[
this mod was made for a assignment by my Mentor in the Mentorship program on mapping analysis. I'm mentioning this since I might also point out concepts just for the sake of me noticing them and not improving the map, but most suggestion will try to improve the map.
there are 3 main aspects I noticed were problematic as a whole Spacing, NC structure and the way you utilize slider leniency.
gl with the set, I hope you can actually use this to look through the map and try to find similar issues I didn't mention because it being redundant, if you'd want to I could do some irc mod with you too in case you want me to adress literally everything... I hope I got the fundamental flaws apparently
Brilliance
]
[Slider Leniency]
[list:1337]there are a few patterns in the map I think that don't play as intended, as some require the player to not actually move. You mostly handle basic jumps out of 1/2 and longer sliders or stuff with 1/4 out of sliders well like 00:17:940 (1,1,2,3,4) - , but you treat a lot of 1/4 sliders more like people would treat 1/2 which is assuming that players will go through the whole shape, while most 1/4 actually plays more like circle jumps because of slider leniency. I'll go a bit into detail
- 00:01:140 - for example the sliders you use in the intro need no movement, you can just stay with your cursor on the slider head, click and snap to the next object. I think you rather intended the player to fully move through the slider rather than staying on the head as it contrast badly with the movement needed here 00:03:368 (1,2,3) - and the sliders in the outro 05:52:225 (1,2) - since these actually need at least some movement to not miss a slider end. I'd suggest either higher SV in the intro or even better something like CTRL + G for the sliders since that would encourage the player to move to the next object through the slider body. *edit you could also move the circles spaced away from the head which isn't really straining because of leniency.
- 00:24:968 (1,2,3,1) - this pattern has 2 issues. First of all 1/4 sliders actually play more like hitcircles spacing wise because of slider leniency so your jump into 2 feels really small almost like DS so treating the two 1/4 sliders as jumps between the heads would work better.
- 00:25:311 (3,1) - a similar problem happens here as above since players can just ignore the slider body of 3 and snap to 00:25:482 (1) - in this case it would also be better to treat 3 into 1 more like a normal circle jump, maybe even bigger now since 1 is a really strong sound
- 00:28:225 (2) - this shape actually uses leniency very well since it's just far enough so you can't treat it like a hold note
- 00:30:111 (1,1,2) - these kinda work in a sense that they play like circle jumps, but I think compared to a lot of your jumps in this section they are actually spaced fairly weirdly. If you imagine the pattern more like this 00:30:111 (1,1) - is a really small jump compared to let's say 00:23:597 (4,1,2) - which all have way weaker sounds. I'd suggest spacing the sliders out more or nerving the others and try to keep the spacing between 00:30:111 (1,1) - more more similar to 00:30:282 (1,2) - since the 2nd one is like twice the size. I think you might also wanna unstack 00:29:940 (1,1) - since there isn't that much emphasis on 00:30:111 (1) -
- 00:33:711 (1,2,1) - this plays like DS because of the 1/4 slider and the overall low spacing into the downbeat 00:33:882 (2,1) - which doesn't add any emphasis to this really strong sound as really small spacing into even smaller spacing doesn't add any strain on the player. It would be more appropriate to either space out all of these like jumps or have a big jump into 00:33:882 (2) - stacked on top of 00:34:054 (1) - to add emphasis by suddenly going from less motion through the stack to lots of motion from the slider into the next object
- 00:34:740 (1,2) - these aren't really fitting since the low spacing makes them play almost like anit-jumps which I don't think is fitting as you only mapped this sound with big jumps so far
- 00:39:540 (1,2,3) - these have not much movement since you can just snap between the heads. I think something like this would work better as snapping between the heads needs a bigger motion (might even be still not enough) and the jump here 00:39:882 (3,1) - actually doesn't unnecessarily force the player to play the last shape in a way more uncomfortable way than the rest of these. You might wanna change it to fit your aesthetic better though.
- 00:40:911 (1,2,3) - the player can also just snap between the heads here so 1 into 2 is a far bigger jump than 2 into 3. 2 into 3 actually needs to follow the shape a bit, but I think that's more unpredictable than anything and still makes 1 into 2 bigger. I think something like this would work better
- 00:41:940 (1) - kinda meh use of this shape since it doesn't require any movement, but could require some if you'd use a more simple curve. It makes more sense to have little than no movement here
- 00:44:682 (1) - players can abuse this shape by just moving slightly upwards and staying in the slider tail area. I'd suggest to use a more simple or rather wider shape to encourage the player more to play the shape as intended.
- 00:45:711 - pretty much all the 1/2 sliders in this section are so small that instead of following the shape players will just snap as I stated before in other suggestion, but in this section specifically I think more implied movement would represent the calmness of the section better than having to snap between slider heads.
- 00:53:254 (1,2,1,2,1,2) - I guess it's intentional that you can stay here in just one spot, think this kinda fits in this case even if I personally would prefer more movement.
- 00:54:968 (2,1) - this jump is stronger than this one 00:55:825 (4,1) - but the 2nd one has the stronger sound
- 01:08:340 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2) - I kinda like how you emphasize the strong sounds with wide angles here, but you didn't really use them anywhere else besides the intro and outro
- 01:16:225 (1) - good shape, slider ticks also force movement through it well
- 01:17:597 (1) - suboptimal slider plays just like a hold note
- 01:18:968 (1) - good shape same as the other good one above
- 01:25:825 (1) - not sure if the speed here is intentional since it could have even more movement with a simpler shape, but I guess it works
- 01:36:797 (1) - bad shape it's fast enough for players to not want to play it fully so they'll just go down a bit and don't move much even though the sounds is really strong and more movement would reflect it better like 01:25:825 (1) -
I think I could go on with shapes, but I guess you get how you might wanna change a lot of those - 02:34:054 (1,1,1) - kinda funny as this is the most intense shape to play in the entire song almost
- 02:54:454 (3,1) - this is one of the only 1/1 jumps in the map and spacing it like just a normal 1/2 jump is really uncomfortable and doesn't really add any emphasis in this case as the jump before isn't big enough to justify it as a anti-jump please space that one out about twice as much
- 03:14:168 (1) - it's really hard to interpret in which direction to move here since both slider end and head are both on the crossing into 4 directions, players might break combo on this without actually being at fault as this isn't introduced in the map at all
- Your spacing overall varies a lot in section and some really calm parts have less spacing then more intense parts like compare 04:39:197 (4,5) - to 00:03:368 (1,2,3) - or 05:34:568 (2,1) - to 02:04:397 (6,1) - it's really hard to actually compare your spacing clearly in relation to each other between sections you start using jumps 3/4 of the screen size almost in the first 30 seconds 00:30:625 (1,2) - or fullscreen 00:36:968 (2,1) -.
Another aspect would be your 1/4 jumps, you introduce them early on which is nice and actually fitting the song 00:27:454 (4,1) - but they are used in somewhat inconsistent ways. The most notable would be that the kick drum often receives the same spacing as all the other sounds even when it's technically the strongest instrument in the section. for example it even lands on a slider end here 03:52:568 - . There's also these overlapping 1/4 notes occasionally which don't make much sense as they aren't consistently expressing the same thing, compare 03:51:968 (1,2,1,2) - to 03:54:025 (1,2) - the interval repeats, but you didn't repeat the small spacing.
- Your NC structure is not really emphasizing anything in particular, most NCs happen more than once in on measure. I can't really see a clear structure to them other than splitting small patterns aesthetically like the first section uses them every 2 objects which takes away emphasis from other possible elements of the song like Downbeats 00:02:511 (1) - , changes or switching between instruments 00:03:368 (1,2,3) - , transitions 00:28:054 (1,2,3) - etc.
I'll point out some is specifically disagree with
- 00:01:825 (1) - the NC here is unnecessary as it just removed emphasis on the downbeat.
- 000:13:140 (1,1) - I don't even understand why you used NCs here
- 00:15:882 (1) - takes away emphasis from the downbeat
- 00:17:082 (1,1,1,1,1) - emphasizes nothing
- 00:19:311 (1) - it would make more sense to NC 00:19:482 (2) - since that one could be justified as emphasizing a different instrument
- 00:22:740 (1) - takes away emphasis from he downbeat and using NC to hint at SV changes in case you tried to do that wouldn't be needed as going from low to lower isn't that noticable.
- 00:23:768 (1,1) - 00:24:968 (1) - these are unnecessary as there's no 1 2 pattern in the song and they take away emphasis from the downbeat and instrument change here 00:25:482 (1) - same for the rest of the section except for 00:28:054 (1,2,3) - for example
- 00:30:282 (1) - I actually wouldn't NC this once as grouping the 3 basses together would make more sense I'd then only NC here again 00:30:797 (1) - to signal another change in instrumentation
- 00:32:682 (1) - SV signaling takes away emphasis from the pattern here 00:33:025 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2) -
- 00:33:025 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2) - also the NC spam here is unnecessary too
- 00:57:711 (1,2,1,2,1,2) - there's no 1 2 pattern in the song and neither does the section build up in intensity, the pattern itself should be enough to emphasize the Lead. honestly there's no need for any specific NC structure in this section 00:45:025 - besides downbeat emphasis
- 01:39:882 - 1 2 NC would actually fit here to represent the build up
- 01:45:368 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1) - NC makes sense here
- 01:50:854 - you could group a few instrument more together here like 01:50:854 (1,1,2) - 01:52:225 (1,2,1,2) - 01:59:597 (3,1,2,3,4,5) -
- 02:00:625 (1,1,1) - the NC spam here is unnecessary, if you tried to hint at SV then I think it isn't needed as players can interpret the gradual increase in spacing
- 02:50:511 (1,1,1,1,1) - really unnecessary NC spam
pretty much anything above repeats the whole map so I'll stop here and suggest to re-do your NC structure as right now it often doesn't emphasize any stanza or instrumentation in the song.
- overall the playfield usage is nice and you also use it evenly not just on a makro scale, but try to fill the screen at all times and the visual design is obviously 10/10 and has even some really creative shapes that often even work really well some patterns even have some more complex geometry I can appreciate like 01:08:340 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1) - also good use of slider art even looking good over longer periods of time example
- 00:03:368 (1,2,3) - nice use of linear jump emphasizing the strongest note on 00:03:711 (3) -
- 00:20:340 (1) - nice reference to the lyrics xd
- 00:27:454 (4,1) - already said this is a nice introduction into 1/4 jumps, but I'll do it again
- 01:28:911 - you actually handled the movement in this section very well in my opinion gj
gl with the set, I hope you can actually use this to look through the map and try to find similar issues I didn't mention because it being redundant, if you'd want to I could do some irc mod with you too in case you want me to adress literally everything... I hope I got the fundamental flaws apparently