Guest
home
beatmaps
rankings
community
store
help
forum
  1. Forums
  2. Beatmaps
  3. Ranked Beatmaps (Archived)
  4. Beatmap Graveyard

All Time Low - Backseat Serenade

posted
Total Posts
81
show more
sahuang
2,293 posts
Joined December 2014
sahuang
Placehold here for 2 kds :)

Try to mod as much as possible for the ticket

[Easy]
  1. 00:56:774 - why not add a note?
  2. 01:29:346 (1) - how about making angle with horizontal line lower to look better?
    e.g. move tail to 405|67 lol
  3. 01:49:060 (3) - touching hp bar
  4. 01:58:489 - still should add a note, the sudden rhythm blank seems weird
  5. 02:15:632 (2) - move it higher for better flow
  6. 02:37:489 (2) - shape can be improved
  7. 02:51:632 - add a note?
  8. 03:02:774 (3,2) - stack can be better imo

[Normal]
  1. 00:34:060 (5,2) - stack?
  2. Really nice kiai lol
  3. 01:21:632 (4) - try 2 1/2 sliders?maybe this fits song better

[Advanced]
  1. 00:20:132 (2,3) - i think they should be stacked as you did before,it's a little bit too hard now?
  2. 01:13:917 (1,2) - blanket
  3. 02:33:632 (2) - curve it more? 02:35:774 (4) - looks better for example
  4. 03:03:203 (4,1,2) - angle between them seems poor imo
  5. 03:09:203 (2,3,4,5) - hmm
    http://puu.sh/pqDIh/84fe5f63f5.jpg
    how about this?

[Hard]
  1. 00:25:060 (3,4) - any reason to stack? imo 00:24:846 (2,3,4) - should be the same
  2. 00:36:632 (2,3,1,2) - rip ds? i would do sth like http://puu.sh/pqDQC/e4a79f3bd8.jpg
  3. 02:46:489 (1,2,3) - try a bigger angle?
    Looks fine

pp here we go!
(rip pp so many streams

[Insane]
  1. 00:22:060 (5) - more it further right so 00:21:632 (3,4,5) - looks better
  2. 00:56:560 (1) - improve it: http://puu.sh/pqE7l/919170f63d.jpg (can still be better)
  3. 00:58:060 (7,8,9,10) - curve more
  4. 02:29:774 - consider a break here cuz hp quite high
  5. 02:52:489 (4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,1,2,3) - imo the stream doesn't really fit in this music here and the shape is poor

The second insane sounds good to me

gl :)
Last edited by sahuang , edited 1 time in total.
Doyak
osu! Alumni
2,621 posts
Joined November 2012
Doyak
Oh why is this map still on WIP xD
Just rank it already
Squichu
1,013 posts
Joined November 2012
Topic Starter
Squichu
It has too few mods and major parts of the Insane still need some polishing ><
Lily Bread
1,228 posts
Joined December 2014
Lily Bread
mod for ticket from your queue

[Easy]
02:31:060 (2) - this circle is a bit weird imo. what about moving it to - 02:31:917 -?

[Normal]
02:31:060 (1) - as Easy diff

[Advance]
01:24:417 - a strong drum beat here. what about to make - 01:24:203 (6) - into a 1/2 reverse slider?

02:31:060 (1) - ^ i won't repeat this in other diffs.

[Hard]
02:05:346 (1,2) - what about this. because - 02:05:989 - is very strong, i want to make it a slider beginning.
http://puu.sh/ppVdO/4e36c78c79.jpg
(the cursor is at white tick.)

[Insane]
nothing found.

good luck!
Cellina
1,004 posts
Joined March 2013
Cellina
M4M from your queue

Hard

  1. 00:49:917 (1,2) - this pattern might be hard for hard diff. i really suggest to change all of those patterns into this.
  2. 02:06:632 (5,6,7,8,1) - too large imo... idk xD
  3. 02:59:774 (5,6,7,8,1) - ^

Insane

  1. 00:14:132 (2) - x 244 y 212?
  2. 00:26:989 (4,5) - overdistanced imo. i cant hear any sound that is strong enough for that ds.
  3. 01:19:060 (1,4) - half stack?
  4. 01:23:989 (1) - put a white dot between slider head and first red dot? cuz it looks nice xD
  5. 02:46:489 (1,2,3) - make it as jump? i think that part has a strong sound and imo stack can represent that sound...

Aia's Insane

  1. 00:23:989 (4) - NC and remove nc 00:23:346 (1) - ?
  2. 01:11:774 (6) - imo replace this with circle and put 1/1 slider on 01:11:989 - sounds much better
  3. 01:16:489 (3,1) - bit messy overlap
  4. 01:20:560 (1) - what about this
  5. 01:59:346 (1,2,3) - tiny thing, make them straight
  6. 02:38:774 (1,2,3) - this is the only part that you have used stack for this section, so consider to make them same as others

Other diff seems fine (actually awesome xD), GL!
Last edited by Cellina , edited 1 time in total.
Deppyforce
1,961 posts
Joined November 2014
Deppyforce
m4ticket from your queue!

[Advanced]
00:32:346 (4) - change to just circle on head? too long 1/2 imo
00:53:132 (5) - plz try this rhythm! http://puu.sh/ppVfo/f0eb1fc74c.jpg
01:21:632 (6,1) - make them parallel for better aesthetics (nazi) also i think 7 -> 1 should be jump cuz its same volume as 6 -> 7
01:52:060 (6) - change to curve slider to highlight the emphasis on 01:52:489 (1) - with slidershape?
02:31:917 - useless timing point (same with other diffs!)
02:38:774 - is this too long 1/2? :ooooooo
02:47:989 (7) - maybe nc this cuz combo 10 in this diff looks too much
02:54:632 - also too long :ooooo

[Hard]
00:34:060 (4,5,6) - shouldnt this have high spacing too like 00:26:774 (3,4) - ??
00:40:917 (4,5) - change to 1/2 slider kinda fits better with vocals thing
01:39:203 (2) - all 1/4s are prety equal here, so hitsound all of them instead of just head?
01:47:774 (5,1) - move this down a bit flows better!
02:35:774 (4,5) - same as 00:40:917 (4,5) -
02:53:346 (1,2) - theres still drum here so make these kicksliders too?

[Insane]
00:09:632 (3,4,5) - not sure why 4 -> 5 have less spacing than 3 -> 4 even though theyre stronger, same for other parts with same rhythm
00:33:632 (4,5) - should emphasize more like before!
01:39:203 (4) - nc this to emphasize that 4567 is stronger than 67123 since yu used same spacing!
02:06:632 (1,2,3,4,1) - is this supposed to be blanketing 02:05:989 (1) - :o if it is, then its off pls fix blanket
02:22:489 (1,2,3,4) - undermapped? lol

good luck!
Battle
2,862 posts
Joined February 2014
Battle
i like the part where everyone ignored your rules :^)

[Easy]
00:07:917 (2) - You can improve the slider shape to go along with the vocals a bit better, by moving the second red anchor to the left a bit
01:12:632 (2) - Could improve with the wave slider here, currently the way it is, it clashes with the aesthetics of the sliders in the section, so you may want a simpler slider shape instead
01:14:774 (3) - You should really make the slider end of this clickable, I know that easy diffs can end on strong ticks but the beat on the slider end is p loud compared to like, everything else xd
02:17:346 (1) - If you want to do a uniquely shaped slide here, you should at least try to make the beat on 02:17:989 - distinctive or sth by making the slider become flat there
02:43:060 (1) - I disagree with this repeat slider, because rn it ignores the strong beats on the white ticks, you may just want to go for a 1/1 repeat rather than a 3/2 repeat here

[Normal]
01:14:774 (4) - Maybe just do a 1/2 slider and a single tap instead of a repeat since the beat on that white tick is still pretty strong

[Hard]
00:26:774 (3,4) - DS 1.8 maybe to be consistent w/ last jump?
00:58:917 (2,3,4) - This jump really doesn't make a whole lot of sense considering how 3 really isn't a strong beat at all
01:04:060 (4) - Having a slider here really doesn't work due to the really strong beat on 01:04:274 -
01:07:703 (4,5) - Perhaps make 4 into a 1/1 slider? There's nothing too significant on the white tick and it would follow the rhythm a bit better imo
01:43:060 (1,2,3,4) - Quite linear compared too all the other times this happens in the chorus, you may want to add a little bit more movement to match the other choruses?
02:22:489 (1,2,3,4) - I don't know, I know you're trying to emphasize the increasing intensity of the music, but I feel like it's done in a rather awkward manner, because although 02:22:489 - gets slightly quieter, the really big drop in density feels awkward, I feel like maybe a sv multiplier change and sliders would do the trick better

[Insane]
00:09:632 (3,4,5) - Even though breaking flow is like, emphasizing it, I would think it would be better to maintain flow while emphasizing, meaning spacing 3 -> 4 still high but not at such a sharp angle
00:20:346 (5,6) - Wouldn't both of them be basically emphasized? I feel like 6 is still a pretty strong beat that shouldn't have such small emphasis
00:36:203 (1,2,3,1,2,3) - It would make a bit more sense if 00:36:203 (1,2,3) - were had smaller spacing compared to 00:36:846 (1,2,3) - since it builds up toward the chorus
00:57:632 (4,5,6,7,8,9,10,1) - You might want to adjust the shape of 4,5,6 to flow more into 7, or sharp flow is maybe what you're going for? I dunno lol
01:04:060 (3,1) - REALLY needs more space in between these,1 is such a strong not but is so unemphasized :/\/\/
01:07:060 (1,2,3,4) - You could group up 1,2,3 w/ smaller spacing and emphasize 4, but if you want to keep ds that's fine too, gonna suggest what I did in hard w/ 4 being a 1/1 slider since the white tick isn't too strong, plus the fact that the slider end ends up on a strong beat and when it's a 1/2 slider I don't think it's good xd
01:42:203 (3,5,1,2) - I really feel like this is like, pretty hard to read, since you only have been doing like single overlaps w/ notes instead of consecutively overlapping, people may tap 5 twice since they might miss 1 appearing
02:22:489 - Suggest same thing as hard
02:46:489 (1,2,3) - This is more like, a personal problem with it, but I always hated when people put single taps after a stream because it's sooooo easy to break accidentally by tapping too fast :(

furries *shudders*

gl~
Akitoshi
2,684 posts
Joined August 2014
Akitoshi
yes
osu needs more ATL
hi from your q not rly good modder but let me try my best

Easy
  1. 00:55:060 (1,2,3) - so, this is followed some vocals on two first white ticks which is 00:55:060 - and 00:55:489 - for emphasize them, but I'm not really sure if you did some variation thingy with 00:41:346 (1,2) - so maybe do the same here as well imo
  2. 01:56:774 (1,2,3) - similar to ^
  3. 02:46:489 (1) - um, consider this to make 1/1 slider because there's a strong drum sound on 02:46:917 - as well
  4. 03:03:632 (1) - I'm not sure about this one, you skipped many strong beats on just 1 reverse slider. maybe this pattern works imo
    SPOILER
Normal
  1. 00:43:917 (4) - since we're on normal, and we can use some 1/2 beats as well, how about you trim this to 1/1 slider and add a note on 00:44:560 - ? It can follows the drums fine as well. And 00:44:774 (1,2) - is 1/1 gap so maybe you can safely put that imo
  2. 00:57:632 (4) - and similar to this slider on other parts, same ^
  3. 02:03:632 (1) - the tail part of slider is a bit weird imo, I prefer more noticeable for the average-new players
    SPOILER
  4. 02:20:560 - maybe can add note here for the drums.
  5. 02:28:917 (2,3) - A bit sad for 1/1 notes even the drums goind to faster, maybe 02:28:917 (2) - can be 1/2 slider imo
  6. 02:43:060 (1,2) - I wish you did like this on other long vocal part too ;w;
  7. 02:56:560 - Add note for vocal? I think.
Advanced
  1. 00:27:632 (1,5) - not really an issue but this stack is kinda weird :3
  2. 00:37:917 (2) - maybe NC should be here
  3. 02:28:703 (4) - uhm, this whole section 02:24:203 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,1) - was all 1/2 and this is the only one you used 1/1. How about convert this to 1/2 related as well?
  4. 03:10:274 (9) - NC? xd
Hard
  1. I only want to say on this diff is the 1/2 stack between triples may misleads the player, example of 00:43:489 (2,3) - between 00:43:917 (4,5,6) - and other related with this. maybe you can unstack the 00:43:703 (3) - for less confusion to the players. Other than that, great diff
Insane
  1. 00:13:489 (5,2) - uhm, how about balance this semi-stack like how 00:12:632 (2,4) - was?
  2. 00:36:846 (1,2,3) - why you holding back the DS? I think this distance should be same as how 00:36:203 (1,2,3) - was... Or opposite of this.
  3. 00:50:560 (6,7,1,2,3) - nice flower xd
  4. 01:01:489 (4) - make it further to 01:01:703 (5) - for emphasis?
  5. 01:21:632 (4,5,6,1) - Scale it up imo, I think this feels holding back a bit.
  6. 01:36:203 (1,2,3,1,2,3) - same to my 2nd suggestion
  7. 01:39:096 - I can clearly hear the drums here as well, even I played with 25% PR :<
  8. 01:54:846 (1) - Hmm, this feels forced to just make a curve from 01:54:632 (5) - even when I was playing, how about this curve instead?
    SPOILER
Rank Alone Together or We Riot
  1. 00:37:917 (5) - you don't want to NC for entering the kiai?
  2. 02:01:489 (5,1) - idk maybe you can spread them more for the emphasis
  3. 02:46:489 (1,2,3) - maybe this circles' spacing is how 02:47:346 (4,5,6) - was, and spacing on 02:47:346 (4,5,6) - is how 02:46:489 (1,2,3) - was. I believe the first three notes are much stronger than second one.
that's all for me
Rank pls :D
Squichu
1,013 posts
Joined November 2012
Topic Starter
Squichu
Thanks, guys! I applied all mods, I'll try to reply in detail with what I changed/didn't change! :3

Lily Bread - changed everything, except for the slider in Advanced, as that is following the vocals.
Cellina - I kept the reverse sliders in Hard, they're no problem, imo, and kept 00:26:989 (4,5) - in Insane because the beat is much louder than everything else. Changed everything else.
Deppyforce

Deppyforce wrote:

only replied to what I didn't change!
[Advanced]
00:32:346 (4) - change to just circle on head? too long 1/2 imo is fine, since it's Adv diff and there are two lower diffs
01:52:060 (6) - change to curve slider to highlight the emphasis on 01:52:489 (1) - with slidershape? can't rmember if I changed this orz
02:38:774 - is this too long 1/2? :ooooooo *
02:54:632 - also too long :ooooo *

[Hard]
00:40:917 (4,5) - change to 1/2 slider kinda fits better with vocals thing I prefer current ryhthm
02:35:774 (4,5) - same as 00:40:917 (4,5) - *
02:53:346 (1,2) - theres still drum here so make these kicksliders too? left this blank for the sake of not making this too complicated

[Insane]
02:06:632 (1,2,3,4,1) - is this supposed to be blanketing 02:05:989 (1) - :o if it is, then its off pls fix blanket nah, just wanted nice curve xD
02:22:489 (1,2,3,4) - undermapped? lol it's simplified so this section works as a built up to following Kiai
Battle

Battle wrote:

i like the part where everyone ignored your rules :^) they never learn.. =o= I only replied to what I didn't change!

[Easy]
02:43:060 (1) - I disagree with this repeat slider, because rn it ignores the strong beats on the white ticks, you may just want to go for a 1/1 repeat rather than a 3/2 repeat here kept this because of the repeating rhythm that starts on the 3/2

[Hard]
02:22:489 (1,2,3,4) - I don't know, I know you're trying to emphasize the increasing intensity of the music, but I feel like it's done in a rather awkward manner, because although 02:22:489 - gets slightly quieter, the really big drop in density feels awkward, I feel like maybe a sv multiplier change and sliders would do the trick better I'll think about changing this, but I really like how it works actually.. so no changes yet, but I guess I'll do so when I come up with something better!

[Insane]
00:36:203 (1,2,3,1,2,3) - It would make a bit more sense if 00:36:203 (1,2,3) - were had smaller spacing compared to 00:36:846 (1,2,3) - since it builds up toward the chorus increased spacing for 2nd pattern instead
02:22:489 - Suggest same thing as hard *

furries *shudders* LOL, but they're so cute!! XD
Akitoshi

Akitoshi wrote:

yes
osu needs more ATL
hi from your q not rly good modder but let me try my best
I only replied to what I declined! (and I agree, osu needs more english stuff in general ;b)

Easy
  1. 00:55:060 (1,2,3) - so, this is followed some vocals on two first white ticks which is 00:55:060 - and 00:55:489 - for emphasize them, but I'm not really sure if you did some variation thingy with 00:41:346 (1,2) - so maybe do the same here as well imo yep, this is for variation, because it's really just too monotonous if it's the same. ><
  2. 01:56:774 (1,2,3) - similar to ^ *
  3. 03:03:632 (1) - I'm not sure about this one, you skipped many strong beats on just 1 reverse slider. maybe this pattern works imo I prefer current rhythm, cause it's the ouro and I want to keep this as simple as possible
Normal
  1. 02:28:917 (2,3) - A bit sad for 1/1 notes even the drums goind to faster, maybe 02:28:917 (2) - can be 1/2 slider imo I don't remember if I changed this tbh D:
Advanced
  1. 03:10:274 (9) - NC? xd I only used NCs on downbeat and sliders that cover downbeats, so this doesn't need one ;o;
Insane
  1. 00:50:560 (6,7,1,2,3) - nice flower xd Thanks XD
  2. 01:54:846 (1) - Hmm, this feels forced to just make a curve from 01:54:632 (5) - even when I was playing, how about this curve instead? I prefer current shape, but I'll consider changing it when more people complain about it! ><
Sotarks
3,493 posts
Joined May 2014
Sotarks
Hi~ !

Aia's Insane

  1. 00:04:703 (5,5) - I feel like this 2 notes can have a little bit morre emphasis since it's a guitar down beat, and you use like small spacing here, compared to the spacing you give to 00:04:489 (4,4) - those notes.
  2. 00:10:274 (1) - What about if you redo your slider for something like that, it's just my opinion tho here.
  3. 00:11:989 (5,3) - Those notes worries me a bit because for 00:11:989 (5) - this one you give a small spacing for the voice, and for exemple this 00:12:846 (3) - one you give more spacing for no reasons, it feels a bit random for me.
  4. 00:37:917 (5) - This downbeat can have a NC here.
  5. 00:42:846 (7) - Same for this one, like you did before.
  6. Why you stack 00:48:632 (3,4) - those, and you don't stack 00:49:489 (7,8) -. It's better to keep the consistency by stacking them or not.
  7. 00:52:917 (6,1) - This flow is really bad, and the spacing is really low for that big downbeat you've got here. Like if you put it somewhere x232 y62 it makes a nice V flow and gives a good emphasis on this vocal. If ever you decide to do that, make sure to fix the rest of the patern after it.
  8. 00:57:953 (4) - There's litterally no sound on this note, and please keep the consistency like you did before, looks weird otherwise.
  9. 01:11:774 (6) - Ayy you're not clicing the voice downbeat like you do before, makes me sad.
  10. 01:16:489 (3,1) - This overlap doesn't looks good, even tho 01:16:703 (4) - this one looks perfectly fine.
  11. 01:17:774 (2) - Try and space this one a bit more, something like this 01:20:132 (4,5) - spacing.
  12. 01:22:917 (7) - Tbh you can make this a slider and finish it on the 2nd blue tic !
  13. 01:25:703 (8) - Making this sound a drum whistle sampleset is sexy af !
  14. 01:27:417 (6) - I think you can NC this.
  15. 02:01:703 (1) - RIP spacing...
  16. 02:01:703 (1,2) - Blanket is off
  17. 02:31:917 (1,2) - this with more more more spacing would be sooooo sexy
  18. 02:37:703 (8) - NC

Insane

  1. 00:25:274 (4) - That overlap is kinda meh, but I have an alternative for that. What about moving 00:23:989 (1) - a bit more down, and taking 00:25:274 (4) - and blanket it with that slider end, it could be cool.
  2. 01:16:060 (3) - Maybe you can space it more like you did with 01:34:917 (3) - could be cool.
  3. 02:05:989 (1) - This could have more emphasis tbh..
  4. 02:19:060 (1,2) - Please add a note between those 2, looks really empty since you mapped it before.
  5. 02:29:346 (1,2) - You could place a spinner between those 2, because rip HP bar xd
  6. 02:47:346 (4) - NC for anti-jump's readability :V
  7. 03:05:774 (2) - Missing clap on head
  8. 03:10:274 (7) - NC this down-beat end pls :V

Nice map!~
Squichu
1,013 posts
Joined November 2012
Topic Starter
Squichu
Thank you very much!

I fixed everything except
03:10:274 (7) - NC this down-beat end pls :V
because it's not a downbeat, just a strong last note. c:

updated with all mods.
Janpai
1,288 posts
Joined March 2015
Janpai
Hi Squee~ Mod for Ticket :D

General
  1. Nothing found xD

Easy
  1. 00:07:917 (2) - How about making these a solid slider shape so that beginners could easily distinguish what they are following and also makes it look neat imo like move the second red point to 214|363
  2. 01:54:632 (2) - Add clap?
  3. 02:01:489 (2) - ^
  4. 02:58:489 (2) - Add whistle and finish to the reverse arrow?

Normal
  1. 03:09:632 (4,5) - Maybe turn them into 1/1 and a circle? so players have time to prepare for the spinner

Hard
  1. 00:32:774 (1,2) - You can swap these two for vocals, i think you were supposed to follow the vocal?
  2. 02:17:346 (1) - Convert to a single circle since this is the only rhythm that have 1/2 among the others and if your following the guitar then you should make others use 1/2 instead or be consistent with the drums xD

Aia's Insane
  1. 00:06:417 (5,1) - Fix Blanket?
  2. 00:22:274 (7) - NC, remove NC at 00:23:346 (1) -
  3. 00:23:989 (4) - NC
  4. 00:32:774 (1,2) - Swap these ? same reason as hard
  5. 00:37:917 (5) - NC
  6. 01:13:703 (4) - NC
  7. 02:14:560 (3,4,5) - I think having triple here seems follows nothing
  8. 02:28:489 (5) - Almost touching the HP bar lo
  9. 02:37:703 (8) - NC
  10. 02:51:417 (7) - NC remove NC at 02:52:489 (1) -
  11. 03:10:060 (6) - Almost touching the HP bar xD
Now I know why some of my schoolmates go crazy on ATL, this song rocks \m/ goodluck Squiiii~ hope it helps a little xD no kd if didn't help xD
sahuang
2,293 posts
Joined December 2014
sahuang
double post so you won't miss my mod above ^^
Squichu
1,013 posts
Joined November 2012
Topic Starter
Squichu
Janpai - thank you! Fixed everything except the thing in Normal, because I don't think it's necessary to prepare players for the spinner there. The rhythm is quite simple and the spinner pretty long, so they shouldn't have any problems. And I kept 00:32:774 (1,2) - in Hard because I think the current rhythm fits the vocals better
sahuang

sahuang wrote:

Only replying to the suggestions I declined!

[Easy]
  1. 02:37:489 (2) - shape can be improved I think current shape is perefctly fine >o<
  2. 03:02:774 (3,2) - stack can be better imo not supposed to be stacked for better flow. And they're not visible at the same time, so no readability issues here

[Normal]
  1. 01:21:632 (4) - try 2 1/2 sliders?maybe this fits song better went with 1/1 slider + circle instead

[Advanced]
  1. 02:33:632 (2) - curve it more? 02:35:774 (4) - looks better for example I prefer the current shape
  2. 03:09:203 (2,3,4,5) - hmm http://puu.sh/pqDIh/84fe5f63f5.jpg how about this? changed differently

[Hard]
  1. 00:36:632 (2,3,1,2) - rip ds? i would do sth like http://puu.sh/pqDQC/e4a79f3bd8.jpg it's intentional, because of the strong drum. But I adjusted the NCs to increase readability
  2. 02:46:489 (1,2,3) - try a bigger angle? looks perfectly fine to me o:

[Insane]
  1. 02:29:774 - consider a break here cuz hp quite high I think this is alright without a break; even if players miss half the stream they'll live (except if they failed the easy part before, but that shouldn't happen)
  2. 02:52:489 (4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,1,2,3) - imo the stream doesn't really fit in this music here and the shape is poor kept the stream, cause it fits fine, imo, but chnged the shape

Thanks to both of you! updated
09kami
828 posts
Joined August 2010
09kami

09kami wrote:

m4m ticket from your queue

[Aia's Insane]

00:41:560 (2,3,4) - I think it should be decline .
http://puu.sh/prZ2H/889fca6da6.jpg

00:42:203 (5,6) - need space out

00:46:274 (1,2) - ......blanket?

01:20:774 - sound？

01:22:917 (7,1) - swap nc

01:27:203 (5) - NC

01:38:774 (1,2) - need space out

02:25:703 (7) - offscreen？

02:51:417 (7) - mabey this? i think need more
http://puu.sh/prZwo/6a5f250347.jpg


[Insane]

00:50:560 (1,2,3,4,5) - test this
http://puu.sh/prZFW/32f2498e82.jpg

02:38:774 (4) - nc

02:53:667 - i think need add cirlcle

02:57:632 (3) - nc
Squichu
1,013 posts
Joined November 2012
Topic Starter
Squichu
09kami

09kami wrote:

m4m ticket from your queue

[Insane]
00:50:560 (1,2,3,4,5) - test this http://puu.sh/prZFW/32f2498e82.jpg there's no rhythm like that, tho?

02:38:774 (4) - nc okay

02:53:667 - i think need add cirlcle there isn't any strong sound here, so I prefer to leave it blank.

02:57:632 (3) - nc why?

Thank you! updated
Strategas
1,378 posts
Joined July 2013
Strategas
[General]

your mp3 suk it says 192kbps, but it's not, feels like 128 I can't really find you a better one, but it would be better if someone did.

[Aia's Insane]

00:22:274 (7,1) - swap ncs to maintain consistency

00:23:989 (4) - nc same reason

00:37:917 (5) - nc kiai start

00:46:060 (6,1) - inconsistant spacing, you had more spacing for this beat all along

00:51:632 (1,2) - inconsistant completely with 00:37:917 (5,6) -

00:52:917 (6,1) - inconsistant spacing 00:39:203 (10,1) -

01:13:703 (4) - nc

01:16:060 (2) - from here on the spacing decreased a lot even when the music is pretty much the same even if looking at claps alone 01:17:774 (2,4) - with 01:09:203 (2,6) - etc

01:26:560 (3,6) - you usally spaced these vocals more, now it's opposite

01:27:417 (6) - nc

01:29:132 (10,1) - too close aswell

01:39:632 (1,2) - vs 01:41:132 (1,2) -

02:01:489 (5,1) - spacing

02:27:632 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,1) - well even if the music is building up this is too extreme, the music isn't that intense and this patern is probably the most spaced in the map

02:46:489 (1,2,3) - this seems very low spaced for how powerful it's in the music, it's like you're saying 02:47:346 (4,5,6) - is twice as strong as that one

dt pp lol

[Insane]

00:23:989 (1) - could space this more from 00:23:774 (5) - for emphasis

00:36:203 (1,2,3,1,2,3) - you keep using same ds for such things, but I'm quite sure they each have different impact. etc 00:36:632 (3,1) - is much more powerful than 00:36:417 (2,3) -

01:16:917 (6,1) - flow can be improved, rn the transition into the slider is flow breaking alot unless you intended it

01:21:632 (4,5,6,1) - feels lacking emphasis too, mb space more

02:15:632 (1) - just turn this into a 1/2 slider like the rest 02:17:346 (1,1) -

02:50:774 (5) - ctrl h and put it pack there? for flow

overall you could use a bit more variety in spacing just using ds all over is eh but it's ok

lower diffs seem fine, gl
Squichu
1,013 posts
Joined November 2012
Topic Starter
Squichu

Strategas wrote:

[General]
your mp3 suk it says 192kbps, but it's not, feels like 128 I can't really find you a better one, but it would be better if someone did.
I know it's not the best quality, but it's the best I could get so far. s:

[Insane]
only replying to suggestions I declined
00:36:203 (1,2,3,1,2,3) - you keep using same ds for such things, but I'm quite sure they each have different impact. etc 00:36:632 (3,1) - is much more powerful than 00:36:417 (2,3) - I agree that there are more powerful, but I don't want to make these patterns too confusing with so many spacing changes, as this Insane is slightly more on the easy side :b
02:15:632 (1) - just turn this into a 1/2 slider like the rest 02:17:346 (1,1) - I kept the first two as circles and the second two as sldiers for variety, but I'll consider changing them!
Thank you very much! updated
Battle
2,862 posts
Joined February 2014
Battle
name changeeeeeeeeeee
Squichu
1,013 posts
Joined November 2012
Topic Starter
Squichu

Battle wrote:

name changeeeeeeeeeee
yeeeesh >w<

also, graved again until I get the update from Aia~~ uvu
Aia
181 posts
Joined October 2013
Aia

Squichu wrote:

Battle wrote:

name changeeeeeeeeeee
yeeeesh >w<

also, graved again until I get the update from Aia~~ uvu
Will have an update soon ;_; sorry for taking a million years..
Doyak
osu! Alumni
2,621 posts
Joined November 2012
Doyak
add Squirrel to the tags
Squichu
1,013 posts
Joined November 2012
Topic Starter
Squichu
Take your time, Aia! ^w^ I won't rush anything

and thanks, Doyak, totally forgot xD
Krfawy
1,374 posts
Joined March 2012
Krfawy
Good morning Squichu and Aia girls, thank you for being patient and using Blady Krfawy Kamyczek's Airlines 2016!

Easy
  1. 00:36:203 (2) - So, for this moment I think you could delete 00:37:489 (3) - this note and use a 3/2 slider so you could stress the next section with three circles instead of a slider here: 00:37:917 (1) - . It would need a bit reworking, but I think it would be benefitial for players to click the rhythmical percussion beats. ;3 By the way, I am aware your patterning is "plain slider + curvy slider", but I can't stop thinking you could actually make it slightly not as plain as it currently is. I am not sure if you know how most Russians make their barely-not-straight-anymore sliders, but I guess you will understand what I mean if you see *THIS*.
  2. 00:50:774 (3) - And again, if you don't mind it, I think it would be more appropriate to use two circles this time as well for the same reasons as above.
  3. 00:56:774 (3,4,5) - And here, I just don't think it's the most fortunate order of the notes, how about *SLIDER-CIRCLE-CIRCLE* order? It's again because of the beats and music that I believe would be stressed perfectly, and, of course, because of the tension.
  4. 01:52:489 (3) - As a few lines before. o/
  5. 01:55:917 (3) - And again maybe a barely curved slider to make it seem more vivid? :3
  6. My only complaint that can be told for the whole set is that 02:31:917 (4) - this would be stressed with any hitsound to show an emphasis on the "BACK" word that is sung by the vocalist. A soft or drum whistle maybe?
  7. 02:51:632 (3,4,5) - And again I would recommend to swap the order of the notes for the sake of stressing the sounds and beats.
  8. 03:08:346 (2,3) - I think you could make it play in the way that makes the last slider end more on the centre of the map field so it's easies to spin (most people, even noobs, start spinning from the centre of the spinner, even if afterwards they don't stick to the centre of the spinner and go around the corners of the screen).
Advanced
  1. 00:18:203 (3,1) - This blanket would be more perfect. *Nazi Krfawy runs
  2. 01:41:132 (1,2) - Those two (or the last one!) could be a bit curved to make a better flow with another notes. Pretty sure you can see it *HERE*, because now the transition is a bit too sharp for me.
  3. 02:49:489 (4) - I have a feeling some kind of hitsound is missing here, I think it could be a clap one.
  4. 03:09:846 (3,4,5) - I think it is very misleading, so maybe you can make it go like *THIS* or *THAT* so it doesn't fool players too much?
Hard
  1. 02:49:489 (4) - The missing hitsound is real. Same in the Insane. D:
  2. 02:59:132 (2) - And the head of the slider is a bit empy too... or is it just me?
Aia
  1. Maybe OD would be OD8.5 and CS would be 4.2-4.3? Just a pure suggestion.
  2. 02:29:346 (1) - How about you put a circle here and move the spinner for 1/4 to the right so this moment is clickable? :o
  3. 02:31:917 (1) - And I think this would be hitsounded with a whistle (a soft or a drum one) so the vocals were emphasized.
  4. 02:49:489 (5) - Missing clap, I believe.
I really enjoyed it! The set is really well-structured and the spread is balanced perfectly! I don't think it needs that much more tweaking, it's pretty awesome and nice. And the hitsounding is very pleasant, good job Squirrel! :D

Good luck guys! <3
Squichu
1,013 posts
Joined November 2012
Topic Starter
Squichu
Thank you very much, my pink friend. <3
but I like straight sliders > : C

Krfawy wrote:

Easy - basically changed everything, just not always 100% like suggested!

Advanced - same here! xD

Hard - fixed all hitsounds in all diffs now (I think.. orz)
@Aia I'll fix hitsounds in your diff when I get the update, so no worries about that! :3

And many thanks again, Krfawy! <3

edit 5th Aug
finally updated all diffs!

edit 6th Aug
fixed all hitsounds and made some more adjustments. c:

edit 7th Aug
morrrre adjustments, yay!
Doyak
osu! Alumni
2,621 posts
Joined November 2012
Doyak
edit 8th Aug
Ranked somehow!

edit 10th October
Got over 10 million plays!

edit 31st December
Became the most played beatmap in history!
Squichu
1,013 posts
Joined November 2012
Topic Starter
Squichu

Doyak wrote:

edit 8th Aug
Ranked somehow!
in 2019, probably. xD
Doyak
osu! Alumni
2,621 posts
Joined November 2012
Doyak
Ok I'm rechecking this after 6 months lol

[Easy]
* 00:03:632 (1,2) - Using 2/1 sliders works better imo, at least it follows more basic rhythms and doesn't make polarity. 00:04:489 - 00:06:203 - are important sounds as well.
* 00:17:346 (1) - I don't see a reason to use 3/2 slider instead of follow the white ticks, especially while missing 00:17:774 - this clap.
* 02:22:489 (3) - It's kinda weird you used 3/1 beat only here, while you were using 2/1 beats overall. 02:20:774 (1,2) - 02:24:203 (1,2,3,4) -
* 02:27:632 (1) - You have increased the intensity 02:24:203 (1,2,3,4) - but why suddenly went backwards? Imo it should be http://puu.sh/qSk6c/0690a7250e.jpg or something.
* 02:43:060 (1) - I know what's your intention here. But you can see that the vocal is repeating something that started at 02:42:846 - where you didn't put a note. Instead, you put a note on 02:43:060 - , which is repeated on 02:43:917 - . So imo just following the white ticks makes more sense. The drums are much stronger on white ticks as well.
* 02:53:346 (1) - You missed a cymbal sound in the middle. It's a bit different than other parts.
* 03:01:703 - 03:08:560 - These are the most important/strongest beats and I think these should be represented. Polarity issues are not appreciated of course, so we can use http://puu.sh/qSkhI/ae6a44d282.jpg

[Normal]
* I think this Normal should be harder than it is now. Like the spread is E-N---A so let's try to buff this a bit.
* 00:03:632 - imo using same rhythm as Advanced is better, if you have to ignore 00:04:489 - otherwise.
* 00:34:489 (1) - This can be divided into 1/1 beats as you know there are strong drums inside. Same for all similar ones.
* 00:37:917 (1) - Even Easy used this as 3 circles. At least Normal should do the same, if not harder. Same for all similar ones.
* 00:48:203 (1) - This is easier than Easy as well. Just represent all white ticks imo Same for 01:01:917 (1) - and etc.
* 02:14:346 (2,4,2,4) - They all have strong drum on the first red ticks. So use http://puu.sh/qSkRK/1851e6b16b.jpg for better spread because Advanced used consecutive 1/2s there.
* 02:59:132 (4,5) - I think it's better to use 1/1 slider + 1/2 slider to make 02:59:774 - clickable
* 03:03:632 (1) - divide to 1/1s
* 03:07:060 (1) - Change like 03:00:203 (1,2,3) -
* 03:09:632 (4,5) - 1/2 reverse + circle to make 03:10:274 - clickable.
If there are more places you think can be buffed, please do it to make a better spread. The movement intensity is almost the same as Easy, so at least more complicated rhythm is needed to make difference with it.

I'll keep modding it when I feel like to xD Just fix these if you have time cuz we probably need to discuss more after fixing these anyway.
Squichu
1,013 posts
Joined November 2012
Topic Starter
Squichu

Doyak wrote:

[Easy]
* 00:03:632 (1,2) - Using 2/1 sliders works better imo, at least it follows more basic rhythms and doesn't make polarity. 00:04:489 - 00:06:203 - are important sounds as well. changed, but differently. I don't think the sounds on the red ticks are any less important, so I mapped them, but avoided any polarity.
* 02:22:489 (3) - It's kinda weird you used 3/1 beat only here, while you were using 2/1 beats overall. 02:20:774 (1,2) - 02:24:203 (1,2,3,4) - as you have noticed, the intensity increases slowly from 02:13:917 - to 02:29:346 - and the ryhthm for 02:22:489 (3) - is totally different from 02:24:203 (1,2,3,4) - so I chose a simple slider over four circles as they were too intense for a very simplified part.
* 03:01:703 - 03:08:560 - These are the most important/strongest beats and I think these should be represented. Polarity issues are not appreciated of course, so we can use http://puu.sh/qSkhI/ae6a44d282.jpg You probably won't like the 1/2s, but imo it feels much weirder to ignore them while playing than the rhythm now.. > changed differently ><

[Normal] - buffed xD
I'll try to change some more things to improve it further uvu ~~

edit fixed all diffs now, spread should look a bit better. c:

edit 10/19 revived and updated with small changes, yay >w<
Doyak
osu! Alumni
2,621 posts
Joined November 2012
Doyak
Are you ready now? But I think I can recheck this at least a week later...
Squichu
1,013 posts
Joined November 2012
Topic Starter
Squichu
Yup yup, all ready (finally)! >w<
Take as much time as you need, I'm not in a hurry <3
Doyak
osu! Alumni
2,621 posts
Joined November 2012
Doyak
Whew I'm back!

Regarding hitsounds, please check other diffs yourself as you might have done the same thing there as well.

[General]
* 01:08:774 - I don't see the reason why here would have such a low volume. It's same as 01:22:917 - , not as 00:07:489 -

[Easy]
* 00:03:632 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - This intro is not any less dense than kiai parts, while the song is just quiet. So I'd recommend reducing the density a bit here.
* 00:36:203 (2) - I recommend whistle only on the tail. There's really no sound that supports the clap there imo, rather it's consistent drum with other whistles. It's a bit different than 01:37:917 (2,3) - if you ask. Apples to all diffs.
* 01:22:917 - add finish
* 02:07:060 (1) - There's a cymbal sound there, and I think it sounds good with soft finish.
* 02:53:774 - There's a strong sound on the slider end so you might want to add a finish there.
* 03:10:060 (6) - Well the only 1/2 slider in this diff? I'd recommend using 3/2 slider from 03:09:632 - instead.
* 03:10:489 (1) - The last soft-hitnormal3 sound is like a hard beat, but the song isn't, so maybe change it to S:C1? Applies to all diffs.

[Normal]
* I'd highly recommend to remove most of consecutive 1/2 clicks on non-kiai parts. Like, the difficulty should be reversed imo. 00:09:632 (6,7,8) - I know you want to make the claps clickable, but this whole part is one of the calmest part but this provides the most difficult action in the whole map. 01:14:774 (5,6,7) - There's no reason to make this more intense even than the kiai. Also your Easy diff doesn't use any 1/2s, so I think you need to not overuse 1/2s in this diff. You have Advanced diff anyway. Things like 00:30:632 (7,8) - 00:34:060 (6,7) - 01:32:346 (7,8) - 01:35:774 (6,7) - can be just a 1/2 slider as well. I think the kiai parts did the best simplification imo. The only place I really thought it is required is 02:46:489 (1,2,3) - , everything else can just be more simplified for better spread.
A simple indication of the note density spread is this. Easy: 195 notes, Normal: 356 notes, Advanced: 401 notes.
* 00:46:060 (3) - The strong point is on 00:46:274 - so I think you need to make this clickable. Imo you can just ignore 00:45:846 - and do similar to 00:38:774 (3,4,5) - Same for 01:47:774 (3) -
* 01:19:489 (2) - Uhh clap instead of whistle? Well same for harder diffs.
* 01:22:060 (7) - I don't hear anything special here, just remove all additional hitsounds?
* 01:34:274 (3) - Hmm, I don't get why this passes through the downbeat, since that beat has a syllable too?
* 01:36:846 (2) - Why finish?
* 02:28:703 (4) - I get what this means but intensity-wise this is too empty, like all those build-ups before just crashed down here. How about http://puu.sh/s7ou9/52a95c067e.jpg ?
* 02:53:774 - As I said on Easy this beat is strong, so not only a hitsound, but consider making this clickable as well.
* 02:54:620 (3) - Unsnapped.

[Advanced]
* 00:25:917 (1,2,3,4) - 01:27:632 (1,2,3,4) - This is pretty random 1/2 sliders for me. I mean, you made the whole part pretty not dense, but I don't see why you would fill all these 1/2s out while there's no significant sound than others at all? It also hurts the purpose of 00:25:060 (2,3) - these 1/2s since they're there to get the vocals.
* 00:31:703 (2) - 01:33:417 (2) - Same, why not give a little break here? You can't emphasize actual strong sounds properly by using every single 1/2 beats.
* 00:34:489 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3) - Not sure if this is good rhythm choice. There's a significant rhythm change on 00:36:203 - here but still you repeated the exact same pattern as before. 00:35:132 (2,4) - actually doesn't sound that strong so I'd rather go for 4 1/2 sliders instead.
* 01:22:274 (1,2) - The music kinda stops and restarts 01:22:917 - here, so having NC on 01:22:917 (2) - instead makes more sense imo.
* 01:37:060 (1) - Why is this NC'd? Also consider using same rhythm as 00:34:489 -
* 02:12:792 - Why is this break manually edited?
* 02:43:060 (1,2,3,4) - 02:56:774 (1,2,3,4) - I know what this means but why only on the last kiai? On the previous kiais you were following just the main 1/1 drums.
* 02:53:774 (2,3) - How about swapping the rhythm, since there's nothing important on 02:53:989 - while 02:54:417 - has a vocal?


Uhh I'll stop here. I think you need to check the whole map thoroughly by yourself first, and consider those points I mentioned and fix the issues on all diffs (especially the hitsounds, because they seem to be copied)
Squichu
1,013 posts
Joined November 2012
Topic Starter
Squichu
reply

Doyak wrote:

[General]
* 01:08:774 - I don't see the reason why here would have such a low volume. It's same as 01:22:917 - , not as 00:07:489 - oops, changed in all diffs except GD. (I'll apply all hitsound changes to the diff after modding is done!)

[Easy]
* 00:03:632 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - This intro is not any less dense than kiai parts, while the song is just quiet. So I'd recommend reducing the density a bit here. I changed the beginning a bit, but not much at the latter parts, because I don't feel like it's too much or too dense.
* 00:36:203 (2) - I recommend whistle only on the tail. There's really no sound that supports the clap there imo, rather it's consistent drum with other whistles. It's a bit different than 01:37:917 (2,3) - if you ask. Apples to all diffs. I prefer the clap here, it sounds much better to me than whistle-only. That just is too empty.
* 01:22:917 - add finish sure! added in all diffs.
* 02:07:060 (1) - There's a cymbal sound there, and I think it sounds good with soft finish. *
* 02:53:774 - There's a strong sound on the slider end so you might want to add a finish there. *
* 03:10:060 (6) - Well the only 1/2 slider in this diff? I'd recommend using 3/2 slider from 03:09:632 - instead. changed whole outro.
* 03:10:489 (1) - The last soft-hitnormal3 sound is like a hard beat, but the song isn't, so maybe change it to S:C1? Applies to all diffs. Sure, why not.

[Normal]
* I'd highly recommend to remove most of consecutive 1/2 clicks on non-kiai parts. Like, the difficulty should be reversed imo. 00:09:632 (6,7,8) - I know you want to make the claps clickable, but this whole part is one of the calmest part but this provides the most difficult action in the whole map. 01:14:774 (5,6,7) - There's no reason to make this more intense even than the kiai. Also your Easy diff doesn't use any 1/2s, so I think you need to not overuse 1/2s in this diff. You have Advanced diff anyway. Things like 00:30:632 (7,8) - 00:34:060 (6,7) - 01:32:346 (7,8) - 01:35:774 (6,7) - can be just a 1/2 slider as well. I think the kiai parts did the best simplification imo. The only place I really thought it is required is 02:46:489 (1,2,3) - , everything else can just be more simplified for better spread.
A simple indication of the note density spread is this. Easy: 195 notes, Normal: 356 notes, Advanced: 401 notes. I don't really want to reply to each thing pointed out, so - yes, I changed most, but not all, because sometimes two(+) consecutive beats should be clickable, imo. Also, I think it works in favour of the spread to have them in this diff, since Advanced uses mostly 1/2 patterns. And about density - sure, object count is an indicator for how close diffs are, but you still need to consider how density works with everything else in the diff, which, imo, works just fine in this set.
* 00:46:060 (3) - The strong point is on 00:46:274 - so I think you need to make this clickable. Imo you can just ignore 00:45:846 - and do similar to 00:38:774 (3,4,5) - Same for 01:47:774 (3) - I disagree here, the sound is too important and shouldn't be ignored. I could go for 1/2 + two circles to have both strong sounds clickable, but since I removed all other similar patterns like this it wouldn't make any sense now. (Also I really like the variety the rhythm provides, so another reason for keeping it. ><)
* 01:19:489 (2) - Uhh clap instead of whistle? Well same for harder diffs. yesss, fixed all.
* 01:22:060 (7) - I don't hear anything special here, just remove all additional hitsounds? I think they go pretty well with the music, since it changes.. 01:21:846 - has a similar sound, too, and (8) as well, but if I put them on each the hitsounds are overpowering the song too much, so I went with sounds on white ticks only instead.
* 01:34:274 (3) - Hmm, I don't get why this passes through the downbeat, since that beat has a syllable too? It passes the downbeat because the syllabels aren't emphasized in the song, but they come fluently.. it's more like "troughitall" than "trough it all", which is why I want to keep it as is.
* 01:36:846 (2) - Why finish? oops, changed in all except Insane, cause I'm prioritizing a different rhythm there.
* 02:28:703 (4) - I get what this means but intensity-wise this is too empty, like all those build-ups before just crashed down here. How about http://puu.sh/s7ou9/52a95c067e.jpg ? changed this, but without the reverse. The rhythm gets far too complicated if I add it, imo.
* 02:53:774 - As I said on Easy this beat is strong, so not only a hitsound, but consider making this clickable as well. Sure~~
* 02:54:620 (3) - Unsnapped. rip

[Advanced]
* 00:25:917 (1,2,3,4) - 01:27:632 (1,2,3,4) - This is pretty random 1/2 sliders for me. I mean, you made the whole part pretty not dense, but I don't see why you would fill all these 1/2s out while there's no significant sound than others at all? It also hurts the purpose of 00:25:060 (2,3) - these 1/2s since they're there to get the vocals. Tbh it's been so long so I don't remember what I wanted to achieve with this, so I changed this to emphasize 00:26:774 - 00:26:989 - 00:27:203 - better.
* 00:31:703 (2) - 01:33:417 (2) - Same, why not give a little break here? You can't emphasize actual strong sounds properly by using every single 1/2 beats. I prefer keeping these circles as there is no break or indicator for that in the melody. I know the beat is not as strong as some others, but in context (=considering melody) it works fine.
* 00:34:489 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3) - Not sure if this is good rhythm choice. There's a significant rhythm change on 00:36:203 - here but still you repeated the exact same pattern as before. 00:35:132 (2,4) - actually doesn't sound that strong so I'd rather go for 4 1/2 sliders instead. changed differently!
* 01:22:274 (1,2) - The music kinda stops and restarts 01:22:917 - here, so having NC on 01:22:917 (2) - instead makes more sense imo. oh, sure.
* 01:37:060 (1) - Why is this NC'd? Also consider using same rhythm as 00:34:489 - Nc was by accident, fixed that. And changed rhythm.
* 02:12:792 - Why is this break manually edited? oops.
* 02:43:060 (1,2,3,4) - 02:56:774 (1,2,3,4) - I know what this means but why only on the last kiai? On the previous kiais you were following just the main 1/1 drums. I guess variety, but I can't remember, so changed.
* 02:53:774 (2,3) - How about swapping the rhythm, since there's nothing important on 02:53:989 - while 02:54:417 - has a vocal? changed (2) to circle only but went with two circles for (3) because the vocals start on the red tick and it plays nice if both is clickable.

I'll update after I checked everything myself again. Thank you!
edit: everything updated!
Doyak
osu! Alumni
2,621 posts
Joined November 2012
Doyak
[General]
* 01:22:489 - imo lower volume would be better since it's supposed to 'mute' the slider anyway.
* Maybe a bit more louder volume for kiais would be good. 60% doesn't sound strong enough to represent the highlight part. Also 02:13:917 - This part needs to be a bit more louder too. It blends with the song's drum too much, it needs to be louder to differentiate.

[Normal]
* 02:28:703 (4) - As this is supposed to represent the drums, I think you need to add some drum hitsounds maybe? Since this diff ignores the white tick inside.
* 02:31:917 (1) - Also only this diff used NC on this note, remove NC?

[Advanced]
* 02:06:632 (3,4,5,1) - Hmm only this one is different than 01:04:917 (3,4) - 02:59:774 (3,4) - , any reason?

[Hard]
* OD6 for better spread. 6.5 is a bit too high for a Hard diff itself (+the song is slow, and has many consecutive clicks)
* 00:33:632 (3,4,5,6) - I know the purpose of this jump, but this is like a 'raw jump' that has no logic of placement. Actually you have made several jumps like this, and this might be able to emphasize certain sounds, but it hurts the map's structure by ruining the map's own base spacing. 00:26:774 (3,4,5,1) - This one at least still has relationship with 00:25:917 (1,2) - so it looks much better, but you'd better avoid 'raw jumps' like 01:14:989 (4,5,1) - 01:35:346 (3,4,5,1) - .
* 00:36:203 (1,2,3) - This really looks like a random shape imo, you can try making it more tidy / logical.
* 01:17:774 - Missing clap
* 01:21:632 (3) - When you suddenly change the base spacing like this, differentiating the pattern for that is much better. I mean, using NC.
* 02:05:346 (1,2,3) - 02:58:489 (1,2,3,4) - Why do you increase the spacing like this while you didn't on 01:03:632 (1,2,3) - ?

[Insane]
* 01:05:346 (1,2,3,4) - It doesn't make sense to make the spacing same as 01:03:632 (1,2,3,1,2,3) - imo, you should differentiate them.
* 01:06:846 (5) - I don't think this is a 1/6. The first drum does sound a bit late, but still it's just 3 drums including the white tick. You already used 1/4 for Hard so it's inconsistent as well.
* 01:35:989 (7,8,1) - Why a triplet here? It should be at 01:35:882 - like 00:34:060 (5,6,7) -
* 02:25:917 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - I'd strongly suggest to not use randomly-shaped jumps like this...
* 02:27:632 (1,2,3,4) - Also I think these need a significant change in spacing to emphasize better.
* 02:45:417 (1,2,3,4,5) - I think I told you this before (maybe only on Hard diff) but this doesn't have 1/4s unlike the other kiais. So this doesn't fit.

You did tell me that you love irregular spacing in Insane, but I still think they should be done in logical way, as like 'why this overlap makes the map better' or 'this inconsistent spacing does "something" to represent music better' things. At least that's what I think about how a map should be constructed.

[Aia's Serenade]
Sadly, I find this diff really troublesome to fit my standard. As I already said, I don't like random/inconsistent stuff and this diff is almost full of them. May I pick some of them out?
* 00:03:632 (1,2,3,4,5) - 00:05:346 (1,2,3,4,5) - Why are they represented with so much inconsistency? Especially with the spacing.
* 00:15:417 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,1) - What is this shape other than random?
* 00:19:060 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - Again very random-like placement, and what is the logic of the spacing increase on 3-4, 4-5? You have mostly used big spacing for strong sounds but here the music doesn't have any. Only 6 is strong.
* 00:20:774 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - The only 'pattern' I can see here is the blanket. Anything else?
* 00:22:274 (7,1,4) - NC is messed up, they all should be swapped.
* 00:32:774 (1,2,3) - 3 is stronger than 2 so why the spacing is like this?
* 00:42:846 (7,8,9,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,1) - Yes I like when you do stuffs like this, please do this for the entire map.
* 00:48:632 (3,4) - Why are these stacked but 00:49:489 (3,4) - is a jump? Also the triangle shape can be improved if you can adjust 'how-much-overlapped' of each position. Is there any reason why 00:48:846 (4,3) - is less overlapped than 00:49:060 (1,4) - ?
* 01:13:703 (4) - Why no NC?
* 01:16:917 (5,1) - 00:28:917 (6,1) - Not only this but sometimes they're jump and sometimes they're not. I can't think of any logical reason to use them differently.
* 01:21:632 (3,4,5,6) - These are very very special sounds but I don't see any difference in pattern/spacing or whatever, compared to other jumps that exist in the whole map.
* 01:33:203 (1) - Useless NC
* 01:43:060 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,1) - I'm just pointing very few of them out but there are just no 'pattern' for any of the jumps.

So I'll stop here. I'm very sorry to say this after Squichu waiting for me like months, but the hardest diff lacks structure too much and I don't think random maps like this should be pushed forward.
Squichu
1,013 posts
Joined November 2012
Topic Starter
Squichu
Thank you very much <3
And please don't feel sorry, the set improved a lot thanks to you! :3
reply's taking a while, tho ><

belated reply
[General]
* 01:22:489 - imo lower volume would be better since it's supposed to 'mute' the slider anyway. I don't think it should be completely silent, some feedback is needed still. '-'
* Maybe a bit more louder volume for kiais would be good. 60% doesn't sound strong enough to represent the highlight part. Also 02:13:917 - This part needs to be a bit more louder too. It blends with the song's drum too much, it needs to be louder to differentiate. increased Kiai volume to 80%

Normal & Advanced - fixed all.

[Hard]
* OD6 for better spread. 6.5 is a bit too high for a Hard diff itself (+the song is slow, and has many consecutive clicks) Okay
* 00:33:632 (3,4,5,6) - I know the purpose of this jump, but this is like a 'raw jump' that has no logic of placement. Actually you have made several jumps like this, and this might be able to emphasize certain sounds, but it hurts the map's structure by ruining the map's own base spacing. 00:26:774 (3,4,5,1) - This one at least still has relationship with 00:25:917 (1,2) - so it looks much better, but you'd better avoid 'raw jumps' like 01:14:989 (4,5,1) - 01:35:346 (3,4,5,1) - . I changed the first, because that was indeed a bit too much for the part, but I kept the other two, because the difference in spacing isn't as huge, they're extremely easy to understand/play and emphasize very strong sounds.
* 00:36:203 (1,2,3) - This really looks like a random shape imo, you can try making it more tidy / logical. changed
* 01:17:774 - Missing clap oops
* 01:21:632 (3) - When you suddenly change the base spacing like this, differentiating the pattern for that is much better. I mean, using NC. Since increased DS isn't much different from the regular one I don't think that's needed.
* 02:05:346 (1,2,3) - 02:58:489 (1,2,3,4) - Why do you increase the spacing like this while you didn't on 01:03:632 (1,2,3) - ? The one in first Kai was increased as well, just not as much as the other two. Changed that.

[Insane]
* 01:05:346 (1,2,3,4) - It doesn't make sense to make the spacing same as 01:03:632 (1,2,3,1,2,3) - imo, you should differentiate them. Okay
* 01:06:846 (5) - I don't think this is a 1/6. The first drum does sound a bit late, but still it's just 3 drums including the white tick. You already used 1/4 for Hard so it's inconsistent as well. Wasn't sure about that '-' fixed(?)
* 01:35:989 (7,8,1) - Why a triplet here? It should be at 01:35:882 - like 00:34:060 (5,6,7) - ops
* 02:25:917 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - I'd strongly suggest to not use randomly-shaped jumps like this... They're not random, tho? Since it's a build-up the spacing increases consistently on each white tick (as they're slighlty stronger than the sounds on the red ticks).
* 02:27:632 (1,2,3,4) - Also I think these need a significant change in spacing to emphasize better. increased further
* 02:45:417 (1,2,3,4,5) - I think I told you this before (maybe only on Hard diff) but this doesn't have 1/4s unlike the other kiais. So this doesn't fit. You did tell me, I just forgot to change it. my bad DDD:

You did tell me that you love irregular spacing in Insane, but I still think they should be done in logical way, as like 'why this overlap makes the map better' or 'this inconsistent spacing does "something" to represent music better' things. At least that's what I think about how a map should be constructed.
Actually, I think I placed all objects in a pretty logical way.. I can give reasons for every irregular spaced object in the diff, excluding some slip-ups that went without noticing. ( After several re-maps there are bound to be left over objects/patterns from previous versions.. >: ) Anyway, if spacing needs an explaination: The beginning has DS of 1.2 since it's calmer than the rest of the song, which uses 1.4 DS starting at 00:20:774 - . Exception are
-some sliders (on strong vocals/downbeats for example)
-jumps to emphasize significant sounds like 00:26:989 (4,5) -
-patterns like 00:41:346 (1,2,3,4) - in all Kiai sections, because of the more intense vocals or like 00:48:203 (1,2,3,4) - because it works as a highlight at end of Kiai
-increased spacing like 00:44:132 (3,4) - or 01:45:846 (3,4) - because this creates very nice flow and looks pretty nice (imo) while it doesn't harm gameplay in any way
As for overlaps.. I don't quite get the problem? I mean are you talking about stuff like 00:20:132 (4,5,6) - ?
Last edited by Squichu , edited 1 time in total.
Aia
181 posts
Joined October 2013
Aia
My guest difficulty is really old, I could do once again another remap and make it a lot better, only if you can wait Squichu. If not you can remove it completely.
Squichu
1,013 posts
Joined November 2012
Topic Starter
Squichu

Aia wrote:

My guest difficulty is really old, I could do once again another remap and make it a lot better, only if you can wait Squichu. If not you can remove it completely.
I don't mind waiting! >w<
Lumael
1,520 posts
Joined December 2014
Lumael
love this song *-* <3
WORSTPOLACKEU
511 posts
Joined May 2013
WORSTPOLACKEU

Doyak wrote:

[General]

[Aia's Serenade]
Sadly, I find this diff really troublesome to fit my standard. As I already said, I don't like random/inconsistent stuff and this diff is almost full of them. May I pick some of them out?
* 00:03:632 (1,2,3,4,5) - 00:05:346 (1,2,3,4,5) - Why are they represented with so much inconsistency? Especially with the spacing. Listen to the tone in the song, obviously mapped to that, not everything is spaced according to drums, this is perfectly fine.
* 00:15:417 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,1) - What is this shape other than random? I am sorry but why does it matter again?
* 00:19:060 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - Again very random-like placement, and what is the logic of the spacing increase on 3-4, 4-5? You have mostly used big spacing for strong sounds but here the music doesn't have any. Only 6 is strong. I'll explain. Not random placment, it's just a pattern, nothing random about it. Spaing 3-4, the tones build 2 sections, that's what I hear, and a new one starts at the note nr 4 so the bigger spacing is there, 4-5 because the mapper wants to emphasize all 3 jumps as buildup before next section.
* 00:20:774 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - The only 'pattern' I can see here is the blanket. Anything else? What is this argument even? The only thing I would suggest is too even the spacing so the triple looks equal but that is not required, or needed. I have no clue what wrongs you see here.,
* 00:22:274 (7,1,4) - NC is messed up, they all should be swapped. Right, NC should be changed like you showed.
* 00:32:774 (1,2,3) - 3 is stronger than 2 so why the spacing is like this? I kinda agree, CTRL-G the slider 3 and it's fine. Even right now it's fine since people use this kind of spacing all the time and it is accepted so I don't see reason why it shouldn't now, still suggesting CTRL-G on 3,
* 00:42:846 (7,8,9,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,1) - Yes I like when you do stuffs like this, please do this for the entire map.
* 00:48:632 (3,4) - Why are these stacked but 00:49:489 (3,4) - is a jump? Also the triangle shape can be improved if you can adjust 'how-much-overlapped' of each position. Is there any reason why 00:48:846 (4,3) - is less overlapped than 00:49:060 (1,4) - ? Agree, should be even overlap and probably stick to same idea if it's stacked.
* 01:13:703 (4) - Why no NC?+1
* 01:16:917 (5,1) - 00:28:917 (6,1) - Not only this but sometimes they're jump and sometimes they're not. I can't think of any logical reason to use them differently. There are hundreds of ranked maps with this stuff, it's just rhythm/spacing inconsitencies that bring something different to the song imo, sometimes it's a jump sometimes it's a small jump.
* 01:21:632 (3,4,5,6) - These are very very special sounds but I don't see any difference in pattern/spacing or whatever, compared to other jumps that exist in the whole map. Yes this needs some bigger jump pattern, right now it's outright
* 01:33:203 (1) - Useless NC ye
* 01:43:060 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,1) - I'm just pointing very few of them out but there are just no 'pattern' for any of the jumps. Just jumps at first, then the stack to accentuate the jump which leads into ending vocal of the section, it fits in my head?

So I'll stop here. I'm very sorry to say this after Squichu waiting for me like months, but the hardest diff lacks structure too much and I don't think random maps like this should be pushed forward.
I don't know what's wrong with the structure here but I can show you many ranked maps that you won't find structure in, and this map is appealing visually and fun to play, some inconsistencies but they are not an issue to the degree you shouldn't rank it tbh.

I think there's nothing realy wrong here.
Doyak
osu! Alumni
2,621 posts
Joined November 2012
Doyak

WORSTPOLACKEU wrote:

I don't know what's wrong with the structure here but I can show you many ranked maps that you won't find structure in, and this map is appealing visually and fun to play, some inconsistencies but they are not an issue to the degree you shouldn't rank it tbh.

I think there's nothing realy wrong here.
You've forgotten something, that it is not me who have ranked all those not-structured maps you would show me. I don't think they're suitable to be ranked. "Visually fun" is only subjective, and more of preference. What makes a map structured is whether you can explain the map by yourself, and whether you can make others understand.

I don't have time to explain one by one right now, but I can say that if a thing can be explained only by "being random", it's not structured.

edit: If you're saying that it is structured by 'spacing depending on the intensity', yes it is also very important. But it's only a little portion of a map. There are a loooooot of other things you should consider at the same time, when you create a map.
show more
Please sign in to reply.

New reply

0
32 / 81