Saiya - Remote Control [Taiko|Osu]

posted
Total Posts
192
show more
Mir
#modreqs cuz bored

[Insane]
  1. 00:04:768 (3) - Whoever made this slider, it triggers me. (not an actual point it's just a joke lol tho tbh it's probably you Kalibe)
  2. 00:18:404 - Could add a note here and stack it under 00:18:222 (5). I mean you did use sliders to cover that note later, but for some reason this one is left unmapped.
  3. 00:46:132 (7,1) - Straighten this out like the others? Small aesthetic thing.
  4. 00:49:132 (1) - Seriously what even is this grey node for... that aside, make 00:49:132 (1,2) - the same slider?
  5. 01:17:313 (2,3) - This blanket really got me lol, please fix?
  6. 01:23:859 (1,3) - You could stack these sliderends together.
  7. 01:29:859 (1,2,3,1,2,3) - Only linear jumps like this in the map?
  8. 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.
  9. 01:57:950 - 02:03:768 - Triple opportunity?
  10. 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.
  11. 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.
  12. 03:18:586 (5) - Only time this ends on a downbeat. To keep it consistent, map it like 03:21:132 (3,4) - since you use this rhythm everywhere else?
  13. 03:28:222 (3,4) - This is the only instance in this section you use a triple. I don't see a reason since it isn't done anywhere else here.
  14. 03:38:404 (2,3) - This is an awkward triple to play since I would expect another jump and the sound at 03:38:495 (3) - isn't very audible.
  15. 03:49:132 (1,2,1) - Same idea with flow as I said above. Applies for most instances really.
  16. 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.
  17. 04:28:586 (4,2) - Stack these?
[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) -
  2. 00:34:859 (2) - This should be removed imo, no sound here that I can hear.
  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.
  4. 01:11:222 - Note here since you did everywhere else.
  5. 01:12:858 (3) - I don't hear a sound here.
  6. 01:23:495 (2,1) - Possible stack, but not a big deal.
  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.
  8. 01:32:404 (5) - Only extended slider?
  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.
  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.
  11. 02:03:768 - You mapped this sound everywhere else but why not here?
  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.
  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.
  14. 03:35:950 (5) - Should be removed, no audible sound for me at least.
  15. 03:36:404 (7) - NC here because of downbeat?
  16. 04:16:222 (4) - Should be a triple because in all other kiais this particular part was a triple, not a kickslider.
  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.
  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.
  20. 04:58:404 (2) - Same tbh, I don't see a reason for this kickslider, no particularly outstanding sounds here.


Pretty good map! Good luck getting this ranked!
Topic Starter
Linada

Mir wrote:

[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 :D
  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 !
Thanks for the mod !
Makeli

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
Sylas
#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
    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
    01:27:677 (6) - looks better if you move this up a little to be in line w the triple
    01:30:950 (3) - id say move this a little further up for emphasis
    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
    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
    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
    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
    03:12:222 (3) - better if u put a triple here instead of the slider to be more consistent
    03:13:677 (3) - ^
    03:13:859 (1) - NC fits here pretty well
    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

    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
    04:32:586 (5,6,7) - i dont like the way this plays, a pattern like this flows better

    Other than these minor things, the difficulty is very fun and i really like it x) definitely close to being ranked
Maakali's Insane


  • 00:11:313 (1,2) - this looks better if you blanket
    00:12:768 (1) - not a fan of this overlapping 00:12:041 (3) completely. id rather you move it up little (if you do move it dont forget to move the next note up too)
    01:17:313 (2,3) - blanket is a little off
    01:17:859 (3,4) - there should be more spacing between these since theres a lot of emphasis so maybe move 4 up to maybe around x:340 y:36
    01:20:404 (3,4) - i dont like the aesthetic of this note being so close to the slider.you could the slider down a bit (even if it overlaps with 01:21:132 (1) a little) but thats just my opinion tho
    01:23:313 (1,2) - i feel like the spacing between these should be a little bigger than 01:22:586 (1,2) rather than equal to build up a little for the chorus
    01:42:768 (4,1) - id like a bit more spacing between these 2 since theres a lot of emphasis on (1). i like this pattern more and i think it even flows better

    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
    02:38:950 (1,2) - same as last chorus
    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?

    03:42:950 (1,1) - since in this pattern the spacing is gradually increasing along with the SV, i think it would make sense to keep that pattern going with the spacing between these notes and increase the spacing rather than overlapping them
    Other than that the diff is rly fun

Solid set. good luck! :)
Topic Starter
Linada

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 :ok_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

    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 :D
    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

    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! :)
Thanks for the mod !!!
Makeli

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
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) -
• 00:13:495 (1,2) - these 2 make 00:12:768 (1) - seems odd, I would make those a 3/4 slider too
• 00:48:132 (3,4) - turn off grid snap and adjust them a bit to make it straight
• 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
• 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
• 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
• 01:13:859 (1) - Don't be an odd one out :( make it symmetrical with 01:14:222 (2,3) - pls
• 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
• 01:37:132 (1,2) - The spacing makes me confused if the 8 objects before has ended or not, consider reducing it a bit
• 01:39:313 (5) - A blanket with 01:39:859 (2) - would do the trick http://puu.sh/sTuXX/3b0dbdee67.jpg
• 02:52:950 (2) - http://puu.sh/sTv5F/081db9e475.jpg this is better imo, the flow you're using is kinda linear and weak
• 02:55:859 (1) - why not making it parallel with 02:56:404 (4) - ?
• 02:58:950 (1) - dont you think the spacing is kinda small for such a "WOO!" ?
• 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
• 04:07:677 (1) - quite inconsistent because you put these (1) circles near the last (2) inb4, so why not now?

Ok
Topic Starter
Linada

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
Thanks for the moddd Yami <3
Uber
Hey, would you mind having the other versions of this song available for download like this map does. This is extremely nice for me people who like other versions of a song
this vers of the song actually tilts me sorry
Musty

Uber wrote:

Hey, would you mind having the other versions of this song available for download like this map does. This is extremely nice for me people who like other versions of a song
this vers of the song actually tilts me sorry
yea tbh id like a linada cover version way much more than the actual one -_
Topic Starter
Linada

Uber wrote:

Hey, would you mind having the other versions of this song available for download like this map does. This is extremely nice for me people who like other versions of a song
this vers of the song actually tilts me sorry
i absolutely hate reol so i don't want to credit her version :D

Musty wrote:

yea tbh id like a linada cover version way much more than the actual one -_
owo this gave me ideas
Lasse
m4m thing

would be great if you could figure out how to hitsound without replacing whistles with kicks cause it feels pretty lacking for songs like this one

ex
00:09:495 (2,3) - why not sth like http://i.imgur.com/vaXWGjQ.jpg to make it look cleaner and rhythm (1/4 gap) better to read?
00:31:222 (1,2,3,4,5) - could use some hitsounding to make it stand out a bit from other streams that are mapped to way different sounds
00:36:768 (1,2) - can you space this more? other patterns make this a bit easy to mistake as 1/4 gap
00:49:040 (10,1) - is this really needed, yes it makes some kind of sense with the song, but you only do it once and it feels completely random cause of that
01:10:950 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - one of these patterns where the way you space 1/4 gaps seems completely random and inconsistent, makes the whole thing feel a bit weird
01:38:768 (2) - completely wrong emphasis makes this feel really off asq blue tick is way stronger. if you want to keep nice polarity without overmapping or weird rhythm just do http://i.imgur.com/R6Qvkjf.jpg
01:57:677 (2,3) - why the sudden 1/2 stack? doesn't quite work with how strong 3 is
02:01:859 (1,2,3,4) - another good example for really strange spacing choices making 1/2 and 1/4 the same
03:14:676 - rhythm choice seems weird compared to the song's emphasis. probably try sth like http://i.imgur.com/wD7SdLR.jpg (ignore the messy comboing)

if you overlap so much at least get some consitency into them like having them (nearly) the same spacing and stuff, especially if they are part of the same pattern, it just looks so unpolished and a bit random otherwise

idk something makes this feel extremely monotonous, probably the very limited amount of different flow/patterning and all parts looking very "same" :c

i
00:31:313 (5,6,7,8,1) - think simple straight stream doesn't really fit with how "wobbly" this sounds, using a less normal shape would be great to fit with how this stands out musically. like for example http://i.imgur.com/gsdxQUh.jpg
kinda similar thing for 00:36:404 (2,3,4,5) - 00:37:132 (7,8,9,10,1) - they are both on different sounds but mapped exactly the same
01:36:950 - sliderend feels really unfitting for such an emphasized vocal, even if the pattern is nice
01:53:677 (3) - replacing this with a simple circle would be great to capture the music stopping here instead of having people hold the slider
02:21:313 (4,1,2,3,4,5,6,1) - 02:27:313 (1,2,3,4,5,6,1) - :thinking:
02:52:586 (5) - why stack when this is so important :c (smilar ro 1:36)
02:55:859 - rip noticeable change in vocals. sth like http://i.imgur.com/Rl5b5zn.jpg seems more reasonable to follow the song
02:58:586 (1,2,3) - 02:59:313 (4,5,6) - these things are so different (the third object of each) in the song, yet mapped as if they were the same. even just different sv/shapes/movement owuld be so nice
03:14:586 (1,2,3,1,2,1,2,1,2,3,4,1) - similar to ex
04:22:768 - as other kiais
04:31:859 (2) - random stack again // 04:53:313 (6) - what are these things
Topic Starter
Linada

Lasse wrote:

m4m thing

would be great if you could figure out how to hitsound without replacing whistles with kicks cause it feels pretty lacking for songs like this one

ex
00:09:495 (2,3) - why not sth like http://i.imgur.com/vaXWGjQ.jpg to make it look cleaner and rhythm (1/4 gap) better to read? fixed
00:31:222 (1,2,3,4,5) - could use some hitsounding to make it stand out a bit from other streams that are mapped to way different sounds yep
00:36:768 (1,2) - can you space this more? other patterns make this a bit easy to mistake as 1/4 gap done
00:49:040 (10,1) - is this really needed, yes it makes some kind of sense with the song, but you only do it once and it feels completely random cause of that fixed
01:10:950 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - one of these patterns where the way you space 1/4 gaps seems completely random and inconsistent, makes the whole thing feel a bit weird fixed spacing
01:38:768 (2) - completely wrong emphasis makes this feel really off asq blue tick is way stronger. if you want to keep nice polarity without overmapping or weird rhythm just do http://i.imgur.com/R6Qvkjf.jpg replaced to a triple
01:57:677 (2,3) - why the sudden 1/2 stack? doesn't quite work with how strong 3 is changed pattern but i might change the whole one
02:01:859 (1,2,3,4) - another good example for really strange spacing choices making 1/2 and 1/4 the same changed spacing too
03:14:676 - rhythm choice seems weird compared to the song's emphasis. probably try sth like http://i.imgur.com/wD7SdLR.jpg (ignore the messy comboing) yea changed

if you overlap so much at least get some consitency into them like having them (nearly) the same spacing and stuff, especially if they are part of the same pattern, it just looks so unpolished and a bit random otherwise gonna work on it when i'll have free time tomorrow

idk something makes this feel extremely monotonous, probably the very limited amount of different flow/patterning and all parts looking very "same" :c i'd like to not make it boring but i'm bad at creating patterns/shapes >< i need to improve www
Thanks for the mod !
[-Chocola-]
Rank whenn?

will mod later
Makeli

Lasse wrote:

02:21:313 (4,1,2,3,4,5,6,1) - 02:27:313 (1,2,3,4,5,6,1) - :thinking: - i'm not a creative person
02:52:586 (5) - why stack when this is so important :c (smilar ro 1:36) - didn't even notice the vocal while mapping cause i tend to ignore them. I based all of my emphasis on the instruments and here the song supports the standard 4/4 emphasis.
02:55:859 - rip noticeable change in vocals. sth like http://i.imgur.com/Rl5b5zn.jpg seems more reasonable to follow the song - i still hate vocals
02:58:586 (1,2,3) - 02:59:313 (4,5,6) - these things are so different (the third object of each) in the song, yet mapped as if they were the same. even just different sv/shapes/movement owuld be so nice
03:14:586 (1,2,3,1,2,1,2,1,2,3,4,1) - similar to ex - here you can see my tendency to only follow the drums
04:31:859 (2) - random stack again // 04:53:313 (6) - what are these things - stacked to give emphasis to the powerful white tick sound
my answer is pretty much the same for every single one of these points. I just don't follow the vocals in any song which probably isn't really a good thing but me just being stubborn. But i'm going to keep being stubborn about this haha
there are enough people mapping vocals only in this community
PoNo
01:39:859 (2) - je repasse juste pour dire, ça se lis super super mal, je l'ai sight read 2 fois ;-;
Topic Starter
Linada

Ponoyoshi wrote:

01:39:859 (2) - je repasse juste pour dire, ça se lis super super mal, je l'ai sight read 2 fois ;-;
j'ai un peu changé le pattern autour mais je vais garder ce pattern bcz overlap www
Karen
Take Control!
  1. 00:14:222 (1,2,3) - 00:08:404 (1,2,1) - why different
  2. 00:17:132 - where are the claps in this part?
  3. 00:22:950 - ^
  4. 00:22:950 (3) - 00:22:586 (1) - should swap NC? i dont understand your nc system
  5. 00:36:768 (1) - remove nc
  6. 02:32:404 (1,2) - this looks like 1/4 :( confusing
  7. 03:33:859 (3,4,5) - this is so weird, at least make the sliders the same shape
  8. hitsounding can be improved a lot, add more claps or whistles on streams


Maakali's Insane
  1. 00:05:495 (1,3) - pretty weird that you didn't make overlap like previous ones 00:04:768 (3,1) -
  2. 01:25:132 (1,1) - a jump fits more, hiding a circle under a fast slider isn't good to play, at least make something like 03:46:222 (1,1) -


don't have much to say because this is totally different with my style, personally i dislike those inconsistent random overlaps and it lacks structure/aesthetics
the main problem is the hitsounding
good luck
Topic Starter
Linada

Karen wrote:

Take Control!
  1. 00:14:222 (1,2,3) - 00:08:404 (1,2,1) - why different fix
  2. 00:17:132 - where are the claps in this part? what the fuc where are the claps
  3. 00:22:950 - ^
  4. 00:22:950 (3) - 00:22:586 (1) - should swap NC? i dont understand your nc system fixed
  5. 00:36:768 (1) - remove nc fix
  6. 02:32:404 (1,2) - this looks like 1/4 :( confusing fixed spacing
  7. 03:33:859 (3,4,5) - this is so weird, at least make the sliders the same shape changed
  8. hitsounding can be improved a lot, add more claps or whistles on streams tried to arrange hitsounds as much as i can


don't have much to say because this is totally different with my style, personally i dislike those inconsistent random overlaps and it lacks structure/aesthetics
the main problem is the hitsounding
good luck
thanks for the mod !
Pentori
hoi
[General]
like lasse said, you should try to add another layer of hitsounding cos there are a lot more sounds other than drums that can be hitsounded. you can hitsound with kick drums and whistles together if u use normal-hitclaps as kick drums and normal-hitwhistles as default soft hitwhistles. and with that u can add whistles to vocals/techno sounds like 00:28:404 (1,2,3,4) . if this doesn't make sense feel free to poke me ^^

[Take Control]
00:19:132 (3,4,5) - stack looks broken lol
00:25:859 (1) - placement isn't the greatest, maybe u could find somewhere to the top left of 00:25:495 (6)
00:28:404 (1) - 00:31:222 (1) - im not sure if all these nc's are really needed.. like sometimes u nc other times u dont like at 00:33:404 (2) - 00:37:132 (6) . whatever you choose to do you should make it consistent, although i reckon u dont need the nc's since they dont do much
00:36:586 (4,5) - 00:36:768 (5,6) - can be misleading cos spacing looks really similar while the rhythms are different
00:45:859 (6,7,8,3) - could make that neater
00:52:586 (3,4,5) - restack
00:56:404 (1,3) - 00:57:132 (4,6) - scenarios such as these, u can copy paste one pattern and flip it so you create structure
01:21:132 (1,2,1,2) - music is still relatively calm here, so i dont think it deserves this much spacing. compared to 01:22:586 (1,2,1,2) - it has more spacing lol
01:22:586 (1,2,1,2) - i also think u should buff these jumps cos this is the build up
01:32:404 (5,2) - a bit too close tbh
02:00:041 (3,1) - can make this look nicer
02:04:586 (8) - 02:05:132 (3) - 02:05:677 (2) - can u make those overlaps consistent
02:28:950 (1,2,3) - make these jumps bigger? helps to differentiate it from 02:28:041 (1,2,3,4,5)
02:40:222 (2) - clap feels random, just use whistle tbh like u did for 01:24:586 (2)
02:49:495 (7) - nc for that "yeah eh" that u normally had
02:53:313 (3,6) - blankets pls
02:55:313 (7) - nc. same for rest of these, it seems u forgot them
03:17:132 (4) - use a copy of 03:16:041 (1) - it makes the pattern visually consistent
03:52:586 (2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11) - 03:56:768 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,5) - spacing seems a bit excessive. in comparison to how the rest of the map plays, this just doesn't feel appropriate
04:08:950 (2) - 04:10:405 (2) - whistles instead of claps

i kinda get where people are going with this. it feels really freestyle-ish without a whole lot of new patterns
show more
Please sign in to reply.

New reply