1. osu! forums
  2. Beatmaps
  3. Ranked/Approved Beatmaps

show more
posted

auux wrote:

I still find it weird when maps like that are still around but this maps is not okay because it has "some spacing inconsistencies". It's a bullshit claim because this map is fine as heck.
what exactly do you mean by "still around"? a map in the ranked section cannot be removed from it (except by copyright claim). chocobo entered the ranked section a very long time ago, before the qualified section existed.
posted

deetz wrote:

auux wrote:

I still find it weird when maps like that are still around but this maps is not okay because it has "some spacing inconsistencies". It's a bullshit claim because this map is fine as heck.
what exactly do you mean by "still around"? a map in the ranked section cannot be removed from it (except by copyright claim). chocobo entered the ranked section a very long time ago, before the qualified section existed.
I seem unable to get my point forward. If that was a ranked criteria back then, considering how awkwardly mapped it is, this should also be able to be "awkward" (It really isn't). I just find it so odd.
posted

auux wrote:

deetz wrote:

what exactly do you mean by "still around"? a map in the ranked section cannot be removed from it (except by copyright claim). chocobo entered the ranked section a very long time ago, before the qualified section existed.
I seem unable to get my point forward. If that was a ranked criteria back then, considering how awkwardly mapped it is, this should also be able to be "awkward" (It really isn't). I just find it so odd.
uh no, because maps were done differently back then with different philosophy. That's like saying all my maps should get ranked because they're better than 2007 maps that got ranked.
posted
OH FOR CRYING OUT LOUD! ._.
posted
;w;
Please contest that disqualification
posted

Quality Assurance Team wrote:

captin's Extra

Lack of a concept regarding spacing and rhythm
  1. 00:21:067 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,5,1,2,3,4,5,6,7) - There are jumps between every pair of objects, even though this is not even the most intense section Then? Doesn't Gaia's Extra diff employ jumps "every pair of objects" too? Admittedly Gaia has the jumps more structured, but the patterns captin made are fine, really. The rhythm, though, is a completely different story...
  2. 00:52:371 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - All the triplets and extended sliders make the rhythm much more dense than it should be. Most of them are overmapped. I... have to agree with this, actually. I'll elaborate later.
  3. 03:08:024 (1,2,3,4,5,1,2,3,4,5,6,1,2,3,4,5,6,1,2,3,4,5,6) - This section is a build-up too the chorus with strong emphasis on the white ticks, yet there are jumps between every objects I can understand what are you trying to say here, and yes, in a few cases, the constant jumps can feel kinda odd due to the fact that the drums are stronger on the white tick here. However, I don't think this is... like, super bad or something.
ok lemme mod captin's diff

  1. 00:21:067 (1,2) - I get it that you want to emphasize the instrument at 00:21:393 and you'll need an object you can click to properly emphasize it. However, (1) currently ends at... nothing, right now. It also ends at an irregular spot, which makes it weird to play this slider. What I'm trying to say by irregular here is the instruments are mainly played in a rhythm every half a beat, landing on the white and red ticks.

    It'd be more natural to hit and play this slider entirely if you ended this on the red tick before the blue tick you're currently placing the end of the slider at (00:21:230) due to the reason I'm saying above. And you know, there is actually an instrument being played at 00:21:230 (although it's admittedly a faint one compared to 00:22:534, but it's there), but none at 00:21:312 (at least none that is played starting from this tick). Ending this on the blue tick will only cause awkwardness because you're not really emphasizing anything there.

    (This applies to stuff like 00:23:676 (1,2) and 00:24:980 (1,2); the latter also has the exact same instruments played as 00:22:371 (1,2), so why the usage of the 3/4 slider there?)
  2. 00:32:806 (1,2) - Umm, there isn't even anything that'd give a valid reason to use a 3/4 slider here, such as any sound mapped by the circle that'd be weird if it were mapped with a slider's tail (in short, clickable objects). A 1/1 slider is definitely the best choice to map this spot, just like 00:34:111 (1).
  3. 00:43:486 (2) - Now... why? Okay, this is actually an okay overmapping that I have to approve. However, the triplet at 00:43:730 (3,4,5) loses its emphasizing power of the instrument the circles are mapping because you just used an overmapped triplet the moment before it.

    They might sound unrelated, yeah (I'm bad at explaining things like this lol), so I recommend you to just try comparing the current state of 00:43:241 (1,2,3,4,5,6) to how will it be if (2) didn't exist and you just made a jump between (1) and (3) instead. Trying it by yourself will be better.

    (This also applies to 00:52:861 (3,4,5,6,7), 00:54:002 (2,3,4,5,6), and patterns with a similar rhythm.)
  4. 00:46:339 (4,5,6,7) - The rhythm and the usage of the 1/4 jump is okay, but don't you think the flow is odd considering how the slider and circles are placed? I'd make the slider... point at (5), and make 00:46:502 (5,6,7)'s placement corresponds with how (4) is placed. Something like this, I guess.
  5. 00:54:002 (2,3,4,5,6) - I just mentioned this two points ago, but I felt the urge to mention it again. The overmapping doesn't go well with how the song rolls. It... just doesn't. I wish I could've elaborated this further, but it's impossible since it's pretty much because it doesn't "click" with the song's general rhythm, and that's it. Maybe it'd be better if the triplets began on the red ticks and end on the white ones (something like 00:52:861 (3,4,5)).
  6. 01:02:480 (1,1) - Use a 1/2 slider like this instead (I'm only showing the screenshot to show the rhythm; the placement is, of course, not the greatest choice)? Unlike 01:02:154 (1,2) where the 1/4 slider jumps would be really fitting with how the instruments are played, this one has a different music structure, and two 1/4 sliders with jumps between them definitely isn't the best choice to map this spot.
  7. 01:26:284 (1) - Any reason why should this be... disjointed? I believe 01:25:632 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1) should just have a constant spacing. 00:52:045 (3,4,5,6,1) is acceptable (for me at least) because (1) is the beginning of the chorus, which is pretty strong, and a bigger spacing is okay to emphasize that, but this one doesn't really have any reason, especially considering (8) is a circle. This would've been acceptable if (7) and (8) were combined into a 1/4 slider, IMO.
  8. 01:28:241 (1,2,3,4,5) - ^
  9. 02:05:415 (3,4) - This is purely an optional suggestion: How about combining them into a 3/4 slider to emphasize the instrument sound at 02:05:659 better (since it feels very different compared to the other instruments played at the second blue tick of a beat in this song)? It'd also help in making 02:05:741 (5) more accentuated.
  10. 02:32:725 (1) - What makes you think this would fit in the group of objects of 02:32:480 (5,1,2)? I can't find any reason for this, so I thought it'd be cool to have more understanding about it.
  11. 02:51:638 - Why isn't this mapped? It's odd to just leave the instrument here unmapped because it's just as noticeable as 02:51:801.
  12. 02:56:937 (7,8) - Honestly, I'm wondering why didn't you use 1/4 sliders or continue the 1/4 stream here considering how great they'd be emphasizing the instruments here.
  13. 03:08:024 - 03:13:078 - I think the problem here doesn't lie on how this section has jumps between every object consistently, but more on the fact that you emphasized the stronger instruments with smaller jumps than the weaker instruments, which makes the accentuation of the instruments here happen in an inconsistent manner. This happens at:
    1. 03:08:676 (3,4,5)
    2. 03:11:121 (3,4,5)
    3. 03:12:100 (2,3,4)


    At those spots, the jumps from the red tick to the white tick (from the weaker to stronger instrument sound) are smaller than the jumps from the white to red ticks (from the stronger to weaker sounds).

    But frankly, I think this isn't really that problematic anyway; I'm just sharing my thoughts here because I just... feel the need to.
  14. 03:17:154 (1,2,3,4) - Are you sure on using such a big spacing in a section where the music is really weak? I can understand the spacing from (1) to (2), but (2,3,4) really has no reason for the wide jumps.
  15. 03:25:306 (2,3) - 03:22:697 (3,4) is okay since there is actually a base (instrument sounds) you're mapping to, but there is nothing to map at the end of these sliders, and the sounds of the instrument on the red ticks are of the "solid" type (without any kind of elongated sound and ends on a "flat" note). I... personally won't recommend the usage of 1/4 sliders here.
  16. 03:28:241 (1,1) - Very minor stuff, but uh, try to make them not touch each other?
  17. 03:45:116 (4) - Why do an overmapping here while there is actually something to map at 03:45:442? This way it goes way better with the song's instruments (you don't map emptiness, but something actually in the song which sounds weird if left unmapped anyway).


That's it.

I seriously hope you won't take this as an attack on your interpretation of the music. I respect how are you mapping the song with the rhythm and placement of the objects, but sometimes the map just... goes on its own way, going quite far from what the song presents.

Loctav wrote:

Whereas the Extra has a multitude of concepts that were not composed together fluently, this one appears to have no real concept and is more of a compilation of difficult patterns for the sake of it.
Still though, I'd like to disagree with this statement. I believe captin won't just paste hard stuff here and there for the sake of it. He knows what he's doing; he just went... a little too far at times.

Well uh, with that, I hope this will be requalified (and then ranked) without any more problems later :)
posted

monstrata wrote:

Feels like whoever did the dq this time is also part of the other asymmetry set :p. To me these reasons sound a lot more like differences in interpretation rather than actual quality issues. If qats could mod without any personal bias they'd be able to manage dq contests honestly... But from taking with ztrot, currently that is not yet foreseeable.

Also can you qats use more appropriate wording when it comes to making objective statements? Stuff like "The difficulty seems to lack..." Just make you sound uncertain, unsure... Don't use seems. or appears. And phrases like "x is completely lost"/"unreadable" overstate your intention and offend the mapper.

Both language misuse create fruction with the community :p. Please fix that.
I can't agree more,
the wording MUST be more precise.
If you want QAT to be considered a somewhat professional status, you MUST have proper wording and have some professionalism.

In addition,

monstrata wrote:

"x is completely lost"/"unreadable" overstate your intention and offend the mapper.
Like I said earlier, can't agree more. You should sound like you're trying to help, instead of sounding unnecessarily condescending.
I don't think anyone likes it, whether good mapper or not, when you are being looked down upon.
Jesus Christ, At least have some manners.
posted

Quality Assurance Team wrote:

Disqualification Notice



Hello!

Unfortunately, the Quality Assurance Team has decided to disqualify this beatmap. The following is a list of reasons and examples for the disqualification. We do not outline every issue in detail, so make sure to take the idea behind each reason and apply it to the entire beatmap as issues might be found in more than the spots mentioned below. If you have any questions, please reply to this post and we will do our best to clarify any misunderstandings.

captin's Extra

Lack of a concept regarding spacing and rhythm

  • The issues mentioned by Loctav have not been addressed - since it was an unsucessfully contested DQ, everything posted there must be fixed before it can proceed towards ranked status.
    The difficulty still seems artificial and lacks a concept in many aspects; There are jumps between essentially all of the objects, so there is no basic spacing the map goes back to. Emphasis for really strong beats through jumps is completely lost, as there are also jumps before weaker beats.
    The rhythm is very dense and consists of a lot of overmapped triplets and extended sliders. Similar to the jumps, those take away the emphasis of triplets and streams that really fit the music and those feel like they were artificially inserted.
    Examples for the above issue:
  1. 00:21:067 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,5,1,2,3,4,5,6,7) - There are jumps between every pair of objects, even though this is not even the most intense section
  2. 00:52:371 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - All the triplets and extended sliders make the rhythm much more dense than it should be. Most of them are overmapped.
  3. 03:08:024 (1,2,3,4,5,1,2,3,4,5,6,1,2,3,4,5,6,1,2,3,4,5,6) - This section is a build-up too the chorus with strong emphasis on the white ticks, yet there are jumps between every objects

If you happen to have concerns about this disqualification, you can contest the decision with this form. Before using this form, please read the instructions carefully.

The Beatmap Nominators may handle this mapset after the issues have been addressed.

Good luck!

###M
As I can see you are a beginner at modding. Your points can be interesting but they do really lack of substance because most of it is really subjective. Also, I advise you to read this thread https://osu.ppy.sh/forum/t/331416. It's a really nice tutorial for beginners at modding. You will improve a lot if you read and understand it!
posted
^ lol very funny and in a lot of ways very true
posted


This in a nutshell
posted
box
posted

Quality Assurance Team wrote:

Disqualification Notice



Hello!

Unfortunately, the Quality Assurance Team has decided to disqualify this beatmap. The following is a list of reasons and examples for the disqualification. We do not outline every issue in detail, so make sure to take the idea behind each reason and apply it to the entire beatmap as issues might be found in more than the spots mentioned below. If you have any questions, please reply to this post and we will do our best to clarify any misunderstandings.

captin's Extra

Lack of a concept regarding spacing and rhythm

  • The issues mentioned by Loctav have not been addressed - since it was an unsucessfully contested DQ, everything posted there must be fixed before it can proceed towards ranked status.
    The difficulty still seems artificial and lacks a concept in many aspects; There are jumps between essentially all of the objects, so there is no basic spacing the map goes back to. Emphasis for really strong beats through jumps is completely lost, as there are also jumps before weaker beats.
    The rhythm is very dense and consists of a lot of overmapped triplets and extended sliders. Similar to the jumps, those take away the emphasis of triplets and streams that really fit the music and those feel like they were artificially inserted.
    Examples for the above issue:
  1. 00:21:067 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,5,1,2,3,4,5,6,7) - There are jumps between every pair of objects, even though this is not even the most intense section - I disagree, I think it is wrong to even call these jumps considering the difficulty of the map, plus there needs to be space there to highlight the transition between quiet intro and the louder section with the "jumps," if they remained similar in spacing it would feel like the mapper isnt acknowledging the change in tone of the song
  2. 00:52:371 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - All the triplets and extended sliders make the rhythm much more dense than it should be. Most of them are overmapped. - I see where you are coming from, but once again i disagree on the basis that it makes it clear that the map has transitioned into the chorus. At the same time however I wouldn't call it overmapped because it still fits in with the music nicely. I like the fact that it isnt just trying to play to the beat of the music, but rather tries to be a part of the song, and I think it does it well.
  3. 03:08:024 (1,2,3,4,5,1,2,3,4,5,6,1,2,3,4,5,6,1,2,3,4,5,6) - This section is a build-up too the chorus with strong emphasis on the white ticks, yet there are jumps between every objects- Yes it is buildup, but it becomes more intense at 3:13 where the jumping becomes more intense as well, thus making the buildup clear. Between 3:08 and 3:13 the intensity doesn't change, but rather leads into another increase in intensity, so why should it be mapped in a way that suggests the contrary?


If you happen to have concerns about this disqualification, you can contest the decision with this form. Before using this form, please read the instructions carefully.

The Beatmap Nominators may handle this mapset after the issues have been addressed.

Good luck!

###M
It feels like you have simply interpreted the map differently to the mapper. This isn't a bad thing until you try to force upon your interpretation. The map may not have a basic spacing to return to, but rather a basic density. The softer parts of the song have a much lower density, the buildups are characterized by sharp consecutive jumps, and the chorus by its increased density that still sounds very much a part of the song. I feel that this is a good approach in this case because it highlights the changes in intensity, whilst keeping the softer parts of the song entertaining still for experienced players.
posted
accidental duplicate
posted
Best Map Ever plz rank this It's really good!! Make other maps like this!! :):):):)8-)
posted
let's chill for a bit
posted
For the love of god, could you leave this map alone and let it be ranked. Please.
posted

Aleycks wrote:

For the love of god, could you leave this map alone and let it be ranked. Please.
posted
How ironical it is that this map (made by a Nominator) was unranked by the Quality Assurance Team. This map feels totally nice, I don't really thing it needed to be unranked to start with.

But who I am to talk, my modding days are long gone.
posted
wew
posted
is skystar's gunna get ranked b4 this :(
show more
Please sign in to reply.