diff, change it to 2 notes instead would be a better choice imo since it makes the clap sound 01:24:462 - clikcable
3. 01:32:022 (2) - 02:29:622 (2) - 02:37:302 (2) - 03:19:542 (2) - 03:27:222 (2) - same here
4. 02:19:662 (6) - 02:20:382 (3,4) - stack instead? make the map cleaner

• [Advanced]

1. 01:01:902 (5) - 02:07:182 (5) - 02:55:182 (5) - NC for emphasis

• 01:00:942 (2,3,4) - Why not continue with the motion for 01:00:942 (2,3) - with 01:01:422 (3,4) - ? Same later

1. 01:20:622 (1) - This NC seems quite unnecessary, 01:22:542 (1) - this one too, and the other ones later
2. 01:25:662 (5) - This could be cuter if you made the curve go the other way, since you've put the beat and the vocal on that curve the other way gives it more of an impact
3. 01:54:222 (4) - This is pretty low and touches the hit error bar, even though most players on Normal difficulties won't have that on
4. 03:12:942 (2,3,1) - yikes overlap here
5. 03:14:862 (2,1) - and this
6. 03:14:382 (1,2,1,2) - Is there any reason for these to be straight, while the sliders for this part of the other choruses are curved?
7. 03:20:862 (5) - You did a different slider for this part in the second chorus, so why not do the same here and put some wacky new slider!
8. 03:28:782 (5) - For some reason I feel like it would be nicer to have this slider stick out by itself, since it's the end of the map, and also since the music drops a lot here so it would be good to not have it grouped with the objects before that

1. I'm just gonna say now I don't like the 100000 new combos in the start
2. 00:14:862 (1) - Ok I am not happy with the second repeat, do a circle instead
3. 00:18:462 (5) - Stack error lols
4. 00:41:022 (1) - Could be good if you move this down to the bottom of (2) and then ctrl+g (2), not a fan of the linear flow 00:39:822 (3,1,2) - here as it is
5. 00:47:022 (1,2,3) - Why not force some symmetry here it's almost already there
6. 01:09:102 (2) - Stack error lols
7. 01:47:982 (1) - Maybe you could position this differently to the rest of the group to show it's different, so instead of following the linear path of all the slider heads move it up a little
8. 01:50:862 (1,2) - Going back to me crying about 2-repeat sliders, if you shorten the repeat and then start a slider on 01:51:342 - and have a circle on 01:51:822 - that's a much less awkward rhythm than it is now
9. 02:14:382 (2) - another one

1. very good

1. 00:23:262 (1) -
2. 00:46:062 (4) - Don't really like curve sliders like this, the ones you did in Advanced where the head and tail don't overlap are better
3. 02:47:022 (1,2,3) - You can structure this better, like 02:50:862 (1,2,3) -
4. 03:14:382 (1,2,3,4) - In the two choruses before you structured these parts as geometric shapes, so why not do the same here? You haven't done squares yet

1. 00:14:622 (3) - It might be beneficial to make this slider stand out from the previous two in some way, since those two are repeats and this one isn't but the structure suggests they might be the same. Moving it out of that structure or adding an NC could fix that
2. 01:44:622 (1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3) - ok this is bonkers hard compared to the rest of the map maybe nerf that
3. 02:55:182 (1) - Ctrl+g on this will make the flow from the stream delicious and much less slider-breaky

1. 01:06:702 (4) - This was a little weird to read
2. 01:22:542 (1) - These raaah sliders have higher SV in Insane and RIDE OR DIE, so being a decrease here is a bit inconsistent to the set
3. 01:38:142 (2) - stack
4. 01:44:622 (1) - omg i fcd these
5. 02:55:182 - Why not steal Natsu's BP so this part isnt just empty
   or add a break just dont drain the hp so much !

1. 01:51:582 (1,2,3) - Covering up slider bodies with a triplet like this is a little weird, if you were to "rotate" the (1,2,3) a bit it would be better but then you'd have a less than desirable with 01:51:022 (2,1) - so hm
2. 02:05:262 (1,2,3,4) - ok im gonna be blunt these slidershapes in this structure are super ugly
3. 02:55:182 (1) - hey you could ctrl+g this one too

1. video isn't muted

1. 00:43:662 (3) - feels weird to switch to drum emphasis for this slider when the entire section before is mainly focussed on vocals. maybe try two 1/2 sliders here?
   
   SPOILER

   
2. 01:04:062 (2,4) - 01:11:742 (1,3) - honestly i think these would be more appropriate if they were two circles instead of a slider, since vocals place equal emphasis on both red tick and white tick. same applies to the other choruses 02:09:342 (2,4) - 02:17:022 (1,3) - and 02:59:262 (2,4) - 03:06:942 (1,3) -

1. 00:44:022 (2,3) - consider Ctrl+G for the rhythm here; i feel that putting the circle on the blue tick and slider on the white tick is nicer for vocal emphasis
2. 01:18:582 (2,3) - i feel that this is a bit tricky to read for the intended target audience due to the somewhat high note density here. consider removing the (2) altogether? i feel that it'd make it easier to read. also applies to 02:23:862 (2,3) - and 03:13:782 (2,3) -
3. 02:10:302 (1,2,3) - 1->2 has more distance than 2->3 which is a bit odd, since it seems you were going for for an equal distance triangle
4. 02:12:702 (3) - i feel this should be stacked underneath 02:11:982 (6) - instead in order to maintain the equal distance triangle pattern you use for your choruses

1. 01:48:462 (1,2) - 01:49:422 (1,2) - 01:50:382 (1,2) - i know the vocals are 1/3 and there's a snare on the red tick, but i don't think trying to combine vocal track and drum track here is a good idea because the 1/6 repeat slider sounds really messy. i'd stick with using one or the other, but not both

1. okay you do this for all your 1/3 rhythms but why make them all a NC? imo it just makes it more difficult to read, especially because of the unpredictable movement patterns and spacing
2. 00:14:862 (1,1,1,1) - care to explain this movement pattern? doesn't feel all that appropriate seeing as how they're all the same sound; the increase in spacing doesn't really seem appropriate. this is actually something you do with most of your 1/3 rhythms actually
3. 00:18:942 (1,2,3) - 00:22:782 (1,2,3) - 00:26:622 (2,3) - these are all the same sound, why are they all mapped differently?
4. 00:30:222 (1,1,1,1) - this is the only 1/3 rhythm you used that looks appropriate since equal emphasis is being placed on all notes
5. 00:30:942 (1,2,1,2,3,4,5,6) - 00:34:782 (1,2,1,2,3,4,5,6) - i kind of expected a star pattern like the one you used at 00:15:582 (1,2,1,2,3,4,5,6) - since these have the same phrasing
6. 00:41:982 (2,4) - pattern here differs from 00:34:302 (6,7,8) - 00:38:142 (6,7,8) - despite being the same musically?
7. 00:45:582 (1,1,1,1) - equal distance would be more appropriate, explained why earlier
8. 00:53:502 (5) - repeat slider doesn't feel appropriate for use here imo, since the song places emphasis on 00:53:262 - and 00:53:742 - . also applies to 01:58:782 (5) -
9. 01:01:302 (2,1,2,3,4,1) - buildup here feels a bit unexpected since it starts on the blue tick. maybe consider starting the buildup at 01:00:942 - instead. also applies to the other two pre-choruses as well
10. 01:17:262 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7) - the lower note density here in comparison to the rest of the chorus makes this stand out a lot more. also applies to the other two choruses
11. 01:34:542 (1,2,3,1,1,1,1) - i have similar complaints about spacing here too since the music places equal emphasis for 01:34:542 (1,2,3) - and equal emphasis for 01:35:502 (1,1,1,1) -
12. 01:36:942 (3,4,5,6) - 01:39:342 (1,2,3,4,5) - since these two parts are both being mapped to the rap, the difference in spacing doesn't sit right with me. care to explain why? also applies to 01:40:782 (3,4,5,6) - 01:43:182 (1,2,3,4,5) -
13. 01:44:142 (1,2) - this 2/3 spacing could be easily be misread as the 1/3s you map right after it
14. 01:44:622 (1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1) - the random spacing differences don't make much sense to me. the song is clearly structured so that every 3 notes has equal emphasis, e.g. 01:44:622 (1,1,1) - , then 01:45:102 (1,1,1) - , then 01:45:582 (1,1,1) - , then 01:46:062 (1,1,1) - , etc. care to explain why spacing here feels so random?
15. 01:47:182 (1,1,1) - i don't think mapping the 1/6 is a good idea; this is the only 1/6 you mapped in the entire map and it comes off as unexpected
16. 01:49:902 (1,2,3,1,1,1,1) - read what i wrote for 01:34:542 (1,2,3,1,1,1,1) - cause that can also apply here
17. 02:55:182 - you could add a break here if you want consistency with Natsu's diffs but it's not really necessary
18. 03:05:982 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - there's no density increase in the music between the first two choruses and the last chorus at this spot; why is the last chorus mapped so densely?

1. 01:48:622 (2) - 01:49:582 (2) - 01:50:542 (2) - mentioned this in the Insane about how the 1/6 repeat sliders sound messy, and i think it can apply here too. i suggest sticking to either vocals or drums, but not both