Mirash wrote:

Mempesona

Hi. Mod from me and neilperry

00:12:789 (4) - не уверен что нужна она тут. лучше наверно чстобы слайцдерэнд бил на этот тик
00:15:384 (4) - 00:17:979 (4) - 00:20:573 (4) - сейм (ибо в некст партах ты игноришь этот звук впринципе) поставил кул слайдеры
00:45:822 - тут слайдер энд заглушить бы 00:48:361 (2) - сейм оке
01:03:745 (8,9) - тут перебор немного. сделай объекты чуток подальше как ты делал до и после попробовал сделать
02:09:438 (6,7,8) - угол слайдера выглядит не красиво относительно паттеринга. попробуй так http://puu.sh/vCPOj/535f1909a9.jpg хорошо
02:32:591 (4,5,6) - тут спейсинг проблемы. 4-5 должен быть ближе чем 5-6 чтобы фоловить общую концепцию твою, как например тут 02:37:514 (4,1,2) - я хотел сделать красивый трейгольник! да и разнообразие не помешает
03:20:976 (1,2,3,4) - т.к. у тебя стак лэтанси маленький я бы предложил сделать небольшой спейсинг а не полностью стакать их https://puu.sh/vCQ2i/6c74430e44.jpg как-то так. Следующий тоже можно, но можно оставить и стакнутым чтобы логика проследовалась твоя анстакнул немного
03:38:822 (2,3,4,5) - спейсинг чуток побольше 03:43:745 (2,3,4,5) - сейм оке
03:57:438 (7,8,1) - неуверен что линейный джамп тут хорошо работать будет работает, не волнуйся
05:16:438 (2) - сделай чтобы бланкет идеально был в шейпе стрима. будет круто там спейсинг поломается тогда

Good map. Good luck with it o/

Suissie wrote:

Hello from my modding queue o/

03:21:591 (1,2,3,4) - why dont make it like there again 03:20:976 (1,2,3,4) - ? A bit random imo. aaa i forgot about it
Even then you should make that one special too.
Idk maybe stack this 04:56:822 (3) - on a note before. it will destroy equal spacing!
03:17:438 (1,2,3,4) - I think this spacing is not even. On purpose ? oh~ corrected!

Sry couldn't find more.
Pretty nice map good luck

- Yoshimaro - wrote:

hi im modder c:

as per mappers' request

I asked Sprok Lover to do a testplay, and we agreed that there were some troubling things that I'll make sure to mention in my mod (the replay file can be found here: https://puu.sh/vEXBo/d567410f72.osr)

General

1. I know that the metadata is taken from the ranked version of this song, but double check that the artist name is Xi (with a captial) as opposed to xi (with a lower case), older maps are never the standard for metadata so just make sure. metadata was taken from here and here, so i think it's fine
2. Your hitsounds in some sections are theoretically inaudible since the samples fit the music near perfectly. This is an unrankable issue since the player needs to get audible feedback. aah, i know that part's, will try to correct

Extra Stage

1. 00:15:870 (3) - Remove slider whistle removed from sliderend
2. 00:19:762 (4) - Ctrl J? naah, this is the same as 00:16:843 (3,4) -
3. 00:22:681 - Starting here, you drastically reduce the object density and switch to much more passive flow which does not seem warranted by the music. compare the density between 00:17:492 (1,2,1,2,3) - 00:22:681 (1,2,3,4,5) - . I suggest at least keeping consistent level of difficulty or combo aesthetic, keepinig one of the 2 would suffice but dropping both of them is inconsistently mapping the same section. i did this for some variety, but dunno, may change later
4. 00:28:195 (3,4) - It did not matter as much for 00:23:006 (3,4) - since the flow is in the opposite direction, but i really recommend giving 00:28:519 (4) - some spacing because you use the same distance (in the same combo) to represent both 1/2 (i.e 00:27:870 (1,2) - ) and 1/1 (i.e 00:28:195 (3,4) - ). Imo, this would do wonders for expression as well. gave some spacing to 00:28:519 (4) -
5. 00:40:843 (1,1) - These are fine, because the context given by the rest of the section makes it very obvious that these sliders will continue the pattern and lower in SV. Note that the context you give for this section is very important, as I will cover a point later in this mod that uses the same 0.01 SV and is unacceptable.
6. 00:43:438 - Make sure your inherited point and timing point start as the same hitsound.
   didn't notice, thank you
7. 00:53:284 (1,2,3,4,5,1,2,1,2,1,2,3,4,5) - This applies for your entire map: Spork Lover and I both agree that it would be much more readable and understandable if you NC'd these sections by downbeats, rather than by the combo. eeeh, okay
8. 00:57:899 (3) - The flow you have set up from 00:56:976 (2,3,1,2,1,2) - makes it much more intuitive for the player to go back towards 00:57:591 (1) - instead of behind 00:57:745 (2) - . This would serve as a nice flourish to finish the combo and emphasize it better in a more intuitive way, although if you were to apply this, 00:57:899 (3) - would end up off screen. One solution would be to try some variation of 00:56:284 (1,2,1,2,1,2,3,1,2,1,2) - Ctrl H and then leave 00:57:899 (3) - where it is currently. ctrl+h looks strange..
9. 01:21:591 - soft-hitnormal55 is very unfitting right here, that goes for 04:16:361 - as well. i will look for a better sample
10. 01:48:668 (1) - This is an unplayable, ambiguous, and unsupported by context. Furthermore, I don't think any BNs will agree to this either. What Spork Lover recommended was to create a shape that makes the player want to move the cursor across less distance:
    However, even then, there is 0 context supporting this slider. Remember that it was accetable here: 00:40:843 (1,1) - because the entire section leading up to those sliders had lowering SVs, so they were both supported by context and intuitive. However, 01:48:668 (1) - completely kills the momentum and gives no provided context to warrant the SV change (also the blanket is off). the player is given 1.5 slider ticks of time to realize that the slider is very slow, which is no where near enough time to be readable, this is a must-memorize element to FC the map, as first plays will 99% involve slider breaking. i don't think it's as bad as you described.. and i can't fix it right now for some reasons, sorry
    
    My suggestions in resolving this issue are:
    1 (most recommended). Raising the SV to a more readable level that is contextually supported by the section leading up to this moment.
    2. Use a slider shape that covers less area to prevent the player from instantly slider breaking.
    
11. 01:54:053 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - Suggestion: since you have the player momentum come to a halt on 01:53:284 (7) - , maybe you could do the same here 01:54:053 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - to form a more synergistic flow? notes fits better, i think.
12. 01:57:284 (1,2,3,4,5,6,1,2,3,4,5,6,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,5,6,1,2,3,4,5,6,1,2,3,4,1) - Nice! thank you
13. 02:05:900 (1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3,4,5) - Again, just a reminder, refer to what I said here: 00:53:284 (1,2,3,4,5,1,2,1,2,1,2,3,4,5) - okay
14. 02:40:361 - Hitsounds yeah
15. 03:21:284 (3,4) - Unrankable direct stack and visually inconsistent with prior combos
16. 03:21:899 (3,4) - Unrankable direct stack and visually inconsistent with prior combos didn't notice, sorry
17. 03:57:745 - Good example of a section that could use some hitsound boosting since the samples mix in near perfectly with the music (there are plenty of sections before this too, so double check and apply). okay
18. 04:28:668 (1) - Again, this won't go over well with both BNs and players. i can't come up something good with it, i'll try again when i'll have fresh thoughts and good mood
19. 04:45:438 - Hitsounds yeah
20. 04:50:438 (12) - This receives just as much flow emphasis as 04:49:591 (1) - and is not emphasized by the music. Consider making 04:50:438 (12,13,14,15,16,17,18,1) - a more rounded curve rather than a sharp turn. i like the sharp one

There are some reeeaally beautiful looking stream sequences in this map, good job with aesthetic because I have literally 0 complaint about aesthetic.

1. 00:14:573 (4) - falls out of place with it's distinct movement that then is discarded again on 00:17:168 (4) - and 00:19:762 (4) -
2. 00:28:195 (3,5,7,9) - would expect an orderly shape or line in these like in the other half of the pattern and the previous section like this. additionally it's weird how you start it anew on 00:28:843 (5) - instead of continuing the back and forth from 00:28:195 (3) - like in all the other iterations
3. 00:32:249 (4,5,6) - it's also a pair of three just like 00:31:762 (1,2,3) - so with having 6 spaced off already you lose the emphasis on 7 completely and emphasise a less important sound instead
4. 00:54:207 (9) - i'd suggest taking away the last repeat and replacing it with a note ontop of 00:54:438 (10) - since the sound pattern you map via tripple plus aftermath in 00:54:668 (2,3,4,1,2,3,4,5,6) - starts there already. so it would make sense to also start the mapped pattern there. by which it's unclear to me why you went with a single plus repeat in that part in the first place as the single doesn't sound to be emphasising anything in particular as it suggests with a peculiar pattern like that. but i guess that concept is not inherently wrong.
5. 00:56:668 (9) - same thing here, the following pattern seems to start too late as this drags on for too long. the same comments also apply to the second half of this section
6. 01:01:899 (1,2,1,2) - this rhythm seems pretty odd in general. the special drum beat here is started on a slider end and one of the important guitar sounds is on another slider end. i don't really see the purpose of handling it this way. with the guitar in 1/2 and the drums coming in a double starting on a blue plus a tripple, good ways to express this would be http://puu.sh/vFJMR/7b4e940390.jpg or if you want to give more emphasis to the drum than the guitar, which is viable since they're a special transiion and really stand out: http://puu.sh/vFJIl/ff8532a11a.jpg
7. 01:02:822 (8) - i'd make this a longer slider since there's an audible break in all the instrumental beats. keeping it as a 1/4 makes it blend in and will count as a filler beat, which seems to be widely acceptable nowadays, so it's probably a preference matter.
8. 01:07:899 (6) - ctrl g might be nice since the sound is so sharp and having the slider in the opposite way can represent that
9. 01:07:284 (4,1) - 01:12:207 (4,1) - might want to increase the spacing here. awkward to play like this and might even be mistakable as a continuous stream. just going with the same spacing as 01:06:822 (1,2) - would be enough, so it's a minor adjustment
10. 01:08:668 (5) - you usually put sliderheads on held notes while this one is a momentanous one. so i'd suggest starting the slider on where it ends now and adding a note in before. if you don't want the next tripple to start ona slider end personally, just two circles should do it too. but as it is it feels like the guitar isn't captured properly while it's an easy fix to do so without losing the focus on the drums
11. 01:16:976 (7,8,9) - i see what you put thi s tripple on, but since you didn't map any of the tripples in this section before, it just seems out of place and disturbs the following pattern that seems to start out of nowhere since the start of the musical pattern is on the start of the tripple
12. 01:40:361 (2,3,4,5,6,7) - i'd either gradually decrease the spacing like the pitch does in the song or if you want to keep the pattern as is, putting 01:39:745 (4,2) - in the proper middle would be nice for neatness. neither is a necessity though.
13. 01:46:976 (3,4,5) - for concistency i'd change either this or 01:39:591 (3,4,5) - since they are the same in the song but vary vastly in spacing concepts. changing the first one would probably be better because of other patterns in this section
14. 01:52:822 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,5,6,1,2,3,4) - having two entirely different concepts in the very same section of a stream is jarring to play. if the movement was at least similar, that would be more acceptable, so if you lowered the spacing in the last five notes instead of at 01:54:283 (4,5,6) - . otherwise changing the slider into more notes also works. however the musically this part 01:54:283 (4,5,6) - doesn't really work as nothing implies drastically lower spacing for those three notes. it's all fixable without completely reworking the stream if you shift around some angles and use the reverse slider beats in a smart way. if you apply this i can make an example on messageing me.
15. 02:03:053 (2,3) - the transition is lackluster due to angle and spacing conciering it's one of the more important sound of the part but is represented with less impact than these 02:02:207 (1,4,7) - . it's too fluent and indistinct
16. 02:09:438 (6,7) - the curve just doesn't look nice with the slider, seems stubbed. going with a mirrored tripple into the same slider would be neater
17. 02:13:207 (10,1) - 02:35:745 (7,8,9) - commented on these earlier, if applied, it also goes for this part
18. 02:20:976 (3) - you're overgoing a unique tripple of the drums here (actually a quint even but for the sake of the following part a tripple plus slider works). as you have it it implies everything is about the same which misrepresents the song a bit so http://puu.sh/vFS4x/3613c09bf6.jpg is the suggestion. a minor complaint
19. 02:41:899 (1,2) - confusing to play since there is not particular sound on the blue tick 2 starts on. making 1 a regular 1/4 slider and making 2 repeat once more instead solves this
20. 02:44:053 (7) - there is actually a 1/2 break from the 1/4 here. so making 7 longer instead of repeating it can fix it while also solving an issue similar to the above point as it doesn't implie anymore that there is a continuous beat. however, you can also just make it a regular 1/4 filler beat like you did somewhere near the beginning and have a proper triple on the red tick if you so prefere
21. 02:44:361 (2,3,4,5,6,7,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10) - this might need some clarification on what you're following, i don't things it's very conclusive
22. 02:46:822 (1,2) - 02:51:745 (1,2) - same as earlier
23. 02:48:361 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - the contrast conveyed with the spacing in this stream seems off. 02:48:668 (1,2,3,4) - has a higher pitch, so it would make sense to have it be at a higher spacing than the previous four notes. probably neglectable
24. 02:54:206 (5,1,2,3,4,1) - i take it you're going for the bakcground beat with these gaps. however they're not quite like you have them, simplified they'd probably play out more like http://puu.sh/vFODl/2fc24f3b17.jpg
25. 02:55:130 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - the spacing choices seem very peculiear. the pitch increases on 02:55:130 02:54:822 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - and decreases again on 02:55:438 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - so your largest spacing ends up being on the least intense part of the stream 02:55:745 (1,2,3,4) - which is quite offputting. the unorderly shapes are quite fitting though, keep those
26. 03:02:207 (7,1,2,3,4) - again it's jarring to have such vastly different concepts on the same sounds in the very same stream. it's fine to vary if it's at least seperate sections, but in the same one, it's highly recommended to also use the same concept. it only gets messy otherwise
27. 03:19:745 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - bit of a waste to not emphasise the harder guitar sounds on the white ticks. since you already use pairs of two patterns, you could alternate between them every third slider rather than keeping them in stacks of four like sjoy's map does. like https://puu.sh/vFPiN/6d11ccea0a.jpg would capture both the 2/1 and the 1/1 beats properly. maybe a bit less spacing within the pair would give extra emphasis to the 2/1 beat if you find it necessary. similarly to that you could also split these 03:23:438 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7) - up into 2x tripple with 1/4 slider in pairs
28. 03:28:361 (1,2,3,4) - 03:33:284 (7) - not a big deal, but i'd make these more similar at least in the object choice
29. 03:38:822 (2,3) - these are the wrong way around. there's a 1/4 tripple on 2 while there is none on 3
30. 03:39:745 (3,4) - stack another note on 4 between these due to the same reason you did 03:39:668 (2) -
31. 03:41:207 (2,3,4,5) - false rhythm, it's the same as 03:39:745 (3,4,5) - including ^ same two points go for the repetition of the part ofc. also the untill the break the same points as already meantioned in earlier points arise again, so make sure to check for that if you applied anything.
32. 03:49:745 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - 03:54:668 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - you usually keep two pairs of these in the same concept shapes behind them in each section, except here. so i'd recommend making th esecond of those also straight lines rather than curves for consistency
33. 04:33:438 (10,1,2) - only 04:33:591 (1) - actually supports a 1/4 beat except for the constant beat that you however don't really map on for the rest of the section. and it should probably be represented as a note stack like in the rest of the section too
34. 04:34:514 (3,4,5,1,2,3) - you always pair tripples in this section so you should probably do the same here while also stacking the second triple
35. 04:40:514 (3,4,5) - it's unclear on why these are 1/4 instead of singles like in the previous iteration of the section.
36. 04:45:898 (3,4,1,2,3,4,5,6) - for one part, there are breaks in the drum beat that you made a constatn stream out of here 04:45:975 (4,4) - you can simplify if and have it continuous, doubt anyone is going to complain, but since you don't simplify much elsewhere in the map i recommend not doing so here either. for the other part it doesn't make much sense to start 04:46:438 (6) - on the blue and leave the heavy beat unclickable. so this is what i recommend http://puu.sh/vFR0K/9c5c9b6981.jpg
37. 04:47:668 (8,1,2) - as nice as it looks, i don't think it very feasable to have such a sharp turn on a stream on a held foreground note, just doesn't accentuate it properly. can't really be excused with the hard percussion sounds either since those are more frequent and would require turns on 5s as well if followed.
38. 04:50:360 (11,12,13) - same as the above point plus the whole stream of this combo colour looks unnecessarily unorderly for a smooth held note. probably gonna need a rebuild
39. 04:56:822 (3) - you can easily stack this on 04:56:129 (6) - like in the previous times you used this pattern while keeping equal spacing, blanket and even angle. you just need to adjust 04:56:899 (4,5,1,2,3,1,2,3) - very slightly. can also be made working with stacking on 7 instead of 6
40. 05:09:283 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18) - same as earlier, unnecessarily unorderly and overly harsh turns, this time with an additional one on 05:10:514 (17) - even. if there's a reason behind these, i'd like clarification on that
41. 05:16:361 (1,2,3,4,1) - could change the initial turn angle so 05:16:668 (1) - isn't quite as out of place and awkward to play, none of the previous ones were either. it's the only time you have it awkwardly like this too, i assume it's due to lack of space towards the top. if the angle of the last five notes gets too wide for your taste trying to fix it, you can also change the turn angle on 05:15:438 (1) - to make it sharper again
42. 05:23:899 (1,2,1) - seems awkward to play and looks out of place. it's the ending, but it's still part of the musical structure and it stands out in a way that implies it's something completely different. the suggestion would be to rotate it by 50 degree and ctrl g to get it to the same deviation from the main axis as the rest of the part. it still stands out enough with it's spacing and the opposite angle to mark the end but it still fits in. would look somehow like http://puu.sh/vFSI9/485b0b5492.jpg variations of the concept or something completely different can also work ofc

Deramok wrote:

it became somewhat sizeable after all i suppose

1. 00:14:573 (4) - falls out of place with it's distinct movement that then is discarded again on 00:17:168 (4) - and 00:19:762 (4) - 00:14:249 (3,4) - are standing on a pretty same sounds, soo i decided to make it like that
2. 00:28:195 (3,5,7,9) - would expect an orderly shape or line in these like in the other half of the pattern and the previous section like this. additionally it's weird how you start it anew on 00:28:843 (5) - instead of continuing the back and forth from 00:28:195 (3) - like in all the other iterations eeeh that (3)
   is out of place, now i see. fixed
3. 00:32:249 (4,5,6) - it's also a pair of three just like 00:31:762 (1,2,3) - so with having 6 spaced off already you lose the emphasis on 7 completely and emphasise a less important sound instead hmm.. i've heard different sound on 00:32:249 (4) - and very same sounds on 00:32:412 (5,6,7,8) - and because of it i decided to change the pattern
4. 00:54:207 (9) - i'd suggest taking away the last repeat and replacing it with a note ontop of 00:54:438 (10) - since the sound pattern you map via tripple plus aftermath in 00:54:668 (2,3,4,1,2,3,4,5,6) - starts there already. so it would make sense to also start the mapped pattern there. by which it's unclear to me why you went with a single plus repeat in that part in the first place as the single doesn't sound to be emphasising anything in particular as it suggests with a peculiar pattern like that. but i guess that concept is not inherently wrong. good idea, applied it in all patterns like this
5. 00:56:668 (9) - same thing here, the following pattern seems to start too late as this drags on for too long. the same comments also apply to the second half of this section also a good suggestion, thank you
6. 01:01:899 (1,2,1,2) - this rhythm seems pretty odd in general. the special drum beat here is started on a slider end and one of the important guitar sounds is on another slider end. i don't really see the purpose of handling it this way. with the guitar in 1/2 and the drums coming in a double starting on a blue plus a tripple, good ways to express this would be http://puu.sh/vFJMR/7b4e940390.jpg or if you want to give more emphasis to the drum than the guitar, which is viable since they're a special transiion and really stand out: http://puu.sh/vFJIl/ff8532a11a.jpg changed and added something from myself
7. 01:02:822 (8) - i'd make this a longer slider since there's an audible break in all the instrumental beats. keeping it as a 1/4 makes it blend in and will count as a filler beat, which seems to be widely acceptable nowadays, so it's probably a preference matter. that kind of slider don't give the former feelings..
8. 01:07:899 (6) - ctrl g might be nice since the sound is so sharp and having the slider in the opposite way can represent that dunno really, that looks strange for me
9. 01:07:284 (4,1) - 01:12:207 (4,1) - might want to increase the spacing here. awkward to play like this and might even be mistakable as a continuous stream. just going with the same spacing as 01:06:822 (1,2) - would be enough, so it's a minor adjustment it's fine for players and 01:12:361 (1,2,3,4) - here i hear a more elongated sound than 01:07:438 (1,2,3,4) - so that's why the spacing are different
10. 01:08:668 (5) - you usually put sliderheads on held notes while this one is a momentanous one. so i'd suggest starting the slider on where it ends now and adding a note in before. if you don't want the next tripple to start ona slider end personally, just two circles should do it too. but as it is it feels like the guitar isn't captured properly while it's an easy fix to do so without losing the focus on the drums i don't like that placement much also thatkind of rhythm would be really strange as i think
11. 01:16:976 (7,8,9) - i see what you put thi s tripple on, but since you didn't map any of the tripples in this section before, it just seems out of place and disturbs the following pattern that seems to start out of nowhere since the start of the musical pattern is on the start of the tripple i use the same triples in all following parts, i think it's fine
12. 01:40:361 (2,3,4,5,6,7) - i'd either gradually decrease the spacing like the pitch does in the song or if you want to keep the pattern as is, putting 01:39:745 (4,2) - in the proper middle would be nice for neatness. neither is a necessity though. moved in middle (i hope it's middle)
13. 01:46:976 (3,4,5) - for concistency i'd change either this or 01:39:591 (3,4,5) - since they are the same in the song but vary vastly in spacing concepts. changing the first one would probably be better because of other patterns in this section okie, changed
14. 01:52:822 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,5,6,1,2,3,4) - having two entirely different concepts in the very same section of a stream is jarring to play. if the movement was at least similar, that would be more acceptable, so if you lowered the spacing in the last five notes instead of at 01:54:283 (4,5,6) - . otherwise changing the slider into more notes also works. however the musically this part 01:54:283 (4,5,6) - doesn't really work as nothing implies drastically lower spacing for those three notes. it's all fixable without completely reworking the stream if you shift around some angles and use the reverse slider beats in a smart way. if you apply this i can make an example on messageing me. i heard other shades in music again! that's why i didn't follow one concept
15. 02:03:053 (2,3) - the transition is lackluster due to angle and spacing conciering it's one of the more important sound of the part but is represented with less impact than these 02:02:207 (1,4,7) - . it's too fluent and indistinct changed spacings
16. 02:09:438 (6,7) - the curve just doesn't look nice with the slider, seems stubbed. going with a mirrored tripple into the same slider would be neater hmm, okay!
17. 02:13:207 (10,1) - 02:35:745 (7,8,9) - commented on these earlier, if applied, it also goes for this part yea
18. 02:20:976 (3) - you're overgoing a unique tripple of the drums here (actually a quint even but for the sake of the following part a tripple plus slider works). as you have it it implies everything is about the same which misrepresents the song a bit so http://puu.sh/vFS4x/3613c09bf6.jpg is the suggestion. a minor complaint i focused more on the guitar than on beats
19. 02:41:899 (1,2) - confusing to play since there is not particular sound on the blue tick 2 starts on. making 1 a regular 1/4 slider and making 2 repeat once more instead solves this okie, changed
20. 02:44:053 (7) - there is actually a 1/2 break from the 1/4 here. so making 7 longer instead of repeating it can fix it while also solving an issue similar to the above point as it doesn't implie anymore that there is a continuous beat. however, you can also just make it a regular 1/4 filler beat like you did somewhere near the beginning and have a proper triple on the red tick if you so prefere triple looks better
21. 02:44:361 (2,3,4,5,6,7,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10) - this might need some clarification on what you're following, i don't things it's very conclusive i'm following some sounds which can be heard by attentively listening to this moment several times
22. 02:46:822 (1,2) - 02:51:745 (1,2) - same as earlier
23. 02:48:361 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - the contrast conveyed with the spacing in this stream seems off. 02:48:668 (1,2,3,4) - has a higher pitch, so it would make sense to have it be at a higher spacing than the previous four notes. probably neglectable i think it's okay..
24. 02:54:206 (5,1,2,3,4,1) - i take it you're going for the bakcground beat with these gaps. however they're not quite like you have them, simplified they'd probably play out more like http://puu.sh/vFODl/2fc24f3b17.jpg that looks strange o.o
25. 02:55:130 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - the spacing choices seem very peculiear. the pitch increases on 02:55:130 02:54:822 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - and decreases again on 02:55:438 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - so your largest spacing ends up being on the least intense part of the stream 02:55:745 (1,2,3,4) - which is quite offputting. the unorderly shapes are quite fitting though, keep those i heard stronger beats 02:56:053 (1,2,3,4) - that's why spacing is so strange
26. 03:02:207 (7,1,2,3,4) - again it's jarring to have such vastly different concepts on the same sounds in the very same stream. it's fine to vary if it's at least seperate sections, but in the same one, it's highly recommended to also use the same concept. it only gets messy otherwise i think it's all because of my strange hearing
27. 03:19:745 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - bit of a waste to not emphasise the harder guitar sounds on the white ticks. since you already use pairs of two patterns, you could alternate between them every third slider rather than keeping them in stacks of four like sjoy's map does. like https://puu.sh/vFPiN/6d11ccea0a.jpg would capture both the 2/1 and the 1/1 beats properly. maybe a bit less spacing within the pair would give extra emphasis to the 2/1 beat if you find it necessary. similarly to that you could also split these 03:23:438 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7) - up into 2x tripple with 1/4 slider in pairs i like what sjoy did in his map and i wanted to reapeat that in my own map, sounds not so bad imo
28. 03:28:361 (1,2,3,4) - 03:33:284 (7) - not a big deal, but i'd make these more similar at least in the object choice okay!
29. 03:38:822 (2,3) - these are the wrong way around. there's a 1/4 tripple on 2 while there is none on 3 true
30. 03:39:745 (3,4) - stack another note on 4 between these due to the same reason you did 03:39:668 (2) - i don't like it for some reasons..
31. 03:41:207 (2,3,4,5) - false rhythm, it's the same as 03:39:745 (3,4,5) - including ^ same two points go for the repetition of the part ofc. also the untill the break the same points as already meantioned in earlier points arise again, so make sure to check for that if you applied anything. changed it in my own way
32. 03:49:745 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - 03:54:668 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - you usually keep two pairs of these in the same concept shapes behind them in each section, except here. so i'd recommend making th esecond of those also straight lines rather than curves for consistency okie
33. 04:33:438 (10,1,2) - only 04:33:591 (1) - actually supports a 1/4 beat except for the constant beat that you however don't really map on for the rest of the section. and it should probably be represented as a note stack like in the rest of the section too made something here
34. 04:34:514 (3,4,5,1,2,3) - you always pair tripples in this section so you should probably do the same here while also stacking the second triple sure
35. 04:40:514 (3,4,5) - it's unclear on why these are 1/4 instead of singles like in the previous iteration of the section. naah, very quiet sounds here. again
36. 04:45:898 (3,4,1,2,3,4,5,6) - for one part, there are breaks in the drum beat that you made a constatn stream out of here 04:45:975 (4,4) - you can simplify if and have it continuous, doubt anyone is going to complain, but since you don't simplify much elsewhere in the map i recommend not doing so here either. for the other part it doesn't make much sense to start 04:46:438 (6) - on the blue and leave the heavy beat unclickable. so this is what i recommend http://puu.sh/vFR0K/9c5c9b6981.jpg 01:21:899 - the same parts, i think
37. 04:47:668 (8,1,2) - as nice as it looks, i don't think it very feasable to have such a sharp turn on a stream on a held foreground note, just doesn't accentuate it properly. can't really be excused with the hard percussion sounds either since those are more frequent and would require turns on 5s as well if followed. in this part i've followed more melodie than beats
38. 04:50:360 (11,12,13) - same as the above point plus the whole stream of this combo colour looks unnecessarily unorderly for a smooth held note. probably gonna need a rebuild same as above
39. 04:56:822 (3) - you can easily stack this on 04:56:129 (6) - like in the previous times you used this pattern while keeping equal spacing, blanket and even angle. you just need to adjust 04:56:899 (4,5,1,2,3,1,2,3) - very slightly. can also be made working with stacking on 7 instead of 6 i can't make it here..
    really
40. 05:09:283 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18) - same as earlier, unnecessarily unorderly and overly harsh turns, this time with an additional one on 05:10:514 (17) - even. if there's a reason behind these, i'd like clarification on that the reason is my love to give attention to almost inaudible sounds and beats
41. 05:16:361 (1,2,3,4,1) - could change the initial turn angle so 05:16:668 (1) - isn't quite as out of place and awkward to play, none of the previous ones were either. it's the only time you have it awkwardly like this too, i assume it's due to lack of space towards the top. if the angle of the last five notes gets too wide for your taste trying to fix it, you can also change the turn angle on 05:15:438 (1) - to make it sharper again fixed now i think
42. 05:23:899 (1,2,1) - seems awkward to play and looks out of place. it's the ending, but it's still part of the musical structure and it stands out in a way that implies it's something completely different. the suggestion would be to rotate it by 50 degree and ctrl g to get it to the same deviation from the main axis as the rest of the part. it still stands out enough with it's spacing and the opposite angle to mark the end but it still fits in. would look somehow like http://puu.sh/vFSI9/485b0b5492.jpg variations of the concept or something completely different can also work ofc good suggestion

hopefully this will help. would like to see the map getting somewhere as i rather like the concepts and the song
also feel free to ask for more mods if the opportunity arises again, twas good practice

Lama Poluna wrote:

[General]

1. Доабвить в теги: 花映塚 Kaeidzuka U2 例大祭 (Раздели shikieiki на Eiki Shiki)
2. По моему мнению артист должен быть AQUAELIE, а Xi в тегах. Да, это один человек, но везде он именует себя именно AQUAELIE, в том числе и твитере и на офф. сайте. Э
   
   теги добавил, насчёт артиста пока что сомневаюсь

[Extra Stage]

1. Чисто по твоему вкусу можно изменить диффнейм на какой то из этих (офф. титулов персонажей):
   Supreme Judge of Paradise
   Nagging Helpful Lecture
   Supreme Judge of Hell меня текущее название устраивает, ну или я просто не привык давать длинные названия диффам..
2. 00:11:654 (5) - НК? на четвёрке лучше будет, как по мне
3. 00:23:006 (3,3,3,3) - НК, ибо 00:15:222 (1,1,1) - тут ты ставил нк, а вообще этот переход на ноты очень странный, я бы лучше дальше слайдерами мапал. нк поставил, а слайдерами всю эту часть мапать мне показалось скучным
4. 01:06:207 (5) - Мисс НК. к
5. 02:21:745 - В этой части НК очень сильно отличаются от первой 01:02:976 - , хотя музыка одна. тут и паттерны немного другие. это всё ради разнообразия
6. 03:10:822 - 02:01:899 - и т.д , на этих партах разный спейсинг, не знаю почему. это вызвано небольшими отличиями в углах 02:00:976 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12) - подобных стримов
7. 03:38:899 - очень глупо мисать тут бит гитары, ибо дальше ты ее фоловишь. исправил это с помощью предыдущего мода
   Коротко, потому что мне лень копаться глубоко, а так норм, но НК пиздос рандом.

удачи

CucumberCuc wrote:

Привет

[Extra Stage]
00:11:979 (4,1) может быть стак? стак убьёт бедный квадратик
01:54:284 (4,5,6,1) мне кажется это можно сделать лучше даже не представляю как
02:18:668 (1,2,3) ^
Не знаю, сделаешь ли ты это, но мне кажется что на таких моментах, как 01:03:745 (8,9) + 01:04:976 (5,6) + 01:11:130 (5,6) + 01:19:745 (7,8) + 01:20:976 (5,6) и т.д. стоит добавить NC, может если и не на всех таких похожих моментах, но всё же наверное стоит страшно как-то выглядит
05:10:438 (16,17,18,1) я думаю это можно сделать немного лучше интересно
Ну это пока что всё, что я смог заметить

я заметил неправильную штуку из-за твоих предложений поставить нк, поэтому пускай будет один невидимый принятый пункт

Классная музыка :3 Может мне тоже потом сыграть в тохо что-ли в первый раз... попробуй, хорошая игра

Catshy wrote:

Hello!

Extra Stage

1. 00:02:588 (1,2,1,2,1,2) - "stack" them the same way as you did here 00:05:183 - so that 2nd circle is moved to the side where next circle will be (I'm not sure how to explain it xd); same applies to 00:07:777 (1,2,1,2,1,2) - but i did it already!
2. 00:15:237 - you probably should stick to slightly curved sliders as they look better imo 3 same parts - 3 different types of sliders for variety, i think it's fine
3. 00:33:075 - I'm wet o.o
4. 00:38:264 (1) - but this blanket needs a fix okok
5. 00:48:053 (1) - you should avoid overlaping like this; at this point it's almost reverse slider this is the only one slider that overlapping like that soo.. i don't see a real problem with that
6. 00:48:361 (2) - this SV is a bit too much, 1.4x should be more than enough i like how it works with the previous slider~
7. 01:22:207 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1) - flip horizontally for better flow oke
8. 02:09:438 (1,2) - maybe like this? current placement works good with the slider shape
9. 02:22:514 (8,9,10) - wide angle jumps are really unpleasant to play; maybe try something like this? i don't want to make big spaceing 02:22:514 (8,9) - here since i have small spacing in all folloing patterns like that
10. 02:54:361 (1,2,3) - sudden break of the flow makes this really awkward to play don't worry about it, i just wanted to emphasize some special sounds
11. 02:54:822 - difficult stream shapes are okay but this looks rather clumsy clumsy shapes fits the music here
12. 03:37:591 (1,2,3,4) - when I played it, I didn't expect it to be 1/2 but I suck at this game so you can ignore this don't blame yourself, everyone can misread something especially when it's so unexpected~
13. 03:43:745 (2,3,4,5,6,1) - how about triangle here? i've repeated 03:38:822 (2,3,4,5,6) - this pattern so it's no need to place notes in different places here
14. 04:13:745 (1,2) - (1) slightly down, (2) up to make it more interesting okie
15. 04:28:668 (1) - almost guaranteed sliderbrake at first try; this SV is too low i knoow, but i like cute extra slow sliders!
16. 04:35:745 (9,10,11) - move it up to x:46 y:214 for less awkward flow(and 04:36:053 (1) - up to keep an emphasis i've applied in my own way but i think it's fine now
17. 04:50:514 (13) - so far you were changing direction of the stream when there was a noticeable change in the guitar line, until now
18. 05:08:053 - other way around this time
19. 05:09:899 (9) - same issue as before i heard some changes in music in all the points selected by you, maybe my hearing sucks but i like this shapes

Map's great and fun to play c: thank you!
Keep it up! i will..

Namki wrote:

03:37:438 (4) - явно 03:37:514 - сильный, сделай лучше кликабельным
04:50:438 - нк
05:09:899 (9) - и тут лучше поставить.
да, я вижу, что ты ставил нк каждый раз, когда инструментал менялся. но там из-за такого курва лучше выделить, имо. ведь тут выделил 04:47:745 - .
05:10:438 (16,17,18) - а еще я не совсем понимаю, зачем ты тут так закрутил стрим в конце.

просто быстро прошелся по карте, удачи

1. Размер бг у тебя странный: Extra Stage: bg.jpg (1366x983). Сейчас можно 1920х1080, так что лучше найди что нибудь такое. Или вот немного фотошопа. А еще это .png переназванная в .jpg. Для большинства прог это неважно, но хранить рисунки лучше в jpg - так компактнее.
2. Mod assistant впаривает какую то дичь, но вроде всё норм.

1. 00:22:696 (1,2) - яб их больше выделил из общей массы - очень громкие ноты
2. 00:25:291 (1,2) - ^
3. 00:27:885 (1,2) - ^ итп. 00:17:507 (1,2) - Я бы и в этой части их еще больше выделил.
4. Вообще тут вот такое дело: 00:17:507 (1,2) - находятся на 1х от слайдера, а 00:20:102 (1) - уже на 2х и это при том что они звучат почти одинаково. Потом вообще 00:25:291 (1) - 0.3. Я понимаю, что это чтоб не скучно было, но слишком сильная разница, на мой взгляд. По крайней мере первые два сделай одинаково.
5. 00:31:777 (1,2,3,4,5) - туда же по-сути: это одни из самых интенсивных звуков в этой части а ты их стакаешь. Сделай хотя бы как 00:21:399 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - тут, или даже еще дальше друг от друга.
6. 00:51:130 (2,3,4,5) - как то поравномернее бы их. Например.
7. 00:44:207 (5,7) - мне очень нравится SV на этой гитарке. Отлично подходит
8. 00:47:130 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - эти очень сильно выделяются из подобных. Тут таких 4 в музке и они звучат очень похоже, если не совсем одинаково.
9. 01:19:591 (5,6,7) - яб их пошире раздвинул, не вижу смысла давай им такой низкий DS
10. 01:21:591 (1,2,3,4,5,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1) - очень бодрое комбо, но имхо 01:22:130 (5,1,2) - вот этот вот острый угол делает его слишком сложным. Яб его как нибудь потупее сделал. Мой кривой пример.
11. 01:48:053 (4,5,1) - круть
12. 02:18:668 (1,2,3) - некрасиво
13. 02:40:899 (5,1,2) - во, вот такой угол проще значительно чет тот, с примером
14. 03:37:591 (3,4,5,6) - можно легко спутать со спейсед стримом. Не знаю даже что предложить на замену, круме как увеличить дс.
15. 04:40:668 (4,5) - мне кажется что вместо (4) и (5) должны быть просто круги (две штуки в общем), а то ритм не очень получается. Даже просто на слух можно это понять.
16. 05:23:899 (1,2,1) - мне кажется это перебор, но это не точно. Может хотябы как то покомфортнее поставить их? Например

direday wrote:

Ого, импрув и впрямь налицо! удивительно!


[General]

1. Размер бг у тебя странный: Extra Stage: bg.jpg (1366x983). Сейчас можно 1920х1080, так что лучше найди что нибудь такое. Или вот немного фотошопа. А еще это .png переназванная в .jpg. Для большинства прог это неважно, но хранить рисунки лучше в jpg - так компактнее.
2. Mod assistant впаривает какую то дичь, но вроде всё норм.

хм хм, бг поменял, спасибо. а моддинг ассистант странный какой-то, я не понимаю, чего он от меня хочет (возможно это из-за чересчур низкого св)

[Extra Stage]
Карта здоровская, мне нравится, много креатива. аа, спасибо

1. 00:22:696 (1,2) - яб их больше выделил из общей массы - очень громкие ноты
2. 00:25:291 (1,2) - ^
3. 00:27:885 (1,2) - ^ итп. а тут так задумано.. да00:17:507 (1,2) - Я бы и в этой части их еще больше выделил. сделал спейсинг немного побольше
4. Вообще тут вот такое дело: 00:17:507 (1,2) - находятся на 1х от слайдера, а 00:20:102 (1) - уже на 2х и это при том что они звучат почти одинаково. Потом вообще 00:25:291 (1) - 0.3. Я понимаю, что это чтоб не скучно было, но слишком сильная разница, на мой взгляд. По крайней мере первые два сделай одинаково. в месте где 0.3 я вообще слайдеры перестаю ставить, а тех такой спейсинг для разнообразия, ты правильно понял
5. 00:31:777 (1,2,3,4,5) - туда же по-сути: это одни из самых интенсивных звуков в этой части а ты их стакаешь. Сделай хотя бы как 00:21:399 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - тут, или даже еще дальше друг от друга. нуууу... мне не хочется снова треугольники делать..
6. 00:51:130 (2,3,4,5) - как то поравномернее бы их. Например. хм, вроде сделал
7. 00:44:207 (5,7) - мне очень нравится SV на этой гитарке. Отлично подходит =)
8. 00:47:130 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - эти очень сильно выделяются из подобных. Тут таких 4 в музке и они звучат очень похоже, если не совсем одинаково. даже не знаю, что ты под этим подразумеваешь..
9. 01:19:591 (5,6,7) - яб их пошире раздвинул, не вижу смысла давай им такой низкий DS им достаточно, как по мне + 01:20:668 (2,5,6) - красиво выглядит
10. 01:21:591 (1,2,3,4,5,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1) - очень бодрое комбо, но имхо 01:22:130 (5,1,2) - вот этот вот острый угол делает его слишком сложным. Яб его как нибудь потупее сделал. Мой кривой пример. сложности это круто! тем более у людей вроде не вызывало проблем это играть.. там главное правильно провести
11. 01:48:053 (4,5,1) - круть ты что единственный, кому это понравилось o.o
12. 02:18:668 (1,2,3) - некрасиво нуу... тут задумка такая! в прошлой подобной части были округлые штуки в начале у стримов, а тут угловатые, воот..
13. 02:40:899 (5,1,2) - во, вот такой угол проще значительно чет тот, с примером тут и слайдер удобнее стоит, но дальше там адские стримы идут, поэтому легче не становится!
14. 03:37:591 (3,4,5,6) - можно легко спутать со спейсед стримом. Не знаю даже что предложить на замену, круме как увеличить дс. один человек путал, но это скорее зависит от читалки, чем от дс
15. 04:40:668 (4,5) - мне кажется что вместо (4) и (5) должны быть просто круги (две штуки в общем), а то ритм не очень получается. Даже просто на слух можно это понять. хорошоо, поставил кружки
16. 05:23:899 (1,2,1) - мне кажется это перебор, но это не точно. Может хотябы как то покомфортнее поставить их? Например o.o раньше оно по-другому стояло.. сейчас исправлю

Надеюсь помог. Удачи с ранканьем! помог! и тебе тоже удачи с твоей картой!

PandaHero wrote:

Take my star ~☆

И мод тебе ещё.

[General]
1. Чекни AiMod, у тебя один слайдерэнд анснапнутый.
2. Я бы перенесла бы киай на вот эти части: 01:52:361, 03:02:514, 04:47:130, 05:06:822, ибо они гораздо интенсивнее.

[Extra Stage]
00:12:642 (1,2,3) - почему бы не сделать спейсинг между 1 и 2 таким же, как между 2 и 3, ведь ты потом делаешь в таких шутках одинаковый спейсинг ( по музыке не слышу ничего особенного между 1 и 2, хоть убей). А ещё я предложу тебе поставить 1 слайдер на один уровень с 3, а 2 поставить по середине между ними, ибо выглядит лучше того, что у тебя здесь сейчас. Правда при таком расположении 2 оверлапнул с этим слайдером - 00:13:615 (1), так что поправь, если что. если ты посмотрит на начало, то 00:02:588 (1,2) - подобные вещи это почти те же слайдеры. 00:12:642 (1,2,3,1,2,3) - первый слайдер в этих конструкциях вообще ни к чему не относится
00:17:831 (1,2,3) - ^ ^
00:15:561 (2,3) - эстет (нацист) внутри меня просит сделать расстояние между концами этих слайдеров таким же, какое у тебя имеется между головами 1 и 2 слайдеров. (1) не имеет отношения к (2,3). я даже специально нк поменяю, чтобы это было видно
00:16:858 (3,4) - почему между ними так мало спейсинга? Может подвигать тут слайдеры немного, чтобы всё уместить. Я подвигала и у меня получилось как-то так. А то момент по музыке точно такой же, как вот этот - 00:14:264 (3,4), а спейсинга пожалел. я не могу поставить слайдеры так, чтобы они мне понравились. потом посмотрю, что можно сделать
00:18:804 (1,2,3,4) - вот тут та же история, только не знаю как фиксить.
00:20:426 (1,2,3) - тут со спейсингом между 1 и 2 беда, зачем он тут такой огромный, расшариваю идею, как это фиксануть - https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/8039064 ок
00:47:899 (6,1) - слишком близко стоят для такого мощного удара на 1, я бы опустила слайдер вниз. дальше мощнее удар
00:48:053 (1) - аж трясёт от этого шейпа, и играется плохо, я бы что-нибудь вот такое сделала (плохо выглядит, но ничего не поделаешь). разными людьми игралось нормально, тем более мне нравится, как это ложится под музыку
00:56:822 (1,2,3,4) - если ты повернёшь эти слайдеры на 15 градусов по часовой стрелке и подвинешь вправо и вверх, это место станет намного приятнее выглядеть. Типа вот так. дополнительные оверлапы это так круто
00:57:284 (5) - ну ещё его можно чуть вправо подвинуть, если очень хочется. не хочется
00:57:591 (1) - можешь скопировать 2 слайдер и ctrl+h/j, так будет лучше выглядеть. не особо
00:57:899 (3) - и вот этого парня на X:211 Y:111 подвинуть (думаю ты понял зачем, чтобы порадовать моего внутреннего нациэстета).
00:59:899 (1,2,3) - вот этот стак плохо выглядит, 3 торчит, поправь пожалуйста. это не стак, а начало стрима со спейсингом 0.17
01:02:514 (1,2,3) - а если вот так их поставить? флоу сломается, хз. я бы такое точно нормально не смог играть
01:02:822 (3,1) - чисто моё мнение, но ты очень зря замедляешь здесь курсор, лучше сделать спейсинг примерно таким же, какой был до этого между слайдерами. ок
01:11:130 (5,6,7) - по-моему здесь угол слишком резкий для такого места, ты обычно такие углы для других целей используешь. я это ставлю не только для того, чтобы что-то выделить
01:15:745 (2,3) - сбивает с толку, ибо ты такой спейсинг юзаешь для 1/4 в этом месте. не сбивает
01:16:053 (3,4) - а вот тут наоборот слишком большой (хотя это вроде как оправдано). звуки другие
01:16:284 (4,5) - но в таком случае непонятно, почему тут так мало спейсинга оО (буду рада, если пояснишь за это место) потому что на 01:16:514 (5) - звук ещё продолжается и не хочу его сильно отделять?
01:37:591 (1) - я бы уменьшила св для этих слайдеров (примерно до 0.7-0.8), потому что они слишком быстрые для этой части, до этого у тебя такие были в довольно интенсивном парте (01:02:976 - тут). мне нравится контраст между x0.5 и x1, поэтому оставлю
01:39:591 (3) - нк может поставишь? ок
01:39:130 (2,3,4,5,1) - довольно некомфортные движения получаются, да и потом ты такой спейсинг не делаешь (вот в этом месте - 01:46:514 (2,3,4,5,1) - тут кстати намного удачнее вышло передать этот момент, как по мне). Сделала бы что-нибудь типа вот этого.
01:56:668 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - слишком крутой изгиб, хотя в музыке нет для этого причин, я бы разогнула немного. сделал его такой формы из-за протяжного звука в музыке
02:08:207 (6) - судя по всему ты тут нк потерял. ок
02:18:668 (1,2) - а такие вещи может лучше через стаки выделять, как ты до этого делал, например вот здесь - 00:59:899 (1,2,3). там акцент был на более округлых формах, тут - на угловатых
02:21:284 (1,2,3) - а если вот так? (Монстрата одобряет) я не планировал делать тут идеальных треугольников
02:43:438 (3) - нк? Так будет эстетичнее смотреться, без этого длинного фоллоу поинта (а ещё ты делал так до этого, да). ок
02:57:130 (3) - ^ ок
02:58:822 (5) - чуть круглее бы его сделать, чтобы он был логическим продолжением стрима. предыдущие и последующие слайдеры были прямыми, поэтому нет особого смысла делать один изогнутым, даже по эстетическим причинам
03:07:899 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - вот этот стрим как-то выделяется из общей картины, может его покруглее сделать? не знаю, почему он показался тебе особенным
03:10:822 (1,2,3,4) - что-то ты перегнул палку, ты же не делал такого дикого спейсинга до этого, даже в самых сильных моментах. Сделай примерно как здесь что ли - 02:01:899 (1,2,3,4). по интересным причинам к концу трек становится громче и интенсивнее. вот тебе и причина
04:56:668 (1,2,3,4,5) - ^ ^
03:11:591 (1) - вот тут нк какое-то совсем ненужное, я бы убрала.
03:12:822 (1) - ^ ок
03:15:130 (4,7) - ^ здесь уже нет нк..?
03:33:284 (1,2,3,4,5) - тут поаккуратнее бы сделать, чтобы стрим вместе со слайдером образовывали овал. ок
03:38:668 - тут бы нашлось место одному маленькому кик-слайдеру (по музыке гитару слышно). я ничего тут не слышу
03:41:130 - ^ ^
Ну и дальше там много такого. ну и много того, что я не способен услышать
03:41:361 - тут кстати тоже гитару пропустил. ок
03:42:207 (3) - я бы нк сюда влепила. не вижу смысла спамить нк в этой части
03:56:514 (1,2,3,4,5,6,1,2,3) - как же классно у тебя тут получилось, ня.
04:24:668 (1) - аналогичное замечание про св (1х тут многовато всё же).
04:50:514 (13) - поставь нк, пожалуйста, ты же сменил направление стрима. ок
05:09:899 (9) - ^ ок
05:10:514 (17) - ^ ок
04:52:053 - 04:54:514 - стрим как-то странно ведёт себя на этом промежутке, даже не знаю, что тебе предложить, он просто не вполне следует тому, что происходит в музыке. нормально он себя ведёт
05:24:053 (1) - не фанат таких нк, взял и разделил троечку, я бы убрала. ок


Прости что так много, в основном прошлась по визуальным моментам и спейсингу, с остальным у тебя дела обстоят хорошо.

BOUYAAA wrote:

Hello, sorry for the delay

00:31:762 (1,2,3,1,2,3) - this is somewhat inconsistent with what you did earlier 00:21:384 (1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2) - in the earlier pattern you group your notes like this : 3, 3, 2 which is think is correct because the music clearly groups notes that way. In the later one you group the first 3 but you don't group the 3 next ones which i find a little weird that was made for the glory of diversity! and because for me this moment is less intense than the previous one for some reasons

00:44:668 (1,2,1,2) - at this point i'd stay stick to normal newcomboing music is not really indicate anything special here so i'd say leave that as 1 nc. Like the part where you nc twice isn't that different from 00:47:130 (1,2,3,4) - anyways oh, okay!

00:48:053 (1) - would be cool if your strong sound would be followed by higher spacing than average too, it sometimes feel yeah, true

01:02:668 (2,3,1,2,3) - i can't really imagine this playing well, i'd suggest you try something like this out : https://puu.sh/vN5u5/bcb276df16.jpg. that way you have a sharp movement between 01:02:668 (2,3,1,2,3) - which in my opinion emphasizes the new phrase properly but also allows for a sharper angle so that the spaced triple is more comfortable to hit good catch, thank you!

02:02:976 (1,2,3,4) - the fact that there suddently no more whistle sounds make it feel empty to me, i'd say add some on the main melody 03:11:899 (1,2,3) - etc don't worry, i filled the void inside your soul

04:51:745 (6,7,1) - this would probably benefit from asharper angle too i think, just for the sake of playability. Maybe something like this https://puu.sh/vN61F/2ee312beed.jpg okay!

05:16:668 (1) - single nc is a bit weird here, you don't do it in the other deathstream parts i think oh, apparently i accidentally placed nc here..~
05:19:130 (1) - same here looks a bit awkward maybe try ncing here 05:18:976 (3) - so that the slider isn't just alone lol хорошо!


That'd be it.
I quite like the map, it's pretty well made imo. Nothing much to say

Good luck!

Hysteria wrote:

• Here by request~
  
  [General]I would strongly suggest trying to match the combo colours a bit better with the bg because as right of now they are extremely neon-y. Easy fix is just to change saturation to 150 and luminosity to 165 for all colours. Fits the background better as well as keeping the colours themselves within a theme. okay!
  
  I'd make the BG a higher resolution if possible as well. it's 1920x1080 already o.o
  
  [Extra Stage]
  
  Introduction:
  
  I've skipped out on a lot of stuff I deemed to subjective to bring up. Your mapping style quite heavily differs from mine, which makes judging and understanding a bit more difficult than usually. So therefore I just decided to not bring up things that feels more "me" than "you" if that makes any sense. Therefore the majority of the points ended up just being spacing emphasis and smaller aesthetical things like blankets and missed stacks.
  
  If you still want the more subjectve things however just pm me online whenever and I'll go through that too!
  
  Unsnapped Objects:
  00:49:356 - Slider end
  00:50:654 - Slider end don't know what is that.. modding assistant shows strange things to you!
  
  Mapping:
  00:31:762 (1,2,3,1,2,3,4,5) - Why the lower spacing compared to 00:11:006 (1,2,3,1,2,3,4,5) - and 00:21:384 (1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2) - ? because it's not so intense as before, i think..
  00:50:053 (2) - Missed stack okay!
  01:02:976 (1,2,3) - Spacing is a bit too intense imo, comes kinda out of nowhere and there's really not much of an intensity shift in the music either. okie, i've reduced spacing here
  01:16:284 (4,5) - This blanket is kinda meh okaaaay, corrected
  01:47:438 (1) - Stack eeh?
  01:48:053 (4,5,1) - This shift in SV is very hard to read. It basically forces the player to have played the map before to be able to not overshoot. i know,
  i know..
  01:54:284 (4,5,6,1) - Why the manual stacking? Music doesn't change enough to just change the spacing of the stream that much. Compare it to 01:59:745 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16) - Where the spacing change makes sense and really fit. there's something similar to 01:53:284 (7) - . i just decided to map it in another way!
  02:01:899 (1,2,3,4,1) - Would argue that the spacing is too large due to music still being borderline the same intensity as before. just wanted to emphasize these sounds really hard
  02:09:976 - Missing a beat. i don't hear anything here o.o
  02:21:745 (1,2,3) - Inconsistent spacing compared to 01:02:976 (1,2,3) since i fixed the spacings 01:02:976 (1,2,3) - here - it should be fine!
  02:37:514 (4) - Stack okaay
  02:58:207 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - Spacing is at it's lowest when the guitar is at it's most intense part. Should rethink that imo. reworked!
  03:10:822 (1,2,3,4,1) - Same as the other similar places, spacing is too big even though the music is almost the same. aand my opinion still the same, sorry..!
  03:23:438 (1) -> 03:27:130 (1) - Quite plain and non interesting part compared to what was just before and what's to come. I would advice to remap it, to make it more interesting and you have shown so far to be way more than capable of doing something cooler than this. but it's fits the music! even if that boring..
  03:38:822 (2,3,4) - Touches the previous slider body, looks really meh. Compared to 03:43:745 (2,3,4) - where it's completely fine.
  03:57:745 (1,2,3) - Inconsistent spacing again. uwu
  04:32:361 -> 04:45:438 - Spacing consistency in this section is really weird. At some points the spacing is really low between triple to triple or from 1/2 to 1/2 but at other places they are distinctly bigger than before. 04:33:591 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - and 04:34:514 (3,4,5,1,2,3) - compared to 04:35:438 (6,7,8,9,10,11). Generally speaking a non linear spacing is fine as long as there's a structure behind it, from what I can tell, there's a lack of structure in this section and therefore the spacing get's inconsistent. somewhere that was more intense to me, that's why the spacings strange. it may be just my awful hearing by the way..
  04:51:899 (7) - Stack stacked already (maybe you didn't update the map, uh?)
  04:56:668 (1,2,3,4,5) - Same as all the others wuw
  05:03:514 - Skipping a beat still don't hear something in that place..
  05:16:361 (1,2,3,4,5) - Same again. ну блин ты понял короче
  05:23:899 (1,2,3) - Inconsistent spacing. because of strong sounds!
  
  Final words:
  
  The map is cool and there's a lot of interesting concepts in it for sure, but I feel that there's a decent amount of things that needs more polish. Spacing emphasis is quite awkward at times, it's inconsistent and doesn't really make any sense in regard to the music. At other times it's the complete opposite where the spacing is consistent, makes sense and really fits the intensity and feeling of the song itself. But from what I can see you're more than capable of fixing and polishing the issues that's at hand.
  
  GL in the future, and I hope to see this ranked eventually! good luck to you too!

YokesPai wrote:

OwO
Hello

00:03:870 (1,2) - Think you should Ctrl+G because these circles move downwards when 00:02:573 (1,2) - and 00:03:222 (1,2) - move upwards. hm hm.. okay!
00:21:708 (3) - Move this to x:161 y:125 if you're going for a perfect triangle.
00:22:195 (3) - Move this to x:159 y:91 if you're going for a perfect triangle. yeah, thank you
00:32:573 (3) - Why is this not stacked with 00:32:249 (1,2) - ? I suggest something like this so you don't need to do anything with 00:32:573 (3,4,5,1) - . i hear some different sounds here, so that's why (yea my ears are shit)
01:48:668 (1) - This one, I feel like you should make the SV higher. I think it's really easy to break on if you don't know the map already. that's the most hardest part in my map so i'll keep it!
02:58:207 (1,2,3,4) - This spacing feels to big, I don't hear any loud drum beats here. And if you want to emphasize, you should emphasize 02:58:514 (1,2,3,4) - because the music is louder there. i imagined sounds on 02:58:207 (1,2,3,4) - like a semicircle and the sounds on 02:58:514 (1,2,3,4) - like a more linear thing. i'm so creative
04:27:438 (1,2,3,4) - If you're going for triangles here you should make them better, I think it looks ugly. didn't wanna to
04:50:438 (12,1) - What happened to sharp angles (or emphasis) on white ticks? This is unconsistent with the other streams.
05:23:899 (1,2,3) - Hmm I'm unsure about this spacing, there's no loud drums but it's the end of the map... Up to you I guess. big spacing because of the end of pain

Hope this helps! Still not very experienced but always good to try

Asaiga wrote:

Hello from queue

1. I find SV is pretty fast with many low spacing objects, making gameplay a bit uncomfortable
2. 00:45:591 (5,1,2) - Visual distance looks pretty the same despite SV + time distance is not. Could you different slidershape here 00:45:899 (1) -
   00:43:438 (1) - Can you for this case as well, maybe an anchored slider would be nice. So players will know there is a change there
   00:50:822 (1) - ^ i'll try red anchors
3. 00:52:668 (1,2,3,4) - By doing this you make 1 and 3 stand out better but music doesn't have any element to make these 2 notes sound more prominent. Which I think you emphasize this in a not very correct way with the music, could just use normal stream here. yeah, tought about it recently
4. 00:53:361 (2) - Can be marked as overmap. I would avoid something like this but up to you that's not a really bad overmap, i suppose..
5. 01:03:129 (3,4,5) - 4 gets too much emphasis more than it should because of the sharp angle and big spacing. And 5,6,7 triplet is underemphasized. because of the small spacing and wide angle. So I think you can do put more emphasize into triplet by increase more spacing and sharper angle. And use non-sharp angle on note that needs less emphasis. okaay
6. 01:03:284 (4,5) - and 01:03:745 (8,9) - look annoyingly close together.
   01:03:745 (8,9,10) - With spacing like this it's hard to tell if it's 1/2 or 1/4. And why does 10 gets bigger distance? i wanted to emphasize sounds on triplet stronger!
7. 01:16:053 (3,4,5) - 5 sounds more like it needs bigger spacing here ctrl+g should work with that
8. 01:21:591 - SV is slowed down here and sudden burst of space stream. 01:21:899 (2,3,4,5) - A bit overdone tbh hmm..
9. 01:52:053 (4,1) - This is something I find awful for the gameplay because of slow slider with sudden fast paced stream. Could use higher sv here 01:52:053 (4) - thaat's not as awful as you think. also that slider give a cute emphasis for the music here!

Good luck :3 thaank you!

lazyboy007 wrote:

Hello for NM as agreed per PM

[General]

1. Files are perfectly formatted no problem here

Anything I say about one pattern here applies to all similar in the map, they're not big or important changes, just slight improvments.

[Mapping]

1. 00:12:627 - you could do the same as you did in this section 01:37:284 - , just less difference in SV. The same bass plays, but because the violin is playing at the same time, you could use a 0.75x - 1.00x instead of 0.50x - 1.00x, I think it would fit better than full 1.00x SV i have tooooo different feelings about these 2 parts
2. 01:04:976 (5,6) - I feel like a short 1/2 slider would fit better here for the long note, same as all similar patterns. 01:05:284 (7,8,9) - here is fine as is, but it would also work with a repeat slider instead for the same reason. hm, sure
3. 01:22:745 (4,1) - You may wanna make this a little more spaced, because 1 is a strong downbeat. No need to make it a jumpstream, but at least for the visual effect it would be nice to go around 0.5-0.75x spacing okay!
4. 02:13:899 (3,4,5,6) - This and all similar streams should have the same visual wiggle as 00:45:284 (1,2,3,4) - , it fits the sound really well. Also, it should be more spaced in the chorus than in the quiet part imo i think i should emphasize it only at the beggining because it sounds not so strong in all further similar parts!
5. 02:48:361 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - could be a bigger jump between the streams, the difference in the guitar notes is very audible and strong. You could go around 1.2-1.5x spacing maybe good idea, thank you

You should abuse your snare hitsounds more, it's really good, but sadly you only use it in the deathstreams sections. You could really use it in all parts of the songs with drums. You also have a few small inconsistencies in hitsounds like here 01:02:976 (1,2,3) - . forgot about that triple, uhhh. and yeah, i'll try to make something good with snares!

A few tiny changes, and this map is all good! I love it ^^ one of the most fun unranked maps I've ever modded, really good music and really nice to watch Good luck! aa, thank you

MadHypnofrog wrote:

привет, м4м

диффа
может од повыше чутка? на 6.5* как мне кажется 8.8 будет маловато, 9ку хотя бы бахни 9 совсем трудно будет, с такими-то стримами. а ещё 8.8 красивее выглядит!

00:02:249 (3,1) - смущает немного маленький дс, несмотря на высокий ар может быть тяжеловато читать это
00:04:195 (2,1) - и вот здесь
00:06:789 (2,1) - ну ты понял ни у кого с этим проблем не возникало, так что оставлю
00:09:870 (2,3) - оверкилл чутка, как мне кажется, там звуки точно такие же, как и 00:07:114 (1,2,3) - не знаю, мне они в этом месте более громкими кажутся
00:13:924 (2,3) - бланкет сломался ну ты нацист конечно. поправил
00:15:870 (3) - мне кажется, на этот слайдер лучше побольше дса сделать - там звук посильнее
это особенно сильно вот здесь заметно 00:17:816 (1,2,3) - внезапно 1-2 большой дс, а 2-3 нет, хотя до этого было по-другому для меня в этой части звуки практически одинаковые..
00:20:735 (1) - нк можно убрать, этот слайдер ничем не отличается от предыдущих я нк перепутал случайно..
00:22:843 (2,1,2) - почему только здесь юзаешь такой дс? потому что после джампиков я решил сделать что-то разительно новое и не слайдеры
00:32:573 (3) - не вижу причин вытаскивать эту тройку из стака, там такой же 1-2-3-1-2-3-1-2 паттерн в музыке ну блиин, я что-то особенно именно тут слышу и не могу ничего с этим поделать!
00:43:438 (1,2) - я бы здесь немного больше дс сделал, чтобы не путалось потом с 00:44:207 (5,6) - , где такой же спейсинг eeeh что-то я не особо хорошо понял, что именно мне нужно сделать
00:45:899 (1,2) - аналогично и тут
00:51:899 (6,1) - джамп куда делся сделал я тебе джамп. даже с бланкетом в придачу
00:57:745 (8,9) - оч плохо играется, флоу совершенно не в ту сторону идет. можешь поменять местами слайдеры так, чтобы (8) был справа, тогда норм будет сломанный флоу тут специально.. ну чтобы звук нормально выделить
01:03:284 (4) - спейсани побольше чутка, а то как-то не оч смотрится ну если только чутка
01:04:361 (1,2,3,4) - очень просится вот такой ритм, т.к. там в начале слайдера такой 1/4 звук я даже с 25% не слышу этого звука!
01:13:591 (3,4) - не очень интуитивный паттерн, больше похоже на 1/2 спейсинг тогда у тестеров очень хорошая интуиция
01:15:745 (2,3) - особенно здесь
01:18:976 (1,3) - поменяй местами нк, чтобы как в предыдущем паттерне ок
01:20:207 (10,1) - внезапные фулскрины такие внезапные прямо в лицо
01:48:053 (4,5) - я не очень фанат подобных слайдеров, поэтому сделал бы что-нибудь такое мне мои больше заезжают
02:03:899 (3,4) - вот эти две ноты как мне кажется лучше звучат как кикслайдер, потому что на тройке там похожий звук на (1) и (2) но тут такая пауза в музыке есть.. поэтому нотки там и поставил
02:09:438 (1,2,3) - оч злой флоу бу!
02:10:053 (1,2,3) - лучше стакни просто стаком некрасиво
02:23:130 (1,2,3,4) - то же, что и на 01:04:361
по следующей секции аналогичные замечания с этими 02:32:361 (3,4,5) - ритмами. можешь попробовать в первой секции их вводить как-то постепенно (сначала просто 3/4 реверсом, например, чтобы игрок знал, что здесь будет повторяться такой ритм), потом плавно перейти к подобным паттернам, а здесь все оставить но я до сих пор ничего тут не слышу..
02:37:745 (1,3) - нк окк
02:40:976 (1,2,3,4) - тоже оч злой флоу, попробуй мб вниз его направить? бу!! а вниз там места не хватит
02:46:822 (5,6) - подобные тройки сложно играются из-за того, что сбивают немного ритм своим одним репитом. 02:41:899 (1,2) - такое подходит намного лучше. а еще у тебя нк отличаются немного, хотя в музыке все так же вроде бы не так сложно, а нк поправил, у меня с памятью проблемы
02:51:745 (1,2) - ^ крышечка, а нк пофиксил
02:58:207 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - чет мне кажется что во второй четверке спейса должно бы быть больше, чем в первой, ибо там рифф посильнее
03:12:822 (5,6) - 02:03:899 я наоборот специально сделал, да
03:16:207 (1,2,3,4,5) - странный оч паттерн, как по мне, но это так, чисто имхо квадратик, а играется по кругу
03:37:438 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - сделай чуть побольше спейсинг, со стаком выглядит будто стак и 4-ка касаются да нормально же вроде
03:38:745 - я упорно слышу здесь звук. два 3/4 слайдера решат проблему, плюс не надо будет со спейсингом париться раньше так и было, а потом мне это перестало нравиться и я переработал немного
03:41:207 - аналогично аналогичное имхо
03:42:822 (6) - пониже и правее, а то сейчас почти касаются и выглядит не очень блин бланкет ломать не хочу..
03:43:668 - ну ты понял аааа
03:54:668 (1,2,3) - поострее угол бы ему и таким хорошо быть
04:35:745 (9,10,11) - я б вверх подвинул немного этот стак, чтобы выглядело поприятнее ладно
04:50:438 (12,1) - оч странные нк, обычные 8-8 как мне кажется лучше зайдут сам намки посоветовал мне так сделать, поэтому оставлю (но да,
это нк очень странно выглядит)
04:56:976 (5,1) - нк перепутал. ну, либо на пятерку поставь перепутал
04:58:668 (1,2) - 02:03:899
05:03:591 (1,2,3) - тоже упоминал уже а я уже отвечал
05:12:130 (6,1) - поворот стрима куда делся? не хватило места.. редактор маленький
05:13:361 (6,1) - и тут =(
05:18:361 (1,2) - было уже, да если это про нк, то тут фоллоу поинт убогий
05:19:053 (2,3) - я бы вот здесь запилил что-нибудь помощнее, потому что в этом киае данная секция посильнее, чем во всех остальных стабильность - наш ответ

а вообще, оч даже неплохая карта, удачи! спасибо!

Monstrata wrote:

Extra Stage

00:12:627 - 00:20:087 - This section, your jumps are quite random and don't really follow any logic imo. 00:13:276 (3,1) - Why is this a jump but not00:16:843 (3,4) - ? 00:17:168 (4,1) - How come there's no jump here? Think about what notes you want to emphasize in this section and map them to larger spacing so you can convey the strength of the music more clearly here. will rework that part
00:23:006 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,1) - Not a fan of this cuz I think the circles are just too close together xP. Use spacing like 00:25:276 (1,2,1) - , this looks clean and even. editor won't allow me to use bigger spacing
00:27:870 (1,2,1) - 00:30:465 (1,2,1) - You could make these bigger and bigger imo, since you're using larger spacing. i don't think it's necessary here
00:45:591 (5,1) - Really lacks emphasis. 00:48:053 (1,1) -compare it to this. that moment on 00:48:053 (1,1) - is a lot stronger then the others as for me
00:50:514 (5,1) - ^
01:03:745 (8,9,10,11,12) - I would arrange them like this. The angle is better. right now 8>9>10 is really sharp and doesn't feel comfortable oh, okay

01:14:053 (5,6,1) - Spacing is kinda weird imo... Jump onto 1 as well?
01:19:591 (5,6,7) - These are too small imo... They don't really fit the section that well, especially with the other spacings you use. raised spacings
01:48:668 (1) - Way too undermapped. Don't do this please ;c.... you skip so many beats unnecessarily. i can't force myself to map something instead of that slider..
02:29:591 (2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9) - Structure looks rather uneven. a parallelepiped here, i think
02:57:745 (3,4,5) - I don't think its a good idea to have the kickslider pointing that way xP it looks pretty bad visually i like it but i've fixed something else
03:27:438 (2,3,4,5,1) - Don't space them out, make them small in spacing so you can distinguish them from 03:28:361 (1,2,3,4,5) - . buut sweet blankets will be ruined :c

[]

Overall, you handle streams and kicksliders very well. Your jump patterns and overall structure could be cleaner though. I think this has a lot of potential if you can clean up some of your jump elements and non stream-based patterns because those still need further polishing. You could also work on emphasis control in the first half of the map imo. Some notes just aren't properly emphasized with spacing. big thanks you for mod! i'll try to rework some parts that you pointed out

Trynna wrote:

only diff

1. although i know you like that part, i'm not a big fan of a break 01:22:976 - + 01:37:284 - a not so calm part + 01:48:668 (1) - a slider that goes against your past rhythms and undermap everything you were following before on the same sounds. The slider made me feel like i was missing something. Anyway, i don't think it's bad overall, cuz the map needs a lot of stamina and this is a super rest part, but wouldn't be better to make it going more intense with time instead of the reverse? still don't know what to do with that orz
2. 02:11:591 - 02:11:668 - maybe i'm insane, but i can hear something on those spots, and ignoring them trigger me a bit it's pretty calm sounds and like the little break with double here~~~~
3. 02:13:438 (4,5,6,1,2,3) - honestly, the flow here isn't so cool while playing, the angle is actually a bit lol, i'd rotate 02:13:745 (1,2,3) - a bit so the circular movement could be cleaner yeah, it's a bit sick
4. 02:32:053 (2,3,4) - visuals are so similar, super easy to misunderstand the pattern actually it's played fine for the most people who tested it before...
5. 02:54:207 (5,1,2,3,4,1) - i don't really feel like you should keep those parts undermapped, considering that you were following the drums pretty well, here the drums are streaming among the guitar and it feels so wrong to have it so sudden, also, you rarely do stuff like this ooo i mapped these strange sounds on bg, reflected it with stream form too
6. 03:02:207 (7) - NC here would fit the song p well okay but.. fitting the song nc's..... what year is it??
7. 03:38:745 - there's a sound like 03:38:822 (2,3,4) - here i suppose, same goes to 03:39:976 - i guess, and prob 03:41:207 - (honestly idk if you did it on purpose but is kinda weird to follow 03:39:668 (2) - and ignore the rest) note here feels so strange, also i hear that sound on 1/8 tick and dunno if it's a good idea to place something on it
8. 03:38:976 (4) - i'd add whistle me too
9. whistles on 03:41:514 (4) - and 03:46:438 (4) - feels so messy when you are using them for the guitar and both (03:46:361 - and 03:46:514 -) and (03:41:438 (3) - 03:41:591 -) are stronger than those blue ticks. I'd use the same idea you used on 03:44:976 (4,5,6) - and 03:40:053 (4,5,6) - ooooh i don't know how did i placed their like that, fix fix
10. 04:48:745 (6,1) - feels like the impact here is only visual while on the other parts you did it with stacking + following the stream again or just changing the movement, idk if it fits so well, but i'm bad on streaming techniques that part are different for me, it's like all of the sounds became more elongated and that's why i used more streams and less stacked streams
11. 05:10:668 (1,4) - idk if just me, but maybe swapping NCs would be more fitting with the pattern itself and the song it's just you! but i removed previous nc because it was a bit strange

overall diff is pretty cool, i'd love to see that ranked soon ufufu~