Kawawa wrote:

펜딩슬롯 넘나 넘치는것

Fresh Chicken wrote:

Kawawa wrote:

펜딩슬롯 넘나 넘치는것

넘나 좋은것

Garalulu wrote:

Hi
Looooooooooooooooooooong time no c

col
1|2|3|4|5|6|7
[BASIC]

1. 00:01:011 - 00:01:984 - 개인적인 의견이지만 이 파트도 충분히 긴 사운드니 롱놋으로 표현해주면 좋겠구만
2. 00:05:389 (5389|6,5713|6) - 꼭 같은 col에 두어야 할 필요는 없는듯. PR을 고려해 00:05:713 (5713|6) - 를 5col로 움직이면 이쁘겠다
3. 00:32:956 (32956|1) - 롱놋 길이가 살짝 애매한데, 00:32:956 - 00:33:281 - , 00:33:281 - 00:33:605 - 가 각각의 멜로디니까 00:33:281 - 까지로 길이를 줄이면
   좋겠다
4. 00:39:605 - suggestion, 드럼이 강하게 3개 내려찍는 구조니까 다른 패턴과 차별성을 두게 같은 col에 위치하는 건 어때
5. 01:10:902 (70902|5) - 왜 안 대칭요 불ㅡ편

[Wonki's NOVICE]

1. 01:37:254 - Maybe 하나 빼먹은듯

[Reba's ADVANCED]

1. 00:32:470 - 드럼 하나 빼묵었구만 냠냠
2. 00:44:794 - 00:45:443 - 이 파트와 동일한 파트 : 00:49:983 - 00:50:632 - , 00:55:173 - 00:55:821 - . 드럼 살짝 다른 부분 : 01:00:362 - 01:01:011 - . 전부
   모양이 다르니 좀 이상한듯. 통일성이 필요하다 - 나중에 전체적을 ㅗ손좀 보겠음
3. 01:57:119 - 01:57:362 - 이후 점프와 좀 낑기니까 약간 모양이 안이쁘넹 How about this?

[jaka::zip's EXHAUSTttttttttttttttttttt]

1. 00:10:902 - 00:12:362 - 못생겼네. 00:11:875 - 00:12:362 - 에 있는 롱놋이 멜로디 PR과 다르게 공간에 끼여있다는
   느낌이고, 00:11:713 - 굳이 여기에 노트 2개를 둬서 드럼을 강조할 필요가 있나 싶음. How about this? 기다란 롱놋의 길이도 상황에 따라 젖절히 조절해서 이렇게 배치하는 게 더 이쁘당
2. 00:47:713 - 00:48:038 - 이 부분과 00:58:092 - 00:58:416 - 이 부분의 모양이 다르네. 난 후자로 둘 다 만드는 게 이쁠것같다
3. 01:25:011 - 01:26:308 - 난 이 소리들이 노트 2개씩 넣을 만한 세기인지 잘 모르겠다. 01:56:146 - 01:57:443 - 와 비교해봐도 너무 작은 소리.
   
   난이도 명 좀 얼른 바꿔라 현기증 난다

[GRAVITY]

1. 00:42:200 - missing note 드람 yeah yeah
2. 00:47:065 - 00:47:389 - 읏딴 딴 표현을 확실히 하기위해 00:47:146 - 와 00:47:308 - 에 있는 노트가 00:47:794 (47794|3,47956|3) - 처럼 같은 col에 있는게 좋겠다 yeah
3. 00:57:443 - 00:57:767 - same issue with above yeah
4. 00:48:038 - 강한 드럼이 있는 것 치곤 노트수가 너무 적은듯 드럼 자체는 같음, 덥스텝 소리때문에 좀 부각되보이는것
5. 01:14:632 - 01:16:254 - 여기도 01:14:713 - 같은 소리에 세개 정돈 박아야할듯; 노트가 너무 빈다 - 잘못집은듯?
6. 01:16:254 - 01:21:119 - 여기도 드럼에 세개 정도 박아버려줭
   
   섹시한데 중간중간 스트림은 오히려 자카난이도보다 밀도가 낮으니깐 한번 체크해서 노트 싸게싸게 박아버리는게 좋을 것 같다

[]

DONE

Garalulu wrote:

Hi

저거 더넣으면 어려울거같아서 냅둠

DONE

Garalulu wrote:

Hi
Looooooooooooooooooooong time no c
[notice]col
1|2|3|4|5|6|7
[jaka::zip's EXHAUSTttttttttttttttttttt]

1. 00:10:902 - 00:12:362 - 못생겼네. 00:11:875 - 00:12:362 - 에 있는 롱놋이 멜로디 PR과 다르게 공간에 끼여있다는
   느낌이고, 00:11:713 - 굳이 여기에 노트 2개를 둬서 드럼을 강조할 필요가 있나 싶음. How about this? 기다란 롱놋의 길이도 상황에 따라 젖절히 조절해서 이렇게 배치하는 게 더 이쁘당 굳
2. 00:47:713 - 00:48:038 - 이 부분과 00:58:092 - 00:58:416 - 이 부분의 모양이 다르네. 난 후자로 둘 다 만드는 게 이쁠것같다 짧은 농놋
   연타로 통일했어
3. 01:25:011 - 01:26:308 - 난 이 소리들이 노트 2개씩 넣을 만한 세기인지 잘 모르겠다. 01:56:146 - 01:57:443 - 와 비교해봐도 너무 작은 소리. 흠터레스팅
   
   난이도 명 좀 얼른 바꿔라 현기증 난다 으악 업뎃 막으려고 난이도명 살짝 바꿨었는데 치킨형이 그대로 업로드하고 무덤갔어 으아악

DONE 도네

_VianK_ wrote:

hello 'w')/


1|2|3|4|5|6|7

jaka

00:27:605 (27605|1) - move this into col 4 why

00:31:497 (31497|3,31659|2) - ctrl +j 00:31:497 (31497|3,31659|2,31821|0,31983|1,32146|2) - PR

00:31:497 (31497|3,31659|2,37497|2,37659|1) - idk tbh, this is should be one LN? i think you have the old version of the map or smth,
i don't get what you're saying

00:42:038 (42038|4,42200|2) - ^ ^

00:48:956 (48956|5,49065|5) - intended lmao sorry

01:31:497 (91497|0) - start at this point, the pattern kinda monotone, please make them more variative, and also what are u doing with this section ( 01:31:983 (91983|0,91983|2,91983|1) - ) 3 note? drum=triple, hi-hat=single. being monotone is intended because why not lel

good luck

_VianK_ wrote:

hello 'w')/


1|2|3|4|5|6|7

gravity

00:21:281 (21281|3,21321|2,21362|1,21402|0,21524|2,21524|0) - too speaky tbh.. try this one https://puu.sh/yIapP/474b5950ca.png - seems fine

00:22:416 - add 1 LN again in 1 (?) - uhh why?

01:14:713 - add 1 note again since 01:14:470 - and 01:14:956 - 3 note - I'll remove 3 instead

i'm not sure if 4 note is a good idea, i more prefer if use LN

01:52:092 - 3 notes? - no for playable

jaka

00:27:605 (27605|1) - move this into col 4

00:31:497 (31497|3,31659|2) - ctrl +j

00:31:497 (31497|3,31659|2,37497|2,37659|1) - idk tbh, this is should be one LN?

00:42:038 (42038|4,42200|2) - ^

00:48:956 (48956|5,49065|5) -

01:31:497 (91497|0) - start at this point, the pattern kinda monotone, please make them more variative, and also what are u doing with this section ( 01:31:983 (91983|0,91983|2,91983|1) - ) 3 note?

good luck

Asherz007 wrote:

Hello!

Feru and I have had a little discussion over this map, and we have decided to disqualify this beatmap primarily for the reasons below. (Apologies for the last-minute dq, literally the earliest available moment for me to check the map)

My main concern here is about the hitsounds. I feel that the custom hitsounds blend far too much because of how similar they are to sounds in the audio, as well as them being at a lower volume. I would suggest making those hitsounds significantly louder so that they stand out more and/or replace with hitsounds that sound a little different compared to ones in the audio.

Does the world change? well blended hitsound is a one of reason of disqualify?

Another concern that Feru raised was the difficulty gap between NOVICE and ADVANCED at 00:48:686 (48686|3). To go from a 2/1 LN to a 1/6 burst felt like a little bit too much of a gap, so we'd strongly suggest buffing NOVICE at this point. (An example I could recommend would be to use 1/2 LNs here instead.)

This I could agree, I'll change NOV as you guys suggestion.

There are also a few hitsound inconsistencies in the lower difficulties, but I'll make those in a separate post to this one (since I needed to write this one quickly before it was too late) along with anything else that I want to suggest changes for.

Will refer your mod with this problem

Again, apologies for the last-minute dq.

You are just doing your job now so I think you shouldn't apologies for it?

Asherz007 wrote:

Ok, so here are the hitsound inconsistencies/inaccuracies that I found. Bear in mind that when applying hitsounds using the wcf method that it is possible to apply more than one hitsound to a note.

(Personally, I would also recommend using some sort of custom hitnormal as well, since it kinda gives a "mushy" feeling (literally don't know how else to describe this feeling lol) which I don't really think works well for this song; maybe some hi-hat of sorts.)

HS inaccuracies

These would only be suggestions based on the current hitsounds that you have; if you're changing them, then they might not be as relevant.

1. 00:17:551 to 00:22:740 - I feel like this section lacks a significant amount of F hitsounds here. You could (for example on GRAVITY) put them on each 4-note chord and then at 00:20:470 and every 1/1 after that.
2. 00:32:956 - I feel like the hitsounds here should be W and F rather than C and F.
3. 00:33:605 - ^
4. 00:51:281 - missing W
5. 00:58:416 and 00:58:740 - Might be better to have a C here instead? - No, this section is too quite for C.
   
6. 01:00:362 to 01:02:308 - I think you'd still be better off having the W hitsound every 1/1 here.
7. 01:21:119 to 01:24:686 - ^ - no, because a song itself have snare for each 1/1 sections, that is why I added C
8. 01:24:848 - W here as well?
9. 01:37:983 - I would probably think about using an F here instead of a C.
10. 01:47:146 and 01:47:308 - Personally feels a tiny bit odd not to have hitsounds here. (a W, maybe.)
11. 01:52:254 - Might want to add an F here. - I think no, there's no need F because song itself doesn't.
12. 01:52:254 to 01:57:362 - Again, might be better to use W over C here - ^

HS BASIC

1. 00:20:470 (20470|2) - All other difficulties have C here
2. 00:24:038 (24038|6) - Could apply F here as well
3. 00:34:416 (34416|4) - ^
4. 00:53:551 (53551|3) - Might be useful to add W here as well
5. 01:02:956 (62956|5,63281|3) - add C
6. 01:05:551 (65551|3) - add F

HS NOVICE

1. 00:01:984 (1984|4) - add W
2. 00:24:038 (24038|5) - add F
3. 00:32:956 (32956|3,33605|6) - Kinda confused as to why these have different hitsounds even though they're for the same thing. - Added F also like other difficulties.
4. 00:34:416 (34416|6) - add F
5. 00:44:794 (44794|1) - add W
6. 00:53:551 (53551|1) - add W
7. 00:55:173 (55173|3) - add F
8. 01:02:956 (62956|3) - add C
9. 01:05:551 (65551|5) - add F

And some other stuff I wanted to raise while looking through. (1|2|3|4|5|6|7)

BASIC

1. 01:16:578 (76578|5,76740|4) - Shouldn't this be a 1/1 LN? (Like with 01:06:200 (66200|4))
2. 01:47:713 (107713|3,107875|4,108038|5,108200|6) - pair of 1/1 LNs? - For emphasis first start of highlight parts, both.

Wonki's NOVICE

1. 00:33:443 - shouldn't there be two notes here like 00:32:632 (32632|0,32794|6)? -> ?? both are single
2. 00:59:713 (59713|0) - I'm kinda confused as to why this is over two distinct chords. I could understand the slight overlaps earlier as a stylistic choice, but this one I don't really understand.
3. 01:10:092 (70092|4) - I'm not entirely sure why the slightly more complex part of the phrase is mapped easier than the other section. It would perhaps be better to replace this with something like a 1/4 roll. - This sone should be understandable pattern because there have definitely what mapper intended (emphasising kick only)
4. 01:14:632 - Similar to above, I think this is a little too sparse for what the song is offering for you to use. You could (for example) use the extra toms and have (extra) notes at:
   
   1. 01:14:632
   2. 01:14:875
   3. 01:15:119
   4. 01:15:362
5. 01:54:848 - I swear, this bit is screaming "buff me pls" at me lmao. As it stands, I feel like this is a little underdone for what is meant to be the most intense section of the song, particularly compared to the rest of the kiai. Something you could do would be to make 01:54:848 (114848|2,115173|4,115497|1,115821|5) - have doubles instead and, at 01:56:146, going for a 1/4 stream instead of the 1/2 jumpstream here. yes but not 01:54:848 - adding note in here, doesn't relly effect much while playing.

Reba's ADVANCED

1. 01:26:308 - Perhaps an odd design choice not to put anything here? it's pretty silent, and could be understand if mapper intended to make this section empty
2. 01:31:335 (91335|4) - I feel like this should be in col 7 rather than 5 for a slight pitch relevancy thing; I don't really think the stack in 5 makes much sense here, or move 01:31:497 (91497|4,91821|4) to col 6 4 instead, you might check a mapper doesn't really care about pitch, so considered playability only
3. 01:47:551 (107551|1) - Are you sure you wanted this to be an LN?
4. 01:48:848 - Missing note in col 4?
5. 01:56:146 - I feel like this is slightly too dense compared to the rest of the difficulty. I would probably nerf to dense js rather than everything being doubles here. - This is definitely not hard as this difficulty is, yes if you are not able to play this chart, it looks hard, but this part is really well considered handbalance also technically has nothing problem, even all of highlight part 01:37:983 - ~ 01:54:848 - is more complexly harder

jakadswhydoallofyourgddiffnameshavereallyweirdtitleslol

I don't think I actually have anything important to say here, maybe wanna ask about ^ tho lol

GRAVITY

1. 00:22:416 (22416|2) - Wondering why this is just an LN rather than the 1/8 like 00:21:767 -(21767|6,21808|5,21848|4,21889|3,22092|0,22132|1,22173|2,22213|3,22254|6,22294|5,22335|4,22375|3) (they're following the same sound, after all.) - This part is much harder harder pitch, Thought use 1/16 first but that is not so good idea I guess, so a way of making difference with other 1/8 is using LN, that is why I don't use 1/8, make difference than other 1/8s,
2. 00:28:254 - Feel like you're missing a note in col 6/7
3. 00:58:902 (58902|4,59065|6) - Could potentially move to 6 and 5 respectively for some pr for 00:58:578 (58578|5,58740|6,58902|4) on that... sound thing - ?? already on 5, and even on 6 doesn't really effect so much, I'll keep it as it is.
4. 01:38:632 (98632|2,98632|3,98632|6,98632|1) - p sure having a 5th LN chord is a little odd since you don't do this on other occasions. Might be messing with the layering a little, seeing as 01:39:038 (99038|0,99200|2) - aren't doubles and probably should be from the looks of it. - I can't understand why it's odd or what should be a problem, and 01:39:038 - added, it seems my mistake.
5. 01:53:227 (113227|6,113227|4) - How come this is a 2-note chord rather than 4 (for the snare)? A suggestion would be to make 01:53:308 (113308|0,113308|2) a single (to avoid cluttering) and 01:54:767 (114767|5) - a double (because these aren't consistent with each other as it stands).No, there are all double stream except this 01:54:524 - part (because 01:54:848 - it gets more harder to play from here, so I make it 2-1-2-1 for good to play)
6. 01:57:119 (117119|1,117119|0,117119|2) - Might want to differentiate this somewhat from the other chords. Perhaps have this chord use [234] rather than the one before it to have emphasis via a note in the central column. - (234) pattern will shows helly hell to right spacebar players, so no

Also, Feerum did mention to me that the background is currently in a .png format, which is usually quite large in filesize, so it might be better to have it as a .jpg to reduce that by a fair amount. - I'll keep it as it is, doesn't feel too much to change it.

Fresh Chicken wrote:

Does the world change? well blended hitsound is a one of reason of disqualify?

Ranking Criteria wrote:

Hit sounds must be audible. Their purpose is to provide feedback, so hit sounds with extremely low volume or samples that blend with a song’s samples are unacceptable. Specific game modes list exceptions to this rule on their respective ranking criterias.