Monstrata wrote:

Unused hitsounds:
soft-hitclap.wav
soft-hitfinish.wav
deleted
FreeSong's

00:09:203 - Red and Green lines are conflicting in volume.
made them the same 10%

1. 00:20:953 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - I might agree if you're going to make them with the backgrounds, but the stacks and pattern feel overdone here. imo the pattern is boosting the emphasis, which is weird because 1) it breaks the consistency on stacks and beats 2) causes a huge emphasis loss on 00:21:828 - behind the slider leniency
2. 00:28:453 (3,4,5) - where's your special stacking pattern? also it fits better here since there's a brass on 00:28:578 - . (percussion gets stronger too btw)
3. 00:44:453 (2,3,4,1) - imo a straight stream could be much better before a sharp Z-shape jumps. those turns are wrist-breaking.
4. 00:49:953 (1,2,1,2) - I did expect a spacing boost because a crescendo starts on 00:48:953 -, but they are all lowered all of a sudden. Let's take 00:33:953 (1,2,1,2) - as a reference, you used anti jumps, bigger spacings, movements...but they are all not being used here. Even if you're trying to make some varieties, they are still way too weird.
5. 00:52:953 (1,2,3,4) - details are dropped here. unlike all the other things, they are represented by four sliders, with repetitive flows. It could be fine to use four slider here, but I think adding some changes on movements can make this better. it also sounds not repetitive anyway.
6. 01:14:703 (2,3,1) - It causes reading issues after the permutation (01:12:703 (2,3,1) - 01:13:703 (2,3,1) - ). apart from the context it's okay though.
7. 00:49:953 - A serious note, the antijumps/sharp jumps are heavily reduced after this time point. I know nothing about your intentions, but it will be great if you're willing to explain them here.

sahuang wrote:

不是很懂你们搞事的，哎...这图打起来根本就没什么问题，这些都是你personal opinions。。反正等福瑞松回复吧

Nerova Riuz GX wrote:

First of all, since 09kami's is no longer available in the regular set, it might not be appropriate to have his name in tags. well.

09kami wrote:

Nerova Riuz GX wrote:

First of all, since 09kami's is no longer available in the regular set, it might not be appropriate to have his name in tags. well.

agree
please delete link

Nerova Riuz GX wrote:

ah. I'm a little bit late here but well, who knows.

I think there might be some things that should be clarified (or even fixed) here, some further discussion is probably required.
They are from my own view, but I'll try my best to make them more objective so people can see and judge them as well.

First of all, since 09kami's is no longer available in the regular set, it might not be appropriate to have his name in tags. well.

[freesongs]

1. 00:20:953 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - I might agree if you're going to make them with the backgrounds, but the stacks and pattern feel overdone here. imo the pattern is boosting the emphasis, which is weird because 1) it breaks the consistency on stacks and beats 2) causes a huge emphasis loss on 00:21:828 - behind the slider leniency I feel like this is the less intense part for the section from 00:17:953 - to 00:25:953 -, so I stack them to sort of express this feeling. They are easy to follow and do not require much reading compared to other patterns before and after. For the second time (00:28:953 (1,2,3,4,5) - ), I changed the idea entirely to build up for the kiai, which makes the entire transition (from "before kiai" to "kiai")more natural imo.
2. 00:28:453 (3,4,5) - where's your special stacking pattern? also it fits better here since there's a brass on 00:28:578 - . (percussion gets stronger too btw) explained above I believe
3. 00:44:453 (2,3,4,1) - imo a straight stream could be much better before a sharp Z-shape jumps. those turns are wrist-breaking. maybe. I think it plays fine and give more variety in stream styles. Also, I personally think the current way feels better than just making the stream straight
4. 00:49:953 (1,2,1,2) - I did expect a spacing boost because a crescendo starts on 00:48:953 -, but they are all lowered all of a sudden. Let's take 00:33:953 (1,2,1,2) - as a reference, you used anti jumps, bigger spacings, movements...but they are all not being used here. Even if you're trying to make some varieties, they are still way too weird. "The big anti jumps and bigger spacings, movements ..." They are all for the sudden transition to the kiai. My intention was to emphasize the beginning of the kiai. At the beginning of the second kiai, there is not much need for emphasis again imo (It is according how I feel the song is like). They are lower in spacing but not in difficulty. The flow is different and that is exactly what I want to create here. It also gives a smooth transition to the calm part after the kiai.
5. 00:52:953 (1,2,3,4) - details are dropped here. unlike all the other things, they are represented by four sliders, with repetitive flows. It could be fine to use four slider here, but I think adding some changes on movements can make this better. it also sounds not repetitive anyway. Yeah, I did hesitate about this when I was placing these four sliders. I tried to make the rhythm as vary as possible while not breaking the flow idea behind it. The idea here was to do an oval flow to make a small contrast with the straight flow right after this 00:53:953 (1,2,1,2,1) -
6. 01:14:703 (2,3,1) - It causes reading issues after the permutation (01:12:703 (2,3,1) - 01:13:703 (2,3,1) - ). apart from the context it's okay though. [color=#8000FF]Well, 01:12:578 (1,2,3,1,2,3,1) - , 01:13:578 (1,2,3,1,2,3,1) - and the first part of the last pattern 01:14:578 (1,2,3,1) - are exactly the same in structure. I don't think the small spacing 01:14:828 (3,1) - can cause any reading issue but emphasize the large jumps right after this.
7. 00:49:953 - A serious note, the antijumps/sharp jumps are heavily reduced after this time point. I know nothing about your intentions, but it will be great if you're willing to explain them here. should have been explained above. antijumps/sharp jumps are reduced by the difficulty is not reduced. The different feeling of flow is exactly what I want the players to get overall.

Karen wrote:

online tag is different from in-game tag, if you want to completely fix the tag issue, you'd better dq it. /passing by