Make sense, thanks for answering. Have fun dealing with the rest of the attention seekers.
forum
Omoi - Snow Drive(01.23)
posted
Total Posts
441
02:51:340 - to 02:51:608 - top diff uses 1/6 while other extras use 1/4 or 1/8 snapping
02:51:608 - to 02:51:875 - there are also 1/4 and 1/6 snappings for extra diffs..i think you should make them consistent.
moph
00:09:837 (3) - im wondering why you dont choose to NC this cuz sv has changed a lot and the length of slider is much shorter than (1). Kinda confused to read for 00:09:301 (1,2,3,4) - lol
00:22:143 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - this seems very weird tbh, all beats here sound similar but you use a very different spacing for 00:22:143 (1,2,3,4) - and 00:22:679 (5,6,7,8) - . Besides, from 00:27:500 - it makes sense for you to use 0.75x since usic is recurring but its less intense. But your ds and sv suddenly decreased so much....examples are 00:29:643 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,5,6) - and 00:21:072 (1,2,3,4,5,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - a huge difference imo. 00:29:643 (1,2,3,4) - should at least ctrl+G 00:29:911 (2,4) - lol
00:35:000 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - flow is hard to follow, also if you look at what ure doing 00:26:429 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - the stack kinda breaks the flow.
01:13:572 (6) - NC
02:28:572 (1,2) - 02:29:643 (1,2) - spacing is inconsistent
02:51:072 (1) - this is a very obvious 1/4 stream tbh
03:56:429 (1,2,3,4,1,2) - spacing is way too small for kiai, you used large spacings for 03:55:090 (5,1,2,3,4,5) - etc anyways
Nino
01:18:393 (1) - why nc
02:37:947 (5,1) - nazi blanket
03:17:724 (3) - should break it to 2 circles cuz its different from 03:17:456 (1,2) - if u listen carefully
03:24:889 - 03:25:291 - why ignored lul
Extreme
00:22:947 (1,2,1) - kinda weird you do such small spacing here compared to 00:22:143 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2) - ,the extremely small spacing isnt reasonable
00:28:572 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2) - 00:30:715 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2) - such big spacing difference as well
01:39:286 (1,2,3,4) - i dont think they deserve big jumps tbh,no vocal and drum isnt really clear and strong/ Compared to 01:39:822 (1,2,3,4) - the first 4 notes are out of place imo.
02:12:902 (3,4) - same concern about ds
02:38:215 (1,2,3,4) - same,they dont deserve same spacing as 02:38:750 (1,2,3,4) -
03:25:625 (3) - No NC for this???
03:29:643 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - same,,copy paste here is dumb imo cuz it doesnt follow music at all
03:43:304 (2) - obviously you should use same 1/8 slider as 03:42:500 (1,2,1) -
03:52:143 (1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3) - jumps just for aesthetics but nothing with music...strongly feel they are out of place here. You should follow music but not just 1/2 spamming.
raikozen
00:03:944 (1,2) - stack 2 to slider end?There's an emphasis on 00:05:015 - tbh
02:05:000 (1,2,3,4) - the 1/6s are really unpredictable and hard to hit here, especially when u stack them all
02:18:929 (1,2) - delete them according to ur rhythm choice 02:18:393 -
02:38:215 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2) - same reason of improper jumps as mentioned in extreme
02:51:340 (2,3) - check out snapping issue mentioned at the beginning
03:52:143 (1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,1) - same as in extreme, the jumps are obviously overdone even if its 224bpm...basically its only following drums and not music at all. Also when ure following drums there's literally no spacing difference for jumps so it's very dumb
02:51:608 - to 02:51:875 - there are also 1/4 and 1/6 snappings for extra diffs..i think you should make them consistent.
moph
00:09:837 (3) - im wondering why you dont choose to NC this cuz sv has changed a lot and the length of slider is much shorter than (1). Kinda confused to read for 00:09:301 (1,2,3,4) - lol
00:22:143 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - this seems very weird tbh, all beats here sound similar but you use a very different spacing for 00:22:143 (1,2,3,4) - and 00:22:679 (5,6,7,8) - . Besides, from 00:27:500 - it makes sense for you to use 0.75x since usic is recurring but its less intense. But your ds and sv suddenly decreased so much....examples are 00:29:643 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,5,6) - and 00:21:072 (1,2,3,4,5,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - a huge difference imo. 00:29:643 (1,2,3,4) - should at least ctrl+G 00:29:911 (2,4) - lol
00:35:000 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - flow is hard to follow, also if you look at what ure doing 00:26:429 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - the stack kinda breaks the flow.
01:13:572 (6) - NC
02:28:572 (1,2) - 02:29:643 (1,2) - spacing is inconsistent
02:51:072 (1) - this is a very obvious 1/4 stream tbh
03:56:429 (1,2,3,4,1,2) - spacing is way too small for kiai, you used large spacings for 03:55:090 (5,1,2,3,4,5) - etc anyways
Nino
01:18:393 (1) - why nc
02:37:947 (5,1) - nazi blanket
03:17:724 (3) - should break it to 2 circles cuz its different from 03:17:456 (1,2) - if u listen carefully
03:24:889 - 03:25:291 - why ignored lul
Extreme
00:22:947 (1,2,1) - kinda weird you do such small spacing here compared to 00:22:143 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2) - ,the extremely small spacing isnt reasonable
00:28:572 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2) - 00:30:715 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2) - such big spacing difference as well
01:39:286 (1,2,3,4) - i dont think they deserve big jumps tbh,no vocal and drum isnt really clear and strong/ Compared to 01:39:822 (1,2,3,4) - the first 4 notes are out of place imo.
02:12:902 (3,4) - same concern about ds
02:38:215 (1,2,3,4) - same,they dont deserve same spacing as 02:38:750 (1,2,3,4) -
03:25:625 (3) - No NC for this???
03:29:643 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - same,,copy paste here is dumb imo cuz it doesnt follow music at all
03:43:304 (2) - obviously you should use same 1/8 slider as 03:42:500 (1,2,1) -
03:52:143 (1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3) - jumps just for aesthetics but nothing with music...strongly feel they are out of place here. You should follow music but not just 1/2 spamming.
raikozen
00:03:944 (1,2) - stack 2 to slider end?There's an emphasis on 00:05:015 - tbh
02:05:000 (1,2,3,4) - the 1/6s are really unpredictable and hard to hit here, especially when u stack them all
02:18:929 (1,2) - delete them according to ur rhythm choice 02:18:393 -
02:38:215 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2) - same reason of improper jumps as mentioned in extreme
02:51:340 (2,3) - check out snapping issue mentioned at the beginning
03:52:143 (1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,1) - same as in extreme, the jumps are obviously overdone even if its 224bpm...basically its only following drums and not music at all. Also when ure following drums there's literally no spacing difference for jumps so it's very dumb
My Angel Azusa wrote:
moph
00:09:837 (3) - im wondering why you dont choose to NC this cuz sv has changed a lot and the length of slider is much shorter than (1). Kinda confused to read for 00:09:301 (1,2,3,4) - lol
I mean I think its far from unreadable but if DQ'd sure will change. 00:09:301 (1,2) - is where the SV increased (where the NC is) and 00:09:837 (3,4) - just goes back to the SV before so its not hard to read
00:22:143 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - this seems very weird tbh, all beats here sound similar but you use a very different spacing for 00:22:143 (1,2,3,4) - and 00:22:679 (5,6,7,8) - . The first part 00:22:143 (1,2,3,4) - is well, mapped to the song. The jump between 00:22:277 (2,3) - is to emphasize (3) for obvious reasons. The second bar 00:22:679 (5,6,7,8) - however is expressing the repetition in the song, as the music repeats for another bar the movement also reflects that, mimicking the last set of movements from the previous bar which is why there isn't a jump. I figured this would be more interesting than repeating the same pattern.
Besides, from 00:27:500 - it makes sense for you to use 0.75x since usic is recurring but its less intense. But your ds and sv suddenly decreased so much....examples are 00:29:643 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,5,6) - and 00:21:072 (1,2,3,4,5,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - a huge difference imo. 00:29:643 (1,2,3,4) - should at least ctrl+G 00:29:911 (2,4) - lol
uh they're different because the song is very different between the two sections. 00:21:072 (1,2,3,4,5,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - percussion wise this section always has something every 1/1 and 00:29:643 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,5,6) - only has percussion every 2/1. It is a pretty noticeable difference and acts as a calmer section before the song picks up again. That is why there is a significant DS to express that point. 00:29:643 (1,2,3,4) - is also spaced lower than than 00:27:500 (1,2,3,4) - because its pitched lower, thought this would fit well with the music.
00:35:000 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - flow is hard to follow, also if you look at what ure doing 00:26:429 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - the stack kinda breaks the flow.
how is the flow hard to follow exactly? If you're wondering why 00:35:536 (5,6,7,8) - is stacked, that's because the drums happens in pairs and 00:35:536 (5,7) - should be emphasized more which is the whole point to the starting and stopping motion. 00:26:965 (5,6,7,8) - is different as every note has the same drum which is why there is movement to each note.
01:13:572 (6) - NC
shit.
02:28:572 (1,2) - 02:29:643 (1,2) - spacing is inconsistent
Whole point is that the pattern goes forward backwards backward with increased spacing to kinda add build up for the following part. I think it fits additionally in the second half the vocal raises in pitch so the music builds up too
02:51:072 (1) - this is a very obvious 1/4 stream tbh
I'd pretty sure this is 1/6 lol. Sounds a bit off but definitely not 1/4 as I count 7 beats. Additionally I don't think a stream fits here.
03:56:429 (1,2,3,4,1,2) - spacing is way too small for kiai, you used large spacings for 03:55:090 (5,1,2,3,4,5) - etc anyways
I thought lower spacing would be a nice way to tie off the map after that intense section. If DQ'd I'll make the spacing larger but imo not an issue.
Topic Starter
Appreciate the 'mod' but it feels like most of what was pointed out was really nitpicky. In my opinion, mods should look to improve what the mappers have established, not say that something is bad without understanding why the mapper did what they did.
Extreme
00:22:947 (1,2,1) - kinda weird you do such small spacing here compared to 00:22:143 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2) - ,the extremely small spacing isnt reasonable Was intended for structural output. New measure can be emphasized or not emphasized I chose not to, would rather it let it flow while looking aesthetic.
00:28:572 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2) - 00:30:715 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2) - such big spacing difference as well This is okay...
01:39:286 (1,2,3,4) - i dont think they deserve big jumps tbh,no vocal and drum isnt really clear and strong/ Compared to 01:39:822 (1,2,3,4) - the first 4 notes are out of place imo. This is just music theory about 4th measures being stronger than previous measures which is something I do thematically in this diff.
02:12:902 (3,4) - same concern about ds Same
02:38:215 (1,2,3,4) - same,they dont deserve same spacing as 02:38:750 (1,2,3,4) - thematic phrasing ive mentioned before
03:25:625 (3) - No NC for this??? this one was kind of toss-up. it wasn't NCd because the kicks were already NC'd and using too many I felt didn't look pretty regardless of the reading which I think is capable for the player since the slider is very slow.
03:29:643 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - same,,copy paste here is dumb imo cuz it doesnt follow music at all kinda personal bias on your part, I'd say it fits well for me music theory 2/4s last measure of phrase stuff.
03:43:304 (2) - obviously you should use same 1/8 slider as 03:42:500 (1,2,1) - the repeat to capture a different feel for the instruments. repeat softs make it agreeable with the other sliders I didnt want that.
03:52:143 (1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3) - jumps just for aesthetics but nothing with music...strongly feel they are out of place here. You should follow music but not just 1/2 spamming. these patterns are a thematic approach like I did with the star pattern in the 2nd chorus.
Extreme
00:22:947 (1,2,1) - kinda weird you do such small spacing here compared to 00:22:143 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2) - ,the extremely small spacing isnt reasonable Was intended for structural output. New measure can be emphasized or not emphasized I chose not to, would rather it let it flow while looking aesthetic.
00:28:572 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2) - 00:30:715 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2) - such big spacing difference as well This is okay...
01:39:286 (1,2,3,4) - i dont think they deserve big jumps tbh,no vocal and drum isnt really clear and strong/ Compared to 01:39:822 (1,2,3,4) - the first 4 notes are out of place imo. This is just music theory about 4th measures being stronger than previous measures which is something I do thematically in this diff.
02:12:902 (3,4) - same concern about ds Same
02:38:215 (1,2,3,4) - same,they dont deserve same spacing as 02:38:750 (1,2,3,4) - thematic phrasing ive mentioned before
03:25:625 (3) - No NC for this??? this one was kind of toss-up. it wasn't NCd because the kicks were already NC'd and using too many I felt didn't look pretty regardless of the reading which I think is capable for the player since the slider is very slow.
03:29:643 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - same,,copy paste here is dumb imo cuz it doesnt follow music at all kinda personal bias on your part, I'd say it fits well for me music theory 2/4s last measure of phrase stuff.
03:43:304 (2) - obviously you should use same 1/8 slider as 03:42:500 (1,2,1) - the repeat to capture a different feel for the instruments. repeat softs make it agreeable with the other sliders I didnt want that.
03:52:143 (1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3) - jumps just for aesthetics but nothing with music...strongly feel they are out of place here. You should follow music but not just 1/2 spamming. these patterns are a thematic approach like I did with the star pattern in the 2nd chorus.
Raikozen
02:51:072 (1,2,3) - This isn't an accurate representation of the music at all and I'm saying this from a somewhat objective view point. If you listen to the music, especially at 25% then 3 sliders of equal length doesn't reflect the different sounds in the song. If this was an attempt at undermapping/overmapping some parts to simplify the rhythm then I'd still say there are better ways to go about it.
02:59:643 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - ghost stream?
03:06:875 (1,2,3,4) - ^
There are some other parts but it's these ones in particular that irk me though I'm not a mapper so maybe my opinion doesn't matter too much ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
02:51:072 (1,2,3) - This isn't an accurate representation of the music at all and I'm saying this from a somewhat objective view point. If you listen to the music, especially at 25% then 3 sliders of equal length doesn't reflect the different sounds in the song. If this was an attempt at undermapping/overmapping some parts to simplify the rhythm then I'd still say there are better ways to go about it.
02:59:643 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - ghost stream?
03:06:875 (1,2,3,4) - ^
There are some other parts but it's these ones in particular that irk me though I'm not a mapper so maybe my opinion doesn't matter too much ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Topic Starter
The circle isn't a mistake Yuii... Most likely a stylistic thing as he does it elsewhere like over here 00:58:304 (1,1) -
@Kisses: The repeat sliders begin on the starting noise of whatever instrument that is being played. There are other beats on the inside of it but this has been changed twice before to better fit the music and it's okay as it is right now even from an 'objective' point of view. As far as the two ghost streams, I don't think is bad at all since they're both on ending measures of their phrases so it gives more emphasis to the start of the new phrase. Usually the 4th measure is more accentuated.
@Kisses: The repeat sliders begin on the starting noise of whatever instrument that is being played. There are other beats on the inside of it but this has been changed twice before to better fit the music and it's okay as it is right now even from an 'objective' point of view. As far as the two ghost streams, I don't think is bad at all since they're both on ending measures of their phrases so it gives more emphasis to the start of the new phrase. Usually the 4th measure is more accentuated.
oo good catch, i didn't notice that. I would agree that is rather out of place.Yuii- wrote:
02:03:661 (3,1) - This still hasn't been fixed, and it does not affect any of the before/previous patterns as mentioned in p/5684862 . This circle should be place elsewhere because it truly was a mistake from Raikozen, which was mentioned a couple of months ago and still has not been fixed.
You still didn't respond to my snapping concerns lol
My Angel Azusa wrote:
Nino
01:18:393 (1) - why nc for emphasis
02:37:947 (5,1) - nazi blanket xdd
03:17:724 (3) - should break it to 2 circles cuz its different from 03:17:456 (1,2) - if u listen carefully mainly for structure consistent tho and the drum sound isnt the sound im following :p
03:24:889 - 03:25:291 - why ignored lul mainly for emphasis on the drum sound, for impact in gameplay xd
I know that my mod will be completely rejected by weird excuses cuz the map is qualified lol
Anyways since I quit std go on with ranking it
Anyways since I quit std go on with ranking it
what would you expect on modding qualified map
its not the matter if its rejected or not , the thing that matter is it helpful or pointless
doesnt relate anything with you quitting std with this qualification anyways you dont need to tell everyone
its not the matter if its rejected or not , the thing that matter is it helpful or pointless
doesnt relate anything with you quitting std with this qualification anyways you dont need to tell everyone
I mean for helpful mod(maybe just 1 suggestion) ppl would take it more seriously when it's not qualified than when it's qualified since it's common sense
Also quit=no interest to further argue about some points
Also quit=no interest to further argue about some points
as far as im concern this map was left out untouched for 2 whole weeks before qualification and no one really bother to give in any suggestions (the fact that before the bubble it took more time) , and now its on qualified status , as a mapper you , it is a status you would want to defend until it get ranked , since disqualification leads to more and more people involved which is troublesome either to bn or to the mapper side and mappers would avoid that.
Post-qualified mods are different from pre-qualified mods. If your mod isn't objectively improving map quality, it's likely to be rejected. Stuff like improving blankets, stacks, NC's etc... can subjectively benefit the map, but mappers are only going to apply those in pre-qualified state because they are so marginally helpful, if not irrelevant to actual mapping quality. In pending, there's the mindset "well, this map isn't qualified yet, so I might as well fix this. It's barely noticeable in gameplay, but I might as well, since ?? pointed it out".
I will stay neutral about this map because there's enough drama in mapping already. Just realize that there are indeed logistical drawbacks to getting maps dq'ed from a mapper's perspective. "There's nothing wrong with a dq" isn't accurate, because not all mappers are able to mobilize BN's effectively. (Actually, barely any mappers are nowadays, even big mappers like me/Sotarks). Yes, disqualifications can benefit the map and the mapper, but please don't expect mappers to treat post-qualified mods like pre-qualified mods.
I will stay neutral about this map because there's enough drama in mapping already. Just realize that there are indeed logistical drawbacks to getting maps dq'ed from a mapper's perspective. "There's nothing wrong with a dq" isn't accurate, because not all mappers are able to mobilize BN's effectively. (Actually, barely any mappers are nowadays, even big mappers like me/Sotarks). Yes, disqualifications can benefit the map and the mapper, but please don't expect mappers to treat post-qualified mods like pre-qualified mods.
actually i didnt plan on getting involved here but im reading hate on this map literally everywhere but no one is even doing anything so eh...i guess here i am lol
A major issue about the last diff is just that it doesn't make any sense from an objective perspective. Yes it sounds rude and harsh, but honestly that's just the truth and there's no other way to say it. To go more in-depth on that, the whole map uses (screen)jumps really randomly (and by that I mean randomly, or just inconsistent, whatever you prefer).
I have no idea if other people even tried to explain the actual issues or anything like that as I always tried to stay away from this set, but reading "omg snow drive sucks so hard why is it qualified" from several people and no one really trying to do anything against it (or more like trying to help the mapper understand the concerns of the community) gets really annoying over time.
Other issues that are worth to mention I found just by glancing over the rest of the diff (I'm pretty sure I don't need to mention more patterns with the issues I mentioned above because I'm sure neither you or Raikozen are not able to understand it and to adapt other patterns) would be:
A major issue about the last diff is just that it doesn't make any sense from an objective perspective. Yes it sounds rude and harsh, but honestly that's just the truth and there's no other way to say it. To go more in-depth on that, the whole map uses (screen)jumps really randomly (and by that I mean randomly, or just inconsistent, whatever you prefer).
- 00:18:929 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - Let's just go in-depth for on this pattern as an example. Just by looking at this and listening to the music I can't figure out at all what you are trying to emphasize in the music. The most intuitive thing would be the melody as it's by far the most dominant, however that doesn't fit as you are using big spacing from 1 to 2 which is totally fine, but on 3 the spacing gets extremely low in comparison to the previous two objects. Afterwards you are using 4 circles to...yeah, I really have no idea what you are trying to express with those. Would be completely fine if there was something special like you have 00:20:804 (4,5,1) - here (where the melody also hits the red tick to make the explanation short) but that's not the case. So to summarize this pattern, which was only an example of all the thousand similar patterns you have in this difficulty, it's purely random and totally ignoring the music as you are not doing what the music suggests. I'm not saying that the whole map is flawed as you did it correctly at some points, but a lot of patterns are really similar and thus not really expressing the music.
- 00:24:286 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - In what way is this pattern a lot more intense than everything before? From the objective perspective it seems like you tried to emphasize the different pitches correctly, however that's only partly the case. 00:22:143 (1,1,2,1,2,1) - here you did completely fine, it's extremely noticable that the pitch went a lot higher and another weird noisy sound appears but for some reason you totally escalate with the spacing two measures later and basically make it non-sense as the music gets a lot calmer...and any explanation like "the section is pretty much about to end so I want to emphasize that) doesn't really work as it's not really noticable in the music (and no where near expectable when listening to the song the first time anyway) so there's that.
- 00:30:715 (1,2,3,1,2,3) - So I can clearly see that you tried to emphasize the higher pitch by using a pattern with higher density, which is totally fine, however you aren't even nearly doing the same 00:32:858 (1,2,3,4,5) - here which is like super confusing because it's just inconsistent, not only density-wise but even spacing-wise it's completely different with not really being anyhing different in the music that gives the player the feeling that the sudden change is justified.
- 00:36:072 - For the ghost stream that actually is already weird enough and not justified at all (yes, your explanation for them aren't satisfying at all and don't really make sense Kroytz), it's even more weird that you aren't highlighting the drums that for some reason land on some red ticks, so basically another major issue where you pretty much just ignore the music.
- 00:43:572 (1,2) - Hm, ignoring the 1/2 vocals here, mapping the 1/2 melody 00:44:375 (3,4) - here and then all of a sudden give the vocals some love 00:47:858 (1,2,3) - here...
I have no idea if other people even tried to explain the actual issues or anything like that as I always tried to stay away from this set, but reading "omg snow drive sucks so hard why is it qualified" from several people and no one really trying to do anything against it (or more like trying to help the mapper understand the concerns of the community) gets really annoying over time.
Other issues that are worth to mention I found just by glancing over the rest of the diff (I'm pretty sure I don't need to mention more patterns with the issues I mentioned above because I'm sure neither you or Raikozen are not able to understand it and to adapt other patterns) would be:
- 00:57:233 (4) - This is imo pretty much the same as the white tick on the slidertail of 00:52:679 (4) - so there should be another 1/1 gap to emphasis the strong upcoming melody instead of the vocals in this case, the 1/2 just feels really random to me because there's like exactly the same thing before but you just start adding objects to it when there's no reason to except than trying to build emphasis which can't really happen when you start going inconsistent.
- 01:09:286 (1,2,3,4,5,1,2,3,4,5) - Extremely counter-intuitive that these two bursts lack hitsounding (and thus feedback) so hard when you even mapped a stream with normal hitsounding to a non-existent thing, don't you think?
- 01:19:733 (4) - Not mapped to the vocals when you do it every time later on?
- 02:05:358 (2,3,4) - I'm wondering how this is supposed to be readable without an extra NC / good readable pattern. Stacked 1/3's are an extreme pain to read and since there's no special NC the player will still expect the rhythm to be either 1/2 or 1/4 just like usual, so in this case the player would tap 1/4s because there's no way to predict / read the 1/3's properly.
- Sometimes there are also patterns like 02:10:893 (1,3) - with no real (or clear) concept behind them, so they feel really forced when playing because the pattern is kinda special but there's no music making it fit or anything else that makes it more intuitive
- 02:23:750 (1,2,1,2) - lol
- 02:51:072 (1,2,3,1) - Since most objects were 1/4 anyway there's nothing wrong with doing the same same here (let alone that there are some 1/4 repeats with a really similar spacing) and 1/8's on this BPM are extremely punishing, so it's just really unneccesary to do this imo.
And why do you think that I'm not following my userpage? I'm not playing nor mapping at all, and just modding or looking at maps when there's something going on, so I'm actually not doing anything wrong.GaterRaider wrote:
@Stjpa:i guess its time for a break; playing isnt fun at all anymore, i suck at mapping so i cant enjoy it either and modding is mehYou should stick to your profile description since your mod is a whole lot of rambling garbage that you felt the need to put a summary at the bottom. Yes it sounds rude and harsh, but honestly that's just the truth and there's no other way to say it.
So what exactly are you trying to tell? It's true that the things are not exactly objective issues, because then the map would have issues that break the RC which is not the case, they are intersubjective issues which is basically the same. Instead of being extremely passive-agressive on how wrong my mod is and so on I'd actually like you to counter-argument on why my mod doesn't make any sense. If you think that not following the music properly and randomly placed object in the context of the music is good and should be ranked you definitely have the wrong definition of maps. Literally everywhere was a little exaggeration indeed, but I'm in multiple mapping / modding discords that contains a lot of experienced modders / mappers and the majority of them dislikes the map for the reasons I pointed out.GaterRaider wrote:
I don't know how mappers put up with shit like this. If you can't express yourself with a thousand words maybe you shouldn't post here. You talk about things not making sense from an objective perspective and list up a bunch of stuff that are your personal opinion and nothing more, no matter how hard you try to spin it any other way. I don't know in which echo chamber you live in to have seen hate on this map literally everywhere. Maybe you should step out of your bubble for a bit and ignore the circlejerk you see by a few select people in this thread.
GaterRider: Basically almost all mods is based on personal opinion, in this case this map still on qualified section so every community member have rights to voice their opinion or concern. Attacking someone like that rather too rude lol.
ok, so:
i'll try to be as polite as possible, but it might not be possible sometimes
and 00:20:804 (4,5,1) you can hear theres the other tone so i emphasize that
well... and later on i map melody cuz there are no vocals in there?
and then i emphasized vocals cuz they are the most dominant thing? i legit dont wanna be obnoxious at this point but holy fucking shit could you like rehear stuff before you say something?
you might not have noticed, but whole map is bulit around these screenjumps, and that's the style i followed in this map. this map is made to make it feel massive and spacious, so it gives the extra vibe to the expirienced player who plays it, since the song itself has some great buildup points in my opinion, and it fits well also
and no, they arent counter intuitive. if you're a bad player and you can't play those, that's your bad, not mine
do i need to put a fucking 130 decibel megaphone right in front of your ear so you can hear that a vocal note starts over here?
in most maps, if there's a burst at the end of the slider, it's most likely 1/4 and it has TWO notes (remember capsed numbers, they are important!)
if there are THREE ( :O ) notes in a 1/4 song that isnt a gimmicky map with doubles all the way, it means it's most likely 1/3!
what a shocker right? if you're a good player you will be able to read that on first try, in the worst case you'll just need one restart to understand it
in the second one, have you ever seen ohigan fuzzyclap?
in the third one, i'll learn you how to count!
how many ticks are there in one slider overe there? let's count:
one, two, three, four, five, six! whole six ticks. that means it's 1/6, not 1/8
and by the way it used to be 1/8 but it was changed due to complains of other people
i just have no idea how not to be pissed of at someone who makes zero sense, not even subjective, and for sure not objective one. sorry
if it plays bad for you, that just means you're just not good enough at the game, and that's it
i'll try to be as polite as possible, but it might not be possible sometimes
i guess i won't blame you if you won't hear it for the first time, but theres actually a quite quiet 1/2 percussion beat in this partStjpa wrote:
- 00:18:929 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - Let's just go in-depth for on this pattern as an example. Just by looking at this and listening to the music I can't figure out at all what you are trying to emphasize in the music. The most intuitive thing would be the melody as it's by far the most dominant, however that doesn't fit as you are using big spacing from 1 to 2 which is totally fine, but on 3 the spacing gets extremely low in comparison to the previous two objects. Afterwards you are using 4 circles to...yeah, I really have no idea what you are trying to express with those. Would be completely fine if there was something special like you have 00:20:804 (4,5,1) - here (where the melody also hits the red tick to make the explanation short) but that's not the case. So to summarize this pattern, which was only an example of all the thousand similar patterns you have in this difficulty, it's purely random and totally ignoring the music as you are not doing what the music suggests. I'm not saying that the whole map is flawed as you did it correctly at some points, but a lot of patterns are really similar and thus not really expressing the music.
and 00:20:804 (4,5,1) you can hear theres the other tone so i emphasize that
the reason for that is that i bulit up for hitfinish on 00:31:786 (1) -Stjpa wrote:
00:24:286 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - In what way is this pattern a lot more intense than everything before? From the objective perspective it seems like you tried to emphasize the different pitches correctly, however that's only partly the case. 00:22:143 (1,1,2,1,2,1) - here you did completely fine, it's extremely noticable that the pitch went a lot higher and another weird noisy sound appears but for some reason you totally escalate with the spacing two measures later and basically make it non-sense as the music gets a lot calmer...and any explanation like "the section is pretty much about to end so I want to emphasize that) doesn't really work as it's not really noticable in the music (and no where near expectable when listening to the song the first time anyway) so there's that.
ok i might kinda agree that this is a bit overhauled, but it also reflects the same pitch change as previously, i do that in other things you pointed out as well00:30:715 (1,2,3,1,2,3) - So I can clearly see that you tried to emphasize the higher pitch by using a pattern with higher density, which is totally fine, however you aren't even nearly doing the same 00:32:858 (1,2,3,4,5) - here which is like super confusing because it's just inconsistent, not only density-wise but even spacing-wise it's completely different with not really being anyhing different in the music that gives the player the feeling that the sudden change is justified.Stjpa wrote:
this is the one objective thing i kinda agree on, i just noticed theres no 1/4 in melody there LOL but still the whole section builds up nicely to the next post-stream section so it's actually negligible if there is a stream there or not since it's still a transition to another part of the music without the noises in the previous one, and the stream shows how you can distinguish that from the previous partStjpa wrote:
00:36:072 - For the ghost stream that actually is already weird enough and not justified at all (yes, your explanation for them aren't satisfying at all and don't really make sense Kroytz), it's even more weird that you aren't highlighting the drums that for some reason land on some red ticks, so basically another major issue where you pretty much just ignore the music.
are you deaf? there are no 1/2 vocals in there, this is a perfect place to use two 1/1 slidersStjpa wrote:
00:43:572 (1,2) - Hm, ignoring the 1/2 vocals here, mapping the 1/2 melody 00:44:375 (3,4) - here and then all of a sudden give the vocals some love 00:47:858 (1,2,3) - here...
well... and later on i map melody cuz there are no vocals in there?
and then i emphasized vocals cuz they are the most dominant thing? i legit dont wanna be obnoxious at this point but holy fucking shit could you like rehear stuff before you say something?
Stjpa wrote:
These issues are pretty much in the whole map. However, the by far biggest issue in this diff are the screenjumps.
LE RAIKONEZEN JUMP TRAININGE MAPER XD TRASH 20 IQ MAPPER ONLY SPAM JUMPS IN EDITROR SO COCKEIZI PLAYS ITStjpa wrote:
screenjumps.
you might not have noticed, but whole map is bulit around these screenjumps, and that's the style i followed in this map. this map is made to make it feel massive and spacious, so it gives the extra vibe to the expirienced player who plays it, since the song itself has some great buildup points in my opinion, and it fits well also
how ununderstandable that i put 1/2 jumps on a fucking 1/2 vocal section? also could you stop going full turbo shiirn autism with your "kiai emphasis" bullshit since it makes zero fucking sense making it a golden unspoken rule of mapping that is forbidden to be broke. if there are jumps that fit and might be bigger than some kiai jumps, why cant i just use them and why would i have to follow some nonsense principal?Stjpa wrote:
00:48:929 - in the section starting here you start placing jumps in a way that is not understandable for anyone who listens to the music properly when playing. Because of all the screenjumps you placed here all the emphasis you tried to use in the kiais, which are unarguably the most intense sections in the song by far, completely lose its emphasis and meaning as they are mapped the same way as in non-kiai parts even though they are stronger. Is that intuitive? Not really. Does it make sense? Not at all, and I'm sure you can agree on it, at least a lot of other people who aren't bad at modding / mapping or whatever can. This is just a very big flaw in the maps concepts which is crucial as maps are supposed to reflect the music, which doesn't happen here when you do something like this.
so you call the non-vocal part and vocal part the same? seriosly i start like i cant even treat you seriously anymoreStjpa wrote:
- 00:57:233 (4) - This is imo pretty much the same as the white tick on the slidertail of 00:52:679 (4) - so there should be another 1/1 gap to emphasis the strong upcoming melody instead of the vocals in this case, the 1/2 just feels really random to me because there's like exactly the same thing before but you just start adding objects to it when there's no reason to except than trying to build emphasis which can't really happen when you start going inconsistent.
there is a change from normal to drum hitsounding in 01:09:420 (3,4,5) - and a hitclap on 01:09:956 (5) -Stjpa wrote:
01:09:286 (1,2,3,4,5,1,2,3,4,5) - Extremely counter-intuitive that these two bursts lack hitsounding (and thus feedback) so hard when you even mapped a stream with normal hitsounding to a non-existent thing, don't you think?
and no, they arent counter intuitive. if you're a bad player and you can't play those, that's your bad, not mine
holy FUCKING SHITStjpa wrote:
01:19:733 (4) - Not mapped to the vocals when you do it every time later on?
do i need to put a fucking 130 decibel megaphone right in front of your ear so you can hear that a vocal note starts over here?
ok let me show you how this works:Stjpa wrote:
02:05:358 (2,3,4) - I'm wondering how this is supposed to be readable without an extra NC / good readable pattern. Stacked 1/3's are an extreme pain to read and since there's no special NC the player will still expect the rhythm to be either 1/2 or 1/4 just like usual, so in this case the player would tap 1/4s because there's no way to predict / read the 1/3's properly.
in most maps, if there's a burst at the end of the slider, it's most likely 1/4 and it has TWO notes (remember capsed numbers, they are important!)
if there are THREE ( :O ) notes in a 1/4 song that isnt a gimmicky map with doubles all the way, it means it's most likely 1/3!
what a shocker right? if you're a good player you will be able to read that on first try, in the worst case you'll just need one restart to understand it
in the first one, you can hear the pitch coming back and forth, and so does that slider.Stjpa wrote:
Sometimes there are also patterns like 02:10:893 (1,3) - with no real (or clear) concept behind them, so they feel really forced when playing because the pattern is kinda special but there's no music making it fit or anything else that makes it more intuitive 02:23:750 (1,2,1,2) - lol 02:51:072 (1,2,3,1) - Since most objects were 1/4 anyway there's nothing wrong with doing the same same here (let alone that there are some 1/4 repeats with a really similar spacing) and 1/8's on this BPM are extremely punishing, so it's just really unneccesary to do this imo.
in the second one, have you ever seen ohigan fuzzyclap?
in the third one, i'll learn you how to count!
how many ticks are there in one slider overe there? let's count:
one, two, three, four, five, six! whole six ticks. that means it's 1/6, not 1/8
and by the way it used to be 1/8 but it was changed due to complains of other people
i just have no idea how not to be pissed of at someone who makes zero sense, not even subjective, and for sure not objective one. sorry
if it plays bad for you, that just means you're just not good enough at the game, and that's it
Is it possible to avoid those toxic answers? That would be nice I guess, and there is no reason to be angry, just do a discussion without being angry ^^
Topic Starter
@Pachiru: I can't speak for Raikozen, but when you have someone question your entire mapping integrity in great length, and then make claims that it is 'objectively shit', it's not hard to see as to why one should feel upset - especially when that user made direct offenses to him.
Also, @GaterRaider congratz on your first forum post~! Seven years without a single comment is quite admirable in some way :3
^ straight up rude btw.Stjpa wrote:
Yes it sounds rude and harsh, but honestly that's just the truth and there's no other way to say it
Also, @GaterRaider congratz on your first forum post~! Seven years without a single comment is quite admirable in some way :3
u better map actual sounds rather things that are barely hearable (if they really exist)Raikozen wrote:
i guess i won't blame you if you won't hear it for the first time, but theres actually a quite quiet 1/2 percussion beat in this part
00:18:929 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - agree with stjpa, just take a look at arieeru's map. rhythm makes a lot more sense than urs tbh
didnt read the entire thing cuz too lazy but the map still can be improved a lot gl
Maybe you should start reading my stuff carefully and properly, it's noticable that you didn't do that in your first answer already
Everything else I didn't comment was just irrelevant or stuff that isn't nearly as important as the stuff I commented.
The lower spacing of 00:19:197 (2,3) - is still not really justified, you emphasized the melody with bigger spacing but totally ignore it here which I find still questionable as you didn't answer that. The transition from 2 to 3 seems completely fine since there's a percussion, ok fine, but 1) why is it not hitsounded at all to give the player feedback that there's a percussion and 2) why is 00:19:733 (5,6) - mapped even stronger without really having anything it could emphasize?Raikozen wrote:
i guess i won't blame you if you won't hear it for the first time, but theres actually a quite quiet 1/2 percussion beat in this part
I don't really understand how it can even reflect the same pitch when the pitch is noticably lower and the previous pitch was like 2-3 seconds ago, so basically not relevant at all anymore.Raikozen wrote:
ok i might kinda agree that this is a bit overhauled, but it also reflects the same pitch change as previously, i do that in other things you pointed out as well
Fair enough, but there's still no reason to map the second build-up less intense when the intention of you is still the same there. Previously you cared about percussion and tried to give it extra emphasis, but 00:31:518 (3) - here you suddenly stop doing it. Not only that, 00:32:858 (1,3) - these have pretty much the same issue. And the overall spacing shouldn't be that much lower, it seems that the melody has a little lower pitch, but the spacing is going so much lower with barely a noticable change when not listening to it multiple times.Raikozen wrote:
the reason for that is that i bulit up for hitfinish on 00:31:786 (1) -
That's a reasoning you could use in any map if there's an actual stream leading into a new section. And there's still no reasoning on why you would avoid mapping to the strong drums in the background then.Raikozen wrote:
this is the one objective thing i kinda agree on, i just noticed theres no 1/4 in melody there LOL but still the whole section builds up nicely to the next post-stream section so it's actually negligible if there is a stream there or not since it's still a transition to another part of the music without the noises in the previous one, and the stream shows how you can distinguish that from the previous part
No vocals? I clearly hear 00:43:706 - an S here and an U 00:43:840 - here, so there are actually vocals lol.Raikozen wrote:
are you deaf? there are no 1/2 vocals in there, this is a perfect place to use two 1/1 sliders
well... and later on i map melody cuz there are no vocals in there?
and then i emphasized vocals cuz they are the most dominant thing? i legit dont wanna be obnoxious at this point but holy fucking shit could you like rehear stuff before you say something?
You are exactly repeating what I was saying and I gave you the reasoning on why it's not working as intended. If a map is built around (screen)jumps then they need to be special and emphasized, which can't happen here if you are using them in the whole map and thus not really giving the feeling of the structure you claim to use. Yes the song has great build-ups for sure, but you can emphasize everything differently (not only different spacing) so make everything feel more intuitive and unique.Raikozen wrote:
you might not have noticed, but whole map is bulit around these screenjumps, and that's the style i followed in this map. this map is made to make it feel massive and spacious, so it gives the extra vibe to the expirienced player who plays it, since the song itself has some great buildup points in my opinion, and it fits well also
I'm not saying that jumps outside of the kiai can't be larger than or equal to kiai jumps, however it's simply not possible here because the kiais are by far stronger because of the stronger melody and higher pitched voice so mapping them just the same is not mapping the difficulty accordingly to the music and reflecting it properly. Is that really that non-sense? I don't think so, and a lot of others don't think so either, so you have to do it properly because this is still a community-driven game.Raikozen wrote:
how ununderstandable that i put 1/2 jumps on a fucking 1/2 vocal section? also could you stop going full turbo shiirn autism with your "kiai emphasis" bullshit since it makes zero fucking sense making it a golden unspoken rule of mapping that is forbidden to be broke. if there are jumps that fit and might be bigger than some kiai jumps, why cant i just use them and why would i have to follow some nonsense principal?
When using the default skin which is common sense when discussing about hitsounding, it's way too hard to notice it which doesn't make sense considering the ghost-stream has a lot better hitsounding that gives good feedback even though there's no stream in the music...Raikozen wrote:
there is a change from normal to drum hitsounding in 01:09:420 (3,4,5) - and a hitclap on 01:09:956 (5) -
My bad that I worded it wrong. What I meant is that you aren't using a 1/1 slider for the long vocals like you did 01:20:000 (1,1,4) - and so onRaikozen wrote:
do i need to put a fucking 130 decibel megaphone right in front of your ear so you can hear that a vocal note starts over here?
This is common sense for you maybe, but not for some modders (like me in this example) or any player who doesn't analyze every damn map to learn different mapping techniques or anything like that.Raikozen wrote:
in most maps, if there's a burst at the end of the slider, it's most likely 1/4 and it has TWO notes (remember capsed numbers, they are important!)
if there are THREE ( :O ) notes in a 1/4 song that isnt a gimmicky map with doubles all the way, it means it's most likely 1/3!
Everything else I didn't comment was just irrelevant or stuff that isn't nearly as important as the stuff I commented.
Greetings
00:36:072 - This is not constant 1/4 in the song, but this is 00:39:822 - , which in turns ruins the coherence of the last stream. There's also the parts that Kisses mentioned. EDIT: Since this was answered, I'll add that reflecting the song itself is more important than making for a good transition. You can always accomplish both goals without resorting to the way it is currently done.
00:37:143 - 00:37:947 - 00:38:215 - 00:38:483 - Other snares are seemingly ignored between the repeats, 00:37:545 - 00:38:884 - . Try this instead.
00:49:733 (5,6) - 00:51:875 (3,4) - 00:53:483 (3,4) - 00:54:018 (3,4) - Snare to low-pitched vocal parts look misspaced, in comparison to the notes with actual impacts, 00:53:215 (1,2) - 00:53:884 (2,3) - , for example.
00:58:304 (1,1) - 00:59:375 (1,1) - It was argued that these were a cause for 02:03:661 (3,1) - , yet they their context is very different, and that's what makes it out of place.
00:59:911 - This is placed half a beat too early according to the prior pattern 00:58:840 - 00:57:768 - and should be moved to 01:00:045 - , in which case 01:00:179 (1,2) - can be removed and stream started on 01:00:313 - , where the drum-kicks are initiated, as a way to make the rhythm more recognizable after 00:59:241 - 00:58:170 - .
01:05:268 - Unlike 01:03:527 - 01:04:197 - 01:04:599 - , there's a vocal here which may want to be stressed, since they're being followed so closely anyway. Make the slider a 1/2 and place a circle here. Refer to 01:07:545 (2,3) - . Same goes for 02:21:340 - and any other occurrences.
01:11:563 - Filling this musical gap in with a circle is rather uncalled for. No impact here, but there is at 01:11:295 - , try using that cue to prevent multiple sliders after each other, and to keep this consistent with 01:12:500 (1) - 01:13:572 (1) - .
01:15:179 (1,2) - Since this is so close to 01:15:581 (4,1) - , the latter pattern loses the contrast it was supposed to have, and in turn makes it stand out less. Generally this is solved by using a different type of note, a slider in this case, but that wouldn't follow the vocals as well, right? That's where the spacing concept becomes a problem.
01:29:911 - See no reason to stray from the vocals here. Nothing in the song seems to suggest it. In turn, 01:30:045 (2,3,4,5) - looks very out of place for this section, considering that the majority or other notes here are sliders.
01:39:822 (5,7) - These are distinct sounds, yet they're just like any other note before and after them. It may be that they have a little more spacing than other notes, but this wouldn't be noticeable, due to the low potential of contrast in spacing we established earlier. Look at 01:39:286 (1,2) - , for example.
02:07:411 (3,4,1) - Every two beats, there's a stronger vocal compared to the rest, indicated by the new combos. However their spacing is questionable when making these comparisons. Preferably it would both be visually indicated as well as accentuated. Applies for 02:07:947 (3,4,1) - 02:08:483 (3,4,1) - etc.
02:09:822 - Considering that every two beats have a new combo, this is probably unintentional.
02:12:902 - This vocal is different, and extends over 02:13:036 (1) - , yet the combo placement and spacing seems to contradict that. Could always turn 02:12:902 (4,1) - into a slider otherwise. Vocals are followed throughout the map, after all.
02:19:063 (2,1) - Similarly to 02:18:527 (1,2) - , this is also a group, and should not be continued nor NCed in this way. In comparison, the spacing of 02:19:465 (1,2) - is not warranted, as the two impacts worked with are actually at 02:19:599 (2,1) - .
02:32:858 - This is actually 1/3 snapping up until 02:33:929 - , not 1/4, and applies to all difficulties.
03:16:518 - Considering that a vocal beings here, try changing (2) to a 1/2 slider and have (3) start from 03:16:518 - , extending it to 03:16:920 - .
Qualified maps receive a lot of publicity, so it only makes sense that they would also receive more feedback as a result. "No one said anything before it was qualified!", is therefore kind of missing the point. Most of the time, it's not that no one said anything, it's that no one saw the things in question. The post-qualification process allows the community to share their opinions of the map before it reaches the ranked section. A kind of test version, if you will. Should the reasons be sound, valid and important to the quality of the map, as judged by the Quality Assurance Team after being reported to them, it will be disqualified for further processing. It may be difficult to regain a qualification after this, but that's the whole point. It is necessary to make sure no other issues remain in the mapset before it is, once again, qualified.
Also, Raikozen, please stay calm when responding to mods. It's very rude of you to attack the modder (and other modders at the same time, apparently) for their reasons, rather than the reasons themselves. We're sharing our opinion of the map, in order to help you help yourself improve upon it, so don't take it personally. If you don't agree with something, tell them why, do not insult them for not seeing what you're doing. I would highly suggest you read over the Code of Conduct before making any more responses.
00:36:072 - This is not constant 1/4 in the song, but this is 00:39:822 - , which in turns ruins the coherence of the last stream. There's also the parts that Kisses mentioned. EDIT: Since this was answered, I'll add that reflecting the song itself is more important than making for a good transition. You can always accomplish both goals without resorting to the way it is currently done.
00:37:143 - 00:37:947 - 00:38:215 - 00:38:483 - Other snares are seemingly ignored between the repeats, 00:37:545 - 00:38:884 - . Try this instead.
00:49:733 (5,6) - 00:51:875 (3,4) - 00:53:483 (3,4) - 00:54:018 (3,4) - Snare to low-pitched vocal parts look misspaced, in comparison to the notes with actual impacts, 00:53:215 (1,2) - 00:53:884 (2,3) - , for example.
00:58:304 (1,1) - 00:59:375 (1,1) - It was argued that these were a cause for 02:03:661 (3,1) - , yet they their context is very different, and that's what makes it out of place.
00:59:911 - This is placed half a beat too early according to the prior pattern 00:58:840 - 00:57:768 - and should be moved to 01:00:045 - , in which case 01:00:179 (1,2) - can be removed and stream started on 01:00:313 - , where the drum-kicks are initiated, as a way to make the rhythm more recognizable after 00:59:241 - 00:58:170 - .
01:05:268 - Unlike 01:03:527 - 01:04:197 - 01:04:599 - , there's a vocal here which may want to be stressed, since they're being followed so closely anyway. Make the slider a 1/2 and place a circle here. Refer to 01:07:545 (2,3) - . Same goes for 02:21:340 - and any other occurrences.
01:11:563 - Filling this musical gap in with a circle is rather uncalled for. No impact here, but there is at 01:11:295 - , try using that cue to prevent multiple sliders after each other, and to keep this consistent with 01:12:500 (1) - 01:13:572 (1) - .
01:15:179 (1,2) - Since this is so close to 01:15:581 (4,1) - , the latter pattern loses the contrast it was supposed to have, and in turn makes it stand out less. Generally this is solved by using a different type of note, a slider in this case, but that wouldn't follow the vocals as well, right? That's where the spacing concept becomes a problem.
01:29:911 - See no reason to stray from the vocals here. Nothing in the song seems to suggest it. In turn, 01:30:045 (2,3,4,5) - looks very out of place for this section, considering that the majority or other notes here are sliders.
01:39:822 (5,7) - These are distinct sounds, yet they're just like any other note before and after them. It may be that they have a little more spacing than other notes, but this wouldn't be noticeable, due to the low potential of contrast in spacing we established earlier. Look at 01:39:286 (1,2) - , for example.
02:07:411 (3,4,1) - Every two beats, there's a stronger vocal compared to the rest, indicated by the new combos. However their spacing is questionable when making these comparisons. Preferably it would both be visually indicated as well as accentuated. Applies for 02:07:947 (3,4,1) - 02:08:483 (3,4,1) - etc.
02:09:822 - Considering that every two beats have a new combo, this is probably unintentional.
02:12:902 - This vocal is different, and extends over 02:13:036 (1) - , yet the combo placement and spacing seems to contradict that. Could always turn 02:12:902 (4,1) - into a slider otherwise. Vocals are followed throughout the map, after all.
02:19:063 (2,1) - Similarly to 02:18:527 (1,2) - , this is also a group, and should not be continued nor NCed in this way. In comparison, the spacing of 02:19:465 (1,2) - is not warranted, as the two impacts worked with are actually at 02:19:599 (2,1) - .
02:32:858 - This is actually 1/3 snapping up until 02:33:929 - , not 1/4, and applies to all difficulties.
03:16:518 - Considering that a vocal beings here, try changing (2) to a 1/2 slider and have (3) start from 03:16:518 - , extending it to 03:16:920 - .
Qualified maps receive a lot of publicity, so it only makes sense that they would also receive more feedback as a result. "No one said anything before it was qualified!", is therefore kind of missing the point. Most of the time, it's not that no one said anything, it's that no one saw the things in question. The post-qualification process allows the community to share their opinions of the map before it reaches the ranked section. A kind of test version, if you will. Should the reasons be sound, valid and important to the quality of the map, as judged by the Quality Assurance Team after being reported to them, it will be disqualified for further processing. It may be difficult to regain a qualification after this, but that's the whole point. It is necessary to make sure no other issues remain in the mapset before it is, once again, qualified.
Also, Raikozen, please stay calm when responding to mods. It's very rude of you to attack the modder (and other modders at the same time, apparently) for their reasons, rather than the reasons themselves. We're sharing our opinion of the map, in order to help you help yourself improve upon it, so don't take it personally. If you don't agree with something, tell them why, do not insult them for not seeing what you're doing. I would highly suggest you read over the Code of Conduct before making any more responses.
This is also a really bad attitude. Just because a modder can't play the map, does not mean they can't bring valid arguments.Raikozen wrote:
if it plays bad for you, that just means you're just not good enough at the game, and that's it
Its not true. If you cant play the map, that means that your arguments are losing its value, so if you mod that way, the arguments you provide will be more theoretical rather than practical, which means its more subjective than objective. Which means, the way you understand mapping in theory can be way different from others (or the mapper in question rn), tho the mapping theory can be explained widely, so... uh.Naxess wrote:
This is also a really bad attitude. Just because a modder can't play the map, does not mean they can't bring valid arguments.
In other words, if you cant play the map, your mod will be just as vague shit at some points, which is a waste of your/mappers time and it doesnt contribute to the map itself.
I wonder when you guys will learn that subjective opinions are perfectly fine in the ranking process...
As long as the person states his reasons and provides examples of what he's saying, it's perfectly fine, so stop with your memery already.
If others don't like your work they have all the rights to tell you so (in a polite way, obviously)
Spoiler: it has always been like this
As long as the person states his reasons and provides examples of what he's saying, it's perfectly fine, so stop with your memery already.
If others don't like your work they have all the rights to tell you so (in a polite way, obviously)
Spoiler: it has always been like this
Word.MrSergio wrote:
I wonder when you guys will learn that subjective opinions are perfectly fine in the ranking process...
As long as the person states his reasons and provides examples of what he's saying, it's perfectly fine, so stop with your memery already.
If others don't like your work they have all the rights to tell you so (in a polite way, obviously)
Spoiler: it has always been like this
You probably dont understand (and im baffled of that tbh, considering ur position in staff), that for now, we got an RC with VERY distinct things in it.MrSergio wrote:
I wonder when you guys will learn that subjective opinions are perfectly fine in the ranking process...
As long as the person states his reasons and provides examples of what he's saying, it's perfectly fine, so stop with your memery already.
If others don't like your work they have all the rights to tell you so (in a polite way, obviously)
Spoiler: it has always been like this
The mod on stuff, that DOES NOT break the RC, can be considered as subjective and its up to mapper, if he should apply it or not.
By forcing your opinion you breaking the current Code of Conduct:
^ unless it breaks the RC ^^^^
Also, for those who's trying to basically nuke this map (or maps in general, like Stjpa's mods usually), the Code of Conduct also contains this:
When pointing out "issues", inspect each thoroughly consider exactly what it is about the particular "thing" you dislike. Then, try to offer a potential solution or improvement and consider exactly how that suggestion will improve the map. If necessary, try multiple suggestions to see which work best - The more help you can offer the mapper, the better.
Means, the mod, that consists of things like "this is shit cuz ... uh i think its shit" are wrong initially.
I think that most of the current BNG didnt even read the Code of Conduct >_>
Since there's some discussion here, I would try to add small stuff about Raikozen's Everlasting Memory diff :
Also take a look on some of Stjpa suggestions, and some of these makes sense and should be adressed correctly imo.
- 00:10:358 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,5,1,2,3,4,5) - Spacing shoun't increase like that. The intensity on vocal remain constant here, so increase spacing don't fit music as it should. Smth more organized like on the previous diff works with it much better.
- 00:36:072 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,5,6,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - I don't understand how you built this stream. I feel like these reverse are placed randomly in the middle. Drums follow a certain pattern, like you can hear drums are stronger at 00:37:947 - , so this would be a nice place for your kicksliders. Also I don't know why you changed the spacing for 00:39:018 (3,4,5,6,1) - .
- 03:35:000 (1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3) - This is something I talked with BOUYAAA. You did this part with only 3 objects patterns, but if you try to emphasis vocal here, it doesn't work since it works on a tempo of 4 beats + a silent one. So spacing like 03:35:402 (1,2) - are just overdone jumps who don't fit the song as intended.
Also take a look on some of Stjpa suggestions, and some of these makes sense and should be adressed correctly imo.
I feel its always the same people who come on in and give their critique after a map is qualified. 95% of the time its the same people the other 5% like myself just sit and laugh as the argument unfold. I would love to help but I'm shit garbage and useless to anyone. Then again I do spent 2 hours a day reading a lot of mods for fun anyways. GL friends 
You know I think it's common sense that you should be a bit respectful during modding and respect people opinions. Even if you don't agree with them. The language used recently kind of makes me lose hope on how modding is supposed to help people improve their maps now and later. Now it seems people are taking offense to them. Even if the person just wants to argue, you should still be respectful.
Yeah, drama is interesting to look at and nice to discuss your opinions on it. This. This is too far.
At least have some decency, this is a circle clicking game, not real life.
Yeah, drama is interesting to look at and nice to discuss your opinions on it. This. This is too far.
At least have some decency, this is a circle clicking game, not real life.
I don't think Raikozen's attitude would help in ranking stuff, but I do wish your mapset the best Kroytz :/
Topic Starter
I'd like to know who deleted my response to Naxess - I don't think what I said was out of line and if they were I apologize but I was only trying to reason for some things pertaining to Raikozen's diff since it seems like all this attention is only welcoming a hate train. (I can see why the post deletion for Raikozen but honestly I've seen worse threads with worse responses slide through).
The post deletions also make it feel like our opinions/statements are unwelcomed here so it's a bit unfair and disheartening to see that happen to the creators. It's almost like we're not even given a chance to address the concerns of others.
The post deletions also make it feel like our opinions/statements are unwelcomed here so it's a bit unfair and disheartening to see that happen to the creators. It's almost like we're not even given a chance to address the concerns of others.
avoid bad words
one thing for sure: raikozen said too much. swearing to that extent was a little silly, i must say.
second thing for sure: i am puzzled as to how many of you guys are so stumped on his over-reaction and not the content. he's trying to provide information, yet you boys create ruckus like children and then deem it drama. also, "like children"? oh wait, many of you guys are full-grown adults... haha never mind that.
arguments strive interesting conversations but i can't say that was one. If you can't provide valuable points, stop adding nonsense to the equation.
fuck fuck dick wank.
second thing for sure: i am puzzled as to how many of you guys are so stumped on his over-reaction and not the content. he's trying to provide information, yet you boys create ruckus like children and then deem it drama. also, "like children"? oh wait, many of you guys are full-grown adults... haha never mind that.
arguments strive interesting conversations but i can't say that was one. If you can't provide valuable points, stop adding nonsense to the equation.
fuck fuck dick wank.
Heads up: If I see a single insult from anybody that is involved in mapping this mapset, I'll just nuke it and you can carry this discussion to the grave.
If I see a single BN getting rude again, I'll just throw them out.
Discuss reasonable, stay on topic, stay on the matter, basically read this red text Irre posted and stop behaving like you just graduated from your local kindergarten. Thank you very much.
@-himei if you dont know how the modding process work, please get lost or discuss that somewhere else. Just because it is not breaking the RC doesnt mean that no debate about the matter is permitted or that stuff still can't be wrong. And apparantly someone nailed something on your forehead, because this is like the 9023490390349509305935902123843298th time that someone told you this and you are still too dense to get it. Can you just quit it altogether and stop teaching people about an ecosystem that you clearly never understood yourself? On a second note, you can discuss your displease about how the modding ecosystem works in its own thread, not in map threads that are only reserved for discussions about the map self. If you fail to abide that, we will have to make sure that you simply never post in this threads again - ever.
If I see a single BN getting rude again, I'll just throw them out.
Discuss reasonable, stay on topic, stay on the matter, basically read this red text Irre posted and stop behaving like you just graduated from your local kindergarten. Thank you very much.
@-himei if you dont know how the modding process work, please get lost or discuss that somewhere else. Just because it is not breaking the RC doesnt mean that no debate about the matter is permitted or that stuff still can't be wrong. And apparantly someone nailed something on your forehead, because this is like the 9023490390349509305935902123843298th time that someone told you this and you are still too dense to get it. Can you just quit it altogether and stop teaching people about an ecosystem that you clearly never understood yourself? On a second note, you can discuss your displease about how the modding ecosystem works in its own thread, not in map threads that are only reserved for discussions about the map self. If you fail to abide that, we will have to make sure that you simply never post in this threads again - ever.
Just to clear things up from my side: I never intended to come off passive-aggressive in my mods so if they did I'm sorry for that, I know what stuff was rather rude so I learned from that as well
However most of my concerns still stand, so we will see if things will get solved on the normal way or not. If Raikozen prefers Kroytz to handle all that I'm open for a discussion via Discord
Also, I can still do a full mod instead of only discussing the "bigger concerns" just in case you want it
However most of my concerns still stand, so we will see if things will get solved on the normal way or not. If Raikozen prefers Kroytz to handle all that I'm open for a discussion via Discord
Also, I can still do a full mod instead of only discussing the "bigger concerns" just in case you want it