HOS let me fix for him
Thanks for modding you guys!
01:28:917 (2) - i know you like aesthetic and this shape is prolly on purpose but it could be parallel like the previous sliders that you did + more neater, current view looks a bit messy and also the position is a bit high, could be improved fixed
01:31:099 (2,3) - you can avoid the overlap by using some other shape like this https://puu.sh/s42k8.jpg or other similar shape for better visuals because the overlap right now is not as pleasing as the other overlaps that you did but it's safe for sure.
- Tags this are your current tags Streliteela Mel Regou Kazuto HOLIC FREAK WorkaHolic Crack Traxxxx REFLEC BEAT colette -Summer- CSHOW 道下朗 Akira Michi Hardcore
Make sure all guest mappers have their names above ^, also ask them if they would like you to add their old nicks. thx for reminding
- Disable widescreen support on; HOS' Normal, Mel's Extra, Regou's Extra umm,k
- This is not a rankable issue but I’d really recommend you give credits to the mapset you took both mp3 and background image in the map description. This is the link just in case https://osu.ppy.sh/s/471504 check the submitted time, me first, mmzz next.
- The background image file size is just too big unnecessarily. I’ve reduced the file size without changing the dimensions, here is the link; http://puu.sh/s5AoC.jpg ok
Remember that reducing it from 1,1mb to 400kb means a lot in multiplayer lobby because a lot of people still don’t have good internet connections.[ HOS' Normal ]
- I don’t really recommend this pattern variety in such a small amount of time.
00:18:008 (1,2,3) -/ 00:22:371 (1,2,3) -/00:27:281 (2,3,4) – are all similar and consistent while this 00:31:099 (1,2,3) – isn’t. I don‘t see any difference here, the mapped rhythm is the same. No need to keep extreme consistency
- Just like this part here 00:44:190 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1) – a lot of the overlaps you did here 00:52:917 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,3) – could be avoided but it’s not a big issue. Just in case if in the future you consider re-working some stuff, give some thought about this overlaps. overlap is allowed to use in any diff, and btw, those overlaps are safe, cuz they didn't cover up the half of the circle(slider head or tail)
- Now this one I really recommend you change since it’s visible how the overlap is affecting the reading of the next object 01:30:008 (1,2) -. Move 01:31:099 (2) – to x:86 y:313 and rotate this 01:31:644 (3) – in “-18º” and move it to x:256 y:375 it's safe
- Rotate this 01:56:190 (5) – “-1º” to improve blanket and consider moving the slider arrow to x:153 y:74 to improve even more ummm, not an issue to fix.
- Stack suggestion 02:42:553 (2,1) – not obvious in game
- This is the strongest part of the music 03:20:190 (3) – and yet it’s mapped just like many other regular parts of it such as this 03:11:462 (2) -/03:02:735 (2) -/02:54:008 (2) -/02:40:917 (2) – etc. I mean you’re not wrong in being consistent but I give you my suggestion to make that part more noticiable. so what kind of slider can we put here? well, I think HOS did the best answer.
- Overall the diff it’s not going with traditional linear flow, at various points you sharpened the movement and even did a 2/1 circular flow by making this square here 02:42:008 (1,2,3,4) - . The idea fits the song and the mapping is consistent good job.[ Collab Advanced ]
- If you play attention to this pattern here 00:41:735 (5,1) – you will see that this two beats are really strong and one marks the end of the measure while the next one mark the start. Having both mapped clickable is correct and fits a lot with the music. However as you can see here you didn’t map this part consistently in the same parts; 00:39:553 (1) -/00:43:917 (5,1) -/00:48:281 (5,1) -/00:52:644 (5,1) – , the patterning however is changing following some logic. Considering the combos, you have structure it like this;
00:39:553 (1,2,3,4,5) - -> slider+slider transition
00:42:008 (1,2,3,4,5) - ->circle+circle transition
00:44:190 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - ->slider+slider transition
00:46:371 (1,2,3,4,5) - ->circle+slider transition
00:48:553 (1,2,3,4,5,6) –slider +slider transition
00:50:735 (1,2,3,4,5) - circle+slider transition
My advice is that you fix the incosistency on the circle+circle transition here 00:43:917 (5,1) – or you can rework the other circle+sliders transitions. This is just to simplify the rhythm a bit more as well as adding consistency. it's a nice idea in timeline, but the 1.4x spacing is quite large and hard to control. It's very hard to map. If you don't believe, try mapping more circles and see if you can control them in edit grid.
- ^ Kind of the same idea as mentioned before 01:12:417 (5,1,2) – and 01:16:644 (5,1,2) – and 01:25:508 (6,1,2) - as above
- This blanket could use some improvement 00:44:462 (2,3) – move the sliderend to x:330 y:187 . Also move this 00:45:281 (4) – to x:283 y:249 to improve distance after applying the blanket mod. fixed
- This symmetric idea of flow here 01:44:190 (4,5) – looks odd comparing how you made the flow in this difficulty. It’s linear at all times or circular motion. But this symmetry here need a sort of back and forth that is strange. If you ctrol+g this slider 01:44:735 (5) – you will notice how the movement will look more like how the movement is being done in this diff so far. My recommendation tho it’s not the ctrol+g it’s this:
Move 01:44:735 (5) – to x:220 y:196 and rotate it “-67º” for an easy flow fix, but you can re-work it however you want. tbh I don't feel any problem here....
- ^01:47:462 (1,2) - as above
- This gaps here seems out of place 02:44:871 – and 02:45:962 - comparing that you have mapped the upbeats of this speed section passivelly at all times 02:44:599 -/ 02:45:417 -/ 02:45:690 - . Also I agree with the idea of the circular motion here really fits, it’s just the gap that I believe it’s uncalled for. gap is for making the voice stand out 02:46:099 (6) -
- Again the undermap problem 03:20:190 (3) – I’ve mentioned in the normal diff. Check what I’ve said there ^ sorry but we can't map a 1/4 slider here, too dangerous[Hard]
- You can avoid this overlap here 00:32:190 (1,2) - in a hard diff maybe we could do that.
- Inconsistent rhythm here 00:41:462 (3,3,3,3,4) -. You’re sometimes making the beat clickable 00:43:917 (3,4) – and in other moments non-clickable00:41:462 (3,3) - . I mean it’s a mappers choice but consider that if you’re making a difficulty spread having all this beats clickable in the advanced and here some times clickable and others not clickable seems weird, even if the mapping is deffinetly harder here. still, strong beat on tail is not an issue, I want to keep the creativity first, not consistency. I don't want to all maps mapped the same, then that's the spirit
- This blanket could be improved 00:50:462 (4,1) – by moving the middle point to x: 462 y: 280 and sliderend to x:467 y:357 . _. isn't perfect now?
- ^00:56:190 (1,2) -
- If you ctrol+g this 01:09:690 (2) – you would an increase of difficulty and emphasis through flow that really fits into this transition section. Personal opinion. not very suitable
- Blanket improvement 01:42:008 (1,2) - ...no
- ^ 01:47:190 (5,1) - as above
- The distance here seems a bit off 01:38:190 (3,4,1) – in the 3 to 4 object it’s bigger than from 4 to 1. Why? cuz of symmetry
- You’re emphasizing the downbeat there by increasing the spacing a bit 01:40:371 (4,3) -/ 02:02:462 (4,1) -. It’s a good way to go. But make sure you use it somewhat consistently. I didn’t take a deep look but at some points you kept the usual 1,2x distance but in other you’ve used 1,4 or even bigger. Remember to apply that consistency idea here as well whenever you use more spacing. I think we could have some random pattern in Hard
- You probably didn’t want a blanket here 02:54:417 (3,1) – but I must warn you that this is really looking that way. You could probably make this slider move into x:131 y:138 to apply a blanket idea. But feel free to ignore this advice. This is really being picky. fine, but I don't want to change it[Insane]
- 00:26:326 (3,4,5,1,2,3) – well it looks great but the flow could be improved. The flow here 00:25:644 (1,2) – starts with this back and forth idea and then goes into circular movement. Feels more natural to start it here 00:26:462 (4) – instead of here 00:26:326 (3) – mainly because you want to keep the back and forth idea and inside this triangle put the circular movement, and my point is that 00:25:644 (1,4) – they look alligned enough to suggest the same movement that you’ve done here 00:25:644 (1,2) – in here as well 00:26:053 (2,4) – that’s why I suggest you ctrol+g this 00:26:326 (3,4) - . In case you apply this remember to ctrol+g this 00:26:735 (1,2) – as well to fix the flow. gosh, I did it like what you said but they.. feel the same...
- To sustain the back and forth of sliders here 00:30:553 (3,4,1) - I’d suggest you ctrol+g 00:30:553 (3) - /00:30:826 (4) - no, 00:30:553 (3) - would be hard to react with
- You can create a constant change of flow here 01:01:644 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) – This is 4 combos of 1/2 sliders
At first you didn’t made any back and forth 01:01:644 (1,2,3,4) –
On the second 01:02:735 (1,2,3,4) – you made the first pair work as horizontal01:02:735 (1,2) - and the next one as back and forth 01:03:281 (3,4) - . If you want to introdude consistency here the logic would say that you would make the same thing with the next 2 combos. But the song is getting progressivelly faster. This affects both distance and flow. So in the next combo you have increased the difficulty and intensity by making all of them back and forth sliders 01:03:826 (1,2,3,4) – with an increse of distance here 01:04:099 (2,3) -. If you want to keep this increase you should change your choice here 01:04:917 (1,2,3,4) -. My suggestion;
Change the order of this objects in the time line 01:05:190 (2,3) -. And then you ctrol+g this slider 01:05:462 (3) -. The result will be an even harder pattern compared to the previous combo 01:03:826 (1,2,3,4) -. Of course this idea is in case you want to increase the difficulty. If you want to keep it consistent, you should then rework both combos here 01:03:826 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) – to make them more similar to what you did in the first two. ummmmmmm looked through this part...errrr, I didn't think about consistency at all when mapping, cuz I know that won't be a problem when your diff is an Insane or Extra, unless the difficulty level are very very obvious
- I really liked this 02:10:371 (1,2,1) - , this looks very nice, great job. thank you
- You’re stacking a lot of 1/4 in this diff. Stacking this 1/2 02:45:281 (1,2) – can be a bit misleading to some players and looks like it could be done different to improve the sighreading of this diff. This is up to your mapping choice, just pointing to make sure you know that this exists in your diff here. some but not many, cuz I know players who could play Insane can't be defeated by a stack.
- Improve blanket here 02:59:326 (4,1) - fixed
Thanks for modding you guys!