Unofficial BN Check INC:
[General]
While it doesnt really affect this mapset. You should have consistency in your letterboxing during break's as Aimod states. So I recommend either turning it on for all diffs or off for all diffs.
Overall the hitsounds need pretty much a complete rework. So much monotony in the hitnormal and what not. While I stated that some sections should be hitsoft, honestly the whole map could be hitsoft as the song isnt that intense in the slightest.
[General]
While it doesnt really affect this mapset. You should have consistency in your letterboxing during break's as Aimod states. So I recommend either turning it on for all diffs or off for all diffs.
Overall the hitsounds need pretty much a complete rework. So much monotony in the hitnormal and what not. While I stated that some sections should be hitsoft, honestly the whole map could be hitsoft as the song isnt that intense in the slightest.
LONELY DAYS
I feel like the biggest problem with this difficulty is how tight your mapping is and how constrained you seem to map. With insanes and the such, you really don't need to be as dependent on distance snap as you are in this difficulty. The problem is that placement of the notes for an insane is supposed to services towards pattern design and visual consistency, not so much following DS.
00:01:692 (3,4) - it might be more satisfying to utilize a slider on these two beats due to the guitar being held on this note. While you can follow the drums here, I think incorporating both instruments would be a better representation to the song.
00:01:879 (4,5,6,7) - the spacing here seems somewhat conflicted, it might be better to create a bit more visually satisfying pattern here because it seem rather random. While I understand that you want emphasis on 6, you can do this more properly with a pattern like such: http://puu.sh/nymVW/db2b1b04b2.jpg because visual distance between notes is conserved (this allows the map to come off as more polished and well constructed.
00:02:624 (1,1) - since you seem to desire an overlap here, it would be best to make sure that the tails of the sliders properly overlap. (i'm personally not a fan of this overlap, but atleast polish it.
00:04:115 (1,3) - this is a poor placement of notes because the notes are overlapping. This is unprofessional because it looks lazily placed. move the notes away atleast a bit to that things look less cramped.
00:05:233 (1) - while I haven't explicitly tested this, I feel like the use of SV change here is probably not advisable, given that there is barely any change in the rhythm of the song, and it can easily come off as 1/1. as it's very similar in length to the two previous sliders.
00:06:164 (3,1,2,3,4,1) - again this to me is bad polishing, this is very easily a parallelogram pattern, but you don't execute it properly, adjust this so that slider end of 3, 1, 2, and 3 are a more proper parallelogram.
00:10:450 (2,3,4,5,6,7) - while i mean yes you can do this, I'd say that this pattern is rather awkward to play. And I feel like these angles make this pattern exceptionally hard to hit for no real reason. It's lacking consistency since it's the only jump of it's kind that is like this.
00:14:922 (2,3,4,5,6,7) - this just generally looks ugly and plays awkwardly. While you lower the DS for the sake of the slower part of the map, your rhythm is still fast and intense with all these circles. It might be advantageous to experiment more with slider usage during this section or work on better. Consider the following rhythm as a possible substitute: http://puu.sh/nynKo/e259768c72.jpg this rhythm pays major focus to the singers voice, so every time she sing's a syllable, the player is clicking, however the slider ends capture the constant 1/2 of the drums, allowing for more focus on the melody and more satisfying and impactful clicks.
In addition to this, I'd like to point out that the hitsounding throughout this section is very very bland and I would DEFINITELY avoid using hitnormal here and it sounds extremely out of place with how calm the song is. Soft is probably best.
00:30:574 (1) - whhyy is this note placed here? It seems really out of place and awkwardly overlapping the slider body, I would try to move this to a place that has a bit more visual justification rather than just random.
00:44:922 (4) - I'm not 100% on this rule, but I have been told that muting slider ticks is not rankable. Do not ask me why, and I would confirm from someone else, but I am fairly certain thats how this works.
00:50:326 (1,2,3,4,5,6,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,1) - I feel like this section could GREATLY value a bit of 1/1 breaks or sliders to clean the monotony thats in place here. So much 1/2 with rather empty hitsounding makes this section sound bad and honestly play bad as well because it feels like we're not emphasizing anything, we're just 1/2'ing around.
00:50:698 (2) - what is this slider... ? ugly
00:55:916 (1) - nc here to make the increase in distance more noticable for the player
00:56:288 (1) - it seems like you accidently raised DS on this due to SV increase, I would keep it consistent with the previous 4 note stream
00:58:897 (5,6) - blanket the notes better
I'm gonna stop here for this difficulty. There is a lot of thing's that could be improved in how you hitsound and in how you space your notes. It is very apparent that, while this has some pro's and interesting parts, and LARGE majority of this map feels unpolished and unclean and I believe a large contributing factor is your dependence on distance snap. While I am not saying that it's necessarily bad, when you are trying to create jumps, you want to place notes, not so much in distance snapped patterns, but patterns that just come off as musically impactful and visually consistent. Another thing is, while you try your best to make the song flow well, I feel like for the most part the map falls into a category of monotony rather than excitement because everything for the most part feels very consistent in spacing and design, and the hitsounding is a large factor in this. There's very little here that truly makes me feel like I am playing THIS specific song. To me I feel like this map could be taken to another song on the same bpm and feel similarly, because again, your spacing poorly reflects the intensity, your sliders are not emphasizing and deemphasizing any beats intentionally and the hitsounds are bland. The biggest example of this I can think of is:
00:41:382 (1,2,1,2) - you have sliders here on these 1/2 vocal emphasized notes, but you have things like 00:40:077 (2,3) - which, while the clap has presence on the white tick 3, the vast majority of players would more likely be focusing on the melody rather than the clap in the backing.
Basically, there is very very little consistency in how you design your chorus: 00:38:400 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,1) - vs 00:32:438 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - vs 00:35:419 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,1) - vs 00:41:382 (1,2,1,2) -
I cannot see any form of reason or logic as to why these sliders are being used in their cases and why they're not, and as such I find this to be a poor representation of the beat.
00:01:692 (3,4) - it might be more satisfying to utilize a slider on these two beats due to the guitar being held on this note. While you can follow the drums here, I think incorporating both instruments would be a better representation to the song.
00:01:879 (4,5,6,7) - the spacing here seems somewhat conflicted, it might be better to create a bit more visually satisfying pattern here because it seem rather random. While I understand that you want emphasis on 6, you can do this more properly with a pattern like such: http://puu.sh/nymVW/db2b1b04b2.jpg because visual distance between notes is conserved (this allows the map to come off as more polished and well constructed.
00:02:624 (1,1) - since you seem to desire an overlap here, it would be best to make sure that the tails of the sliders properly overlap. (i'm personally not a fan of this overlap, but atleast polish it.
00:04:115 (1,3) - this is a poor placement of notes because the notes are overlapping. This is unprofessional because it looks lazily placed. move the notes away atleast a bit to that things look less cramped.
00:05:233 (1) - while I haven't explicitly tested this, I feel like the use of SV change here is probably not advisable, given that there is barely any change in the rhythm of the song, and it can easily come off as 1/1. as it's very similar in length to the two previous sliders.
00:06:164 (3,1,2,3,4,1) - again this to me is bad polishing, this is very easily a parallelogram pattern, but you don't execute it properly, adjust this so that slider end of 3, 1, 2, and 3 are a more proper parallelogram.
00:10:450 (2,3,4,5,6,7) - while i mean yes you can do this, I'd say that this pattern is rather awkward to play. And I feel like these angles make this pattern exceptionally hard to hit for no real reason. It's lacking consistency since it's the only jump of it's kind that is like this.
00:14:922 (2,3,4,5,6,7) - this just generally looks ugly and plays awkwardly. While you lower the DS for the sake of the slower part of the map, your rhythm is still fast and intense with all these circles. It might be advantageous to experiment more with slider usage during this section or work on better. Consider the following rhythm as a possible substitute: http://puu.sh/nynKo/e259768c72.jpg this rhythm pays major focus to the singers voice, so every time she sing's a syllable, the player is clicking, however the slider ends capture the constant 1/2 of the drums, allowing for more focus on the melody and more satisfying and impactful clicks.
In addition to this, I'd like to point out that the hitsounding throughout this section is very very bland and I would DEFINITELY avoid using hitnormal here and it sounds extremely out of place with how calm the song is. Soft is probably best.
00:30:574 (1) - whhyy is this note placed here? It seems really out of place and awkwardly overlapping the slider body, I would try to move this to a place that has a bit more visual justification rather than just random.
00:44:922 (4) - I'm not 100% on this rule, but I have been told that muting slider ticks is not rankable. Do not ask me why, and I would confirm from someone else, but I am fairly certain thats how this works.
00:50:326 (1,2,3,4,5,6,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,1) - I feel like this section could GREATLY value a bit of 1/1 breaks or sliders to clean the monotony thats in place here. So much 1/2 with rather empty hitsounding makes this section sound bad and honestly play bad as well because it feels like we're not emphasizing anything, we're just 1/2'ing around.
00:50:698 (2) - what is this slider... ? ugly
00:55:916 (1) - nc here to make the increase in distance more noticable for the player
00:56:288 (1) - it seems like you accidently raised DS on this due to SV increase, I would keep it consistent with the previous 4 note stream
00:58:897 (5,6) - blanket the notes better
I'm gonna stop here for this difficulty. There is a lot of thing's that could be improved in how you hitsound and in how you space your notes. It is very apparent that, while this has some pro's and interesting parts, and LARGE majority of this map feels unpolished and unclean and I believe a large contributing factor is your dependence on distance snap. While I am not saying that it's necessarily bad, when you are trying to create jumps, you want to place notes, not so much in distance snapped patterns, but patterns that just come off as musically impactful and visually consistent. Another thing is, while you try your best to make the song flow well, I feel like for the most part the map falls into a category of monotony rather than excitement because everything for the most part feels very consistent in spacing and design, and the hitsounding is a large factor in this. There's very little here that truly makes me feel like I am playing THIS specific song. To me I feel like this map could be taken to another song on the same bpm and feel similarly, because again, your spacing poorly reflects the intensity, your sliders are not emphasizing and deemphasizing any beats intentionally and the hitsounds are bland. The biggest example of this I can think of is:
00:41:382 (1,2,1,2) - you have sliders here on these 1/2 vocal emphasized notes, but you have things like 00:40:077 (2,3) - which, while the clap has presence on the white tick 3, the vast majority of players would more likely be focusing on the melody rather than the clap in the backing.
Basically, there is very very little consistency in how you design your chorus: 00:38:400 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,1) - vs 00:32:438 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - vs 00:35:419 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,1) - vs 00:41:382 (1,2,1,2) -
I cannot see any form of reason or logic as to why these sliders are being used in their cases and why they're not, and as such I find this to be a poor representation of the beat.
Insane
00:01:789 - I don't really see why you're not mapping the full intro..? Did you just not finish it after 2 years (lol)
00:07:469 (2,3,4) - consider adjusting these notes so that they all are equal distance from eachother (In the sense of visual distance, aka no slider is closer to another part of another slider, if you have a question on what I mean ask me)
00:08:587 (1,2) - this looks very awkward, why are you taking downward motion up with a slider and then back down..? it also looks visually poor since the notes don't really work with eachother at all (no blanket, etc)
00:09:705 (3,3) - awkward overlap , why?
00:14:549 (1) - soft hitsounds for this section
00:23:866 (3,1) - i mean i guess you can do this, but again, kind of weird overlap that probably could be avoided.
00:34:487 (3) - i mean your call on a slider but I feel like this just looks awkward.
00:41:009 (4) - consider making this 1/2 circles to better reflect the singer before going into the next part of the chorus (there are probably more instances where such a rhythm might be advantageous
01:11:941 (2) - soft hitsounds in this part too
01:45:295 (6) - you can move said note and make a bit more of a jump so that its not overlapping the slider like it is here. this is fine and probably would play better so people don't get tripped up on reading.
02:13:431 (3,1,2,3,4) - soooo clustered, try to break this up more so its not so overlapping and compressed
Much better overall diff. There are definitely places for improvement that I didn't 100% go into, but with some better hitsounding and slider / hit circle consistency and overall design, this could be ready for rank.
00:07:469 (2,3,4) - consider adjusting these notes so that they all are equal distance from eachother (In the sense of visual distance, aka no slider is closer to another part of another slider, if you have a question on what I mean ask me)
00:08:587 (1,2) - this looks very awkward, why are you taking downward motion up with a slider and then back down..? it also looks visually poor since the notes don't really work with eachother at all (no blanket, etc)
00:09:705 (3,3) - awkward overlap , why?
00:14:549 (1) - soft hitsounds for this section
00:23:866 (3,1) - i mean i guess you can do this, but again, kind of weird overlap that probably could be avoided.
00:34:487 (3) - i mean your call on a slider but I feel like this just looks awkward.
00:41:009 (4) - consider making this 1/2 circles to better reflect the singer before going into the next part of the chorus (there are probably more instances where such a rhythm might be advantageous
01:11:941 (2) - soft hitsounds in this part too
01:45:295 (6) - you can move said note and make a bit more of a jump so that its not overlapping the slider like it is here. this is fine and probably would play better so people don't get tripped up on reading.
02:13:431 (3,1,2,3,4) - soooo clustered, try to break this up more so its not so overlapping and compressed
Much better overall diff. There are definitely places for improvement that I didn't 100% go into, but with some better hitsounding and slider / hit circle consistency and overall design, this could be ready for rank.
Nya's Hard
00:00:956 - i really dont get why we're not mapping this but okay.
This applies to pretty much the entire map. You use WAY to many straight 1/2 sliders. When you're diliberately trying to go from one point to another using a slider, I seriously advise you to use more curved sliders as they look way more appropriate.
There's too much here for me to really say. Basically this difficulty falls into the trap of sliders that don't agree with follow arrows. What this means is that notes like: 00:27:965 (4,5) - look and play bad, because the follow up to the note (aka the follow arrow) is not consistent with the way that the slider wants to go. Now understand this isnt always required, but by almost never appropriately doing it, your beatmap comes off as very poorly constructed as it doesnt take visual attention to how the player wants to flow. a simple fix for 00:27:965 (4,5) - could be: http://puu.sh/nyqFh/f39ee01862.jpg because it more accurately tries to realize the motion that the player has coming into the slider as well as what the player will aim towards coming out of the slider.
Another thing worth pointing out is how circular this map is. While I understand that hards has this problem alot. things like 00:54:798 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7) - are literally vomit inducing because they make no discernable shape and seem to, for the most part be randomly placed in some circlyish amoeba.
Overall I feel like this difficulty, along with the top, need some serious work and would probably advise HEAVY revisement to try to address said problems.
This applies to pretty much the entire map. You use WAY to many straight 1/2 sliders. When you're diliberately trying to go from one point to another using a slider, I seriously advise you to use more curved sliders as they look way more appropriate.
There's too much here for me to really say. Basically this difficulty falls into the trap of sliders that don't agree with follow arrows. What this means is that notes like: 00:27:965 (4,5) - look and play bad, because the follow up to the note (aka the follow arrow) is not consistent with the way that the slider wants to go. Now understand this isnt always required, but by almost never appropriately doing it, your beatmap comes off as very poorly constructed as it doesnt take visual attention to how the player wants to flow. a simple fix for 00:27:965 (4,5) - could be: http://puu.sh/nyqFh/f39ee01862.jpg because it more accurately tries to realize the motion that the player has coming into the slider as well as what the player will aim towards coming out of the slider.
Another thing worth pointing out is how circular this map is. While I understand that hards has this problem alot. things like 00:54:798 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7) - are literally vomit inducing because they make no discernable shape and seem to, for the most part be randomly placed in some circlyish amoeba.
Overall I feel like this difficulty, along with the top, need some serious work and would probably advise HEAVY revisement to try to address said problems.
deejaydray's Normal
00:01:434 - WHY NO MAP???
Turn off gridsnap. Your notes are all randomly spaced (while yes their are distance snapped they are not properly distance snapped. For example, look at: 00:07:096 (1,2) - vs 00:10:450 (1,2) - If you did this intentionally, shame on you. (I'm pretty sure you didnt though) This is bad mapping for a normal because it makes all the notes slightly different spacing which looks bad.
00:11:568 (2,1) - overlap these to keep the pattern consistent?
00:15:854 (3,4) - this is probably confusing to a new player playing normals. I wouldn't overlap here since it's the first example of a 1/2 and players have a really hard to discerning note overlap's pause length when they are new.
00:22:375 (2,3,1,2) - here it may be acceptable since the presense of 1/2 has been atleast described by this point to the player
00:22:375 (2,3,1,2) - ugly avoidable overlap
00:32:438 (1,2,3,4,5) - slider at the end sort of looks awkward due to the angle of entry from the previous note, consider curving the note
00:36:910 (5,6) - try to use less overlapping to accomplish this. generally slider body's shouldnt overalp, but slider end / head its okay
00:38:400 (1,2,3) - D: so vertical, maybe try to make less old style patterns? more curves and angles?
01:29:642 (2,3,4,5,6,7,1,2,3,1,2,3,1) - sooo blocky, maybe more varience?
Overall try to experiment more with curved sliders on shorter things, avoid super blocky patterns and maybe polish up some slider entry angles and the map should be read to go (i didnt pay too much attention to hitsounds tho so bare in mind that.
Turn off gridsnap. Your notes are all randomly spaced (while yes their are distance snapped they are not properly distance snapped. For example, look at: 00:07:096 (1,2) - vs 00:10:450 (1,2) - If you did this intentionally, shame on you. (I'm pretty sure you didnt though) This is bad mapping for a normal because it makes all the notes slightly different spacing which looks bad.
00:11:568 (2,1) - overlap these to keep the pattern consistent?
00:15:854 (3,4) - this is probably confusing to a new player playing normals. I wouldn't overlap here since it's the first example of a 1/2 and players have a really hard to discerning note overlap's pause length when they are new.
00:22:375 (2,3,1,2) - here it may be acceptable since the presense of 1/2 has been atleast described by this point to the player
00:22:375 (2,3,1,2) - ugly avoidable overlap
00:32:438 (1,2,3,4,5) - slider at the end sort of looks awkward due to the angle of entry from the previous note, consider curving the note
00:36:910 (5,6) - try to use less overlapping to accomplish this. generally slider body's shouldnt overalp, but slider end / head its okay
00:38:400 (1,2,3) - D: so vertical, maybe try to make less old style patterns? more curves and angles?
01:29:642 (2,3,4,5,6,7,1,2,3,1,2,3,1) - sooo blocky, maybe more varience?
Overall try to experiment more with curved sliders on shorter things, avoid super blocky patterns and maybe polish up some slider entry angles and the map should be read to go (i didnt pay too much attention to hitsounds tho so bare in mind that.