just a small suggestion. make the hp a bit higher, maybe like hp4? i passed this map way too easily for not being able to play it appropriatly.

Fookiezi wrote:

just a small suggestion. make the hp a bit higher, maybe like hp4? i passed this map way too easily for not being able to play it appropriatly.

Hp 5 or riot

Amazing! ;O;

Fookiezi wrote:

just a small suggestion. make the hp a bit higher, maybe like hp4? i passed this map way too easily for not being able to play it appropriatly.

I mean that's not really a problem, is it? If more people can pass it then more people can have fun with it

i don't get that mindset. It's a hard map, it's intended to be hard, which should also include posing some kind of challenge to pass instead of setting hp to a point where a lot of people can just mash through and still survive...

w

Okorin wrote:

i don't get that mindset. It's a hard map, it's intended to be hard, which should also include posing some kind of challenge to pass instead of setting hp to a point where a lot of people can just mash through and still survive...

well i personally dont like the idea of drain osu! have in the first place...
each to their own i guess.

the thing is, passing or not passing in this game doesnt matter as much as other games imo, this game rather relies on how good acc and combo you can do instead of whatever you can pass or not, and whole game is also made around it (pp system etc) so passing hard things can be impressive sometimes, but doing a good acc and combo is far more impressive on most cases so i personally highly approve low hp maps.

its honestly dissapointing when youre doing pretty good up until one part where you accidentally fucked up, maybe your hand slipped or you misread and it causes you to die, i mean sure you can say "git better" but it still doesnt change the fact its annoying.

actually the best map ive seen in a long time
gj tyui

i dont see why this cant be ranked if hw can rank notch hell tbh with the very high svs at the end


gl with rank!

god

Okorin wrote:

i don't get that mindset. It's a hard map, it's intended to be hard, which should also include posing some kind of challenge to pass instead of setting hp to a point where a lot of people can just mash through and still survive...

It's the same mindset that says all maps need to have easy difficulties so that every play must be able to play songs they like.

I can confirm that this map still isn't easy to pass. The HP makes it so that it's fun to play for people besides the top 1% of players. No need to have an elitist attitude regarding the settings.

Venix wrote:

1. 00:36:127 (2) - This slider not including 00:36:215 - this bass, please fix it, because it's the main rythm. Mby try make a repeat slider? yeah there is bass sounds but i mainly consistently take the sounds like strings. also i dont think main rhythm is bass only.
2. 00:36:921 - on this moment you can leave this slider because this part of rythm is not to hearable there are reverb sounds. i cant replace them with circle or cool sounds like strings flow will be stopped.
3. 00:52:097 - why break end not here? You can place elements after this moment no i dont wanna put circle before a strong symbal sound.
4. 01:01:274 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - ik, this is nazi but i cant understand your logic here, this stack not follow the aesthetics rules, for better logic of this 01:02:685 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - mby stack it? you can hear the different sounds here. (01:02:685 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - )
5. 02:14:332 (2) - i think this slider should be longer than 02:13:979 (1) - this because music here is more energetic i understood your logic. but i wanna keep this symmetry visual.
   
6. 04:42:744 (4) - Please fix end of this slider, this is unrankable this is rankable. i already mentioned it at my replying for Kaifin's mod.
7. Stack Leniency is 0 already fixed.
8. Music is not 192kbit or VBR ~1.0 ok ill change this.

Zel wrote:

00:35:862 (1) - would be nice to overlap with 00:35:156 (5) - nope i wanna keep this.
00:44:156 (2,3,1) - personally i would stack these for consistencies sake like you were doing with 00:43:450 (2,3,1) - there is a turning point o rhythm (1/4 to 1/8).
00:58:450 (1) - 10/10 with these next section of notes tbh it really feels like youre playing the song what a rhythm game should be about thanks.
01:10:803 (4,5,2,1) - overlap here is a little weird is it not? maybe rotate square nope
01:43:274 (1,2) - this overlap is peculiar i would move next repeating sliders to X:480 Y:211 ok fixed.
02:04:097 (1,2) - nice thanks.
03:33:568 (1) - very good slider shape im jealous thanks.

to Fookiezi and Okorin:
tbh i agree the combination of a hard map with low HP drain cuz you're not able to leave the score when you failed with a freak accident.
imo i think the goal maybe freely determine by case by case (for examble to the goal i mean: 600 combo, 98% acc, fc with dt, ss with hd).

"then you should put NF"? no there is the score reduction and you can put weird score like a "D" to rankings. it's not just smart.

but i also recognize hp3 is too small. i put hp4 now. but i dont really wanna put more higher... (perhaps 4.5 but you know)

i hope you understand my opinion.




also, rechecked i had forgotten stuff (mainly hitsounding). mp3 will be soon.
thanks for modding and checking my map to all.

@rrtyui
https://puu.sh/rDcw6/4d58e50dc0.png (source)

05:28:097 (1)

pls no ;~;
or at least make it more evident that this will be a slow slider

really fun map!!

This looks harder than Mazzerin's Camellia map.

I'm here~

[Evolution]

00:29:156 (3,1) - This jump felt too big compared to the rest of the section. The jump goes into a flow-break too, so it just feels like too much emphasis onto that one note on 00:29:332 - .
00:45:744 (1,1,1,1) - The repeats cannot be seen here. Can you space them out more or try a different pattern? If repeats cannot be seen, then it's breaking a RC rule.
01:24:215 (1) - Its a nice slider, but the slider path cannot be read based on just looking at the slider. Are you supposed to go up or down? If you can't tell where the slider is supposed to go, then unfortunately it's not rankable with the current RC.
02:04:097 (1,2) - Similar to above, the repeat on the 2nd slider can't actually be seen, so you need to try another pattern here unfortunately, if you want to get this ranked xP.
02:38:332 (3) - Place it like this:
02:39:215 (1,2) - I think using sliders with more bumps to them would follow the whirring sounds here a bit better. Star slider was nice!
02:51:038 (1,1,1,1,1) - Uh, shouldn't this be 1/3? I can't really hear the 1/4's, but maybe its just me.
03:25:274 (1) - This is really nazi, but:
03:33:568 (1) - This one, the slider-path isn't completely clear either. Do you go left, or downward first? I think with this slider, making a gap would be enough.
03:57:038 (1,2) - Same as earlier
04:05:421 (1,2,3) - This seems like a really sudden spacing increase, if you compare the spacing from 04:04:803 (1,2) - . I wonder if people will be able to read this as a 1/4 jump? or if they'll misread it as a 1/2 jump? Lemme know what you think.
04:09:656 (1,2,3) - Same idea here. I think cuz of how large the spacing is, people will read it as 1/2 isntead of 1/4.
04:18:127 (1) - This slider is offscreen by like 2 pixels.
04:39:744 (1,1) - Generally, its okay for 2nd repeat to not be visible, but I think it's best not to overlap the 2nd repeat because its really important here. If players don't know theres a 2nd repeat they'll release early and it will mess up their rhythm.

Bolded: Unrankable or extremely risky. We still have to follow the RC if we want to rank this ;c.

Let me know how this goes!

i thought burai sliders were only not allowed because of unclear slider path? 03:25:274 (1) has an easily discernable slider path even though it's technically burai

also the 01:24:215 (1) slider is readable on sight-read, the gap above the sliderhead tells the player to go down rather than up

Nice sliders

awesome map!

melloe wrote:

i thought burai sliders were only not allowed because of unclear slider path? 03:25:274 (1) has an easily discernable slider path even though it's technically burai

also the 01:24:215 (1) slider is readable on sight-read, the gap above the sliderhead tells the player to go down rather than up

Burai just means any slider that goes back on its own slider-path. Stuff like this, even though its really obvious, is still unrankable according to the current ranking criteria. I also find it really unnecessary here, but we still have to follow it, o well lol.

Amazing map, I hope to see this ranked

Just a few thoughts

00:18:568 (2,1) - after the previous pattern distance is not intuitive. Maybe increase it ?
05:28:097 (1) - why ? A row of fast sliders would fit better imo
Can't agree with increase HP or riot thingy. Player don't nesessarily have to be able to play the map with high accuracy to pass it

Good luck!

Hope this helped, sorry if I mentioned things other modders have already.

KDs only if any of my mod was applied

Also wanted to mention that HP4 was good update, because HP3 was too easy (was able to mash my way to a win, now you actually have to try)

Monstrata wrote:

I'm here~

[Evolution]

00:29:156 (3,1) - This jump felt too big compared to the rest of the section. The jump goes into a flow-break too, so it just feels like too much emphasis onto that one note on 00:29:332 - . changed.
00:45:744 (1,1,1,1) - The repeats cannot be seen here. Can you space them out more or try a different pattern? If repeats cannot be seen, then it's breaking a RC rule. changed.

Something like this maybe?

01:24:215 (1) - Its a nice slider, but the slider path cannot be read based on just looking at the slider. Are you supposed to go up or down? If you can't tell where the slider is supposed to go, then unfortunately it's not rankable with the current RC. these two arcs have a gap. it seems they don't go up...
02:04:097 (1,2) - Similar to above, the repeat on the 2nd slider can't actually be seen, so you need to try another pattern here unfortunately, if you want to get this ranked xP. rip changed.
02:38:332 (3) - Place it like this: ok.

Looks cleaner

02:39:215 (1,2) - I think using sliders with more bumps to them would follow the whirring sounds here a bit better. Star slider was nice! ok fixed.
02:51:038 (1,1,1,1,1) - Uh, shouldn't this be 1/3? I can't really hear the 1/4's, but maybe its just me. it's hard to hear... but i think It's 1/4 on 100% speed. (To begin with, does the wobble sound have a consistent rhythm...? if so, well, i still wanna emphasize this session because there is a swell of sound.)
03:25:274 (1) - This is really nazi, but: lol fixed.

This part is unrankable, since the slider goes back on itself, making it burai lol.

But this is fine. Yea, its a dumb rule, but this is an easy fix, so please fix~

03:33:568 (1) - This one, the slider-path isn't completely clear either. Do you go left, or downward first? I think with this slider, making a gap would be enough. Compare this with that, i think the former seems weird. The former have a clearly different angle but the latter is not there is a smooth S-shaped curve. It's imo but if stacking slider (like this slider) appeared, i regard that as smoother curve pattern. Why? otherwise its conceivable that this slider has interesting slider-path (for examble, this. I hesitate to put them (unless a slider has a transparency lol...)). i certain that it's still readable. ill keep it.

That way, players know to go downward first, not left.

03:57:038 (1,2) - Same as earlier ok.
04:05:421 (1,2,3) - This seems like a really sudden spacing increase, if you compare the spacing from 04:04:803 (1,2) - . I wonder if people will be able to read this as a 1/4 jump? or if they'll misread it as a 1/2 jump? Lemme know what you think. well changed the slider's vector but i dunno how far it's a problem... there is a consistent rhythm.
04:09:656 (1,2,3) - Same idea here. I think cuz of how large the spacing is, people will read it as 1/2 isntead of 1/4. i think this slider (04:09:656 (1) - ) is smaller then it's no problem to play with regarding as 1/2 rhythm cuz its easy to earn 300.
04:18:127 (1) - This slider is offscreen by like 2 pixels. oops fixed.
04:39:744 (1,1) - Generally, its okay for 2nd repeat to not be visible, but I think it's best not to overlap the 2nd repeat because its really important here. If players don't know theres a 2nd repeat they'll release early and it will mess up their rhythm. reverses are wiped out rip.

Bolded: Unrankable or extremely risky. We still have to follow the RC if we want to rank this ;c.

Let me know how this goes!

Maelstrrom wrote:

Just a few thoughts

00:18:568 (2,1) - after the previous pattern distance is not intuitive. Maybe increase it ?　hmm but ill keep this angle.
05:28:097 (1) - why ? A row of fast sliders would fit better imo it's end of this song. also it's finished that sounding of kick sound. so well it's ok.
Can't agree with increase HP or riot thingy. Player don't nesessarily have to be able to play the map with high accuracy to pass it

Good luck!

Shiguma wrote:

[box=A random mod]Probably been mentioned before, but the bitrate of .mp3 is too high right now. Needs to be 192 kbps

04:42:744 (4) - Offscreen (AImod) this is actually not.

https://puu.sh/rFU6K/4343bb8f73.png 02:31:021 - I think accidental ok.
03:04:901 - ^
03:50:079 - ^
03:51:491 - ^
04:44:338 - ^ I'm assuming some copy pasting mistake

00:46:097 (1) - ctrl + g fixed
00:46:450 (1) - ^
00:46:803 (1) - ^ reason is because I don't think you can see the reverse arrow otherwise

01:12:391 (4) - Move more to the left maybe? nope ill keep it.

02:10:803 (4,5,6) - I would consider selecting these three and doing ctrl + shift + r and doing these settings: https://puu.sh/rFVzX/c6e0c5f0f4.png because it makes it more readable and acessible to play I think, but doesn't nerf the pattern hmm well i love this aethetics
02:22:096 (4,5,6) - same for this, but counterclockwise

02:38:509 (1,2,1) - Needs more spacing because of how fast the sliders were going before. I'd say something like 0.55x instead of the 0.50x you have right now i think this pattern is still ok.

02:50:921 (3,1) - The spacing into the 02:51:038 (1,1,1,1,1) - is very low compared to what was going on before, I think it makes it awkward to land. well i dont think awkward. it was designed.
03:51:744 (3,2) - Intentional to not do perfect overlap? for smooth aiming i'm noob
04:00:215 (4,1) - Maybe overlap perfectly? idk ok.
04:27:391 (1,2) - I think 04:27:391 (1) - should be moved 3 pixels up because then it overlaps the sliderbody of 2 better ok.


Also wanted to mention that HP4 was good update, because HP3 was too easy (was able to mash my way to a win, now you actually have to try)

also replaced mp3. thanks for modding, also mentioning about drain.


also The c00l banner is created by eLy! Thanks to him. (my reserved post is gone...)

i think the offset is wrong. = too early. try +44?

final offset should be: 2024. what do you think?

offset mistake mightve happened because you changed the mp3? (just downloaded this a few mins ago w)

rip 04:38:685 (1) - repeat sliders..!
they were one of my favorite patterns, so fun to play ):
do you think you can bring back that pattern but spaced so that the repeat is visible still? i think that would be rankable
http://puu.sh/rHUJa.png http://puu.sh/rHUVW.png like that maybe, but prettier

Seems more rankable after monstrata's mod. Really good map that osu! need today bcs We've had enough easy pp maps.

best map in 2016

Replying to your reply, but removing the quotes so the images are bigger:

[Evolution]

01:24:215 (1) - Its a nice slider, but the slider path cannot be read based on just looking at the slider. Are you supposed to go up or down? If you can't tell where the slider is supposed to go, then unfortunately it's not rankable with the current RC. these two arcs have a gap. it seems they don't go up... Is it possible for you to make that more clear? Maybe have the head down just a bit more so the two arcs are more visible?
03:33:568 (1) - This one, the slider-path isn't completely clear either. Do you go left, or downward first? I think with this slider, making a gap would be enough. Compare this with that, i think the former seems weird. The former have a clearly different angle but the latter is not there is a smooth S-shaped curve. It's imo but if stacking slider (like this slider) appeared, i regard that as smoother curve pattern. Why? otherwise its conceivable that this slider has interesting slider-path (for examble, this. I hesitate to put them (unless a slider has a transparency lol...)). i certain that it's still readable. ill keep it.
Mmm... I think it looks smoother. Your first image shows that there would be like a sharp corner turn, but I think if you consider the curve, its possible for the slider to be constructed like this: Which is why I think having a visible loop in the centre would make this easier to interpret. I agree though that going downward is the most logical movement, but I think this slider is still ambiguous since its *possible* to create a slider that goes left-ward and have almost the same shape.

[]

Just those two. Feel free to get another opinion on those two sliders though! I just want to iron this out because I can see people pointing them out as possibly unrankable elements. it's better to discuss them now while this is still pending, than later when it's qualified.

I don't think those sliders can really be misread. While it's not as noticeable, the sliders themselves actually make a pretty good indication of how the slider plays out here
The center is a bit darker so it kinda already drawer the path the slider could take which would probably be more twisted if it somehow went the other way if that makes sense. Applies to the second slider as well.

The other thing is sliders snake out by default so it tells you how the slider will go. It's pretty hard to misread especially the second slider. Even without considering the snaking effect which is normally not disabled anyway, this small S curve is a lot more plausible than the alternative you describe as shown
Hard to explain sorry but that alternate angle you display with the arrows is pretty unrealistic based on how sharp this looks

Not up to me obviously but I really doubt these can be misread much less at this level.

in my opinion the first slider is perfectly clear

the second slider is trickier, but only on sightread. the SV is rather fast and much increased from that of the previous slider, so the player will be caught by surprise and will be struggling to keep up. the player won't have time to examine every curve and sharp angle of the slider to discern the sliderpath. furthermore, it'd be much more intuitive to continue on that counterclockwise path and keep going to the right rather than down.

i personally didnt have any trouble with that slider but i can see why others might, it's a bit tricky

For the first slider, ok I changed this because well That's no much influence for this visual beauty.
For the second slider, I denied this. I wanna mention about it.

I hope your understanding.


btw actually I like the repeat sliders but It may happen ton of shit by the reason of the place of time lol On the whole i think It's potentially FCable enough for players nowadays. I'm generous. xppp

also thanks for posting your opinion.

02:07:141 (1,2,3) - y-values are 208, 193, 179 (should be 178)
02:07:847 (1,2,3) - y-values are 188, 172, 157 (should be 156)
02:09:965 (1,2,3) - x-values are 269, 255, 240 (should be 241)
02:12:788 (1,2,3) - y-values are 324, 309, 295 (should be 294)
02:13:494 (1,2,3) - y-values are 273, 290, 306 (should be 307)
02:18:435 (1,2,3) - y-values are 15, 165, 318 (should be 315) x-values are 276, 262, 254 (should be 258)
02:19:141 (1,2,3) - y-values are 15, 165, 316 (should be 315) x-values are 254, 262, 268 (should be 270)
02:21:259 (1,2,3) - y-values are 20, 171, 323 (should be 322) x-values are 240, 253, 265 (should be 266)
02:24:082 (1,2,3) - y-values are 27, 178, 330 (should be 329) x-values are 236, 249, 261 (should be 262)

02:25:141 (1,2,3) - y-values are 34, 186, 337 (should be 338) x-values are 223, 210, 194 (should be 197)
02:25:494 (1,2,3) - y-values are 37, 188, 337 (should be 339) x-values are 198, 172, 142 (should be 146)
02:25:847 (1,2,1) - y-values are 32, 180, 326 (should be 328) x-values are 169, 130, 88 (should be 89)
for the above 3, maybe you can just copy 02:24:788 (1,2,3) - and use rotate

02:30:435 (1,2,3) - y-values are 156, 171, 185 (should be 186) x-values are 442, 262, 81 (should be 82)
02:32:553 (1,2,3) - y-values are 132, 150, 165 (should be 168) x-values are 464, 259, 52 (should be 54)
02:35:376 (1,2,3) - y-values are 324, 309, 295 (should be 294)
02:36:082 (1,2,3) - y-values are 273, 290, 306 (should be 307)
02:41:729 (1,2,3) - y-values are 19, 191, 362 (should be 363) x-values are 256, 270, 283 (should be 284)
02:46:671 (1,2,3) - x-values are 272, 264, 252 (should be 256)
02:47:377 (1,2,3) - x-values are 252, 244, 228 (should be 236)

most of these are just one pixel off, so it shouldn't matter, but some are off by a lot

all fixed thanks melloe for responding to my request DD

The offset at the beginning is all wrong, it should be 1980. The sounds of sliders doesn't follow any sound of the instrumental atm

idk what happened but a recent update made me have to change my offset by -40 or something

Cthulhu the Dog wrote:

idk what happened but a recent update made me have to change my offset by -40 or something

Redownload the map, he changed the mp3

Very satisfying map to play. (or atleast trying to)

Alright, finished rechecking, and I'm happy with the map now.

Bubbled~!

wait, what