Fyre wrote:

kira kira

rtech wrote:

Beautiful map <3

Okoratu wrote:

hello

are you still m4ming for this, idk I'm just writing this anyways and see what you're going to do with it..

My first question is do you map for players to play your map or did you make this to fully represent this song? yes, and yes.
Depending on your answer to this question the following stuff will be helpful or completely wasting time:

I am capable of playing most of this correctly, by the way. Also I'm only trying to help because i love this song. i see.

1. why is the offset negative, i see absolutely no need for it to be negative because musically correct would be choosing 00:02:658 - as the notes before are an Anacrusis. I encountered the same thing on https://osu.ppy.sh/b/544671 so you can see what we came up with in the end. It would just be more musically correct to not do this maybe you don't know that there're timing section bugs exsist long time ago, negative offset can avoid that 100%.
2. I'd also advice you to snap the preview time to either 00:01:981 - or 00:02:029 - , because the current one can confuse people because they hear nothing for half a second after choosing this song, I can see why you would choose this time, but reducing the amount of silence you get would be.... preferable. i see your point with the common sense, but i insist my choice. the very 1st part of the song is also the very important impression to every ones who would listen to the song themselves, so i usually put those epic song's preview time sections at the places which are belong to them indeed.
3. 00:08:078 (5) - this one is pretty weird considering how it represents the vocals which start at 00:08:271 - . Splitting it up would result in this but i mainly follow electrical beats rather than vocal track, you can notice that special one if you ignore the vocal with my stuff.
4. 00:22:207 (2) - yes i did understand the purpose of this pattern but it's more difficult to read than most things around here i believe that moving 00:22:207 (2) - so taht its end stacks with 00:21:820 (2) - or 00:22:594 (1) - whatever, same thing would make this a lot easier to read and i think it wouldn't destroy your idea with this pattern hmm, but my idea do is the one i set there which can be destroyed by changing it in your way imo.
5. 00:25:691 (7,1) - the sudden space increase makes the low spacing to 00:26:078 (2) - feel pretty weird when playing it, one solution would be increasing space between 1 and 2, the other solution would be nerfing the 1/4 jump that sudden jump express the sudden high pitch vocal beat here.
6. What follows is a general comment about the next part, the same probably applies to 00:29:368 - and 04:53:755 - alike since they are the same kind of thing
   
   1. Both of these parts contain elements which are rather unpleasant for players. I would recommend nerfing them, but let me explain what and why first
   2. Both are basically all 155 bpm streams with 310 bpm triplets in some places.
      the 310 triplets feel. weird and combined with the cruel spacing of the 1/4 notes in this section they also feel overdone, i doubt you want to nerv them but most players who are going to play this - if not almost everyone except some people who practiced this a long time - will not be able to play constant 155 bpm 1/4 with 1/8 bursts put into them. well... i think we should get one thing clear: 155 bpm elements in this map are not streams, but only notes. so, i'll choose some of your mods to reply... consider the reply is like "nothing goes wrong here if you noticed my highlighted words before" if i don't reply your mod below.
   3. 00:30:723 (2,3,4) - things like this can be fine and ok actually since all the player has to do in order to play it correctly would be hitting 00:30:868 (3) - on time because the other 2 objects are sliders and therefore free 300 hits if you aren't retarded
   4. 00:31:110 (5,6,7) - a jump like this is probably done for emphasis but doesn't work out on a gameplay side because this section just started abruptly and 00:30:723 (2,3,4) - is not enough imo to introduce players to this kind of thing, I would either nerf the jump considerably or replace it with an 1/8 kickslider to actually introduce players to this section, this introductory thing applies until 00:42:916 - and 05:06:142 - respectively as it only makes sense to go for a more complex pattern after introducing players to the concept
      but honestly i would avoid the 310 bpm triplets altogether because the space to the next object are usually requiring you to am a jump, suddenly burst and then go back to playing 155 bpm 1/4 which is uhhhhhhm jump between notes to express melody, jump near streams to low down the difficulty for players ← all sense of my patterns there.
   5. 00:32:029 (5,1) - random comment that this stack is off and makes it not look like your other 1/8 stuff and therefore even harder to read
   6. 00:32:852 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3) - i can see where you're coming from with this pattern but gameplaywise this doesn't work out as smoothly as 04:56:078 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2) - does, the 2nd pattern is much more player friendly for the same thing and you should either think about doing something similar to it or come up with another creative pattern which uses less sharp angles in a 155 bpm stream
   7. 00:34:207 (6,7,8) - why is 04:57:433 (6,7,8) - a jump while this is a more or less cramped pattern in the bottom right (i'm still for avoiding 1/8 triplets and using rhythms that don't rely on randomly bursting the whole section)
   8. 00:35:561 (3,4,1) - this transition plays rather meh due to the direction changes required in order to snap 3,4 and 4,1 correctly 04:58:787 (3,4,1) - 05:11:174 (3,4,1) - rely on different, arguably more intuitive movements
   9. 00:36:626 (3) - instead of forcing a more or less circular motion and then breaking this to the next object it might work better to just move it to thre right of this slider because then 00:36:626 (3,1) - wouldn't break flow as much as they do now
   10. 00:40:884 (4,1,2) - this transition is very rough, while it may be fitting it may also be very very very ... frustrating
   11. 00:41:852 (4,1,2) - tbh the direction change here is super unpleasant because depending on how you snap objects you will have to move up in order to catch this slider, then somewhat follow it's repeat down and back up and then snap back to the position you came from which is either super awkward to play
       or a sliderbreak in 99999% of the cases
   12. 00:48:045 (4,1) - breaking flow in this kind of way is nooooooot that nice to play i think reducing the left/right dependency of this pattern helps in case you dunno what i mean or think i'm crazy or sth ayy
   13. 00:53:078 (2,3,4,5,6,7) - i suggest to tone this down a bit similarly to 05:16:207 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,1) - which is followable without breaking your arm
   14. i only picked a few patterns but the same of course applies to this whole section, it can be a lot friendlier for players, it's second iteration will be in the bottom if i find other things which i haven't mentioned above yet
7. 01:01:111 (2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,1) - if you look at this without stacking you will notice that 01:01:497 (1) - is pretty much beneath the entire stack, moving the whole stack to the left may look a bit better (as in not hiding this circle for 80%) that effects nothing because all elements here are notes.
8. 01:05:755 (8) - ^ doing something like the timestamp above to it may actually be consistent besides 01:05:368 (1,2) - is something like a jump upwards so doing something like this at it's end may make for a nice effect
9. 01:01:884 (2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2) - this could feel a lot less sudden if you moved these down as a whole a bit regard the 1/4 sliders as notes as well.
10. 01:24:141 (1,2,3) - doing something similar to 01:21:045 (1,2,3) - might actually feel better here and in other instances like 01:27:238 (1,2,3) - patterns like this look like something you would do and would be a lot more intuitive to play in these 2 cases people may hardly understand this, but i wanna say that combos are not spread by only distances, but also parted patterns noticed by nc, flow or even anti ds settings.
11. 01:26:658 (1,2) - i advise to move these up to make this pattern more of a zig zag motion also as it is it is hella cramped in the bottom right of the screen
12. 01:27:432 (3) - if you agree with my previous suggestion you could move that one to make a triangle like
13. 01:33:626 (3,4,5,6,7) - just saying that due to stacking this breaks your perfect alignment in a straight line with 01:32:465 (1,2,3,4,1,2) -
    
    1. the following probably applies to all 3 kiais
    2. 01:35:949 (1,2,1,2,1) - these and other instances don't work as well as they could because the straight line jump between 01:36:045 (2,1) - doesn't have that much changing emphasis in the song and that kind of movement is pretty much doom for your snapping
       you did this consistently but cases like 01:39:820 (1,2,1,2,1) - 01:46:014 (1,2,1,2,3) - where you didn't do jumps as cruel as the previous ones ended up playing a whole lot better and were actually enjoyable.
       also i don't think the difference in emphasis in the song calls for heavily snapping dependant patterns like this, something more smooth as the examples i gave you may work better and may actually be more intuitive to play i follow guitar track by NOTES.
    3. 01:46:208 (1,2,3) - speaking of this as an example that works better actually you could increase distance so that these circles don't overlap or something btw shouldn't 3 have a nc or no ok 02:51:433 (3) - probably no so whatever about nc :D this is just a tricky pattern i've set on purpose, don't be too serious... orz
    4. 01:52:497 (2,1) - doing something like this with this pattern may be more predict able since you don't have to change directions as much in order to play it
    5. 00:27:432 (9) - as i saw 01:58:787 (1) - i asked myself why you didn't nc this first one because it's the same nc as 00:25:884 (1) - , not 00:27:432 (9) - ...
    6. 02:09:239 (1,2,1,2) - well i play without colors so these surprised me but they actually make sense so \:D/
14. 02:26:464 (1) - having a left-right kind of movement might work better? You have something similar to what i suggest in 02:29:173 (1,2,3,1) - already did a change here.
15. 02:32:657 (1) - having this to the right of 02:32:851 (1) - might make for better or flow or something when testing that kind of suggestion i moved it to the position that 02:31:786 (2) - had lol i think that's a bit nazi...
16. 02:38:658 (3,4,5,6,7) - if you fixed the first one you should fix this one as well just saying so nothing is forgotten lol
17. 02:42:142 (1,1) - seriously this stop surprised me, you didn't stop once like that in the first kiai and i see no reason to stop movement here either so it's really offthrowing, the same applies to this whole kiai section they are just two kinds of spread notes' patterns, why should i set them in a same style?
18. 02:43:110 (7,8) - if you care due to stacking these overlap while the other circles in this stream don't
19. 03:16:594 (1) - the sound this spinner is supposed to follow - so i suspect - starts around 03:16:787 - . I would simply have it start in 03:16:303 - to follow the same sound as 03:13:110 (2) - does...? agree, start the spinner at 03:16:303 now.
20. 03:54:916 - the whistles in this section seem rather uhh random ? not really...
21. Here's something i don't really like about the concept of this part:
    It is supposed to be a build up, right? so why is the part starting in 04:07:303 - a whole lot easier than the part starting in 03:54:916 - ?
    contrary to the previous part it doesn't use stacking circles in the same place which ends up playing easier as intended for a buildup? do you know Symphony in G major No. 94, “Surprise nvm, all patterns are in similar difficulty, don't block your eyes with those ds pls.
22. ok so about the last kiai: the way you use 04:28:787 (3,1,2) - in order to map guitar stuff is not really consistently hard: e.g. 04:33:240 (1,2,1,2) - is much smaller overall. the same kind of inconsistencies can be seen in your spacing for these patterns all over this kiai i should tell you that ds is the second part of these patterns, when the 1st one is their orders. how players read them effects a lot to playing. i can give same structure's stuff with different orders, that's the point of those patterns, and especially after that, all those ds problems you worried about are just little ones players cared (only when their aiming skill is "good enough", noobs can't play this map, we all know that.) actually, common maps do the exactly same stuff like mine, the difference is only how fast those objs appear, that's all.
23. 05:16:981 - how about lowering SV since the song loses most of its instruments in that part

I hope some of this was constructive / helpful
aaaaa
i hope you can deal with lazy formatting w

feverset wrote:

很出色的图 膜拜
beat heaven
看到图里用了1/8做连打我觉得也许可以加倍bpm换成1/4看着可能更舒服一些虽然也没什么影响
02:06:529 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,5,6,1,2,1,2,1,2,3,4,5,6,1,2,3,4,5,6) - 这个部分节奏比较紧密，也许可以考虑放密集的whistle？感觉现在的这部分听起来有点有点单调 这里比较安静，用w太吵了。
04:48:723 (1,2,1,2) - 这里有点太挑战极限了一些，感觉这个滑条后面的跳flow有点别扭，不妨试试04:48:723 (1,2) 反过来并且往上面放放？ 这跳我自己都能打。
新人，可能有不对的地方，还望见谅 加油吧。

1. 00:02:658 (4) - make this a slider to follow vocal better? like thishttp://puu.sh/kGT6f/63a7db4bff.jpg or you can extend
   to the next blue tic
   
2. 00:08:078 (5) - why cover up the vocal with a repeat when you mapped it earlier? maybe this is better?http://puu.sh/kGTf9/92b950638e.jpg
   5 follows the drop like sound and 6,7 are mapped to vocal
   
3. 01:36:143 (1,2) - ctl+g plays better into 01:36:336 (1) - imo
   
4. 01:36:917 (1,2) - same here if you agree to change ^
   
5. 01:41:368 (5) - NC so its more readable w
   
6. 01:45:432 (4) - ctl+g the vocal has a rise fall feel to me here, so I think this follows it better :3
   

Depths wrote:

[Beat Heaven]

small recheck no KD

1. 00:02:658 (4) - make this a slider to follow vocal better? like thishttp://puu.sh/kGT6f/63a7db4bff.jpg or you can extend
   to the next blue tic i think leave that tick blank can be played better...
   
2. 00:08:078 (5) - why cover up the vocal with a repeat when you mapped it earlier? maybe this is better? wanna let players hold tapping at that repeating slider to follow the electric melody. http://puu.sh/kGTf9/92b950638e.jpg
   5 follows the drop like sound and 6,7 are mapped to vocal
   
3. 01:36:143 (1,2) - ctl+g plays better into 01:36:336 (1) - imo those patterns are set in a system work in general, don't want to change that now ;w;
   
4. 01:36:917 (1,2) - same here if you agree to change ^
   
5. 01:41:368 (5) - NC so its more readable w hmmm rearranged nc style in the whole map, but not in your way.
   
6. 01:45:432 (4) - ctl+g the vocal has a rise fall feel to me here, so I think this follows it better :3 just wanna set nc mainly follow basic drum track orz...

sukiNathan wrote:

!!!

Mitch wrote:

Very gimmicky, unnecessary hard patterns, nobody will fc this.
QATs, please fix.

Just for clarification: same sliders throughout the entire map is very unimaginative and boring, and patterns like this:

just adds unnecessary difficulty in a already way too hard map.

Mitch wrote:

Very gimmicky, unnecessary hard patterns, nobody will fc this.
QATs, please fix.

Just for clarification: same sliders throughout the entire map is very unimaginative and boring, and patterns like this:

just adds unnecessary difficulty in a already way too hard map.

Painketsu wrote:

Mitch wrote:

Very gimmicky, unnecessary hard patterns, nobody will fc this.
QATs, please fix.

Just for clarification: same sliders throughout the entire map is very unimaginative and boring, and patterns like this:

just adds unnecessary difficulty in a already way too hard map.

"nobody will fc this" Totally out of place.

"unimaginative and boring" I strongly disagree.

"unnecessary difficulty" If the mapper feels like the rhythm follows a "back and forth" flow so be it.

I mean no offense but your fully subjective post adds nothing to this thread in my opinion, feel free to disagree.

Cheesecake wrote:

Mitch wrote:

Very gimmicky, unnecessary hard patterns, nobody will fc this.
QATs, please fix.

Just for clarification: same sliders throughout the entire map is very unimaginative and boring, and patterns like this:

just adds unnecessary difficulty in a already way too hard map.

Since when has nobody being able to fc something affected it being ranked?

Cheesecake wrote:

I'm sure you know a lot about mapping

Mitch wrote:

Cheesecake wrote:

I'm sure you know a lot about mapping

Implying adding maps to your list of favorites makes you know a lot about a game?
C'mon now, at least come up with something better than that.

Mitch wrote:

Cheesecake wrote:

I'm sure you know a lot about mapping

Implying adding maps to your list of favorites makes you know a lot about a game?
C'mon now, at least come up with something better than that.

Mitch wrote:

"Totally out of place." Not really, it's a common trend with maps like this that the entire top 50 is filled with A-C ranks, which technically means that people couldn't play the map like the beatmapper intended.

"I strongly disagree." How isn't it? Everyone can make a map with the same sliders throughout the entire map, it's just plain lazy.

"If the mapper feels like the rhythm follows a "back and forth" flow so be it." Which there isn't, please point out how any of those back and forth patterns are even following an instrument or vocal.

Considering only about 10 people will be able to even play this map "properly" it seems like a waste of time to even rank.
Approved with some tweaks sure, approved as in what ridiculous maps got a few years ago

Zak wrote:

His point was more so you have 0 uploaded maps, which gives an idea of your mapping experience

Ant wrote:

Couldn't play the map like the beatmapper intended? Are you trying to say that HW intending for the map to be S'd? Are you implying that a mapper even needs to intend for whatever kind of score to be set? I, as a mapper, want to make playing songs I like fun by making maps in a way which complements the song well. What kind of scores people can get (now) does not matter.

Having the same-shaped sliders in your entire map is not remotely lazy. Slider placement is still a thing, so is flow, fittingness, consistency. Forcing yourself to use the same sliders like this isn't easier, it's harder, and you can even call it an artistic choice.

Have you even listened to the song..? Those patterns are mapped to an instrument and I'd say the patterns picked fit well, but to say they're not mapped to anything at all is absurd.

What the hell does it even mean to play a map "properly"? Given you said that nobody will FC this, I assume you mean that playing a map "properly" is FCing it, so any non-FC on any map is just not playing the map "properly"? Besides, why should any map have to be forced to be FCable by current players? Should we not have some ranked maps that even top-tier players can aspire to FC?

Mitch wrote:

Why wouldn't you want to have people S your maps?
You want people to enjoy the rhythmic feel and flow that you are trying to express right?
Might as well just create maps like Centipede if you don't want any proper scores on it.

Using the same sliders just feels copy/pasted to players, sure it might be technically correct and "artistic", players won't perceive it like that.

Yes I have, the music doesn't resemble a back and forth pattern.

I'm fine with creating harder maps than the current top-tier players can play, but doing so by adding in gimmicky back and forth patterns really doesn't make a lot of sense to me.

Hollow Wings wrote:

thou i don't wanna cause some drama here... it's like a must do event every time... so well, let me look at this:

"Totally out of place." Not really, it's a common trend with maps like this that the entire top 50 is filled with A-C ranks, which technically means that people couldn't play the map like the beatmapper intended. how can you know that when i've already got 10+ A rank replays of this map?
"I strongly disagree." How isn't it? Everyone can make a map with the same sliders throughout the entire map, it's just plain lazy. are you sure you can insist your idea of this? then how about this: everyone can make a map with various sliders throughout the entire map like they always do, it's just plain lazier.
"If the mapper feels like the rhythm follows a "back and forth" flow so be it." Which there isn't, please point out how any of those back and forth patterns are even following an instrument or vocal. are you sure you can insist your idea of this again? then give some positive examples of totally match the point of this, which the whole mapping field can hardly be any one. btw, i put those patterns to larger ds by only 4 notes pattern's composing with that structure, which is also a common one in other maps.

Considering only about 10 people will be able to even play this map "properly" it seems like a waste of time to even rank.
Approved with some tweaks sure, approved as in what ridiculous maps got a few years ago you can say that if you really want to.

maybe it's necessary to give this post, thou won't reply things other than mods from now on imo... mods are still welcomed, if something you think is really need to be changed.

Ant wrote:

This isn't a matter of "wanting" people to S your maps. Of course, you can make a map and want someone to S it, but actually caring about the scores people can get on your map (=/= playability) isn't something which is necessarily included in making a map. You can make an extremely hard map to fit an extremely difficult-sounding song with no regards to whether or not people can FC it. Even so, you say that the way the beatmapper intends it is for it to be S'd, but what if the beatmapper just wants to make a map people enjoy, regardless of if they hit every circle or not?

Players will play the map, and they'll enjoy it or they won't. Some people might dislike the sliders, but to claim they're lazy is just wrong and disrespectful. Feel free to dislike the sliders, but stick with opinions and not accusations.

Different interpretations for different people then, right?

So harder maps are allowed!.. if they're the "right kind" of hard. You consider the jumps gimmicky, but being able to play flow like this is a skill, and being able to map stuff like this properly is too.

-Ryuujii- wrote:

Man people sure loveeee drama in this game.