00:15:143 (2) - xDDDDDDDDDDD okok i understand , i was scared by finding nothing... so i find useless things ...

M4M queue, sorry for the delay

[- - General - -]

[- - Reflection - -]

Alright, that should be it~ Quite a good song, liked it!
Good luck.

Cerulean Veyron wrote:

M4M queue, sorry for the delay

[- - General - -]

• - Since you aren't using a sampleset of drum, or D:C2, or switching the addition set to drum on N:C2 over 01:04:429 -. Which leaves the "drum-hitwhistle2.wav" custom hitsound unused. Perhaps you can use it on that part with the drum set addition in order not to be helpless. Or either way, you may delete it from the beatmap folder if you want things lighter in filesize.
  
  What the heck that isn't the hitnormal I wanted woops
  
  Also, I use that specific sound for the 1/6 repeated sliders in the beginning. I don't really like it at the moment though, so I'll probably replace it.
  
  - The custom hitsound "normal-hitclap3" has a quite bit of delay on the start of hitting it. It would sound pretty weird while the circle-clicking notes hits earlier than the soundwave of the hitsound plays. But don't worry, I'll give you a hand by giving you the fixed one!
  
  Wow, thanks! First time I'm tinkering with custom hitsounds, so the help's much appreciated.

[- - Reflection - -]

1. 00:15:143 (2) - Ehh, If you're really getting this to an approval... this is legit not rankable as it is concurrent on a slider, if it's not that... I don't know what you're trying to purpose here. This is self explanatory of course.
   
   Forgot to remove that when I was pointing something out LOL
   
2. 00:43:000 (2) - Maybe add the pinkish purple new combo on this streaming kick slider here? It seems like you're constantly using specific colors by combo on many notes to indicate the change of the song track, or some differential patterning each track.
   
   Yeah, generally wanted the colors to alternate from pink to green and use yellow for any special sounds, so I replaced 00:43:515 (1) with yellow to make the colors consistent from 00:43:857 (1). Thanks for the reminder!
   
3. 01:25:857 (7,8,1) - Speaking of intensity over notes, how about swapping out the distance spacing by having (8) and (1) a bigger distance spacing than in-between (7) and (8)? It would kinda represent the bass line and sustain the base out more correctly and better on note density to be honest. Which in short, "making the jump bigger for the good intense beat on 01:26:200 - ".
   
   You're right that the emphasis on that bass is off; I kept the spacing still a bit larger on 7 and 8 for the snare, but used a jerky angle for 1.
   
4. 02:10:772 (1,2) - I guess this is something a little bit clustered though. Like the twinkles that's landing on the four notes which are 02:10:257 (1,2,3,1) - and could fit as one combo. So maybe swapping the new combo for that kind of melody here would make more sense visually in my point of view.
   
   It's supposed to be reminiscent of the 3-3-2 pattern of the same notes, so I'll keep the combo as it is here.
   
5. 02:19:857 (1,1,2,1,1,2) - Well, at least the rhythm and structure is not bad at all. But creating a near-duplicate pattern (there is a slight change on the two sliders' tail nodes if I'm correct) isn't really showing some of the efforts you could make over this section. At least try something similar as in for placing them in different area, or rotating this in order to not lead the repeated patterning repetitive in cursor movement.
   
   I actually had the same thought before and had it as a horizontal flip, so I'll change it back. It overlaps a bit, but doesn't look too messy.
   
6. 03:14:029 - Doesn't this tick sound very elusive for a circle? The small snare beat here is pretty much showing potential for one though. Leaving it blank in rhythm like that makes it sound pretty much lacking of notes to be honest. So yeah...
   
   True, made it into a repeating slider instead to keep the rhythm empty and to not overly emphasize.
   
7. 03:36:143 (1) - This slider is very close over the bottom of the screen monitor which it's tail nearly touching the edge clearly, to be considered an off-screen object. I would recommend changing the placement of this slider, or at least moving it a little higher to avoid covering readability.
   
   Yeah, didn't think it was off-grid, made the vertical position the same as 03:35:286 (1).
   
8. 04:24:315 (1) - Okay, as I've heard on 50%-25% playback rate on this complex-snapped slider, this actually doesn't sound like a snap division of 1/8. The bass line here is still closely at 1/4 as it probably amplifies the volume until it hits 04:24:657 -, and not 1/8. It simply just ruined the rhythm composition by the sound of it. I would suggest redoing this for once.
   
   The buzz slider's meant to represent the harsh growl/whine, so I think it's fine to divert from the rhythm since it's quite prominent in the song.
   
9. 04:46:600 (1,1) - A brief reason why I issued this. The complete overlap you intend to do, doesn't seem to be far rankable as the current one looks. Actually, it's acceptable but close to breaking one rule and quoting: "[i]When perfectly overlapping two slider bodies, the first slider must be fully faded out before the second slider is fully faded in.[/u]". As the aesthetically long slider completely covered the next slider's sliding position, this should be dealt with. It's probably a slight visibility because of the high approach rate setting, but it's very clear to see the issue going on.
   
   After such a long slider, I'd say it's quite hard to misread this with the break the player's given, especially since it's a 1/1 gap. Anything different would look too weird aesthetically, so I'll keep it as is unless it is a glaring issue against the RC.

Alright, that should be it~ Quite a good song, liked it!
Good luck.

Thanks for the mod! It was quite helpful.

sorry, but i'm not quite sure how to mod this :I. these i listed below are just kind of personal preference
i can give you a ticket if you want since i did say i would give a nm, and this barely counts as anything lol; but well done, this map is so good!

01:01:686 - the jump section starting here is kinda confusing to me, i would group them into quads
02:12:657 (1) - i think should be rotated right, kinda fit into the next slider and the current angle looks kinda odd i guess pic
04:13:515 (1) - curve to fit with 04:14:457 - and even 04:10:772 (1) -
04:43:000 (1,2) - i mean 04:42:486 (1,2) - both of them are p much the same thing so why is one distance significantly larger

[Jenn] wrote:

sorry, but i'm not quite sure how to mod this :I. these i listed below are just kind of personal preference
i can give you a ticket if you want since i did say i would give a nm, and this barely counts as anything lol; but well done, this map is so good!

Yeah, I don't think dnb maps are easy to mod since there's a lot of freedom for rhythm and flow, so no worries.

I'm not one to refuse a ticket though so thanks owo

01:01:686 - the jump section starting here is kinda confusing to me, i would group them into quads

I wanted them to be patterned by 8 in rotating square patterns to emphasize each note rather than a select few.

02:12:657 (1) - i think should be rotated right, kinda fit into the next slider and the current angle looks kinda odd i guess pic

Originally I did something like that (and even weirder ones before, trust me), but I found that the way that it is right now does stop the flow of the burst, but it also flows into the next slider very nicely, and both things are what I want right now to emphasize the sound.

04:13:515 (1) - curve to fit with 04:14:457 - and even 04:10:772 (1) -

I would normally since I usually use this type of slider for quirky sounds or the vocal, but there's also a string plucking sound as well as an increasing intensity, so I wanted to change it aesthetically to show that.

04:43:000 (1,2) - i mean 04:42:486 (1,2) - both of them are p much the same thing so why is one distance significantly larger

Mainly for reading since I want the 1/1 gaps to be back and forth instead of stacked, as well as an increasing intensity; if I stack them perfectly, it seems really odd after what seems like a buildup right before. I might change it since I'm a bit iffy on it right now as well, though.

Thanks for the (smol owo) mod and the star!

it took me long enough lmaO
m4m from my queue? your queue? i think both xd

00:01:343 (1,2,3) - why do you map this differently from 00:04:086 (1) - when its the same sound? i hear the echo, and if anything it's more audible in the second part since it doesn't have that bass under it. i would just change (1,2,3) to another long slider. if you want to map each echo to be clickable, you could do something with equal sliders like:
00:04:086 (1) - the top part of this could be curved slightly differently, but that's just my opinion
00:07:857 (1) - more consistency - keep this consistent with 00:10:600 (1,2) - . slight rhythm changes can be ok for variety, but these both represent drastically different sounds in the music.
00:15:057 (1) - this seems like rly large spacing for a pretty chill part of the song
00:32:457 (2,1) - i can't help but hear 1/6 rhythm here, maybe it's just me
00:39:743 (1,2) - its weird how you overlapped these here but not anywhere else
01:02:715 (7,8) - you could probably space this farther, i guess then you would have to change position of 01:03:057 (1) - but how it stands (7) and (8) seem really close
01:06:257 (2,3) - seems like pretty far spacing to me
01:10:257 (3,4,5) - you might want to distinguish between these kinda like you did with the jumps in the part before- they're all kinda different sounds + the music drops out a little on 01:10:943 (5) - but what is mapped doesn't really convey that. you did something similar with 01:21:229 (3,4,5,1) - , so maybe this would give you something to think about, though i don't like how 01:21:829 (5,1) - since there isn't really a sound on (5) and (1) doesn't need to be emphasized very much. it could be a solution though since it seems like you're using bursts for emphasis often.
01:16:600 (2,1,2,1,2) - this seemed really far spaced during testplay
01:19:343 (7) - you could map this like you mapped 01:08:372 (1) - , same with 01:30:315 (2) - , etc. keep consistency with how you emphasize things typically
01:28:429 (1,2,3,4,5) - maybe curve this up against the direction that (3) is facing? the way that (3) flows into this stream feels really weird
01:34:600 (1,1) - you don't need to NC each of these, just putting NCs on one or the other should be fine. i would put the NCs on the slider, but thats just me. same with at 02:18:486 (1) - aaaaaaaand 03:46:257 (1) -
01:40:429 (3,4,5,6,7,8) - this flows really weirdly since you need to move from (3) to (4) and then go to straight down movement. it's hard to explain but i feel like this could be placed better. like, for example:
02:22:257 (1) - remove NC
02:37:686 (1) - this spacing is pretty far too
03:09:915 (1,2) - i have some concerns about how this section is mapped. more specifically the sliders at 03:10:600 (1,2) - . i think some of the other ones make sense because on 03:11:629 (2) - the melody pauses, though at a place like 03:10:943 (2) - the melody is still playing a 1/2 rhythm, so extending it to 3/4 length wouldn't represent the song very well. i also wouldn't use all sliders here since you should distinguish where the melody pauses, so distinguish the difference between a circle and a slider.
03:17:457 (1,2,3,4) - this rhythm could use some work as well. if you're going to do the double on (2,3), you might as well do it for (4) as well. However, i would map it using 1/2 length sliders so the player can easily tell how long the slider is and when they should next click.
03:24:315 - there's a strong kick here, so i feel like it should be clickable
04:03:057 (2) - i dont understand why this is snapped to 1/8. 1/4 should be good enough
04:04:772 (1,2) - it seems like you map this sound differently a couple times - yes, variety is good, though the variety should at least stay somewhat consistent with how it's emphasizing sounds. for what it sounds like you're mapping, the sound should stop on 04:04:772 (1) - since that sound is not on 04:04:943 (2) - . for examples of consistency - you map it different from 04:07:515 (1) - , 04:09:057 (5,6,7) - , 04:10:429 (5,6) - , 04:11:800 (5,6,1,2) - , 04:15:743 (1) - , 04:17:286 (6,7) - , etc.
04:13:857 (1) - starting in this section, the times you decided to use the 1/8 sliders seemed kinda random to me. by about this point it seems like the sound is still there (though quite faint at this point), though you only mapped it at 04:15:229 (1,2,3) - and 04:20:715 (1,2,3,4) - . i would choose to either keep doing the 1/8 or not do it at all.
04:26:715 (1,2) - i think these can be 1/4
04:35:629 (1) - lower SV in this section thank
04:46:257 (1,2,3,4,1) - uhhhhhhh i think this spacing might be a little excessive but thats just my opinion xd
04:46:600 (1) - the loud synth sound that starts on this slider ends at around 04:49:343 - , so at this point i would probably start the 04:52:429 (1) - . cool sliderart, though i'm not sure if it represents the music perfectly.

overall i think your biggest problem is consistency, whether it be with spacing/rhythm. remember that variety in rhythm is okay as long as each rhythm is acceptable and not too far from one another. while both 04:04:257 (1,2,3,1,2) - and 04:13:857 (1,2,3,4,5) - can be acceptable rhythms for the part, switching up the two seems unusual considering they both portray a different kind of sound. if you want to emphasize these notes, then go for the first one. if you want to keep it simple, go for the second. but typically rhythms that are quite different i would not interchange. other than that, your structure and aesthetics are fairly good.

if you have any questions, feel free to pm me!

gl !

Bergy wrote:

it took me long enough lmaO
m4m from my queue? your queue? i think both xd

I was replying to this but it erased so I'm super tilted wew

Why do I reply on forum box

00:01:343 (1,2,3) - why do you map this differently from 00:04:086 (1) - when its the same sound? i hear the echo, and if anything it's more audible in the second part since it doesn't have that bass under it. i would just change (1,2,3) to another long slider. if you want to map each echo to be clickable, you could do something with equal sliders like:

this

Agreed about emphasis, I just made it into a reverse slider.

00:04:086 (1) - the top part of this could be curved slightly differently, but that's just my opinion

Blanket all the way or it's gay

00:07:857 (1) - more consistency - keep this consistent with 00:10:600 (1,2) - . slight rhythm changes can be ok for variety, but these both represent drastically different sounds in the music.

They are different sounds, actually.

00:15:057 (1) - this seems like rly large spacing for a pretty chill part of the song

Eh, it's only one jump after a very long slider, and 5.0x isn't that much of an increase from 4.0~4.5x.

00:32:457 (2,1) - i can't help but hear 1/6 rhythm here, maybe it's just me

o sht you're right, but a 5/12 gap would be gay af

00:39:743 (1,2) - its weird how you overlapped these here but not anywhere else

There's a new reverbing sound here, so I wanted to show that clearly.

01:02:715 (7,8) - you could probably space this farther, i guess then you would have to change position of 01:03:057 (1) - but how it stands (7) and (8) seem really close

I have to agree but the structure's fine as it is and it's not too much of a difference, but...you're right hnggggg I'll think of something

01:06:257 (2,3) - seems like pretty far spacing to me

What'd you highlight lo

01:10:257 (3,4,5) - you might want to distinguish between these kinda like you did with the jumps in the part before- they're all kinda different sounds + the music drops out a little on 01:10:943 (5) - but what is mapped doesn't really convey that. you did something similar with 01:21:229 (3,4,5,1) - , so maybe this would give you something to think about, though i don't like how 01:21:829 (5,1) - since there isn't really a sound on (5) and (1) doesn't need to be emphasized very much. it could be a solution though since it seems like you're using bursts for emphasis often.
01:16:600 (2,1,2,1,2) - this seemed really far spaced during testplay
01:19:343 (7) - you could map this like you mapped 01:08:372 (1) - , same with 01:30:315 (2) - , etc. keep consistency with how you emphasize things typically

Yeah you're right, I lowered SV to show that. As for the burst you talked about, the stacked double was there for emphasis but mainly for the quick breath the vocal takes before the actual beat, so I wanted to show sustained sound but also separated by rhythm, if that makes any sense.

01:28:429 (1,2,3,4,5) - maybe curve this up against the direction that (3) is facing? the way that (3) flows into this stream feels really weird

Feels good to me unless I have downs

01:34:600 (1,1) - you don't need to NC each of these, just putting NCs on one or the other should be fine. i would put the NCs on the slider, but thats just me. same with at 02:18:486 (1) - aaaaaaaand 03:46:257 (1) -

I'm not a huge fan of NC spams as well, but it looks better aesthetically, shows the higher SV better, and makes the symmetry pattern more noticeable.

01:40:429 (3,4,5,6,7,8) - this flows really weirdly since you need to move from (3) to (4) and then go to straight down movement. it's hard to explain but i feel like this could be placed better. like, for example:

this

You're right, I changed it to make it move smoothly.

02:22:257 (1) - remove NC

I always NC this pattern >:CccccCCc

02:37:686 (1) - this spacing is pretty far too

Tried ctrl+g'ing and that feels better, so did that.

03:09:915 (1,2) - i have some concerns about how this section is mapped. more specifically the sliders at 03:10:600 (1,2) - . i think some of the other ones make sense because on 03:11:629 (2) - the melody pauses, though at a place like 03:10:943 (2) - the melody is still playing a 1/2 rhythm, so extending it to 3/4 length wouldn't represent the song very well. i also wouldn't use all sliders here since you should distinguish where the melody pauses, so distinguish the difference between a circle and a slider.

I originally did this to represent the fading of the vocal, but you're right, this makes more sense. I'll change it accordingly.

03:17:457 (1,2,3,4) - this rhythm could use some work as well. if you're going to do the double on (2,3), you might as well do it for (4) as well. However, i would map it using 1/2 length sliders so the player can easily tell how long the slider is and when they should next click.

If you listen closely, the snare and the electronic note are in unison on 03:17:972 (4), while they aren't on the double, so I'll keep it as it is.

03:24:315 - there's a strong kick here, so i feel like it should be clickable

The song kind of pauses in intensity (similarly to what you described before) as well as the sound being sustained, so I'll just keep it as a held slider.

04:03:057 (2) - i dont understand why this is snapped to 1/8. 1/4 should be good enough

For consistency with the other short 1/8 notes, and it's not important enough to be mapped with a 1/4 slider.

04:04:772 (1,2) - it seems like you map this sound differently a couple times - yes, variety is good, though the variety should at least stay somewhat consistent with how it's emphasizing sounds. for what it sounds like you're mapping, the sound should stop on 04:04:772 (1) - since that sound is not on 04:04:943 (2) - . for examples of consistency - you map it different from 04:07:515 (1) - , 04:09:057 (5,6,7) - , 04:10:429 (5,6) - , 04:11:800 (5,6,1,2) - , 04:15:743 (1) - , 04:17:286 (6,7) - , etc.

I apparently misheard the second slider and assumed it was the same type of sound, so I replaced it with a circle. Thanks for pointing it out!

04:13:857 (1) - starting in this section, the times you decided to use the 1/8 sliders seemed kinda random to me. by about this point it seems like the sound is still there (though quite faint at this point), though you only mapped it at 04:15:229 (1,2,3) - and 04:20:715 (1,2,3,4) - . i would choose to either keep doing the 1/8 or not do it at all.

The 1/8 sounds here are actually significantly clearer than in the sections when I didn't; the only exceptions being when the more dominant vocals or chimes come it.

04:26:715 (1,2) - i think these can be 1/4

This sound I've mapped as overlapping 1/8's everywhere, so I'll keep it even though it looks weird out of context.

04:35:629 (1) - lower SV in this section thank

You're just too weak

Seriously though, intensity and tone of the song is at a new high, so I want to reflect that with higher SV as it's not rhythmically intense.

04:46:257 (1,2,3,4,1) - uhhhhhhh i think this spacing might be a little excessive but thats just my opinion xd

Kind of agreed but another spacing in crease for this is practically required, IMO, just because of the snares and the new whooshing sound on this beat. The sliders also make it easier to play than regular circles due to acc not being an issue and being easier to not miss.

04:46:600 (1) - the loud synth sound that starts on this slider ends at around 04:49:343 - , so at this point i would probably start the 04:52:429 (1) - . cool sliderart, though i'm not sure if it represents the music perfectly.

Have to agree that it doesn't particularly suit the fading synth, but I want to give the player a break after the nonstop objects they had to go through before immediately going into the kickslider patterns again. It ends on a special sound and it's 4 measures long, anyway, so it's not too out of place.

overall i think your biggest problem is consistency, whether it be with spacing/rhythm. remember that variety in rhythm is okay as long as each rhythm is acceptable and not too far from one another. while both 04:04:257 (1,2,3,1,2) - and 04:13:857 (1,2,3,4,5) - can be acceptable rhythms for the part, switching up the two seems unusual considering they both portray a different kind of sound. if you want to emphasize these notes, then go for the first one. if you want to keep it simple, go for the second. but typically rhythms that are quite different i would not interchange. other than that, your structure and aesthetics are fairly good.

I totally agree, my hearing isn't really the best and I may tend to forget about previous patterns or reasoning I used. That, and it was especially hard to stay consistent on a 5 min dnb map with so many different sounds and variations. I'll be sure to work on rhythm and consistency!

if you have any questions, feel free to pm me!

Will do!

gl !

Thanks for the border wallmod mr berg

Hey, from my queue.

Holy Timing points batman

REFLECTION

00:53:800 (1,2) - Why are these the only 1/4's that don't overlap? Bring 2 a bit closer so that the slider paths touch at least (To align with your back and forth kicks from earlier)

01:22:600 (2,3,4) - This feels quite awkward, maintaining your counter-clockwise flow would be nicer to play, right now this triangle really sticks out and I don't think that is the intention here.

01:30:829 (3) - Shouldn't this circle be pretty far up to the right? This spacing is weirdly small, it doesn't make a huge difference in terms of play-ability but I'm curious as to why this is placed differently.

03:35:800 (3,4) - Another instance of really small spacing compared to its surroundings, maybe bring 4 a bit higher.

Wow, this is really good. Frankly seeing that you've never ranked a map before this kinda blew my mind, I can't think of anything else I'd change. Really good job dude, keep it up and this will get ranked soon, have 2 stars. GL

TheOnlyLeon wrote:

Hey, from my queue.

Holy Timing points batman

How'd you know I was batman

REFLECTION

00:53:800 (1,2) - Why are these the only 1/4's that don't overlap? Bring 2 a bit closer so that the slider paths touch at least (To align with your back and forth kicks from earlier)

Made a difference in the sequence to show that the map breaks off from the kickslider spam at this point. You're right that it's inconsistent,
though, so I might still change it if it comes up again.

01:22:600 (2,3,4) - This feels quite awkward, maintaining your counter-clockwise flow would be nicer to play, right now this triangle really sticks out and I don't think that is the intention here.

Wow, you're right. Switched around 3 and 4 (roughly) and it feels (and looks) a lot better, thanks.

01:30:829 (3) - Shouldn't this circle be pretty far up to the right? This spacing is weirdly small, it doesn't make a huge difference in terms of play-ability but I'm curious as to why this is placed differently.

I wanted it to be in the direct center of the triangle slider structure, but you're right that spacing's inconsistent, so changed around some things so that it fits now.

03:35:800 (3,4) - Another instance of really small spacing compared to its surroundings, maybe bring 4 a bit higher.

Wanted to intentionally decrease intensity here for the buildup after, but I agree; increased a bit (and decreased a few of the jumps before the slider patterns for consistency).

Wow, this is really good. Frankly seeing that you've never ranked a map before this kinda blew my mind, I can't think of anything else I'd change. Really good job dude, keep it up and this will get ranked soon, have 2 stars. GL

Glad to hear you liked it, thanks a lot for the mod and the stars!

a

[Virtuality]

00:04:086 (1) - greenline derp here ? the rest of the sliders in the phrase are keysounded but the pitch on this one seems off

00:20:543 (1) - maybe silence sliderend ?

00:34:086 (2,2) - not perfectly stacked

00:43:515 (1) - idk this hitnormal sounds to me like very low feedback, might wanna raise the volume here

00:41:629 (2) - shouldn’t this break the flow like the rest of the sliders do ( eg 00:38:372 (1,2) - 00:37:000 (1,2) )

01:02:372 (5) - why the reversal of circular flow here ? your jumps give all circles equal emphasis through spacing so I don’t see why flow should be reversed here

01:06:829 (1,2) - I think this is a bit over the top for its being an introduction of a slider that’s rather confusing ; in that it’s kind of hard to know its length ( especially considering the rather big SV change here ). You might wanna reduce the spacing a bit this time so that the player gets used to this slider being half a beat long

01:10:086 (2,4) - ugly overlap tbh

01:10:257 (3,1) - fix blanket

01:14:372 (2,1) - overlap again here

01:15:057 (2,1) - stack

01:27:915 (1,2,3) - don’t you think those should at least have some similarity to 01:26:543 (2,3,4) ? both sounds are similar so differentiating them as much as you did seems off to me

01:50:029 (5) - why that direction change when the previous ones were following that weird sound @ 01:49:257 (1,1,1) ; there isn’t that sound there so I feel that stream should stay linear

01:54:486 (4,5) - mind explaining me that stack ? not a mistake if you can justify it, but I’d like to hear the reasoning behind it.

02:00:657 (1,2,3) - overlap again

02:06:829 (3,4,1,2) - I’m a bit confused as to why you chose linear flow here, since it has already been used for a way different sound at 01:09:400 (1,2,3,4,1)

02:48:657 (1) - might be problematic when it comes to reading due to the end segment being relatively close to the path before it changes direction

Ranking Criteria wrote:

Every slider must have a clear and visible path to follow from start to end. Sliders which overlap themselves in a way that makes any section unreadable or ambiguous cannot be used, such as burai sliders and hold sliders without straightforward slider borders. When perfectly overlapping two slider bodies, the first slider must be fully faded out before the second slider is fully faded in.

03:27:229 (1,2,3,4) - y u no linear flow like @ 03:24:657 (2,3,4) - 03:26:029 (2,3,4)

04:01:857 (1,2,3) - why the repetition when the song clearly changes ? to me those sounds are at most similar

Guess that’s all I have to say. I really like how you handled the linear flow in your map ; although, be careful not to use it for too many different sounds, or the emphasis will lose its purpose.

Have a star and good luck !

AyanokoRin wrote:

a

m gya

[Virtuality]

00:04:086 (1) - greenline derp here ? the rest of the sliders in the phrase are keysounded but the pitch on this one seems off

Fk me you're right, must've deleted the original line

00:20:543 (1) - maybe silence sliderend ?

It's already at 5%

00:34:086 (2,2) - not perfectly stacked

Literally a part of a pixel off, not even Loctav would support this

00:43:515 (1) - idk this hitnormal sounds to me like very low feedback, might wanna raise the volume here

Forgot to change it back, great catch

00:41:629 (2) - shouldn’t this break the flow like the rest of the sliders do ( eg 00:38:372 (1,2) - 00:37:000 (1,2) )

You have a point, ctrl+g'ed 00:41:115 (1)

01:02:372 (5) - why the reversal of circular flow here ? your jumps give all circles equal emphasis through spacing so I don’t see why flow should be reversed here

sht you're right, will fix so it changes flow on the NC

01:06:829 (1,2) - I think this is a bit over the top for its being an introduction of a slider that’s rather confusing ; in that it’s kind of hard to know its length ( especially considering the rather big SV change here ). You might wanna reduce the spacing a bit this time so that the player gets used to this slider being half a beat long

It's fine since it's almost visually similar to a regular straight slider, and it's just 1/4 long instead of a half, so it won't really affect the playability.

01:10:086 (2,4) - ugly overlap tbh

Sliderend doesn't show as a circle so don't judge thank

01:10:257 (3,1) - fix blanket

end urself

01:14:372 (2,1) - overlap again here

stop judging it's beautiful on the inside

01:15:057 (2,1) - stack

alright

01:27:915 (1,2,3) - don’t you think those should at least have some similarity to 01:26:543 (2,3,4) ? both sounds are similar so differentiating them as much as you did seems off to me

Honestly, it's not really that different since it's still three 1/4 sliders in a row; only differences are that this time they don't abuse slider leniency, and they're curved.

01:50:029 (5) - why that direction change when the previous ones were following that weird sound @ 01:49:257 (1,1,1) ; there isn’t that sound there so I feel that stream should stay linear

I was waiting for someone to call me out on that but I didn't change it cause I liked the stream, will change

fk

01:54:486 (4,5) - mind explaining me that stack ? not a mistake if you can justify it, but I’d like to hear the reasoning behind it.

The kick on 5 is the same as 4, but the electronic note drops out, so stopping the movement would reflect that pretty well (also should be readable considering I used 1/2 perfect stacks before).

02:00:657 (1,2,3) - overlap again

No idea what you mean by these three but if you're talking about 1 and the burst after it looks fine and the player can't tell since they're not on at the same time so stop criticizing or I'll criticize ur asshol

02:06:829 (3,4,1,2) - I’m a bit confused as to why you chose linear flow here, since it has already been used for a way different sound at 01:09:400 (1,2,3,4,1)

Not the first time I used it to represent the vocals; for example, at 01:12:315 (1,2)

02:48:657 (1) - might be problematic when it comes to reading due to the end segment being relatively close to the path before it changes direction

Ranking Criteria wrote:

Every slider must have a clear and visible path to follow from start to end. Sliders which overlap themselves in a way that makes any section unreadable or ambiguous cannot be used, such as burai sliders and hold sliders without straightforward slider borders. When perfectly overlapping two slider bodies, the first slider must be fully faded out before the second slider is fully faded in.

Changed it up a bit

03:27:229 (1,2,3,4) - y u no linear flow like @ 03:24:657 (2,3,4) - 03:26:029 (2,3,4)

Wanted to deviate from that pattern since the song breaks off from repeating those electronic notes over and over with the 3/4 sound that pops up often in the song.

04:01:857 (1,2,3) - why the repetition when the song clearly changes ? to me those sounds are at most similar

Only the vocals change to a higher pitch; it was meant to be consistently mapped to the recurring electronic melody.

Guess that’s all I have to say. I really like how you handled the linear flow in your map ; although, be careful not to use it for too many different sounds, or the emphasis will lose its purpose.

Agreed, I'll improve on that in future maps.

Have a star and good luck !

Thanks but the star is a lie

Thanks for the mod!

Opsi wrote:

Thanks but the star is a lie

O shit I forgot to actually give a star lo

Fixed

Hello from modding queue



[Reflection]

Kocari wrote:

Hello from modding queue



[Reflection]

00:55:343 (4,1) - Movement feels skewed while playing could somehow be better imo

Switched rhythm and flow, so fixed

01:03:057 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - Some large spacing on calm parts seem unnatural

eh, this was meant to show escalating intensity compared to the last 8 jumps so should be fine imo

01:06:229 (2,3) - Spacing is so large here, idk why. 9.5 spacing how rare to see

nerfed to 9.49

01:17:457 (1,2) - Really fast to a sudden triplet that slows down interesting

changed the slider and sv's just for aesthetics since no cursor movement's required so it's fine

if you use a sarcastic adjective one more time I'm going to mount you

01:19:515 (1,2) - Why is this spacing bigger than 01:18:829 (4,5,6,7) - not that strong of a beat to make the jump here that drastic

redid this section so should be fine now

01:35:457 (1,2,1,2) - Not sure why these were copy pasted rhythms. It was done 3 times which doesn't create balance because it skips the 4th which happens to be the same sounds and then mapped differently

are you hihg I did it 4 times

01:51:057 (1) - Quite a distinctive drum on this slider

gameplay purposes, a sustained slider gives the player slightly more time to recover after the deathstream

I think it's ok the rest are just the same thing anyways so it should be fine so good work keep it up

ye remapping this now

sorry for the late reply mr cocarine thanks for the mod

Why is no one modding this I'm triggered af

Zedther wrote:

Reflection

Inexperienced modder at your service
01:05:115 (1,1) - This section of the stream could be neater. It doesn't seem to flow very well because the last note juts outward and doesn't curve well.

Meant for emphasis on the 3/4 sounds; sharp points are deliberate.

01:34:257 (1,2) - I think these sliders hang off the screen too much

It's not offscreen, it's fine

01:36:143 (1,2,1,1) - Optional: I see what you were going for there, but I personally suggest that you have those 2 sliders higher than 01:34:772 (1,1) on the map, simply because it would look and feel better.

That's actually a cool idea, I'll make the second repeat vertical flips!

01:49:515 (1) - Same problem as before, note juts out of stream.

Deliberate as before
01:49:686 (1) - ^

^
01:50:286 (8,2) - ^ Also, this curve feels too sharp.

Meant for emphasis considering the vocals rise in pitch there
01:58:600 (1,2) - sliders hang off of map a fair bit

Not sure what you mean, it's not even offgrid

02:27:057 (3,4,5,6,7) - Optional: Personally, I feel as though this backwards curve is odd. I suggest curving the slider and flipping the direction of the stream, like this:


flows fine the way it is, and I want it to change direction for emphasis on the electronic notes within the burst

02:32:714 (7,2) - Same problem as before, curve feels too sharp

Same as before

02:33:315 (3,2) - ^

^

03:03:229 (2,3,4) - I suggest that these notes be placed further apart, as players will expect this to be a triple, rather than singlteaps.

Only if they're terribly bad at reading considering there is no reason for such a spaced triple to be in this section

04:38:886 (3) - This note should be closer to 04:38:543 (2)

Meant to emphasis the electronic note; not sure why you pointed this one out in particular considering 04:37:515 (3) is slightly further and it's consistently spaced throughout this section

04:39:057 (1,2,3,4,1) - These notes should be flipped so they flow with 04:39:572 (2)

This is pretty insignificant by now and more aesthetics/structure-wise because the tiny spacing doesn't require the player to flow into the next object so much as stopping movement here

I would also consider looking at Aimod and resolving, or at least taking note of, the issues/warnings that it is noticing.


fixed the timing point; everything else is valid since AIMod's just meant to give guidelines aside from unrankable issues

All in all, a really fun map so far, GL!

Thanks! Sorry about the many rejects but I think they represent the song well enough as is.

Thanks for the mod!

Opsi wrote:

Why is no one modding this I'm triggered af

k

M4M on this: https://osu.ppy.sh/s/624572

My points may apply in more places than mentioned.

[Reflection]
Base SV is good for BN test.
A general problem I noticed in play was that the map felt like it was overspaced to the point of being uncomfortable. That combined with some of the misplaced emphasis hurt the playing experience, so that's most of what my mod will focus on.
I also noticed your rhythm is basically different in every measure, but the song is fairly consistent. Rhythms like 01:07:172 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - don't prioritize melody or drums and end up completely different from 01:08:543 - where the rhythm is mostly similar except for 01:09:400 (1,2,3,4,1). Variation is fine to have as long as you stick to some sort of overarching logic (having two variations of a rhythm works well), though that won't really be necessary on a rameses b song since he actually has interesting melodies.
00:21:915 (1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2) - Your pattern indicates that this measure of 1/2 has two groups of three and a pair, but at least i hear a group of four notes and two pairs. Another thing is that 00:22:429 (1,2) - has a really sharp spacing decrease despite the previous note having a larger decrease in intensity. Finally, due to the lower spacing of 00:22:429 (1,2,3) - the spacing of 00:22:772 (3,1,2,1) - makes those notes stand out more than they should. Spacing between 00:21:915 (1,2,3) - also has really low contrast despite the decreasing intensity. Since there's no easy fix for this, here's a a rough idea of what the spacing i'm talking about looks like (not a pattern, that part is up to you).
00:32:886 (1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2) - Similar to the above but probably with slightly higher overall spacing due to the increased intensity.
00:42:486 (1,2) - Kinda weird to have one of these buffered and one unbuffered. If you're using this kind of spacing though, I think removing a repeat from 1 is a good choice.
00:43:429 (3,1,1) - I suggest moving these closer to the previous notes like this since the jump between 00:43:515 (1,2) - is overkill for the intensity.
00:43:515 (1,2,1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2) - Considering the individual sounds here are lower intensity than stuff like 00:21:915 (1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2) -, I think it is more fitting to have lower spacing than whatever you decided on for the previous pattern.
01:01:686 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - Not sure what you're really going for with this buildup, since emphasis (strong notes on white ticks, weak ones on reds) is pretty much the same throughout, yet your spacing seems to vary without reason here. It also looks like your patterns don't group notes appropriately since 01:03:572 (4,5,6,7) - look like more of a pattern than 01:03:743 (5,6,7,8) - in terms of movement, which isn't what's going on with your emphasis here. I suggest starting from a lower spacing for more of a build up effect across these two measures so that the increase is more noticeable (rather than having to resort to cross screen spacing to achieve this).
01:05:115 (1) - 01:05:372 (1) - 01:05:629 (1) - The wider the angle at each stream bend, the less emphasis each bend has. The strongest snare is on the third of these, the second strongest on the first, and the weakest on the second. I recommend adjusting your stream bends to accomodate this.
01:09:743 (3,4,1) - It'd be cool to space these out like this to differentiate the melody 1/4 and the percussion 1/4.
01:09:400 (1,2,3) - For your large overall 1/2 spacing, it's weird to see you use low spacing from 1/4 sliders like this and makes these melody beats feel really weak. I suggest raising spacing here to match your 1/2 spacing.
01:29:115 (1,2,3) - So this is the first introduction you have of something that plays like a wide angle, but the real issue I have here is that because of that, you're putting the emphasis on 3 which takes away emphasis from 01:29:800 (5). Using a sharper angle here would fix this issue.
01:40:515 - Makes me a bit sad that you're skipping this.
01:42:229 - This too. When you skip these melody blue ticks, you're skipping part of what makes Rameses B's melodies really cool and interesting. Simpler rhythms that don't include blue ticks would fit much better on a different dnb song.
01:53:115 (1,2) - I think that ctrl+g on 01:53:286 (2) - would probably represent those short held sounds better, and they're properly supported since you set them up really well at 00:51:057 (1,2) -
02:19:000 (2,1) - This spacing decrease is really unfitting considering how strong the next note is and that you don't use such a spacing concept in this map. I know it breaks your pattern, but it's worth rearranging objects here to have more fitting spacing.
02:22:600 (1) - I think you're better off visually disassociating this from 02:22:600 (1,2,1,2) - since this slider represents a drum while the next three represent the melody. A possible solution would be making 02:22:772 (2,1,2) - a 30 or 45 degree rotation pattern.
03:02:372 (1,2,3) - Cool motion, but not really appropriate considering the rest of your map, since you rarely use these sorts of linear jumps. I would probably change this to a sharp angle, or if you really wanted to keep this, introduce more angles like this in the rest of your map.
04:56:543 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1) - This stream is both unexpected and unfitting since this is such a weak part of the song, and you just finished the kiai with a long spaced stream. I recommend using 1/4 repeats here instead.

IRC me if you have any questions. Good luck!

Thanks for the mod!

~hi , nice song,

00:01:343 (1) - : lul, what's the point behind of this reverse slider? I don't hear any pause behind of this specific held synthesizer sound there to cut it suddenly. It should be mapped like this one 00:04:086 (1) - .
00:27:915 (2) - : this slider art could be structured better in my opinion

00:21:915 (1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2) - , 00:32:886 (1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2) - : :thinking_of_the_random_spacing_between_the_first_and_the_second_part_when_it's_the_same_tempo:

01:08:200 (6,1) - : unstack maybe,they are different sounds
01:15:743 (2,3) - : wtf is this emphasis here lol.these 01:12:829 (2,3,4) - are even more loud with that bass sound and you didn't even emphasize them like these 01:15:743 (2,3) - . Also ,this should be clickable 01:15:572 . Make a triplet instead and delete the slider?

01:18:486 (3,1) - : i found this stack really uncomfortable while i was playing the map,maybe unstack it
01:21:057 (2,3,4,5) - : hardcore undermapping 01:21:229 (3,4) - . would you focus these gay pitched wub sounds or the dominant beats of a dnb sonk?this sounds a lot better imo

01:24:229 (5) - : it fits buuuuuuuuuuut i think it would be better if this whole part was all about singletapping here,i would delete that.same with 01:25:600 (5) - ,or even 1/4 sliders would fit better,1/8 how the fck u call them anyways.
01:42:657 (3,4) - : i don't see any reason putting a triplet here,its the exact sound like these 01:42:315 (1,2) -
02:02:543 (1,2) - : the player might sliderbreak at this part,idk fam.maybe restructure them?
02:05:457 (5,6) - : hmm,maybe put 1/2 slider here for the vocal's invasion?no reason to be clickable here.
02:10:600 (3,1,2) - : weird flow
02:16:600 (2,1) - : the distance of those are 1 cm longer than my https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NHO84rOp8FQ . NERF IT LOL,ALMOST FULL SCREEN JUMP FOR NO REASON.
02:31:515 (1,2,1,2) - : welp,really weird angles + flow + aesthetically random.look at how beautiful u ve done it here 02:29:457 (1,2,1,2) - . why you don't follow the same concept?
02:44:543 (1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,1,2,1,2) - , 02:32:200 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1) - : most orgasmic parts of your map
02:47:800 (2) - : i don't like this shape hommie,it looks like a triangular boob.
02:56:886 (1) - : inconsistent break,no reason for a pause here,the synthesizer is even starting from there.maybe 1/2?
02:59:629 (1,1) - : ^
03:14:200 (2) - : this is mapped to what?on this whole part 03:13:686 (3,1,2,1,2,3,1,2,1) - ,imo,you should follow the gay pitched beats here with breaks,so the player will be aware that there is a strong kiai part coming up to fuck him up
03:07:857 (1) - : they should be click click able.
03:21:229 (5,1) - : this break felt really akward while ingame.map something here,it's a freaking kiai part,map it like 03:22:600 (1) - .

03:24:486 (1,2,3,4) - , 03:25:857 (1,2,3,4) - , 03:27:229 (1,2,3,4) - : :thinking_of_the_random_spacing_camparing_the_other_parts._this_was_too_random_and_overemphasized_03:27:229 (1,2,3,4) - .
04:14:543 (5,1) - : cringy slider art
04:36:486 (1) - : ^
04:38:543 (2) - : in some resolutions, this is touching the HP bar, unrankable.

~gl

Thanks for the...interesting mod!

Suppose to be m4m but it's so late i'll just give u free NM xD

00:43:000 (2,3) - way too big spacing, nothing to support it, and people will most likely slider break with that repeating slider.

02:10:772 (1,2) - small awkward spacing

02:15:572 (6,2) - the visual spacing for these 2 might be too small

03:28:600 (2,3) - Why aren't these 1/8 slider's like 03:27:229 (1,2,3,4) -

04:04:943 (2) - I don't think this is suppose to be 1/8. Also not sure why you NC'ed 04:04:772 (1) -

04:07:515 (1) - Should be 1/8 If you're mapping to the electro sound like 04:05:629 (1,2,3,4) -

04:07:857 (1,2,1,1) - Not liking the NC spam here. There's nothing special about those particular parts to NC them. for Applies to all instances like 04:09:572 (1,1) - 03:25:686 (1) -

01:47:629 (1) - Not liking how this slider is the same as 01:47:115 (2,4) - ,even though there's a different sound there. Why don't you do something different like how you made a 1/2 here 01:46:257 (1) -

01:50:715 (1) - mm also not liking how the position of this slider makes the whole thing 01:50:371 (1,2,3,4,1) - not a good curve.

You need to check over your NCs, it's really inconsistent, and many of them are unnecessary.

Dat's it from me, GL

seriously one of the best maps i've ever played. this needs to get ranked right now

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nDakuid ... e=youtu.be

05:00:657 (1,2,1,2,3,4,1,1,2,1,2,3,4,1) - these kick slider patterns... I feel like they'd either fit better at the start of the ending. I also say this b/c I went to the start, and the patterns of sliders near the start happened during a lower note, while these ones happen during a higher note.

I hope you know what I mean. Just DM me if you don't, and I can show you in more detail.

Good luck on this one :3

Will be pushing this forward after mostly remapping the top difficulty along with a fresh Another diff; consider this current version as a placeholder until upload.

EDIT: nvm no another diff lol

Why is this not a ranked mapset T.T

Edit: I rly like these funky pattern!

feels quite random ngl

*insert mod here*