yugijedi wrote:

I know what you mean I also liked them more.
I asked MANY BNs if the could take a look and see if it is ready for bubble but nearly everyone said that everything is cool and has good flow but the sliders are bad. You don't know how much I've done for my special sliders but, as it seems, I'm not "famous" enough to help them to survive..
I also hate people who don't like slider-shapes(!), don't want to push a map forward because of that cause slidershape is a personal opinion and in my opinion the old shape had fit to the song.

I'm sorry.. but no one in this game helps me to push a mappu with sliders like that.

And my mod willl come later in this post

Fantastica wrote:

yugijedi wrote:

I know what you mean I also liked them more.
I asked MANY BNs if the could take a look and see if it is ready for bubble but nearly everyone said that everything is cool and has good flow but the sliders are bad. You don't know how much I've done for my special sliders but, as it seems, I'm not "famous" enough to help them to survive..
I also hate people who don't like slider-shapes(!), don't want to push a map forward because of that cause slidershape is a personal opinion and in my opinion the old shape had fit to the song.

I'm sorry.. but no one in this game helps me to push a mappu with sliders like that.

In my opinion...
Slidershape isn't matter when mapping. The main idea of mapping is how to make the mapset is comfortable to play. Everyone have their own style of mapping so if someone said that our mapping style is wrong it's totally not right because that was our mapping style. But if someone want to give a suggestion of mapping we can can talk about it with them and maybe we can improve our mapping style rather than change it.

Note : And my mod willl come later in this post Here is it

Smoothness

1. from 00:02:044 - to 00:21:096 - I think you need some hitsounds here (soft whistles will works). Yeah you're absolutely right! added some
2. 00:21:441 (1) - a whistle will more fit with the song than a finish already changed
3. 00:25:406 (4,5,6,7) - I think this pattern isn't really fit with the song since there's nothing in the song at 00:26:096 - . I suggest to repeat the slider 00:25:406 (4) - just like 00:30:924 (5) - and remove 00:26:096 (5,6,7) - . you're perfect omg now one noticed that!
4. 00:44:544 (7,1) - hmm... A big jump here looks not really good and the flow too. Try this on 00:45:062 (1,2,3,4,5) - http://puu.sh/gSDue/de2e832dc4.jpg no that's ok
5. 01:09:889 (4) - unreasonable soft sampleset ? Give me the reason if there's one. no reason, right
6. 01:50:924 (4,1) - just IMO isn't the distance is looks a bit too far for transition from slider to stream ? (I don't know about it because I'm not a skilled player at all XD) I know what you mean but the stream is very spaced and so it's way more comfortable to go from the longer 1/4's the the spaced stream
7. 02:13:682 (2,3,1,2) - maybe it's not a big deal but avoid the overlap ? http://puu.sh/gSE2J/27905b472d.jpg changed as it was before, the bigger jump is always cooler
8. 02:25:924 (2,3) - ctrl+g on every of them ? I think it'll flow better. hm no..
9. 02:35:406 (2,3,1) - I like how you play SV here. Good Job thank u I spend so much time here..
10. 03:11:268 (2) - you missed the stack here fixed
11. 03:11:268 (2) - move it to left 3 times with ctrl+<- to stack the tail properly (and disable the grid snap)
12. 03:11:268 (2) - and you missed the stack again here copied something wrong?
13. 04:39:545 (5) - maybe move it somewhere around http://puu.sh/gSECQ/03aace6907.jpgto make it flow from (4)'s tail and (6)'s head nice, thanks!
14. 04:49:027 (1) - change it to soft ? since the piano part start from here yeah
15. 04:59:126 (2,3,4) - stacking this much in one beat snap isnt really good I think. maybe you can make them like http://puu.sh/gSEUB/d6f944f955.jpg ? no, I want it exactly this way, should be a bit hard to read.

Okay that's it :3
good luck with this mapset
And your slider shape isn't bad since there's no bad overlap in it (an addition, one that I dislike the overlap is 02:46:613 (1,2) - )
bye ( ^w^)/

edit : oh and one more. your preview point isn't snapped okk

yugijedi wrote:

I know what you mean I also liked them more.
I asked MANY BNs if the could take a look and see if it is ready for bubble but nearly everyone said that everything is cool and has good flow but the sliders are bad. You don't know how much I've done for my special sliders but, as it seems, I'm not "famous" enough to help them to survive..
I also hate people who don't like slider-shapes(!), don't want to push a map forward because of that cause slidershape is a personal opinion and in my opinion the old shape had fit to the song.

I'm sorry.. but no one in this game helps me to push a mappu with sliders like that.

Fantastica wrote:

In my opinion...
Slidershape isn't matter when mapping. The main idea of mapping is how to make the mapset is comfortable to play. Everyone have their own style of mapping so if someone said that our mapping style is wrong it's totally not right because that was our mapping style. But if someone want to give a suggestion of mapping we can can talk about it with them and maybe we can improve our mapping style rather than change it.

Doyak wrote:

I don't understand why maps should be 'comfortable' to play. Some maps can have really uncomfortable moving line and that can also be part of the map's difficulty. Being uncomfortable doesn't mean it's not fun, because some people can enjoy overcoming the 'uncomfortableness' and being good at it. I feel too lazy when I play those 'comfortable' maps and they are too boring, even when the map is unFCable for me.

Of course, comfortable flow would seem to be better for most people so if that 'comfortableness' is liked by most of them then it's alright, but those sliders were not uncomfortable or something, it's just those sliders had a little awkward shape - which was an art - and he just changed it smoothly, and I feel this map has gone too simple and less artistic, thus less fun.

Fantastica wrote:

hmm... I think just me who have another meaning about "comfortable" XD. Here I mean a mapset that comfortable to play is fun to play. The design wasn't the matter because the design wasn't an unrankable issues. And I didn't say that this mapset was bad, otherwise this mapset was really comfortable to play. "Comfortable" in my vision wasn't mean good in design, but how the mapset make a flow, when to put a jump, and the mapset wasn't overmapped. this mapset have those 3 of my comfortableness so this mapset was really good.

1. I would consider a different difficulty name, e.g "Shine", "Mellow", "Cheerful". If you do like the difficulty name don't worry about it
2. 00:02:045 (1) - This note could probably be a bit quieter.
3. 00:13:165 (5) - This note goes outside the playfield, consider moving.
4. 00:21:441 (1) - This note also goes slightly outside the playfield, and I suggest you rotate it slightly also, as it seems bland.
5. 00:28:337 (1) - This note goes outside the playfield, consider moving.
6. 00:30:924 (5) - ^
7. 00:41:958 (5) - ^
8. 00:44:372 (5,6,7) - ^
9. 01:11:958 (4) - ^
10. 01:12:648 (2) - ^
11. 01:33:165 (4) - ^
12. 01:34:544 (1) - ^
13. 01:35:924 (2) - ^
14. 02:04:717 (4) - ^
15. 02:20:751 (4) - ^
16. 02:25:062 (6,8) - ^
17. 02:26:268 (3,4) - ^
18. 02:26:268 (3,4) - ^
19. 02:44:199 (4) - ^
20. 02:45:234 (6) - ^
21. 02:45:234 (6) - ^
22. 03:09:717 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16) - This stream shouldn't be one combo only.
23. 03:12:475 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16) - ^
24. 03:13:855 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16) - ^
25. 03:34:372 (6,9) - These notes go outside the playfield, consider moving.
26. 04:00:752 (1) - ^
27. 04:07:303 (7,1) - ^
28. 04:08:855 (8) - ^
29. 04:10:752 (2,3) - ^
30. 04:23:165 (3) - ^
31. Lots of notes outside the playfield, honestly I think these are all not really a big deal, but you may want to go into/fix them at some point.

Nozhomi wrote:

Hi~ fast lucky mod I guess ?

- General :

1. Remove newgrounds from tags, you already have it on source.

- Smoothness :

1. 00:07:648 (4,5) - Make them centered, we don't see stack with 00:05:924 (4) - . I see what you mean, but the beginning of (4) is the exact middle of the triangle. I centered the (5)
2. 00:44:544 (7) - Move it to 196:380, like this the curve of stream is kinda weird with slider's position. hmm.. this is also weird, but moved to (190/377)
3. 00:59:372 (5,8) - You shouldn't extend your jumps like that, music is not enough "strong" to go for giant jumps. Somethings like this fit better imo you're right they're a bit unlinear I moved (5) up to create a straight linehttp://puu.sh/gTAXA/8b18ef7d0a.jpg.
4. 01:18:510 (3,1) - I don't like how the flow is here. Transition is too abrupt. Change direction of slider to make transition better or use 2 circles instead. rotated the slider a bit
5. 01:30:234 (7,1) - This overlap don't work here and make map just looks messy. ok, ok moved down.
6. 01:43:165 (3,4,5) - You just kill flow here, slider direction are misplaced and are not coherent. Somethings like this have much more sens "sens" hahaha okay yes rotated (4)http://puu.sh/gTDug/024f01f909.jpg.
7. 01:50:406 (1,2,3,4) - this is probably the worst idea to raise SV here. It's too sudden and with the fast rhythm of this part lead to easy break. Just use same SV as before but you can keep this spacing for following stream. no this SV is pretty okay. It introduced the spaced stream, has good circle flow and also makes the player take a look at further "crazy-violet sliders"
8. 01:52:044 (12,13,14,15,16) - If you want to make a real star use CTRL+Shift+D. no thanks:) should be exactly this way, the last circle should have lower distance
9. 02:11:441 (4,5) - These jumps have no reason to be here imo, or at least shouldn't be so huge. right.
10. 02:46:613 (1) - The whirlpool at the end could be improve imo. hm.. I've no idea how..
11. 03:16:613 (1,2) - To respect flow, stream should restart with 03:17:303 (2) - at 160:228. oh why?
12. 03:31:441 (10,2) - Bad stacking. right
13. 04:26:096 (1,2) - Flow again is broken. You can change position of slider to fit it correctly or minimum move his end to 448:224. I would change it if the stream was "uncornered" but the stream has corners the flow is not bad it is just a bit difficult.
14. 04:28:165 (2,3) -Same as 02:11:441 (4,5) - . right, moved
15. 04:28:165 (2,3,3) - Move end to 360:276 for flow. ?
16. 04:46:355 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15) - You should use 0.8x or 1.0x spacing for this part, because you can feel music become stronger at 04:47:648 - , so use a lower spacing and raise it after this point is more coherent to music. I see what u mean but it is even hard to get the spaced stream down so if the spacing also changes it would be reaaally hard
17. 04:52:919 (1,2,3,4,5) - Don't stack them but use a low spacing like 0.2x, a stack is just boring here. good idea, changed it into a "a bit hard to read antispacing pattern "
18. 04:58:781 (1,2,3,4) - Same as above. here does the stack fit cause the rhythm is equal.
19. 05:09:126 (1) - Make it start to 05:08:608 - . okay that's right, don't know why no one saw this before

That's all.
Mukyu~

Kuki wrote:

From ✞Kuki and Moph's Modding Q✞

[Smoothness]

1. I would consider a different difficulty name, e.g "Shine", "Mellow", "Cheerful". If you do like the difficulty name don't worry about it I will think about a change..
2. 00:02:045 (1) - This note could probably be a bit quieter. why
3. 00:13:165 (5) - This note goes outside the playfield, consider moving.
4. 00:21:441 (1) - This note also goes slightly outside the playfield, and I suggest you rotate it slightly also, as it seems bland.
5. 00:28:337 (1) - This note goes outside the playfield, consider moving.
6. 00:30:924 (5) - ^
7. 00:41:958 (5) - ^
8. 00:44:372 (5,6,7) - ^
9. 01:11:958 (4) - ^
10. 01:12:648 (2) - ^
11. 01:33:165 (4) - ^
12. 01:34:544 (1) - ^
13. 01:35:924 (2) - ^
14. 02:04:717 (4) - ^
15. 02:20:751 (4) - ^
16. 02:25:062 (6,8) - ^
17. 02:26:268 (3,4) - ^
18. 02:26:268 (3,4) - ^
19. 02:44:199 (4) - ^
20. 02:45:234 (6) - ^
21. 02:45:234 (6) - ^
22. 03:09:717 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16) - This stream shouldn't be one combo only.
23. 03:12:475 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16) - ^
24. 03:13:855 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16) - ^ My combnopatterning is constisent because I NC after 8/1 in streams.
25. 03:34:372 (6,9) - These notes go outside the playfield, consider moving.
26. 04:00:752 (1) - ^
27. 04:07:303 (7,1) - ^
28. 04:08:855 (8) - ^
29. 04:10:752 (2,3) - ^
30. 04:23:165 (3) - ^
31. Lots of notes outside the playfield, honestly I think these are all not really a big deal, but you may want to go into/fix them at some point.

This map is beautiful, the sliders are amazing, and deathstreams orz

Good luck with getting this ranked, I can't wait to play it

sorry for no changed I checked it an I think nothing is outside of playfield I don't know what you mean.

1. I guess newgrounds is website name (?) , if yes
   RC:Only use the Source field if the song comes from or was made famous by a video game, movie, or series. Website names are not an acceptable Artist nor Source.
2. have you ask any some timing experts to confirm the timing ? since this song has some piano track and that might need adjust some timing at piano part

1. 00:27:475 (3) - x324 y124 ? I think note here will play better if you increase spacing a bit here
2. 00:30:924 (5) - try this shape?
   SPOILER

   
3. 00:32:820 (2) - try this ? it would make the flow here 00:32:820 (2,3) - a bit better imo
   SPOILER

   
4. 00:34:372 (4,5,6) - try this rhythm? , sound better imo
   SPOILER

   
5. 00:36:441 (4) - maybe you can make the curve at the head consistent with curve at the tail , that would make this slider flow more smooth
6. 00:40:924 (2,3) - the jumps here feels a bit awkward for me so I suggest you ctrl+g this 00:41:096 (3) - that would make the jumps better imo
7. 00:48:682 (7,8) - why not make spacing here same as 00:48:165 (4,5) - that would here flow here a bit nice and consistent
8. 00:55:924 (1,2) - increase spacing a bit here is not a bad idea
9. 00:59:372 (5,8) - maybe you can make pattern like this
   SPOILER

   
   that would make the pattern looks better and also might make flow better too
10. 01:08:337 (1) - try this shape ?
    SPOILER

    
11. 01:12:303 (6,1) - this would make a great jumps , why you use low spacing here that kinda make flow here 01:12:303 (6,1,2) - a bit weird imo
12. 01:13:855 (1) - try this shape ?
    SPOILER

    
13. 01:30:406 (1) - you might need to adjust node a bit so the left side and right side stay consistent
14. 02:00:406 (4,5) - this would flow better if you swap the place of these two notes
15. 02:02:993 (5) - ctrl+g would make flow a bit better here 02:02:648 (4,5) -
16. 02:08:165 (4,5,6) - try this rhythm ? sound better imo
    SPOILER

    
17. 02:14:027 (3) - ctrl+g would make flow a bit better here 02:13:682 (2,3) -
18. 02:14:372 (1,2) - the spacing here is a bit too much imo and the stright flow there make this feel a bit awkward tho so you might need to consider this jumps a bit
19. 02:35:406 (2,3,1) - this flow better imo
    SPOILER

    
20. 02:37:131 (1) - try this shape ?
    SPOILER

    
21. 02:46:613 (1) - I think slow sv would emphasis this part better
22. 03:08:165 (1) - nc for change in spacing ?
23. 03:11:268 (2) - this make flow here 03:11:268 (2,3) - better imo
    SPOILER

    
24. 03:27:131 (3,4) - jumps here might be a bit too big imo
25. 03:56:269 (5,6) - this would flow better if you swap the place of these two notes
26. 04:54:643 (5) - nc ?
27. 05:02:919 (9) - nc this instead of 05:03:263 (1) - ?
    

CelsiusLK wrote:

[General]

1. I guess newgrounds is website name (?) , if yes
   RC:Only use the Source field if the song comes from or was made famous by a video game, movie, or series. Website names are not an acceptable Artist nor Source. fix
2. have you ask any some timing experts to confirm the timing ? since this song has some piano track and that might need adjust some timing at piano part yeah I have and it's ok

[Smoothness]

1. 00:27:475 (3) - x324 y124 ? I think note here will play better if you increase spacing a bit here right
2. 00:30:924 (5) - try this shape? fix
   SPOILER

   
3. 00:32:820 (2) - try this ? it would make the flow here 00:32:820 (2,3) - a bit better imo fix
   SPOILER

   
4. 00:34:372 (4,5,6) - try this rhythm? , sound better imo sounds really better
   SPOILER

   
5. 00:36:441 (4) - maybe you can make the curve at the head consistent with curve at the tail , that would make this slider flow more smooth no that's ok
6. 00:40:924 (2,3) - the jumps here feels a bit awkward for me so I suggest you ctrl+g this 00:41:096 (3) - that would make the jumps better imo yeah
7. 00:48:682 (7,8) - why not make spacing here same as 00:48:165 (4,5) - that would here flow here a bit nice and consistent no should be exactly like that
8. 00:55:924 (1,2) - increase spacing a bit here is not a bad idea right
9. 00:59:372 (5,8) - maybe you can make pattern like this
   SPOILER

   
   that would make the pattern looks better and also might make flow better too I think it's abit challenging and should stay. It is consistent.
10. 01:08:337 (1) - try this shape ? perfect!
    SPOILER

    
11. 01:12:303 (6,1) - this would make a great jumps , why you use low spacing here that kinda make flow here 01:12:303 (6,1,2) - a bit weird imo changed in a cool way
12. 01:13:855 (1) - try this shape ? already done
    SPOILER

    
13. 01:30:406 (1) - you might need to adjust node a bit so the left side and right side stay consistent yeah!
14. 02:00:406 (4,5) - this would flow better if you swap the place of these two notes yep
15. 02:02:993 (5) - ctrl+g would make flow a bit better here 02:02:648 (4,5) - no, special antiflow
16. 02:08:165 (4,5,6) - try this rhythm ? sound better imo yeah
    SPOILER

    
17. 02:14:027 (3) - ctrl+g would make flow a bit better here 02:13:682 (2,3) - again anti-flow
18. 02:14:372 (1,2) - the spacing here is a bit too much imo and the stright flow there make this feel a bit awkward tho so you might need to consider this jumps a bit tell me how pls..
19. 02:35:406 (2,3,1) - this flow better imo for me this is absolutely perfect.. but nice idea
    SPOILER

    
20. 02:37:131 (1) - try this shape ? perfect
    SPOILER

    
21. 02:46:613 (1) - I think slow sv would emphasis this part better hmmmmm
22. 03:08:165 (1) - nc for change in spacing ? ok that's right
23. 03:11:268 (2) - this make flow here 03:11:268 (2,3) - better imo PERFECT!!
    SPOILER

    
24. 03:27:131 (3,4) - jumps here might be a bit too big imo they're awkward, that's right
25. 03:56:269 (5,6) - this would flow better if you swap the place of these two notes no sorry..
26. 04:54:643 (5) - nc ? yeah
27. 05:02:919 (9) - nc this instead of 05:03:263 (1) - ? nice
    

so hard map ;_;
but stream part look pretty good thanks..

Good luck

thanks much for ur mod I made many changes. Am I allowed to ask for recheck later?

FrostxE wrote:

Reallyyyy a great map for the very first.

I hope it gets ranked soon Good luck!

Rumia- wrote:

from modding queue ~
[Smoothness]
00:26:791 (6) - i personally think this should be closer to 5 , feel more comfortable to play yeah, moved under (2)
00:46:273 - i think this greenline should lowers the volume a little ( 60% works fine ) since its kinda feel too loud , especially those streams,
barely hear the music 55
00:59:377 (5,8) - this jump feels kinda awkwardly big since 00:59:549 (6,7) - have constant spacing with 00:59:032 (3,4) - while
00:58:860 (2,5,8) - have a large distance , consider reducing 00:58:860 (2,5,8) - a little for better playability no, should be a challenge for especially people who "circling around at triangles" what is not really clean, many people make that mistake so I wanted to implement something which trains a clear, triangle corner cursormotion.. I know it's a bit hard because the angle gets closer but I want this that way.
01:09:722 (3) - suggest to move it down for a better flow : something like this : yes, flows nice like that https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/2961843
01:51:791 (9) - i'd nc here right
02:00:411 (4,5) - ctrl+g would be nice to play hmmm, no I don't think so
02:15:239 (4,5) - suggest to ctrl+g too , would play better along with pattern on 02:14:722 (1,2) - this should be a bit weird like it is now
02:20:411 (2,4) - couldve have a closer blanket here right
02:22:998 (2,3) - ctrl+g would play nice because the pitch is go up and down here , would fit the feeling more OMG this idea is so perfect <3
02:25:411 (8) - suggest to move it a bit to the left for variety flow , feel kinda cramp to the right side here , maybe something like this : WOW very nice suggestion again https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/2961856
02:28:342 - for me this 1.3x sv is kinda too sudden and felt too fast , maybe reducing it a little ? around 1.15 would feel nicer imo hmm, maybe 1,25x, but I think you can see it at because of the AR very good and a circle slider cannot be played very wrong, know what I mean, u don't have to move the cursor far
02:35:411 - nice thanks, spend so much time here
03:10:411 (9) - long combo , nc here yep
03:11:101 (1,2,3,4) - the flow is kinda too random here , feel a little confuse , might want to rework the pattern here nooo up and down and up and down...
03:13:170 (9) - nc here tho yeah
03:14:549 (9) - ^ yes
03:20:411 (3) - this object doesnt represent anything lol, okay it represents a very weird electric pitchsound and it fits really good like a fcking drop, in my opinion
03:29:032 (1) - fix overlap yeah sure
03:35:411 (6,7,8) - suggest to ctrl+g this for nicer flow ok, not bad
04:16:963 (4,5) - ctrl + g It flow mega perfect now thaaaanks <3
04:17:998 (5,6) - ^ would be better for 04:18:170 (6) - to be at (5) would form a nice triangle : no sorry, then the flow down from (4) to (5) to (6) would be weird https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/2961894
04:18:687 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - felt weird with the anti flow here , wouldve be nicer if u split it by 4 objects by moving the (8) near the (7) like this : sorry, I want this to be so, these should be antijumps, you know they're a bit too rare in 2015 mapping http://osu.ppy.sh/ss/2961902
04:35:584 (3,4) - personally feel ctrl+g here felt better to play >< same for me your absolutely right..
04:46:963 (9) - nc here ~
04:48:342 (9) - ^ ~
05:11:199 (1) - feel this object isnt necessary tho , you can just end the spinner here , no need to clap 05:11:027 - here too not familiar with a finishing object EXACTLY in the middle of the flower ?


very nice and enjoyable map , i would consider to change the normal-hitnormal to blend it well with the music , its kinda loud for this beautiful song
ps : call me anytime when you think it is ready

thank you so much, nice mod, I will call you back

Kotonoha wrote:

m4m, id like to keep a ticket since I still need to finish up my map

• 
  [Smoothness]

1. 00:05:929 (4,1) - swap nc since that piano melody starts from 00:05:929 (4) - comboing is one big white ticks..
2. 00:07:653 (5) - You could try this to catch both piano hits. this tone is not strong enough I think but good idea, i will think about it..
3. 00:11:877 (2) - Not snapped to the piano hit, Id suggest making 00:11:791 (1) - a 1/8 slider and have a circle at 00:12:136 - instead, would probably be better than a 1/8 doublet. I had exactly this pattern before (1/8 slider) but many modders said that this probably confuses and they were right, but good catch
4. 00:17:653 (8) - I don't like the slider here, it's a fading piano hit but the sliderticks makes it so noisy. But if you want to keep the slider, id suggest silencing the sliderticks. and have the curve on the first slidertick so it turns on the beat. I don't see a reason here, sorry
5. 00:25:411 (4) - unnecessarily long slider, youre missing several white ticks and a particularily strong beat at 00:25:756 - id suggest this instead, youll catch all the white ticks because they are important for the percussion and the 1/1 slider should emphasize the long synth hit a bit. I'm not mapping percussion here, I'm mapping melody..
6. 00:30:929 (5) - same as above
7. 00:36:446 (4) - same as above
8. 00:35:239 (1) - Make this parallel with 00:34:894 (6) - so make it look better wow I never heard of parallel curves, but I know what you mean, changed it a bit, they are now 180°
9. 00:36:446 (4) - Ill stop here, you get the drift. ?
10. 00:53:429 (2) - blanket is off.fix
11. 00:55:929 (2) - blanket is off ??
12. 00:55:929 (1,2) - unnecessary sliders, its overmapped and its pretty noisy, just change to circles, and you could use a big jump between them to emphasize the double kick I don't think so, it is ok
13. 01:09:894 (4) - bad flow, rotate it like -50 and blanket it again and move away 01:10:239 (5) - umm no..
14. 01:19:032 (5) - could make a turn here. cool idea you mean because of the other streams which are turning? I just won't change that becuase I have another "circle-shaped stream" later
15. 01:30:411 (1) - the long sliders in this section is pretty fine though i think since youre almost exclusively following the synth in this part.thank you
16. 01:31:791 (2) - could blanket this slider with (1) to make it look better right, cool idea
17. 01:45:929 (5,6,7) - bad flow, [urlhttp://puu.sh/h2ghv.jpg]try this[/url] I like it this way
18. 01:50:411 - really random sv change, I hear nothing in the music that calls for a change, the stream from 01:51:101 (1) - is a bit higher pitch so the increased spacing there is fine but I think its a bit too much, consider reducing, I will think about the sliders, some modders complain about this, but I won't change any streamspacing or streamshapes (important for every further modder)
19. 02:04:377 (3) - blanket is off fix
20. 02:12:825 (5) - should probably stack with 02:11:618 (7) - not necessary at all
21. 02:35:411 - this is really cool!! <3
22. 02:40:411 (1) - blanket is off on sliderhead ok, but really not important..
23. 02:40:929 (2) - straighten it out a bit so it blankets better ..
24. 02:53:515 (2,3) - these are off, notice how the followpoints between (2) and (3) is slanted hmm, but the pattern should be symmetric..
25. 02:58:342 (2,3,4,5) - these could easily be confused to 1/3 because the spacing change is so sudden no surely not
26. 03:47:480 (2) - stack no one can notice that it's unneceassry and also the space between the straigh sliders is fixed
27. 03:54:204 (2) - can blanket with (1) and (3) better yes.. changed a bit
28. 04:51:199 (3) - I like this pointed downwards hm I think thats ok like it is now
29. 04:59:131 (2,3,4) - could use a bit of movement, and the bigger movement from 05:00:165 (1) - would nicely imo no let this just be a normal oldschooly stack, many modders complain about this but I won't change because it is my opinion.
30. 05:11:199 (1) - center this? It's exactly stacked on the flower.

Nice map and song, I hope it can get ranked

WildOne94 wrote:

Hey There /
Sorry for late mod as i have been on holiday in Jersey ;w;
From the Wild and Hyper's NM/M4M Queue [STD|CTB]

Smoothness

00:02:049 (1) - imo this note would be better extended one more time and remove the reverse (consider making these sliders slower for the soft music) no this is an 1/8 melody and I mapped it this way.


00:22:825 - There is sound here so please map it in. even if it's just all circle notes like this ?? why


00:28:342 (1) - shorten the slider down by one as it fits more I don't understand what you mean
00:33:256 (4) - removing this note will give more sound to the next notes so you can hear it better. this is a normal little stream
00:34:377 (4,5,6) - swap 5,6 over with 4's place cause it sounds better (like i mention later on at 02:08:170 - ) that's absolutely right, man, fixed
00:39:377 (1) - Shorten again no
00:44:291 (4) - remove again haha why
00:46:273 (1) - this should have a finish on the start of the slider also as it has a finish sound in the song yep
00:52:308 (2,3) - imo i would remove (3) and extend the (2) slider reverse as it sounds better. no feels better like this
01:26:101 (4,1) - removing (4) will give more emphasis one (1) I won't remove any 1/2 because it has crucial impact on the flow of a map, remember that.
01:37:308 (6) - bit of a gap in the play here. at least make this one a slider no reason
01:41:101 (1) - please reduce the audio of the timing point here at the start of the slider down to about 50%. It's so loud for a nice song ;w; ok done
01:57:825 (4) - the start of this slider fits more with a circle note so i would remove the reverse and have a single slider after adding a circle note here instead. yes changed a bit


02:03:515 (1) - Add a finish to the start of the slider yes
02:07:049 (4) - remove so other notes can be heard more noooo
02:07:653 (1,2,3) - the claps are a bit loud here. either add a timing point to reduce, Remove or mostly i highly recommend switching to whistles they're ok
02:08:170 (4) - This section would sound better with the music switched around like this yes, again


02:08:946 (6) - shouldn't this note be 02:08:860 - here instead?
02:13:170 (1) - shorten no
02:35:411 (2,3) - watch auto play and see how fast you truly got to be to do this ;w;. I recommend doing this instead I don't watch auto, I play and this part feels perfect


02:36:618 (4) - make into a slider instead no, energykilling


02:49:894 (5) - Just a small idea but it would be nice to delete some of these one notes with not much sound on for emphasis on the next notes (since you were at one point focusing on the dinging sounds) no again, would be flow destruction
02:59:894 (2) - Like here ^ no sound at all feels good
03:20:067 (1,2,3) - omg so faaaast ;w; try slow or find other ways around. it seems so impossible ;w; no it's perfect
03:25:584 (3,4,5) - Curve these instead of a straight line hm ok


03:31:791 (1) - add finish to the start
03:35:067 (3,4,5,6,7,8) - possible curve mirror these? no
03:42:998 - add circle note no (please get more experience in "modding of delete and adding notes")
03:59:204 (4) - shorten by 1 tick and make into a reverse instead no
04:15:584 (9) - ^ but not too essential
04:42:825 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - possible curve mirror again? no
04:49:032 (1) - this reverse does not really fit. imo just have a circle note instead (and also consider deleting 04:48:946 (8) - for more emphasis on the next one too) listen to the music.
04:54:648 (1) - consider this for the intro ones too but make these long nice slow sliders the outro is perfect.


05:02:924 (9) - make into a slider which ends where (2) is
05:08:441 (1) - same as before. just make into a circle note instead
05:08:613 (1) - add finish

Well i hoped this helped
Any questions just pm me or leave a message in my inbox
Good luck

Rumia- wrote:

ww testplay

just a last thing to suggest before pushing this
mostly just hitsounds and neating some parts , feel free to take any.
no kds ~

00:13:170 (5) - how about a whistle on the head here ?
00:14:549 (1) - ^ on the reverse
00:15:929 (3) - ^ you mean (4), sound much cooler, added on (4)
00:18:687 (1) - can be neater adjusted
00:33:429 (6,7) - maybe can fix this curve to something like : https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/3005321 I don't want to make this curve like this, the slider should be antiflow with the little stream, to emphasize this purpose I rotated (7) more.
00:39:032 (6,3,5,6) - how about clap whistle here ? would sound nice with the bgm done. (5) is a whistle and the other s claps, sounded good to me
01:41:101 (1) - i think better remove the clap on the tail tho OH, yeah moved clap and finish to (1)
01:51:704 (8) - maybe move this a bit down to make the curve looks more natural : https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/3005350 for me it's perfect, sorry
02:07:825 (2) - maybe remove this clap would sound nicer imo right
02:26:273 (3) - i think better remove this clap and add clap at 02:26:618 (4) - head instead sounds nice
02:34:894 (6) - would clap on head ? no normally on (1) feels better..
02:37:136 (1) - remove clap , i think the finish only sounds just nice yes
02:40:411 (1) - i think better clap on head instead of tail both
if you agree with ^ , 02:40:929 (2) - add a clap on tail too would be to much clapping, but I made it my own way, listen to it~ until the big violet slider
02:41:791 (7,8) - also would sound nice with clap on head yeah fits perfect
02:55:584 (9) - clap here yeah
02:56:273 (5,5) - how about clap here too ? would be more rhytmic no sorry, also 02:55:929 (1) - finish only here works nice enough , remove clap yes
03:09:204 (4) - i think remove clap here would sound nice yep
03:08:342 (2) - ^ no I like it here
03:21:791 (4) - clap yep, good idea
03:32:136 (2) - hmm after few plays i think ctrl+g works with the flow better imo OMG how perfect!!
03:34:722 - i think its better to add a circle here , the break sounds kinda awkward , tho here have sound to , maybe suggest to make like this : http://puu.sh/hbYaX.jpg works so perfect, thanks
03:37:308 (7) - remove clap on tail and add clap on 03:37:653 (1) - head hmm I don't know why I did this
03:59:377 (5,6) - same as ^ yep..
04:04:033 (1) - nc here ~ yes
04:36:273 (7) - clap ~ uuh nice
04:45:584 (1) - remove clap on reverse ? hmm no
04:46:877 (8) - move a bit down like this : http://osu.ppy.sh/ss/3007732 you're right, was a bit inconsistent here
04:48:342 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1) - maybe this stream flow can be curve nicely tho , just a rough suggestion : http://osu.ppy.sh/ss/3007737 I changed it for better flow but not like yours ~

Rumia- wrote:

#1

Fort wrote:

you need to improve your own mapping skill to make this ranked!

Cherry Blossom wrote:

Many patterns look untidy, and quite random.

BeatofIke wrote:

My goodness CB. He's a new mapper lol. Be easy with him. He is still learning the process, so no need to overdo it. One step at a time. Don't get me wrong, you did the right thing and the bubble pop is valid.

Anyways yugijedi, don't expect a instant nomination as a new mapper (unless you're like a few talented mappers like RLC, which is quite rare). Remapping your first few maps is common for newer mappers so don't feel disappointed. Just remember to have fun mapping and have fun learning the process as well. Also, considering that this is a marathon map (which I don't recommend for newer mappers to aim for nomination), changes are you will need to remap a lot of times. This is just my opinion though and this is what I've learned from experience and observations.

BeatofIke wrote:

My goodness CB. He's a new mapper lol. Be easy with him. He is still learning the process, so no need to overdo it. One step at a time. Don't get me wrong, you did the right thing and the bubble pop is valid.

ByBy_ChAn wrote:

I checked the map and I totally agree with you CB. I saw some sliders which I don't like so much and I dislike some placement of the streams because those looks weird and I feel the movement of the cursor looks desoriented. My suggestion to mapper is to get some mods on patterns,blankets,stream placements,hitsounding and rhythms before bubble to improve the quality of the mapset to be ranked.

ByBy_ChAn wrote:

Sorry for I mentioned the blankets because I guess I saw some blankets there ;w;

Cherry Blossom wrote:

Hello, this map clearly lacks of quality.
Default volume is too loud and it sounds really odd to use default Normal hitsound for this kind of map, especially on the stream part. Poor Hitsounding and I really recommend you to add more improvements on them. At least, decrease the volume.
Well, let's talk about the playability of the map. Many patterns look untidy, and quite random. They do not really reflect the real impact of the song. They also look inconsistent, i mean, you make difficult things on parts which are supposed to be more calm than the kiai time which is the most powerful part of song, i have an example of this : 04:04:894 (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) - , It's clearly something you should avoid.
And the other way round.

Smoothness

1. 00:24:204 (1,2,3,4) - This is the first kiai part, there should be more distance between these objects to introduce the next patterns which are a little fast and surprising because the first pattern is quite slow and the player don't expect a speedup, the song is not faster here and more dense here, there is no reason for a speed change. remapped
2. 00:29:377 (5,6,1,2,3) - This is uncomfortable and difficult to handle these circles, the motion is like a "S" and the player needs much aim to be able to handle these circles, i recomend you to do something like a ctrl+g on 00:29:722 (1,2) - , or you can decrease the distance between each objects. fixed another way
3. 00:41:101 (3,4) - there should be more distance between these sliders, because on your previous patterns there is more distance between them and it should be better if you keep consistency to make these pattern more intuitive to play. Plus 00:41:618 - is a strong note, and make it more distanced will be nice for emphasis. yes
4. 00:52:308 (2) - i can't see any reason for using a reversed 1/4 slider. There is nothing audible on the blue tick, and following the blue tick does not really make sense. ok changed
5. 00:55:929 (1,2) - This is overmapping, useless difficulty. As i said for ^, there is nothing audible on blue ticks, and following them in order to make this map harder is not recommended to do, and you should avoid that.
6. 00:56:618 (5,6) - This is difficult to get, because 00:56:273 (3,6) - are overlapped, and you should make this pattern easier to read. Make it more airy and try to avoid overlaps like this : remapped this one and the previous one now I think it looks pretty cool
   
   SPOILER

   
7. 00:57:308 (1,1,2) - These objects are too close, for the sake of playability, there should be more distance between them. yes
8. 01:07:653 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - This stream is a little overdone. The distance between each circles is little high for what these circles follow. The notes on 1/4 are a little difficult to hear, you should reduce a little the distance between each circles. that is the first thing I don't agree with you. Every stream like this has something like a corner and the same spacing, the spacing is not extreme and the 1/4 are hearable as anywhere else. son no reason for me to change that.. I also don't see a quality issue here, the stream follows a clear path and then turns at a white tick.
9. 01:11:273 (2,3,4,5,6,7,1,2,3,4,5,6) - This is weird, the stronger notes are followed by 01:12:653 (2,3,4,5,6) - which are easier than the star pattern you made which follows something less powerful. you should increase the distance between 01:12:998 (3,4,5,6) - because the strongest beat is 01:13:170 (4) - and to emphasize it, you should use a jump. remapped anyways
10. 01:18:515 (3) - Here, you should not use a 1/4 slider, the stream starts here 01:18:687 - , not here 01:18:515 - . Same for 02:55:756 (10) - this is the next thing I don't understand. if you are so strict with 1/4 use, then why don't you listen to the song very closely.. there is something audible what is DIFFERENT to the tone which I can hear during the stream, so why shouldn't I use a DIFFERENT object at 01:18:515 (3) - which is 1/4 ? Something like this has high mapping quality in my opinion. the next thing is right, there is nothing there at 02:55:756 (10) - just an overmap
11. 01:51:101 (1) - When playing, this circles looks hidden by the previous objects, but it is not. For the sake of readability, it should be better if you don't overlap objects here, the stream is difficult, and you should make it as readable as possible. okay that's right. now it has "quality circularity flow"
12. 01:57:825 (4,5) - It is not really a good idea to stack these objects, because the strong beat here 01:57:998 - should be emphasized to give a better impression. For me, a stack is a way to emphasize something.. If you noticed it, in this map there aren't much stacks, JUST at places where something should be emphasized, as a BN who's reputation as an objective person predeces him, you should accept that.Plus, the NC should be here because the combo starts here, not here 01:58:342 - . Same for 03:37:136 (6,7) - and many more. my mistake, yes
13. 02:07:308 (7,1) - This is counter intuitive, the player expects that there is a 1/2 gap here, not a 1/1. There should be more distance between them. Or you can use a 1/2 slider instead of 02:07:308 (7) - That can work. distance increased
14. 02:27:825 (5,6,7) - These circles are a little overkill, because these previous sliders 02:25:584 (1,2,3) - are really close, and that plays really weird, and it is surprising too. There should be a higher distance between 02:25:584 (1,2,3) - and less distance between 02:27:825 (5,6,7) - . Make them a little more balanced. ok, your right they're are a bit too far but again, this has a purpose, to introduce the next increased SV so these circles aren't related to the previous patterns, they are something like a prelude for the next pattern. I changed it though, because it really was too high distance. I tell you my purpose at every suggestion of you because I want to show you that nothing is random here, and my map does not deserve something like the word RANDOM.
15. 02:36:101 (1,2,3,4) - This jump looks a little overdone, the distance between them is too high, you should reduce the distance between each circles on this triangle 02:36:101 (1,2,3) - this is the next thing I do not understand. this pattern causes so much energy, this is probably the best pattern in my map. The crowd of people I asked for testplay has one opinion, this pattern is fun. I understand people who are telling me that this jump is too big, but these people cannot play the rest of the map. your rank is better than #1000, and you don't think this jump makes fun? really..? the music is soo strong here and it fits perfect.
16. 02:48:687 (4,5) - same as ^, there is no reason for large jumps like this, especially after something which slowdowns when the current atmosphere is not changing. Try something like this instead : yes you're right.
    SPOILER

    
17. 02:53:170 (1,2) - The angle is a little clunky and that makes this pattern not really comfortable to play, I suggest you to increase the angle between these objects to make this pattern more comfortable to play, just see : yeah
    
    SPOILER

    
18. 03:02:825 (1,2) - The distance between these objects is low compared to the previous and next patterns. This is something weird which should be fixed, because there is no reason to reduce the distance here. yeah I noticed that you're absolutely right, I changed the order of the circles in a flowy way
19. 03:29:032 (1,2,3) - This plays on a close angle and, this current pattern is not really comfortable to play. You should make it more airy and increase the angle between these objects, you have enough space to do whatever you want, so you can do something like yes you are right. my purpose here was the kinda "swing" motion to the right and then back, but like you say, a more airy version works better.
    
    SPOILER

    
20. 04:02:136 (5,6,7) - There should be a larger angle between these objects, to make this pattern better concerning gameplay, try something which is smoother like :
    SPOILER

    
21. 04:04:549 (5,6) - This is "too much", there is nothing audible on blue ticks and using two 1/4 sliders is kind of overmapping and useless difficulty on something already difficult. You should avoid them. listen to the music. if you have good speakers (maybe a subwoofer here ) you can here the wobbling bass (I know it's a very low frequency, but it is audible). I also asked to creator of this song especially for this reason, "where his 1/4 basses end". You can't here it with hitsounds, yes, but I will probably hitsounds everything new..
22. 04:04:894 (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) - As i said above, this patterns looks out of place, it is also overdone. There is too much distance between each circles, you should at least reduce the distance between each circles. This pattern is way easier than 04:10:411 (1,2,3,4,5,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - for example. They follow the same sounds. I will clearly remap this, until it has enough quality to hold on with the rest of my map.
23. 04:16:446 (1,2,3,4,5,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2) - same as ^ etc. yes
24. 04:38:860 (4,5) - Make this beginning more noticeable, this pattern looks a bit messy because this overlap is werid and easily avoidable. See yes, I done like this.
    
    SPOILER

    

Fort wrote:

you need to improve your own mapping skill to make this ranked!

Yes he is right, i don't really think that someone that does not have any ranked maps and not experienced enough with modding could get a bubble after 1 month.
You got almost 20 mods and i think that for an average approval map, there are too many, it looks weird to see that a map really lacks of quality when it has received almost 20 mods. You should remap some parts, as an old chinese BAT said, remapping is better than 30 mods. And that shows that you have interests in being better at mapping and improving your own skills.
I've pointed out the most important things, you should also work on hitsounding.
For now, i'll leave a bubble pop icon. You can call me back when you finally feel ready for a rebubble but I won't recheck it unless there are improvements and enough quality to get rebubbled and considered as ready for approval.

Rakuen wrote:

As posted on the board by Cherry Blossom

Some mods here, hopefully would help

Legend

Default = Normal mods
Blue = Strongly recommended
Red = Unrankable issue
Pink = Will be discussed if not changed

General

• Just so, we all have different points of "ranking a map"
  
  For example, some mappers just want everyone else to play their maps (song), even it's crappy or anything, and some rank a very quality map and let everyone else to remember (ofcoz not just these). It's good to have an aim tho.
  
  Anyways, I'd suggest first ranked map with a lot more DS instead of jumps, which might help to make your map more neatly. Especially, when we don't have enough experience in mapping OR playing (so we know where to place jump and how far between each note by playing experience)

Hitsound

• I'd use claps at places like 00:25:239 - 00:25:929 - 00:26:618 (5) - and so on, can hear snare hit

Smoothness

• Basically the map looks fine to play, but maybe just not really neat

1. Din't get what diff name means by "Smoothness"
2. 00:11:877 (2) - Wrongly snapped, it's at 1/8 > 00:11:834 - fixed!
3. 00:15:584 (2) - Don't think it's necessary to use 2.9x spacing here, it's too far. The down beat is at 00:15:929 (3) - so I'd let (3) be more jumpy instead. I think it's ok they're 1/1! and at 174 bpm you can't call 1/1 "a jump".
4. 00:16:618 (5,6) - At this part, you can hear (6) is slightly louder than (5), so I'd make (6) a jump and (5) closer to previous note
5. 00:17:998 - Might wanna 5% slider tick as well, sounds unbalanced for just slider tail yeah
6. 00:18:687 (1,2,3,4) - Try not to randomly place them if you're aiming for pattern, look at the pics, you'll realize: right, fixed
   
   Image

   
   _
   
7. 00:32:136 (6,7,1) - Make them same distance would be more neater remapped anyways
8. 00:50:411 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - I'd not force stack them on previous note, such as 00:49:894 (3) - on slider head of 00:49:032 (1) - , remember the lighting is on slider tail. remapped
   ^ If you don't agree with this, why not make stacks at 00:38:860 (4,5,6,7,1,2,3,4,5,6,1,2,3) - more okay to read
9. 01:18:515 (3) - Overmapped, just make it a circle listen to the music, I will emphasize it later I'm working on hitsounding...
10. 01:21:963 - Inaudible slider tail could be unrankable, don't be afraid to sound them full volume??
11. 01:29:722 (2) - NC here for consistency with 01:28:342 (1) - (8 stream hits ea) yes
12. 01:30:411 - Next time you map parts like this, make it more densed. It basically sounds like the other parts with a lot covers and drums, just the instrument changed. Listen closely, drum is hitting non-stop. okay I know what you mean here I though it would be a bit varied if I map something WHICH FITS but is chilling here.. But I will remember that in the future.
    Rest is not a good option if you wanna map for approvals. Make sure the whole song is balanced in its difficulty (Extra, in this case)
13. 01:40:411 (7) - Remove this, and place a circle on 01:40:584 - , would it sound nicer? It matches with the instrument imo yes, mathces not good now I will map it another way
14. 01:50:411 (5,6,7,8) - A bit messy here, I'd suggest to decrease unnecessary stacks like 01:50:067 (3) - + 01:50:756 (7) - (number is covered), 01:50:411 (5) - + 01:50:756 (7) - + 01:51:101 (1) - remapped
15. 01:51:963 (3,4,5,6,7,8,1) - Is this a small flower shape? Wouldn't it be better like: yes, adjusted
    
    Image

    
16. 02:07:480 - I'd place something here, the map itself is non-stop, so another circle wouldn't differ. Long slider like 02:10:239 (5) - is likely counted as small break cuz players don't have to keep tapping Increased distance
17. 02:35:411 - Dangerous part, try not to accelerate too much here. If you do, 02:35:584 - should be slowed down, it sounds like "down" part I'm sorry that I have to say something against a "red complaint"... but I think this is not a slow down tone it is a crazy electric melodic white sound.. and to have the next slider very slow is perfect I think... for me this pattern is really nice..
18. 02:36:101 (1,2,3,4) - Too big jump, even the end of KIAI which is 02:13:687 (2,3,1,2) - doesn't have that big jump yes I think that jump really has to be big but ok, I moved the (3) much more down. The sound really fits!!
19. 02:46:618 (1) - Remove slider whistle, it sounds better to listen to the music, not the whistle ok
20. 02:55:756 (10) - Overmapped fixed
21. 02:58:687 - Why clap here? fits, I think
22. 03:07:653 (2,1,2) - Don't try to create a rhythm yourself here, it doesn't sound great for me. Just fully stick to the music if you want safe rank ?? I'm mapping exactly with the music, but just the most audible tones here, that works fine I think.
23. 03:20:411 (3) - As mentioned before about slider tail. And there's a sound at 03:20:584 - if you remove the notes and listen carefully okay, I think I've done it a cool way
24. 04:53:786 (3,4) - I'd space them to let players realize there are gaps, not same rhythm. Pure reading sucks when the song is leading out no it is fun

Good luck!

1. About your hitsounds, i recommend you to use this kind of snare you used on this part 01:08:342 - with soft samplesets, Normal hitsounds sound a little noisy and this does not give the real impact of the song. Use soft hitsounds with it. Just rename it to soft-hitclap2 or something like this.
2. 01:18:515 (3,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - This is what i expected here concerning hitsounds, good job.
3. 01:27:653 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1) - try to use default soft-hitwhistle on this stream which should be hitsounded to give a better impression, just use a whistle every white tick
4. 01:30:411 - to 01:37:308 - This part should be remade, because there are inconsistencies between objects, and that may be misleading. You should keep consistency with spacing on this part.
5. 01:41:446 - to 01:52:480 - same things as 01:27:653 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1) - . And also 02:55:929 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,5) - and all streams with the same sound followed.
6. 02:21:446 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - as i said last time, this is a little too much, you used too many circles for a part which is supposed to be a little easier than kiai part, i recommend you to use some sliders here, and it will be also better if you avoid high jumps. Same for 04:05:411 (1,2,3,4,5,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - and many more ?
7. 02:35:411 (2,3,1) - I realized that this motion can be improved here, it is better to make a "S" motion instead of a "M" motion, try something like this instead
   
   SPOILER

   

1. present soft-hitnormal should be cutted till it got like 1.2 sec empty sound. New file. Old LordRaika's samples sometims got that problem.
2. 04:49:131 - can't find reason why you add so strange time lime. I think is much better move it to normall 04:49:118 - . Well i dont see any reason to do it, maybei am wrong.
3. mmm i think you need a bit more metadatta. At least "dnb" till it got so clear liquid beat. Btw, copy?
4. dont see any reason to use 9.2 ar cause you got slow intro and end parts, but well its your decidion.
5. in you storyboard add string in "//Background and Video events". It will remove useless bg which esist during all song. It will remove overload somewhere on 02:04:798 - . It wont remove overaod at start but i think its nvm but youc an try bns in case if rankability but normally dqs never happend cause of sb.
   

   Sprite,Background,Centre,"cindy_bg.png",320,240
    F,0,0,,0

Cherry Blossom wrote:

Hello.

It's better than last time, but this current version is not good enough yet. I'll give you things which can improve your map's quality.

1. About your hitsounds, i recommend you to use this kind of snare you used on this part 01:08:342 - with soft samplesets, Normal hitsounds sound a little noisy and this does not give the real impact of the song. Use soft hitsounds with it. Just rename it to soft-hitclap2 or something like this. rehitsounded
2. 01:18:515 (3,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - This is what i expected here concerning hitsounds, good job.
3. 01:27:653 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1) - try to use default soft-hitwhistle on this stream which should be hitsounded to give a better impression, just use a whistle every white tick ok
4. 01:30:411 - to 01:37:308 - This part should be remade, because there are inconsistencies between objects, and that may be misleading. You should keep consistency with spacing on this part. yes
5. 01:41:446 - to 01:52:480 - same things as 01:27:653 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1) - . And also 02:55:929 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,5) - and all streams with the same sound followed. ok
6. 02:21:446 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - I don't know what is your problem here, no one complained about this and there aren't too many circles.. as i said last time, this is a little too much, you used too many circles for a part which is supposed to be a little easier than kiai part, i recommend you to use some sliders here, and it will be also better if you avoid high jumps. Same for 04:05:411 (1,2,3,4,5,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - ok will add some sliders here and many more ? ?
7. 02:35:411 (2,3,1) - I realized that this motion can be improved here, it is better to make a "S" motion instead of a "M" motion, try something like this instead I think my cursor motion works better
   
   SPOILER

   

Things i really recommend to you :
- Try to get hitsounding mods. Hitsounds on a map are very important. got 3 hs mods, really helped me
- Ask some BNs for testplays, and ask them what plays well or not. everything plays well
- Try to keep consistency throughout your map, that means don't add sudden spikes to your map like these jumps part that are still overdone. I made the jump easier which created a "SPIKE" in starrating and there is really NO jump in my map now which is too far, there a just too many cricles.

You still can call me back.

1. When comparing with Normal samples, soft-hitnormal is quite...unaudible. Maybe you can change them to drum-hitnormal. Especially in your kiai times. Unaudible notes make players feel like they are clicking nothing.
2. In my opinion the sb is fine, but it still need to be checked by some professionals I guess.

1. 00:07:653 (4) - it will look much better if you could make it symmetrical.
   Simple way: move 4th grid to x276 y212.
2. 00:14:549 (1,2) - compared with former parts the spacing is a bit too big imo. I recommend you to move them closer.
   
   to somewhere like

   
3. 00:17:653 (8) - slider end sound weird because there's no sound in the song. add a green line at 00:18:601 - to mute it? as you did in 01:33:084 -
4. 00:29:032 (3) - as I said in Gerenal. Since the acute-angle flow emphasized this circle, adding some sound to it will make this part much better. (e.g. change it to Normal sample)
5. 00:40:067 (3) - ^. Also the song has a strong sound here. Add a Normal-addition clap?
6. 00:58:860 (2,5,8) - 8 feels too far to 01:00:067 (1) - imo. I recommend you to keep these notes in same spacing as 00:58:687 (1,4,7) - . It will also make this pattern looks better. (well, maybe, I guess, huh
   
   looks like

   
7. 01:06:101 (2) - a jump will emphasize the latter note of it. So here I recommend you to put 2 closer to 1 and make a jump between 2 & 3. It will make this part more logical and fit the song better.
   
   put it like this

   
8. 01:18:773 (2,3,4,5,6,7) - Normal-addition whistles fit quite well here. Try it? (just normal addition, samples should still be soft
9. 01:21:446 (4,5) - Actually in the song these two parts are same. So 1/2 slider is enough for 5 imo.
10. 01:29:722 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - The song is fading-out here, while you are using spaced streams and jumps...It doesn't fit the song imo. Using something gentler will be better.
    
    possible solution(used 0.9x sv in yellow combo)

    
11. 01:37:480 - ...nothing here? Sorry I don't understand it...
12. 01:50:756 (7) - The placement feels a bit sudden for me (it didn't follow former notes' regularity). Former short sliders can be divedid into 3 groups (left-right left-right left-right). So move 7 to the left side of 8 is better imo.
    
    example

    
13. 02:07:308 (7) - I suggest change it to a 1/2 slider because the rhythm is a bit empty here.
14. 02:15:239 (5,6) - players have to slow down here because smaller spacing. However slowing down doesn't fit the song because 02:14:549 (1,2,3,4) - are still jumps. Maybe you need to rearrange this pattern.
    Simple way: ctrl+g. So 4 & 5 will also become a jump.
15. 02:24:894 (5,6) - again. move 5 to x308 y160 could help.
16. 02:26:273 (3) - ctrl+g? just a suggestion
17. 02:35:411 (2,3) - Well, to be honest I got scared at first time. This fast slider is a bit too sudden.
    
    make it gentler

    
18. 02:57:998 (1,2,3,4,5) - same to 01:29:722 - . This spaced stream is really off.
19. 03:17:308 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4) - Nice idea.
20. 03:52:136 (6,1) - Not a good flow imo. I suggest move 1 to the down side. It will plays better.
    
    example

    
21. 04:03:171 (6,1) - ^, and same solution.
22. 04:10:239 (8,1) - Also odd flow imo. I suggest just copy 04:10:756 (2) - and ctrl+h, which gives better flow and looking.
23. 04:12:480 (5,6,7,8) -
    1. ctrl+g 5 & 6, then all jumps from 1 to 8 go anticlockwise. Logical jumps plays much better than totally random jumps.
    2. move 8 to the upside of 1. Current flow of 04:12:998 (8,1) - is quite odd to me.
    
    in the end this should be like

    
24. 04:29:894 (2,5) - looks too far from 3. Try move them closer?
    
    example

    
25. 04:48:342 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1) - ...well, third time. This spaced stream is really too off.
26. 04:58:786 (1,2,3,4) - I recommend you to separate them. I'm sure this will fit the song better.
    
    exapmle

    

imoutosan wrote:

I guess I should begin mod this now... I want this to be ranked ;w;

imoutosan wrote:

I guess I should begin mod this now... I want this to be ranked ;w; Then I got a cold. *cough
Ok. whatever.
[General]

1. When comparing with Normal samples, soft-hitnormal is quite...unaudible. Maybe you can change them to drum-hitnormal. Especially in your kiai times. Unaudible notes make players feel like they are clicking nothing. I think I will make it louder.. imo the soft-hitnormal gives the right dnb feeling, you know..
2. In my opinion the sb is fine, but it still need to be checked by some professionals I guess. ok

[Smoothness]
not that smooth imo just a joke, don't mind

Bold = please think it over carefully

1. 00:07:653 (4) - it will look much better if you could make it symmetrical. yes!!
   Simple way: move 4th grid to x276 y212.
2. 00:14:549 (1,2) - compared with former parts the spacing is a bit too big imo. I recommend you to move them closer. imo it is cool like this
   
   to somewhere like

   
3. 00:17:653 (8) - slider end sound weird because there's no sound in the song. add a green line at 00:18:601 - to mute it? as you did in 01:33:084 - I muted before the tick so there is also no sound at the end
4. 00:29:032 (3) - as I said in Gerenal. Since the acute-angle flow emphasized this circle, adding some sound to it will make this part much better. (e.g. change it to Normal sample) yeah I think that's right
5. 00:40:067 (3) - ^. Also the song has a strong sound here. Add a Normal-addition clap? as above, will change it.
6. 00:58:860 (2,5,8) - 8 feels too far to 01:00:067 (1) - imo. I recommend you to keep these notes in same spacing as 00:58:687 (1,4,7) - . It will also make this pattern looks better. (well, maybe, I guess, huh should be exactly like this, I want to train people who don't have a clear triangle movement.
   
   looks like

   
7. 01:06:101 (2) - a jump will emphasize the latter note of it. So here I recommend you to put 2 closer to 1 and make a jump between 2 & 3. It will make this part more logical and fit the song better. that's a good idea!
   
   put it like this

   
8. 01:18:773 (2,3,4,5,6,7) - Normal-addition whistles fit quite well here. Try it? (just normal addition, samples should still be soft yes
9. 01:21:446 (4,5) - Actually in the song these two parts are same. So 1/2 slider is enough for 5 imo. yes
10. 01:29:722 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - The song is fading-out here, while you are using spaced streams and jumps...It doesn't fit the song imo. Using something gentler will be better. I don't think so, it fits perfect for me, like a bridge to the next part of the song
    
    possible solution(used 0.9x sv in yellow combo)

    
11. 01:37:480 - ...nothing here? Sorry I don't understand it... I follow different synths here, listen to the type of tones
12. 01:50:756 (7) - The placement feels a bit sudden for me (it didn't follow former notes' regularity). Former short sliders can be divedid into 3 groups (left-right left-right left-right). So move 7 to the left side of 8 is better imo. right
    
    example

    
13. 02:07:308 (7) - I suggest change it to a 1/2 slider because the rhythm is a bit empty here. no I think it is good like this
14. 02:15:239 (5,6) - players have to slow down here because smaller spacing. However slowing down doesn't fit the song because 02:14:549 (1,2,3,4) - are still jumps. Maybe you need to rearrange this pattern. I want it like this
    Simple way: ctrl+g. So 4 & 5 will also become a jump.
15. 02:24:894 (5,6) - again. move 5 to x308 y160 could help. ^
16. 02:26:273 (3) - ctrl+g? just a suggestion wow nice
17. 02:35:411 (2,3) - Well, to be honest I got scared at first time. This fast slider is a bit too sudden. no it is ok
    
    make it gentler

    
18. 02:57:998 (1,2,3,4,5) - same to 01:29:722 - . This spaced stream is really off. I like to emphasize parts like this, and if I have a system, as you see, it is okay.
19. 03:17:308 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4) - Nice idea.
20. 03:52:136 (6,1) - Not a good flow imo. I suggest move 1 to the down side. It will plays better. I think it is good flow, did you play this part? Because the zigzag motion from the end of the slider to the circles works very nice for me..
    
    example

    
21. 04:03:171 (6,1) - ^, and same solution. ^
22. 04:10:239 (8,1) - Also odd flow imo. I suggest just copy 04:10:756 (2) - and ctrl+h, which gives better flow and looking. yeah that works better, you're right
23. 04:12:480 (5,6,7,8) -
    1. ctrl+g 5 & 6, then all jumps from 1 to 8 go anticlockwise. that's best!! thanks Logical jumps plays much better than totally random jumps.
    2. move 8 to the upside of 1. Current flow of 04:12:998 (8,1) - is quite odd to me.
    
    in the end this should be like

    
24. 04:29:894 (2,5) - looks too far from 3. Try move them closer? hm no
    
    example

    
25. 04:48:342 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1) - ...well, third time. This spaced stream is really too off. Again, I emphasize things like this and that is the system..
26. 04:58:786 (1,2,3,4) - I recommend you to separate them. I'm sure this will fit the song better. okay good I will do what sooo many modder said, seperate them haha
    
    exapmle

    

I guess that's all. Good luck!

1. 00:04:204 (3) - That actually ends on an 8th tick not a 4th Image
2. 00:11:791 (1,2) - Stacking those normally would be much better because It would be a better indicator to the player that those notes are an 8th apart
   especially because its a lot easier to tell how far each note is from the other because of the approach circles
3. 00:40:239 (4) - Stack the 4 under the 3 and stack the 00:40:584 (6) - under the 5? It's just a suggestion but I think the stacks put a nice emphasis on the drums.
4. 00:56:101 (2,5,6,7) - Ctrl+G the 5 & the 6 and stack the 7 under the 2. It flows a lot better that way.
5. 02:02:653 (4) - Ctrl+G that so it flows better
6. 03:07:653 (2) - There isn't anything in the music for that to be mapping it should be moved to 03:07:480
7. 03:07:998 - Add a note here stacked under the 1 and move 03:08:170 (3) - under the stack aswell like this. That combined with the mod for 03:07:653 (2) fits the music much nicer.
   04:06:618 (3,4) - Ctrl+G those. Unexpected changes don't make the map exciting or innovative they just make it confusing.