Lasse wrote:

your mp3 quality is too high, it's 192kbps, but 192 is the maximum rankable except for some featured artist things the mp3 is VBR V2 which has been stated to be an acceptable encoding p/1358291

I see you want for that .1 thing for you difficulty settings, though I think od9.1 is a bit high for this type of map, especially on low bpm and makes it rather painful to play, but 8.1 might be too low so lol i think since this is a very rhythmic intensive map od9.1 makes sense

01:06:563 - you might want to change sampleset everywhere to S:C1 and add a silenced soft-sliderslide.wav and a custom soft-hitclap.wav
some interesting ideas, but overall it seemed quite messy perhaps, though i think it is good as is. there are a lot of different sections / themes of hitsounding in this map and i worry about complicating it further

00:06:563 (1,1,1,1,1,2) - immediately at thestart one the biggest issues is noticeable: the visuals just feel pretty random and cluttered, because everything overlaps so randomly. if you want to overlap thigs which are noticeable ingame you'd usually want some consistency behind how they overlap
compare what you have currently with something that just utilizes some stacks instead and plays pretty much the same: http://i.imgur.com/M54g1TF.jpg i went through and fixed some overlaps, though i feel many are okay for this beatmap. one of the themes of the map is microflow and thus consequently, reading
00:08:018 (1,2) - another example where you could just perfectly overlap the slidertail of 2 with 1-body http://i.imgur.com/V3rUv7P.jpg
basically happens throughout the whole map, like 00:10:563 (2,3,1,2,3,1,1) - etc. i do not like overlapping slider tails on another slider perfectly, as it joins them and looks quite ugly to me, it connects patterns that i prefer to have visually separated

a similar issue are seemingly random patterns like 00:09:472 (1,1,1,1) - => 00:09:654 (1,1,1) - is pretty nice, but why is 00:09:472 (1) - placed where it is right now? musically it would belong with the others (be in the same pattern), like you did on 00:06:563 (1,1,1,1) -
same thing hapeens a lot and just contributes even more to a very unstructured feeling map i agree that maybe visually some of these cases do not look connected but i worked around this by resuing slider shapes very often to connect patterns and instead focus very hard on the flow to articulate the music.

00:11:654 (1,1,2,1) - this is quite awkward to play because of the linear movement together with slowdown on 00:11:654 (1,1,2) - but then speedup to hit 00:12:018 (1) - combined with rhythm changes. how about moving 00:11:654 (1) - to get something like http://i.imgur.com/VYEwDvv.jpg ? this would contrast the two 1/4 circles' movement with the jump even more which is dangerous, it would make the aim even more jagged
00:16:018 (1,2,1,2) - I think this should use a different sv from your other 1.5x patterns as the sounds are so different musically its the same as 00:10:927 (1,2,3) except that it repeats the first beat
also 00:16:290 (2,1) - these things are just extremely annoying to play, you got from fast slider to stop to big active 1/4 jump, sth like http://i.imgur.com/nyG1NOk.jpg would work better and still give a fitting emphasis due to the 1s being at the end of doubles // similar for 00:26:927 (1,2,1) - etc. this flows very poorly imo and de-emphasizes the downbeat
00:19:563 (3) - seems to be missing some hitsound its the same as all others in this section, drum sampleset, whistle addition
00:22:290 (1,2) - high pitched musical pattern continues here and you spaced the last double so idk why this would be stacked following drum sounds 00:10:927 (1,2,3), fits well since high pitched part is reversed and glitchy
00:24:745 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - this is pretty nice. how about adding some green lines that start with lower volume and gradually increase it? good idea
00:28:381 (1,1,1,1) - seems like you put nc spam to make the 1/3 more noticeable because that is what people often do, just doesn't work in this case cause the whole map is nc spam, main issue is the 00:28:987 (1,1) - stack as people usually dont expect stacked 1/3s in this context 00:28:381 (1,1) - gives time to react, in playtesting this wasn't an issue
00:40:745 (1,2,3,1) - this kind of movement just feels way too forced http://i.imgur.com/KsM4VtM.jpg with the small 1/4 back and forth things out of nowhere, when you could http://i.imgur.com/oHcYySg.jpg or something this suggestion incentivizes the player to shortcut cursor movement which is a theme i am trying to avoid / highlight in the map
00:54:200 (1,1,1,1) - nice, just doubt it needs nc spam fixed
01:29:109 (6) - you could use a different shape to make this stand out more to match the weird sound, just like you did on 01:23:290 (7) - i use this slider shape to flow into the next section's slider shape, plus the blanket on 4
also weird that 01:34:927 (4) - suddenly isn't a slider similar to ^ following vocals though D:
01:48:381 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - this whole thing just feels incredibly messy and 01:48:927 (4,5,6) - also kills playability. how about stacking 01:49:290 (6) - tail on 01:48:563 (2) - and moving 5 so you get http://i.imgur.com/XaS2kwr.jpg this is much weaker musically though. the followpoints and rhythm make this quite easy to read but i'll have people playtest it more
01:54:745 (2) - why is this clickable? there's barely anything and 01:54:836 - is way stronger http://i.imgur.com/0WRRyCN.jpg would make more sense // 01:56:018 (1,2) - following vocals + establishes theme for rest of section
02:05:836 (8,1,2) - I recommend you enable stacking in the editor http://i.imgur.com/UMiV2q0.jpg and it should be clear what is wrong here // 02:58:745 (4,5,6,7,8) - and more i have stacking enabled. i dont see the problem? are you suggesting i lower stack leniency?
02:07:836 (3) - simialr to the 1:56 thing and it really doesn't capture rhythm of this part well i don't see a better way to follow vocals primarily with drums acknowledged
also a thing: a lot of your 1/2 stacks feel pretty random as the second sound on them is quite strong and tend to kill moementum the part, like 02:11:836 (1,2) - whereas stacks like03:15:654 (1,2) - actually make sense these stacks are used when the vocals sing the same note twice
things like 02:19:290 (1,2,3,4,5,6,1,2,1,2,3,4,5,6,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,1) - feel incredibly cluttered, looking at how much of the playfield they use should tell you why thematically it is fine to me
02:46:563 (1,1,1) - these can work, but not if you only do them once randomly, that just makes the a really annyoing thing leading to frustrating combobreaks i think the section builds to it nicely, and you have quite a lot of time to react
03:17:654 (4,5,6) - could easily be a bit more readable //03:23:472 (4,5,6) - increased spacing
03:23:472 (4,5,6,7,8) - even more cluttered : / ^
03:30:018 (3) - pretty sure this is 1/8 i think its indistinguishable but i changed it
04:58:563 (1) - could change spacing/patterning to make the different sounds stand out more would conflict structure / drums here as well

most of these things happen on more spots so yeah

gl with this, it could become an interesting map if you can polish up things and make if feel more structured

thank you!

transcendental wrote:

hallo man

just overall i'll have to admit i'm not a fan of this sort of messy style but i'll do my best to make suggestions. i know i'm repeating at least a few of lasse's points but suggesting different alternatives pls don't get mad D:

00:07:290 (1,2,1,1,2) - you have this mapped as groups of 3, 2, and 3, whereas the music does 2, 3, 3. this rhythm would better match what the music suggests. its sync'd to the high pitch notes. this is simply an arpeggio of a chord so this is interpretable, i think the rhythm i have fits bettersome instances of this musical phrase are mapped properly such as 00:18:927 (1,1,2,1,2,3) different rhythms here though in the other parts of the music but others aren't such as 00:21:836 (1,2,1,1,2) so go through closely and find these; i'm sure there are more. same as intro
00:08:927 (1,2) - ctrl+g these would continue the clockwise flow through 00:08:018 (1,2,3,1) into 00:09:109 (1,2,1) 00:08:563 (3) - changes the flow to counter clockwise
00:16:018 (1,2,1) - this is super awkward to play since you have to move cursor fast through the slider, stop for the circle, and then jump again in the same direction to the next slider. simply moving 2 a bit farther away like this would make it much better. sliders are shaped such that you can skip to the ending for slow cursor movement. the stop-n-go flow is used in many other situations in the map, regardless
00:27:290 (1,2,1,2) - this reads as a 1/2 gap. disagree, i don't see how, since this is 1.8x as everywhere else before in map, plus overlaps which are only 1/4 in this section increasing 00:27:654 (1,2) spacing would help it read more as a sequence of 1/4 circles into a slider than the way it is right now, which looks like a small jump into a circle+slider double.
00:29:472 (1,2) - not mapping these as 1/4 sliders seems weird. why not? following drums, i follow these drums everywhere else in this section
00:30:200 (1,2,1,2,1,2) - same issue as 00:16:018 (1,2,1). maybe? this pattern would also allow faster cursor movement maintained through the pattern and be a cool link with 00:31:290 (1,2,3) which is now the same pattern but mirrored, without the circles, and distorted. stop n go movement is common theme, microflow
00:38:018 (1,2,1) - this spacing is a little large, i'd reduce a little. perhaps make 00:38:018 (1,2) halfway between 00:37:654 (3) and 00:38:200 (1) its same as everywhere else in section, 1.8x
00:40:927 (2,3,1) - this is incredibly awkward to play since 3 direction changes are required in a very short period of time. ctrl+g 00:41:018 (3,1) would help. same theme i want to keep D:
01:16:563 (2,3,4,5) - love this pattern <3
01:48:927 (4,5,6) - same as 00:16:018 (1,2,1), honestly just removing the kink at the end of 01:48:927 (4) changes the implied flow enough to make it significantly more comfortable this 01:48:745 (3,4,5,6,7,8) - flows in a circle, i think breaking the kink removes that implication
02:07:654 (2,3,4) - if you want to emphasize vocal more you could use a pattern like 02:12:018 (2,3,4,5) with a 1/1 slider into 1/4s i think both are fine, though mine builds a 1/2 theme for next combos
02:05:836 (8,1,2) - right now 02:06:200 (1,2) is a stack meaning that 02:06:200 (1) appears at 306, 83 with stacking enabled even though it's placed at 309, 86. 02:05:836 (8) however is stacked on 02:06:381 (2) at 309, 86 (since it's too far away from 02:06:200 (1) to trigger auto-stacking) which looks super weird. just manually stack these by moving 02:06:200 (1) to exactly 306, 83 and 02:05:836 (8) to 303, 80 fixed
02:59:290 (6,7,8) - here the auto stacking just looks ugly, manual stack it with 02:59:290 (6) at 247, 318, 02:59:381 (7) at 250, 321, and 02:59:472 (8) at 253, 324 this breaks the vertical symmetry
03:28:745 (1,2,3,4,5,1) - the section starting here is way more cleanly mapped than the section at the beginning of the song. nice work thank you its cause its constant 1/1 downbeat, intro isn't and requires more fluid mapping

please don't take this the wrong way i love this map and i'm not trying to be mean :/ you're fine i understand your suggestions, i think some of them just break the microflow theme of the map
good luck!

1. Diffname is RGB but there's a white combo color? :thinking:
2. 00:39:290 (2) -slightly overlap with 00:39:381 (3)'s startpoint?
3. 00:50:927 (1) - cancer flow
4. 01:21:381 (3) - I'm P sure everything I point out is done on purpose, still cancer flow to me
   

PyroBear wrote:

WHEW LAD tech aim map, my only weakness.
[RGB]

1. Diffname is RGB but there's a white combo color? :thinking: only 3 colors doesn't look as good to me D:
2. 00:39:290 (2) -slightly overlap with 00:39:381 (3)'s startpoint? its cause 0.8x ds
3. 00:50:927 (1) - cancer flow I Love Cancer
4. 01:21:381 (3) - I'm P sure everything I point out is done on purpose, still cancer flow to me || lol

Aight, it's a great map have some stars.

Altuth wrote:

00:08:018 (1,2) - These two can ble blanked. blanket made flow too diagonal, but i changed shape to make nicer
00:10:927 (1,2) - Make similar ^ i think this case is fine
00:08:927 (1,1) - These can overlap. prefer equidistant from each slider, less visually obscured
00:16:381 (1,2,1,2) - Blanket this pattern something like this http://puu.sh/t5FXT/50c85c4808.jpg changed in similar way
00:22:563 (1,2) - Remake this pattern to be more similar to ^ kept this one
00:34:472 (2) - Remake slider, maybe curved. changed, been meaning to
00:36:563 (1,2,3) - Make better symmetry with the sliders. done
00:42:745 (3,4) - Why aren't these two stacked like?? 00:40:927 (2,3) - more sounds / energy
00:45:836 (1,2) - Blanket changed in different way
01:07:836 (2,7) - Overlap 2 got moved, fixed
01:12:745 (4,1) - ^ need different spacing, i think its fine the way it is
01:14:836 (7,1) - Feels strange to play, as its not repeated anywhere. It might be a little too random. will consider but i think its fine for now
01:18:381 (3,2) - Overlap would get rid of angle i use for all jumps of 2 combos, i think its far apart enough in time to not matter.
01:19:109 (7,4) - ^ ^
01:21:654 (5,5) - ^ ^
01:25:109 (1) - Place so that it corresponds better to previous notes, like the other overlaps do. its using the midpoint axis of 01:24:563 (5,6,7) triangle
01:49:290 (6) - Plays bad, consider having it blanket 01:48:927 (4) - and make it curved. everyone points this out so i changed it to something less controversial though i feel it plays worse.
03:35:836 (2) - Make it the same slider as 03:35:654 (1) - if you mean same angle it already was? if you mean same rhythm i disagree
03:37:381 (2,1) - Have these two overlap, remember to also drag up the slider that its blanketing. fixed
03:44:018 (1,2) - Have them overlap prefer to not since new rhythm
03:48:200 (2,1) - ^ this would require new spacing
03:55:290 (1,1,2,3) - ^ done
03:59:109 (2,1) - Make better blanket. sacrifices 03:59:109 (2) - overlap which is more important imo
04:00:745 (1,1) - Make overlap on sliderends changes spacing too much
04:25:654 (1,1,1) - I dont think you need NC on all of these. it is a reference to the intro
04:28:563 (1,1,1) - ^Same here it is a reference to the intro
04:29:836 (1) - A slider here would follow the vocals well. Seeing as its done that way here 04:32:745 (1,2) - i'm mapping to drums but will consider.
04:35:654 (1,2) - Can they blanket? Yes They Can!™
01:57:836 (4,5,6) - I dont like 45 degree sliders, every other curvature/degree makes for better playability, revise. i avoid it normally but i actually think it works well here

The kiai time was really nice, it felt flawless with good flow. Object distance was thought out and works in all the cases I saw. Maybe the only thing I didnt like was that it easily got clustered in the technical parts and the playing field was not used to its limit. A little more structure would really elevate the style of this map, good luck!

neonat wrote:

Can't really find where the artist name can be shown as AVTechNO! & Treow
Though Treow did remix this track and another, it's not explicitly stated in the way you phrased it.
You can use AVTechNO!×ELECTROCUTICA as the Artist name, as it is stated for DYE SYNTHESIS -extended-, which is the album this song is in.
Title is also just DYE/Re:flection+

http://electrocutica.com/album-dyesyn/

haha woah man wrote:

as well, on the link you listed it says " Song : AVTechNO!　Rebuild & Remix : Treow" which makes the artist area more apt. as far as removing vocaloid luka, i think keeping it is more relevant since it is listed in the official video page and amazon mp3 downloads. do you think i should remove it for consistency with osu beatmaps regardless of this?

neonat wrote:

Well, I think you should remove from the title, for several reasons:

Why I gave that as a suggestion is that AVTechNO!×ELECTROCUTICA is the overall artist of the album, as you can see in the CD pictures and the crossfade video, AVTechNO! being the song composer and Treow the remixer of tracks 6-7 is going into the specifics in the crediting, like how they will include things like who mastered, who designed etc.
Treow is just part of ELECTROCUTICA which involves another 2 people in the circle as well. (To answer the part of the alias)

The video uses AVTechNO!×Treow for the artist, so if you do want to use that, use x instead of &
But the vocaloid is not part of the artist field, vocaloid artists tend to use a format of [vocaloid] song title [composer] or something along the lines, so that they give adequate information for users in the video site to see what the song is (like how some artists would add genre in the title, or that it's a cover, etc.). The vocaloid used would then go into the tags here.

AmazonMP3 isn't really a good source for metadata. Music stores like iTunes and Mora are rated very lowly in terms of how accurate the information they give as they tend to change the information themselves, especially when it's an English site selling Japanese songs. The metadata criteria is not out yet but in a tier system, music stores are only just above unofficial wikis (it's not really accurate with a lot of chance that it is not officially stated). This is why I recommend you use information from their official website and CD scans, and official music videos are just below that in priority.

neonat wrote:

It may not be recognised as a normal character, but you change it to the x we know for romanised field, here's some clarification

SPOILER

Hope this clears the doubts

-Mo- wrote:

Okay so I really like this map so here's a recheck.

RGB
- The combo colours go in the order of RBG :thinking: tru
- I still also think it would be cool if stronger places in the map were colourhaxed to use only colours, and calmer sections to use whites. it'd be cool but i dont think the work would justify the small quality increase. i had tried it out and i couldnt get good colors that were different enough but not too dark/too light
- 00:05:109 (1) - This kinda feels ninja-spinner-esque. It comes almost unexpectedly since there's not much indication of it coming, and by the time most people realise it's a second spinner, it's too late to score a 300. It might be better replacing this with something else. it makes more sense contextually than other objects and since its at the beginning of the map i think its not a problem
- 00:06:927 (1) - 00:07:381 (2) - Is it necessary to overlap so much of a short slider? I think you should probably reduce how much is being overlapped even if overlaps like these seem to be a common theme. It could also easily stack like you did with 00:06:745 (1) 00:07:109 (1). fixed stack in similar way, also addresses next point v
- 00:07:109 (1) - 00:07:563 (1) - I'd maybe not have these ones overlap though since they're part of a different pattern.
- 00:15:836 (1) - You could maybe orientate this slider in a different way since it's a different sound than the previous sliders are mapping. i feel like it would be too convoluted
- 00:40:927 (2,3,1) - I don't think this is really necessary and feels like too much of a spike in difficulty. There's a lot of strain on the player since they already have a large jump into 2, change directions to hit 3, and then change directions again to hit 1. I'd try to at least use smoother flow for these objects, and maybe reduce the jump between 3-1. the purpose of this map is to explore 1/4 spacing concepts and its the same spacing as is used elsewhere in the map, i think this one is fine
- 01:12:018 (1) - I'd probably only keep about 25% of the circle overlapped instead of half so it's a little clearer since it's a NC. It'll also match the overlapping with 01:12:200 (2). should be more clean
- 01:15:472 (3,4,6) - This overlapping feels like it more makes the pattern feel cluttered than add anything special though. changed
- 01:19:836 (3) - I'd probably nudge this to about (381, 125) so 01:20:381 (6) doesn't seem so cluttered. would break angle structure mentioned previously
- 01:21:836 (6,2) - This one feels kind of unecessary to me. artifact of structure
- 01:49:200 (5) - I feel like it's a better idea to places this ontop of 6 so that this sort of rhythm and pattern is easier to follow. almost everything in this diff puts the movement into the strong beats, i think it would break structure
- 01:51:836 (3,5) - These aren't perfectly inline which each other if you care about that. fixed
- 02:20:018 (7,8,1,2,3) - Yeah the amount of overlapping done in this section feels a little overdone and way too cluttered. i disagree
- 02:22:018 (2) - Probably should rotate this slightly so match with 02:21:654 (8) better. The stack is also slightly off with 02:22:563 (5) if you care about that. each pair of two sliders is rotated 60deg it wouldnt make sense to change rotation. fixed two stacks here
- 02:27:290 (7,1) - This overlap also feels kind of weird. i would have to introduce new spacing values to avoid this or sacrifice motion emphasis
- 02:33:472 (1,4) - Might be better to make these not touching. its moved slightly
- 02:50:109 (3) - Would probably be better off as circles to transition into the triples later on. agree
- 03:30:018 (3) - This may need a buffer (end it on the blue tick) because of how short you hold for and the gap needed to jump to the next slider. The alternative would be to move this ontop of the next slider. buffer
- 03:32:745 (1,1) - Not perfectly stacked if you care about that. fixed
- 03:37:018 (2) - 03:42:836 (2) - The disconnected streams are already pretty difficult to hit on their own when in groups of two, however when you place these extra notes before them it adds another level of complexity that I don't think is needed for this map, where a player has to hit this stream in a 1-2-2 grouping. I would consider dropping these extra notes before these streams just so the difficulty here isn't too unreasonable. doing so would comprimise the rhythm / structure
- 03:41:472 (1,2,3,1) - The amount of directional changes needed to hit this stream of notes feels too unreasonable to me. It should ideally be something a lot smoother. it feels very smooth to me already
- 03:44:563 (2) - This amount of overlapping felt kind of confusing where the direction of the slider was. I'd reduce this one. increased angle change so it overlaps less
- 04:08:745 (1,2,2,3) - Yeah, this is also too cluttered I think. They don't need that much overlapping. i will think about this one but it looks much less cluttered in play and i like the movement a lot here
- 04:32:745 (1,3) - Unrankable overlap, the first object must be fully faded out before the second object is fully faded in for perfect overlaps. fixed, hadnt been updated since new criteria
- 04:44:381 (17) - NC should be here I think. yep

I wouldn't mind giving this a push but I don't think I can in its current state. I can take another look at it after some more opinions from more experienced modders.

1. apart from that: 00:07:290 (1,2,1,1,2) - 00:21:836 (1,2,1,1,2) - seems odd to offbeat the entire thing especially since there's no real distinct blue tick focus going on to begin with and you dongt do it in patterns like 00:18:200 (1,1,1,1,1) - 00:15:290 (1,1,1,1) - and you completely drop the concept by the next part: 00:44:381 (1,1,1,1,1,1,2,3,4,1) -
   the grouping itself is kinda counter-intuitive as there's no clearly audible reason opposed to patterns such as 00:18:927 (1,1,2) -
   
   overall i'd advise you to stick to on beat patterns for these two
   
2. 03:41:381 (2) - this is kinda lol, you ignore all the 1/8 in the next place where it happens (03:47:200 (2,1,2) - ) after that so it not only seems random as heck it also doesnt really play well
   how about just not doing that
   
3. 03:58:927 (1,1) - offset the second slider the same way you do to 02:46:563 (1,3) - ? would improve readability and other patterns kinda already do this by having different slidershapes
   
4. 04:12:200 (2,3,1) - you didnt really do this sort of thing, you always had some sort of offset or a slider for this stuff, so having two directly underneath this sliderend would lead people to believe its a slider and only click once even though there's another circle - at that point into the map youve conditioned them to because circle patterns under sliderends were usually offset in some way everywhere else.

Okorin wrote:

congrats on placeholder

idk what the .1 diffstats are supposed to mean, at least it plays much better to me with 9.3 as the clutter itself gets more bearable that way
so if you can do just .3 everything apart from cs or something thatd be neat i'm over the same decimal everywhere thing so changed it (CS5.1, HP5.4, AR9.4, OD8.6)



[rgb]
why do you have 4 combo colours with that title wtf true, i originally did it cause it balances the combo colors but conceptually just rgb makes more sense.
i do have only one pressing issue that could potentially just make me go away completely for the rest of it and that's 00:06:563 - to 00:31:290 - being comparatively one of the hardest to interpret parts of the entire map whereas even the cluttered kiai is easier to execute because object placements themselves are more friendly for players by not having 1/4 objects under sliderends and jumping to the next objects.

overall i think the intro is a weird way to introduce the player into the gameplay experience this map provides overall because the beginning uses so much more complex patterning right off the bat that by the time the player is used to them they just stop, that especially goes for things such as 00:29:836 (1,2,3) - 00:30:200 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - the song itself is quite 'cluttered' with many separate and unique ideas or rhythms being presented, with nearly no two identical measures. as well, conceptually the map is constructed to present a series of ideas which culminate (as they too do musically) in the pre-kiai section, as the whole of all parts. the jump 1/4 spacing is used elsewhere in the map, its just typically connected with a kickslider instead of circle to end it. i dont want to get too pretentious but i do believe this is the best representation of the song musically especially for someone who has not heard it before playing the map

1. apart from that: 00:07:290 (1,2,1,1,2) - 00:21:836 (1,2,1,1,2) - seems odd to offbeat the entire thing especially since there's no real distinct blue tick focus going on to begin with and you dongt do it in patterns like 00:18:200 (1,1,1,1,1) - during this section i am following the drums as it takes precedence, i changed the NCing to represent this clearly00:15:290 (1,1,1,1) - this one is the same as in the intro, its just that the part that would be mapped off beat is under 00:16:018 (1,2,3,4) - and you completely drop the concept by the next part: 00:44:381 (1,1,1,1,1,1,2,3,4,1) - i actually changed this to match intro, this was just poor structure
   the grouping itself is kinda counter-intuitive as there's no clearly audible reason opposed to patterns such as 00:18:927 (1,1,2) -
   
   overall i'd advise you to stick to on beat patterns for these two
   
2. 03:41:381 (2) - this is kinda lol, you ignore all the 1/8 in the next place where it happens (03:47:200 (2,1,2) - ) after that so it not only seems random as heck it also doesnt really play well changed to circle
   how about just not doing that
   
3. 03:58:927 (1,1) - offset the second slider the same way you do to 02:46:563 (1,3) - ? would improve readability and other patterns kinda already do this by having different slidershapes ye
   
4. 04:12:200 (2,3,1) - you didnt really do this sort of thing, you always had some sort of offset or a slider for this stuff, so having two directly underneath this sliderend would lead people to believe its a slider and only click once even though there's another circle - at that point into the map youve conditioned them to because circle patterns under sliderends were usually offset in some way everywhere else. i changed this, take a look and let me know if you think its ok

as i said my only pressing issue with this is the thing before any bullet point i'm looking forward to your answer to that one

Hobbes2 wrote:

Regarding oko's first bullet, so if the drums are taking precedence, why is 00:21:381 - a slider tail then? nowhere in thsi intro section are the hihats mapped, they are extremely quiet it also doesnt explain 00:07:290 (1,2,1,1,2)'s weird offbeat rhythms this isn't offbeat for the drums its offbeat to represent the accented notes of the arpeggiated synth because there's not even drums there. This also doesnt explain 00:21:836 (1,2,1,1,2) - when the drum is even on 00:22:200, a note you put on a slidertail.again i dont map the hihats since they are very quiet and there are more prominent things in the music. the intro is mapped between the arpeggiated synth and the bass / snare patterns which variate every 2 measures I think your explanation for these has nothing to do with what you're actually doing.

I'm willing to icon this, but idk if mo + oko wanna tag team so yea lol. consider me a back up