KuroRyu wrote:

Did anyone pass this yet?

TequilaWolf wrote:

!

1. I love this song.
2. Try to find a hitsound replacement for the hit-whistle (seen here 00:54:101 (1) - ).

1. Is AR10 necessary? Isn't the HP too low for the song's intensity? AR 9.7/8 and HP 7?
2. 00:08:021 (1,2,1,2) - I kind of like how you angled the others differently in the previous two patterns (it helps emphasize the pitch shift visually), so maybe rotate the bottom one downwards some?
3. 00:08:501 (1,1,1,1) - 00:10:421 (1,1) - 00:12:341 (1,1,1) - 00:14:261 (1) - Pretty sure the guitar through here is 1/3rd (which could probably be mapped as 1/6th as well if you argued how it slurs together, but the beats land on 1/3rd). Its easiest to notice at 00:08:981 (1,1) - and if you listen to the guitar during the drums here 00:14:741 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - .
4. 00:25:301 (9) - Really sharp turn here mapped to nothing in-particular. Its a really minor thing though.
5. 00:35:861 (6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16) - Do you mind explaining the concept behind these? This pattern (compared to the last two) is a lot more linear which doesn't play as smoothly so I was wondering if there was any specific reason.
6. 01:03:701 (1,2) - I think these should be moved up a bit to better match the DS between 01:03:941 (1,2,1,2) - these.
7. 01:08:021 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - The DS beween these shouldn't be consistent (1>2, 3>4, 5>6) because the pitch is shifting downwards.
8. 01:09:461 (1,2,3) - Why are these so close together compared to 01:04:421 (1,2,3,4) - or 01:06:581 (1,2,3,4) - ? Also, why make the 3 a slider rather than 2 circles?
9. 01:11:501 (8,1) - Spacing here is a bit extreme compared to other places (unless you're using the drum intensity on 1 to justify it?)
10. 01:12:821 (3,1,2) - This is kind of an awkward transition because the previous pattern was a consistent zig-zag upwards and then you have to drop down to hit the 1. This definitely needs some changing.
11. 01:17:381 (1) - Why does kiai start here and not 01:15:221 (1) - here?
12. 01:22:901 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - The drums here do have a distinct difference between the patterns and it feels kind of weird that they're mapped the same. Why not do something similar to 01:17:381 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - there? (Not the pattern, just the differences in DS.)
13. 01:43:061 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - Gonna mention this again since I think its pretty important.
14. 01:45:701 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - DS on the second should probably be lower if you listen to the drums closely.
15. 02:28:181 (3,4) - This spacing is really sudden compared to the overall DS of this section, I'd probably move the slider up or condense the DS of the 5-note stream at 4.
16. 02:45:461 (1,2,3) - Make the DS on these larger to emphasize the extra layer of guitar compared to 02:44:981 (1,2,3) - .
17. 02:48:821 (1,2,3,1,2,3) - Same here.
18. 03:04:181 (1,2,3,1,2,3,1) - This should be a separate pattern from 03:03:221 (1,2,3,1,2,3) - this due to the pitch shift in the music. Also, I'd like to see another iteration of this part: 02:55:541 (1,2,3,1,2,3) - so maybe that would be a good way to throw it in there.
19. Overall, I am a bit worried about the playability of the triangular section, but I'm assuming you'll be getting more testplays on this before pushing it fully forward to rank anyway.
20. 03:38:741 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,1) - The speed of this song makes it sound super awkward with the miss spots in the roll, maybe make 5 a kick to help smooth it out?
21. 03:40:901 (1,2,3,4,5,6,1) - This pattern could be improved. Firstly, the distance between 1>3>5 is not consistent as seen here. Secondly, 03:41:021 (2,4,6) - this is a bit too large of a transition too fast, but it can be solved by keeping the 2 in the same spot and rotating it approximately -15 degrees. Finally, the 03:41:621 (1) - is kind of in the middle of nowhere in comparison to the previous pattern. I'd put it at x130 y326 as that follows your (fixed) spacing pattern of 1>3>5 as seen here. (The yellow one is my proposed change.)
22. 03:42:941 (4,1) - For such a strong beat on the 1, the 4 and 1 are quite close together, why is that?
23. 03:46:841 (8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,1) - Nazi, move these a pixel or two upwards to make the curve of the last combo look smoother.
24. 03:48:341 (5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,1) - Same thing here, except move it down and to the right a little.
25. 03:57:221 (1,2) - So originally I was going to suggest a spacing nerf due to your pattern and the tone changing, but upon closer inspect it would actually be better to make it a vertical jump similar to 03:56:261 (1,2,1,2) - as thats what you did to denote the tone shift before.
26. 04:01:301 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - These should have a smaller DS than the previous combo (even though its really pretty as it is right now) due to the pitch shift.
27. 04:03:141 (6,1) - This is a little bit iffy for me. Firstly, I think you should actually have a bit more space between the 6 and 1 due to the strong drum. Second, I think that the flow change here is a bit too sharp so perhaps lower the 1 slider as well.
28. When you get the chance, lets IRC about the 7th kiai. Its similar to Swamphell in that the rhythm could potentially be improved upon.
29. 04:16:361 (2,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1) - Nothing particularly wrong here other than its kind of just ugly? I'd like to see some curve in at least one of the combos.
30. 04:17:621 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - 04:18:341 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - Why is there no difference between these? Musically, the first combo has the drum on every white tick whereas the second has ride? (I think, I'm not great at matching the sounds with the names.)
31. 04:20:501 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - Please, the flow from 3>4>1>2 is painful. I like the concept a lot but see if theres a way you can rework the sequence of the second combo to make it a bit more smooth.
32. 04:25:301 (1,2,3) - Make these 1/6th sliders? (Or the first two I guess?)
33. 04:26:021 (1,2,3) - Make the second two 1/6ths?
34. 04:27:861 (1,2,1) - This transition is really rough, I'm not quite sure how you'd want to fix it but its a bit unrealistic in it's current state.
35. 05:47:701 (3,4,5) - Linear anti-jumps are kind of a no-no. Can you come up with an alternative for this?

Cryptic wrote:

At your request. This'll probably just be a quick/light check since it needs mods before an icon check.

[General]

1. I love this song.
2. Try to find a hitsound replacement for the hit-whistle (seen here 00:54:101 (1) - ).

[Eternal Darkness]

1. Is AR10 necessary? Isn't the HP too low for the song's intensity? AR 9.7/8 and HP 7?
   it's 250 bpm at 8 stars, I think anyone that plays this is comfortable with it being AR10, I'll raise hp to 7 for now though yes.
2. 00:08:021 (1,2,1,2) - I kind of like how you angled the others differently in the previous two patterns (it helps emphasize the pitch shift visually), so maybe rotate the bottom one downwards some?
   ok
3. 00:08:501 (1,1,1,1) - 00:10:421 (1,1) - 00:12:341 (1,1,1) - 00:14:261 (1) - Pretty sure the guitar through here is 1/3rd (which could probably be mapped as 1/6th as well if you argued how it slurs together, but the beats land on 1/3rd). Its easiest to notice at 00:08:981 (1,1) - and if you listen to the guitar during the drums here 00:14:741 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - .
   ok
4. 00:25:301 (9) - Really sharp turn here mapped to nothing in-particular. Its a really minor thing though.
   changed the curve on 00:25:721 (16,1) - to be sharp as well, I think it's fine on white tick and the fact that it's only 0.6 spacing, I just mixed stream patterns up a bit so it isn't too repetitive
5. 00:35:861 (6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16) - Do you mind explaining the concept behind these? This pattern (compared to the last two) is a lot more linear which doesn't play as smoothly so I was wondering if there was any specific reason.
   changed
6. 01:03:701 (1,2) - I think these should be moved up a bit to better match the DS between 01:03:941 (1,2,1,2) - these.
   ok
7. 01:08:021 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - The DS beween these shouldn't be consistent (1>2, 3>4, 5>6) because the pitch is shifting downwards.
   ok
8. 01:09:461 (1,2,3) - Why are these so close together compared to 01:04:421 (1,2,3,4) - or 01:06:581 (1,2,3,4) - ? Also, why make the 3 a slider rather than 2 circles?
   it's an absolute spacing deal, and the placement of sliders vs circles is just flow based except for the more intense parts where I use lots of circles 01:10:901 (1) -
9. 01:11:501 (8,1) - Spacing here is a bit extreme compared to other places (unless you're using the drum intensity on 1 to justify it?)
   yes, also happens on 01:31:781 (1) -
10. 01:12:821 (3,1,2) - This is kind of an awkward transition because the previous pattern was a consistent zig-zag upwards and then you have to drop down to hit the 1. This definitely needs some changing.
    the spacing is far too low to make a difference, I think it plays really easily because of how lenient sliders are, it's basically a 3/4th space you have there to aim that next circle
11. 01:17:381 (1) - Why does kiai start here and not 01:15:221 (1) - here?
    but it does start there where your second link is
12. 01:22:901 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - The drums here do have a distinct difference between the patterns and it feels kind of weird that they're mapped the same. Why not do something similar to 01:17:381 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - there? (Not the pattern, just the differences in DS.)
    the first one contains 2 groups of 4 of tom drums, second one has tom drums (medium spacing) + bass drums (low spacing) + snare drums (high spacing), gonna change the lower volume tom drums to 0.35x instead of 0.5x though
13. 01:43:061 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - Gonna mention this again since I think its pretty important.
    ^
14. 01:45:701 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - DS on the second should probably be lower if you listen to the drums closely.
    ^ but I think it's the opposite, feels like their louder on the second group to me
15. 02:28:181 (3,4) - This spacing is really sudden compared to the overall DS of this section, I'd probably move the slider up or condense the DS of the 5-note stream at 4.
    it's similar to those jumps on the strong drum notes at 02:26:621 (6) - 02:27:581 (4) - 02:28:061 (2) - and I think it's fine for it to be slightly larger since the flow into that slider with the burst is really good, also leads in to the streamy section with a larger jump
16. 02:45:461 (1,2,3) - Make the DS on these larger to emphasize the extra layer of guitar compared to 02:44:981 (1,2,3) - .
    ok
17. 02:48:821 (1,2,3,1,2,3) - Same here.
    ok
18. 03:04:181 (1,2,3,1,2,3,1) - This should be a separate pattern from 03:03:221 (1,2,3,1,2,3) - this due to the pitch shift in the music. Also, I'd like to see another iteration of this part: 02:55:541 (1,2,3,1,2,3) - so maybe that would be a good way to throw it in there.
    I like linear flow there on the less intense part cause it's not that spaced and it varies up the patterns a bit, and I increased SV on the last 2 but didn't change any angles because it still feels like it's from the same group, just a slightly higher pitch
19. Overall, I am a bit worried about the playability of the triangular section, but I'm assuming you'll be getting more testplays on this before pushing it fully forward to rank anyway.
    it's really intense and in 1/3 so it's more than fine, there are harder parts
20. 03:38:741 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,1) - The speed of this song makes it sound super awkward with the miss spots in the roll, maybe make 5 a kick to help smooth it out?
    that's how it's played so I hitsounded it to that, sounds good to me
21. 03:40:901 (1,2,3,4,5,6,1) - This pattern could be improved. Firstly, the distance between 1>3>5 is not consistent as seen here. Secondly, 03:41:021 (2,4,6) - this is a bit too large of a transition too fast, but it can be solved by keeping the 2 in the same spot and rotating it approximately -15 degrees. Finally, the 03:41:621 (1) - is kind of in the middle of nowhere in comparison to the previous pattern. I'd put it at x130 y326 as that follows your (fixed) spacing pattern of 1>3>5 as seen here. (The yellow one is my proposed change.)
    ok I fixed it to be perfectly linear on both groups and have the same spacing (246 135) but I like the fact that the super loud drum hit 03:41:621 (1) - is in the middle of nowhere, it has to be spaced
22. 03:42:941 (4,1) - For such a strong beat on the 1, the 4 and 1 are quite close together, why is that?
    oh yeah I really have to change this
23. 03:46:841 (8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,1) - Nazi, move these a pixel or two upwards to make the curve of the last combo look smoother.
    ok
24. 03:48:341 (5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,1) - Same thing here, except move it down and to the right a little.
    ok
25. 03:57:221 (1,2) - So originally I was going to suggest a spacing nerf due to your pattern and the tone changing, but upon closer inspect it would actually be better to make it a vertical jump similar to 03:56:261 (1,2,1,2) - as thats what you did to denote the tone shift before.
    hmm it has nothing to do with verticality or horizontality, I just changed the angle because the pitch changes heavily from 03:56:741 (1) - , and then keeps increasing (at least by my ears), changing the angle would make it look bad visually and would kinda be weird in general because all 6 of those notes seem like they're grouped musically
26. 04:01:301 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - These should have a smaller DS than the previous combo (even though its really pretty as it is right now) due to the pitch shift.
    alright 1.1x it is
27. 04:03:141 (6,1) - This is a little bit iffy for me. Firstly, I think you should actually have a bit more space between the 6 and 1 due to the strong drum. Second, I think that the flow change here is a bit too sharp so perhaps lower the 1 slider as well.
    well you kinda reproduced my idea in another way, it switches the angle because of the strong drum hit, but since it's an angle change, I didn't increase the spacing by much, I could do it the way you suggested as well but I think both fit
28. When you get the chance, lets IRC about the 7th kiai. Its similar to Swamphell in that the rhythm could potentially be improved upon.
    what I heard was 04:08:981 (1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3) - not being perfectly snapped to the drums, it's still 9 notes though and gets back on time and I might change these to 1/3 04:14:741 (1) -
29. 04:16:361 (2,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1) - Nothing particularly wrong here other than its kind of just ugly? I'd like to see some curve in at least one of the combos.
    I don't see anything ugly with it really, it's really subjective I think
30. 04:17:621 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - 04:18:341 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - Why is there no difference between these? Musically, the first combo has the drum on every white tick whereas the second has ride? (I think, I'm not great at matching the sounds with the names.)
    increased the spacing between white ticks to 0.8x from 0.6x should be pretty different visually now
31. 04:20:501 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - Please, the flow from 3>4>1>2 is painful. I like the concept a lot but see if theres a way you can rework the sequence of the second combo to make it a bit more smooth.
    HMM it was already perfect but I ctrl+g'd 04:20:981 (1,2) - so the spacing remains consistent, but I can assure you the flow is good
32. 04:25:301 (1,2,3) - Make these 1/6th sliders? (Or the first two I guess?)
    ok yeah
33. 04:26:021 (1,2,3) - Make the second two 1/6ths?
    ok
34. 04:27:861 (1,2,1) - This transition is really rough, I'm not quite sure how you'd want to fix it but its a bit unrealistic in it's current state.
    hmm it makes no difference since they play as 1/4th 190~ bpm sliders, but I ctrl+g'd the second one so it leads into the last (1)
35. 05:47:701 (3,4,5) - Linear anti-jumps are kind of a no-no. Can you come up with an alternative for this?

ok

Looks good, call me back when you have more mods, playtests, and SP.

Akali wrote:

General

I think the background fits electronic/hardcore with classical elements more than metal (seriously though, doesn't feel fitting, not aggressive enough)
NICE TRY

As usual I don't really like how most of 1/4 repeat/slider jumps don't follow the cursor path at all, but oh well it's your thing
well you they're literally holds if they're repeat and snaps if they're non repeats, it even works on 1/2 sliders that way depending on sv (try it on a 1/2 repeat slider)

edgy diffname

00:06:101 (1) - would ratherr see this as 2 circles
ok
00:23:021 (3) - ugly wanker, move the red dot more to the middle and straighten out a bit, could crook to the right not left too
ok
00:23:561 (3,1) - can avoid blue tick stream start if you use reverse slider like 00:46:001 (2) -
the 2nd one has bass drum on repeats and first has snare drums right after the slider end so it's different
00:32:501 (12) - dunno why combo count goes so high in this section, these look like you forgot to NC
idk doesn't make a difference and I nc'd on cymbal things like 00:31:541 (1) - 00:33:461 (1) -
00:37:181 (18,19,1) - don't know if you copypasted all of them, but on this one it stands out that it's not perfect
ok
00:46:181 (1,2,3,4) - don't hear any reason for gimmicky ds change
it's tom to bass drum
00:46:421 (5) - maybe having 2/3 circles all of suden would be too confusing but return feels so weak here, 1/3 sliders fit better
oh shit it's actually 3/4
00:46:901 (1,1) -

00:50:261 (1) - 00:48:821 (1) - etc, + they are fun to play and provide same rest time as long returns

eh you use them later for other things, whatever
yes
01:02:981 (1) - should be 2 circles
ok
01:14:741 (1,2,1) - looks ass when playing, 01:14:741 (1,2) - feels more like a slider candidate anyway
looks good to me and I kinda place objects accordingly to drums in those sections same as 01:34:061 (2) -
01:54:101 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - switching focus to guitar rhythm would be cool here
I'll probably remap that somehow later on gotta think about it
01:56:021 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - this part is epic m8, good times for Relax players

02:45:461 (1,2,3) - change the pattern compared to 02:44:981 (1,2,3) - for bass emphasis could keep 02:44:981 (1,2,3) - reverse tbh
cryptic mentioned this and I changed
02:48:821 (1,2,3,1,2,3) - something cooler and more jumpy for you know it
^
02:50:741 (1) - start second spinner on this timing
ok
03:05:221 (2) - find a slave to make lyrics storyboard for you zzzzzzzzzzz longest break ever
LF storyboarding slaves
03:34:541 (2) - put it on the left/under the stream for sharper jump? kinda noodle flow
it's fine
03:36:221 (4,5,6) - ctrl+j
no
03:40:301 (2) - missing note? or you just go drums
just drums
03:40:901 (1,2) - 03:41:141 (3,4) - 03:41:381 (5,6) - ctrl+G each pair? transition from 03:40:661 (4,5) - is too smoth and if you want these to be more impactful from the start cause of drums (1) on the other side of things would be better. 03:41:621 (1) - replace of course
ok
03:51:461 (1,2,3) - again, looks ass during gameplay
no
03:56:021 (1,2,3,1) - direction change might be enough but could as well space it out even more
seems like they're weaker than 03:54:581 (1,2,3,1,2,3) - which would be the next spacing if I increased
03:58:661 (1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3) - it's ok cause more natural/by the book with white ticks and stuff, but doesn't fit the guitar phrasing listen to it closely 03:58:981 (2,2,2,2) - are more impactful
yeah but I don't know how to incorporate that, I'd use 1/6 sliders for the 1st notes but that would sound like shit on 100%
05:19:061 (1,2) - I don't like ALL of these stacks because sounds have different pitch all day, but that's just how I feel about stacks in general
I grouped them cause 05:19:061 (1,2) - 05:19:541 (3,4) - sound like they're separate groups
05:24:821 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - here especially because bass goes into high pitches
same thing
05:41:621 (1,2,3,4) - looks like you were tired and didn't give a fuck at this point, make some bigger nice jump patterns this is lame
ok I increased spacing on the melodic guitar stuff
05:43:541 (1,2,3) - 05:45:461 (1,2) -
ok
05:47:541 (2,3) - 05:48:021 (5,6) - these feel like stacks on the other hand
I focus on drums on these where the guitar is held
05:49:301 (1,2,3,4) - 05:51:221 (1,2,3,4,5,6) -
ok
05:56:501 (2,3,4) - more jumpy (slider+circle)*2 not returns
ok
05:57:941 (4) -
ok
06:05:141 (1,2,3) - shouldn't be the same as 06:04:661 (1,2,3) -
ok
Promethean Kangs some other day

Mazzerin wrote:

Cryptic wrote:

At your request. This'll probably just be a quick/light check since it needs mods before an icon check.

[Eternal Darkness]

1. 01:17:381 (1) - Why does kiai start here and not 01:15:221 (1) - here?
   but it does start there where your second link is Just realized, theres a double green line here, one is kiai one isn't. At 01:15:221. Thats why the kiai is glitchy there.

Looks good, call me back when you have more mods, playtests, and SP.

havkz wrote:

wow hp 7 thats really high maybe change to like 6 or 5,8?

1. 00:30:101 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - imo this will follow the guitar part better, if you separate this 00:30:341 (5,6,7,8) notes out from the stack and give them some space, because they are played without palm-mute and sounds vastly higher, in compare to 00:30:101 (1,2,3,4)
2. 00:31:541 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12) - And yet, I also would like to suggest to make some NC design there. As i see the music, it would be good to make NC on this notes 00:32:021 (6,12) - because this is the strongest hits on the snare drum
3. 00:33:941 (1,5,11) - to the above, in the 21-note part these notes could be NC'ed
4. 26-note part could be unchanged, because there's any strong accents. Only dynamics grows. But i think you can make the NC every 4 or 8 notes, because its musically stable solution in general
5. 00:42:581 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - this guitar pitch is the same note as this 00:41:621 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) , but the spacing is grows. In case you are reflecting a guitar pitch by spacing over the entire map (when it mapped to guitars ofc) this should be fixed. You could make this 00:42:101 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - with DS=1, and the nearest with 0.8, or how you like...
6. 00:57:461 (1,2,3) - idk why is it THAT spaced. I agree about nice view, but in compare to 00:55:541 (1,2,3) this (which is the same picking), mentioned triangle is twice spaced
7. 01:13:541 (4,5) - this is too spaced compare to this 01:08:501 (5,6)
8. 02:24:461 (4,5,6) - pretty stable part in dynamics, so i suggest to give 02:24:581 (5,6) - same space as 02:24:461 (4,5)
9. 02:26:261 (3,4,5,6) - ^ same, but it looks pretty cool, so idk
10. 03:04:181 (1,2,3,1,2,3) - guitar pitch is changed on this, but you still using the same space and rotation. At least reverse the direction
11. 03:35:021 (4,5,1) - i suggest to emphasize the strong beat of 03:35:141 (1) - by moving out from the stack. like this or idk (don't watch the timeline, i accidently moved it, im speaking only about position on the playfield)
12. 03:57:221 (1,2) - guitar pitch goes down, but spacing grows
13. 04:11:141 (1,2,3,1,2,3) - guitar pitch isn't that high to be that spaced (just in compare to what you did before) - this is even more spaced then this 04:07:541 (1,2,3,1,2,3) - but the first one is MUCH lower in pitch
14. 04:08:981 (1,2,3,1,2,3) - to the above, this could be MORE spaced
15. 04:11:141 (1,2,3,1,2,3) - too spaced
16. 04:16:361 (2,1) - move 2 a little bit, as you did it there 03:33:701 (1,2) - (kinda same part, or close to)
17. 04:29:621 (1,2,3,1,2,3,1) - 04:30:341 (1,2,3,1,2,3,1) - same guitar part, but view (spacing at least) is so different
18. 04:58:901 (3,4,5) - may be give 04:58:901 (3,4) - more space, because of the sound and accent on 3

1. 01:47:141 (1,1,1,1,1) - default whistles, what?
2. 02:19:541 (1,1) - ^
3. 02:23:381 (3) - missed whistle on the very sliderend
4. 02:27:221 (3,1) - ^
5. 02:44:021 (1) - sliderhead is missing something i think
6. 03:48:461 (7,8,9,10) - missed sounds
7. 03:51:701 (1) - hitfinish is applied to the whole slider, so sliderhead missing something
8. 04:30:101 (1) - whistle
9. 04:32:021 (1) - ^
10. 04:59:061 (4,5) - toms
11. 05:44:021 (4) - whistle on the very sliderend
12. 06:05:141 (1) - whistle

Mazzerin wrote:

havkz wrote:

wow hp 7 thats really high maybe change to like 6 or 5,8?

yea no I don't want to see any more 70% passes

Dammond wrote:

About the musical part

1. 00:30:101 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - imo this will follow the guitar part better, if you separate this 00:30:341 (5,6,7,8) notes out from the stack and give them some space, because they are played without palm-mute and sounds vastly higher, in compare to 00:30:101 (1,2,3,4)
   hard to think of any patterns that looks good with super stacked notes into barely stacked notes into super spacing, guitar sounds pretty vague there to me too so I grouped it by 8 instead of 4
2. 00:31:541 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12) - And yet, I also would like to suggest to make some NC design there. As i see the music, it would be good to make NC on this notes 00:32:021 (6,12) - because this is the strongest hits on the snare drum
   changed ncs so it looks good here, follow points made them ugly before
3. 00:33:941 (1,5,11) - to the above, in the 21-note part these notes could be NC'ed
   nah one looks better here
4. 26-note part could be unchanged, because there's any strong accents. Only dynamics grows. But i think you can make the NC every 4 or 8 notes, because its musically stable solution in general
5. 00:42:581 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - this guitar pitch is the same note as this 00:41:621 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) , but the spacing is grows. In case you are reflecting a guitar pitch by spacing over the entire map (when it mapped to guitars ofc) this should be fixed. You could make this 00:42:101 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - with DS=1, and the nearest with 0.8, or how you like...
   hmm I wanna keep the growing intensity, I think it fits even if the pitch stays the same
6. 00:57:461 (1,2,3) - idk why is it THAT spaced. I agree about nice view, but in compare to 00:55:541 (1,2,3) this (which is the same picking), mentioned triangle is twice spaced
   snare drums on 2,3, doesn't really matter cause it's really easy anyways
7. 01:13:541 (4,5) - this is too spaced compare to this 01:08:501 (5,6)
   I wanna build intensity for the chorus there and drum pattern is a bit different (finish hitsounds cause of that)
8. 02:24:461 (4,5,6) - pretty stable part in dynamics, so i suggest to give 02:24:581 (5,6) - same space as 02:24:461 (4,5)
9. 02:26:261 (3,4,5,6) - ^ same, but it looks pretty cool, so idk
   I focus more on drums in that part
10. 03:04:181 (1,2,3,1,2,3) - guitar pitch is changed on this, but you still using the same space and rotation. At least reverse the direction
    yeah
11. 03:35:021 (4,5,1) - i suggest to emphasize the strong beat of 03:35:141 (1) - by moving out from the stack. like this or idk (don't watch the timeline, i accidently moved it, im speaking only about position on the playfield)
    ok
12. 03:57:221 (1,2) - guitar pitch goes down, but spacing grows
    THE PATTERN IS TOO GOOD FOK
13. 04:11:141 (1,2,3,1,2,3) - guitar pitch isn't that high to be that spaced (just in compare to what you did before) - this is even more spaced then this 04:07:541 (1,2,3,1,2,3) - but the first one is MUCH lower in pitch
    oh it's cause of snare drums again
14. 04:08:981 (1,2,3,1,2,3) - to the above, this could be MORE spaced
15. 04:11:141 (1,2,3,1,2,3) - too spaced
    ye same with these
16. 04:16:361 (2,1) - move 2 a little bit, as you did it there 03:33:701 (1,2) - (kinda same part, or close to)
    k
17. 04:29:621 (1,2,3,1,2,3,1) - 04:30:341 (1,2,3,1,2,3,1) - same guitar part, but view (spacing at least) is so different
    is it the same?? idk sounds a bit different to me and it's fine
18. 04:58:901 (3,4,5) - may be give 04:58:901 (3,4) - more space, because of the sound and accent on 3
    it's fine like this I like the descension effect

Hitsounds check

1. 01:47:141 (1,1,1,1,1) - default whistles, what?
2. 02:19:541 (1,1) - ^
3. 02:23:381 (3) - missed whistle on the very sliderend
4. 02:27:221 (3,1) - ^
5. 02:44:021 (1) - sliderhead is missing something i think
6. 03:48:461 (7,8,9,10) - missed sounds
7. 03:51:701 (1) - hitfinish is applied to the whole slider, so sliderhead missing something
8. 04:30:101 (1) - whistle
9. 04:32:021 (1) - ^
10. 04:59:061 (4,5) - toms
11. 05:44:021 (4) - whistle on the very sliderend
12. 06:05:141 (1) - whistle

thanks for the hitsound check, I use default whistles on just the guitar parts tho ye

Monstrata wrote:

Irre is such a good singer!

Beer wrote:

I don't think this is possible to be ranked. overused streams, fix that (even though I know death metal can be mapped in any way, just not THAT much xd)

Sonnyc wrote:

01:09:221 (1,2,3,4) - 01:14:801 (2) - 01:17:681 (2,3,4) - 01:20:501 (1) - 01:22:901 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,1) - 01:37:841 (2,3,4) - 01:40:661 (1,1) - 01:43:061 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3) - 03:39:821 (6,7,8,9,10,11,1) - 04:05:921 (2,3,4) - 04:40:901 (1) - 05:47:061 (5) - 05:54:661 (4,5) - You will want to reconsider your rhythm choices this part. These are the ones that had a weak, or nearly no distinct beat in the song yet got mapped (which I consider overmaps). I see you were expressing some weak beats are an extremely close spaced streams. The thing is, some of those were really weak beats and mapping that way was pretty fine, but the ones I've highlighted here are ones with nearly no beat. Some 1/4 reverse sliders are also in the list, because some 1/4 sliders were having a strong & real beat while the ones I've highlighted here are ones with nearly no beat to get expressed. Mapping the same way didn't felt really great here.
02:20:021 - Personally, a change of pitch wasn't as notable as 02:19:541 which kinda felt apart froom the song. Imo, just using a long slider that starts from 02:19:541 would reflect the song better.
02:35:381 - The sudden switch from 1/3 to 1/4 along a similar looking stream shape doesn't really seem to be properly indicating the rhythm of the pattern.
02:51:701 - The claps at the slider end in this section... I can understand that it fits with the song, but in the viewpoint of hitsounds, since the tail's sound was much stronger than the head, while the prominent rhythm the clicking beats are following something other than drum beats, it really felt weird for me. Mind using some alternative hitsound file, or something?
03:48:101 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12) - I wasn't pretty sure if this is accurate to be 1/4.
04:58:421 (4,1,2,3,4,5) - I'm pretty curious what happened to the patterning and the comboing. It kinda felt broken with the 3 combo cycle.
05:04:181 (1) - The slider concept I'm seeing here is mostly parallels. I'm pretty sure avoiding this overlap would work much better for consistency.
05:11:861 (1) - Parallel at the last part could be better.

I do approve the aesthetic concepts and the structure idea overall, but the map quite feels too excessive for me.
Popping over questionable rhythm choices.

Warpdrive wrote:

04:36:821 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16) - 04:38:801 (2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - Shouldn't these parts be with more spaced streams, because of the higher pitch again like in 04:32:501 ?

HML wrote:

lol ur gay

Maybe OD10? It's 250bpm for the most part, so why not?

00:00:581 (1) - Why a NC here? I don't think it's strong enough here to justify one, and it's the same change in pitch from 00:00:341 (1,2) -
00:04:421 (1) - Same dealio
00:08:261 (1) - ^
00:16:181 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9) - This is the same intensity as 00:17:141 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,1) - , so why not make it the same DS?
00:25:301 (9) - NC this because it's a significant pivot and change in the stream. My philosophy is that if the sound is strong enough to warrant a pivot, fold, or change DS, it deserves to have a NC

00:45:701 (5) - I'd assume this is mapped to the guitar saying that there's no drum sound here, but how you structured your streams at this bit would say otherwise. Keep it if you want, but I personally would add 1/2 here, not 1/4/

00:51:701 (1) - This NC seems meaningless imo. No real sound to back it up.
01:19:541 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1) - It would be orgasmic if you made a climbing DS (increases every 5th note by .1) to fit with the gradual intensity raise

01:29:621 (1) - Is the same sound as 01:30:341 (1) - , so why did you give 01:30:341 (1) - a special slider shape?
02:00:821 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1) - Here I suggest changing the direction at 02:01:781 (1) - . It feels like you're moving in teh same direction for a long time, and you change it on a not that is vastly weaker than it (02:02:261 (1) - )

02:20:981 (1,1) - Make this a stream like you did 00:37:541 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25) - . I think it would be amazing. Whenever I get here in the map, I expect streams and I find myself disappointed with what you did.

02:29:621 (1,2,3,4,5,6,1,2,3,4,5,6,1,2,3,4,5,6,1,2,3,4,5,6,1) - I think this stream looks ugly because of the small angles you give the stream to pivot on, and the extremely sharp ones you give right after. It just looks half-assed and ugly.

03:49:301 (4) - NC this because the sound difference between that an 03:48:821 (1,2,3) - is pretty huge when you hear he stopped hitting the snare.
03:49:541 (1) - Get rid of NC as a follow-up
05:38:261 (3) - This ends on a stronger note than it starts on. Maybe just make them two notes?

Good luck

Lasse wrote:

apparently yes

00:27:461 (11,12) - seems a bit extreme spacing wise with how consistent stuff here it feels unjustified. maybe something like https://i.imgur.com/htNfJPt.jpg could work?
02:11:781 (2) - i don't really get why you decided to map this when you undermap similar stuff in this whole part
02:18:101 (1,2,1) - what's with the splitting of pattern/nc here? sounds more like either it should be one single thing or 02:18:261 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10) - also split in groups of 2? at least from how drums sound to me here
02:49:841 (1,1) - snapping like https://i.imgur.com/IrTRsa7.jpg at 02:50:771 - seems more fitting considering people won't click for the spinner anyway you at least get the end on the stronger beat instead of nothing
03:40:421 (2,3,4,5,1,2,3,4,5,6) - even if drums build up here, the contrast seems a bit too huge. just tone second pattern down a bit?
03:51:401 (4,1,2,3) - direction of the stack thing looks a bit weird with the stream shape, consider something like https://i.imgur.com/901HyVm.jpg ?
03:54:821 (1,2,3) - at this spacing, being uneven becomes really noticeable so polishing it a bit would be nice
03:57:221 (1,2) - why is this not split from before 03:56:741 (1,2) - ? seems better with guitar and cymbals
04:00:341 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12) - 04:01:781 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12) - feels overspaced since it's so similar to the ones before which also have guitar spam
04:57:381 (6,1,2) - just somehow get this slightly more spaced for visuals, similar to 04:56:901 (6,1) - would be nice
05:04:181 (1) - not sure but this might count as unclear sliderpath lol, looks kinda easy to mistake for a loop


looks like sonnyc's pop was addressed properly so just let me know when you replied