[General]
It plays, really weirdly
shit. I don't even know where to begin with this, the rhythm choices are questionable, distance is rarely emphasised because of distance snap, there are overlaps o' plenty, flow is off here and there, slider ends are on strong sounds. I mean if I wanted to I could just stop writing the mod right here and let you find all the problems listed above on your own but since I'm such a niceguy I'll point them out anyways
<3I ususally don't put my mods in boxes like this but since I knew this was going to a looong one I did it, enjoy ~
"Easy" and "Unamashi's Normal"
... has different drain time from all other diffs. 3.06 minutes and 3.08 minutes respectively while "Hard" and "Insane" has 3.07 minutes.
...really? they all start with a slider on 00:09:882 and end with a spinner on 00:09:882. either way,
it probably wouldn't be a big deal, since after all its literally a 1 second difference. this map's easy and normal difficulties have 3:02 drain and the other difficulties are 3:01 drain and is ranked."Easy" is not an easy, it's a "Normal".
maybe, but its fine to have an easy difficulty that has the normal icon on it. this map has an easy diff in the normal rating threshold and is also ranked.The song on all diffs should start here 00:01:145
taiko and std are different, i'll consider.[Rhythm choice]
00:09:882 (1,2,3) - "Sliders should start on strong sounds and end on sounds with equal or relatively less strength". The slider end is a passive note and should therefore not end on a sound that's better emphasised with something that's clickable. This is part of the
Ranking Criteria Guidelines makes sense but i'll keep this one the same since after all it leads into a pretty hefty section of the introduction.00:15:708 (3) - ^^
yes sir!1!11!!1!00:18:911 (5) - ^^
i'll keep this one since it's the same across all difficulties and it's a transition into the next part of the song.00:23:717 (3) - ^^
yes sir@2@22@@2@00:33:475 (3) - ^^
yes sir#3#33##3#00:40:756 (1) - ^^
was going for the vocals here, so i'll keep it the same.00:43:523 (2) - ^^
i mean, that was all i could map in a 1/4 rhythm am i rite????00:45:416 (1) - ^^
i want a slider here, and if i had to shorten it, i'd have a sliderend on nothing.00:57:358 (1) - ^^
in this part of the song, i map loosely to the vocals. at 01:06:387 is when i start to add in the instruments in the song.01:10:319 (3) - ^^
here i was focusing on the clap sounds in the song. i fixed the issue in the insane diff if you're interested 00:12:649 (4,5) - 00:12:212 (3) - This slider doesn't end on a sound strong than its head, but rather it ends on a
held vocal, since you map the vocal on (4,5) it's clear that you prioritize vocals hence making (3) ending on a sound that would be better emphasised with a clickable object like a circle or 1/4 slider.
00:12:649 (4,5) - Overmapped, (4) is a held sound and should therefore not be a burst, clicking on (5) is like clicking on nothing, like clicking on a sound in the song that doesn't even exist or vanished into the aether.
nope, there's some sweet ol' subtle hi-hats in the song.00:13:669 (4,1) -
What's happening here?! For a start, the tiny sound on 00:14:251 - does not warrant making (1) a repeating slider.
do you mean the hi-hats? the hi-hats sound throughout the entire section of the song from 00:09:882 to 00:17:455, and since they constantly sound in a 1/4 rhythm a repeat slider would be ok. 00:14:543 (2) - This focus on vocals
it doesn't, it's focusing on the whistle sounds in the song. but both (4) and (1) don't because (4)
ends on a strong vocal that (1) isn't mapping, and (2) is the exact same sound as 00:13:960 - yet mapped entirely opposite of (4). And (4)'s slider head starts on 00:13:669 - which is such an insignificant sound it's barely audible.
there isn't a note (4)?00:14:834 - Undermapped, if you wanted to capture the ticking sound here there should be a circle on yellow instead of the timegap, othervise with the low pitch of the sound people don't even know that 00:14:979 (3,4) - is following it, and once again it feels like the clicking the burst is like clicking nothing.
moving the burst onto the previous yellow tick they would be too close to the slider before it and would have to be stacked or overlapped,
which don't look really neat.00:17:018 (4) - Exactly the same as 00:17:455 (1,2,3) - on all accounts other than histsounding, distance is the same, shape is the same, pattern is the same,
even though (4) is a vocal sound that has absolutely nothing to do with (1, 2, 3). Adding a new combo is not enough to differ a sound if it's mapped the way it is.
it flows nicely into the repeat sliders following it.00:27:212 (1) - Streams are quite uncomfortable in 103 BPM, but that's not a big problem because it's subjective, although what is a problem is that this stream follows no logic because even though it follows vocals it's inconsistant with the rest of the map that uses repeat sliders or regular sliders to emphasise the same thing and also it misses sounds worth emphasizing like 00:27:358 (2,3)
i used streams and sliders just for variety but i'll make it consistent00:30:708 - Missed a sound. And the repeat arrow on a repeat slider is a passive note just like the slider end and should therefor not be used to emphasise 00:31:144
missed a sound? sounds ok to me fixed the slider you're talking about00:32:018 - Same, slider head has no sound while the repeat arrow emphasise the important sound.
there are vocal syllables, that's why the slider starts there00:33:620 - Vocal sound is on blue tick here.
yeah, but there really isn't any way to map that sound right? the repeat slider is doing fine00:34:348 - ^^
sounds like its on white tick00:35:805 (3) - Held sound, also it's inconsistant with how you mapped it earlier here 00:17:018 (4)
does that mean i add a circle or extend the slider?00:47:455 (1,2,3) - Not only does (1) end on a strong vocal sound which you clearly should emphasise since you've been emphasising vocals only up until that but also the sound on (1) is very different from (2, 3) yet there is no distinction in the pattern used to show for that.
well (1) is perpendicular to (2,3) and sounds similar to (2,3) so that would work as distinction01:08:572 (4,5,1) - Don't know if I missed any but I think this is the first 1/8 beat-snap devisor burst used so far in the song, not only does it add inconsistency but it's also blatant over mapping, given that there ain't no sound worth emphasising on 01:08:644 (5) -, it's only a held sound on (4).
you're missing the hi-hats01:10:975 (6) - Wow okay, on this there actually is a sound, but if you couldn't tell this is so insignificant that it might as well be treated like a held sound once again from (5) instead of blatantly overmapping like this.
it isn't 'blatant overmapping'... there are hi-hat sounds here. plus how is 00:14:834 undermapped when this and 00:14:834 are almost the same rhythm?01:16:144 (3,1) - After reading everything I already mentioned above this is self explanatory, also I've mentioned this much and I'm only 36% through the entire song so I think this is a good a time as any to move on to the next topic!
[Aesthetics]
00:10:611 (2,2) - A few overlaps here and there for the sake of gameplay does not equal bad,
but consistently overlapping almost all the time does equal bad. With more thought put behind object placements, a mapper can avoid overlaps almost altogether
in most cases.
i mean the first (2) disappears well before the second (2) appears. not too sure if this one matters00:17:455 (1,3) - ^^
fixed00:22:552 (1,3) - ^^
^00:23:717 (3,4) - ^^
^00:24:009 (4,1) - ^^
^00:29:979 (3,4) - ^^
^00:29:979 (3,4) - ^^
the power of copy and paste is very powerful :300:36:970 (3,4,1) - ^^
well (1) is supposed to blanket with (5) so i'll keep this00:40:174 (2,3) - ^^
fixed00:45:416 (1,3,1) - ^^
they still overlap, but i stacked the two (1) to make it look neat00:48:911 (1,2,1) - ^^
the second (1) looks nice being in the middle of the entire combo00:50:368 (2,2,3) - ^^
i mean that's kinda the only thing i could do here without breaking DS00:54:154 (3,3) - ^^
second (3) is so far out of first (3)'s timeframe, doing this feels redundant01:06:387 (1,3) - ^^
fixed00:13:232 (3,4,1,2) - Overlap fiesta! Good thing I saw this because big clusters of objects overlapping each other are the
worst offenders in terms of aesthetics/visuals which is similar to what I already mentioned above.
overlap fiesta, must mean its good! lol jk, fixed00:26:484 (2,1,2,3,1,2,1) - ^^
here the objects appear a while after the object over it disappears, doesn't feel like a problem here00:43:523 (2,3,4,5,1) - ^^
they're like 2 seconds apart, well out of the (5,1) timeframe, its like having to remove an overlap that's 3 minutes apart, then i would have to remap (i won't make any terrible jokes like these anymore)00:45:999 (3,2,3,2,3) - ^^
fixed00:57:358 (1,2,3,1,2) - ^^
fixed01:15:125 (1,3,1,3,4) - ^^
partially fixed00:14:543 (2,3) - Stack slider end to slider head instead of overlapping.
fixed00:15:562 (2,1) - Stack this as well.
^00:16:290 (1,1) - ^^
difficult to stack regarding DS complications00:28:523 (1,3) - ^^
not really important since they both blanket something else and are far away from each other in the timeline00:39:300 (3,2) - ^^
not sure how to stack these since (2) is already blanketing (1) right before it.00:42:358 (2,3) - ^^
fixed (please be careful when copy-pasting timeframes, since you selected (2,3) and i thought you were talking about the (3) directly after (2) this is a bit misleading)00:50:950 (1,4) - ^^
fixed00:51:096 (2,1) - ^^
^01:14:543 (1,1) - ^^
ahh which second (1) are you talking about?00:15:125 (1,2) - Hard visual flow break, slider implies movement somewhere else even though with slider leniency abuse it doesn't break flow, regardless sliders should imply movement. This is also even more important for curved sliders.
huh, does that mean i make the repeat more visible or just improve the flow? the terminology/wording here is a bit confusing00:21:533 (1,2) - ^^
00:28:523 (1,1) - ^^
00:40:174 (2,1) - ^^
00:45:416 (1,2) - ^^
00:49:494 (3,1) - ^^
00:52:407 (1,2) - ^^
00:25:028 (2,3) - You did a good job on blanketing, I couldn't find alot of blankets that where off but this is one of them.
yeah (2) was really short so it's kinda difficult here but i fixed it best i could00:18:911 (5) - And this one as well ^^
^00:48:329 (1) - This should be moved to x267 y119 to be symmetrical with 00:47:455 (1)
^Once again I'll stop at 36% into the song because as much as I love writing wall-of-text mods such as this it's taking forever and it's extremely unnecessary lol
don't you like writing wall-of-text mods but hate responding to themLet's move on!
[Distance Snap]
Distance snap is a double edged sword in that it is both a massively helpful tool to give a map consistent spacing with time/distance equality, but the problem here lies that a song is never "monotone", meaning that different sounds stand out by having different volumes, pitches, and parts of the song always differs in intensity like the intro is usually not as rhythmically intense as the chorus, etc. I'm sure you've heard the word "Distance Emphasis" before, but if you havn't, let me tell you what it is.
"Distance Emphasis" is essentially the opposite of distance snap, meaning you put strain on a player by increasing distance between two objects depending on the intensity of the sound. Not only does this give off a satisfying psychological (aesthetic) response to the player but it also helps keep the map less stale and repetetive by adding a little bit of veriety, which is something this map lacks. Because around 90% of this map is distance snapped, I will only mention a few sounds that deserves more intense emphasis through distance, the rest is up to you to find.
00:21:533 (1) - Because SV on (1) is higher, distance between 00:21:533 (1,2) - should be increased to match said SV change.
yeah,
i use 2.6/2.7x so that (2) is a bit further regarding the SV00:26:193 (1,2) - ^^
^00:10:611 (2,3) - Increase distance to emphasise sound on 00:11:047
00:11:921 (2,3) - Incre.. ^^ sound on 00:12:212
00:12:722 (5,1) - ^^ 00:12:795
00:12:795 (1,2) - ^^ 00:13:086
00:13:378 - sound on..
changed some that you listed ^^You get the idea.
Also while we're on the topic of distance, the low distance snap couppled with the wierd movements/angles makes the map extremely iffy to play, because at parts like 00:12:212 (3,4,5,1,2,3) - and 00:09:882 (1,2,3) - where you take all these factors into account movement is very odd.
More on that here!
[Gameplay and Object placements]
00:09:882 (1,2,3) - What is going on here? Too many uncomfortable movements..
(See picture "1" in the bottom of this post)* ah,
i assume the flow is too sharp, i tried to make it a bit more comfortable00:15:125 (1,2,3) - ^^
shoot not too sure how to fix this one, i'll leave it for now00:15:708 (3,1,2) - ^^
i think i fixed it00:12:649 (4,5,1) - 00:14:979 (3,4,1) - Bursts at 1/8 beatsnap divisor doesn't fit at all with the rest of the song. And most of the time they don't even serve a purpose because, like I already mentioned in the rhythm section of this mod, the sound they emphasise is so insignificant.
you keep mentioning this; since i have a reason for keeping it i'll start considering remodeling the 1/8 bursts in the map00:18:766 (4,5) - Takes me back to what I already mentioned but distance here is so tiny, even tinier than what was previously used 00:17:892 (2,3) - which not only contradicts the distance snap you've been using up until that point but is the exact opposite of what should be used to clearly emphasise the sounds.
yeah, probably was the SV, increased the DS to make it equal00:20:659 (2,1,2) - Avoid wide angles, not only does the angle it's currently at implying different movement but even if this was angled correctly it'd still break the flow.
(See picture "2" in the bottom of this post)* made the flow more comfortable00:16:290 (1,2) - 00:25:028 (2,3) - While anti-jumps like these (which are frequently used) is not a bad thing, overuse of them is a bad thing because they put unnecessary strain on the player.
i changed them earlier ^00:27:212 (1) - I already mentioned what I think of 103BPM streams but aside from that, it leads poorly into 00:27:941 (1,2)
sure, but how what do you think would make the flow better?00:28:523 (1,1) - This has the same distance as almost everything else yet it has a much bigger timegap, making this essentially a guaranteed 100/50 points or even combo breaker.
fixed00:29:979 (3,4) - Awkward flow
is a sliderwave ok?00:30:853 (4,1,2) - ^^
^00:35:513 (1,2,3) - Very unfomfortable to play mainly because of the flow break here 00:34:640 (2,1)
i changed it earlier, hopefully its ok then00:38:135 (1,1) - When breaking flow try and use stationary movement, slow movement or linear movement, instead of breaking expectation like this. Although I wil ladmit because of the time gap I had no real issue playing this.
noted!00:40:174 (2) - Flow break but done well because it follows linear movement, although what isn't done well is that this does not lead into 00:40:174 (2,1) - good
'well' not good :3 at all and (1) the repeat slider actually breaks movement even more.
improved the flow here