forum

sakuzyo - AXION [OsuMania]

posted
Total Posts
144
show more
Garalulu
01:27:415 (87415|1) - There is an nonexistent hitsound file on Lv.2 (vo1.wav), should be fixed to F!

and additional hitsound mod

[lv1]
  1. 00:24:790 (24790|1) - Normal Clap인데 샘플셋만 Normal로 되어있습니다
    00:25:352 (25352|1) - W
    00:52:165 (52165|2) - 00:52:915 (52915|1) - 00:54:415 (54415|0) - 00:55:165 (55165|2) - 00:55:915 (55915|1) - 00:56:665 (56665|1) - 01:08:852 (68852|3) - 01:56:665 (116665|1) - C
  2. 01:03:415 (63415|2) - C 추가해야 합니다
[lv2]
  1. 01:21:415 (81415|3) - 계속 같은 이슈, C 없읍니다
    01:22:352 (82352|3) - 01:22:915 (82915|3) - 01:23:852 (83852|1) - 01:24:415 (84415|3) - 01:25:352 (85352|1) - 01:25:915 (85915|1) - 01:26:852 (86852|1) - 01:08:852 (68852|3) - 01:10:540 (70540|0) - C
  2. 00:51:415 (51415|0) - W가 아니라 C가 필요, 두 노트에 각각 넣어주세요. (한 노트에 두개 넣을 시 빈 노트 힛사 샘플셋을 Auto로 변경)
  3. 01:03:415 (63415|2) - same with lv1

전체적으로 힛사가 일관성이 맞지 않는 부분들이 많은데, 의도일 수 있지만 저는 조금 의문이 드는 내용이 많네요! 다시 한 번 꼼꼼히 살펴볼 필요가 있습니다.

plz check them all, will back~
Topic Starter
MadBricktree
Blue - Accepted and fixed
Light Blue - Fixed, but may need some additional checking
Red - Rejected
Purple - Will be considered/Unsure
Green - Note/Comment

Garalulu wrote:

01:27:415 (87415|1) - There is an nonexistent hitsound file on Lv.2 (vo1.wav), should be fixed to F! - Fixed

and additional hitsound mod

[lv1]
  1. 00:24:790 (24790|1) - Normal Clap인데 샘플셋만 Normal로 되어있습니다 - 인트로에 있는 노트들이 드럼을 따르지 안아서 의도적으로 4/1선에만 드럼 힛사운드를 적용했습니다
    00:25:352 (25352|1) - W - ^
    00:52:165 (52165|2) - 00:52:915 (52915|1) - 00:54:415 (54415|0) - 00:55:165 (55165|2) - 00:55:915 (55915|1) - 00:56:665 (56665|1) - 01:08:852 (68852|3) - 01:56:665 (116665|1) - C - 이 중에 많은 구간들은 노트들이 킥 소리를 일관적으로 노트들과 일치하지 안으므로 일부로 Clap힛사운드를 적용하지 안았습니다
  2. 01:03:415 (63415|2) - C 추가해야 합니다 - 추가했습니다
[lv2]
  1. 01:21:415 (81415|3) - 계속 같은 이슈, C 없읍니다 - 원래는 위와 같이 일부로 C를 무시했지만 01:21:415 - ~ 01:27:415 - 에 lv1과 동일한 힛사운드를 적용하면서 여기와 밑에 표시된 노트 일부에 C가 추가되었습니다
    01:22:352 (82352|3) - 01:22:915 (82915|3) - 01:23:852 (83852|1) - 01:24:415 (84415|3) - 01:25:352 (85352|1) - 01:25:915 (85915|1) - 01:26:852 (86852|1) - 01:08:852 (68852|3) - 01:10:540 (70540|0) - C - ^ 적용이 안된 부분은 lv1과 동일한 이유입니다
  2. 00:51:415 (51415|0) - W가 아니라 C가 필요, 두 노트에 각각 넣어주세요. (한 노트에 두개 넣을 시 빈 노트 힛사 샘플셋을 Auto로 변경) - W->C
  3. 01:03:415 (63415|2) - same with lv1 - Fixed

전체적으로 힛사가 일관성이 맞지 않는 부분들이 많은데, 의도일 수 있지만 저는 조금 의문이 드는 내용이 많네요! 다시 한 번 꼼꼼히 살펴볼 필요가 있습니다. - 하하하하하하.......

plz check them all, will back~ - 👍
Garalulu
[General]
  1. 01:50:290 - 모든 난이도에 공통으로 볼륨 10% 초록선이 들어있는데 01:45:508 - 에서 이미 동일한 내용의 초록선이 존재하므로 지워도 무방합니다.
  2. 00:24:415 - 볼륨 35% 초록선이 00:13:915 - 와 정확히 동일하므로 지워도 무방합니다. (Lv.5 ~)
[Lv.2]
  1. 01:20:196 (80196|3) - 앞 파트 01:17:196 - 와 달리 멜로디가 존재하지 않으므로, 이 노트를 그대로 둔다면 멜로디가 아닌 이 파트에서 유일하게 1/4 드럼을 표현한 것이 되어버립니다. (01:17:571 - 에서는 표현되지 않음) 이는 Clap 힛사 일관성과도 연결될 수 있으니 삭제하는 걸 추천합니다.
  2. 01:08:758 - 동일한 구조인 Lv.3과 달리 C가 없네요! 01:08:852 - 도 동일
[Lv.3]
  1. 00:27:696 (27696|2) - C 사운드가 없으니 00:30:696 - 나 00:33:696 - 처럼 공간을 비워두세요.
  2. 00:45:133 (45133|1) - 이와 비슷한 내용인데, 멜로디를 표현한다면 00:45:321 - 나 00:46:633 - 같은 곳에도 노트가 필요하기 때문에 C 사운드가 없는 이상 비워두는게 좋겠네요.
  3. 01:36:227 - 노트 두개 겹쳐있습니다!
[Lv.5]
  1. 00:49:915 - 00:51:415 - 드럼 구조가 달라지는 부분이니 단순히 이전 파트와 동일하게 롱놋 하나 + 단놋 스트림으로 가기보단 롱놋을 지우고 드럼을 좀 더 강조하는게 어울리다고 생각해요. 01:01:915 - 01:03:415 - 도 생각해보세요!
  2. 01:09:415 - 01:13:915 - Lv.6과 난이도 갭이 큽니다. Lv.6에서는 01:03:415 - 01:09:415 - 에서 추가된 멜로디를 표현해 스트림을 넣었으니 이 난이도에서도 동일하게 1/4에 노트를 넣어 고조된 느낌을 표현해주세요.
[Lv.6]
  1. 00:23:946 - 주변과 달리 명확한 사운드가 아니니 제 생각엔 필요 없는 노트네요, 이후 난이도에서도 동일한 이슈가 있으니 체크해보세요.
  2. 00:49:915 - 00:51:415 - Lv.5와 동일한 이슈
  3. 01:21:415 - 01:27:415 - 패턴이 00:27:415 - 에 비해서 가볍네요. 모든 1/4 마다 노트가 있지 않고 드럼 사운드에 트리플도 없습니다. 1/4 스트림을 넣지 않은건 멜로디 강조라서 괜찮지만 전반적인 노트량이 이전 파트에 비해서 적으니 이 점 고려해서 노트를 추가해주세요!
    01:33:415 - 01:39:415 - 여기도 몇 군데 추가 가능합니다
  4. 01:38:665 - 01:39:415 - Lv.5와 난이도 갭이 큽니다. Lv.6 ~ Lv.9까지 이 파트의 구조가 똑같네요. Lv.8과 Lv.9는 각각 단놋 / 롱놋 구조로 마지막 난이도를 구성하고 있다고 볼 수 있지만 이 난이도는 상위 난이도들과 격차가 있어야 한다고 생각해요. 1/6과 1/8 트릴에서 노트량을 조절하면 좋겠습니다.
[Lv.8]
  1. 00:49:540 (49540|2) - col3의 경우 3연타(00:49:540 (49540|2,49633|2,49727|2) - )가 되버리니 col4로 이동해서 00:49:540 - 00:51:415 - 파트에서 각각 2번씩만 겹치도록 연결시켜주면 이뻐보이네요.
  2. 00:58:915 - 01:00:415 - 멜로디 더블 잭이 모두 오른손에만 위치해 있네요. 이 파트를 Ctrl+H 해서 각각 손마다 2번씩 잭을 분포시키는 건 어떨까요?
[Lv.9]
  1. 01:00:040 - 01:00:133 - 이후 파트와 연결을 위해 롱놋을 넣었지만 이 핵심 멜로디 2연타는 빠지면 섭하니 01:00:040 - 에 단놋 하나 추가해서 포인트를 짚어주세요. 예시
  2. 01:45:040 (105040|3) - 3/4 스냅에 맞춰서 끝나는 소리가 아니니깐 롱놋 끝을 01:45:321 - 에 두지 말고 01:45:290 (105290|0) - 와 맞추어 두는게 처리, 모양 면에서 깔끔해 보입니다.
FAMoss
hi, can you change the special cymbal in 01:30:790 - 01:31:165 - 01:31:446 - 01:31:727 - 01:32:008 - 01:32:290 - with a low sound hihat, very spammed sounds and makes my ears hurt lol. I suggest to use this sample https://puu.sh/BcZln/7329e4cc0c.wav and increase to 70% the volume to get effect from the sample.

Anyway i love this map, good luck!
Topic Starter
MadBricktree
Blue - Accepted and fixed
Light Blue - Fixed, but may need some additional checking
Red - Rejected
Purple - Will be considered/Unsure
Green - Note/Comment

Garalulu wrote:

[General]
  1. 01:50:290 - 모든 난이도에 공통으로 볼륨 10% 초록선이 들어있는데 01:45:508 - 에서 이미 동일한 내용의 초록선이 존재하므로 지워도 무방합니다. - Lv.8 빼고 전부 다 지웠습니다
  2. 00:24:415 - 볼륨 35% 초록선이 00:13:915 - 와 정확히 동일하므로 지워도 무방합니다. (Lv.5 ~) - 5~6에서 지웠습니다
[Lv.2]
  1. 01:20:196 (80196|3) - 앞 파트 01:17:196 - 와 달리 멜로디가 존재하지 않으므로, 이 노트를 그대로 둔다면 멜로디가 아닌 이 파트에서 유일하게 1/4 드럼을 표현한 것이 되어버립니다. (01:17:571 - 에서는 표현되지 않음) 이는 Clap 힛사 일관성과도 연결될 수 있으니 삭제하는 걸 추천합니다. - 삭제했습니다
  2. 01:08:758 - 동일한 구조인 Lv.3과 달리 C가 없네요! 01:08:852 - 도 동일 - Lv. 3에서 힛사를 지웠습니다
[Lv.3]
  1. 00:27:696 (27696|2) - C 사운드가 없으니 00:30:696 - 나 00:33:696 - 처럼 공간을 비워두세요. - 수정했습니다
  2. 00:45:133 (45133|1) - 이와 비슷한 내용인데, 멜로디를 표현한다면 00:45:321 - 나 00:46:633 - 같은 곳에도 노트가 필요하기 때문에 C 사운드가 없는 이상 비워두는게 좋겠네요. - 지웠습니다
  3. 01:36:227 - 노트 두개 겹쳐있습니다! - ?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!? :?
[Lv.5]
  1. 00:49:915 - 00:51:415 - 드럼 구조가 달라지는 부분이니 단순히 이전 파트와 동일하게 롱놋 하나 + 단놋 스트림으로 가기보단 롱놋을 지우고 드럼을 좀 더 강조하는게 어울리다고 생각해요. 01:01:915 - 01:03:415 - 도 생각해보세요! -
  2. 01:09:415 - 01:13:915 - Lv.6과 난이도 갭이 큽니다. Lv.6에서는 01:03:415 - 01:09:415 - 에서 추가된 멜로디를 표현해 스트림을 넣었으니 이 난이도에서도 동일하게 1/4에 노트를 넣어 고조된 느낌을 표현해주세요. - 1/4 스트림을 넣었습니다
[Lv.6]
  1. 00:23:946 - 주변과 달리 명확한 사운드가 아니니 제 생각엔 필요 없는 노트네요, 이후 난이도에서도 동일한 이슈가 있으니 체크해보세요. - Lv.6~9 전부 수정했습니다
  2. 00:49:915 - 00:51:415 - Lv.5와 동일한 이슈 -
  3. 01:21:415 - 01:27:415 - 패턴이 00:27:415 - 에 비해서 가볍네요. 모든 1/4 마다 노트가 있지 않고 드럼 사운드에 트리플도 없습니다. 1/4 스트림을 넣지 않은건 멜로디 강조라서 괜찮지만 전반적인 노트량이 이전 파트에 비해서 적으니 이 점 고려해서 노트를 추가해주세요! - 스네어에 노트를 하나 더 추가했습니다
    01:33:415 - 01:39:415 - 여기도 몇 군데 추가 가능합니다 - 노트를 추가하기 약간 애매하고 음악이 아무래도 바로 전에 비해 잔잔함으로서 이정도 난이도가 괜찮다고 생각합니다.
  4. 01:38:665 - 01:39:415 - Lv.5와 난이도 갭이 큽니다. Lv.6 ~ Lv.9까지 이 파트의 구조가 똑같네요. Lv.8과 Lv.9는 각각 단놋 / 롱놋 구조로 마지막 난이도를 구성하고 있다고 볼 수 있지만 이 난이도는 상위 난이도들과 격차가 있어야 한다고 생각해요. 1/6과 1/8 트릴에서 노트량을 조절하면 좋겠습니다. - 약간 너프했습니다
[Lv.8]
  1. 00:49:540 (49540|2) - col3의 경우 3연타(00:49:540 (49540|2,49633|2,49727|2) - )가 되버리니 col4로 이동해서 00:49:540 - 00:51:415 - 파트에서 각각 2번씩만 겹치도록 연결시켜주면 이뻐보이네요. - 현재 패턴이 더 읽기 슆고 잭 난이도가 양손에 더 균일하게 분배됬다고 생각합니다 다만, 00:50:946 -의 코드잭은 바로 전의 스네어-킥 잭과 맞추어 그냥 잭으로 바꿨습니다.
  2. 00:58:915 - 01:00:415 - 멜로디 더블 잭이 모두 오른손에만 위치해 있네요. 이 파트를 Ctrl+H 해서 각각 손마다 2번씩 잭을 분포시키는 건 어떨까요? - 코드잭으로 표현한 관악기 소리의 음이 높아서 오른손에 놓게 되었지만, 코드잭들이 읽기 슆게 배치되어있고 드럼 잭 대부분이 왼손에 있어서 문제가 없다고 생각합니다.
[Lv.9]
  1. 01:00:040 - 01:00:133 - 이후 파트와 연결을 위해 롱놋을 넣었지만 이 핵심 멜로디 2연타는 빠지면 섭하니 01:00:040 - 에 단놋 하나 추가해서 포인트를 짚어주세요. 예시 - 노트를 하나 추가했지만 약간 다르게 배치했습니다.
  2. 01:45:040 (105040|3) - 3/4 스냅에 맞춰서 끝나는 소리가 아니니깐 롱놋 끝을 01:45:321 - 에 두지 말고 01:45:290 (105290|0) - 와 맞추어 두는게 처리, 모양 면에서 깔끔해 보입니다. - 1/4 -> 1/3 스냅으로 바꿨습니다

FAMoss wrote:

hi, can you change the special cymbal in 01:30:790 - 01:31:165 - 01:31:446 - 01:31:727 - 01:32:008 - 01:32:290 - with a low sound hihat, very spammed sounds and makes my ears hurt lol. I suggest to use this sample https://puu.sh/BcZln/7329e4cc0c.wav and increase to 70% the volume to get effect from the sample. - I have to agree that the cymbal is a bit more than just a bit loud. Didn't use the hihat you linked but I grabbed a different crash sample that doesn't have all that static noise, and edited in a separate sample for the cymbal spam so that the cymbal sounds don't overlap. Hopefully I didn't mess up anything while doing this.

Anyway i love this map, good luck! - thanks for the random mod


fkhitsounds
Garalulu
01:53:671 - this green line should be placed at 01:53:665 - tho (lv.8)

01:37:165 - 01:37:540 - 01:37:915 - you should delete background hitsound (lv.3)

normal-hitnormal.wav is too short (72.83ms), here is the edit ver with blank sound
Topic Starter
MadBricktree

Garalulu wrote:

01:53:671 - this green line should be placed at 01:53:665 - tho (lv.8) - how tf did a line go 10ms off

01:37:165 - 01:37:540 - 01:37:915 - you should delete background hitsound (lv.3) - ah fk that didn't get deleted

normal-hitnormal.wav is too short (72.83ms), here is the edit ver with blank sound - done
fkhitsounds
lenpai
fkhitsounds
Arzenvald
brilliant

maybe want to add old username to tag too

WOO V1 THREAD
Garalulu
Hi #mapfeed
Kawawa
Is this an intention? spread name is indeed inconsistent. see the space of "LV.2 difficulty" https://puu.sh/Be3qH/8698cb68dc.png
It looks like same thing with EZ LV. 1 // NM LV.2 // HD LV. 3 // MX LV. 4
according to your post It seems a mistake :: https://puu.sh/Be3oN/0533493d3c.png

I actually don't see any intention and reasonable reason, so should be fixed.
Anyway nice map. good luck for ranked!
Topic Starter
MadBricktree

Kawawa wrote:

Is this an intention? spread name is indeed inconsistent. see the space of "LV.2 difficulty" https://puu.sh/Be3qH/8698cb68dc.png
It looks like same thing with EZ LV. 1 // NM LV.2 // HD LV. 3 // MX LV. 4
according to your post It seems a mistake :: https://puu.sh/Be3oN/0533493d3c.png

I actually don't see any intention and reasonable reason, so should be fixed.
Anyway nice map. good luck for ranked!
It is completely unintentional and should be fixed if it is an issue.
However, I question whether the missing space in a guest diff is an issue at all considering that...
1. it is hardly noticeable, to the point that not a single person noticed the past year and...
2. it hardly has a role in indicating the difficulty since that is what the number at the end of the difficulty name does.

I'll contact a QAT to confirm if this really is an issue that undermines the quality or the rankability of this set.


Arzenvald wrote:

brilliant

maybe want to add old username to tag too

WOO V1 THREAD
o crap I missed this one since I was outside when this got qualified.
If this does get DQ'd over the issue above or any other issue that might get raised later I'll try to remember to add my old ign to tags.
Kawawa

MadBricktree wrote:

It is completely unintentional and should be fixed if it is an issue.
However, I question whether the missing space in a guest diff is an issue at all considering that...
1. it is hardly noticeable, to the point that not a single person noticed the past year and...
2. it hardly has a role in indicating the difficulty since that is what the number at the end of the difficulty name does.

I'll contact a QAT to confirm if this really is an issue that undermines the quality or the rankability of this set.
not for the chart issue but a fundamental problem. so I assuming It's entirely a mistake, so was right.
If all the guest difficulties are no space at all, It can work as related point but this is not a case for it.
so It's a good idea to fixing it because still 1st day. That's all.
"It's invalid because people hardly notice it" is unreasonable reason. If no one notices about the defects of the hitsound and snapping or something else, then the map is ranked. that is true but if someone pointing it out, the map can be improved. even If It's a minor issue, is the still same but I'm not the one who judge it finally, so I just leave the opinion here. anyway hope everything is well for the map!
Topic Starter
MadBricktree

Kawawa wrote:

MadBricktree wrote:

It is completely unintentional and should be fixed if it is an issue.
However, I question whether the missing space in a guest diff is an issue at all considering that...
1. it is hardly noticeable, to the point that not a single person noticed the past year and...
2. it hardly has a role in indicating the difficulty since that is what the number at the end of the difficulty name does.

I'll contact a QAT to confirm if this really is an issue that undermines the quality or the rankability of this set.
not for the chart issue but a fundamental problem. so I assuming It's entirely a mistake, so was right.
If all the guest difficulties are no space at all, It can work as related point but this is not a case for it. so It's a good idea to fixing it because still 1st day. That's all. but I'm not the one who judge it finally, so I just leave the opinion here. anyway hope everything is well for the map!
I admit that the missing space is erroneous but I simply find that it is nothing more than an aesthetic issue, rather than practical.

Just to be sure I tried to contact a QAT just a few minutes ago so I'm just waiting for a reply.
Hopefully it won't take more than a day.
Lude
Hello, nice LN map. Just few concerns about Lv. 8, density issues
  1. 00:55:821 (55821|1,55915|1,55915|3,55915|2,56008|3,56008|2,56102|3) - Using these kind of structure is not coherent with the song, specially the 4th column, you barely gave triple jacks throughout the map. I'd recommend to replace these notes. 00:49:540 (49540|2) - Same goes with this, you could simplify the pattern by moving it to col 4
  2. 01:09:040 - You could just simplify these snaps by either only following melody or drums
  3. 01:10:165 - Clap 3, yet these two bass (01:10:540 (70540|0,70540|3,70540|2,70633|3,70633|1,70633|2) - ) has triple chords. 3-3-2-3 is quite heavy compared to the progression of the song. In my opinion, 01:10:633 (70633|2,70633|3,70633|1) - these could be doubled, 01:10:821 - triple here and double 01:10:915 - here to make it 3-2-2-3. Follows the drum more properly, and yet gives the staccato rhythm for players.
  4. 01:13:258 (73258|0,73258|2,73258|3,73352|2,73352|1) - Same goes here, chords does not follow the patterning logic (01:13:540 (73540|2,73540|3,73633|2,73633|1,73633|3) - bass double and snare triple).
  5. 01:15:040 - Popped up right now, add a note at 4?

I'll see if I can find out more. Lv. 9 is just excellent. Good luck!
Topic Starter
MadBricktree
incoming dq
Protastic101
tfw no ninja

Nah but yea, fix the diff name real quick and then look over Lude's mod
Topic Starter
MadBricktree
Blue - Accepted and fixed
Light Blue - Fixed, but may need some additional checking
Red - Rejected
Purple - Will be considered/Unsure
Green - Note/Comment

Lude wrote:

Hello, nice LN map. Just few concerns about Lv. 8, density issues
  1. 00:55:821 (55821|1,55915|1,55915|3,55915|2,56008|3,56008|2,56102|3) - Using these kind of structure is not coherent with the song, specially the 4th column, you barely gave triple jacks throughout the map. I'd recommend to replace these notes. 00:49:540 (49540|2) - Same goes with this, you could simplify the pattern by moving it to col 4 - The part at 00:55:915 (55915|3,55915|2,56008|3,56008|2,56102|3) - is basically equivalent to the part at 00:56:665 (56665|1,56665|0,56758|0,56758|1,56852|1) - (it's there to put emphasis on the brass.) For 00:49:540 (49540|2,49633|2,49727|2) - this 3 note long jack, please refer to my reply to one of lulu's mods (which basically sums up to that the current pattern is rather easy due to its readability and hand balance + it looks prettier imo)
  2. 01:09:040 - You could just simplify these snaps by either only following melody or drums - The whole section is based on piano and drums. I see no reason to simplify here considering that it the current pattern isn't hard at all since the different snaps are mostly separated.
  3. 01:10:165 - Clap 3, yet these two bass (01:10:540 (70540|0,70540|3,70540|2,70633|3,70633|1,70633|2) - ) has triple chords. 3-3-2-3 is quite heavy compared to the progression of the song. In my opinion, 01:10:633 (70633|2,70633|3,70633|1) - these could be doubled, 01:10:821 - triple here and double 01:10:915 - here to make it 3-2-2-3. Follows the drum more properly, and yet gives the staccato rhythm for players. - That would be inconsistent considering my layering approach which is explained in one of my previous posts (basically there are 4 different instruments that are being represented in this section.) Also, the difficulty jump is not all that high here considering that there are plenty of sections previous to this that is quite close in density. Also, IMO the music in this section is intense enough to warrant a slight increase in difficulty.
  4. 01:13:258 (73258|0,73258|2,73258|3,73352|2,73352|1) - Same goes here, chords does not follow the patterning logic (01:13:540 (73540|2,73540|3,73633|2,73633|1,73633|3) - bass double and snare triple). - Refer to the reply above.
  5. 01:15:040 - Popped up right now, add a note at 4? - I think it's fine without an extra note there since that'll mean that a line in a transitional section has bigger chord size and complexity than the start of 01:15:415 - a new section

I'll see if I can find out more. Lv. 9 is just excellent. Good luck! - Thank you for the mod. I will be waiting for your next post.

Also...

Fixed lv2's diff name and added my old username to tags
Arzenvald
No sakuzyo for me smh
Gl for requalification!
Garalulu
악 시온 조아
Topic Starter
MadBricktree
FAMoss

MadBricktree wrote:

lenpai
hell yeah
Rivals_7
heyo. a couple of light concern on hitsounding that could be improved.

[All]

00:53:665 - this bit seems to be missing a C. if i saw the overall structure that similar to this such as - 00:52:071 - 00:56:571 - 00:55:071 - then its surely a bit off

01:41:290 - (except mentholz) this sounds like a ghost. idk. or maybe if there is some sound, its pretty faint

[Kaito]

00:24:790 (24790|1,25352|1,25540|3) - missing W
00:52:165 (52165|2) - 00:52:915 (52915|1) - 00:54:415 (54415|3) - 00:55:165 (55165|2,55915|1) - 00:56:665 (56665|2) - missing C

[mentholz]

00:26:383 (26383|0,26477|1,26571|2) - missing C? feels like its intended so maybe not
00:50:008 (50008|2) - C i think

[5]

00:35:196 (35196|3,35290|2) - it seems that you misplaced the C because it was suppose to be in a swapped positions like other diffs did

01:15:415 -> 01:39:415 - thorughout Lv 2 to 6. there is a couple mount of missing C throughout them. either it is intentional or not, it looks just odd since most of the notes are there for percussion yet no percussion HS for the feedback

These are just a couple of points of missing hitsound. seemingly unintended, but since the pattern are mostly following percussion, just like the two highest diff did (implying the hitsound reference were referred from there), there should be some sort of more consistency in-between.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

tfw no flashy kiai stuff
else is cool and good ;)
Kawawa
Here my cent. That HS were already brought the best results by the mapper's interpretation.
That HS consistency of all the difficulties are not essential. It kinda a mind block. If It looks entirely an intention we actually don't need to assume it as "It seems entirely missing when compared with all the difficulties" anyway It's a trivial part in front of the grand song but If we just try to find any defects, over 80% of qualified maps will be valid for it like HS consistency(nevertheless first of all It's intended) we don't map to do hitsounding. so as what you said some parts are valid but not all. It will be useful but considering It's V1, the time will be reset.
so well I don't think it actually deserve to reporting imo.

summary; HS is an important factor yeah as judging quality but while I was checking your modding I wonder It really needs to be pointed out to get a disqualification. anyway If the map gets better, will be fine but kinda yeah.
Arzenvald
No v1 for me smh
lenpai
Lower diffs do not share the same hitsound ideas with the higher diffs as the keysounds are given much more priority and certain C samples are deliberately ignored due to the infrequency of them being used as part of the layering.

In the context of potential ghost notes im very positive both cytus and bms versions are reviewed to make it to a point that the notes are not ghosts and have the correct snapping
Topic Starter
MadBricktree
Blue - Accepted and fixed
Light Blue - Fixed, but may need some additional checking
Red - Rejected
Purple - Will be considered/Unsure
Green - Note/Comment


o wtf why is everyone so fast

Rivals_7 wrote:

heyo. a couple of light concern on hitsounding that could be improved. - ic

[All]

00:53:665 - this bit seems to be missing a C. if i saw the overall structure that similar to this such as - 00:52:071 - 00:56:571 - 00:55:071 - then its surely a bit off - from what i can hear it's not a kick but a really loud hihat/some-other-percussion. Paired with the background synths it kinda does sound like a kick but not quite (compare with all the 1/4 snaps nearby if that helps.)

01:41:290 - (except mentholz) this sounds like a ghost. idk. or maybe if there is some sound, its pretty faint - just a very faint piano.

[Kaito]

00:24:790 (24790|1,25352|1,25540|3) - missing W - I deliberately did not put any hitsounds there. It was explained in my reply to one of lulu's mods which basically sums up to that the notes don't properly follow the drums.
00:52:165 (52165|2) - 00:52:915 (52915|1) - 00:54:415 (54415|3) - 00:55:165 (55165|2,55915|1) - 00:56:665 (56665|2) - missing C - The C samples are intentionally ignored in this section for reasons similar to the point above.

[mentholz]

00:26:383 (26383|0,26477|1,26571|2) - missing C? feels like its intended so maybe not - Those notes do not represent the drums.
00:50:008 (50008|2) - C i think - i guess yea

[5]

00:35:196 (35196|3,35290|2) - it seems that you misplaced the C because it was suppose to be in a swapped positions like other diffs did - actually an error

01:15:415 -> 01:39:415 - thorughout Lv 2 to 6. there is a couple mount of missing C throughout them. either it is intentional or not, it looks just odd since most of the notes are there for percussion yet no percussion HS for the feedback - all of the "missing C/W/anyhitsoundsample" in this section deliberately "missing" to make way for the keysounds.

These are just a couple of points of missing hitsound. seemingly unintended, but since the pattern are mostly following percussion, just like the two highest diff did (implying the hitsound reference were referred from there), there should be some sort of more consistency in-between. - save for 2 genuine errors that you pointed out, those "seemingly unintended" "missing hitsound"s are all (or at least should be) intentional. There is no need for cross-difficulty consistency for anything if the difficulties follow different formulas.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

tfw no flashy kiai stuff - i don't like kiais
else is cool and good ;) - thanks for the mod

am I going to have to have this set DQ'd again for 2 erroneous hitsounds.
find out on the next episode of axion speedranking
Wonki
안녕하세요 몇가지 문제를 발견해서 적어봅니다

HP관해선데요 최소한의양심이있다면 HP를낮춰주세요 롱놋곡에 HP9는 양심없는행동이라고생각합니다

Lv. 9
00:26:008 (26008|3,26008|2,26102|3,26102|2) - 드럼이랑 신스음을 잭으로하셨는데 신스음을 12 로옮기고 00:26:196 (26196|0,26196|1) - 여기에있는 드럼음을 34로 옮겨서 00:26:290 (26290|2,26290|3) - 이노트와 잭으로 만드는게 이치에 맞다고 생각합니다

00:39:415 - 이쪽파트의 잭에 관한건데요 00:39:508 (39508|1,39696|3,40071|1) - 저는 무슨음에 잭을 넣었는지 도무지 이해가안갑니다. 잭을 넣을거면 00:39:790 (39790|1,39883|0) - 이런 서브음에 잭을 넣으셔야지 반대로넣으신거같아요

00:40:446 (40446|0,40540|0) - 마찬가지입니다 객관적으로 봤을때도 (00:40:352 - 00:40:446 - ) 여기쪽 서브음이나 (00:40:540 - 00:40:633 - ) 여기쪽 서브음에 잭을넣어야 맞다고생각되는데 지금 보시면 정반대로 잭을 넣으신거같네요.

뒷부분에 나오는잭도 수정하셔야할거같습니다

00:51:040 (51040|1,51040|0) - 00:51:227 - 여기까지 롱놋으로하셔도 괜찮을거같네요

00:51:696 (51696|1,51790|2,51883|3,51977|2,52071|1,52165|3,52258|2,52352|3,52446|1,52540|2,52633|3,52727|1,52821|2,52915|3,53008|1,53102|3,53196|2,53290|1,53383|3,53477|2,53571|1,53665|3,53665|2) - 물론 이런 짜잘한음에맞춰서 롱놋으로 하는거도 괜찮다고 생각하지만 제생각에는 00:51:415 (51415|2,51696|1,51977|0) - 이렇게 메인음을 살리셨는데 00:52:165 - 이쪽부터나오는 메인음에는 짜잘한 부분에 롱놋을 넣기위해서 신경을쓰지않으셨더라구요. 메인음을 살리는게 곡표현에 더좋다고 생각합니다. 그리고 애초에 일관성도 맞지않네요. 00:55:915 (55915|1,56665|2) - 메인음을 표현하기위해 넣으신걸로 보이는데 완벽하게 메인음을 표현하는게 좋다고생각합니다.

00:56:758 (56758|3) - 무슨 롱놋인가요? 어떤음인지 알수가없습니다

01:08:008 - 여기에도 잭표현이 되야한다고 생각합니다 일관성문제군요

01:21:415 - ~01:24:415 - 이파트에도 문제점을 발견할수있는데요 01:21:977 - 01:22:821 - 이쪽부분에는 노트가없고 01:23:477 (83477|2) - 이쪽에는 노트가있네요 일관성문제라고생각합니다.

01:30:508 (90508|0) - 여기에 노트하나를쓰셨다면 01:30:696 (90696|0,90696|1) - 이부분에도 노트하나를써야한다고생각합니다

도움이됬으면 좋겠네요
Topic Starter
MadBricktree
Blue - Accepted and fixed
Light Blue - Fixed, but may need some additional checking
Red - Rejected
Purple - Will be considered/Unsure
Green - Note/Comment


Wonki wrote:

안녕하세요 몇가지 문제를 발견해서 적어봅니다

HP관해선데요 최소한의양심이있다면 HP를낮춰주세요 롱놋곡에 HP9는 양심없는행동이라고생각합니다 - 롱놋이 많기는 하지만 롱놋 부분들이 별로 길지 않아서 아예 롱놋을 못읽는게 아니면 HP문제는 없을거라고 생각합니다.

Lv. 9
00:26:008 (26008|3,26008|2,26102|3,26102|2) - 드럼이랑 신스음을 잭으로하셨는데 신스음을 12 로옮기고 00:26:196 (26196|0,26196|1) - 여기에있는 드럼음을 34로 옮겨서 00:26:290 (26290|2,26290|3) - 이노트와 잭으로 만드는게 이치에 맞다고 생각합니다 - 드럼과 신스음은 00:25:915 - ~ 00:26:571 - 전 구간 다 있는데요.

00:39:415 - 이쪽파트의 잭에 관한건데요 00:39:508 (39508|1,39696|3,40071|1) - 저는 무슨음에 잭을 넣었는지 도무지 이해가안갑니다. 잭을 넣을거면 00:39:790 (39790|1,39883|0) - 이런 서브음에 잭을 넣으셔야지 반대로넣으신거같아요 - 무슨 음을 따라 잭을 넣은게 아니라 매 1/1에 잭을 넣은건데요. 모들 드럼마다 잭을 만들면 잭 난이도가 너무 높아집니다.

00:40:446 (40446|0,40540|0) - 마찬가지입니다 객관적으로 봤을때도 (00:40:352 - 00:40:446 - ) 여기쪽 서브음이나 (00:40:540 - 00:40:633 - ) 여기쪽 서브음에 잭을넣어야 맞다고생각되는데 지금 보시면 정반대로 잭을 넣으신거같네요. - ^

뒷부분에 나오는잭도 수정하셔야할거같습니다

00:51:040 (51040|1,51040|0) - 00:51:227 - 여기까지 롱놋으로하셔도 괜찮을거같네요 - 그러면 전환이 별로 안예쁘게 되는데요

00:51:696 (51696|1,51790|2,51883|3,51977|2,52071|1,52165|3,52258|2,52352|3,52446|1,52540|2,52633|3,52727|1,52821|2,52915|3,53008|1,53102|3,53196|2,53290|1,53383|3,53477|2,53571|1,53665|3,53665|2) - 물론 이런 짜잘한음에맞춰서 롱놋으로 하는거도 괜찮다고 생각하지만 제생각에는 00:51:415 (51415|2,51696|1,51977|0) - 이렇게 메인음을 살리셨는데 00:52:165 - 이쪽부터나오는 메인음에는 짜잘한 부분에 롱놋을 넣기위해서 신경을쓰지않으셨더라구요. 메인음을 살리는게 곡표현에 더좋다고 생각합니다. 그리고 애초에 일관성도 맞지않네요. 00:55:915 (55915|1,56665|2) - 메인음을 표현하기위해 넣으신걸로 보이는데 완벽하게 메인음을 표현하는게 좋다고생각합니다. - 이 난이도에는 관악기음보다 현악기음에 더 큰 강조를 줬습니다.

00:56:758 (56758|3) - 무슨 롱놋인가요? 어떤음인지 알수가없습니다 - 현악기음입니다.

01:08:008 - 여기에도 잭표현이 되야한다고 생각합니다 일관성문제군요 - 이 부분의 피아노가 대체적으로 4/1마다 2연타가 없어서 넘어갔네요.

01:21:415 - ~01:24:415 - 이파트에도 문제점을 발견할수있는데요 01:21:977 - 01:22:821 - 이쪽부분에는 노트가없고 01:23:477 (83477|2) - 이쪽에는 노트가있네요 일관성문제라고생각합니다. - 01:23:477 - 에 노트가 하나 잘못들어간거 같네요.

01:30:508 (90508|0) - 여기에 노트하나를쓰셨다면 01:30:696 (90696|0,90696|1) - 이부분에도 노트하나를써야한다고생각합니다 - 원래 둘다 두개를 넣어야 하지만 01:30:508 - 여기에 더블이 있으면 치기 불편하게 되어서 노트를 하나 지운것입니다.

도움이됬으면 좋겠네요 - 모드 감사합니다.

another dq soon i guess
Protastic101
Disqualified to make appropriate changes to hitsounds
Wonki
리퀄되기전에 빨리얘기해야겠네요

일단 HP에대해 답을해주셨는데 기본적으로 롱놋을잘치는분들은 HP가9이건 9.5이건 상관을안할겁니다. 근데 대체로 롱놋 랭크맵을 보신다면 플레이수가적고 깬사람이 많지않다는걸 알수있죠. 그걸 보면 롱놋을 잘치는 사람이 얼마없다는뜻입니다. 롱놋위주로치는 사람위주가아닌 랭크맵을 즐기는사람들을 위한 맵이되기위해서는 HP를 낮춰야한다고생각합니다. 솔직히 8.5까지만내려줘도 대다수의사람들이 좋아할거에요.

00:49:352 (49352|1) - 이쪽에 노트가좀몰려있기도하고 하니 4로옮겨주시는게 좋을거같네요

00:56:758 (56758|3) - 이쪽이 현악기음이라고 답해주셨는데 00:57:040 - 이쪽에서 현악기음이 짤립니다. 00:56:946 - 여기에 롱놋을 끊고 00:57:040 - 여기에 따로 발생하는음에 롱놋을 새로집어넣어야한다고 생각해요.

01:07:915 (67915|1) - 대체적으로 4/1에 음이없다고 넘어가셨는데 그나마 저쪽음에 강조를하기위해 짧은롱놋이라도 하나필요하다고 생각합니다
genkicho
*warning : this is not important >.>im bad at english*

sorry i just jumped in randomly here.. just want to share my opinion on LV.9
not saying the map is bad, it's actually good ok (subjective), but :
the inverse at 00:27:415 feels so heavy for beginning of song, also imo it doesnt fit the song well, first time i played it i was like : "wtf why inverse" -- what i feel about these inverse parts are that theyre forced for the sake of LN, it's kinda fun to play though, but as i said, imo doesnt rlly fit the song

but i dont have any good advice either... so... yea just saying what i feel about the map >.>
not mod for inverse but whatever

--
imo 00:27:415 feels so uncomfortable and (randomly placed?) or maybe you were trying to follow the pitch but it feels uncomfortable. might want to try these
Phase 1 - Base >Modified
Phase 2 - Base > Modified
Phase 3 - Base > Modified
After Phase 3 - There u go

--
01:15:415 Chorus : idk these patterns feels so uncomfortable (yeah im bad at thhese 2 hand notes in inverse) but it's weird that the previous inverse are FAR easier.. well this might be just high level stuff but might want to reconsider this nvm my hands just tired

--
01:26:946 imo this just looks weird. It's like : theres no transition between phase. i mean, it re-entering the chorus, which use inverse pattern but the inverse is used even before the chorus starts, so it looks like theres no transition there, or at least it looks like the transition starts at wrong time.
idk maybe something like this or like this | more like transition pattern
--
maybe thats all, but well i cant mod those inverse part because thats how you want to map it >.>

smh 4 edits srry i dont want to sound rude need to edit many times
Topic Starter
MadBricktree
Blue - Accepted and fixed
Light Blue - Fixed, but may need some additional checking
Red - Rejected
Purple - Will be considered/Unsure
Green - Note/Comment

wtf 2 mods

Wonki wrote:

리퀄되기전에 빨리얘기해야겠네요

일단 HP에대해 답을해주셨는데 기본적으로 롱놋을잘치는분들은 HP가9이건 9.5이건 상관을안할겁니다. 근데 대체로 롱놋 랭크맵을 보신다면 플레이수가적고 깬사람이 많지않다는걸 알수있죠. 그걸 보면 롱놋을 잘치는 사람이 얼마없다는뜻입니다. 롱놋위주로치는 사람위주가아닌 랭크맵을 즐기는사람들을 위한 맵이되기위해서는 HP를 낮춰야한다고생각합니다. 솔직히 8.5까지만내려줘도 대다수의사람들이 좋아할거에요. - 이 난이도는 롱놋 초보자용이 아닙니다. 기본적인 풀롱놋 패턴을 읽을 수 있는 사람들을 위해 만들어진 난이도입니다.

00:49:352 (49352|1) - 이쪽에 노트가좀몰려있기도하고 하니 4로옮겨주시는게 좋을거같네요 - 롱놋과 숏놋이 다른 손들로 나누어 져있어서 오히려 현재 패턴이 더 치기 편하다고 생각합니다.

00:56:758 (56758|3) - 이쪽이 현악기음이라고 답해주셨는데 00:57:040 - 이쪽에서 현악기음이 짤립니다. 00:56:946 - 여기에 롱놋을 끊고 00:57:040 - 여기에 따로 발생하는음에 롱놋을 새로집어넣어야한다고 생각해요. - 00:57:040 - 여기에 있는 음은 현재 표현이 되고있는 현악기 음과 다릅니다.

01:07:915 (67915|1) - 대체적으로 4/1에 음이없다고 넘어가셨는데 그나마 저쪽음에 강조를하기위해 짧은롱놋이라도 하나필요하다고 생각합니다 - 노트수가 이미 충분히 강조를 하고 있고, 짧은 롱놋을 넣으면 오히려 치기 어색하고 01:07:915 - 의 강한 피아노와 타악기음의 표현을 약화시킨다고 생각합니다.

genkicho wrote:

*warning : this is not important >.>im bad at english* - that should be fine

sorry i just jumped in randomly here.. just want to share my opinion on LV.9
not saying the map is bad, it's actually good ok (subjective), but :
the inverse at 00:27:415 feels so heavy for beginning of song, also imo it doesnt fit the song well, first time i played it i was like : "wtf why inverse" -- what i feel about these inverse parts are that theyre forced for the sake of LN, it's kinda fun to play though, but as i said, imo doesnt rlly fit the song - it's not exactly heavy considering the entire difficulty. The first LN wall that you spoke of has a very simple structure (try converting the LNs to SNs if that helps you visualize it) and is relatively easy to read for a LN wall. LN walls are basically what the difficulty's concept revolves around so it'd be strange to remove any LN wall just because "they felt heavy."

but i dont have any good advice either... so... yea just saying what i feel about the map >.>
not mod for inverse but whatever
--
imo 00:27:415 feels so uncomfortable and (randomly placed?) or maybe you were trying to follow the pitch but it feels uncomfortable. might want to try these
Phase 1 - Base >Modified
Phase 2 - Base > Modified
Phase 3 - Base > Modified
After Phase 3 - There u go - read previous reply

--
01:15:415 Chorus : idk these patterns feels so uncomfortable (yeah im bad at thhese 2 hand notes in inverse) but it's weird that the previous inverse are FAR easier.. well this might be just high level stuff but might want to reconsider this nvm my hands just tired - rip. Inverse can be extremely stamina draining to those not accustomed to it.

--
01:26:946 imo this just looks weird. It's like : theres no transition between phase. i mean, it re-entering the chorus, which use inverse pattern but the inverse is used even before the chorus starts, so it looks like theres no transition there, or at least it looks like the transition starts at wrong time.
idk maybe something like this or like this | more like transition pattern - That shield in col 4 will likely make the transition even weirder. The transition in question is placed with PR and to warn the player of another LN wall.
--
maybe thats all, but well i cant mod those inverse part because thats how you want to map it >.> - well it's the whole concept of the difficulty. The point of Lv. 9 is to fill a niche need for inverse patterns (which basically means that the intended audience is very small.)
smh 4 edits srry i dont want to sound rude need to edit many times - rip. language barrier is a real issue

thanks for all the mods
Wonki
01:07:915 (67915|1) - 도대체 여기가 뭐가강조됬다는지 전혀 이해가가지않습니다 설명해주세요 듣기에는 01:09:790 - 01:10:165 - 이쪽부분보다 훨씬더 명확하게 소리가 들립니다



00:53:758 (53758|0,54040|0) - 이렇게 끊었듯이 00:56:758 (56758|3) - 여기도 끊어줘야된다 이말이에요 일관성에 전혀 맞지 않습니다 분명히 음이 2개로 나뉘어져있습니다


그리고 듣다보니 오프셋이 잘못된거같아서 적어봅니다

1938로 바꾸셔야할거같네요 00:01:938 - 여기부터 드럼시작입니다
Topic Starter
MadBricktree

Wonki wrote:

01:07:915 (67915|1) - 도대체 여기가 뭐가강조됬다는지 전혀 이해가가지않습니다 설명해주세요 듣기에는 01:09:790 - 01:10:165 - 이쪽부분보다 훨씬더 명확하게 소리가 들립니다 - 01:07:915 - 에있는 드럼과 피아노요..?



00:53:758 (53758|0,54040|0) - 이렇게 끊었듯이 00:56:758 (56758|3) - 여기도 끊어줘야된다 이말이에요 일관성에 전혀 맞지 않습니다 분명히 음이 2개로 나뉘어져있습니다 - 현악기음 노트는 00:53:665 (53665|2,54040|1,54415|0) - 여기에 있는데요???


그리고 듣다보니 오프셋이 잘못된거같아서 적어봅니다

1938로 바꾸셔야할거같네요 00:01:938 - 여기부터 드럼시작입니다 - 1938으로 하면 너무 늩다고 생각하지만 한번 다른 사람들도 물어보겠습니다.


+selfmod
moved notes at 01:11:758 - and 01:11:852 - to col 4 and 2 respectively (1|2|3|4)
Niks
어쩌다가 보게됐는데 오프셋이 1938까진 아닌것같고 1910이 정확한거같습니다
Wonki
오프셋은 다시보니 맞는거같네요 마지막으로 몇가지 추천해드리고싶은게있어서 짚어봅니다

01:50:665 (110665|1,110665|0,110758|2,110758|3,110852|0,110852|1) - 12 - 34 - 21 보단 01:50:665 - 이쪽피니쉬사운드에 맞춰서 12 - 12 -34 가 더 적합하다고생각해요



이런식으로

01:57:040 - 이쪽부터 나오는 피아노 3음 있죠? 그걸 강조하면 더좋을거같네요



화이팅
Topic Starter
MadBricktree

Niks wrote:

어쩌다가 보게됐는데 오프셋이 1938까진 아닌것같고 1910이 정확한거같습니다 - ✅

Wonki wrote:

오프셋은 다시보니 맞는거같네요 마지막으로 몇가지 추천해드리고싶은게있어서 짚어봅니다 - 👌

01:50:665 (110665|1,110665|0,110758|2,110758|3,110852|0,110852|1) - 12 - 34 - 21 보단 01:50:665 - 이쪽피니쉬사운드에 맞춰서 12 - 12 -34 가 더 적합하다고생각해요



이런식으로 - 이 부분은 곡이 잔잔함으로서 일부러 치기 슆게 잭을 피했습니다. 그러나 여기에 임팩트가 부족하긴 한거 같아서 [14][23][14]트릴로 바꿨습니다.

01:57:040 - 이쪽부터 나오는 피아노 3음 있죠? 그걸 강조하면 더좋을거같네요 - 노트는 추가하지 안았지만 스트림의 방향을 바꿨습니다.



화이팅 - 모드 감사합니다.
Garalulu
again~
lenpai
good luck with getting a new bn >w<
Arzenvald
Lol what next?
Topic Starter
MadBricktree
i should probably start looking for another bn
-MysticEyes
I love #mapfeed <3

Topic Starter
MadBricktree
lightning fast
AyeAries
oh yes it's back!
Unpredictable
this is definitely a victory royale

Topic Starter
MadBricktree
FAMoss

MadBricktree wrote:

Joe Castle
i would strongly suggest that the source should be changed to BMS and move cytus to the tags, since the song's first appearance was in the BMS contest "Wire Puller 2" in 2011, then in 2012 was featured in cytus with "Chapter VIII (8): Another Me".

Heres some useful link:
1. http://manbow.nothing.sh/event/event.cgi?action=List_def&event=67
2. http://manbow.nothing.sh/event/event.cgi?action=More_def&num=39&event=67
Topic Starter
MadBricktree

Joe Castle wrote:

i would strongly suggest that the source should be changed to BMS and move cytus to the tags, since the song's first appearance was in the BMS contest "Wire Puller 2" in 2011, then in 2012 was featured in cytus with "Chapter VIII (8): Another Me".

Heres some useful link:
1. http://manbow.nothing.sh/event/event.cgi?action=List_def&event=67
2. http://manbow.nothing.sh/event/event.cgi?action=More_def&num=39&event=67


ur an year too late to point that out
wire puller 2 is literally in tags
i put cytus in as source since it's the first commercial game to include it
not to mention that it got disqualified in wire puller 2
Please sign in to reply.

New reply