Cirno wrote:

Guys stop about the video. It had been removed from the osz. Now leave this map in peace if you have got nothing else to say.

Stop about the video

1. Clean :>

1. I find this AR too high for this diff tbh. The BPM is not helping at all, please, consider reducing AR at least 1 tick.
2. 00:28:356 (3,4,5,6) - I think this pattern is might be hard for the easiest diff. Repeating sliders, stacked objects and 185 as BPM, yeah it's too hard imo. Perhaps, try something like this instead? It sounds perfectly fine and it's way easier to read.
3. 00:33:870 (1,2) - This one is not as bad but It's not too convincing either. I strongly suggest to replace the first 1/4 repeating slider with a 1/1 one, the pattern will sound ok and it will suit better this diff.
4. 00:53:329 (1) - I wouldn't suggest to use this kind of anti-jumps for the easiest diff. Spacing should be easy to read and intuitive for these diffs. (Increase spacing a bit should be enough)
5. 00:58:762 - I find this break completely unnecessary, you should remove it. The Drain Rate is low enough so there shouldn't be any problem.
6. 01:42:302 (3,4) - Just a minor suggestion, stacked objects at the end of a slider are a bit hard to read for rookies so you should consider unstacking these circles.

1. Just a comment, the first part of the map was a bit hard to read due to some spacing changes.
2. 00:11:167 (1) - I don't find this anti-jump intuitive enough, it kills the flow of the map. You should increase spacing a bit to make it easier to read and to improve the flow.
3. 00:58:681 - Same thoughts as [Boy]. I find this break unnecessary, you should remove it.
4. 01:05:005 (1) - Half of the slider-body and the-slider end is getting covered by the previous slider making this one really hard to see while playing, you will need to move this somewhere else.

1. Really nice and creative patterns at the beginning. Some circles were a bit hard to see due to hitbursts but I guess it's ok... nothing else to say here.

• 
  -Some minor suggestions to improve the readability and the flow of map a bit:

1. 00:16:356 (1) - Would you use 0.75x instead of 0.50x here? That slider-speed change seems unintuitive mainly because there's not a noticeable music change, plus 0.75x flows better.
2. 00:29:978 (1,1,2) - Is the 2nd NC really necessary? It looks quite random, I suggest to remove it and then place the NC here: 00:30:465 where it makes more sense
3. 00:31:275 (1,1,2) - Same here, remove the 2nd NC and then place it here: 00:31:762
   
   -Some important stuff
4. 01:06:789 (2,3,4) - That anti-jump seems a bit unexpected, you should use distance snap or increase spacing a bit more, but if you wish to keep it, then place a NC on (4) please. Otherwise it's too confusing.
5. 01:12:789 (6) - The 2nd repeat arrow is getting completely covered by the previous hitbursts making it unrankable, try removing 1 repeat and then adding some circles instead.

Gonzvlo wrote:

[Boy]

1. I find this AR too high for this diff tbh. The BPM is not helping at all, please, consider reducing AR at least 1 tick.
   AR4 is already low for an Easy imo, but still AR-1
2. 00:28:356 (3,4,5,6) - I think this pattern is might be hard for the easiest diff. Repeating sliders, stacked objects and 185 as BPM, yeah it's too hard imo. Perhaps, try something like this instead? It sounds perfectly fine and it's way easier to read. ok
3. 00:33:870 (1,2) - This one is not as bad but It's not too convincing either. I strongly suggest to replace the first 1/4 repeating slider with a 1/1 one, the pattern will sound ok and it will suit better this diff.
   Hmm.. tbh this sounded really off to me. I don't think I'm going to change this unless this is unrankable, sorry ...
4. 00:53:329 (1) - I wouldn't suggest to use this kind of anti-jumps for the easiest diff. Spacing should be easy to read and intuitive for these diffs. (Increase spacing a bit should be enough)
   ok. Distance snap really didn't agree with this pattern, so I just moved it up a few grids. I hope this is fine then.
5. 00:58:762 - I find this break completely unnecessary, you should remove it. The Drain Rate is low enough so there shouldn't be any problem. ok
6. 01:42:302 (3,4) - Just a minor suggestion, stacked objects at the end of a slider are a bit hard to read for rookies so you should consider unstacking these circles. ok

[Gachimuchi]

1. Just a comment, the first part of the map was a bit hard to read due to some spacing changes. imo a player who clicked into a diff displayed as 4.5 stars should be aware of this.
2. 00:11:167 (1) - I don't find this anti-jump intuitive enough, it kills the flow of the map. You should increase spacing a bit to make it easier to read and to improve the flow. ok. scaled (1,2,3) with x1.4. It's still easy to hit while being intuitive as you say.
3. 00:58:681 - Same thoughts as [Boy]. I find this break unnecessary, you should remove it. ok
4. 01:05:005 (1) - Half of the slider-body and the-slider end is getting covered by the previous slider making this one really hard to see while playing, you will need to move this somewhere else. ok

[Deep Dark Fantasy]

• 
  -Some minor suggestions to improve the readability and the flow of map a bit:

1. 00:16:356 (1) - Would you use 0.75x instead of 0.50x here? That slider-speed change seems unintuitive mainly because there's not a noticeable music change, plus 0.75x flows better. these sliders follow the slapping sounds from the music, and the slowdown is present mainly to emphasize the "pausing" feel from the music (fast -> hold -> slow -> fast again)
2. 00:29:978 (1,1,2) - Is the 2nd NC really necessary? It looks quite random, I suggest to remove it and then place the NC here: 00:30:465 where it makes more sense
3. 00:31:275 (1,1,2) - Same here, remove the 2nd NC and then place it here: 00:31:762
   ok changed those two. It doesn't seem to me that this matters much though.
   
   -Some important stuff
4. 01:06:789 (2,3,4) - That anti-jump seems a bit unexpected, you should use distance snap or increase spacing a bit more, but if you wish to keep it, then place a NC on (4) please. Otherwise it's too confusing.
   Oops. Seems that I broke this in a random misoperation... I restored it to the state it was after Card N'FoRcE's mod, and added NC on (4) just in case
5. 01:12:789 (6) - The 2nd repeat arrow is getting completely covered by the previous hitbursts making it unrankable, try removing 1 repeat and then adding some circles instead.
   reduced 1 repeat and added a circle at 01:13:519 where the slider should have ended. adjusted spacing a bit so that it's not hidden by slidertrack.

Call me back when you're done and let's get this re-ranked asap.

1. 00:26:086 (3) - The second arrow is getting completely covered by the previous hit bursts, therefore this slider is unrankable. Same suggestion as before, try removing 1 repeat and then adding some circles. (or simply unstack the slider like you did with this one: 00:29:978 (3)).
2. 00:35:167 (3) - ^
3. 00:36:465 (3) - ^
4. 01:03:708 (3) - ^
5. 01:14:086 (2) - ^
6. 01:20:573 (5) - ^
   Side note: I think some of those sliders were kinda intuitive unlike others that just are not. However, I asked around to some BATs, apparently all of them have to be fixed.

Gonzvlo wrote:

Oh god, I don't know how I missed this stuff, sorry if I'm delaying the proccess a bit :<

[Gachimuchi]

1. 00:26:086 (3) - The second arrow is getting completely covered by the previous hit bursts, therefore this slider is unrankable. Same suggestion as before, try removing 1 repeat and then adding some circles. (or simply unstack the slider like you did with this one: 00:29:978 (3)).
2. 00:35:167 (3) - ^
3. 00:36:465 (3) - ^
4. 01:03:708 (3) - ^
5. 01:14:086 (2) - ^
6. 01:20:573 (5) - ^
   Side note: I think some of those sliders were kinda intuitive unlike others that just are not. However, I asked around to some BATs, apparently all of them have to be fixed.

Everything else should be fine, call me back, please.
Sorry, again.

osuplayer111 wrote:

Should I check this tomorrow?

The star priority seems interesting to me.

osuplayer111 wrote:

Should I check this tomorrow?

The star priority seems interesting to me.

Current Priority: +112

ziin wrote:

A guy masturbating with a baby's face covering his junk is still a guy masturbating. This was a silly rank for a video.

Let's see:
Someone licking an ass
A baby's face censoring out penises (you could make an argument saying that's all clothes do, but you'd be an idiot).
In the United States, bare ass is partial nudity and has many restrictions on when you can show it on TV. Most of the time it's censored.
People having sex (although all inappropriate parts are censored)


What the fuck? People having sex is NOT RANKABLE.

Miu Matsuoka wrote:

i still prefer moaning girls :3
/me runs

Avadon wrote:

Genre: Novelty (Japanese)
Nooooooo,It's English,gay.

SPOILER

someone wrote:

Keep your ass back!

Nivalis wrote:

Congratulations (again) for the re-rank~

Not to mention I still have a big desire to FC Psikyoh diff, I failed to FC it last time orz...