u should use at least tickrate 2 for this type of style

ex
00:08:586 (8) - repeat is so hard to see >< can u increase sv for this slider
00:54:186 (3,4,5) - flow is kinda sharp here, and if ur going to map like this, i think you should avoid things that are jittery to play.
01:04:386 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - idk what to really say about this.. dont u think the spacing gets a little harsh at the end lol
01:07:186 (5,6) - why is this spaced so big?


insane
00:32:986 (1,2,3,4) - can u not do something like this lol, too misleading and no manual stack on 00:32:986 (1,2) - doesn't help cuz it all looks the same in game
01:03:986 (3,4,5) - u need more spacing here, looks too similar to 01:04:586 (1,2,3,4) -
01:10:686 (6,7,8) - the stack makes the movement super jittery, can u either space them all out or stack them all

hard
00:27:686 (4) - unecessary triplets here imo
00:30:886 (4) - ^
why does hard diff have lower CS than advanced? follow something linear pls?
also i think its better to rename advanced > hard and hard > hyper

normal
00:43:586 (4,5,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1) - can u insert a 1/1 break somewhere here? 1/2 chain a bit too long imo

easy
can u not use 1/2s here? >< otherwise it becomes more like a normal

Kibbleru wrote:

u should use at least tickrate 2 for this type of style OH, right, changed in all diffs.

ex
00:08:586 (8) - repeat is so hard to see >< can u increase sv for this slider I guess incresaing the SV could work too, should be okay now.
00:54:186 (3,4,5) - flow is kinda sharp here, and if ur going to map like this, i think you should avoid things that are jittery to play. To be honest I use sharp flow in more places, it goes really well with the vocals. e.g. 00:53:386 (7,1) - 01:01:586 (9,1) - The reasoning for the movement from 3->4 is the vocals obv but the movement from 4->5 is quite fun and not as terrible as it might seem in the editor, here's how it actually plays http://puu.sh/o593N/f25cd66713.jpg (excuse my terrible paint skills lol)
01:04:386 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - idk what to really say about this.. dont u think the spacing gets a little harsh at the end lol Not really, it's quite smooth, everyone who played it found it just fine Maybe it's a bit scary on the editor.
01:07:186 (5,6) - why is this spaced so big? Mostly because of the sudden strong violin (and because it looks really well!), unlike 01:09:686 (9,1) - which starts really low


insane
00:32:986 (1,2,3,4) - can u not do something like this lol, too misleading and no manual stack on 00:32:986 (1,2) - doesn't help cuz it all looks the same in game Not really sure what to do here then, everything else is even more overdone or awful.
01:03:986 (3,4,5) - u need more spacing here, looks too similar to 01:04:586 (1,2,3,4) - NC is the best I can offer, the pattern is not that hard to distinguish and you can hear the intensity change too.
01:10:686 (6,7,8) - the stack makes the movement super jittery, can u either space them all out or stack them all Yeah I agree. BUT GOD DAMNIT everything else just doesn't work, 01:10:786 (7) - is clearly the strongest drum, the play here should be this way 01:10:386 (5,6,7) - is supposed to play like a triplet on sliderend but then it gets mixed with a double here 01:10:786 (7,8) -, honestly blame the song, I tried placing the slider at 1/2 but it makes the whole pattern sound awful. I do think lieaving it like this is the wise choice too, as the pattern is well constructed otherwise.

hard
00:27:686 (4) - unecessary triplets here imo I used those triplets to fill in some of the rhythm, since the vocals halt there, unlike 00:29:186 (3) - and 00:32:586 (3) -
00:30:886 (4) - ^
why does hard diff have lower CS than advanced? follow something linear pls? Yeah okay, I explained it previously and I will again, Hard is big spacing oriented, means I focus on big movements rather than aim, hence the forgiving circle size. For example - 00:49:186 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2) - on Hard, compared to 00:49:186 (1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1) - on Insane, I hope it's understandable.
also i think its better to rename advanced > hard and hard > hyper Eghh, could be fine but I don't really want to user Hyper here, seems unfitting.

normal
00:43:586 (4,5,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1) - can u insert a 1/1 break somewhere here? 1/2 chain a bit too long imo I tried, again and again, but the vocals are just intense and non-stop here, it just feels wrong to cut it somewhere, 00:44:986 (3) - was 1/2 at first but I made it easier with a 1/1, maybe a halt at 00:46:786 (4) - would work but that's the endof the pattern and there's a 1/1 break right afterwards, so I think it's best to keep it as it is.

easy
can u not use 1/2s here? >< otherwise it becomes more like a normal [b]That's unavoidable :< Shift between strong beats and vocals is on 1/2, I can't avoid that completely otherwise it's just terrible, there's still quite a gap between this and Normal.[/b

I might have ended declining most stuff, but most of those did appear before and I am declining those like I did back then, I hope my explanations are understandable!

adding response to some additional irc stuff

2016-04-04 03:17 Kibbleru: as for 00:32:986 (1,2) - in insane
2016-04-04 03:17 Kibbleru: u can try swapping the nc maybe
2016-04-04 03:17 Kibbleru: itll help a bit It was like that at the origin, some people said it should be this way and some this way, I guess I'll NC it.
2016-04-04 03:17 Kibbleru: 01:04:386 (5) - maybe nc on here too? It's just a NC, so okay.
2016-04-04 03:17 Kibbleru: to indicate start of stream
2016-04-04 03:19 Kibbleru: on easy 01:09:386 (3) - i dont think u need to use 1/2 here If I move it to the red tick then it'll be even worse, I did follow all the strong vocals I could on this kiai, which was my aim from the beginning, so it wouldn't be right.
2016-04-04 03:19 Kibbleru: 01:09:386 - doesn' really land on any percussion
2016-04-04 03:20 Kibbleru: so its rather a weak beat
2016-04-04 03:20 Kibbleru: 01:03:586 (3) - consider adding repeat If I do that, I'd have to map everything between 01:03:586 (3,1) -, otherwise it's awkward, I intentionally ignored the vocals between the kiais, it's cool.

alright u worked hard finding lots of mods n feed back so, support

Ok for me.

Qualified~


Also I have to apologise for rushed the bubble without have more thoughts about the set :c That was quite absurd even if I still think it was fine. Sorry.

why is this diff name something u can easily qualify LOL triggered by this artist/song/diff name my god

oh, and gratz!

Sorry about this but I'm not sure this is ready quite yet.

[DiFf_(k)NAME]
I see what you are doing with this map and I'm wanting to start off by saying the map isn't bad but there are a lot of inconsistent spacing that could be made consistent while still keeping your vision in tact.
01:04:386 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - prime example currently the spacing is all over the place I figure you are trying to match the pitch change, but there is a far more consistent approach to this, you can take 1 2 3 and make them all one consistent spacing and on 4 (where the pitch actually changes you could increase the spacing a bit more like in this screenshot https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/4870661 I suggest you take a bit more time on the final diff and look through it fully as these happen a bit more than once. I would also like to see some discussion about possible consistent fixes from the community and as to why you might feel this is okay. overall the set isn't bad timing is good and all the other stuff checks out but trust me someone is going to point out these flaws in spacing so it is better to get it fixed now than wait to have it DQ'ed in the last day. If you have questions feel free to contact me.

[DiFf_(k)NAME]
Several 1/4 spacings could get revised. 00:52:786 (4,5,6) - 00:55:186 (1,2,3) - 00:56:586 (2,3,4) - 00:59:886 (6,1) - 01:04:986 (1,2,3) - 01:05:586 (4,5,6) - 01:07:486 (6,7) - 01:07:986 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7) - 01:10:186 (3,4,5) - Assuming the consistent spacing for the kiai section was meant to be 1.5x, these were stuffs that needed a rearrange for a better organization.

00:57:786 (3,4,5) - Besides, this jump having less relevance to spacing, resulted in less organization.
01:15:386 (1,2) - Also you'll want to start the combo from (2) since that's where the symmetry pattern starts, and 01:15:386 (1) belongs to the previous increasing spacing pattern of 01:14:986 (1,2,3,4).

Sadly I can't disagree with ztrot and Sonnyc about these issues.
Would add too about 00:13:186 (2,3,4) - / 00:13:786 (1,2,3) - these spcaing who could be more consistant here since the violin is not stronger at any point, nor the drums.
00:37:786 - About these sliders (since we talked about them with ztrot), I still wonder if they had to be all NC due to small SV changes.

Call me back when issues are resolved, and once again sorry or these mistakes.

Thanks for the input, I'll take a look when I get home.

damn son. dat went quick

Alright!

ztrot wrote:

Sorry about this but I'm not sure this is ready quite yet.

[DiFf_(k)NAME]
I see what you are doing with this map and I'm wanting to start off by saying the map isn't bad but there are a lot of inconsistent spacing that could be made consistent while still keeping your vision in tact.
01:04:386 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - prime example currently the spacing is all over the place I figure you are trying to match the pitch change, but there is a far more consistent approach to this, you can take 1 2 3 and make them all one consistent spacing and on 4 (where the pitch actually changes you could increase the spacing a bit more like in this screenshot https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/4870661 I suggest you take a bit more time on the final diff and look through it fully as these happen a bit more than once. I would also like to see some discussion about possible consistent fixes from the community and as to why you might feel this is okay. overall the set isn't bad timing is good and all the other stuff checks out but trust me someone is going to point out these flaws in spacing so it is better to get it fixed now than wait to have it DQ'ed in the last day. If you have questions feel free to contact me.

I guess it is unavoidable then, personally, I don't see it as a flaw, I purposely didn't make it completely consistent, it'd kill the freedom in the difficulty, I don't want it to be uptight, just enjoy the abundant music with the map.

Unfortunately it seems that I do need to make it a bit more strict, which I'll do now.

Relating to your prime example, it's simple, the pattern is building emphasization towards the entrance of the kiai, I didn't like your screenshot, it's too sharp, the emphasization comes with the increased speed, not with the movement, the movement is supposed to be fluid, it's completely readable and plays great, never seen anyone mess this up by getting confused about 1/2 or whatever. Even if the song doesn't increase the pitch after every note, I build the emphasization myself, and it works really well.

Making a reference to the stuff I want to comment on Sonnyc's mentions -

1. 01:07:486 (6,7) - I slightlyd increase the spacing here to 1.3, but 1.5 would simple be overkill with the jump from 01:07:186 (5) -

Everything else on Sonnyc's mod was changed / fixed.

Sliders @00:37:786, SVs changes are a little play with the vocals, the pair NCs work really well here and using NC on everyone would be unnecessarily too spammy.

I did read the chat on #nominators (it was open luckily so I could scroll up), I hope everything is understandable!

Oh, and about this quote

Trust me, I put much thought into my maps, perhaps even too much, if something is not clear, feel free to ask.

Yet every map of you got disqualified because if inconsistency, when will you learn? ;_;

Avishay wrote:

Okay! I've decided to get some more opinions from high rank players on the highest diff, therefore I'll pop the bubble myself, I'll post screenshots and logs here.

Also better not pop your own bubble using a self-icon since it raises 5 star priority. Doing such stuff isn't right in the ranking procedure, and is unfair for non-bns afterall!

Sonnyc wrote:

Avishay wrote:

Okay! I've decided to get some more opinions from high rank players on the highest diff, therefore I'll pop the bubble myself, I'll post screenshots and logs here.

Also better not pop your own bubble using a self-icon since it raises 5 star priority. Doing such stuff isn't right in the ranking procedure, and is unfair for non-bns afterall!

I did not know it does that, sorry.

But I am highly positive that stat priority has no importance.


@Stjpa, it's just that I don't myself the need to be so tight when mapping HL difficulties.

just to clear a few things up once the examples have been cleaned up and the other patterns are brought up feel free to have BN recheck the map for the ranking process again.

Great, I will.

hitsounds are strange

I can't really give a response to that, could you elaborate? I hitsound in a way that is honset to the song and not automated, while keeping note feedback in place.

well, it seems like the issues were fixed/addressed to so we can get it back on the road now.

if any1 else has any concerns, now is the time to speak up.

Avishay wrote:

I can't really give a response to that, could you elaborate? I hitsound in a way that is honset to the song and not automated, while keeping note feedback in place.

sorry, never mind,that's just my mistake.


plus, a little tip:
DiFf_(k)NAME
00:31:386 flow uncomfortable.

@^
Not really sure how to comment on that, I tried looking around but it seems pretty fine, next time elaborate further on why.

We fixed last inconsistencies with spacing, at least what looks weird to me :/
Since issues were fixed, should be to go again.

(K)NoW_GRATZ

(A)Vi_SHAY - Rank map

congrats!

(K)NiCe_MEME
good luck on round 2 :d

Hello, congratulations for get this mapset qualified but there are some things that concern me a lot and for obvious reasons could be improved.

DiFf_(k)NAME

1. 00:01:586 (1,1,1,1) - These kind of patterns look good and are awesome if they fit, but this is not the case here. In this song the music and the voice at the beginning sound consistent and there technically is no change in the music. I would like to recommend you to do something different instead.
2. 00:05:586 - 00:10:586 - The whole section is quite weird itself, due to that there are some beats that were completely ignored so it can be somehow difficult to understand and to play play also these changes of speeds doesn't helps at all neither.
   00:29:786 (1,2) - Could you explain to me why you've used a spacing lower at this section in compared to the rest that is technically the same kind of rhythm and that you've added jumps there?
3. 00:10:586 (1,1) - The pitch in both sections feels almost the same. The only difference is the sound finish at the background but the voice seems like the same, so a change of speed in this part makes no sense at all.
4. 00:32:786 (7,1,2) - I really don't understand the point of the constantly mapped into a double BPM and then go back to typical 1/2 rhythm? actually this could be even more confused due that the previous object is 1/4 and then swap it into 1/2 is difficult to read anyways I'm quite sure that most of the players will be confused or probably will fail that part so I would suggest you remap the whole pattern by anything else.
5. 01:03:786 (1,2,3,1,2,3,4,5,6,1) - The same thing happens here, just that in this part it is a bit different - but I guess you get the idea.
6. 00:40:386 (2) - This SV makes no sense, the vocal is not that much lower to do something like this.
7. 00:43:286 - How about to add something clickable here? There are some sounds that are quite noticeable.
8. 00:51:186 (1,2,3,4,5) - Overall it's not that bad but I'm pretty sure that this could be more polished, try to make it consistent.
9. 00:56:386 (1,2,5) - I think these kind of jumps are quite inconsistent because the background sound seems like the same all the time and having jumps like this is weird and obviously plays bad.
10. 00:57:186 (7,1) - What are you trying to emphasize here?
11. 00:57:786 (3,4,5,6) - I really would like to see other kind of patterns here, apparently your intention to make it fun is great but the kind of flow you've used seems inappropiate and the cursormovement feels forced as well.
12. 00:58:586 (1,2) - Same as above.
13. 01:14:986 (1,2,3,4,5) - This is way too much for an extra difficulty, the amount of objects in a such a short time feels too dense in my opinion.

Best of luck.

rip rank

#2000 post ewe

Stop rushing the bubbles guys!

actually I didn't want to mod but it seems like this map needs some. :v

[Easy]
• In the beginning I can't really figure out your system of how ur whistles are placed. It definitely can't be that one "whoosh" sound because it would make the hitsounding inconsistent except you wanted it to be lol.
• 00:48:186 (2) - Why didn't you place this slider on the previous red tick for the vocals? You used 1/2 in the kiai too, so this would be a great transition if you ask me.
• 01:09:386 (3) - Shouldn't there be a clap on the sliderhead? Seems inconsistent otherwise.

[Normal]
• 00:10:386 (5) - Not really satisfying that the downbeat which has a prominent sound on it is not clickable.
• 01:17:386 (1,1) - ^ and especially here you can't use an excuse because there's no reason at all to ignore it.

[Advanced]
• 00:24:186 (6) - A kickslider in an Advanced? It's already meh to use them in a Hard.
• 00:35:786 (3,4,5) - Not really a problem, but why would you use a custom stack so randomly?

Hard is fine, but I really don't know what to say about the spacing in Insane. For that difficulty it seems way too much sometimes.

Glancing through the map, I have to withdraw it from the qualified pool for now. Please reply properly to the above suggestions and good luck with requalification.

Ok. Will take a look later.

Hula wrote:

Stop rushing the bubbles guys!

We don't. Actually I looked at Gero and Stjpa suggestions and kinda agree on 2-3 max of them. To me the map was fine and play fine too, so we can't call that a "rush" :/

If you scrutinize hard enough, you can comment/suggest changes on any map. There's no sense in spiting the BN's involved, because objectively there is nothing wrong. Subjectively, people can always disagree and that's perfectly fine. These disagreements have nothing to do with BN's rushing their decision to icon/qualify this set.

Good luck with ranking. Imo, it's only rushed if obvious unrankable issues are overlooked, like unused hitsounds etc... which doesn't seem to be the case here.

Hello again, I'll start by responding to the concerns that were raised and hopefully we can get to an agreement about the state of this map.

Gero wrote:

Hello, congratulations for get this mapset qualified but there are some things that concern me a lot and for obvious reasons could be improved.

DiFf_(k)NAME

1. 00:01:586 (1,1,1,1) - These kind of patterns look good and are awesome if they fit, but this is not the case here. In this song the music and the voice at the beginning sound consistent and there technically is no change in the music. I would like to recommend you to do something different instead. That's just wrong, the background sound is being increased in volume, the vocals become more intense, I am trying to understand why you would say something like that. I like that, it fits, it plays well, it looks well, so I can't really agree on that.
2. 00:05:586 - 00:10:586 - The whole section is quite weird itself, due to that there are some beats that were completely ignored so it can be somehow difficult to understand and to play play also these changes of speeds doesn't helps at all neither. It's not complicated at all. Did you even try playing it? Lett me start with the SV changes: 00:08:586 (8) - Done to make the reverse arrow more visible, it has no impact on the gameplay, at all. 00:08:986 (1) - Returning to the original SV before this change. 00:09:586 (1) - Slight increase to make a transition into the next section, since 0.5 -> 1.5 is quite huge, reducing the gap helps. As for the section itself, I can't follow everything, it sounds awful, takes emphasization from vocals, too dense and more stuff, present rhythms are well thought and placed, if you had any suggestion for improvement, I'd like to hear that.
3. 00:29:786 (1,2) - Could you explain to me why you've used a spacing lower at this section in compared to the rest that is technically the same kind of rhythm and that you've added jumps there? Valid concern. But, the patterns in this section use mostly the same rhythm and similar pattern structure, I am not using the same spacing all over this section, it makes it unnecessarily boring. Perhaps it looks a bit odd in the editor, but I can assure you that the whole section plays really well, this specific pattern does not stand out. I'll elaborate a bit more on the spacing anyway - it is quite similar to 00:28:186 (1,2,3) - in that manner, the pattern looks different, but it is spaced the same, giving emphasization to the last slider, if it's such a huge concern I might change it, but it doesn't really matter in my opinion.
4. 00:10:586 (1,1) - The pitch in both sections feels almost the same. The only difference is the sound finish at the background but the voice seems like the same, so a change of speed in this part makes no sense at all. Please, try putting a bit more thought, it's clearly obvious for everyone. 00:10:586 (1) - The sound here is unexpected, giving it huge SV allows the momentum of the surprise to be actually played, at first I wanted to extend 00:10:386 (3) - just to follow the vocals, but it was awful, so I had to follow this note, even though it disturbs the vocals, hence the surprise. 00:10:786 (1) - There's nothing new on the sliderhead, some weird sound started playing but the intensity from the previous slider is gone, reducing the SV is just appropriate, but I ended up making this whole section gimmicky and fun, and it makes sense too.
5. 00:32:786 (7,1,2) - I really don't understand the point of the constantly mapped into a double BPM and then go back to typical 1/2 rhythm? actually this could be even more confused due that the previous object is 1/4 and then swap it into 1/2 is difficult to read anyways I'm quite sure that most of the players will be confused or probably will fail that part so I would suggest you remap the whole pattern by anything else. It is done because the rhythm changes, unlike the previous patterns, there are no vocals at 00:32:986 (1) -, meaning I can't use the same pattern there, anyway there isn't any point of having 00:32:786 (7) - as a 1/4 slider because of the sudden shift to a single 1/2, it just plays odd, I did try it before and it did not work at all. No players got confused here, they aren't supposed to predict how the song plays, but read it and react accordingly, how are you so sure they will fail?
6. 01:03:786 (1,2,3,1,2,3,4,5,6,1) - The same thing happens here, just that in this part it is a bit different - but I guess you get the idea. I don't, we are not in the kiai anymore this is an intersection between both kiai sections, mapping any 1/4 on those 01:03:786 (1,2,3) - is just wrong, nothing supports it, and it takes away the intensity and impact of the next stream.
7. 00:40:386 (2) - This SV makes no sense, the vocal is not that much lower to do something like this. Yeah, this is gimmicky, might a bit hard to understand it immediately. I had explained this whole section before in some comment that I can't seem to find, so I'll just explain again. 00:37:786 (1) - till 00:47:386 (1) - is a section that can get cut to 3 sections, the first two are quite similar, vocal intensity is medium+- and it doesn't really change much, therefore they are mirroring each other, the thitd section is irrelevant in this explanation so I'll cut to the mentioned slider - because the sections are mirrored, the last and first notes of the first and second sections respectively are identical, I wanted to make something that allows the player to actually sense the cut between the sections, the slow reverse slider does it in a nice fashion, both time the head hits it's on a vocal and the slider doesn't put any pressure at all as he plays a mere transition into the upcoming section (I use this word a lot don't I)
8. 00:43:286 - How about to add something clickable here? There are some sounds that are quite noticeable. It's not that noticeable in my opinion, but it does exist. I did follow this note on Insane but not here, my claim behind this is because I want the mirroring pattern to be kinda perfect, the triplet wouldn't work if a sliderend is a part of it, it's just odd. Yeah this might not be the best explanation, but I simply wish to undermap it.
9. 00:51:186 (1,2,3,4,5) - Overall it's not that bad but I'm pretty sure that this could be more polished, try to make it consistent. I am lost on this one, what do you mean by making it more consistent? Spacing is increasing, creating a triangle that builds itself from inside, what's wrong here?
10. 00:56:386 (1,2,5) - I think these kind of jumps are quite inconsistent because the background sound seems like the same all the time and having jumps like this is weird and obviously plays bad. Listen to the violin, I tried following the drums too but as the strongest drums land on the blue ticks it's quite hard, the violin supports this pattern really well, nothing I can add here. But I wonder, how did you conclude that it plays bad? I don't really like this judgement.
11. 00:57:186 (7,1) - What are you trying to emphasize here? Last violin note, it's held and placing it this way makes the whole pattern consistent, along with some buildup to the upcoming vocals.
12. 00:57:786 (3,4,5,6) - I really would like to see other kind of patterns here, apparently your intention to make it fun is great but the kind of flow you've used seems inappropiate and the cursormovement feels forced as well. Hm, it can be improved indeed, changed.
13. 00:58:586 (1,2) - Same as above. That's actually just fine, a bit forceful yeah, but the drums supports it regardless, it's cool.
14. 01:14:986 (1,2,3,4,5) - This is way too much for an extra difficulty, the amount of objects in a such a short time feels too dense in my opinion. Egh.. what? It's literally a 1/4 stream, the whole song is as dense as this.

Best of luck.

Stjpa wrote:

actually I didn't want to mod but it seems like this map needs some. :v

[Easy]
• In the beginning I can't really figure out your system of how ur whistles are placed. It definitely can't be that one "whoosh" sound because it would make the hitsounding inconsistent except you wanted it to be lol. They were copied from the highest diff, but because it is not as dense as the other one the hitsounds are different, fixed it up a bit.
• 00:48:186 (2) - Why didn't you place this slider on the previous red tick for the vocals? You used 1/2 in the kiai too, so this would be a great transition if you ask me. I definitely agree, it's much better.
• 01:09:386 (3) - Shouldn't there be a clap on the sliderhead? Seems inconsistent otherwise. Claps are on redtick, so nope.

[Normal]
• 00:10:386 (5) - Not really satisfying that the downbeat which has a prominent sound on it is not clickable. It's fine, main focus is the vocals, and the halt after the downbeat creates a nice effect with the sliderend.
• 01:17:386 (1,1) - ^ and especially here you can't use an excuse because there's no reason at all to ignore it. There is, vocals. Same happens on advanced but you haven't said anything.

[Advanced]
• 00:24:186 (6) - A kickslider in an Advanced? It's already meh to use them in a Hard. It's pretty good with the violin, what's wrong?
• 00:35:786 (3,4,5) - Not really a problem, but why would you use a custom stack so randomly? It was stacked normally before, however someone suggested I do this to avoid overlapping with 00:35:186 (2) - because of the stack leniency.

Hard is fine, but I really don't know what to say about the spacing in Insane. For that difficulty it seems way too much sometimes.

First of all, I thank you both for your time you took to help and improve this set.

Now, as for the set and the disqualification themselves, the whole situation is just disrespectful, and not for me, but for Nozhomi and Kibbleru (and the many other people who helped me and mod this map), whom spent a lot of time looking through the set several times. Yes, this is not your regular extra difficulty. Yes, I am known for not being a consistent mapper. Yes, my maps are not for everyone. Yet, I did gather many opinions, from both mappers and players. I fixed inconsistencies to be more respectful to the RC. I am trying to make everyone happy while keeping my vision in tact (which obviously is almost impossible to achieve, but still).

I do not want to offend anyone, but at this point, after the Extra difficulty was checked by many eyes, you can't just judge it without playing it properly, the patterns were placed with lots of thoughts, ideas, improvements. Some may look weird on paper (the editor) but they end up playing really well while making sense, I almost never place notes randomly, I enjoy thinking about connections and then applying them. Sometimes they end extremely fun and great, and sometimes they are not that good, when that happens I obviosuly try to improve / change it by myself or by other's opinions.

As Monstrata mentioned above, "If you scrutinize hard enough, you can comment/suggest changes on any map". You can always suggest stuff on people's maps, mainly because mapping can be done in many ways, some are bad, some are not, some are likeable by certain people and some are not. If you wish to understand my thoughts behind this set, you can just PM me and I'll gladly explain, but don't be disrespectful towards the work done by me, the modders and the other BNs.

Avishay wrote:

you can't just judge it without playing it properly

First wrong point, with experience you can judge mostly any kind of map.

Avishay wrote:

you can just PM me and I'll gladly explain, but don't be disrespectful towards the work done by me, the modders and the other BNs.

Disrespectful? for posting their concerns about your map during Qualified period? qualified period is supposed to be the time where your map get criticism from the community, the one being disrespectful is you, by discouraging people from checking qualify maps, is true that Hula was a bit rude, but take a more deep look to Gero mod, I think you can still improve your map with it.

anyways GL with this

Natsu wrote:

Avishay wrote:

you can't just judge it without playing it properly

First wrong point, with experience you can judge mostly any kind of map.

Avishay wrote:

you can just PM me and I'll gladly explain, but don't be disrespectful towards the work done by me, the modders and the other BNs.

Disrespectful? for posting their concerns about your map during Qualified period? qualified period is supposed to be the time where your map get criticism from the community, the one being disrespectful is you, by discouraging people from checking qualify maps, is true that Hula was a bit rude, but take a more deep look to Gero mod, I thn you could still improve your map with it.

anyways GL with this

My opinion differs from yours, as long as this is not a traditional map, you still may interpret it in a bad way, even if you are experienced.

It is disrespectful because when you say "obviously plays bad" while you most likely didn't even play it properly. I am open for criticism but when it's done in such manner it's infuriating.

Is a really normal map, it doesn't have nothing special apart of the comboing in 00:49:186 (1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1) - and a lot of inconsistencies (even i have a similar map in graveyard and did icon a few), double bpm mapping isn't new, then again you suppose he didn't play the map, even tho I saw him testing it alot, that's why supposing stuff is bad, specially in a normal map which isn't hard to play at all. Anyways maybe I'll take a look as well after sleep a bit.

Even if he did, (and again, sorry for being rude) I can't expect him to play it well on his skill level. Yeah it's double bpm but it's a really small minority, the NCs are irrelevant.

Please note that I am not mad, I did not decline most of Gero's mod because of saltiness, those are my honest thoughts.

Natsu wrote:

qualified period is supposed to be the time where your map get criticism from the community

I really didn't want to post in this map thread because I feel like the highest diff's basic concept is sound but could do with large swaths of remapping entirely to pin down the concept (right now with everyone pointing out minor flaws and errors you end up with a patchwerk mess, better to remap with so many bandaids being forced onto it)

but


what the f*** is that supposed to mean?

I thought qualification was supposed to be about QAT checking to make sure maps are error free in the sense that anything clearly looked over (missing hitsounds, wrong snaps, unrankability, etc)

not about having "the community" (which almost always consists of the same handful of people) point out personal judgements on a person's mapping style.


This is just an example, but if you, a modder, were to say "These kind of patterns look good and are awesome if they fit, but this is not the case here. In this song the music and the voice at the beginning sound consistent and there technically is no change in the music. I would like to recommend you to do something different instead." and the mapper were to respond "the volume itself is increasing and thus the spacing and slider speeds are" then that's all that's necessary.


I'm tired of people throwing pointless walls of text to make their posts look big and scary during qualification. It's underhanded and disgusting. Stick to any actual, valid concerns about the rankability of certain patterns. If you think the flow is shit, if you don't like how it plays, go somewhere else. There are hundreds of other maps in pending that could do with that sort of modding. Keep it out of qualification. If it's good enough for a handful of other BNs, then it's good enough for ranking - whether you personally like it or not.