Raymond wrote:
quick mod
Raymond wrote:
quick mod
Raymond wrote:
quick
Kuo Kyoka wrote:
quick mod before set off everything again
[Easy]
00:17:057 - this note also have cymbal, you might want to add a note here ok
00:25:527 (25527|0,26233|4) - instrument on here is kind of different with the rest of banjo sounds, I mean with 1/4, personal I think long notes fits it well pm
00:28:351 (28351|6,29057|2) - same goes^
00:29:763 (29763|4,29763|6) - no cymbal here, I think you mean two notes with banjo and string sounds? something different sound without adding hitsounds
01:32:939 (92939|0) - what about move it to 3rd? It sounds different with the rest on 1st, not a kick sound too ok
01:34:704 (94704|3) - I think better to remove this, the string sound stands with long note right there sound better ^
01:50:057 - start on here, personal: http://puu.sh/tzzOo/c5816eb353.png, due to this: http://puu.sh/tzzPl/8bdb5c041a.png stand for the pitch sound, http://puu.sh/tzzQO/b4a720cb52.png stand for main instrument, sound better than it to me last one looks better
01:51:645 (111645|3) - can be end on 01:53:057 - no good
01:52:351 (112351|6) - move to 01:52:527 - for main instrument, sound better than follow kick sound then instrument to me ^
[Normal]
00:09:998 (9998|1,10351|6,10351|4,10880|1,11057|4,11057|6,11410|0,11410|3) - you can ctrl h here for instrument split it's too short to split them
00:14:057 (14057|1) - move to 5th for pitch ok
00:19:704 (19704|5) - same goes here but on 3rd ^
00:51:998 (51998|2,51998|0) - opinional: I think it's better to keep one note on here for like on 00:49:175 (49175|0,50586|6) - ^
01:35:939 - what about this refection: http://puu.sh/tzAo8/19daac0bf1.png also good too, and i need to fix up other part
01:47:233 (107233|4,107322|5,108469|2,108645|2,108733|1) - same with before if you argeed ^
02:32:410 (152410|0,152586|0) - move to 2nd for balance
[Hard]
01:33:822 (93822|0,93822|4) - I dont get why it have to be 2 notes here, if it was for kick, then on here should be same 01:34:175 - yeah , you're right. there a kick sound i missed to put here
01:57:116 - add a note for main melody on 7th for like 01:56:410 (116410|3,116410|0) - the 4th col note it's already in melody note
02:12:645 (132645|1) - I think it's better to move it to 4th for pitch moved
02:32:939 - personally I think it's better to make some mini jacks here, gap on this part to insane is a little large potential hard is for stream note. if i need to make slight jack or mini jack, i have to give some gap with no note before jack coming to reduce fingertap tension.
[Insane]
01:19:175 (79175|0) - remove hitsound for the rest of instrument (i mean to make it the same, like on hard diff) agree this
01:28:351 (88351|3,88351|5,88351|1) - these notes got a different sounds than other 3 I guess rearrange whole part this section
01:56:057 (116057|2) - hitsound on here should be on 01:55:880 (115880|3) - already??
01:58:704 (118704|5,118704|6,119057|5,119057|1,119057|6) - its kind of weird to have this, where this one have 2 notes but the rest are 3
here is solution: actually i dont have any ideas here, but maybe may the next pattern go this way sound better http://puu.sh/tzBHK/0db492e5f5.png there an error note on first column has conflicted with LN ends, managed to make it 567 123 567 123
02:15:116 (135116|0,135116|2) - move to the right 1 column? it's not snare sound on here agian not good enough
[Infection]
00:38:939 - If the normal kick sound is 2 notes, on here should be 3 with melody on here added for strings melody
00:40:351 - same ^
00:40:704 - 4 notes compared with 00:39:292 - added maintain as 4 notes
01:58:704 - same goes with insane on this part, I think it's better to find a solution here done
That's all!
Anyway, here is the better BG resolution: http://puu.sh/tzCjy/bfade152f1.png
Call me back soon, gl
Totally agree with thisExPew wrote:
i just want tell you guys to consider these things:
1) criticism =/= you are forced to follow/change as instructed.
2) if you feel uncomfortable, you have the freedom to create your own map without anyone hating about it. this is where the variation and diversity exist.
3) i have to repeat this again since you are clearly you missing the point. if they were that serious in disqus, they should have posted their thoughts in the thread itself to make it more constructive and relevant. contribute to the map if you need to justify your reason. make sure to understand the point at (1) above too.
4) those who said about not being skilled enough to play the chart, congratulations for showing your prejudice to the public.
5) to satisfy all players is not an easy task. keep in mind different people has different taste. you know how this works.
So because the current map/pattern is not YOUR taste or the map/pattern isn't up to the standard YOU want, by that you can just say he is not capable of this?juankristal wrote:
And even more seriously, Kuo Kyoka, I imagine there is a rule saying dont nominate stuff you cant judge right? I mean, Mazzerin stuff from STD is the first thing that comes to mind and I think this is a pretty similar comparision. Just leaving it there for you to think about it.
hey so I'd like to point out that when that rule came into fruition the implication was that the nominator can play the map he's nominating or at least be at a level where he can almost play it, because you can't really properly judge hard af map with just theory, you gotta be able to FEEL how it plays unless the map does pretty standard things but fasterYaHao wrote:
So because the current map/pattern is not YOUR taste or the map/pattern isn't up to the standard YOU want, by that you can just say he is not capable of this?
He mod this map more than several times, there are efforts and actual works behind this bubble icon.
Unlike someone who just walk into the thread, give one long essay (Which some of the points are valued, i agree) but without giving any timing point, any suggestions on how to improve the mapping quality, plus 80% of the points are whether "Personal" or "Community think"instead of being "Subjective". Do you think this person is capable of popping this map? Dont think so.
this is a dangerous precedent to set, "I can just ignore QAT's reasons and do whatever I want, that guy did it as well lol", that can honestly dig even deeper hole for mania ranking process that it's already inExPew wrote:
updated.
the jack ending part was reverted like old qualified version.
Hey that is the next map I was planning to pop. Don't spoil my stuffYaHao wrote:
Be able to play surely will help you a lot on judging a map, but that's not everything. Of course, "just theory" is not gonna stand either.
Let's quit arguing whether a BN can or not judge this map, its pointless and i dont think this can do any help to the map itself, plus i can find many examples of BN icon a map which is beyond his playing skill. http://osu.ppy.sh/forum/p/5771261
Less talking, some actual work (like a proper mod) to improve the map will be helpful, or even quote the QAT mod if not agree with pew's reply to them, cause i dont see any of you two did that.
Let's do everyone a favor and drop the condescending tone here. You're targeting juankristal for his point and acting as if he's the only one that has expressed any sort of concern about this map being ranked. I'm gonna cut straight to the point here and not beat around the bush: you're trying to abuse intersubjectivity to get something absolutely ridiculous ranked, because "it follows ranking requirements" and therefore, should be allowed. The fact of the matter is that there's been a clear disrespect by ExPew because a section that was previously reverted as suggested by others has been added back into the map. That's not alright under any circumstance — that screams "well, others have vetted this, that means it is ok."YaHao wrote:
So because the current map/pattern is not YOUR taste or the map/pattern isn't up to the standard YOU want, by that you can just say he is not capable of this?juankristal wrote:
And even more seriously, Kuo Kyoka, I imagine there is a rule saying dont nominate stuff you cant judge right? I mean, Mazzerin stuff from STD is the first thing that comes to mind and I think this is a pretty similar comparision. Just leaving it there for you to think about it.
He mod this map more than several times, there are efforts and actual works behind this bubble icon.
Unlike someone who just walk into the thread, give one long essay (Which some of the points are valued, i agree) but without giving any timing point, any suggestions on how to improve the mapping quality, plus 80% of the points are whether "Personal" or "Community think"instead of being "Subjective". Do you think this person is capable of popping this map? Dont think so.
The purpose of beatmap modding is to get the map to the highest quality out of the beatmap. Those who are modding don't have to change one's attitude in most cases — however, when you have players who absolutely dislike the map, and various impartial people saying that the structure is basically unplayable/unenjoyable, that should be an immediate red flag that something like this is an issue. While juankristal might not have been the best at making his point by adding a bit of a tactless statement about the song/map, the point is that this map presents a serious issue for another reason as well:richardfeder wrote:
...did you pop this bubble on a bn's point of view with specific reasons regarding any technical issues presented in the mapset, or did you just pop it because you don't like Expew's attitude and the fact that he declined mods with legit justification? I do believe that, despite mapper's attitude is a huge factor in the ranking process, we do not veto a map just because its owner is an asshole(and Expew is not an asshole, nor is he trying to be arrogant and shit at people). Modders are here to express their opinions and offer helps to the map, but here to not change one's attitude.
The moment something like this hits ranked, it's going to assist in setting a precedence that states "well, ExPew managed to get this kind of map ranked, I should be able to do it too." This kind of mentality enables a snowfall effect that transcends this single map for the purpose of ranks: people will feel like they have the ability to "innovate" or "try something new" in a map, and to be perfectly honest: this isn't any sort of novelty or groundbreaking. It's just abusive patterning in a short section of the song that delivers nothing more than a substantial difficulty spike.juankristal wrote:
I hope you can see its not about skill, is about making the map more reasonable. Stuff like this in general are uncommon to see ranked and if you want to do it, you have to do it right. AiAe was a mistake, so will this map be if it hits ranked.
I think you're disregarding the fact that, if I'm interpreting the context correctly within the course of the thread and the post that ExPew made: he nerfed the ending with respect to criticisms provided, only to decide to put it back right at the end of the map's modding cycle (basically post Kuo's bubble). And the whole concept of this map not violating any written rules of the RC is a stupid excuse, let's drop that right at the door — it's a pathetic excuse of a shield for the purpose of trying to let something that has been established as subjectively incorrect and poorly done by both mappers and players (polarization in rankings). I've yet to see anyone that the difficulty aims to target, who is impartial to the situation, react positively about the structure of this map. In fact, I personally was tipped off about this map's infamy for the same reason that this map was disqualified, and alone speaks volumes. This is not something that should pass.richardfeder wrote:
The map doesn't violet any written rules in the RC. You said that this map was disqualified for a reason and it has not yet been addressed. What I can see from both disqualification posts is that, QATs put this down for spaces to discuss and Expew to justify his mapping or make any changes if necessary, and Expew indeed went through mods and replied. Did you interpret the disqualification post as a denial to certain part of the map? No one disqualified this map because any parts are absolutely unacceptable and have to be changed because they violate RC or anything. Indeed the jack part is not considered as common sense in mania mapping by some people, but there are also folks who like it and are looking forward to see how pros, or themselves, smash through that part. In their opinion, the jack parts are absolutely an authentic expression of the music and are parts that make this map special.
Kawawa wrote:
Players also already playing similar tempo with this(recently DT patch)
If I compared with something.
https://puu.sh/va1ae/5e05342095.jpg
LEFT :: C18H27NO3(extend) 4K DT burst one(310 BPM)
RIGHT :: Beethoven will be calculated as 340 BPM(because It used only one hand)
maybe it can be ridiculous that I brought 4K and DT.
nevertheless It shows the player can play. how much player can passed it?
holy shit it's like i'm psychicHalogen- wrote:
The moment something like this hits ranked, it's going to assist in setting a precedence that states "well, ExPew managed to get this kind of map ranked, I should be able to do it too." This kind of mentality enables a snowfall effect that transcends this single map for the purpose of ranks: people will feel like they have the ability to "innovate" or "try something new" in a map, and to be perfectly honest: this isn't any sort of novelty or groundbreaking. It's just abusive patterning in a short section of the song that delivers nothing more than a substantial difficulty spike.
! no hate please!Halogen- wrote:
As Kamikaze said: you cannot judge a map purely on theoretical ability. There are playability standards that should be adhered to, and the highest difficulty on this map is far from it. When you're going out of your way to get a bubble on this map, you are acknowledging that you have intent to expose this file to players, and you can't just insert something that you want because it "feels right." A 25-note 1/4 chord jack at 170 BPM is simply not acceptable under any constraint: I don't care in this particular case that it is an atonal repetition, and I wouldn't care if it was a repeated piano chord or something that would "theoretically merit" that kind of patterning: you wouldn't do it in any case because it's largely unplayable and is a huge difficulty spike with comparison to the rest of the map.
I think the jack pattern definitely does not go over the playability standards, if it actually exists. You said that the highest difficulty is far from it, and I do agree with you that indeed it is if one tries to fc it. The "playable" you stated above is clearly too much. It is absolutely doable, but hardto be executed perfectly. I am not going to pretend that many people can actually handle it, but I am pretty sure that at the same time, there are quite a few pro who believe they can do it and are willing to repeated challenge that pattern to proof their skills.
The purpose of beatmap modding is to get the map to the highest quality out of the beatmap. Those who are modding don't have to change one's attitude in most cases — however, when you have players who absolutely dislike the map, and various impartial people saying that the structure is basically unplayable/unenjoyable, that should be an immediate red flag that something like this is an issue. While juankristal might not have been the best at making his point by adding a bit of a tactless statement about the song/map, the point is that this map presents a serious issue for another reason as well:
I absolutely have no idea about the immediate red flag part. Why is it a "NO" just because, let's say 60% of the people(if you do go over the thread you will notice that 60% is way more than a conservative calculation) hate it? You should be aware of the fact that people out there are promoting this map with careful thoughts.The moment something like this hits ranked, it's going to assist in setting a precedence that states "well, ExPew managed to get this kind of map ranked, I should be able to do it too." This kind of mentality enables a snowfall effect that transcends this single map for the purpose of ranks: people will feel like they have the ability to "innovate" or "try something new" in a map, and to be perfectly honest: this isn't any sort of novelty or groundbreaking. It's just abusive patterning in a short section of the song that delivers nothing more than a substantial difficulty spike.juankristal wrote:
I hope you can see its not about skill, is about making the map more reasonable. Stuff like this in general are uncommon to see ranked and if you want to do it, you have to do it right. AiAe was a mistake, so will this map be if it hits ranked.
What are you afraid of? The danger of snowfall always exists, and it is not going to be an excuse for us to stop here and with our limited mapping styles stays unchanged for ages. Indeed jack pattern itself is not a new technique, but trying to use long jack pattern and corporate it with the rest of the map is definitely something we have not tried in the past. It opens up the discussion if patterns like this are actually usable in certain cases and I do not think it is wise to shut this down just because many people can't play this pattern at all.
We are not in the stage of snowfall. We have not even experienced a single snow due to the fact that how cautious we are. I 100% understand the fear you and Juan harbor, but I also have confidence that, even if Expew ranked his map and it failed the community miserably and someone tries the same thing later, instead of saying "well, Expew managed to get his shit ranked so I guess I should be able to do that too", our mappers, BNs and QATs will say "hey did you see those salty comments and replays on the scoreboard? Don't try that and we won't rank map like that anymore".I think you're disregarding the fact that, if I'm interpreting the context correctly within the course of the thread and the post that ExPew made: he nerfed the ending with respect to criticisms provided, only to decide to put it back right at the end of the map's modding cycle (basically post Kuo's bubble). And the whole concept of this map not violating any written rules of the RC is a stupid excuse, let's drop that right at the door — it's a pathetic excuse of a shield for the purpose of trying to let something that has been established as subjectively incorrect and poorly done by both mappers and players (polarization in rankings). I've yet to see anyone that the difficulty aims to target, who is impartial to the situation, react positively about the structure of this map. In fact, I personally was tipped off about this map's infamy for the same reason that this map was disqualified, and alone speaks volumes. This is not something that should pass.richardfeder wrote:
The map doesn't violet any written rules in the RC. You said that this map was disqualified for a reason and it has not yet been addressed. What I can see from both disqualification posts is that, QATs put this down for spaces to discuss and Expew to justify his mapping or make any changes if necessary, and Expew indeed went through mods and replied. Did you interpret the disqualification post as a denial to certain part of the map? No one disqualified this map because any parts are absolutely unacceptable and have to be changed because they violate RC or anything. Indeed the jack part is not considered as common sense in mania mapping by some people, but there are also folks who like it and are looking forward to see how pros, or themselves, smash through that part. In their opinion, the jack parts are absolutely an authentic expression of the music and are parts that make this map special.
I am not trying to say that he does not violate any written laws so he is safe. Sorry for not saying my thoughts in a clean, understandable way.
Please allow me to rephrase what I tended to say in my previous post. We have so little rules which gives us the maximum potential to express our interpretation freely, and as long as it is justified reasonably, it should not be easily denied. Same, if you are going to say no, you have to voice your concern with details. A undefined idea "Unplayable"(where's the boundary? No no can fc = unplayable? 70% players can't catch 70% of the notes in the jack part = unplayable? Or no one can actually pass it is a true "unplayable"?) sounds so rude and arrogant compares to how much efforts modders, BNs who support this map with their reasons stated.
I was thinking about Juan saying Expew did not fix any "QAT's concern" when I typed my previous post. All I wanted to say before is that Expew did not violate and written rules and QAT did not disqualified the map, saying that "you must change this part" ect.. There's no such "QAT's concern". They DQ-ed for more discussions so that we all can sit down and talk about this before everything is settled too quickly.
A good mapper knows how to express the music properly, while still making it approachable for the players who want to play it. This is not approachable under any circumstance. If my memory serves me correctly, even jakads, who is #1 in the game statistically at the moment, a player that has spent time crushing all varieties of maps in the game, was not able to properly play the ending of your not even 6* map.
There's no guarantee that if you S-ranked all 5* maps then when you download the next 5* maps you are going to pass it. It is highly likely that you can handle it well, but sometimes not. As you know Tom's algorithm has been helping us a ton, but it is also true that the star rating system we have right now still cannot handle certain patterns for instances heavy LNs and jacks. You know that this is actually not 6* at all.
I am still note sure what do you mean by saying properly. I am not, and I guess no one, maybe including himself, is expecting jakads or someone else crushes that part easily. Are you expecting him to perform "properly"?
That's not true. ExPew already made the change so the map *should* be ready to go. It's just that I feel I had to answer kawawa after saying something I found really irrelevant/false. In any case, you can move on.Kuo Kyoka wrote:
This will never had a stop.
Yeah, while I didnt mod 7K that much I care about what I do and I talk with people about the choices I will take before I take them. After a 3 month period of modding stuff got modded and changed, then at the end you bubbled it with the changes of those mods reverted. Figure out what you say. As I marked in red, you can pmuch see the issue.Kuo Kyoka wrote:
It's not impossible to play, someone does FC'ed it. jakads himself is an example, in early stage of first qualified I watched his gameplay.
The map supposed to be challenge. I can't understand why everyone forced ExPew to do what he don't want to, he explained many times, he do progress quite a lot already, taking critisms like you've asked but yet someone doesn't new ending so he reverted it.
And you're saying I can't judge the map? So my mod and testplay for the map is meaningless? Judge doesn't mean you can only do that by gameplay, a few gameplay would help to check the comfortability but playability isn't the only way to judge can you just understand what I'm saying? It's rude and my thought you guys mean that I go blindly nominated this mapset for no reasons.
And again, why? ExPew even give you guys 3 months of period, after DQ-ed on January, everything calmed down and we thought you are COMPLETELY fine with it, now continue with a group of "community" after juankristal showed up?
And no hate, did you ever mod a 7K map before, juankristal? Or just popped the bubble because of "community voice"?
You can hate this map/song, but that doesn't mean ALL players hate it, ALL mappers hate it, I repeat, ALL, not a group of 20 people with haters. It's not neccessary to force other to do something they don't like, frame-work job is no good.
We care what you said, we read what you wrotr, we listen and understand what you're trying to say, but going on, we don't want to neccessary follow what you said if we have a good reason to do that, or you guys didn't care what we said and our effort putted on here, or just watch the result and spoil it all?
17VA: Know what you're saying, did you even look to the thread itself?
So, ExPew changed then stop please, it's better for you to pass over lower tier difficulities than just focus on one last diff to understand how the map was going on, it's just like you watching the end of a new movie.
Thanks. I stop here, I'm sorry if I'm salty.SPOILERI belive Glorious Crown got the same treats, many people said they will mod it but it been 2 weeks since last DQ and Interlude-and Tifyron and Tode are 3 people only came back
Dear juankristal,juankristal wrote:
And last, any BN can pop any bubble at any time before something is qualified. The BN who got his bubble popped can icon the set again until both parts find an agreement. I am trying to go with some pattern derivations of what ExPew has right now to try and reflect how is it achieved right now in at least a better way (to not be 100% the guy who says, this is bad, fix k bye) tho I will consult some high end players first before anything.
I think the ending could look a bit more symetric or pleasing but I might just be wrong and it could be fine as it is. Anyways, I will try to get that veredict done for tonight.
I was sure the end was at a bad state because it was quite obvious. This year around given that I don't consider myself to be good enough to tell if that ending would play just fine or if it still should be reconsidered.Kuo Kyoka wrote:
Dear juankristal,juankristal wrote:
And last, any BN can pop any bubble at any time before something is qualified. The BN who got his bubble popped can icon the set again until both parts find an agreement. I am trying to go with some pattern derivations of what ExPew has right now to try and reflect how is it achieved right now in at least a better way (to not be 100% the guy who says, this is bad, fix k bye) tho I will consult some high end players first before anything.
I think the ending could look a bit more symetric or pleasing but I might just be wrong and it could be fine as it is. Anyways, I will try to get that veredict done for tonight.
By what you said, you can't unsure something by yourself even, that make me rethink that you pop the bubble just because you feel that map is not ready and everyone (your community voices) think like you, but not because you have a special details on it: "why and should not why?"
So, please define bad? What is bad to you in the ending?
i change again ending jack pattern make it more balance. please look again.juankristal wrote:
So this is what I find out to be what I would end up doing, ExPew, I would like your thoughts on this and potentially talk about it to get into a middle point with it and both be okey.
Infection diff:
02:33:292 -
The way I drafted this is in a way where it is symetrical-ish I guess. You can also do some mixing and instead of making it full like that it could be [67][23][56] etc (all of them being 2 note jacks ofc). I think it would be more playable overall.
based on pic, people can fc with ease by simply spam with 3 finger ( no need to read the note column changes ) and easier than Insane diff jack.
referring to the right finger jack i made last time, due to the complaint where it caused a spike on the right and a bit too long, i arranged it with 2 fingers left and right together for better playability which some player has difficulty of a weak right spot for the jack
This is another example of the usage, a bit more challlenging and harder:
But then again we reach another issue which would be the other long jacks:
continuous jack on space is not recommend for me because we don't know player will play it by using left or right thumb since it's a long jack on this part.
02:25:527 - 02:14:233 - this ones being the most significants. So here it would happen the thing I mentioned earlier but in the opposite way. How to fix this well, you always have the option of rotating this into 2 sets of jacks instead only one but I imagine you want to keep them so, you could try and use the 4th column a bit in the ending to balance that gap out a little bit. In my honest opinion, I would change the remaining jacks that I marked into 2 bllocks of jacks or maybe even like the ending I proposed splitting them into 2 note jacks.
i have to refuse. im following the instrument pitch and this section is not for extensive long jack. if you think there is a less column usage, the music already fit it well with the current note.]
Tell me what you think about them so we decide what to do after all.
For the insane difficulty however I believe that would create a gap between both endings so you probably want to change that ending a little bit too. Keeping it as a double trill until 02:34:351 - that part should be good enough but I guess you could draft something else like having sudden 2 note jacks instead. Just make it easier than the proposed ending of the hardest diff and avoid the 4note jack usage for spread reasons. In any case, I am up for debating this further and reach conclusions that satisfies both of us.
considering to nerf the jack due to slight gap on Hard diff (single note stream without any jack). this might look better
Waiting for your answer then.
i might not explain in detail on the above post. i follow the music pitch on this section and this is not the kind of abuse like ending part i did previously.juankristal wrote:
So, the insane part looks cool so let leave that as resolved already.
For the ending, I guess your arguments are fair. I understasnd your point of FC with ease by spamming and I find it fair enough to let it as it is.
Although, I think that if you ended up changing that ending you should stay consistent with the rest, I know the change hurts and it might be against your ideals, but hey, you can keep up the difficulty level of the ending into the other parts too.
So lets mark all the long jacks that are questionable:
02:07:880 (127880|6,127880|4,127969|6,127969|4,128057|4,128057|6,128145|4,128145|6) - Just doing a ctrl+h here to split the 8 note jack into 2 different 4 blocks should be good enough for players to still take it as a challenge yet not be completely out of place compared to the rest of the chart.
02:14:233 - For this section, I think using blocks of 2 jacks each would be the best idea to go. Think it this way, if the ending is supposed to be the harder part of the map then this should have somewhat of an easier pattering and having an extended lenght of 2 jack blocks is probably a good setup for the harder ending. Other options are also viable such as separating it into 3 blocks of 4 jacks or doing something like the ending but in an easier scale.
02:25:527 - Same thing should apply here, in fact, if you want to make the players have to deal with a challenge you could have something a bit different or some sort of deviation of the previous suggestion/ending since at the end of the day, if all the patterns work the same "way" as in, they have the same strucutre, it would target just a specific term of playstyle but you can very well test it in different ways avoiding pattern repetition if that makes sense.
This would also sorta fix the gap between insane and infection difficulties which were kinda huge even before the first change ever.
when did I say I was going to rebubble this mfw, anyways, dont worry about that