Checking this.
[Salad]
[Overdose]
[Salad]
- 00:22:068 (1,2) - If you intended this (and all the similar patterns to be dashed), they would benefit from a couple grid spaces more of distance, to make it even clearer.
- 00:31:034 (2,3,1) - I don't consider this the best pattern to introduce the first 1/2 dash in this diff, as it requires 2 direction changes. I would either delete (3) and rearrange stuff, or Ctrl+H 00:31:551 (1,2,3) - and move it towards the center to keep the 1/2 dash.
- 00:42:758 (1,2,1) - Although I understand that you placed the circle on the red tick because the higher pitched sound is there, to me it sounds way better on the white tick. Also, the pattern requires 2 direction changes, which feels a bit too uncomfortable to play. So I suggest you move (2) to the white tick, have it follow the movement of the slider, and then you can Ctrl+H 00:44:137 (1) - and play with the following notes around a bit.
- 00:58:620 (2) - I'd slant this slider a bit more, so that it does look like you can stay still on it to catch it. With the current angle, some players might try to wiggle it which will make the following dash a bit hard to do.
- 01:11:724 (1,2) - I'd prefer if you had the slider first, as it adds some leniency to the 1/2 dash, and it also follows the music a bit as there's a held sound in the downbeat. Also applies for similar parts, such as 01:25:517 (1,2) - .
- 01:23:448 (2,3) - and 01:25:862 (2,3) - This part of the song is calm, so the dashes aren't really fitting here.
- 01:54:137 (3,1) - (1) isn't that intense to require a dash on this, so I'd remove it.
- 02:13:792 (1,2) - This is a rather ambiguous distance, and the sound at (2) is rather weak, so I'd reduce the distance to make the walk clearer.
- 02:57:241 (2,3) - and 02:59:655 (2,3) - same as previously mentioned.
- 03:07:413 (7,1) - This looks rather weird, and it's inconsistent with a previous similar pattern that had no dash at all (01:34:482 (2,3) - ), so I'd make it walkable.
- 00:00:000 (1,2,1) - The distances between these objects are so different, yet the sounds are exactly the same. The first one feels way to large, and it can really throw players off being the first jump of the map, while the second one falls a bit short. I'd move 00:00:000 (1,2) - around so the distances are ~x1.9 between each object.
- 00:06:379 (3) - Why is there a dash to this? The song isn't really calling it and it's inconsistent with all your previous patterning. I'd Ctrl+G it.
- 00:10:517 (7,8) - This dash feels slightly off on its own, since it's on an upbeat. If anything, I would have expected a dash between 00:10:172 (5,6) - .
- 00:12:413 (5,6) - Rather ambiguous distance, I'd reduce it a bit to make it more walkable, since having two dashes in a row doesn't fit your patterning for this section.
- 00:27:068 (5,1) - This patterns feels odd because the jump emphasizes the synth, while the slider end focuses on the drums. I'd suggest either extending the (1) slider to the red tick, so it follows the synth and keeps the focus on it, or even extend it to the white tick where (2) starts and map a circle on 00:28:275 - (or a slider covering both that note and (3)).
- 00:50:862 (3,4) - The dash between these notes is really unfitting, as the sound on the red tick is really weak. Not to mention, the whole movement is unexpected because for a similar sound you had a slider covering it (00:45:344 (3) - ). So I'd go for consistency here and keep the slider.
- 00:57:931 (1,2) - Again, the direction change here is really uncalled for. I'd just go for the pattern that you used previously in 00:46:896 (1,2,3) - .
- 01:16:379 (5,6,7) - I'd reduce the distance between these objects to add some leniency to the pattern, since it's two direction changes leading to a HDash.
- 01:22:758 (1,2) - I'd go for slider and then circle instead, to add leniency and consistency to the pattern.
- 01:31:379 (2,3) - This dash is really uncalled, and I think the circle sounds way better on the following white tick.
- 01:40:517 (3,4) - Either a repeat slider or going for slider > circle fits better.
- 01:52:241 (2,3,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - I find it rather weird that you changed the focus from the synth to the stuff in the back. I would replace 01:52:931 (3,1,2,3,4,5,6,7) - with two 3/2 sliders like 01:51:551 (1,2) - , and then switch the focus at 01:54:482 (1,2,3,4) -.
- 02:32:586 (8,1,2) - Same suggestion as in 00:58:793 (2,3).
- 02:50:173 (5,6,7) - Similar stuff as mentioned for 01:16:379 (5,6,7) -.
- 02:56:551 (1,2) - And same stuff as in 01:22:758 (1,2) -.
- 03:04:827 (1,2) - This distance is a bit ambiguous to me. I'd move (2) to the right a a bit to make it walkable, while making a larger jump to (3) which probably deserves it due to its higher pitch.
- 00:21:379 (5,6) - I'd put the circle first and then the repeat slider, it fits the music better. Try this:
- 00:26:034 (1) - Since some people wish death to things or persons they don't agree with, death to extended sliders!
- 00:31:551 (1) - ^
- 00:39:827 (1) - This feels so off, considering you've used C-shaped sliders for all the sounds like this, even throughout the Kiai. And the antiflow makes it harsher than it should be.
- 00:56:379 (1) - ^Same.
- 01:22:758 (1,2) - Replace with a single 1/1 slider for consistency please.
- 01:33:620 (5,1) - This could use a larger distance, to emphasize the change in the song.
- 01:28:275 (1,2,3,4,5) - To me the strongest sounds land on (4) and (5)'s tail (kinda like you did on 01:29:655 (1,2,3) - ), so moving the repeat slider 1/2 earlier and taking one repeat off follows the music more closely (and, of course, re-adding the circle on 01:29:310 - ). The same applies for 01:31:034 (1,2,3,4) - and 01:32:413 (1,2,3,4,5) - , although in this last one the sounds are weaker, but the player would expect it for consistency.
- 01:35:000 (3) - One could expect a larger distance to this, based on its pitch. Maybe Ctrl+G it?
- 01:38:275 (2,3) - I think this sounds slightly better if you take the circle away and move the slider 1/2 earlier. If you do this, you should move both sliders a bit to the right.
- 01:40:517 (1,2) - Slider first follows the music in a better way, and it's more consistent with the rest of your patterns.
- 01:50:344 (1) - I would remove this note, as it takes emphasis away from the synth, which you have been following throughout this section.
- 01:53:103 (1,2) - Same comment as done for the Platter.
- 02:37:241 (1,2,3,4) - Place (4) closer to the triplet, as it can be easy to miss considering the antiflow movement.
[Overdose]
- 00:06:551 (4,1) - This should have a larger distance for consistency with the previous ones. It currently feels a bit underwhelming.
- 00:22:413 (2,3) - This should be slider first and circle after it, to follow the music better. You're missing a relatively strong sound at 00:22:758 - the way it is now.
- 00:25:172 (2,3) - Similar stuff here. Two 1/2 sliders could do.
- 00:26:034 (1) - and 00:31:551 (1) - :^)
- 00:38:620 (1,2,3,4,5,1) - Really weird that you have an HDash between (1,2) and not between (5,1), considering (1) is stronger (and is emphasized that way with your afb's hitsounding
- 00:48:275 (1,2) - This plays and sounds really weird to me, without being overmapped. I would have gone for a 1/2 repeat or something like you did on 00:46:896 (1,2) - . Also applies for the same pattern in the second half of the Kiai.
- 01:07:586 (1,2,3) - It's weird that the distances are so similar when (3) is stronger. You could even have an HDash to it.
- 01:18:448 (5,1) - This is way too harsh for what the section is. I'd go for normal flow here.
- 01:29:655 (1,2,3,4) - The change in spacing from the previous pattern feels a bit sudden, so I'd reduce the distance here.
- 01:50:344 (1) - Same comment as in Rain.
- 01:55:517 (3) - In this case I'm not against the extended slider, but having a x7.4 1/4 HDash is way overdoing it. Maybe you can curve the slider a bit more so the strenght of the HDash isn't that much. Also, it's easy to overshoot considering the next section has lower SV.
- 02:22:068 (1,2,3) - Same comment as in the previous Kiai.
- 02:33:103 (1,2,3,4) - ^Same stuff. Also, it doesn't make sense that (1,2) is larger than (4,5) since (5) is stronger.
- 02:41:206 (5,1) - Again, the harsh antiflow doesn't fit the section.
- 02:51:034 (1) - ^