Nwolf wrote:

hi, I have a few concerns~

00:00:508 (1) - I know this was a last minute addition and it's kinda evil to point this out, out of all things, however currently I (and someone who I discussed this with) feel that it could have worked nicer since at the moment, it's very loud compared to the few sounds this spinner is mapped to. My suggestion would be to silence this spinner (5/10%) and possibly even to restart the spinner 00:05:093 - here with a slightly higher volume (20-30%) - maybe even having the volume working similar to 05:05:093 - but going up instead of down. Restarting the spinner would also fit to the last spinner. i understand what do you mean, i was thinking about that a lot, but i think keeping as a normal volume there it's better, also, before i wasn't able to change the volume because the red line was in 00:14:265 - , if happens a dq (hope not lol) probably i'll change

01:01:017 (213,214,215,216,217,218,219) - Maybe you did this for playability, but this could follow the song slightly more accurate, mainly 01:01:081 - 01:01:463 - these two spots. not a bad idea, it's nice, but yes, i would like to keep this as kddkddkddk for playability

01:32:800 (124,125,126,127) - Why 1/6? The thing below I can understand more than this one, where I can't find a reason... as i said to other bn, it's ddk but 1/6 dddk fits really nice there imo, it's overmapping, yes, but nobody complains about that, as i said, sounds fine for me

03:43:692 (17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,29,30,31,32,33,34,35,36) - I'm pretty sure you put thought into this, but please please please reconsider the usage of 1/6 here. I know ddkkddkk is not a solution, so is repeating the same pattern, but I also don't think using 1/6 is. One suggestion would be 1/4 ddkdkkdk, which is a minor pattern change. If you keep 1/6, give a reason why. Except if it's the one I mentioned, then I successfully argumented against myself. i used 1/6 because the guitar it feels hmm.. like more intense? as i said to some people, i know it's the hardest part (imo) of the map, but fits really nice, i wouldn't overmap if sounds weird but in this case it sounds nice in my opinion, i want to keep the pattern, not for the pp, because if i wanted pp i would put something like (kddk)d(kddk)d(kddk) etc, but nope, in this case i used (dddk)k(dddk)k(dddk)k because it feels nice with guitars, i hope you understand.


also other stuff that I wouldn't request a DQ for tho:

01:26:781 (88) - Could be a kat so the vocals 01:26:877 (89) - here are emphasized a little bit better without making it a kat. both patterns sounds nice for me, not bad idea your pattern but i prefer mine ><

03:34:711 (81,82,83,84,85) - Either 03:34:807 (82) - or 03:35:093 (85) - should be turned into a kat, as this sounds very similar to the other kkddk patterns here. 82 being kat would make the bass on 83 more noticeable, kat on 85 follows snare wanted to use kdddd there because more simple and the dddd fits nice with the guitar imo, also, i think before it was kkddk but if i don't bad remember Judy suggested me this and imo sounds better as kdddd.

03:57:068 (17) - Would make sense to me if this was a big note instead of 03:56:304 (15) - as there's loud guitar here similar to all 2/1 notes before. 03:57:068 - not decided to put big note there due to d ddk it plays better than D ddk, it's like a rest calm so.. xD


(As a side note before anyone throws this at me, I sightread fc'd this thanks bye. Apparently that's a counter-argument people love to use??)


Final note: Generally I enjoy this map a lot, it follows a clear rhythm and plays very nicely, kudos for that! glad to hear that :3

_Gezo_ wrote:

Well someone is going to be called a ripoff for diff name and that someone is me ayy

Hanjamon wrote:

Nwolf wrote:

00:00:508 (1) - I know this was a last minute addition and it's kinda evil to point this out, out of all things, however currently I (and someone who I discussed this with) feel that it could have worked nicer since at the moment, it's very loud compared to the few sounds this spinner is mapped to. My suggestion would be to silence this spinner (5/10%) and possibly even to restart the spinner 00:05:093 - here with a slightly higher volume (20-30%) - maybe even having the volume working similar to 05:05:093 - but going up instead of down. Restarting the spinner would also fit to the last spinner. i understand what do you mean, i was thinking about that a lot, but i think keeping as a normal volume there it's better, also, before i wasn't able to change the volume because the red line was in 00:14:265 - , if happens a dq (hope not lol) probably i'll change

OnosakiHito wrote:

Everythings fine now. As it was a minor change we can go directly for requalification.

Requalified.