Not agreeing with you about this cuz rabbit jumps are always 200bpm cross-screen jumps. This doesn't make much sense compared to this map,where every pattern is carefully concerned and considered before composing.WORSTPOLACKEU wrote:
So is every rabbit jumping map.
forum
Ocelot - TSUBAKI
posted
Total Posts
405
Please read my mod on page 22 and explain to me why the choices I brought up are well thought out and carefully concerned and considered before composing.sahuang wrote:
Not agreeing with you about this cuz rabbit jumps are always 200bpm cross-screen jumps. This doesn't make much sense compared to this map,where every pattern is carefully concerned and considered before composing.WORSTPOLACKEU wrote:
So is every rabbit jumping map.
Why do you care so much?
"You" being pretty much everyone getting emotional over it.
It doesn't effect you at all.
I have no mapping experience but it seems like it plays pretty fine.
At the end of the day, isn't that what counts?
If some like it, it was approved for ranking but you don't like it. Just don't play it?
Seems pretty simple to me.
End goal for maps is things for people to play, nobody is ever going to universally agree on a map.
"You" being pretty much everyone getting emotional over it.
It doesn't effect you at all.
I have no mapping experience but it seems like it plays pretty fine.
At the end of the day, isn't that what counts?
If some like it, it was approved for ranking but you don't like it. Just don't play it?
Seems pretty simple to me.
End goal for maps is things for people to play, nobody is ever going to universally agree on a map.
ok rank any map that meets RC requirementsMazziv wrote:
+1Illkryn wrote:
If some like it, it was approved for ranking but you don't like it. Just don't play it?
literally the worst argument in the game
by the way: if you're gonna complain about the map being flawed, at least give suggestions other than "remap" or "delete the diff" on how to make it better
I also suggest to wait for HW's opinion on WORSTPOLACKEU issues before moving on, even though BD seems to have answered them pretty accordingly.
On the other hand i just cant understand why this got on hold until the last minute.
Im salty as fuck
EDIT: I also think that WPEU should give more detailed arguments.
On the other hand i just cant understand why this got on hold until the last minute.
Im salty as fuck
EDIT: I also think that WPEU should give more detailed arguments.
"It was approved for ranking"Xexxar wrote:
ok rank any map that meets RC requirementsIllkryn wrote:
If some like it, it was approved for ranking but you don't like it. Just don't play it?
literally the worst argument in the game
Don't just skip points for your convenience, I made sure to cover that.
You're too emotional about this. Chill.
I think we should give HW a chance to read everything and give a reply. Having more comments that don't clearly contribute to this map won't help in this case, so I will lock it until HW is able to respond.
Unlocked on hw's request.
Please keep in mind that we discuss this mapset itself, help the mapper, rather than anything else. Any nonsense spam / offtopic or useless posts would lead a silence.
GL.
Please keep in mind that we discuss this mapset itself, help the mapper, rather than anything else. Any nonsense spam / offtopic or useless posts would lead a silence.
GL.
Topic Starter
have read 7 pages, here i give simple answers because i think it's not necessary to give feedback to mod - i've got no mod.
to Kathex: you are just delayed from current mapping nowadays, in rc, progress or most things of it.
to winber1: reading patterns can confuse you ofc, if you really read the map's cw. that truely is the point of that difficulty, and you've missed it at all.
to WORSTPOLACKEU: overviewed the "mod" thou i think most of them can be like "This will never play well." which i really don't think can be regarded as a mod, even did after the map got ranked. the map is obviously possible to play even get fc or ss score. and what's more important, you mentioned no unranble issues.
and if you wanna talking about ranking criteria, this thread is not the right place imo.
to Alveryn: i don't think extra level diff is made for everyone to enjoy.
to SFGrenade: sv change and different kiai for gd are allowed.
to Kurokami: well, i got the situation, and thanks for taking care these things, it's also appreciation that other modes' qats don't mind get involved into this. (qat get really busy lol, everyone should know that, especially mappers imo.)
if responding mods after the map qualified is also a responsibility to any mapper in any maps, i'll do that from now on and avoid such dq like this.
to Xexxar: slot at p/5133943 shows no issues, and btw, spacing and sv settings like ex ex diff are really common in ranked maps nowadays, that diff just bend all sliders into straight horizonal ones.
that's it.
to everyone: i know my maps may be questionalble, and still here those are. believe it or not, i've almost considered all possible points of people even in the last drama, by asking bunches of peoples' opinions much more than ones appeared in this thread. for that, you can regard my works as depending on - i can say, like at least 100 persons' - opinions in every map i've made. they can be short irc mods, tests or even detail checking by tools, double tests after those. noobs have complained those tricky patterns to let me low down some ridiculous spikes, pros have given personal opinions to let me provide more confortable settings to play, mappers even told some unbelieveble ideas or various suggestions as other styles' mappers. then i choose what i wanna insist and what really should be changed: just like seeking mods and giving feedback, but i think lots of people didn't remind how important that is. you may say this map is not perfect and i haven't think deep, just test me, find the issue and convince me. if you really can do that, it'll be always welcomed.
so waiting for next progress.
to Kathex: you are just delayed from current mapping nowadays, in rc, progress or most things of it.
to winber1: reading patterns can confuse you ofc, if you really read the map's cw. that truely is the point of that difficulty, and you've missed it at all.
to WORSTPOLACKEU: overviewed the "mod" thou i think most of them can be like "This will never play well." which i really don't think can be regarded as a mod, even did after the map got ranked. the map is obviously possible to play even get fc or ss score. and what's more important, you mentioned no unranble issues.
and if you wanna talking about ranking criteria, this thread is not the right place imo.
to Alveryn: i don't think extra level diff is made for everyone to enjoy.
to SFGrenade: sv change and different kiai for gd are allowed.
to Kurokami: well, i got the situation, and thanks for taking care these things, it's also appreciation that other modes' qats don't mind get involved into this. (qat get really busy lol, everyone should know that, especially mappers imo.)
if responding mods after the map qualified is also a responsibility to any mapper in any maps, i'll do that from now on and avoid such dq like this.
to Xexxar: slot at p/5133943 shows no issues, and btw, spacing and sv settings like ex ex diff are really common in ranked maps nowadays, that diff just bend all sliders into straight horizonal ones.
that's it.
to everyone: i know my maps may be questionalble, and still here those are. believe it or not, i've almost considered all possible points of people even in the last drama, by asking bunches of peoples' opinions much more than ones appeared in this thread. for that, you can regard my works as depending on - i can say, like at least 100 persons' - opinions in every map i've made. they can be short irc mods, tests or even detail checking by tools, double tests after those. noobs have complained those tricky patterns to let me low down some ridiculous spikes, pros have given personal opinions to let me provide more confortable settings to play, mappers even told some unbelieveble ideas or various suggestions as other styles' mappers. then i choose what i wanna insist and what really should be changed: just like seeking mods and giving feedback, but i think lots of people didn't remind how important that is. you may say this map is not perfect and i haven't think deep, just test me, find the issue and convince me. if you really can do that, it'll be always welcomed.
so waiting for next progress.
things got replied, here you go again
Hey please don't forget to remove CLSW and examination from tags x.x
Topic Starter
hmmmmmm i think that's ok to keep the tag, how cw's gd can't be added into metadata...? clsw and examination's gds are used to be in the mapset, which i've asked them to put their effort into this, i think that can be considered into someones who contributed to the map, too. for ctb players, i think those diffs are valueble to give a try, too... x.xNatsu wrote:
Hey please don't forget to remove CLSW and examination from tags x.x
but the ctb diffs are gone?? or am I stupid or something http://puu.sh/oYtkq/54aacb9ac4.png cause I can't see them
My tags make objective sense, not make your sense.Alveryn wrote:
but the ctb diffs are gone?? or am I stupid or something http://puu.sh/oYtkq/54aacb9ac4.png cause I can't see them
I just wonder if this on purpose 01:03:699 (3,4,1) -
01:03:699 (3,4,1) -
Kick slider's movements usualy works like this :
but to get 300 you have to make the first picture movement i wonder why no ctrl g 4 ?
Kick slider's movements usualy works like this :
but to get 300 you have to make the first picture movement i wonder why no ctrl g 4 ?
I'm a bit busy atm, but I'm planning on qualifying this map in like ~ 2 days. I realize the thread was locked for a while so lets give some time for people to finalize their opinions. It seems the majority of discussion points here have concluded, and I'm happy with that. However, if anyone still has anything left to say, now would be the best time, before the map is requalified.
I would at least decrease the sv on 01:03:699 (3,4)
Topic Starter
-Kanzaki wrote:
I just wonder if this on purpose 01:03:699 (3,4,1) -01:03:699 (3,4,1) -
Kick slider's movements usualy works like this :
but to get 300 you have to make the first picture movement i wonder why no ctrl g 4 ? because i want players make the first picture movement, if you are only talking about playability here.
Shizuku- wrote:
I would at least decrease the sv on 01:03:699 (3,4) that beat at the head is heavy enough to gain a longer slider.
Sure thing.
If you don't think there are any issues then well, go ahead rank this thing.
I still think you could improve the map but it seems you think it is good enough.
GL
If you don't think there are any issues then well, go ahead rank this thing.
I still think you could improve the map but it seems you think it is good enough.
GL
ctb diffs are in the description and they were made for this set, it shouldn't be too much of a problem for people to be able to search and find them, even if they aren't ranked with the rest of the set. It would, however, be nice if the links to the diffs were in a more noticeable place lol
It would be awesome if they were rankeddeetz wrote:
ctb diffs are in the description and they were made for this set, it shouldn't be too much of a problem for people to be able to search and find them, even if they aren't ranked with the rest of the set. It would, however, be nice if the links to the diffs were in a more noticeable place lol
So RIP ctb's diffs
Can you please fix that?
EDIT: Whoops, didn't update the map. Nevermind that.
yea tbh if u r going to add the ctb mappers in tags u sud make their diffs more obvious/easier to get in the description lo idk
Can I look for some modders again? 
Yes please!CLSW wrote:
Can I look for some modders again?
HW, please give the ctb diffs another chance ;w;
http://puu.sh/oZhah/9d24bc0c06.txt
I fixed some NC issues
I would really appreciate if someone could give a hitsound mod on Irrelvis EX because I just always find an inconsistency, but I'm not sure.. orz
Something that caught my attention on wkyik's EX: 01:10:030 (1,2,3,4) - I really believe that you can emphasize this sound better by not overmapping it like this, the stress is kind of really at the wrong place imo (same with repeated place)
I fixed some NC issues
I would really appreciate if someone could give a hitsound mod on Irrelvis EX because I just always find an inconsistency, but I'm not sure.. orz
Something that caught my attention on wkyik's EX: 01:10:030 (1,2,3,4) - I really believe that you can emphasize this sound better by not overmapping it like this, the stress is kind of really at the wrong place imo (same with repeated place)
Topic Starter
CLSW wrote:
Can I look for some modders again?
currently ctb additional diffs should give a nearly complete mapset for that, which i've tried to earn like over 1 month from other ctb mappers, but failed at last because got no finished works. i think i've been delayed for already enough time and decide to move this on...Razor Sharp wrote:
Yes please!CLSW wrote:
Can I look for some modders again?
HW, please give the ctb diffs another chance ;w;
so maybe next time? i think this is not the only mapset you guys can entry www
Irreversible wrote:
http://puu.sh/oZhah/9d24bc0c06.txt
I fixed some NC issues updated to last submission.
I would really appreciate if someone could give a hitsound mod on Irrelvis EX because I just always find an inconsistency, but I'm not sure.. orz i think this diff's hs work is really awesome, like the most excellent one in the whole mapset: it only used what i've already provide in source level, but still give various of hs pattern showed different original track to give much more joy expressed among patterns.
Something that caught my attention on wkyik's EX: 01:10:030 (1,2,3,4) - I really believe that you can emphasize this sound better by not overmapping it like this, the stress is kind of really at the wrong place imo (same with repeated place) reduced that part's additional beats (thou they do have some pitch shifting to follow, too weak that change can be noticed thou).
KittyAdventure wrote:
If you remove CLSW & examination CTB diff from your mapset but why you adding CLSW & examination to tags?
i think you need to reword itKittyAdventure wrote:
If you remove CLSW & examination CTB diff from your mapset but why you adding CLSW & examination to tags?
do you mean like this?KittyAdventure wrote:
If you remove CLSW & examination CTB diff from your mapset, why you keep CLSW & examination in tags?
though, honestly, their CtB diffs are on map description
RIP tho
I agree with other people here, the CTB difficulties should be more visible in description
Maybe I'm noob at all of that mapping stuff, but for me, this map looks like unplayable shit..
Strato wrote:
Maybe I'm noob at all of that mapping stuff, but for me, this map looks like unplayable shit..
Well, considering how many people have said and verified that all of the diffs are playable and FC'able (most noticeable being Cookiezi's 99,19% HD S on EX EX with <10 playcount), its safe to say that that sentence is incorrect.
Please keep opinions like this for yourself unless you're planning on modding this set, else you're just clogging up the thread.
It's senseless to keep in tags the name of mappers whose guest difficulties aren't uploaded into the BSS along with the rest of the mapset. Please get them removed before getting the beatmap qualified.
Topic Starter
Deif wrote:
It's senseless to keep in tags the name of mappers whose guest difficulties aren't uploaded into the BSS along with the rest of the mapset. Please get them removed before getting the beatmap qualified. ... ok.
reposting because saying "shows no issue" isnt responding to my modHollow Wings wrote:
to Xexxar: slot at p/5133943 shows no issues, and btw, spacing and sv settings like ex ex diff are really common in ranked maps nowadays, that diff just bend all sliders into straight horizonal ones.
Xexxar wrote:
The biggest problem that I have with this mapset is the aesthetic style leads to forced mapping choices on the creator that I believe lead to a poor experience for players. As we know, this map follows a grid focused aesthetics that leads to an extremely limited number of places of notes. This style also uses stack leniency of 2 to accomplish said grid style, which means that absolutely no notes are being displaced for any level of readability improvement. In a mapset which relies so heavily on SV changes and chaotic spacing, it's a huge oversight.Loctav wrote:
- Unless the concept behind a beatmap is fundamentally flawed from the start, modding should aim to improve the map in it’s current design - not force your own style upon it.
For example, in the beginning of this map, 00:35:659 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - there is a very consistent and readable level of spacing variety, which is extreme important given the grid nature of the visuals. 1/1's are consistently larger spaced and the 1/2 spacing is differential from this. However, as the map progresses, we get to this part: 00:45:910 (1) - which's theme is for the downbeat of the next measure to be on the opposite side of the last note of the previous measure. The spacing here simply does not make sense in terms of the choices of rhythm:
00:45:910 (1,2,3,4) - Kick is 1.0 spacing on 2, which then has 1.0 linear motion towards the weak beat of 3.
00:47:116 (1,2,3,4,5) - Kick has 1.0 spacing on 2, but then has 0 spacing on the weak 3 that follows then 1.0 spacing on strong 4 with 1.0 spacing to 5.
This immediately is an inconsistency in spacing choices for 3, why have different levels of spacing for the same sound. In a part that is SO restricted that it has literally only two angles of motion, the choices made here need to be extremely purposeful.
00:48:322 (1,2,3,4) - kick is 1.0 spacing on 2, which then has 0 distance weak beat 3 underneath.
00:49:528 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - small spacing on drum on 4 leads to giant 2.0 jump on strong clap of 5.
Now the first pattern should be noted as having the exact same musical sound of the first pattern, but randomly chooses to overlap 3 instead of not. The only reason I can come up for why this choice was made was in order to make it so that the 4 that follows is the maximum distance away from 3.
As for 00:49:528 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - , we have double spacing on the clap that before was only emphasized with a space of 1.0, I understand there is some difference in rhythm, but compare 00:47:116 (1,2,3,4,5) - 4 is the exact same strong beat but is only given half the spacing because HW chose to make her design so restrictive that she has to place 5 on the end not 4 because she wants to keep her theme.
This is where I believe this map starts to fall apart, because she's mapping towards the theme and not the song. I know I'm being extremely short with this mod but... lazy.
The song's should be what drives the theme, and the theme shouldn't be tacked on. If she wasn't using such a restrictive style on this part she could much more closely follow the song's strong beats with appropriate spacing. Therefore I believe that the concept behind the beatmap is fundamentally flawed for ATLEAST this section of the song.
to Blue Dragon: as for a suggestion on what to do about this: Don't use a restrictive style that forces the mapper to make choices that aren't in the best interest of the song.
Topic Starter
reposting because saying i've already respond your so called "mod", which is really nazi like "this blanket is not perfect". for the map which has decided to be put into qualified section, you should give issue to let me fix. i've also explained why i said those words, in case you only focus on the previous part of my post.Xexxar wrote:
reposting because saying "shows no issue" isnt responding to my modHollow Wings wrote:
to Xexxar: slot at p/5133943 shows no issues, and btw, spacing and sv settings like ex ex diff are really common in ranked maps nowadays, that diff just bend all sliders into straight horizonal ones.
Ofc, im in 2016 and still looking at 2009 maps concepts getting ranked by our "Very Efficient and Fair Ranking System"...Hollow Wings wrote:
to Kathex: you are just delayed from current mapping nowadays, in rc, progress or most things of it.
Pls i need to waste more time complaing about ranking system on forum to someone with "powers" make it less flawed?
Your map dont have "unrakeable things", just mappers opnions about ur super doubtful "objective sense" differs from yours.
You do not want to have people complaining of your map? Nobody likes, but is fault of the ranking system not your fault.
I already did posts in the "correct place" of furun with suggestions, complains, pointed some failures, and now complaing in maps like im doing now, the result? Im being regarded as a bad reputation. All my posts get ignored, locked or even deleted. Im wrong of complain this ranking system? I m sure not, cause everyone can realize problems with that.
Try you suggest things to change in this system, i want to see if they will ignore you like they do with me.
If someone again say me thats not the right place to do it, pls, if you know the right place, where we not get ignored, help me to make it change, im realy trying to help more mappers rank their maps, not just doing a rage about maps.
Rank this map if you're sure about the quality of it. It has been proven to be FCable anyway...