1. osu! forums
  2. Beatmaps
  3. Beatmap Graveyard
show more
posted
edit 8th Aug
Ranked somehow!

edit 10th October
Got over 10 million plays!

edit 31st December
Became the most played beatmap in history!
posted

Doyak wrote:

edit 8th Aug
Ranked somehow!
in 2019, probably. xD
posted
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.
posted

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<
posted
Are you ready now? But I think I can recheck this at least a week later...
posted
Yup yup, all ready (finally)! >w<
Take as much time as you need, I'm not in a hurry <3
posted
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)
posted

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!
posted
[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.
posted
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 ><

[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) - ?
posted
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.
posted

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<
posted
love this song *-* <3
posted

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.
posted

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.
posted
I don't have a problem understanding the map and I don't see issues with it either.
The NC yes but the spacing stuff, even if I would do it differently I wouldn't say it's not suitable for ranking.
posted
You only understood why this spacing is bigger than others, and not why it is 'there'. You also didn't explain why they are inconsistent while it is important to keep a consistent logic throughout a map. If you don't think they're issues then it can't be helped, but I do think they're issues.
posted
What you said makes no sense.

"You only understood why this spacing is bigger than others, and not why it is 'there'"
Uh, what? It's "there" for a reason and it's increased for a reason?

"You also didn't explain why they are inconsistent while it is important to keep a consistent logic throughout a map."
They are so called inconsistent consistencies, all of which occur more than few times throughout the song to give variety in rhythm instead of having the same one pop up, this is not 2010 anymore.

"If you don't think they're issues then it can't be helped, but I do think they're issues."
Opinions I guess, you have yours and I just say what I think about this because the mod seemed a bit extraordinary to me as the song was modded like it was a few years back.
posted

WORSTPOLACKEU wrote:

What you said makes no sense.

"You only understood why this spacing is bigger than others, and not why it is 'there'"
Uh, what? It's "there" for a reason and it's increased for a reason?
I mean, why do you ignore basic mapping elements, and only care about the spacing? Like it can be there for the sake of blanket, parallel, triangle, square, symmetry, stability, and further, repeating similar patterns, and many many more.

WORSTPOLACKEU wrote:

"You also didn't explain why they are inconsistent while it is important to keep a consistent logic throughout a map."
They are so called inconsistent consistencies, all of which occur more than few times throughout the song to give variety in rhythm instead of having the same one pop up, this is not 2010 anymore.
Why should the mapping nowadays be different than 2010? Only the "meta" is different, but you map with same game rules with same elements. I've never said you should use 'same' rhythm. It can be varied within that style. But what is style? Can you say being random is a style?
Look, the same song can be expressed as a map with different styles. But if you switch between various styles every few seconds, you can't say it's structured. Putting notes in random places is like that. If you don't have a consistent logic(Again, I'm not only talking about the spacing) throughout the whole map, how would you say this map is structured, in which way?

WORSTPOLACKEU wrote:

"If you don't think they're issues then it can't be helped, but I do think they're issues."
Opinions I guess, you have yours and I just say what I think about this because the mod seemed a bit extraordinary to me as the song was modded like it was a few years back.
It has nothing to do with the year. Let me explain this through a similar situation.

You have a sequence of numbers: 2, 3, 5, 7, 11, 13, 17. What number would you like to put next?

"Oh, the number is increasing, so I can put ANY numbers larger than 17." <- loose logic
"It's increasing, but only by less than 5 each time, so maybe between 18 and 21?" <- tighter logic
"19. It's sequence of prime numbers." <- solid logic

Mapping is same as this. Having a spacing logic is one of those many logic. But is that all you can put in a map? No, there can be much much more. What you're saying is that using random logic regarding everything else than spacing should be allowed, which is same as using ANY number larger than 17, so it can be like 10000 or 2^99 or anything. Would you like to call this a "variety"?

Talking about variety, here's an example of variety. Now let's assume you have a sequence of numbers: 1, 2, 4. What next?

"8, 16, 32" <- 2^(n-1)
"7, 11, 16" <- increases by n-1 each time.

You created two different patterns. Looks logical. But what if you say,

"-300, 23474324293, 123456789. they're all integers"

Being integers is one of those logic. But it's not tight. So we can say "it lacks logic".

I actually think this map isn't too bad, but not quite at my standard. There are already so many maps being ranked everyday, so I'd like to keep my standard high instead of nominating every maps.
posted
Yo, I'd really like to hear from mapper wha't up with the set and whether there is a need in further modding pushing it forward.

I've always wanted to help you out with this.
show more
Please sign in to reply.