deetz wrote:

[ez]
00:34:259 (2,3,4) - yea i think stuff like this will confuse newbies cuz they'll see it right next to the head and be unsure when to click fixed
non chorus parts seem a little confusing in terms of emphasis, consider using more repeats to hit red ticks. stuff like 01:44:486 (1,2) - makes me feel a bit unsure about what your focus is in these parts. diff is as dense as it should be tho, for spread to normal remapped all rhythms to follow vocals only lol

[nm pls]
00:54:884 (3,4) - maybe circle -> repeat would fit better done
03:24:884 (4) - if you can find a way to do it without breaking your structure you could make this into a 1/2 repeat. that would seem to fit the way you map vocals in the choruses. done
03:34:429 (1,2,3,4) - just curious why you chose to do this cuz i'm too fried to figure anything out right now not sure what you mean, just mapping vocals and using circles at 03:34:770 (2,4) to have a gap as resting time in the rhythm

[hd]
00:42:441 (3,4,5,1) - auto stacking makes this overlap and look ugly just saying ://// asdf
00:43:805 (3,4,1) - looks hard to predict made the first repeat start on white tick
01:02:384 (1,2,3,1,2,3) - hopefully stuff like this is okay for a hard diff, not sure. it does make it a lot more interesting to play tho yeah, I think it should be fine with the way I progressed the rhythm of that part throughout the spread, and in this diff it's introduced with repeats before going to circles
really great stuff

[grld]
00:21:305 (6) - maybe NC here instead of 1 to show that the red tick clicking starts here yes
00:26:077 (3,4,5,6) - having 6 as part of the square makes 00:27:611 (3,4,5,6) - lose some of its impact I think. well it's just a snare, and the fact that it's the last circle of the square could be considered as some emphasis, pretty sure ryan would rather keep the pattern
00:55:055 (4,5,6,1) - consider having a 6 -> 1 jump for MAXIMUM IMPACT. what you have right now works but imo a jump would only make the chorus start impact more :p yes
00:58:634 (2) - ctrl-g would be super cool for the crash cuz antiflow -> not antiflow asdf
01:09:543 (2) - ^ asdf
01:29:486 (5) - same as before asdf
01:31:873 (4) - 01:33:236 (4) - these take away from 01:34:259 (3,4) - and 01:35:623 (3,4) - because they have a vocal note on the tail while the latter two do not. I'd recommend for this whole section to be more clear about what you're following. while playing it felt a bit odd that I was clicking the vocal notes sometimes but not ~all~ the time. so yeah, consistency in this section would feel a lot better imo.
02:01:021 (1,2,3,4) - so basically i noticed that the first time the song did this, you did something else. all of the transitions like 00:45:680 (5,1) - were in places that the cursor would naturally gravitate towards, then the player would be surprised by having to move towards 00:52:839 (1) - for the different sound which would lead into the chorus start. this felt super awesome to play, but you didn't do it the second time. if you could find out a way to do what you did again without breaking the structure that would be awesome. maybe something like ctrl-g'ing 01:59:316 (5) - . did a ctrl+g
02:03:236 (4,5,6,1) - same as what I mentioned before asdf
02:06:816 (2) - again a ctrl-g would play really cool here asdf
02:17:725 (2) - same tbh asdf
03:01:190 (4,5,6,1) - same as before once again asdf
03:04:770 (2) - same as before ok you get it asdf
03:57:441 (3) - either NC here like I've suggested or at 03:57:781 (4) - like you did before asdf

other than what I've mentioned, really awesome stuff.

[Expert]
i think i've already given you enough input on this diff and i don't wanna take my mouse out to test it lolo
i'll just say i don't really understand why you skip notes like this 03:48:406 (3) - prioritizing crash over guitar

gr8 stuff im gay same

Asahina Momoko wrote:

Giralda

1. 00:11:248 (1) - i'd like to put it near 00:11:759 (1) - rather than current place, because somehow i felt it fits here lol ryan definitely wanted a harsh movement here for peak of the build up , that placement would be underwhelmingly easy
2. 01:10:651 (2) - there's drum sound but i can hear vocal sound lands on 01:10:736 - , and also 01:10:992 (3) - there's no sound like vocal or drums, so how about change rhythm like this did something else
3. 01:52:157 (5,6) - a bit risky? how about change their direction opposite ctrl+g'ed
4. 02:18:748 (1,2,3) - same as above 01:10:651 (2) - ok
5. 03:00:679 (2,3) - reduce their spacing would be better for 1/4 interval i think it plays fine, there's definitely more than enough slider leniency

pishifat wrote:

gira
your combo colors are so much better (aka they dont use that gross blue which blends into any dimmed bg) ((<-- nathan read this it's a hint))
00:08:180 (2,3,4,5,1,2,3,4) - dont understand what you're trying to emphasize with offbeat groupings like this. if anything 00:09:202 (3) - should have emphasis of some kind cuz omgdownbeat changed downbeat circle to a slider
00:39:032 (6) - is kinda the same thing as ^ u can figure out what i would say hmm I'm sure ryan had this in mind but I guess he just prioritizes patterns so I'll leave it, tbh it's not even that bad because the crash sounds very abrupt and out of nowhere, actually I don't hear how the crash even accents anything in the music
00:10:566 (1,2,3,4) - oh it's ok
01:10:992 (3) - 02:19:174 (3) - 03:17:128 (3) - ok i really dont know what youre doing with these. clicking on the nonexistent 1/4 then ignoring the 1/2 after it is wha if there were something emphasized on the blue tick that would be okay but there just istn 02:36:901 (4) - is slightly better cuz there is actual 1/4 but not really standing out more than the red tick thing so still wha changed rhythm
01:19:430 (1) - 03:47:384 (1) - same sv as 00:11:248 (1) - pls same

1. 00:53:205 (1,2) - 00:53:886 (1,2) - What do you think of Ctrl+G'ing these sets of jumps? I think they'll set up the flow for the triplets 00:54:227 (1,2,3,1,2,3,4) - more smoothly.
2. 01:00:960 (9) - This circle looks a bit misplaced. Well, the DS seems to be off anyways, but if you could have the notes arranged more linearly that'd look nicer.
3. 01:19:284 (1) - Try changing the combo color to red or something cuz this particular shade just blends with the spinner quite well.
4. 02:37:864 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - That snapping tho
5. 02:38:546 (1,2,3) - I think since you've been following the piano earlier (which is 1/3) you should continue to follow that here and switch to 1/3 snapping.
6. 02:52:181 - 02:58:318 - Just making sure but, is the break intentionally on a 1/12? You changed the mp3 earlier so im guessing you shifted offset, but that doesn't change the break times, just making sure if this is intentional lol.
7. 03:17:750 (5,1) - Would be nice if you could make them parallel.
8. 03:30:705 (2) - Pretty sure this isn't stacked right but *shrugs*
9. 03:33:176 (2,3) - More subjective I guess, but overlaps like this don't look as nice imo because of the uneven gap when the slider fades, so I would overlap the slider halfway instead of 4/5th's of the way.
   
   ~

   
10. 03:57:466 (1,1,1) - Try arranging them like this. Flows a bit nicer at the end imo.
    
    Triangles

    

1. 01:27:636 (3,4,1) - D: Not going to prioritize 01:28:148 - ?
2. 02:21:159 (2,1) - This jump just felt really big in comparison, because you also attack a flowbreak on here. It feels a bit overemphasized for me. I would nerf spacing a bit.

1. 00:29:171 (4,1) - Not symmetrical pls dq.
2. 01:29:511 (1) - No jump here? You have a finish tho.
3. 02:46:386 (3) - Can you make the start/end sections more parallel? xddd
4. 03:29:681 (2,1) - Blanket xd

1. 02:01:046 (1) - Looks overbent x___x. Not really a problem I guess lol.
2. 03:05:477 (4,5) - Blanket
3. 03:39:909 (1) - Idk if you care, but some of these cornered sliders aren't symmetrical. There's a few more if you care to fix.

1. 00:28:148 (1,2) - Blanket Nominator coming through
2. 00:35:648 (4,1) - ^
3. 00:43:830 (1) - NC doesn't seem necessary here.
4. 03:12:636 (1,2) - Blanket
5. 03:18:772 (2,3) - Having the corner align with / blanket 2's sliderend would look nicer. If its possible

Monstrata wrote:

[Expert]

1. 00:53:205 (1,2) - 00:53:886 (1,2) - What do you think of Ctrl+G'ing these sets of jumps? I think they'll set up the flow for the triplets 00:54:227 (1,2,3,1,2,3,4) - more smoothly. I prefer a sharp angle going into the triplet, moving directly into it makes the player slow down a bit in movement to match the spacing
2. 01:00:960 (9) - This circle looks a bit misplaced. Well, the DS seems to be off anyways, but if you could have the notes arranged more linearly that'd look nicer. done
3. 01:19:284 (1) - Try changing the combo color to red or something cuz this particular shade just blends with the spinner quite well.hm ok
4. 02:37:864 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - That snapping tho LOL WTF, aimod never caught this for me ;;
5. 02:38:546 (1,2,3) - I think since you've been following the piano earlier (which is 1/3) you should continue to follow that here and switch to 1/3 snapping. I stopped following the 1/3 in preparation for the 1/4 at 02:39:227, I think it still sounds fine abruptly switching to a 3/4 since there's a jump in pitch at 02:38:545
6. 02:52:181 - 02:58:318 - Just making sure but, is the break intentionally on a 1/12? You changed the mp3 earlier so im guessing you shifted offset, but that doesn't change the break times, just making sure if this is intentional lol. oh oops fixed
7. 03:17:750 (5,1) - Would be nice if you could make them parallel. well, this was meant to be a fan-symmetry thing, but I guess it's hard to see so I just made them all parallel lol
8. 03:30:705 (2) - Pretty sure this isn't stacked right but *shrugs* fixed
9. 03:33:176 (2,3) - More subjective I guess, but overlaps like this don't look as nice imo because of the uneven gap when the slider fades, so I would overlap the slider halfway instead of 4/5th's of the way. ok done
   
   ~

   
10. 03:57:466 (1,1,1) - Try arranging them like this. Flows a bit nicer at the end imo. I did a ctrl+g on 03:57:466 (1,1), but not 03:57:807 (1,1), I like the sharp movement onto the loop slider
    
    Triangles

    

[Hard]

1. 00:29:171 (4,1) - Not symmetrical pls dq. asdf
2. 01:29:511 (1) - No jump here? You have a finish tho. added jump
3. 02:46:386 (3) - Can you make the start/end sections more parallel? xddd yes
4. 03:29:681 (2,1) - Blanket xd ffff

[Normal]

1. 02:01:046 (1) - Looks overbent x___x. Not really a problem I guess lol. reduced curve a tiny bit
2. 03:05:477 (4,5) - Blanket asdf
3. 03:39:909 (1) - Idk if you care, but some of these cornered sliders aren't symmetrical. There's a few more if you care to fix. lol why not

[Easy]

1. 00:28:148 (1,2) - Blanket Nominator coming through asdf
2. 00:35:648 (4,1) - ^ asdf
3. 00:43:830 (1) - NC doesn't seem necessary here. removed
4. 03:12:636 (1,2) - Blanket asdf
5. 03:18:772 (2,3) - Having the corner align with / blanket 2's sliderend would look nicer. If its possible

call me back when you're ready~

Haskorion wrote:

Just found one little hitsounding error while playing a few days ago:

00:47:580 (2) - Clap hitsound is missing on the tail in every diff at 00:47:750 except hard where it has longer slider with no ticks. while 00:50:307 (2) - has a clap on it (same sound and pattern)

sukiNathan wrote:

did you even redl? I changed the mp3 a few days ago lol

Rizia wrote:

o/

ex
01:00:619 (6,7) - clap?
01:29:341 (5) - ^

samething on hard/insane

Meg wrote:

ruutin <3

VINXIS wrote:

Meg wrote:

ruutin <3