Karen wrote:

Lunatic
ar8.3太高了吧 其实我也觉得有点快，我还是喜欢AR8，那就AR8好了
00:11:562 (6,7,2) - 要跟钢琴就好好跟，突然跟vocal很难受诶 唔，这还是狗笔提出来的，之前我也是单跟钢琴，不过这样子尝试了感觉还不错。保留吧
00:21:047 - clap? fixed
00:29:430 - 这种地方加finish 加上感觉奇怪于是把这一段的音量都有所降低感觉好点
01:10:018 (1,2) - 这只是个简单图，这么大的距离会增加难度，老老实实靠近点吧 那就放近点吧，难度也没变化，原来的那个难度强双其实这里打着挺舒服的Q.Q.
01:14:871 - 这whistle是啥 去掉了
01:31:636 - clap? fixed
开头放了些whistle，但是结尾一样的部分又没了，你看看加点什么 恩，适当加点吧
01:38:143 - 转盘可以这里开始 好的
对了音效要改的话跟hard一起改 copy过去了

给图

Karen wrote:

01:37:592 (6,7,8) - 1/6

Karen wrote:

Qualified!

you have already qualified a map today!
rip

1. My personal two cents that ar5 felt a little high for the actual diff itself.
2. 01:38:253 - It's pretty sad that there is no spinner here, which hurts the consistency cross difficulties. Also since 01:36:488 (1,2,3) is highly related with 00:25:900 (1,2,3) in patterns and the song, having no spinner at the end such as 00:27:665 (1) also damaged consistency.

1. 00:23:474 (3,4) - (3) has a bigger spacing, while (4) has a bigger sound.
2. 00:48:180 (4,5,6) - Emphasis issue. (5) has a stronger sound, while (6) containing a jump.
3. 01:15:312 (1,2,3) - Indeed (2,3) is bigger in spacing, and you may wanted a downbeat emphasis. But since (1,2) is also far enough, the feeling of an emphasis wasn't clear enough only to get feeled as an unbalanced spacing.
4. 01:16:415 (4,5,6) - (5) has a stronger sound while (6) having a bigger jump. Emphasis issue.
5. 01:04:724 (1,2,3,4) - (2,3) has strong sounds, so it is understandable for them to have big spacing. However (4) does not, and it also having a big spacing feels not fitting the song properly.
6. 01:05:827 (4,5) - 01:07:592 (4,5) - These got similar feelings, but the spacing is different.
7. 00:28:768 (1,2,3) - Spacing is inconsistent.
8. 00:30:312 (3,4,5,6) - 00:32:297 (4,5,6) - 00:34:062 (4,5,6) - 00:35:827 (5,6,7) - 00:37:592 (4,5,6) - 00:41:121 (4,5,6) - 00:42:885 (4,5,6) - Structure issue. I see you were trying to give a similar feeling by using notes for similar parts of the song, but unlike the consistency of rhythms, the patterning wasn't as organized enough. Sometimes it is a triangle, sometimes it's a linear beat. Sometimes the spacing is 1.00x, sometimes 1.5x, 2.00x, or having random spacings.
9. 01:26:562 - The hitsound here feels unnatural compared to the song. It's way too much ;w;
10. Spacing consistency is highly lacking. 1.00x and 1.50x seems to be some of the major spacings you are using, but those in usage feels quite arbitrary. 00:31:194 (1,2,3,4,5,6) for example, 1.5x is the main usage while (5) being inconsistent. Seems as an intended jump, but the scale is so minor, only to be interpreted as a spacing error. 00:41:783 (1,2) - 00:45:974 (3,4) - 1.00x isn't been used for close 1/2 here.
11. Major issues are lacking of patterns, and weak logic behind emphasis selection.

_MiaoFUuU_ wrote:

恭喜1st!!

Sonnyc wrote:

[Lunatic]

1. 00:23:474 (3,4) - (3) has a bigger spacing, while (4) has a bigger sound. fixed
2. 00:48:180 (4,5,6) - Emphasis issue. (5) has a stronger sound, while (6) containing a jump. fixed the placement
3. 01:15:312 (1,2,3) - Indeed (2,3) is bigger in spacing, and you may wanted a downbeat emphasis. But since (1,2) is also far enough, the feeling of an emphasis wasn't clear enough only to get feeled as an unbalanced spacing. 3 also has accent，but，changed ds（not for better play，only for accent
4. 01:16:415 (4,5,6) - (5) has a stronger sound while (6) having a bigger jump. Emphasis issue. fixed
5. 01:04:724 (1,2,3,4) - (2,3) has strong sounds, so it is understandable for them to have big spacing. However (4) does not, and it also having a big spacing feels not fitting the song properly. move 4 al little left
6. 01:05:827 (4,5) - 01:07:592 (4,5) - These got similar feelings, but the spacing is different. fixed
7. 00:28:768 (1,2,3) - Spacing is inconsistent. i think here is no problem，keep
8. 00:30:312 (3,4,5,6) - 00:32:297 (4,5,6) - 00:34:062 (4,5,6) - 00:35:827 (5,6,7) - 00:37:592 (4,5,6) - 00:41:121 (4,5,6) - 00:42:885 (4,5,6) - Structure issue. I see you were trying to give a similar feeling by using notes for similar parts of the song, but unlike the consistency of rhythms, the patterning wasn't as organized enough. Sometimes it is a triangle, sometimes it's a linear beat. Sometimes the spacing is 1.00x, sometimes 1.5x, 2.00x, or having random spacings. yes,i use line all this part fisrt time,but aftter remap,i remove these line,because,i afraid boring,its a short map,peopele will not fell sleepy,but if its a long map,they will.and if i changed all things same when they have same rhythm,people will fell boring,as me,i will never play again.i think some radom will make map fell not so boring.
9. 01:26:562 - The hitsound here feels unnatural compared to the song. It's way too much ;w; remove the clap
10. Spacing consistency is highly lacking. 1.00x and 1.50x seems to be some of the major spacings you are using, but those in usage feels quite arbitrary. 00:31:194 (1,2,3,4,5,6) for example, 1.5x is the main usage while (5) being inconsistent. Seems as an intended jump, but the scale is so minor, only to be interpreted as a spacing error. 00:41:783 (1,2) - 00:45:974 (3,4) - 1.00x isn't been used for close 1/2 here. not use ds very much，and i think this not influence play and i make it on purpose.no change
11. Major issues are lacking of patterns, and weak logic behind emphasis selection.

I don't think this mapset has reached it's highest potential yet, and has still got several space for improvement remaining.

Lily Bread wrote:

Normal
◾My personal two cents that ar5 felt a little high for the actual diff itself.
//AR5 is ok for normal imo, but AR4 is ok too. change to AR4 if momizi want.

◾01:38:253 - It's pretty sad that there is no spinner here, which hurts the consistency cross difficulties. Also since 01:36:488 (1,2,3) is highly related with 00:25:900 (1,2,3) in patterns and the song, having no spinner at the end such as 00:27:665 (1) also damaged consistency.
//i don't like spinner. i won't add two spinner in one map. and i don't think a boring spinner can make any consistency.

Lily Bread wrote:

my mapping style for easy and normal diff: in quiet part, map vocal as many as possible; if there doesn't have vocal or vocal is hard to map, map drum instead.

Lily Bread wrote:

quite weird, because they are harder than kiai part. see above, so i choose to map drum here.

Lily Bread wrote:

2. these two part is not the same in vocal. no reason to map them in same rhythm.

Lily Bread wrote:

01:16:856 - here has a vocal.

Lily Bread wrote:

so why did you ignore "consistent" this time?
see - 01:14:430 (6) -

Lily Bread wrote:

why should i add a spinner? i hate spinner. boring and it can't express any music at all.

Doyak wrote:

Sonnyc forced me to take a look at this xD

[Lunatic]
* 01:13:327 (4) - 01:20:386 (1) - Inconsistent NC use. fixed
* 00:34:724 - 00:35:386 - these piano sounds, are represented with whistles on 00:48:842 - 00:49:503 - fixed
* 00:30:312 (3,4,5,6) - 00:32:297 (4,5,6) - Why are these represented differently? One is a train, and the other one is triangle jump. I want.why i use it i said in sonnyc's mod, i will not say it again
* 00:29:430 (1,2,3) - This is the only one you didn't make 00:30:092 - this vocal clickable unlike 00:31:856 - 00:33:621 - 00:37:150 - 00:40:680 - 00:44:209 - 00:45:974 - 00:47:739 - 00:51:268 - 00:53:033 - 00:54:797 - i want use slider here,i dont want it have to many singletap,and for better connect with 00:30:312 (3,4,5,6) - 。 no change,
* 01:04:724 (1,2,3) - This have a big jump pattern to emphasize the sounds, but why not on 01:06:489 (1,2,3) - ? fixed，chaged pattern
* 01:16:194 - There's no sound here, so might be better to make 01:15:974 (3,4) - into a 1/1 slider. its slider，not clickable，i think here is ok，and i want 01:16:415 (4) - clickable.no change
* 01:23:474 (1,2,3) - Seems way too large compared to the rest of your map. Around 2.50 would work better. fixed,use 2.7

[Hard]
* 00:01:195 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2) - Why not use same NC term as Lunatic? want 2 note 1 part,no chage
* 00:18:621 (1) - 00:22:150 (6) - 00:25:680 (5) - Inconsistent NC fixed
* 00:48:621 (6) - Need NC fixed
* 00:59:430 - If you're going to neglect this downbeat, it's better to neglect 00:58:106 - this beat and extend 00:57:665 (1) - to 00:58:327 (2) - to represent the long vocal instead. fixed on 00:59:430 (1) -
* 01:23:033 (3,4,5) - inconsistent spacing on a linear pattern isn't good, as it breaks the flow by suddenly accelerating/breaking the cursor speed without direction change. chaged triangle's ds to 1.6

Pata-Mon wrote:

_MiaoFUuU_ wrote:

恭喜1st!!

你这个……

DreaM117er wrote:

Generally, I checked Doyak's mod first, then knew what happened here...

[Hard]

1. This diff doesn't have big problem on rhythm, but you should fix Doyak's mod first.
   00:20:386 (1,2) - why don't you use 1/1 or 1/2 slider to fit guitar?? chaged to slider
   00:28:989 (3,1) - It have no sense to use large jump on the song going slower. Reduce distance here (DS). Same 00:53:915 (4,1) -
   00:37:812 (5,1) - same as this part^ these 1 have accent,i think its ok
   00:42:444 (2,3) - fix DS fixed
   01:10:459 (2,2) - I hope you set NC on these 2 circles to be more readable. here can be read(its stacked),and i want01:10:900 (1,2,3,4,1) - be a part so nc in01:10:900 (1) -
2. That's all.

[Lunatic]

• 
  00:07:371 (4,5) - This is what I say "you should fix Doyak's mod first". I hope you should make sure difference of 2/1 and 1/1 rhythm. If you agree, please fix whole diff. if i want change here to manke people notice 1/1,00:07:812 (5) - nc will be the best way? But i dont like use nc very often，its dont look good.i think people can play hard could easy to watch the thythm difference.or by listening.so,no chage herer
  00:27:003 (4,5) - Just a question: This pattern isn't too hard for the diff?? 00:27:224 (5,6) - I think you should reduce some distance on this jump. 01:37:592 (6,7,1) - same. these are fine,not very difficult,its Lunatic,not hard.Because song is a little slow,so it can has in icon.(in fact,its a in dif)
  00:27:444 (6) - NC fixed
  01:10:900 (1,2,3,4) - I'd like to see you make a real star path here. fine.fixed
  01:13:327 (4,1) - swap NC fixed on last mod

Go~

Doyak wrote:

It's her decision whether she'll fix it or not. It can be preference. But I'm raising my concerns. I'm asking her if she's really okay with these concerns, not whether she likes it or not. If she's fine with these things, then go ahead, but she's just saying "it's my style", "why do you force me to change", "my mapping, not your mapping" things and never revealed her opinions about my concerns. I'm always happy to listen to the mapper's thoughts.

Momizi wrote:

Doyak wrote:

It's her decision whether she'll fix it or not. It can be preference. But I'm raising my concerns. I'm asking her if she's really okay with these concerns, not whether she likes it or not. If she's fine with these things, then go ahead, but she's just saying "it's my style", "why do you force me to change", "my mapping, not your mapping" things and never revealed her opinions about my concerns. I'm always happy to listen to the mapper's thoughts.

maybe she has a little intemperate，but i also fell very angry when mod comes when this map is in qua.the question sonnyc said is not unrankable question(Big questiion).its some advice to improve map's quality(Small question).For this,i think BN should more foucus on Pending maps before they qua.when a map qua,is two or more BNs think its good enough.And if the map shouldnt be ranked,QAT will DQ it,its not BN's thing,BN's thing is to help mappers before their map qualified.
I mean BN should focus on maps in pending not in qua.The time you see a map in qua,you can see many other maps need BN's help.For example,https://osu.ppy.sh/s/226670,its my map.And its very difficult to find BN to mod it.not only me,others are also have the question.and i put this map is want to say，if it ranked，some people like you and sonnyc will mod it and make it dq and then to change some thing.Why not mod map before it qualified?