forum

MAXIMUM THE HORMONE - A-L-I-E-N

posted
Total Posts
1,187
show more
Coin

Shiirn wrote:

maximum the hormone is basically like



edge in a can
more like
nyathil
AR10 just feels a lot more fitting when playing this. And HP 4.5-4.7 feels more fitting than 5. idk that's just my opinion on the matter...
XII
This isn't 5 minutes, where is the set? Or am I missing something.

Approved Category is only for Marathon maps. Long maps with over 5 minutes of draining time fit the Approval category. Only then they are allowed to be single difficulty mapsets. If they are below 5 minutes of draining time, a full difficulty spread is needed and the map will have to be ranked instead.
And isn't the approved section dead anyways? I don't see why they would break their guidelines and use a section that has been unused since 2.5 years back.

Edit: Totally forgot about the ol' long spinner at the end.
anna apple

XII wrote:

This isn't 5 minutes, where is the set? Or am I missing something.

Approved Category is only for Marathon maps. Long maps with over 5 minutes of draining time fit the Approval category. Only then they are allowed to be single difficulty mapsets. If they are below 5 minutes of draining time, a full difficulty spread is needed and the map will have to be ranked instead.
And isn't the approved section dead anyways? I don't see why they would break their guidelines and use a section that has been unused since 2.5 years back.

the drain time calculator is kind of broken because it doesn't really count spinners
XII

[alt][F4] wrote:

the drain time calculator is kind of broken because it doesn't really count spinners
Totally forgot about that!
EEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
MAXIMUM THE CIRCLEJERK - A-L-I-E-N [Stop! Stop complaining about my map and let me rank this!]
Topic Starter
Monstrata

FailureAtOsu wrote:

Extremely minor thing
02:28:885 (1,2,3,4) -
02:32:313 (9,10,11,12) -
Why does the former have a new combo but not the latter? It's the same sounds so I don't see why it would be inconsistent.
The NC's here are placed based on movement and flow, and not rhythm. Since its one consistent updown or leftright movement it has one combo, where as the previous ones can be split into two sets of flows/movements with backforth going into clockwise/counterclock.

Thanks for checking though!

N1k0 wrote:

AR10 just feels a lot more fitting when playing this. And HP 4.5-4.7 feels more fitting than 5. idk that's just my opinion on the matter...
AR 9.7 is high enough imo. Theres already been a lot of discussion going into this, you can check out p/5253277 if you'd like to read more into detail! Thanks for your concerns.

I feel like decimal HP values won't really make much of a difference though, just because of how complicated HP drain actually is. 5 is really just there because people believe 3/4 to be too low for a map of this difficulty. I don't really wanna get into the math of decimal HP drain cuz I myself don't really know how to calculate it lol.
EphemeralFetish
Posting for clarification.

https://www.discogs.com/Maximum-The-Hor ... se/4887492

Official run time is 4:46. Making this MP3 an edited version. Yet no mention of this in the metadata. (Even though as far as Im aware editing MP3's for more length is against a rule)
Battle
often times if the mp3 is edited by the user, you still use the same metadata as the source, for example if you cut a song to be shorter such as this due to it being repetitive you still keep the same metadata
lilelf29

Battle wrote:

often times if the mp3 is edited by the user, you still use the same metadata as the source, for example if you cut a song to be shorter such as this due to it being repetitive you still keep the same metadata
Editing the song to be shorter is very different to editing it to be longer.
I fail to see what point you're making?
Topic Starter
Monstrata
mp3 is slightly edited yes. It's not against the current ruleset, but you're welcome to discuss it further, here: t/417977.
lilelf29

Monstrata wrote:

mp3 is slightly edited yes. It's not against the current ruleset, but you're welcome to discuss it further, here: t/417977.
Wait it's allowed?
I thought you just linked to a thread that says you can't extend the mp3 file, unless I'm missing something.
Topic Starter
Monstrata

lilelf29 wrote:

Monstrata wrote:

mp3 is slightly edited yes. It's not against the current ruleset, but you're welcome to discuss it further, here: t/417977.
Wait it's allowed?
I thought you just linked to a thread that says you can't extend the mp3 file, unless I'm missing something.
It's allowed currently. The thread is a discussion about making mp3 extension against the rules. I thought i'd link it so people can discuss there instead.
QTS
This song should not be qualified nor ranked.

Half of the map is some kind of lullaby that is FC:able by 5 digit players, including me, this necessarily might not be a bad thing, but I personally find it unfit for a 8.5* map.

Other than that, I find that the map isn't of greater quality, even though I probably wouldn't be able to do shit better myself, but I just find it to play awfully bad.
lilelf29

Monstrata wrote:

It's allowed currently. The thread is a discussion about making mp3 extension against the rules. I thought i'd link it so people can discuss there instead.
Oh damn, I know a few people that are under the impression it's not allowed and so instead are making mapsets of 4min+ songs.
Will spread the news that they don't need to.
unko
monstrata reply to wank wank wank but not bob
Topic Starter
Monstrata

lilelf29 wrote:

Monstrata wrote:

It's allowed currently. The thread is a discussion about making mp3 extension against the rules. I thought i'd link it so people can discuss there instead.
Oh damn, I know a few people that are under the impression it's not allowed and so instead are making mapsets of 4min+ songs.
Will spread the news that they don't need to.
Well, if you extend, you should try to make it as natural as possible too. It's sometimes quite hard to extend songs past 5 minutes, especially if theyre like just 4:01 or something. There are a lot of songs i want to map, that are like 4:40-4:50 that I just can't tastefully extend haha.
Sieg
placeholder
blahpy

MillhioreF wrote:

Remember: there's nothing wrong with mapping for the graveyard.
Slips

Monstrata wrote:

Well, if you extend, you should try to make it as natural as possible too. It's sometimes quite hard to extend songs past 5 minutes, especially if theyre like just 4:01 or something. There are a lot of songs i want to map, that are like 4:40-4:50 that I just can't tastefully extend haha.
Not every map has to be marathon size. Couldn't you just make more diffs?
Enkidu

Sliproads wrote:

Monstrata wrote:

Well, if you extend, you should try to make it as natural as possible too. It's sometimes quite hard to extend songs past 5 minutes, especially if theyre like just 4:01 or something. There are a lot of songs i want to map, that are like 4:40-4:50 that I just can't tastefully extend haha.
Not every map has to be marathon size. Couldn't you just make more diffs?
It's quite literally 11 seconds. C'mon friend.
deathmarc4

Enkidu wrote:

It's quite literally 11 seconds. C'mon friend.
I love being lazy!
Girl

Microsoft Vista wrote:

monstrata reply to wank wank wank but not bob
hi mothew!!
fradiger
While I don't agree with mappers editing mp3s to push their songs into the marathon category rather than having to map a full spread, complaining about it in this thread will just make you look stupid.

I think the song is perfectly fine, it's music, it has a beat and a melody, and therefore can be adequately mapped. This map meets all of the ranking criteria, isn't over the top ridiculous, and while it does look ugly (which mind you, is the entire purpose of the mapping style that Monstrata chose to use), it is passable (perhaps even fcable).

The best part is it's a consistent group of people who talk crap in these threads. Mappers shouldn't have to put up with this stuff, their map is their opinion, and while everyone is entitled to have one, and you can debate back and forth about them, you can't just blow off the mapper's effort with these stupid backhanded comments like "remap" or "wow this map is BAD." That's like telling an artist that you don't like their painting, and then when they ask why you respond with "it's just bad and I don't like it." If you disagree, please provide some sort of argument that makes sense, and if the mapper tells you to shove it, there's nothing you can do about it. If you don't like the map, don't install it, don't play it. Every day there are probably 3-4 maps ranked that you never even hear about or play, just turn this map into another one of those. It's not like ranking maps like these will destroy the mapping community here in osu!, so don't act like it.

Also the amount of >20k ranked players commenting on the playability of this map is far too high and honestly just silly.
Booze

total terror wrote:

Also the amount of >20k ranked players commenting on the playability of this map is far too high and honestly just silly.
I haven't read this thread much, but the only opinion of a top player that I've seen is Elysion's on their stream and iirc they just said "Doesn't play well."

I think it would be a pretty neat idea to get multiple top players opinions on this map to improve it (since it is a 8.5* map...), but Monstrata might've already done that.
MEK
brb adding 4:30 of cheering to the end of a 30 second map for marathon length
Rapthorn

isopaharuntikka wrote:

total terror wrote:

Also the amount of >20k ranked players commenting on the playability of this map is far too high and honestly just silly.
I haven't read this thread much, but the only opinion of a top player that I've seen is Elysion's on their stream and iirc they just said "Doesn't play well."

I think it would be a pretty neat idea to get multiple top players opinions on this map to improve it (since it is a 8.5* map...), but Monstrata might've already done that.
Rafis did say he never wanted it to ever get ranked, make of that what you will
Battle

lilelf29 wrote:

Battle wrote:

often times if the mp3 is edited by the user, you still use the same metadata as the source, for example if you cut a song to be shorter such as this due to it being repetitive you still keep the same metadata
Editing the song to be shorter is very different to editing it to be longer.
I fail to see what point you're making?
lmao wh it's still basically the same regarding metadata
VINXIS

blahpy wrote:

MillhioreF wrote:

Remember: there's nothing wrong with mapping for the graveyard.

o btw

estellia- wrote:

also vinxis the structure of your post is so fucked can you get good at being estellia- tyvm
thts the point u deege n -_ -
Arphimigon
Who cares about ugli aesthetics tbh
Gonna talk about other things blahblah w/e

Mod time!
I'm kinda sad that after these jumps 00:18:626 (1,2,3,4) - here that 00:19:486 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - these are so low spaced, since the later ones have the extra punchy drum to go along with them but have a lower spacing. I feel like the low spaced patterns should be before, while the jumpy/snappy sliders should be after.
00:31:475 (1,2,3,4) - If you play these fully it creates some nice snaps with a bunch of spacing which feels cool, however on the next slider pattern here 00:33:189 (1,2,3,4) - I feel as though 00:33:189 (1,2) - these are too cramped up spacing wise to give the same feel. It's minor yes, but every little helps. A 10 degree rotation seems to make the spacing work and keep the same aesthetical style here.
00:34:474 (5) - Unsnapped sliderend, should end later but the slider end is snapped slightly early, may want to wiggle it to place.
(00:34:933 (1) - No idea what this is mapped to, if its an instrument, it should start on the blue tick (00:34:986 - or smth), if its mapped to the vocal, it starts on the red tick (00:35:040 - ) but ssince it coverss both its really confussing.)
00:34:933 (1,2) - This spacing is awkwardly low compared to the slider SV here, I'd honestly suggest you lower the SV more to make it less weird to play here.
00:48:192 (3) - For editors sake, can you simplify this slider down? I have an awkward feeling this can be called out for burai for no reason idk
01:01:580 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - Well you've probably heard enough about these but still I need to say it but from a different perspective. 00:51:250 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - and 00:54:726 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - have similar spacing because the sounds are similar, now 00:58:150 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - is increased spacing because there is an extra cymbal sound, right? If that is the case, then there should be no reason to further increase the spacing to 01:01:580 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - this pattern, since the previous mentioned one is identical in sound and volume to this.
01:38:058 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,5) - I can see that you have a bunch of different shapes here, but if possible, could you make 01:38:165 (2,4) - more vertical? I know you can just hit the slider heads and play right, but it would still encourage a more vertical and sharp snapping motion if they were more vertical. You can just rotate the sliders.
I'd also like to mention that 01:39:130 (3) - this slider is the only one that goes up a bit before it goes down, whilst being completely playable if you include leniency in the mix, it still discourages a cooler, consistent vertical play which could be happening instead, so this iss the only slider I'd suggest to make differently and move the redpoint downwards on.
02:09:830 (2,3,4,5) - Two things here.
Obvious no.1) The linear play is really awkward after an entire map of little linear movement and only snapping pretty much, so it feels plainly wrong to put in since it is so out of the maps context flow/wrist-movement-wise
No.2) This looks too damn neat. Needs to be MESSIER.
So a solution to both of those is below I made for ya. Also at the same time, that idea/solution gets lower in spacing as the pitches lower with every sound so it seems more with the music.

That's it for input that doesn't relate to aesthetics wheee hopefully it makes it more enjoyable to play cya
Side

QTS wrote:

This song should not be qualified nor ranked.

Half of the map is some kind of lullaby that is FC:able by 5 digit players, including me, this necessarily might not be a bad thing, but I personally find it unfit for a 8.5* map.
The same could be said about a lot of wub maps since they usually start out like 2* maps
QTS

Side wrote:

QTS wrote:

This song should not be qualified nor ranked.

Half of the map is some kind of lullaby that is FC:able by 5 digit players, including me, this necessarily might not be a bad thing, but I personally find it unfit for a 8.5* map.
The same could be said about a lot of wub maps since they usually start out like 2* maps
"this necessarily might not be a bad thing". What I meant was that I think it's fine to bring in "easier" parts into songs as "breaks" but when half-ish of the song consists of that, I personally think it's a bit too much.
unko

Girl wrote:

Microsoft Vista wrote:

monstrata reply to wank wank wank but not bob
hi mothew!!
Topic Starter
Monstrata

Arphimigon wrote:

Who cares about ugli aesthetics tbh
Gonna talk about other things blahblah w/e

Mod time!
I'm kinda sad that after these jumps 00:18:626 (1,2,3,4) - here that 00:19:486 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - these are so low spaced, since the later ones have the extra punchy drum to go along with them but have a lower spacing. I feel like the low spaced patterns should be before, while the jumpy/snappy sliders should be after. Swapped 3 and 4 to keep the spacing lower.
00:31:475 (1,2,3,4) - If you play these fully it creates some nice snaps with a bunch of spacing which feels cool, however on the next slider pattern here 00:33:189 (1,2,3,4) - I feel as though 00:33:189 (1,2) - these are too cramped up spacing wise to give the same feel. It's minor yes, but every little helps. A 10 degree rotation seems to make the spacing work and keep the same aesthetical style here. I don't like this change. I don't think you should play those sliders fully anyways. Well, i don't, and I find the angles to be fine as they are, taking advantage of leniency.
00:34:474 (5) - Unsnapped sliderend, should end later but the slider end is snapped slightly early, may want to wiggle it to place. it's snapped tnough.
(00:34:933 (1) - No idea what this is mapped to, if its an instrument, it should start on the blue tick (00:34:986 - or smth), if its mapped to the vocal, it starts on the red tick (00:35:040 - ) but ssince it coverss both its really confussing.) snapped to that buzz that definitely lands on the downbeat. The vocals are a kinda awkward transition out of the 1/4 repeats, same with the guitar that's on the blue tick, i just wanted something with a very straightforward rhythm even if it meant following something that was more a noise than a sound. I think with this set up though, the rhythm is pretty easy to see, whereas if i used a bluetick or red tick rhythm after a 1/4 repeat it would be hard to catch.
00:34:933 (1,2) - This spacing is awkwardly low compared to the slider SV here, I'd honestly suggest you lower the SV more to make it less weird to play here. Intentional anti-jumps so I have more spacing increases to work with when i transition back into 1/2 rhythms.
00:48:192 (3) - For editors sake, can you simplify this slider down? I have an awkward feeling this can be called out for burai for no reason idk It's not burai. It's not possible to create burais without red nodes xD.
01:01:580 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - Well you've probably heard enough about these but still I need to say it but from a different perspective. 00:51:250 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - and 00:54:726 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - have similar spacing because the sounds are similar, now 00:58:150 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - is increased spacing because there is an extra cymbal sound, right? If that is the case, then there should be no reason to further increase the spacing to 01:01:580 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - this pattern, since the previous mentioned one is identical in sound and volume to this. oh, Bonsai already mentioned these to me with the same perspective about identical sounds. Basically, I originally wanted the entire section to be this big, and i created an imtermediate section instead with the first half. When I map, I like to create easier and more difficult versions if the music provides similar rhythms and patterns, just to keep things interesting. I want the intensity to build up here as the player continues through this section, so you can see that the jumps after the sliders get progressively larger and larger.
01:38:058 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,5) - I can see that you have a bunch of different shapes here, but if possible, could you make 01:38:165 (2,4) - more vertical? I know you can just hit the slider heads and play right, but it would still encourage a more vertical and sharp snapping motion if they were more vertical. You can just rotate the sliders. Those are my favourites though ;c.
I'd also like to mention that 01:39:130 (3) - this slider is the only one that goes up a bit before it goes down, whilst being completely playable if you include leniency in the mix, it still discourages a cooler, consistent vertical play which could be happening instead, so this iss the only slider I'd suggest to make differently and move the redpoint downwards on. Sure, fixed.
02:09:830 (2,3,4,5) - Two things here.
Obvious no.1) The linear play is really awkward after an entire map of little linear movement and only snapping pretty much, so it feels plainly wrong to put in since it is so out of the maps context flow/wrist-movement-wise idk.. I like this pattern. I want a break from all the rotational flow since the song is breaking into a harsher section (and you can see the sliders changing shape).
No.2) This looks too damn neat. Needs to be MESSIER. I think the flow choice already contributes, without making the structure messy yet, because this is still part of the previous section imo.
So a solution to both of those is below I made for ya. Also at the same time, that idea/solution gets lower in spacing as the pitches lower with every sound so it seems more with the music.

That's it for input that doesn't relate to aesthetics wheee hopefully it makes it more enjoyable to play cya
Thanks for your input!! I'll apply the changes with the flame since I didn't make any major changes to gameplay.
Weber
:!: :shock: :!: WARNING :!: :shock: :!: DRAMA INCOMING :!: :shock: :!: WARNING :!: :shock: :!:
Natsu
mmm i'll give my opinion here, if this map get ranked, then any map can be, since the sliders are not different to any new mapper first map sliders, they are bad and they make the map looks ugly.

Yeah the song is chaotic, but doesn't sounds bad, but the map is chaotic and looks bad that's the difference, I always support your maps, Monstrata. But in my opinion this shouldn't be ranked in the current state, I read your responses to similar arguments to mine and they are not objetives, when you say is *art* we can recall in situations like this:

which I believe is happening here, anyways not every map have to be ranked and the community response you are getting is mostly negative (for what I can see in the thread), just rework that sliders, you are a good mapper and I'm sure you can build a chaotic map that looks nice and not the current one that looks like someone first attempt of mapping, sorry Monstrata, but I have to said it too.
Topic Starter
Monstrata
Hmm... I know a couple of people are comparing the sliders here to stuff you find on beginners' maps. I wonder how many beginners actually create sliders like this... because I think most beginners will use straight / overly curved sliders. I also think my rhythm, spacing, and flow choices are certainly not reflective of "beginner" maps. I think aesthetically, the map is just very different from anything you would usually find. The vocals are harsh, the song is really chaotic, and I think the slider designs recreate this harshness best, without compromising actual playability elements like rhythm, flow, spacing. Some other ideas I had going into this map were to create really jarring and "harsh" flows and awkward spacings, but I ultimately decided on something simple like slider designs, which would be purely visual. I'm confident my patterns play well, they just appear ugly.

The other thing here though, is that the slider designs are also being used as juxtaposition between the metal part and the winny upload part. You can clearly see a distinction between the two.

I think the map is controversial, so naturally there will be people who dislike it. I don't see a majority though, and I think judging the community's response based on the people in this thread can create really lopsided results.
Shiirn
I think the main thing that makes this all feel so disrespectful is that the bullshit is just really obvious. Your reasons are flimsy, your map is clearly intended to be various combinations of "ez 8* pass" "hardest ranked map" "haha its super hard half the time and super boring the other half" "I can make something extremely ugly and anti-meta too guys! and rank it!" and "i can map what i want and bullshit anything past", if I'm missing anything let me know.

I'm an honest fellow. I like it when people are honest, even if their actions aren't.


But we all know that you'd rather just let people let you do whatever the fuck you please, so since I personally have no capability of forcing you to do anything, only my own words, which are oft bereft with language that leads people to disregard me outright from offense.

I'm done dealing with your self-serving fantasy map, myself. I no longer care if you want to embarrass yourself further among any worthwhile peers. This has long since gone beyond the pale.
Topic Starter
Monstrata

Shiirn wrote:

lol.
Sonnyc

Natsu wrote:

mmm i'll give my opinion here, if this map get ranked, then any map can be, since the sliders are not different to any new mapper first map sliders, they are bad and they make the map looks ugly.

Yeah the song is chaotic, but doesn't sounds bad, but the map is chaotic and looks bad that's the difference, I always support your maps, Monstrata. But in my opinion this shouldn't be ranked in the current state, I read your responses to similar arguments to mine and they are not objetives, when you say is *art* we can recall in situations like this:

which I believe is happening here, anyways not every map have to be ranked and the community response you are getting is mostly negative (for what I can see in the thread), just rework that sliders, you are a good mapper and I'm sure you can build a chaotic map that looks nice and not the current one that looks like someone first attempt of mapping, sorry Monstrata, but I have to said it too.
Actually this is what I feel too.

I normally won't say such things, but if this was mapped by a new mapper, this will be no where close to a ranked status. I wouldn't even give a nomination for such stuff, but there are many first time mappers who can map like this.
show more
Please sign in to reply.

New reply