Lasse wrote:

rechecked things

oni
04:50:543 - http://i.imgur.com/zudWGOc.jpg different volume settings on red/green line. should probably both be 50%? Fixed

predator
02:23:014 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18) - minor, but slightly upscaling this or something might make the slight spacing inconsistencies become less apparent (or just clean it up a little cause things like 02:23:614 (7,8,9) - are quite noticeable ingame cause of the nearly overlapping spacing) Fixed.

should be all before I bubble

1. 00:58:795 (1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3) - Can you buff these so they don't look like full 1/4 patterns? I feel like you did a much more professional job at 00:49:495 (1,2,3,1,2,3) - , for example.
2. 01:01:845 (1,1) - Could you confirm the snapping of these? To me, they are completely off, I feel like 01:01:845 (1) - should be 1/8 and 01:02:045 (1) - 1/16 or something like that.
3. 01:26:914 (1,2) - Brutal stop in momentum. I'm fine with the shape, but the spacing (or rather, these anti-jumps) feel so unnatural.
4. 01:38:614 (1,2,3) - Would you consider a different rhythm? I don't get why the triplets are getting ignored and the vocals sound rather overshadowed by the circle huh http://i.imgur.com/mDR1lB1.jpg
5. 01:47:014 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12) - To be fair, I was expecting more spacing here, it's hard to tell these are 1/3 because the spacing is visually the exact same as the previous 1/4 stream.
6. 01:48:514 (2,3) - Emphasis vs 01:49:714 (2,3) - no emphasis
7. 01:52:414 (5) - Hey, come on, make 01:52:314 (4,5,6) - a full burst
8. 02:14:614 - 02:30:214 - Hmmm, huge diff spike if you ask me, especially on 02:19:014 (3,1,2,1) - and 02:33:614 (2,3,1,2) - because they just break with the whole movement you were keeping on previous patterns, they are really hard to follow. I know for a fact that you are going to rant about this saying this isn't a difficulty spike. Yet, it's a really interesting one. I tried to find an alternative but everything really just doesn't seem to work with what you are trying to do. Also, leaving that side, would you consider moving 02:25:414 (1) - so it overlaps with (6)? http://i.imgur.com/pyyVtgQ.jpg I feel like it gives a good effect to it!
9. 02:35:089 (1) - This spinner is snapped to nothing, so consider muting it because it doesn't make any sense to have its end as a sound. Same goes to 04:46:983 (1) - .
10. 02:53:014 (1,2,3,4) - Check previous/next patterns, these deserve a buff to be fair.
11. 03:13:114 (1,1,1) - Remove these NCs because you are not actually doing any streamjumps, you NC'd them in the same way as 02:14:614 - 02:30:214 - 03:29:614 - .
12. 03:19:414 (5,6) - Completely personal, but you could have done something more cooler with this loop-y sound, like extending the slider to 3/4 and also reducing the spacing from (4,5). I don't know, as said, that's what I would do.
13. 03:42:214 - What's up with the huge spacing here? You are about the enter a relatively calm part of the song and this pattern just go crazy in spacing.
14. 03:50:644 (1) - This isn't actually covering anything yet it's being placed as a jump taking any sort of visual emphasis to 03:50:798 (2,3) - . What if you make 03:50:183 (3) - shorter to 03:50:414 - and then you make another slider from 03:50:529 - to 03:50:644 - in order to follow the vocals better?
15. 04:23:783 (1,2) - Same as I mentioned before, these Ctrl+G'd sound way better.
16. 05:20:138 (1,2) - Merge them into a 1/1 slider because (2) doesn't really deserve to be a separate circle?
17. 05:30:194 (3) - Slider here instead of circle would give more emphasis to 05:30:528 (1) - in my opinion.

Yuii- wrote:

[anime]

1. 00:58:795 (1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3) - Can you buff these so they don't look like full 1/4 patterns? I feel like you did a much more professional job at 00:49:495 (1,2,3,1,2,3) - , for example. They play just fine cuz theyre positioned in a way where players will naturally hover towards the 1/4 slider rather than follow the slider completely. Taking advantage of slider-leniency and the expectation that people who can play this would naturally not play out the slider.
2. 01:01:845 (1,1) - Could you confirm the snapping of these? To me, they are completely off, I feel like 01:01:845 (1) - should be 1/8 and 01:02:045 (1) - 1/16 or something like that. Yea, they're 1/3. Using 1/8 or 1/16 sounds off, and besides, using those snaps wouldn't help gameplay cuz you can't expect people to perform 7/16 rhythm snaps.
3. 01:26:914 (1,2) - Brutal stop in momentum. I'm fine with the shape, but the spacing (or rather, these anti-jumps) feel so unnatural. Mmm... I kinda like the anti-jumps here. I think they're readable enough due to the high AR, as well as the 1/3 snap change. Players should be more aware of their rhythm here after those NC spams.
4. 01:38:614 (1,2,3) - Would you consider a different rhythm? I don't get why the triplets are getting ignored and the vocals sound rather overshadowed by the circle huh http://i.imgur.com/mDR1lB1.jpg This rhythm is there to follow the snares on 01:38:764 - 01:39:964 - 01:41:164 - since those are the dominant beats.
5. 01:47:014 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12) - To be fair, I was expecting more spacing here, it's hard to tell these are 1/3 because the spacing is visually the exact same as the previous 1/4 stream. Hehe... everyone mentions them. The idea is to create a pattern where spacing remains consistent so the transition will be very smooth, however the rhythm changes so the player's rhythm recognition is tested instead. It's fun the second time you play, though you could possibly misread the first time. I don't want this map to be sightreadable anyways though, and this is pretty fun to try and land once you know how the rhythm operates. You won't mess up a second time because you'll expect it (and kudos if you got it the first time).
6. 01:48:514 (2,3) - Emphasis vs 01:49:714 (2,3) - no emphasis Good point. Fixed
7. 01:52:414 (5) - Hey, come on, make 01:52:314 (4,5,6) - a full burst Kinda hesitant to do that mainly because this section isn't very intense yet. I want the 1/3 bursts to come in with the guitar later.
8. 02:14:614 - 02:30:214 - Hmmm, huge diff spike if you ask me, especially on 02:19:014 (3,1,2,1) - and 02:33:614 (2,3,1,2) (Nerfed the jump here) - because they just break with the whole movement you were keeping on previous patterns, they are really hard to follow. I know for a fact that you are going to rant about this saying this isn't a difficulty spike. Yet, it's a really interesting one. I tried to find an alternative but everything really just doesn't seem to work with what you are trying to do. Also, leaving that side, would you consider moving 02:25:414 (1) - so it overlaps with (6)? http://i.imgur.com/pyyVtgQ.jpg I feel like it gives a good effect to it! The angle shift on 6 is good enough I think. While remaining consistent with the visuals. Anyways, this section is really trying to test player's ability to alternate. The rhythm is really unique where because its triplets in 5/4 time signature, you will always be alternating between jumping on your dominant key (xzx) and your non-dominant key (zxz). Furthermore, since its 5/4, every new measure will be a switch too (xzx, zxz, xzx, zxz, xzx, next measure begins with zxz which adds to the challenge because now the second pattern you're beginning it on your weaker key). The jumps themselves are not too difficult imo, it's mainly finger control.
9. 02:35:089 (1) - This spinner is snapped to nothing, so consider muting it because it doesn't make any sense to have its end as a sound. Same goes to 04:46:983 (1) - . Reduced volume and added a green line.
10. 02:53:014 (1,2,3,4) - Check previous/next patterns, these deserve a buff to be fair. I think they're fine... the point of emphasis is the second iteration of the vocals anyways. And I like how these geometric jumps flow haha.
11. 03:13:114 (1,1,1) - Remove these NCs because you are not actually doing any streamjumps, you NC'd them in the same way as 02:14:614 - 02:30:214 - 03:29:614 - . True. Did some NC rework here.
12. 03:19:414 (5,6) - Completely personal, but you could have done something more cooler with this loop-y sound, like extending the slider to 3/4 and also reducing the spacing from (4,5). I don't know, as said, that's what I would do.I prefer the spacing increase with simple flow here hehe.
13. 03:42:214 - What's up with the huge spacing here? You are about the enter a relatively calm part of the song and this pattern just go crazy in spacing. Well, its entering a calm section, but this section is really intense. It's the pitch of the whole alternator section. You can hear that the drums double here, so thats why it has to be intense. The song winds down after this point.
14. 03:50:644 (1) - This isn't actually covering anything yet it's being placed as a jump taking any sort of visual emphasis to 03:50:798 (2,3) - . What if you make 03:50:183 (3) - shorter to 03:50:414 - and then you make another slider from 03:50:529 - to 03:50:644 - in order to follow the vocals better? I suppose this is the same idea as your first point. The slider is designed in a way where movement from the slider to the circle doesn't actually trigger a jump for the player, despite it's visual appearance.
15. 04:23:783 (1,2) - Same as I mentioned before, these Ctrl+G'd sound way better. Mmm, same reasoning, but we can discuss further if you don't think my reasoning is good enough.
16. 05:20:138 (1,2) - Merge them into a 1/1 slider because (2) doesn't really deserve to be a separate circle? Agreed. Actually I did some rhythm rework here and a bit after with that 1/6 jump hehe.
17. 05:30:194 (3) - Slider here instead of circle would give more emphasis to 05:30:528 (1) - in my opinion. I kinda like the emptiness after that circle, before the final note. Feels more suspenseful lol.

[]

That's all, folk! Very solid I would say.

cmb~