1. I personally would suggest HP 4 since its a marathon, but this is only my opinion :p.
2. 

1. 00:23:277 - I think, since you're mapping the piano, you should add a note here, this without a note sounds awkward imo.
2. 00:28:523 - ^
3. 00:46:391 - Personally, dddkd sounds better for this kind of sound, 00:46:637 - this note here is the one that sounds the highest too.
4. 00:47:703 - ^
5. 00:48:359 - Make this one a dkd to make it fit more with the music and the vocals.
6. 00:51:637 - Same thing with the dddkd.
7. 00:52:949 - ^
8. 01:06:719 - Try making this one a k, you can hear the melody getting higher everytime and it goes down at 01:07:047 -
9. 01:11:965 - ^
10. 01:47:211 - Same thing as the first point.
11. 01:52:457 - ^
12. 02:03:932 - Personally, I think k d d k d fits better here, following better the piano and the drums.
13. 02:27:539 - Have you tried making this pattern kdkkddk? I think it fits better with the vocal.
14. 02:43:932 - Don't know about you, but I think D kkk D kkk D kkk D kkk D sounds better for this.
15. 02:46:555 - Here you could do the exact opposite, making it K ddd K ddd K ddd K ddd K
16. 03:13:441 - Don't really think this sounds as good as it might sound. Try kkddkdkkd, I think it fits better for this kind of melody.
17. 03:32:129 - You know what I will say about this, follow the first point :p.
18. 03:34:752 - ^
19. 03:37:375 - ^
20. 04:07:867 - Same thing I suggested before.
21. 04:10:490 - ^
22. 04:35:900 - This sounds way better as kdddk imo.

1. Check your kiai times. They look unsnapped.
2. Fix the Bugged SV.
3. Set a consistent preview point.
4. Preferably change "bgbgbg.png" to "bgbgbg.jpg", cuz y'know, it saves space.

1. 00:44:752 (9,10,11) - / 00:49:998 (47,48,49) - Since these patterns are very similar both with the lyrics and with the instruments, I would prefer if they're mapped the same way. Either 00:50:162 (49) - switch that to k or switch 00:44:916 (11) - that to d.
2. 02:26:228 (533) - This isn't good position for a finisher in my opinion. Other finishers, such as 02:25:572 - here, have clearly audible cymbals in the music, but there isn't a cymbal noise 02:26:228 - here, only a drum. Unless you want to emphasize that drum, I recommend you remove the finisher from this position. If you would like, consider removing 02:26:801 (537) - this and adding a finisher 02:26:719 (536) - there.
3. 02:51:473 (718) - I recommend switching this to k because the pitch is more similar to 02:51:637 (719) - this than 02:51:309 (717) - that.
4. 02:54:424 (741) - Similar to what I said about the finisher 02:26:228 (533) - here, it's just my opinion though.
5. 03:02:293 (799,800) - I recommend removing (100) and adding a finisher to (799). I think you understand what I mean now and probably you disagree lol but either way I'll stop with that. :3
6. 05:05:572 - / 05:15:408 - Since this is the same as 01:04:260 - / 01:14:752 - this, I encourage you to make it kiai time. It's fine if you don't though.

Jonawaga wrote:

Hello, M4M~!
[~(Ai)Mod~]

1. Check your kiai times. They look unsnapped.
2. Fix the Bugged SV.
3. Set a consistent preview point.
4. Preferably change "bgbgbg.png" to "bgbgbg.jpg", cuz y'know, it saves space.

[~Mod~]

1. 00:44:752 (9,10,11) - / 00:49:998 (47,48,49) - Since these patterns are very similar both with the lyrics and with the instruments, I would prefer if they're mapped the same way. Either 00:50:162 (49) - switch that to k or switch 00:44:916 (11) - that to d.
2. 02:26:228 (533) - This isn't good position for a finisher in my opinion. Other finishers, such as 02:25:572 - here, have clearly audible cymbals in the music, but there isn't a cymbal noise 02:26:228 - here, only a drum. Unless you want to emphasize that drum, I recommend you remove the finisher from this position. If you would like, consider removing 02:26:801 (537) - this and adding a finisher 02:26:719 (536) - there.
3. 02:51:473 (718) - I recommend switching this to k because the pitch is more similar to 02:51:637 (719) - this than 02:51:309 (717) - that. Since 02:51:637 (719) - is significantely stronger than (718) I didn't change to k, I want to make sure the sax on (719) is emphasized properly.
4. 02:54:424 (741) - Similar to what I said about the finisher 02:26:228 (533) - here, it's just my opinion though.
5. 03:02:293 (799,800) - I recommend removing (100) and adding a finisher to (799). I think you understand what I mean now and probably you disagree lol but either way I'll stop with that. :3 100? :^) Changed anyways.
6. 05:05:572 - / 05:15:408 - Since this is the same as 01:04:260 - / 01:14:752 - this, I encourage you to make it kiai time. It's fine if you don't though. I haven't set this part on Kiai to increase the impact of 05:16:064 - 05:26:555 - but I understand what you mean. No change howevber.

Overall nice job with this map~!! Have a well-earned star!

BoberOfDarkness wrote:

So I finally manage to start working on that

CTB

1. 00:36:555 (7,8) - I feel you should't place hyperdash to this note, I would moved them around 00:36:391 (5,6) - and then place hyper from (8) to 00:36:719 (1) - - Fiddled around a little and made another type of hyper.
2. 02:09:834 (2,4) - I don't like idea of those slow sliders here - They fit the vocals.

Thats all from me right now

1. 00:34:096 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - the curve here looks really weird with the previous pattern, moving them to the right of 00:34:014 (8) - looks much better
2. 00:43:277 - I think this section here needs a bit of rework, mostly due to very long hypers with antiflow (00:44:424 (6,1) -) but also generally strong hypers in a rather calm part (00:45:736 (6,1) -). This is a calm part of the map and I think you can nerf it a bit to fit the song better. I think after 00:51:146 - though, the longer distances fit better due to the intensity building up.
3. 00:53:769 (1,2,1,2,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - And for this, I think you can keep the same switching 1/2 and 1/4 pattern you used in the previous part, doesn't make sense to me that a more intense part of the song plays calmer than the calm part of the song
4. 01:00:982 (1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3) - idk what i feel about these tbh...
5. 01:03:769 (2) - I'd tilt this to the left to emphasise the strong beats in the music better
6. 01:04:916 (1) - 01:06:555 (1) - 01:07:539 (1) - why are these combos so short??
7. 01:06:473 - 01:09:096 - unmapped triplets that you for some reason chose to map here 01:11:637 (5,6,1) - and here 01:13:932 (1,2,3) -
8. 01:09:833 (3,4,1) - I understand the usage of the previous double hypers cause high pitch but this one doesn't make sense to me, please remove hyper between (3,4)
9. 01:14:424 (3,4,1) - way way way way too long distance, especially with (1) being almost entirely vertical pls nerf
10. 01:17:375 (1,1,1) - 01:18:195 (1,1) - 01:18:687 (1,1,1) - etc... ok what the fuck is this nc'ing?
11. 01:23:932 (1) - ehhhh you follow vocals other places (01:43:605 (1,1,1) - ) so why ignore it here?
12. 01:25:244 (1) - 01:26:555 (1,2,3) - 01:27:867 (1) - 01:32:949 (1) - 01:37:047 (1,2) - etc you’re switching way too much between following vocal and not, try to be consistent about it.
13. Furthermore I’d discuss the usage of hypers, what is the purpose of having hyper here 01:25:244 (1,2) - ? There is literally no distinct sound on (2) to support a hyper. Here 01:25:900 (3,1,2) - you at least have vocals but I still don’t think they fit due to the pitch being so low. While here 01:29:670 (3) - the strong beat is on a slider end. This issue runs through most of the map
14. 01:56:719 - 02:07:211 - And here the density suddenly drops from all 1/2’s to 1/1 rhythm ignoring the piano completely which feels very very odd to play
15. 02:45:572 (2,3,1,2,3) - holy wtf this is so overdone
16. 03:31:146 - 03:41:637 - I enjoyed this part though, I feel this part compliments the music very very well compared to the rest of the map
17. 04:50:818 (1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1) - holy that's a lot of nc's in a row LOL
18. 05:04:260 (1,1,1) - 1/8 starts already here

xfraczynho wrote:

Here I am finally xD

[General]

1. Well as I said Preview timing could be really nicer, the silence is a little long when selecting so it's a little confusing and not that hype. If you want to hold it then 00:00:982 - is really better imo :p (remember to change the ctb aswell in that case) Uh, I am actually curious why I have placed it so damn early at all. lmao

[Taikovic Inner Oni]

1. I can agree if you don't like it since it's personal but 00:01:310 - D could be interesting if you don't have problem with making people wait for next note xD Oh believe me, I actually had a note here but people were like ";; stop doing that" so I removed the note just for people's sake.
2. 00:24:588 (14,15,16) - these three kats sounds a little exagerated so 00:24:588 (14) - don could fit better I use kat for the reason of emphasizing the piano well.
3. 00:27:211 (29) - 00:29:834 (44) - ^ ^
4. 00:33:441 (62,63,64,1) - this doesn't make sense at all for me since 00:33:441 - you're mapping the piano then suddenly 00:35:408 - an spinner to emphasize the background sound that is coming from 00:33:769 - , deciding for one of them should be better I agree at some point that the sudden density change - or rather focus change - isn't everybody's taste but I found that cool from the very begin and I don't want to change it near end.
   It does make sense but it's nothing someone needs to like purely from the concept.
5. 00:53:605 (74) - kat on here so you make a mirror from 00:53:113 (69,70,71) - and follows the kick better, also emphasize on next D It'd only make sense if I would also map 00:53:687 - with a kat note so kdkkD could indeed cover the kicks at 00:53:605 - / 00:53:687 - well.
6. 00:56:965 - 00:58:277 - you could add a note on them, there's a sound that I feel could be really mapped imo they are not so significant to have them mapped with objects.
7. 01:02:457 (146,147) - ctrl+g cause pitches? Yeah, thought the same while playing. Thanks for strengthing that feeling. :3c
8. 01:19:998 (121) - I don't feel like this really needs a big note tbh I probably love it waaaay too much to work with big notes but I like this one a lot so no change.
9. 01:24:588 (157) - ^ same mmm That on the other hand sounds plausible to change it as simple note. At least it doesn't sound that significant that should be different from 01:23:932 (155) - (which is a simple kat as well)
10. 01:30:654 (200) - 01:30:326 - fits better for the break imo wh.. this is indeed a weird break spot, changed.
11. 02:35:900 - I think isn't that dense if you add a note on here, noticed you wanted to break on here but could be enough with 02:39:178 - It isn't dense at all but I feel it works out better to skip that beat to strenghten the voice here a bit.
12. 02:54:424 (741) - same about big note usage, by deleting I don't hear anything that strong Song itself doesn't but how I use the finisher by having them consistent after each 16/1 makes them viable.
13. 03:09:506 (858,859,860,861,862,863,864) - I highly suggest to delete this stream, is reaaaaaaaaaally overmapped; there isn't any sound else than relax voice Man.. I really hate to remove that stream but I guess nothing else is left for me. Removed the entire stream.
14. 03:15:244 - add k? Moved 03:15:572 - instead, to be consistent with 01:30:654 (200) - .
15. 03:59:834 - same as above, add? ~
16. 04:18:359 (1336) - same about finisher usage ~
17. 04:34:752 (1451,1452,1453,1454,1455,1456,1457,1458,1459,1460,1461,1462,1463,1464,1465,1466) - this really feels weird, probably 04:34:752 (1451,1452,1453,1454,1455,1456) - dkddk d on these could fit better changed to kkddk instead.
18. 04:38:932 (1486,1487) - delete these cause no sound on there and makes a good space for next D :p buh-byeee
19. 04:49:670 - k too? Yeah, something like that.
20. 04:54:506 (1601,1603) - delete aswell? a lil overmapped imo I used kkddkkd for the first two refrain as well, doesn't look wrong to me either way.
21. 04:55:736 (1612,1613,1614,1615,1616,1617) - dkddk d too? aye, applied my changes here.

Other than that seems reaaally nice for me, you choiced a good song made a good job on there :p
Let me know when you apply it, anyways I'd like to read 1 more comment specially on some finishers usage and some parts that are a lil overmapped

1. I'd recommend you set the preview point at around 01:14:998 - or something, I saw you were aware that the preview point was kinda early so maybe this is a nice spot (or 04:13:359 - for the same purpose but avoiding playing the whole song in the preview w)

1. 02:13:769 (465,466) - delete first, change second to k. This way you make a little more emphasis on the vocals while also making 02:14:096 (467) - more notorious as the prominent drum sound in this pattern. If it wasn't for vocals, I'd also delete 02:14:916 (471) - to make the pattern feel better on itself.
2. 02:16:391 (480) - I'd say move this to 02:16:555 - and change it to k. Better drum following and a bit better transition between a pattern and the other.
3. 02:21:637 (507) - (mostly personal suggestion, as I don't really like much those "k d d d d k") delete this note and not necessary but 02:21:801 (508) - could become a k
4. 02:27:211 (540) - The song doesn't really call for this to be a finisher, as it instead goes for the trills that start at 02:26:883 - . This may be a little harder than you want for this diff, so I don't think a long deathstream starting from 02:26:883 is the solution here.
5. 02:54:424 (741) - that doesn't really need to be a finisher
6. 03:05:736 (826) - (personal suggestion, don't really like kdkdk so I'd understand if you don't agree on this one) maybe you could delete this note so that 03:05:900 (828) - is better represented as the main snare here
7. 03:39:998 - starting here, the drums go like 1/2 "dk kd" so probably it'd be nice if you did that aswell
8. 04:00:818 (1216,1217,1218,1221,1222,1223,1226,1227,1228) - to make a bit of variance between these, maybe you could make them "ddk dkk ddkkd" (also personal suggestion in case a bit of variance here weighs more than consistency). In any case, I really see the last ddk as a ddkkd working perfectly so at least consider that one
9. 04:48:441 (1545,1546) - how about a little CTRL+G here for a slightly nice pattern?

-Kazu- wrote:

damn at this point it's really hard to point stuff that really matters, a lot of good modders were here x_x

[General]

1. I'd recommend you set the preview point at around 01:14:998 - or something, I saw you were aware that the preview point was kinda early so maybe this is a nice spot (or 04:13:359 - for the same purpose but avoiding playing the whole song in the preview w) This is me, being individual and I already decided to stay with the current preview point.

[Taikovic Inner Oni]

1. 02:13:769 (465,466) - delete first, change second to k. This way you make a little more emphasis on the vocals while also making 02:14:096 (467) - more notorious as the prominent drum sound in this pattern. If it wasn't for vocals, I'd also delete 02:14:916 (471) - to make the pattern feel better on itself. Applied to the first point, made consistency changes as well.
2. 02:16:391 (480) - I'd say move this to 02:16:555 - and change it to k. Better drum following and a bit better transition between a pattern and the other. Cool.
3. 02:21:637 (507) - (mostly personal suggestion, as I don't really like much those "k d d d d k") delete this note and not necessary but 02:21:801 (508) - could become a k Applied to the first point.
4. 02:27:211 (540) - The song doesn't really call for this to be a finisher, as it instead goes for the trills that start at 02:26:883 - . This may be a little harder than you want for this diff, so I don't think a long deathstream starting from 02:26:883 is the solution here.
5. 02:54:424 (741) - that doesn't really need to be a finisher removed~
6. 03:05:736 (826) - (personal suggestion, don't really like kdkdk so I'd understand if you don't agree on this one) maybe you could delete this note so that 03:05:900 (828) - is better represented as the main snare here Well.. I indeed don't like that point. I find kdkdk pretty.
7. 03:39:998 - starting here, the drums go like 1/2 "dk kd" so probably it'd be nice if you did that aswell yap
8. 04:00:818 (1216,1217,1218,1221,1222,1223,1226,1227,1228) - to make a bit of variance between these, maybe you could make them "ddk dkk ddkkd" (also personal suggestion in case a bit of variance here weighs more than consistency). In any case, I really see the last ddk as a ddkkd working perfectly so at least consider that one Used ddk kkddk ddk instead.
9. 04:48:441 (1545,1546) - how about a little CTRL+G here for a slightly nice pattern? nice one

though nothing really was slightly wrong for me to point out x_x This should have been ranked since years wwww ☆☆☆☆☆