1. osu! forums
  2. Beatmaps
  3. Ranked/Approved Beatmaps
show more
posted
helo our m4m in case you forgot!! https://osu.ppy.sh/s/559097

sry if i go over some points in the other mods cause i see you havent applied them yet but i really dont wanna check every time i make a point sorry :?

Normal

  1. 00:00:636 - is this snapped to this on purpose? honestly just snap it to the 00:00:584 - and make the line straight will be way less likely to miss the slider end for noob (looking ahead it appears this is definitely not snapped like this on purpose lol)
  2. 00:06:834 (1,2) - DS, also the blanket is a little bit fucked lol
  3. 00:06:834 (1,2,1) - when you fix the DS on this be sure to make it a proper triangle too cause that would be swell
  4. 00:09:334 (1) - imo this shouldnt be NC'd because it looks a little spammy with 00:08:501 (1) - NC'd
  5. 00:14:751 (4,2) - maybe you might want to avoid this overlap? it seems like it would be mind melting for noob player
  6. 00:22:668 (2,3) - if you found a way to stack these it would make your structure juicy
  7. 00:41:834 (1) - this shape is pretty d tbh
  8. 00:52:668 (3) - its unnecessary to extend this slider, just like the other missnapped one i think this is also missnapped but if it isn't i think it should be just snapped to 00:52:668 (3) to avoid noob confusion!
  9. 00:56:418 - is this enough spinner recovery time?? you might wanna shorten it by a bar but im not 100%
  10. 00:58:084 (1) - okay if i was a noob i'd totally click the slider end here, especially since it has a bright flashing repeat that draws them in and the slider flow suggests that the repeat arrow would be clickable
  11. 00:58:084 (1,2) -
  12. 01:00:168 (1,1) - this isnt properly stacked D: also are you sure you wanna use stacks in this diff seeing as they don't occur often and this is lowest diff in the set? should follow Easy rules but its probably fine, just suggesting because its probably not a big hassle to change the stack and it'd be safe
  13. 01:30:375 (3) - DS
  14. 01:52:388 - ok this one SHOULD be snapped to here instead of where you snapped it tbh, this won't have any impact on the player reading wise but will sound 1000000000x times better
  15. 02:03:082 - okay if the last spinner was close this one is way way too close
  16. 02:21:832 (1) - unsnapped but i laughed out loud when i saw the slider ticks
  17. 02:29:332 (3,1,2) - can you avoid this overlap? seems like it would be very confusing for noob as well as it is quite ugly
  18. 02:36:832 (2,1) - this might be a kind of aids suggestion but im quite surprised this didnt blanket lol
  19. 02:40:165 (2,1) - can you separate these a bit more so that there isnt a barely overlap between the two?
  20. 02:46:832 (3) - DS
  21. 02:48:777 - i think this is a bit late in the map to be introducing this new rhythm, you could make it one slider? like this
    this applies to all 3 at the end

    nice lower diff!

Hard

  1. 00:06:209 (3,4,5,1) - this hexagon is not a real hexagon >:(
  2. 00:24:334 (4,5) - can you avoid this the rest of your structure is so good!!!! ! ! ! ! !! !
  3. 00:44:751 (4,1) - wooooaooaoooooo thats way too far for that, im assuming you meant to snap 00:44:751 (4) - to 00:45:376 -
  4. 00:58:918 (3,4) - can you make the angle of this more extreme so that the overlap doesnt look so cluttered with the slider ends
  5. 01:09:334 (3,4,5,6,1) - this would be a lot less cluttered + fit your structure better if you made this a triangle and adjusted the following pattern accordingly
  6. 01:12:251 (2,3) - same complaint about making this more extreme to be less cluttered
  7. this continues to occur throughout the segment so i wont mention it: i understand why its the way it is rn i just think it looks super cluttered and might get a little confusing to newer player but up 2 you
  8. 01:16:834 (1,2) - this is a lot better as an example
  9. 01:31:833 - break here?
  10. 01:41:832 (1,3) - can you separate these like 01:45:166 (1,2,3)
  11. 02:01:832 to 02:16:832 - lol the intensity of this section alone makes me think maybe you should consider having an advanced diff
  12. 02:41:832 (1) - not even

    nice hard but its quite intense compared to normal: i know that the bpm is quite low so 1/4 isnt as big of a deal but there sure is a lot of it in this map, maybe making an advanced diff with a lot of 1/2 and minimal 1/4 would be a good solution for the spread

UC's Insane

  1. 00:01:834 (7,1,2) - this is pretty unreadable for low insane player, spacing like you did for 00:05:480 - would be a lot better even though i appreciate the idea behind your pattern
  2. 00:24:438 (5) - ctrl g this for noob? i appreciate the pattern but not for this difficulty level
  3. 00:28:918 (2,3,4,5) - i see what you're trying to do with the stream shaping but it looks really really bad, especially because 00:28:501 (1,2) - and 00:29:022 (3,4) - aren't the same spacing apart
  4. 00:40:168 (2,4,5) - can you structure this so 00:40:168 (2) - and 00:41:001 (4,5) - are separated, or 00:40:168 (2,4,5) - is all the same level of overlapped
  5. 00:47:876 (1,2,1) - using the same spacing for 1/4 as 1/2 literally in the next note is really jarring for this player, maybe connect 00:48:084 (2,1) ala 00:48:709 (1,2) -
  6. 00:49:334 - it would be more intuitive for a longer stream to make this note clickable especially because its a clap imo
  7. 01:18:501 - another note that is very very very strong, super weird to see the emphasis being placed on 01:18:605 - with a stream jump when the real emphasis should be on 01:18:501 -
  8. 01:19:126 (6,7) - what is this flow
  9. 01:25:376 (1,3) - why not just stack this?
  10. 01:27:251 (1,2) - perhaps make this a tiny bit more spaced because it is very easy to read it as 1/4 this way
  11. 01:27:945 (4,7) -
  12. 01:35:166 - this section is a pretty gnarly diff spike from the rest of the map in a very calm section, imo you should just establish the way the 1/3 is spaced and stick to it, these kind of jumps are too complicated for this spread + difficulty level without having a simpler insane which i doubt is feasible because of how low star this map is: this is a calm section there doesn't need to be difficult aim, the difficulty here for the player comes from simply playing these 1/3 rhythms. this applies until 01:48:499 -
  13. 02:00:166 (1) - 02:00:999 (1) - you have the whole playfield open to you, can you avoid this bad overlap or make it a better one by overlapping a bit more?
  14. 02:12:943 (2,1,2) - pretty unintuitive flow, maybe you could find a way to put this in a non flow breaking place without ruining the structure
  15. 02:15:999 (1,2,3,4,1) - idk what to say about this pattern to convince you its not good because i feel like if i criticize it you'll just say i'm not open to edgy mapping, but if you've seen my maps you'll know that's the opposite of true so please take it 100% without a grain of salt that this pattern fucking sucks, if you're going to do it like this at least make the 02:16:207 (3,4,1) - even so it doesn't look as bad
  16. 02:19:541 (1,2,3,4) - use the same rhtyhm as 02:17:874 (1,2,3) for consistency?
  17. 02:48:499 - this part is just as fuckd as the part earlier
  18. 02:48:777 (2,2) - can you avoid this overlap?
  19. 02:50:860 (4,1,2,3) - either make this a line or separate it further because right now it looks like you wanted to make it a line then got cold feet and ran away from your wedding
  20. 02:52:249 (3,4,5) - not sure why this isnt just stacked on 02:51:277 (2) -

    this diff needs a lot of work before rank, those 1/3 sections are actually harder than the ones in both the extras through bad design

-PC's Extra

  1. tags and countdown
  2. i don't like the way you structured stuff in 00:10:168 - this section but it's consistent so i can't really complain
  3. 00:12:667 (1,2,3,4) - is there a way to make this shape and also have 00:13:293 (4) - and 00:12:043 (2) - stack
  4. 00:14:543 (2,4) - this would look a lot better if you made the stack the same angle as 00:13:501 (1) -
  5. 00:17:668 (1) - 00:18:709 (2) - really irked to see these aren't stacked when it's so close to good structure
  6. the structure gets a lot better nice maybe you should rethink stuff like 00:10:480 (2,3,4,5,6,2) - and 00:12:043 (2,3,4,5,6,7,2) - when the rest of your structure is much better and different than this?
  7. 00:27:356 (5,6,7,1,2) - not perfect if you care
  8. 00:29:751 (1) - honestly just stack this note on 00:29:334 (1) - and itll look + feel 10x better, adjusting 00:29:855 (1) - to suit
  9. 01:16:626 (10,11,1) - have you considered spacing this out as most of your 1/6 to this point has been all stacked and there is no stacked 1/4 iirc
  10. 01:37:249 (4) - if you NC this it would really help with reading and look better
  11. 01:40:582 (4) - same
  12. 01:47:249 (4) - here as well, skipped the 1-2 pairs because obviously it would be messy to nc those in 3s
  13. 01:53:499 (1) - wow that slider is tight lik my asshole nice 1
  14. 02:05:999 (1,2,3,4) - do you think its unreasonable to space this 1/6 this drastically for reading? i dont think i'd break on this but i know a lot of people would, maybe decreasing the spacing a touch would be nice for reading
  15. wow that whole kiai section is cool nice!!
  16. 02:24:332 - for the record i think this part is fair because of all the 1/6 that comes before it
  17. 02:40:166 (1) - no NC for consistency with 02:36:832 (6) -
  18. 02:52:249 (2,2) - can u avoid this >:(

    nice map fellow polygon mapper

Happily Ever After

  1. 00:13:293 (2) - maybe it would be cute to put this blanketing 00:12:043 (2,3,4,5,6,7,1) - instead of having this icky overlap
  2. 00:14:543 (2,4) - these are a bit close to 00:13:709 (2,3,4,5,6,7,1) - for my taste, specifically 00:14:543 (2) -
  3. 00:15:376 - since you dont NC spam stuff like this later like at 00:45:793, do you think its necessary to NC each slider? i know that there is the building emphasis but i just cant help but feel it feels a little spammy
  4. 00:21:001 (1,2,3,4,1) - making this some sort of proper star or simply avoiding the overlap with the stream with 00:21:627 (4) - because you stack 00:22:251 (4) - directly after would make this pattern a lot better looking
  5. 00:26:626 (2) - why not just stack this on the 00:25:480 (3) - or 00:25:584 (4) - or 00:25:376 (2) -
  6. 00:35:063 (2,3) - 00:36:001 (1,1) - angery
  7. 00:56:418 (1,1,1) - pretty sure these sliders are 1/6 snaps
  8. 01:25:376 (2,3) - make this even please!
  9. 01:58:499 - this is a good meme
  10. 02:49:610 (2,4) - stack these?

    really nice map!

o yeah add kiai and stuff to the lower diffs too in case you forgot

good luck with your set!
posted
this song is awesome
you're probably gonna need an advanced because that jump in difficulty from normal to hard is crazy
conflicting tags in -PC's
maybe try looking for a better bg as the resolution of this one is a bit weird
kiai's in lower diffs blahblah

Normal



check aimod, unsnapped object and distance snap
00:00:168 (1) - gonna guess this was a mistake but if not you should end this on white tick, keep rhythm simple in normal
00:22:459 - maybe map this because it's a cymbal crash and all
02:16:832 (1) - i think this is the wrong section to be doing circle spam in but ya

Hard



00:22:459 - make this clickable maybe? such a strong sound here
00:32:668 (4) - missing finish
00:44:751 (4) - nc?
00:48:084 (4) - nc?
01:31:833 - did you forget to insert break or

UC's Insane



00:32:668 (3) - missing finish
00:34:543 - why ignore this sound ;;
01:21:834 - would be cool if you made this clickable because of downbeat and stuff
01:31:000 - ^
01:35:721 (2,3) - this increase in spacing doesn't make sense at all lol
01:42:388 (3,4) - ^
01:45:166 (1,1) - why so little spacing here but huuuge spacing here 01:41:832 (1,1) -

-PC's Extra



00:32:668 (1) - missing finish
00:35:376 (1) - nc for readability?
00:49:438 (1) - nc feels a bit unneccesary here

i like this :O

Happily Ever After



00:05:029 (3) - there's nothing here, it should be on 00:05:063 -
00:08:501 (1) - end it on 00:09:126 - to catch drum?
00:09:751 (1,1) - a bit more spacing between these would be nice
00:31:279 (7,8) - maybe do something to indicate this is 1/6 instead of stacking like the 1/4 you did basically right before, https://sy.phic.al/i/emegchr.png smth like this?
00:32:668 (1) - missing finish
00:35:168 (3) - nc for the downbeat?
00:40:168 (1) - i think 1/2 slider fits the music here better
00:56:626 (1) - end on blue tick? kinda weird to ignore that sound
01:12:546 (4,5) - same as mentioned before etc
01:21:834 (1) - i know you're trying to put this in the center and stuff but proper emphasis on this would be cool, maybe stack on the head of 01:21:418 (3) -
02:49:054 (3,4) - ctrlg? plays better

gl~
posted

bor wrote:

UndeadCapulet's Insane

  1. 01:39:054 (2,3) - wouldn't this be the jump since 3 has the strong note on its TAIL since that's how you do 01:35:860 (3) - and 01:39:610 (5) - and 01:42:527 (4) - random stuffs sometimes makes the map better
  2. also to make that idea more clear maybe nerf 01:43:638 (1,2,3) - this isnt exactly hard to hit in any way ww
  3. 02:15:999 (1,2,3,4) - I kind of know why you did this, though I think you can make it more obvious m i think it's okay as is
  4. 02:19:541 (1,2,3,4) - and 02:17:874 (1,2,3) - can match, though if you don't want them to it works for intensity purposes. done
  5. 02:23:499 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,1) - spooky ww not hard to hit in any way
  6. 02:25:999 (1,2) - 02:32:666 (3) - these two should match imo ah, that would work well, but i think my way is ok since these sections have different pitches and drum lines, so i used different rhythms to help build into respective sections

Halfslashed wrote:

UC's Insane put ur future mods in noticeboxes pls ;;
00:27:668 (3,4,5) - Spacing seems a bit high for sounds that aren't particularly strong here. lowered spacing
00:29:542 (8) - I wish you did something to reflect the strong chime here (or whatever instrument is playing here). lol that would detract from the drum emphasis imo, i want the whole stream build into the 00:29:855 - beat
00:31:209 (1,2,3) - Simplified 1/6 >.< that's a 1/8 beat, and i mean i can map it but like
02:16:416 (1) - How about a circle + 1/2 slider here to reflect how the string instrument here cuts off? mm prefer my transition, esp bc the drums on those beats are all rly weak

This is pretty "neat" for you, it's weird.

Kaifin wrote:

UC's Insane

  1. 00:01:834 (7,1,2) - this is pretty unreadable for low insane player, spacing like you did for 00:05:480 - would be a lot better even though i appreciate the idea behind your pattern uh insane players can read this easily since the approach circles are so close together the eye can track them easily
  2. 00:24:438 (5) - ctrl g this for noob? i appreciate the pattern but not for this difficulty level uh i think that'd just make it harder bc of the spacing between objects.. insane players understand pretty well how 1/4 sliders work
  3. 00:28:918 (2,3,4,5) - i see what you're trying to do with the stream shaping but it looks really really bad, especially because 00:28:501 (1,2) - and 00:29:022 (3,4) - aren't the same spacing apart oh well
  4. 00:40:168 (2,4,5) - can you structure this so 00:40:168 (2) - and 00:41:001 (4,5) - are separated, or 00:40:168 (2,4,5) - is all the same level of overlapped i cannot
  5. 00:47:876 (1,2,1) - using the same spacing for 1/4 as 1/2 literally in the next note is really jarring for this player, maybe connect 00:48:084 (2,1) ala 00:48:709 (1,2) - its not jarring as you suggest, for similar reasons mentioned before, and it's all still in basic white-redtick clicking so nobody should misread this
  6. 00:49:334 - it would be more intuitive for a longer stream to make this note clickable especially because its a clap imo will consider changing, but rn i like how 00:48:084 (2,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10) - are all rhythmically connected to match how the song drags on
  7. 01:18:501 - another note that is very very very strong, super weird to see the emphasis being placed on 01:18:605 - with a stream jump when the real emphasis should be on 01:18:501 - prob not changing this, it fits the wind-down effect well imo
  8. 01:19:126 (6,7) - what is this flow a common spacing change down a linear motion for emphasis purposes, basically anyone can play this, people that say this kind of thing is bad are being ridiculous imo
  9. 01:25:376 (1,3) - why not just stack this? perfect stack would be rly unpleasant here imo
  10. 01:27:251 (1,2) - perhaps make this a tiny bit more spaced because it is very easy to read it as 1/4 this way would make no difference lol, at 144bpm this should be obviously 1/3 due to approach circle spacing already anyway
  11. 01:27:945 (4,7) - lol, prefer mine though to lead out of the arrangement better
  12. 01:35:166 - this section is a pretty gnarly diff spike from the rest of the map in a very calm section, imo you should just establish the way the 1/3 is spaced and stick to it, these kind of jumps are too complicated for this spread + difficulty level without having a simpler insane which i doubt is feasible because of how low star this map is: this is a calm section there doesn't need to be difficult aim, the difficulty here for the player comes from simply playing these 1/3 rhythms. this applies until 01:48:499 - 144bpm 1/3 snaps are 192bpm 1/2 singletapping [edit: 216, my mistake], so this isn't a diffspike the way you say it is. this section fits well for me, no change
  13. 02:00:166 (1) - 02:00:999 (1) - you have the whole playfield open to you, can you avoid this bad overlap or make it a better one by overlapping a bit more? totally disagree with your idea that this is a "bad overlap", but i moved 02:00:166 (1,2,1) - around for a better play experience
  14. 02:12:943 (2,1,2) - pretty unintuitive flow, maybe you could find a way to put this in a non flow breaking place without ruining the structure nope, this playmotion works great for emphasis here
  15. 02:15:999 (1,2,3,4,1) - idk what to say about this pattern to convince you its not good because i feel like if i criticize it you'll just say i'm not open to edgy mapping, but if you've seen my maps you'll know that's the opposite of true so please take it 100% without a grain of salt that this pattern fucking sucks, if you're going to do it like this at least make the 02:16:207 (3,4,1) - even so it doesn't look as bad ww not changing this, and yes i have seen your mapping, make a full spread for Nounai Kakumei GAARU and i'll bubble it when i become bn in may
  16. 02:19:541 (1,2,3,4) - use the same rhtyhm as 02:17:874 (1,2,3) for consistency? done
  17. 02:48:499 - this part is just as fuckd as the part earlier even if this were a diffspike, which it's not, surely you can agree it fits here for the song's big finish?
  18. 02:48:777 (2,2) - can you avoid this overlap? lol this doesnt even show up ingame
  19. 02:50:860 (4,1,2,3) - either make this a line or separate it further because right now it looks like you wanted to make it a line then got cold feet and ran away from your wedding lmao what a great analogy, but i wanted the slight angle here to separate the beats
  20. 02:52:249 (3,4,5) - not sure why this isnt just stacked on 02:51:277 (2) - again this doesn't show up ingame, unless you're on ez mod, in which case this keeps the objects from stacking and messing up visual arrangements (also prefer this way for playing tho i doubt that's enough justification for you ww)

    this diff needs a lot of work before rank, those 1/3 sections are actually harder than the ones in both the extras through bad design i think you focus way too much on trivial things like standardized visual arranges that only limit how objects can interact. and you also seem to think insane-level players have no reading ability which just isn't true (unless ofc you continue to nerf reading challenge for all difficulties like you're trying to do here)

Syph wrote:

UC's Insane



00:32:668 (3) - missing finish will leave this for xilver to judge since i didn't hs this diff
00:34:543 - why ignore this sound ;; focusing on the main melody line more
01:21:834 - would be cool if you made this clickable because of downbeat and stuff this song heavily goes against downbeat-clicking rhythms, i prefer my rhythm here
01:31:000 - ^
01:35:721 (2,3) - this increase in spacing doesn't make sense at all lol its just basic 1/3 patterning
01:42:388 (3,4) - ^
01:45:166 (1,1) - why so little spacing here but huuuge spacing here 01:41:832 (1,1) - 4th measure of a section tends to be either buildup or wind-down, this one is clearly wind-down so i use spacing like this to show that
Thanks for modding, everyone!

@Xilver, please check the hitsound thingy Syph pointed out
http://puu.sh/v433b/65803ddcb9.osu
posted

UndeadCapulet wrote:

oh well
posted

Halfslashed wrote:

[PC's Extra]
00:11:834 (1,2) - I prefer what you did at 00:10:168 (1) here, since it offers a cleaner switch between the string instrument and drum and back. Right now having 3 1/2 circles makes it less clear what you're following, and due to spacing here it offers way more emphasis here than the previous one. :arrow:While I agree that these patterns are a tad inconsistent, I really feel it allows for more variation. Might consider changing some of them later, but currently I really like the way they all play.
00:12:667 (1,2,3,4) - Spacing is inconsistent with 00:11:001 (1,2,3,4). There isn't any noticeable change in intensity here that justifies this imo. :arrow:Reduced spacing a bit in the first one. Also, considering this is an Extra, it should be fine to give patterns slightly different (usually unnoticable when playing) spacing, imo.
01:12:876 (2,3,4) - It's technically fair that these are the same spacing as 01:12:529 (4,5) due to being in a the same combo, but I think these would be more readable with a different spacing than the 1/6. :arrow:I agree these are tricky to differentiate, but it's kind of a thing I do throughout the entire map. If it needs justification, I think it acts as a reading challenge, which fits well for the mapset imo. Might change if this is unacceptable for hidden though.
01:19:647 (1) - This beat really isn't obvious, so it doesn't feel like it deserves to be clickable. I just wouldn't map this honestly. :arrow:Yeah, I agree.
01:21:209 (1,2,3) - Big difficulty spike considering you didn't use any linear patterns and very few wide angle patterns before this. I'd just change this to a wide angle since 2 doesn't really deserve a jerky halt and it'd be a nice progression of emphasis to 01:21:834 (4). :arrow:Changed to a cross jump similar to 01:30:375 (1,2,3,1) -
01:22:251 (1,2,3) - Doesn't really make sense for this to be higher spacing than 01:23:084 (1,2,3) due to the intensity differences. :arrow:Fixed.
01:25:376 (1,2,3) - I think it'd add a cooler effect if you moved this more towards the right side of 01:25:793 (4,5), something like this (x 450, y 375) (you could also do some other stuff like just ctrl+hing this pattern and moving it to this side of the screen, but that would require changing other things as well). :arrow:Sure, made something similar to the image provided, although less triangle movement.
01:35:721 (3,4) - I'd recommend a 1/3 slider here instead, since 4 isn't really a strong beat. :arrow:Sure, changed.
01:36:832 (1,2,3,4,5,6,1) - This pattern is kind of intense due to the reading requirements for a relatively calm section, and also doesn't really provide emphasis to the strong beats on 01:37:109 (3,5). I'd just map some more sliders here or just change the pattern to include some more direction changes after the stronger beats. :arrow:I prefer this when it's mapped solely to the main string, like the rest of the patterns. However, I completely agree that this pattern doesn't quite fit so well. Should be way more playable now (might also change the following patterns later).
02:00:374 (3,4) - 4 isn't really strong enough to warrant being clickable for section imo. If you changed this you'd also be able to use spacing to reflect the intensity difference between these sounds and 02:00:582 (1) as well. :arrow:Nice!
02:00:791 (3,4) - Similar to the above. :arrow:Changed both. Also changed the following stream.
02:15:999 (1,2,3,4,1) - Harsh difficulty increase due to the fact that this is overlapped by the stream before it and has a massive spacing change. I think if more of this was visible it'd be more predictable, so i'd recommend increasing the angle between 02:15:895 (8,1,2) to fix this. :arrow:This is true. I really like the stream though, so I rotated the stream before it in order to increase this angle.
02:18:082 (3,4) - These sounds don't really feel like they're held to me, so I think circles would provide a better effect here. :arrow:While I do agree this part is confused about what it's mapped to, I think I'll leave it how it is. I really like the variation here.
02:19:749 (3,4,5,6) - On the other hand, here it makes more sense to have 1/4 sliders since you're following strings mainly in this section. As is it's acceptable but it would provide a better progression effect if you did this. :arrow:Same as already stated. I think this stream works wonders for variation.

fieryrage wrote:

pc ext
  • 00:12:667 (1,2) - holy this has like no emphasis whatsoever lmao space this out more or place it where 00:13:084 (3) - is right now :arrow:I like the low spacing as a sort of introduction thing, as well as the difficulty not being entirely based on jumps.
    00:16:626 (4) - remove nc :arrow:Sure.
    00:29:855 (1) - ^ :arrow:I really think this NC made it stand out, but I can see how it isn't optimal for gameplay. Changed.
    00:35:376 (5) - add nc here for spacing change :arrow:Alright.
    00:49:438 (1) - remove nc :arrow:Like previously, I found this to be very nice esthetically. Changed anyway.
    01:00:515 (2) - see my suggestion for xilver above, timing's wack on this one idk if it's just my ears or whatever :arrow:You're right with the timing; it starts as 1/4 and continues with 1/6 from 01:01:001 - . Making this 1/8 is excessive and just wouldn't fit imo, and changing to two sliders would be way more confusing (considering this feels like a hold sound during gameplay). I think the current setup fits quite nicely (again, this shouldn't be very noticable when actually playing the map).
    01:16:001 (6) - add nc maybe? :arrow:Good call.
    01:19:647 (1) - remove nc :arrow:Fixed through last mod.
    01:24:959 (5) - ^ :arrow:Sure.
    01:27:667 (4,7,10) - honestly nc these so it's more apparent this is 1/3 (also it looks neater lul) :arrow:Yup!
    01:41:832 (2) - nc :arrow:Whoops.
    01:46:832 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - ok why didnt u just use distance snap for all these like the ones before this plays like dDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD :arrow:The spacing change isn't too noticable and imo this fits the way the arpeggio is structured (1 and 4 are the same note).
    01:48:499 (1,2,1) - yea silence slider ticks :arrow:Will leave this one to Xilver (assuming sample change).
    02:03:291 (4) - remove nc :arrow:Sure.
    02:13:013 (3,4,5) - pretty awkward rhythm for a pattern like this, maybe stack 4 on 5? :arrow:I think this one plays nicely.
    02:22:666 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - ok no 1 is gonna hit this properly and u know it imo make this 2 repeat sliders, next one should start 02:23:082 (4) - here :arrow:Sure. Might make this a bit more difficult in the future (perhaps like Xilver did it).
    02:23:499 (1,2,3) - and 02:23:916 (1,2,3) - just make these repeat sliders plz this rhythm is like near impossible to hit properly lol :arrow:^
    02:33:916 (3,4,1) - inconsistent spacing idk if that was a common theme throughout this diff i just noticed it here for whatever reason :arrow:I wouldn't call this inconsistent, it's completely a design choice. Makes for good playability.
    02:51:832 (1) - remove nc :arrow:Removed nc on 02:52:110 (2) - instead.

Kaifin wrote:

-PC's Extra

    1. tags and countdown :arrow:Fixed.
    2. i don't like the way you structured stuff in 00:10:168 - this section but it's consistent so i can't really complain :arrow:Sure.
    3. 00:12:667 (1,2,3,4) - is there a way to make this shape and also have 00:13:293 (4) - and 00:12:043 (2) - stack :arrow:Yes, done.
    4. 00:14:543 (2,4) - this would look a lot better if you made the stack the same angle as 00:13:501 (1) - :arrow:I think what it currently is looks a lot better than the suggested angle. I also like how this one is between the slider and the first jump.
    5. 00:17:668 (1) - 00:18:709 (2) - really irked to see these aren't stacked when it's so close to good structure :arrow:Oh dude nice!
    6. the structure gets a lot better nice maybe you should rethink stuff like 00:10:480 (2,3,4,5,6,2) - and 00:12:043 (2,3,4,5,6,7,2) - when the rest of your structure is much better and different than this? :arrow:I don't get this. The structure is just as good and very similar both in the start and later on, e.g 00:10:168 (1,2,3,4,5,6,1) - vs 00:23:501 (1,2,3,4,5,6,1) -
    7. 00:27:356 (5,6,7,1,2) - not perfect if you care
      :arrow:Nice, fixed.
    8. 00:29:751 (1) - honestly just stack this note on 00:29:334 (1) - and itll look + feel 10x better, adjusting 00:29:855 (1) - to suit :arrow:I don't agree with this. I feel it's more readable like this, and I also think it looks better (at least it really looked better when (2) was NC...)
    9. 01:16:626 (10,11,1) - have you considered spacing this out as most of your 1/6 to this point has been all stacked and there is no stacked 1/4 iirc :arrow:There are a lot of stacked 1/4 in this diff as well as 1/6, and I feel there's some sort of harmony in having both apparent. I used spaced 1/4 triples to emphasize more isntruments than drums, and sometimes no movement is better than spacing (again, for emphasis) and vice versa.
    10. 01:37:249 (4) - if you NC this it would really help with reading and look better :arrow:Sure.
    11. 01:40:582 (4) - same :arrow:same
    12. 01:47:249 (4) - here as well, skipped the 1-2 pairs because obviously it would be messy to nc those in 3s :arrow:Yup, agree with this.
    13. 01:53:499 (1) - wow that slider is tight lik my asshole nice 1 :arrow:
    14. 02:05:999 (1,2,3,4) - do you think its unreasonable to space this 1/6 this drastically for reading? i dont think i'd break on this but i know a lot of people would, maybe decreasing the spacing a touch would be nice for reading :arrow:Yeah sure, changed from .5x to .4x
    15. wow that whole kiai section is cool nice!! :arrow:Thanks!
    16. 02:24:332 - for the record i think this part is fair because of all the 1/6 that comes before it :arrow:and now there are no 1/6 before it lol. Still think it fits though.
    17. 02:40:166 (1) - no NC for consistency with 02:36:832 (6) - :arrow:True!
    18. 02:52:249 (2,2) - can u avoid this >:(:arrow:Avoid what D:

      nice map fellow polygon mapper :arrow:Thanks dude!!

Syph wrote:

-PC's Extra



00:32:668 (1) - missing finish :arrow:Added soft finish, although I think this would more be a job for Xilver before copying hitsounds if he's doing that.
00:35:376 (1) - nc for readability? :arrow:Done in fieryrage's mod.
00:49:438 (1) - nc feels a bit unneccesary here :arrow:Same as above (I explained this NC there too).

i like this :O :arrow:Thanks! :O
https://ragte.s-ul.eu/bKOlsQ2u.osu
posted
I updated -PC's and Capulet'd diff. Currently working on mod responses.

I'm not knowledgeable enough in ar, but 9.3 maybe? kind just wanna know ur reasoning | Sure! It seems kinda fitting too. Changed
00:04:681 (4) - idk if you care about additive rhythm | Nice catch. Changed
00:15:376 (1,2,1,1,2,1,1,2,1) - cool effect could be having the triples increase spacing since you do similar stuff with 00:22:668 (1,1,1,1) - (and there is more spacing per pitch stuff you do later) | Nice idea. Changed
00:32:459 - you could have mirrored this rhythm 00:31:001 (6,7,8,1) - | I kinda wanted to focus on the drums on this part, with the changing sv managing the drum's pitch.
01:12:980 (7) - this is same rhythm as 01:12:529 (4,5,6) - | Another nice catch. Changed
01:16:279 (6,7) - I think this should be 1/8? | Hm, no. I hear 1/6th..
01:24:334 (5,6,7) - 1/6 | Good catch, changed.
01:37:249 (7) - 01:40:582 (7) - afterwards you nc this type of thing | True, changed.
01:58:499 (1) - this is so fricken good i love it | Thank you <3
02:24:957 (5) - 1/4 | True. Changed to 1/8th because there's a new sound I could be following and I liked it better c:
02:45:166 (1,1,1,1) - correct me if I'm mistake, but this is free kds? ur sv makes the rhythm do ?? | Yeah xd...that was a mistake. Some lines from other diffs got messed up while I was copying hitsounds. Fixed.
02:51:554 (1) - remove nc? | Done.

HP 6 --> 4 pls (OD to 6?) | Done.
01:31:000 - insert break time? | Done.

HP 5 --> 3 pls (same to OD) | Done.
00:41:834 (1) - could probably make something that focuses on the louder notes like 00:42:459 - for this phrase | Changed slider to longer and removed repeat.
02:21:832 (1) - snap | Whoops. Fixed!
02:53:916 - maybe do 3 1/2 circles or 2 1/1 circles stacked | Did the latter.\


Halfslashed

Happily Ever After
00:32:460 (2) - I don't know how you'd accommodate this in your patterns, but since you're following the whistle or whatever here, it'd make more sense to follow the 1/6 here (preferrably clickable). | I kind of wanted a distinct contrast between the flute and the drum, which is why I changed instruments mid section. I'd like to keep this.
00:45:584 (1,2,3,1,2,3) - If you lowered the spacing here you'd provide some better contrast with the stronger sounds on 00:46:418 (1,2,3,4,1). | Very true! Changed.
01:12:980 (7,8) - Not a fan of similar 1/4 and 1/6 in this section, and it makes sense that you'd avoid that since you did so in the intro. | Changed the latter to 1/6 from a previous mod.
01:36:832 (4,5,6,7,8,9) - Similar to PC, not a fan of how you didn't acknowledge the stronger beats on 01:37:110 (6,8) with this pattern. | The other instrument gives a more consistent beat to follow, so I chose to map to that instead.
01:58:499 (1) - Sexy. | <3
02:00:374 (3,4) - Same thing as PC, I'd recommend a 1/4 slider here due to the lack of strength on 4. | I'll consider it, I kind of want to introduce stream jumps before the kiai to prepare the players to them. We'll see.
02:10:894 (4,1) - Noticeably harsher 1/4 jumps than anything else up to this point on a sound that isn't really deserving of it. I'd recommend a more straightforward movement here but it'd be really hard to accommodate that in your patterning here. | Reduced the angle a bit, hopefully that's better :p
02:15:999 (1,2,3,4,5) - The fact that this doesn't have a direction change after it makes it feel kind of weak, and the fact that 02:16:416 (5) isn't emphasized like everything else in this section has been is as well. I'd recommend ctrl+g and stacking 5 under 1 here (NC it too). Rip pentagon though... | True. I reversed the direction.
Happily Ever After


00:13:293 (2) - maybe it would be cute to put this blanketing 00:12:043 (2,3,4,5,6,7,1) - instead of having this icky overlap :arrow: Super cute! Changed.
00:14:543 (2,4) - these are a bit close to 00:13:709 (2,3,4,5,6,7,1) - for my taste, specifically 00:14:543 (2) - :arrow: Moved them a little bit.
00:15:376 - since you dont NC spam stuff like this later like at 00:45:793, do you think its necessary to NC each slider? i know that there is the building emphasis but i just cant help but feel it feels a little spammy :arrow: I NC'd to indicate the SV changes, which aren't a thing at 00:45:584 -.
00:21:001 (1,2,3,4,1) - making this some sort of proper star or simply avoiding the overlap with the stream with 00:21:627 (4) - because you stack 00:22:251 (4) - directly after would make this pattern a lot better looking :arrow: Moved around to look nicer.
00:26:626 (2) - why not just stack this on the 00:25:480 (3) - or 00:25:584 (4) - or 00:25:376 (2) - :arrow: Sure!
00:35:063 (2,3) - 00:36:001 (1,1) - angery :arrow: Fixed.
00:56:418 (1,1,1) - pretty sure these sliders are 1/6 snaps :arrow: Seems about right. Fixed.
01:25:376 (2,3) - make this even please! :arrow: The goal wasn't to make it even haha. I made them more spread out to indicate better.
01:58:499 - this is a good meme :arrow: xd..
02:49:610 (2,4) - stack these? :arrow: Done!

really nice map! :arrow: Thank you!
Happily Ever After



00:05:029 (3) - there's nothing here, it should be on 00:05:063 - :arrow: Good catch! Fixed.
00:08:501 (1) - end it on 00:09:126 - to catch drum? :arrow: Fixed.
00:09:751 (1,1) - a bit more spacing between these would be nice :arrow: Spaced them out a little bit.
00:31:279 (7,8) - maybe do something to indicate this is 1/6 instead of stacking like the 1/4 you did basically right before, https://sy.phic.al/i/emegchr.png smth like this? :arrow: I feel like the approach circles are a good enough indicator for the change. The stack leniency helps, too.
00:32:668 (1) - missing finish :arrow: Fixed.
00:35:168 (3) - nc for the downbeat? :arrow: Done.
00:40:168 (1) - i think 1/2 slider fits the music here better :arrow: Good idea! Changed.
00:56:626 (1) - end on blue tick? kinda weird to ignore that sound :arrow: I don't think I'm ignoring anything :o I'd like to keep them at 1/6th.
01:12:546 (4,5) - same as mentioned before etc :arrow: I think the approach circles are good enough.
01:21:834 (1) - i know you're trying to put this in the center and stuff but proper emphasis on this would be cool, maybe stack on the head of 01:21:418 (3) - :arrow: Wouldn't stacking it on the head be the opposite of emphasis? I think repeating flow angles are really weak, not to mention the music gets weaker and weaker in pitch so it's logical to place in the center to reduce spacing.
02:49:054 (3,4) - ctrlg? plays better :arrow: Sure!
xilver ext
00:02:876 (4) - yo add a repeat leaving this unmapped is like rly weird :arrow: Done.
00:08:501 (1) - sliderend look ugly asf moving it up a bit makes it look cooler imo :arrow: Done.
00:13:084 (1) - remove nc since you didn't do it 00:11:418 (3) - here :arrow: Done.
00:15:376 (1,1,1,1,1) - also remove like all these ncs lo :arrow: These are placed to indicate SV changes. I'd like to keep them.
00:19:751 (1) - same as 00:13:084 (1) :arrow: Done.
00:26:418 (1) - ^ goddam :arrow: Done.
00:41:626 (1) - ok wot is this nc even here for :arrow: Done.
00:42:876 (1,1,1) - maybe i'm just gay as hell but adding a repeat to these sliders actually sounds kinda nice and doesn't affect flow much here, i doubt ull actually do that tho cuz its overmapped at that point :arrow: It sounds cool but I think it'd be overmapping so I'd just keep it like that for now.
00:50:793 (1,1) - remove ncs (the last one is kinda debatable but first one doesn't really need to be there) :arrow: Changed some NCs around. I don't want to remove them completely :p
00:56:418 (1,1) - remove nc on second slider and silence slider ends plz :Oo :arrow: Done.
00:57:668 (1,2) - kinda hard to tell from the spacing here that this is 1/4, i'd reduce a bit cuz every other pattern like this was never this spaced out and this is relatively calm :arrow: True, Changed.
01:00:515 (1) - if you slow this slider down the timing is wicked off, sounds like it should start on the 1/8 tick so just moving it over to the next 1/8 tick and adding an extra repeat to it is fine :arrow: Fixed, I think. This section of the song is weird :c
01:21:626 (4,1) - y is this spacing so low :(:arrow: Music drops down in pitch and intensity, so does the spacing.
01:24:681 (6) - shouldn't this be on the 1/8 tick :arrow: Don't think so, should be 1/6th.
01:27:251 (1,2,3,1,2,3) - space these out a bit more, hard to tell it suddenly changes to 1/3 rhythm here :arrow: Tried to do something.
01:38:499 (2) - nc :arrow: Done.
01:42:666 (5,1,1) - nc first one, remove ncs on last two :arrow: Did the former.
01:45:166 (2,6) - nc :arrow: Done.
01:46:832 (1,1) - remove nc :arrow: I'd like to keep them like that.
01:47:666 (1,1,1,1,1) - silence ur slider ends and ticks : ///// :arrow: Done :p
01:58:499 (1) - more fitting to end this on the 1/6 end instead, also conveniently makes it harder to 100 on this cuz of the speedup
02:08:707 (1,1) - i get the ncs are here for the sv changes but its kinda unnecessary when they're this close together imo :arrow: Them being close together adds a lot of emphasis I think. This sort of stop and go motion, I did a similar thing with Cherry Blossoms. Also, I think the length is good enough, this slider shape was meant to imitate the speed of a gun shot so having it longer adds to that effect.
02:31:207 (1,1) - remove ncs :arrow: Indicating SV changes.
02:42:666 (1,1,1,1) - remove these ncs too :arrow: Changed these around a little bit.

fuck sakes this turned into remove nc the mod real fast
no real changes to patterns since its polished enough as is though :arrow: Thank you!


Not done yet, I'm planning to nerf the Hard a little bit to fit with the spread, so I should be done with the lower diff mod resopnses in a bit. Thank you everyone for modding!
posted
M4M <3

[Last Diff]
00:01:001 (4,5,6,7) - since the pitch of sounds is going down, I think (7) shouldn't be as far. (I won't be including all these things, because it's dominant error here. It's not that important, just my opinion)
00:03:917 (1,2,1,3,1,2,3) - since this isn't dominant sound there, its pretty hard to guess if its 1/3. You should emphasize it somehow. Combo colours maybe? or NCs?
00:22:668 (1,1) - spacing isnt as far as on the rest of sliders
00:32:876 (2) - Ctrl+G, if done, then 00:33:084 (1) - Ctrl+G this
00:46:730 (4,1) - this looks kinda crooked. Just my opinion.
00:47:668 (1) - hm? 00:47:147 (2,3) - here are the same sounds and there are no 1/8 sliders, so... why is here a 1/8?
00:50:168 - its so empty here, put a slider on (1)
00:57:043 - love that part <33
01:27:251 (1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3,4) - you should emphasize it more
01:28:779 (5) - NC because it's 1/4 not 1/3
01:47:943 (1) - It's supposed to be stacked I think? (or decrease stacking leniency to stack it)
01:58:499 (1) - BAM!... MUHAHAHAHAHA (I see here a witch on a broom laughing lol)
02:53:916 (1,2,3,4,5) - i would put all NCs for fun :D


[The diff before the last one]
00:04:473 (1,2,3,1,2,1) - not cool changing the beat so frequently at short amount of time. Keep one beat divisor.
00:30:793 (4,5) - why so close to each other?
00:35:376 (1,2,3) - spacing?
00:36:834 (1,2) - repair blanket like this
01:08:918 (3) - what's with this red anchor here? other sliders are round.
01:27:390 (1,2,3) - spacing?
02:00:999 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - wut?
02:25:582 (3) - NC?


Hope to see the map in ranked section ASAP! Love it! <3 Good luck!
posted

CptSqBany wrote:

[The diff before the last one]
00:04:473 (1,2,3,1,2,1) - not cool changing the beat so frequently at short amount of time. Keep one beat divisor. :arrow:The only change in beatmap divisor for this part is the last circle (00:05:063 (1) - ). I don't feel like this is a problem as it plays intuitively (for me at least), and it introduces the player to the concept that stacked notes can differentiate between 1/4 and 1/6.
00:30:793 (4,5) - why so close to each other? :arrow:Emphasis. And I think it's on the drums. I feel it fits quite nicely with emphasis in mind anyway, and it plays well.
00:35:376 (1,2,3) - spacing? :arrow:True. Even though all beats in this triple are strong, I think it plays way better as a slider with a circle anyway. I couldn't get the triple to have consistent spacing and play well.
00:36:834 (1,2) - repair blanket like this :arrow:I've moved this slider over as the spacing from the last one is too much. The sliderend of (2) is now blanketed. (and I know how to blanket!! xd)
01:08:918 (3) - what's with this red anchor here? other sliders are round. :arrow:Yeah true, changed.
01:27:390 (1,2,3) - spacing? :arrow:Not quite sure where you're linking (1:27:390 is the second circle, when you link to 1,2,3), and whether you mean the spacing is too big or not evenly spaced out. I reduced the spacing of this entire pattern a little bit.
02:00:999 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - wut? :arrow:Arpeggio goes from being four notes to eight, so an 8 note stream is in it's place.
02:25:582 (3) - NC? :arrow:Sure!
https://ragte.s-ul.eu/iFJi52sJ.osu
posted
this map is sick
posted
True masterpiece
posted

Kaifin wrote:

helo our m4m in case you forgot!! https://osu.ppy.sh/s/559097

sry if i go over some points in the other mods cause i see you havent applied them yet but i really dont wanna check every time i make a point sorry :?

Normal

  1. 00:00:636 - is this snapped to this on purpose? honestly just snap it to the 00:00:584 - and make the line straight will be way less likely to miss the slider end for noob (looking ahead it appears this is definitely not snapped like this on purpose lol) yeah done
  2. 00:06:834 (1,2) - DS, also the blanket is a little bit fucked lol yes
  3. 00:06:834 (1,2,1) - when you fix the DS on this be sure to make it a proper triangle too cause that would be swell yes
  4. 00:09:334 (1) - imo this shouldnt be NC'd because it looks a little spammy with 00:08:501 (1) - NC'd yes
  5. 00:14:751 (4,2) - maybe you might want to avoid this overlap? it seems like it would be mind melting for noob player yes
  6. 00:22:668 (2,3) - if you found a way to stack these it would make your structure juicy yes
  7. 00:41:834 (1) - this shape is pretty d tbh Seems ok to me?
  8. 00:52:668 (3) - its unnecessary to extend this slider, just like the other missnapped one i think this is also missnapped but if it isn't i think it should be just snapped to 00:52:668 (3) to avoid noob confusion! yes
  9. 00:56:418 - is this enough spinner recovery time?? you might wanna shorten it by a bar but im not 100% reduced
  10. 00:58:084 (1) - okay if i was a noob i'd totally click the slider end here, especially since it has a bright flashing repeat that draws them in and the slider flow suggests that the repeat arrow would be clickable yes
  11. 00:58:084 (1,2) -
  12. 01:00:168 (1,1) - this isnt properly stacked D: also are you sure you wanna use stacks in this diff seeing as they don't occur often and this is lowest diff in the set? should follow Easy rules but its probably fine, just suggesting because its probably not a big hassle to change the stack and it'd be safe fixed
  13. 01:30:375 (3) - DS yes
  14. 01:52:388 - ok this one SHOULD be snapped to here instead of where you snapped it tbh, this won't have any impact on the player reading wise but will sound 1000000000x times better yes
  15. 02:03:082 - okay if the last spinner was close this one is way way too close yes
  16. 02:21:832 (1) - unsnapped but i laughed out loud when i saw the slider ticks yes
  17. 02:29:332 (3,1,2) - can you avoid this overlap? seems like it would be very confusing for noob as well as it is quite ugly yes
  18. 02:36:832 (2,1) - this might be a kind of aids suggestion but im quite surprised this didnt blanket lol It should be fine
  19. 02:40:165 (2,1) - can you separate these a bit more so that there isnt a barely overlap between the two? yes
  20. 02:46:832 (3) - DS yes
  21. 02:48:777 - i think this is a bit late in the map to be introducing this new rhythm, you could make it one slider? like this
    this applies to all 3 at the end introducing is boring...

    nice lower diff!

Hard
  1. 00:06:209 (3,4,5,1) - this hexagon is not a real hexagon >:(REEEEEEEEEEEEEE
  2. 00:24:334 (4,5) - can you avoid this the rest of your structure is so good!!!! ! ! ! ! !! ! I don't think it poses a problem
  3. 00:44:751 (4,1) - wooooaooaoooooo thats way too far for that, im assuming you meant to snap 00:44:751 (4) - to 00:45:376 - yes
  4. 00:58:918 (3,4) - can you make the angle of this more extreme so that the overlap doesnt look so cluttered with the slider ends yes
  5. 01:09:334 (3,4,5,6,1) - this would be a lot less cluttered + fit your structure better if you made this a triangle and adjusted the following pattern accordingly yes
  6. 01:12:251 (2,3) - same complaint about making this more extreme to be less cluttered yes
  7. this continues to occur throughout the segment so i wont mention it: i understand why its the way it is rn i just think it looks super cluttered and might get a little confusing to newer player but up 2 you
  8. 01:16:834 (1,2) - this is a lot better as an example yes
  9. 01:31:833 - break here? yes
  10. 01:41:832 (1,3) - can you separate these like 01:45:166 (1,2,3) yes
  11. 02:01:832 to 02:16:832 - lol the intensity of this section alone makes me think maybe you should consider having an advanced diff I'll consider
  12. 02:41:832 (1) - not even yes



good luck with your set!
Please sign in to reply.