1. osu! forums
  2. Beatmaps
  3. Ranked/Approved Beatmaps
show more
posted
same

ty!
posted
[Marathon]
  1. 00:26:500 (5,7) - better to NC imo
  2. 00:32:996 (11,12) - change to a slider? better to keep consistency with 00:30:261 (5) - imo
  3. 00:52:825 (1,1) - a bit concerned about the ds here cuz the spacing is the same as 00:52:141 (8,1) - but it's 3/2 rather than 1/2.
    How about swaping 00:54:705 (1,3) - or 00:54:705 (1,2) - ? Looks cool as well.
  4. 01:15:560 - add a note? the beat is as strong as 01:15:218 (4) - and would be consistent with 01:16:415 (3,4,5,6) - .
  5. 01:26:329 (3,1) - since you emphasise the downbeat 01:25:304 - by a jump 01:25:133 (6,1) - ,why use such small ds here?
  6. 01:31:799 (3,1) - same here,you should emphasis by a jump for both two or both use stack
  7. 01:33:338 (7) - stack it with 01:32:483 (2) - slider head should be fine, i think ds is now a bit too big
  8. 01:36:928 (1,1) - as above
  9. 01:43:936 (6,7,8) - ctrl+J? would play much more fun and flow will be nice
    http://puu.sh/qTPt0/8bba00c3d9.jpg
  10. 01:44:278 (1) - cancel NC
  11. 01:47:697 (2) - ctrl+J? it flows better and also looks neat.
  12. 01:55:389 (1,2) - the only 2 sliders that are not identical compared with 01:47:184 (1,2) - 01:49:919 (1,2) - 01:52:654 (1,2) - etc.
  13. 02:04:962 (3,4) - 02:05:645 (3,4) - sounds like 1/4...how about swap 02:04:449 (4,5) - 02:05:133 (4,5) - 02:05:816 (4,5) - ?this also fits 02:03:594 (1,2,1) - flow better.
  14. 02:25:303 - 02:25:388 - add notes here.
  15. 03:10:772 (2,4) - stack?looks better lol
  16. 03:33:422 - clearly there should be a note here as a drum sound.03:33:165 (5,6,7,8,9,10) - make it a stream.
  17. 03:47:353 (8,1) - distance is really too big,try a smaller one?
  18. 03:59:832 (1,2) - why is this different from 04:00:174 (3,4,5) - ?should be 4 sliders imo
  19. 04:34:875 (4,5) - swap these two so flow and spacing will be better. also there's emphasis on 04:35:046 -
  20. 04:42:225 (4) - NC for better readability
  21. 04:47:183 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7) - doesnt fit here imo,at least NC 04:47:695 (4) - ot it will be really hard to play.
  22. 04:49:063 (1,1) - dont stack,do sth similar to 04:40:858 (1,1) - 04:43:593 (1,1) -
  23. 04:50:430 - i really don't like the NC spam here. although it's 1.5x and 1.0x, you can put 2 in a group so 04:50:772 (1,1) - etc. NC can be cancelled.
    The music actually suggests that 2 in a group is fine,so i guess making it 1,2,1,2...looks better.Too many NCs will only mess up this part.
  24. 05:12:311 (1,2,3) - flow is too straight, mind changing to a more friendly one?
  25. 05:28:892 (2,3) - why not swap these 2...sudden stack just plays really really weird.also if you need stack 05:28:379 (6,7) - should be stacked instead of 05:28:721 (1,2) - if you listen to the music and compare with 05:33:849 (6,7) -
  26. 05:31:627 (2,3) - 05:34:362 (2,3) - 05:37:097 (2,3) - 05:39:832 (2,3) - swap cuz the music should be emphasised but not a stack.
  27. 05:44:789 (1) - maybe change a shape cuz it's exactly the same as 05:01:029 (1) - ...
  28. 06:01:883 (1,2,3) - bit hard to read imo
  29. 06:56:584 (2,3) - 06:59:319 (3,4) - 07:04:789 (3,4,5,6,7) - 07:07:781 (3,4,5,6) - 07:10:259 (3,4,5) - ds should be consistent,especially the last one.
  30. 08:36:926 (6) - ctrl+G?only place where 08:36:926 (6,7) - has large spacing
  31. 08:53:849 - the stream from here is really too long,44 notes......you should break it apart,such as use sliders 08:54:533 - .I can't accept a stream with 44 notes here...there's not even a change in the song but more notes=more intense.
  32. 10:06:670 (3,1) - ds feels like 1/2 if you look at 10:06:499 (2,3) -
  33. 10:40:516 (1) - actually i think tick rate 1 is better..cuz so many white dots on the slider,looks horrible
  34. 12:51:120 (1,2) - increase spacing here?too small imo
`
Too tired,will do the second half later...

[continue]
  1. 14:13:342 (5,6) - too big compared with 14:02:402 (5,6) -
  2. 14:35:222 (6,7,1) - ^
  3. 15:50:436 (4,1,2) - this flow...too blunt and ds is a bit imbalanced
  4. 16:19:154 (1,2,3) - 1/2 but spacing is the same as 16:18:128 (5,6,1) - ,why?it's really confusing..
  5. 18:09:069 (1,1) - maybe overlap instead of stack
  6. 20:19:496 (4,5,1) - weird spacing

Call me back.
posted
[Marathon]
  1. 00:26:500 (5,7) - better to NC imo I used new combo for piano pitch change in this section
  2. 00:32:996 (11,12) - change to a slider? better to keep consistency with 00:30:261 (5) - imo similar story, has to do with piano pitch, I used sliders for those like at 00:35:047 (3,4,5) -
  3. 00:52:825 (1,1) - a bit concerned about the ds here cuz the spacing is the same as 00:52:141 (8,1) - but it's 3/2 rather than 1/2.
    How about swaping 00:54:705 (1,3) - or 00:54:705 (1,2) - ? Looks cool as well.
  4. 01:15:560 - add a note? the beat is as strong as 01:15:218 (4) - and would be consistent with 01:16:415 (3,4,5,6) - . I focused on two instruments here which is 01:25:987 (1,2,3) - and drums, like that part you mentioned is pretty much the same as in kiai just quieter and at 01:16:928 (6) - it has the sound I'm following just like at 01:27:868 (4) - etc
  5. 01:26:329 (3,1) - since you emphasise the downbeat 01:25:304 - by a jump 01:25:133 (6,1) - ,why use such small ds here? because those are 1/1 gaps and jump for emphasis just wouldn't work, so I just used it for aesthetics instead. same applies for the rest to be consistant in spacing
  6. 01:31:799 (3,1) - same here,you should emphasis by a jump for both two or both use stack
  7. 01:33:338 (7) - stack it with 01:32:483 (2) - slider head should be fine, i think ds is now a bit too big nah it's intended, most intense in the section, it's similar to 01:38:808 (4) - 01:27:868 (4) -
  8. 01:36:928 (1,1) - as above
  9. 01:43:936 (6,7,8) - ctrl+J? would play much more fun and flow will be nice
    http://puu.sh/qTPt0/8bba00c3d9.jpg
  10. 01:44:278 (1) - cancel NC
  11. 01:47:697 (2) - ctrl+J? it flows better and also looks neat. 01:47:184 (1) - ctrl j on this instead because my original intention was to make it similar to 01:48:722 (2,3) - just idk what happened there
  12. 01:55:389 (1,2) - the only 2 sliders that are not identical compared with 01:47:184 (1,2) - 01:49:919 (1,2) - 01:52:654 (1,2) - etc.
  13. 02:04:962 (3,4) - 02:05:645 (3,4) - sounds like 1/4...how about swap 02:04:449 (4,5) - 02:05:133 (4,5) - 02:05:816 (4,5) - ?this also fits 02:03:594 (1,2,1) - flow better.
  14. 02:25:303 - 02:25:388 - add notes here. nah I emphasize certain notes this way
  15. 03:10:772 (2,4) - stack?looks better lol I like the current flow a lot
  16. 03:33:422 - clearly there should be a note here as a drum sound.03:33:165 (5,6,7,8,9,10) - make it a stream. it's because I wanted to emphasize 03:33:507 (8) - with a jump, not very easy to emphasize such things with a stream
  17. 03:47:353 (8,1) - distance is really too big,try a smaller one? most of the section focuses on emphasizing that note so I'll keep and it's rather cosistant anyway 03:36:413 (8,1) - 03:46:157 (1) -
  18. 03:59:832 (1,2) - why is this different from 04:00:174 (3,4,5) - ?should be 4 sliders imo because 04:00:003 (2) - has vocal aswell, the rest of the red ticks on the slider don't
  19. 04:34:875 (4,5) - swap these two so flow and spacing will be better. also there's emphasis on 04:35:046 - actually disagree, because if I swap them then the flow of 04:34:362 (2,3,5) - would become linear and that kinda of flow I don't really like, also 04:35:046 (5) - is already emphasized, it's the biggest jump right now http://image.prntscr.com/image/570dc128 ... c16d43.png
  20. 04:42:225 (4) - NC for better readability no, I indicated 1/1 gaps with NC so it would break my idea
  21. 04:47:183 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7) - doesnt fit here imo,at least NC 04:47:695 (4) - ot it will be really hard to play. I have jumps on drums, and as said NC indicates 1/1 gaps right now
  22. 04:49:063 (1,1) - dont stack,do sth similar to 04:40:858 (1,1) - 04:43:593 (1,1) -
  23. 04:50:430 - i really don't like the NC spam here. although it's 1.5x and 1.0x, you can put 2 in a group so 04:50:772 (1,1) - etc. NC can be cancelled.
    The music actually suggests that 2 in a group is fine,so i guess making it 1,2,1,2...looks better.Too many NCs will only mess up this part.
  24. 05:12:311 (1,2,3) - flow is too straight, mind changing to a more friendly one?
  25. 05:28:892 (2,3) - why not swap these 2...sudden stack just plays really really weird.also if you need stack 05:28:379 (6,7) - should be stacked instead of 05:28:721 (1,2) - if you listen to the music and compare with 05:33:849 (6,7) - changed 05:28:379 (6,7) - only
  26. 05:31:627 (2,3) - 05:34:362 (2,3) - 05:37:097 (2,3) - 05:39:832 (2,3) - swap cuz the music should be emphasised but not a stack. stacks for the instrument I follow, jumps for drums
  27. 05:44:789 (1) - maybe change a shape cuz it's exactly the same as 05:01:029 (1) - ... uhh what's wrong with having same shape, it's even better imo because people will know what do expect when they see it again
  28. 06:01:883 (1,2,3) - bit hard to read imo better than completely overlapping imo
  29. 08:36:926 (6) - ctrl+G?only place where 08:36:926 (6,7) - has large spacing slider leniency so the spacing is the same http://image.prntscr.com/image/07f0c341 ... be69b4.png
  30. 08:53:849 - the stream from here is really too long,44 notes......you should break it apart,such as use sliders 08:54:533 - .I can't accept a stream with 44 notes here...there's not even a change in the song but more notes=more intense. meh, it was 128 note stream before lol, but I tried, to make it even easier, I don't even see what's so hard about it, spacing is really low
  31. 10:06:670 (3,1) - ds feels like 1/2 if you look at 10:06:499 (2,3) - again indicating with NCs that those are 1/1, noone had problems reading that so far.
  32. 20:19:496 (4,5,1) - weird spacing indicating with nc again, plus rather calm, also noone messed it up ever
Too tired,will do the second half later...
ty! changed all but red
posted
@sahuang

12:51:120 (1,2) - increase spacing here?too small imo - sure
15:50:436 (4,1,2) - this flow...too blunt and ds is a bit imbalanced - made the pattern a bit "easier" to play also the flow should be less blunt
16:19:154 (1,2,3) - 1/2 but spacing is the same as 16:18:128 (5,6,1) - ,why?it's really confusing.. - ok made it denser so it stands out from the triples
18:09:069 (1,1) - maybe overlap instead of stack - ok

thank
posted
14:13:342 (5,6) - too big compared with 14:02:402 (5,6) -
14:35:222 (6,7,1) - ^

ok

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/751 ... hon%5D.osu
posted
Did irc only to fix 1 NC.
The marathon seems fine to me,let's try.
My first flame w
posted
gratz
posted
o
posted
woah, finally it's happening!

thanks to everyone that helped, especially the GDers and nominators!
posted
thank you so much
posted
Congratz. Not a big fan of liquicity, but EDM is EDM /o/
posted
Such a great compilation :)
posted
congrats dude, you really deserve it
posted
gratz 20min app
posted
Fucking overlaps lol.
Good map anyway, grats! :D
posted
wtf , you guy so crazy 20min!

gratz :)
posted
huge work , you're the man!

13:35:564 - HOLY SHIT YES

rip the muzzy song on it ;_; WANTED TO DO IT
posted
yay ranked, thank you everyone
posted
\o\ yay /o/
posted
What a journey. Very nice :')
Please sign in to reply.