1. Boxart Wongline: FOREVER (7,4 stars, 1105 notes)
2. Doormat's Normal (2,2 stars, 366 notes)
3. Easy (1,58 stars, 166 notes)
4. fanzhen's Extra (6,67 stars, 949 notes)
5. Kibb's Hard (3,56 stars, 515 notes)
6. Nathan's Extra (5,96 stars, 744 notes)
7. Plaubbes' Light Insane (4,59 stars, 759 notes)
8. Singbot's Insane (5,47 stars, 961 notes)
9. winber1's Extra (6,88 stars, 1095 notes)

-Zel wrote:

yo





kds pls

chainpullz wrote:

00:23:118 (1) - I know the readability of this map isn't really much of a consideration but it would (imo) be a major improvement if there was a slight corner right at the start of this slider and that's where the hold was as opposed to a straight entry slider that gives no indication of a hold:

something like this

ProfessionalBox wrote:

chainpullz wrote:

00:23:118 (1) - I know the readability of this map isn't really much of a consideration but it would (imo) be a major improvement if there was a slight corner right at the start of this slider and that's where the hold was as opposed to a straight entry slider that gives no indication of a hold:

something like this

surprise

chainpullz wrote:

01:11:118 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1) - Not very surprising here though.

Also, just the existence of the hold in the slider provides a surprisal factor given the lack of them in modern mapping. The rest of the map seems perfectly readable with 0 prior knowledge though I'll admit it's far beyond what I can personally play. I would have been more surprised if you accepted the suggestion than I was by the slider itself though. I'd give the gimmick 7/10.

Sing wrote:

p sure it's just a troll slider handsome put in for the memes, it's gonna be taken out when it's going for ranked lol...

Sing wrote:

when it's going for ranked lol...

F1r3tar wrote:

Sing wrote:

when it's going for ranked lol...

o

F1r3tar wrote:

Sing wrote:

when it's going for ranked lol...

o

Natsu wrote:

I really like this song, is this going for loved?

- Frontier - wrote:

Natsu wrote:

I really like this song, is this going for loved?

v_Yper wrote:

This map is good for loved

C00L wrote:

Yo kds pl s?

[A L P H A] wrote:

C00L wrote:

Yo kds pl s?

Uber wrote:

playability in 2017 lul

J_8579 wrote:

Sing wrote:

when it's going for ranked lol...

o

• 00:36:618 (1,1) - probably want to silence sliderends like this, i know there's a note here but the main rhythm you're following doesn't really give emphasis to it
  00:40:743 (1,2) - i was personally told trying to rank guilty that these were unrankable due to unreadability, i honestly don't really care but if it's unrankable u should probably change these (even tho its like half the map so yea xd)
  00:46:368 (1,1,1,1) - i feel like these are a bit too high of an sv especially since it's 1/8 repeat, makes it really easy to break on these especially on hr
  01:01:368 (1,2,3,4) - i honestly think some sort of back-and-forth gimmick would be better here and make it more flowy especially when compared to handsome's part (00:56:305 (1,2,3) - like this) but blah blah personal opinion
  01:08:399 - why do u skip this note
  01:24:618 (1) - why are the hitsounds here like 0% i can barely hear anythign plz buff sound
  02:10:649 (1,2,1,2) - giving the same emphasis to 02:10:649 (1,2) - as you did to 02:10:836 (1,2) - is kinda weird considering the latter has more pitch
  02:35:868 (1,2,3,4) - wouldn't it make more sense just to have a spaced stream or something here? 1/8 sliders don't make any sense here to me
  02:42:805 (2,1) - i feel like you can just make a simple back-and-forth here rather than complicating it by doing this lol, kinda ruins the emphasis since it's all the same pitch
  03:00:993 (1,2,1,2) - a better rhythm to make this play better would be having 03:00:618 (1) - end on 03:00:899 (1) - and having 03:00:993 (1,2) - these two as a slider, having a 1/4 jump here is like e348451hgb

• 00:23:118 (1) - thumbs
  00:52:743 (1,2) - are the 1/8 sliderends really needed here? would be better off with just higher sv 1/4s imo
  00:59:305 (2,2) - these gaps feel pretty empty, maybe make sliders here instead?
  01:36:805 (2,3,4) - bro how am i supposed to know this is a 1/4 jump when the ds changes literally mid pattern, like it's hittable but god damn dude do u want people to kill thesmelf
  01:57:711 (1) - could probably extend this spinner to 01:59:680 - instead
  02:00:149 (1,1) - both these ncs aren't necessary
  02:14:680 (1) - same thing as 00:52:743 (1,2) - idk i don't really find it necessary to just randomly have sliderends on 1/8 ticks despite the entire song not having them at all (if you don't change this at the very least make 02:13:743 (3) - these consistent on ending at 1/8 as well)
  02:15:618 (1,2,1,1,2,1,1,2,1,1,2,1) - i like the fast-paced slider into a slowdown but literally end yourself for making this part aids to read properly (it's mainly because of the 1/8 sliders)
  02:23:305 (1) - offscreen sliderend
  02:49:368 (3) - make this 1/4 slider so it covers the blue tick note
  02:52:368 (3) - ^
  02:53:118 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - this spacing increase is pretty drastic tbh lol, i'd space out 02:53:118 (1,2,3,4) - this a bit more so it's not as random
  02:54:618 (1,1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,1,2,3) - djpop (also some of these aren't stacked properly, and ncs should probably be on 02:54:618 (1,3,3,3,11) - these notes instead)
  02:58:368 (9) - nc this
  03:21:430 (2,3,1) - why is this not straighta sdfkjagfnkb
  03:23:868 (6) - would make more sense to nc this, i mean the entire map is a spam of ncs anyway so

fieryrage wrote:

top diff

in all honesty, with the amount of gimmicks that are in this map this should probably be upwards of od 9.6 to avoid any form of notelock, this is essentially a 320 bpm map with how some of these jumps are spaced during the kiais hmmhmm od 9.6 sounds brutal as hell tho and I'm not very knowledgeable about how notelock works. I'm not opposed to changing the od but I really want to know if it will benefit anything or not so would you mind explaining the difference when it comes to notelock between different od?

probox part
00:36:618 (1,1) - probably want to silence sliderends like this, i know there's a note here but the main rhythm you're following doesn't really give emphasis to it added 20% volumes to slidertails
00:40:743 (1,2) - i was personally told trying to rank guilty that these were unrankable due to unreadability, i honestly don't really care but if it's unrankable u should probably change these (even tho its like half the map so yea xd) Perfectly readable, will keep : )
00:46:368 (1,1,1,1) - i feel like these are a bit too high of an sv especially since it's 1/8 repeat, makes it really easy to break on these especially on hr Lowered sv from 1.7 to 1.5
01:01:368 (1,2,3,4) - i honestly think some sort of back-and-forth gimmick would be better here and make it more flowy especially when compared to handsome's part (00:56:305 (1,2,3) - like this) but blah blah personal opinion I like the current pattern
01:08:399 - why do u skip this note The distance would be brutal as hell if it was for example a stacked double and skipping it makes sense for the following 1/8 sliders
01:24:618 (1) - why are the hitsounds here like 0% i can barely hear anythign plz buff sound made it 40% like the rest of the part (if you want more buff then say)
02:10:649 (1,2,1,2) - giving the same emphasis to 02:10:649 (1,2) - as you did to 02:10:836 (1,2) - is kinda weird considering the latter has more pitch I feel like this back and forth movement captures the rapid lyrics well
02:35:868 (1,2,3,4) - wouldn't it make more sense just to have a spaced stream or something here? 1/8 sliders don't make any sense here to me I feel like these pack more of a punch than having them be a spaced stream
02:42:805 (2,1) - i feel like you can just make a simple back-and-forth here rather than complicating it by doing this lol, kinda ruins the emphasis since it's all the same pitch Having these be simple back and forths would be underwhelming considering the difficulty of the map. The gimmicky nature of these makes it more appropriate for the difficulty
03:00:993 (1,2,1,2) - a better rhythm to make this play better would be having 03:00:618 (1) - end on 03:00:899 (1) - and having 03:00:993 (1,2) - these two as a slider, having a 1/4 jump here is like e348451hgb Sliders would be very underwhelming if overused, which they would be in this case.