1. osu! forums
  2. Beatmaps
  3. Ranked/Approved Beatmaps
show more
posted
raikozens diff is ok leave it alone just let me farm my 700pp already
posted

Loctav wrote:

@-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.
Im sorry.
You probably dont know what is going on here, aside from the discussion about the map in question. Check your email.


Shiirn wrote:

Attacks and dissenting opinions towards a map are not necessarily personal attacks on the mapper. This is something everyone should try to remember, as it's very easy to feel as if your opinions are being disregarded when presented with conflicting ones.

Your maps are not you. They are not an extension of you, no matter what you may feel on the matter. They are something that are created, and once ranked have officially "grown up" - they're no longer under your control. Ranking a map is by definition ceasing all development and putting out a final, unchangeable copy. You'd best be ready for that.

Maps do not have feelings. Mappers do. People get pissed off when they feel their opinion is being disregarded, or when they feel people aren't giving them the respect "they deserve" by implying, or in many cases, outright saying, that they feel the mapper did something incorrectly.

The main conflicts people are bringing up with this map proper are based on what constitutes "proper representation of the song". The biggest nail of discord there is that the song itself is extremely messed up and hard to follow. As such, different levels of experience in music, listening, or even possibly physical gear (headphones, speakers, etc) can be causing massive changes in what each person hears in this track.

This is why I went to so much effort to point out how horrible this track was - not the map, not the mappers, the song itself. A song that has this much conflict over what even constitutes the basic rhythms and melodies really shouldn't have a difficulty over 6.5*. And that's being generous.
With the time the map becomes as an embodiment of its mapper's soul's expression. When somebody continuously tries to change it/nuke it, or just inhibit the ranking of it, the whole discussion becomes personal.
You cant deny anything from ^
It is truth for any map and any mapper that got some experience in mapping and the mapping itself for him (you, me, everyone) becomes an
expression of his feelings
that is personal. It is true for eveyone here who stopped mapping to the "beat" after realizing what mapping is in its advanced form.
posted
Someone needs to watch more pishifat videos about jumps

But really can't the jumps be moved on actual beats and the spacings made more acceptable? that's all that people here want and I'm sure you can do that while mantaining your maps identity
posted

-himei wrote:

With the time the map becomes as an embodiment of its mapper's soul's expression. When somebody continuously tries to change it/nuke it, or just inhibit the ranking of it, the whole discussion becomes personal.
You cant deny anything from ^
It is truth for any map and any mapper that got some experience in mapping and the mapping itself for him (you, me, everyone) becomes an
expression of his feelings
that is personal. It is true for eveyone here who stopped mapping to the "beat" after realizing what mapping is in its advanced form.
Modders who hate your maps are not clawing through the fabric of reality to tear at your soul. Your creation is intangible, it cannot be damaged or destroyed unless you let it be.

Just because it's important to you doesn't mean that you need to be a neurotic sociopath to protect it from things that cannot hurt it.

The same applies here. Personal attacks are pointless; attacking the map has purpose as the moment you push your map for ranking you are by your own choice putting it under review by opinions that are not your own. Being able to be objective and logical about your own emotions is literally what "maturity" is about.


If you truly wanted to have a map be a personal bastion of your feelings and soul, you would not try to rank it. They're mutually exclusive.
posted
fun and challenging style, don't hurt mapper's spirit please
posted

Shiirn wrote:

Modders who hate your maps are not clawing through the fabric of reality to tear at your soul. Your creation is intangible, it cannot be damaged or destroyed unless you let it be.

Just because it's important to you doesn't mean that you need to be a neurotic sociopath to protect it from things that cannot hurt it.

The same applies here. Personal attacks are pointless; attacking the map has purpose as the moment you push your map for ranking you are by your own choice putting it under review by opinions that are not your own. Being able to be objective and logical about your own emotions is literally what "maturity" is about.


If you truly wanted to have a map be a personal bastion of your feelings and soul, you would not try to rank it. They're mutually exclusive.
You are missing the point that most of us (mappers) are ranking stuff to show everyone our perspective of view of music, and the feeling we are experiencing while listening to the song.
Same applies to you in first place.
and to me as well.
We can not just express all the stuff we are experiencing during the listening to the music in words or something. Mapping is the answer at most points of it, but huh... talking about "when you about to rank your map, get ready for it to be destroyed/modified at parts"
I think theres a borderline for "making things to become personal offense" and "improving the map".
Basically, as we all know here, the more attention map gets, the more opinions people expressing here about it, and the more chances for it to basically die, just because theres no distinct borderline of "what is good/bad", aside from RC/Code of conduct, which are vague at some points.
Which is confusing for mapper, cuz, you never know what is "optional enough" to skip or "bad enough" to change,, because, eventually, the more people comes, the more stuff you must respond to, the higher chance that you wont handle everything alone.
so in conclusion I can say that people here should distinguish the stuff that is bad, optional and their own opinion.
by making mods here, some (or maybe most) of you combining these 3 ^ into 1
which doesnt contribute anything good for mapper, for your reputation and for map itself.
posted
this discussion about mapping is more verbose and pretentious than the memes itself
posted
mapping is literally the worst thing ever
posted
You can express all the things you want, but ranking something means making it "official content of the game"
If you want to try out stuff do it, but don't pretend to make it for ranking x)

-himei wrote:

theres no distinct borderline of "what is good/bad", aside from RC/Code of conduct, which are vague at some points.
The BNg exists for that purpose. Like it or don't like it you have to pass their opinion and in this case, the community's too.

Is it bad? Ok
Is it optional? We can consider it
It is personal opinion? By all means it is accepted

Now, can you like... focus on the map instead of debating mapping itself here?


-himei wrote:

you never know what is "optional enough" to skip or "bad enough" to change,, because, eventually, the more people comes, the more stuff you must respond to, the higher chance that you wont handle everything alone.
Make a really good map to begin with and people will come praise you instead of complaining :p
If you can't "express" your vision in an easy-to-understand manner then you failed.
It's like... "are people not understanding what I'm saying or is it me who can't explain things?" kind of thing.

Anyway, I believe it is pointless to keep arguing on the meaning of or how people complains
posted
Press F to pay respects
posted
From my modding queue~~~

-Couldn't find anything wrong, great map! (o u o)b
posted

MrSergio wrote:

If you can't "express" your vision in an easy-to-understand manner then you failed.
It's like... "are people not understanding what I'm saying or is it me who can't explain things?" kind of thing.
Quoting for emphasis even if it's a general statement not particularly directed at this map. It applies to much more than just mapping and is an important lesson everyone has to learn eventually so I feel it has value even if this "isn't the place for it."

To add a further example from experience as a software engineer, the time of your developers is generally one of your more valuable assets. Code that works but no one understands will just lead to net losses later on.

Aesthetics and clarity of expression aren't going to make or break a map but the lack of them is just going to lead to a lot of wasted time if/when anyone has to mod your map.
posted
I have gone over this map many times and my opinion is that lots of stuff that is mentioned by Stjpa and other modders don't really improve the map in any way. Especially the kiai thing, what should he do there if he already built the map around that and used it in non-kiai version?

Maybe his "you're too bad to play the map so you don't know" actually could be applied here since I even asked some players about stuff that is mentioned in mods and I don't know, we don't see a problem and there is no need for further improvement? Unless you want to improve this map to infinity, which could be done for every map in existence.

Personally, I don't understand some things that are mentioned because when I play this map I do not see the problem while playing or in edit.
If needed later on I can mention those mods and talk about them but I just don't feel like it is needed right now

Imo there's a reason why there are playtests from appropriate players regarding all kinds of maps, yeah very experienced mappers can probably see most of the problems if there are any but they will not feel the same "awkward" movement while playing or think there IS one where it is not.
I base this assumption on the fact that I see many situations like that in maps that are mapped by very experienced mappers that are not really good players, these maps tend to have really awkward movements in random places because the mapper is focusing solely on the song sounds but not playability. I see this mostly in the case of jumps, where mappers just place random antijumps or after following a certain logic with the jumps like changing the direction at the same beats and randomly deciding to stop it and making antijump which is in a very random spot because "song changes" but that makes that part play really bad and it can be done in different ways to make the song play better.

This is the reverse case imo in some situations, sacrificing being 100% with the song to match the difficulty and make the diff less awkward in playing.
I think if there is anything that doesn't suit the song perfectly it is there for a reason, Raikozen is not a person who wouldn't think of why he put a certain rhythm or note in a certain spot.

I hope you will stop trying to improve this to infinity because it will not yield any results, this map can be better in everyones eyes in different ways but will it really be better if you change that little thing to your liking instead of Raiko's liking? Probably not seeing how the map is right now.
posted

Loctav wrote:

@-himei .
-himei your discussion here is pointless please take it somewhere else
posted

WORSTPOLACKEU wrote:

Stuff
you missed the point entirely.

a map playing "well" (or comfortably, which is what you mean ofc) has absolutely nothing to do with its quality. it's really really easy to make a map that has a high star rating and plays perfectly comfortably since it uses exclusively sharp angles and has no major spacing changes, etc etc etc. that's what raikozen did here. there's nothing WRONG with doing that either.

the issue with this map that most people who modded it are talking about is from the theory side of it, where what "should be emphasized" is not and what "should be followed" is not. talking about how it plays is entirely irrelevant since any player that can play 8 star maps with some level of ability won't be put off by high spacing sharp angles or overmapped streams. therefore, people are talking about how raikozen could, in their opinion, use objects to represent the song better from a theory perspective.
posted
especially naxess' mod pinpoints a few things that that have only been explained in weird ways (aka by kroytz instead of raikozen for a reason i don't get) or in ways that ended up getting removed from here

just throwing my own opinion into the mix tho, can't hurt lol. The layout of this map is questioned even by people that can't really play it (all i struggle with for example is streaming the 220 without warmup) that well because the map itself is very simplistic so judging the way it plays doesn't require you to do much besides being familiar with how movement through patterns works (unrelated: spaces to the list are just to separate separate throughts better and increase readability)

  1. 00:13:572 (1,2) - i think going along the way 00:11:161 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,5,1,2,3,4,5,6) - suggested which is going for following vocals would actually make that more predictable, you currently have 00:13:974 (2) - which is off-beat from that so using two 1/2 sliders would make more sense with your overall structure you had so far, also applies to 00:14:643 (1,2) - 00:15:715 (1,2) - doing this will enable you to have 00:16:786 (1,2) - stand out specifically and highlight that the vocals there are doing something different

  2. 00:18:125 (1,2) - this is minor but the overlap is so much that it could make the pattern harder to read depending on the skin you're using, could try having the sliderhead of 2 more noticably outside of 1

  3. 00:21:340 (2,3,1,2,3,4) - 00:24:286 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - idk throughtout this section you do seemingly arbitrarily lengths of 1/2 circles before using sliders again, like i get what layer of the music you're following with 00:20:000 (1,2,3,4,5) - , but for some of these it just seems you're mixing multiple layers of the song until it's unclear what rhythm you're actually trying to highlight, i'd advise to follow the melody primarily and only switch to the drum layer when it does something extravagant like it does in 00:26:965 (1,2,1,2) -

  4. 00:23:215 (1,2) - 00:25:358 (1,2) - seem out of place considering that you don't do 1/1 slider in the section otherwise, they stand out by being different where the song doesn't really do anything different

  5. 00:35:536 (3,4) - 00:31:518 (3) - shouldn't these be circles according to how you handled focuses on drums previously? using sliders for these seems kind-of wasted potential to me

  6. 00:36:072 - to 00:40:358 - maps everything as one long stream with highlights on white ticks (aka the reversing sliders) which is kind-of disregarding that the song provides highs on 00:36:340 - 00:36:741 - 00:37:143 - 00:37:545 - 00:38:884 - , some of these are just left in the middle of sliders that start on white ticks for the sake of easy gameplay (assumption from my side) i think you could do more with this if you included a clearer focus on what you're primarily following through rhythm here

  7. 00:59:911 (3) - according to your previous structure this one would probably make more sense as two circles as that would at least allow you to have 01:00:045 - as something that the player has to click.

  8. 01:10:358 - starting here i am unsure what you're mapping the circle-only patterns to, you seem to fall back to mixing multiple layers of the song arbitrarily (at least i can't hear a clear thing that does constant 1/2 at the same intensity in these parts, because not even the vocal layer does that, so whatever you were going for with that it's not very clear) so having something that is in some way predictably following the song through rhythm would probably be better here. I think this is the main thing people take issue with, you mix multiple layers in order to have more circles in seemingly not that obvious ways so people don't really get what you're doing throughout most sections that involve lots of circles with almost the same spacing which leads people to believe you aren't trying to represent the song in any clear shape or fashion.

  9. most of the chorus feels just like any of the previous sections with some slightly higher SV or is even easier, i don't know if this is what you were going for because the way i see it you generally intended the chorus to be more intense.

  10. 01:47:858 (1,2,1,2) - isn't vocal intensity increasing while spacing is decreasing throughout this?

  11. 02:10:893 (1,2,3) - this would be such a cool place for a break similarly to how you did 00:52:411 (3,4) -

  12. 01:44:643 - a lot of your patterns are very circular, most obvious in the circle only patterns which just keep going on in the same direction for like 5 seconds sometimes. you could make a lot of the other patterns stand out more on their own if you e.g. change directions whenever the vocalist starts the phrase over in 01:45:447 - 01:46:250 - 01:47:054 - , right now everything with the exception of 01:46:920 (3,1,2) - which go back-forth, the entire pattern is clockwise and kind-of misses a chance to highlight that the vocalist is starting over the same phrase a lot by making all of these feel similar.


A lot of these things (especially the ones with general explanations) repeat throughout the map in the respectively similar sections, but pinpointing every example of this is way too tedious and wasted efforts if you happen to disagree with the reasoning i provided since the map is somewhat consistent within itself i'll assume you know where else you do this and how to go about fixing this stuff up if you agree with something
posted
Sup.

[moph's Expert]
  1. From the song, 02:10:893 (3) - sounds like it could be a 1/1 slider and 02:12:500 (1) - could've been 2 1/2 sliders.


[Snow Drive Extreme]
  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) - This should really be following the vocals, there's no emphasis on the OOO~ part. I think you should revisit your Everlasting Memories Diff, there are some useful stuff like what you did to emphasis the OOO~.


[Raikozen's Everlasting Memories]
  1. 00:10:358 (1,2,3,4) - Why is it that you have 3 circles and a 1/1 slider here and decide to increase spacing between notes where there is no build up of intensity?
  2. 00:11:831 (1) - remove nc
  3. 00:11:965 (2) - nc
  4. 00:12:634 (1) - remove nc
  5. 00:12:768 (2) - nc
  6. 00:24:286 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - I think you should decrease the spacing between these notes since music became less intense.
  7. 00:30:715 (1) - change this sliders position, its better to give it more emphasis by not having it flow with 00:29:643 (1,2,3,4) -
  8. There's a strong sound here 00:37:545 - and here 00:37:947 - , you could map them as kicksliders?
  9. 00:44:643 (1,2) - blanket?
  10. I don't understand why you have huge jumps here 01:11:429 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - but not as big here where it makes sense to have large jumps 01:17:858 (1,2,3,4,1,2,1,2) -
  11. 01:43:974 (2) - x268 y23
  12. 02:51:072 (1,2,3) - try something else, it isn't very creative and music doesn't really support it.
  13. 02:59:643 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - a stream? why?
  14. 03:05:000 (1) - could be 1/2 and a circle, works better imo
  15. 03:25:625 (1) - why not end slider on blue tick?
  16. 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) - lower distance between notes, jumps are quite large, music hasn't change from the last two kiai
  17. 03:43:572 (1,3) - that's a pretty ugly slider tbh and blanket
  18. 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) - look at suggestion I gave kroytz about this section.


Raikozen's diff does need a lot of work. In my opinion, I think it lacks creativity. Nothing in this diff stands out other than large spacing between notes. I really do feel it needs a remap.

Edit: sorry it seems like I'm just repeating what's already been said. I didn't really take the time to read previous mods.

Peace ~
posted
00:22:947 (1) and 00:31:518 (3) - should be two circles because of the drums, and the density of 00:21:072 (1,2,3,1,2,3,4) and 00:24:286 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) should be reduced so they stand out instead of just being more circles. (it looks like you're following the drums here at least? Not sure)

00:30:983 (2) - and 00:31:518 (3) - NC to drums.

01:08:215 (1) - This is a strong sound in the music which should be emphasized, shouldn't put it under a sliderend when you use the same kind of pattern here 00:55:224 (6) for a weak sound.

01:09:688 (1,2,3,4,5) - This rythym is definitely wrong, the drums go like this: https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/7575845 (actual position of circles is just an example).

01:10:893 (1,2) - Every other set of 1/2 sliders in this part of the song starts on a big white tick up until 01:15:715 - where the vocals change a bit. It would make more sense to replace these sliders with circles, and the circles on 01:11:429 (1,2,3,4) - with sliders.

01:16:250 (1) - There should be a circlafter this to match 01:14:108 (1,2) - .

01:39:286 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - The other kiais use more linear 1,2 patterns, only this one uses 8 with circular flow like this. The other way seems better for emphasizing the drums.

01:50:536 (3) - This long slider is very out of place, every other 1/1 slider is emphasizing a vocal note but this one ends on one. A rythym more like https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/7576134 would fit better.

02:09:822 (5,6) - Using the same curved/straight slider for both of these looks better I think. https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/7576151

02:18:929 (1) - No drum here.

02:19:331 (2) - No drum here.

02:24:286 (1) - You're ignoring a noticable drum sound on the red tick with this slider.

02:47:590 (4) - ctrl+j for extra symmetry aesthtics tbh https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/7576198

02:52:679 (3,4) - Not making the player stop for a stack here would play better after 02:51:072 (1,2,3,1,2,1) - I think.

03:55:358 (1,2,1,2) - Make these parallel?


First attempt at modding. Hope to see this in ranked eventually, it's pretty cool. :D
posted
Haven't looked at the map and have no intention to but when a map thread gets like this post qualification it makes me feel bad for the mapper in question. I've been in their shoes and it really sucks trying to justify your logic vs theirs in an attempt to see whose is more flawed. One thing I suggest to those ppl is to look back at hanzer's miss you thread post-qualification. I know it's likely not the same case but there's a lot that can be said here as well and from prominent names in the mapping community at that.

As an addendum I'm not defending raikozen and wouldn't do so for personal reasons but I don't like seeing someone in this position being bashed by members of the community just for having a different mindset in mapping.
posted
Or maybe you just accept the fact that ranking very difficult maps is a very difficult thing to do. And that it is very hard to figure out if it is done right. If you are not up for the controversy and just want everyone to accept your very hard maps as they are, maybe you simply shouldn't map very hard maps and only stay with milder stuff that it easier to evaluate for everyone, including the mapper.
show more
Please sign in to reply.