谢谢！除了红字标出的，其余都改正了Kencho wrote:
- Black is Personal comments.
Bold Black is Highly recommended to fix.
Red is Unrankable that you should fix.[General]
- Processing error: Unsupported sourceStream format :
normal-hitclap7.wav- Usage of mp3 and ogg as hitsounds is not recommended (consider converting to .wav) :
normal-hitclap5.wav- 總結就是上面的兩個音效出了問題，我幫你弄好了，下載這個 : normal-hitclap5 和 normal-hitclap7 然後取代舊的音效就可以了
[E.T.]弄好了叫我
- 01:01:591 (1,2,3) - 沒疊好
- 01:09:134 (3,4,5) - ^
- 02:16:506 (1,1,2,3,4) - 這種雖然沒有什麼問題，但對我來說不太好打。在打圖角度來想，02:16:849 - 是重音所以放clickable的物件比較好，然後你後面跟了4個圓圈而且NC了，看上去就像是4連一樣所以不好打。我個人意見是改成像02:13:763 (4,1,2,3,4,5) - 這樣的，一個1/2滑條然後5個圓圈，這種才是最適合的，正好02:16:677 - 也是有音，用1/2滑條也適合。圖後面還有很多這種地方，如果要改的話是大工程，但改了圖肯定會更好打的。 这里是为了这个人声的变缓而故意的，音效也有特意强调，所以我保留了这个
- 01:05:191 (1,2) - 01:16:163 (1,2) - 01:21:649 (1,2) - 這些地方其實也像我上面說的，重音要clickable的物件，雖然你這裡用了折返滑條取代，但是折返通常是在白線開始的，藍線開始的很不好打，所以這類型的你要改成這樣
- 04:42:306 - 04:42:477 - 漏了跟鼓，你前面也有跟，這個怎麼不跟呢
- 04:45:220 - 04:45:391 - 04:50:534 - 04:50:706 - 04:53:277 - 04:53:449 - 這些都是，我是覺得跟一個不跟一個不太好，要不全部都跟，要不全部都不跟這樣，然後物件方面用一個固定的形式會比較好，現在這樣顯得太亂。 04:45:391 - 04:50:534 - 04:50:706 -没有改，因为想强调一下人声，其余人声不强烈的都改了
- 05:52:420 (1,2) - 故意沒疊好的？是的~
- 05:57:134 (1,2,3) - 開了堆疊效果的話應該向右一個像素，按ctrl+右方向鍵就可以了，然後記得05:57:649 (4) - 也要向右移一個像素
- 06:36:220 (6,7,8) - 沒疊好
- 06:38:963 (3,4,5) - 06:45:306 (7,6) - ^
forum
TwoThirds & Feint - Epiphany (feat. Veela)
posted
Total Posts
135
Topic Starter
Topic Starter
of course :')RikiH_ wrote:
Would be cool if you add I took your memories to the tags, since lots of people like me can't remember the title :')
05:55:934 (1,1,2) - I don't really wanna ignore this pattern. You only use it this one time, and the strongest beat of the quad is on the white tick (while the kickslider's end is on that tick, making the 05:56:534 (2,3,4) - jump extremely hard to land, you're clicking the two least audible beats, and there's a 1/2 break between them, which looks like a 1/4 break because it's a kickslider. It's not really a healthy pattern in my eyes (I was in the middle of modding the map when it got qualified lel xd, and apart from some minor pattern things, this one really caught my eye, since it seemed really odd this late into the song)
Also, there's a constant 5.66x load time in the "red flashy section" (05:51:134 - to 06:28:849 - ) of the storyboard, which shouldn't really be a problem, but still did some tiny spikes for me when playing through the song (People will disable the storyboard anyway on their 2nd attempt anyway xd)
Don't give kd for this if it gets denied, and if it goes through clean, gratz, I like that you did a completely different take from Aiceo's version
Also, there's a constant 5.66x load time in the "red flashy section" (05:51:134 - to 06:28:849 - ) of the storyboard, which shouldn't really be a problem, but still did some tiny spikes for me when playing through the song (People will disable the storyboard anyway on their 2nd attempt anyway xd)
Don't give kd for this if it gets denied, and if it goes through clean, gratz, I like that you did a completely different take from Aiceo's version
[General]
- So the diffname "E.T." stands for "Echoy. Tatsh." basically. Diffnames related to player names aren't allowed since 2013 I think.
- As I can see, l1mi and Kite aren't supposed to be in the tags as they didn't provide anything useful (beside mods) to the map, why are they in the tags? Also, just because someone made the combo colours for your map you can't put them in the tags as it's something everyone can do in a few minutes. Tags are supposed to help people who are looking for a specific map, and I don't think someone will look for "rain1214" to find some neat combo colours. At that point the tags "I took your memories" is kind of questionable as well. Just because a single player here can find the map easier with that single line she says in the song you shouldn't put it there. Otherwise people can just put the whole lyrics of the song into the tags, right?
[E.T.]
- Already in the beginning you are changing your rhythms all the time without having an (audible enough) change in the music. For example 00:24:391 (2,3,1) - 00:25:934 (6,7,8) - here you are mapping the triplets / 5plets the music definitely provides but then again 00:21:991 (1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3) - in this section you completely ignore them and use 1/2 patterns even though the rhythms are focusing on the same beats.
- 00:41:191 (1,1) - I know it's just a personal thing, but these sliders are really ugly and boring. There are lot of clean and good looking sliders in plenty of maps, so consider using a different shape as those look like you haven't put any effort into them.
- 00:43:677 (1) - What is this mapped to? It doesn't have a sound on the red tick while also having an NC that doesn't make sense if you ask me.
- 00:49:591 (1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3,4) - Rhythm issue here as well. You are ignoring sounds on blue ticks and use a star pattern that even has decreasing spacing over time. If you really wanna emphasize vocals that bad, the spacing should increase rather than decrease.
- 01:01:419 (5,1) - In my opinion, if you wanna do things like that, you should definitely take an acuter angle as they are way better to emphasize certain things rather than linear flow with different spacing that are horribly to play.
- 01:03:134 (1,1,1,1,1) - From the playing perspective I don't really remember a single part where you emphasized vocals this way (except 01:11:363 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2) - obviously).
- 01:14:106 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - What is the spacing supposed to highlight here? There aren't any vocals and out of a sudden you go to big jumps and then to small jumps again.
- 01:27:820 - For this whole part I share the same opinion about the hitsounding than others. Hitsounds are supposed to help the player keeping a proper rhythm feeling for the map. That means, the hitsounds should at least fit a little bit to the song to maintain that. But in this case you are using some that don't have anything to do with the music itself.
- 01:48:563 (3,4,5) - Just for a comparison; 01:34:849 (3,4,5) - 01:37:592 (3,4,5) - the spacing difference between those is way too huge. Sure you can increase the spacing when it's the last pattern of a part or something, but this feels really odd and out of place considering that the music didn't change that extreme as your spacing.
- 02:01:934 (4,5) - Why that custom stack when it's always stacked later on?
- 02:08:105 (6,1,2,3) - The stream afterwards appears kinda out of a sudden because this pattern doesn't indicate that something harder is coming very soon because of the low spacing and not even sharp flow.
- 02:11:363 (3,4) - Why do you use an anti-jump at the end of a stream part?
- 02:14:620 (1) - Isn't NC'd anywhere else in the music.
- 02:48:049 (1,2,3,4) - I really like the idea of the pattern you used, but I think rotating it a bit more to avoid the overlap here 02:47:534 (2,2) - would be neat.
- 02:49:420 (1,2,3,4,5) - Music not any less intense than before but way lower spacing?
So this is what I literally got in like 10-15 minutes. The issues (at least I see them as issues) appear over and over in the map.
Topic Starter
The differ name has been explained before:Stjpa wrote:
This map contains multiple unrankable things as having a diffname related to player names and unrelated names in the tags. Also in general, I see a big lack of quality because some random patterns you just use in the beginning for the vocals, some spacing issues and so on. I might mod it later if I find the motivation to.
Edit: modding rn
"and you're right, the first time we came up with "E.T" is because the initial letter of our names, but it's also a coincidence that I guess you understand, E.T also refers to alien. I won't use this as a differ name if it was E.S or D.A or whatever that is quite meaningless other than names. The original idea of this map is to create a unique and relatively challenging one, so.. here it is: E.T."
the unrelated names in tags is people who gave important suggestions that changed the map a lot.
Don't know what those are but well I have discussed a lot with other modders about patterns and spacing, and to differ from other Epiphany maps which both ignore vocals a lot, I think it's good to have a change in it and even in dnb maps
Thanks
Topic Starter
Thanks for your advice!Spork Lover wrote:
05:55:934 (1,1,2) - I don't really wanna ignore this pattern. You only use it this one time, and the strongest beat of the quad is on the white tick (while the kickslider's end is on that tick, making the 05:56:534 (2,3,4) - jump extremely hard to land, you're clicking the two least audible beats, and there's a 1/2 break between them, which looks like a 1/4 break because it's a kickslider. It's not really a healthy pattern in my eyes (I was in the middle of modding the map when it got qualified lel xd, and apart from some minor pattern things, this one really caught my eye, since it seemed really odd this late into the song) well i have to admit i did this because i think it's fun, and testplays didn't show any problem here ^ ^ i think it's alright
Also, there's a constant 5.66x load time in the "red flashy section" (05:51:134 - to 06:28:849 - ) of the storyboard, which shouldn't really be a problem, but still did some tiny spikes for me when playing through the song (People will disable the storyboard anyway on their 2nd attempt anyway xd) yes, and nothing really can be done to improve this ;_;
Don't give kd for this if it gets denied, and if it goes through clean, gratz, I like that you did a completely different take from Aiceo's version
Even if it's only coincidence it's not allowed at all. We had a similar case with HW already, so please consider changing it. Also, I edited my post with a mod, so make sure to check it.
And still, only because people gave important suggestion it doesn't mean that you can put them into tags. That's not how tags work.
Edit: How is it coincidence when even your userpage says that it means Echoy&Tatsh?
And still, only because people gave important suggestion it doesn't mean that you can put them into tags. That's not how tags work.
Edit: How is it coincidence when even your userpage says that it means Echoy&Tatsh?
Topic Starter
Stjpa wrote:
[General]rain1214 didn't do this is 2 mins, it may seems easy to you but it's not like that. he did more that that. and i said important advice, this map is two years old. and those people in my tags are doing things more than giving a few mods...
- So the diffname "E.T." stands for "Echoy. Tatsh." basically. Diffnames related to player names aren't allowed since 2013 I think.
- As I can see, l1mi and Kite aren't supposed to be in the tags as they didn't provide anything useful (beside mods) to the map, why are they in the tags? Also, just because someone made the combo colours for your map you can't put them in the tags as it's something everyone can do in a few minutes. Tags are supposed to help people who are looking for a specific map, and I don't think someone will look for "rain1214" to find some neat combo colours. At that point the tags "I took your memories" is kind of questionable as well. Just because a single player here can find the map easier with that single line she says in the song you shouldn't put it there. Otherwise people can just put the whole lyrics of the song into the tags, right?
[E.T.]
- Already in the beginning you are changing your rhythms all the time without having an (audible enough) change in the music. For example 00:24:391 (2,3,1) - 00:25:934 (6,7,8) - here you are mapping the triplets / 5plets the music definitely provides but then again 00:21:991 (1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3) - in this section you completely ignore them and use 1/2 patterns even though the rhythms are focusing on the same beats. 00:21:991 (1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3) - fade in and to echo to the last part
- 00:41:191 (1,1) - I know it's just a personal thing, but these sliders are really ugly and boring. There are lot of clean and good looking sliders in plenty of maps, so consider using a different shape as those look like you haven't put any effort into them. .-. i think it's good.. yeah like you said, it's too personal
- 00:43:677 (1) - What is this mapped to? It doesn't have a sound on the red tick while also having an NC that doesn't make sense if you ask me. but it do have sound
- 00:49:591 (1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3,4) - Rhythm issue here as well. You are ignoring sounds on blue ticks and use a star pattern that even has decreasing spacing over time. If you really wanna emphasize vocals that bad, the spacing should increase rather than decrease. why increase... the vocal is literally fading away!
- 01:01:419 (5,1) - In my opinion, if you wanna do things like that, you should definitely take an acuter angle as they are way better to emphasize certain things rather than linear flow with different spacing that are horribly to play. hmm
- 01:03:134 (1,1,1,1,1) - From the playing perspective I don't really remember a single part where you emphasized vocals this way (except 01:11:363 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2) - obviously). it's emphaized because it's obvious. same here 03:14:791 (1,1,1,1,1) -
- 01:14:106 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - What is the spacing supposed to highlight here? There aren't any vocals and out of a sudden you go to big jumps and then to small jumps again. am i wrong?? there is vocal, like 04:59:020 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - ,even 05:42:906 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) -
- 01:27:820 - For this whole part I share the same opinion about the hitsounding than others. Hitsounds are supposed to help the player keeping a proper rhythm feeling for the map. That means, the hitsounds should at least fit a little bit to the song to maintain that. But in this case you are using some that don't have anything to do with the music itself.
- 01:48:563 (3,4,5) - Just for a comparison; 01:34:849 (3,4,5) - 01:37:592 (3,4,5) - the spacing difference between those is way too huge. Sure you can increase the spacing when it's the last pattern of a part or something, but this feels really odd and out of place considering that the music didn't change that extreme as your spacing.
- 02:01:934 (4,5) - Why that custom stack when it's always stacked later on?
- 02:08:105 (6,1,2,3) - The stream afterwards appears kinda out of a sudden because this pattern doesn't indicate that something harder is coming very soon because of the low spacing and not even sharp flow.
- 02:11:363 (3,4) - Why do you use an anti-jump at the end of a stream part? because it represents a large change in music
- 02:14:620 (1) - Isn't NC'd anywhere else in the music.
- 02:48:049 (1,2,3,4) - I really like the idea of the pattern you used, but I think rotating it a bit more to avoid the overlap here 02:47:534 (2,2) - would be neat.
- 02:49:420 (1,2,3,4,5) - Music not any less intense than before but way lower spacing?the kiai time ends here, i do think it's less intense
So this is what I literally got in like 10-15 minutes. The issues (at least I see them as issues) appear over and over in the map.
This is what I can give right now, i'll look into them later on and have some discussions with my friend
Thanks
Throwing my two cents here.
01:20:191 - 01:20:877 - you really should map these 2 places,it's 100% inconsistency.
take a look at 01:17:449 (4) - 01:18:134 (3) - 01:22:849 (4) - 01:23:534 (3) - 01:25:677 (2) - 01:26:363 (2) -
there are 4 stanzas in this part,you only ignore the triple in the second stanza but for the other 3 you all use triples,this seems really weird for me.
02:49:077 (1) - no sv change so why NC?
02:52:677 (1,2,3,4,5,1,2,3,4) - if you follow vocal here 02:52:591 - 02:52:763 - should still be mapped cuz vocal starts from 02:52:849 - .i dont understand why you ignore the beats here.
01:14:106 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - feels a bit out of place. consider 01:11:363 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2) - you are using 1/2 sliders,which is fine,but suddenly density increases cuz you use 8 circles in a row,yet the music does not show that much difference.
02:01:934 (4,5) - stacking stuff as mentioned above
02:55:934 (1,1) - NC spam is weird..
05:22:163 (2,3,4) - also questionable to me..05:22:334 - and 05:22:677 - have same vocal so the ds for 05:22:163 (2,3,4) - should be around the same. now you use 2.5x and 1.4x which have a big difference...you emphasised 05:22:677 (4,1) - with big jump but how come 05:22:163 (2,3) - is even bigger? See 06:06:049 (2,1,2,1) - ,you did very well,but why inconsistent?
05:52:420 (1,2) - why not stack them as 05:51:734 (3,4) - ?
06:21:906 - add a note to form triple.
06:28:077 - not mapped?
Overall i think some patterns are really interesting,but in case of rhythm choice and spacing sometimes i think there're some issues. I skippped all my personal concerns, those above are some general ideas.
01:20:191 - 01:20:877 - you really should map these 2 places,it's 100% inconsistency.
take a look at 01:17:449 (4) - 01:18:134 (3) - 01:22:849 (4) - 01:23:534 (3) - 01:25:677 (2) - 01:26:363 (2) -
there are 4 stanzas in this part,you only ignore the triple in the second stanza but for the other 3 you all use triples,this seems really weird for me.
02:49:077 (1) - no sv change so why NC?
02:52:677 (1,2,3,4,5,1,2,3,4) - if you follow vocal here 02:52:591 - 02:52:763 - should still be mapped cuz vocal starts from 02:52:849 - .i dont understand why you ignore the beats here.
01:14:106 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - feels a bit out of place. consider 01:11:363 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2) - you are using 1/2 sliders,which is fine,but suddenly density increases cuz you use 8 circles in a row,yet the music does not show that much difference.
02:01:934 (4,5) - stacking stuff as mentioned above
02:55:934 (1,1) - NC spam is weird..
05:22:163 (2,3,4) - also questionable to me..05:22:334 - and 05:22:677 - have same vocal so the ds for 05:22:163 (2,3,4) - should be around the same. now you use 2.5x and 1.4x which have a big difference...you emphasised 05:22:677 (4,1) - with big jump but how come 05:22:163 (2,3) - is even bigger? See 06:06:049 (2,1,2,1) - ,you did very well,but why inconsistent?
05:52:420 (1,2) - why not stack them as 05:51:734 (3,4) - ?
06:21:906 - add a note to form triple.
06:28:077 - not mapped?
Overall i think some patterns are really interesting,but in case of rhythm choice and spacing sometimes i think there're some issues. I skippped all my personal concerns, those above are some general ideas.
00:21:991 (1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3) - Looks like an excellent idea to me, helps the player get into the rythm and the music by just tapping to the beat should be simple enough.Stjpa wrote:
z
00:24:391 (2,3,1) - As you said yourself, this is fine.
00:25:934 (6,7,8) - As you said yourself, this is fine.
00:41:191 (1,1) - The curve is prefect and feels good to play, anyone can (if they want) see that the mapper put effort into making them and they are uniqe, havent seen any similar ones before. And the part about no effort is kinda unfair, ive played this map since the first version and I can tell you that I never seen a mapper work so hard with a map before and every pattern every note has been replaced one or more times over the whole map.
00:43:677 (1) - Its mapped to the drum that play on the red tic, you are wrong listen again. About the color combo I can only guess, it looks better? Two sliders before had a NC each so putting one on that reversed slider looks better to me as well and after that the color combo continnue as usual. Either way it dont make it harder to play, its problably the other way around.
00:49:591 (1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3,4) - You do hear that her voice is slowly more quiet dont you? Its not getting stronger. If your way (increasing the distance) was used the flow would also be worse and the music dont really call for an increasing distance spacing here beside... a static distance would feel really cheap as if the mapper put no effort into it. The extreamly small change in distance spacing 1,8 to 1,6 can barley even be called a change in distance on this map if you compare it to other spacings, it just makes it feel more organic.
And since its 1/2 all the way its really hard to fail to read or understand it, even someone who played dai dai gnome 275 times shouldnt have a problem with that.
01:01:419 (5,1) - There is nothing horrible with this flow, it feels good to play this pattern no problem at all. Could be improved but, that could be said about most things on most maps. In the bigger picture this map is very good compared to some other maps that got ranked 2016 and im sure alot of people would enjoy playing it.
01:03:134 (1) - So its following the vocal here with 1/2 sliders and..? I didnt understand the problem or what was bad about it.
01:13:763 (2) - Here, compare these two places, you hear that her voice get more quiet over time after that peak, the slowly decreased distance absolutley make sense and it feels god damn nice to play.
01:16:163 (1) - <-------------------------
01:48:563 (3,4,5) - Wouldnt call it huge in the context, for someone who can play this map the increased distance makes no difference all it does is making a part where not much have happened a little bit more interesting and as you said, its the last pattern. Seem to be a thought behind it and not random right.
02:01:934 (4,5) - Who knows, variation makes things more fun especially when mapping a song that repeat itself over and over for a long time. I guess ambitious would be a fitting word? its not like its a sloppy TV size map. (I love them too). I didnt understand the problem again, it dont really create any problem does it?
02:08:105 (6,1,2,3,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4) -
02:00:734 (1) - Im guessing the background sound start here and get increased <----
02:03:477 (1,1) - here and.. <----
02:06:220 (1) - here you get that wierd feeling when hearing it that a stream might be on its way and your whole body just want to stream something really long very badly. I wouldnt have mapped it that way, but because im a bad mapper. <----
02:11:363 (3,4) - Let me guess, because it would be harder to play and someone problably thought it was mapped to hard before this current pattern so the mapper made it alot easier to play? I tried changing that to a distance of 5.0 and it feels as a low quality pattern.
02:11:534 (4,1) - You see the flow here, the sliders point the opposite direction so a decreased distance here is really good. So the short answer to your question would be, because the sliders point in opposite directions.
02:14:620 (1) - It makes the map easier to read anyway, so that was good I wish more mappers would do that.
02:48:049 (1,2,3,4) - What overlap? The note are gone before any overlap is happening.
02:44:620 (1) - From this beat on her voice get lower.
02:45:991 (2) - <---
02:47:363 (1) - <---
02:49:420 (1) - untill here where she sing longer isntead and the lower slider velocity / smaller distance spacing fits really well.
This is a damn good map and unless someone can come up with a quality mod I really hope it dont get unqualified.
Hello
00:23:877 (3,1) - spacing error. not only that but it's linear flow and inconsistent spacing.
00:24:049 (1,2) - this transition has bad flow. consider switching 00:24:049 (1,2) -
00:24:734 (1,2,3) - inconsistent spacing
00:25:591 (4,6,7,8) - bad overlap
00:25:934 (6,7,8,2) - ^
00:26:620 (3,4) - considering the triangle jump just before that, this spacing is inconsistent as well.
00:27:477 (1,2) - this jump is disproportionally large considering the previous jumps.
00:28:077 - you were also really content on mapping the triplets in the song so why skip this one here
00:31:249 (5,6) - spacing error as aforementioned.
00:31:934 (2) - and again, a 0.6 difference in prev and next. inconsistent spacing.
00:33:306 (2,4) - bad overlap
00:33:563 - same thing with the triplet that i mentioned before
00:34:163 (6,1) - considering you have used triplets to map the snare in the song this really come out of the blue. i wouldnt mind if you used it more than once but you didnt so it does not fit well
00:35:020 (3,4) - this doesnt only flow very bad, the jump is awkward and too big considering your previous jumps.
00:36:906 (6,7,8) - this triplet overlaps badly with 00:36:391 (3) -
00:37:077 (8,1) - inconsistent spacing especially since this is a jump pattern.
00:37:763 (4,5) - bad flow. reverse 00:38:106 (5) - 00:38:277 (6) - and 00:38:449 (1) - . what you do with 00:38:791 (2) - is up to you to create flow
00:39:134 (3,6,7,8) - overlap
00:39:820 (8,1) - spacing error as aforementioned
00:41:191 (1,1) - i really really dislike these sliders. personal preference but what i dont understand is why you muted the sliderends. The song gives clear sounds on the sliderend so please consider giving them a whistle or something
00:43:934 (1,2) - this pattern looks and plays really awkwardly. move 00:43:934 (1) - further to the left and straighten it's curve so it points more towards 00:44:277 (1) -
WHile we're at it what's up with the NCs on 00:43:677 (1,1,1) - these 3? i dont think they are neccessary at all.
00:44:277 (1) - as it stands now the pattern is awkward
00:47:277 (3,4) - again, you consistently mapped triplets and non-jumping streams. this is way out of context, the song does not justify this jump at all since it's just the regular snare triplet that pretty much repeats the entire song
i wouldnt complain if you had consistently mixed up what you did with the triplets but since you've mapped it pretty much the same all the way this shouldnt be there.
00:48:049 (8,1) - inconsistent spacing given the next pattern is a jumppattern and your previous 1/2 spacing is much larger than this
00:53:877 (5,6) - same reasoning as above take away the jump pattern.
00:54:734 (9,1) - this jump is wayyyy to big and pretty much comes out of the blue again.
00:58:249 (4,5) - you started mixing up what you are doing with the triplets but this jump still is toob big and unpredictable.
01:00:220 (2) - again, a 3.68 jump from a slider into a cricle
01:00:734 (3) - i dont think a half screen jump here is neccessary or even slightly suggested by the music.
01:01:419 (5) - linear flow and spacing that is off by 0.9 plays really bad. consider moving 01:01:591 (1,2,3,4,5) - closer and rotating it so it fits into the next pattern.
01:02:791 - ok from here i see what you did. and i kinda like it, the decreasing sv fits the song.
BUT. why are 01:03:134 (1) - and 01:04:163 (1) - the same color when their sv is literally half apart? this leads to 01:04:163 (1) - being read as a 1/4 and provoking a sliderbreak due to misleading combo colors.
01:04:506 (1) - give this one the red color and 01:04:163 (1) - the grey one.
01:03:134 (1,1,1,1,1) - also why do these all have a NC on them? really unfitting since there really isnt anything in the song to justify that.
01:05:191 (1) - this is misleading as well since 01:04:506 (1) - leads the player to assume the map is back to high SV again. this is just again provokling a sliderbreak
01:07:934 (2) - this one is really close to the default HP bar and borderline unrankable
01:11:191 (2,1) - these are too close to each other. it looks bad.
I am sorry i cant finish this mod whatsoever. This map is riddled with inconsitencies and SV changes that dont make any sense at all. Ontop of that the flow is really really bad at thimes.
I am assuming you have mapped this entire thing without using the distance snap at all...
Considering this is going to stay ranked or get ranked again i have nothing more to say in order to make this a better map without suggesting a remap.
00:23:877 (3,1) - spacing error. not only that but it's linear flow and inconsistent spacing.
00:24:049 (1,2) - this transition has bad flow. consider switching 00:24:049 (1,2) -
00:24:734 (1,2,3) - inconsistent spacing
00:25:591 (4,6,7,8) - bad overlap
00:25:934 (6,7,8,2) - ^
00:26:620 (3,4) - considering the triangle jump just before that, this spacing is inconsistent as well.
00:27:477 (1,2) - this jump is disproportionally large considering the previous jumps.
00:28:077 - you were also really content on mapping the triplets in the song so why skip this one here
00:31:249 (5,6) - spacing error as aforementioned.
00:31:934 (2) - and again, a 0.6 difference in prev and next. inconsistent spacing.
00:33:306 (2,4) - bad overlap
00:33:563 - same thing with the triplet that i mentioned before
00:34:163 (6,1) - considering you have used triplets to map the snare in the song this really come out of the blue. i wouldnt mind if you used it more than once but you didnt so it does not fit well
00:35:020 (3,4) - this doesnt only flow very bad, the jump is awkward and too big considering your previous jumps.
00:36:906 (6,7,8) - this triplet overlaps badly with 00:36:391 (3) -
00:37:077 (8,1) - inconsistent spacing especially since this is a jump pattern.
00:37:763 (4,5) - bad flow. reverse 00:38:106 (5) - 00:38:277 (6) - and 00:38:449 (1) - . what you do with 00:38:791 (2) - is up to you to create flow
00:39:134 (3,6,7,8) - overlap
00:39:820 (8,1) - spacing error as aforementioned
00:41:191 (1,1) - i really really dislike these sliders. personal preference but what i dont understand is why you muted the sliderends. The song gives clear sounds on the sliderend so please consider giving them a whistle or something
00:43:934 (1,2) - this pattern looks and plays really awkwardly. move 00:43:934 (1) - further to the left and straighten it's curve so it points more towards 00:44:277 (1) -
WHile we're at it what's up with the NCs on 00:43:677 (1,1,1) - these 3? i dont think they are neccessary at all.
00:44:277 (1) - as it stands now the pattern is awkward
00:47:277 (3,4) - again, you consistently mapped triplets and non-jumping streams. this is way out of context, the song does not justify this jump at all since it's just the regular snare triplet that pretty much repeats the entire song
i wouldnt complain if you had consistently mixed up what you did with the triplets but since you've mapped it pretty much the same all the way this shouldnt be there.
00:48:049 (8,1) - inconsistent spacing given the next pattern is a jumppattern and your previous 1/2 spacing is much larger than this
00:53:877 (5,6) - same reasoning as above take away the jump pattern.
00:54:734 (9,1) - this jump is wayyyy to big and pretty much comes out of the blue again.
00:58:249 (4,5) - you started mixing up what you are doing with the triplets but this jump still is toob big and unpredictable.
01:00:220 (2) - again, a 3.68 jump from a slider into a cricle
01:00:734 (3) - i dont think a half screen jump here is neccessary or even slightly suggested by the music.
01:01:419 (5) - linear flow and spacing that is off by 0.9 plays really bad. consider moving 01:01:591 (1,2,3,4,5) - closer and rotating it so it fits into the next pattern.
01:02:791 - ok from here i see what you did. and i kinda like it, the decreasing sv fits the song.
BUT. why are 01:03:134 (1) - and 01:04:163 (1) - the same color when their sv is literally half apart? this leads to 01:04:163 (1) - being read as a 1/4 and provoking a sliderbreak due to misleading combo colors.
01:04:506 (1) - give this one the red color and 01:04:163 (1) - the grey one.
01:03:134 (1,1,1,1,1) - also why do these all have a NC on them? really unfitting since there really isnt anything in the song to justify that.
01:05:191 (1) - this is misleading as well since 01:04:506 (1) - leads the player to assume the map is back to high SV again. this is just again provokling a sliderbreak
01:07:934 (2) - this one is really close to the default HP bar and borderline unrankable
01:11:191 (2,1) - these are too close to each other. it looks bad.
I am sorry i cant finish this mod whatsoever. This map is riddled with inconsitencies and SV changes that dont make any sense at all. Ontop of that the flow is really really bad at thimes.
I am assuming you have mapped this entire thing without using the distance snap at all...
Considering this is going to stay ranked or get ranked again i have nothing more to say in order to make this a better map without suggesting a remap.
Hi there, plenty of valid discussion ongoing here. Please make sure to take things mentioned serious, and give your best improving your map!
强势
Topic Starter
I'll remap now as some mods requests. Rename the diff name, retag everything.
Though I hope all the bns be a bit fairer from now on. Use same standard for all beatmaps.
Give me one week to restart.
I will rank this, @Tatsh.
Though I hope all the bns be a bit fairer from now on. Use same standard for all beatmaps.
Give me one week to restart.
I will rank this, @Tatsh.
Why is this so easy? QwQ
Love the song, just would love a somewhat easier version...
I wish you good luck with the ranking!
why are you saying its so easy when you get 82 acc on it
DeletedUser_4329079
This modding thread has been migrated to the new "modding discussions" system. Please make sure to re-post any existing (and unresolved) efforts to the new system as required.