Having a different perspective and interpretation doesn't mean they are equally ideal for the ranked section.
You feel the difference not because of the spacing but because of the angle shift. The map uses a very consistent rhythm. I use aesthetic changes such as turns and dips in streams to create variety and difficulty in tracking the stream movement.
These "dips" and "turns" do create variety and difficulty, but it barely follows the song in a consistent manner. As such, both the difficulty as well as the aesthetics become incoherent and unrepresentative of the song, which is the core of the problem.
Just because i'm not following the layer you think is the dominant layer doesn't mean I'm not following the song... Also looking at the rhythms you "want" me to map instead,
there would be very few places where streams would actually fit because the layer you believe is the strongest does not allow for stream mapping, only triplet spam, and that's not something I consider reflective of the song at all.
Generally the most prominent layer is what makes the song what it is. The problem isn't your rhythm choice, the problem is that a lot of the details in the song are ignored without the slightest indication that anything is different. You may argue that some angle changes or flow turns, but since these are already done incoherently, that connection is unlikely to be drawn. This in turn becomes detrimental to the map's overall quality.
Those examples aren't even related... you're taking my words out of context now. These are fine as kicksliders. They function as 1/2 clicking breaks in between streams and map the drum rhythm here.1-2-3--- 1-2-3--- 1-2-stream...
Mir is not taking your words out of context, the examples are actually related. The point of focus here is the comparison between the map and the song. the previous 1/2s reflect drums each 1/1. These, however, reflect drums on each 1/2. This is why circles were suggested to reflect that difference.
Because the piano layer you're following isn't the layer I consider dominant. It's exactly why I don't use triplet spam rhythms too because those rhythms would reflect the piano sound you envision no? Hopefully you see my perspective now. Also just because a sound is held doesn't mean you just map it. You can default to following other sounds, especially if those other sounds are what I consider more dominant to begin with. Slapping a 2/1 slider here is a mistake, i'm sure you can agree.
Slapping a 2/1 here isn't what was suggested, because that would completely ignore the background layer. Mir specifically suggested 1/4 reverse sliders in order to cover both layers while giving emphasis to the most dominant one in order to represent the song more accurately. You may argue that this wouldn't be consistent, but that's only because you mapped everything else with the same mindset as you did these, and doesn't retract from the initial argument.
I'm fine with it. I think ht expresses them adequately. Feel free to give me ideas if you think there is a better way to map them that doesn't interfere with my consistent spacing structure and flow. Otherwise I am keeping because all of these 1/3 streams are necessary in this sort of aesthetic because they are trying to constrict mapper's movement through tighter and tighter angles. Breaking structure here for the sake of mapping some drums "more properly" ends up detracting from the player experience here. I don't think theres a need to express these sounds differently because fundamentally, that would suggest that I am trying to emphasize those sounds, or highlight them, and that's not my intention.
There's really no need to break structure at all,
you could potentially just lower the spacing between 01:13:548 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9) - and any other 1/3 stream until the point that the drums kick in. That way the map would actually imply that something is different from the previous streams. Not wanting to emphasize those sounds is essentially just ignoring that they're there in other words, which would be unrepresentative of the song.
It's just a consistent stream until near the end because only that section is where the song drops slightly in intensity.
The argument for the above point also applies here. By intentionally implying that nothing changes, the map is basically ignoring that the drums in the song are now completely gone. The same idea can be applied to the way the piano is completely ignored for the sake molding the map into what you imagined it would be, without respect for what the song itself is actually expressing.
Its unnecessary for the same reasons I mentioned earlier with regard to those 1/3 streams. It causes a lot more damage just to follow notes that I don't think are important and worth highlighting anyways. As well, highlighting them is counterintuitive to my rhythm choice to begin with...
You assume that the only way to reflect these is through rhythm and fear that any change made in this regard will no longer make your map worthy of the title "stream map", when in reality you can do so through the many other aspects given in the game. Just think of spacing, flow, angle changes, etc. The things you used to give visual charm and difficulty can also be used reflectively. There's no need to ignore the song to make these come alive. Problem with implementing it now, with the map in it's current state, is that it would lack contrast due to the way these concepts are previously incoherent. You may assume that implementing this, as you assume I am envisioning it, would be even more counter-intuitive, but this is where mapping skill shines most.
I think i'm interpretting it just fine. There is no correct way to interpret the song. I disagree strongly with how you think it should be interpreted. You are welcome to map your own version if you believe my interpretation won't express the song the best. But my interpretation has strong ideas and mapping techniques behind it too. Please don't discredit my map just because you disagree with it.
Mir's intent is not to discredit your map, it is to help you improve it before it's too late. There may be no correct way to interpret or map a song, but there are certainly ways that are better than others in many perspectives; otherwise there wouldn't be a need for a ranked section or ranking system. Encouraging Mir to map their own version is just irrelevant and irresponsible at best. How strongly you disagree does not matter in a discussion. What matters is how you argue for your cause. Solely disagreeing really only ends it with Mir's argument unanswered.
Seriously, just because something is rankable doesn't mean it should be ranked. Just because something is subjective doesn't mean it's invalid. Just because you disagree with a perspective doesn't mean you should ignore it's arguments. At least discuss it properly instead of saying that their standpoint is different from yours and leaving it at that.
.
