Nardoxyribonucleic wrote:

In this case, we should go back to address the cause of disqualification i.e. removal of irrelevant tags and fixing metadata issue. If Lopkyy is just a modder that helped the mapset, it would be better not to include their name in tags.

Kisses wrote:

Net0 wrote:

"You should never follow ranked maps to justify errors in qualified or pending maps." Errors should be justified by rules. Errors cannot be justified by an uneven treatmeant of mapsets.

Can you just stop. PLEASE!

Wafu wrote:

Only text bellow is really important

From now on, I would like if this discussion could continue by addressing only the issues brought up. My concern again is:

1. Background is not relevant to the band Agree.
2. Background is not relevant to the song Disagree. Even though you've said "using "atmosphere" as "it fits" doesn't seem very competent", I couldn't agree less. I think this is a very important aspect of choosing a background, no matter what - because the song is the main actor in a map.
3. Background is not relevant to the lyrics or the theme of the song Can't judge at this point.

Nardoxyribonucleic wrote:

Well, it is time to step in as the discussion is going nowhere as it seems.

About the current BG choice, I think it somewhat fits the song. Relevance of BGs is in fact a relative concept. As we all know in the common practice, certain degree of freedom is allowed in choosing background images for a map to show some connections with the song, be it the lyrics, theme or overall atmosphere. Unless it goes completely unrelated to the song (in this case, say an image of a skull for example), limiting BG choices for songs that are sung by a band with reality images is just too strict and out of the scope of current mapping context.

In this case, we should go back to address the cause of disqualification i.e. removal of irrelevant tags and fixing metadata issue. If Lopkyy is just a modder that helped the mapset, it would be better not to include their name in tags.

1. (1) Use a background directly related to the song You can choose any frame of the clip, you can use any image featuring the song
2. (2) If none good exists, use a background that is related to the band You can use any image relevant to the band
3. (3) If none good exists, use an image from random source that is thematically relevant You can use any image that has one (yes, even just one) major feature in common

Wafu wrote:

Anyway, that's all I'm willing to say about the background. But @Igor Sprite could say a word to it too, I don't feel like I deserve being ignored completely on this one by the mapper themselves.

Wafu wrote:

@Irreversible, the veto was not only because of the background. The discussion about tags was not finished and my suggestion about the background was entirely ignored. It must had been addressed by the mapper in order to be eligible for a bubble in the first place. I admit I should've stated all the reasons for a veto, I thought it was pretty obvious that the discussion was still happening. My apologies.

Okoratu wrote:

Dude wafu wtf - the amount of braincells we waste arguing about this.

something fitting the song's mood is so relative and majority seems to be against making a huge deal about this, i'm more concerned about Surono trying to end any discussion by just nominating the goddamn map right in the middle of it.

Case in point: For most people seems suitable enough, especially since it is original artwork without relation to anything else so here have the bg in a not shit-resolution (yay):

https://puu.sh/yOjzt/e7a6240d6e.jpg

Nifty wrote:

I don't know about the title/artist, but it sounds to me like igor needs to just remove lopkyy from the tags or add him to the diff names.

In the description it says "but didn't changed these name diffs as your request" which is the downfall of language barriers, and I would like igor to try to rephrase this to make some sort of sense.

The way I read it, it sounds like someone told you to not put lopkyy's name in the difficulties he helped map, which is just incorrect, but I didn't find one person in this thread who's told you that. This leads me to assume that lopkyy themselves told you to not put their name on the diffs (perhaps to not take credit or whatever), and that's also wrong and kind of breaking the rules, since you have to put whoever is involved with mapping the diff in the name.

Ranking Criteria wrote:

The information of multiple mapset contributors must be provided in the mapset, if there is any guest mapper. This might be in the creator's words, via a storyboard or via naming the guest difficulties appropriately. You only need to provide information of guest mapper and corresponding guest part. Guest mappers must be added to the tags of a mapset. This helps others to know if the map uploader is the main contributor of the mapset and who else contributed to the given mapset.

Kisses wrote:

Well your words turned from him helping you with some patterns to flat out collabing with you lol

Igor Sprite wrote:

Kisses wrote:

Well your words turned from him helping you with some patterns to flat out collabing with you lol

sorry net0 ins't here now say "he put notes in editor and sent me a file with .osu format" have relation with "he did a GD diff for me" no?

osuskrub wrote:

okay, did he map an entire diff? or did he map part of one and you finished the rest?

if it's the first one you should add his name to what difficulty he did.
if it's the second one you can add a combination of your names or write "collab [diff name]" and possibly indicate in the map description who mapped which parts

Wafu wrote:

If lopkyy really did make a collab with you, sure, add lopkyy in tags. But he didn't post anything here (and has played 12 minutes of taiko overall)

Kisses wrote:

Wafu wrote:

If lopkyy really did make a collab with you, sure, add lopkyy in tags. But he didn't post anything here (and has played 12 minutes of taiko overall)

Lol well this is interesting

Sinnoh wrote:

Stop twisting what Wafu said about irrelevant. The context he used it in was that the tag was not related to the set because Wafu assumed lopkyy did not map anything, not because lopkyy is irrelevant as a person.

Wafu wrote:

If lopkyy really did make a collab with you, sure, add lopkyy in tags. But he didn't post anything here (and has played 12 minutes of taiko overall), can we get some clarification from lopkyy? We need to know if he really participated to know if he truly can be in tags.

1. 00:26:181 (127) - add don here? It flows well imo and would still keep the melody you were following from earlier
2. 00:28:056 (131,135,137,141,143,147) - The finishes on these notes feel unnecessary. There doesn't feel a need to create so much emphasis when the song doesn't give it any. I'm not sure if it's your style but it does feel incredibly forced and plays a lot smoother when deleting the finishes
3. 00:38:121 (152) - Listening to the drums surely a don would fit here better right? It would also give more emphasis to the final kat 00:38:319 (153) -
4. 00:51:740 - For this section how about deleting notes like 00:53:319 (235) - 00:56:477 (250) - ? The long sequences doesn't really make me feel like I'm playing to a calmer part of the song and the long sequences don't work well with low SV
5. 01:16:312 (342) - Personally I think this plays much better as a kat
6. 01:23:121 (377,378,379,380,381,382,383,384,385,386,387,388,389,390,391,392,393,394,395,396,397,398,399,400,401) - Looking at the spread between Futsuu > Muzu > Oni , the pattern you used here makes the spread really skewed
7. 01:46:115 (509) - 01:47:694 (519) - 01:49:273 (529) - I'm surprised you didn't have these notes as dons to play more closely to your patterns at the beginning of the map

-Sh1n1- wrote:

dunno why this guy makes the map more complicated
@Igor: Lopkyy in description is more than enough if you really want to show gratitude, do you really want to rank the map? just remove and everything should be ready to go.

I just want to proceed with the requalification of the map and avoid the useless drama about BGs and tags, I hope this post will start a new discussion about the map itself and not irrelevant things.

General

1. 01:15:424 - there are some things I wanna point out here:
   
   Click me~~

   kantan and Futsuu: Spinner until 01:16:608 -
   Muzukashii: Slider until 01:16:510 -
   Oni: stream until 01:16:510 -
   My suggestion here is map this part with notes:
   
   Click me~~

   Kantan: 01:15:424 - 01:15:819 - 01:16:213 - everything as k
   Futsuu: 01:15:424 - 01:15:621 - 01:15:819 - 01:16:213 - everything as k and then 01:16:608 - as d
   Muzukashii: 01:15:424 - 01:15:621 - 01:15:720 - 01:15:819 - as k, 01:16:016 - as d, 01:16:213 - 01:16:411 - as k and 01:16:608 - as d
   Oni: 01:16:608 - add a note here, it's true that drums are not prominent until here but voice is strong enough to deserve a note imo, also to match with my previous suggestions of additions on the other diffs. you are only saying to remap
2. Same thing with 01:28:746 (34) - Futsuu and 01:28:845 (285) - Muzukashii, they should be mapped imo, also why they start in a different place? @-@

Kantan

1. 01:13:056 - add k here, this part feels too empty, current gap with higuer diffs is too long. ok
2. 01:14:635 - I'll suggest you to add a note here too, d could be the best possible. yeah
3. 01:43:845 (42) - to avoid a repetitive pattern cause you have triplets in 1/1 at the next section I wanna recommend you to remove such object and add 01:43:845 - d and k at 01:44:635 - no

Futsuu

1. 00:12:069 - you miss a finish note here. yeah
2. 01:05:161 (151,152,153,154) - this part doesn't match with 01:08:319 (159,160,161,162,163,164,165,166) -, dunno what are you following tbh, a possible solution to fix the current inconsistent between both sections also between all difficulties is moving 01:05:358 (152) - to 01:05:753 -, then 01:09:306 - to 01:08:911 - and 01:09:503 (162) - to 01:09:108 - i don't want change the structure here
3. 01:11:871 (168,169) - this is kinda unconfortable for a newcommer imo and also for the sake of spread, I'll recommend you to move 01:11:871 (168) - to 01:11:674 - okay
4. 01:23:121 - remove this note, you have more notes at this section than Muzukashii that is weird, also gap with katan is huge. again this (i'm looking Oni --> Kantan) see what i wrote in muzukashii
5. 01:35:753 - remove pls, same as above ^
6. kinda unfair that you have something to hit at 01:44:733 -01:44:832 - 01:44:931 - while Muzu is empty, I strongly recommend you to remove 01:44:437 - and then change 01:44:635 (75) - into d d k at 1/2. what it's the problem with my sliders? you only said remove all and change to... why i can't keep all change nothing ;-;

Muzukashii

1. 00:48:977 (149,150,151,152,153) - dunno why your rhythm choice is different than Futsuu, I recommend you to move 00:49:569 - to 00:49:174 - to keep consistency with your futsuu and to add more vocal enphasis to 00:49:766 (152,153) - i want keep the enphasis here 00:48:977 -
2. 00:50:950 (157) - this is kinda controversial for me, less enphasis to 00:51:740 - that deserve to be finisher (D), there should be a triplet at 00:50:950 -, also if you wanna add a slider here, why didn't you do the same at lower diffs?, remove slider and put notes imo. doesn't have triplets in my muzukashii @-@, and i put a slider because i want a transition less "agressive" to this calm part 00:52:135 -
3. 00:53:911 (165) - move to 00:54:503 - to keep the same rhythm base as lower diffulties, kinda weird that the same mapper is following another sounds on the same song. it's a bit weird you say "the same mapper" when i call this a collab '^'
4. 01:23:121 - add a note here to fix spread. i did the same thing here 01:35:753 -
5. 01:26:477 - missing finisher here. yeah
6. 01:35:753 - a note here will add more balance to the spread, dunno why futsuu has more notes here. as you can see, in futsuu doesn't have these notes 01:36:345 (309,311,313,315) - and in muzukashii doesn't have this note 01:35:753 (308) - so it's really to balance
7. 01:41:477 (325) - it will be better as notes, trust me, what do you think about 01:41:477 - k, 01:41:674 - 01:41:773 - 01:41:871 - 01:42:069 - d and 01:42:266 - K i want keep my sliders
8. 01:44:437 - remove cause adding more enphasis to drums it's important at this part, changing from 5-plet (Oni) into 1/2 transition (Muzukashii is too much imo), that's why I also wanna suggest you to add d at 01:44:733 - and 01:44:832 - i don't want triplets and i did the same thing here 00:12:463 -

Oni

1. 01:28:056 - what hapenned here? are you skipping this sound on purpose? cause other diffs are following this sound with notes. yes,
   maybe only my imagination,but i think a note here it's weird
2. 01:54:898 - you miss a finish here to keep consistency with your previous patterns. i think the sound here is a bit low, because this i didn't put note here 01:55:983 - too

That's all from my side, I hope it could be re-qualified soon, it's a great map!, good luck and remove Lopkyy from tags, don't be stubborn or you won't receive more help.

Kisses wrote:

@Sh1n1 I think the finish at 01:54:898 was intentionally skipped in the oni diff because of the fact the mp3 fades out good good xd

Oni

1. 00:26:181 (127) - add don here? It flows well imo and would still keep the melody you were following from earlier wait... here
2. 00:28:056 (131,135,137,141,143,147) - The finishes on these notes feel unnecessary. There doesn't feel a need to create so much emphasis when the song doesn't give it any. I'm not sure if it's your style but it does feel incredibly forced and plays a lot smoother when deleting the finishes again talking about change the structure of certain session
3. 00:38:121 (152) - Listening to the drums surely a don would fit here better right? It would also give more emphasis to the final kat 00:38:319 (153) - my intention here is low to high, a don here break this
4. 00:51:740 - For this section how about deleting notes like 00:53:319 (235) - 00:56:477 (250) - ? The long sequences doesn't really make me feel like I'm playing to a calmer part of the song and the long sequences don't work well with low SV it's a bit hard keep the 1/2 rhythm with slow SV
   when you starts play oni. it's intentional, don't worry
5. 01:16:312 (342) - Personally I think this plays much better as a kat too hard
6. 01:23:121 (377,378,379,380,381,382,383,384,385,386,387,388,389,390,391,392,393,394,395,396,397,398,399,400,401) - Looking at the spread between Futsuu > Muzu > Oni , the pattern you used here makes the spread really skewed it's your opinion, a problem or something else? .-.
7. 01:46:115 (509) - 01:47:694 (519) - 01:49:273 (529) - I'm surprised you didn't have these notes as dons to play more closely to your patterns at the beginning of the map ^

[]I just wanted to test my modding skills ~ back to std yeah, it's really nice when we are trying to improve

-Sh1n1- wrote:

Lopkyy in description is more than enough if you really want to show gratitude, do you really want to rank the map? just remove and everything should be ready to go.

Poii wrote:

if he only put 1 or 2 notes in your diff, its not a collab dude, at least tell me which part that he made ?

Surono wrote:

-Sh1n1- wrote:

Lopkyy in description is more than enough if you really want to show gratitude, do you really want to rank the map? just remove and everything should be ready to go.

already said by Shini lol okay and so Lopkyy still on tags?

Poii wrote:

if he only put 1 or 2 notes in your diff, its not a collab dude, at least tell me which part that he made ?

right, you can tell it now. please reconsider about this if you really want this set get requalified

Surono wrote:

I saw Kisses point from 01:22:727 - here and its about spread

* delete 01:23:121 - this on futsuu and add notes on muzukashii, I dont know why 4plet 1/2 on futsuu ok
* 01:23:713 - 01:24:898 - 01:25:490 - add don around here, its similar with Kantan density ok
* 01:25:292 - just add don in here for futsuu, since oni has 3plet + finishers

I think the spread of this set would be fine and neat if you fix these

Wafu wrote:

I also mentioned the mp3 quality in the older post, nobody still gave a response to it. I said I can give you a better one without changing offset. Yes, it is a suggestion, but you need to respond to everything with a reason. For the time being, I'll leave the sample-exact mp3 here. You are not forced to use it, but at minimum give your response to it.

Ataraxia wrote:

saudades lopkyy foda . . .

qualifica ae nrml xddd

Lanturn wrote:

SILENT SIREN / Silent Siren / サイレント サイレン / サイレントサイレン
Regarding the artist field. When Silent Siren was published by Brand-New Music (http://www.brand-newmusic.co.jp/artist_ ... _siren.php) and dreamusic (http://dreamusic.co.jp/artist/silent-siren/profile/), they officially went by "Silent Siren" with "サイレント サイレン" (Brand-New Music) and "サイレントサイレン" (dreamusic) on the side for reading assistance. SILENT SIREN is now the bands current name under the label by EMI-RECORDS. (http://www.universal-music.co.jp/silent-siren/)

This song was published under Brand-New Music so the most appropriate Artist to use would be the first one

Artist: Silent Siren

The Katakana is just to assist the reader as shown on the official publisher site so it shouldn't be used (throw in tags). You can see the romanization only being used in the official music video as well: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S4i1xbKCK7Y

Your current artist field uses dreamusic's artist choice.

tl;dr, remove the unicode artist and use Silent Siren.

Igor Sprite wrote:

Naotoshi wrote:

Kurai wrote:

Naotoshi wrote:

Net0 wrote:

@Igor Sprite Para com os meme velho, fodendo Valdomiro velho kkkk, só ajeita o artist pra Silent Siren nos dois campos e vai estar pronto pra qualificar novamente.

Gabe wrote:

:weary: