apple
01:38:689 (1,4) - not sure if you intended this or what but... is that a non-stacked object or it is a variation of an overlap from the previous patterns?
you
01:05:930 (4) - could you not stack it with 01:05:413 (2) - so it's consistent along with 01:10:930 (2,4) - ? looks sick without the stack, y'know
01:20:241 (2,3) - this is some sick anti-jump compared to (1,2) and (3,4). in case you wanna keep it, you could try nc'ing the current (4) so it's some cool nc'ing b)
01:36:965 (2,3,4,5) - rhythm is quite vague here, not because of your 1/2 placement of course, but in the bgm. i'd suggest you some sort of slider to follow the vocals or smth similar. to be hoenst, the current pattern is just too poor
01:38:689 (1,2,1,2) - do you remember the doubles at the very beginning of the map? imo, players (yehaaa, this happened to me while playing the map!!!) can misread these as 1/4s, so making them different from the ones on the beginning would be something cool!
call me back !!
01:38:689 (1,4) - not sure if you intended this or what but... is that a non-stacked object or it is a variation of an overlap from the previous patterns?
you
01:05:930 (4) - could you not stack it with 01:05:413 (2) - so it's consistent along with 01:10:930 (2,4) - ? looks sick without the stack, y'know
01:20:241 (2,3) - this is some sick anti-jump compared to (1,2) and (3,4). in case you wanna keep it, you could try nc'ing the current (4) so it's some cool nc'ing b)
01:36:965 (2,3,4,5) - rhythm is quite vague here, not because of your 1/2 placement of course, but in the bgm. i'd suggest you some sort of slider to follow the vocals or smth similar. to be hoenst, the current pattern is just too poor
01:38:689 (1,2,1,2) - do you remember the doubles at the very beginning of the map? imo, players (yehaaa, this happened to me while playing the map!!!) can misread these as 1/4s, so making them different from the ones on the beginning would be something cool!
call me back !!