forum

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

posted
Total Posts
1,187
show more
Swell
zzzzzz someone lock this thread until someone actually relevant has anything to say pls.
DeviousPanda

Gokateigo wrote:

You can't say it's a good style, it's ugly on purpose stfu
E X A C T L Y, you don't seem to understand that this is what monstrata wants, he made it ugly to fit the song, and him being able to do that when we know he can map other maps much 'cleaner' shows that this can't just be monstrata being lazy.

This map honestly looks ugly, and that's why I like it, it is the whole point of the map, and you honestly can't accept that, so just stop speaking please because it will get you nothing but hate from other people on this thread.

A map can be well made and ugly at the same time
Ephemeral
if you have nothing constructive to say - say nothing.

will start handing out large silences to people who don't understand this. contribute meaningfully to the map by helping out instead of arguing over each other's opinions plz
LimePixel
Honestly, can't pass the map but from playing with NF I really enjoyed it. It's pretty obvious why it's mapped so differently, and I think song representation is more important than aesthetics.

Small possible problems I noticed:
-02:56:316 (1) - This is touching the health bar slightly
-04:30:366 (3,4,5,6) - This felt odd, there's no major difference in anything for 04:30:610 (4) to be emphasized with higher spacing

I don't see why this wouldn't be rankable, since it accurately represents the song. Besides, only mapping in the usual 'safe' way (or pp mapping, with tv size songs) is going to result in player burnout and tons of the same map with different songs behind them.
Topic Starter
Monstrata
Different mappers have different interpretations. This is a question about intepretation, not style. Clearly alien is not my regular mapping style. Mazzerin interprets metal songs through attention to patterning, spacing shifts, harsh flows. I interpret the metal section through harsh slider designs and aesthetics, however if you can play the map, you'll notice the flow is largely similar to my regular maps. Quite a few top players have agreed that it flows perfectly well and simply looks bad, but the entire premise is that through using slider leniency, and being able to recognise when you can use sliderball leniency, the ugly sliders will still give a clean movement that is predictable and straightforward.

If you replaced Mazzerin's maps with an mp3 for an intense piano song like iets say https://osu.ppy.sh/s/383094 or some other Louis Cyphre map, Mazzerin's map would still fit very well. This is because Mazzerin's aesthetics is not tied to the song, nor do his placements or choices of flow. Promethean Kings, Apparition, all these maps are part of Mazzerin's style of mapping. They are not bound only to the song he is mapping. They are habits and mapping philosophies, such as using progressively increasing/decreasing spaced streams, cross screen kicksliders that are pointed at each other's slider heads, using stationary streams that increase in spacing and angle, using circular and slider-converted streams etc...

If you want to analyze my map, you need to recognize that the slider aesthetic isn't a "style" and not something you can compare with other "styles". It's an intepretation of the song, and is therefore bound to the song. Replace the mp3 with another song of the same genre, and it won't work anymore. The ugly sliders work well because there is a juxtaposition to a more beautiful section later. If there was no beautiful section later, then there'd be nothing really to juxtapose the aesthetics. Then we'd have an issue because the map is only being ugly. There is much more at play here, and you should realize that with 50 odd pages of discussion your argument needs to be exceptional it you want it to be something that hasn't already been said a hundred times before.

In any case, I will reply to your mod later, for now, just sit back and farm some of my pp maps. There is no need to continue a pointless discussion when I've already promised a response to what actually matters.
qwr
Why these sliders look like some shit Larto would put in his maps



jk the map plays fine. Also kudos to you if you recognize the painful beatmap I screenshotted from
xDololow
It's possible to fc... with touchscreen and two tablets hehehe. :P
Mini Gaunt

Monstrata wrote:

The ugly sliders work well because there is a juxtaposition to a more beautiful section later. If there was no beautiful section later, then there'd be nothing really to juxtapose the aesthetics.
This right here is why this map should be ranked. The mapping and the song bring something special to the table that really has not been done before. This map is something far out there in terms of uniqueness and it is important that a gem such as this gets the recognition it deserves. Honestly? I am disappointed that this map had far too much resistance for no well explained reason.
Gokateigo
ok last post in this thread since all of you can't understand my point and I'm bored of repeating the same thing everything
  • I know this map is made to be ugly, I know a lot of people like it (even if the user rating says the opposite but whatever), I know Monstrata knows what he's doing with the editor so stop saying I'm an ignorant because you're wrong

    BUT
  1. The gimmick is pushed too far sometimes, especially at the kickslider part : it can be ugly and good at the same time, I've already explained it in my mod, i won't say it again (fuck I'm lazy)
  2. The gimmick isn't used in some ugly parts, I looked at the map and modded it with the gimmick in head, sometimes the map has good patterns (perfect angles, flows perfectly...) in ugly parts like these perfect pentagons here 00:38:356 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,5) - or the squares here 03:45:634 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - it's not a really ugly part with the vocals etc, but it uses the same instruments + the high sound in the bg literally fuck your ears
  3. The gimmick is a bit useless/wrong : Ok, contrast, bla bla bla, I know, but the contrast is just obvious with the difficulty 8*/4* not obvious enough ? ok, there are a few ways to map metal like Mazzerin's style "omg you suck Mazz's dick kys" first : fuck you and it was an example, Maakeli is also a good metal mapper, pishi is a good metal mapper, Sayaka is a good metal mapper (restricted for shit but we're not here to talk about that). You get my point, there are other ways to map this and they're all better
  4. Some jumps are weird and uncomfortable : "it's the point of the map lol" It can be ugly and comfortable, some jumps look like normal patterns (triangles, stars,...) but with extended ds for spacing emphasis, back and forths/really sharp angles/wide angles are better than this imo and can be ugly
  5. Some patterns have nosense spacing : thinking especially about these 00:58:150 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - the DS goes at weird spots, it's just 2 (maybe 3) repeated sounds so the ds shouldn't change that much (+ 01:01:580 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - this one is just too spaced)
    I'm also thinking about this one 04:33:754 (1) - this part was just 2 sliders 1/2 for stop stop and it's reverse sliders at a random point
Ok this is literally my mod but extended, but now eveything is justified I guess (inb4 some fanboy saying I'm totally wrong) (I'll only answer to real posts now, not the usual "lol your opinion doesn't matter here")
Aezis

Gokateigo wrote:

Gasai wrote:

If you're going to bubble or veto it, give good reasons that the mapper can actually consider and implement to make the map better and that 'better' being the 'better' in your opinion and not necessarily the thousands of people playing the game.
osu! is a community based game, if a huge part the community doesn't like a map (obvious in this cse, seiously look at the user rating) the map shouldn't be ranked, especially when it uses such a controversial mapping
A huge part of the community doesn't have the skill required to even play this map, nor do most have enough mapping knowledge to grasp an understanding of what is exactly wrong with this map.
Gokateigo
AAAAH you answered while I was typing fuck
Finally a good explanation and not fanboys salt
I'm ok with it, ok I really don't like it and still disagree but it's explained correctly so meh
thanks for answering my mod
I don't farm your maps, I dislike them for being pp (I hate you ♥)
Logic Agent
i don't care about any of this drama but i think there's an aesthetic inconsistency you might consider changing unless it was intentional.

00:17:766 and 01:22:624 are obviously supposed to be similar with the whole guitar going ham and the vocals increasing in intensity, however in the first section you start using "ugly" 1/2 sliders way sooner than you do in the second section. 00:23:986 (5) Here is the first to show that some kind of aesthetic change is gonna start and then after that the last slider in every group of four is ugly.

01:30:362 (4) - but here you waited until pretty far into the section to start making slightly ugly sliders to indicate the change again, maybe cause the section itself is longer before the vocals start yelling again? i dunno, just something i thought i'd ask about. don't mind me if it was intentional/ you've already brought it up, but you could probably start doing slightly ugly ones 01:27:148 (5) here or something.

but yeah, good luck with... all this. my opinion on this map has changed significantly since i voted it a 1/10 almost a year ago
Mini Gaunt

Gokateigo wrote:

The gimmick isn't used in some ugly parts, I looked at the map and modded it with the gimmick in head, sometimes the map has good patterns (perfect angles, flows perfectly...) in ugly parts like these perfect pentagons here 00:38:356 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,5) - or the squares here 03:45:634 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - it's not a really ugly part with the vocals etc, but it uses the same instruments + the high sound in the bg literally fuck your ears
Not here to reply for monstrata but...

03:45:634 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - This is not an ugly part??? The percussion is gone from this section and the only thing that is playing is a simple (bass?) guitar. If you are trying to compare the two, I think 00:38:356 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,5) - is a fast build up but with percussion a guitar backing up the singer, the two parts are not alike. Monstrata said he was going to change it to something else anyway.
Kite
Thought I was in a HW map topic for a second there
GL with the map my boi, I can take a look in a bit if u care about another opinion
Natteke desu
wow i saw a dead Brayan


Map concept is nothing special and this can be ranked, see you later bob
3301
the map is fun, just rank it fags
Shock

Opsi wrote:

There are very few maps (if there even are) like Alien, but tell me; is there another song like Alien? It's a fucking mess of exorcised screams that not even Mazzerin would map, that suddenly cuts out to a loli singing about...wanting to be kidnapped by an alien...? (whattheactualfuck.jpeg)
Experimental metal often has a lot of unpredictable rhythms to it. They're usually a sort of "controlled chaos" and not completely random, but if you think this is extremely cacophonous then I'd advise you to step outside of your musical comfort zone a bit.

Also, if I remember correctly, the "winny upload" bit refers to some sort of controversy in Japan regarding piracy.
MrMenda
I shouldnt be typing here as i'm not that much of an experienced mapper (not even close), but whatever. I still have an opinion

This map should be ranked, as it is another way of changing mapping. This is a different approach to the extremely good visuals we are trying to emphasize more into lately, there is no need to have cute sliders in every single song if the song is a experimental metal one. Having variety is never bad at all. If you dont like a map it is as simple as not playing it.

The excuse I've seen of "the sliders look like ones a new mapper would do" kinda falls apart, as they are executed logically and, what's more important in this community, consistently.

The map is well structured, as the more Chaotic part has more chaotic visuals and the "cuter" part has more pleasing ones, so the concept Monstrata is trying to show is pretty clear after all. I would complain about some 1/4 sliders being way to hard to be playable (yet i'm only a 55k scrub) in the chaotic parts.
Ora
i say just let the map through lol, its not like anyone's going to play it more than once anyways and we'll just see a few cool passes on it. Just get it over with and let it die
Kagetsu

Monstrata wrote:

@Kagetsu: A lot of analysis and discussion has gone into this map's patterning and playability so it is a disservice to everyone here if you just give a blanket statement that it's "unplayable" without giving specifics for me to explain to you.
please note that i mentioned the loved section with the sole purpose of proving that there was no decent scores on this map, i consider a map playable when the player can get 98% or more acc. this was definitely not the case.
if you want a deeper explanation about why the playability of this map is bad, i would have to say that it's a sum of things: first would be the editor limitations, you've stated that there are players who are capable of playing maps around this speed, the fact that you're not considering, though, is that they do it with dt, where you can play at higher ar and od. i'm remarking these two because i believe they have a lot to do with the map playablity. the current ar is far too low. it feels like playing a 190~ bpm map at ar 8.5 which is obviously not the best setting when it comes to smoothly read the patterns. it's debatable whether or not we should choose upon not the best way of making things because of the editor limitations, you might have your own opinion as well as i can have mine.
another point: we all know this a complex song, and as such, it will always tend to be harder to play than common songs, what i don't understand though, is why you're using such a bad transitions when changing the bpm, for example, on 02:55:471 - this section, the bpm increases by 14 units yet you decided to use full screen jumps, which aren't bad in paper, because the music is strong enough to support jumps, but the transition is just unpredictable. you could've been considered a smoother way to put these sections together, by using less spacing/pasive objects or whatnot.
i consider this specific pattern 02:55:471 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1) - as near to impossible to hit (unless you're using touchscreen), the distance is just too much and the rotations aren't the best either, you might argue that you're using "uncomfortable movement" in order to accentuate the music, but the truth is that the higher the bpm is, the less you feel the difference between awkward and non-awkward movements, this is because the bpm makes all the beats awkward to play already. the worst transition here would be 02:55:787 (2) - to 02:55:893 (1) - especially because the rotation changes on 02:55:893 (1) - which makes it very hard to hit. you might want to move 02:55:999 (2) - somewhere to the up side of the screen in order to "fix" that.
in any case, the distance is still something debatable, again, not because it isn't supported by the music, but rather because it's unplayable. i'm pretty sure there's no one that can consistently hit this pattern 3 times in a row when going throughout the entire map, otherwise prove me wrong.

i believe unplayable maps doesn't fit the ranked section, and that's why tag4 maps were moved to the loved one. believe it or not, your map shares some similarities with tag4 maps: difficult patterns, rough movements, high spaced objects combined with a very high object density in the screen (this due to low ar considering how fast the bpm is) etc.
now i'm not saying that mapping this song is completely impossible, but it would need a complete rework in order to make it playable, because nerfing some patterns would end up unbalancing the map.

about how countering the veto, i honestly think that we won''t reach an agreement, i'm just using my right to vote about whether or not this map should be qualified, i've decided upon no. the veto system is nothing more than a voting system after all.
kbd

Kagetsu wrote:

the current ar is far too low. it feels like playing a 190~ bpm map at ar 8.5 which is obviously not the best setting when it comes to smoothly read the patterns.
Isn't the map currently AR10? That's what it says for the current pending version lol.
Hopefully I'm not taking your statement out of context.
Izzywing

kobolddragon wrote:

Kagetsu wrote:

the current ar is far too low. it feels like playing a 190~ bpm map at ar 8.5 which is obviously not the best setting when it comes to smoothly read the patterns.
Isn't the map currently AR10? That's what it says for the current pending version lol.
Hopefully I'm not taking your statement out of context.
He's saying that the liminations of the editor (AR 10) is the problem.
Kagetsu

kobolddragon wrote:

Kagetsu wrote:

the current ar is far too low. it feels like playing a 190~ bpm map at ar 8.5 which is obviously not the best setting when it comes to smoothly read the patterns.
Isn't the map currently AR10? That's what it says for the current pending version lol.
Hopefully I'm not taking your statement out of context.
in terms of approach rate, playing a 190 bpm 8.5 ar map with dt would be the same as a 285 bpm map with ar 10. that's what i meant to say.
Mini Gaunt
@Kagetsu I understand the points you are making. However, this will be brought up time and time again because it is the counter-argument to this. It feels like your definitions aren't taking in other ranked maps into account. People will say Mazzerin, or Hollow Wings, etc. but because it is true. The main idea behind every single point you make is playability

Kagetsu wrote:

i'm remarking these two because i believe they have a lot to do with the map playablity.

but the transition is just unpredictable.


not because it isn't supported by the music, but rather because it's unplayable.


i believe unplayable maps doesn't fit the ranked section,


need a complete rework in order to make it playable,
Playability is certainly something that should be taken into consideration, however as long as it is not unreasonable a map can be, for all purposes, unplayable. There are many examples of unplayable maps that should be and are ranked and I don't see why this is an exception.

Also the AR issue shows up in other high bpm maps too, does it not?
UndeadCapulet
comparing this map to tag4 is pretty childish, please dont use massive exaggerations to help make a point, your point should be able to stand on its own if its valid
Flezlin

Kagetsu wrote:

please note that i mentioned the loved section with the sole purpose of proving that there was no decent scores on this map, i consider a map playable when the player can get 98% or more acc. this was definitely not the case.
if you want a deeper explanation about why the playability of this map is bad, i would have to say that it's a sum of things: first would be the editor limitations, you've stated that there are players who are capable of playing maps around this speed, the fact that you're not considering, though, is that they do it with dt, where you can play at higher ar and od. i'm remarking these two because i believe they have a lot to do with the map playablity. the current ar is far too low. it feels like playing a 190~ bpm map at ar 8.5 which is obviously not the best setting when it comes to smoothly read the patterns. it's debatable whether or not we should choose upon not the best way of making things because of the editor limitations, you might have your own opinion as well as i can have mine.
i think you're severely underestimating the reading capability of players, and just because most maps at this bpm with dt end up with higher ar doesn't necessarily make those comfortable to read either
sure, its ar10 with 285 bpm, but most of that is 1/2s, and there are only a few sections with 1/4s which are quite natural to play
the map is very straightforward with most of its stuff, so i think something like this doesn't need any higher ar

the od also seems fine to me while playing the map
coming from the same point, there aren't that many 1/4s, and i haven't experienced any problems with notelocking

Kagetsu wrote:

another point: we all know this a complex song, and as such, it will always tend to be harder to play than common songs, what i don't understand though, is why you're using such a bad transitions when changing the bpm, for example, on 02:55:471 - this section, the bpm increases by 14 units yet you decided to use full screen jumps, which aren't bad in paper, because the music is strong enough to support jumps, but the transition is just unpredictable. you could've been considered a smoother way to put these sections together, by using less spacing/pasive objects or whatnot.
i consider this specific pattern 02:55:471 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1) - as near to impossible to hit (unless you're using touchscreen), the distance is just too much and the rotations aren't the best either, you might argue that you're using "uncomfortable movement" in order to accentuate the music, but the truth is that the higher the bpm is, the less you feel the difference between awkward and non-awkward movements, this is because the bpm makes all the beats awkward to play already. the worst transition here would be 02:55:787 (2) - to 02:55:893 (1) - especially because the rotation changes on 02:55:893 (1) - which makes it very hard to hit. you might want to move 02:55:999 (2) - somewhere to the up side of the screen in order to "fix" that.
in any case, the distance is still something debatable, again, not because it isn't supported by the music, but rather because it's unplayable. i'm pretty sure there's no one that can consistently hit this pattern 3 times in a row when going throughout the entire map, otherwise prove me wrong.
ok so i'll leave the transition into the jumps for monstrata to respond to, but these jumps are far from impossible, i've even hit them myself as a 4 digit player, nowhere near the skill level of, say, the top 50
example: http://puu.sh/wPQQf/5ffdeb6a64.osr (not my best run on the map but anyway they're not as bad as you say)

also about the part with hitting the pattern 3 times in a row, that's setting an arbitrarily high standard, and you might as well be asking someone to perform their top play 3 times in a row otherwise they should be considered cheating
actually i'd probably even consider hitting these jumps 3 times in a row quite doable from several players (some that come to mind are emilia, cookiezi, vaxei, rafis, bubbleman, etc )

so yea personally i seriously dont consider playability an issue with this

Kagetsu wrote:

i believe unplayable maps doesn't fit the ranked section, and that's why tag4 maps were moved to the loved one. believe it or not, your map shares some similarities with tag4 maps: difficult patterns, rough movements, high spaced objects combined with a very high object density in the screen (this due to low ar considering how fast the bpm is) etc.
now i'm not saying that mapping this song is completely impossible, but it would need a complete rework in order to make it playable, because nerfing some patterns would end up unbalancing the map.

about how countering the veto, i honestly think that we won''t reach an agreement, i'm just using my right to vote about whether or not this map should be qualified, i've decided upon no. the veto system is nothing more than a voting system after all.
the movement is actually smoother than you may expect, the aesthetics seem very rough, but while actually playing through it your movement simplifies itself quite a bit and some of it is even comfortable
the map is hard, yes, but i believe the aesthetics and movement match the song very well, and the movement is nothing particularly awkward




anyway yea i just wanted to throw my two cents in since i dont agree with this reasoning for a veto
not sure if it'll convince you or not but hopefully you'll reconsider a bit
Aurele
Nonsense posts prior to Ephemeral's warning have been deleted from the thread. Please refrain from doing it again.

A short reminder from our lord and savior:

Ephemeral wrote:

if you have nothing constructive to say - say nothing.

will start handing out large silences to people who don't understand this. contribute meaningfully to the map by helping out instead of arguing over each other's opinions plz
Thank you!
Nao Tomori
this entire argument still makes no sense. should we veto every map that players cannot get a 98% fc on? say goodbye to like, most maps above 7 stars. where did this 98% number come from anyway? there were several a rank passes on the map, why is that insufficient to show playability?
is any AR setting below 10 unacceptable to you? like, yes, you play hr/dt, and maybe you can't or don't enjoy playing maps with "low ar" but many others can and DO play maps with "real" ARs similar to this. notable examples being, again, freedom dive, a lot of 0108 style maps, etc etc.
additionally, as flezlin stated, this map is like 80% 1/2 spam. there are very few complex patterns (since, as monstrata and many others commented, he uses patterning very similar to his other maps) and as such the reading difficulty of the map at AR10 should not be unrankably low.
further, stating that a map being too mechanically difficult to FC is also not a reason to keep a map unranked. I gave several examples of maps that at one point were or still are considered impossible to fc; we can get more if you don't think that players improve over time. aside from that, there's the very real chance that people CAN fc these 280 bpm jumps, since comparable scores have already been set, repeatedly. like kira kira days DT, done without a touchscreen.

this honestly feels much more like "i don't like monstrata getting this map ranked so i'm gonna veto it regardless of reasoning" rather than "i think this map can be improved / changed to make it better" which is not what the veto system should be used to do.
Topic Starter
Monstrata
Chatlog with Kagetsu on Discord
Monstrata - Today at 7:02 AM
theres been 50 pages of discussion, surely there is mroe to say than that...
Kagetsu - Today at 7:04 AM
that's the only issue that comes to my mind
i just didn't want to post a wallmod
because they're useless
anyways gtg
Monstrata - Today at 7:26 AM
so is what you posted...
so how do you want me to counter your veto? just finding anothe rbn?
your only reason was "i dont think its rankable"
Monstrata - Today at 8:22 PM
I am going to get Kurai to rebubble after replying to your mod >:(
Ok?
Your concern about playability severely underestimated people's skills sadly
Kagetsu - Today at 8:32 PM
it's okay
that's in the rules
i can't do anything
it wouldn't be fair otherwise
Monstrata - Today at 8:35 PM
The unfair thing is that you haven't given any good reasons lol. I could have said any map was unplayable unless ppl get 100% and are able to consistently fc a section 15 times in a row
The idea is the same. Arbitrary values that you're trying to attach to quantify something being unplayable
Anyways spoke with some qats, doesn't seem like the veto will float when the playability case is so weak xp
I just hope u weren't trying to play the hero by popping alien lol it's clearly backfired
Kagetsu - Today at 8:39 PM
playing the hero?
i just think the map is unplayable
it might be subjective but there's that
i don't have any other concern
as i've already said, i find the map concept cool
it's just wrongly executed imo
Monstrata - Today at 9:00 PM
wrongly executed? then what would make it well executed? if the spacing was smaller? that has nothing to do with the concept :stuck_out_tongue:
basically my counter argument to your claim is "the map is playable" but look at it from this perspective
I could go to some random 6 star map and veto it with the reasoning "i don't think this map is playable, I consider a map playable if the scoreboard is filled with 99%/SS's and people can fc the largest jumps consistently 5 times in a row"
what's the counter argument? "but the map is playable"...
you see why the veto doesn't sound strong at all.
Kagetsu - Today at 9:03 PM
uh but that wasn't what i said
i basically said that there's no player who can properly play the map
98 acc is a reasonable number i think
Monstrata - Today at 9:04 PM
thats not a reasonable number at all... 98 acc is being able to play it very proficiently, and fc'ing it
we have 95% accs, 93% accs, you quoted the scoreboard for Alien when it was loved
so you should ahve seen the nunmber of ppl with A's and over 90% acct plays at least, no?
Kagetsu - Today at 9:05 PM
but what's the point on getting something that can't be played by anyone ranked
Monstrata - Today at 9:05 PM
it can be played. it just has't been fc'ed yet
Kagetsu - Today at 9:05 PM
and when i say "played" i mean play it proficiently
there are some maps that are playable but don't have an fc on their ranks though
Monstrata - Today at 9:06 PM
because maps can be there to challenge people while still be rankable. there are no fc's on glorious crown, there were no fc's on freedom dive / insert old hard maps etc...
Kagetsu - Today at 9:07 PM
glorious crown is playable though
i do think it's possible to get 98 acc
Monstrata - Today at 9:08 PM
im not quoting it because its playable. im quoting it because the intention of such maps is to challenge players
people aren't pushing it forward because "its playable" people are pushing it forward because "it challenges players"
do you only play games where you can easily play the levels?
Kagetsu - Today at 9:09 PM
there's a difference between challenging and impossible(edited)
Monstrata - Today at 9:09 PM
theres a reason you put HD/HR/etc... or play maps that are above your skill level, to challenge yourself and improve
clearly alien is challenging and not impossible
there is literally zero evidence to support alien being "impossible"
Kagetsu - Today at 9:10 PM
i could say the same about it being playable
it's all subjective
Monstrata - Today at 9:10 PM
thats not a good excuse :stuck_out_tongue:
"its all subjective" is what people do when they disagree with something but don't know how to analyze it or explain it
when you veto, you need to engage in this discussion though. that Xexxar pop on after rain basically confirmed that :stuck_out_tongue:
Kagetsu - Today at 9:12 PM
neither is your's
Monstrata - Today at 9:12 PM
i have multiple replays of people who have gotten over 93% acc, people who've passed the map on HR
people who have fc'ed the jumps
opinions on the jumps,
from top 50's
i can give even more reasons, but tell me what do you have aside from "but no one's gotten over 98% so its impossible"
Kagetsu - Today at 9:13 PM
uh
i've already stated some reasons in the map thread
Monstrata - Today at 9:14 PM
like?
Kagetsu - Today at 9:14 PM
the ar not being suitable?
Monstrata - Today at 9:14 PM
what makes you say that?
have you considered the number of milliseconds lost between AR 10 and AR 10.33 or whatever AR you believe is necessary?
Kagetsu - Today at 9:15 PM
can you even play ar 10 though
because i can tell you that the difference is noticeable
kynan said so
Monstrata - Today at 9:16 PM
kynan agreed AR 10 was good though?
i already increased it to AR 10 btw
it was a really recent update from AR 9.7...
Kagetsu - Today at 9:16 PM
no, he said something like 10 was too slow
Monstrata - Today at 9:16 PM
where?
Kagetsu - Today at 9:17 PM
not sure if the post got deleted lol
no, wait
he said 9,7 was too slow
and it's now "fixed" because ar 10
i don't think ar 10 is enough though
Monstrata - Today at 9:18 PM
00:00:000 -
sdfsdf'
p/6145143
yes
he said AR 10 so really you have no one to quote, yet
people who clearly have a lot of experience playing high bpm stuff think the new AR is good
Kagetsu - Today at 9:19 PM
because there's nothing better lol
Monstrata - Today at 9:19 PM
so what AR do you think is necessary? have you even compared the AR values?
Kagetsu - Today at 9:20 PM
i play high ar stuff
as well as high bpm maps
Monstrata - Today at 9:20 PM
and i map high AR stuff :stuck_out_tongue:
you're not really answering the question :stuck_out_tongue: and sure you can quote your own experiences but that just shows that your argument really has no basis on the "loved leaderboard" that you quoted as being one of the motivations for your veto :stuck_out_tongue:
Kagetsu - Today at 9:21 PM
why do you spam that emoji tho
it's annoying lmao
and why should i need another person to prove my reasoning
Monstrata - Today at 9:22 PM
because you quoted the scoreboard was your reason :stuck_out_tongue: and right now you have given no evidence that anything on the alien's loved scoreboard has supported your reasoning that the map is impossible
let me just explain to you the AR
indeed, a higher AR can help. but do you know what that higher AR would be?
Kagetsu - Today at 9:23 PM
10.5 would be reasonable
Monstrata - Today at 9:23 PM
no
Kagetsu - Today at 9:23 PM
why not
Monstrata - Today at 9:23 PM
that would be too high mathematically
at 280 bpm
anything over 428 ms will have no bearing on AR
let me explain
Kagetsu - Today at 9:23 PM
but that's what most of 280 bpm dt maps use?
Monstrata - Today at 9:24 PM
at 280 bpm, 428 ms is the nearest time frame that snaps to a rhythm
lets say
01:29:720 - to 01:30:148 -
thats two white ticks
two white ticks spam 428 ms
but theres also the blue tick afterwards to consider, because otherwise when you see the white tick, the previous one will have already faded
in actuality one only needs
AR 10.15 to AR 10.2
https://osu.ppy.sh/help/wiki/Beatmap_Editor/Song_Setup
well, that doesn't have every decimal AR but the AR calculator does
because anything over 428 ms will still show as "three white ticks / two beats"
err anything under 428 ms
the effect of lowering the AR to say 10.5 and using 400 ms would mean less time for the player to react, but it wouldn't lower the density of objects on the screen
is the tldr reasoning
omg i keep saying the opposite
the effect on raising the AR to 10.5*
Kagetsu - Today at 9:30 PM
it isn't as complicated as you're saying tho
just pick a 190 bpm 8.5 ar map and play it dt
Monstrata - Today at 9:30 PM
it is if there was literally 4 pages of discussion on it that i guess you didnt read xP
also, the dt argument isn't good
you shouldn't consider other mods to begin with, and additionally, the DT values are too great anyways. you probably just aclimated to those values,
Kagetsu - Today at 9:31 PM
uh i'm just telling you how it feels
playing your map
Monstrata - Today at 9:31 PM
if mappers had a choice of what AR/OD they wanted to attribute to DT values, they wouldn't pick the default ones
so if i played one of your maps and couldn't pass it does that mean i can veto and say its impossible? :stuck_out_tongue: because this is what you're doing right now
since you have't given any evidence outside of your own experience
im trying to show you why the reasoning is flawed and needs more support
(and may convince you that the veto isn't going to float)
Kagetsu - Today at 9:33 PM
but i'm not vetoing it because i can't pass it
Monstrata - Today at 9:33 PM
you're vetoing it because you think its impossible according to yourself...
Kagetsu - Today at 9:33 PM
actually i think i can pass it xD
Monstrata - Today at 9:34 PM
thats good that you can pass. the map is not impossible...
Kagetsu - Today at 9:35 PM
did i say the map is impossible? if so i apologize
Monstrata - Today at 9:35 PM
yes :P. and that its not playable. but again, no evidence other than yourself
Kagetsu - Today at 9:36 PM
it being unplayable isn't equal to it being impossible
Monstrata - Today at 9:36 PM
either way though. the intention is the same
"this map isn't playable for me so I'm going to veto it"
Kagetsu - Today at 9:36 PM
that wasn't my reason lmao
Monstrata - Today at 9:37 PM
try doing that on other maps
that was though...
your argument is literally that you think the map is unplayable, therefore it shouldn't be in the ranked section
Kagetsu - Today at 9:37 PM
ye
that's my reasoning
Monstrata - Today at 9:38 PM
try that on any other map.
and yous ee why this reasoning is honestly full of holes :stuck_out_tongue:
Kagetsu - Today at 9:38 PM
people doesn't usually make unplayable maps
Monstrata - Today at 9:39 PM
no my point is
https://osu.ppy.sh/s/444335
i could go to this map
and veto it with the line "i think this map is unplayable, therefore it shouldn't be in the ranked section"
what will your response be? probably" but its playable... "
Kagetsu - Today at 9:40 PM
ya
Monstrata - Today at 9:40 PM
yes right?
Kagetsu - Today at 9:40 PM
because it's indeed playable?
Monstrata - Today at 9:40 PM
thats the same idea here
alien is indeed playable.
Kagetsu - Today at 9:40 PM
i don't think thats true
Monstrata - Today at 9:41 PM
so heres the kicker. i can say that too
"i dont think thats true"
for your map
Kagetsu - Today at 9:41 PM
lmao
so i demonstrate you it's playable
Monstrata - Today at 9:42 PM
but how? i don't think its playable unless the leaderboard is all SS's and people can FC the jump section 5 times in a row while playing it through
i could insert any arbitrary "task" that would be required to call it playable
Kagetsu - Today at 9:42 PM
thats not what i asked for, in your case though?
Monstrata - Today at 9:42 PM
in the end, the whole "criteria for calling something playable" is subjective
whatever you asked, is subjective.
Kagetsu - Today at 9:43 PM
i'm asking for something way more factible
Monstrata - Today at 9:43 PM
its not
any more factible
because there is nothing that determines something is more factible or not.
but all that is irrelevant. the fact is. if i said that on your map
the veto wouldn't last because i woulndn't be able to prove it was unplayable
and its going to be the same case here if im reading what qat's are saying correctly
Kagetsu - Today at 9:44 PM
uh but
under that logic wouldn't it be possible to rank anything?
because everything is playable
because no one can demonstrate that something is unplayable
Monstrata - Today at 9:46 PM
you draw the playability line through evidence from top players
and ive quoted multiple evidences that support my claim that the map is indeed playable.
while you don't have anything
Kagetsu - Today at 9:46 PM
it's just the same
i have the alien scoreboard
where the top play was made by a touchscreen player
Monstrata - Today at 9:47 PM
but it wasnt...
Kagetsu - Today at 9:47 PM
uh i don't recall the players name
Monstrata - Today at 9:48 PM
you really sound like you're making stuff up here... you come in and veto a map where people have put countless hours into discussing ideas and concepts, and watched hours of replays and anlyzed literally every part of the map
the least you can do is provide some evidence...
Kagetsu - Today at 9:49 PM
isn't it enough evidence already
Monstrata - Today at 9:50 PM
that the map is playable, yes..
Kagetsu - Today at 9:51 PM
i mean't evidence that the map is unplayable
lol
Monstrata - Today at 9:51 PM
so what evidence? lol
you're completely avoiding the question because you don't have an answer...
Kagetsu - Today at 9:52 PM
i don't have an answer because playability is subjective
your "evidence" proves nothing
Monstrata - Today at 9:52 PM
its a hell of a lot better than no evidence
Kagetsu - Today at 9:53 PM
i mean i can use the same arguments to back up my points
pointing the scoreboard
"i have watched a lot of players not being able to play this map"
Monstrata - Today at 9:54 PM
this map is not playable because the leaderboard is only filled with scores that are over 90% acc. the map is not playable because only one person was able to pass it with HR.
Kagetsu - Today at 9:54 PM
and it's the same thing at the end
Monstrata - Today at 9:54 PM
yea i can do the same for your arguments if i were to veto one of your maps xP
"the scoreboard is only filled with 99% accuracy scores" "only 15 people have fc'ed it on DT"
Kagetsu - Today at 9:54 PM
you're using arbitrary numbers too
see?
Monstrata - Today at 9:54 PM
as are you :stuck_out_tongue:
Kagetsu - Today at 9:54 PM
ya
that's why i say it's subjective
Monstrata - Today at 9:55 PM
im doing exactly what you're doing to demonstrate that they are not good reasons...
you're just hiding behind the "everything is subjective" thing again and avoiding trying to discuss it.
Kagetsu - Today at 9:55 PM
but there's nothing to discuss
you can't prove the map is playable
and i can't prove the map is unplayable
Monstrata - Today at 9:56 PM
you know this reasoning wont work lol
with that reasoning i can just pop any map and say
"but you cant prove the map is playable"
Kagetsu - Today at 9:57 PM
the difference is that most of the maps are already proven to be playable
unless you ask for something impossible
Monstrata - Today at 9:57 PM
how?
how did you prove the map was playable? if everythign is subjective?
Kagetsu - Today at 9:57 PM
because it's agreed upon
Monstrata - Today at 9:57 PM
does 100 people fc'ing it prove the map is playable? how about 99? all these numbers are arbitrary
agreed upon by who? 5 people, 50 people?
everything iss ubjective remember
Kagetsu - Today at 9:58 PM
by the majority
that's why i'm voting no
Monstrata - Today at 9:58 PM
the majority are you sure? did you actually ask every player in china? because the chinese players are the majority of osu players.
Kagetsu - Today at 9:58 PM
lmao
Monstrata - Today at 9:58 PM
how do you know its a majority? xD
Kagetsu - Today at 9:59 PM
if it wasn't like that, then people wouldn't even be playing the game lol
Monstrata - Today at 9:59 PM
no matter what you say, it can always be disproven by "its subjective" which si precisely why your veto'ing logic is flawed :stuck_out_tongue:
Kagetsu - Today at 9:59 PM
because the maps are unplayable
i mean, i wouldn't play something unplayable
Monstrata - Today at 9:59 PM
you played alien and said you could even fc it...
???
Kagetsu - Today at 10:00 PM
i didn't say i can fc it
no one can
Monstrata - Today at 10:00 PM
pass*
doesn't change the fact you played it lmao
Kagetsu - Today at 10:00 PM
ya, but playability involves more things
it's all about passing
it's about feeling the music
or something like that
Monstrata - Today at 10:00 PM
really? all about passing?
Kagetsu - Today at 10:01 PM
nononoon
my english is just bad lol
it isn't all about passing
please consider that this isn't even my native language ):
Monstrata - Today at 10:01 PM
feeling the music? how does that determine playability?
well, as a BN you are required to know english so
not really my problem :stuck_out_tongue:
Kagetsu - Today at 10:02 PM
ye, i'm just asking for consideration
and idk,i think i just expressed it wrong
i mean mashing the keyboard
and passing something
doesn't mean it's playable
it's like vaxei passing airman dt hr
he literally waits on the left side of the screen
so that he hits 1/1 instead of hitting the entire 1/2 patterns
Monstrata - Today at 10:03 PM
i've already considered your arguments thoroughly. you have no evidence that suggests the map is unplayable. i've demonstrated why your logic is faulty because it can be easily used on other maps, and i've given you counter arguments that support the map is playable through scores, as well as why the AR even though it could be slightly higher, is already very close to the ideal number
Kagetsu - Today at 10:04 PM
i don't think you've demonstrated my logic is faulty
Monstrata - Today at 10:05 PM
"i don't think this is playable so i'm veto'ing it" is faulty
1. no evidence from other people to support its "not playable"
2. can be applied to literally every map you think is "not playable"
3. no reasoning or discussion because if someone disagrees, they just have to disagree or absolutely convince you the map is playable.
Kagetsu - Today at 10:06 PM
you've been gotten through that already
and demonstrated nothing
the only thing we can come out from this discussion is that playability is subjective
and it's something agreen upon
so i voted no
just get people who vote yes
and that's it
agreed*
Monstrata - Today at 10:07 PM
no, the only thing we can come out from this discussion is that you don't have any evidence so you're just hiding behind the "playabilty is subjective" line
Kagetsu - Today at 10:07 PM
xD
but we already discussed that
Monstrata - Today at 10:08 PM
no, you tried multiple times to end the discussion on" playability is sibjective so we have to disagree"
if something is subjective, it means there are multiple ways to interpret something
you haven't given any evidence or interpretation on your end
which is why i say you are "hiding behind the line"
if you have any evidence then at least i can say "i disagree with Kagetsu's opinion on playability, but at least i know what his viewpoint looks like"
Kagetsu - Today at 10:10 PM
get kurai to rebubble it
or post the chat logs in the thread
if the qat decides that my veto is invalid
then i have nothing to say
Monstrata - Today at 10:11 PM
https://puu.sh/wPW3O.png

its not far off
Kagetsu - Today at 10:13 PM
is there a way to save the logs on discord
Monstrata - Today at 10:13 PM
i dont know but i'll gladly post them

Will reply to the mods now, and then get Kurai to rebub probably
Topic Starter
Monstrata

Kagetsu wrote:

Monstrata wrote:

@Kagetsu: A lot of analysis and discussion has gone into this map's patterning and playability so it is a disservice to everyone here if you just give a blanket statement that it's "unplayable" without giving specifics for me to explain to you.
please note that i mentioned the loved section with the sole purpose of proving that there was no decent scores on this map, i consider a map playable when the player can get 98% or more acc. this was definitely not the case.
if you want a deeper explanation about why the playability of this map is bad, i would have to say that it's a sum of things: first would be the editor limitations, you've stated that there are players who are capable of playing maps around this speed, the fact that you're not considering, though, is that they do it with dt, where you can play at higher ar and od. i'm remarking these two because i believe they have a lot to do with the map playablity. the current ar is far too low. it feels like playing a 190~ bpm map at ar 8.5 which is obviously not the best setting when it comes to smoothly read the patterns. it's debatable whether or not we should choose upon not the best way of making things because of the editor limitations, you might have your own opinion as well as i can have mine. We discussed everything here in the irc.
another point: we all know this a complex song, and as such, it will always tend to be harder to play than common songs, what i don't understand though, is why you're using such a bad transitions when changing the bpm, for example, on 02:55:471 - this section, the bpm increases by 14 units yet you decided to use full screen jumps, which aren't bad in paper, because the music is strong enough to support jumps, but the transition is just unpredictable. you could've been considered a smoother way to put these sections together, by using less spacing/pasive objects or whatnot. This has been analyzed in detail already. Please refer to Hobbes2's analysis of it on: p/6145650. They are indeed playable, and the transition is very much anticipated because the repeating up/downward sliders train the player to move upward on the next circle, and therefore, downward again the circle after.
This is already very smooth.

i consider this specific pattern 02:55:471 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1) - as near to impossible to hit (unless you're using touchscreen), the distance is just too much and the rotations aren't the best either, you might argue that you're using "uncomfortable movement" in order to accentuate the music, but the truth is that the higher the bpm is, the less you feel the difference between awkward and non-awkward movements, this is because the bpm makes all the beats awkward to play already. the worst transition here would be 02:55:787 (2) - to 02:55:893 (1) - especially because the rotation changes on 02:55:893 (1) - which makes it very hard to hit. you might want to move 02:55:999 (2) - somewhere to the up side of the screen in order to "fix" that. The rotation does not change at all... The jumps are symmetrical so all rotations are mathematically constant... It's the same difficulty as every other jump that's off-center symmetrical.
in any case, the distance is still something debatable, again, not because it isn't supported by the music, but rather because it's unplayable. i'm pretty sure there's no one that can consistently hit this pattern 3 times in a row when going throughout the entire map, otherwise prove me wrong.

i believe unplayable maps doesn't fit the ranked section, and that's why tag4 maps were moved to the loved one. believe it or not, your map shares some similarities with tag4 maps: difficult patterns, rough movements, high spaced objects combined with a very high object density in the screen (this due to low ar considering how fast the bpm is) etc.
now i'm not saying that mapping this song is completely impossible, but it would need a complete rework in order to make it playable, because nerfing some patterns would end up unbalancing the map.

about how countering the veto, i honestly think that we won''t reach an agreement, i'm just using my right to vote about whether or not this map should be qualified, i've decided upon no. the veto system is nothing more than a voting system after all.
We discussed this in a lot more depth over discord chat. I hope this short reply is sufficient considering the log discusses everything much more thoroughly over literally a whole hour.
Topic Starter
Monstrata

Itasha_S13 wrote:

I don't really like jumps on 00:54:726 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - considering 00:51:250 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1) - 00:58:150 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - 01:01:580 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - because pattern on 00:54:726 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - doesn't move.. like the jumps are static in the same side of the screen unlike the others that makes a movement, it fits the song. but 00:54:726 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - doesnt do that. I think something like this would fit better and keep the idea of that moving Im talking about to fit the guitar https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/8647226 i think the current positioning is fine, and the sections are seprated enough not to feel that related. Also the jumps are quite central, of course a bit to the left, but not to the point where its disorientating or cumbersome to hand positioning.
01:07:259 (1) - check timing on this I think its a bit late It was slightly late, i adjusted a bit for good measure.

Gokateigo wrote:

mod
  1. 00:01:621 - this sound fuck my ears, if you want to map ugly things don't do a perfect curve This is all part of establishing a baseline aesthetic. There needs to be something that demonstrates the map is breaking apart as the vocals kick in and the song becomes more clearly harsher.
  2. 00:17:766 (1,2,3,4) - nice curves/square for an ugly map ^
  3. 00:38:356 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4) - perfect pentagons are bad for an ugly map ^ Though i ended up fixing it to something else
  4. 00:51:250 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - back and forths fit better here and it'll be moe playable This is also back and forths. and this plays just fine.
    It's just angled a bit to help with transitioning to the side of the screen.
  5. 00:58:150 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - ^ No. THis is perfectly fine and they are already back and forths, they just also have movements that go in a singular direction.
  6. 01:01:580 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - ^ ^ honestly see nothing wrong.
  7. 01:06:090 (1) - this spinner is full of strong sounds I want to use a spinner because people will still play spinners as a fast gameplay element. When you see a spinner, you move really fast, you don't sit idly by so the intensity is kept. I don't want to use streams because the timing is really messed up, and the section doesn't call for intense rhythm because they are preceded by slow sliders.
  8. 01:10:902 (1) - ^ ^
  9. 01:15:702 (1) - ^ ^
  10. 01:23:493 (1) - ctrl g ? + redo the pattern if you do it No, I want the patterns to be asymmetrical. It creates some uneasiness in the object placement that the player is now accustomed to.
  11. 01:25:434 (6) - map something ugly here the vocals are different Okay sure, applied to the two below too.
  12. 01:27:148 (5) - ^
  13. 01:28:862 (5) - ^
  14. 01:38:058 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - this (and the other similar patterns) are the worst thing in the map, you can do ugly things which look good, you should do ugly slider-same slider reversed-ugly slider-... it'll look good but it'll be ugly I absolutely disagree then. I think they are the best thing in the map honestly.
  15. 01:41:487 (1) - for all this part : nc on bpm changes no thanks, I don't want to NC just for bpm changes. My NC is rhythmic. the bpm changes aren't rhythmic and not predictable so its best to give players a visual rhythm to keep with. The BPM changes are very slight too, mainly due to offset shifts that ended up being recalculated for bpms.
  16. 02:02:564 (2,3,4,5) - do a normal jump maybe ? the sounds are strong and this part is pretty calm Nah, I like this arrangement a lot better. it's small, but still forces players to make 90 degree snaps or alternates.
  17. 02:25:494 (1,2,3,4,5) - it's not enough spaced, it's just before a fast part I think this is perfectly fine. Just because its before a fast part doesn't mean it should be faster if the atmosphere doesn't really suggest ain increase. really, the song doesn't really explode until the downbeat so creating abuildup effect wont work here, especially when theres a 2/1 gap.
  18. 02:51:908 (1,1) - make this possible to hit with a point where you can put your cusor and wait, it's pretty hard at 280bpm No. I want the player to have to move up and down.
  19. 02:55:471 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1) - all the transition snares have a little spacing but this one is cross screen and really hard to play, why ? This is the high point of the map before the transition and there is a lot of build up going into it.
  20. 03:07:390 (1) - it reminds me of ugly sliders,... in the calm part It's not... You see sliders like this all the time in regular maps.
  21. 03:15:390 (1,2) - clockwise 03:16:390 (3,4,5,6) - counter clockwise, why ? Flow shift...?
  22. 03:31:498 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - ^ but goes counter clockwise/clockwise Why is this even important? I'm just switching flows to make things more enjoyable.
  23. 03:45:634 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - "ugly" part callback and it's perfect squares, it should be a bit ugly No.
    This is all part of the winny upload section which is the pretty section. The map is divided by genre please, not by the vocal, which isnt even harsh here.
  24. 04:09:581 - this part is singed by the guy of the ugly part, it should be (again) a bit ugly No, for the same reasons as above.
  25. 04:32:302 (1,2,3,4) - nc no thanks. why?
  26. 04:33:754 (1) - (and similar sliders) no, it's just bad, all the stop stop before are 2 normal sliders, but it changes at a random moment It's not a random moment, its the final verse. im using slider art as a means to emphasyze the lyrics and the song instead of just regular mapping because I think this is a more creative approach.

my opinion
This map sucks tbh, you shitmapped a huge part because you think metal is disgusting, Mazzerin maps death metal and thinks song representation is more important than aesthetics. His maps are NOT ugly af, they are a bit ugly sometimes (with really ugly sounds, not everything) but his style fits very well to metal, you should map something similar to his style in the "ugly" part and map ugly sliders when they are in the middle of the calm part because you can't change your style for 2 objects. If you map something like this I'll bee happy if it's ranked, it's just a random shit map atm for me
gl I guess

Painketsu wrote:

I don't mind this map's aesthetics or concept at all, I think variety is always good and I disagree with the popular idea that a map being clean makes it good.

Gonna do a small flow and cursor movement mod since I feel like it's where the map has most flaws.

  1. 00:28:922 (1,2,3,4) - this little square kinda kills the cursor speed built up previously and aesthetically feels out of place, I think an irregular shape with a bit more spacing (same movement is fine) would be better. I gave a better angle from 3>4>5 to offset the movement a bit so there doesn't need to be as much precision in maintaining a linear movement from 4>5
  2. 00:32:760 (3) - I don't see much reason for this to be ctrl+Gd, this will be prone to confuse players causing a late hit, please keep in mind that with how the game works right now you need to hit this slider a bit early otherwise it will reach the first repeat and cause a sliderbreak even if it's within the hit window (first repeat is 54ms after the start so with this OD that means you'd break if you hit basically anything later than a 300). it's because the previous sliders were really big in spacing. Also the Ctrl+G is better because you are naturally going to move upward playing the slider given the inward flow,
    which helps keep you from breaking.

  3. 00:38:356 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4) - this doesn't fit at all imo, you theme almost all sliders "ugly" and with uneven spacings but this a "perfect shape", I think this comes from you being used to mapping like this (not saying it's a bad thing) but imo this pattern is out of place here, I'd personally go with something more in tone with the map's theme and difficulty, check this for an idea: https://gfycat.com/gifs/detail/HotOpulentGosling And more importantly than aesthetics, using a cursor-snap-based small jump section is a great setup for the next big one here 00:40:385 (2) - your current pattern is based on constant circle movement so it doesn't transition very well. I fixed it, though its still a pretty pattern because I want to show the visual breaking apart as the voice becomes harsher and tenser.
  4. 00:40:385 (2,3,4,5,6,1,2,3,4) - I think you could improve this flow to be less awkward but it's not terrible so I wont go into detail unless requested. I think its already fine as is/..
  5. 01:01:258 (4,5,6,1) - this almost square-like flow is one of the most awkward in the whole map, this comes after a whole section of acute angled jumps, I think this can be improved, first thing that comes to mind would be 01:01:258 (4) - on x:163 y:326, 01:01:366 (5) - on x:319 y:233, 01:01:473 (6) - on x:30 y:189 and 01:01:580 (1) - a bit closer to 01:01:794 (3) - , the reduced spacing from 6 to 1 increses the emphasis of the back and forths making them more powerful. Fixed it.
  6. 02:25:494 (1,2,3,4,5) - I disagree with this shape, aesthetics aside, I don't see how this would play better than angled jumps and they would fit better imo. Its there for juxtaposition with the next section. It just makes the kicksliders in the next section stand out more than they would if i used an ugly pattern. Also i think this arrangement can kind of be alternated and give people a sensation that maybe they can alternate stuff but nope. :!:
I think it's a hard map but it's not unplayable by any means, shouldn't be unrankable imo

CXu wrote:

Have you thought about mapping in a way where each pattern/combo is messy, but how the patterns/combos interact with each other on the playfield is more organized? While the song is indeed, well, "messy", it does have an overarching structure as music mostly do with just how it's structured. Since you're trying to make the patterns ugly to reflect the song, making the patterns the patterns make more organized (?? lolidk) could improve the map aesthetically while still keeping the core idea of ugly vs not ugly. You have some more structural mapping in there already. At least it sounds like a good idea in my head xd

So like idk doing something like this at 01:39:451 (1) -

The slider on its own is still ugly, but it doesn't bleed into the previous sliderpattern, so they can more easily be seen in isolation, if that makes sense.

Just a thought, and it would be quite a bit of work if you were to do this, but I might as well throw the idea out there.
I think its too far in to implement this idea. I don't really like it anyways since imo that doesn't really have any aesthetic consistency anyways, or its really hard to tell given the AR anyways. But thanks. Could be useful for my other maximum the hormone map :D.

LimePixel wrote:

Honestly, can't pass the map but from playing with NF I really enjoyed it. It's pretty obvious why it's mapped so differently, and I think song representation is more important than aesthetics.

Small possible problems I noticed:
-02:56:316 (1) - This is touching the health bar slightly It's fine to touch the health bar and I think this arrangement is good for symmetry and works well as the final jump location.
-04:30:366 (3,4,5,6) - This felt odd, there's no major difference in anything for 04:30:610 (4) to be emphasized with higher spacing I think its fine, i'm just using a spacing here thats more reflective of the pattern (hexagon) and not really respecting emphasis. It's fine imo cuz i think respecting emphasis everywhere on this section of the map becomes a bit predictable and boring too.

I don't see why this wouldn't be rankable, since it accurately represents the song. Besides, only mapping in the usual 'safe' way (or pp mapping, with tv size songs) is going to result in player burnout and tons of the same map with different songs behind them.

Gokateigo wrote:

ok last post in this thread since all of you can't understand my point and I'm bored of repeating the same thing everything
  • I know this map is made to be ugly, I know a lot of people like it (even if the user rating says the opposite but whatever), I know Monstrata knows what he's doing with the editor so stop saying I'm an ignorant because you're wrong

    BUT
  1. The gimmick is pushed too far sometimes, especially at the kickslider part : it can be ugly and good at the same time, I've already explained it in my mod, i won't say it again (fuck I'm lazy)
  2. The gimmick isn't used in some ugly parts, I looked at the map and modded it with the gimmick in head, sometimes the map has good patterns (perfect angles, flows perfectly...) in ugly parts like these perfect pentagons here 00:38:356 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,5) - or the squares here 03:45:634 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - it's not a really ugly part with the vocals etc, but it uses the same instruments + the high sound in the bg literally fuck your ears
  3. The gimmick is a bit useless/wrong : Ok, contrast, bla bla bla, I know, but the contrast is just obvious with the difficulty 8*/4* not obvious enough ? ok, there are a few ways to map metal like Mazzerin's style "omg you suck Mazz's dick kys" first : fuck you and it was an example, Maakeli is also a good metal mapper, pishi is a good metal mapper, Sayaka is a good metal mapper (restricted for shit but we're not here to talk about that). You get my point, there are other ways to map this and they're all better
  4. Some jumps are weird and uncomfortable : "it's the point of the map lol" It can be ugly and comfortable, some jumps look like normal patterns (triangles, stars,...) but with extended ds for spacing emphasis, back and forths/really sharp angles/wide angles are better than this imo and can be ugly
  5. Some patterns have nosense spacing : thinking especially about these 00:58:150 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - the DS goes at weird spots, it's just 2 (maybe 3) repeated sounds so the ds shouldn't change that much (+ 01:01:580 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - this one is just too spaced)
    I'm also thinking about this one 04:33:754 (1) - this part was just 2 sliders 1/2 for stop stop and it's reverse sliders at a random point
Ok this is literally my mod but extended, but now eveything is justified I guess (inb4 some fanboy saying I'm totally wrong) (I'll only answer to real posts now, not the usual "lol your opinion doesn't matter here")
I think i replied to these all already in your earlier mod.

Logic Agent wrote:

i don't care about any of this drama but i think there's an aesthetic inconsistency you might consider changing unless it was intentional.

00:17:766 and 01:22:624 are obviously supposed to be similar with the whole guitar going ham and the vocals increasing in intensity, however in the first section you start using "ugly" 1/2 sliders way sooner than you do in the second section. 00:23:986 (5) Here is the first to show that some kind of aesthetic change is gonna start and then after that the last slider in every group of four is ugly.

01:30:362 (4) - but here you waited until pretty far into the section to start making slightly ugly sliders to indicate the change again, maybe cause the section itself is longer before the vocals start yelling again? i dunno, just something i thought i'd ask about. don't mind me if it was intentional/ you've already brought it up, but you could probably start doing slightly ugly ones 01:27:148 (5) here or something.

but yeah, good luck with... all this. my opinion on this map has changed significantly since i voted it a 1/10 almost a year ago
Ended up fixing this with Gokateigo's original mod so i guess this is fixed?

[]

Thanks for the mods everyone~
Topic Starter
Monstrata

Kurai wrote:

Just throwing things I believe should really be fixed. I did not take into account the "beauty" of the patterns.

[Stop! Stop Winny Upload!!]
  1. 01:40:844 (2) - Overlapped by the HP bar with the default skin. Fixed this
  2. 01:58:499 (1) - Shouldn't be a normal finish? yea
  3. 02:27:195 (1,2,3,4) - I really dislike how those kick sliders are overlapped by the previous ones. 1 also slightly overlaps 3 and 2 overlaps 4 as well. I understand you probably did that on purpose, but it's hardly sightreadable and more confusing than anything when you could have made it easier to read just like 02:28:885 (1,2,3,4) - . Well, they are still overlapped, but i made the heads more visible.
  4. 02:37:902 (2,3,4) - Slightly overlapped by the HP bar with the default skin. Moved it down slightly
  5. 02:40:244 (2) - Slightly overlapped by the HP bar with the default skin. ^
  6. 02:56:316 (1) - Slightly overlapped by the HP bar with the default skin.
  7. 02:56:786 (1) - Slighlty overlapped by the score nulbers with the default skin. Moved both down a bit i guess.
  8. 04:22:012 (2) - Almost under the HP bar grr I think thats fine D:
  1. I really dislike when objects are put just next to the bottom border of the screen because 1. it's not that comfortable to play 2. it's sometime overlapped by the little accuracy bar. Here's a list of the objects placed way too close to the bottom border of the screen, moving them some grids up should do the trick, it's not like you have to care much about the aesthetics of the map xp: I'd like to keep these because imo putting it near the bottom of the screen doesn't really make it less comfortable to play. i'm just using more of the screen to my advantage really. also the accuracy bar is disabled by default so I don't think its necessary to consider that unlike hp bar etc...

    1. 00:51:250 (1) -
    2. 00:56:007 (3,5,1) -
    3. 00:59:022 (1) -
    4. 01:01:794 (3,5) -
    5. 01:31:862 (3) -
    6. 01:33:991 (1) -
    7. 01:35:058 (3) -
    8. 01:58:499 (1) -
    9. 04:45:311 (1) -
I don't mind rebubbling this if I am allowed to.
Thanks for the check!
Yusomi

Kagetsu wrote:

what most of people would agree with, though, is that 280~ bpm full screen jumps aren't approachable even for the top part of the playerbase
huh ??
hi-mei
<3 kagetsu

one of few that deserves respect

if you wanna hear community, just take a look on this:



quoting random people that dont know shit in mapping and saying "hey nice map" has 0 effective value

kagetsu not the last one to pop this
CXu

Monstrata wrote:

CXu wrote:

Have you thought about mapping in a way where each pattern/combo is messy, but how the patterns/combos interact with each other on the playfield is more organized? While the song is indeed, well, "messy", it does have an overarching structure as music mostly do with just how it's structured. Since you're trying to make the patterns ugly to reflect the song, making the patterns the patterns make more organized (?? lolidk) could improve the map aesthetically while still keeping the core idea of ugly vs not ugly. You have some more structural mapping in there already. At least it sounds like a good idea in my head xd

So like idk doing something like this at 01:39:451 (1) -

The slider on its own is still ugly, but it doesn't bleed into the previous sliderpattern, so they can more easily be seen in isolation, if that makes sense.

Just a thought, and it would be quite a bit of work if you were to do this, but I might as well throw the idea out there.
I think its too far in to implement this idea. I don't really like it anyways since imo that doesn't really have any aesthetic consistency anyways, or its really hard to tell given the AR anyways. But thanks. Could be useful for my other maximum the hormone map :D.
I agree it's probably too far in right now, esp. if you do get it ranked. It was more as a suggestion in the case if you were still getting a lot of resistance to how it looks currently.

As for the aesthetic consistency part, what I meant is more in the sense that even though 01:38:058 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,5) - is "messy" with a bunch of overlaps, if you look at it as a whole, it looks like... idk a caterpillar I guess? So there's still overarching structure within the chaos you're making already, and what I meant was to more clearly make structures like these, were when looked at as a whole can look structured, even if the individual parts of it are messy. I just used that one random slider and no overlaps because it was easy to do xd.
Sotarks
hi-mei judging a map on user rating is really good, yeah sure x)
idk how can poeple be so dumb on this game wow
poeple just rate 1 for the lolz, how is this map and the effort monstrata put in this deserve 1/10, you guys has seriously brain issues.
do irl stuff instead of wasting your time on a drama jeez

also your only ranked map has 6,31 user rating

so it's obviously bad ?

;);););););)
Tae

hi-mei wrote:

if you wanna hear community, just take a look on this:



quoting random people that dont know shit in mapping and saying "hey nice map" has 0 effective value
The reverse is true too though, so that argument is essentially invalid. How many of those bad ratings come from people who have a good knowledge in mapping? also weren't you one of the people quoted

At least there have been a fair amount of people so far who have assisted in improving the map while keeping the entire concept of it, which I feel is an issue a lot of the 'community', as you put it, don't agree with, along with its difficulty.

As someone who bases their mapping around aesthetics, I can't really help much with this mapset lmao. That doesn't mean I don't like the map though. In fact, I actually really like this map, it sticks to its core concept, and is still playable despite this. Good luck on ranking this, Monstrata.
Caput Mortuum
btw why Maximum the is in the tags when it's in the artist already
sahuang

hi-mei wrote:

<3 kagetsu

one of few that deserves respect

if you wanna hear community, just take a look on this:



quoting random people that dont know shit in mapping and saying "hey nice map" has 0 effective value

kagetsu not the last one to pop this
lol this is really invalid

People rate low for various reasons, not just because this map sucks or it lacks quality.
For some maps players rate very low because of bad song choice/bad anime/no pp/too much pp etc.
In case of ALIEN most players find it extremely difficult and uncomfortable to play so they rate 1 star, however this still doesn't contribute to anything about its quality.
Cygnus
Honestly, I find the map really horrible but not in the sense of calling it unrankable. It just doesn't fall to most people's subjective taste in mapping and I believe we should all just respect each others' opinion. The map is indeed hard and the playability is very much questionable due to its peculiar patterns but as I said, none of these parts are unrankable. The ranking criteria do not state that if a map is hated by most of the community, it shouldn't be ranked (basing this on the preliminary user rating).

The idea is simple: if you do not like a map, point your concern and suggest a solution. If your suggestion has been rejected, reconsider whether your concern points out unrankability or just something that doesn't fit your taste in mapping. If your concern doesn't involve unrankability, then just leave it as it is and respect the mapper's decision. No need to spread hate and gather people to tell the mapper how horrible the map is. The map just did not satisfy your taste, but that doesn't matter because ranking maps should only satisfy the requirements stated in the Ranking Criteria. So in this case, your best solution is to just ignore the map and move on (or you could make a map of your own).

Okay there goes my two cents on the issue. ^^ Here's a little mod btw:

[Stop! Stop Winny Upload!!]
• 00:21:206 (1) - Remove the new combo here and put it on 00:21:419 (2) instead just to be consistent with your new combos since you added new combos on parts where the singer starts singing like on 00:23:131 (1) -, 00:24:842 (1) -, and 00:26:553 (1) -.
• 00:48:623 (1,2) - This one is fine as it is but I find the playability on this part much better if the slider goes first before the hit circle. Try it for yourself. This also applies to the rest like on 00:49:515 (1) -, 00:50:384 (1) -, and I think the succeeding 3 more of these.
• 01:24:363 (1) - Same new combo suggestion like on 00:21:206 (1) -.
• 01:46:531 (1) - I don't think a new combo is necessary here?
• 04:45:311 (1) - Use the brownish new combo instead since it's a heart-shaped slider? XD

Best of luck getting this ranked. Will stay tuned to this map :3
show more
Please sign in to reply.

New reply