Guest
home
beatmaps
rankings
community
store
help
forum
  1. Forums
  2. Beatmaps
  3. Ranked Beatmaps (Archived)
  4. Beatmap Graveyard

NGC 3.14 - Red Eyed Girl

posted
Total Posts
17
Moe
99 posts
Joined December 2013
Topic Starter
Moe
This beatmap was submitted using in-game submission on Friday, June 8, 2018 at 6:41:22 PM

Artist: NGC 3.14
Title: Red Eyed Girl
Tags: electronic
BPM: 140
Filesize: 8278kb
Play Time: 05:02
Difficulties Available:
  1. Daybreak (5.71 stars, 911 notes)
Download: NGC 3.14 - Red Eyed Girl
Information: Scores/Beatmap Listing
---------------
Have fun and gl mapping
Song from https://soundcloud.com/ngc-3-14
Something new, something bad, as well as something for fun.
Thanks for mods from
Chocobo
Smokeman
FoolB(ingame)
-himei(ingame)
Start
Azure
Salinqi
Elinia
[ Emillia ]
Last edited by Moe , edited 31 times in total.
Chocobo
104 posts
Joined June 2013
Chocobo
明天爬起来摸；
先射个星星；
眼前一亮啊，确实做得好；
MODDING
没有kiai time；
aimod有大量报错不知道是不是改过offset；
1. 00:30:839 - 我觉得可以用稍微长一点的滑条or连续几个短滑条过渡，单一个感觉有点突兀；
2. 00:34:375 (1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3) - 这几个摆摆好？
3. 00:45:303 - 这个地方还是建议补一个note，和前面一致顺便和后面的长滑条区分；
4. 00:50:661 (3,4) - 感觉漏音了，我觉得可以连在一起；
5. 00:54:732 (3,4) - 3,4互换一下位置？
6. 00:55:374 - 这个地方感觉可以加个音效；
7. 01:09:232 (2) - holy shit 1/6；
8. 01:35:874 - 这一段三角跳的方向可以试着可以设置一下；
9. 01:51:947 (2,3,4,5,6) - 摆的不好看；
10. 01:54:947 (1,2,3,4,5) - 我听出来是2个1/4滑条加四个单点；
11. 02:00:089 (1,2,3) - 间距问题，还有这个单戳挺丧病的；
12. 02:00:839 (8) - 要是能协调前面把这个blanket到滑条9里面可能好一些；
顺便一提，8分拍特别密，我感觉这是6分拍，但是非常不确定，建议仔细看一下；
13. 02:07:232 (2) - 太大；
14. 02:08:089 (3,1) - 太大而且flow略迷；
15. 02:10:375 (1,2,3,1,2,3) - 间距问题；
16. 02:23:232 (3) - 可以转一下(((((
17. 02:28:804 (4,5,6,7) - 我建议这四个摆在一起，单独把8,9隔离开来，7,8之间最好有点间距；
18. 02:30:089 (9) - - hitsound；
19. 02:30:947 (1) - 额....来点形状；
20. 02:55:589 (3,4,5) - 形状；
21. 03:01:375 (1,2) - 这个flow有点。
22. 03:16:214 (4,5,6,7,1,2,3,4,5) - 我觉得可以摆得亲民一点；
23. 03:19:589 (5) - NC；
24. 03:22:589 (5) - ^；
25. 03:24:089 - 这一段简直起飞；
26. 03:33:089 - 这一段到03:36:089怎么没音效了；
27. 04:04:089 - 这一部分感觉漏音了，尝试用点来回滑条？
28. 04:40:803 (1) - 转盘从这儿开始；
29. 04:42:946 - 用尾音做下个section的首音总感觉有些奇怪，不如给尾巴加个音效？
高潮部分的一些滑条拜访我觉得可以看看这位的：https://osu.ppy.sh/b/1023091
一些琐碎的blanket和遮挡就不写了，全部列出来感觉很zz；
要是能app请我吃饭啊！！！
Last edited by Chocobo , edited 2 times in total.
suima
2 posts
Joined March 2016
suima
有空打打，先给个差评

看过Auto了，再来个差评
Smokeman
463 posts
Joined November 2012
Smokeman
m4m from my q

normal ???????????

use these combocolours
Combo1 : 249,176,6
Combo2 : 159,199,3
Combo3 : 240,32,105
Combo4 : 34,232,123

00:00:089 (1) - you can emphasis this part a lot better than with a single repeatslider over one whole measure. https://puu.sh/rCgH6/21b7596e10.png Just something simple as this
00:13:803 - dont end spinners on important notes. The end of a spinner is not clicked and thus the player doesnt get any feedback from this intense beat 00:15:946 (2,3,4,5) - since 00:16:160 - has a melodic note i would suggest you use a rythm like this so you properly emphasise the most out of this part https://puu.sh/rCgVx/173f76cda3.png. Note: 00:16:589 - is the weakest of all notes here so it would be wise to put the slider taile over this beat
00:17:232 (1,2,3,4) - off-stack these a bit. Example https://puu.sh/rCh3x/63f2d3c795.png. Here i used 0.05-ish spacing and rotated each for 20°
00:20:660 - same thing with spinners
00:22:804 (5) - again, having both of these notes clickable would be preferable since the tail is on 00:23:017 - which is stronger than 00:22:803 -
00:24:089 (1) - just use a spinner here 00:24:517 - . It would be much more fitting and swap the head of the slider with a single note
00:29:124 (15,1) - why this much emphasis on this. There is barely anything important on 00:29:231 - in the song, you just put a finish over it. Besides, 00:30:731 (15) - you used a kick here which is a much smoother transition to the next long stream. but you spaced the next one half the grid away... wtf?
00:32:554 (16,1) - lets not begin talking about this
00:32:661 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - or this
00:34:375 (1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3) - these feel way more natural to play
00:37:696 (16,1,2) - same thing.
pls reconcider your spacing in this part, its rediculous
00:54:518 (1,2,3,4) - inear spacing would be more fitting and look less like 2 random doubles. You will be playing 2 doubles 00:53:875 (1,2,1,2) - with similar spacing and then suddenly the doubles turn into a 4 note stream which could be misread as 2 doubles
00:56:232 (2,3) - dont stack these. Move 00:56:661 (3) - like half across the screen to emphasise this strong piano-like sound
i have no idea what you did with the spacing in the following part, and i dont have the motivation to figure it out
01:30:947 (1,2,3,4,5) - Why isnt this spacest lower or the same than 01:29:232 (1,2,3,4,5) - since they sound the same if not 01:30:947 (1,2,3,4,5) - even weaker
01:50:661 (2) - emphasise the wubs with slider shapes mb ?
01:50:661 (2,1,2,6,1) - same and so on...
02:42:947 (1) - like this https://puu.sh/rCi36/2d88a2f377.png
02:48:518 (3,4,5,6,7,8,9) - spacing, rythm and visual representation isnt rly complimenting the music. You did it a lot better later on

The map gets a bit better after this, the climax is decently done, but i stopped playing before i hit it.

this needs a lot of work and i see you dont have much experience yet. You should be able to make this better if you put the effort doe

gl&hf mapping
Moe
99 posts
Joined December 2013
Topic Starter
Moe

Smokeman wrote:

m4m from my q

normal ???????????

use these combocolours
Combo1 : 249,176,6
Combo2 : 159,199,3
Combo3 : 240,32,105
Combo4 : 34,232,123

00:00:089 (1) - you can emphasis this part a lot better than with a single repeatslider over one whole measure. https://puu.sh/rCgH6/21b7596e10.png Just something simple as this done
00:13:803 - dont end spinners on important notes. The end of a spinner is not clicked and thus the player doesnt get any feedback from this intense beat done00:15:946 (2,3,4,5) - since 00:16:160 - has a melodic note i would suggest you use a rythm like this so you properly emphasise the most out of this part https://puu.sh/rCgVx/173f76cda3.png. Note: 00:16:589 - is the weakest of all notes here so it would be wise to put the slider taile over this beat
00:17:232 (1,2,3,4) - off-stack these a bit. Example https://puu.sh/rCh3x/63f2d3c795.png. Here i used 0.05-ish spacing and rotated each for 20° done
00:20:660 - same thing with spinners done
00:22:804 (5) - again, having both of these notes clickable would be preferable since the tail is on 00:23:017 - which is stronger than 00:22:803 - done
00:24:089 (1) - just use a spinner here 00:24:517 - . It would be much more fitting and swap the head of the slider with a single notedone

remapped here
00:29:124 (15,1) - why this much emphasis on this. There is barely anything important on 00:29:231 - in the song, you just put a finish over it. Besides, 00:30:731 (15) - you used a kick here which is a much smoother transition to the next long stream. but you spaced the next one half the grid away... wtf?
00:32:554 (16,1) - lets not begin talking about this
00:32:661 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - or this
00:34:375 (1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3) - these feel way more natural to play
00:37:696 (16,1,2) - same thing.
pls reconcider your spacing in this part, its rediculous

00:54:518 (1,2,3,4) - inear spacing would be more fitting and look less like 2 random doubles. You will be playing 2 doubles 00:53:875 (1,2,1,2) - with similar spacing and then suddenly the doubles turn into a 4 note stream which could be misread as 2 doubles done
00:56:232 (2,3) - dont stack these. Move 00:56:661 (3) - like half across the screen to emphasise this strong piano-like sound I don't see the space will be a big problem here. I've testplayed this part several times (also asked a lot test players to play). It's okay if you disagree with my spacing style.
i have no idea what you did with the spacing in the following part, and i dont have the motivation to figure it out


01:30:947 (1,2,3,4,5) - Why isnt this spacest lower or the same than 01:29:232 (1,2,3,4,5) - since they sound the same if not 01:30:947 (1,2,3,4,5) - even weaker done
01:50:661 (2) - emphasise the wubs with slider shapes mb ?done, but I am REALLY bad at slider art, and that's why I always prefer simple sliders. I am afraid that it will be even worse if I spam weird sliders even though I am not capable of currently.
01:50:661 (2,1,2,6,1) - same and so on...

02:42:947 (1) - like this https://puu.sh/rCi36/2d88a2f377.png Done
02:48:518 (3,4,5,6,7,8,9) - spacing, rythm and visual representation isnt rly complimenting the music. You did it a lot better later on Done

The map gets a bit better after this, the climax is decently done, but i stopped playing before i hit it.

this needs a lot of work and i see you dont have much experience yet. You should be able to make this better if you put the effort doe

gl&hf mapping Thank you
Moe
99 posts
Joined December 2013
Topic Starter
Moe

Chocobo wrote:

明天爬起来摸；
先射个星星；
眼前一亮啊，确实做得好；
MODDING
没有kiai time；
aimod有大量报错不知道是不是改过offset；
1. 00:30:839 - 我觉得可以用稍微长一点的滑条or连续几个短滑条过渡，单一个感觉有点突兀；
2. 00:34:375 (1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3) - 这几个摆摆好？
3. 00:45:303 - 这个地方还是建议补一个note，和前面一致顺便和后面的长滑条区分；
4. 00:50:661 (3,4) - 感觉漏音了，我觉得可以连在一起；
5. 00:54:732 (3,4) - 3,4互换一下位置？
6. 00:55:374 - 这个地方感觉可以加个音效；
7. 01:09:232 (2) - holy shit 1/6；
8. 01:35:874 - 这一段三角跳的方向可以试着可以设置一下；
9. 01:51:947 (2,3,4,5,6) - 摆的不好看；
10. 01:54:947 (1,2,3,4,5) - 我听出来是2个1/4滑条加四个单点；
11. 02:00:089 (1,2,3) - 间距问题，还有这个单戳挺丧病的；
12. 02:00:839 (8) - 要是能协调前面把这个blanket到滑条9里面可能好一些；
顺便一提，8分拍特别密，我感觉这是6分拍，但是非常不确定，建议仔细看一下；
13. 02:07:232 (2) - 太大；
14. 02:08:089 (3,1) - 太大而且flow略迷；
15. 02:10:375 (1,2,3,1,2,3) - 间距问题；
16. 02:23:232 (3) - 可以转一下(((((
17. 02:28:804 (4,5,6,7) - 我建议这四个摆在一起，单独把8,9隔离开来，7,8之间最好有点间距；
18. 02:30:089 (9) - - hitsound；
19. 02:30:947 (1) - 额....来点形状；
20. 02:55:589 (3,4,5) - 形状；
21. 03:01:375 (1,2) - 这个flow有点。
22. 03:16:214 (4,5,6,7,1,2,3,4,5) - 我觉得可以摆得亲民一点；
23. 03:19:589 (5) - NC；
24. 03:22:589 (5) - ^；
25. 03:24:089 - 这一段简直起飞；
26. 03:33:089 - 这一段到03:36:089怎么没音效了；
27. 04:04:089 - 这一部分感觉漏音了，尝试用点来回滑条？
28. 04:40:803 (1) - 转盘从这儿开始；
29. 04:42:946 - 用尾音做下个section的首音总感觉有些奇怪，不如给尾巴加个音效？
高潮部分的一些滑条拜访我觉得可以看看这位的：https://osu.ppy.sh/b/1023091
一些琐碎的blanket和遮挡就不写了，全部列出来感觉很zz；
要是能app请我吃饭啊！！！
改了不少，感谢mod
Start
289 posts
Joined December 2012
Start

Remilia_CO wrote:

Daybreak
  1. 00:17:660 (2,3,4) - 统一间距
  2. 01:10:160 - 漏音了
  3. 01:36:518 (2,3,4,5) - 点击顺序是一直顺时针来，然而跟BGM里的四个音符的高低顺序感觉不太搭
  4. 后面几个三角也类似
  5. 01:49:804 (1) - unrankable滑条啊
  6. 02:00:089 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9) - 考虑用NC分个组
  7. 02:52:804 (4,5) - nazi
  8. 03:52:589 - 这里应该是滑条头。


Good luck XD
Moe
99 posts
Joined December 2013
Topic Starter
Moe

Start wrote:

Remilia_CO wrote:

Daybreak
  1. 00:17:660 (2,3,4) - 统一间距 OK
  2. 01:10:160 - 漏音了 OK
  3. 01:36:518 (2,3,4,5) - 点击顺序是一直顺时针来，然而跟BGM里的四个音符的高低顺序感觉不太搭 THAT'S IT
  4. 后面几个三角也类似
  5. 01:49:804 (1) - unrankable滑条啊 OK
  6. 02:00:089 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9) - 考虑用NC分个组 OK
  7. 02:52:804 (4,5) - nazi ??
  8. 03:52:589 - 这里应该是滑条头。Changed in the other way


Good luck XD
Thanks!
Azure
771 posts
Joined November 2010
Azure
Hello,from the queue

[General]
  1. BG的尺寸不對，BG應該是1366*768要不就是1024*768，只能有這兩種比例
  2. TAG裡把Red Eyed Girl NGC 3.14刪掉，因為title跟artist已經有了
  3. Aimod裡有關對齊時間軸的部分記得都要改掉才可以進pending
  4. 其實這歌可以多下點音效，也有鼓點可以跟，如果不知道怎麼弄自定義音效的話發pm給我或在遊戲裡敲我
  5. 整張圖我覺得挺好的，但有礙於現在(屎)rule太多，很多部分可能都是unrank的...
[Daybreak]
  1. 00:18:518(4) 跟前面三個一樣保持相同間距，這裡有點太短了
  2. 00:21:089 NC拿掉 下在 00:22:374
  3. 00:27:517 這段開始連續的一大串note可能有unrank的風險因為太長了
  4. 00:48:947 (3,4) 這兩個的疊法我覺得弄得跟(1,2)一樣比較好
  5. 00:52:375 變速NC
  6. 00:53:232、00:53:875、00:54:197 NC拿掉 下在 00:54:517 因為1/4的DS改變
  7. 01:00:089 NC拿掉
  8. 01:22:804 (1,2,3,4)這四個note的DS跟後面一樣比較好，然後擺法這樣，因為你後面也有個正方形
    SPOILER
  9. 01:26:232 (1,2,3,4)DS意思同上^ (因為你做到後面的DS變化太大，所以前面近可能的減少變速的地方，被針對的地方才不會太多)
  10. 01:32:661 這裡可以下個note，然後把spinner開頭放在後面的1/4上 (因為還是有音樂的，你前面也是跟那個旋律的吧)
  11. 01:36:089 - 01:42:517 '挺有意思的，但集中在中間會造成讀譜困難，我建議可以散著擺，每個三角形一個地方，有點像花到處盛開的那種感覺 (希望你聽得懂..)
  12. 01:52:268 像這樣的DS改變都會有問題，而且後面也很多這樣的(大概吧，因為屎rule太多)
  13. 01:58:160 這有個音，略過感覺不好
  14. 01:57:517、01:58:374 NC
  15. 02:00:089 (1,2,3) 同理
  16. 02:02:660 拿掉NC
  17. 02:03:518 (1,2,3,1,2,3) 這個應該會有問題吧...!!!??? 因為同樣都是1/4，卻全部的DS都不同，不同就算了還大跳
  18. 02:06:947 (1,2,1,2) slider接note的地方DS保持相同
  19. 02:11:660 (1,2,3,4) DS保持相同
  20. 02:27:947 拿掉NC
  21. 02:28:803 (4,5,6,7,8)擺成這樣
    SPOILER
  22. 02:29:231 這一定要NC!
  23. 02:49:374 拿掉NC
  24. 02:55:910 (5) 拉到中線的位置，讓3尾巴,4,5成一個鈍角比較舒服
  25. 03:04:804 (1,2,3) 原本有點難看，不如弄成這樣
    SPOILER
  26. 03:17:151 (1,2,1,2,1,2,3) 照你跟音樂的下法應該是1/4的DS越來越大，怎麼反而到後面(1,2,3)又變小了?
  27. 03:18:651 (1,2) 和下一個 (1,2)弄得一樣吧
  28. 03:21:276 NC
  29. 03:22:214、03:22:589 這絕對會出事的..
  30. 03:24:089 (1,2,3,4) 這DS應該要一樣，怎麼(4)變那麼近
  31. 03:29:714 (4) slider沒拉好，後面凸出來了 (可以把grid變小比較好拉)
  32. 03:34:964 (2) 這個形狀不好看...
  33. 03:44:714 NC拿掉 下在 03:45:089
  34. 03:49:682 這種來回完全疊壓的連打型note我記得現在是unrank了，因為不能讀..
  35. 03:52:214 NC拿掉 下在 03:52:714
  36. 03:55:682 同理
  37. 03:57:464 (1,1,1) NC都拿掉
  38. 03:58:589 (1,2,3) 嗯...
總之我覺得圖跟歌都挺好的，梗也不錯，但就是很多地方可能都是UNRANK的，你要有心理準備，祝你好運啦!
salinqi
121 posts
Joined August 2012
salinqi
象征性摸一下 反正都是废话

00:08:231 (4) - 减音比例逼死强迫症
00:18:089 (3,4) - 为何不和前面一样保持0.05x
00:21:089 (1) - NC意义不明，改到00:22:375 (4) - 比较正常吧
00:24:517 - 意义不明的绿线
00:27:517 (1) - 刚开始就来这么长的连打不好吧，建议处理得人性一点
00:32:660 (1) - 我感觉这里是每4个小节一个整体 所以到00:34:376 (1) - 再加音效比较好？
00:50:232 (2) - 这个很明显的鼓点在滑条尾我认为很奇怪，打击感不好，应该放在有打击感的位置
01:12:804 (3) - 和01:12:089 (1) - 尾端贴好？而且234不等距
01:39:946 (1) - 按照01:36:089 (1,2,3,4,5) - 的规律这里不用NC吧
01:26:232 (1) - ^
01:50:660 (2) - NC？
01:51:518 (1,2) - blanket不是很准
02:00:089 (1,2) - 只有这两个挤很不好看，3个一变也会好看一些
02:27:947 (1) - 这个不用NC？
02:29:231 (8) - 这 要NC的吧
02:45:304 (1) - NC移到02:44:660 (3) - ？
02:47:661 (1) - NC移到02:48:089 (2) -
02:51:089 (1,2) - ^
02:49:374 (1) - 大概……不用NC
接下来几段也是，不过NC方法各人理解不同所以随意
02:58:375 (2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - 特别想换成一顺一逆两个三角形……
03:04:804 (1,2,3) - 这个太近了特别难受，尤其3我觉得一定要跟1 2 远一点
03:21:089 (1,2,3,4,5) - 统一吐槽一下为什么又要放逼死强迫症的间距（。
03:22:401 (3,3) - 对齐？
03:44:339 (1,2,3,1,2,3) - 前面单点放得挺开的这里突然这么挤很难受……
03:45:089 (4) - NC？
04:46:374 (1) - 没加绿线导致没有体现那种减弱的感觉 而且04:49:803 - 这么重要的音还是单独放个note吧 滑条尾结束在04:49:374 - 比较好



建议多加点炫酷的音效！
莫敢仰视。
Moe
99 posts
Joined December 2013
Topic Starter
Moe
Thanks for all the mods above!
I'll start working on it soon after I survive some midterms.
Elinia
97 posts
Joined February 2012
Elinia
废话不多说辣

00:20:660 (1,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9) - 这段为啥不和前面一样下NC，不太懂
00:27:517 - 00:32:553 - 个人建议8个1NC，连打好找节奏一点
00:34:589 (3,3,3,3) - 这几个四分滑条弧度再小一点？感觉这个连打接滑条看起来不是很舒服（虽然打起来都一样）
00:36:946 (9) - NC
00:38:660 (2) - NC
02:17:232 (1) - 弧度小点
02:23:232 (3) - 摆成这个形状怎么样（嗯……懒得上传直接QQ传截图了），照顾flow的话后面两个滑条也可以调整一下
02:27:947 (1) - remove NC
02:29:231 (8) - NC
03:45:089 (4) - NC

PS1：萌爷爷教我摆滑条啊
PS2：果然成为变距连打的鬼畜麻婆了吗
Moe
99 posts
Joined December 2013
Topic Starter
Moe

Azure wrote:

Hello,from the queue 感谢mod!除了红字部分都改了

[General]
  1. BG的尺寸不對，BG應該是1366*768要不就是1024*768，只能有這兩種比例
  2. TAG裡把Red Eyed Girl NGC 3.14刪掉，因為title跟artist已經有了
  3. Aimod裡有關對齊時間軸的部分記得都要改掉才可以進pending
  4. 其實這歌可以多下點音效，也有鼓點可以跟，如果不知道怎麼弄自定義音效的話發pm給我或在遊戲裡敲我 好 等有空一定来学习下音效
  5. 整張圖我覺得挺好的，但有礙於現在(屎)rule太多，很多部分可能都是unrank的... :cry:
[Daybreak]
  1. 00:18:518(4) 跟前面三個一樣保持相同間距，這裡有點太短了
  2. 00:21:089 NC拿掉 下在 00:22:374
  3. 00:27:517 這段開始連續的一大串note可能有unrank的風險因為太長了
  4. 00:48:947 (3,4) 這兩個的疊法我覺得弄得跟(1,2)一樣比較好
  5. 00:52:375 變速NC
  6. 00:53:232、00:53:875、00:54:197 NC拿掉 下在 00:54:517 因為1/4的DS改變
  7. 01:00:089 NC拿掉
  8. 01:22:804 (1,2,3,4)這四個note的DS跟後面一樣比較好，然後擺法這樣，因為你後面也有個正方形
    SPOILER
  9. 01:26:232 (1,2,3,4)DS意思同上^ (因為你做到後面的DS變化太大，所以前面近可能的減少變速的地方，被針對的地方才不會太多)
  10. 01:32:661 這裡可以下個note，然後把spinner開頭放在後面的1/4上 (因為還是有音樂的，你前面也是跟那個旋律的吧)
  11. 01:36:089 - 01:42:517 '挺有意思的，但集中在中間會造成讀譜困難，我建議可以散著擺，每個三角形一個地方，有點像花到處盛開的那種感覺 (希望你聽得懂..)
  12. 01:52:268 像這樣的DS改變都會有問題，而且後面也很多這樣的(大概吧，因為屎rule太多)
  13. 01:58:160 這有個音，略過感覺不好
  14. 01:57:517、01:58:374 NC
  15. 02:00:089 (1,2,3) 同理
  16. 02:02:660 拿掉NC
  17. 02:03:518 (1,2,3,1,2,3) 這個應該會有問題吧...!!!??? 因為同樣都是1/4，卻全部的DS都不同，不同就算了還大跳
  18. 02:06:947 (1,2,1,2) slider接note的地方DS保持相同
  19. 02:11:660 (1,2,3,4) DS保持相同
  20. 02:27:947 拿掉NC
  21. 02:28:803 (4,5,6,7,8)擺成這樣
    SPOILER
  22. 02:29:231 這一定要NC!
  23. 02:49:374 拿掉NC
  24. 02:55:910 (5) 拉到中線的位置，讓3尾巴,4,5成一個鈍角比較舒服
  25. 03:04:804 (1,2,3) 原本有點難看，不如弄成這樣
    SPOILER
  26. 03:17:151 (1,2,1,2,1,2,3) 照你跟音樂的下法應該是1/4的DS越來越大，怎麼反而到後面(1,2,3)又變小了?
  27. 03:18:651 (1,2) 和下一個 (1,2)弄得一樣吧
  28. 03:21:276 NC
  29. 03:22:214、03:22:589 這絕對會出事的.. 这个不是很明白 能解释下吗
  30. 03:24:089 (1,2,3,4) 這DS應該要一樣，怎麼(4)變那麼近
  31. 03:29:714 (4) slider沒拉好，後面凸出來了 (可以把grid變小比較好拉)
  32. 03:34:964 (2) 這個形狀不好看... 改了然而觉得更丑了 囧
  33. 03:44:714 NC拿掉 下在 03:45:089
  34. 03:49:682 這種來回完全疊壓的連打型note我記得現在是unrank了，因為不能讀..
  35. 03:52:214 NC拿掉 下在 03:52:714
  36. 03:55:682 同理
  37. 03:57:464 (1,1,1) NC都拿掉
  38. 03:58:589 (1,2,3) 嗯...
總之我覺得圖跟歌都挺好的，梗也不錯，但就是很多地方可能都是UNRANK的，你要有心理準備，祝你好運啦!
Moe
99 posts
Joined December 2013
Topic Starter
Moe

Elinia wrote:

废话不多说辣
其余均已改正 谢谢E神！

00:20:660 (1,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9) - 这段为啥不和前面一样下NC，不太懂
00:27:517 - 00:32:553 - 个人建议8个1NC，连打好找节奏一点
00:34:589 (3,3,3,3) - 这几个四分滑条弧度再小一点？感觉这个连打接滑条看起来不是很舒服（虽然打起来都一样）其实是原来滑条转Note然后把最后两个note变成滑条。。弧度也是对的
00:36:946 (9) - NC
00:38:660 (2) - NC
02:17:232 (1) - 弧度小点
02:23:232 (3) - 摆成这个形状怎么样（嗯……懒得上传直接QQ传截图了），照顾flow的话后面两个滑条也可以调整一下 改得稍微有点奇怪了..
02:27:947 (1) - remove NC
02:29:231 (8) - NC
03:45:089 (4) - NC

PS1：萌爷爷教我摆滑条啊
PS2：果然成为变距连打的鬼畜麻婆了吗
Moe
99 posts
Joined December 2013
Topic Starter
Moe

salinqi wrote:

象征性摸一下 反正都是废话 除了红字部分基本已改正，谢谢Mod!

00:08:231 (4) - 减音比例逼死强迫症 音效之后还要大改，暂时先放一边
00:18:089 (3,4) - 为何不和前面一样保持0.05x
00:21:089 (1) - NC意义不明，改到00:22:375 (4) - 比较正常吧
00:24:517 - 意义不明的绿线
00:27:517 (1) - 刚开始就来这么长的连打不好吧，建议处理得人性一点 可是感觉没有别的方法可以下这一段了
00:32:660 (1) - 我感觉这里是每4个小节一个整体 所以到00:34:376 (1) - 再加音效比较好？
00:50:232 (2) - 这个很明显的鼓点在滑条尾我认为很奇怪，打击感不好，应该放在有打击感的位置
01:12:804 (3) - 和01:12:089 (1) - 尾端贴好？而且234不等距
01:39:946 (1) - 按照01:36:089 (1,2,3,4,5) - 的规律这里不用NC吧
01:26:232 (1) - ^
01:50:660 (2) - NC？
01:51:518 (1,2) - blanket不是很准
02:00:089 (1,2) - 只有这两个挤很不好看，3个一变也会好看一些是个逐渐加大的连打
02:27:947 (1) - 这个不用NC？
02:29:231 (8) - 这 要NC的吧
02:45:304 (1) - NC移到02:44:660 (3) - ？
02:47:661 (1) - NC移到02:48:089 (2) -
02:51:089 (1,2) - ^
02:49:374 (1) - 大概……不用NC
接下来几段也是，不过NC方法各人理解不同所以随意
02:58:375 (2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - 特别想换成一顺一逆两个三角形…… 感觉差不多。。
03:04:804 (1,2,3) - 这个太近了特别难受，尤其3我觉得一定要跟1 2 远一点
03:21:089 (1,2,3,4,5) - 统一吐槽一下为什么又要放逼死强迫症的间距（。随音的高低在变
03:22:401 (3,3) - 对齐？
03:44:339 (1,2,3,1,2,3) - 前面单点放得挺开的这里突然这么挤很难受…… 毕竟有个慢滑条卡速度
03:45:089 (4) - NC？
04:46:374 (1) - 没加绿线导致没有体现那种减弱的感觉 而且04:49:803 - 这么重要的音还是单独放个note吧 滑条尾结束在04:49:374 - 比较好



建议多加点炫酷的音效！
莫敢仰视。
emilia
893 posts
Joined October 2012
emilia
noticed that most of your mods were done in chinese

but if you understand english i think i'd rather mod in english cuz my chinese skill level for modding is still p bad xd

[Daybreak]
  1. 00:08:232 (4) - personally i dont think double reverses play very well when the sliderbody is too long, would suggest you drop the SV for the front part of the map to make this work
  2. 00:15:518 (1,2,3) - make make the rhythm have a clearer distinction between 1,3 and 2 because only 2's slidertail has a sound
  3. 00:22:589 (2) - this maps to nothing?
  4. 00:28:267 (1) - whats the use of the NC here? why not keep it consistent with the 8-8 NC as you've done after?
  5. 00:40:375 (9) - NC as well?^
  6. 00:41:232 (1) - sudden simplification of the rhythm compared to before 00:41:125 (16) - is rather disconcerting. dont really like the sudden decrease in intensity by using slow sliders
  7. 00:46:803 - and this sound will be masked by a slidertick and not mapped to?
  8. 01:08:661 (1,2,3,4) - i think it would be hard for people to read 234 as being on 1/3 timing immediately, suggest mapping a reverse slider instead
  9. 01:09:947 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7) - when you don't NC between 1/4 and 1/3 timings its rather confusing even if you were to change the distances. and at the same time i would still suggest a reverse slider for the 1/3 as at this point the player is still unsure of when the music is playing in 1/3 and 1/4
  10. 01:14:232 (2,3,4,5) - would suggest making the 1/3 note distances comparable to 01:15:518 (1,2,3,4) - , and i'd say its safe to use 1/3 hitcircles now because the player should be familiarized enough
  11. 01:22:804 (2,3,4,5) - whats the reasoning behind keeping this so closely spaced as compared to the instances after?
  12. 01:26:232 (1,2,3,4) - similarly^
  13. 01:36:089 (1) - within this section i was almost consistently misreading the 1/2s as 1/3s and hitting 100s all over the place. would suggest you space the 1/2 notes greater
  14. 01:49:804 (1) - dont really like how you handled the wub parts. the rhythms here were all very basic because all your sliderends seem to end on important notes as well. i would highly suggest this instead, so in this way you dont lose out on any of the rhythm and could've made it more extravagant:
    img
  15. 01:55:161 (2) - any reason for ending this on a strong clickable beat?
  16. 01:59:017 (3) - ^
  17. 02:01:589 - reason for not mapping this?
  18. 02:03:660 (2) - reason for killing the momentum with slow SV even though when compared to before(02:00:947 (1) - ) the intensity is approximately the same?
  19. 02:09:518 (5) - try and NC whenever you have a new SV, it makes it more readable
  20. 02:11:232 (1,2,3) - this stack gave me the impression that 02:13:482 (2,3,4,1) - this was 1/3 as well. would suggest you make the spacing clearer or change the 1/4 section to a slider for as little confusion as possible
  21. 02:17:232 (1) - really intense but the rhythm is as simple as before and the SV is just as slow as before. makes no sense to me
  22. 02:30:947 (1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1) - can't really see the structure within these patterns, just looks very ugly to me. would suggest you keep some form of consistency like:
    1st
    lining them up
    and:
    2nd
    having them all stacked or something
  23. 02:45:304 (2) - any reason to use a special slider for a boring note?
  24. 03:12:089 (1,2) - was completely thrown off by the sudden increase in bpm, would suggest you begin this section by making notes less spaced out
  25. 03:16:589 (1,2,3,4,5) - similar intensity as 03:16:214 (4,5,6,7) - but HUGE increase in distance?
  26. 03:17:714 (1,2,3) - if anything something of this nature is more acceptable compared to^
  27. 03:22:214 (1,2,3,3) - why the inconsistent spacing?
  28. 03:51:932 (2,3,4,5) - even though i could FC this section im still not sure why you've made it so much more intense compared to 03:49:682 (2,3,4,5) - when they are of basically the same musical structure
  29. 03:54:651 - missing strong beat?
  30. 03:56:714 (1) - missing a lot of strong beats within this slider imo
  31. 04:04:589 (1,2) - looks really cluttered and messy
  32. 04:19:214 (1,2,1,2,1,2) - dont like this sudden increase in distance compared to 04:18:089 (1,2,1,2,1,2) - , im sure you can still incorporate 120deg rotation flow in some other way
  33. 04:30:589 (2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9) - similar intensity as 04:27:589 (2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3) - but for whatever reason a stream instead
  34. 04:37:374 (1,2,3) - nothing on sliderend 1
  35. 04:46:374 (1) - why not just map a spinner like you've done before

    i dont particularly agree with a lot of things you've done with your map. firstly, you brute forcing the drain time by mapping the really boring intro and ending is kinda iffy to me already. not just that, it also just seems like you've just chosen to not think much about patterns and slapped on whatever you pleased as long as it made sense to you, as such i can't really find a structure within your map. not just patterns wise or drain time wise, i think you've handled a lot of the rhythms really poorly, be it skipping beats or choosing not to map certain rhythms for whatever reason. importance of clickable beats with sliderheads or hitcircles should be greatly emphasised and not brought over with merely slidertails because it can make playing this very uncomfortable. as much as these reasons, i think intensity wise you arent very good at that as well because some parts literally sound the same as others but are mapped with completely different intensity, which can throw players off when playing your map.

    i didnt really enjoy playing the map or song and i really would say remap but thats a little harsh, but you do have a lot of things you need to work on imo

    gl
Moe
99 posts
Joined December 2013
Topic Starter
Moe

[ Emillia ] wrote:

noticed that most of your mods were done in chinese

but if you understand english i think i'd rather mod in english cuz my chinese skill level for modding is still p bad xd

[Daybreak]
  1. 00:08:232 (4) - personally i dont think double reverses play very well when the sliderbody is too long, would suggest you drop the SV for the front part of the map to make this work
  2. 00:15:518 (1,2,3) - make make the rhythm have a clearer distinction between 1,3 and 2 because only 2's slidertail has a sound
  3. 00:22:589 (2) - this maps to nothing?
  4. 00:28:267 (1) - whats the use of the NC here? why not keep it consistent with the 8-8 NC as you've done after?
  5. 00:40:375 (9) - NC as well?^
  6. 00:41:232 (1) - sudden simplification of the rhythm compared to before 00:41:125 (16) - is rather disconcerting. dont really like the sudden decrease in intensity by using slow sliders Strong drum beats start here, therefore I follow them instead. I did not change the SV in the whole 25 seconds.
  7. 00:46:803 - and this sound will be masked by a slidertick and not mapped to?
  8. 01:08:661 (1,2,3,4) - i think it would be hard for people to read 234 as being on 1/3 timing immediately, suggest mapping a reverse slider instead
  9. 01:09:947 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7) - when you don't NC between 1/4 and 1/3 timings its rather confusing even if you were to change the distances. and at the same time i would still suggest a reverse slider for the 1/3 as at this point the player is still unsure of when the music is playing in 1/3 and 1/4
  10. 01:14:232 (2,3,4,5) - would suggest making the 1/3 note distances comparable to 01:15:518 (1,2,3,4) - , and i'd say its safe to use 1/3 hitcircles now because the player should be familiarized enough
  11. 01:22:804 (2,3,4,5) - whats the reasoning behind keeping this so closely spaced as compared to the instances after?
  12. 01:26:232 (1,2,3,4) - similarly^
  13. 01:36:089 (1) - within this section i was almost consistently misreading the 1/2s as 1/3s and hitting 100s all over the place. would suggest you space the 1/2 notes greater
  14. 01:49:804 (1) - dont really like how you handled the wub parts. the rhythms here were all very basic because all your sliderends seem to end on important notes as well. i would highly suggest this instead, so in this way you dont lose out on any of the rhythm and could've made it more extravagant:
    img
  15. 01:55:161 (2) - any reason for ending this on a strong clickable beat?
  16. 01:59:017 (3) - ^
  17. 02:01:589 - reason for not mapping this?
  18. 02:03:660 (2) - reason for killing the momentum with slow SV even though when compared to before(02:00:947 (1) - ) the intensity is approximately the same?
  19. 02:09:518 (5) - try and NC whenever you have a new SV, it makes it more readable
  20. 02:11:232 (1,2,3) - this stack gave me the impression that 02:13:482 (2,3,4,1) - this was 1/3 as well. would suggest you make the spacing clearer or change the 1/4 section to a slider for as little confusion as possible
  21. 02:17:232 (1) - really intense but the rhythm is as simple as before and the SV is just as slow as before. makes no sense to me
  22. 02:30:947 (1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1) - can't really see the structure within these patterns, just looks very ugly to me. would suggest you keep some form of consistency like:
    1st
    lining them up
    and:
    2nd
    having them all stacked or something
    well...
  23. 02:45:304 (2) - any reason to use a special slider for a boring note? I'll take that as a suggestion. But I do see many maps using special sliders for ordinary notes
  24. 03:12:089 (1,2) - was completely thrown off by the sudden increase in bpm, would suggest you begin this section by making notes less spaced out
  25. 03:16:589 (1,2,3,4,5) - similar intensity as 03:16:214 (4,5,6,7) - but HUGE increase in distance?
  26. 03:17:714 (1,2,3) - if anything something of this nature is more acceptable compared to^
  27. 03:22:214 (1,2,3,3) - why the inconsistent spacing?
  28. 03:51:932 (2,3,4,5) - even though i could FC this section im still not sure why you've made it so much more intense compared to 03:49:682 (2,3,4,5) - when they are of basically the same musical structure The music itself is something like that
  29. 03:54:651 - missing strong beat? Yes but I am folowing something else
  30. 03:56:714 (1) - missing a lot of strong beats within this slider imoI've turned the speed to 25%, still found nothing to be added
  31. 04:04:589 (1,2) - looks really cluttered and messy uhh...why?
  32. 04:19:214 (1,2,1,2,1,2) - dont like this sudden increase in distance compared to 04:18:089 (1,2,1,2,1,2) - , im sure you can still incorporate 120deg rotation flow in some other way
  33. 04:30:589 (2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9) - similar intensity as 04:27:589 (2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3) - but for whatever reason a stream instead
  34. 04:37:374 (1,2,3) - nothing on sliderend 1
  35. 04:46:374 (1) - why not just map a spinner like you've done before That's the thing. I've changed it between spinner and slider back and forth for several times in different mods, might make a final decision later.

    i dont particularly agree with a lot of things you've done with your map. firstly, you brute forcing the drain time by mapping the really boring intro and ending is kinda iffy to me already. Waiiiiiit. We can't skip any parts just due to their intensity.
    not just that, it also just seems like you've just chosen to not think much about patterns and slapped on whatever you pleased as long as it made sense to you, as such i can't really find a structure within your map.
    It took me at least 5 mins for mapping every single second.
    not just patterns wise or drain time wise, i think you've handled a lot of the rhythms really poorly, be it skipping beats or choosing not to map certain rhythms for whatever reason. Possibly I am not following the same track as you did.
    importance of clickable beats with sliderheads or hitcircles should be greatly emphasised and not brought over with merely slidertails because it can make playing this very uncomfortable. as much as these reasons, i think intensity wise you arent very good at that as well because some parts literally sound the same as others but are mapped with completely different intensity, which can throw players off when playing your map.OK, got it :D

    i didnt really enjoy playing the map or song and i really would say remap but thats a little harsh, but you do have a lot of things you need to work on imoSorry to hear that. Really appreciate your help :w

    gl
Taking most of the advice listed above, except for those replied by red text. Thank you!
BanchoBot
w00t p00t
34,830 posts
Here since the beginning
BanchoBot
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.
Please sign in to reply.

New reply

0
1 / 17