no ,We using programs and Brains and HandsShiirn wrote:
>bpm using programs
(ノಠ益ಠ)ノ彡┻━┻
it's obivious you never use it right?
no ,We using programs and Brains and HandsShiirn wrote:
>bpm using programs
(ノಠ益ಠ)ノ彡┻━┻
Shiirn wrote:
bpm is fine in the end since only notes at the end are 5-6ms off, but at that point you might as well throw off the .02. Hurp.
OK,Actually this bpm 180.01 .The change is fine to you?Shiirn wrote:
bpm is fine in the end since only notes at the end are 5-6ms off, but at that point you might as well throw off the .02. Hurp.
well it's fine ,that you admit the bpm is fine so the topic don't need any others argumentsShiirn wrote:
>deltamax XXX.995
ok
I get your point, but mapping is about precision as well. I think it's fine, but it's still not right. I'm not trying to troll either. You're reacting too heavily.
That's not a reason. 181.02 is the correct BPM for thisShiirn wrote:
and timing *cough*
Faust wrote:
Eh, I thought for sure it was Ryu*
It's not compulsory?
Not trying to raise crap here, just that I noticed the lack.
*sigh*Shiirn wrote:
and timing *cough*
ye!Ibuki Suika wrote:
大快人心=Im soooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo happy!!!!!!!!
Well over a course of some time, lets say 1:30 cause the map is that long, even a 0.02 bpm can be felt pretty heavily.ziin wrote:
you've got a 20 ms window to hit a note on OD10. If the beginning is 5 ms late and ending is 5 ms early all it does is cut it to a 10 ms/30 ms window.
Timing stuff to be absolutely exact is pointless since you're never going to get it 100% right. Of course this message is to both the people saying 181.000 and 181.020 bpm. I don't see the point in changing the BPM if it's sorta close to a whole number like this, unless there's a better reason like Alace mentioned.
You did read the thread, right?Anticloud wrote:
why be unranked?