CookieKivi wrote:

ι αlreαdy мodded тнιѕ? lol eнн.. тαĸe мy ѕтαr.

CookieKivi wrote:

reмod αѕ reqυeѕтed

easy

00:16:688 (1) - 'rework' shape like this http://puu.sh/pzsWI.jpg I prefer the "hill" shaped arrangement here
00:21:475 (3) - fix blanket Fixed
00:24:188 (1) - i think its when when you make it straight Fixed
00:27:858 (2) - fix blanket Fixed
00:36:794 (1) - whistle where? Fixed
00:45:571 (4) - same shape as 00:44:454 (3) - pls This one I prefer to keep it as it is
01:15:092 (3) - maybe rework slider? shape looks so meh. ~ or make it symmetric Improved it a little. It seems more symmetrical now
01:32:964 (1) - end is offbeat. just a pure 1/1 slider Fixed
01:54:347 (2) - fix blanket Fixed
02:31:209 (1) - symmetry They look ok to me..
02:54:507 (2) - same shape as 02:53:390 (1) - pls Fixed
03:04:879 (2) - same shape as 03:03:603 (1) - Fixed
03:09:986 (2) - fix blanket Fixed
03:13:815 (1) - just straight Uhh what does this mean ? Its already straight

Ars Novaa wrote:

MrKOSIEJ wrote:

Ayy, from my queue
So

Insane

[General]
You didn't use the whole space you had. https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/5440684 . Your map is too much in the middle, excluding some options. Try to make everything wider, map across the whole given space. It will be more fun, and less monothone. Don't be afraind to go out of bounds with dem circlez. I understand this but I don't see it as a very major issue

01:01:528 - to - 01:07:113 - i would map that part, you did a spinner but it has more potential than a spinner I will consider this. Before the remap this section was mapped actually , and I found it particularly hard to play and map.

[Placing]
You know what i thought i first time played your map? Dem, this spacing could be more equal. And the first space you made, is unequal. I mean this 00:01:369 (2) . Come on, it would look a lot better and sctructured with equalized spacing. I mean the whole map.
Maybe do sth like https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/5440725 to make a lil nice curve
I wrote only example, spacing is unequal over the whole map. OFC not all unequal spaces are bad, but those unreasoned, random, without a plot, are. The way I map Insanes is that I turn OFF distance snap . I'm not sure if this is even the correct was but no major problems so far.

00:08:709 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7) - this is random. Remake this, or make it more structured, elminate overlapses or make them reasoned Fixed

00:09:826 - u suggest adding a circle here, right before spinner. It will make a better impact. I want the spinner to start at the same time the instrument at 00:09:826 starts ( not sure what it is )

00:17:326 (6,2) - move things around and make a blanket? Fixed

00:34:720 (3) - example of unequal spacing, use DS. (There were unequal spaces before i didnt mention, and there are later on. Too many to point them all out) Like I said I didn't think these were a big problem...fixed anyway

01:00:411 (3,4,5,6,7) - that star is twisted, would suggest making it better, not a major thing tho. Looks kinda good how it is right now. Fixed the star

01:07:592 (2) - i don't hear sound there, i don't think that circle should be there. I think removing it would leave a gap there

01:26:741 (2,1,2) - overlapse Fixed

01:57:698 (1) - spinner too soon, map those seconds before that long note at 01:58:496 comes in Got rid of the spinner and just mapped that part

04:02:326 (1) - rly? u r gonna just make those perfectly mappable notes, mapped with a spinner? that's a bit lazy. Overally the diff' feels a bit lazy, not enough special patterns, creativity. But overally it's playable.I would prefer to end it with a spinner

Thanks for your mod , I appreciate it. Though as a side note , I felt kind of offended when you said the diff was lazy . I spent alot of time into it and I don't really feel that it can be called " lazy "

I'm sorry if you felt offended. I got used to that kind of comments. I could spent tens of hours on my map, somebody mod it, said it felt lazy. I was like "Ok m8, what can i do to make it better?". That kind of comment felt harsh at first, but i thought, hey, it doesn't matter how much time you spend on it, what matters is the ending result. And if someone thinks it's mapped lazy, it's because he feels it's mapped lazy, not because he wants to offend anybody.
Sorry once again for my harsh comments, good luck with your map and in future mapping. Cheers

1. 00:01:050 (1,2,1,2) - you can put finishers on the heads like you did with the harder diffs aswell
2. 00:08:709 (1,1) - pretty sure this needs more recovery time for an easy diff
3. 00:21:475 (3,1) - check DS here suddenly 1.3 instead of the 1.2
4. 00:59:773 (3) - tail could use a finish
5. 01:55:943 (2) - 1.14DS ez fix
6. 01:48:284 (1) - finish on head like you did with 00:52:113 (1) -
7. 02:20:198 (1) - finish here
8. 02:25:305 (3) - missing whisle for consistency
9. 03:11:901 (2,1) - you can avoid this overlap here
10. 03:23:230 (1,1) - same as 00:08:709 (1,1) -
11. 03:38:390 (3) - 1.14ds

1. 00:01:050 (1,3,1,3) - finishers on the head here and delete the wishle on the last (3) -
2. 00:21:315 (5,1) - 1.1DS
3. 01:17:964 (2,3) - you can blanket this if you want since its so close to an almost blanket, can be easily done by just moving the head of (3) up by using the approach circle as a guidance like this (might wanna check for diffs using this method to polish the map more when everything else is good)
   
4. 01:46:369 (4,5) - ^
5. 02:30:411 (4) - whistle for consistency
6. 03:35:518 (3,4) - blanket this better, make 3 more rounder here

1. AR 8 might be a bit too high for this spread would lower it to 7-7.5
2. 00:12:220 (3,4,5) - no reason for a trip here, should move 00:12:300 (4) - to 00:12:459 - since heres the extra sound on the bluetick and you empasize the downbeat this way
3. 00:18:603 (4) - such a strong and unique tail sound deserves a clap or smthing imo
4. 00:38:071 (1,2) - bit of a weird ds increase for this weak note during this section, would just go with 1.4 ds
5. 00:47:964 (3,1) - blanket can be improved (drag the head of 1 to the left a bit)
6. 00:51:794 (4) - control G this one, really hard to read for a hard diff that these aren't the standard 1/2s by control + g you got the slider leniency working with you so its easier to play when going to 00:52:113 (1) - would consider doing this for the other kiais where you use these aswell
7. 01:47:486 (2) - move 1/2 forwards, you can hear in the song that the red ticks are the ones emphasized so its best to start the slider on these
8. 03:07:113 (3) - unstack this, such a strong strong sound deserves some ds
9. 03:12:858 (2) - like 01:47:486 (2)
10. 03:23:230 (1) - why not end 1/2 or 1/1 sooner for it to land on the drum? now it stops a bit random
    

1. 00:23:230 (4,5) - don't ignore the middle loud drum here if you're gonna map 00:23:709 (5) - these drums, since the vocals extend all the way here I don't think your following that
2. 01:19:401 (4,5) - same for ^ this plays really weird currently
3. 02:04:720 (1) - finish on head
4. 02:23:869 (3) - increase the ds to 1.4-1.5 like you've been doing for this section, kinda stood out here that this is the only note without the constant ds
5. 02:57:379 (1,2) - really weird to emphasize the (2) here since its on weak beat, would make more sense to have to jump at 02:57:698 (3) - for the piano kicking in
6. 03:40:305 (6,1) - finish should be on end 6 here instead
7. 03:45:571 (1,2,3,4) - bit weird to stack (3,4) since 4 stand out so much, why not stack (2,3) instead since these have the same sounds and it gives (4) more of an impact
8. 03:59:773 (1,2,3,4,5,6,1,2,3) - check the drums here again,rythm is wrong here, 03:59:773 (1,2,3) - control+g 04:00:252 (4,5,6) - control +g 04:00:730 (1,2,3) - control+g these rythmicly speaking

Wishkey wrote:

Heyo!
Finishing up the mods that didn't make it first round

Easy

1. 00:01:050 (1,2,1,2) - you can put finishers on the heads like you did with the harder diffs aswell Fixed
2. 00:08:709 (1,1) - pretty sure this needs more recovery time for an easy diff Fixed
3. 00:21:475 (3,1) - check DS here suddenly 1.3 instead of the 1.2 Fixed
4. 00:59:773 (3) - tail could use a finish Fixed
5. 01:55:943 (2) - 1.14DS ez fix Fixed
6. 01:48:284 (1) - finish on head like you did with 00:52:113 (1) - Fixed
7. 02:20:198 (1) - finish here Fixed
8. 02:25:305 (3) - missing whisle for consistency Fixed
9. 03:11:901 (2,1) - you can avoid this overlap here Fixed
10. 03:23:230 (1,1) - same as 00:08:709 (1,1) - Fixed
11. 03:38:390 (3) - 1.14ds Fixed

Normal

1. 00:01:050 (1,3,1,3) - finishers on the head here and delete the wishle on the last (3) - Fixed
2. 00:21:315 (5,1) - 1.1DS Fixed
3. 01:17:964 (2,3) - you can blanket this if you want since its so close to an almost blanket, can be easily done by just moving the head of (3) up by using the approach circle as a guidance like this (might wanna check for diffs using this method to polish the map more when everything else is good)
   
   Fixed
4. 01:46:369 (4,5) - ^ Fixed
5. 02:30:411 (4) - whistle for consistency Fixed
6. 03:35:518 (3,4) - blanket this better, make 3 more rounder here Fixed

Hard

1. AR 8 might be a bit too high for this spread would lower it to 7-7.5 Lowered to 7.5
2. 00:12:220 (3,4,5) - no reason for a trip here, should move 00:12:300 (4) - to 00:12:459 - since heres the extra sound on the bluetick and you empasize the downbeat this way Doing that sounds a little wierd so I'll keep it as it is
3. 00:18:603 (4) - such a strong and unique tail sound deserves a clap or smthing imo Fixed
4. 00:38:071 (1,2) - bit of a weird ds increase for this weak note during this section, would just go with 1.4 ds Fixed
5. 00:47:964 (3,1) - blanket can be improved (drag the head of 1 to the left a bit) Fixed
6. 00:51:794 (4) - control G this one, really hard to read for a hard diff that these aren't the standard 1/2s by control + g you got the slider leniency working with you so its easier to play when going to 00:52:113 (1) - would consider doing this for the other kiais where you use these aswell Fixed..Don't quite understand the point though
7. 01:47:486 (2) - move 1/2 forwards, you can hear in the song that the red ticks are the ones emphasized so its best to start the slider on these Good point, but I think I like to keep it as it is
8. 03:07:113 (3) - unstack this, such a strong strong sound deserves some ds Fixed
9. 03:12:858 (2) - like 01:47:486 (2) I didn't apply that one. Moreover 03:13:177 has an empty note there, doesn't seem much sense to put something there
10. 03:23:230 (1) - why not end 1/2 or 1/1 sooner for it to land on the drum? now it stops a bit random I think its ok. It sets the beat for the notes to follow
    

Insane

1. 00:23:230 (4,5) - don't ignore the middle loud drum here if you're gonna map 00:23:709 (5) - these drums, since the vocals extend all the way here I don't think your following that Fixed
2. 01:19:401 (4,5) - same for ^ this plays really weird currently Fixed
3. 02:04:720 (1) - finish on head Fixed. I actually wanted to put that but I thought the finishes would be too excessive. Guess it was ok
4. 02:23:869 (3) - increase the ds to 1.4-1.5 like you've been doing for this section, kinda stood out here that this is the only note without the constant ds Fixed
5. 02:57:379 (1,2) - really weird to emphasize the (2) here since its on weak beat, would make more sense to have to jump at 02:57:698 (3) - for the piano kicking in Fixed
6. 03:40:305 (6,1) - finish should be on end 6 here instead Fixed
7. 03:45:571 (1,2,3,4) - bit weird to stack (3,4) since 4 stand out so much, why not stack (2,3) instead since these have the same sounds and it gives (4) more of an impact Unstacked all of them
8. 03:59:773 (1,2,3,4,5,6,1,2,3) - check the drums here again,rythm is wrong here, 03:59:773 (1,2,3) - control+g 04:00:252 (4,5,6) - control +g 04:00:730 (1,2,3) - control+g these rythmicly speaking Thanks! That was good

Thats about it GL with the map!
srr for the late mod, had exams and some priority mods to finish first

MrKOSIEJ wrote:

Ayy, from my queue
So

tutu's Neuroi

[General]
It's more/ better structured than insane, still have some issues but overally looks better and fancier

[Placing]
00:05:358 (2) - overlapse with 00:04:879 (1)

00:09:667 (7,8) - i have a feeling that those two are too close, it all 00:08:709 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - should be a nice jumping pattern ending with 00:09:826 (8) - that slider, but not that close.

00:29:613 (2) - move a bit higher

00:30:252 (4) - overlapse, move to the left

00:45:411 (5,6,7) - overlapse, maybe make a blanket with 00:45:730 (1)

00:49:560 (1) - overlapse, also looks ugly imo

01:02:805 (3,5) - NC's?
Same thing later on

01:21:315 (6,1,2) - improve double blanket
can also make it a tripple blanket with 01:22:113 (3)

01:29:773 (3) - overlapse
01:44:294 (6) - ^
01:49:241 (8) - ^

01:37:991 (8,1) - some people approve it, some people don't. I belong to that second group of people, i don't like this spacing in the end of that stream.
03:03:523 (7,1) - ^

01:48:922 (7,1) - blanket?
01:49:879 (2,5) - ^

01:51:475 (4) - ur rockin' in the end with those overlapses, make 01:50:996 (2) on the end of that slider

01:52:592 (2) - equalize the spacing

01:53:390 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4) - imo that's a bit random

02:18:922 (1) - ugly, imo ofc. Others might like it.

02:41:342 (1) - don't be lazy, map those notes. (i don't mean the break after, i mean the spinner)

03:36:076 (3,4,5,6) - curve that

03:50:518 (7,8,9,10,1) - i wouldn't do that, i would curve that

Ok that's it. I hope i helped, GL with the map, Cheers :3

tutuhara wrote:

MrKOSIEJ wrote:

Ayy, from my queue
So

tutu's Neuroi

[General]
It's more/ better structured than insane, still have some issues but overally looks better and fancier

[Placing]
00:05:358 (2) - overlapse with 00:04:879 (1)

00:09:667 (7,8) - i have a feeling that those two are too close, it all 00:08:709 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - should be a nice jumping pattern ending with 00:09:826 (8) - that slider, but not that close.

00:29:613 (2) - move a bit higher

00:30:252 (4) - overlapse, move to the left

00:45:411 (5,6,7) - overlapse, maybe make a blanket with 00:45:730 (1)

00:49:560 (1) - overlapse, also looks ugly imo

01:02:805 (3,5) - NC's?
Same thing later on

01:21:315 (6,1,2) - improve double blanket
can also make it a tripple blanket with 01:22:113 (3)

01:29:773 (3) - overlapse
01:44:294 (6) - ^
01:49:241 (8) - ^

01:37:991 (8,1) - some people approve it, some people don't. I belong to that second group of people, i don't like this spacing in the end of that stream.
03:03:523 (7,1) - ^

01:48:922 (7,1) - blanket?
01:49:879 (2,5) - ^

01:51:475 (4) - ur rockin' in the end with those overlapses, make 01:50:996 (2) on the end of that slider

01:52:592 (2) - equalize the spacing

01:53:390 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4) - imo that's a bit random

02:18:922 (1) - ugly, imo ofc. Others might like it.

02:41:342 (1) - don't be lazy, map those notes. (i don't mean the break after, i mean the spinner)

03:36:076 (3,4,5,6) - curve that

03:50:518 (7,8,9,10,1) - i wouldn't do that, i would curve that

Ok that's it. I hope i helped, GL with the map, Cheers :3

I'm sorry I can not answer you. I asked to remove my Ars novaa differential ! As he added ugly addition Meep ! And all my attempts to prove to him that he created man who does not understand the map did not bring success . + Also, he has put peredomnoy catches. Like if BN decides to remove your differential I delete . If not, I leave at home. I decided not to argue with him and asked him to remove Tutu different. So please correct your fashion and make it to the Meep Extra. Thank you

Electoz wrote:

Throwing my opinion here, just passing by

Choosing whoever to do guest difficulties for you is a crucial part when you're going for rank, especially when you don't have a ranked map yet.
Some new mappers ask experienced mappers for guest difficulties to avoid this problem. If your GD'er is not experienced enough in mapping skills, they might drag you down in the ranking process.
That doesn't mean that you can't choose inexperienced people as a GD but it requires much more effort to rank the set that way. If you're fine with that then go ahead, why not?

Sonnyc wrote:

Insane feels fine, but the spacings need to have much more consistency than now. It's one of the biggest issue you got here.
I wonder if someone told you.

Xinying wrote:

sorry for the short mod... will only mod insane for now

General

1. Kiai isnt snapped (check ai-mod)
2. remove " _Meep_" from tags

Insane

1. 00:05:198 (2) - The extra node makes the slider distorted. Just copy paste 00:04:879 (1) - and ctrl-h ctrl-j
2. 00:08:709 (1,2,3,1,2,3,4) - I would (my mapping style) make this a hexagonal structure. You don't have to place the notes by yourself. So for example just remove 00:09:028 (3) - , copy-paste 00:08:709 (1,2) - and rotate it (ctrl-shift-r) by 60 degrees. Basically simple geometry gives you a perfect triangle. After that you can play around with any flow you find suitable!
3. One thing I've noticed about your maps is you tend to start spinners too early. 00:09:826 (1) - Could really use a note before a spinner. Hence a rhythm like this will be better
4. 00:50:677 (1,2,3) - This placement and rhythm is very similar to your previous rhythms. Such as 00:47:007 (1,2,3) - and 00:48:284 (1,2,3) - . Simply because of this, it is very easy for players to mistake 00:51:315 (2) - for a 1/2 jump instead of a 1/1 jump.
   
   Because 00:50:677 (1) - this long slider is following vocal (?), I suggest to change the rhythm to something like this instead. It puts much more emphasis on the drums. You might also want to space them a little bigger so that it's easier to tell the difference between 1/1 and 1/2 jumps?
5. You repeated ^ a few times, 01:46:847 (1,2,3) - and 03:12:379 (1,2,3) -
6. 01:02:804 (3,5) - I think new combo-ing these notes will look nicer
7. 01:05:358 (3,5) - ^
8. Are you sure about skipping these beats? 02:42:060 - and 02:42:220 -
9. 03:06:156 (1,3) - I don't think this overlap works. Actually the rhythm doesn't work imo. try something like this?
10. 03:23:071 (1) - Instead of a spinner here I think you should map. Reason being you didn't place a spinner here 01:58:496 (1) - and 01:02:326 (1) - which is basically similar or if not the same rhythm.

not too shabby overall

Electoz wrote:

Throwing my opinion here, just passing by

Choosing whoever to do guest difficulties for you is a crucial part when you're going for rank, especially when you don't have a ranked map yet.
Some new mappers ask experienced mappers for guest difficulties to avoid this problem. If your GD'er is not experienced enough in mapping skills, they might drag you down in the ranking process.
That doesn't mean that you can't choose inexperienced people as a GD but it requires much more effort to rank the set that way. If you're fine with that then go ahead, why not?