WOOOOOO
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.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
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][Easy]
- Not kiai in low diffs??
- 00:00:729 (2) -
nazican you move to (its just for aesthetic ^^U https://puu.sh/wt9FC/650ef2cef3.png )- 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)- 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.
- 01:55:805 (2,3) - that was a bit confuse for me... ^^U
- 02:13:036 (1,1) - Similar suggestion as before (manual stack).
- 02:19:190 (1,2) - i like this a lot <3
- 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 . Please, consider unstack like in similar previous patterns.
- 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:- 03:32:113 (2,3,4) - is not this rhythm a bit strange? Making the slider a repeat could be better, imo:
- 03:42:882 (1) - Similar suggestion (manual stack).
- 03:44:729 (2) - Similar to the first suggestion... in a way to avoid the overlap with (3) ^^U
- 04:02:575 (1) - the linear body is very close to the previous repeat.
list of blankets that I think could be improvednice diff
- 01:04:113 (3) -
nazicould improve the blanket yet :3- 01:10:267 (1) -
naziblanket :3- 00:50:575 (3) -
- 02:03:190 (1) -
- 02:09:652 (2) -
- 02:36:421 (2) -
- 02:51:190 (2) -
- 02:54:882 (1,2) -
- 03:39:498 (2) -
[Normal]That is all (for now? xDD)
- 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:
- 00:15:806 - 00:17:037 - missing circles??
- 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) -- 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:- 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)- 00:52:575 (2,3) - However, here the problem is very notorious!. Doing a stack is a better alternative for this.
- 00:55:498 (1) - Random normal-whistle xD
- 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,
- 01:00:729 (2,3) - could improve blankets.
- 01:05:805 (2,3) - I... i found those slider not very intuitive of play... I want to suggest this:
- 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:- 01:10:729 (2,3) - same suggestion that in 01:05:805 (2,3) -
- 01:13:190 (2) - same suggestion that in 01:08:267 (2,3) -
- 01:20:113 (1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3) - amazing <3
- 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)
- 01:43:652 (4,5,6) - wow, nice.
- 01:45:959 (1,2,3) - Similar here, I want to suggest this:
- 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
- 02:03:959 (2) - this overlap will be difficult for some players (and maybe unrankable?? ask for more opinions please)
- 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
- 02:32:882 (1) - lol, I failed here, and that was because spacing is at 1.3x!, move with DS in 1.4x please >.<
- 02:37:344 (2) - are you sure? personally I found this its fine, but some modders will complain about.
- 03:05:960 (1,2,3) - similar suggestion like before.
or- 03:15:806 (1,2,3) - similar suggestion like before.
- 03:22:729 - similar suggestion like before. (a circle)
- 03:40:882 (2) - I want to suggest a slider instead:
- 03:59:805 - 04:01:036 - missing circles??
[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) -
[Hard]
- Very funny!
- 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- 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)- 02:16:113 (3) - Not a blanket?
- 02:23:959 (3,1,2,3,4) - ufff, nice.
- 03:49:959 (4) - Improve blanket?
[yf's Insane]
- Very interesting, that diff remember me a bit the pishi diff in the sukinathan map.
- Mmm.. thinking about spread, maybe this have too many streams??
- 00:55:498 (1,1) - random whistles
- 00:09:267 (2,1,1,1,1) - those were particularly difficult to play
- 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.- 02:34:882 (1) - 02:37:652 (1) - lol, very troll.
- .. 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:
- 01:36:113 (1) -
- 01:46:882 (1) -
- 01:48:421 (1,1) -
- 03:10:882 (1) - <- 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
- 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]
- 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.
- 02:47:652 (2) - Not perfect yet xDDD
[]
Good luck!!!!!!!!!!!!11111
----
Edit: wtf, I have no idea what bbcode is wrong, Im sorry. You can quote this with this link
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 good point. done
00:18:575 (1) - shud be parallel i think 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. 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? ok
01:17:652 (1,2,1,1,2,1,1,2,1,1,2,1,1,2,1) - nice 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 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 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. 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. 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) 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) - 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) - 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) - I don't really get what you mean.
03:34:575 (2) - ctrl+g for better pattern? I think my pattern looks better.
04:02:575 (1) - shud be parallel i guess? 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) 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) - 00:15:806 (1) - ? ( same 03:58:882 (1,2,1,1,1,1,2,1,1,1) - ) 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: cool!
code: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. it is intuitive to play so I won't change this.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:
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. 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. 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? why?
All applied.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
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
Kisses wrote:
blow out?
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 so I cannot change to kkd because Muzu cannot have double-coloured triplets? (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 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 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.
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 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. 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 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 MuzukashiiApplied 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!
thank you Jenny! I will fix it later todayJenny 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
Bubblun wrote:
General
- normal-hitwhistle31.wav
normal-hitwhistle30.wav
normal-hitfinish31.wav
normal-hitclap22.wavHard
- All these hitsounds have a delav of at least 0.005s which is too large to rank, you'll have to cut out the empty space at the start so there's less of a delay.
- Crystal's Uncollected Rain has a timing point at 00:24:729 - which isn't in any other diff of the set. Is there something to it having to do with ctb or was it a mistake xp deleted
- For everyone: Check aimod for snapping errors. There might be too much to do manually, so you can try to snap all notes with done with all diffs
https://puu.sh/zUL8s/73acb6f92d.jpg but you'll have to keep your timeline at 1/16 or else it'll snap the notes to incorrect ticks.- 04:10:430 - Some diffs have these 2 lines at the end after the mp3 cut off. Delete one of them as you can't have 2 timing points at once (or both if they serve no purpose) deleted
It feels like the diff is missing a lot of hitsounds. I can hear the hitnormal at 01:09:098 - but parts like 01:35:037 - feel quiet comparably as the top diff had very explosive hitsounds xp might be easier to use a copier on this diff. copied
osu wont even let me load the easy and normal diffs for some reason, prob related to the storyboard issue as all the objects have a black box around them. should be able to access now
Call me back will do when the ctb dispute is solved
Ascendance wrote:
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.
Spectator wrote:
Crystal and Ascendance are discussing the 1/8 & 1/16 so it should be better in some hours!
I added fruit-bananas and bananas overlay.Spectator wrote:
Seems we're missing fruit-drop-overlay / fruit-bananas / fruit-bananas-overlay for fruits' skin, can you add them please?
We removed the hyperwalks but the SR is still way too high. Normally we do not appropriate difficulty or spread by SR, but this gap is enormous and can definitely be reduced before moving this forward. The map plays like a 5* difficulty and due to some gameplay mechanics overinflating the SR for not too much of a reason, it's kind of sucky looking at this massive gap. I'll be trying to work with spectator to find a fix to this.nold_1702 wrote:
Ascendance wrote:
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.Spectator wrote:
Crystal and Ascendance are discussing the 1/8 & 1/16 so it should be better in some hours!
And what was the result of the discussion?
Bubblun wrote:
nm
Regou's Extra
00:46:113 (1,2,3) - The blanket the triplet forms is slightly off. fixed
gl
ErunamoJAZZ wrote:
hi nold and guests!, I finally have a time to look in
[Regou's diff]
- 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. yeah this is intentional cuz im following piano and the piano stopped at blue tick
- 02:47:652 (2) - Not perfect yet xDDD oops im not that good at slider shaping back in the days xDDD fixed
Good luck!!!!!!!!!!!!11111
----
Edit: wtf, I have no idea what bbcode is wrong, Im sorry. You can quote this with this link
Also made some changes to make it not-so-uglyhi-mei wrote:
woooo hello! since ive modded the last diff like a year ago, this time ill focus on the rest of the set!
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:
kickslider fits the music much better imo due to the kick.... i rearranged the pattern tho to make it more readable.
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)
Yeah i know it suck i missed at this point almost everytime i play it LOL fixed
00:18:575 (1) - this "tear" on the loop of the slider feels underdone. i would suggest this:
code:i‘ve’ just made another slider xd192,192,18575,6,0,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) - ?
might not be a good choice lol wide angle jumps that comes from nowhere is not really comfortable to play imo
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.
i guess this is better this time
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 -
keeping it as triplet is better imo as i rarely use any reverse slider in the map lol i want to keep my pattern choice consistent
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
yeah i did that only to force difficulty before LOL fixed
02:02:575 - probably a mistake? its a unmapped strong beat fixed
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.
can't really say they are overmapped since they are still following the background the music, i did that because i want to make my rhythm choice more consistent so that it's easier to follow during gameplay
02:47:652 (2) - unrankable since you dont know which way you go, right or left?
try it in default skin and you can easily tell the slider will move towards left first since the tail is not completely overlapped on the body
To BN who gonna nominate this: please check yf's insane.
Oh shit... I need to copy and paste 19 times againNardoxyribonucleic wrote:
Nice storyboard nold! There is a typo at the ending though