Pachiru wrote:

[Maridius]

1. 00:28:135 (3,4) - This pattern could be improved it this sound wasn't mapped with such a low spacing with the previous note. By increasing the spacing, it will give a better emphasis of the beat. This is actually a different kind of emphasis where 2 similar sounding sounds are grouped close as a form of emphasis.
   
2. 00:09:760 (2) - Ending this slider here instead 00:10:135 - would be better since there is an important vocal here.u're right, fixed.
   
3. 00:19:135 - I'm not really fan of reducing the hitsounds so much here, cause I think it give less feedback of the piano sounds. im too lazy to use my brains for hitsounds when akareh did them, please check this out akey.
   
4. 01:48:947 (2,1) - The flow of this pattern could be improved, cause actually the most difficult part of this pattern is here 01:48:947 (2,1) - due to the flow while the most intense sound is here: 01:49:322 (2) - so maybe simplify this flow in order to make the flow of this 01:49:135 (1,2) - harder. I feel like grouping these two sounds is more important which I tried to accomplish with the movement to (1) while (2) still making the spacing (2) high enough,
   gradual difficulty increasment didn't feel as prominent as this, especially on 1/4 sliders.
   
5. 01:54:010 (1) - Since the sound is strong here, add more spacing, something in the same way like this one 01:56:822 (4,1) - can be good (not the pattern shape but the distance). I've used reverse emphasis far too often and it contrasts nicely the drum jumps. however, I made the jump more difficult now.
   
6. There is some places where strong beats aren't mapped with a jump, where sometimes it needs, especially during the kiai part.
   
   Ah nice, first mod and I already have the opportunity to explain. Basically the kiai is too energetic with various piano intensities done randomly while the kicks and snares are on metronome. If I were to emphasize only those with spacing I would get a quite stale section with only 1 out of 3 movements being spaced which was like in my old map. So I just decided to contrast the overall fast movement of 2 out of 3 with reversed emphasis to express those stronger sounds resulting in a section that follows both the energetic and exciting feeling of the song overall while also expressing individual sounds in a little bit unusual way.

Guess that's all, also, very nice work on the storyboard Myka

1. 00:57:666 - I think a more consistent rhythm would have the 1/4 mapped as at 00:56:166 (4) - this part is mapped as a 1/4 jump, which I feel would strain the player more. The same might apply 01:02:166 -
2. 01:24:947 (4) - I feel the slider would be overwhelming to play, as the note it sounds like it's mapped to ends on the white tick, and the shape seems similar to 01:24:291 (1) - in complexity. I feel a better rhythm would be https://puu.sh/zx90l/0f258ba2a9.png with 2 having sv of .5 because it puts stress on 01:25:322 -
   

Bubblun wrote:

Mod on MaridiuS' diff as requested

You left countdown on xp yah
Should ask the storyboarder to fix the little cursor thing that follows the notes in the other diffs. yah

1. 00:57:666 - I think a more consistent rhythm would have the 1/4 mapped as at 00:56:166 (4) - this part is mapped as a 1/4 jump, which I feel would strain the player more. The same might apply 01:02:166 - discussed irc, they don't have a hihat on blue ticks so they're not the same.
2. 01:24:947 (4) - I feel the slider would be overwhelming to play, as the note it sounds like it's mapped to ends on the white tick, and the shape seems similar to 01:24:291 (1) - in complexity. I feel a better rhythm would be https://puu.sh/zx90l/0f258ba2a9.png with 2 having sv of .5 because it puts stress on 01:25:322 - I've built a movement going up and down with previous 2 sliders which lead into up and down movement of the slider so i dont think its overwhelming. Relating your suggestion, ehh I really like this one how it leads into a drum layer switch for the first drum hanzer streams.
   

Not much I could find. gl xp

1. 00:22:697 - 20% volume is pretty inaudible especially with the current hitsounding like 00:22:697 (2,3,4,5,6,7,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,1) - . please adjust more volume. i testplayed it and it is not really comfortable in my ear
2. 00:04:510 (1) - change this slider into https://i.imgur.com/g54I1IW.png. because right now. the player will just cheese the slider end away and thats is a weird thing to play imo
3. 01:00:947 (9) - nc to separate the 1/2 beat from the 1/4
4. 01:13:885 (7,8) - distance is too far @@. atleast nc them to make it more readable or reduce the distance
5. 01:54:947 (6) - nc would emphasized the violin more
6. 02:21:010 (3) - its better to hit this without the reverse. the reverse's tail is not really covering anything important
   
   
   [Hard]
7. 00:03:010 (2) - you can definately space this more. to make a bit of contrast on the 2/1 gap.
8. 01:14:260 (3) - slider end should be clickable imo. the sound is loud and really spicy to hit. also if yes nc the circle to maintain hp before the spinner
9. 01:26:635 (5,1) - blanket. i usually doesnt mind a bad blanket but this one is pretty noticeable
   
   [FlameL's Normal]
10. 00:01:510 (1,2,3,4,5,1,2,3,4,5,1,2,3,4,5,1,2,3,4) - you should make them visually the same distance with 00:19:510 (1,2,3,4,5,1) - . i know its lower because of the sv. but hitting an object that close could cause a confusion lol. also it looks cleaner imo
11. 00:36:760 (2) - ctrl + h this slider. i would really love to maintain the circular flow for lower diff. beside there is nothing to emphasize there
12. 01:06:010 (1,1,2) - repeating reverse should be avoided on lower diffs. its really confusing for normal players. 01:06:010 (1) - make this a normal reverse and then add circle 01:07:135 - . for 01:09:010 (1,2) - , just add three reverse slider. its more friendly for newbie players.
13. 01:27:760 (3,4) - stack this instead? they are both building up some tenste to each other. should make them the same pattern instead

Ryuusei Aika wrote:

:) Hello!
From my modding queue.

Annotation

Words in red means that is an unrankable issue (= violate the "Rules" in Ranking Critiria General / Ranking Critiria in osu!) that you MUST fix.

Words in bold black means that is an issue that I highly recommand you (= either violate the "Guidelines" in Ranking Criteria General / Ranking Criteria in osu!, or I believe this issue will influence a lot of the experience of playing) to fix.

diuS' Arietta
[notice]

1. Enable epilepsy warning because we have fantastic dazzling storyboard. yes, map is not yet resbed.
2. 00:06:010 (1,2,3,4) - How about using once again the patterns based on descending sv like what you have done at 00:03:010 (3,4,5,6) - ? That should be cool and represent the decrease of tunes of the vocal here much more better. tbh the descending isn't as obvious so I just went will all 4 being high SV but differentiated with patterning.
3. 00:24:947 (2) - The strong piano sound here is literally the same with which on 00:25:135 (3) - and 00:25:322 (4) - , so for a better consistency I think it would be better if you change this note into a 1/4 slider too. not literally the same but I applied anyways.
4. 00:48:760 (1) - The general idea of your kiai part looks like you use smaller distances and slight flow changes to emphasize some strong beats (like 00:44:260 (1) - , 00:45:760 (1) - , 00:47:260 (1) - etc...) so I think it would be better if you do the same thing on this slider too instead of increase the spacing of 00:48:572 (4,1) - for emphasize, that can show your emphasizing idea better. Here's my suggestion (changed the position of 00:48:572 (4,1,2,3) - ): https://imgur-archive.ppy.sh/GJMeXV9.png fixed in my way.
5. 01:25:697 (2,3) - Personally I'd like to stack them so that can show the different intensity of drum beats (this part is a little weaker then 01:26:072 (2,3) - and 01:26:447 (2,3) - ), but it depends on you. Mhh not really noticeable, the players won't realize what am I doing at all.
   - 01:37:697 (5,6) - ^ (drum beats weaker then 01:38:072 (2,3) - and 01:38:447 (2,3) - ).
6. Really like this one, love your emphasizing ideas on kiai part some streams with distance changes and distinctive way to arrange the objects!

Generally it's a mapset really sui generis and has many strong personal styles, should be really exciting if this can get ranked!
Good luck, and have fun!

Ryuusei Aika wrote:

:) Hello!
From my modding queue.

FlameL's Normal

1. 00:22:510 (1,2) - Maybe change this pattern into something like this in order to avoid tiny overlap (which looks not quite good here)? Just moved 00:23:260 (2) a bit.
2. 02:03:010 (3) - Off-screen. ups. Fixed
3. 02:07:135 - How about add a note here to represent the vocal sound which has the same intensity with 02:05:635 (2) - ? Sure
4. Constant work!

Generally it's a mapset really sui generis and has many strong personal styles, should be really exciting if this can get ranked!
Good luck, and have fun!

Uta wrote:

from my q

• 
  [FlameL's Normal]

1. 00:01:510 (1,2,3,4,5,1,2,3,4,5,1,2,3,4,5,1,2,3,4) - you should make them visually the same distance with 00:19:510 (1,2,3,4,5,1) - . i know its lower because of the sv. but hitting an object that close could cause a confusion lol. also it looks cleaner imo Nah I want to keep it that way. It gives a better impression of it being less intense than the other parts of the song
2. 00:36:760 (2) - ctrl + h this slider. i would really love to maintain the circular flow for lower diff. beside there is nothing to emphasize there Nah I want to keep that pattern, It emphasizes the extension of the vocal
3. 01:06:010 (1,1,2) - repeating reverse should be avoided on lower diffs. its really confusing for normal players. 01:06:010 (1) - make this a normal reverse and then add circle 01:07:135 - . for 01:09:010 (1,2) - , just add three reverse slider. its more friendly for newbie players. I think they are not that hard to play/read the way they are placed. Also changing those two 01:09:010 (1,2) to 3 reverse sliders wouldn't fit the music at all.
4. 01:27:760 (3,4) - stack this instead? they are both building up some tenste to each other. should make them the same pattern instead Sure

1. 00:09:010 (1) - a tiny bit sceptical about how this slider looks
2. 00:28:135 (3,4) - i'm worried about these two being so closely spaced, i think ppl will misread this as 1/4
3. 01:18:010 (1) - perhaps put closer to the centre since that's where most ppl's spins gonna be? idk how valid this suggestion is
4. 01:49:135 (1) - quite excessive spacing from last slider to this one
5. 02:00:010 (1) - this whole section up until the end is quite compact in the middle band of the screen. i'd utilise more of the field personally

1. 00:50:822 (4) - this one should also jut out of the sliderend a bit like 00:50:072 (2) - and 00:51:385 (2) -

1. the AR should be higher honestly. atleast 7.5

1. AI mod: This object is too far from the previous object. 01:27:760 (3) -

Apo11o wrote:

howdy

all diffs
i find it strange how the dubstep bit isn't the bit in kiai mode it's in the place where the voice has more intensity. Wub section already has SB emphasis anyway

Insane

1. 00:50:822 (4) - this one should also jut out of the sliderend a bit like 00:50:072 (2) - and 00:51:385 (2) - I prefer to stack to make 00:50:822 (4,1) - more impactful here.

Hard

1. the AR should be higher honestly. atleast 7.5 sure, why not

Normal

1. AI mod: This object is too far from the previous object. 01:27:760 (3) - fixed

nice song

Apo11o wrote:

howdy hi hi

all diffs
i find it strange how the dubstep bit isn't the bit in kiai mode tbh its more contrast, the song builds up into the kiai already chosen, but dubstep section comes out of nowhere.

diuS' Arietta

1. 00:09:010 (1) - a tiny bit sceptical about how this slider looks It's fine owo
2. 00:28:135 (3,4) - i'm worried about these two being so closely spaced, i think ppl will misread this as 1/4 00:16:135 (7,8,1,2) - 00:21:760 (3,4) - there were mutliple such usages beforehand so it will not come out as weird at all imo.
3. 01:18:010 (1) - perhaps put closer to the centre since that's where most ppl's spins gonna be? idk how valid this suggestion is Spinner jump holy this is a thing. Still the slider deserves emphasis so no need.
4. 01:49:135 (1) - quite excessive spacing from last slider to this one I don't think so, its quite important when it comes to me.
5. 02:00:010 (1) - this whole section up until the end is quite compact in the middle band of the screen. i'd utilise more of the field personally Ughhh tried a bit but I don't think its really necessary, the streams are a thing for itself so its just a few patterns located around the middle.

i like this diff thank you woo

nice song

Chekito wrote:

- 02:13:510 - Random MaridiuS pops up on the screen LMAO (oh yeah I had to delete the SB to mod this cuz too laggy, so Idk if there's something on there, but it seems like a random maridius, i really laughed at this xD)

Chekito wrote:

As I said, I'm just modding u, don't give me anything in exchange.

Chekito wrote:

OHHHH IT'S THE OLD FORUMM YES

MaridiuSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS
- Countdown enabled ewwwwwwwwwww
- 01:24:947 (4) - This is barely offscreen on 800x600 resolution xd
- You must check in the "Epilepsy Warning" option
- You didn't add NC on 00:03:010 (3) - so I could take that you didn't want to sepparate it into two combos, but you did it later on 00:06:010 (1) - even thought the difference on the way it sounds was really similar to the transition between 00:02:260 (2,3) - . So I'd suggest you either to add NC on 00:03:010 (3) - or remove NC on 00:06:010 (1) - both would work in my opinion
- Just as a detail, you could stack 00:12:010 (1) - 's sliderend to 00:10:510 (3) - 's sliderend jesus this is not visible at all, cant bother xd
- Seems pretty much like you missed to NC here 00:15:760 (5) - (You did it previously on 00:15:010 (1) - so I guess you should do it later on too)
- This is not an issue or something like that, but why to add a grey anchor on 00:21:010 (1) - ? I've seen this in a lot of maps, but never this straight lmaoI think the mouse sometimes put an anchor randomly lul, but removed it
- 00:23:635 (3,4,5,6,1) - This would make more sense if it was curved as the previous stream was 00:22:697 (2,3,4,5,6,7,1) - (Well, not "sense" but it's fine to have it as a detail) Uh quints are consistently straight because they look bad if they're curved on this spacing imo. Much more prefer this design.
- 00:25:322 (4) - Maybe doing Ctrl+G here would feel better while playing, you'd still get the emphasis on 00:25:510 (1) - because the spacing will be similar (it wouldn't even change that much) Circular/linear movement was my intention here, sharp movement isn't in lines with the idea of the map since I usually use things like this on moderate spacing.
- This is not relevant nor important, but moving this 00:40:510 (1) - a bit to the left would make it's overlap with 00:40:135 (6) - seem way better
- 00:47:635 (2,3,1) - I think the flow here is too linear, there's barely no emphasis on 00:48:010 (1) - since there isn't any change of flow, actually, the spacing is even less than the previous 00:47:635 (2,3) - The emphasis is forced slowdown of the cursor. The reason for such linear and peaceful movement is because this part of the song seems the most flowy consistent with 00:58:885 (2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3,4,5,6,7) - since the vocals are clearly accentuated in the song here without any weird things happening.
- 00:49:322 (4) - I just thought about a different positioning for this, stacking it into 00:48:385 (3) - wouldn't look that bad in my opinion (It would also fit with 00:49:510 (1) - 's shape) the movement it suggests seems terrible and I see no need to change that in the first place?
- 00:56:166 (4,1) - This is way overspaced, you used a similar spacing than your previous 1/2 patterns (000:44:072 (3,1) - This is the most closer one) It's still a hihat to snare jump +on this bpm doesn't feel overspaced and plays easily. Any lower and the emphasis on the snare will be null.

- I came to think that this 00:58:135 (2) - would emphasize better if it was a 3/4 slider (Just in case that I said that in a wrong way, I meant that it would fit better if it ends here 00:58:416 - ), but to do it you'd have to move a whole pattern so I doubt you'd apply something like this The vocals don't feel so heavy for a 3/4 to be warranted here tbh, compare it to 01:03:010 (1,2,1,2) - for example
- Just a small detail, but what about stacking 01:03:760 (1) - 's sliderend to 01:02:822 (3) - 's sliderhead? can't bother, it won't do anything.
- Oh, also, there's a clap on this slider (01:04:135 (2) - ). Was it intended? It doesn't really seem like fitting
- 01:11:635 (5) - You used kicksliders a lot to represent this kind of small sounds so why not to add one here too? because the contrast between the speedup and flowy section that's about to come after this drum buildup will be null if these were 1/4 sliders too.
- 01:15:010 (5) - You should add NC here, it gets pretty much different here than the previous parts.
- 01:24:291 (1) - This is also a stupid detail, but what about stacking this instead of overlapping it? I actually tried it and you'd emphasize the small pause on the song a bit better imo you know that by starting a sentence with "this is also a stupid suggestion" won't help get the suggestion applied.
Anyways I don't see it doing anything important its either do dis or do dis both work equally well.
- 01:25:135 - Why are you avoiding this? You kinda mapped it here on 01:19:135 - so it's a bit weird to avoid it afterwards
- Even thought it's a kiai, 01:26:541 (3,1) - This is pretty much overspaced, at least add more spacing between 01:26:447 (2,3) - so it gets closer to the slider, or at least so you have a feeling of moving the cursor instead of a "stop" lol (god it's so hard to explain myself, if u didn't get what I meant just dm me) Check reply to bubblun.
- 01:28:322 (2) - Wait this isn't stacked lol
- This: 01:32:072 (2) - , Is the same than 01:32:447 (2,3) - This. If we agree then you should use a kickslider on both, or well, you could keep your variation but it doesn't seem right for me Both are viable variations in which the drums get less emphasis and the snare gets full emphasis tbh.
- 01:33:010 (2) - Also not stacked?
- I was hearing this 50% just to be sure but there seems to be a sound on 01:34:228 - so why don't you change 01:34:135 (5) -into a kickslider? (I also added a greenline changing the SV to 0,75x so the slider didn't seem too long and fast) It took you 50% speed and constant rechecks to determine that there's a sound there, that means players will never notice that so the stop in rhythm will make that feeling more powerful.
- 01:39:947 (2,3) - You used 1,27x spacing here and 01:40:135 (3,4,1) - 1x here, Why not use the same on all of them? They didn't feel different at all Idk 1.27x makes the pattern a bit more separated.
- 02:02:822 (4,1,4,1) - You added NC here because the "tsch" on the background, right? Then why didn't you add it 01:59:260 (5) - here too?
At first I thought you just NC'ed on 02:02:260 (1) - because the vocals, so it was fine, but there isn't any vocal after that that would lead to an NC, the only thing was the "tsch" and you pretty much didn't add NC to that sound before, so it wouldn't make sense to have it afterwards Because the NCed notes lead into new sound grouping while in this nonNCed case it stays the same.
- 02:04:510 - For this stream I think you should just keep the NC on the vocals, since it's kinda hard to differentiate the piano while playing, so it would seem like randomly separated in the eyes of the one who's playing, so keeping the NC's following the voice isn't that bad It will only make one note unNCed which will make the streams just be inconsistent, I separated by piano too.
- 02:13:510 - Random MaridiuS pops up on the screen LMAO (oh yeah I had to delete the SB to mod this cuz too laggy, so Idk if there's something on there, but it seems like a random maridius, i really laughed at this xD) MadridiuS

As I said, I'm just modding u, don't give me anything in exchange.

MaridiuS wrote:

MadridiuS

Akareh wrote:

Yeah, I've also noticed the issue with the muzu, but I don't have a clue what's causing it. I'm going to try doing a "clean update" by removing the taiko diffs and uploading, then upload a second time adding them again to the set. Hopefully that will fix it?

Updated with ayy's changes, thanks!

edit: It did not fix it. Now Oni also has this issue. Welp. I'm a n g e r y

Uta wrote:

just a small opinion (insane diff)
01:22:322 (4) - would be cool if this have more emphasize on visual https://i.imgur.com/Sfw1F9h.png did a thing
01:34:322 (6) - the next same part is a 1/8 reverse which is fine i guess ye, not doing anything special here because of rhythm tho, I think it's best for this diff if I keep this one simple

dont kds i guess

1. The piano part at the very beginning uses finishes in a pretty weird manner. Piano there sounds quiter equally for me. For instance, 00:01:510 - sounds the same as 00:02:260 - but the latter one has finish. Or 00:06:010 - is kind of prominent but does not have finish. I'd highly recommend you tro change these into that.
2. Also, clap usage makes little sense to me. Like, 00:21:760 - and 00:21:947 - both use clap but sounds are like way too different. You could use this hitsoundfor placing it for sounds like: 00:20:260 - / 00:21:760 - / 00:23:260 - etc.
3. Check MA it says that a bunch of SB files are unused.
4. Spread is a bit uneven. Like, hard uses 1/2 and sometimes 1/4 but Normal uses 1/1 mostly.

1. 00:14:447 (1,2,3,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - this entire section lacks emphasis. Music for 00:14:447 (1,2,3) - is hardly audible but then its intensity rises gradually and after 00:15:760 (1,2,3,4) - intensity keeps. So the thing is, you're using the same spacing with different instensity. Consider emphasizing stuff. Also, it would be good if you change volume level, like, smaller for 00:14:447 (1,2,3) - and bigger for 00:15:010 (1,2,3,4) - .
2. 00:18:760 (1,2,1,2) - I would suggest to change spacing vice versa that 00:18:760 (1,2) - have smaller spacing and 00:19:135 (1,2) - bigger spacing because sound for latter sounds pretty much like a part peak so it would be logical having bigger spacing for a climax, don't you think so?
3. 00:20:822 - there's no sound to have a clap on it.
4. Just to be clear. You making lower spacing for more prominent sound intentionally? The kiai section. I can undertand if it is some kind of an IDEA but as an aesthetic guy I suffer. x.x
   Though I wanna see a bit more consistency. For instance, at the beginning you make small spacing for that snare 00:44:260 - / 00:45:760 - and big for kick 00:45:010 - but the suddenly change you mind 00:48:010 - . The same for 01:00:010 - .
5. Also, that 01:05:635 (2) - seems extreme, I mean you ain't done symmetrical patterns and this one breaks emphasis so badly.
6. As far as I understand the wub section meant to be "decent" and "aesthetically pleasant" so 01:19:885 (1,2,1,2) - that kinda goes against that idea bc 01:20:260 (1) - this certain slider doesn't correlate with 01:19:885 (1) - . I suggest you to simply ctrl+H that one 01:19:885 (1) - .
7. 01:32:072 (2) - didn't use this kind of slow 1/4 sliders. Consider maybe changing into a double?

1. 00:54:010 (1,2,3,4,5) - they seem to be divided to 00:54:010 (1,2,3) - and 00:54:572 (4,5) - but according to music it is 00:54:010 (1,2) - and 00:54:385 (3,4,5) - . Also spacing makes little sense as this is 00:54:385 (3) - quite prominent sound. Consider changing pattern in a way that 00:54:385 (3,4,5) - are different from 00:54:197 (2) - both aesthetically and spacing wise.
2. 01:07:135 (6,7,8) - I can't hear sound here 01:07:416 - . Also bigger spacing to 01:07:697 (9) - than 01:07:885 (1) - makes 0 sense.
3. 01:35:541 (7) - undermapped snare 01:35:635 - isn't a good idea tbh. Consider making that pattern 01:31:135 (3,4) - instead.
4. 01:41:166 (2,3) - stack went wrong. Move it manually.
5. 01:41:447 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - stream isn't audible. There's only few 1/8 doubles.

1. 00:13:510 (1,1) - 1/1 gap isn't enough to recover.
2. 00:21:947 (4,5,6) - because this is hard there is no need to spam triples, also this one is made manually I can't hear triple there. Consider deleting circle here 00:22:041 - .
3. 00:28:510 (1) - you make big slider for that 1/4 piano slider what you made with 00:22:510 (1,2) - earlier, quite inconsistent.
4. You like make 1/2sliders for 1/1 kick and 1/2 sliders for 1/2 kicks 01:07:510 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3) - which makes little sense to me as music intensity rises but pattern intensity does not. I'd recommend you to put few circles, intead.
5. 01:54:385 (2) - violin goes 1/2, not 1/1. 1/2 reverse, instead?

1. 01:27:572 (2,3,4) - outstanding pattern, It would mislead players bc you didn't use such stacks for the entire diff. Consider avoiding stack there.

Namki wrote:

Hello. o/

I fixed claps in section 20secs in the map

diuS' Arietta

1. 00:14:447 (1,2,3,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - this entire section lacks emphasis. Music for 00:14:447 (1,2,3) - is hardly audible but then its intensity rises gradually and after 00:15:760 (1,2,3,4) - intensity keeps. So the thing is, you're using the same spacing with different instensity. Consider emphasizing stuff. Also, it would be good if you change volume level, like, smaller for 00:14:447 (1,2,3) - and bigger for 00:15:010 (1,2,3,4) - . Yeah u're right. I wouldn't want to change volume because I'd like for hitsounds to be more intuitive, such small changes will justt feel weird imo especially when the pianos don't have a clear objective regularity in tonality.
2. 00:18:760 (1,2,1,2) - I would suggest to change spacing vice versa that 00:18:760 (1,2) - have smaller spacing and 00:19:135 (1,2) - bigger spacing because sound for latter sounds pretty much like a part peak so it would be logical having bigger spacing for a climax, don't you think so? 00:19:135 (1,2) - I personally find these two sounds grouped without the second one having impact so I decided to make them close that way I can establish a contrast and have 00:19:510 (1) - bring a large impact.
3. 00:20:822 - there's no sound to have a clap on it. fixed d
4. Just to be clear. You making lower spacing for more prominent sound intentionally? The kiai section. I can undertand if it is some kind of an IDEA but as an aesthetic guy I suffer. x.x
   Though I wanna see a bit more consistency. For instance, at the beginning you make small spacing for that snare 00:44:260 - / 00:45:760 - and big for kick 00:45:010 - but the suddenly change you mind 00:48:010 - . The same for 01:00:010 - . Actually bigger spacing on kicks is an accident, I simply decided to follow kicks and snares in a similar way but the melody and other aspects of the note are more important, for example 00:49:322 (4,1) - (1) is firstly given here big spacing because it starts a new measure (first downbeat). Another reason to why are those particular notes spaced more is because they didn't come from 2 circles for any contrast to be established therefore a bigger spacing is needed for that emphasis. As for 00:47:635 (2,3,1) - it's because vocals again, there are no distractions in the song and vocals are really straightforward so mapping it similarly to 00:47:072 (3,1) - will make it feel flowy like the song is suggesting.
5. Also, that 01:05:635 (2) - seems extreme, I mean you ain't done symmetrical patterns and this one breaks emphasis so badly. I mean with 2 sliders I cannot do much to emphasize the end of section and loud vocals on 01:05:635 (2) - so I don't see any emphasis broken when this are completely new sounds, 2 sliders being symmetrical doesn't seem like a big deal in a non symmetrical map though, it emphasizes the 2 new sounds by placement too.
6. As far as I understand the wub section meant to be "decent" and "aesthetically pleasant" so 01:19:885 (1,2,1,2) - that kinda goes against that idea bc 01:20:260 (1) - this certain slider doesn't correlate with 01:19:885 (1) - . I suggest you to simply ctrl+H that one 01:19:885 (1) - . ye xd
7. 01:32:072 (2) - didn't use this kind of slow 1/4 sliders. Consider maybe changing into a double? Dunno it seems like a viable variation, it won't cause playability concerns and plays just about like a double except I will avoid doing the same pattern. The emphasis on (1) is important and that is kept.

call me back after I suppose

Namki wrote:

Hello.

General

1. Spread is a bit uneven. Like, hard uses 1/2 and sometimes 1/4 but Normal uses 1/1 mostly. Made some changes.

Normal

1. 01:27:572 (2,3,4) - outstanding pattern, It would mislead players bc you didn't use such stacks for the entire diff. Consider avoiding stack there. Reverted to what I had earlier.

call me back after I suppose

Namki wrote:

Hello.

General

1. The piano part at the very beginning uses finishes in a pretty weird manner. Piano there sounds quiter equally for me. For instance, 00:01:510 - sounds the same as 00:02:260 - but the latter one has finish. Or 00:06:010 - is kind of prominent but does not have finish. I'd highly recommend you tro change these into that. I wanted to spice hitsounds a bit there with voice/pitch differences so the feedback wasn't just whistles or finishes for like 20 secs. Updated using your finish, since it sounds a bit different but I guess it's softer so it doesn't stand out so much. Mari wants to use his own hitsounding tho, so only applied to NHI.
2. Also, clap usage makes little sense to me. Like, 00:21:760 - and 00:21:947 - both use clap but sounds are like way too different. You could use this hitsoundfor placing it for sounds like: 00:20:260 - / 00:21:760 - / 00:23:260 - etc. ye,
   fixed for NHI
3. Check MA it says that a bunch of SB files are unused. MA doesn't give me any warnings about SB elements, maybe you have an older version of the map? Mari and I fixed some of these things a few weeks ago.
4. Spread is a bit uneven. Like, hard uses 1/2 and sometimes 1/4 but Normal uses 1/1 mostly. I don't think the jump is really huge, tbh,
   but anyway told lancer to add some more 1/2s to his diff so that the spread is a bit cleaner.

Insane

1. 00:54:010 (1,2,3,4,5) - they seem to be divided to 00:54:010 (1,2,3) - and 00:54:572 (4,5) - but according to music it is 00:54:010 (1,2) - and 00:54:385 (3,4,5) - . Also spacing makes little sense as this is 00:54:385 (3) - quite prominent sound. Consider changing pattern in a way that 00:54:385 (3,4,5) - are different from 00:54:197 (2) - both aesthetically and spacing wise. to me, the biggest emphasis in the strings is at 00:54:385 (3,4) -, but I guess I can space 3 a bit further from 2, sure.
2. 01:07:135 (6,7,8) - I can't hear sound here 01:07:416 - . Also bigger spacing to 01:07:697 (9) - than 01:07:885 (1) - makes 0 sense. fixed both
3. 01:35:541 (7) - undermapped snare 01:35:635 - isn't a good idea tbh. Consider making that pattern 01:31:135 (3,4) - instead. can't do 01:31:135 (3,4) - since 01:35:260 (6) - holds here, but I made the snare clickable.
4. 01:41:166 (2,3) - stack went wrong. Move it manually. I¡m not good at manual stacks but... fixed?
5. 01:41:447 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - stream isn't audible. There's only few 1/8 doubles. it's simplified rhythm, and it plays a lot better than a long slider there would, so I'd like to keep this, sorry.

Hard

1. 00:13:510 (1,1) - 1/1 gap isn't enough to recover. made it like the one in normal, but I think it was fine tbh
2. 00:21:947 (4,5,6) - because this is hard there is no need to spam triples, also this one is made manually I can't hear triple there. Consider deleting circle here 00:22:041 - . oke
3. 00:28:510 (1) - you make big slider for that 1/4 piano slider what you made with 00:22:510 (1,2) - earlier, quite inconsistent. Intentional,
   I want to reduce the density since the song is calming down, piano also sounds softer here than before so it wouldn't make much sense imo to keep following it here.
4. You like make 1/2sliders for 1/1 kick and 1/2 sliders for 1/2 kicks 01:07:510 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3) - which makes little sense to me as music intensity rises but pattern intensity does not. I'd recommend you to put few circles, intead. turned 01:09:010 (1) - into 2 circles
5. 01:54:385 (2) - violin goes 1/2, not 1/1. 1/2 reverse, instead?oke

Namki wrote:

круто

Namki wrote:

круто

Stefan wrote:

I don't write in vodka

Hula wrote:

The top end diff is really disappointing, full of gimmicky patterns which are not good to play.

Your set would have been so much better off with your diff being the top diff, since it plays so much better.