Love it when two people team up to shittalk a mapper and throw salt on their mapping thread, nice. GL for ranking Shiirn, call me again if you need more test plays~
MillhioreF wrote:
Agreeing with the general idea of what Silynn said. You've chosen to make a map that has very little structure and instead relies on flow and powerful spacing to carry it, which is a valid design decision given the song choice - but as a result, your flow has to be on point in order to make this a good map, and in that regard it isn't quite ready yet.
A couple more examples in Comfort of things that can be improved, although far from an extensive list:00:27:686 (1,2,3,4) - While this pattern itself holds up fine, the way these notes squish into (1) of the next combo is really awkward due to the lowered spacing and tight angle. It feels like the next (1) would be better above (4). The brief hold sliders are in a triangular pattern. I can simply reverse 2 and 3 so that they bounce outwards instead of inwards, but that'd mean increasing the spacing so that we don't have OH MY GOD OVERLAPS CALL 911 etc etcThis doesn't go on to list the extensive amount of times you intentionally wreck the smooth flow of the map by requiring hairpin cursor turns or having a slider start where flow dictates it should end. I personally don't like this at all, but I don't think I'm qualified to determine how well it plays in practice. The hairpin turns are all intended and play quite well with the music. I do agree, however, that if there are any instances in which the map is unfair by telling the player to do one thing and then punishing them for it (for example, the sliders that will 100 you if you try to hit the note after them in a direct line) then those should FOR SURE be fixed but I need good mods for those because if I just fix them myself nobody ever notices they were changed and then i get people claiming i need more mods for other inane reasons
01:05:915 (7,8,9,1,2,3) - This whole cluster of notes is oddly powerful for how relatively calm the music is, and smashing your cursor down to (1) feels a bit strange due to the angle. This is following the beat of the music, and 8,9,1 are very powerful snare hits that are much more prominent than any one of the other bass-spam sections.
01:19:561 (6) - This should be flipped vertically, nobody is gonna move their cursor -upwards- on this slider. This is fairly semantics-level modding. It's meant to imply a curve over to (7) but at these speeds i guess people just click it and rush over to the next note and that MAY cause them to 100 this. Sure, I'll move it, just hope people don't whine that it increases the spacing.
01:30:915 (5,6,7) - Having (6) and (7) go the same direction on these weird back and forth hops is just plain awkward, especially considering the cursor movement to get to the next note. I agree that this is rotated the wrong way, but short of redoing the entire section just ctrl+ging it would lead to a much larger jump than i wanted. I'll just ctrl+G it and see how it goes.
If possible, you should try and add some more structured patterns to the map as well, since I'll be honest, it looks butt ugly in most places. While play is obviously the most important thing in a beatmap, and this map accomplishes that decently, you should at least try to add some sense into your patterns where you can instead of the "fling you cursor out and place a circle where it naturally feels like it should go" style of mapping that some mappers tend to use. I for one find the ridiculously stringent rules placed on aesthetics for maps is hurting their creativity. Now before people start quoting me back at me, hear me out. This map is very structured, but it also has many breaks in the structure purely to move into a different set of rules. For example, some of the bass-heavy points use the "blanket spam" structure that gave Comfort its name, and the parts of the map, especially the kiai, that are much more note-heavy and less inclined to the bass use a back-and-forth setup and movement yes, reminiscent of Tengaku. When you put all of these together without actually taking a moment to think about what the mapper is doing, it can look like a messy hodge-podge of "random" structure. Which is just silly. I was originally a mapper when the entire concept of "transitions" either between patterns, structure, or beat patterns was really starting to take hold in the meta and it will likely stick with me forever. If that makes my maps "look" ugly, then so be it.
Some people think this map is hopeless. I'm inclined to disagree, but saying it's ready for ranking in its current state is an overstatement. Please get a few more mods and top player opinions, and I highly suggest toning down the spacing during pretty much the entire kiai as well. Maybe if people actually would mod it and i've gotten many top player opinions and implemented MANY MANY MANY of the suggestions you damn know me milly you know I'm basically a lightning rod for community input so don't tell me these canned phrases.
(Also I'm pretty sure the current spread isn't rankable yet. The new rules have been repealed for now, and whether it SHOULD be rankable is its own discussion.) (i'll argue against making a 6* diff until the point where this map is nuked if need be)
please remain civil, this is seriously insulting to meMillhioreF wrote:
"fling you cursor out and place a circle where it naturally feels like it should go" style of mapping that some mappers tend to use.
ok. sorry that i feel offended if someone calls me a shittalker BIG SORRYShiirn wrote:
I mean, it's unfortunate for you Mazziv, but no matter how loud you cry or how bitchy you get, it's not going to make your or RikiH's mods any more relevant or acceptable for me. You're just embarrassing yourself.
Smoothie World wrote:
Hey, gonna mod this tomorrow night when I'm home since you modded my map. : )
Don't say my name, thanks.Shiirn wrote:
I mean, it's unfortunate for you Mazziv, but no matter how loud you cry or how bitchy you get, it's not going to make your or RikiH's mods any more relevant or acceptable for me. You're just embarrassing yourself.
fieryrage wrote:
Jesus fucking christ, this turned into a shitshow. Alright. Take 2. Not touching the easy to insane diffs because those seem to be alright for now.okextra
aka the "this should be 6 stars how the fuck is this 5.42" difficulty
00:02:061 (2,3,4,5) - I get that you try to make the mapping style unique and all but these patterns just look ugly and make me sad, might be better off doing a linear style pattern just so there's less cluster and confusion or something (because I mean you did basically what I just suggested here 00:03:728 (2,3,4,5) - so uhh??)2 was actually missnapped somehow, moved back to its proper place, also, fuck linear, and there is a bass hit on the first pattern that lets it work fine, the second pattern is different because the music is different
00:04:249 (6) - NC this to maintain consistency with 00:10:915 (1) Done
00:05:395 (1) - remove NC, or NC 00:02:061 (2) - and any other intro patterns like this to maintain consistency Added a new combo by re-organizing the pattern so i could get a bass click in there
00:09:665 (7) - NC might be better here to showcase the jump Done
00:12:895 (1,2,3,4) - I really don't like how tight the jump is between 00:12:895 (1,2,3) - it makes the entire pattern play really badly. Maybe increase the spacing between 1 and 2? Changed so that the 4 notes go over the next 7 stream's structure. inb4 people whine its not a square
00:25:186 (1) - yo why is this a NC as well as 00:25:395 (1) - ?? Emphasis on the single instrument used there. it's an aesthetics thing.
00:26:020 (1) - ^ I'm seriously confused by this ^
00:27:895 (1,1,1,1) - honestly this would be a lot better playability-wise as a 1/6 stream or repeat slider like in Comfort, because while this follows the rhythm technically it just aaaa it doesn't feel right with the emphasis on the synth; also I don't really think NC spam is needed here The nc was for pretty aesthetics to emphasize the 1/8 roll but i mean the ranking criteria has had 5 years to pin down a rule of "in cases where a 1/6 or 1/8 stream would be too difficult, you can ignore the exact timing to use a 1/4 or 1/6 stream" and hasn't so i dont know exactly what to do here.
00:34:145 (1,1,2,1) - NC's here are a bit fucky imo, could be better by removing NC at 00:34:457 (1) - and placing it 00:34:561 (2) - and removing the NC on the slider after redid the ncs
00:35:533 (1,1,1,1,1) - still don't think NC spam works here i dont either but i mean i take suggestions too easily sometimes. ncs removed and will leave it removed.
00:38:311 (6) - NC for downbeat? Ok
00:39:770 (3) - this might be better as a single note, and then putting the spinner on the blue tick I like the bass = slider general rule. it doesn't ruin the spinner either.
00:44:353 (3,1) - jump is a bit overkill for this difficulty imo, put 1 closer to the sliderend of 3 like this or something
00:46:645 (1,1) - basically same thing here although I'm not really sure that's an easy fix with how you designed the rest of the things following it
00:48:311 (5) - NC for downbeat? Ok
00:55:915 (1) - maybe extend this slider to the blue tick? I think it flows better that way Ok
01:04:978 (1) - I don't really get why you put a spinner here instead of just using the same rhythm you've used for the past two things like thisOk
01:09:561 (1) - this is actually really good sliderart tbh Ok
01:24:040 (2,3,1) - this pattern would flow a lot better by removing 3 and just having 2 be a 1/8 repeat slider imo Ok
01:25:186 (1) - remove NC since there's a spinner directly after (is this against the ranking criteria idfk) Ok
01:29:978 (6) - NC for downbeat? Ok
01:32:686 (4) - NC since this is basically an entirely new pattern separate from the previous one Ok
01:39:874 (1) - remove NC for the spinner again Ok
01:42:061 (2,3,4,5) - same thing that I said for 00:02:061 (2,3,4,5) - applies here too STAAAACKING
01:45:394 (2,3,4,5) - ^STAAAACKING
01:50:082 (3) - NC this since it's a new pattern Ok
01:52:895 (1,2,3,4) - again, I think this jump could be a bit more spaced in terms of the spacing between 1 and 2 Ok
comfort
00:20:395 (1,2,3,4) - this pattern plays really awkwardly in comparison to everything else, adding a curve between 2 and 3 helps a bit
01:09:978 (1) - remove NC cuz the spinner again Ok
01:14:561 (3,5) - NC these two? you did it in the extra difficulty and I think it'd work well here for readability Ok
01:19:770 (7) - why does the kiai end here and then start again??? there's no difference in beats fountains br000000
01:21:020 (2,4,6) - NC these and remove NC on 01:20:915 (1) - for the same reason as 01:14:561 (3,5) Ok
01:21:645 (1,2,3) - previous pattern like this didn't have 1/8 after it, so why does this one have it?
01:39:874 (1) - remove NC cuz spinner I'm starting to question my thought process behind removing these tbh
01:42:061 (2,3,4,5) - holy spacing this is a calm part man clam down Ok
Don't really have much to say on the Comfort difficulty, I personally enjoy the patterns but there's at least some things in there.
Anxient wrote:
just gonna drop my two cents
this guy looks like axariousboxcomfortablepls no unfriendnot really
things i hope you applied
00:11:228 (2,1) - putting this downwards http://puu.sh/n86KM/77af9d0dc1.jpg, coz its a flowbreak worthy part and has similar rhythm as 00:10:915 (1,2) -
the actual check
00:13:936 (1,2,1,2,1,2,3) - #i_shouldnt_have_shown_xxr_routing
00:15:290 (2) - move this further away from 3 because 3 has a strong beat, so its better to have 2 stick to regular distance and have 3 be extended for emphasis. http://puu.sh/n86UW/c3964ccd29.jpg
00:15:707 (5,6) - these notes are nearly touching lol which are an not-ok in my book. to fix this i moved 00:15:499 (4,5) - to 373:367. also grants extra emphasis for 00:15:811 (6) - http://puu.sh/n875y/ddf0baceab.jpg
00:16:749 (4,1) - stack lol
00:17:270 (2,1) - maybe fix the blanket on sliderend? http://puu.sh/n878Q/fddeb9667c.jpg
00:20:395 (1,2,3,4) - maybe have these follow the same DS you used for 00:19:353 (1,2) - coz the part isnt very emphasized. like the beats are soft. heck, 00:19:353 (1,2) - this part is more emphasized actually lol. have a really bad fix http://puu.sh/n87mu/2e0d4444c2.jpg
00:20:811 (1,2,3) - honestly i cant think of any reason as to why you made the part... like this lol there are no beats to represent those 5/8 sliders. i choose to attack this part coz this a major part (and not minor either lol like those sliderends being hitcircles and shortening sliders). using this rhythm wouldve done just fine http://puu.sh/n87Gy/8a6d140228.jpg. you can do your fancy curve sliders using some SV altering but pls change this part. (incase you dont wanna redo these sliders, using SV 1.5x would do just fine (might be disorienting but hey this map is confusing as it is already LOLOLOL)
00:22:686 (1) - ctrl g this lol i dont see a reason as to why you used a flow break. flow is extremely important in double bpm maps (but im sure you knew that)
00:22:686 (1,2) - also fix sliderblanket http://puu.sh/n87U0/41fd3a1ff9.jpg
00:23:311 (3,4,1) - i was wondering what was wrong with this part lol. use the same DS. i dont see why its different (lower even), especially when it has more sounds in it
00:24:665 (2) - if i were to put a flow break in this part i wouldve done it in 00:24:561 (1) - instead of 00:24:665 (2) - lol but since you did neither, ill just go ahead and tell you to make this part super flowy http://puu.sh/n888j/0dbde249f9.jpg
00:26:020 (1) - ctrl g this for emphasis (well it players better when i was simulating it) 00:26:228 (1) - also gives this the extra kick :l
00:27:061 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - i dont understand all the hate in this part lol
00:28:832 (4,5,6) - 5 is in the wrong spot lol. do this instead http://puu.sh/n892L/d476e3034b.jpg
00:31:645 (7) - ctrl g coz it makes the other parts more fun to play imo 00:31:853 (1) -
00:31:645 (7) - also NC ths i dont know why this is continue combo
00:31:853 (1,1) - same goes for here. why NC :l http://puu.sh/n88AX/4931ca3994.jpg
00:32:686 (1,2,3,4) - if anything i would have this stream go down lol because theres nothing in the song that suggests a upward stream (and the stream is nearly vertical so this would be appropriate with some really strong increasing pitch)
00:40:186 (1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3) - i dont understand why people hate this part too lol i mean it creats pretty good buildup :l
00:47:374 (3) - i dont think its a good idea to use a sliderend to emphasize a strong beat.
00:57:061 (2,3,4,5) - id prefer if you ctrl g'd (as in reverse the position of slider start coz i dont understand why you put the flowbreak here other than the finishes. if you wanna keep this, okay but this looks really painful to play.
00:59:978 (1,2) - lemao overlap
01:03:311 (1,2,3,4,5) - this part is fine tho. its cool.
01:33:103 (5) - ctrl g this lol why flowbreak
Or maybe they did look at it and don't think you did a good job at it? Your patterns look like a mess from a purely aesthetic standpoint, where things are unevenly spaced and notes overlapping with other notes, making one combo bleed into another one and just making everything look like a jumble of notes in general.Shiirn wrote:
anyone who thinks i sacrifice structure for anything clearly hasn't actually looked at how the patterns tie to eachother and how the notes are connected
I never said it was perfect. I've applied many mods just today. Most people I've spoken to like the map a lot, just a vocal minority like to find any reason to dislike the map.Yauxo wrote:
(I dont care if you try to defend your map, just dont act like it's perfect)
Anxient wrote:
boxcomfortablepls no unfriendnot really
things i hope you applied
00:11:228 (2,1) - putting this downwards http://puu.sh/n86KM/77af9d0dc1.jpg, coz its a flowbreak worthy part and has similar rhythm as 00:10:915 (1,2) -
the actual check
00:13:936 (1,2,1,2,1,2,3) - #i_shouldnt_have_shown_xxr_routing
00:15:290 (2) - move this further away from 3 because 3 has a strong beat, so its better to have 2 stick to regular distance and have 3 be extended for emphasis. http://puu.sh/n86UW/c3964ccd29.jpg Sure, why not. If i get people bitching "but muh spacing it should be equal" they can kiss my ass
00:15:707 (5,6) - these notes are nearly touching lol which are an not-ok in my book. to fix this i moved 00:15:499 (4,5) - to 373:367. also grants extra emphasis for 00:15:811 (6) - http://puu.sh/n875y/ddf0baceab.jpg the reason they're close to begin with was because someone was whining "muh equal spacing" but screw those guys. moved over a bit.
00:16:749 (4,1) - stack lol how the hell do you people find these 1-pixel stack issues
00:17:270 (2,1) - maybe fix the blanket on sliderend? http://puu.sh/n878Q/fddeb9667c.jpg i tried
00:20:395 (1,2,3,4) - maybe have these follow the same DS you used for 00:19:353 (1,2) - coz the part isnt very emphasized. like the beats are soft. heck, 00:19:353 (1,2) - this part is more emphasized actually lol. have a really bad fix http://puu.sh/n87mu/2e0d4444c2.jpg lowered the spacing a bit but honestly whatever
00:20:811 (1,2,3) - honestly i cant think of any reason as to why you made the part... like this lol there are no beats to represent those 5/8 sliders. i choose to attack this part coz this a major part (and not minor either lol like those sliderends being hitcircles and shortening sliders). using this rhythm wouldve done just fine http://puu.sh/n87Gy/8a6d140228.jpg. you can do your fancy curve sliders using some SV altering but pls change this part. (incase you dont wanna redo these sliders, using SV 1.5x would do just fine (might be disorienting but hey this map is confusing as it is already LOLOLOL) Not doing this. These three sliders heavily emphasize the wubs and encourage the player to hold the beat very hard, as well as alternate. This map tries very hard to be single-tap friendly while trying to encourage alternating in places like this, where I want to have buttons held down for longer than just short taps. At 25% you might feel like they're not entirely accurate but at any higher speed they fit very well! Also, they're 3/8 buddy :U
00:22:686 (1) - ctrl g this lol i dont see a reason as to why you used a flow break. flow is extremely important in double bpm maps (but im sure you knew that) Gameplay wise there is literally no difference and i wanted the swap in clockwise-counterclockwise to emphasize the wubs, but if people start throwing that scary 'flow' buzz word around i better line the fuck up right?
00:22:686 (1,2) - also fix sliderblanket http://puu.sh/n87U0/41fd3a1ff9.jpg did with zexous' help
00:23:311 (3,4,1) - i was wondering what was wrong with this part lol. use the same DS. i dont see why its different (lower even), especially when it has more sounds in it fiddled a bit
00:24:665 (2) - if i were to put a flow break in this part i wouldve done it in 00:24:561 (1) - instead of 00:24:665 (2) - lol but since you did neither, ill just go ahead and tell you to make this part super flowy http://puu.sh/n888j/0dbde249f9.jpg I mean except for the abuse of the word 'flow' i don't really see the point in this but i should pretend to actually care about this, but since it has no gameplay impact whatever let's do it
00:26:020 (1) - ctrl g this for emphasis (well it players better when i was simulating it) 00:26:228 (1) - also gives this the extra kick :l Nope. One of the stringent rules of this track is that 1/8 = very close, overlapping or almost overlapped spacing. Not going to break it exactly once.
00:27:061 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - i dont understand all the hate in this part lol Haters should just be glad I didn't actually map every individual beat in the music here.
00:28:832 (4,5,6) - 5 is in the wrong spot lol. do this instead http://puu.sh/n892L/d476e3034b.jpg I'll do it but i mean im sure some idiot is going to say 'muh flow' or 'muh spacing'. I think either way works fairly fine due to how the synth and bass work out.
00:31:645 (7) - ctrl g coz it makes the other parts more fun to play imo 00:31:853 (1) - Don't see the point. if it's reversed then we have 'anti-flow' because the cursor has to go even more distance. idk don't ask me to explain what flow is ur just a bad mapper blah blah etc.
00:31:645 (7) - also NC ths i dont know why this is continue combo
00:31:853 (1,1) - same goes for here. why NC :l http://puu.sh/n88AX/4931ca3994.jpg I have always new combod the 3/8 sliders that emphasize the intermittent interjections of interesting instruments.
00:32:686 (1,2,3,4) - if anything i would have this stream go down lol because theres nothing in the song that suggests a upward stream (and the stream is nearly vertical so this would be appropriate with some really strong increasing pitch) The direction really doesn't matter. It really, really doesn't unless it's clear you're using volume as a model for where you're aiming a section. These are four notes and they just happen to go upwards. It's not implying that the pitch or volume go up or down. Not every note or pattern needs to have a deep underlying meaning behind it.
00:40:186 (1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3) - i dont understand why people hate this part too lol i mean it creats pretty good buildup :l I've only ever seen people think it's either "pretty good" or "fucking amazing". I've only seen people whine about it once it got qualified. That's mapping for you.
00:47:374 (3) - i dont think its a good idea to use a sliderend to emphasize a strong beat. It's not emphasizing a strong beat. The strong beat just happens to be on the end because here I am mapping that high pitched unidentifiable instrument rather than purely the bass.
00:57:061 (2,3,4,5) - id prefer if you ctrl g'd (as in reverse the position of slider start coz i dont understand why you put the flowbreak here other than the finishes. if you wanna keep this, okay but this looks really painful to play. what? these bouncy bits play amazing, ive not seen a single person dislike it and that includes the haters, even the most staunch of haters said they liked these
00:59:978 (1,2) - lemao overlap palrevo oamel
01:03:311 (1,2,3,4,5) - this part is fine tho. its cool. this is literally the exact same as the other one except rotated 180 degrees
01:33:103 (5) - ctrl g this lol why flowbreak This is changing direction so that the impulse to leap to the next start doesn't lead to the player 100ing the slider. It's for gameplay. Sliderballs don't need to constantly go in the same general direction. That's not how flow works...
Not that I ever said you had to do any of those things. It's possible to make tasteful overlaps. It's possible to transition between styles without making it feel jarring (not that I even see that much of a style change in your diff in general). Doesn't change the fact that I don't think the map looks good though. But hey, since I dislike the map my input is completely useless anyway I guess? Yeah, I'm not modding it, because from the way you reply to these things I don't think you'd like/want my input anyway nor do I think you would agree with most of them. In the end it would just be me saying a bunch of things, and you rejecting it.Shiirn wrote:
I never said it was perfect. I've applied many mods just today. Most people I've spoken to like the map a lot, just a vocal minority like to find any reason to dislike the map.Yauxo wrote:
(I dont care if you try to defend your map, just dont act like it's perfect)
Most pro player input I have gotten is that it plays very well for the most part and any parts that feel directly unfair as opposed to challenging are being found and weeded out.
The raw aesthetic rule of " you need to make sure no notes overlap and the map has the exact same style the entire map" is not going to happen here. If you want it to happen here, you're looking for the wrong map. Having a stringent rule of "sliders need to point directly at the next note or it is ugly" is just as silly. If you want to say "its all just a god damn mess" then have fun. I won't accept "change it because it looks bad" as a mod.
Most of the input I've gotten since the disqualification has been "shit from the thread, value from in-game". The people that are speaking their mind in this thread without giving specific advice (or are telling me I mapped a section wrong because they'd do it differently and refuse to see any sort of alternative) are completely useless. The people who chat with me in-game and discuss actual pattern shape and flow are far more valuable. As such, I'm going to give them the attention they deserve.
I'm going to go over Comfort with a very fine toothed comb over the next day while seeking (and going over already posted) input from people whom I know aren't just making shit up because they vaguely find the map disagreeable. After that, I'm going to work back towards qualification. If it gets DQ'd again, so be it. I will not be fillibustered out of ranking something I know is not just rankable, but pretty good. And Comfort is pretty good. It's nowhere near perfect, but perfect is unobtainable as there will always be people who think it should be different.
I've replied to every actual mod with thought-out responses and a lot of acceptance. I don't understand where you get the idea that I deny all feedback. I just don't accept feedback that doesn't have actual suggestions. It's easy to say "this is ugly". It takes actual work to say "this is ugly to me because...".CXu wrote:
Still, I don't think writing opinions is useless. Maybe you do, but eh.