Since most of your answers are like:
I will leave this stuff for QAT, thank god they are more active and resolute right now.
but this thing bothers me the most:
But the entire question here is the cross-screen jump 01:51:805 (2,1) - here which break flow. Compare this to 01:53:305 (2,1) - which is way better and fluent.
????????
Im saying that 00:52:180 (1,2,3) - unexpected/unintuitive/forces new concept to the player that has to play a whack-a-mole game.
Ask someone to tesplay it, people are failing at this pat the most.
Thats what I called a sacrifice. This slow slider is unexpected, there is no tangible sounds to indicate with that.
I know that, you know that, everyone knows that.
This map is an entire "read me" or "guess the SV" or "guess the rhythm" challenge, which is why people here are trying to bring some logic in and make this thing more fluent.
handsome wrote:
no
handsome wrote:
not strong
feels like I am not that welcomed here eh? Nice arguments at the end of 2017!handsome wrote:
???????????
I will leave this stuff for QAT, thank god they are more active and resolute right now.
but this thing bothers me the most:
does it even matter if that thing is strong or not? You placed a finish and NC there, which means you considered it as strong.handsome wrote:
01:53:680 (2,1) - compare it to 01:51:805 (2,1) - this spike is HUGE and indicates literally nothing (another Candy-Candy chorus), here you got a strong beat 01:53:868 (1) - and no spacing to the previous slider end at all. not strong
But the entire question here is the cross-screen jump 01:51:805 (2,1) - here which break flow. Compare this to 01:53:305 (2,1) - which is way better and fluent.
Why do you answering a question with another question?handsome wrote:
00:52:180 (1,2,3) - its really hard to read, you did kinda similar thing with triplet here 00:48:618 (1,2,3,4) - but it was rather a hold-stream. where in the world are you drawing comparisons from these
????????
Im saying that 00:52:180 (1,2,3) - unexpected/unintuitive/forces new concept to the player that has to play a whack-a-mole game.
It is more thats insufficient, you have to differentiate visually what is slow and what is not, these are having the same form concept.handsome wrote:
02:15:805 (1) - 02:16:180 - 02:16:555 - 02:16:930 - this stuff if where most of players fails at, why? because you didnt restructure these slow sliders (at least make them straight like here 00:42:993 (1) - or here 02:18:243 (1) - ) the biggest flaw of this map in my opinion there is a restructure, with NC and lower spacing for the next note
Ask someone to tesplay it, people are failing at this pat the most.
yes.handsome wrote:
00:23:118 (1) - it doesnt reflect the music properly, 00:23:868 - this thing is a new sound measure, even being a part of 00:23:118 - doesnt make it that dependent to previous vocal phrase. no
Dont you see the SV gap here? from 2x to 0.2x? just to make sure that 03:15:243 (1) - stacked with 03:14:680 (1,2) - ????handsome wrote:
03:15:243 (1) - you sacrificed structure/flow for aesthetics here. But how is this expected? hard to make sense of what you're saying, really
Thats what I called a sacrifice. This slow slider is unexpected, there is no tangible sounds to indicate with that.
I know that, you know that, everyone knows that.
Thats the objective flaw, we are mappers and we supposed to estimate the map from editor. If you use 2 objectively the same patterns on a different sound phrases it forces the player to completely give up on memorization and just to read the map from what he sees.handsome wrote:
00:55:930 (1,1,2,3) - and 01:24:243 (1,1,2,3) - these are literally the same pattern-wsem so the player is getting ready for huge triplet, but LOLJK its not. its 1/2s. try playing the map, not looking in edit
This map is an entire "read me" or "guess the SV" or "guess the rhythm" challenge, which is why people here are trying to bring some logic in and make this thing more fluent.