Cubzy wrote:

Heh, like the game said, gotta mod this to get this ranked

Teike Conturoru!

Overall: Map's pretty great, you seem to use the tone of the voice on the kiai to difference the spacing(like the normal voice to the "robot" voice). Good job!

00:05:495 (1,2) - You could move this a bit more down and make the second slider a little bit more sharp Like this, on x:252 y:272 yea why not

00:37:859 (3) - moving this slider a little more to the top, to gradually increase with the next jump fix

01:12:222 (6) - maybe(?) rotate this 35º and move to x:424 y:152 sound cool !

01:41:495 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - you could increase the spacing a little bit on this to difference from those jumps : 01:40:222 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - no, i think it'll be really too much there

01:50:949 (1,2,3) - and 01:52:404 (1,2,3) - You could increase those a little bit, though it wouldn't really change a thing yep

02:28:586 (4) - move this a little bit further to the top right? changed angle

02:48:404 (1,2,3,4,5) - you could move the triplet x:333 y:149 nah, it'll kill the blanket

03:36:768 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2) - maybe increase the spacing a little bit(?) nah

03:52:586 (2,3,4,5,6,7,1,2,3,4,5) - maybe decrease the spacing, because it's a bit sudden how the spacing on the stream got larger reduced just a little bit, because i want it to be intense

04:09:677 (1) - increase the slider velocity a bit? nope but changed the shape

That's all for today, didn't find anything on the two last kiais, they were pretty good, if I may say so thanks :3

Arche-kun wrote:

Bonne map, j'aime beaucoup Make this ranked pls

ikorza wrote:

from mod reqs hope it helps

00:12:950 (2,2) - these sounds were here the whole time so why are they being mapped suddenly? 00:12:768 - actually you completely stop the 3/4 sliders from here on but i think its fine at 00:14:222 (1) - since the music sounds different. to mark the new section is coming
00:16:768 (7,8,1) - 00:22:586 (1,2,3) - these are exactly the same musically but youve done things differently in the second example yea but i keep mapping the same rythm anyways so it should be fine
00:18:132 - overmap for no clear reason is not ideal fixed
00:15:677 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - 00:21:495 (1,2,3,4,5) - one uses a 1/2 slider the other uses a circle and they should be the same i think the 1/2 slider is the better choice because it will differentiate it from the previous 2 circles at 00:15:313 (4,5,1) - yea feel better now
00:30:950 (5,4) - stacking these would look knicer aesthetically woops
00:37:132 (2,3,4,5,1) - 00:40:041 (6,7,1) - these are the same sounds and you are using different rhythms for each i relise the the music is in a new section but the sounds at 00:40:041 (6,7,1) - are of equal strength so not understanding the kick sliders here. i used kicksliders because they're without vocal here, but they're fine here
00:42:222 (3) - change to circles and 00:42:950 (6,7,8,1) - this should all be circles it's ok to represent 1/4 as kicksliders, it help emphasizing the next object
00:45:859 (6,7,8,1) - ^ im done with the streams just choose something logical and consistant
00:48:768 (7,8,9,10,1) - what is this spacing change for im not seeing a reason to mark new strong section
00:49:859 (5,1) - swap NC i NC'd to park the back&forth pattern related to the 3 claps
00:52:586 - accidentally deleted stuff? wtf
01:25:132 - suggestion: 3/4 slider here since the kiai doesnt start till 01:25:495 - the music supports it just fine i see your point but i really want to mark the vocal here 01:25:313 (2) -
01:29:132 - 1/2 slider yep
01:49:132 - triple no, but i'll prob change rythm here
03:14:859 - 03:15:132 - strong sounds on slider ends i think it's fine
03:22:586 (3,4,5,1) - random stacks? especially weird on the downbeat as you havent done that before. nothing entirely wrong with the other stack but its random because you didnt do it before yea, i don't want to make this part boring
03:53:495 (12) - lower spacing would work better here as the repeated slider is too easy when its not that different fix

Smolboi wrote:

01:57:132 (1) - ^
02:02:950 (1) - ^ - no cause i want to emphasise the sudden sound you hear there
02:06:222 to 02:17:859 - Too many stacks - huh?
02:40:768 (1) - Replace this with a 1/2 slider - circle fits better imo
03:14:586 (1,2,3,1,2,1,2,1,2,3,4,1) - I would simplify this section, maybe something like this? - that doesn't fit the music. Also git gud

Kocari wrote:

I don't think you really need my help. Go talk to a BN I can gurantee you this will be ranked in one weeks time if the right person you contact will be willing to help you out. Chao!

Mir wrote:

Take Control!

[Extra]

1. 00:12:768 (1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2) - Why do you change rhythm for this section? The song is exactly the same as 00:09:859 (1,2) - so why change it? I don't see anything to emphasize or any transitional reason for this change other than 00:14:222 (1,2,3,4,5) - gonna change the first but will keep the 2nd to mark the newt section
2. 00:34:859 (2) - This should be removed imo, no sound here that I can hear. ops fix
3. 01:07:313 (1,2) - I don't really see a reason for kicksliders here. I can understand 01:06:950 (1,2) - though since there is 1/4 in the background. The ones I mention could just be normal circles since I don't really see a reason to emphasize those sounds - they're the same as almost everywhere else. im deaf help
4. 01:11:222 - Note here since you did everywhere else. ye
5. 01:12:858 (3) - I don't hear a sound here. nah the synth is clearly earable here
6. 01:23:495 (2,1) - Possible stack, but not a big deal. nah intended
7. 01:30:313 (4) - I feel like you should either remove this or add a note at 01:31:041 - since it plays weird having a triple there and then not again at the same place. This goes for most instances of this rhythm. nah, the is the only triple on thoses part, if you remove circles they're really audible , but the others are almost unhearable so i don't want to map them
8. 01:32:404 (5) - Only extended slider? added on other parts
9. 01:34:041 (2) - Could be two circles to get that clickable downbeat. Not a big deal, but something to consider. Could apply this to all other instances. no because i'm mainly following vocals
10. 01:42:041 (4) - Why is this a kickslider when 01:30:313 (4) - was a clickable triple? There's nothing different about these sounds. to make different rhythm
11. 02:03:768 - You mapped this sound everywhere else but why not here? fixed
12. 02:28:586 (4) - This can be a normal circle since I don't hear a distinct sound that should be emphasized using a kickslider and I don't think you use this otherwise. yep fix
13. 02:30:950 (1,2) - Why are these different shapes? In keeping with the theme of this particular combo, 02:30:950 (1) - should be using a red anchor. fix
14. 03:35:950 (5) - Should be removed, no audible sound for me at least. i put it in wrong place -_
15. 03:36:404 (7) - NC here because of downbeat? yep
16. 04:16:222 (4) - Should be a triple because in all other kiais this particular part was a triple, not a kickslider. but here i want to fully emphasize the kiai since it's the stronger parts
17. 04:22:768 (2,2) - This blanket is really off. I try to avoid pointing out blankets but this one is really noticeable. In fact, I recommend you check your entire diff for blankets because I've seen a LOT of them that I've neglected to mention just because blanket mods don't really look all too great. blankets aren't my strong points =w=
18. 04:45:132 (3,4) - I feel like this should be a 1/2 slider like 04:45:859 (7) - mainly because I don't hear a triple for these notes, so the kickslider doesn't really need to be there. You're using circles already for vocals and this kickslider isn't following anything different that I can hear either.
19. 04:53:313 (3) - I also don't see the need for this kickslider either. If anything I hear the sound at 04:53:435 - not at 04:53:404 - which is definitely not going to be mapped, but that's just me. I would remove it. yea you're right
20. 04:58:404 (2) - Same tbh, I don't see a reason for this kickslider, no particularly outstanding sounds here. the same as others kiais

Pretty good map! Good luck getting this ranked! thnaks !

Mir wrote:

#modreqs cuz bored

1. 01:57:132 (1,1) - These feel really weird if 01:57:313 - isn't clickable. Not a huge deal, but it's something to consider. - i still believe that the sound on the white tick allows me to do this
2. 01:57:950 - 02:03:768 - Triple opportunity? - yea thought about it while mapped but decided that it was a bad idea
3. 02:26:222 (1,1,2,3) - Wew this flow. It's kinda a sharp turn from the end of the first 1. Positioning it the same way as 02:20:404 (1,1,2,3) - would flow better imo. - 02:26:222 (1,1,2,3) - flow pretty much just like 02:20:404 (1,1,2,3) - + no player is ever going to play that like the slider suggests lol
4. 03:01:313 (2) - I feel like you could position this more to the center of 03:00:586 (4,5). Not a huge deal. - umm... no, i want my custom overlaps
5. 03:49:132 (1,2,1) - Same idea with flow as I said above. Applies for most instances really. - answered this already
6. 03:52:768 (4,1) - Okay this is probably the biggest problem I have with this part, the slider ends on the opposite side of where the stream starts creating really bad flow and could also cause unfair sliderbreaks. An easy fix would just be to ctrl+g 03:52:768 (4). The same goes for 03:53:859 (1,2) - to be honest. The sliders end in the opposite direction of flow and it could cause breaks/slider end misses. - nothing wrong with the flow here. i wanted to emphasize the change of sound at 03:53:132 (1) - with movement and stuff. i can only tell you to git gud

TheKoala wrote:

#modreqs~

Take Control!

• 
  00:27:586 (2,3) and 00:27:950 (4,5) - i think you should stack these notes since in the rest of this part you stacked them and it would be more consistent fix
  00:49:859 (5) - i think it looks and fits the song better if you move this note further left (around x:216 y:144) since the song emphasizes this note. it also makes 00:50:041 (1) more emphasized which is what you were probably going for hey that's nice
  01:27:677 (6) - looks better if you move this up a little to be in line w the triple yea aesthetics k_hand:
  01:30:950 (3) - id say move this a little further up for emphasis k
  01:56:677 (3,) - i found this quite hard to read. id rather you stack it on (4) since the note is pretty quiet it shouldnt be too hard to read fixed
  02:02:222 (2,3) - you should either add a note in between these 2 or remove ^ to be consistent since both these parts follow the same rhythm. if you add a note you probably need to rearrange the pattern nice catch
  02:40:768 (1,2) - i find the spacing between this and 02:40:950 (2,1) too similar which contradicts the emphasis of the song. itd be better if you moved02:40:950 (2) - closer to 02:40:768 (1) and 02:41:132 (1) - further away since it has a lot of emphasis yea you're right
  02:48:586 (2,3,4) - for every other pattern in the chorus u used a larger spacing between the triple and the note before so why have such a small spacing here since theres not a huge difference in the song gonna reduce the other ones instead !
  03:12:222 (3) - better if u put a triple here instead of the slider to be more consistent gonna consider, but the song is quite different here so i want to say it lol
  03:13:677 (3) - ^
  03:13:859 (1) - NC fits here pretty well yea but i didn't put one 03:12:768 (5) - here, and if i do it'll be quite nc spam with the next downbeat so i don't know
  03:35:313 (3,4) - spacing here is confusing since u usually used an overlap to indicate a 1/4 gap but here theres jump even tho the song isnt different. i like this pattern more how 2 be consistent teach me
  
  image warning its huge

  
  04:11:313 (2) - i prefer it if NC and emphasis was on this note rather than 04:11:132 (1) but what you have works if you follow the vocals only yea that's the point, i follow mainly vocals, and i have sometimes to skin downbeats clickable to follow them better
  04:32:586 (5,6,7) - i dont like the way this plays, a pattern like this flows better changed the flow, but in another way
  
  image

  
  Other than these minor things, the difficulty is very fun and i really like it x) definitely close to being ranked thanks :3
  

Solid set. good luck!

TheKoala wrote:

Maakali's Insane

• 
  02:12:041 (1,2) - shouldnt there be a note between these? its what u did in every other pattern so it would be more consistent to do it here too - consistent with 02:06:222 (1) - this
  02:38:950 (1,2) - same as last chorus - nah the sounds are pretty equal in power to me
  02:40:950 - there could be a note here since theres a strong vocal, but if youre not following the vocals here then its okay. maybe you could do something like this? - yea no vocals (removed image cause formatting lol)
  

Yamicchi wrote:

Hi :3
[Take the remote!]
• 00:04:041 (1,1) - As I can see those 2 are symmetrical, so why not doing something similar to 00:05:495 (1,1) - ? And yea the overlap 00:05:495 (1) - here looks bad, might wanna stack its sliderend with 00:04:404 (2) - fixed
• 00:13:495 (1,2) - these 2 make 00:12:768 (1) - seems odd, I would make those a 3/4 slider too fixed
• 00:48:132 (3,4) - turn off grid snap and adjust them a bit to make it straight fix
• 00:48:768 (7,8,9,10) - stack (7) instead, and I personally think if you wanna emphasize 00:49:131 (1) - with spacing, make the spacing around 0.6-0.7x because the way you're doing it makes the circle look like a bad spacing issues than an emphasis yea fixed
• 00:50:041 (1,2,3) - For the drum emphasis you might wanna make (3) around X160 Y216 to make a different pattern represents the drums i'm scared the spacing will be too much but yea i like the idea
• 01:06:950 (1,2,3,4) - the flow here is going clockwise, so the 4 circles seems weird to me, I'd do sth like this http://puu.sh/sTuG2/c36e03d8b3.jpg yea fixed, but i changed this pattern and next one
• 01:13:859 (1) - Don't be an odd one out make it symmetrical with 01:14:222 (2,3) - pls hehe
• 01:35:677 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2) - highly recommend you to use ctrl + shift + d instead of random place like this. Try it yea i know i was just sooo lazy xD // also did on last jumps
• 01:37:132 (1,2) - The spacing makes me confused if the 8 objects before has ended or not, consider reducing it a bit i did, but is it enough ?
• 01:39:313 (5) - A blanket with 01:39:859 (2) - would do the trick http://puu.sh/sTuXX/3b0dbdee67.jpg i didn't even think of it wtf
• 02:52:950 (2) - http://puu.sh/sTv5F/081db9e475.jpg this is better imo, the flow you're using is kinda linear and weak changed
• 02:55:859 (1) - why not making it parallel with 02:56:404 (4) - ? yep
• 02:58:950 (1) - dont you think the spacing is kinda small for such a "WOO!" ? ctrl g'd 02:58:586 (1,2) -
• 03:08:768 - 03:12:768 - 03:13:859 - you needn't increase the SV for higher pitch, just need to use the spacing, because if you SV change you might have to SV change for EVERY SINGLE PITCH CHANGES which is kinda ridiculous to do and you'll have to NC every time you change, so yea i get your point but i think it's ok here, since it's only the slow part, and theses pitch are really noticeable, that's why i wanted to express it. will change if necessary
• 04:07:677 (1) - quite inconsistent because you put these (1) circles near the last (2) inb4, so why not now? i think it's cooler as it xD but i don't think this is really a problem here

Ok