man, why is too difficult found a bubble nowadays

Insane

00:04:654 (5,6) - Try setting it up like this instead: Overlap looks pretty bad, this would fit ur structure pretty well
00:09:111 (3,4,5) - use a 1/2 repeat instead? Lots of clicking for something that isn't that dense xP
00:21:111 (7) - Consider just removing this, since the clicking here is quite different from 00:20:083 (3,4,5) - .
00:26:083 (1,2) - Try blanketting instead, It looks better imo. Right now the sliderend of 1 + 2 + 3 looks kinda weird to me lol
00:34:311 (1,2) - Not a good place for a jump imoo, since 2 is quite weak
00:34:826 (1,2) - COntrast with this where 2 is really strong, but you use a stack instead. emphasis isn't well conveyed.
00:45:283 (1) - Pretty nazi, but this isn't symmetrical about the X axis. Rotate it 2 degrees xD
00:46:654 (1,2,3,4,1) - Visual spacing looks kinda bad between 3>4 i recomend something like this:
01:19:568 (1,2) - Maybe try something like this:
01:31:054 (2) - Ctrl+G flows better.
01:47:340 (2,4) - Try Ctrl+G'ing 2 and 4. Creates a nicer flow imo.
01:55:911 (3,4,5,6,1) - SHape looks rather weird imo cuz the angle change isn't consistent.
01:58:997 (4,2) - Poor visual imo. you don't have to overlap. try doing a triangle instead?
02:14:083 (7) - You could try ctrl+g'ing for spacing emphasis.

[]

Quick mod from my queue, I think patterns could still be polished up a bit, but its not a bad set. Good luck~

Monstrata wrote:

Insane

00:04:654 (5,6) - Try setting it up like this instead: Overlap looks pretty bad, this would fit ur structure pretty well that was to keep the same DS, but okay

~

00:09:111 (3,4,5) - use a 1/2 repeat instead? Lots of clicking for something that isn't that dense xP Sorry, Im not agree, those are for the voice (stacked here, and spaced in next similar sections)
00:21:111 (7) - Consider just removing this, since the clicking here is quite different from 00:20:083 (3,4,5) - . true
00:26:083 (1,2) - Try blanketting instead, It looks better imo. Right now the sliderend of 1 + 2 + 3 looks kinda weird to me lol uhg, sorry but I like the linear geometry in this patter :/ https://puu.sh/wgaY1/a5020df60b.png
00:34:311 (1,2) - Not a good place for a jump imoo, since 2 is quite weak Im sorry, I found this very interesting.
00:34:826 (1,2) - COntrast with this where 2 is really strong, but you use a stack instead. emphasis isn't well conveyed. I not agree, in the other similar sections (I mean 00:23:854 (2,3) - 00:29:168 (2,3) - 00:34:826 (1,2) - 00:37:568 (2,3) - ) I used a low spacing or an stack. Only in 00:40:311 (2,3) - there is a jump, but its because the music start to be intense here.
00:45:283 (1) - Pretty nazi, but this isn't symmetrical about the X axis. Rotate it 2 degrees xD lol, good catch.
00:46:654 (1,2,3,4,1) - Visual spacing looks kinda bad between 3>4 i recomend something like this: Done.

Something like this

01:19:568 (1,2) - Maybe try something like this: Not bad idea

~

01:31:054 (2) - Ctrl+G flows better. ok
01:47:340 (2,4) - Try Ctrl+G'ing 2 and 4. Creates a nicer flow imo. omg, I cant believe that I did not see that xD, nice

~

01:55:911 (3,4,5,6,1) - SHape looks rather weird imo cuz the angle change isn't consistent. Okay, I changed a bit the next pattern too.

try something like this

01:58:997 (4,2) - Poor visual imo. you don't have to overlap. try doing a triangle instead? mehh, I moved all a bit.

~

02:14:083 (7) - You could try ctrl+g'ing for spacing emphasis. Not for consistency

[]

Quick mod from my queue, I think patterns could still be polished up a bit, but its not a bad set. Good luck~

Sorry for late response, I was very busy irl.
Thanks Monstrata!

[easy]
00:30:197 (1,2) - replace with 00:35:683 (1,2) - rhythm. that rhythm doesn't really fit there in my perspective
00:54:883 (1,2) - you seem to be going back and forth with vocal and instrumental which gets quite confusing. because of that, that part now feels empty compared to other parts. as an example of swtichinng back and forth, compare 00:59:683 (3,1) - and 00:35:683 (1,2,3) - & 00:41:168 (1) -
01:42:883 (2,3,4) - rhythm wise this should've been switched. slider -> circle -> circle just like 01:37:397 (2,3,4) - if you're going to use circle there
02:32:940 (1) - you missed out on last beat by using spinner, use slider from where spinner starts and end it at 02:33:283 - and use spinner at 02:33:454 - .

[normal]
00:48:883 (4) - i have no idea what this is following. vocal starts at 00:48:711 - . if you are following that guitar strum, it feels really out of place since you suddenly switched to that. adding to guitar strum reasoning, what happen to missing note at 00:47:168 - then?
01:32:940 (6,7,1) - please dont do this, you never did this sort of thing for more than a minute and half in to the song and now you introduce these things suddenly. Plus, beat at 01:33:111 - is less than beat at 01:32:940 - , so this really should've been a 1/4 slider rather than clickable.
01:35:683 (6,7,1) - ^ (etc, find similar things and fix the rest)
01:49:054 (6,7) - what is this mapped to? remove and have a listen, if you hear stream of kick drum, this would've been better implemented with slider body

[hard]
this diff feels like normal diff with smaller cs and probably bit of jumps in kiai section :l I think you can use some spacing emphasis to show more characteristics of the song. As an example of spacing 02:01:054 (2,3,1,2,3,4,5,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,5,1,2,3,4,5,6,1,2,3,4) - these chains of objects dont really express well song at all, songs have ups and downs in each beat. in my perspective it lacks what it needs truly to be hard diff
01:38:768 (1,2,3) - really should've been https://puu.sh/wq4Nh/6dbbdf3627.jpg since current is just really really out of place

gl with ranking.

oh

Sidetail wrote:

[easy]
00:30:197 (1,2) - replace with 00:35:683 (1,2) - rhythm. that rhythm doesn't really fit there in my perspective okay, you are not the first in point this, so I made something different.
00:54:883 (1,2) - you seem to be going back and forth with vocal and instrumental which gets quite confusing. because of that, that part now feels empty compared to other parts. as an example of swtichinng back and forth, compare 00:59:683 (3,1) - and 00:35:683 (1,2,3) - & 00:41:168 (1) - There is not the same case. Here the song have a silent (no guitar, no drums, no voice), so, I dont should map anything here xD
01:42:883 (2,3,4) - rhythm wise this should've been switched. slider -> circle -> circle just like 01:37:397 (2,3,4) - if you're going to use circle there Not agree, 01:38:083 (3,4) - have more intensity that in 01:43:568 (4) - , in fact, the intensity is lowing, so this patter feels more adequate for this section, imo
02:32:940 (1) - you missed out on last beat by using spinner, use slider from where spinner starts and end it at 02:33:283 - and use spinner at 02:33:454 - . This is intentional, because the sound that is following the spinner.

[normal]
00:48:883 (4) - i have no idea what this is following. vocal starts at 00:48:711 - . if you are following that guitar strum, it feels really out of place since you suddenly switched to that. adding to guitar strum reasoning, what happen to missing note at 00:47:168 - then?
lol?,it is not suddenly, 00:46:654 (1,2,3,4) - is following the guitar!, this is very intuitive (checked in testplays with noob players). Also, I cant add a note 00:47:168 - because I avoided any patter of close slider-circle-slider before kiai. I must be consistent with the sections!
01:32:940 (6,7,1) - please dont do this, you never did this sort of thing for more than a minute and half in to the song and now you introduce these things suddenly. Plus, beat at 01:33:111 - is less than beat at 01:32:940 - , so this really should've been a 1/4 slider rather than clickable. for sure that I can make this xD, its the kiai section in a normal diff. The pattern is adequate for a normal, but before kiai the music was not very intense!!, no one wish this pattern in not intense sections
01:35:683 (6,7,1) - ^ (etc, find similar things and fix the rest)
01:49:054 (6,7) - what is this mapped to? remove and have a listen, if you hear stream of kick drum, this would've been better implemented with slider body Im sorry, I dont understand your point here. Here the pattern is similar to 01:43:225 (4,5,6) - , and sincerely, i dont found how a slider instead will make this more intuitive... in fact, I found this bad because 01:49:397 - need to be clickable.

[hard]
this diff feels like normal diff with smaller cs and probably bit of jumps in kiai section :l I think you can use some spacing emphasis to show more characteristics of the song. As an example of spacing 02:01:054 (2,3,1,2,3,4,5,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,5,1,2,3,4,5,6,1,2,3,4) - these chains of objects dont really express well song at all, songs have ups and downs in each beat. in my perspective it lacks what it needs truly to be hard diff
01:38:768 (1,2,3) - really should've been https://puu.sh/wq4Nh/6dbbdf3627.jpg since current is just really really out of place
> these chains of objects dont really express well song at all
> it lacks what it needs truly to be hard diff
Our vision of what a "truly hard" must be are very different. Hards are not about long spacing, but about complex rhythms!!. Players that play hards usually use mouse to play, so, considering the public target and the gap spread of the set, I found those comments really out of place.


gl with ranking.

Thanks.

only thing holding me back from bubbling is the difference between spacing and sv in the kiai
would be ok if like 1.3x sv and 1.3x spacing were used, since moving on a slider and moving between objects wouldn't be such an extreme difference

omg, I cant believe this aaaaaaaaaa

Hi pishi!

humm.... well... I understand your point about that difference in SV and DS feels very extreme, but in my head I cant match how changing SV and DS to 1.3x will help to fix this.
I mean, actually SV in kiai is 1.2x, and DS base still in 1.2x, and jumps are around 2.1x and 2.7x (except for the one at 3.35x).
But if I change SV to 1.3x and DS at 1.3x too.... is not this the same but more extreme? xD

Now, in the other side about why I made it in this way, My intention was to make a feeling similar to this xDD

UHHHHH i somehow didnt mention i was talking about the normal diff lol

oh man, I moved the insane, LOL (well, I made a backup before, so its not problem, its restored now)

so, its in Normal.
I am sincerely sure about this spacing change. I asked to dozen of players around 100k~200k to test it, and this spacing change was a nice surprise for many of they.
Now technically, imo, increasing SV to 1.3x is a lot for a normal. In my experience, fast SV is most difficult that long spacing for casual players. In fact, I feel that increasing SV, even if that "reduce" the relative DS to 1.3x, only will make the kiai more extreme... and Im not sure if it is a good idea for target audience for normals xD

pishifat wrote:

only thing holding me back from bubbling is the difference between spacing and sv in the kiai
would be ok if like 1.3x sv and 1.3x spacing were used, since moving on a slider and moving between objects wouldn't be such an extreme difference

Even the most incompetent of a normal player will be able to recognize that there is no rhythmic difference between kiai and non-kiai. The change in spacing is also largely negligible for actual movement from note to note. It is a visible increase, but not a visceral one. Normal players are not limited by cursor speed, but by reading and button-tapping accuracy. For aesthetic difference and pattern difference purposes, this normal hampers neither of those things.


Quit pretending that there are lobotomized chimpanzees playing Normal difficulties. That's just silly.

I think the spacing at kiai is fine, I don't like the custom stacks, since they can be not intuitive to play o.O

Okay, I finally made some little changes in Normal diff:

1. SV in kiai to 1.1x: Since a SV in 1.3 is a long change for a normal diff, but pishi's argument have sense ("moving on a slider and moving between objects wouldn't be such an extreme difference"). Relative DS is at 1.5x now.
2. Add more spacing in "stacked circles" in kiai: Following recommendations of Natsu and Voli, about possible confusion with a 1/4 triple, and aesthetic flow.
   
   Illustration

   

I think Im done now!

As per your request

[Insane]

1. 00:34:483 (2,1) - THis anti-jump is awkward to play since you have quite a large jump just before.
2. 01:36:711 (3,4,5) - I would avoid stacking (5) on (3) as a back-and-forth movement doesn't seem optimum to me, and to be honest, having the circle stacked on the head of the slider hinders its readability a bit.
3. 01:37:397 (1,2,3,4,5) - The same can also be said for this then. But more importantly, having obects placed at the same spot for a 3-beat duration is not that entertaining.
4. 01:43:226 (2) - I would reverse this slider (ctrl+G). It provides a better flow this way in my opinion.
5. 02:02:083 (1,2) - Are they not alingned on purpose?
6. 02:20:597 (3,4,5) - What's with the sudden use of two 1/4 sliders when you've only been using triples before and after this pattern?

[Hard]

1. I believe that if you are to put a circle at 01:08:083 - (same thing goes for 01:10:826 (3) - ), you should also have something at 01:08:426 - . The sole purpose of this circle is to follow the vocals,yet if you ignore the vocals right afterward, it feels off and awkward to play. Moreover, you randomly start following a completely different rhythm with 01:11:683 (2,3) - (still ignoring the vocals on 01:13:911 - though).
2. 01:14:768 (3) - Why does this have a reverse but not 01:11:683 (2) - ?
3. 01:27:797 (1,2) - This jump seems rather sudden here. I know it is here for the sake of symmetry, but it really feels awkward, especially considering that you are not really using jumps for similar rhythms.
4. 01:38:768 (1,2) - Why a jump only here and not at similar rhythms like 01:38:768 (1,2) - for example?

Kurai wrote:

As per your request

[Insane]

1. 00:34:483 (2,1) - THis anti-jump is awkward to play since you have quite a large jump just before. I know some people will found this antijump weird, but this is not difficult to read (except if the player is asleep xD) and personally, I feel this very interesting for this section
2. 01:36:711 (3,4,5) - I would avoid stacking (5) on (3) as a back-and-forth movement doesn't seem optimum to me, and to be honest, having the circle stacked on the head of the slider hinders its readability a bit. humm... idk, The reason why I made this pattern is because music repeat the same sounds 3 times before increase the tone and continue, then the back-and-forth have many sense for me, this will be a bit difficult with HD, but I feel this enough readable (even if I know that many players are bad readings those stuff nowadays, and I am good playing those patters in old maps xD)
3. 01:37:397 (1,2,3,4,5) - The same can also be said for this then. But more importantly, having obects placed at the same spot for a 3-beat duration is not that entertaining. sorry I dont agree, I feel this type of patters very interesting u.u
4. 01:43:226 (2) - I would reverse this slider (ctrl+G). It provides a better flow this way in my opinion. okay, and change concavity too to make more smooth.
5. 02:02:083 (1,2) - Are they not alingned on purpose? opps... fixed (maybe I did it in the laptop screen, its a bit small to see this stuffs xD)
6. 02:20:597 (3,4,5) - What's with the sudden use of two 1/4 sliders when you've only been using triples before and after this pattern? My itention was to just make something different, but mehh, changed xD

[Hard]

1. I believe that if you are to put a circle at 01:08:083 - (same thing goes for 01:10:826 (3) - ), you should also have something at 01:08:426 - . The sole purpose of this circle is to follow the vocals,yet if you ignore the vocals right afterward, it feels off and awkward to play. Moreover, you randomly start following a completely different rhythm with 01:11:683 (2,3) - (still ignoring the vocals on 01:13:911 - though).
   There are two considerations here: 1) I used 3/4 spaces in similar sections before (00:43:911 (1,2,1,2,3) - ), so I think its more appropriate to keep the same idea here. 2) The core of this section are the drums in the same way as in Normal. I only was following the voice to avoid too many empty xD.
2. 01:14:768 (3) - Why does this have a reverse but not 01:11:683 (2) - ? well... in 01:14:083 - the music start to increase, so this repeat is to make this different.
3. 01:27:797 (1,2) - This jump seems rather sudden here. I know it is here for the sake of symmetry, but it really feels awkward, especially considering that you are not really using jumps for similar rhythms. This jump is for the same reason that I made long jumps in Insane (please, see the response to pishifat xD)
4. 01:38:768 (1,2) - Why a jump only here and not at similar rhythms like 01:38:768 (1,2) - for example? In the same way I made in insane, I did here a jump at mid kiai.

Thank you for the mod Kurai :3

hello
[Easy]
- 01:52:140 (4,1) - Would be nice to get stuff like this a clickable downbeat.

Otherwise seems okay.
[Normal]
- 00:23:340 (3,4) - Having all the drums clickable here then skipping them on 00:24:711 (1,2) - feels very weird. A rhythm like 00:32:940 (1,2,3) - works well imo.
- 01:22:311 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - Having some angular consistency here through mirroring/symmetry would look nicer than these kinda arbitrary-looking angles.

Essentially it seems fine but the aesthetics look kinda unstructured in terms of rotational/angular consistency etc.
[Hard]
- 01:30:540 (1,2,3,1,2,3,4,5) - Rhythm with 01:33:283 (1,2,3,1,2,3,4,5) - is inconsistent and too different just like 01:27:797 (1,2,1,2,3) - is and etc. Main issue with the diff is rhythm inconsistency in the
- 01:38:768 (1,2) - Jump looks kinda random? o.o The stronger beat is 1 not 2.
- 02:00:026 (3) - Why not ctrl+g this so the pattern is more like a funnel?
- 02:11:083 - There's also a pretty strong snare here that seems to be skipped and not at 02:32:940 (3,4,5) - ?
- 02:11:683 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - Rhythm is again inconsistent with 02:14:426 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - and since this is dnb and the song is fairly consistent in rhythm they should be the same imo.

[Insane]
- 00:25:226 (2,3) - Ctrl+g this rhythm would make more sense imo to have the snare clickable. // 00:41:683 (2,3) -
- 00:28:826 (1,2,3,1,2,3) - Odd density decrease here when the rest of the parts have constant 1/2.
- 00:41:683 (2,3) - 00:46:483 (4,1) - Inconsistent emphasis?

Mh, tilted by your 45 degree sliders but also your flow feels very random at times since you use symmetry sometimes then 02:29:683 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7) - 01:46:997 (1,2,3,4) - etc and I don't really see a structure to this.
[ ]
Good luck!

Mir wrote:

hello
[Easy]
- 01:52:140 (4,1) - Would be nice to get stuff like this a clickable downbeat. Good catch! fixed

Otherwise seems okay.
[Normal]
- 00:23:340 (3,4) - Having all the drums clickable here then skipping them on 00:24:711 (1,2) - feels very weird. A rhythm like 00:32:940 (1,2,3) - works well imo.
- 01:22:311 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - Having some angular consistency here through mirroring/symmetry would look nicer than these kinda arbitrary-looking angles.
But what about this?

Essentially it seems fine but the aesthetics look kinda unstructured in terms of rotational/angular consistency etc.
I... I dont know what say about ... ._., All angles and patters have sense for me. I feels that I care aesthetics a lot, I am a heavy user of rotation tool too... idk, maybe I'm mad and it is why I feel this fine? ._.


[Hard]
- 01:30:540 (1,2,3,1,2,3,4,5) - Rhythm with 01:33:283 (1,2,3,1,2,3,4,5) - is inconsistent and too different just like 01:27:797 (1,2,1,2,3) - is and etc. Main issue with the diff is rhythm inconsistency in the
- 01:38:768 (1,2) - Jump looks kinda random? o.o The stronger beat is 1 not 2. emm... but the jump feels better in 2 (imo), because the note in 01:38:940 - is more high that in 01:38:768 -
- 02:00:026 (3) - Why not ctrl+g this so the pattern is more like a funnel? I tried, but not, this feels strange. 01:59:340 (1,2) - are cool in the same direction because 01:59:683 - is very low, but 02:00:026 (3,4) - deserve to be in opposite direction because 02:00:368 - is ate the same volume that 02:00:026 -
- 02:11:083 - There's also a pretty strong snare here that seems to be skipped and not at 02:32:940 (3,4,5) - ? good point.
- 02:11:683 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - Rhythm is again inconsistent with 02:14:426 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - and since this is dnb and the song is fairly consistent in rhythm they should be the same imo.

[Insane]
- 00:25:226 (2,3) - Ctrl+g this rhythm would make more sense imo to have the snare clickable. // 00:41:683 (2,3) - oh, but then it will lost the emphasis the the voice in 00:25:568 (3,4,5) - and 00:42:026 (3,4,5) - sorry u.u
- 00:28:826 (1,2,3,1,2,3) - Odd density decrease here when the rest of the parts have constant 1/2.
- 00:41:683 (2,3) - 00:46:483 (4,1) - Inconsistent emphasis?

Mh, tilted by your 45 degree sliders but also your flow feels very random at times since you use symmetry sometimes then 02:29:683 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7) - 01:46:997 (1,2,3,4) - etc and I don't really see a structure to this.
[ ]
Good luck!

I really sorry, many of your suggestion were about inconsistent structure that I cant understand why do you felt it wrong. Of course it is valid, I am not saying you are wrong, but I don't want a copy pasted map. I usually don't copy paste any note in my maps except in GDs (because my time to delivery this xD).
When I make a map, there are the points that I care: 1) rhythm, 2) flow, 3) funny, 4) aesthetic


Many thanks for look my map, and sorry for late response, I am busy with my work because we moved to a new office and we have a deadline for... today xD

ranked when?

edit: this map is awesome! im hyped to wait this map ranked

[insane]
00:09:454 (5) - wat does this follow
delete plz

00:10:311 (7) - just make it a 1/1.. mapping objects to the wavering 1/2 is unnecessary..

00:14:940 (5) - delete imo, this is weirdly dense for how calm the intro is
just cuz there is a sound doesnt meaen you need a click on it

00:27:968 (3,4) - ctrl g makes more sensefor the vocal rhythm

also 00:26:083 (1,2,3,4,5,1,2,3,4,5) - this entire thing is too dense. basically same rhythm density as the kiai time, and the vocals are not doing anything special, so no need for this much stuff. just map the vocals and not the constant 1/2 drums i think

00:33:454 (2,3) - ctrl g

00:49:740 (2,3,4,5,6,7,1,2) - sudden spike in density but the part is calm ;w;

00:52:140 (1,2,3) - ctrl g makes more sense with the vocals

00:55:568 - circle into offbeat slider at 00:55:740 - makes more sense, again with the vocals. if you're following the guitar, delete the first slider cuz there isnt a guitar there.

01:03:111 (1,2) - ctrl g

01:25:054 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,5) - idk its a buildup but the spacing gets smaller lol

01:30:540 (1) - should be 1/1. also would be nice to see a structure based on repeating these rhythm / pattern at 01:27:797 (1,2,3) -

01:29:854 (3,4) - sslider fits better here

think your kiai needs better internal consistency. sometimes you represent the same sound as 1/1, or 1/2 + circle, or circle + 1/2. iverall it just ends up becoming an uncertain mess where it's hard to tell what your rhythm is following cuz of constant 1/2 spam.

you can implement this type of structure pretty easily. first example: at the start of each measure, a 1/1 slider helps the player recognize that the new measure is starting, since the song has the same held out sound each time.

keeping sliders on the same sound:
if you ctrl g 01:33:797 (3,4) - you'd see that 01:33:283 - and 01:33:968 - land on the same synth sound. stuff like that can help organize the rhythm a bit more.

you already d this to some extent, so just make it more consistent.



aside from this sstuff, the constant 1/2 gaps is a bit of a turn off. why not throw in some triples?

01:50:254 - this section

why is it just constant 1/2 -_- i cant tell what youre following, like just putting circles or sliders everywhere cuz the drum is ding contant 1/2 is so boring... idk. just feels like going in circles but not really following the song to me. i recommend undermapping and following one layer closer, instead of constant drums and going to lower density once or twice to highlight new sounds...

if you want me to explain more what i mean, pm me in game

01:27:797 - Change preview point to this thanks. That buildup preview point is bleh

Naotoshi wrote:

[insane]
00:09:454 (5) - wat does this follow
delete plz
It is following the voice, in the same way that 00:14:940 (5) -

00:10:311 (7) - just make it a 1/1.. mapping objects to the wavering 1/2 is unnecessary..
I not agree, there is a "wuwuw" sound that feels better with this repeat.

00:14:940 (5) - delete imo, this is weirdly dense for how calm the intro is
just cuz there is a sound doesnt meaen you need a click on it
But this feels cool, Im sorry.

00:27:968 (3,4) - ctrl g makes more sensefor the vocal rhythm
But why?, I mean, doing 00:28:140 - clickable here is more intuitive, and even if I followed the voice in 00:24:711 (1,2) - , they are not the same case.

also 00:26:083 (1,2,3,4,5,1,2,3,4,5) - this entire thing is too dense. basically same rhythm density as the kiai time, and the vocals are not doing anything special, so no need for this much stuff. just map the vocals and not the constant 1/2 drums i think
You have a point here.

00:33:454 (2,3) - ctrl g Not agree

00:49:740 (2,3,4,5,6,7,1,2) - sudden spike in density but the part is calm ;w; because voice deserve this.

00:52:140 (1,2,3) - ctrl g makes more sense with the vocals Agree

00:55:568 - circle into offbeat slider at 00:55:740 - makes more sense, again with the vocals. if you're following the guitar, delete the first slider cuz there isnt a guitar there.

01:03:111 (1,2) - ctrl g ok

01:25:054 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,5) - idk its a buildup but the spacing gets smaller lol well, its how I feel this xD

01:30:540 (1) - should be 1/1. also would be nice to see a structure based on repeating these rhythm / pattern at 01:27:797 (1,2,3) -

01:29:854 (3,4) - sslider fits better here Not agree.

think your kiai needs better internal consistency. sometimes you represent the same sound as 1/1, or 1/2 + circle, or circle + 1/2. iverall it just ends up becoming an uncertain mess where it's hard to tell what your rhythm is following cuz of constant 1/2 spam.

you can implement this type of structure pretty easily. first example: at the start of each measure, a 1/1 slider helps the player recognize that the new measure is starting, since the song has the same held out sound each time.
I understand your point, but... it is not funny :/, i mean, a map that you can play sleeping is not funny for me. xD
But if most of start of each measures have a slider, only at kiai start not and in 01:38:768 (1,2) - , and there are because the music deserve this.


keeping sliders on the same sound:
if you ctrl g 01:33:797 (3,4) - you'd see that 01:33:283 - and 01:33:968 - land on the same synth sound. stuff like that can help organize the rhythm a bit more.

you already d this to some extent, so just make it more consistent.
Here is where I don't understand you guys, I feel all what I did intuitive at play, it is consistent and where not, it is because the music have something interesting to follow. When anyone say it is not consistent, I only think that they want a boring and generic map :/


aside from this sstuff, the constant 1/2 gaps is a bit of a turn off. why not throw in some triples? I dont feel any place to do triples in kiai

01:50:254 - this section Yeah!, the hold slider is very nice Also, did you see galvenize maps?, he use this in some :3

why is it just constant 1/2 -_- i cant tell what youre following, like just putting circles or sliders everywhere cuz the drum is ding contant 1/2 is so boring... idk. just feels like going in circles but not really following the song to me. i recommend undermapping and following one layer closer, instead of constant drums and going to lower density once or twice to highlight new sounds...
It is what will happen if I do the kiak "more consistent". I know it is the same 1/2 in all this section but music is the same most of time, and I actually did something with density close to the end. This section is not very long anyway.

if you want me to explain more what i mean, pm me in game

Thank you very much Nao!


----------------

Side wrote:

01:27:797 - Change preview point to this thanks. That buildup preview point is bleh

idk, I feel the tobelievetobelievetobelievetobelievetobelieve more interesting xD

This modding thread has been migrated to the new "modding discussions" system. Please make sure to re-post any existing (and unresolved) efforts to the new system as required.