1. Ambiguous Love (3.69 stars, 191 notes)
2. Cup (1.32 stars, 67 notes)
3. Platter (2.78 stars, 125 notes)
4. Salad (1.94 stars, 92 notes)

Pending on September 15, 2017
Bubbled on October 7, 2017 by Monstrata
Qualified on October 26, 2017 by Electoz

Cup : By Ascendance
Salad : By Ascendance
Platter : By Ascendance
Ambiguous Love : By Ascendance

19:53 Ascendance: im boutta speedrank something
19:53 Ascendance: u just need to throw some random points on my map and i kd u

1. 00:02:357 (1) - I find it kinda strange that you used a spinner here only for the cup diff. Well, if you plan on keeping it, consider shortening it to 00:03:485 for better recovery time
2. 00:14:989 (1) - This could be distanced more to the left for emphasis of finish
3. 00:45:665 (1) - Maybe slant this a bit? kinda dull with it just straight, especially since its kiai
4. 00:54:688 (1,2,3,4,1) - you could do what you did at 00:36:643 (1,2,1) because from where it stands it looks kinda messy for a cup, alot of staggering
   movement might confuse players

1. 00:01:229 (3,1) - Because of how short the sv is for a fairly lengthy slider, its kinda hard to hit 00:02:357 (1) from the slidertail. ctrl+g the repeat slider and move to x322
2. 00:17:470 (2) - Consider moving this slider more to towards the left to decrease distance. If you were going for a dash here, coming from 00:16:116 (3,1) might be excessive.
3. 00:28:071 (1,2,3,4,1) - Straighten the slider maybe? From where the pattern stands, its a bit straining for a salad.
4. 00:36:643 (1,2) - I get that you use a 1/1 reverse to make room for dashing, but it doesn't make sense why the note density of the cup's section of the song is alot heavier than this one. If you want to keep the movement you have now maybe you can shape it like this
   
   00:36:643 (1,2)

   
5. 00:51:079 (1,2,1) - Move 00:51:981 (2) over to x341 for better equal spacing between the dashes

1. 00:02:808 (2,3) - Space these two sliders a bit more since its really hard to tell that you need to dash from the slidertail. You can probably make 00:03:485 (3,4) - as three separate notes of the pattern you're going for as well. Sure its nice for visual
2. 00:24:688 (2) - Since you're going for a dash here, consider making it completely horizontal to avoid players not missing any fruitdrops
3. 00:40:816 (2) - I don't really hear an audible note on this sliderhead. Might be best to make the slidertail its own note instead.
4. 00:54:688 (1,2,3,1,2,3,1) - man this pattern is fun

Californian wrote:

mod request from literally no one

[Cup]

1. 00:02:357 (1) - I find it kinda strange that you used a spinner here only for the cup diff. Well, if you plan on keeping it, consider shortening it to 00:03:485 for better recovery time Mostly density purposes, keeping the spinner length tho since recovery time is okay here
2. 00:14:989 (1) - This could be distanced more to the left for emphasis of finish sure but only slightly since I want to keep 00:13:184 (1,1,2) - from being too hard
3. 00:45:665 (1) - Maybe slant this a bit? kinda dull with it just straight, especially since its kiai curved it
4. 00:54:688 (1,2,3,4,1) - you could do what you did at 00:36:643 (1,2,1) because from where it stands it looks kinda messy for a cup, alot of staggering
   movement might confuse players should be ok

I don't really agree with the nc usage for the 1/1 sliders because although they represent a somewhat long sections of the song its a bit redundant. Nice job overall

[Salad]

1. 00:01:229 (3,1) - Because of how short the sv is for a fairly lengthy slider, its kinda hard to hit 00:02:357 (1) from the slidertail. ctrl+g the repeat slider and move to x322 It's meant to be a dash :0
2. 00:17:470 (2) - Consider moving this slider more to towards the left to decrease distance. If you were going for a dash here, coming from 00:16:116 (3,1) might be excessive. reduced
3. 00:28:071 (1,2,3,4,1) - Straighten the slider maybe? From where the pattern stands, its a bit straining for a salad. tried something
4. 00:36:643 (1,2) - I get that you use a 1/1 reverse to make room for dashing, but it doesn't make sense why the note density of the cup's section of the song is alot heavier than this one. If you want to keep the movement you have now maybe you can shape it like this fixed
   
   00:36:643 (1,2)

   
5. 00:51:079 (1,2,1) - Move 00:51:981 (2) over to x341 for better equal spacing between the dashes sure

Pretty solid salad

[Platter]

1. 00:02:808 (2,3) - Space these two sliders a bit more since its really hard to tell that you need to dash from the slidertail. You can probably make 00:03:485 (3,4) - as three separate notes of the pattern you're going for as well. Sure its nice for visual yup
2. 00:24:688 (2) - Since you're going for a dash here, consider making it completely horizontal to avoid players not missing any fruitdrops i thinks its ok desu
3. 00:40:816 (2) - I don't really hear an audible note on this sliderhead. Might be best to make the slidertail its own note instead. yeet
4. 00:54:688 (1,2,3,1,2,3,1) - man this pattern is fun <3

Nothing much to say about this diff but for some reason 00:47:921 (2,3) feels kinda blank, its a bit tough to describe it though. There's some distancing that's sorta confusing whether to dash or not but otherwise its fairly nice.

I don't feel like modding the rain since its like 2am as im writing this, if you really want me to try modding it tomorrow ill do it then.
good show. can tuesday come any faster

1. Lots of missed opportunities for finishes for cymbals, would suggest to add them at 00:07:771 - , 00:09:575 - , 00:24:011 - , 00:25:816 - , 00:49:274 - and 00:55:590 - .
2. I suggest you to lower the tick rate to 1 if you are going to silence like all of them (well maybe not silenced but sure does sound silenced with default skin), it really does nothing but increase combo unnecessarily. It's a musical property, not an aesthetical tool by any means.

1. Coulda used more emphasis on downbeats that really called for it but you missed out quite a number of them. Will list them down in the box below for reasons provided :
   
   here

   These are for strong downbeats and part transition that are worth getting emphasized for extra credit.
   

   1. 00:07:771 (1) -
   2. 00:09:575 (3) -
   3. 00:18:598 (1) -
   4. 00:24:011 (1) -
   5. 00:25:816 (1) -
   6. 00:36:643 (1,2,1) -
   7. 00:49:274 (1) -
   8. 00:52:883 (1) -
   9. 00:54:688 (1,2) -

   Somewhere around 1.45x on distance would work well.
   
   These are for extra emphasis on vocals occasionally to break the long chain of 1.0xs.
   

   1. 00:05:966 (3) -
   2. 00:13:184 (1) -
   3. 00:14:989 (1) -
   4. 00:16:793 (1) - and all those downbeats which doesn't include any cymbals or special instrument in it
   5. 00:42:507 (2) -

   For extra vocal emphasis here and there so there are variety in distances instead of just plain old 1.0x and 1.1x. These doesn't need to go as high - somewhere around 1.3x would do.
2. 00:31:229 (3) - Would make this a slider like 00:20:402 (1) - so that the vocal build-up is properly emphasized at the end here.
3. 00:55:590 (2,3,4) - Idk going straight for these strong vocals doesn't pack as much punch as if you were to use a slider like 00:54:688 (1) - . Would do that tbh so the vocal's strength are much more accentuated.

1. Can't you be a little more consistent on NC xD Places like 00:09:575 (3) - , 00:13:184 (4) - and 00:34:838 (3) - can use some adding.
2. 00:01:229 (2,1) - Personally would remove the dash here so there's a contrast between these and 00:03:485 (2,3) - these in strength, it makes for a good effect.
3. 00:07:319 (4,1) - You really could have used a dash here considering platter+ uses a hyper for this, and its supported by strong instruments. Would add 1.
4. 00:25:816 (1) - 00:29:425 (1) - 00:33:034 (1) - From this difficulty onwards you don't have claps on these, although in Cup you do. Do just 1 for the whole set for consistency.
5. 00:38:447 (1,2) - These compared to 00:39:575 (3,4) - are weaker by quite a lot, so putting them as a dash is kinda overstating their strength. Would remove it.
6. 00:51:079 (1,2) - These aren't dashes right? Yet due to the anti-flow they look hella lot further than it should look and it's intimidating. Would reduce their distance overall. Well while you do that you should try to make a dash towards 00:52:883 (1) - somehow to emphasize that strong af vocals too.

1. 00:03:485 (3) - Oh come on you didn't even make a dash towards 00:03:710 - but to this slider's head? you cuck I highly suggest you to separate this into 2 circles and make a dash towards the 2nd circle instead to show that it's a lot more stronger, this kind of wrong emphasis just plays out weird.
2. 00:09:575 (1,2) - This technically would be unrankable cause it's an hyper into an anti-flow movement. You will have to do something about this.
3. 00:09:801 (2,3) - This looks like it was meant to be a dash but right now it's not that clear, I would increase a little more so that it comes off as a dash clearer.
4. 00:12:507 (3,1) - Is this a dash or no? If it is 1 then you really need to increase the distance. Otherwise you might want to reduce it a little cause it kinda is ambiguous. Same goes for 00:14:312 (2,1) - .
5. 00:17:470 (2) - Dash towards to this note can come off as sudden as 00:13:861 - wasn't even emphasized with an individual object. Would remove it.
6. 00:21:304 (2,3) - The distance looks quite similar to 00:20:402 (1,2) - this so it's hard to assess whether this is a dash or not tbh - it's ambiguous at best. You know what to do.
7. 00:25:816 (1,2) - Although this anti-flow might be on the slower side considering their snaps, it is still 1 so it still can be unrankable. Would just combine both of these into a slider and flip it horizontally, or do something like 00:29:425 (1,2) - idk
8. 00:28:297 (2,1) - Again, if its a dash it needs to be further apart, or if not, it needs to be closer. Same goes for 00:37:094 (2,3) -
9. 00:31:229 (1,2) - 00:32:131 (3,4) - More potential unrankable hurray
10. 00:36:643 (1,2) - I just find it weird that all other sliders will hit that vocals on the blue tick nicely, but except for this one. If you really want to follow the vocals you should do it consistently correct. Would make this into a rhythm like 00:29:425 (1,2) - or something.
11. 00:44:537 (2,3) - When heard closely the vocals on 00:45:665 (1) - is so much more stronger than this one so a hyper here is also overstating its strength. Would make it into a dash or lower.
12. 00:55:365 (3,1,2) - Again I would consider this unrankable for stuff I mentioned up there.
13. Not too sure about hyper into 3/4 snapped anti-flow pattern being unrankable but imo those have not the best amount of recovery time so I think it is.

1. 00:01:229 (2) - 00:02:357 (1) - It's the top diff already so not making dashes on beats like this imo feels like missing out a lot on the music tbh. Would add dashes here, or else it feels like Platter all over again.
2. 00:19:951 (2,3) - Would be a nice place to add a dash for that vocal emphasis.
3. I mean since its the top diff and almost nothing's barren I can't find the diff too bad, nice.

Sc4v4ng3r wrote:

zz lost mod

[General]

1. Lots of missed opportunities for finishes for cymbals, would suggest to add them at 00:07:771 - , 00:09:575 - , 00:24:011 - , 00:25:816 - , 00:49:274 - and 00:55:590 - . I suck at hitsounds
2. I suggest you to lower the tick rate to 1 if you are going to silence like all of them (well maybe not silenced but sure does sound silenced with default skin), it really does nothing but increase combo unnecessarily. It's a musical property, not an aesthetical tool by any means. I don't suck at selecting slider tick rate though.

[Cup]

1. Coulda used more emphasis on downbeats that really called for it but you missed out quite a number of them. Will list them down in the box below for reasons provided :
   
   here

   These are for strong downbeats and part transition that are worth getting emphasized for extra credit.
   

   1. 00:07:771 (1) -
   2. 00:09:575 (3) -
   3. 00:18:598 (1) -
   4. 00:24:011 (1) -
   5. 00:25:816 (1) -
   6. 00:36:643 (1,2,1) -
   7. 00:49:274 (1) -
   8. 00:52:883 (1) -
   9. 00:54:688 (1,2) -

   Somewhere around 1.45x on distance would work well.
   
   These are for extra emphasis on vocals occasionally to break the long chain of 1.0xs.
   

   1. 00:05:966 (3) -
   2. 00:13:184 (1) -
   3. 00:14:989 (1) -
   4. 00:16:793 (1) - and all those downbeats which doesn't include any cymbals or special instrument in it
   5. 00:42:507 (2) -

   For extra vocal emphasis here and there so there are variety in distances instead of just plain old 1.0x and 1.1x. These doesn't need to go as high - somewhere around 1.3x would do.
   Basically fixed most of them just different distances
2. 00:31:229 (3) - Would make this a slider like 00:20:402 (1) - so that the vocal build-up is properly emphasized at the end here. Understandable but I prefer to accent the leadin to the stronger vocals with 00:32:131 (4) - . I don't want to make it too dense or complex.
3. 00:55:590 (2,3,4) - Idk going straight for these strong vocals doesn't pack as much punch as if you were to use a slider like 00:54:688 (1) - . Would do that tbh so the vocal's strength are much more accentuated. I was lazy so I just made the circles into a repeat slider shape B)

[Salad]

1. Can't you be a little more consistent on NC xD Places like 00:09:575 (3) - , 00:13:184 (4) - and 00:34:838 (3) - can use some adding. gomen
2. 00:01:229 (2,1) - Personally would remove the dash here so there's a contrast between these and 00:03:485 (2,3) - these in strength, it makes for a good effect. yes sure
3. 00:07:319 (4,1) - You really could have used a dash here considering platter+ uses a hyper for this, and its supported by strong instruments. Would add 1. kind of challenging to make a 1/1 dash but I did my best
4. 00:25:816 (1) - 00:29:425 (1) - 00:33:034 (1) - From this difficulty onwards you don't have claps on these, although in Cup you do. Do just 1 for the whole set for consistency. fuck hitsounds seriously
5. 00:38:447 (1,2) - These compared to 00:39:575 (3,4) - are weaker by quite a lot, so putting them as a dash is kinda overstating their strength. Would remove it. ok
6. 00:51:079 (1,2) - These aren't dashes right? Yet due to the anti-flow they look hella lot further than it should look and it's intimidating. Would reduce their distance overall. Well while you do that you should try to make a dash towards 00:52:883 (1) - somehow to emphasize that strong af vocals too. Actually all of 00:51:079 (1,2,1) - are intended to be dashes, but I changed some distances and some curves.

[Platter]

1. 00:03:485 (3) - Oh come on you didn't even make a dash towards 00:03:710 - but to this slider's head? you cuck I highly suggest you to separate this into 2 circles and make a dash towards the 2nd circle instead to show that it's a lot more stronger, this kind of wrong emphasis just plays out weird. done
2. 00:09:575 (1,2) - This technically would be unrankable cause it's an hyper into an anti-flow movement. You will have to do something about this. yes
3. 00:09:801 (2,3) - This looks like it was meant to be a dash but right now it's not that clear, I would increase a little more so that it comes off as a dash clearer. fixed that with the above
4. 00:12:507 (3,1) - Is this a dash or no? If it is 1 then you really need to increase the distance. Otherwise you might want to reduce it a little cause it kinda is ambiguous. Same goes for 00:14:312 (2,1) - . yes
5. 00:17:470 (2) - Dash towards to this note can come off as sudden as 00:13:861 - wasn't even emphasized with an individual object. Would remove it. I thinkl it's fine, the dash isn't that big and the vocals have a bit of oomph to them
6. 00:21:304 (2,3) - The distance looks quite similar to 00:20:402 (1,2) - this so it's hard to assess whether this is a dash or not tbh - it's ambiguous at best. You know what to do. increased slightly
7. 00:25:816 (1,2) - Although this anti-flow might be on the slower side considering their snaps, it is still 1 so it still can be unrankable. Would just combine both of these into a slider and flip it horizontally, or do something like 00:29:425 (1,2) - idk I think there's enough reaction time, got the opinion of JBH though here and changed it accordingly
8. 00:28:297 (2,1) - Again, if its a dash it needs to be further apart, or if not, it needs to be closer. Same goes for 00:37:094 (2,3) - Yup
9. 00:31:229 (1,2) - 00:32:131 (3,4) - More potential unrankable hurray as above with JBH
10. 00:36:643 (1,2) - I just find it weird that all other sliders will hit that vocals on the blue tick nicely, but except for this one. If you really want to follow the vocals you should do it consistently correct. Would make this into a rhythm like 00:29:425 (1,2) - or something. fixed
11. 00:44:537 (2,3) - When heard closely the vocals on 00:45:665 (1) - is so much more stronger than this one so a hyper here is also overstating its strength. Would make it into a dash or lower. tbh I think the opposite
12. 00:55:365 (3,1,2) - Again I would consider this unrankable for stuff I mentioned up there. this one i fixed
13. Not too sure about hyper into 3/4 snapped anti-flow pattern being unrankable but imo those have not the best amount of recovery time so I think it is.

[Ambiguous Love]

1. 00:01:229 (2) - 00:02:357 (1) - It's the top diff already so not making dashes on beats like this imo feels like missing out a lot on the music tbh. Would add dashes here, or else it feels like Platter all over again. ok
2. 00:19:951 (2,3) - Would be a nice place to add a dash for that vocal emphasis. fix!
3. I mean since its the top diff and almost nothing's barren I can't find the diff too bad, nice.

Good luck

1. 00:31:229 (3) - NC
2. 00:05:966 (3,3) - Though I don't know whether these are intentional since they're consistently inconsistent within the section

1. 00:01:906 - Sounds like a more prominent beat to map than 00:02:131 .
2. 00:53:786 (2) - You used a denser rhythm in Cup on this spot what

1. 00:28:297 (2,1) - dash or something pls you did hyper in the top diff
2. 00:55:928 (2) - Can you do something about this thing it plays somewhat awkward when placed so near the border

1. 00:15:440 (2) - Not really worth using hyper tho
2. 00:33:484 (4) - Clap missing