i've been mapping one section in a way i like, then realizing another section is the same so i copy paste for consistency, but i end up disliking the other section because its just a worse version of the first section. However, i dont understand what im supposed to do otherwise for consistency. Is this something people do? What do people normally do for making a maps structure consistent?

Mainly, how do you balance keeping a map consistent while not making it boring?

If the song repeats something so much that simple repetition gets stale, I make variations of earlier ideas and/or expand upon those ideas, making something new while keeping enough of the core idea that it's recognisably related to what came before.

In a strict sense, the former method tends to be more applicable to stuff where the song just repeats itself, while the latter is great for spots where the song repeats an idea but in a noticeably different way or with more intensity. Making your ideas evolve can be viable even when the song does nothing new, though: it's a kind of artificial layer of progression in the map.

To give an example, I make heavy use of these methods in ☆☆☆☆☆☆*****, where the song repeats the same ideas a lot, with some differences each time. Let's take a look at how I handle the song's main motif in different parts of the map:

1. In the intro, I introduce the basic form of the idea I'll be working with.
2. At 00:10:489, more instruments come in and the song gets more intense, so I increase my spacing and rhythm density as well as adapt the rhythm of the pattern to fit the new stuff in the song.
3. At 00:30:489, certain background instruments get stronger and the drums start doing 1/4 rhythms a bit more often. I change my rhythm and patterning quite a bit to match the change in the song's vibe, but the focus on overlaps is still there and the general movement is still similar to what I had before.
4. At 00:40:489, the song overlays the main motif with the guitar from an earlier section, so I combine the ideas I used in that section with the ideas I've been using for the main motif.
5. At 01:20:489, the song is pretty similar to 00:30:489, but I'm evolving the map ever so slightly towards what will come next by using overlaps a bit more sparingly and making my 1/4 patterns a bit harsher.
6. At 01:30:489, the pitch of the melody goes up a notch and the timbre becomes sharper as well, so I increase my rhythm density and add 1/4 sliders to the mix.
7. Finally, at 02:10:489, we reach the climax of the song, with the same higher-pitched melody as before overlaid with what's basically a guitar solo; it's all chaos from this point until the end. The 1/4 sliders are back, I'm using slider shapes I introduced in the calmer part of the guitar solo, the intensity is dialed up on all fronts, and although there's a lot of different things going on all the time, you can still see ideas from the first half of the map used here.

Now, going back to your post for a bit, you say that after mapping one section, you're just now realising that there's another section just like it. Learning ways to structure maps is good and all, but I think this part is actually the real cause of your problem.

You shouldn't be realising that two sections of the song are the same after you've already mapped one of them, you should identify things like that ahead of time and plan your map accordingly. It's often easier to expand upon ideas if you've come up with them with that in mind. Besides, in the first place, you can't really design the overarching structure of your map by just reacting to each section of the song as you get to it; you've got to consider the song as a whole.

To illustrate this a bit, I have to confess that I wasn't entirely truthful in the way I worded my explanation of the map I linked. The way it's worded sounds really linear/chronological; that's the way a player would see the map, after all. However, that's not even close to how I approached making it.

The last section was the first one I mapped, because that way I always had a clear picture of what I'd be working towards throughout the map. After that, I mapped the intro to show the other end of the spectrum, then I mapped the beginnings of several other sections to sketch out some ideas, and finally, I filled in the gaps to finish the map.

Compared to just going through the song from start to finish, mapping the song out of order like this gives you a lot more control over the structure of the map and how your concepts evolve over time. I'd say it's straight up the better way to work if you want to end up with the best map you can with your current skill or if you want to practice some overarching concept like structure between sections. The drawbacks are that it's slower and forces you to think a lot more, so if you just want to chill, practice more detail-oriented concepts, or get a map done fast, a linear approach can still be valuable.

There's nothing wrong with "copying" (in the sense of making very similar, not actual copy paste) another section of the song that sounds the same. Do you like how you mapped the first section though? If so, the idea/concept is probably fine, maybe the second one just isn't as good execution-wise as the first one, probably because you had a clear image of how you wanted to map that section the first time but ran out of ideas the second time. I think the easiest way to add variation is with object placement, patterns and slider shapes. This can be done in many different ways but it's hard to explain here without some concrete examples so I won't go into detail. In my opinion rhythm and spacing are more difficult to balance when trying to add variety since the risk of creating some kind of unwanted inconsistency is bigger.

Regarding map structure in a more general sense, I agree with lewski that planning your map beforehand can help a lot.
I try to make my maps very consistent/well structured and this is the process I personally follow:

1. Listen to the whole song and divide it into sections (chorus, verse, etc.) with bookmarks.
2. Decide what slider velocity (and spacing in the case of low diffs) to use for each section. Equal sections are assigned the same settings.
3. Lay down only the rhythm without paying attention to object placement. I do this to avoid having to redo entire patterns only because I changed the rhythm later on (for example if the rhythm density turns out to be too high in a certain part). But this is mostly because my mapping style is heavily based on specific visual elements (blankets, geometrical shapes, etc.). If you have a more "freeform" mapping style (like most mappers nowadays) you might want to skip this step and combine it with the next step by just mapping normally. But when it comes to rhythm I follow the same principle as before that equal sections get the same rhythm (except small differences between one chorus/verse/etc. and another which occur most of the time). As lewski already said, you don't have to map or even plan the map in chronological order, you can start with the easier parts and do the rest later. Then compare the different sections to check if there are balancing issues (mostly rhythm density relative to song intensity) or inconsistencies.
4. Move the objects properly and cross-check aspects like spacing etc. again.

Obviously this is just my approach which won't work or even be necessary for everyone but it's just to give you an idea of what planning a map could look like.

Serizawa Haruki wrote:

3. Lay down only the rhythm without paying attention to object placement.

good point, I think this is something literally everyone should try out at least once

it won't work for everyone but I've heard really good things about it from multiple people who it does work for

for the measly cost of a bit of time and effort you might just find a way to map that works better than what you had before

lewski wrote:

You shouldn't be realising that two sections of the song are the same after you've already mapped one of them, you should identify things like that ahead of time and plan your map accordingly. It's often easier to expand upon ideas if you've come up with them with that in mind. Besides, in the first place, you can't really design the overarching structure of your map by just reacting to each section of the song as you get to it; you've got to consider the song as a whole.

Yeah you're right I've just been mapping chronologically which prevents me from designing an overarching structure of my map but the problem is that I simply don't have the understanding how to plan a map unless I'm listening to each section carefully and if I'm doing that I end up feeling that I may as well just map right then and there (which would end up being chronological) since it would take much longer which you mentioned.

However, I guess this means I should just be hitsounding first which I sort of already do but chronologically. I suppose in the future I could try doing this non-chronologically.

Mainly, the issue is that I map compulsively.

Serizawa Haruki wrote:

1. Listen to the whole song and divide it into sections (chorus, verse, etc.) with bookmarks.
2. Decide what slider velocity (and spacing in the case of low diffs) to use for each section. Equal sections are assigned the same settings.
3. Lay down only the rhythm without paying attention to object placement. I do this to avoid having to redo entire patterns only because I changed the rhythm later on (for example if the rhythm density turns out to be too high in a certain part). But this is mostly because my mapping style is heavily based on specific visual elements (blankets, geometrical shapes, etc.). If you have a more "freeform" mapping style (like most mappers nowadays) you might want to skip this step and combine it with the next step by just mapping normally. But when it comes to rhythm I follow the same principle as before that equal sections get the same rhythm (except small differences between one chorus/verse/etc. and another which occur most of the time). As lewski already said, you don't have to map or even plan the map in chronological order, you can start with the easier parts and do the rest later. Then compare the different sections to check if there are balancing issues (mostly rhythm density relative to song intensity) or inconsistencies.
4. Move the objects properly and cross-check aspects like spacing etc. again.

this really, I should try to do. I don't really know what my mapping style is but compartmentalizing a map and hitsounding each section would probably make it easier.