ts8zs wrote:

quick check
00:37:024 (4) - remove nc fix
00:45:799 (10) - overmap?
02:26:074 (2,3,4,5,6,7) - unreadable fix
03:49:324 (2,3) - https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/5454312 fix
04:07:324 (2,3) - Ctrl+G on rhythm fix
sample.

_MiaoFUuU_ wrote:

Legend

1. 00:18:424 (1) - 结尾放红线吧，然后00:18:724 (2,3) - ctrl+g一下，然后 00:18:799 - 这里放歌圈，你看怎样。
2. 00:22:474 (6) - 做成短滑条更合适
3. 00:24:874 (6) - 我建议不要放原来的位置，打的时候不舒服，可以按DS放在连打的前面，或者你都可以叠去连打开头。
4. 00:41:974 (7) - 这里尽量做出人声拖音，不要3组3连打 some fix
5. 00:46:924 (1,2,1,2,3,4) - 这两组的NC统一一下，如果是故意让颜色好看点的话就无视这一点 fix
6. 00:52:924 (1) - 可以NC fix
7. 01:16:174 (1) - 建议第一个不要放这里，放远一点跳的比较舒服，01:16:774 (5,1) - 同时这个圈不要叠上去，建议滑条也是要跳一下。 fix
8. 02:26:074 (2,3,4,5,6,7) - 这里改一改，放的这么窄好难读图。 fix
9. 02:58:624 (1,2,3) - 这里改成这个1/6节奏怎样 https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/5501733
10. 03:01:924 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,1,2,3) - 这里用1/6节拍放这样吧 https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/5501908
11. 03:55:024 (3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4) - 没必要放1/6，全部放1/4吧

后面懒看了qwq good luck!

Xilver wrote:

hello o/ m4m from my queue

[General]

custom combo colors? fix

[Legend]

00:19:924 (1,1,1) - i think you should remove NC, as it's inconsistent with the first part fix
00:29:824 (1,1) - same here, also i think you could do a 5 burst stream starting at 00:30:124 - to be consistent with 00:27:724 (3) - fix
00:50:749 (8) - should NC this and remove NC on 00:50:824 (1) - to be consistent with your other NC (I'm pretty sure you NC to vocals?) fix
00:50:749 (1) - maybe note here? hummm...I need to consider
01:17:224 (1,1) - you could probably gradually decrease SV here for a nice effect (maybe 0.8 for the first one and 0.6 for the second one?)
https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/5557936 fix
01:21:424 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7) - i don't really hear that stream in the song i think you should do the same rhythm you did here 01:19:174 - fix
01:45:049 (2) - i think you should remove this circle, it creates a better effect for the stream without starting on a blue tick fix
01:56:224 (1) - NC? fix
02:13:924 (2) - you should NC this to be consistent with your NC here 02:11:524 (1) - fix
02:15:424 (1) - most of the times i like your slider shapes but honestly this one is kind of ugly imo i made a small something you should consider changing to https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/5557973 fix
02:41:824 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - this stream is really sudden, maybe put 2 repeat sliders for the first 8 notes instead so it's easier to predict?http://osu.ppy.sh/ss/5557998 hummm no
02:44:224 (1) - should ctrl j this imo because slider start going down-up is better to play from this angle no
02:45:424 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12) - i don't hear this stream at all. music has a long guitar note, not a stream fix some
02:46:624 (1) - ctrl g? and then move 02:47:074 (2) - to the slider end fix
03:05:224 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1) - this part of the stream isn't heard in the song, there's a long guitar chord (which you could replicate using a long slider imo) fix
03:18:274 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7) - 03:19:474 (4,5,6,7,8,9,10) - can't hear the stream for both of these, i think the rhythm is more like this http://puu.sh/pTBMv/b1553b53c6.jpg fix
03:22:624 (17) - NC? fix
03:40:624 (9) - NC? fix
03:49:324 (2,3) - i think you need to increase spacing of these sliders to fit the big spacing you had in the last stream fix
03:49:324 (2,3) - also, i'm pretty sure this is a triple and not a slider? fix
03:53:824 (1,2) - this should be a stream, it's really emphasized to only be covered by 2 sliders fix
04:01:324 (1,2,3,4,5) - i know that you blanketed this to the stream but the fact that it's so far away from the next stack is really off putting. maybe overlap with one of the notes from the stream? http://osu.ppy.sh/ss/5558067 fix
04:10:624 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,1) - can't hear the stream here. also i think with how hard the previous streams are you should give players a break and make it have sliders instead http://puu.sh/pTC7g/80edc34198.jpg fix
04:11:824 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10) - again, don't hear a stream here, this is just a long guitar chord (you could probably use 3 sliders here aswell) fix
04:17:824 (1) - SV is very anticlimactic, i think you should make these go faster instead (1.5x maybe?) fix
04:20:224 (17) - NC? fix
04:30:724 (1) - NC? you did the same thing on previous streams from kiai on 01:36:874 - fix
04:35:524 (5) - ^ fix
04:50:074 (5) - diagonal slider is ugly imo, maybe try this? https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/5558095 (you could also blanket this with 1) fix?
04:59:074 (1,1) - how about gradually increasing SV on these for better emphasis? i think it'd work nicely (1.2x then 1.4 for example) http://osu.ppy.sh/ss/5558109 fix

good luck with your map! this is very cool c:

Toy wrote:

[General]

1. hi kami big fan
2. You've got some good emphasis using kicksliders on the vocals. Ex: 00:55:324 (1,2) -
   You could try to use this as a motif throughout the map, it feels really stream heavy
3. Personally I feel like the emphasis on the "extraction zone" streams are misplaced and you should consider revising them but I can see what you're doing right now. If you keep it as is, at least keep it consistent.
   01:37:924 (1,2,1) - some streams have this 1,2,1 pattern and others don't 00:51:724 (1,2,3,4,1) - it's not consistent Ex: 04:30:724 (9,10,1,2) -
4. a lot of the larger streams/patterns could end on a NC
   03:22:624 (17) - 03:40:624 (9) - 04:20:224 (17) - etc

fix

[Legend]

1. 00:45:874 (1) - 00:46:099 (4) - NC the downbeat instead? fix
2. 00:46:324 (1) - not sure why you NC'd here and not 00:47:425 - here as well fix
3. 00:47:074 (1) - instead of emphasizing the vocals with a NC you could make 4 kick sliders that lead into the stream http://puu.sh/pVAdY/7697f0e1a7.jpg something like this but with better placement fix
4. 00:51:724 (1,3) - same here. I think it'll help emphasize the vocals fix
5. 00:52:924 (13) - could be kickslider fix
6. 01:03:724 (1) - remove this NC and then add one every four notes starting here 01:04:024 (1) - to match the guitar fix
7. 01:04:174 (7,8,9,10,11) - this is a really sharp angle; consider making it round up and increase spacing instead of relying on such a sharp direction change to emphasize that note considering the rest of this stream is really circular fix
8. 01:36:874 (1,2,3) - I don't think the emphasis is on "zone" but rather when the backup vocals come in, it'll probably play cleaner if you start the spacing at the white tick emmm but I think this cool
9. 01:38:074 (1,2) - same here, I'd consider these to still be part of the .4x spacing and 01:38:224 (3) - be the start of the larger spacing again
10. 01:40:249 (6,1,2,1) - I know the NCs match the vocals, but it looks odd to have it part of the stream like this me too.But I haven't found a better way. I don't want to change this stream
11. 01:51:124 (1) - I really like this whole stream. Emphasis seems well placed and the sharp direction changes fit and don't feel like they come out of nowhere THX! > <
12. 02:26:074 (2,3,4,5,6,7) - careful using such similar spacing to map notes that have different spacings on the timeline fix
13. 02:46:624 (1) - ctrl+g this? fix
14. 02:51:424 (1) - wow this stream is a beast
15. 03:01:924 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16) - this section of the stream seems overmapped to what's actually going on in the song emmm...I need more mod this
16. 03:05:374 (3,4,5,6,7,8,1) - same here, there's no sound that supports the end of this stream, maybe make this a long slider or something fix
17. 03:11:974 (1) - how come you made such large direction changes at the first 2 NCs then kinda stopped? would be cool if this one also had a sharp direction change to match the others fix.I added a little space
18. 04:08:224 (1,1) - these are so cool but holy cow fix

Man this is so cool, I love the rhythm choices you made after the last kiai

Speechless wrote:

[General]

Marc Hudson加进标签，另外我比较倾向把Herman Li 也加进去 fix

这首歌的专辑是Maximum Overload，加进标签 fix

DragonForce从标签里去掉，因为artist已经出现过一次了所以没必要 fix

Legend也去掉，因为这已经是难度名了 fix

stream ->deathstream fix

宽屏支持是啥 emmm...这个可以打开吧

[Legend]

00:02:824 (1,2,3,4,1) - 这五个可以把间距一个个缩小下来，2.0x->1.5x->1.0x->0.5x这样 fix

00:04:024 (1) - 这里应该塞个串或者两个1/4折返滑条，00:04:624 - 这里才是长音的开始，应该在这里加一个滑条 按我现在对图的理解我改了下这里

00:45:124 (1) - 感觉这段有点太在意放串了，跟vocal 结合的不是很好，虽然vocal 的优先级不是非常靠前 same

01:16:924 (1,1,1) - 这三个滑条尾的音量应该再小一点，另外我感觉这几个做成折返滑条比较好 fix

01:20:524 (2,3,4,5) - 太近了，看上去有点像1/4 fix

01:26:224 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - 前五个ctrl+g，6和1叠一起 same

02:20:224 (1,1) - 滑条尾音量太大 same

02:35:824 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16) - 这种相当于break 的比较慢的地方感觉不太干他妈塞爆比较好 same

03:18:274 (1) - remove NC fix

03:34:624 (3) - NC fix

03:37:024 (1,2,3,4) - 为什么不放Y轴上啊 不用啊 放Y轴的话 后面的稍微偏一点会不就有强迫症了吗

03:55:024 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - 这地方怎么听都是1/4啊 fix

04:52:174 (1) - 怎么没在白线上 fix

把滑条的音量处理一下应该可以了

pw384 wrote:

Legend

1. 00:31:324 (1,2) - 掉个位置好不好啊 fix
   
2. 00:46:024 - 这一段finish的音效太轻了，不带感 fix
   
3. 00:57:649 - 加个note在00:57:724 (5) - 的头上？ 这个我倒是感觉没必要
   
4. 01:06:874 (1) - 去掉nc，因为后面类似的地方都没加 fix
   
5. 01:17:224 (1) - ctrl+G? 一方面强制要求鼠标有更大的移动，来回地玩着更带感，另一方面01:17:224 (1) - 的吉他只出现在右声道，01:17:524 (1) - 只出现在左声道，所以这两个slider的方向如果反过来的话好像更带点劲（？） fix
   
   
6. 01:32:224 (1,2) - 弯过来？如图 fix
   
   图片

   
7. 02:20:224 (1) - 建议缩小1/2到白线，因为02:20:824 - 有个音，刻意跳过这个音而把结尾落在更轻的02:20:974 - 是不太合理的 这里是故意为之的 因为如果跟02:20:824 - 这个白线的话 那想必02:20:674 - 这个音也不能漏掉 这样的话不太符合这一段比较休闲的部分了
   
8. 03:07:024 (1,2) - 观察 前后的pattern，感觉这里间距最好和03:06:874 (2,1) - 一样 fix
   
9. 03:11:899 (6,1) - 为啥spacing是在这里断开的。。。 因为考虑到TOY的MOD 我开始是想把这里再弄个尖锐的转折点 但好像那么做的话不太好看 于是就缩写妥协了下 把这里拉远了 想了下 我把前面56这两个点改成了一个滑条 然后把1的距离拉远了一点 应该没问题了
   
10. 03:38:824 (3,4) - 间距再大一点啊 fix
    
11. 03:39:424 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - 卧槽这个有点灭绝人性啊，看到1~5是个大钝角已经很难打了，结果6又突然折返往上走了，最好改一下6的位置啊 fix
    
12. 04:07:324 (2) - 缩小到1/2，因为04:07:474 - 有个更重的音；（前面那个3/4就不用缩小了，因为04:07:249 - 这个被对上了） fix
    
13. 04:25:624 (1,2) - 这间距很容易看成1/4，拉大一点 fix

美丽

1. 00:18:424 (1) - Having it land on the kick would be more accurate of the rhythm.
2. 00:22:174 (2,3,4,5,6,1,2,3,4,5,6,7) - I question whether you're actually following the rhythm by mapping this as all 1/4s. The measure on 25% playback doesn't sound like constant 1/4 beat repetition.
3. 00:27:949 (6) - It seems like you're trying to follow the vocal, but this isn't mapped to a distinct sound of the vocal. Even if you're following the background instruments, placing a note here reduces emphasis on the kick.
4. 00:45:424 (5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12) - "Zone" should receive more emphasis than "extraction," because it's a more intense part of the vocal. Therefore, I wouldn't agree with equally-large spacing in the gray combo, especially for the buildup into the main part of the kiai. Just do what you did for 01:36:124 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10).
5. 01:16:774 (5) - This could be spaced closer to (4) since the guitar starts dropping pitch.
6. 01:33:274 (6) - Off with the pattern's structure; move to x:244 y:320.
7. 01:34:774 (2) - accidental whistle
8. 01:46:324 (1,2,3,4,1) - The strength of this doesn't die down after the lavender combo. In fact, I would say that the vocalist is increasing in volume.
9. 02:36:424 (1,2,3,4,5) - At least follow the same curve as 02:35:824 (1,2,3,4,5) or have it in a straight line. Curving the end toward 02:37:024 (1) looks plain ugly.
10. 03:16:024 (1) - Fix placement in relation to 03:15:574 (2,1,2).
11. 03:22:699 (1) - The song sounds like it briefly pauses at 03:27:124 before continuing at the next measure. Perhaps end the spinner at 03:27:124 to indicate that?
12. 03:39:424 (1,2,3,4) - Pattern placement is poorly executed. Since it looks like you want to form a pentagon, you could just do what Monstrata does when he creates polygons. You should be able to get a cleaner pattern like this (you might consider readjusting the square's placement).
    
    1. Copy/paste (1,2)
    2. Rotate 72 degrees
    3. Delete (3)
    4. Drag the new (3) on to the white tick
    5. Repeat the copy/paste method, but with (2,3)
13. 03:40:624 (9) - The shape doesn't look like it fits with the pattern. In addition to that, the angle creates questionable flow due to right-angle movement.
14. 04:01:024 (1,2,3,1,2,3,1,1,2,3,4,5,1,2,3) - You can place this better using the method I gave above.
15. 04:18:424 (1) - The pitch doesn't even drop that much to justify a whole 1.0x difference.

F1r3tar wrote:

1. 00:18:424 (1) - Having it land on the kick would be more accurate of the rhythm. emmmm...I did this place on purpose
2. 00:22:174 (2,3,4,5,6,1,2,3,4,5,6,7) - I question whether you're actually following the rhythm by mapping this as all 1/4s. The measure on 25% playback doesn't sound like constant 1/4 beat repetition. ↑ There are times when rhythm is diverse and we just have to make the player feel reasonable
3. 00:27:949 (6) - It seems like you're trying to follow the vocal, but this isn't mapped to a distinct sound of the vocal. Even if you're following the background instruments, placing a note here reduces emphasis on the kick. no
4. 00:45:424 (5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12) - "Zone" should receive more emphasis than "extraction," because it's a more intense part of the vocal. Therefore, I wouldn't agree with equally-large spacing in the gray combo, especially for the buildup into the main part of the kiai. Just do what you did for 01:36:124 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10). fix
5. 01:16:774 (5) - This could be spaced closer to (4) since the guitar starts dropping pitch. fix
6. 01:33:274 (6) - Off with the pattern's structure; move to x:244 y:320. well...In fact, there is no structure here... Just jump...
7. 01:34:774 (2) - accidental whistle fix
8. 01:46:324 (1,2,3,4,1) - The strength of this doesn't die down after the lavender combo. In fact, I would say that the vocalist is increasing in volume. no
9. 02:36:424 (1,2,3,4,5) - At least follow the same curve as 02:35:824 (1,2,3,4,5) or have it in a straight line. Curving the end toward 02:37:024 (1) looks plain ugly. fix
10. 03:16:024 (1) - Fix placement in relation to 03:15:574 (2,1,2). no
11. 03:22:699 (1) - The song sounds like it briefly pauses at 03:27:124 before continuing at the next measure. Perhaps end the spinner at 03:27:124 to indicate that? emmmm.....no
12. 03:39:424 (1,2,3,4) - Pattern placement is poorly executed. Since it looks like you want to form a pentagon, you could just do what Monstrata does when he creates polygons. You should be able to get a cleaner pattern like this (you might consider readjusting the square's placement). fix
    
    1. Copy/paste (1,2)
    2. Rotate 72 degrees
    3. Delete (3)
    4. Drag the new (3) on to the white tick
    5. Repeat the copy/paste method, but with (2,3)
13. 03:40:624 (9) - The shape doesn't look like it fits with the pattern. In addition to that, the angle creates questionable flow due to fixright-angle movement.
14. 04:01:024 (1,2,3,1,2,3,1,1,2,3,4,5,1,2,3) - You can place this better using the method I gave above. no
15. 04:18:424 (1) - The pitch doesn't even drop that much to justify a whole 1.0x difference. ....0.75X

zigizigiefe wrote:

Random mod I have concerns about hitsounds and felt like I have to share it since I'm big DF fan :v

00:46:099 (2,1) - Having finishes here is really weird, it doesn't fit to the drum and makes irritating sounds. Hitsounds in stream at 00:46:024 - should have followed a hitsound line like "finish, finish, finish-whistle(because of snare), finish, finish, finish, finish-whistle" according to your custom hitsounds. You may reject this suggestion but at least review hitsounds of this part, it goes totally wrong imo.

Kibbleru wrote:

03:22:324 (1,2,3,4,1) - increase spacing? that seemed to be your intention fix
00:10:474 (7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16) - why the random direction change :/ fix
00:19:624 (1) - why NC :/ fix
00:43:924 (1,2,3,1) - 00:44:524 (1,2,3,1) - maybe u could gradually increase spacing? color=#FF0000]fix[/color]

AncuL wrote:

Was the meetup on Guangzhou? Just wondering

MrSergio wrote:

too bad there are no modding coffee houses in Italy

04:19:024 - this stream can be reduced in spacing to make it fit with the decreased volume in hitsounds fix
not a big problem, but you should try to make your patterns fit with the hitsounding. I saw some parts where strong hitsounds were doing a rhythm which was simply expressed with a stream in the map.
That is surely not the best, since the map is one, yet you seem to have divided your map into 2 distinct layers: hitsounds and patterns I seem to understand the difference you're trying to say, because the hit and sound effects of this map are done separately from patterns .some to 01:04:024 (1) - 01:16:624 (4) - In this, I try to tune the music to the sound, not the patterns.. If you think these places need to be changed, I'll try it. But I also want to keep those thoughts, because it's an attempt

Anyway, I won't ask to redo them, since only some streams seem to do that (04:32:224 - dynamic hitsounds) while some do it better (03:41:824 - static hitsounds) fix to 04:32:224 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16) -
Dynamic hitsounds: when the base line, aka the strong drum beats of your hitsounding, follows a specific and varied rhythm.
Static hitsound: when your drum hitsounds only support the song, usually following the default 4/4 metric.
Keep it in mind for next maps
of course

What's with "rsi" in tags? I don't like memes, you know... ("rice" and "insane" too seem unrelated to the map imo) fix

The map's design is not bad at all, but tbh those hitsounds kinda go against my philosophy

MrSergio wrote:

If you can explain me the reason why you tried to make this "innovation" by dividing hitsounds and patterns I can probably come to understand it too, but right now it feels like "hey, let's try to do this because sounds like fun" without actually having a real reason behind it. (that's what I understand from "In this, I try to tune the music to the sound, not the patterns.. ")

Also, I know what RSI means lol, that's why I considered it a meme x)

squirrelpascals wrote:

was looking through this map and i thought i'd bring this up while your bubble is popped

04:19:024 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,1) - you completely skipped hitsounds on this stream. Pretty confusing because the stream before it is very heavily hitsounded.

no kd

Nevermind I'm dumb, my map want updated. Ignore this

Circle wrote:

Not saying this is an issue, but I just felt that the song being so quiet in this section 01:51:424 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,1,2,3,4,5,6) - was weird. It's part of the song but I just wasn't expecting the volume to go down in that section? emmm....I'm not quite sure what you mean. Do you mean the song itself?I didn't reduce this part of the sound volume o.o I just reduced the density

The map looks fun to play. If only I could play it.

Hpocks wrote:

Why are these streams so ugly? Did you even use slider to stream?

• 1) why are your finish hitsounds overused in the kiais? it makes playing this song without your hitsounds feel like complete ass because all i can hear is just "pop pop pop pop" where there should be vocals and, you know, not finishes
  
  2) on the topic of hitsounds, WHY are the whistles substitute clap hitsounds? what is even the purpose of doing that, just make them actual whistles or some other sound besides a snare
  
  3) why do your streams in the kiai follow vocals at some points in terms of spacing changes but then go to drums like 01:01:624 (1) - here during this entire stream?
  
  4) what's wrong with your nc's like 00:51:724 (1,1) - this literally screams unpolished
  
  5) 00:55:624 (1,2,3,4,5) - where is the emphasis on literally any of these patterns? because 00:57:124 (1,2,3,4) - you seem 00:58:024 (1,2,3,4,5) - to be 00:59:524 (2,3,4,5,6,7) - changing 01:07:624 (1,2) - emphasis 01:19:024 (1,2,3,4) - quite 01:20:524 (2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - a 01:22:324 (1,2,3,4,5) - lot
  
  6) 01:19:924 (6,7,8,9) - this is not straight, unpolished, although this is more of a minor thing anyway
  
  7) 01:22:624 (4) - nc every downbeat but then this isn't? what?
  
  8) 01:28:624 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - this blatantly ignores rhythm for no reason, same thing with the next pattern, you could be following vocals or guitar here but it's just 1/4 spam???
  
  9) 02:15:424 (1) - what the absolute fuck is this
  
  10) 02:25:024 (1) - hitsounds randomly get 30% louder here??
  
  11) 02:28:024 (2,3) - 02:29:224 (2,3) - these are the same distance but different gaps in rhythm, why?
  
  12) 02:41:824 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - don't you think this is a TINY bit overmapped considering the part before it?
  
  12) 02:45:274 (4,1) - why? no, like, genuinely, why? how do you imagine this as a playable pattern? you're introducing a concept like this 3 minutes into the map, you are LITERALLY asking for people to break here
  
  13) 02:51:424 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16) - i've legitimately seen more structured stream patterns from unranked mappers, like 02:51:724 (5) - why isn't the direction change on the white ticks? it shouldn't be on the blue ticks, that ignores rhythm entirely
  
  14) 02:55:624 (1,2,3) - yeah, no, please actually stop doing this, your map is unplayable at this point

fieryrage wrote:

playability > aesthetics

edit: ok there's actually things wrong with this map, wtf is wrong with the hitsounding and ncs and what are the streams even following lol

goes from vocals to guitars to drums and where is the consistency hello

idke wrote:

i believe this can be ranked someday, but not now especially with many questionable flaws included in the map.

Xexxar wrote:

01:55:474 (7,8,1) - isnt this just emphasizing 8 because u simply ran out of room in the editor due to poor stream placement management
01:55:024 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - 01:55:624 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - In fact, this is a set of accelerated sounds .about this sharp angle. I don't think there is any problem. because 01:54:949 (16,1,8,1) - Here, as the beginning of the acceleration, it is also an acute angle . but this looks, is not very molimen

02:51:649 (4,8,12,16) - vs 02:53:524 (13) - what is the reason for this difference is stream design? lol..I think this should be a classic part, not a mistake. This paragraph follows the guitar.Toy's Mod mentioned it here .and I like it

03:42:274 (7) - red tick vs 03:42:949 (16) - blue tick in the same combo ?? 03:42:274 (7) - watch the difference in guitar 03:42:949 (16,1) -The definition of the turning point of the tail and head is very vague .Because they're turning at the point of stress, In fact, I can explain that since 03:43:024 (1) is stress, it is connected to the acute part .and 03:42:274 (7) - I can explain that it's stressed, so I'm just pausing for a shot, and then connecting the acute angle. It doesn't make sense because they're all in the spinning part

i dont rly care how you want to prioritize rhythms, whether that be forcing direction change after the blue tick to emphasize a change in movement before the white tick / red, or if you want highlight it by making the red / white tick be the corner of the stream, but you need to be consistent with it and especially shouldnt be doing these changes in the same combo. But about turning, I'm not thinking about defining the stress as the center, or the head at the next sharp angle .In my opinion, they just need to do something about the turning point

04:58:324 (7,8,1) - this flow makes me a sad boy emmm.....If you want, i can really drop 04:58:474 (8) - a little .But now I don't feel necessary

Lasse wrote:

didn't expect it to get qualified so fast after bubble, even less so as it is right now..
I called for you, but you didn't pay attention to me

hitsounding
why are you using edm kick samples as hitnormal, that sounds so unfitting with this song
using some non-electronic kick samples would make much more sense

04:22:624 - using hihat hitnormals in parts like this also makes no sense with the song, there are drum and guitar 1/4 but basically adding a 1/4 hihat layer with hitsounds sounds horrible

similar for the intro/part until first kiai
and parts like 01:17:824 - etc.

not using cymbal samples (like default soft finish) in a song that uses them quite frequently also seems really lacking

I don't quite follow you . Is this denying all sound effects...? I can't guarantee that everyone sounds good .at least these sound effects are regular .Hummm... I've changed my hitnormal once. At least it's not bad now. If you have a better hitnormal.please send it to me


streams
your stream emphasis is all over the place in many spots
just from looking at parts like 03:41:824 - 03:49:024 -
things like 03:42:274 (7,8) - are emphasized a lot for whatever reason but then 03:42:424 (9) - isn't all, even though it stands out much more in the song and your hitsounding
then 03:42:949 (16,1) - 03:43:549 (8,9) - 03:44:149 (16,1) - actually make sense, but for some reason you do nothing on 03:44:824 (9) - 03:45:349 (16,1) - etc
03:46:024 (9,11) - are hitsounded to somehow stand out, but your patterning doesn't make them stand out in any way
u overlooked an important piece of information .03:46:174 (11) - this .It's the last repetition 03:46:024 (9,11,13) - 03:44:824 (9,13) - 03:43:624 (9,13) - 03:42:424 (9,13) - In the next paragraph. a change has taken place 03:46:624 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16) -
So it's changed at the end of the paragraph

I mean these things could work if you actually were consistent with them, but emphasizing like half of the stronger beats and ignoring the other half makes no sense
That's a very good suggestion, but about this. I just cut the same paragraph very thin. So that it looks very random. maybe it makes you feel a little confused... Emmm... I'll try to get someone to understand my audio model .mrsergio and I discussed the problem

00:08:749 (16,1) - this is suddenly using such an outstanding angle when you didn't do that on all the strong beats before is ?? 00:08:749 (16,1) - 00:09:874 (15,1) - 00:11:149 (16,1) - 00:12:349 (16,1) - If I say it's a twist, I don't know if you can accept it .yes, I can start with an acute angle from the front, but I didn't do that. Is consistency necessary here? 00:06:124 (13,14,15,16,1,2,3,4,5) - 00:07:324 (13,14,15,16,1,2,3,4,5) - If you need, I can even explain these two as buffering because their angles are getting sharper and sharper .but it doesn't make sense, you know. If I keep the consistency here, it will become very single. streams lost his mind

these issues are mainly relating to when you use such inconsistent concept of (not)emphasizing stuff during the same stream, and how you decide to do it.
changing things up a bit for different parts etc. is alright though, especially for a long song with so many streams

perhaps the consistency for many people is a must. But this is not blindly believe the reason. Most of the time, what we see is quite different .

more things
00:47:824 (6) - is putting lots of emphasis on the 1/2 ticks with hitsounding but mapped tapping rhythm doesn't fit, this would be much better as two 1/4 sliders I don't deny your point of view, but I don't think it's bad right now .00:47:824 (6) - This can be seen as a pause .00:48:124 (1,2) - give the player a better response to this place .

03:55:024 (1) - should probably be 1/4, the guitar is not that clear, but sounds better on 1/4 as the important guitar beats seem pretty close to 03:55:174 - and 03:55:249 - , together with clear drums on 03:55:174 -
hummmm... This place is very blurry, because I really follow the guitar .I think if I use a 1/2 slider. Plus a note. here will become very strange. But if 1/3, it will not be so molimen .03:55:324 (1) - because the two sounds coincide here But I still have a choice, if you think so https://puu.sh/x8aMM/47defe6647.png

04:19:924 (13,14,15,16) - this doesn't give enough hitsound feedback, 10% is way too low, fadeout you put here should just se smaller steps as the ones before are really hard to hear
but this is a diminishing process.a gradual process of decline .04:19:924 (13,14,15,16) - they all added finish.and there's a rising sound in

the map uses some nice ideas, but it seems to really lack in how they were executed

fieryrage wrote:

ok i have to make a separate post for this

• 1) why are your finish hitsounds overused in the kiais? it makes playing this song without your hitsounds feel like complete ass because all i can hear is just "pop pop pop pop" where there should be vocals and, you know, not finishes
  no
  
  2) on the topic of hitsounds, WHY are the whistles substitute clap hitsounds? what is even the purpose of doing that, just make them actual whistles or some other sound besides a snare
  no
  
  3) why do your streams in the kiai follow vocals at some points in terms of spacing changes but then go to drums like 01:01:624 (1) - here during this entire stream?
  no
  
  4) what's wrong with your nc's like 00:51:724 (1,1) - this literally screams unpolished 00:51:874 (1) - This NC is consistent for the number of streams .00:51:874 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14) - 00:53:224 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14) -
  
  5) 00:55:624 (1,2,3,4,5) - where is the emphasis on literally any of these patterns? because 00:57:124 (1,2,3,4) - you seem 00:58:024 (1,2,3,4,5) - to be 00:59:524 (2,3,4,5,6,7) - changing 01:07:624 (1,2) - emphasis 01:19:024 (1,2,3,4) - quite 01:20:524 (2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - a 01:22:324 (1,2,3,4,5) - lot
  no
  
  6) 01:19:924 (6,7,8,9) - this is not straight, unpolished, although this is more of a minor thing anyway
  no
  
  7) 01:22:624 (4) - nc every downbeat but then this isn't? what? I can't understand why I need Nc here
  
  8) 01:28:624 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - this blatantly ignores rhythm for no reason, same thing with the next pattern, you could be following vocals or guitar here but it's just 1/4 spam??? 01:27:424 (1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - 01:29:824 (1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - Really?
  
  9) 02:15:424 (1) - what the absolute fuck is this no
  
  10) 02:25:024 (1) - hitsounds randomly get 30% louder here?? no
  
  11) 02:28:024 (2,3) - 02:29:224 (2,3) - these are the same distance but different gaps in rhythm, why? no
  
  12) 02:41:824 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - don't you think this is a TINY bit overmapped considering the part before it?
  Is this really overmapped? There is enough intense guitar sound to support this paragraph
  
  12) 02:45:274 (4,1) - why? no, like, genuinely, why? how do you imagine this as a playable pattern? you're introducing a concept like this 3 minutes into the map, you are LITERALLY asking for people to break here no
  
  13) 02:51:424 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16) - i've legitimately seen more structured stream patterns from unranked mappers, like 02:51:724 (5) - why isn't the direction change on the white ticks? it shouldn't be on the blue ticks, that ignores rhythm entirely no
  
  14) 02:55:624 (1,2,3) - yeah, no, please actually stop doing this, your map is unplayable at this point no

not to mention the fact that the 100 bpm sections aren't even warranted considering the only things mapped in those sections are spinners, it should be a consistent 200 bpm throughout the entire song no

i seriously can't be bothered to look at this map more, it's not ready for ranking at all. the fact this even was considered as anything near a rankable map basically just proves the existence of a double-standard in the mapping community, as if it weren't proven already by monstrata being able to rank literally fucking anything

Yes, you're too lazy to look at this map. So what are you writing so much for? Do you promote your sense of being? Or just because your high ranking can do this? This is not an mod.

why did this get through with like 10 mods it so very clearly needs a LOT more than that?

Natsu wrote:

If the mod is disrespectful then the mapper don't need to reply to it

Mun wrote:

Whether the mod was respectful or not, the points it brings up are entirely valid, and just responding "no" is not a valid defense - just a segue into more shitfighting.

Shouldn't this be DQ'd until 09kami provides some sort of valid defense against the vehemently negative reaction this has received from mappers - something he has utterly failed to do?

MashaSG wrote:

Wtf is this guy ranking one of the most beautiful Dragonforce's song that badly and just answer to actual points in mods by copying "no"? Where is QAT members??? Many people ( even BNs and previous BNs ) have many suggestions for the map to increase it's quality, isn't this the reason to DQ this?

I'm sure this would got DQ in 2 days or so, but if it wouldn't, I will "join party" and write mod as well

Actually, I don't mind dq. if there's a better hitnormal. stubbornness doesn't make sense, but it takes better advice to break it . The map doesn't make everyone feel good. If it doesn't make you feel good, I'm sorry, but I hope you look at it in an objective way

fieryrage wrote:

6) 01:19:924 (6,7,8,9) - this is not straight, unpolished, although this is more of a minor thing anyway
I don't think it's a kind of mod.. Is it straight? Is it important?

12) 02:45:274 (4,1) - why? no, like, genuinely, why? how do you imagine this as a playable pattern? you're introducing a concept like this 3 minutes into the map, you are LITERALLY asking for people to break here
I can't understand why I can't do it here

Natsu wrote:

If the mod is disrespectful then the mapper don't need to reply to it

MashaSG wrote:

Wtf is this guy ranking one of the most beautiful Dragonforce's song that badly and just answer to actual points in mods by copying "no"? Where is QAT members??? Many people ( even BNs and previous BNs ) have many suggestions for the map to increase it's quality, isn't this the reason to DQ this?

I'm sure this would got DQ in 2 days or so, but if it wouldn't, I will "join party" and write mod as well

Raiden wrote:

I would also like to point out that the switch to 200 should be at 02:41:824 - . Currently there are double the necessary downbeats

Reset back to 100 at 03:22:624 -

And back to 200 at 03:37:024 -

Current timing playwise is fine but musical accuracy is ignored

(also for extra accuracy 01:17:824 - red line with 200 for "NC friendliness" or "metronome reset";

similarly 02:44:224 - here)

gratz tho, more DragonForce is always welcome 👀

Kagetsu wrote:

hmm... the thing that bothers me the most about this map is the lack of contrast between intense and non-intense beats. the streams are so poorly (in my opinion) implemented that it's difficult to actually feel the song when playing.

for example, around 04:29:674 - you start mapping an endless deathstream using only spacing changes in order to somehow represent the song variations, which sounds good on paper, but the thing you're ignoring here is that after such high density, the patterns start to feel difficult regardless of the spacing shifts. there's a guideline in the ranking criteria that states: "Avoid following multiple layers of the song if it is unclear what rhythm is prioritizing. Players should be able to discern what part of the song is being followed." which doesn't seem to be followed here, as it's pretty difficult to recognize what your arrangements are mapped to.
04:29:674 (1) - Hummm... I've thought about it. This section follows Voice ., but there's a section in the middle that I need to filter through 04:30:424 - 04:30:649 - There are several similar ones that are rhythmic only .I've thought that if the spacing is lowered, maybe people will understand that .But what I want to say is that the rhythm here is stream too .If change here, I think all of them need to be changed. And this change is the whole map.I think I have a clear purpose. It's part of the voice .I've made a lot of concessions about the difficulty. I don't think it's difficult for everyone to play now .what you said is a very good point of view .thx


other things i'd like to point:

most of your direction changes feel random in my opinion, your streams are extremely inconsistent on sections such as 03:41:824 - where things like 03:43:399 (6,7,8,9,10) - are tremendously difficult for no reason
well. all don't seem to like it here. I changed my angle to a very simple angle


your map contains a lot of snapping mistakes. i'm pretty sure that stuff like 03:01:924 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16) - 03:57:424 (1,2,3,4,5) - are 1/3.
no. I noticed in many places that the guitar was 1/3., but I only followed a small part .because I made a mistake on another map(https://osu.ppy.sh/s/459901). It's because of 1/3 .I always remember this mod. when you frequently switch between 1/3 and 1/4. in a stream, the player is very out of tune. This is not a good idea .switching between 1/4 and 1/3 will be difficult for players to master
Avoid following multiple layers of the song if it is unclear what rhythm is prioritizing. Players should be able to discern what part of the song is being followed."
and I think the red line sounds(no hitsounds) good enough to support these using 1/4

you have many streams that follow nothing. 04:11:824 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9) - 02:45:424 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - just to mention a few
same

Naotoshi wrote:

the mapper should respond to all mods properly, respectful or not... ignoring them cuz he doesn't find them nice and coddling is stupid =D

sdafsf wrote:

i dont understand much about hitsounding but while this is disqualified i have concerns with the emphesis on the streams.

in some parts you accentuate beats by placing them on the turn of the stream like:
04:09:424 (1) - , 04:33:424 (1) - , 04:38:224 (1) - , 04:48:124 (1) -
04:09:424 (1) - emmm... I think it's ok. because of the shortening of the spacing 04:09:424 (1,2,3,4) -
04:33:424 (1) - About here. I can understand the idea at the time. The turning point in the white of the drums. 04:33:124 (13,14,15,16) - But you reminded me. I should slow down here .like 04:37:924 (13,14,15,16) -
04:38:224 (1) - Emmm... I may know why you have any doubts about these places . 04:38:224 - This place is a drum sound and coincides with the long sound of the human voice .when sufficient conditions are supported, this rotation gives the player an accelerated sense of power .Also, the deceleration ahead is enough to allow the player to adapt to this segment .
04:48:124 (1) - same
About the angle of the corner, I don't think it's necessary to adjust the angle to the same, because the only thing you need is to let the player feel the effect. Most of the same angle doesn't make sense

but in some parts you place the beat before the accentuated beat on the turn of the stream like:
03:43:024 (1) - , 03:43:624 (9) - 03:44:224 (1) - , 03:57:424 (1) - , etc.
on.I changed it here in the mod above

these are just some examples the it is incosistent throughout the whole map.

also i dont know why this is accentuated 03:42:274 (7) - .
03:42:424 (9) - this should be instead.
same

maybe im misunderstanding your structure. im interested in an explanation.

zigizigiefe wrote:

I would want to point out a consistency issue

00:45:874 (11) - You forgot to add clap sound as you did for 01:36:874 (1) - or 04:29:674 (1) - or other parts where Marc says "zone", so it doesn't emphasize "zone".
on.sorry .It was a mistake. I corrected it > <

Okorin wrote:

so why do you halve bpm on spinners to then immediately double it again?

i mean if you halve it it shoulda stayed halved until like 02:41:824 -
but even that doesnt seem necessary

There are some differences. I think I need to change the BPM to 100. BPM is now modified to be provided by Raiden


03:55:324 (1,2,3,4) - this is 1/3??

fix

those hihats that you use as a hitnormal are so much louder than everything else >_<

fix


taking this down to further discuss the things that were mentioned properly because a lot of the things that you just said "no" to were actually not hostile
I picked up some of the items that need to be modified and put it on the separate Post above

09kami wrote:

I don't follow a fixed pendulum. It makes the map very boring, but I fix a rhythm at each section .same to stream. in my opinion, a lot of stream can do it in different ways .but this can become inconsistent in some people's eyes .This is not a kind of targeted speech. I mean. Everyone has different opinions .But I'm used to looking at this from a variety of perspectives .That's what I learned when I followed HW .Creation, change .

sdafsf wrote:

consistency and creativity are not mutually exclusive

09kami wrote:

But I'm used to looking at this from a variety of perspectives .That's what I learned when I followed HW .Creation, change .

sdafsf wrote:

09kami wrote:

I don't follow a fixed pendulum. It makes the map very boring, but I fix a rhythm at each section .same to stream. in my opinion, a lot of stream can do it in different ways .but this can become inconsistent in some people's eyes .This is not a kind of targeted speech. I mean. Everyone has different opinions .But I'm used to looking at this from a variety of perspectives .That's what I learned when I followed HW .Creation, change .

so your point is basically consistency is boring and uncreative?
i disagree with that in the first place but i dont think having the emphesis points in your stream off by one object makes your map any more interesting as it is.
consistency and creativity are not mutually exclusive

Shiirn wrote:

HW himself was extremely consistent. Like, wow, his maps are absurdly consistent and predictable. They're just crazy creative and interpretive. But misunderstanding creativity to mean "making up random stuff" is such a cute thing to do. It's literally what makes most newbie maps so adorably awful.

But practice makes perfect.

pkhg wrote:

why is the mp3 so bad lol

1. I know people already mentioned it, but could you improve your map visually ? This does not really impact the gameplay a lot, but it doesn't make eyes bleeding. Small details can make your map a lot of times better visually, trust me.
   Some streams are really weird-shaped and not really polished like
   
   - 00:54:274 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10) - when you can make something better shaped :
   
   SPOILER

   
   
   - 03:41:824 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16) -
   
   SPOILER

   
   
   - 04:45:274 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12) - : you just have to move 04:46:024 (11) - a little on the left for a perfect shape.
   
   
2. This could be considered as a rhythm choice issue : 01:19:174 (2) - when you start the slider on the red tick (so this very important tick 01:19:324 (3) - is only followed and not played (and it should be played)) but you do the "right" thing 01:21:424 (1,2) - , so is there any reason ? Variating patterns is not really a good idea if you don't really emphasize the right notes, this current example is the perfect example of what you should not do if you want to vary patterns. If you want to keep variating, then keep emphasizing the "right" (by "right" i mean strongest/most important) notes. So you should make this tick 01:19:324 - clicked
   
3. 02:45:499 (2) - There is definitely nothing audible on this blue tick, why do you follow it ? (even the guitar isn't snapped on it)

Shiirn wrote:

Don't use HW as an excuse if you're doing the exact opposite of what he/she does, hahahaha.

Neptune wrote:

09kami take my star as a sign of my appreciation for this masterpiece

Cherry Blossom wrote:

Did i see someone mentioning "HW" here ?
Before this goes for qualified section could you look at these following points ? :3

1. I know people already mentioned it, but could you improve your map visually ? This does not really impact the gameplay a lot, but it doesn't make eyes bleeding. Small details can make your map a lot of times better visually, trust me.
   Some streams are really weird-shaped and not really polished like
   
   - 00:54:274 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10) - when you can make something better shaped :
   
   SPOILER

   
   fix
   
   - 03:41:824 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16) -
   
   SPOILER

   
   It's a strange suggestion. I don't think they have to be round .the ellipse is actually a spin. u mentioned the "polished". A detail is ignored. that's the AR. of this picture. when you're at test or playauto, you'll see. they don't look like edit .It's just a turn .but the difference between an ellipse and a circle is that the speed of rotation is different. what mapper and player see is different .that's why I've been looking for someone to test the map. Some places I need to look at them from their perspective .But on this question, I choose to respect your opinion, because I always think you are a great mapper. So I reworked the place. I modified some ellipses for the circle .so I reworked the place
   
   - 04:45:274 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12) - : you just have to move 04:46:024 (11) - a little on the left for a perfect shape.
   emmm.....According to your idea, I just need to change the position of 04:44:824 (1,2) - . 04:45:274 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12) - Some subtle spins
   
   
2. This could be considered as a rhythm choice issue : 01:19:174 (2) - when you start the slider on the red tick (so this very important tick 01:19:324 (3) - is only followed and not played (and it should be played)) but you do the "right" thing 01:21:424 (1,2) - , so is there any reason ? Variating patterns is not really a good idea if you don't really emphasize the right notes, this current example is the perfect example of what you should not do if you want to vary patterns. If you want to keep variating, then keep emphasizing the "right" (by "right" i mean strongest/most important) notes. So you should make this tick 01:19:324 - clicked
   fix.I agree with that, but it's very difficult to grasp the most important sound when it comes to the switch between voice and accompaniment .Some people will say, "why do you follow the two? It's confusing! "but balance the vocals and the accompaniment to complete a map. You know, when it's done, it'll be very cool. remove not adapted things .complete this mapping. that's what I'm doing
   
3. 02:45:499 (2) - There is definitely nothing audible on this blue tick, why do you follow it ? (even the guitar isn't snapped on it)
   02:45:499 - There is an extension of the guitar here .02:45:424 - 02:45:949 - In fact, I believe it is a complete guitar sound because it has no sense of pause .02:46:024 (1) - But starting here, the change can be clearly distinguished .02:45:424 (1) - I'll change it here to 1/4 slider.maybe it will make you accept it .

No kd.

xDololow wrote:

small thing

04:17:824 (1,1) - how about end those sliders on red ticks ( 04:18:274 and 04:18:874 .) , because it more feet the music. And make them more wiggly?
hummm...fix to 04:18:274 - because there's a change in the guitar sounds here .but 04:18:874 - not added. If choose the weaker drums here .will conflict with 04:18:424 (1) .

0w^

MaestroSplinter wrote:

So this is mapping has become, people complaining about every single object that the mapper has placed, even going disrespecfull and expect to someone listen him...


^We reached this point ? Someone needs to call respect ?

Mun wrote:

MaestroSplinter wrote:

So this is mapping has become, people complaining about every single object that the mapper has placed, even going disrespecfull and expect to someone listen him...


^We reached this point ? Someone needs to call respect ?

Discourse is not disrespect, and if anyone can't handle this level of discourse, they probably shouldn't be putting their own work out into a community that is centered almost entirely around the judging of said work. I'd even go so far as to say that avoiding providing any sort of thoughtful criticism in a map that you see needs work is far more disrespectful, and even patronizing. At the end of the day, the goal isn't to be disrespectful to 09kami, it's to make the map better before it's brought into the ranked section, a section of "finalized works."

But you need to know about "mod". It's about map communication .the premise of communication is that it can be discussed with mapper .when language is offensive, this is no respect. would u casually greet a stranger with offensive words on the street? at least I won't . for instance.when your map is Qualified, I'll use Chinese to "mod"(and based on the fact that I understand the need to use English.) .but my "mod" is based on maps .what would you think? think this is a mod or a provocation? at least for fieryrage's speech. I think it's the same effect . u can see my response to other people. I believe everyone has answered them in detail .that's what I call a kind of respect .At least I think that "mod" must be based on communication, and that exchanges are based on the most basic equal dialogue
edit : If you don't respect me, why do I need my map to respect what you call "mod"?" yes, you can say. You don't need to respect "mod". You just need to change it .So why should I change it? Can you make sure that what you mentioned is correct? You answered, "yes, because I found these mistakes! " Since I don't respect your mod, why should I take notice of your findings? I just want to say "no". mapper is not a machine. It's not when you type an error that you change it .the path to a map entering ranked is through mapper. at least I won't accept rude "mod". about maps. In my eyes, it's a formal occasion .

destruction zone

01:16:774 (5) - I opened the map and saw this - you should add a hitwhistle here! The sound in the song is almost entirely consistent with 01:16:174 (1,2,3,4) - but the lack of a hitsound + the difference in spacing makes it look and feel more like an entirely different beat. fix

As for consistency, the map is highly inconsistent, but I haven't seen any real reason provided for it. For example, look at the 2 measures starting at 01:17:824 - vs the 2 measures starting immediately after them at 01:20:224 - the rhythm changes completely in the middle of it. Major rhythmic inconsistencies like these are evident throughout the map.
About consistency .I don't even have to open the map to know what you're trying to say...consistency is not a necessary thing. It's just a condition. a mapping. This map varies in two ways based on voice and accompaniment .when you think you need to maintain a high degree of consistency, it's different from this map, mapping's policy .but I don't mean there's no need for consistency .consistency is not a requirement. There is no need for a whole map to maintain a consistency. Some details, etc. I'll read the map tomorrow and explain
edit : It looks just like I guess .

Beyond that, what's with your streams? For example, check out 01:36:124 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10) - it's quite obviously hand-placed, but the curve is extremely rough and abrasive looking. Do you have a reason not to use more consistent curves in your streams?
all streams just hand-placed.Is there any doubt about that? Do you have a reason not to use more consistent curves in your streams
So why more consistent? what you mean is the need for bigger flow., simpler streams ?no. Streams does not have to meet all the needs of everyone .It's just because you think .In fact, does it make sense to adjust it to a perfect arc? This is just looking pretty pretty in edit. For this AR., some ugly angles can have a more intuitive effect on test .

After that, why emphasize 01:36:874 (1) - instead of 01:37:024 (3) - ? Sure, the word "zone" starts at 01:36:874 (1) - but it's obvious to anyone listening that the most intensely emphasized note here is at 01:37:024 (3) - .

So I think it's too much trouble to explain these things. I've explained the same thing in front of post .according to your idea, should even delete 01:36:949 (2) -.01:37:024 (3) - As a place to start .but isn't that the way you choose it? but it's obvious to anyone listening that the most intensely emphasized note here is at 01:37:024 (3) - . are you sure it's anyone? I don't agree with that .I think it's necessary to follow "ZONE".
Such emphasis and construction issues are present throughout the map.

Mun wrote:

MaestroSplinter wrote:

So this is mapping has become, people complaining about every single object that the mapper has placed, even going disrespecfull and expect to someone listen him...


^We reached this point ? Someone needs to call respect ?

Discourse is not disrespect, and if anyone can't handle this level of discourse, they probably shouldn't be putting their own work out into a community that is centered almost entirely around the judging of said work. I'd even go so far as to say that avoiding providing any sort of thoughtful criticism in a map that you see needs work is far more disrespectful, and even patronizing. At the end of the day, the goal isn't to be disrespectful to 09kami, it's to make the map better before it's brought into the ranked section, a section of "finalized works."

destruction zone

01:16:774 (5) - I opened the map and saw this - you should add a hitwhistle here! The sound in the song is almost entirely consistent with 01:16:174 (1,2,3,4) - but the lack of a hitsound + the difference in spacing makes it look and feel more like an entirely different beat.

As for consistency, the map is highly inconsistent, but I haven't seen any real reason provided for it. For example, look at the 2 measures starting at 01:17:824 - vs the 2 measures starting immediately after them at 01:20:224 - the rhythm changes completely in the middle of it. Major rhythmic inconsistencies like these are evident throughout the map.
Beyond that, what's with your streams? For example, check out 01:36:124 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10) - it's quite obviously hand-placed, but the curve is extremely rough and abrasive looking. Do you have a reason not to use more consistent curves in your streams?
After that, why emphasize 01:36:874 (1) - instead of 01:37:024 (3) - ? Sure, the word "zone" starts at 01:36:874 (1) - but it's obvious to anyone listening that the most intensely emphasized note here is at 01:37:024 (3) - .
Such emphasis and construction issues are present throughout the map.

Shiirn wrote:

Please note that a lot of the issues that people have with this map are not due to you making "mistakes while mapping".

It's because the mapping quality is extremely low.

You are not paying attention to the music's level of intensity or where the music gets stronger or weaker, nor are you using the vocals at all.

As an example, 00:58:324 (3,4,5,1,2,3,4,5,6,1) - This is an pattern. It's not a bad one, nor is it a good one. But it uses the previous notes and goes under them. But the music doesn't do anything to suggest that. The music does not repeat in any way. This isn't a matter of "creativity" or "my style", it's just straight up ignoring the music in favor of putting a "pattern you think looks cool". This is your entire map.

Your entire map is "patterns you think look cool", not "patterns which fit the musical structure".

You have made a map with no soul. It is just taking music and turning it into a one-dimensional set of clicks with plain, simple patterns representing it.

That's rankable. But it's a horrible way to map. And accepting it just lowers the quality of mapping as a whole. And it's why monstrata's cookie map is an insult to everyone who has any respect for music or this game. Because it's rankable, but intentionally lacking anything resembling mapping.
That said, your map is "rankable", but if you're satisfied with ranking but being bad, that's your choice. You'll just end up being another soulfear - a forgotten relic only remembered by a few for "how badly they mapped for how hard they tried".

Shiirn wrote:

If you want a community-based content creation system, you're going to have to deal with criticism, often harsh. Because very few people actually get good at something by getting nothing but praise. "Rankable" should be equated with "Mediocre" - because that's what ranking standards are meant to be, a minimum quality threshold for maps. Aiming to be mediocre, being satisfied with being mediocre, is something that needs to be pointed out in a "are you SURE you really want to be boring?" question.

If you want a game where everyone gets praised for doing their best, go play Hello Kitty World.

1. 00:23:224 (1,2) - Here i don't really understand why you stack these objects when the whole section has spaced objects because if you want to properly emphasize vocals, then these objects should be distant. You stacked 00:23:974 (4,5) - to follow the song and not vocals which is more suitable than stacking 00:23:224 (1,2) - to follow vocals imo. If you plan to follow vocals then don't stack objects, it would give a better impression.
2. 00:26:824 (1,2,3,4,1,2) - The strongest note here 00:27:424 (1) - is just played with a low distance between 00:27:274 (4,1) - . So it is not really emphasized. And it looks like you prefered to emphasize vocals instead with the highest distance between 00:27:424 (1,2,3) - so it can be possible and it works. Concerning visual and structure, the way they are placed just looks like they are "thrown" away with a random distance between them, at least if you make the distance consistent between 00:26:824 (1,2,3) - , between 00:27:124 (3,4,1) - , it would be better.
3. 00:29:224 (1,2,3,4) - the same idea as ^, it also looks like they are thrown away.
4. 00:40:024 (1,2,3,4) - ^
5. 00:56:224 (1,2,3) - ^ , when you add a lower distance between 00:56:374 (2,3) - compared to the distance between 00:56:224 (1,2) - when the strongest note to emphasize is 00:56:524 (3) - so there should be more distance 00:56:374 (2,3) - or an equal distance as 00:56:224 (1,2) - .
6. 04:41:674 (3,4,5,6) - ^
7. 04:51:274 (5,1) - The distance between them should be higher or equal to 04:50:974 (4,5) - , because the strongest note is on 04:51:424 (1) - which should be emphasized better. The low distance doesn't really do it.

Shiirn wrote:

Please note that a lot of the issues that people have with this map are not due to you making "mistakes while mapping".

It's because the mapping quality is extremely low.

You are not paying attention to the music's level of intensity or where the music gets stronger or weaker, nor are you using the vocals at all.
This is a strange point of view .I even suspected that I had misunderstood this sentence .If follow this point of view. So this map, so the object just follows the sound of my brain? well, mine brain power is really too high .I think if I don't follow these .can't even finish the map

As an example, 00:58:324 (3,4,5,1,2,3,4,5,6,1) - This is an pattern. It's not a bad one, nor is it a good one. But it uses the previous notes and goes under them. But the music doesn't do anything to suggest that. The music does not repeat in any way. This isn't a matter of "creativity" or "my style", it's just straight up ignoring the music in favor of putting a "pattern you think looks cool". This is your entire map.
It's also a weird argument .But the music doesn't do anything to suggest that. The music does not repeat in any way. It's just a choice of location! yes. I can definitely stagger it. even change it directly. But what's the point? But the music doesn't do anything to suggest that. ?I don't think this paragraph tells you anything. I don't think your understanding is music. It's about you. It's about thinking. about mapping. "memetics" If you understand the word, you will see what I am trying to say. In your mind, you think everyone does that, but it's a prejudiced view. u rule out some of the things that you think are wrong . And it's a long process. When you keep a point of view for a long time, you think that's the only thing that's right .when you maintain this view, your thinking has been fixed, so I'm breaking this mindset . these are just some opinions. For what you mentioned. and about maps .there's a simple reason here, but you didn't notice it .00:58:324 (3,4,5,3,4,5,6) - delete these .bring your headset and slow down to 25%.Listen to the drum. 00:59:149 - if you say there's no sound here, I can tell you . It's only because of the different tones of 00:58:474 (5,5) - I think 00:59:149 (6) - need to fill that difference. Of course. If you insist on.00:59:074 (5) - can modify the slider for 1/4. Include other places .But for the players, I believe these places are relative to the 1/4 slider . A continuous stream is no sense of violation. This is not a view I have imagined .It's what I found when the player tested the map .00:58:474 (5,5) - Some people say that this is just a drum. Why do you need to distinguish them? Just because of the scale? yes. just because of the scale. It's a kind of detail .There's another reason .00:59:074 (5,6,1) - Here it is. It's a part of the voice. It's coincident with the drum . So that's what I need to explain to you about innovation .but when you look at the problem in a single angle, it's easy to ignore something else. When people collect these things before your eyes, isn't that an innovation?

Your entire map is "patterns you think look cool", not "patterns which fit the musical structure".

You have made a map with no soul. It is just taking music and turning it into a one-dimensional set of clicks with plain, simple patterns representing it.
The soul of this map. I think it's at least stronger than you see . take an inappropriate example .please look at someone else's Extraction Zone. and look at my map .I'm sure you have a lot of opinions about the difficulty, but I want you to see the middle section 02:05:824 (1) - 02:41:374 (6) - this is my favorite part .About"patterns which fit the musical structure".this is a veryveryveryveryveryvery subjective view . music will not tell you any design .tell you about it. It's the player. so about not "patterns which fit the musical structure".I think it should be amended as "patterns which fit the player".
.So when you choose "patterns which fit the player".u will consider a question. Is this suitable for most player? or "I seem to think it's flow ".It's a complicated problem. I don't want to talk about it .But I'd like to mention two points
1 In the case of high AR, speed issues need to be taken into consideration .As I mentioned before, the relation between the cround and the ellipse. They are in the case of high AR. Just a few deviations from the radian. These slight deviations are even invisible .but you would say that bigger round make players feel more flow .That's the right point. When you change an ellipse to a bigger cround, it really reduces the difficulty of the player. Also, increase flow. But I would like to make second points. In fact, it is not my point .It's hers .
2 one can play a map well, but you can't. then you're just too weak. but what I need to add is that we need a limit .I can add difficulty in many places. Even in one version, the difficulty is raised to 8.25 stars .of course. I changed it later. I don't think it's necessary .back to this topic. I don't think stream needs to be in full compliance with everyone's flow .of course, I can do that, too. if I want to complete this kind of map as a pp map .You can look at 1 toy and Xilver's mod. I almost completely took their advice because I knew what they were thinking. I watched them play with this map .that's why I limit the limit. They're the standard .but right now, almost everyone wants me to follow them on flow .And that's why. or the fuse .I think there's no need to explain any more


That's rankable. But it's a horrible way to map. And accepting it just lowers the quality of mapping as a whole. And it's why monstrata's cookie map is an insult to everyone who has any respect for music or this game. Because it's rankable, but intentionally lacking anything resembling mapping.

And accepting it just lowers the quality of mapping as a whole. Can I understand that only pp map can belong to the correct mapping? In fact, according to the idea you mentioned, there is only a fixed rhythm. fixied the ds. fixied the flow. fixed pattern is the correct way to mapping .

That said, your map is "rankable", but if you're satisfied with ranking but being bad, that's your choice. You'll just end up being another soulfear - a forgotten relic only remembered by a few for "how badly they mapped for how hard they tried".

If there's no malicious vote, let me try. At least I'm willing to go on the road map. Look for different ways with ppmapping .(and at least all of my rank maps have done this before

Shiirn wrote:

It's not bad like "why are you even mapping"?

It's just so plain and simple and could be so much better, but you'd need to basically remap over and over to make it better. People expect better from DragonForce maps.

Cherry Blossom wrote:

Hello again, i can review this map if you need more feedbacks (the points i mentioned previously are just more or less "objective").
Note that's it's my own viewpoint, so take what is said below, very subjective.

I can agree that this map lacks of quality overall, but it is not really a "very bad quality map". This map lacks of structure (but this is a stream map so it's a little ok) but a majority of what is not stream is not really very well structured. I and people don't really expect perfect things, but at least try to make things a little tidied up and very carefully done with a real intention of making things structured. If i take your references like HW, her maps (despite they are "special" compared to others), there is a consistent structure behind them. I know we should not really compare maps because each style is different etc. but there is a lot of things in common in mapping. By making things structured and making things emphasized well, the quality of your map will be increased, that's my viewpoint.

first. thank for your viewpoint. .
But some ideas about stream. I'm different from HW .If you open Genryuu Kaiko. 04:05:781 - Notice the changes in these stream .they don't have much in common. or radians .04:08:555 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12) - like this. I'm sure my map has a similar place before, but everyone is proposing a point of view, consistency .04:09:942 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,1,2,3,4) - And this. I don't think these are for flow., or even you can say. they're not an arc. But are they important? flow does make players feel smoother, but if all stream uses a flow., they can create a sense of aesthetic fatigue . I saw almost half of them letting me modify the shape of the stream . I can't guarantee it's the right change. Maybe I'll regret it later .Because you have to understand the shape, the stream of the flow. The size of the rotation. everything is a way. Maybe we can change that and make it easier for the players .but for players, that might not be a good thing .Maybe someone plays this map just for pp. In fact, these changes have indeed been done. But are you sure we need to make this compromise for this part of the player? In my opinion, it doesn't make any difference to completing a map for pp. I didn't blame anything, but... why don't we decorate something? For example, there are some difficult places. Isn't it a pleasure? Some people would say, "you don't make these changes. This map is already difficult. Why don't you lower it?!" In fact, this subtle change .It's an attitude .I don't want to compromise with everyone. I don't want to compromise with ppmapping .I just want players play maps for map instead of playing maps for pp

Well, i can point out some things that look a little "messy" to me like :

1. 00:23:224 (1,2) - Here i don't really understand why you stack these objects when the whole section has spaced objects because if you want to properly emphasize vocals, then these objects should be distant. You stacked 00:23:974 (4,5) - to follow the song and not vocals which is more suitable than stacking 00:23:224 (1,2) - to follow vocals imo. If you plan to follow vocals then don't stack objects, it would give a better impression.
   00:23:374 (2,3,4) - I thought what they meant was already obvious ... This triangle is following the guitar, because the three sounds are similar .00:23:674 (3,4) - if follow the vocals, this place should be a 1/1 slider
   
2. 00:26:824 (1,2,3,4,1,2) - The strongest note here 00:27:424 (1) - is just played with a low distance between 00:27:274 (4,1) - . So it is not really emphasized. And it looks like you prefered to emphasize vocals instead with the highest distance between 00:27:424 (1,2,3) - so it can be possible and it works. Concerning visual and structure, the way they are placed just looks like they are "thrown" away with a random distance between them, at least if you make the distance consistent between 00:26:824 (1,2,3) - , between 00:27:124 (3,4,1) - , it would be better.
   emmm...00:27:424 (1,2) - I modified their location .fix.but This irregular quadrilateral is a pendulum that I often use .no fixed spacing. This is a shape similar to an equilateral quadrilateral, but it is more fluid than the quadrilateral due to its uneven spacing. The fixed spacing will increase the difficulty
   
3. 00:29:224 (1,2,3,4) - the same idea as ^, it also looks like they are thrown away. same
4. 00:40:024 (1,2,3,4) - ^ same.but some changes in position
5. 00:56:224 (1,2,3) - ^ , when you add a lower distance between 00:56:374 (2,3) - compared to the distance between 00:56:224 (1,2) - when the strongest note to emphasize is 00:56:524 (3) - so there should be more distance 00:56:374 (2,3) - or an equal distance as 00:56:224 (1,2) - .
   fix
6. 04:41:674 (3,4,5,6) - ^ fix
7. 04:51:274 (5,1) - The distance between them should be higher or equal to 04:50:974 (4,5) - , because the strongest note is on 04:51:424 (1) - which should be emphasized better. The low distance doesn't really do it.
   fix

Well it would be better if you tidy up some patterns concerning the distance between objects. Randomly using distance to emphasize wrongly the strongest notes doesn't really give quality to your map. The other way round, using proper emphasis makes your map very good, comfortable and pleasant to play.
I don't really ask you to remap some parts (concerning the placement), but it would be nice to make things more tidied up at least. If i take another chinese reference, popner, "Sometimes remapping can be more useful than hundreds of moddings.".
Now that you made your stream shapes better, you should make your patterns more tidy, and then your map will be really nice.

No kd because you already kd my previous post (when i said no kd on it lol)

F1r3tar wrote:

02:36:724 (5) - You should nudge this to the left. Looks kind of weird.