Mir wrote:

04:28:866 (1,3) - Some more subjectively ew wave sliders.

[ In Plain Sight]
00:59:312 (1,2) - Could you make this symmetrical on the y-axis like the previous patterns were? This looks weird as is, but is made more apparent due to your previous patterning. Since I repeat this kind of patterning again 01:08:724 (1,2,3,4) -
01:17:547 (1,2,3) - This (2) is clearly stronger than the previous (1) and the following (3), but is mapped the same as the rest of this combo. I would remove the combo on the (1) and move it to the (2) and maybe have a direction change from the (1). Something like this: http://i.imgur.com/GGrVEsW.png Since I want equal feeling since I'm focussing on the vocals purely here
01:25:194 (3) - Why not ctrl+H this like your other symmetrical patterns? Would fit more with the style so far imo. It would also provide more comfortable visual flow into the next object. 01:13:430 (1,2,3) - I didnt flip all the sliders, it depended on how I thought it felt, see here
02:57:056 (1) - Remove NC because you're using one NC per two downbeats and this ends up inconsistent. Add an NC at 02:59:410 (4) - then too. Fix the rest accordingly. you mean... remove 02:54:702 (6) - here right?
03:34:722 (5) - Maybe Ctrl+H this too? Prefer the look of it now

Pretty chill map! Good luck with this.~

1. are you serious for the background image anyway
   
2. in Simple diff, for the part starting from 04:42:972 (1) - , would it be better if the rhythm is back to 2/1 gaps between notes? at least the intensity drops, and players won't be confused while determining the rhythm since the distance-time concept changes visually through overlaps.
   
3. in collab diff, 01:32:273 (1,2,3) - turning point is rather sharp so would recommend sth like lifting the circle above the slider instead of beneath https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/7433097 + 01:31:077 (3,4,1) - would be better if the triangle is equilateral instead to improve in aesthetics and also flow.
   
4. 03:03:806 (5) - would it be better if the slider is replaced with a spinner instead since it's the peak of the music section, and the motion provided by spinner would be much fitting. though if you meant to include this, you might need to include at least one in the Simple difficulty as well.

HootOwlStar wrote:

1. are you serious for the background image anyway Yes, it fits perfectly with the messages of the song and I don't see why it would be wrong for a background image
   
2. in Simple diff, for the part starting from 04:42:972 (1) - , would it be better if the rhythm is back to 2/1 gaps between notes? at least the intensity drops, and players won't be confused while determining the rhythm since the distance-time concept changes visually through overlaps. 04:33:556 (1,2,3) - 04:38:264 (1,2,3) - 04:42:972 (1,2,3) - 04:42:972 (1,2,3) - gradual decrease, doesnt happen instantly, should be fine
   
3. in collab diff, 01:32:273 (1,2,3) - turning point is rather sharp so would recommend sth like lifting the circle above the slider instead of beneath https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/7433097 I... don't think that feels sharp in-game, it looks aesthetically sharp but it actually curves pretty nicely in-game + 01:31:077 (3,4,1) - would be better if the triangle is equilateral instead to improve in aesthetics and also flow. eh, slider would be too low for my liking :c
   
4. 03:03:806 (5) - would it be better if the slider is replaced with a spinner instead since it's the peak of the music section, and the motion provided by spinner would be much fitting. though if you meant to include this, you might need to include at least one in the Simple difficulty as well. Spinner would *suck* here. Spinners are really spammy and annoying and fast and ugh, no, it would ruin the calmness. Also, no spinners is fine! Why should there need to be a silly mechanic anyway?

1. 00:35:783 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - just a reminder that your hitsounding is rather questionable considering that all of these are default hitnormal and nothing else
2. 02:47:621 - missing claps on this section too, etc.

1. 00:35:783 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2) - Please understand that ultra beginner difficulties like this are not quality. Please make these sections properly mapped and not 8 objects for 40 seconds.
2. After you buff these sections, please make sure that the kiai has increased difficulty to compensate.

Xexxar wrote:

I have some issues with this mapset.

Arphimigon wrote:

Xexxar wrote:

I have some issues.

I'm not surprised.

• HS is to provide audio feedback. My audio feedback is loud enough to hear and get feedback from, so in theory it is perfectly valid.
  This section isn't following any particular instrument or vocal, and so needs no emphasis on any particular sounds.
  Any particular hitsounding suggestions will and have been thought about and refuted, since they provide no tranquility to this section and are not needed, thus should not be added.
  However I did fix the inconsistent hitsounding elsewhere!

• Don't get me wrong, I never wanted, and don't believe that this difficulty should even exist. It exists purely because the RC demands me so. But if I'm going to have to make it, I'm going to make it in a way that reflects the top difficulty.
  Because of the above, a valid spread is needed, and the reasonable spread from a normal to an easy is half the objects approx, this difficulty follows that very well.
  To follow the same sort of themes as in the top difficulty so that players can get the same enjoyment, the slow sections have to be made in such a way that is very calm and slow.
  It is quality to make something purposefully slow, like this, if it achieves a valid emotional or even musical meaning. I think we can both agree, this song doesn't need to be very fast or full of clicks, but instead suits many less clicks, especially in the section you mentioned.

• Fixed inconsistent hitsounding in a certain section
  Buffed some sections of the Simple difficulty
  Fixed some slidershapes or smth

• Add hitsounds to the pure-hitnormal section, that is purposeful, however I will change the volume if requested

Regraz wrote:

Sorry I have some concerns regarding this map.

[General]
1. Hitsounds are still not satisfying. Yes they are.
A great amount of clearly audible instruments are not represented or emphasized by hitsounds. For example: 24Claps in 00:35:783 (1) - this part. (Verse) Repeating previous statements, it doesnt feel correct or even in the slightest "good" to tap lots of stuff in these sections. It breaks the calmness completely. I've had players and mappers agree with me here.
And, why you used S for Simple but S:C1 for the top diff? Ya I go fix
2. You want to keep the countdown? It's not suitable for such a smooth/slow song tbh. Agree. Never noticed because my countdown is quite calm so it fit nicely.

[Simple]

1. Slider-tail and slider-head stacks.
There are a lot of slider-tail or slider-head stacks in this map. For example: 00:16:959 (1,2) - 01:18:136 (1,2) - Those stacks are not recommended in lower difficulties because of the readability issues engendered by them. Additionally, it also breaks the visual spacing and under such a circumstance that AR is relatively low, could cause misread as well. This spacing is so close to 1/1 during all those times. It's very obvious it's the same relative spacing and rhythm, the second is literally 0.96x.
Also for a bit of numbers:
Slider ends overlapped for 300msTime between each hit is 1200msTherefore 900ms reaction time which is still really high, and likely you'll be able to see it before this 900ms interval

2. Rhythm gap between these two difficuties are too large.
in Simple diff: Mainly 2/1 or longer rhythms with occasional 1/1 rhythms while, in the top diff: Mainly 1/2 and even some 1/4 could be figured out. It could be also found that the object amount are more than doubled from Simple to the top diff.
The problem lies in your imbalanced rhythm arrangement. For example, in verse parts of Simple diff, sliders are extremely long (4/1) which not only plays weird (because too many vocals and drumbeats are covered) but also jeopardizes your spread.
I added a bunch of notes between some stuff. I don't think mapping over any drums is wrong though, rhythm simplification is meant to happen in easier difficulties.

3. Placement.
00:49:900 (3,4) - Some objects are not blanket'ed: 00:49:900 (3,4) - I know it may be hard to make blankets because you have to obey the ds but I am sure that it is not impossible. You may adjust some slider shapes, directions to achieve nicer blankets. Unlike most people, I do not care a diddly doo about blankets unless it achieves some sort of theme I'm going for. That is unless I can do it without it ruining any previous themes, but otherwise it is useless to even bother trying to go for
01:04:018 (1,2) - Try to make them symmetric. LOL I thought they were, nice one!

[Top diff]
1. Prosiac rhythms
00:35:783 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - Too repetitive rhythms. There are only 1/1 sliders from 00:35:783 (1) - to 01:13:430 (1) - , which lacks of variety and for sure needs to be fixed.
After looking up the definition of prosaic, I'll be delighted to tell you that my choice of repetitive rhythm was indeed in the name of poetry! You see, as I've stated (and I wouldn't expect you to go search for), the theme represented here is receptivity of living in such a way as the people in question. The use of the same rhythms whilst the lyrics are about the people living in the street, and lack of slider shape, is supposed to make you feel a sort of sympathy with the lyrics in question. Contrasting with the other sections (kiai) which have more diverse rhythms, they are focussed on the people who ignore the homeless. The ones without repetitive life, and with joy and fun. Hence why they are not so repetitive. I think, after reading this, you'll hopefully have gained some insight into the prosaic intentions behind my mapping and enjoy playing the map with the new emotional insight you have obtained about the meaning of it!

2. Long-slider
03:03:806 (5) - The curves of it are not reasonable, it does not match the drums at all. 03:04:688 - I mean I tried but I fixed it up a little... I dont want to spend 20 hours trying to come up with a new slider that moves the right distance AND hits both those two drums. I've tried and I nearly quit mapping the map after

Xexxar wrote:

proceed then i suppose. I'm not a fan of how this set is mapped but i'm not that offended to attempt to stop something like this from being ranked. Good luck.

1. 00:18:724 - From how you mapped the 2nd kiai. I would suggest adding circles here, and in every other spot as you did in the 2nd kiai. These two sections honestly sound the exact same.
2. 00:35:783 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3) - This whole section needs some hitsounds. I suggest lowering the volume and using whistles at the start of each measure. same with 01:55:847 (1) - onwards. Just another person probably mentioning the same thing as others. Which means you should really consider it this time.
3. 01:07:547 - any reason you skip this note? It's just as powerful as 01:12:253 (3) - You should probably either add a note, or remove the other one.

1. 00:35:783 - The same hitsound thing as easy. Same with 01:55:847 (1) - onwards
2. 00:54:606 (1) - at this point, it may be better to swap over to new patterns. After playing the previous 4 measures, this point of the map is where it becomes too repetitive. You can use the same idea, but if you do, try different shapes.

Lanturn wrote:

Mainly came here to poke at your metadata, but I'd figure I'd drop a few other suggestions.

Title: Another Day In Paradise
You should capitalize the I in "in" Cool, done!

[Simple]

1. 00:18:724 - From how you mapped the 2nd kiai. I would suggest adding circles here, and in every other spot as you did in the 2nd kiai. These two sections honestly sound the exact same. haha I just forgot to add them in this kiai
2. 00:35:783 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3) - This whole section needs some hitsounds. I suggest lowering the volume and using whistles at the start of each measure. same with 01:55:847 (1) - onwards. Just another person probably mentioning the same thing as others. Which means you should really consider it this time. And like everyone else, just saying "it needs it" wont do, I have given reasons to not do it, no one has given me reasons to actually implement it
3. 01:07:547 - any reason you skip this note? It's just as powerful as 01:12:253 (3) - You should probably either add a note, or remove the other I think I just forgot it, added in!one.

[In Plain Sight]

1. 00:54:606 (1) - at this point, it may be better to swap over to new patterns. After playing the previous 4 measures, this point of the map is where it becomes too repetitive. You can use the same idea, but if you do, try different shapes. The idea *is* repetitivity, this only strengthens my want to keep it

1. "...but seriously" How this tag is related to the song or either with the other mapper? I'd to remove it, cause it doesn't reflect anything at all. That's just spam for me, and I'm amazed that the previous BN threw the bubble without even checking tags or something.
2. Well honestly I'm agree with the others that have checked this mapset regarding the hitsounds. there's some sections were the hitsounds are completely non-existent, which is really weird, because the song has some claps and kick sounds that could be hitsounded with soft whistles, drum claps/whistles or something else. Just as Lanturn mentioned it there's like 30 seconds without a hitsounds which is a issue for sure. Would you consider to re-work them a bit more? I think would be a lot better to improve the Quality of them to be enjoyable for everyone.
3. About the repetitive patterns, they're fine for me, but would be great if you bring us a kind of shapes variation to be more interesting to play or either to improve the asthetics a bit more.
4. Try to get a timing check by someone good at it, because sometimes your timing goes off, and it's kinda uncomfortable to play without a stable one.

1. 01:44:066 (3,1) - Man this pattern is great, but I wouldn't recommend to use overlaps in this kind of difficulties due that it could be a bit confusing for newbies even if the BPM is slow, cause it's probably that they could get confused by moving the cursor in the wrong part of the slider. Still it's not good to use overlaps in them anyway.

1. Good job.

Gero wrote:

♥ Phil Collins ♥

General

1. "...but seriously" How this tag is related to the song or either with the other mapper? I'd to remove it, cause it doesn't reflect anything at all. That's just spam for me, and I'm amazed that the previous BN threw the bubble without even checking tags or something. ...but seriously is the album of which the song is in!
2. Well honestly I'm agree with the others that have checked this mapset regarding the hitsounds.
   
   You dont need to read this

   I feel like no one has even the slightest hint of how to express something beyond the stuff they were brought up with. Since when did you *need* to put hitsounds on all the fancy in song sounds? Sounds illogical to me since you can listen to the song for any sounds but use the hitnormals for timing. Anyways, every single person saying the lack of hitsounds is bad has failed to give me a legitimate reason on how it is bad or how to improve it, only saying "a lack of any is bad", and this just tells me that the mapping abilities of modders (or in this case, nominators?) are shallow and narrow, and quite frankly, it annoys me to have to respond to it, but I added the vaguest of hitsounds just to appease those people whilst making them sparse enough to still hold a resemblance of what I wanted to actually portray, which isn't even hard to understand.
   tl;dr whoever wanted me to change these hitsounds for no actual reason should feel shame, but I'm one versus many, so there ya go
3. About the repetitive patterns, they're fine for me, but would be great if you bring us a kind of shapes variation to be more interesting to play or either to improve the asthetics a bit more. Fancy shapes still goes against the point for those sections, so I can't do much about that
4. Try to get a timing check by someone good at it, because sometimes your timing goes off, and it's kinda uncomfortable to play without a stable one.The bpm isn't actually stable in the song, but I did time it in like 5 mins so yea I should go over it + drag someone else along with me

Simple

1. 01:44:066 (3,1) - Man this pattern is great, but I wouldn't recommend to use overlaps in this kind of difficulties due that it could be a bit confusing for newbies even if the BPM is slow, cause it's probably that they could get confused by moving the cursor in the wrong part of the slider. Still it's not good to use overlaps in them anyway. my new friends didnt have a problem with it, this speed is far too low for even beginners to mess up, so I'd say this is a good way to teach overlaps instead!

In Plain Sight

1. Good job.

Ranking Criteria wrote:

Avoid overlapping circles, slider heads, and slider tails. These can be confusing for new players. 1/2 overlaps due to distance snapping are an exception.

Arphimigon wrote:

Anything about following vocals or hitsounds I've expressed my answers to for 3 pages in a row (unless you're THAT certain I've not explained about it before of which I think I have!)

Kisses wrote:

in areas such as these 01:51:121 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - it feels more worthwhile to follow the vocals to avoid montonous patterns. You did it in sections like 02:47:622 (1) .
There's a very *clear& change in tone as the vocals pick up volume from those two sections, I've explained my stance on keeping monotonous patterns, no one has given me a valid reason to change them other than "it's just bad" without considering context

02:51:742 (5) - drum addition?
Oops ya that should be a drum addition my bad

02:52:919 (8) - drum clap here as well? There is no hitsound on this object
And another agree, should have a drum clap here too

lulu lemon wrote:

"... but seriously" in tags? is that even necessary