1. Easy (1.33 stars, 30 notes)
2. Hard (2.71 stars, 75 notes)
3. Insane (4.03 stars, 136 notes)
4. Normal (1.78 stars, 55 notes)
5. OK_oreGENKI's Insane (3.85 stars, 162 notes)
6. Rei24's Insane (3.3 stars, 117 notes)

• 
  ・GOD

• 
  ・GOD

• 
  ・00:06:597 - 単発おいてもいいかも

• 
  ・00:04:240 (1) - whistle追加
  ・00:17:740 (2) - clap追加

• 
  ・ヒットサウンドの音量５％はだめかもしれない
  ・00:07:026 (1) - NCいらないかも
  ・00:31:454 (9) - ^
  ・00:07:454 (3) - このNCを消して00:07:669 (1) - ここから入れたほうがいいかもしれない

• 
  ・00:22:883 (7) - 00:24:597 (6) - ここのclapだけずれてるのが気になった(わざとやってるのなら無視してくれておｋです)
  ・00:33:812 (2,3,4,5,6) - この5連も少し難しくしてもいいかも

1. 00:13:026 (3) - imo a repeat-slider would fit better since the melody got even more beats but there are less mapped rn : \
2. 00:31:883 (1) - repeating this would fit better too imo, but I guess that's not really possible bc then the last few beats can't be mapped nicely

1. 00:00:812 (1,3) - dunno if it would suit a Normal to do that at the beginning but how about making those circle+1/1slider? It's just my opinion but I don't like forcing this rhythm when it's not really present in the song since the first two beats are just an anacrusis or appoggiaturas or whatever they're called in english (same thing with the whistles in Insane (modded that first ^^))

1. 00:02:526 (4) - no NC here? O.o
2. 00:07:883 (5) - I'd put a NC here too since it's the actually beginning of the main part, and it would then follow the every-white-tic-system
3. 00:10:026 (2,1,2,3) - not really stacking bc of auto-stack, dunno if you want it that way
4. 00:33:812 (2,3) - the positioning kinda suggests that the repeat-slider ends on the tail by repeating one more time, I'd suggest moving it like this or even a bit further apart so it doesn't overlap and an aesthetic pattern is recognizable

1. 00:01:240 (4,5) - this jumps is one of the hugest in the whole diff, and you didn't put any jump at all at 00:02:954 (4,5) so I wouldn't map it at the very beginning either, doesn't really fit the diff, it's just the intro + very inconsistent
2. 00:13:454 (3) - even bigger jumps when you gave other similar parts zero emphasis, I'd highly recommend to lower them
3. 00:18:597 (2,3) - really low spacing although (3) is more important than (2) but 00:18:169 (1,2) is a way bigger jump o: try to keep the jumps somewhat consistent in your diff!
4. 00:27:169 (3) - whoa they keep getting bigger lol. Why are jumps like these bigger than for example 00:26:312 (4,1) when they're way less important?

1. You probably don't view stacking in the editor which leads to some minor issues: 00:02:526 (1,2,3) doesn't really stack on 00:01:883 (7) and 00:28:240 (1,2,3) is not really in the middle of that symmetrical pattern, so I'd advise you to move both by 8x8pixels
2. 00:04:240 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11) - I don't really like this because imo (4) shouldn't be seperated from (3) as they are in the same musical pattern, a descending scale, so I'd start that circle with 00:04:454 (3) - keep the auto-stacking in mind though, if you decide to map it like that then the stack kinda covers parts of the next circles, dunno if you'd want that
3. 00:14:097 (6) - Are you missing the clap on the last tail on purpose? There's no break in the music so I'd put one there too
4. 00:23:740 (2,3) - this jump is unreasonably huge, the (3) doesn't deserve special emphasis, (2) or (4) would but definitely not (3)! 00:22:883 (7,8) is also pretty huge but at least there's a melody-note on (8) so there's some reason behind it
5. 00:26:526 (8,1) - this jump is rather small compared to 00:24:812 (8,1) - 00:25:240 (2,3) - 00:25:669 (4,5) -(this one is really huge tho O.o) and 00:26:097 (6,7) - adding that you don't change direction in 00:26:526 (8,1,2) it doesn't give (1) the emphasis it deserves imo
6. 00:05:954 (10,11,1) and 00:34:240 (6,1) - dunno if that's okay for ranking? It's very confusing when double the time interval got the same absolute distance : \

1. 00:00:812 (1,1) - I'm not a big fan of the whistles here, (1,2) are in both cases just anacrusis or appoggiaturas of 00:01:026 (3,3) -(or whatever they're called in english), the main accent is still on the (3)s so that's where the whistles whould be imo. You created a rhythm that is not really present in the song with those whistles
2. 00:27:168 (3) - why is there no whistle here? o:
3. 00:20:312 (2,3,4,5,6) - whoa this really comes out of nowhere, there hasn't been a single 1/4-jump until here o: I'd at least lower the spacing to the one of 00:33:812 (2,3,4,5,6) because 1) the absolute spacing is pretty similar to 00:19:026 (5,6) so that might be irritating, and also for the sake of consistency I guess. Mapping one of them jumpy and one of them in a straight line seems pretty random too since the musical pattern is the same (ascending scale) - imo the straight line fits better (and is probably easier to play for most people, those two patterns are huge spikes in starrating anyways so you could at least make them easier to play ^^)

Bonsai wrote:

heyoo, random mod bc I stumbled upon this map in a modding queue and like the song and am happy to see a newer mapset of it too bad you aren't a BN so I could ask you to check my map though hue Thank you so much!
[Easy]

1. 00:13:026 (3) - imo a repeat-slider would fit better since the melody got even more beats but there are less mapped rn : \　 prefer to use 2/1 skider at here
2. 00:31:883 (1) - repeating this would fit better too imo, but I guess that's not really possible bc then the last few beats can't be mapped nicely ^

can't say more, I just don't like Easys in general because most of the time they can't be mapped appropriately, so these two suggestions are pretty unnecessary anyways ^^

[Normal]

1. 00:00:812 (1,3) - dunno if it would suit a Normal to do that at the beginning but how about making those circle+1/1slider? It's just my opinion but I don't like forcing this rhythm when it's not really present in the song since the first two beats are just an anacrusis or appoggiaturas or whatever they're called in english (same thing with the whistles in Insane (modded that first ^^)) It's fine to me!

[Hard]

1. 00:02:526 (4) - no NC here? O.o ok!
2. 00:07:883 (5) - I'd put a NC here too since it's the actually beginning of the main part, and it would then follow the every-white-tic-system ^
3. 00:10:026 (2,1,2,3) - not really stacking bc of auto-stack, dunno if you want it that way no problem.
4. 00:33:812 (2,3) - the positioning kinda suggests that the repeat-slider ends on the tail by repeating one more time, I'd suggest moving it like this or even a bit further apart so it doesn't overlap and an aesthetic pattern is recognizable fixed

[Insane]

1. 00:00:812 (1,1) - I'm not a big fan of the whistles here, (1,2) are in both cases just anacrusis or appoggiaturas of 00:01:026 (3,3) -(or whatever they're called in english), the main accent is still on the (3)s so that's where the whistles whould be imo. You created a rhythm that is not really present in the song with those whistles ok!
2. 00:27:168 (3) - why is there no whistle here? o: Because i added a clap!
3. 00:20:312 (2,3,4,5,6) - whoa this really comes out of nowhere, there hasn't been a single 1/4-jump until here o: I'd at least lower the spacing to the one of 00:33:812 (2,3,4,5,6) because 1) the absolute spacing is pretty similar to 00:19:026 (5,6) so that might be irritating, and also for the sake of consistency I guess. Mapping one of them jumpy and one of them in a straight line seems pretty random too since the musical pattern is the same (ascending scale) - imo the straight line fits better (and is probably easier to play for most people, those two patterns are huge spikes in starrating anyways so you could at least make them easier to play ^^) No change!

1. You probably don't view stacking in the editor which leads to some minor issues: 00:02:526 (1,2,3) doesn't really stack on 00:01:883 (7) and 00:28:240 (1,2,3) is not really in the middle of that symmetrical pattern, so I'd advise you to move both by 8x8pixels no change
2. 00:04:240 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11) - I don't really like this because imo (4) shouldn't be seperated from (3) as they are in the same musical pattern, a descending scale, so I'd start that circle with 00:04:454 (3) - keep the auto-stacking in mind though, if you decide to map it like that then the stack kinda covers parts of the next circles, dunno if you'd want that OK! nice mod
3. 00:14:097 (6) - Are you missing the clap on the last tail on purpose? There's no break in the music so I'd put one there too oo thx mod
4. 00:23:740 (2,3) - this jump is unreasonably huge, the (3) doesn't deserve special emphasis, (2) or (4) would but definitely not (3)! 00:22:883 (7,8) is also pretty huge but at least there's a melody-note on (8) so there's some reason behind it keep
5. 00:26:526 (8,1) - this jump is rather small compared to 00:24:812 (8,1) - 00:25:240 (2,3) - 00:25:669 (4,5) -(this one is really huge tho O.o) and 00:26:097 (6,7) - adding that you don't change direction in 00:26:526 (8,1,2) it doesn't give (1) the emphasis it deserves imo keep
6. 00:05:954 (10,11,1) and 00:34:240 (6,1) - dunno if that's okay for ranking? It's very confusing when double the time interval got the same absolute distance : \

1. 00:01:240 (4,5) - this jumps is one of the hugest in the whole diff, and you didn't put any jump at all at 00:02:954 (4,5) so I wouldn't map it at the very beginning either, doesn't really fit the diff, it's just the intro + very inconsistent
   I don't think so, keep!
2. 00:13:454 (3) - even bigger jumps when you gave other similar parts zero emphasis, I'd highly recommend to lower them
   swaped 00:13:454 (3) - 00:13:883 (5) -
3. 00:18:597 (2,3) - really low spacing although (3) is more important than (2) but 00:18:169 (1,2) is a way bigger jump o: try to keep the jumps somewhat consistent in your diff!
   ok fixed
4. 00:27:169 (3) - whoa they keep getting bigger lol. Why are jumps like these bigger than for example 00:26:312 (4,1) when they're way less important?
   
   I see. ok fixed