1. Glissando (6,48 stars, 2114 notes)

[ Scarlet Red ] wrote:

Alright, for M4M (I'm not a very good modder but I'll give it my best!)

- Just wanna check, you sure about a 3.8 circle size and not 4? xD
- 00:10:176 (3) - Shift one unit to the right. Makes the blanket look a tad bit better
- 00:02:772 (2) - Maybe make this straight? It makes it more generic but the other two sliders are straight. Either that or curve all sliders. looks better together, and all sliders are generic here
- 00:15:176 (2,1,2,3) - I don't really like the way this looks. Maybe move the (2) circle a bit forward so it's at even spacing with the (3) slider beginning. Kind of like this it looks ok for me, new meta etc, + doesn't play any worse
- 00:20:465 (11) - Maybe stack (11) with (9)'s end. Or maybe do the opposite and move (11) after (9)'s end like this. The point is, the overlap doesn't look very neat. doesn't look that great but it's more readable and I want to keep straight downward movement
- 00:20:849 (2,3,4,5,6) - You can make these somewhat neater if you use 1.3x DS to evenly space them out. Looks and plays a lot better imo. changed slider a bit
- 00:23:061 (5) - Imo if you placed this in the middle of the (4) and (6) it would look a lot better. look, maybe but woudl require different motion/would change 2,0ds into next slider etc, + looks ok, 3,4,5 fit each other
- 00:26:619 (7) - Same thing as (11) previously. You could try to either stack it with (5)'s end, or do the opposite and place it after (5)'s end.
- 00:26:907 (1) - Never liked overlaps like these, maybe placing it under the slider would be the best? This is complete personal preference though.
- 00:27:003 (2,3) - Also why overlap these like that? Move this up and then evenly space out the rest of the stream is 1.3x DS. ye this one's weird
- 00:27:869 (1) - This seems to be a bit too far from the stream. Maybe move it closer or something? it's intended for pressue/music intensity
- 00:34:599 (5) - Stack with the end of (4) that kinda ruins the pattern/movement here
- 00:36:138 (3) - Fix the stack under (2). ?
- 00:38:157 (4) - Move this (4) a tad bit up above (5)'s path. curved 5 + blanket
- 00:49:022 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - Creative idea but it plays out a bit weird maybe check it over again? doesn't play any worse than standard jumpstreams
- 01:03:926 (1) - Move a little closer to (8) so it looks like even spacing among the stream. again more pressure/intense sound, it's fine
- 01:28:253 (1,2,1,2) - I don't think you'd need two seperate combos here. it's commonly used in patterns like that for easier object order readability
- 02:49:118 (6,7,8,1) - (6,7,8) look a bit sloppy when overlapping (1). I think it looks cool
- 02:56:329 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - You really hate people don't you? xD It fits very well
- 03:49:795 (5) - You shouldn't make this (5) off of the stream. Keep it consistent spacing, Move the (1,2,3) after it over the same amount so the (5) still stacks with it. Why not it's reocurring thing in the map, is readable and puts more pressure on that note
- 04:19:218 (3) - Shift to the right a little bit? It looks off. Intended, most of the time sliders following stream path exactly look kinda lame changed the shape to better one though
- 04:21:910 (10,1) - I don't like how (10) overlaps (1) kept the overlap just made it more even
- 04:39:506 (2,3,4,5) - I feel like flow is lost when you go from (4) to (5) because it just backtracks your cursor. Maybe look into that? It's clever but I don't know if it works. this is not how intended whoops, shouldn't be 1/4 gap
- 04:38:352 (3) - Maybe try to blanket (3) a little bit with (4)'s curvature. The overlap currently looks weird.
- 04:46:718 (2) - Move a little closer to (1)?

I really liked the map. It felt weird but a good type of weird so I offered as much advice as I could. Idk if it's enough advice to warrant a mod back but I did my best.

1. applause.wav has like 5ms delay fix
2. 00:44:792 (1,2,4,5) - pretty sure the spacing on these should be massive compared to all the streams (oh I encountered something that is similarly spaced and would fit here: 03:51:718 (2,3) - )
3. 01:04:503 (5,1) - why does it decrease
4. 01:28:253 (1,2,1,2) - I think a square pattern or something with one nc would fit more here like the ones before
5. 01:54:119 (1) - this one is super brutal I would either use this pattern with lower spacing or something different with the same spacing
6. 02:32:579 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - give this more spacing
7. 03:41:427 (1,2,1,2) - looks weird when they're not paralleled, reminds me too much of 1/2 patterns
8. 04:13:833 (1,2,3,4,5) - it's not like these notes are distinct or something, I don't think they call for a zig-zag vs 04:14:218 (5,6,7,8) -
9. 04:40:371 (3) - might want to make this a 1/8 repeat drums are 1/8
10. 04:47:006 (3,4,5) - feels like the things around these circles are too close to them
11. 05:08:641 (1) - space these doubles and make a bit lesser jumps or something idk feels weird when they're stacked
12. 05:00:759 (2) - unsnapped

Mazzerin wrote:

1. applause.wav has like 5ms delay fix it's score screen sound, what does it matter
2. 00:44:792 (1,2,4,5) - pretty sure the spacing on these should be massive compared to all the streams (oh I encountered something that is similarly spaced and would fit here: 03:51:718 (2,3) - ) Yee it's intense but it's the same pitch being repeated, stack would be the best representation but this effectively requires more precision. Will still think about it just for the difficulty's sake
3. 01:04:503 (5,1) - why does it decrease
4. 01:28:253 (1,2,1,2) - I think a square pattern or something with one nc would fit more here like the ones before it has a fun fitting movement
5. 01:54:119 (1) - this one is super brutal I would either use this pattern with lower spacing or something different with the same spacing ctrl shift s'd
6. 02:32:579 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - give this more spacing same, will think about this
7. 03:41:427 (1,2,1,2) - looks weird when they're not paralleled, reminds me too much of 1/2 patterns but plays nice with this momentum, people sightread this, I think I use those kinda consistently?
8. 04:13:833 (1,2,3,4,5) - it's not like these notes are distinct or something, I don't think they call for a zig-zag vs 04:14:218 (5,6,7,8) - ctrl+shift+s'd to make it consistent with 1:54:119 ,changed shape, still want some zigzag on it
9. 04:40:371 (3) - might want to make this a 1/8 repeat drums are 1/8 not that important, don't want to make one short repeat slider that is 1/8 when all others during 5 minutes of draintime are 1/6
10. 04:47:006 (3,4,5) - feels like the things around these circles are too close to them
11. 05:08:641 (1) - space these doubles and make a bit lesser jumps or something idk feels weird when they're stacked changed this section for now
12. 05:00:759 (2) - unsnapped

FailureAtOsu wrote:

i can't say much about the playability cuz i cant play it well at all but i CAN say stuff about the a e s t h e t i c
00:15:561 (3,2) - THIS BLANKET IS EVER SO SLIGHTLY OFF. FIX OR ELSE I WILL BE SAD I TRIED
00:31:619 (11,1,2) - i think this'd be better if you increased spacing rather than lowered it becuase of the piano Piano repeats the same chords kinda want to be more stacky when that happens, just what I do
01:18:446 (1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3) - i don't see the purpose of all the NC's tbh but i might just be mentally challenged (hint i am) Me neither tbh
01:37:099 (1,2,3) - mfw not evne stream meh
01:54:119 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7) - streams like this make me feel like you hate the human race; these angles r weird to aim to so quickly Smoothened it out in the centre a bit
04:19:121 (2,5) - wo ah nice b;lanket t h a n k s
this is actually really fucking good
sorry for shitty mod

Deramok wrote:

from your queue, i'll just go ahead and post first since i have it already anyway.
the mirage garden flashbacks are strong with this one. quite differently mapped from the other map i had to this song (nooblet's), so i guess both will be played~
anyway, to the mod, most things i found are time signature related this mod is great and you caught a lot of stuff, but these things aren't "time signature" (just saying), if you intend to simplify things for whatever reason, the might be useless: No I don't, I was just derping hard

~

1. 00:10:465 (4,5,6,7,8,1) - this curve seems quite off in the sense of the angles within it shrinking and widening for reasons that escape me ye not that great, and 00:10:946 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - does not sound like 1/6 to me. Good catch, I think 1,2,3 is 1/6 though for certain and 4,5,6 isn't, changedi can guess why you used it, but i really doubt it's appropriate. for the angles on the first stream i'd suggest something like http://puu.sh/r9r9H/c9f5030eab.jpg , or with a sharper turn if you want to hold the blanket on 3 for a note longer
2. 00:15:946 (2) - i think this would look nicer if you nestled the end of it to the curvature of 00:15:561 (3) - like http://puu.sh/r9rlL/2f1c0a45d2.jpg it doesn't hint the direction the following note is in quite as strongly, but it still doesn't disturb anything and doesn't make a difference when played. nice
3. 00:15:561 (3) - since you mapped the latter part of the quint i don't see why you'd end the slider on the purple instead of the red tick. it's really the same sound, seems arbitrary to just skip the first one of them. i'd prefere the first 1/4 you skipped in it mapped out as well, but i can live with that. quint? changed anyway was sort of pointless to skip
4. 00:17:484 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7) - these are doubles http://puu.sh/r9rvv/5335252476.jpg no they aren't
5. 00:24:696 (1,2) - as you follow the piano here (otherwise you wouldn't skip the notes during 2) you might as well make the slider longer, from 1 to where 2 ends I want this movement for pressure, I sometimes don't do it on this phrase but I think it's ok for the sake of variety and that it's balanced
6. 00:28:542 (4,1,2,3) - the piano starts with 1/6 while the repeat is still active, since you mapped the rest of it, i would ditch the repeat and map the full length of the piano 1/6 instead ye, wasn't sure of one note before
7. 00:33:125 (5,6) - it switches to 1/4 here y
8. 00:35:849 (2) - the piano clearly take a 1/2 beat on this one. could be hinted at with somehting that practically plays the same like http://puu.sh/r9rYW/982e32f82d.jpg or even with two notes. i do see why you usd an extended slider instead, but i thought i'd point it out anyway as an option i would personally prefere. did something else
9. 00:36:619 (3,4) - i don't hear the 1/4 on the note and the first repeat of the slider as well as 00:37:099 (5,9) - 00:36:619 (3) - is 00:36:522 (2) - pitch repeated, 90% sure, for repeat doesnt' really matter (there is a ghost note + some random hihat)I just want the hold there, next slider only has it's end overmapped which is ok for continuity, 00:37:580 (9) - pretty sure there is a pitch repeat there but just ghostnoted and barely hinted, should be fine for this phrase's consistency
10. 00:38:830 (2) - 1/4 fixed
11. 00:41:971 (1,2) - also 1/4. getting these things accurately is extremely important on a song like this, and you do seem to go for it as well, so you should maybe pay closer attention when timing changes happen
12. 00:54:311 (4) - this note is a bit off to the top left x192 y114 would work with the following 00:54:407 (1,2,3,4,5,6,1) - moved to x165y156 in consequence
13. 00:54:663 (5,6) - 1/4
14. 01:03:926 (1) - rather than starting this on a weak note that you ignored just a meassure earlier, i'd skip it here as well and start it a tick earlier, on the strong beat
15. 01:09:599 (4,5,6) - i'm not certain what this is exactly, i know it's not 1/6. there is a hit on the blue tick and then nothing untill the white one. there are 3 sound before the blue one tho, maybe 1/8, but it's tricky to tell. ye, will leave it 1/6 for now to simplify
16. 01:13:125 (4,5) - ^ doing 1/4s here
17. 01:13:253 (1,2) - since you mapped the 1/6 on the drum i wouldn't leave a gap here, where the drum plays as well
18. 01:21:138 (2,3,4) - the heaviest sound in this is 4. so the turn or split if you so want should be on that instead of on 3. you could increase the spacing gradually into 3, so that note would still get the presence it deserves as well. as a suggestion https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/6082680
19. 01:23:510 (1,2) - 1/4+1/8 changed to 1/4 but I really don't want 1/8s anywhere
20. 01:23:253 (5) - you skipped both piano and drum with this one. i see why you want a slider there, but i don't agree with it as it skips important notes and the hard hit could be stressed otherwise too
21. 01:26:587 (1,2) - 1/4 drums seem to be 1/8 going to simplify with 1/4
22. 01:32:580 (2) - either i'm missing what it follows or it should be 1/4 due to the piano no idea what happened here lol
23. 01:35:946 (5) - i would definitely split this up for the distinct change on the red tick .
24. 02:04:983 (2) - probably just preference, i'd use two notes instead since both piano sounds are recognisable contrary to 02:04:791 (1) - to preserve the overlaps this could work out http://puu.sh/r9usO/dac413deeb.jpg I like the movement, + the pitches repeat
25. 02:07:772 (4) - same as previously "the piano starts with 1/6 while the repeat is still active, since you mapped the rest of it, i would ditch the repeat and map the full length of the piano 1/6 instead" i guess at least you did it consistently
26. 02:15:272 (4,5,6,7) - might work better at a more fluent angle like http://puu.sh/r9uDs/279643b35a.jpg as you can see 4 and 5 also can form an equal connection to 02:14:695 (6) - that way, which looks nicer than the previous overlap imo
27. 02:20:079 (4,1) - you know what i want to say about these by now. not gonna point out more of them since you can find them yourself if you want to change them, and if you don't the points will all be denied anyway.
28. 02:44:214 (1,2,3,4,1) - this timesignature sounds more like something like http://puu.sh/r9v2h/689ba01d9d.jpg (just the piano) to me. and you don't really try to simplyfy that part either by using 1/6 and all that. so having those be off can be confusing. I will just ignore it and go with the dnb like later
29. 02:50:656 (4) - preference i guess, but since you mapped the part of the previous point on the piano, i'd do the same here as well
30. 03:15:047 (1,2) - 1/4
31. 03:16:329 (1) - i don't quite get why you didn't continue mapping the piano here after following it through 03:15:656 (2,3,4,5) -
32. 03:22:483 (1,2,3,4) - since you increase your spacing for 03:22:868 (1,2,3,4,5) - despite the furtherly decreasing pitch i would already increase it there as well as a build up as the piano, that shifts it's pitch upwards, starts there already I think stressing out last 5 notes is better for pressure here
33. 03:41:620 (1,2,1) - you map on the piano for all these streams, but suddenly a note is missing. i'd just put a 1/4 slider on 03:41:620 (1) - , stressing the drum in the process, and use another circle to bridge the gap 03:41:427 (1,2,1,2) - these two are SUPER paired and stand out
34. 03:48:256 (2) - one repeat too much some hihat in there + flows better
35. 03:50:564 (4) - is ever so slightly out of the straight line to the left. try x235y35
36. 03:50:564 (4,5,6) - it's really unclear what you follow here. you switch from the piano in 1/2 to the drums in 1/4, which were playing during the 1/2 piano notes already. additionally you now don't pay any attention to the piano once you swapped to the drums, having them play on a slider end rather than start. it's just a guessing game on what you need to try hitting at this part. you even start the second repeat on a weak drum note rather than the strong one one tick after it. piano goesv 5/8 or something, switched to drums differently
37. 04:21:910 (10) - i guess you go for the buzzy upwards sound using this, which is fine. but myself i'd use a 1/4 with one repeat. it got a snappier feeling to it, which is what that part calls for to me with the abrupt cut of the piano note on the red tick. the following slider would just stay in place. I will just go 1/6 I think that's what synth does (maybe?) and would be consistent with the map
38. 04:24:602 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - same as in the beginning. to me it's all 1/4, i could understand the first half beat being mapped otherwise due to the constant sound, but it's not something i like seeing. but the second halfbeat is definitely just 1/4 and not 1/6, so it doesn't even really make sense to have the first one be somethign else anyway. like before, changed to 1/6+ 1/4

let's hope the two and a half hours i spent on this haven't been in vain, good luck with this as well your other marathons (especially memories of you)

1. 00:10:465 (4,5,6,7,8) - You used a higher spacing for this meloody earlier so maybe make it consistent
2. 00:17:548 (2) - There is no sound for me so I would say overmapped
3. 00:20:080 (9) - Maybe make the curve upside down and stack the end with 00:20:465 (11) -
4. 00:24:407 (2,1,2) - (1) breaks the flow here imo and the blanket from (2,2) isnt clean
5. 00:37:484 (8,9) - This should be a slider but I slider wont really fit in this kind of stream.. but yea 2 singles sound overmapped
6. 00:41:138 (1,2,3,4) - They are in 1/8 one tick tothe right each
7. 00:46:330 (8,9,8,9) - Maybe make those the same
8. 00:53:446 (2,3,4,5) - 1/8 here again
9. 01:05:369 (1,2,3) - You could try to make this a bit smoother unless you inteded it to lok like this
10. 01:06:330 (9) - NC and remove NC here 01:06:715 (1) -
11. 01:21:042 (1,2,3,4,5) - THe jump at (3,4) looks weird and doesnt fit in the rythm either
12. 01:22:099 (1,2,3,4) - I would make it go clockwise
13. 01:23:830 (9,10) - Maybe stack (9) with 01:24:311 (3) - and (1) with 01:24:503 (5) -
14. 01:26:907 (1,2,3,4,5,1,2,3,4,5,6) - I think you should stick with the piano here 01:27:484 (1,2,3,4,5,6) -
15. 01:28:253 (1,2,1,2) - the NC is kinda confusing here
16. 01:30:272 (7,8,9) - This part could be a bit rounder
17. 01:35:369 (2) - Make the stack on (3)
18. 01:42:003 (3) - Remove this to make it consistent. You ignored strong sdrums before so no point in mapping weaker ones now just to justify a stream
19. 01:42:772 (3) - ^
20. 01:43:830 (5,6) - ^
21. 01:48:157 (3,4) - ^
22. 01:53:061 (2,3) - A slider would better fiot on (3) and a note on (2)
23. 02:14:983 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7) - You always used a NC on a new DS/Different instrument - Make it consistent here too
24. 02:36:329 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - ^
25. 02:50:945 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9) - Dont really know but something is weird about this part. I guess the piano is just too strong but I can see why you didnt map it hue.. tho it would be nicer to hear imo
26. 03:17:099 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - Not sure why you skipped the NCs now...
27. 03:21:714 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - This stream could be a bit more curved. Maybe use 03:21:329 (5) - as stackpoint
28. 03:49:410 (1,2,3,4,5) - Adjust the stream DS so there is no gap
29. 04:01:910 (4) - Remove
30. 04:03:641 (5) - ^
31. 04:28:064 (1,2,3,4) - Would suggest clockwise here again
32. 04:35:564 (1,2,3,1) - This looks kinda unclean
33. 04:38:064 (2,3,4) - The overlap (3) doesnt look good here
34. 04:52:871 (4,1) - You could rotate (1) up a bit so it flows more smoothly
35. 05:07:679 (1,2,3,4,5) - This is a tad too moving maybe just use a DS of x1.0 like before
36. 05:14:795 (1) - Line this up with the slider 05:15:660 (4) - ~ around x96 y52