Arrival wrote:

Stefan wrote:

About the BPM: Guys, please think logical: If you have a BPM of 290 and using 0.6x SV this is exactly the same like 145 BPM with 1.2x SV. I understand we stick for usual on 1.2-1.4-1.6 but at extremely high (starting from 260) or low BPM (85 or below) it's better to half/double the SV instead of the BPM. Also: What sounds like 145 doesn't has to be 145 but doubled. Same goes with the opposite. Just leave it to these users which are really experienced about this (which I do not include in this case but I know what I am talking about this issue. )


I am aware this was NOT the reason why this has been disqualified. But about this what some wrote I want to clarify why it's stupid to half the BPM. Barlines here, Barlines there: Some things seems not able to be fixed to 100%.

This isn't the problem. The problem is too double it IN ORDER TO overmap. We know it's the same if you double the BPM and the SV.

Would you have this at 200 BPM ? Probably not, same goes for this map. Now that everything is done this is stupid not to rank it again, but we shouldn't forget that "Your map must be perfectly timed." is written in the RANKING CRITERIA. I don't know why you guys think it's 290, it is 145, same goes for Kyouki Chinden, which is 140 and not 280.

We just should stop being hypocrites with this BPM-thing, and write in the Ranking Criteria something like : "Can be double if you want to make something hard". BECAUSE IT IS THE CASE FOR 30% OF THE MAPS ON OSU GOD DAMMIT

Two Fruit Cakes wrote:

As for the BPM, is it not a non-issue? From a player standpoint it affects pretty much nothing. Changing the BPM from the "true" BPM is simply done for the convenience of the mapper, which shouldn't be a problem. The BPM could have been done slower but since it wasn't it wouldn't make very much sense to redo it with a slower BPM just so that it uses it's musically accurate BPM.

Nashmun wrote:

Two Fruit Cakes wrote:

As for the BPM, is it not a non-issue? From a player standpoint it affects pretty much nothing. Changing the BPM from the "true" BPM is simply done for the convenience of the mapper, which shouldn't be a problem. The BPM could have been done slower but since it wasn't it wouldn't make very much sense to redo it with a slower BPM just so that it uses it's musically accurate BPM.

In most of the cases, yes. Once again, the point we are trying to make is not to put real BPMs everywhere, because (And especially on taiko) it makes it way easier to map and it is pretty much transparent in a players point of view. Regarding this map though, I must say I tend to agree with Ono, because on easier difficulties like Kantan, player is spammed with barlines because of the high BPM.

hutunohito wrote:

People who say BPM=145 should go to school and learn music again

OnosakiHito wrote:

1.) First of all, I censored what you said TKS. That's exactly the reason why the DQ post has no details. Because it is NSFW talk.

OnosakiHito wrote:

2.) Now about the BPM - You didn't read my post properly, and it starts at the very first line:

OnosakiHito wrote:

Additional Modding

It's put under additional modding, which means you are free to disagree with it.

Ranking Criteria wrote:

Your map must be perfectly timed. This means that your BPM and offset are spot-on, sliders end when they should, notes are generally following a recognizable rhythm (such as the lyrics or drums) which is comprehensible by a player, and that there are no unsnapped notes (you can check this by running AIMod (shortcut ctrl+shift+a) in the editor).

Luna wrote:

This disqualification is pretty ridiculous

Luna wrote:

This disqualification is pretty ridiculous

hutunohito wrote:

People who say BPM=145 should go to school and learn music again

Spy wrote:

New BG lol'd.

TKS wrote:

im done for now. had a good time.

OnosakiHito wrote:

But again, look at the amount of barlines on the Kantan. When do you see so many barlines at once?

OnosakiHito wrote:

[General]

1. Another problem we have here is the amount of barlines most of the difficulties provide. Especially in Kantan this is noticeable. Because of that, I recommend you to use BPM145 with SV multiplier x2.00. Of course, that means you can't have x1.20 in the Inner anymore. But dunno if it is that important compared to the amount of barlines. Or you just wait for this: p/3578338 (In this way barlines are fixed, and you have your acceleraiting part.)
   Note: I didn't put this into the disqualify reason since it isn't your fault but rather the fault of the editor. Else, it would be there.
2. Lower diffs could use just some deletions. Not much, so no worries. But there should be some.
3. SV in Kantan should be also higher like in the other diffs if you ask me. At least 0.70.
4. SV in Kantan is 0.80 instead 0.70, that means it is like SV 1.60. Any reason for this? Maybe because it looks better and not too slow? Just wanna make sure. - SVs are fine for me.
5. 01:45:109 - This note isn't snapped correctly. Though, it is in general hard to have a proper snapping here. Yet, I think on the blue tick it is more accurate. - bad to play when i move this one to blue tick.

[ Kantan]

1. 00:33:213 (27) - Such notes should be deleted. The song is intense indeed, which is why I'm fine with sections like 00:15:834~00:30:730 . But you should have at least some more breaks at certain places (e.g. at transition from one section to another).
2. 00:39:834 - Do the same here or delete note at 00:41:489, so in this way it might sound nicer.
3. 00:53:075 - ^
4. 00:59:696 - ^ - i thought again but those are really necessary sound for me.

[ Futsuu]

Actually similar to Kantan, so I won't mention above said points. If you didn't like the suggestion, please try something else.

1. 00:15:834~00:30:730 - Note like 00:20:385 (37,38) - and 00:27:006 (58,59) - I recommend to delete. The spread is overall fine, indeed. The jumps from diff to diff are high, which is fine. But since the BPM here is pretty high and mapping continuous in this way for 15 seconds, having at least two rest moments is really important, so Futsuu player can rearrange them self and prepare for the next pattern. - your opinion makes sense for me but i would like to reject. because this part has the speedy pace of the song and i think i have to keep it for the flow. instead, i already made enough rest at next part also its working.
2. 00:43:971~00:50:592 - ^
3. 01:05:075 - Oh, maybe delete this note? So 01:08:385 this note would work as "rise of notes". Just an idea from me. - i want to keep the consistency this time.
4. 01:31:971~01:45:109 - Same like above.

TKS wrote:

@OniJAM
dont star please because i have already received new BG from lolcubes.
i will return some star to you someday lol

bbj0920 wrote:

rip