Hello, from my queue (m4m)
[General]
* I see one mod post that consists metadata, but Wikipedia cannot be used as a reliable source as it can be edited by everyone, and it's not official. Also an album name cannot be used as a source. Just delete it.
[Moonlight]
Your map is very consistent throughout the whole map, but only the notes are. This means I don't see proper emphasis for certain sounds, or specific patterns that could represent each part better. Yes, this song is kinda like that, but still you can make difference depending on what kind of sound is there.
Especially the jumps. This map contains a lot of circles and jumps. But that's it, this map has the same kind of jumps on the whole map. I can't tell what kind of part I'm playing if I don't listen to the music. Like, in example, the vocal sound of 01:35:347 (3,4,5,6) - and 01:36:175 (1,2,3,4) - are pretty different. But there is just no difference on the shape/distance/movement of the jump pattern. More obvious one here: 01:45:278 (3,4,5,6) - and 01:46:106 (1,2,3,4) - . The music is vitally different, but is there any pattern difference between them? No, it's just a continuous of the previous jump pattern.
So let me start from the beginning and point some of them out. I won't say same thing over and over again. Try to find similar ones as you get through.
* 00:13:416 (1,2,3,4,5,6,1,2,1,2,3,4,5,1,2,1,2,3,1,2,1,2,3,1) - This is really good, I can clearly see the pattern and structured shapes.
* 00:21:072 (4,5,6) - Personally I don't agree this kind of triplets. They serve nothing but overmapping. Not that there's especially a strong sound too.
* 00:21:278 (6,7,1) - Rather than using similar distance, discreting the pattern by distance would be better. They're not just the same sounds. Considering that 00:21:485 (7) - is a deep long sound, increasing the distance 00:21:278 (6,7) - would work nicely. The opposite would work as well. Anyway, keeping it just similar is what makes this pattern monotonous. 00:24:589 (6,7,1) - is done pretty well.
* 00:22:520 (1) - Is this NC needed? You usually keep the downbeat on every downbeats, so removing the NC here would make more sense.
* 00:22:520 (1,2,3) - As you can hear, the pitch of the deep sound (what is it called, bass?) goes up by 1 octave on 00:22:727 (2,3) - , while 00:22:520 (1,2) - these are just same pitches. So back-and-forth jump with stack is just a monotonous jump, and you can represent the changes of the music better by increasing the distance for 00:22:727 (2,3) - .
* 00:25:416 (2,3,4,5) - Their impact aren't just the same. 00:25:003 (1,2,3) - is one group of sounds, and 00:25:830 (4,5,6,7,8) - is another. But I don't see any pattern difference between them. You even bound them into one pattern so that I cannot feel the strong beat on 00:26:037 (5) - at all.
* 00:27:485 (5,6,7,8,9,1) - So you used triplets to emphasize that sound. Then why don't you care about the same sounds on 00:28:934 (4) - 00:29:347 - 00:31:003 - ? The tone is a bit down, but still you decided to emphasize that instrument, then you need to keep tracking on it afterwards as well.
* 00:31:623 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9) - Apparently some sliders can emphasize certain sounds, if you're not going to strictly control the distance between circles. Right now, these are just all random jumps/distances that represent nothing but the 1/2 beats, rather they're strong or not.
* 00:35:347 (2,3,4,5,6,7) - Same here. You can hear 00:35:347 - 00:35:761 - 00:35:968 - 00:36:382 - are stronger than others, but there's just nothing that cares about them. I'm not saying you should only emphasize what I'm picking. You need to find your own beats you want to emphasize and put impact on them. The song's intensity is not 1/2 consistent, and you know that.
* 00:46:520 (1,2,3,4,5) - 00:48:175 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - Both are focusing on the vocals. But are the vocals that same for both parts? I totally hear that the latter one is much more faded out, but I don't see any difference on the pattern. These should have different scale to represent the change of the song properly. Just putting same notes all over the map doesn't make the map consistent. The map should follow the song's changes.
* 00:49:416 (5,6) - Especially for this one, with the faded vocal, this beat should be very very weak. But you're keeping the same distance as before, and you even used a circle while it was on a slider on 00:47:761 (5) - .
* 00:56:451 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - This, on the other hand, makes sense. Because the vocal is 1/2 consistent with the same pitch for all these beats. It's well representing it.
* 01:07:830 - 01:11:141 - 01:14:451 - 01:17:761 - These need more emphasis. When you have jumps around everywhere, one another jump cannot emphasize a certain note, like this case. These sounds have great impact on this part but it's just... in the middle of the jumps. I would rather use the rhythm of 01:21:072 (1,2) - , but I guess you don't want to miss the downbeats here, so at least adjust the distance to make a proper emphasis for those sounds.
* 01:26:244 (1) - This one sound, is definitely stronger than others and should be emphasized, but it's just inside a random jump pattern 01:25:003 (2,3,4,5,6,7,1,2,3,4) - and it's even stacked with an object before, so I don't feel any impact on that strong beat. The distance is even smaller than others.
* 01:27:899 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - Starting from 01:27:899 - , you have the star jump repeating two times, and all of the jumps have equal distance with others. But are the vocals really that equal? There's a huge pitch jump between 01:27:692 (3,1) - 01:28:313 (3,4) - but any emphasis for those? Speaking of the distance overall, I don't think the whole vocal sounds deserve that amount of distance. Only those few high-pitched vocals would deserve it, considering the spacing you've been using before these jumps.
* 01:31:209 (1) - This sound is something that gets out of the 1/1 vocals 01:29:554 (1,2,3,4) - , so placing it on the far left side would make more sense, rather than just reapeating same circular movement like before.
* 01:31:313 (1,1,2,3) - I'd just use a stacked triplet as a moving triplet 1/2 after a spinner is really harsh. This can be so annoying for CW spin players. Also use an NC on 3 because that's where the new 'part' of the song starts where you put the kiai start.
* 01:43:416 (4,5,6) - Look at the place where you used the triplet. Now check here: 00:27:485 (5,6,7,8,9,1) - see the difference? You used the triplets on different beats for the similar beats. Do you want to emphasize that kind of sounds? Then use it consistently. (The 00:27:485 (5,6,7,8,9,1) - one is much better for me)
* 01:44:244 (1) - This also needs emphasizing but you used just the same distance as before D:
* 02:04:934 (4,5,6,7,8,9) - Same as above. This is inconsistent with the red-tick-starting triplets like 02:01:209 (2,3,4) - 02:02:865 (2,3,4,5,6,7) - 02:07:830 (2,3,4) - 02:09:485 (2,3,4,5,6,7) - as well.
At this point you should already know what I'm talking about. The rest of the map is just same as now. So you should check the later part and find similar things too.
I'll continue to write some things that I didn't mention above.
* 03:38:658 (1,1,1,1,1,1,1) - I lost some score on BN test because I didn't point this out. An object that is on 1/12 after a DRRRRR slider is just being an evil and makes players hard to get 300s on the pattern. Especially 03:44:451 (1,1) - this. At least make some gap between the sliders so that players won't miss because of lack of slider leniency.
* 04:13:209 (8,1) - 04:16:520 (9,1) - Using a 1/2 slider on things like this can represent the vocal better.
Also use lower AR because a 145 bpm without long streams is just too much. Only the consecutive jumps made this difficult, but that doesn't mean each notes deserve fast approach to be read properly.
Good luck!
I just catch this map problem. but I only a catch nazi mods...
