forum

S3RL feat Harri Rush - Nostalgic (Nightcore Mix) [CatchTheBe

posted
Total Posts
362
show more
Topic Starter
Ulysses
Please pardon me for replying to you only after a year.

Bubblun wrote:

nm

Posthumous

00:04:421 (1,2,1,2) - The flow of the sliders contradicts how the player would actually play them. I think a pattern like https://puu.sh/wFwJ5/4f3d2002ec.png would work better, except cleaner. :arrow: 00:04:421 (1) - points towards the following slider so I think it is fine.

00:07:037 (4,1) - These are slightly off. :arrow: They are not?

00:18:575 (1) - Because of the way this pattern flows the player can't hit this. It's also hidden under the mess of follow circles. You could move the slider head out more so it's visible. :arrow: I understand that this slider is very hard to hit, but I put it here because of 'suddenness' of the sound.

01:14:421 (1) - This slider is too quick to move the player upwards, so the direction really doesn't matter except it'd play better if the head was under the previous slider. :arrow: ok I slowed it down

03:26:575 (2,1) - 1 is slightly off center. :arrow: ok!


Regou's Extra

00:46:113 (1,2,3) - The blanket the triplet forms is slightly off. :arrow: I will leave it to Regou


Kloyd's Extra

Check aimod for some snapping issues. :arrow: ok

02:23:344 (3,4,5) - This pattern seems randomly placed as there's no correlation to the previous slider or the next. I had something like https://puu.sh/wFxDt/cf8a8c2bdb.png in mind. :arrow: I cannot see the hyperlink is dead now after half a year :<

03:12:729 (3,4,1,2,3) - This rhythm seems incorrect. I'd remove 3 and use sv to extend 2 or try :arrow: I think it is fine

03:18:267 (1,1) - I can't tell what the intent with this was, so I personally think this would look better as a curved slider. :arrow: I believe the intent is to match the vocal and 03:19:190 (1) -

03:19:959 (4,5,6,2) - You could space these out more, as the overlap seems random. :arrow: OK

03:35:959 (4,5,6) - lol this looks kinda funny. Doesn't cause any issues but it could look better as a stream or triplet. :arrow: I personally find it ok


Drop's Extra

00:15:498 (1,1,1) - For these minor fluctuations in rhythm I'd hitsound these. :arrow: ok

00:17:344 - For the 1/8 stream you don't have to silence the ends, but they do need to get toned down a bit as atm they sound obnoxious. :arrow: they sound the same as Posthumous and I personally find no problem with the hitsound in the pattern

00:46:267 (5) - Blanket's slightly off. :arrow: I think Drop does not intend to blanket this slider with (5). (5) is a slider too flowy to manifest the intention of blanketing the next.


yf's Insane

01:38:575 (1) - There's too much background noise to use this idea. I'd shorten it to the 1/4 tick and place a circle. :arrow: This choice of rhythm is indeed unusual, I however find it fitting as yf has been following the vocal.


Hyper

03:26:882 (1,2,3) - Triangle is off. :arrow: I don't intend to arrange these circles to form a triangle. Actually it looks better in my opinion to leave it like this


Hard

aimond's showing snapping issues. :arrow: I am ashamed of myself :( done

02:06:575 (3) - The automatic stacking mechanic didn't place this right, so you might need to move it. :arrow: OK


Normal

00:56:729 (3) - Blanket is slightly off. :arrow: ok

Nothing else to say except why not apply Hard's kiai format on Normal? Out of all the diffs they're the most similar when it comes to ideas.


Easy

00:05:037 (1,2) - These are slightly off from being parallel. :arrow: they are perfectly parallel: https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/10558817

04:01:344 (1,1) - ^ :arrow: OK


gl
Mir
Unloved upon creator request.
Shohei Ohtani
oh jeez
Kaifin
gogogogogogogo!!
Topic Starter
Ulysses
Please allow me to apologise for replying to you only after a year.

_Yiiiii wrote:

passing by

Posthumous
*00:09:806 (1,1,1) - This is a jump after a stream plus straight flow so it need much attention when hitting this 00:09:883 (1) - according to my playing feedback, but there is no sound to focus on. So I suggest you start the stream from this position 00:09:421 (1) - and end it up here 00:09:344 (1) - to form an angle for the jump. Try this two jumps and you will know the difference. :arrow: I know where are you coming from, but the thing is the expense of altering the pattern in the way you said is the aesthetic.
*00:14:421 (3,5) - Ctrl + G, better imo, since they have stronger sounds. :arrow: I tried before and I find the gameplay less smooth.
*00:18:575 (1) - Not readable, because the slider head is on the path. ↓They look the same :arrow: a very good argument. done.
96,216,18575,6,0,B|64:159|64:159|108:103|108:103|140:167|140:167|96:216|96:216|136:287|136:287|216:191|216:191|216:151|216:151|160:36|160:36|72:28|72:28|-12:132|-12:132|-12:180|-12:180|88:356,1,1120,4|0,0:0|0:0,0:0:0:0:
*03:31:805 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2) - Sounds are fading out here so you should do Ctrl+G

They are just my personal ideas mainly focused on playing feedback, I hope you consider them, good luck~
Topic Starter
Ulysses
Please accept my apology for replying to you only after a year.

Skylish wrote:

From nostalish, my 777th post holy moly

[General]

> .mp3 159 kbps, could it be better?

> Taiko HS is not fully set. You missed K. I find a K hitsound for you https://puu.sh/xdJIa/657b265bdc.wav , rename it to 'taiko-normal-whistle'. :arrow: the hyperlink is dead :(

> 00:24:729 - unnecessary red timing point, remove it. :arrow: OK

> SV usages in Muzukashii need not be too aggresive. 0.8x to 1.0x at 01:05:344 - is too obvious. Take care of similar SV usages as well. :arrow: I am not sure what changes should be made here.

[Muzukashii]

> HP=6? a better spread btw Oni and Inner Oni :arrow: ok

> 00:09:344 - triplet could be made here as same as what you did at 00:04:421 - :arrow: ok

> 00:09:960 - Finisher missing :arrow: ok

> 00:25:036 - it should be identical with 00:29:959 - , either being don or blank :arrow: ok

> 00:50:421 - remove this for the consistency in this whole section of nnnn nn pattern. In other way if you want to add note, you can add it at 00:48:421 - :arrow: OK

> 01:03:036 - same as above, this n n n n pattern is a bit awkward. :arrow: I am following the music here though

> 01:05:959 - / 01:10:882 - a bit unfit to the music itself in terms of flow. These timings contain slightly strong vocal starts which deserve proper isolating effects there imo. Perhaps you can gather some opinion of this part from other mods later. Imo that 7-plet in 1/1 could be rearranged in other patterns like 3 +_+ 3 . Some breaks btw the notes go against with the vocal part.

> 01:48:882 - high-pitch vocal here, monochrome kat triplet worthy for sure. :arrow: given that I did not use don't use any don triplet in the kiai it will be absurd if I use one here

> 01:49:498 - Remove it to provide a little break to separate the new start of chorus at 01:49:652 - , and balance the density of previous triplets usages. :arrow: ok

> 01:53:805 - you can use a triplet here, if you like, just a suggestion to make reduce boring 1/1 spams. :arrow: I don't think it is suitable to use a triplet here because the music goes quiet here

> 02:03:652 - weird isolation here without sufficient musical elements supporting it. Connect this don to other parts by adding some notes right before it. :arrow: ok added a kat

^ 02:24:882 - same as above, you may have some idea now :arrow: what do you mean? same as which section?

> 02:29:036 - There are new drum kicks neglected, imo this could be done better to match them in order to show the layers of music. :arrow: added a kat

> 02:39:805 - k d k fit the upcoming flow and pitches better :arrow: ok

> 02:43:036 - remove it for the sake of consistency of n nn nn pattern :arrow:

> 02:45:036 - the plainest way of simply mapping to the sync. melodies are not enough. They are too boring. For example, you may add a don to enrich the kat at 02:46:729 - ; shift 02:48:421 - to 02:48:113 - for a better pattern. :arrow: ok

> 02:49:959 - similar case as above, until 02:54:882 - :arrow: ok

> 02:54:575 - / 02:54:882 - They should be d D yeah? :arrow: ok

> 03:03:190 - having k d k instead of d _ d is a better way to illustrate the music layers and progression imho. :arrow: ok

> 03:18:729 - / 03:20:267 - You can't miss these prominent vocal notes since you are following them. Rearrange the patterns when applicable. :arrow: ok

> 03:27:805 - mismatch of notes with pitches, k k d suits more. :arrow: ok

> 03:29:036 - changing it to kat for a better flow :arrow: ok

> 03:52:729 - feel a bit empty after it, that could be potential don spams. :arrow: ok

[]

Please find at least 3 more mods for all Taiko difficulties because there is still discussion-worthy space.
Topic Starter
Ulysses
I need some taiko mods for Muzu. I will be very grateful if you can spare your time to mod the Muzu diff :D.
Ideal
im fairly sure you shouldn’t have “taiko <diff>” as diff names since that was dropped a while ago, but rather “muzukashii”, “inner oni”, etc.

some sort of reminder to mod the muzu diff if i can find anything i guess since i like the song and especially the std diffs

actually excited for this to get ranked tbh
autofanboy
woah
Lexii
WOOOOOO
Topic Starter
Ulysses

Idealism wrote:

im fairly sure you shouldn’t have “taiko <diff>” as diff names since that was dropped a while ago, but rather “muzukashii”, “inner oni”, etc.

some sort of reminder to mod the muzu diff if i can find anything i guess since i like the song and especially the std diffs

actually excited for this to get ranked tbh
I keep the word 'taiko' because in the old days people included the word in the difficulty name. So the word is for the nostalgia, not for practical reasons.
Topic Starter
Ulysses

ErunamoJAZZ wrote:

hi nold and guests!, I finally have a time to look in ;)
Firstly, and foremost, thank you so much for your mod! It is a long mod and I know you have dedicated a lot of time into it. Secondly, please accept my apology. I am ashamed of myself that I only manage to reply and apply your mod after one year. I am deeply sorry for neglecting your mod. And, because this mod is so historical, all the illustrating pictures you have provided in your mod are now dead hyperlinks. I, therefore, cannot make use of the mod completely. I hope you can understand.

I attempted to make individual responses to each of your mod. However, I pressed the previous page button and my reply is all gone. I applied some of your mods and adopted some of your suggestions. Not many in easy, quite a lot in hard and moderate amount in normal. It is a really good mod. I wish I had read it when the pictures were still here. Thank you.

[General]
  1. Not kiai in low diffs??
[Easy]
  1. 00:00:729 (2) - nazi can you move to (its just for aesthetic ^^U https://puu.sh/wt9FC/650ef2cef3.png )
  2. 00:14:883 (1,1,1) - Those sliders have 6 repeats, but look like the previous of only 2. This will be bad idea for an easy, imo. I think that doing his shape a bit different will help here, I mean something like this:
    Anyway, the target for this map is people that does not have many plays... maybe asking for testplays will let you see if they can play this or not (because, sincerely, idk... you know, nowadays players can play any suff lol)
  3. 00:54:267 (1,1) - i think that a manual stack could be good idea here, like its now, could be a bit confuse imho.
  4. 01:55:805 (2,3) - that was a bit confuse for me... ^^U
  5. 02:13:036 (1,1) - Similar suggestion as before (manual stack).
  6. 02:19:190 (1,2) - i like this a lot <3
  7. 02:32:421 (2,1) - :!: This is the unique stack of this style in this diff... also, usually stacks are not good idea in easy diffs :P. Please, consider unstack like in similar previous patterns.
  8. 02:47:498 (1) - etto... this could make a nice double blanket, here the code if you want :3
    slider~

    372,336,167498,6,0,B|334:349|293:337|268:283|268:283|245:229|191:218|164:231|133:254,1,269.999991760254,4|2,1:0|2:1,0:0:0:0:
  9. 03:32:113 (2,3,4) - is not this rhythm a bit strange? Making the slider a repeat could be better, imo:
  10. 03:42:882 (1) - Similar suggestion (manual stack).
  11. 03:44:729 (2) - Similar to the first suggestion... in a way to avoid the overlap with (3) ^^U
  12. 04:02:575 (1) - the linear body is very close to the previous repeat.
list of blankets that I think could be improved
  1. 01:04:113 (3) - nazi could improve the blanket yet :3
  2. 01:10:267 (1) - nazi blanket :3
  3. 00:50:575 (3) -
  4. 02:03:190 (1) -
  5. 02:09:652 (2) -
  6. 02:36:421 (2) -
  7. 02:51:190 (2) -
  8. 02:54:882 (1,2) -
  9. 03:39:498 (2) -
nice diff


[Normal]
  1. omg, I think this mod will be a bit long?, most because I love normal diffs and I found many (imo, of course) ugly stuffs. All this is with the spirit of improve the set! so.. here we go:
  2. 00:15:806 - 00:17:037 - missing circles??
  3. 00:29:652 (1) - 00:30:882 (1) - 00:32:729 (3) - I feel those sliders off, making this section not very intuitive to play! (not mentioning that overlaps are not easy to read for players nowadays... :S)
    So!, here my suggestions in rhythm for this section (also, try to be careful with overlaps, and ask for testplays to be sure about ;) )
    susususugestions!
    00:29:652 - to 00:32:113 -


    and in 00:32:729 (3) -
  4. 00:35:805 (2,3,4,1) - like said before, players nowadays are very confused with overlaps like this... even if in praxis it is not veeery difficult, its a good idea do stuffs a bit more "obvious" for they.
    My suggestion is to move the arrow down of (2), keeping DS to 1.5x:
  5. 00:46:575 (3,1) - I understand that this change in DS is for aesthetics, but playing, the jump feels. Personally, I think that this is bad idea.
    And making patters with the same DS does not look bad (imho) -> https://puu.sh/wtdsi/a8594dd716.png
    (lol, I know that you may not want to change those sliders xD)
  6. 00:52:575 (2,3) - :!: However, here the problem is very notorious!. Doing a stack is a better alternative for this.
  7. 00:55:498 (1) - :!: Random normal-whistle xD
  8. 00:56:729 (3) - 00:58:729 (3) - Not a very serious issue, but (its a personal style), a way to improve overlaps and stuffs like this, is to move objects a bit to get overlaps over very previous objects,
  9. 01:00:729 (2,3) - could improve blankets.
  10. 01:05:805 (2,3) - I... i found those slider not very intuitive of play... I want to suggest this:
  11. 01:08:267 (2,3) - mm... I feel that 01:08:729 (3) - is following the voice (in the no no no, no), but 01:08:267 (2) - is not following this.
    I want to suggest to move (2) to the white tick, because I feel this more intuitive:
  12. 01:10:729 (2,3) - same suggestion that in 01:05:805 (2,3) -
  13. 01:13:190 (2) - same suggestion that in 01:08:267 (2,3) -
  14. 01:20:113 (1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3) - amazing <3
  15. 01:36:113 (1,2,3) - :!: mm... i dont found this rhythm very intuitive, Its really weird to follow, imho. I want to suggest this rhythm (and a possible pattern if you want)
  16. 01:43:652 (4,5,6) - wow, nice.
  17. 01:45:959 (1,2,3) - Similar here, I want to suggest this:
  18. 01:52:882 - I feel that a circle here (or change for a little slider instead??, I vote for two circles xD) could be better in order of keep polarity
  19. 02:03:959 (2) - this overlap will be difficult for some players (and maybe unrankable?? ask for more opinions please)
  20. 02:14:267 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2) - just for comment about... I was not sure what were you following here ^^U
  21. 02:32:882 (1) - :!: lol, I failed here, and that was because spacing is at 1.3x!, move with DS in 1.4x please >.<
  22. 02:37:344 (2) - are you sure? personally I found this its fine, but some modders will complain about.
  23. 03:05:960 (1,2,3) - similar suggestion like before.

    or
  24. 03:15:806 (1,2,3) - similar suggestion like before.
  25. 03:22:729 - similar suggestion like before. (a circle)
  26. 03:40:882 (2) - I want to suggest a slider instead:
  27. 03:59:805 - 04:01:036 - missing circles??
That is all (for now? xDD)


[diff filler2]
This still wip (and looks nice), so, just want to say: remove NC in 00:55:805 (1) - 00:58:267 (1) - 01:00:729 (1) - 01:03:190 (1) - :P


[Hard]
  1. Very funny!
  2. 00:18:575 (1) - 04:02:575 (1) - Its not perfectly symmetric, here the code if you want :3
    peace!


    177,137,18575,6,0,B|233:138|293:237|256:270|256:270|218:237|278:138|334:137,1,360.000013732911
  3. 01:43:344 (1,2,3) - I felt those stranges... I want to suggest this:


    However, maybe its just the jump (because in 03:13:190 (1,2,3) - I dont feel this weird)
  4. 02:16:113 (3) - Not a blanket?
  5. 02:23:959 (3,1,2,3,4) - ufff, nice.
  6. 03:49:959 (4) - Improve blanket?
8-)


[yf's Insane]
  1. Very interesting, that diff remember me a bit the pishi diff in the sukinathan map.
  2. Mmm.. thinking about spread, maybe this have too many streams??
  3. 00:55:498 (1,1) - random whistles :P
  4. 00:09:267 (2,1,1,1,1) - those were particularly difficult to play :(
  5. There are some circles that I feel overmaped. I mean, even if there are some sound, this is very soft and in play this result a bit annoying to fail xD.
    - 00:48:036 (6) - 00:52:959 (6) - | 02:25:267 (7) - 02:27:728 (7) -
    - 01:06:190 (4) - 01:07:421 (4) - 01:07:729 (6) - | 01:11:113 (4) - 01:12:344 (4) - 01:12:652 (6) -
    My suggestion is delete them, for two reasons: 1) this diff have enough streams and 2) removing does not change the stars.
  6. 02:34:882 (1) - 02:37:652 (1) - lol, very troll.
  7. .. and well... I felt this very away from hard u.u (even if its in general a good diff)

[Drop's Extra]
02:23:498 (2) - random clap xD
This diff is playable =w=
I just dislike the shape of some sliders... they are not very aesthetic and can be improved, imho:
  1. 01:36:113 (1) - :(
  2. 01:46:882 (1) - :(
  3. 01:48:421 (1,1) - :|
  4. 03:10:882 (1) - :D <- I like this

[Kloyd's diff]
hi Kloyd o/
I tried this, but 00:17:344 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - was very difficult xD, or fast sliders like 02:22:882 (1) - are the dead for me :P
  1. 03:09:344 (2) - I dislike a lot this.. looks ugly. You made some nice in 01:08:729 (1,1,1) - , so, I really think you can improve this here ;)

[Regou's diff]
  1. 01:57:652 - 02:02:575 - missing circle???, or is it intentional?, because this is a bit out of place, imho xD, Actually, the other sections were you could make doubles, have or triples, or circle+1/4slider. Please, consider this.
  2. 02:47:652 (2) - Not perfect yet xDDD

[]

:D

Good luck!!!!!!!!!!!!11111


----
Edit: wtf, I have no idea what bbcode is wrong, Im sorry. You can quote this with this link
Topic Starter
Ulysses
The previous post is in response to ErunamoJAZZ's mod (on page 10). I did not write the content of the post, apart from the words coloured. I cannot edit it or delete it either due to some technical problems. Moderators please delete it if you can.

I will re-post my reply to JAZZ's mod here:

'I should thank you so much for your mod! It is a long mod and I know you have dedicated a lot of time in writing it. And, please accept my apology. I am ashamed of myself that I only managed to reply and apply your mods after one year. I am deeply sorry for neglecting it. Because this mod is so historical, all the illustrating pictures you have provided in your mod are now dead hyperlinks. I, therefore, cannot make use of the mod completely. I hope you can understand.

I attempted to make individual responses to each of your mod. However, I pressed the previous page button and my reply is all gone. I applied some of your mods and adopted some of your suggestions. Not many in easy, quite a lot in hard and moderate amount in normal. It is a really good mod. I wish I had read it when the pictures were still here. Thank you.'
hi-mei
woooo hello! since ive modded the last diff like a year ago, this time ill focus on the rest of the set!

Posthumous
00:12:421 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2) - i think these ones shud be a bit harder, since they are using 3x DS, when 00:11:190 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2) - these ones are using 7x DS on the similar sound phrase. more over, the thing is that the melody intensity is increasing, but the DS is going from 3x > 7x > 3x
00:18:575 (1) - shud be parallel i think
00:33:344 (1) - i dont agree with it ending on the new sound measure. 00:34:575 - i think this one shud be a separated note.
00:39:959 (2,5) - fix blanket?
01:17:652 (1,2,1,1,2,1,1,2,1,1,2,1,1,2,1) - nice
01:25:036 (1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1) - feels like it lacks scaling in SV, since the sound intensity is increasing
02:19:652 (3) - i think its a mistake in rhythm, the slider end is on strong beat, while 02:19:190 (1) - 02:19:498 - 02:20:113 - are clickable
i think it solves the problem
02:27:498 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2) - i think this is the only place im completely against. its a huge diff spike that feels really out of place.
would like to nerf it.
03:12:422 (1,2,1) - i think that the jump between 03:12:575 (2,1) - is too low especially considering everything before that place in the same section.
03:36:882 (1) - can be improved (the slider end doesnt fit to the slider body gap)
03:42:729 (4,1) - isnt this too much? maybe put it in the center of that square? 03:42:267 (1,2,3,4) -
03:56:421 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2) - same issue i mentioned above this place 00:12:421 (1) -
03:31:805 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2) - feels like a wrong patter, since its made up in a single thing, while there are 2 music phrases 03:31:805 (1,2,1,2) - and 03:32:421 (1,2,1,2) -
03:34:575 (2) - ctrl+g for better pattern?
04:02:575 (1) - shud be parallel i guess?

Regou's Extra
00:01:344 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - i think this thing is overcomplicated rhythm wise, its the start of the map and i feel like putting 1/4 kickslider is really unnecessary and hard to read. i personally had issues reading that place. would suggest this:
00:18:498 (1,1) - feels like this jump is way too hard considering that its 1/8 (or to be precise 1/4 of slider tail)
00:18:575 (1) - this "tear" on the loop of the slider feels underdone. i would suggest this:
code:
192,192,18575,6,0,B|244:192|297:131|302:31|302:31|280:140|323:206|323:206|382:152|414:49|414:49|406:146|360:231|371:308|427:336|524:323|549:262|551:186|443:82|350:201|323:237|317:290|335:353|431:372,1,1241.99996209717,4|0,0:0|0:0,0:0:0:0:
01:09:344 (3) - maybe stuck this with 01:08:575 (5) - to avoid sharp jump on 01:09:344 (3,1) - ?
01:15:190 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2) - i would disagree with such placement since the music intensity is increasing and its really strange that these pairs are so close to each other. would add some distance between not+slider.
01:42:729 (2,3,4) - are you sure it shud be a tripple? similar to 01:41:652 (1,2,3) - ? its a different sound and i feel like making it a reverse slider would solve the problem. since it doesnt feel like triple there. 01:42:805 - has no sound in it. and here is the same issue 01:44:036 - 01:44:959 - 01:47:729 - 01:49:267 -
01:52:421 (5,1) - this jump felt really out of place, since 01:52:421 (5) - a strong beat, 01:52:575 (1) - weak beat, the distance is abnormal
02:02:575 - probably a mistake? its a unmapped strong beat
02:04:959 - 02:07:729 - 02:08:652 - 02:10:190 - 02:01:882 - 02:11:729 - 02:12:344 - 03:13:882 - 03:11:575 - overmapped triplet. maybe reconsider these places. there are lots of them and i feel like its unnecessary to keep them since its going to rank.
02:47:652 (2) - unrankable since you dont know which way you go, right or left?

Kloyd's Extra
00:14:267 (1,2,3,4,5) - consider nerfing the distance here since its a huge diffspke from 0.1x to 1.8x (same place 03:58:190 (8,1,2,3,4,5) - here)
00:14:883 (1,2,1,1,1,1,2,1,1,1) - maybe add some structure in the placement you've used here? feels like 00:15:190 (2,1) - too far from each other.00:16:114 (1,2,1,1,1) - same with this. so if youre arguing that 00:16:729 (1) - this one is a strong beat, then why didnt you use the same distance in 00:17:037 (1) - 00:15:806 (1) - ? ( same 03:58:882 (1,2,1,1,1,1,2,1,1,1) - )
00:18:575 (1) - maybe change the slider shape? it doesnt right or pretty at all. my suggestion:
code:
104,240,18575,6,0,B|161:162|126:25|-5:-19|-26:94|-14:159|119:137|119:137|173:123|217:99|259:103|336:183|311:291|243:288|186:271|172:183|211:126|211:126|251:45|393:44|431:160|323:172|324:123,1,1106.99996621704,4|0,0:0|0:0,0:0:0:0:
00:31:344 (4,1) - i think they are too close to each other, maybe consider setting the Stacking leniency to 0 or space them out a bit so it would not ruin the aesthetics of the pattern.
01:15:036 (3,1) - distance is too small for that strong beat i think. 01:14:575 (3) - 01:15:190 (1) - consider stacking them, that would solve the issue.
01:34:575 (1,1) - distance is too small for emphasis of 01:34:882 (1) - strong beat i think? maybe add some spacing there.
02:19:036 (7,1) - maybe change the flow direction on the 02:19:190 (1) - since its a new sound phrase?

Drop's Extra
01:36:882 (3,4) - maybe put more distance between them to emphasize strong beat of 4?
01:43:344 (7,1) - same suggestion
02:50:421 (3,4,5) - hitsound problem? 02:50:497 (4) - this note is hitsounded for some reason in a strange way.
02:52:882 (3,4,5) - well now i see its intended but i would suggest to reconsider hitsounding of these triplets since it sounds too loud on a place with no sound at all. 02:52:959 - check this. same comes for other places: 02:54:190 - etc
03:30:882 (2,3,4) - 03:29:652 (2,3,4) - the hitsounding of these two triplets are different despite they are emphasizing similar sounds.
03:38:267 (2,3,4) - and 03:37:036 (2,3,4) - and 03:41:959 (2,3,4) - same thing

To BN who gonna nominate this: please check yf's insane.
Ideal
heyo im here, free nm because i really, REALLY want to see this mapset ranked its so good

muzukashii bc i suck at modding onis and above
00:33:344 (1) - since the piano mantains an ascending pitch here despite lower intensity, this would fit better as a k (noting that you're following pitch since you decided to have a d at 00:32:882 (4))
01:09:652 (130) - there isn't much of a relevant sound here, so moving this to 01:09:498 - seems to be better.
01:12:113 (145) - ehhhh, nazi, but i think this would be much better at 01:11:959 - as a k.
02:17:959 (6,7,8) - think this would work better as a kkd, but up to you. mostly because of the descending pitch.
02:42:729 (89) - this sounds just about the same as 02:43:344 (90), you could change to a k or even make the entire pattern a dkk.
02:45:036 (95) - either a D or a K works here, but add a finisher here bc its a really strong beat
03:26:882 (30) - maybe move to 03:26:729
03:29:652 (49,50,51,52) - could change it to a kkk d instead to follow the same sounds you did on 03:30:882 (57,58,59,60)

gl, really hope you manage it. :d have a few stars too for no reason
Broly
🤪🤪🤪
Topic Starter
Ulysses

hi-mei wrote:

woooo hello! since ive modded the last diff like a year ago, this time ill focus on the rest of the set!

Posthumous
00:12:421 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2) - i think these ones shud be a bit harder, since they are using 3x DS, when 00:11:190 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2) - these ones are using 7x DS on the similar sound phrase. more over, the thing is that the melody intensity is increasing, but the DS is going from 3x > 7x > 3x :arrow: good point. done
00:18:575 (1) - shud be parallel i think :arrow: done
00:33:344 (1) - i dont agree with it ending on the new sound measure. 00:34:575 - i think this one shud be a separated note. :arrow: I think it is appropriate to start the slider here. the sound is fading thereafter. And I do not think that a note being added at 0034575 is a good idea as I wish not to emphasis the next pattern. I want it soft.
00:39:959 (2,5) - fix blanket? :arrow: ok
01:17:652 (1,2,1,1,2,1,1,2,1,1,2,1,1,2,1) - nice :arrow: thanks
01:25:036 (1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1) - feels like it lacks scaling in SV, since the sound intensity is increasing :arrow: I really fancy this pattern. The music does not sound increasingly intense but rather sounds repetitive to me. Therefore, I think it is a fitting pattern.
02:19:652 (3) - i think its a mistake in rhythm, the slider end is on strong beat, while 02:19:190 (1) - 02:19:498 - 02:20:113 - are clickable
i think it solves the problem :arrow: I am not mapping the drum here but the piano sound in the background.
02:27:498 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2) - i think this is the only place im completely against. its a huge diff spike that feels really out of place.
would like to nerf it. :arrow: I agree.
03:12:422 (1,2,1) - i think that the jump between 03:12:575 (2,1) - is too low especially considering everything before that place in the same section. :arrow: I think it is fine the spacing is not too small.
03:36:882 (1) - can be improved (the slider end doesnt fit to the slider body gap) :arrow: ok
03:42:729 (4,1) - isnt this too much? maybe put it in the center of that square? 03:42:267 (1,2,3,4) - :arrow: Since (1) is the start of a new section, for emphasising purpose I think it is completely fine especially with the bomb hitsound supporting it.
03:56:421 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2) - same issue i mentioned above this place 00:12:421 (1) - :arrow: ok
03:31:805 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2) - feels like a wrong patter, since its made up in a single thing, while there are 2 music phrases 03:31:805 (1,2,1,2) - and 03:32:421 (1,2,1,2) - :arrow: I don't really get what you mean.
03:34:575 (2) - ctrl+g for better pattern? :arrow: I think my pattern looks better.
04:02:575 (1) - shud be parallel i guess? :arrow: ok

Kloyd's Extra
00:14:267 (1,2,3,4,5) - consider nerfing the distance here since its a huge diffspke from 0.1x to 1.8x (same place 03:58:190 (8,1,2,3,4,5) - here) :arrow: ok
00:14:883 (1,2,1,1,1,1,2,1,1,1) - maybe add some structure in the placement you've used here? feels like 00:15:190 (2,1) - too far from each other.00:16:114 (1,2,1,1,1) - same with this. so if youre arguing that 00:16:729 (1) - this one is a strong beat, then why didnt you use the same distance in 00:17:037 (1) - :arrow: 00:15:806 (1) - ? ( same 03:58:882 (1,2,1,1,1,1,2,1,1,1) - ) :arrow: the logic in the pattern is rather reasonable to me.
00:18:575 (1) - maybe change the slider shape? it doesnt right or pretty at all. my suggestion: :arrow: cool!
code:
104,240,18575,6,0,B|161:162|126:25|-5:-19|-26:94|-14:159|119:137|119:137|173:123|217:99|259:103|336:183|311:291|243:288|186:271|172:183|211:126|211:126|251:45|393:44|431:160|323:172|324:123,1,1106.99996621704,4|0,0:0|0:0,0:0:0:0:
00:31:344 (4,1) - i think they are too close to each other, maybe consider setting the Stacking leniency to 0 or space them out a bit so it would not ruin the aesthetics of the pattern. :arrow: it is intuitive to play so I won't change this.
01:15:036 (3,1) - distance is too small for that strong beat i think. 01:14:575 (3) - 01:15:190 (1) - consider stacking them, that would solve the issue. :arrow: given that the whole part's spacing isn't big I think it is fine.
01:34:575 (1,1) - distance is too small for emphasis of 01:34:882 (1) - strong beat i think? maybe add some spacing there. :arrow: moving (1) away will require the re-structure of all other objects in the same pattern. And the triangular pattern now looks good enough to me.
02:19:036 (7,1) - maybe change the flow direction on the 02:19:190 (1) - since its a new sound phrase? :arrow: why?
Topic Starter
Ulysses

Idealism wrote:

heyo im here, free nm because i really, REALLY want to see this mapset ranked its so good

muzukashii bc i suck at modding onis and above
00:33:344 (1) - since the piano mantains an ascending pitch here despite lower intensity, this would fit better as a k (noting that you're following pitch since you decided to have a d at 00:32:882 (4))
01:09:652 (130) - there isn't much of a relevant sound here, so moving this to 01:09:498 - seems to be better.
01:12:113 (145) - ehhhh, nazi, but i think this would be much better at 01:11:959 - as a k.
02:17:959 (6,7,8) - think this would work better as a kkd, but up to you. mostly because of the descending pitch.
02:42:729 (89) - this sounds just about the same as 02:43:344 (90), you could change to a k or even make the entire pattern a dkk.
02:45:036 (95) - either a D or a K works here, but add a finisher here bc its a really strong beat
03:26:882 (30) - maybe move to 03:26:729
03:29:652 (49,50,51,52) - could change it to a kkk d instead to follow the same sounds you did on 03:30:882 (57,58,59,60)

gl, really hope you manage it. :d have a few stars too for no reason
All applied.
ayyEve
super sorry about the delay, lots of things came up unexpectedly.
i looked over the map, in general it seems a little dense for muzu, but otherwise i cant really see any issues with it, sorry i cant be of much else help :c

good luck with ranking!
Jenny
Taiko Muzu:

00:33:344 (1) - I really think this should be a d for contrast; three kats in a row just doesn't do anything for me, and impactful notes should be highlighted by switching colour imo
00:36:729 (10) - would rather this be a k; as this is a Muzu, so looping patterns once or twice is nice since it gives the player a bit of extra comfort
00:37:959 (15) - in turn, I'd make this one a d
00:47:344 (35,36,37,38,39,40,41,42,43,44,45) - I'd replace this section with a copy of 00:44:882 (23,24,25,26,27,28,29,30,31,32) - for the familiarity aspect talked about above
01:05:344 (104,105,106,107) - personally I'd rather have this as a d kkd since I don't like starting triples on white beats, it just doesn't feel comfortable for me
01:05:959 (108,109,110,111,112,113,114,115,116,117,118,119,120,121,122,123,124,125,126,127,128,129,130,131,132,133,134,135,136,137,138,139,140,141,142,143,144,145,146,147,148,149,150,151,152,153,154,155,156,157,158,159) - in general I'd thin out the note density in this section for contrast, so that 01:15:190 (164) - onwards sticks out more to the player
01:34:882 (261,262,263,264) - d ddk goes better here; white tick triple awkwardness and all
01:37:344 (275,276,277,278) - ^
01:38:575 (282,283,284,285) - ^
01:39:805 (290,291,292,293) - ^
01:42:267 (305,306,307,308,309,310,311,312) - ^
(I'll stop listing them now but I think the map would improve a lot if you change it across the entire song; honestly this is my biggest issue with the map)
02:14:267 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,1,2,3,4,5) - a 2/1 clap rhythm goes better in this section I think, so just have ks on every 2nd white beat
02:26:575 (23,24,25,26,27,28,29,30,31,32,33,34,35) - I think repeating the patterns from the previous two measures works better here for familiarity & rhythm consistency's sake
02:51:190 (120,121,122) - works better as k k k for me (due to the shift in the synth's pitch; leave 123 as a d though, gives better contrast as you go into the next measure)
02:54:575 (129) - k for contrast with the next measure
02:59:805 (142,143,144,145,146,147,148,149,150,151,152,153,154,155,156,157,158,159,160,161,162,163,164,165,166,167,168) - starting triples on the red ticks works better here as for the rest of the map pretty much
(..I said I'd stop mentioning these..)


That's it pretty much; the biggest source of confusion/discomfort while playing comes from the mixing of red and white tick triples - then there's the few irregular rhythms, but that should all be easy to patch up.
With that out of the way, this plays really well tbh.
Ascendance
top ctb diff is a very very big no
_handholding
why do you always have that cheer hitsound in every map? you might as well just edit it in every mp3 you use
Topic Starter
Ulysses

Kisses wrote:

why do you always have that cheer hitsound in every map? you might as well just edit it in every mp3 you use

I reckon you are talking to the wrong person. This is the first and the only map I use the cheer hitsound.
_handholding
blow out? anyways it really takes away from the song when you have such a lengthy hitsound over the chorus like that. You use it frequently too
Topic Starter
Ulysses

Kisses wrote:

blow out?

I am not sure if you are being serious or what. But if using a hitsound on two occasions entails that I should embed the hitsound into the song, then most of the mp3 files on osu, including the ones in your maps, will be in need of being edited. And indeed, any reasonable person will find this conclusion absurd.

However, thank you for your suggestion.
_handholding
Yes I wasn't actually serious with the editing thing. I do think you're using the hitsound way too much in the chorus to the point where you're almost butchering the song.
Topic Starter
Ulysses
OK. On second thoughts I think it is somehow true. I will lower the frequency of the cheer hitsound in the chorus section.
Topic Starter
Ulysses

Jenny wrote:

Taiko Muzu:

00:33:344 (1) - I really think this should be a d for contrast; three kats in a row just doesn't do anything for me, and impactful notes should be highlighted by switching colour imo
00:36:729 (10) - would rather this be a k; as this is a Muzu, so looping patterns once or twice is nice since it gives the player a bit of extra comfort
00:37:959 (15) - in turn, I'd make this one a d
00:47:344 (35,36,37,38,39,40,41,42,43,44,45) - I'd replace this section with a copy of 00:44:882 (23,24,25,26,27,28,29,30,31,32) - for the familiarity aspect talked about above
01:05:344 (104,105,106,107) - personally I'd rather have this as a d kkd since I don't like starting triples on white beats, it just doesn't feel comfortable for me
01:05:959 :arrow: so I cannot change to kkd because Muzu cannot have double-coloured triplets? :roll: (108,109,110,111,112,113,114,115,116,117,118,119,120,121,122,123,124,125,126,127,128,129,130,131,132,133,134,135,136,137,138,139,140,141,142,143,144,145,146,147,148,149,150,151,152,153,154,155,156,157,158,159) - in general I'd thin out the note density in this section for contrast, so that 01:15:190 (164) - onwards sticks out more to the player
01:34:882 (261,262,263,264) - d ddk goes better here; white tick triple awkwardness and all
01:37:344 (275,276,277,278) - ^
01:38:575 (282,283,284,285) - ^
01:39:805 (290,291,292,293) - ^
01:42:267 (305,306,307,308,309,310,311,312) - ^
(I'll stop listing them now but I think the map would improve a lot if you change it across the entire song; honestly this is my biggest issue with the map)
02:14:267 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,1,2,3,4,5) - a 2/1 clap rhythm goes better in this section I think, so just have ks on every 2nd white beat :arrow: The current rhythm sounds fine to me.
02:26:575 (23,24,25,26,27,28,29,30,31,32,33,34,35) - I think repeating the patterns from the previous two measures works better here for familiarity & rhythm consistency's sake :arrow: Avoiding repetitiveness here will be better?
02:51:190 (120,121,122) - works better as k k k for me (due to the shift in the synth's pitch; leave 123 as a d though, gives better contrast as you go into the next measure)
02:54:575 (129) - k for contrast with the next measure
02:59:805 (142,143,144,145,146,147,148,149,150,151,152,153,154,155,156,157,158,159,160,161,162,163,164,165,166,167,168) - starting triples on the red ticks works better here as for the rest of the map pretty much
(..I said I'd stop mentioning these..)


That's it pretty much; the biggest source of confusion/discomfort while playing comes from the mixing of red and white tick triples - then there's the few irregular rhythms, but that should all be easy to patch up.
With that out of the way, this plays really well tbh.

Applied unless otherwise specified. Thank you Jenny!
Vulkin
NM Request for only the Muzukashii, sorry Nardo.

General
-Before I start, i think it would be better to remove the "Taiko" from the taiko difficulty names, since its already shown in the gamemode icon, and its a bit unnecesary considering Muzukashii-Oni-Inner Oni are (mostly) only used in Taiko
-00:24:729 - I dont think the Timing point here is needed, as it changes things that an inherited point could do anyway, so maybe make it inherited instead.
-I like the Storyboard uwu, but it doesnt like to cooperate with taiko layout, some lyrics are obstructed by it

Taiko Muzukashii
-00:00:114 (1) - Maybe put a finisher? clear cymbal (?) sound and would make consistency with 00:09:960 (55) -
-00:18:575 (104) - I think you could remove the finisher from this note, would emphasize the quiet but noticeable removal of the kicks (?), and it would give an even greater emphasis to 00:19:806 (1) - , which i think is more important in this case
-00:36:267 - maybe make this ddkd ? the pitch is slightly different than 00:38:729 -
-00:54:113 (70) - Maybe delete this note? I believe it would give a bit more emphasis on 00:54:267 (71) -
-01:05:036 - I think a d could fit here, theres a bit of sound here, the same one that you followed with d's before
-01:05:344 - Instead of there being a triplet, i think a K could fit instead, to emphasize the bass increase there
-01:13:344 - Maybe follow something like https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/10605586 this?, it would follow the voice a little bit, and it would make it feel better to hit the finisher at 01:15:190 (161) - (since it would also give a bit more emphasis to it)
-01:24:729 - You could try doing kkD here, to follow the cymbal (?) sound at 01:25:036 (208) -
-01:54:421 (15) - I think you should delete this note, its to give a little bit more break, since its a bit too dense, and it would make consistency (note ammount-wise) with the incoming parts
-02:21:036 - Maybe try dkd d ddk here instead of dkd dkd d? it would follow the voice a little bit better imo
-Im not sure about the last kiai, the length of the patterns seem a little bit too excessive, specially 03:24:421 - , might want to recheck this?
-03:44:113 (1) - Maybe put a finisher here? cymbal sound (?) is there, and would make consistency with the intro
-03:51:498 - Again from here, its a bit too excessive imo, its not even on kiai, but the patterns are longer than the ones that are on there
-04:02:575 (125) - Maybe remove finisher? would give more emphasis on the finisher at 04:03:805 (1) -

Wish you the best of luck in ranking!
Topic Starter
Ulysses

Vulkin wrote:

General
-Before I start, i think it would be better to remove the "Taiko" from the taiko difficulty names, since its already shown in the gamemode icon, and its a bit unnecesary considering Muzukashii-Oni-Inner Oni are (mostly) only used in Taiko :arrow: Because people in the past included the word Taiko in it so I want to keep it for nostalgia.
-00:24:729 - I dont think the Timing point here is needed, as it changes things that an inherited point could do anyway, so maybe make it inherited instead. :arrow: I will change it later
-I like the Storyboard uwu, but it doesnt like to cooperate with taiko layout, some lyrics are obstructed by it :arrow: Because it is a 4-mode hybrid map, it will limit the freedom of the storyboard too much if I consider all 4 modes when creating it. Therefore, I take no mods into accouont when making the storyboard.

Taiko Muzukashii
:arrow: Applied all
-00:00:114 (1) - Maybe put a finisher? clear cymbal (?) sound and would make consistency with 00:09:960 (55) -
-00:18:575 (104) - I think you could remove the finisher from this note, would emphasize the quiet but noticeable removal of the kicks (?), and it would give an even greater emphasis to 00:19:806 (1) - , which i think is more important in this case
-00:36:267 - maybe make this ddkd ? the pitch is slightly different than 00:38:729 -
-00:54:113 (70) - Maybe delete this note? I believe it would give a bit more emphasis on 00:54:267 (71) -
-01:05:036 - I think a d could fit here, theres a bit of sound here, the same one that you followed with d's before
-01:05:344 - Instead of there being a triplet, i think a K could fit instead, to emphasize the bass increase there
-01:13:344 - Maybe follow something like https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/10605586 this?, it would follow the voice a little bit, and it would make it feel better to hit the finisher at 01:15:190 (161) - (since it would also give a bit more emphasis to it)
-01:24:729 - You could try doing kkD here, to follow the cymbal (?) sound at 01:25:036 (208) -
-01:54:421 (15) - I think you should delete this note, its to give a little bit more break, since its a bit too dense, and it would make consistency (note ammount-wise) with the incoming parts
-02:21:036 - Maybe try dkd d ddk here instead of dkd dkd d? it would follow the voice a little bit better imo
-Im not sure about the last kiai, the length of the patterns seem a little bit too excessive, specially 03:24:421 - , might want to recheck this?
-03:44:113 (1) - Maybe put a finisher here? cymbal sound (?) is there, and would make consistency with the intro
-03:51:498 - Again from here, its a bit too excessive imo, its not even on kiai, but the patterns are longer than the ones that are on there
-04:02:575 (125) - Maybe remove finisher? would give more emphasis on the finisher at 04:03:805 (1) -

Wish you the best of luck in ranking!
Secre
nold asked me to provide input on the pattern at around 14 seconds
i think it is just pp inflation, if you remove that pattern the SR goes down by 1.03
I don't think these "pp patterns" should be ranked
that is my opinion
Kimitakari
I agree with chickenbible. It's just a pp pattern. Also I heard that your map won't be ranked unless the top difficulty could be modified to the ranked status but I don't know if they'll help you out or not.
Topic Starter
Ulysses
Hello. I want CTB mappers’ and modders’ opinions on the hyper walk section. I am personally in favour of it. But I will be happy to see it being altered if the the general opinions are against it.

A typical argument against the section in question is that patterns such as this only appear in maps for loved and graveyard. In other words, that there is no precedent for patterns as such in the ranked section renders the diff inappropriate to be ranked.
This argument is invalid. That there is no such pattern in any ranked maps is no valid reason that there should not be any patterns like this be ranked in the future. If enough people are in favour of the pattern, we should establish a precedent together, not to avoid creating one. This is how maps becomes diversified —- by establishing precedents that did not exist in the past.

However, my stance is not set in stone. If enough of you think it is not a good idea to rank patterns like this, then I am willing to shrink the scale of the pattern. So that it looks less ‘ridiculous’. But I am reluctant to, as some suggest, remove the whole diff as it is against the will of many who enjoy this piece of map and the retired mapper himself. I wish that nominators will not take the ‘all in or nothing’ stance by asking me to remove the diff or the whole map will be vetoed. Rather, it will be more constructive to provide suggestions as to how to improve the diff.

Have your say here.
Ascendance
PP should never be an argument when it comes to a pattern or a map’s quality. I’ll write something more in-depth at a later time today.
MBomb
I personally am fine with how the patterns are used in the 1/16 sections, however the 1/8 feels like it could be structured to the music a lot better. As well as this, whilst I am fine with them, the 1/16 would actually be really nicely emphasised if it was starting off with a smaller distance and gradually increasing, as the pitch does in the section, it would look really cool to me.

I do have a few concerns with this map, but it's stuff that isn't a huge concern compared to people's opinions on this in particular, as it's more changes to flow and such, and a few particular streams where the lack of HDashes feels really weird in comparison to the parts where there are hyperwalks (Thanks Sanyi for pointing that out to me).

Will wait for Ascendance to post his thoughts on this first, but wanted to just put my opinion out there.
Spectator
Seems we're missing fruit-drop-overlay / fruit-bananas / fruit-bananas-overlay for fruits' skin, can you add them please?

Crystal and Ascendance are discussing the 1/8 & 1/16 so it should be better in some hours!
Jenny
Some lyric error in the SB: during the chorus it says "cause it play the first time I laid eyes on you" when it should be played
Topic Starter
Ulysses

Jenny wrote:

Some lyric error in the SB: during the chorus it says "cause it play the first time I laid eyes on you" when it should be played
thank you Jenny! I will fix it later today :)
Topic Starter
Ulysses
Metadata: Artist and Title


The original metadata is Nostalgic - S3RL feat Harri Rush:
https://djs3rl.com/shop/Nostalgic

The song is remixed by CLuBLioNXNightcore (a youtuber) who has not an official website but a youtube and twitter account.
They titled the remixed song 'Nightcore - Nostalgic [S3RL feat Harri Rush]':
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ZbBQg0coqU
https://twitter.com/CLuBLioNNight

They have not effectively altered the title of the song but only replaced the artist 'S3RL feat Harri Rush' with 'Nightcore' and putting 'S3RL feat Harri Rush' at the back of the title.

In consistency with recently ranked Nightcore maps, if the reproducer of the piece of music has not altered the title of the song, the title shall not be changed save that '(Nightcore Mix)' be added in the title after the original title.
Examples:
https://osu.ppy.sh/s/463866 Cascada - Why You Had To Leave (Nightcore Mix) ranked on March 4, 2018
https://osu.ppy.sh/s/659854 DJ THT meets Scarlet - Live 2 Dance (Nightcore Mix) ranked on Jan 23, 2018
https://osu.ppy.sh/s/646724 Paolo Ligorio - The Colors Of My Life (Nightcore Mix) ranked on Sep 28, 2017

Thus, the artist shall be 'S3RL feat Harri Rush', same as in the official description; the title shall be changed to 'Nostalgic (Nightcore Mix)' taking the precedents aforementioned into regard.



Metadata: Source

The source shall be left blank as all other S3RL maps do.
Examples:
https://osu.ppy.sh/s/83560 DJ S3RL - T-T-Techno (feat. Jesskah); no source
https://osu.ppy.sh/s/660109 S3RL - Well, That Was Awkward; no source
https://osu.ppy.sh/s/651692 S3RL feat Tamika - Tell Me What You Want; no source
Mekki
I love this map so much, good luck in further processing ♥

And yeah, metadata looks ok. The song has been speeded up both tempo and pitch and its genre is techno so (Nightcore Mix) in the title fits well~
show more
Please sign in to reply.

New reply