Lasse wrote:m4m from your queueEasy
00:37:082 (1,2) - how about aligning the sliders with each other, would look better imo http://i.imgur.com/5Ql8pas.jpg I prefer my current pattern since it flows better to later patterns.
00:39:691 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - flow here could be a bit better, rough suggestion: http://i.imgur.com/FZvqowA.jpg + http://i.imgur.com/BRylVvD.jpg No, my flow is better . Your's includes a 120 degree change from 2>3>4 which is a lot sharper than my 60 degree angle changes.
00:55:343 (1) - how about changing this shape a bit and put it somewhere aroung 250/280? Changed the shape but kept the position.
00:57:952 (1) - pls move sliderend ~2px down, It looks fine :S
01:04:474 (3) - the sliderhead poiting down here seems to disrupt the flow a bit, I think a modified version of 01:03:821 (2) - might play better No, the flow is still very straightforward, as is the pattern. There is little angle change anyways.
01:11:307 (2) - this seems slightly off-screen http://i.imgur.com/nKKQWQI.jpg Oh, fixed.
01:14:894 (3,4,5,6) - would flow better if it was a little bit more down-left imo Nah, the flow is fine.
01:17:503 (3,4) - and 01:22:720 (3,4) - => It might be nice if you used the same angle for both, or at least a more similar one Did something
00:21:104 (4,1) - flow could be better here mayve curve 4 (but then it' wont fit with 3) or move 1 and following a bit down+left I don't see how flow could be better here lol. It's very straightforward and the direction is very easy to understand.
00:24:691 (3,4,1) - make it like this instead? http://i.imgur.com/iuWCBBT.jpg looks cool. okay sure!
00:37:082 (1,2,3,4) - pattern looks nice, but 1->2 seems to play a little awkward compared to the rest They play just fine to me :S. You should consider slider-leniency more when considering flow from sliders to sliders. This pattern is very straightforward when you play it.
00:40:669 (5,1,2) - this might be a bit weird to read and could flow better No... it flows really well. I'm just using zigzag flow + jumps here instead of typical clockwise/counterclockwise flow
00:59:745 (2,3,4) - 00:59:745 (2,3,4) - 4 looks a bit weirdly placed, how about making 2 a wave slider and blanketing 4 with it? I changed the positions of 3 and 4 instead.
01:05:452 (5,1) - looks really easy to sliderbreak on since slider leniency has to be abused near perfectly to not have to do a small 1/8 jump Uhhh, This isn't even 1/8 it's 1/4. And it's really easy to play this lol. You can literally let go of the slider on the red tick and still get a 300. Hold sliders are deceptively easy to play, and putting a jump on them is still easily playable because you can let go 1/4 of a beat before the slider actually ends. as long as you let go after the last repeat arrow (which will be on a red tick).
move the sldierend more on 1 to make better to read and play
01:15:873 (4,1) - ^ ^
01:35:764 (1,2,3) - ^ ^
I just testplayed the diff and it seemed fine to read (even for me who struggles at AR<8 but I don't normally play Hards so I can't really judge how it will play for someone who does...)
In case you want to see the testplay, here's the osr: http://lasse.s-ul.eu/ssYKi9a0 Thanks!
00:14:582 (3,5) - would look better if symmetric I much prefer the triangle slider pattern with 00:13:604 (1,2,3) - .
00:31:865 (1,2,3) - flows a bit weird if slider leniency doesn't get fully abused Well, the intention is to use slider-leniency. That's how you would normally play. People always take short cuts when given the opportunity.
00:41:321 (3,4) - idk about putting this anti-jump here It's not an anti-jump though, i'm just using normal DS because 4 doesn't need to be emphasized.
00:51:919 (3,4,5,6,7,8,9) - putting the stream at this place makes if awkward to aim I think maybe put it in the upper left quarter and /or cuve a bit?
those stright, longish and slow downward motions at the bottom of the screen just don't feel nice to play, at least for me But the entire pattern here with al the symmetry was set up to lead into this stream. I don't see how the location of the stream on the map will affect player performance, and theres more than adequate lead into this stream with previous patterns.
=> this one is much better to play for example: 01:05:289 (3,4,5,6,7,8) -
00:58:604 (4,5,6,7) - might feel better if you kept the flow for the whole combo by swapping 6 and 7 This is zig-zag flow as well, not counter-clockwise flow. I want an up/down motion
01:02:680 (6,7) - you are going close-far-close etc for the combo buut suddenly far-far-far, might feel better if 01:02:843 (7) - was stacked on 01:02:028 (2) - But theres a strong beat on 7 that needs to be emphasized. I don't see anything wrong with the jumps getting progressively larger. They fit the emphasis in the music, and are certainly interesting to play for me.
00:15:724 (6,7,8) - - - seems to flow a bit awkward since 4-5-6 leads to some kind of circular motion and 78 break it, i'd put 8 somewhere right of 7/above of 5this pattern for example 00:19:800 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7) - feels so much better to play even if it is actually harder with the higher spacingTried something. I think it's fine atm, but yea i don't use this flow structure a lot. It still plays alright here and I have no better idea atm.
red seems to flow way better than blue here
00:21:267 (11) - feels a bit out of place with the rest of the "ctrl-g double square pattern", stack on 1 ? No, stacking on 1 would mean there'd be no jump at all from 7>1 and there needs to be a jump here to properly emphasize the downbeat.
00:51:919 (4,5,6,7,8,9,10) - curve the stream a bit upwards to make it play better Oh, cool okay made it blanketted.
can't seem to find more issues with that diff. Blankets are nice and a majoritsy of the jumps flows really nicely, rhythm seems okay too.
Can't really comment on hitsounds cause I suck at that, but I didn't hear any hitsound that seemed misplaced... thats good to hear
Thanks for the mod!