Karen wrote:

Insane
00:04:654 (5,1) - unnecessary overlap imo, it looks ugly mm.. okay, I did Ctrl+J and moved
00:20:426 (5,6) - 00:14:940 (5,6) - use the same spacing? I changed that in a pereira's suggestions many time ago, but its true that its inconsistent. Changed.
01:15:454 (1) - any reason for why you use these red points? it doesn't follow anything lol, I made this just to avoid the simple straight slider... is it not following the voice? xD
01:48:883 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - something like this would look nicer http://puu.sh/vIkEP/0f589b7901.jpg okay, applied

Hard
00:58:140 (2) - again same
01:57:968 (1,2,3) - feels weird to follow vocals here, you skipped so many strong drums, also it's inconsistent with 02:08:940 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - this Okay, you are right, this feels strange. I made something different here.

Normal
01:04:140 - add a circle here? 01:03:797 - this break is so empty true, added.

not much to complain, gl

DTM9 Nowa wrote:

Recheck

Easy
00:24:711 (1) - 00:30:197 (1,2) - 00:35:683 (1,2) - 00:41:168 (1) - I mean, having consistent rhythm on all of these patterns would improve the general following of the song as they all are mapped on nearly identical beat patterns and vocals
mm... I understood your point, but this does not feels right for me, what is the sense of make a copypasted map?. I mean that simplifying the rhythms in the same way around the map is boring.
There are many ways to how simplify a song, the most important point is to make this in an intuitive way for new players.

00:51:283 (3,1,2) - This could be aesthetically improved if the circularity of these two would be connected or broken completely instead of both going on a tiny bit with each other. Mostly just personal preference and there shouldn't really be any problems with it begin what it is now
lol, well, 00:53:511 (2) - is related to 00:50:768 (2,3) - , making this circular around 00:51:454 (3) - will feels dense, imo.

01:45:626 (2,3) - This is slightly inconsistent with the other section since the movement kinda cuts and goes backwards instead of flowing ( 01:34:654 (2,3) - ) or having other kind of patterning where the movement is still continuous ( 01:40:140 (2,3) - ). I'd not really say it's bad for it directly but it's something that is really different when compared to the usual patterning. I would suggest to move the 3 down a bit, roughly bit under the vertical level of the tailpoint of the 2 which would keep the pattern style but it would make the movement bit more continuous https://puu.sh/vIlk2/70e5597ebe.png
I applied your suggestion. However, man, there are many words for say something simple xD, and about the inconsistency, sincerely i don't found any inconsistency, The pattern feels like previous patterns like 01:38:768 (1,2,3) - or 01:31:911 (2,3) - .

01:55:911 (2,3) - Nazi, the blanketing between the reversepoint of 3 and body of 2 is not perfect fixed.

Normal
You have simplified stuff quite a lot in the beginning which kinda makes hard to figure out what exactly you are following, which is one way to map normals. Though this 00:08:768 (2,3) - pattern is kinda different from everything as it is quite intense. So to simplify stuff you could extend the 2 by 1/2 beat and palce a hitcircle here 00:09:626 - which would be consistent with the way you have usually patterned the objects ( see 00:13:740 (1,2,3) - ) or alternatively make all of them more intense. Considering the intensity of the beginning overall, i'd suggest to make that one pattern bit less intense
I think its because how you conceive the way to make normal diffs. I usually switching between intense sections and calm sections when I feel this intuitive in the song.
The voice in the back in 00:08:254 (1,2,3) - contains some intensity (the expectation of "its begin"). But its not very intense here, a repeat is not very intense anyway. Also, add a repeat in 00:13:740 (1,2,3) - feels not good, because it is not the right moment for this since there is any change in the song yet.

00:42:197 (3,4) - Sort of similar thingy as above. As the intensity for the similar beat patterns is 00:30:197 (1,2,3) - (or atleast what you have presented it as) it's not really justified to increase the intensity in this kind of a situation where the beat doesn't really increase either
But its full of intensity here!, the "voices" rising in the background are full of intensity.

01:16:826 (1,2) - This is inconsistent for some reason with the following three patterns
Good catch!

01:25:054 (1) - Nazi, the curve formed by the two last followpoints and the red anchor is little bit tighter than the curve below it. Adjusting the middle point by moving it bit to the right should solve the issue
Fixed

02:30:883 (1) - If you want to follow the vocals imo this https://puu.sh/vIte2/68ae1a292f.png kind of a rhythm would fit it better
I'm not agree. I feels that 02:30:883 (1) - following the voice is more intuitive.

Hard
00:09:626 (1,2,3) - This pattern doesn't really follow the way that you have mapped otherwise on the sections as the spacing between 1 and 2 is extremely high even when considering the slider leniency and the fact that the 2 is mapped on a really light piano beat which emphasizes it even though it's totally unnecessary
You are not considering the hold effect in (1), or the fact that it is a symmetrical pattern.

00:20:597 (1) - You usually haven't NCd these beats so i don't really see a reason to do it here either
I will check all NCs

00:25:397 - You have represented these white ticks with a clap on every other occasion with the exception of 00:43:226 - (which imo should have a clap) so could there be a way to represent it here 00:25:397 - aswell?
Well... the actual patter here is following the voice, and because in the previous section the "main sense" was the voice, I felt more appropriate to keep this here.

01:08:083 (3) - 01:10:826 (3) - 01:13:397 (3) - 01:16:140 (4) - All of these bring unnecessary emphasis to something that is next to non-existent. The part would feel much more natural if more of the sounds were mapped that are like the ones after the long sliders or the objects after the longer sliders were removed
I'm sorry but I am not agree. The circles are doing this very interesting, they are there because the voice, but adding other notes before the strong notes (01:08:597 - 01:11:340 - 01:14:083 - ), will cut the intensity (and I don't wanna add jumps there)

01:20:940 (1,2,3) - You could make these like you the patterns prior to this one as the the part it's mapped on is fairly similar to them. If not you should atleast move the 3 away from the body of 1 as they don't have to be that close
I only moved (3).

01:58:140 (2,3) - You could try to follow the vocals more accurately to solve Karen's issue like this https://puu.sh/vIAI7/cf52b0f770.png for example. Though i don't think it can be compared to 02:08:940 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - as the other one misses out the synthesizer
I changed this in the previous mod ;3

02:10:140 (6,1) - 02:16:997 (4,1) - (ect.) This kind of spacing may be mistakenly read as 1/1 spacing as you don't really use spacing to emphasis anything too much on the difficulty with hitcircle->other object patterning like this (only slider->other object 01:44:254 (1,2) - like here). Also it doesn't really help you that you use nearly identical spacing for 1/1 gaps in the same section, 02:25:054 (4,1) - to name one. Yes there is a small difference but it's kinda hard to read no matter what and when you have mapped one thing one way in one place, it shouldn't magically change since you are theoretically mapping the same thing
Its true that those jumps look like notes at 1/1. But I feel some of they very appropriates, so, I changed the DS to 1.5 for some of they.

Insane
00:14:940 (5,6) - 00:20:426 (5,6) - Could use some consistency?
fixed in the last mod.

00:26:597 (3,4) - 00:29:168 (2,3) - You could try to keep an eye out for emphasis stuff generally. As i said in the suggestions/notes for hard "when you have mapped one thing one way in one place, it shouldn't magically change since you are theoretically mapping the same thing"
o.o?, well, theory and praxis will not be the same for all cases... it is not a exact science anyway.

00:38:940 (2,3) - Imo CTRL Ging the rhythm here would follow the melody little bit better
Sorry, I dont feel the same.

01:34:654 (1,2,3,4) - I personally disliked how this part felt when playing ;/

01:41:168 (5) - Imo the tailpoint could be mapped as a hitcircle since the beat it's mapped on is audible and it sounds very similar to 01:42:711 - for example
I don't feel this very different, but okay.

01:50:083 - Why this cymbal doesn't have any emphasis but for some reason 01:50:254 (2) - gets all the spacing emphasis even though the beat it's mapped on is not even important by any means
Yes, patterns like this are common in some galvenize maps, by example.

Monstrata wrote:

Insane

00:04:654 (5,6) - Try setting it up like this instead: Overlap looks pretty bad, this would fit ur structure pretty well that was to keep the same DS, but okay

~

00:09:111 (3,4,5) - use a 1/2 repeat instead? Lots of clicking for something that isn't that dense xP Sorry, Im not agree, those are for the voice (stacked here, and spaced in next similar sections)
00:21:111 (7) - Consider just removing this, since the clicking here is quite different from 00:20:083 (3,4,5) - . true
00:26:083 (1,2) - Try blanketting instead, It looks better imo. Right now the sliderend of 1 + 2 + 3 looks kinda weird to me lol uhg, sorry but I like the linear geometry in this patter :/ https://puu.sh/wgaY1/a5020df60b.png
00:34:311 (1,2) - Not a good place for a jump imoo, since 2 is quite weak Im sorry, I found this very interesting.
00:34:826 (1,2) - COntrast with this where 2 is really strong, but you use a stack instead. emphasis isn't well conveyed. I not agree, in the other similar sections (I mean 00:23:854 (2,3) - 00:29:168 (2,3) - 00:34:826 (1,2) - 00:37:568 (2,3) - ) I used a low spacing or an stack. Only in 00:40:311 (2,3) - there is a jump, but its because the music start to be intense here.
00:45:283 (1) - Pretty nazi, but this isn't symmetrical about the X axis. Rotate it 2 degrees xD lol, good catch.
00:46:654 (1,2,3,4,1) - Visual spacing looks kinda bad between 3>4 i recomend something like this: Done.

Something like this

01:19:568 (1,2) - Maybe try something like this: Not bad idea

~

01:31:054 (2) - Ctrl+G flows better. ok
01:47:340 (2,4) - Try Ctrl+G'ing 2 and 4. Creates a nicer flow imo. omg, I cant believe that I did not see that xD, nice

~

01:55:911 (3,4,5,6,1) - SHape looks rather weird imo cuz the angle change isn't consistent. Okay, I changed a bit the next pattern too.

try something like this

01:58:997 (4,2) - Poor visual imo. you don't have to overlap. try doing a triangle instead? mehh, I moved all a bit.

~

02:14:083 (7) - You could try ctrl+g'ing for spacing emphasis. Not for consistency

[]

Quick mod from my queue, I think patterns could still be polished up a bit, but its not a bad set. Good luck~

Sidetail wrote:

[easy]
00:30:197 (1,2) - replace with 00:35:683 (1,2) - rhythm. that rhythm doesn't really fit there in my perspective okay, you are not the first in point this, so I made something different.
00:54:883 (1,2) - you seem to be going back and forth with vocal and instrumental which gets quite confusing. because of that, that part now feels empty compared to other parts. as an example of swtichinng back and forth, compare 00:59:683 (3,1) - and 00:35:683 (1,2,3) - & 00:41:168 (1) - There is not the same case. Here the song have a silent (no guitar, no drums, no voice), so, I dont should map anything here xD
01:42:883 (2,3,4) - rhythm wise this should've been switched. slider -> circle -> circle just like 01:37:397 (2,3,4) - if you're going to use circle there Not agree, 01:38:083 (3,4) - have more intensity that in 01:43:568 (4) - , in fact, the intensity is lowing, so this patter feels more adequate for this section, imo
02:32:940 (1) - you missed out on last beat by using spinner, use slider from where spinner starts and end it at 02:33:283 - and use spinner at 02:33:454 - . This is intentional, because the sound that is following the spinner.

[normal]
00:48:883 (4) - i have no idea what this is following. vocal starts at 00:48:711 - . if you are following that guitar strum, it feels really out of place since you suddenly switched to that. adding to guitar strum reasoning, what happen to missing note at 00:47:168 - then?
lol?,it is not suddenly, 00:46:654 (1,2,3,4) - is following the guitar!, this is very intuitive (checked in testplays with noob players). Also, I cant add a note 00:47:168 - because I avoided any patter of close slider-circle-slider before kiai. I must be consistent with the sections!
01:32:940 (6,7,1) - please dont do this, you never did this sort of thing for more than a minute and half in to the song and now you introduce these things suddenly. Plus, beat at 01:33:111 - is less than beat at 01:32:940 - , so this really should've been a 1/4 slider rather than clickable. for sure that I can make this xD, its the kiai section in a normal diff. The pattern is adequate for a normal, but before kiai the music was not very intense!!, no one wish this pattern in not intense sections
01:35:683 (6,7,1) - ^ (etc, find similar things and fix the rest)
01:49:054 (6,7) - what is this mapped to? remove and have a listen, if you hear stream of kick drum, this would've been better implemented with slider body Im sorry, I dont understand your point here. Here the pattern is similar to 01:43:225 (4,5,6) - , and sincerely, i dont found how a slider instead will make this more intuitive... in fact, I found this bad because 01:49:397 - need to be clickable.

[hard]
this diff feels like normal diff with smaller cs and probably bit of jumps in kiai section :l I think you can use some spacing emphasis to show more characteristics of the song. As an example of spacing 02:01:054 (2,3,1,2,3,4,5,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,5,1,2,3,4,5,6,1,2,3,4) - these chains of objects dont really express well song at all, songs have ups and downs in each beat. in my perspective it lacks what it needs truly to be hard diff
01:38:768 (1,2,3) - really should've been https://puu.sh/wq4Nh/6dbbdf3627.jpg since current is just really really out of place
> these chains of objects dont really express well song at all
> it lacks what it needs truly to be hard diff
Our vision of what a "truly hard" must be are very different. Hards are not about long spacing, but about complex rhythms!!. Players that play hards usually use mouse to play, so, considering the public target and the gap spread of the set, I found those comments really out of place.


gl with ranking.

pishifat wrote:

only thing holding me back from bubbling is the difference between spacing and sv in the kiai
would be ok if like 1.3x sv and 1.3x spacing were used, since moving on a slider and moving between objects wouldn't be such an extreme difference

1. SV in kiai to 1.1x: Since a SV in 1.3 is a long change for a normal diff, but pishi's argument have sense ("moving on a slider and moving between objects wouldn't be such an extreme difference"). Relative DS is at 1.5x now.
2. Add more spacing in "stacked circles" in kiai: Following recommendations of Natsu and Voli, about possible confusion with a 1/4 triple, and aesthetic flow.
   
   Illustration

   

1. 00:34:483 (2,1) - THis anti-jump is awkward to play since you have quite a large jump just before.
2. 01:36:711 (3,4,5) - I would avoid stacking (5) on (3) as a back-and-forth movement doesn't seem optimum to me, and to be honest, having the circle stacked on the head of the slider hinders its readability a bit.
3. 01:37:397 (1,2,3,4,5) - The same can also be said for this then. But more importantly, having obects placed at the same spot for a 3-beat duration is not that entertaining.
4. 01:43:226 (2) - I would reverse this slider (ctrl+G). It provides a better flow this way in my opinion.
5. 02:02:083 (1,2) - Are they not alingned on purpose?
6. 02:20:597 (3,4,5) - What's with the sudden use of two 1/4 sliders when you've only been using triples before and after this pattern?

1. I believe that if you are to put a circle at 01:08:083 - (same thing goes for 01:10:826 (3) - ), you should also have something at 01:08:426 - . The sole purpose of this circle is to follow the vocals,yet if you ignore the vocals right afterward, it feels off and awkward to play. Moreover, you randomly start following a completely different rhythm with 01:11:683 (2,3) - (still ignoring the vocals on 01:13:911 - though).
2. 01:14:768 (3) - Why does this have a reverse but not 01:11:683 (2) - ?
3. 01:27:797 (1,2) - This jump seems rather sudden here. I know it is here for the sake of symmetry, but it really feels awkward, especially considering that you are not really using jumps for similar rhythms.
4. 01:38:768 (1,2) - Why a jump only here and not at similar rhythms like 01:38:768 (1,2) - for example?

Kurai wrote:

As per your request

[Insane]

1. 00:34:483 (2,1) - THis anti-jump is awkward to play since you have quite a large jump just before. I know some people will found this antijump weird, but this is not difficult to read (except if the player is asleep xD) and personally, I feel this very interesting for this section
2. 01:36:711 (3,4,5) - I would avoid stacking (5) on (3) as a back-and-forth movement doesn't seem optimum to me, and to be honest, having the circle stacked on the head of the slider hinders its readability a bit. humm... idk, The reason why I made this pattern is because music repeat the same sounds 3 times before increase the tone and continue, then the back-and-forth have many sense for me, this will be a bit difficult with HD, but I feel this enough readable (even if I know that many players are bad readings those stuff nowadays, and I am good playing those patters in old maps xD)
3. 01:37:397 (1,2,3,4,5) - The same can also be said for this then. But more importantly, having obects placed at the same spot for a 3-beat duration is not that entertaining. sorry I dont agree, I feel this type of patters very interesting u.u
4. 01:43:226 (2) - I would reverse this slider (ctrl+G). It provides a better flow this way in my opinion. okay, and change concavity too to make more smooth.
5. 02:02:083 (1,2) - Are they not alingned on purpose? opps... fixed (maybe I did it in the laptop screen, its a bit small to see this stuffs xD)
6. 02:20:597 (3,4,5) - What's with the sudden use of two 1/4 sliders when you've only been using triples before and after this pattern? My itention was to just make something different, but mehh, changed xD

[Hard]

1. I believe that if you are to put a circle at 01:08:083 - (same thing goes for 01:10:826 (3) - ), you should also have something at 01:08:426 - . The sole purpose of this circle is to follow the vocals,yet if you ignore the vocals right afterward, it feels off and awkward to play. Moreover, you randomly start following a completely different rhythm with 01:11:683 (2,3) - (still ignoring the vocals on 01:13:911 - though).
   There are two considerations here: 1) I used 3/4 spaces in similar sections before (00:43:911 (1,2,1,2,3) - ), so I think its more appropriate to keep the same idea here. 2) The core of this section are the drums in the same way as in Normal. I only was following the voice to avoid too many empty xD.
2. 01:14:768 (3) - Why does this have a reverse but not 01:11:683 (2) - ? well... in 01:14:083 - the music start to increase, so this repeat is to make this different.
3. 01:27:797 (1,2) - This jump seems rather sudden here. I know it is here for the sake of symmetry, but it really feels awkward, especially considering that you are not really using jumps for similar rhythms. This jump is for the same reason that I made long jumps in Insane (please, see the response to pishifat xD)
4. 01:38:768 (1,2) - Why a jump only here and not at similar rhythms like 01:38:768 (1,2) - for example? In the same way I made in insane, I did here a jump at mid kiai.

Mir wrote:

hello
[Easy]
- 01:52:140 (4,1) - Would be nice to get stuff like this a clickable downbeat. Good catch! fixed

Otherwise seems okay.
[Normal]
- 00:23:340 (3,4) - Having all the drums clickable here then skipping them on 00:24:711 (1,2) - feels very weird. A rhythm like 00:32:940 (1,2,3) - works well imo.
- 01:22:311 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - Having some angular consistency here through mirroring/symmetry would look nicer than these kinda arbitrary-looking angles.
But what about this?

Essentially it seems fine but the aesthetics look kinda unstructured in terms of rotational/angular consistency etc.
I... I dont know what say about ... ._., All angles and patters have sense for me. I feels that I care aesthetics a lot, I am a heavy user of rotation tool too... idk, maybe I'm mad and it is why I feel this fine? ._.


[Hard]
- 01:30:540 (1,2,3,1,2,3,4,5) - Rhythm with 01:33:283 (1,2,3,1,2,3,4,5) - is inconsistent and too different just like 01:27:797 (1,2,1,2,3) - is and etc. Main issue with the diff is rhythm inconsistency in the
- 01:38:768 (1,2) - Jump looks kinda random? o.o The stronger beat is 1 not 2. emm... but the jump feels better in 2 (imo), because the note in 01:38:940 - is more high that in 01:38:768 -
- 02:00:026 (3) - Why not ctrl+g this so the pattern is more like a funnel? I tried, but not, this feels strange. 01:59:340 (1,2) - are cool in the same direction because 01:59:683 - is very low, but 02:00:026 (3,4) - deserve to be in opposite direction because 02:00:368 - is ate the same volume that 02:00:026 -
- 02:11:083 - There's also a pretty strong snare here that seems to be skipped and not at 02:32:940 (3,4,5) - ? good point.
- 02:11:683 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - Rhythm is again inconsistent with 02:14:426 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - and since this is dnb and the song is fairly consistent in rhythm they should be the same imo.

[Insane]
- 00:25:226 (2,3) - Ctrl+g this rhythm would make more sense imo to have the snare clickable. // 00:41:683 (2,3) - oh, but then it will lost the emphasis the the voice in 00:25:568 (3,4,5) - and 00:42:026 (3,4,5) - sorry u.u
- 00:28:826 (1,2,3,1,2,3) - Odd density decrease here when the rest of the parts have constant 1/2.
- 00:41:683 (2,3) - 00:46:483 (4,1) - Inconsistent emphasis?

Mh, tilted by your 45 degree sliders but also your flow feels very random at times since you use symmetry sometimes then 02:29:683 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7) - 01:46:997 (1,2,3,4) - etc and I don't really see a structure to this.
[ ]
Good luck!

Naotoshi wrote:

[insane]
00:09:454 (5) - wat does this follow
delete plz
It is following the voice, in the same way that 00:14:940 (5) -

00:10:311 (7) - just make it a 1/1.. mapping objects to the wavering 1/2 is unnecessary..
I not agree, there is a "wuwuw" sound that feels better with this repeat.

00:14:940 (5) - delete imo, this is weirdly dense for how calm the intro is
just cuz there is a sound doesnt meaen you need a click on it
But this feels cool, Im sorry.

00:27:968 (3,4) - ctrl g makes more sensefor the vocal rhythm
But why?, I mean, doing 00:28:140 - clickable here is more intuitive, and even if I followed the voice in 00:24:711 (1,2) - , they are not the same case.

also 00:26:083 (1,2,3,4,5,1,2,3,4,5) - this entire thing is too dense. basically same rhythm density as the kiai time, and the vocals are not doing anything special, so no need for this much stuff. just map the vocals and not the constant 1/2 drums i think
You have a point here.

00:33:454 (2,3) - ctrl g Not agree

00:49:740 (2,3,4,5,6,7,1,2) - sudden spike in density but the part is calm ;w; because voice deserve this.

00:52:140 (1,2,3) - ctrl g makes more sense with the vocals Agree

00:55:568 - circle into offbeat slider at 00:55:740 - makes more sense, again with the vocals. if you're following the guitar, delete the first slider cuz there isnt a guitar there.

01:03:111 (1,2) - ctrl g ok

01:25:054 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,5) - idk its a buildup but the spacing gets smaller lol well, its how I feel this xD

01:30:540 (1) - should be 1/1. also would be nice to see a structure based on repeating these rhythm / pattern at 01:27:797 (1,2,3) -

01:29:854 (3,4) - sslider fits better here Not agree.

think your kiai needs better internal consistency. sometimes you represent the same sound as 1/1, or 1/2 + circle, or circle + 1/2. iverall it just ends up becoming an uncertain mess where it's hard to tell what your rhythm is following cuz of constant 1/2 spam.

you can implement this type of structure pretty easily. first example: at the start of each measure, a 1/1 slider helps the player recognize that the new measure is starting, since the song has the same held out sound each time.
I understand your point, but... it is not funny :/, i mean, a map that you can play sleeping is not funny for me. xD
But if most of start of each measures have a slider, only at kiai start not and in 01:38:768 (1,2) - , and there are because the music deserve this.


keeping sliders on the same sound:
if you ctrl g 01:33:797 (3,4) - you'd see that 01:33:283 - and 01:33:968 - land on the same synth sound. stuff like that can help organize the rhythm a bit more.

you already d this to some extent, so just make it more consistent.
Here is where I don't understand you guys, I feel all what I did intuitive at play, it is consistent and where not, it is because the music have something interesting to follow. When anyone say it is not consistent, I only think that they want a boring and generic map :/


aside from this sstuff, the constant 1/2 gaps is a bit of a turn off. why not throw in some triples? I dont feel any place to do triples in kiai

01:50:254 - this section Yeah!, the hold slider is very nice Also, did you see galvenize maps?, he use this in some :3

why is it just constant 1/2 -_- i cant tell what youre following, like just putting circles or sliders everywhere cuz the drum is ding contant 1/2 is so boring... idk. just feels like going in circles but not really following the song to me. i recommend undermapping and following one layer closer, instead of constant drums and going to lower density once or twice to highlight new sounds...
It is what will happen if I do the kiak "more consistent". I know it is the same 1/2 in all this section but music is the same most of time, and I actually did something with density close to the end. This section is not very long anyway.

if you want me to explain more what i mean, pm me in game

Side wrote:

01:27:797 - Change preview point to this thanks. That buildup preview point is bleh