rust45 wrote:

Christmas Mod!

[SB]
I don't really see why you need that negative image. In collab, negative image is for my second part of collab

[Collab Flower]
00:33:190 (1) - Why does this have a new combo? Opss, sorry
00:46:575 (5,6,7,8) - Don't like the anti-jumps, but if you want to keep them, at least put on a new combo. Ok
04:54:883 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - Just seems like a clusterfuck that's hard to follow to me. It's fine for me >.<
05:09:652 (1,2,3,4,1,1,2,3,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - ^ It's fine for me >.<

[Leo's Flower]
04:47:499 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - Return of the clusterfuck. It's fine for me >.<
04:54:883 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - ^ It's fine for me >.<
No warning for 2x (The Negative Image strobing doesn't tell you anything), and I don't really think the 2x fits. Added the Speed up!

[Taiko]
Fine

I'll shoot a star, and don't ask me to come back for a bubble cause I can't bubble approval maps. I know that MAT can't bubble the approval map, but It's too hard to find a BAT for that

dNextGen wrote:

saran nama diff boleh gak ya

Leorda
Collab
Taiko

better imo

• Please remove the "Speed up" warning from the Collab Flower View Difficulty.

1. .Suggestions: (Fixing this should make gameplay/aesthetics a bit better)
   02:26:036 (7,8,9) - playable, but a really unbalanced jump

1. .Opinions: (Just some thoughts, I'd personally like if you follow them)
   Nothing to say.

1. .Opinions: (Just some thoughts, I'd personally like if you follow them)
   If it's a Collab, where are the mappers' names? :X

Card N'FoRcE wrote:

-Storyboard:

• Please remove the "Speed up" warning from the Collab Flower View Difficulty. Ok

- Collab Flower View:

1. .Suggestions: (Fixing this should make gameplay/aesthetics a bit better)
   02:26:036 (7,8,9) - playable, but a really unbalanced jump Fixed

- Leo's Flower View:

1. .Opinions: (Just some thoughts, I'd personally like if you follow them)
   Nothing to say.

- Taiko Collab Flower View:

1. .Opinions: (Just some thoughts, I'd personally like if you follow them)
   If it's a Collab, where are the mappers' names? :X The problem is, I don't know the part where the mapper fills.... That's why I don't add the mapper names. Only 3UNI is know, but I think he is busy during at school

Let me know and i'll bubble.

Card N'FoRcE wrote:

Ok then.

Bubble #1

Larto wrote:

Leo's Flower View:
04:47:499 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - I find that kind of hard to read. I hit it while playing, but had my problems with it. If you really want to keep it, do so, but I just want to note that this is quite hard to play/read, to me anyways. It's easy to read for me~
04:54:883 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - ^ ^
05:13:344 - Eh, do you really have to use 2.0 sections? Now that we have custom slider speeds you could just use 1.5 or so, that wouldn't be so extreme. Though, as you have a warning, it still works. Keep if you must, change if you can. Change to 1.5x sections

Collab Flower View:
02:58:113 (4) - Add new combo? =P OK
03:17:959 (3,4,5,6,7) - This spacing change looks a bit weird, but iiiiiiiiiit's playable... if you want to keep it. It's easy to read for me~
04:42:883 (1,1,2,3,1) - These new combos are a bit ugly and don't quite make sense Fixed, I think Ain053 is make a combo nonsense
04:54:883 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - Again, these overlaps are hard to read. OK
05:10:806 (1) - Remove New Combo? OK
05:09:652 (1,2,3,4,1,1,2,3,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - Again, these overlaps are hard to read. OK

I guess none of this is compulsory, but it'd certainly improve the map quality to look into some of these issues. Nice mapset though.

lufi10 wrote:

star

Larto wrote:

Oh, woops. Sorry. Rebubbled.

mekadon wrote:

SPOILER

Larto wrote:

(EDIT: #1 I suppose, sorry)

Starrodkirby86 wrote:

Is marvelous work, yes~

However, there's some minor things that I'd like addressed! Let's see.


[Collab Flower View]:
03:17:959 (3,4) - This spacing tripped me utterly. First, you have a (3) - (4) 1/2 jump, then immediately followed by (5) being super close but the same rhythm. I suggest you should either make (3)-(6) the same spacing or repattern this weird thing altogether. Fix

Do we need the inverted BG here? There's no speed-up, after all... In [Taiko Collab Flower View] there isn't an inverted BG. ok ok, I remove that

[Leo's Flower View]:
Delicious.

[Taiko Collab Flower View]:
Is it intentional that you don't have the mappers' names for their respective parts in this collab? oxo 3UNI is being AFK
I understand that the names are embedded into BG's for [Collab Flower View], though what's your input on not having names for [Taiko Collab Flower View]? Since 3UNI AFK, I removed this sorry

Leorda wrote:

Starrodkirby86 wrote:

[Taiko Collab Flower View]:
Is it intentional that you don't have the mappers' names for their respective parts in this collab? oxo 3UNI is being AFK
I understand that the names are embedded into BG's for [Collab Flower View], though what's your input on not having names for [Taiko Collab Flower View]? Since 3UNI AFK, I removed this sorry

Starrodkirby86 wrote:

Hmm...So are you saying that, because 3UNI is absent, you were unsure of where the storyboarded names belonged? o.o

If you're online, I'll talk to you there...xD

And what ._.

Why did the first post not update when you removed the Taiko difficulties?

Also, don't worry if the names aren't there. You credited the collab'ers in your first post. You might as well just resubmit that difficulty again. I was just asking a concern I had.

EDIT:

And Leorda...If you're going to fix that part like that...you might as well make it look more like this (Except neater):

The way you fixed it still didn't fix much of anything x[

Starrodkirby86 wrote:

Leorda, my child ~

About the Taiko difficulty. I suggest you don't need to worry about who's part is who. The names aren't required --- I've seen collabs that don't implement SB names. I was simply asking a concern I had within the map, that's all. Maybe I didn't clarify that having names wasn't required. Anyway, you're free to insert that Taiko difficulty again as long as you credit all the collabers in the beatmap description again.

And don't worry about the bubble stuff. Changing only one pattern and a bit of the storyboard shouldn't reset the process over again.

I just insist that you insert the Taiko difficulty again since there wasn't anything wrong with it.

KIA wrote:

What's this I don't even
approach rate TOO low *facepalm*

I must to make a not-so-insane diff, because I don't want this map is impossible to approved

CDFA wrote:

(full ver.) FFFFFFFFUUUUUUUUU-

Mystica wrote:

grats.Finally.

Leorda wrote:

inb4 you rate 1

KIA wrote:

no, I didn't

Tenshi-nyan wrote:

Oh boy.

Bad hitsounds and overmap.

I don't like this at all.

Hakeru Prismriver wrote:

DT-able <3
grats leorda

Leorda wrote:

Tenshi-nyan wrote:

Oh boy.

Bad hitsounds and overmap.

I don't like this at all.

Just go away and go to hell

JesusYamato wrote:

Fun to play... What's the complaining about?

Hakeru Prismriver wrote:

Overmap ?___?

nvm ..

DT-able <3
grats leorda

Komeiji Yuki wrote:

GJ Leorda

I like this song extremely

And so glad to see it approved~

mekadon wrote:

Hakeru Prismriver wrote:

Overmap ?___?

nvm ..

DT-able <3
grats leorda

Agree. Grats Leorda <3