Okoratu wrote:

this page is a nominator assembly or something xD
gz

Gaia wrote:

holy flask!!!!!!!
i LOVE koichoco aaa congrats ☆ﾐ(o*･ω･)ﾉ

1. 02:36:372 (1,2) -
2. 02:40:684 (1,2) -
3. 03:06:193 (2) - The only 1/8 slider that has 2 repeats when there's an object right after it, would be cool if it was consistent and had only 1 repeat instead, but I can understand if you wanna keep the consistency to 03:05:833 (1) - .
4. 03:32:240 (9) - Felt rather inconsistent with the other 1/8 sliders because most of them have a note right after, yet this one doesn't. Would be better to emphasize the stanza by adding a note instead.

Okoratu wrote:

Interesting, a discussion, imma join

[Skystar's Chocolate]

00:20:384 (3) - I do not see a need for this extended slider here. Indeed, I consider this a bit too offthrowing and I see no fadeout or anything familiar that I would associate with an extended slider end. ➥ while it isn't offthrowing i dunno why it should be needed either but maybe skystar can explain
00:40:684 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - I deleted the notes and tried to find the noises this is mapped on and I heard.. nothing D: ➥ are you sure? I think the constant 1/4 track is pretty clear there lol I was totally incapable to hear anything here
00:56:402 (3,4,5,6,7) - I dont see how the triplet differs much from the circle-kickslider combination, considering the song self. So yeah, why is the one the one and the one the other? ➥ considering the song itself, the white tick that the slider is placed on does have a kick of some sort, so forcing movement through a kickslider is more intuitive to play than just having circles for all of them. swapping the arrangement to something like http://puu.sh/kpg3i/80651df3f5.jpg which would be assuming all sounds mapped there are approx equal and it'd turn out more of an oddball playability wise because it'd give you 4 clicks after the sliderend and then one instead of what people are more commonly used to: playing this like a doublet followed by a triplet immediately.
Idk i may have gotten that wrong I find the noises present here way too similiar to warrant such an alteration tbh, the kick is caused as hitsound, so I wouldnt let that argument count.
00:57:929 (5,6,7) - Oh yeah, I noticed this kind before. Why exactly do the circle need to be spaced away from the sliderend? Is there any reason for that apart of making the movement shorty snappy for a reason I don't see? These kind of snappings appear across the entire map somehow and I don't know why. (even before) ➥ I often find myself doing stuff like this if i don't want to stop movement like what 00:51:821 (2,3,4) - would do. There are certain places there flow - which is subjective yaya - would suffer from having a stop after the slider so some of the doublets after sliders are spaced out in order to lead into something else instead of stopping movement momentarily then it doesnt make sense why the 1/4 circles self are having a lower distance. It's basically forcing you to speed up to get the first circle and to slow down to get the second.
01:01:163 (7,8) - I find this really ew, especially because (8) is on a blue tick ➥ why? this essentially plays like something like http://puu.sh/kpgjM/221d733b4a.jpg which is essentially like using a sliderend with a circle inbetween in order to replace a triplet, people should be used to that, all i could say is that spacing seems a tiny bit excessive because the blue tick isn't supposed to be stressed that way, but otherwise the effect of 01:01:522 (1) - being stressed is gone too so i do not really see how this could be better while following the 1/4 as well (without deleting that circle to justt... space 1 out) so ya does it play the same? don't forget that reverse sliders do not have the same leniency than kicksliders, which you could abuse. The movement time you need to snap to (8) is way shorter and the movement is way harsher, considering the rather sharp angle. And yeah, I am mostly criticizing the harsh spacing here. Playing this itself is not the issue, but because (8) is so much away, I see this as something troublesome
01:01:163 (7,8,4,5) - the movement from the (4) to the (5) is really sharp, don't you think? I think this looks good but doesn't play very well. ➥ as a player... uhm sharp edges are usually much much much easier to play because snapping them is much easier than wider angles so uhm i don't know how this plays bad at all oh wow, I copied the wrong timestamp here. I meant 01:02:240 (4,5) -
01:02:600 (7,8) - this isnt any better either ➥ can you please actually describe what's wrong with this? It plays weird? I don't really understand this one Considering I linked the wrong stamp before, this one should make more sense now. 01:02:600 (7,8) - is really harshly spaced compared to the other 1/4 jumps
01:04:576 (2,3,4,5,6) - that's quite harsh, isnt it? ➥ so what would be less harsh? I fail to see the harshness of this to begin with so understanding what your problem with this is is extremely difficult for me I just consider the usage of 1/4 as unneedingly high. I can understand the usage of certain kicksliders, but I do not see the reason to space them that much apart, unless just for forced difficulty
01:06:731 (3,4) - uh oh, increased SV on similiarly long sliders by time? happens here, why not here: 00:55:234 (3,4) - ? I consider this as rather inconsistent. ➥ ??
the instance you linked is the Anacrusis leading into the kiai, which is - by the fact that kiai is triggered off alone - a bit different from 01:06:731 - as well as 02:20:025 - which both are in kiai and both use similar SV changes, also he didn't do that for 02:08:348 (1,2,3,4) - for, i assume, exactly the same reason as not doing it for 00:55:054 (1,2,3,4) -
it's like ultra consistent in this matter, not doing it for 03:26:133 (1,2) - by the way only makes sense because if you put an 1/8 slider and put a huge SV change on it people could misinterpret it as 1/4 and screw the whole thing up so i guess it's not being done there for readability, 03:14:636 (1,2) - is also consistent with the 2 other Anacrusis to the kiais so uhm
yes I don't see how this could potentially be inconsistent in any way well fine, I probably oversaw the multiple usage of SV changes on similiar spot here, yet I do not see why sections like 00:55:054 (1,2,3,4) - do not follow the same scheme. They might be slightly different but not that much big of a difference to warrant that kind of, in my eyes, massive variation. Same slider slidetime but different visual slider length is extremely tricky and should only be used with high caution and even be avoided if possible. And I see the option to avoid this gimmick here.

The comment about the 1/4 being unneeded is like saying all streamy maps are unneeded just because this is not a BMS song that doesn't mean it doesn't have a lot of background 1/4 so i see no harm for any set in having a diff that actually tries to utilize them and make something interesting in combination with the vocals out of it.
also how is 01:18:767 (1,2,3) - a breakpoint? it's pretty obvious that this is supposed to be 1/4 and in the context of the whole map it plays pretty intuitively imo I don't find this kind of spaced away circles from sliderends intuitive at all. They became more common lately, but they are not intuitive. With breakpoints, I probably used the wrong term, I was referring to the idea of breaking up the flow here by insisting on a quick snapping to the two circles and forcing to be slower right away to complete said two circles. But this kind of patterning amplifies the difficulty here without any extend need. And no, the song does not have a lot of 1/4 in the background. It does have it occassionally and I can see why it is mapped at places, but just because it contains 1/4, it doesnt mean you have to go full apeshit with spacing them, right? You can map 1/4 without spacing the streams, putting tons of kicksliders and doing other fancy tricks just to make it more difficult than it needs to be.

I didn't really understand some of your points especially "o yeah, why is the one the one and the one the other? "
like
what.
If one tries to understand this statement they will most likely end up rereading a few of these issues you want to discuss multiple times before understanding what you most likely want, and in some cases im not really sure about what exactly you're putting up for discussion as i hopefully outlined above.

----

I noticed Asphyxia posted and looked through these as well and would agree on these points
I don't really have the time to actually look for other stuff that might be weird, so i only commented on the things presented

Loctav wrote:

Okoratu wrote:

Interesting, a discussion, imma join

[Skystar's Chocolate]

00:20:384 (3) - I do not see a need for this extended slider here. Indeed, I consider this a bit too offthrowing and I see no fadeout or anything familiar that I would associate with an extended slider end. ➥ while it isn't offthrowing i dunno why it should be needed either but maybe skystar can explain Yeah fixed this.
00:40:684 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - I deleted the notes and tried to find the noises this is mapped on and I heard.. nothing D: ➥ are you sure? I think the constant 1/4 track is pretty clear there lol I was totally incapable to hear anything here they're mapped to the 1/4 layer, simply like 00:43:558 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2) - and 01:56:851 (1,2,1,2,1,2,3,4) - .
00:56:402 (3,4,5,6,7) - I dont see how the triplet differs much from the circle-kickslider combination, considering the song self. So yeah, why is the one the one and the one the other? ➥ considering the song itself, the white tick that the slider is placed on does have a kick of some sort, so forcing movement through a kickslider is more intuitive to play than just having circles for all of them. swapping the arrangement to something like http://puu.sh/kpg3i/80651df3f5.jpg which would be assuming all sounds mapped there are approx equal and it'd turn out more of an oddball playability wise because it'd give you 4 clicks after the sliderend and then one instead of what people are more commonly used to: playing this like a doublet followed by a triplet immediately.
Idk i may have gotten that wrong I find the noises present here way too similiar to warrant such an alteration tbh, the kick is caused as hitsound, so I wouldnt let that argument count. The kick isn't caused as hitsound, the music itself DOES HAVE the kick. The triplet hihat at 00:56:672 - gives a rather "liquid" feeling. While the point 00:56:492 - is a kick sound that justifies the kick slider, it's nowhere close to being a similar thing at all.
00:57:929 (5,6,7) - Oh yeah, I noticed this kind before. Why exactly do the circle need to be spaced away from the sliderend? Is there any reason for that apart of making the movement shorty snappy for a reason I don't see? These kind of snappings appear across the entire map somehow and I don't know why. (even before) ➥ I often find myself doing stuff like this if i don't want to stop movement like what 00:51:821 (2,3,4) - would do. There are certain places there flow - which is subjective yaya - would suffer from having a stop after the slider so some of the doublets after sliders are spaced out in order to lead into something else instead of stopping movement momentarily then it doesnt make sense why the 1/4 circles self are having a lower distance. It's basically forcing you to speed up to get the first circle and to slow down to get the second. It does. Circles do never play the same as sliderends - you won't "speed up to get the first circle" as you don't have to actually stop on the sliderend and hit. Rather you just move to the circles without even slowing down the movement, that's why the spacing between the circles are way lower.
01:01:163 (7,8) - I find this really ew, especially because (8) is on a blue tick ➥ why? this essentially plays like something like http://puu.sh/kpgjM/221d733b4a.jpg which is essentially like using a sliderend with a circle inbetween in order to replace a triplet, people should be used to that, all i could say is that spacing seems a tiny bit excessive because the blue tick isn't supposed to be stressed that way, but otherwise the effect of 01:01:522 (1) - being stressed is gone too so i do not really see how this could be better while following the 1/4 as well (without deleting that circle to justt... space 1 out) so ya does it play the same? don't forget that reverse sliders do not have the same leniency than kicksliders, which you could abuse. The movement time you need to snap to (8) is way shorter and the movement is way harsher, considering the rather sharp angle. And yeah, I am mostly criticizing the harsh spacing here. Playing this itself is not the issue, but because (8) is so much away, I see this as something troublesome And having a less leniency here is the point? Like apparently the whole vibe the music at 01:01:163 - gives is having a really quick move. Players do hold the reverse 1/8 slider until it ends, then move quickly to 8 and so on, it's at least what I feel that will represent the music the best.
01:01:163 (7,8,4,5) - the movement from the (4) to the (5) is really sharp, don't you think? I think this looks good but doesn't play very well. ➥ as a player... uhm sharp edges are usually much much much easier to play because snapping them is much easier than wider angles so uhm i don't know how this plays bad at all oh wow, I copied the wrong timestamp here. I meant 01:02:240 (4,5) - Yeah actually agree with this.
01:02:600 (7,8) - this isnt any better either ➥ can you please actually describe what's wrong with this? It plays weird? I don't really understand this one Considering I linked the wrong stamp before, this one should make more sense now. 01:02:600 (7,8) - is really harshly spaced compared to the other 1/4 jumps Since I fixed the last one I'm sure this one is fine now.
01:04:576 (2,3,4,5,6) - that's quite harsh, isnt it? ➥ so what would be less harsh? I fail to see the harshness of this to begin with so understanding what your problem with this is is extremely difficult for me I just consider the usage of 1/4 as unneedingly high. I can understand the usage of certain kicksliders, but I do not see the reason to space them that much apart, unless just for forced difficulty W-what? How are they even spaced much apart at all.. I mean they're all just placed in a very small spacing until the music goes up at 01:05:115 (6,7) - , I don't even see how this is difficult at all..
01:06:731 (3,4) - uh oh, increased SV on similiarly long sliders by time? happens here, why not here: 00:55:234 (3,4) - ? I consider this as rather inconsistent. ➥ ??
the instance you linked is the Anacrusis leading into the kiai, which is - by the fact that kiai is triggered off alone - a bit different from 01:06:731 - as well as 02:20:025 - which both are in kiai and both use similar SV changes, also he didn't do that for 02:08:348 (1,2,3,4) - for, i assume, exactly the same reason as not doing it for 00:55:054 (1,2,3,4) -
it's like ultra consistent in this matter, not doing it for 03:26:133 (1,2) - by the way only makes sense because if you put an 1/8 slider and put a huge SV change on it people could misinterpret it as 1/4 and screw the whole thing up so i guess it's not being done there for readability, 03:14:636 (1,2) - is also consistent with the 2 other Anacrusis to the kiais so uhm
yes I don't see how this could potentially be inconsistent in any way well fine, I probably oversaw the multiple usage of SV changes on similiar spot here, yet I do not see why sections like 00:55:054 (1,2,3,4) - do not follow the same scheme. They might be slightly different but not that much big of a difference to warrant that kind of, in my eyes, massive variation. Same slider slidetime but different visual slider length is extremely tricky and should only be used with high caution and even be avoided if possible. And I see the option to avoid this gimmick here. Yeah let me explain this. As we can hear, 00:55:234 - has a triplet drum, right? While 01:06:731 - here, instead of the triplet drum, it has a way more dense 1/8 hihats, I set an increased SV slider to represent it which imo fits pretty well. Using a 1/4 slider + a circle to follow the drum, while having an increased SV slider to follow the speedup hihats, they're two different things to work with two different layers.

The comment about the 1/4 being unneeded is like saying all streamy maps are unneeded just because this is not a BMS song that doesn't mean it doesn't have a lot of background 1/4 so i see no harm for any set in having a diff that actually tries to utilize them and make something interesting in combination with the vocals out of it.
also how is 01:18:767 (1,2,3) - a breakpoint? it's pretty obvious that this is supposed to be 1/4 and in the context of the whole map it plays pretty intuitively imo I don't find this kind of spaced away circles from sliderends intuitive at all. They became more common lately, but they are not intuitive. With breakpoints, I probably used the wrong term, I was referring to the idea of breaking up the flow here by insisting on a quick snapping to the two circles and forcing to be slower right away to complete said two circles. But this kind of patterning amplifies the difficulty here without any extend need. And no, the song does not have a lot of 1/4 in the background. It does have it occassionally and I can see why it is mapped at places, but just because it contains 1/4, it doesnt mean you have to go full apeshit with spacing them, right? You can map 1/4 without spacing the streams, putting tons of kicksliders and doing other fancy tricks just to make it more difficult than it needs to be. Like I can 100% assure you that stuff you pointed out like 01:18:767 (1,2,3) - definitely aren't as bad as you described. As I explained above, you don't have to stop and click the slider end, players just have to focus on the two circles, and that's why those circles are placed in a way lower spacing. And I have to disagree with your second argument. The 1/4 notes in this map are never placed in a very huge spacing, nor are they mapped to be tricky, difficulty or anything. I've testplayed the map over and over during mapping it to make sure that they're all mapped in a way that plays intuitively. Testplays and feedbacks from a lot of players have been made before it got qualified too.

I didn't really understand some of your points especially "o yeah, why is the one the one and the one the other? "
like
what.
If one tries to understand this statement they will most likely end up rereading a few of these issues you want to discuss multiple times before understanding what you most likely want, and in some cases im not really sure about what exactly you're putting up for discussion as i hopefully outlined above.

----

I noticed Asphyxia posted and looked through these as well and would agree on these points
I don't really have the time to actually look for other stuff that might be weird, so i only commented on the things presented

Asphyxia wrote:

Now that this is disqualified, there's few jumps that felt unnecessarily big compared to the average spacing you had going on throughout the section. A small decrease would be enough, up to you though! Some other suggestions here too.

[Skystar's Chocolate]

1. 02:36:372 (1,2) - the 2 is placed as a jump since there's a really special sound at 02:36:552 -, I can decrease the spacing a bit but I don't want to break the purpose here.
2. 02:40:684 (1,2) - k
3. 03:06:193 (2) - The only 1/8 slider that has 2 repeats when there's an object right after it, would be cool if it was consistent and had only 1 repeat instead, but I can understand if you wanna keep the consistency to 03:05:833 (1) - . Yeah you answered it for me. That's also why I put 03:06:372 (3) - literally nearby the previous slider, to not make players shitmiss just because it has 2 repeats, lol.
4. 03:32:240 (9) - Felt rather inconsistent with the other 1/8 sliders because most of them have a note right after, yet this one doesn't. Would be better to emphasize the stanza by adding a note instead. Here is a rather special spot. Unlike the other choruses, the last one here has been doubled. And here's is the transitional part from the first half to the second half. Also I'm like sure adding a circle at it would make it play WAY WORSE as players would have to awkwardly stop and hit another note before they move on.

captin1 wrote:

the question to be asked though, is if the changes being suggested are actually improvements or not.

I found very little issue with the 1/4 patterns throughout, they're very logically placed to compliment the rhythm of the song

Loctav wrote:

I wouldnt call the feedback negative. We are just trying to improve the map to make it better. I think that's what everyone desires!

I'll look on that tomorrow again. I need to look through all the other maps first haha

1. 00:14:276 (5,3) - These could have a Whistle, they deserve it and fit very good with the beats overall.
2. 00:15:534 (1) - You forgot to hitsound? This circle is so inaudible compared to the music.
3. 00:16:073 - From this point this part plays quite bad with all those constant SV changes. There's no need to them. I mean, yeah, the music gets more emphasised on some parts, but do you really think it's worth spamming all those SV changes? They are completely inconsistent and counter-intuitives. There's no track or path in which you could say "hum, okay, the SV will change every 2 sliders..." and that's the problem here.
4. 00:25:055 (2) - I'm unsure about this. 00:25:414 (2,2) - Those have a really similar sound and they are really emphasised by the Normal sampleset, I don't get why are you silencing this one.
5. 00:28:109 (1,1,1,1,1,1,1) - I have two problems regarding this: the first one is how random the NCs are, it makes you think (at least when I played it) they are 1/1 spacing instead of the 1/2 you are using. And then is how loud they since according to the background music. I tried to reduce the green line to 40% and it was much "decent" that way, but it's still not highlighting it that much. Additionally, I want to add how much I'd like to see a Clap+Finish on these circles.
6. 00:39:426 (1,2) - What are these supposed to be following? I can quite understand the purpose of the second one following the piano... but the first one? And why is the SV so low? It just doesn't fit at all. Moreover, ignoring 00:39:606 - was a terrible idea, you are not even using normal-slidertick.wav or anything similar. I'll definitely split it into two different objects. I'd go for a 4 notes colour and make something like: https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/3749030 for some sweat flow.
7. 00:42:300 (1,2) - Now, something similar happens to this one. I didn't see it when typing the previous one so I guess you could leave it, for consistency, though, as I said, it could definitely be improved. The problem with this pattern is the random spacing between 1 and 2. Why? Aren't they supposed to be THE SAME as the previous one? Why would you create such a gap when the music doesn't support it at all?
8. 00:54:875 (4) - Sorta of a personal opinion, but this sounds much better as a 1/4 slider since it's a constant beat. It'll also fit much more with the following patterns.
9. 01:01:163 (7) - NC'ing this for the sake of the 1/8 wouldn't be a bad idea.
10. 01:32:959 - 01:35:833 - 01:55:773 (2) - I can't figure out why you ignored these. If you did it for some consistency with what you are mapping then it's quite a mistake. It has such a similar connotation with 00:45:714 (3,4,5,6) - . And the second one, it'd make more sense, since you are mapping a 3-3-3 combo right there, but still... ignoring the vocals isn't a good idea, it doesn't sound good at all, it really feels empty. It completely differs from 01:37:270 - because there's literally nothing there, that's right, but... ya. Finally, regarding the last time stamp I'm referring to, it has a similar problem, but at the same time, it has a wrong rhythm. To begin with, 01:55:773 - it's supposed to be a drumkick, so there shouldn't be any slider right there, it's an instant sound. One click, one moment, that's it, no need to extend it too far from that. Now, the constant sound goes from 01:55:953 - to 01:56:043 - although making a 1/4 slider and then adding a circle on 01:56:133 - just to fit the music perfectly wouldn't fit at all with how calm you're mapping this section. So maybe a 1/2 slider will be perfect.
11. 02:11:761 (4,1) - ?? I'm unsure of this. All in all, all the 1/4 jumps in this part are linear or they have a very low spacing (as you can see 02:22:001 (2,3) - ), what happened to this one in particular?
12. 02:36:372 (1,2,1) - Why (1,2) has such a ridiculous spacing even though (2) has a tiny beat whilst (2,1) isn't properly emphasised?
13. 02:57:749 (4) - Honestly speaking, both slider and 02:57:749 (4,1) - jump don't fit at all. If you think you should keep the distance, it's fine, but at least make (4) as a circle instead, no need for that 1/4 slider. The same goes to 03:03:498 (4,1) - . I'll detail this a bit. The 1/4 actually does fit the vocal, but the way the pattern plays is skyrocketing the section. Also, why would you make that and not make 02:58:468 (2) - 03:04:217 (2) - as 1/4 sliders as well? After all, they are the same.
14. 03:26:492 - The volume of this is just insane. Isn't the same as the one mapped in 03:37:989 - ?

1. 00:11:223 (1,2,3) - You were mapping this section so calmly when suddenly... you ruin the pace of this part, aw
2. 00:18:947 (2) - Just a question, don't worry, but are you sure you want to keep this anti-flow? Seems to be a really interesting jump if you compare it with the music as a whole.
3. 01:00:983 (5) - Ctrl+G would look better, imo!
4. 02:33:318 (1,2) - I find this transition being too forced, maybe. Especially the angle you decided to make. I'd overlap (2) with the head of 02:32:779 (3) - , honestly I think it feels waaaay better.
5. 03:14:815 (2) - Can I suggest a Clap instead? This beat is clearly different from the ones in (1).
6. 03:22:001 (5,6,1) - I'd like to suggest something different for this part since the angle of 03:22:181 (6,1) - is quite questionable, after doing this "triangle" movement you have to move your cursor while being in such an awkward spot.
7. 03:49:306 (1,1) - Could you try to make this pattern more readable for a 1/4 style? I swear I read it as a 1/2 from the very beginning. Even moving the slidertail a bit would help!
8. 03:58:288 (1) - Forgot a hitsound?

Yuii- wrote:

Just a personal opinion on the Insanes.

[Skystar]

You might want to uncheck the letterbox during breaks!

1. 00:14:276 (5,3) - These could have a Whistle, they deserve it and fit very good with the beats overall. Added.
2. 00:15:534 (1) - You forgot to hitsound? This circle is so inaudible compared to the music. Fixed.
3. 00:16:073 - From this point this part plays quite bad with all those constant SV changes. There's no need to them. I mean, yeah, the music gets more emphasised on some parts, but do you really think it's worth spamming all those SV changes? They are completely inconsistent and counter-intuitives. There's no track or path in which you could say "hum, okay, the SV will change every 2 sliders..." and that's the problem here. At first I wasn't really sure with these SV changes too. But after getting a lot of testplays I can say they play fine. Everyone was able to sightread it naturally.
4. 00:25:055 (2) - I'm unsure about this. 00:25:414 (2,2) - Those have a really similar sound and they are really emphasised by the Normal sampleset, I don't get why are you silencing this one. uhh? the "special sounds" start at 00:25:234 - lol.
5. 00:28:109 (1,1,1,1,1,1,1) - I have two problems regarding this: the first one is how random the NCs are, it makes you think (at least when I played it) they are 1/1 spacing instead of the 1/2 you are using. And then is how loud they since according to the background music. I tried to reduce the green line to 40% and it was much "decent" that way, but it's still not highlighting it that much. Additionally, I want to add how much I'd like to see a Clap+Finish on these circles. Reduced the volume by 10%. But I don't really see how you will misread these as 1/1s at all, like the whole part here doesn't even have one 1/1 note that makes you confused to begin with.
6. 00:39:426 (1,2) - What are these supposed to be following? I can quite understand the purpose of the second one following the piano... but the first one? And why is the SV so low? It just doesn't fit at all. Moreover, ignoring 00:39:606 - was a terrible idea, you are not even using normal-slidertick.wav or anything similar. I'll definitely split it into two different objects. I'd go for a 4 notes colour and make something like: https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/3749030 for some sweat flow. The entire part here goes by a regularity of "x0.5 > x0.75 > x1.0". It moves from slow to fast then fast to slow gradually, that's also why I'm ignoring the drum beat as putting 1/2 notes doesn't really fit the vibe I want.
7. 00:42:300 (1,2) - Now, something similar happens to this one. I didn't see it when typing the previous one so I guess you could leave it, for consistency, though, as I said, it could definitely be improved. The problem with this pattern is the random spacing between 1 and 2. Why? Aren't they supposed to be THE SAME as the previous one? Why would you create such a gap when the music doesn't support it at all? ^
8. 00:54:875 (4) - Sorta of a personal opinion, but this sounds much better as a 1/4 slider since it's a constant beat. It'll also fit much more with the following patterns. You did bring up a really good point here, really thanks for this!
9. 01:01:163 (7) - NC'ing this for the sake of the 1/8 wouldn't be a bad idea. Okay.
10. 01:32:959 - 01:35:833 - 01:55:773 (2) - I can't figure out why you ignored these. If you did it for some consistency with what you are mapping then it's quite a mistake. It has such a similar connotation with 00:45:714 (3,4,5,6) - . And the second one, it'd make more sense, since you are mapping a 3-3-3 combo right there, but still... ignoring the vocals isn't a good idea, it doesn't sound good at all, it really feels empty. It completely differs from 01:37:270 - because there's literally nothing there, that's right, but... ya. Finally, regarding the last time stamp I'm referring to, it has a similar problem, but at the same time, it has a wrong rhythm. To begin with, 01:55:773 - it's supposed to be a drumkick, so there shouldn't be any slider right there, it's an instant sound. One click, one moment, that's it, no need to extend it too far from that. Now, the constant sound goes from 01:55:953 - to 01:56:043 - although making a 1/4 slider and then adding a circle on 01:56:133 - just to fit the music perfectly wouldn't fit at all with how calm you're mapping this section. So maybe a 1/2 slider will be perfect. How are 00:45:714 (3,4,5,6) - and 01:32:959 - the same things at all? these are two different parts in the music. I don't even understand how you take it as a reference in the first place.
11. 02:11:761 (4,1) - ?? I'm unsure of this. All in all, all the 1/4 jumps in this part are linear or they have a very low spacing (as you can see 02:22:001 (2,3) - ), what happened to this one in particular? Well, because (1) starts at a new stanza. I also don't think the jump is that "big", but yeah.
12. 02:36:372 (1,2,1) - Why (1,2) has such a ridiculous spacing even though (2) has a tiny beat whilst (2,1) isn't properly emphasised? Because (2) is the one that needs to be emphasised, not (1)?
13. 02:57:749 (4) - Honestly speaking, both slider and 02:57:749 (4,1) - jump don't fit at all. If you think you should keep the distance, it's fine, but at least make (4) as a circle instead, no need for that 1/4 slider. The same goes to 03:03:498 (4,1) - . I'll detail this a bit. The 1/4 actually does fit the vocal, but the way the pattern plays is skyrocketing the section. Also, why would you make that and not make 02:58:468 (2) - 03:04:217 (2) - as 1/4 sliders as well? After all, they are the same. "The 1/4 actually does fit the vocal" You acutally answered it yourself, and the way it plays does fit the emphasis. 02:58:468 (2) - 03:04:217 (2) - aren't the same because 02:57:749 (4) - has a triplet in the music, therefore I used a 1/4 slider there, nothing special.
14. 03:26:492 - The volume of this is just insane. Isn't the same as the one mapped in 03:37:989 - ? Okay.

Yuii- wrote:

Just a personal opinion on the Insanes.


[Insane]

Letterbox during breaks blabal
HP6 would be better for the spread!

1. 00:11:223 (1,2,3) - You were mapping this section so calmly when suddenly... you ruin the pace of this part, aw it's still good if read like 1/2 circle
2. 00:18:947 (2) - Just a question, don't worry, but are you sure you want to keep this anti-flow? Seems to be a really interesting jump if you compare it with the music as a whole. yes i wanna keep
3. 01:00:983 (5) - Ctrl+G would look better, imo! but now is more smooth i think
4. 02:33:318 (1,2) - I find this transition being too forced, maybe. Especially the angle you decided to make. I'd overlap (2) with the head of 02:32:779 (3) - , honestly I think it feels waaaay better. ok
5. 03:14:815 (2) - Can I suggest a Clap instead? This beat is clearly different from the ones in (1). ok
6. 03:22:001 (5,6,1) - I'd like to suggest something different for this part since the angle of 03:22:181 (6,1) - is quite questionable, after doing this "triangle" movement you have to move your cursor while being in such an awkward spot. ok
7. 03:49:306 (1,1) - Could you try to make this pattern more readable for a 1/4 style? I swear I read it as a 1/2 from the very beginning. Even moving the slidertail a bit would help! ok
8. 03:58:288 (1) - Forgot a hitsound? ok

---------

Aaaand one more thing!

04:34:935 - (On Easy) Are you sure you don't want to end the spinner there? It'll make sense since all the other diffs finish at that point.

---------

Alright, that's it!

sukiNathan wrote:

is loctav going to make another statement or can i push this

Chloe Lemaire wrote:

want to eat skystars chocolate

Karen wrote:

from forum pm

insane
00:55:234 (1,2,3) - 觉得三连不合适，跟着vocal听起来很违和 我想保留 因為背景本來就有3連音
01:44:636 (1,2) - 分开一些？中间滑条都碰到，看起来不好看 fixed
02:08:528 (1,2,3) - 同第一条 ^^
03:13:378 (1,1) - 这insane好像不能很难，这个梗有点太难了，我觉得要么一样1/12要么就跟星爷diff一样弄一个滑条就行 fixed
03:24:696 (5,1,1) - 这三个滑条距离差的也太多了些，03:25:414 (1) - 这个往上一些？不要blanket了 fixed

that should be all i think