Crissa wrote:

Hey, from q
i forgot how to mod in v1

01:05:328 (3) - this spacing is too low compared to the rest, considering your sv change is not that noticeable, you could try to start the same pattern from the bottom instead of here Changed this pattern.

01:16:471 (2) - i like the vocal emphasis here, but ignoring this strong beat doesn't feel that good 'here' since there's a pause after it I made it repeat.

01:23:328 (5) - ignoring your previous vocal emphasis for some jumps doesn't seem accurate for me, i would consider to keep the same pattern as before I wanted to deny this but it makes more sense to do vocal emphasis since that's what is being focused on. Did this for all four or five patterns.

01:32:414 (1,2,3,4) - might be a bit sudden taking in count you never used something like this before, you could try to lower distance between 1-3 and 2-4 It might be sudden but I want to represent the music well and I think this does a good job. Besides, kicksliders aren't hard to read, especially considering it's an Extra. Also I don't see how lowering the distance really helps.

01:38:414 (2) - if you applied the one before, you should change this too for consistency Applied what before? I don't see how this section is a problem either.

01:39:786 (2,3) - feels a bit out of place, it's overmapped, i think a triple feels much better, keeping consistency with others in this section Actually this is 1/3, so the sounds actually last a bit longer than a 1/4 triple. I tried making this a triple, but it's a bit more obvious that a sound is not being mapped, so I think 2 kicksliders works better here. Why not 1/3? For playability, and so I don't ignore equally important sounds.

01:45:271 (3) - same beat thing Don't understand what you mean exactly, but there are vocals on all the notes.

01:12:357 (5,6) - try to keep your rhythm choice clear, ignoring vocals here is inconsistent, it repeats again later Unlike Time Freeze, I think this is more acceptable.

i like this diff, you could try to improve some patterns aesthetics like 01:32:414 (2,3,4,5) - or 00:39:957 (1,2,3,4) Thanks, but I like those two patterns. First one I don't see what needs to be improved, second one I like the branching out motion.

01:38:586 - 01:40:643 - i don't think ignoring those is correct, i know you did it to emphasize vocals, but seems out of place since it's the first time you do this, almost at the end of the map I think this section can be improved, but I can't think of a solution right now. If you have a solution without making it too rhythmically dense (like there are no 1/1 breaks), follow the vocals, and follow those snares, that would be awesome.

Milar001 wrote:

Hi, from my queue

[Insane]
00:49:900 (2,3) - Rhythm here should be like 00:47:157 (2,3) - There is a sound that should be mapped on 00:50:071
01:00:871 (2,3) - ^
01:04:814 - I don't understand why did you leave this red tick empty, while it's same as 01:05:157 (2) - The song has gotten much calmer so it's appropriate to make your rhythm less dense.
01:42:100 (7) - There's no need for this note imo There's a clear oscillation.

[Extra]
Since it's an extra diff I would make something like this https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/10312514 I don't think that's a good rhythm to separate the kiai from the intro.
01:31:128 (4) - There's no need for this note imo You are right.
01:35:157 (2,3,4,5) - Since it's same vocal "operation" as the ones you mappes as streams consider something like this https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/10312532 I don't hear anything that warrants that.

That's all, hope you'll find it good

Ritaka wrote:

Time Freeze:

00:23:671 (2,3) - Instead of having these two being the objects that are spaced further away, why not space 00:24:014 (4,5) - further apart from each other instead? I feel like that would fit better into this section of the map and would flow well with 00:24:700 (6,1). This part got remapped but spacing should not be so precise.

00:40:128 (2,3) - There's nothing indicating that this change in spacing will occur, and it feels like 3 is where it is just to be on the slidertail. Also I don't feel this spacing fits at this exact point because of this being at the beginning-ish point of the song. If this was during one of the kiai times I would think this is fine, but probably not here. So, possibly use regular spacing like you were doing with 00:39:957 (1,2)? Intro remapped, spaced every downbeat.

01:22:814 (2,3,4,5,6,7) - I feel like this pattern is very uncomfortable to play. Usually sharp angles are easier to play in certain situations, but this pattern is a really big jolt that breaks the more circular flow of your map. I believe this is the only time you use an "up-and-down" pattern like this as well, so it sticks out in a not-so-great way. I would experiment with different patterns. Changed.

Insane:

I couldn't really find anything to suggest in this diff. This is actually really clean and nice and has good flow, so good job to you. That's awesome.

Also I'll give a kudosu, even though kudosu nowadays is actually useless To me it just shows you support the map, kinda like favorites or upvotes.

Good luck!

Chalwa wrote:

Hellow from q:

[General]

1. Why only in Time Freeze diff you have iifrostii tag? Old username, applied to all. Still like to add it.

[Time Freeze]

1. 00:35:843 (1,2) - Maybe Ctrl+G this rhythm, because it will be more intuitive and also you focused vocal in this part, so if you will continue this focus there should me slider + circle. Actually to follow the vocals it's not the converse of what it is now.
2. 01:02:928 (5,6,1,2) - I think flow here is too complicated, before you've made it very light and simple which is good, but the 01:03:271 (1,2) feels kinda weird for me. Maybe do a Ctrl+G on 01:03:614 (2) to make a circular flow with 01:03:271 (1,2,3,4,1)? Yeah
3. 01:08:757 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7) - I really like this jump pattern <3 (:
4. 01:16:471 (2) - This one will be subjective, but I think it's not best thing put a strong beat in reverse. I prefer to remove a reverse arrow and put circle on 01:16:814. Also you have four the same vocals so four the same sliders rhythms will be fine. Well If I put a circle there it would be on a pretty weak sound and I don't like using filler rhythm that way.
5. 01:40:128 (1) - I know it's vocal focus mostly, but in this slider you missed a strong sound 01:40:300. Maybe circle + slider within this 1/1 slider? Unlike 01:42:871 (1) slider which is cool since there're not a sound in the track of it. Ehh, I prefer the slider since a slider and circle doesn't capture the extended vocal too well.
6. 01:49:728 (3,1) - I think this jump can be further, not for pp ofc, but for emphasise this is the end of map. And yea this can sounds kinda weird, but in my subietcive opinion it will be great. It's a soft sound but I agree.

[Insane]

1. 00:56:414 (1,2) - I think the blanket 00:56:071 (4,2) should be remove and you should make 00:56:414 (1,2), because when 00:56:757 (2) is fade in i can't see a 00:56:071 (4) circle which is fade out. Huh?
2. 01:12:186 (4,5) - This this jump is that small when a 01:12:357 (5) circle has a strong sound? It should be the same or further than 01:12:014 (3,4) jump in my opinion. This is subjective but it's just how I see the vocals, "clocks on the" is stronger than "walls are.."
3. 01:23:157 (4,5) - The same as above
4. 01:23:843 (1,2) - This blanket should be a bit polished, because end is a little too close the second slider. Okay.

[Hard]

1. 00:36:528 (5) - I think this slider looks just weird and also with 00:36:871 (6) aren't good blanketed. So i think making it parallel with 00:36:014 (2) will be greater than what's you've made now. Okay.
2. 00:39:100 (2) - The same as above >.< Heh, I like this one.
3. 01:06:528 (3,4) - This jump is a little unpredicionable, because you didn't make thing like this in combo before, i think just a 01:06:014 (1,2,3,4) trapeze will be really fine to this part. Good suggestion.
4. Really good diff, i really like the structure here. (:

Good luck c:

1. add a normal-sliderslide and soft-sliderslide
2. would increase the hitsound volume in the kiai to 70% tbh because the songs gets stronger there and a change from 50 to 60 isn't really noticeable.
   the last greenline should be 50% because the song slows down there

1. SV 1.00x is too fast for a easy. 0.8 or 0.9 would be better
2. 00:37:557 (2,4) - imo you should change the structure here because 2 isn't fully faded out yet so the reverse still gets hide by the circle which could lead to misreading and in Easies it must be pretty straight forward when it comes to pattering
3. 00:38:586 (4) - This breaks the idea from the 3/2 slidershapes here in the non-kiai those 3/2 sliders have red anchors and this is the only one which hasn't would fox it to keep consistency in terms of slidershapes
4. 00:54:357 (4,5,1,2) - this might be a little bit too harsh to play as they don't really know what to follow there, in easies the flow needs to lead into the next object while this is confusing when it comes to simplicity
5. 01:30:014 (3) - any reason why the sliderbody is hitsounded here

1. 00:26:243 (2) - not sure, but it is offscreen I think
2. The SV changes are too much 1.10 would be enough as new players who barely played this game will have problems following sv's like that
3. 01:07:900 (5) - ds
4. 01:26:071 (1,2) - this is pretty hard to read for a noob something like this https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/10367159 would be enough.
5. 01:30:014 (4) - same thing in Easy

nextplay wrote:

Hello from OwO q
[General]

1. add a normal-sliderslide and soft-sliderslide I don't think it's necessary.
2. would increase the hitsound volume in the kiai to 70% tbh because the songs gets stronger there and a change from 50 to 60 isn't really noticeable.
   the last greenline should be 50% because the song slows down there I agree except the greenline.

[Easy]

1. SV 1.00x is too fast for a easy. 0.8 or 0.9 would be better It's not.
2. 00:37:557 (2,4) - imo you should change the structure here because 2 isn't fully faded out yet so the reverse still gets hide by the circle which could lead to misreading and in Easies it must be pretty straight forward when it comes to pattering Fixed.
3. 00:38:586 (4) - This breaks the idea from the 3/2 slidershapes here in the non-kiai those 3/2 sliders have red anchors and this is the only one which hasn't would fox it to keep consistency in terms of slidershapes Didn't even notice, fixed lol.
4. 00:54:357 (4,5,1,2) - this might be a little bit too harsh to play as they don't really know what to follow there, in easies the flow needs to lead into the next object while this is confusing when it comes to simplicity Fixed.
5. 01:30:014 (3) - any reason why the sliderbody is hitsounded here Yes, advanced and harder diffs have this as a hitsounded stream.

[Normal]

1. 00:26:243 (2) - not sure, but it is offscreen I think I don't think it was but I moved it down anyway.
2. The SV changes are too much 1.10 would be enough as new players who barely played this game will have problems following sv's like that Fixed.
3. 01:07:900 (5) - ds Fixed.
4. 01:26:071 (1,2) - this is pretty hard to read for a noob something like this https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/10367159 would be enough. Applied that.
5. 01:30:014 (4) - same thing in Easy

GL!

Mordred wrote:

general

50% hs volume for the entire intro and then 60% the rest is :/ 40% for the intro and 50 for outro might be nicer; also not a fan of the normal sampleset but you do you Something similar. And sampleset not changed.

also for hard insane extra I don't agree with 00:22:643 - yes it's there, but it's so quiet that you barely hear it, which makes it not worth mapping imo Well it's not quiet enough because it's the first thing I noticed when I began mapping this song.


easy

ar4 is better Yeah.

00:41:328 (1,2) - flow is kinda unnatural here,moving 2 a little should improve this; ds is also kinda big here lol, being almost 1.2x Did something similar in the previous mod.

00:54:357 (4,5,1,2) - this is actually unreadable for beginners, people who just started playing this game won't know how to read this since there are 4 different objects on the screen at the same time, something more liear like this would make this a lot easier to play I love this suggestion but I already applied it for this section. I did apply it for the part where it repeats though.

01:02:243 (4,2) - do you really need this blanket - _ - It's fixed since I kinda remapped this.

01:45:442 (3,2) - overlap might be confusing since the 2nd note appears just when you hit the first, just move 2 down or something I just ctrl+G'd the slider and then moved 2 way up.


normal

don't think 1.25x sv is a good idea, 1x vs 1.25x is pretty noticable and the bpm isn't exactly low either, 1x and 1.1x should be better Fixed.

01:07:214 (4,5) - breaking ds just for a blanket, really? I really don't think it mattered before but it's fixed now.

01:26:071 (1,2) - this is the first time you do this kind of overlap in the entire diff, might throw people off A bit more natural now.


advanced

00:43:386 (1) - looks pretty much the same as previous 1/2 sliders, don't think you need the slowdown here Fixed, 0.75x now.

01:06:528 (2,1) - overlap might throw off a lot of people since it's the first time in the map you do this Fixed both instances of these.

01:10:643 (3,1,2) - not sure about this, newer players might misread this since both objects are visible at the same time, but visual spacing is exactly the same as before Fixed.


hard

00:39:614 (3,1,2,3) - flow here is kinda uncomfortable here with the zigzag motion, could do something like this if you want to keep the linear part Fixed.

01:12:014 (3,4) - fits better as a slider since it captures the vocals better + you mapped them with the next slider so might as well do it here too There are two vocals there.

01:16:128 (1) - this barely has any emphasis at all due to being so close the the previous slider, and slider leniency doesn't really help with that either, maybe space it out a bit more Fixed.

01:19:728 (1,2,3,4,5) - why is this so much more spaced than 01:18:871 (3,4,5,6) - the vocals' intensity doesn't really change Just how I interpret the song.

01:30:014 (4) - I think converting this to circles would make for a better spread since the insane mapped a stream here Yup.


insane

00:34:986 (4,5) - you'd expect to continue the up and down motion, but instead you suddenly switch to left right with the slider which makes this pretty awkward to play, could ctrl+g 00:34:643 (2,4) - or 00:34:643 (2,3) - to make this more intuitive to play Fixed.

00:36:014 (2) - this has way more emphasis it should have due to the sudden change in spacing combined with linear flow, maybe rotate it a bit and stack on the previous note Fixed.

01:36:871 - introducing perfect slider overlaps this late into the map isn't the best idea imo, why not just stick with rotations similar to 01:15:443 (1,2,1,2) - I offset them a bit, didn't rotate.

1. 00:35:843 (1,2) - opposite to the rhythm you usually used
2. 00:51:271 (2,3,4) - ignored sounds starting here 00:51:443 - I would suggest shortening slider to 1/2 and make a 5 note stream http://prntscr.com/iwpgkt
3. 00:57:614 - add circle since there is sound here
4. 01:02:243 (2,3,4) - same as what I read before

1. 00:51:271 (2,3,4) - same as before
   
   This diff so much more cleaner than top diff ~
   

Kujinn wrote:

[time freeze]

1. 00:35:843 (1,2) - opposite to the rhythm you usually used I'm following the vocals and they fully support this rhythm.
2. 00:51:271 (2,3,4) - ignored sounds starting here 00:51:443 - I would suggest shortening slider to 1/2 and make a 5 note stream http://prntscr.com/iwpgkt I'm following the melody and the rhythm is fine as it is now.
3. 00:57:614 - add circle since there is sound here Refer to p/6495228.
4. 01:02:243 (2,3,4) - same as what I read before

[insane]

1. 00:51:271 (2,3,4) - same as before
   
   This diff so much more cleaner than top diff ~

GL

1. 00:41:328 (1,2) - missing whistles on head
2. 01:26:559 - 01:47:243 (1) - can you start these at the next red tick instead of the blue, makes it show up a bit later for newer players so it's a bit less cluttered
3. 01:36:871 (2,1) - Should prob go for a 1/1 transistion to red ticks here instead of introducing a single 1/2 rhythm this late into an easy diff map, bit worse rythm but better for the overall diff
   

1. 00:55:900 (2) - can you move this a bit down so you got a bit of oval flow here, like at 293/291 ish
2. 01:04:643 (1) - missing whistle + clap looking at other diffs
3. 01:26:928 (1) - 01:48:871 (1) - no need to NC these
4. 01:30:014 (4) - Could NC this since you do it for those vocal changes later on aswell like 01:40:128 (1,1) - and its pretty unique
5. 01:33:957 - 01:44:928 - thoughts about adding a circle on these? 3/2 gaps while the music is still so intense felt kinda odd compared to how dense the prev combo is mapped and is has those back layer vocals kickin in too
6. 01:45:786 (1,2) - bit odd rythm here with skipping 01:46:643 - which has that drum + vocal, I'd just go for this rythm again 01:11:500 (1,2,3) - sounds a lot better imo

• 00:43:386 (3) - No need to NC

1. 00:55:043 (1,2,1,2,1,2,3) - probably done for diversity but this is so much easier and a lot less dense then what you do previous like this chaing of 1/2s 00:50:928 (1,2,3,4,1,2) - even though the song doesnt change that drasticly at all, could really be filled up a bit rythm wise or nerf the other similar sections a bit so its not that big of a difference. Maybe something like this to have a bit of diversity still and its the weaker version of hard diff kinda 00:55:043 (1,2) -
   
2. 01:20:414 (4,5) - control g the rythm like 01:09:443 (4,5) - sounds and plays better here after that stack
3. 01:49:900 (1) - why not unstack this to emphasise the difference a bit better with the rest

1. 01:30:014 (4,5,6,7,8) - first the circles then the return plays kinda better so you got flow going into the 1/4 circles
2. 01:36:871 (1) - No need to NC
3. 01:39:786 (4) - could make this 3 circles too like the later ones since you come from an easy 1/2 slider section anyway

1. 01:04:300 (4,3) - minor stack
2. 01:06:014 (1,7) - would move thise up a bit to like blanket ish distance with 01:06:528 (3) - , pretty insane transistion here in terms of movement and flow atm 01:05:671 (4,1,2) - kinda belongs in extra right now
   

1. 00:30:871 (2,1) - minor stack
2. 00:49:900 (2) - would stack on top of 00:48:186 (1) - instead, flows alot smoother here (maybe move 00:50:071 (3) - a bit down afterwards for visual stuff if you apply)
   

Wishkey wrote:

Heyo o/

Easy

1. 00:41:328 (1,2) - missing whistles on head Fixed.
2. 01:26:559 - 01:47:243 (1) - can you start these at the next red tick instead of the blue, makes it show up a bit later for newer players so it's a bit less cluttered Yup.
3. 01:36:871 (2,1) - Should prob go for a 1/1 transistion to red ticks here instead of introducing a single 1/2 rhythm this late into an easy diff map, bit worse rythm but better for the overall diff Yeah I was looking at this at 2 AM today but didn't get to change it lol.
   

Normal

1. 00:55:900 (2) - can you move this a bit down so you got a bit of oval flow here, like at 293/291 ish Flows better.
2. 01:04:643 (1) - missing whistle + clap looking at other diffs Fixed.
3. 01:26:928 (1) - 01:48:871 (1) - no need to NC these I like this NC + I do it in the top diffs too.
4. 01:30:014 (4) - Could NC this since you do it for those vocal changes later on aswell like 01:40:128 (1,1) - and its pretty unique Sure.
5. 01:33:957 - 01:44:928 - thoughts about adding a circle on these? 3/2 gaps while the music is still so intense felt kinda odd compared to how dense the prev combo is mapped and is has those back layer vocals kickin in too Really like this, thanks.
6. 01:45:786 (1,2) - bit odd rythm here with skipping 01:46:643 - which has that drum + vocal, I'd just go for this rythm again 01:11:500 (1,2,3) - sounds a lot better imo Applied.

advanced

• 00:43:386 (3) - No need to NC Pretty sure I do this on all diffs that have this rhythm mapped.

1. 00:55:043 (1,2,1,2,1,2,3) - probably done for diversity but this is so much easier and a lot less dense then what you do previous like this chaing of 1/2s 00:50:928 (1,2,3,4,1,2) - even though the song doesnt change that drasticly at all, could really be filled up a bit rythm wise or nerf the other similar sections a bit so its not that big of a difference. Maybe something like this to have a bit of diversity still and its the weaker version of hard diff kinda 00:55:043 (1,2) - Not done for diversity, it's just the melody is less dense than before, but I do agree I made it way less dense; fixed.
   
2. 01:20:414 (4,5) - control g the rythm like 01:09:443 (4,5) - sounds and plays better here after that stack Yeah
3. 01:49:900 (1) - why not unstack this to emphasise the difference a bit better with the rest Sure.

Hard

1. 01:30:014 (4,5,6,7,8) - first the circles then the return plays kinda better so you got flow going into the 1/4 circles Yeah
2. 01:36:871 (1) - No need to NC Fixed.
3. 01:39:786 (4) - could make this 3 circles too like the later ones since you come from an easy 1/2 slider section anyway Fixed.

Insane

1. 01:04:300 (4,3) - minor stack Fixed.
2. 01:06:014 (1,7) - would move thise up a bit to like blanket ish distance with 01:06:528 (3) - , pretty insane transistion here in terms of movement and flow atm 01:05:671 (4,1,2) - kinda belongs in extra right now Yeah this is pretty big, reduced distance and made everything more comfortable

Extra

1. 00:30:871 (2,1) - minor stack Fixed.
2. 00:49:900 (2) - would stack on top of 00:48:186 (1) - instead, flows alot smoother here (maybe move 00:50:071 (3) - a bit down afterwards for visual stuff if you apply) Fixed, had to rotate 3 just a little bit so everything looks better, hope I didn't undo this suggestion lol.
   

Cool set! Only major thing is that point in advanced diff, rest looks good. Call me back!

Icebolt wrote:

hs fixes

Mir wrote:

excuse you that's "nyab" to you >:

also ghab>nyab tbh

Namki wrote:

Uhm, I think the very beginning kinda lacks hitsounds, like, kicks for 00:22:985 - and 00:25:728 - etc. I suggest using that for 00:22:986 - kicks on red ticks like this one and using this for downbeats 00:22:471 - and 00:23:157 - (basically u need just replace ur one with mine). My one gives better feedback bc I can barely hear urs ingame lo
You may call me back after if u decide to fix those.

_orange wrote:

im back

[General]

02:32:397 - i'd prefer if you ended the kiai here bc thats when the beat stops Changed.

[Easy]

fix snapping lol Fixed, I don't know what happened...
01:58:453 (2,3) - i dont like how the first slider perfectly leads in to the next. imo it'd be better if this 01:59:482 (3) - was a straight slider or something like that Okay.


[Hard]

00:43:197 (2,1) - 01:49:026 (2,1) - one of them has a stack and the other doesnt, also this 00:43:369 (1) - is too short Fixed both.

[Insane]

02:11:826 - this section uses a lot of these https://puu.sh/AsqAw/ec3e9da379.png stacks while this section 01:05:997 - uses normal stacks. im not sure if its intended Intended, if this becomes a problem I'll just make everything the same.

[Time Freeze]

00:39:940 (1,2,3,4,5) - looks really awkward, i like this better 01:45:769 (1,2,3,4,5) - I don't see any problem here :/
01:41:483 (6,1,2) - this plays weird because of the wide angle and anti jump Changed.

that's all, didn't find much but i hope i was helpful, gl again

-Mo- wrote:

Sorry for late Time flies, it's fine.

General
- Would suggest a different combo colour to your white, since although white is present in the background, it seems out of place compared to yellow and orange which are more vibrant colours. Red-orange.
- I'd consider removing the kiai time from 00:44:054 and 01:49:883 since otherwise around 66% of your map is kiai time which makes it not very special. That's true, but right now the kiai does emphasize the strongest parts of the song.
- You can remove '&' from tags since it's in the artist already. Removed and added two more DnB abbreviations lol
- Would do -5 to offset. I think it's slightly late right now. Knew something was wrong with my friend's suggestion.
- Metadata seems to be in check. Seems like the already ranked version is the one that's inaccurate¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Easy
- 00:35:826 (5) - Your NCing seems to have messed up a little past this point. Since you were going for an NC every 2 measures, but this combo is 3 measures which messes up your next few combos. This is intended, the way I view the song is that this vocal fits together with 00:33:083 (1,2,3,4) - so I'm keeping the NC.
- 01:21:083 (3) - Seems to be missing hitsounds. I wanted to capture the extended vocal but I'll split it into two sliders.
- 01:41:654 (5) - NC thing again. Intended.
- 02:09:426 (2) - Would look cool if this was the same shape as 02:08:054 (4) instead, similar to what you did at 01:55:711 (2,4). Yeah.
- 02:14:569 (1) - Minor thing, would rotate this clockwise a little so the visual flow into 02:15:597 (2) is a little smoother. Yeah, looks better that way.
- 02:23:140 (2) - Touches the healthbar, if you care about that sort of thing. Fixed.
- 02:26:911 (3) - Hitsounds again. Fixed.
- 02:35:826 (4) - Not sure if you were supposed to have a whistle go over the entire slider or not here, but it seems out of place. It was intended, but perhaps it's just too jarring.
- 02:44:569 (1) - 02:45:940 (1) - Feels underwhelming in terms of hitsounding for some reason. Yeah I know, the vocals don't align with the drums but I still want to continue mapping vocals.
- It also seems a little weird to me that 00:22:111 - 00:44:054 this section is a higher density comapred to 00:44:054 - 01:04:626 even though the latter is a more intense part of the song. I would try to replace 00:24:854 (1,2) these rhythms with 00:35:826 (5) these sorts of 3/2 sliders. Fixed.

Normal
- 00:23:483 (1) - 00:31:711 (1) - 00:37:197 (1) - Would remove these NCs if you want to go with the "NC every 2 measures" pattern. Not going to remove 00:31:711 (1) because the singer raises their voice here, but I changed the rest.
- I would actually look through your NCing again in general actually, since it seems you switch between 1 measure and 2 measure patterning every so often within sections. Yup they were pretty inconsistent, fixed all of them. Let me know if you catch anything else.
- 02:35:826 (1) - Slider whistle thing again. Removed.
- 02:47:312 (3) - Fairly significant healthbar overlap, if you care about that. I don't think objects touching the HP bar is too bad, if I can fix it I will. However, I don't know where to place this.

Hard
- 01:00:854 (2) - This slider shape seems a little out of place since you don't seem to use something like this anywhere else. Changed

Hyper and Insane
- are good. Nice.

Time Freeze
- 01:02:654 (3,4) - Stack seems to have messed up a bit. How do you catch stuff like this? Fixed.

Upper diffs are actually pretty clean. Nice job.

-Mo- wrote:

Normal: 02:53:821 (1) - 02:55:193 (1) - Would probably remove these NCs since it does get a little spammy at the end. Wanna emphasize drums.

Also I understand adding kiai to the strongest parts of the song, though the general tone of the song is pretty strong already, and as a result you're highlighting well over 2/3s of the mapped section with kiai. Using it for such a large portion of the map kinda ruins the effectiveness of kiai time, so I would really recommend using it only for the vocals section. Kiai flash.

Wishkey wrote:

Yow o/ late aswell as usual

Applies to all diffs, time stamp on easy diffs

01:04:621 (1,1) - section vs 02:10:449 (1,1) - section, same hs and volume settings would be nice here since they're identical in the music i.e. only easy diff got a finish 02:10:449 (1) - , some inconsistent whistles on the higher diffs between these parts, drop volume to 40% on the second part,... Fixed.

About the kiai thingy, some mappers choose to not use kiai at all even though the song has clear high points like this recently ranked map for example https://osu.ppy.sh/s/780885, so this is a bit the other end of the spectrum to me. Not that much of problem with how its used for this song imo but will leave it to you guys to discuss it. Call me back whenever you're ready!

1. Consider doing a -5 to -10 offset, it plays better to me and few more people that i've asked (specially 10)

1. 01:07:192 (4,5) - This one is problematic, the reverse arrow is closer to the sliderend than the head is, and new players often assume that reverse arrow is clickable. We make it not confusing by simply making the sliderhead being closer to the previous object than the reverse arrow. I have watched a few C plays on the map and few of them completely got lost while the others aimed at the slidertail straight but hit sliderhead due to them overlapping. Generally it's confusing and should be avoided at normal and easy difficulties. 01:18:164 (4,5) - Same.
2. 01:05:992 - Quite minor but in this section sometimes the DS ends up being 1.00x or something, on that spacing the circles get overlapped not just the frames, if you're up to it you can polish it but it isn't mandatory at all.

1. 01:09:764 (2,3) - In easies you should avoid such triangles because players judge by spacing not approach circles, many of players first time playing the game can confuse what should be clicked first here.
2. 00:33:078 (1,2,3) - Although a cool pattern, new players don't know if they should ignore the reverse arrow or takes them a lot of attention to realize it. The casually player won't focus here at all and would most likely be clicking on reverse arrows. Can easily be fixed with https://i.imgur.com/dhuThjE.jpg and not cause confusion at all.

MaridiuS wrote:

Hello there, few concerns.

[General]

1. Consider doing a -5 to -10 offset, it plays better to me and few more people that i've asked (specially 10) There have been a lot of timing suggestions, you say -10, Mo and Wishkey believe it's fine right now, Namki also though it was okay (I would assume, since he qualified it before with this offset). For me -10 is too much, maybe -5 is alright, but I can't tell the difference. I'll just leave it unchanged lol.

[Normal]

1. 01:07:192 (4,5) - This one is problematic, the reverse arrow is closer to the sliderend than the head is, and new players often assume that reverse arrow is clickable. We make it not confusing by simply making the sliderhead being closer to the previous object than the reverse arrow. I have watched a few C plays on the map and few of them completely got lost while the others aimed at the slidertail straight but hit sliderhead due to them overlapping. Generally it's confusing and should be avoided at normal and easy difficulties. 01:18:164 (4,5) - Same. Alright, if this ever gets dq'd I will change this, but I still think it's pretty straightforward. A few things: First, I believe it's okay because it's a bit of a higher level Normal. You can see this because of the SR and spacing, and 1/2 appears quite often. With all this in mind, I think a bit of reading should be fine here. There is an easier diff after all. Second, you should not be using C plays for your judgement, because those players are obviously pretty inexperienced. It would be better if you looked at a replay that was an A or B made by a Normal player, especially since this is a higher end Normal. Third, it fits with the flow - it's kinda weird to go down so sharply where the reverse arrow is. I doubt high end Normal players would be confused here, they would be able to instantly tell the difference from a circle and arrow.
2. 01:05:992 - Quite minor but in this section sometimes the DS ends up being 1.00x or something, on that spacing the circles get overlapped not just the frames, if you're up to it you can polish it but it isn't mandatory at all. No need to, I'll change if DQ.

[Easy]

1. 01:09:764 (2,3) - In easies you should avoid such triangles because players judge by spacing not approach circles, many of players first time playing the game can confuse what should be clicked first here. The AR is quite high here (AR 4), players can easily see that (2) comes in first so this will stay unchanged.
2. 00:33:078 (1,2,3) - Although a cool pattern, new players don't know if they should ignore the reverse arrow or takes them a lot of attention to realize it. The casually player won't focus here at all and would most likely be clicking on reverse arrows. Can easily be fixed with https://i.imgur.com/dhuThjE.jpg and not cause confusion at all. High AR + (1,2) give an upward movement, so this should be expected so I think it's okay right now.