Hanatan - Hajimete no Oto

posted
Total Posts
166
show more
Topic Starter
Avishay

Baraatje123 wrote:

00:38:593 (4,1) - Such low ds Made a slight different pattern, please recheck this.
00:50:893 (1,2,3,4,5) - Way too forced Errrrrrrr.. Alright, I guess I'll remap it to present the beats better, I want to avoid DQs.
00:51:868 (5) - Remove whistle from body please ^
00:56:443 (6,7,1) - DS is a bit confusing here, same spacing, different rhythm Yeah, requires a bit of reading skills but this pattern plays just fine, NC helps a bit and it is relatively commonly used.
01:00:193 (6) - Silence end?
01:01:093 (4) - ^^
01:13:693 (1) - ^^ Sure ^ ^ ^
01:53:293 (1,1) - Might be difficult to read, space the circle closer to the slider Alright.
02:43:093 (3) - Drum sample feels weird, as it isn't used otherwhere Pretty sure I am using the drums in other parts in the song, regarless as long as it sounds fine and doesn't ruin the experience I will let it stay.
02:47:218 (6) - Sure this is there? The other 1/8 feel fine, but this one is a bit weird This one is great, triplet on held vocals that end on a new vocal and a nice slider.
03:16:393 (1,2,3,1) - Feels forced, and the end feel weird (if you don't change it to make it less forced, at least silence the ends) Okay, as I agree that it feels a bit too forced, I remapped this pattern and made some modifications to the section afterwards, please recheck this too :)
04:24:943 (3,1) - ^^

Call me
Bara-
Let's try again!
walaowey
I still not yet post my irc mod the other day LOL

2015-12-06 04:54 walaowey: hey avishay o/
2015-12-06 04:54 Avishay: heyo
2015-12-06 04:54 walaowey: lets have a mod for your map ^^
2015-12-06 04:54 walaowey: are u free for irc mod now?
2015-12-06 04:55 Avishay: yeah, sure
2015-12-06 04:55 Avishay: I'll appreciate it
2015-12-06 04:55 walaowey: and nice song from hanatan xD
2015-12-06 04:58 walaowey: 00:22:243 -
2015-12-06 04:58 walaowey: btw
2015-12-06 04:58 walaowey: i think u can add circle here like u did on earlier part?
2015-12-06 04:58 walaowey: 00:21:343 (2) - like here
2015-12-06 04:58 Avishay: where o.o
2015-12-06 04:59 walaowey: since i heard the same beat there
2015-12-06 04:59 Avishay: yeah but I am kinda emphasizing the drums with the vocals
2015-12-06 04:59 Avishay: while on the latter I go with the vocals mainly
2015-12-06 04:59 walaowey: oic, alright
2015-12-06 05:02 walaowey: 04:13:693 (1) -
2015-12-06 05:02 walaowey: imo, this part can be change to circle + slider
2015-12-06 05:02 walaowey: 1/4 slider
2015-12-06 05:03 walaowey: seems like 04:13:843 - have strong piano sound here
2015-12-06 05:03 walaowey: 04:14:293 (3)
2015-12-06 05:03 walaowey: ^
2015-12-06 05:03 Avishay: um
2015-12-06 05:03 Avishay: but don't you think the reverse slider goes nicer with the repetitive melody
2015-12-06 05:04 walaowey: LOL, well you're right
2015-12-06 05:04 walaowey: i didnt notice it earlier
2015-12-06 05:05 Avishay: :P
2015-12-06 05:06 walaowey: well, nice vocal emphasizing xd
2015-12-06 05:06 walaowey: i like how u jump for intense vocal part
2015-12-06 05:06 Avishay: Hanatan <3
2015-12-06 05:06 Avishay: but honestly it just how I feel about them
2015-12-06 05:07 Avishay: and it works nicely
2015-12-06 05:07 Avishay: it's fun
2015-12-06 05:07 walaowey: 03:38:893 (5) -
2015-12-06 05:07 walaowey: i think maybe nc here?
2015-12-06 05:07 walaowey: seems like the downbeat is here
2015-12-06 05:07 Avishay: woudln't it be misleading?
2015-12-06 05:07 Avishay: yeah I know but
2015-12-06 05:07 Avishay: 03:39:193 (1,2) - new vocals start here
2015-12-06 05:08 walaowey: yeah it will be misleading though
2015-12-06 05:08 Avishay: and the spacing between those 03:38:893 (5,1) - is kinda close, even though it is 1/1
2015-12-06 05:08 walaowey: bcoz there's a large jump there, player will easily misread it
2015-12-06 05:09 Avishay: not necessarily misread, but it will be confusing with the next pattern
2015-12-06 05:09 Avishay: I think the AR helps avoiding misreading
2015-12-06 05:09 walaowey: 03:52:993 (3,4) - imo, it plays better if u unstack them
2015-12-06 05:09 walaowey: they give out the clickable + jumping feeling
2015-12-06 05:09 walaowey: yeah.. AR helps xD
2015-12-06 05:10 Avishay: hm I agree about this one
2015-12-06 05:10 Avishay: since it does not sound the same as 03:52:693 (1,2) -
2015-12-06 05:10 Avishay: any positioning suggestions?
2015-12-06 05:10 walaowey: sec
2015-12-06 05:11 Avishay: perhaps something like this http://puu.sh/lKAwV/6d977eb3a9.jpg
2015-12-06 05:11 walaowey: try x:37|y:209
2015-12-06 05:11 walaowey: ya, that works
2015-12-06 05:11 Avishay: on which of them
2015-12-06 05:12 walaowey: i mean (4)
2015-12-06 05:12 walaowey: see if u ok with it
2015-12-06 05:13 Avishay: it could work but I think my pattern gives more emphasization to 03:53:293 (5) -
2015-12-06 05:13 walaowey: yeah, (5) need more emphasize bcoz of the strong beat
2015-12-06 05:15 walaowey: 02:55:393 (3) -
2015-12-06 05:15 walaowey: perhaps u could make this an extend slider
2015-12-06 05:15 walaowey: and add a circle on 02:55:693 -
2015-12-06 05:16 Avishay: what do you mean by extend slider
2015-12-06 05:16 walaowey: god damnit, i'm typing in the dark, so hard
2015-12-06 05:16 walaowey: a 3/4 slider
2015-12-06 05:16 walaowey: 02:55:618 - i mean end the slider here
2015-12-06 05:16 Avishay: yeah yeah
2015-12-06 05:16 Avishay: I understood
2015-12-06 05:16 Avishay: lemme try
2015-12-06 05:17 walaowey: haha
2015-12-06 05:17 Avishay: oh that's actually nice
2015-12-06 05:17 Avishay: sure
2015-12-06 05:17 walaowey: the beat is nice to be clickable xd
2015-12-06 05:18 walaowey: 02:58:543 (2) - unstack this maybe?
2015-12-06 05:18 walaowey: since u have previous part unstack
2015-12-06 05:18 Avishay: 03:22:993 (1,2,3,4,5,1,2,3,4,5,1) -
2015-12-06 05:18 walaowey: ?
2015-12-06 05:18 Avishay: it was unstacked before but the rhythm is nicer with a stack
2015-12-06 05:19 Avishay: as for my quiestion
2015-12-06 05:19 Avishay: question*
2015-12-06 05:19 Avishay: do you think I need to reconstruct the second part of jumps? I am not sure if it's finw
2015-12-06 05:19 Avishay: e
2015-12-06 05:19 Avishay: since I changed that part lately
2015-12-06 05:19 walaowey: sec lemme check
2015-12-06 05:19 Avishay: perhaps moving 03:24:043 (2,3) - a bit to the left and down would look and play nicer
2015-12-06 05:20 Avishay: like this compared to what you see now http://puu.sh/lKB6i/d68e544d3e.jpg
2015-12-06 05:21 walaowey: well, both of them works imo
2015-12-06 05:21 Avishay: alright then I will keep the new one, I just want thoughts on if it's fine at all
2015-12-06 05:21 walaowey: but there's one thing i dont really like, its the flow there
2015-12-06 05:21 walaowey: the flow is changing rapidly
2015-12-06 05:22 Avishay: well you mean the sharp direction changes?
2015-12-06 05:22 walaowey: no
2015-12-06 05:22 Avishay: because how else would I do that with such strong beats
2015-12-06 05:22 Avishay: then? o.o
2015-12-06 05:22 walaowey: i mean u change flow from anti clockwise to clockwise and then back to anti again
2015-12-06 05:23 walaowey: try ctrl+g (4,5)
2015-12-06 05:23 walaowey: so that the flow will flow in circular
2015-12-06 05:23 Avishay: oh I like this one a lot
2015-12-06 05:24 walaowey: ok xd
2015-12-06 05:25 Avishay: cool suggestion
2015-12-06 05:28 walaowey: damn this song is too good
2015-12-06 05:28 walaowey: i cant stop myself from listening
2015-12-06 05:28 walaowey: this song have the calm moment, but the vocal make it exciting,
2015-12-06 05:28 walaowey: its like a perfect pairing LOL
2015-12-06 05:29 Avishay: I know rightttttttt
2015-12-06 05:29 Avishay: I hate mapping slow songs but this one is so exciting and great
2015-12-06 05:29 walaowey: yeah
2015-12-06 05:29 Avishay: wish I could do the same to
2015-12-06 05:29 Avishay: ACTION is listening to [http://osu.ppy.sh/b/377784 Hanatan - Tell Your World]
2015-12-06 05:29 Avishay: but it is too calm
2015-12-06 05:29 walaowey: 03:26:743 (3) -
2015-12-06 05:30 walaowey: maybe make the triplets flow straight from the previous notes?
2015-12-06 05:30 walaowey: lol tell your world is too damn calm
2015-12-06 05:30 walaowey: at least hajimete no oto have the strong vocal LOL
2015-12-06 05:31 Avishay: hm
2015-12-06 05:31 Avishay: how about this
2015-12-06 05:31 Avishay: http://puu.sh/lKBQY/fb94c36d41.jpg
2015-12-06 05:32 walaowey: nice xd
2015-12-06 05:32 Avishay: I might make a curve in the slider as well
2015-12-06 05:32 walaowey: yep
2015-12-06 05:33 walaowey: 03:44:143 (3) - i think u can have lower spacing here
2015-12-06 05:33 walaowey: bcoz the beat is quite weak
2015-12-06 05:33 walaowey: compare to (4)
2015-12-06 05:34 Avishay: hm yeah but it is meant to give emphasization to 4 with sharp movement and spacing, got any better placement suggestions?
2015-12-06 05:35 walaowey: tbh, i dont suggestion for this ><
2015-12-06 05:35 Avishay: perhaps x504 y360
2015-12-06 05:35 Avishay: and then ctrl+g on 03:44:293 (4) and 03:44:593 (5) -
2015-12-06 05:36 walaowey: but themn
2015-12-06 05:36 walaowey: but then (4) will be too far away
2015-12-06 05:37 walaowey: nvm then
2015-12-06 05:37 walaowey: leave it first
2015-12-06 05:37 walaowey: it should be ok
2015-12-06 05:37 Avishay: wait what how is it too far o.o
2015-12-06 05:37 walaowey: mm...can u screenshot it?
2015-12-06 05:37 Avishay: yeah
2015-12-06 05:37 Avishay: http://puu.sh/lKCib/291566cad9.jpg
2015-12-06 05:38 walaowey: mm, i think nvm
2015-12-06 05:38 walaowey: bcoz its easy to break
2015-12-06 05:39 Avishay: alright then I'll return it to how it was
2015-12-06 05:39 walaowey: yeah
2015-12-06 05:39 walaowey: original better .. xd
2015-12-06 05:41 walaowey: 01:05:743 (3) -
2015-12-06 05:41 walaowey: i think this need bigger spacing
2015-12-06 05:42 walaowey: the beat is strong
2015-12-06 05:43 Avishay: It's not that strong, having bigger spacing on 01:05:893 (4) - would be nicer but I don't feel it's mandatory
2015-12-06 05:43 Avishay: the pattern looks nice eitherway
2015-12-06 05:43 walaowey: yeah its not necessary ..bcoz if u follow vocal, it will be nice there
2015-12-06 05:45 walaowey: 04:41:893 (1,2,3) -
2015-12-06 05:45 walaowey: imo, this spacing is quite confusing
2015-12-06 05:46 Avishay: AR and NC helps reading it
2015-12-06 05:46 Avishay: might be a bit hard to read yeah, but I like it a lot
2015-12-06 05:46 Avishay: so I'll keep it
2015-12-06 05:46 walaowey: ok
2015-12-06 05:46 walaowey: 04:47:293 (1) -
2015-12-06 05:46 walaowey: maybe blanket it with (3)?
2015-12-06 05:47 Avishay: would be weird as 3 doesn't really blanket 2
2015-12-06 05:48 Avishay: and the heads of 2 3 1 are creating a triagle
2015-12-06 05:48 walaowey: maybe just lift up the slider tail to blanket it
2015-12-06 05:49 Avishay: nono I am keeping the same shape
2015-12-06 05:49 Avishay: I could maybe rotate it instead
2015-12-06 05:49 Avishay: hm
2015-12-06 05:49 walaowey: oo ok, the same shape with (2,3) right
2015-12-06 05:49 walaowey: alright
2015-12-06 05:50 Avishay: http://puu.sh/lKDal/6996137f08.jpg
2015-12-06 05:51 walaowey: yep nice
2015-12-06 05:52 walaowey: 00:51:868 (5) - the whole slider is filled with whisle
2015-12-06 05:52 walaowey: whistle*
2015-12-06 05:52 walaowey: is it intentional?
2015-12-06 05:52 Avishay: yep
2015-12-06 05:52 walaowey: alright
2015-12-06 05:53 walaowey: well, thats all from me
2015-12-06 05:53 walaowey: everything looks nice to me xd
2015-12-06 05:53 Avishay: thank you very much :P
2015-12-06 05:53 Avishay: hopefully I'll be able to push it forward this year
2015-12-06 05:53 walaowey: yeah good luck man
2015-12-06 05:54 Avishay: thanks, shoot me amsg if you need a mod or something

Gratz for the bubble btw xd
-Nya-
Heya~ Responding to your request in-game.

Beginning:
  1. The preview point isn’t snapped. Snap it to 00:59:443 –
  2. 00:09:343 –Clear beat here. Even if you’re following that ping sound, it still won’t hurt to map that beat imo.
  3. 00:23:293 (5) –I would add NC here and remove NC here: 00:23:593 (1) – The strong beat is on: 00:23:293 (5) –
  4. 00:24:493 (1) –Don’t you think this jump might be too much? Since the music is calm.
  5. 00:28:543 –A note here would fit nicely.
  6. 00:43:693 (3) –NC here? There’s a strong beat there.
  7. 00:43:693 (3) –Dang, this is a big jump, lol. I suggest you try easing down on a jump like that. The music is still calm.
  8. 00:54:793 (4,5) –Since the (5) has to be clicked faster than the previous circles, can’t you maybe move them a bit closer together to make that clearer?
  9. 01:02:893 (3) –Imo, the NC should rather be on the large white tick, since that’s where the beat is strong.
  10. 01:05:293 (2) -^,etc.
  11. 01:12:193 (4,6) –Ugly overlap. Try to avoid them touching.
  12. 01:14:893 (5) –NC here and remove NC here: 01:15:193 (1) –
  13. 01:16:543 (1) –I wouldn’t place a NC here.
  14. 01:53:293 (1) –You didn’t place a slow slider like this anywhere else in the previous part of the kiai so it may cause confusion. I suggest you return the SV to normal there.
  15. 02:12:493 (3) –NC?
  16. 02:14:893 (3) -^
  17. 02:17:293 (2) -^
  18. 02:19:693 (5) –NC here and remove NC here: 02:20:293 (1) –
  19. 02:48:193 (1) –I don’t understand why there’s a single NC here >.<
  20. 03:18:493 (3) –NC
  21. 03:19:093 (5) –NC here and remove NC here: 03:19:243 (1) –
  22. 03:58:093 (1) –Same as 01:53:293 (1) –

Eh, your NC’s are very inconsistent and can use more work imo. I mean, in some places you placed a NC on the white tick (like it actually should be imo) and in other places you didn’t. NC’s should usually be placed where the beat is the strongest. (You’re probably going to tell me that ranting on about NC’ing is stupid, but the wrong NC’ing can affect a map badly imo)

Then, I only like pointed out two jumps at the beginning of the song, cuz I felt it would be useless to point out every single one if you’re not going to fix any in any case, but I really feel, especially at the beginning where the music is calm, that you shouldn’t go all out with jumps since they don’t support the music that well at all.

I don’t know, Avishay. In my eyes, this can still be improved. This kind of map is not really my style, so I guess it’s mostly just my own opinion though.
Topic Starter
Avishay

-Nya- wrote:

Heya~ Responding to your request in-game.

Beginning:
  1. The preview point isn’t snapped. Snap it to 00:59:443 –
  2. 00:09:343 –Clear beat here. Even if you’re following that ping sound, it still won’t hurt to map that beat imo. Well you pretty much said why I don't want to map it :P
  3. 00:23:293 (5) –I would add NC here and remove NC here: 00:23:593 (1) – The strong beat is on: 00:23:293 (5) – Just because the strong beat is there it doesn't mean the NC should be there, having the NC there would be more confusing than helpful, the NC indicates no more anti jump and new stanza.
  4. 00:24:493 (1) –Don’t you think this jump might be too much? Since the music is calm. More instruments are getting into the music, and I want to emphasize the vocals anyway, so it goes nicely.
  5. 00:28:543 –A note here would fit nicely. I'm pretty sure I had a note here before, but it simply didn't work that well, the note between the beat and the vocal is not that significant so I left it at that.
  6. 00:43:693 (3) –NC here? There’s a strong beat there. I rearranged the NCs, some SV used to exist and now they're gone.
  7. 00:43:693 (3) –Dang, this is a big jump, lol. I suggest you try easing down on a jump like that. The music is still calm. Regardless it's really fun, it flows really well and it goes with the strong note, nobody else mentioned it and I think it's great.
  8. 00:54:793 (4,5) –Since the (5) has to be clicked faster than the previous circles, can’t you maybe move them a bit closer together to make that clearer? Actually it was like that until someone suggested placing 5 in the triangle to make it look cooler, it's not that hard to read with the AR and 5 is relatively closer than everything else, it doesn't really affect gameplay.
  9. 01:02:893 (3) –Imo, the NC should rather be on the large white tick, since that’s where the beat is strong. But I decided to start it on the vocals, there's nothing wrong with that, is there?
  10. 01:05:293 (2) -^,etc. ^
  11. 01:12:193 (4,6) –Ugly overlap. Try to avoid them touching. Yeah, you're right, fixed.
  12. 01:14:893 (5) –NC here and remove NC here: 01:15:193 (1) – V
  13. 01:16:543 (1) –I wouldn’t place a NC here. V
  14. 01:53:293 (1) –You didn’t place a slow slider like this anywhere else in the previous part of the kiai so it may cause confusion. I suggest you return the SV to normal there. I will keep it, it's still the first kiai just cut into 4 parts lol, it's a small thing of mine I'd like to keep.
  15. 02:12:493 (3) –NC?
  16. 02:14:893 (3) -^
  17. 02:17:293 (2) -^
  18. 02:19:693 (5) –NC here and remove NC here: 02:20:293 (1) – I made some changes to the NC in this section ^ I don't really want to spam too many, I use them in SV changes and big music gaps.
  19. 02:48:193 (1) –I don’t understand why there’s a single NC here >.< Oops, lol.
  20. 03:18:493 (3) –NC Not necessary, the previous NC are due to SV changes.
  21. 03:19:093 (5) –NC here and remove NC here: 03:19:243 (1) – Cool.
  22. 03:58:093 (1) –Same as 01:53:293 (1) –
Same :3

Eh, your NC’s are very inconsistent and can use more work imo. I mean, in some places you placed a NC on the white tick (like it actually should be imo) and in other places you didn’t. NC’s should usually be placed where the beat is the strongest. (You’re probably going to tell me that ranting on about NC’ing is stupid, but the wrong NC’ing can affect a map badly imo) I'm not really going to rant, usually I have reasoning but thank you for finding some unreasonable NCs.

Then, I only like pointed out two jumps at the beginning of the song, cuz I felt it would be useless to point out every single one if you’re not going to fix any in any case, but I really feel, especially at the beginning where the music is calm, that you shouldn’t go all out with jumps since they don’t support the music that well at all.

I don’t know, Avishay. In my eyes, this can still be improved. This kind of map is not really my style, so I guess it’s mostly just my own opinion though.
As for the jumps, they're fun and might be a bit harder than your usual *insert this kind of song* map, but it seems appropriate for the high difficulty and it goes well. The only sections that can't really have big spacing are the one after the kiai and the one at the end of the song, but some mappers would still use big spacing patterns or idk.

Thanks for checking!
pishifat
from el queueo

so i see 5 pages of mapping debate and after skimming through it i understand nothing

from what i see on the surface though, the map was disqualified for ignoring consistency and the song itself, while your response was that it's your interpretation and consistency isn't needed. (if i'm wrong then my b)

with that in mind, i don't know if how open you'll be to this stuff, but i'll try anyway lol. first, being consistent with rhythms usually only matters for the most important sounds. nobody's going to care if you have 01:00:493 (1,2,3,4,1) - 01:02:893 (3,4,5,6) - using slightly different rhythms since you're essentially clicking on the most important sounds for both
what does stand out as bad is ignoring the more important sounds inconsistently. 03:08:293 (6) - the sound on the tail here repeats itself 3 other times in the song: 01:00:493 (1) - 01:03:793 (6) - 03:06:193 (5) - so why is this the only one where you're not emphasizing it at all? would using this rhythm actually harm your intentions, or am i just unable to understand the intentions here
01:17:893 (1) - vs 03:22:693 (7,1) - they're both getting the hold thing, then only one is putting pressure on the emphasized sound. i dont really understand how it could just feel better to not click on the downbeat in one instance and not the other like what
01:39:793 (3) - vs 03:44:893 (1) - clear empahsis on one one and completley ignoring the other pourquoi
00:02:743 (2) - im sure someone's mentioned this one before. you've got the first strong sound completely unemphasized while you emphasize it everywhere afterwards. how bad is it to do a triple into a strong sound? based on some stuff i read on earlier pages you're in favor of that, so like when teh music supports it what's the issue with doing it lol

there's also some things that aren't necessarily inconsistent with anything yet still are gross. i can see why you'd do a few of these, but it's really easy to follow the instruments you consider strong while still following what's conventionally strong
02:05:143 (2,3) - 04:37:543 (2,2) - i see your intentions of ignoring the white tick since there's no piano there, but how different would this be? it's clear that the piano is what you're following since it's the only sound, then when there's another louder sound present, you're not ignoring it for the sake of just following one instrument (which would sound dumb)
04:40:093 (1,2,1) - 04:43:093 (2) - focus should be on the downbeats and the introduction of the vocal thing, rather tahn ignoring those and emphasizing the less important stuff
02:40:693 (3) - yea um

you also mentioned how the 1/8 was all now either in the music or used for emphasis, but what's with 03:48:493 (1,2,3) -
emphasis into a slider where the reverse actually has the more emphasized sound whattttttt

another thing that the dq mentioned was spacing, which doesn't really seem to be that addressed either. just like what i said for the introduction to the rhythms thing, all you really need is the most important sounds emphasized. 03:34:693 (2,3,4,5,1) - nobody's going to care about how 4 technically should be more emphasized than 3 when you've clearly got 1 with major emphasis
01:16:993 (1,2,3) - anyone can tell there's major emphasis on 3, yet you're not showing that through mapping at all. especially offputting when you perfectly show proper spacing to represent intensity half a second before this at 01:16:243 (4,5,6) -
04:10:093 (1) - 03:22:093 (3) - some major sounds that you're emphasizing equally to unemphasized sounds
01:59:893 (2,3,1) - 00:54:793 (4,5,1) - 1 there would be one of those major sounds while the thing before 1 = minor zzzzz youve seen me complain about this before ha

comboing is what i understand the least here. people either choose to place new combos according to musical phrasing, vocal phrasing, or patterns, yet you're doing all three and some more that i dont evne comprehend
01:36:043 (7) - vs 03:40:843 (1) - you're even using the same rhythm/placement concepts and they're inconsistent
01:27:493 (1) - vs03:32:293 (2) -
01:48:493 (1) - 01:49:693 (1) - vs 03:53:293 (5) - 03:54:493 (4) - the first kiai seems to be doing it according to phrasing, then the second is some way that is beyond me
03:17:293 (1,2,1,2,3,4) - you've got the same thing repeating 3 times, so like putting a new combo on 3 to express that would make sense. as it is now, does 03:17:893 (1) - need its own combo?
03:19:693 (5,1) - 03:43:693 (1,2) - you've got a lot of these 1/2 stack things. keeping new combos on either the first object or the second object would make snese, but switching all the time doesn't really make much sense
03:12:493 (3) - vs 01:07:693 (1) - really how different are these? they're both symmetric stuff following the same rhythms so likeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee

when modding your last map, i kind of already said all that i had to about movement. some stuff like 01:31:243 (1,2,3,1,2,3) - gets really uncomfortable with transitions into sliderbodies and momentum based jumps stuff so you know what i would say

some other unrelated-to-anything things
00:10:393 (2,4) - 00:24:343 (4) - 00:14:593 (3) - and some other 15% stuff -- while really low volume sliderends are fine, when you cant get enough feedback from stuff you're clicking on, it's kind of uh bad. this really shouldnt be controversial at all lolz
04:36:943 (5) - the um why's this ending on a 1/8 tick

one of the really big overall things that i don't understand is how you structured your main slider velocities. i understand the small changes depending on pitches and stuff (which i don't really agree with to the extent you're doing, btu that's not the point). what i dont get is how you mostly use 1x sv up til the second kiai, then increase it for the sake of showing intensity.
by that logic, you should probably have been showing intensity through your primary slider velocity prior, but you've got the same 1x for the super calm intro as you do for the first kiai lol

tried to explain stuff as clearly as possible so it got a little too wordy haha. bye!!
Topic Starter
Avishay

pishifat wrote:

from el queueo

so i see 5 pages of mapping debate and after skimming through it i understand nothing

from what i see on the surface though, the map was disqualified for ignoring consistency and the song itself, while your response was that it's your interpretation and consistency isn't needed. (if i'm wrong then my b)

with that in mind, i don't know if how open you'll be to this stuff, but i'll try anyway lol. first, being consistent with rhythms usually only matters for the most important sounds. nobody's going to care if you have 01:00:493 (1,2,3,4,1) - 01:02:893 (3,4,5,6) - using slightly different rhythms since you're essentially clicking on the most important sounds for both Someone should've mentioned this to me earlier, although a lot of people seem to disagree, it looks like they are just mad because I don't have the exact same 2 patterns for the same part of music. I agree with the bold statement.
what does stand out as bad is ignoring the more important sounds inconsistently. 03:08:293 (6) - the sound on the tail here repeats itself 3 other times in the song: 01:00:493 (1) - 01:03:793 (6) - 03:06:193 (5) - so why is this the only one where you're not emphasizing it at all? would using this rhythm actually harm your intentions, or am i just unable to understand the intentions here
01:17:893 (1) - vs 03:22:693 (7,1) - they're both getting the hold thing, then only one is putting pressure on the emphasized sound. i dont really understand how it could just feel better to not click on the downbeat in one instance and not the other like what
01:39:793 (3) - vs 03:44:893 (1) - clear empahsis on one one and completley ignoring the other pourquoi
00:02:743 (2) - im sure someone's mentioned this one before. you've got the first strong sound completely unemphasized while you emphasize it everywhere afterwards. how bad is it to do a triple into a strong sound? based on some stuff i read on earlier pages you're in favor of that, so like when teh music supports it what's the issue with doing it lol I did it because the triplet just felt wrong, I can't really explain why, perhaps it was poor implementation or whatever, eitherway I tried something new with a triplet, hopefully it's fine.

there's also some things that aren't necessarily inconsistent with anything yet still are gross. i can see why you'd do a few of these, but it's really easy to follow the instruments you consider strong while still following what's conventionally strong
02:05:143 (2,3) - 04:37:543 (2,2) - i see your intentions of ignoring the white tick since there's no piano there, but how different would this be? it's clear that the piano is what you're following since it's the only sound, then when there's another louder sound present, you're not ignoring it for the sake of just following one instrument (which would sound dumb) I don't really find this dumb tbh, it's not like I completely ignored it, the player is supposed to play the pianos here while letting the other instruments join in if they want, and I find it completely fine.
04:40:093 (1,2,1) - 04:43:093 (2) - focus should be on the downbeats and the introduction of the vocal thing, rather tahn ignoring those and emphasizing the less important stuff Those are fine, first slider is vocal ending, and the second slider is supporting the long held vocal, the downbeat is still felt and it's fineee.
02:40:693 (3) - yea um Honestly it's just fine for various reasons.

you also mentioned how the 1/8 was all now either in the music or used for emphasis, but what's with 03:48:493 (1,2,3) -
emphasis into a slider where the reverse actually has the more emphasized sound whattttttt oooooops I totally forgot abou the clap in the reverse, fixxx

another thing that the dq mentioned was spacing, which doesn't really seem to be that addressed either. just like what i said for the introduction to the rhythms thing, all you really need is the most important sounds emphasized. 03:34:693 (2,3,4,5,1) - nobody's going to care about how 4 technically should be more emphasized than 3 when you've clearly got 1 with major emphasis
01:16:993 (1,2,3) - anyone can tell there's major emphasis on 3, yet you're not showing that through mapping at all. especially offputting when you perfectly show proper spacing to represent intensity half a second before this at 01:16:243 (4,5,6) -
04:10:093 (1) - 03:22:093 (3) - some major sounds that you're emphasizing equally to unemphasized sounds Actually this is a common thing to do to keep the pattern well, 04:10:093 (1) - increasing the spacing here would destroy the nice and consistent spacing throughout this section, I did emphasize this with the slider shape. 03:22:093 (3) - self explanatory I think.
01:59:893 (2,3,1) - 00:54:793 (4,5,1) - 1 there would be one of those major sounds while the thing before 1 = minor zzzzz youve seen me complain about this before ha First one fixed, second one is a recent change and honestly 1 is not a that strong note compared to 00:55:693 (3) -, the whole pattern is really fun and cool this way.

comboing is what i understand the least here. people either choose to place new combos according to musical phrasing, vocal phrasing, or patterns, yet you're doing all three and some more that i dont evne comprehend xd
01:36:043 (7) - vs 03:40:843 (1) - you're even using the same rhythm/placement concepts and they're inconsistent
01:27:493 (1) - vs03:32:293 (2) -
01:48:493 (1) - 01:49:693 (1) - vs 03:53:293 (5) - 03:54:493 (4) - the first kiai seems to be doing it according to phrasing, then the second is some way that is beyond me
03:17:293 (1,2,1,2,3,4) - you've got the same thing repeating 3 times, so like putting a new combo on 3 to express that would make sense. as it is now, does 03:17:893 (1) - need its own combo?
03:19:693 (5,1) - 03:43:693 (1,2) - you've got a lot of these 1/2 stack things. keeping new combos on either the first object or the second object would make snese, but switching all the time doesn't really make much sense
03:12:493 (3) - vs 01:07:693 (1) - really how different are these? they're both symmetric stuff following the same rhythms so likeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee
I think the reason for the inconsistencies in the NCs is because the different patterns, the patterns somehow represent the NCs by themselves and it self misleads me, heh.

when modding your last map, i kind of already said all that i had to about movement. some stuff like 01:31:243 (1,2,3,1,2,3) - gets really uncomfortable with transitions into sliderbodies and momentum based jumps stuff so you know what i would say

some other unrelated-to-anything things
00:10:393 (2,4) - 00:24:343 (4) - 00:14:593 (3) - and some other 15% stuff -- while really low volume sliderends are fine, when you cant get enough feedback from stuff you're clicking on, it's kind of uh bad. this really shouldnt be controversial at all lolz You could call it lazy keynote hitsounding, I did it just for the beginning (xd). The 15% does leave small feedback while giving the emphasization to the actual strong notes afterwards, like 00:10:993 (5) - 00:24:493 (1) - 00:14:893 (1) -
04:36:943 (5) - the um why's this ending on a 1/8 tick Listen closely, 25% playback rate

one of the really big overall things that i don't understand is how you structured your main slider velocities. i understand the small changes depending on pitches and stuff (which i don't really agree with to the extent you're doing, btu that's not the point). what i dont get is how you mostly use 1x sv up til the second kiai, then increase it for the sake of showing intensity.
by that logic, you should probably have been showing intensity through your primary slider velocity prior, but you've got the same 1x for the super calm intro as you do for the first kiai lol I agree to some degree, but I don't find the intro as weak as everyone makes it. Unlike the sections at the end and after the first kiai, which obviously I did map accordingly imo.

tried to explain stuff as clearly as possible so it got a little too wordy haha. bye!!
Thank you very much for clarifying some big stuff, I'm still sure 'consistency' by some people means same music = same pattern, but I can relate to your points easily.

Whatever wasn't commented on was fixed.
Krfawy

#1


Have I ever told you how I hate Japanese vocals?
Topic Starter
Avishay

Krfawy wrote:


#1


Have I ever told you how I hate Japanese vocals?
Nope, but I know just how much you hatelove me.

Thanks!
Mint
So, I guess Krfawy rebubbled #1?

Well, the map isn't your usual but I think that's okay too (of course, up to the QAT's to decide whether its reaally okay or not), but after playing the map myself, talking with Avishay and watching some play (Frost's liveplay, awesome!!) I think it's okay.

Checked some stuff over IRC. I wish you good luck!
Bubble #2!

22:45 appleeaterx: 00:03:643 (1) - off? or is that on purpose for playability
22:45 Avishay: on purpose for playability
22:46 Avishay: 1/16 doesn't seem like a wise solution lol
22:46 appleeaterx: sounds more like 1/6 tho, idk xd
22:46 Avishay: it's snapped one 1/16 tick backwards
22:46 appleeaterx: oi leave it then
22:47 appleeaterx: 00:06:493 (3,4) - ugh idk why but when playing it felt so weird that these were so close
22:47 appleeaterx: like
22:47 appleeaterx: all the sounds have those clap thingies
22:47 appleeaterx: but all spaced differently, and (3,4) really close
22:48 Avishay: tbh I can't really see the issue here or why it's weird
22:49 Avishay: I have the whole pattern thought pretty well
22:49 Avishay: movements and spacing wise to emphasize what's needed, 00:06:643 (4,5) - those are pretty much the same so they're stacked
22:49 appleeaterx: 00:39:493 (2,1) - reason why its antijump here?
22:49 appleeaterx: sound on (1) seems pretty noticeable for a calm section
22:49 Avishay: yes, the slow vocal
22:50 Avishay: it's a little game with the whole pattern
22:50 Avishay: it starts with this
22:50 Avishay: 00:38:593 (1) -
22:50 Avishay: and ends with this 00:39:793 (1) -
22:51 appleeaterx: 01:12:493 (4) - nc here instead?
22:51 Avishay: sure
22:52 appleeaterx: 01:15:493 (4) - kinda expected a large jump here? i mean most of the times u have a clap the jump is largerrrrrr
22:52 appleeaterx: (example right after this 01:16:543 (5,6) - )
22:53 Avishay: lol I can relate but I have no idea where the hell I should put the note then
22:53 Avishay: I think that's why it's like that in the first place xd
22:53 Avishay: so the pattern forced it into this position
22:54 appleeaterx: http://puu.sh/m41F7/8408a5b028.jpg
22:55 appleeaterx: idk something like that, did that in literally 3 secs
22:55 appleeaterx: 01:40:693 (6) - sad slider cuz no hitsound :c
22:56 Avishay: weps
22:56 Avishay: added
22:56 appleeaterx: 01:42:043 (4,5,1) - lol so confusing... equal spacing different snaps, and especially with this map you cant rely on AR or something cuz everythings everywhere
22:57 Avishay: okay changed
22:59 appleeaterx: so this is kinda minor but also not, maybe itll explain something: 01:53:293 (1) - 03:58:093 (1) -
22:59 appleeaterx: the difference between those sounds: nothing
22:59 appleeaterx: difference between SV
22:59 appleeaterx: you know, its not that everything has to be precisely consistent
22:59 appleeaterx: but if its everywhere
22:59 appleeaterx: you will notice it during gameplay
23:00 Avishay: the difference in the SV is mainly because of the difference in the two kiai sections
23:01 appleeaterx: just a tip for your next map(s) xd
23:01 Avishay: also the patterns that precede are not the same .-.
23:01 appleeaterx: (if you plan on staying here after finding out how ranking system works lmao)
23:01 Avishay: oh believe me I see how it works very well xd
23:01 appleeaterx: oh, i mean that in general because the SVs in your map change like every <insert small amount here> seconds
23:02 Avishay: if I find them appropriate I see no reason not to lol
23:02 appleeaterx: you can see how they are appropriate,but if a qat member doesnt its rip
23:03 Avishay: well I pretty much explain everything when mentioned, there's a lot of thought and time wasted into the crap I do
23:03 appleeaterx: "crap" xdd
23:05 appleeaterx: but i guess your view of mapping is that the song should be judged on each second and not 5 min long same stuff >->
23:05 Avishay: pretty much ^
23:05 Avishay: this is why I never map dnb lol
23:05 Avishay: becsue it is the same thing
23:05 Avishay: OVER AND OVER
23:05 appleeaterx: xdddddd\
23:05 Avishay: but I'll admit playing it is fun
23:06 appleeaterx: and the pp it gives
23:06 appleeaterx: gives the illusion i can actually play the stuff i icon while in reality i cant
23:06 Avishay: yess
23:06 Avishay: arrghrghrgh
23:06 appleeaterx: 03:31:243 (6) - wasnt a fan of this tbh ;( , i kinda like smashing keys when there are strong sounds like that lol
23:07 Avishay: but but vocalssss ;;
23:07 Avishay: I was and still am about in a dilemma about this lol
23:07 Avishay: I said to myself that if many people mention it as a problem I'll change it
23:08 Avishay: but lmao people find it acceptable
23:08 Avishay: I can barely play my maps because I spend so much time on them so I memorize them even if I don't want to, so I suck at playing and testing them after a while zz
23:08 appleeaterx: 03:51:193 (1,2,3,4,5,6,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - gotta say this is pretty cool with the vocals
23:08 appleeaterx: i cant play my own maps either
23:09 appleeaterx: unless i use HR or something cuz then its not the same anymore
23:09 appleeaterx: but i suck at HR
23:09 Avishay: I KNOW LOL
23:09 Avishay: and yes vocals too gudddd
23:10 appleeaterx: 04:36:493 (1,2,3,4,5) - because of the cymbal crash before this, theres a extra loud sound here that goes on and on
23:10 appleeaterx: so it makes those barely audible
23:11 appleeaterx: gives almost no feedback, prehaps increase the volume a bit just for that section?
23:11 Avishay: seems right
Topic Starter
Avishay

appleeaterx wrote:

So, I guess Krfawy rebubbled #1?

Well, the map isn't your usual but I think that's okay too (of course, up to the QAT's to decide whether its reaally okay or not), but after playing the map myself, talking with Avishay and watching some play (Frost's liveplay, awesome!!) I think it's okay.

Checked some stuff over IRC. I wish you good luck!
Bubble #2!

22:45 appleeaterx: 00:03:643 (1) - off? or is that on purpose for playability
22:45 Avishay: on purpose for playability
22:46 Avishay: 1/16 doesn't seem like a wise solution lol
22:46 appleeaterx: sounds more like 1/6 tho, idk xd
22:46 Avishay: it's snapped one 1/16 tick backwards
22:46 appleeaterx: oi leave it then
22:47 appleeaterx: 00:06:493 (3,4) - ugh idk why but when playing it felt so weird that these were so close
22:47 appleeaterx: like
22:47 appleeaterx: all the sounds have those clap thingies
22:47 appleeaterx: but all spaced differently, and (3,4) really close
22:48 Avishay: tbh I can't really see the issue here or why it's weird
22:49 Avishay: I have the whole pattern thought pretty well
22:49 Avishay: movements and spacing wise to emphasize what's needed, 00:06:643 (4,5) - those are pretty much the same so they're stacked
22:49 appleeaterx: 00:39:493 (2,1) - reason why its antijump here?
22:49 appleeaterx: sound on (1) seems pretty noticeable for a calm section
22:49 Avishay: yes, the slow vocal
22:50 Avishay: it's a little game with the whole pattern
22:50 Avishay: it starts with this
22:50 Avishay: 00:38:593 (1) -
22:50 Avishay: and ends with this 00:39:793 (1) -
22:51 appleeaterx: 01:12:493 (4) - nc here instead?
22:51 Avishay: sure
22:52 appleeaterx: 01:15:493 (4) - kinda expected a large jump here? i mean most of the times u have a clap the jump is largerrrrrr
22:52 appleeaterx: (example right after this 01:16:543 (5,6) - )
22:53 Avishay: lol I can relate but I have no idea where the hell I should put the note then
22:53 Avishay: I think that's why it's like that in the first place xd
22:53 Avishay: so the pattern forced it into this position
22:54 appleeaterx: http://puu.sh/m41F7/8408a5b028.jpg
22:55 appleeaterx: idk something like that, did that in literally 3 secs
22:55 appleeaterx: 01:40:693 (6) - sad slider cuz no hitsound :c
22:56 Avishay: weps
22:56 Avishay: added
22:56 appleeaterx: 01:42:043 (4,5,1) - lol so confusing... equal spacing different snaps, and especially with this map you cant rely on AR or something cuz everythings everywhere
22:57 Avishay: okay changed
22:59 appleeaterx: so this is kinda minor but also not, maybe itll explain something: 01:53:293 (1) - 03:58:093 (1) -
22:59 appleeaterx: the difference between those sounds: nothing
22:59 appleeaterx: difference between SV
22:59 appleeaterx: you know, its not that everything has to be precisely consistent
22:59 appleeaterx: but if its everywhere
22:59 appleeaterx: you will notice it during gameplay
23:00 Avishay: the difference in the SV is mainly because of the difference in the two kiai sections
23:01 appleeaterx: just a tip for your next map(s) xd
23:01 Avishay: also the patterns that precede are not the same .-.
23:01 appleeaterx: (if you plan on staying here after finding out how ranking system works lmao)
23:01 Avishay: oh believe me I see how it works very well xd
23:01 appleeaterx: oh, i mean that in general because the SVs in your map change like every <insert small amount here> seconds
23:02 Avishay: if I find them appropriate I see no reason not to lol
23:02 appleeaterx: you can see how they are appropriate,but if a qat member doesnt its rip
23:03 Avishay: well I pretty much explain everything when mentioned, there's a lot of thought and time wasted into the crap I do
23:03 appleeaterx: "crap" xdd
23:05 appleeaterx: but i guess your view of mapping is that the song should be judged on each second and not 5 min long same stuff >->
23:05 Avishay: pretty much ^
23:05 Avishay: this is why I never map dnb lol
23:05 Avishay: becsue it is the same thing
23:05 Avishay: OVER AND OVER
23:05 appleeaterx: xdddddd\
23:05 Avishay: but I'll admit playing it is fun
23:06 appleeaterx: and the pp it gives
23:06 appleeaterx: gives the illusion i can actually play the stuff i icon while in reality i cant
23:06 Avishay: yess
23:06 Avishay: arrghrghrgh
23:06 appleeaterx: 03:31:243 (6) - wasnt a fan of this tbh ;( , i kinda like smashing keys when there are strong sounds like that lol
23:07 Avishay: but but vocalssss ;;
23:07 Avishay: I was and still am about in a dilemma about this lol
23:07 Avishay: I said to myself that if many people mention it as a problem I'll change it
23:08 Avishay: but lmao people find it acceptable
23:08 Avishay: I can barely play my maps because I spend so much time on them so I memorize them even if I don't want to, so I suck at playing and testing them after a while zz
23:08 appleeaterx: 03:51:193 (1,2,3,4,5,6,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - gotta say this is pretty cool with the vocals
23:08 appleeaterx: i cant play my own maps either
23:09 appleeaterx: unless i use HR or something cuz then its not the same anymore
23:09 appleeaterx: but i suck at HR
23:09 Avishay: I KNOW LOL
23:09 Avishay: and yes vocals too gudddd
23:10 appleeaterx: 04:36:493 (1,2,3,4,5) - because of the cymbal crash before this, theres a extra loud sound here that goes on and on
23:10 appleeaterx: so it makes those barely audible
23:11 appleeaterx: gives almost no feedback, prehaps increase the volume a bit just for that section?
23:11 Avishay: seems right
Thanks applexxx!

If anyone has concerns about stuff in the map please contact me or post here, I don't mind discussing my choices and thoughts if necessary.
Bara-
As Avishay can't qualify this, he asked me to do it
Lasse

Lasse wrote:

👀
Kalibe
Regrats Avi !
Sey

appleeaterx wrote:

Well, the map isn't your usual but I think that's okay too (of course, up to the QAT's to decide whether its reaally okay or not)
Lol... If you are uncertain whether it goes through the qualification process or not, don't qualify it at all? .-.
Zectro
good luck, really like this map :3
Topic Starter
Avishay
Thanks guys!
Smokeman
wow loctav gonna be pissed again..

(i might throw in a mod but i think more qualified ppl will show up anyway)
Irreversible
Hello Avishay,

after checking your map again I have decided to pull it out of qualification again for the following reasons:

  1. 00:06:493 (3) - This sound should be emphasized more than the rest, yet it has lower spacing than the objects before.
  2. 00:09:493 (4) - It doesn’t make too much sense that this is the same slider as before, adding no NC indicates the slowdown even less. I can see you try to emphasize this sound in a special way, but you should try your best indiciating it, then.
  3. 00:12:943 (4) - Why stacked? There is no real reason to keep it stacked, as the song regurlarly goes on. You only achieve the player to awkwardly stop here, and this really doesn’t fit the songs mood.
  4. 00:13:693 (1,2,3,1) - Is there any structure behind these objects? For me they really only look like you’ve placed them pretty arbitrary.
  5. 00:43:693 (1,2) - Again, the stack. You kill movement and emphasize nothing in the song.
  6. 00:45:793 (3,1) - Feels sorta random to me. First of all why this shape and why does it not properly follow to the next note? The way she is saying “anata” is calling for a neat pattern, maybe keep the same slidershape and try working with rotating?
  7. 00:50:293 (3,4,1) - It really feels like that something went horribly wrong here with the hitsounding.
  8. 00:52:093 (1) - This should probably be a slowdown according to the rest of your piano, or whatever you tried to emphasize, emphasis.
  9. 01:10:993 (1) - You say you want to emphasize the vocals.. but why is this such a low spacing? Whatever you are argueing with, it’s really contradicting.
  10. 01:16:543 (5,6) - Really high spacing compared to the rest of the map. Nothing special to be found either here.
  11. 01:24:943 (1) - Inconsistent NC with 01:27:493 (2) -
  12. 01:41:143 (7) - Again, the stack.
  13. 01:43:243 (4,5,6) You have only used this once and it doesn’t fit at all. Why are you not using circles like you did before?
  14. 01:53:293 (1) - What’s the reason of this sudden slowdown? This sound appears quite often and suddenly you make a slowdown here after an intense build-up.
  15. 01:50:893 (1,2) - 03:55:693 (1,1) - these 2 are basically the same thing vocal-wise but comboing and slidervelocity are completely different for both cases without any apparent reason.
  16. 02:03:193 (1,1) - There’s clearly no sound these circles could be mapped to. If you listen closely with 25% speed you will realize that there’s just a quiet sound on the blue tick.
  17. 03:43:093 (6) - if you mainly focus on capturing the intensity of the vocals with this map why do you ignore vocals here and in several other places too
  18. 04:12:493 (1) - Is there any reason for this repeat slider? I’d suggest using a circle instead.


As you can see, there are the same points listed up over and over (mainly stacking, consistency, slowdowns) etc. I can not see this map in the ranked section in its current state and you should keep improving your map to get it there eventually. Consistency is actually really important, especially when you try to do special stuff such as slowdowns. At least, we’ve got rid off the overmapping which is a good sign and a step into the right direction.

Good luck with further processing.
Topic Starter
Avishay

Irreversible wrote:

Hello Avishay,

after checking your map again I have decided to pull it out of qualification again for the following reasons:

  1. 00:06:493 (3) - This sound should be emphasized more than the rest, yet it has lower spacing than the objects before. It's not really strong.. Regardless I did give it some emphasization with the sharp movement from the previous notes.
  2. 00:09:493 (4) - It doesn’t make too much sense that this is the same slider as before, adding no NC indicates the slowdown even less. I can see you try to emphasize this sound in a special way, but you should try your best indiciating it, then. I had a NC on it before then, however some people suggested that I remove it because various reasons, regardless you are not really supposed to be able to hit everything perfectly on sightread.
  3. 00:12:943 (4) - Why stacked? There is no real reason to keep it stacked, as the song regurlarly goes on. You only achieve the player to awkwardly stop here, and this really doesn’t fit the songs mood. I agree with you to some degree, there's no real reason to have it stacked, however it is not awkward, the current pattern goes really well, just before the movement with the slider there's a reall small halt, which is fun.
  4. 00:13:693 (1,2,3,1) - Is there any structure behind these objects? For me they really only look like you’ve placed them pretty arbitrary. In shape and size? Not really, in movement? Yeah. You could say that the shapes are the way I thought of the song, but it doesn't really matter, the movements here are great.
  5. 00:43:693 (1,2) - Again, the stack. You kill movement and emphasize nothing in the song. I do emphasize 00:43:693 (1) - with the big jump, then comes the really weak note that starts at 00:43:843 (2) - and because it's weak I represented it with the anti-jump.
  6. 00:45:793 (3,1) - Feels sorta random to me. First of all why this shape and why does it not properly follow to the next note? The way she is saying “anata” is calling for a neat pattern, maybe keep the same slidershape and try working with rotating? I don't really understand why, I'll tell you why I did use this, first of all the shapes do go well with the "anata", then there's the extended vocal slider, the note that starts at 00:46:093 (1) - is really strong so I've wanted to have some emphasization with the previous slider, therefore the anchor on the previous slider.
  7. 00:50:293 (3,4,1) - It really feels like that something went horribly wrong here with the hitsounding. Really? Why? There isn't really anything to have hitsounds on 00:50:593 (4) - and the drum sampleset before then goes really well with the music.
  8. 00:52:093 (1) - This should probably be a slowdown according to the rest of your piano, or whatever you tried to emphasize, emphasis. I can't really see a problem here, it's completely fine.
  9. 01:10:993 (1) - You say you want to emphasize the vocals.. but why is this such a low spacing? Whatever you are argueing with, it’s really contradicting. Pretty sure I've said that before, but the emphasis comes with the movement from the circle-ish slider and the increased SV.
  10. 01:16:543 (5,6) - Really high spacing compared to the rest of the map. Nothing special to be found either here. Obviously there is the strong drum, but you are probably asking now why didn't I do the same to 01:15:493 (4) - ? The answer is because of the pattern structure, 01:14:893 (1,2,3,4) - slider into (relatively) big spaced circle and bla bla pattern continues, 01:15:793 (1,2,3) - then this starts (with great nice halt at 01:15:493 (4) - ) and then 01:16:243 (4,5,6) - which is a slider into a not so big spaced circle and then the real thing is kickin', regardless I feel that it plays pretty good.
  11. 01:24:943 (1) - Inconsistent NC with 01:27:493 (2) - To be fair, there used to be a NC until pishi mentioned that it was incosistent with 03:32:293 (2) - , but I don't really think it has anything to do with 01:27:493 (2) - maybe the fact the the vocals start on both of those notes but I don't really go with that.
  12. 01:41:143 (7) - Again, the stack. I admit that this could have been not stacked, but this was mainly done to emphasize 01:41:143 (7,8) - , I wanted a complete opposite direction movement into 8, and this works well too because the sliderend and 7 are the same sound.
  13. 01:43:243 (4,5,6) You have only used this once and it doesn’t fit at all. Why are you not using circles like you did before? Why is it a problem that I did not use this again? The important thing is the notes that are getting emphasized, and those are obviously the drums, it plays really well and is just a different pattern to this pattern in the music.
  14. 01:53:293 (1) - What’s the reason of this sudden slowdown? This sound appears quite often and suddenly you make a slowdown here after an intense build-up. You could probably take a look at the other tens of responses I gave on this.
  15. 01:50:893 (1,2) - 03:55:693 (1,1) - these 2 are basically the same thing vocal-wise but comboing and slidervelocity are completely different for both cases without any apparent reason. Because it has no affect on the play at all? Both patterns are emphasizing the vocals in different ways and are just fine?
  16. 02:03:193 (1,1) - There’s clearly no sound these circles could be mapped to. If you listen closely with 25% speed you will realize that there’s just a quiet sound on the blue tick. I'm 1000000% sure that there are notes there, use an audio software to see yourself, regardless, even if there are none, this gives the player something to play with the transition instead of an awkward gap.
  17. 03:43:093 (6) - if you mainly focus on capturing the intensity of the vocals with this map why do you ignore vocals here and in several other places too Because there's nothing wrong with following instruments as well, just because I mainly focus vocals does not mean I should follow them preciesly all of the time.
  18. 04:12:493 (1) - Is there any reason for this repeat slider? I’d suggest using a circle instead. Yes, the sounds on the head and the reverse are similar and it gives a nice repetition effect.


As you can see, there are the same points listed up over and over (mainly stacking, consistency, slowdowns) etc. I can not see this map in the ranked section in its current state and you should keep improving your map to get it there eventually. Consistency is actually really important, especially when you try to do special stuff such as slowdowns. At least, we’ve got rid off the overmapping which is a good sign and a step into the right direction.

Good luck with further processing.

Avishay wrote:

If anyone has concerns about stuff in the map please contact me or post here, I don't mind discussing my choices and thoughts if necessary.
Just because I don't use the same pattern over and over, nor have a clear structure through out my maps it doesn't mean everything is random and put out without thought, I really think that this is just plain nitpicking, hope my explanations are understandable.
show more
Please sign in to reply.

New reply