-Sh1n1- wrote:

Yahallo Myle, yeah as I said I wanna help here too

General

1. 01:55:602 - green line at this point is not necessary if you won't change volume or SV, remove it or reduce to 20% of volume at all difficulties please.
2. Your current BG has poor quality or my eyes sucks? :3 I feel that is the second one but check it by yourself.

Cup

1. 00:02:802 (1,2) - reduce the distance between such notes, 1.20x will be a good option and I'll explain why, from 00:00:402 - to 00:10:002 - you can recognize that this is the calmest part of the song right? why you are using the same distances as you did on intense parts like 00:10:002 (1,2) - or parts like kiai time as 00:21:402 (3,1) -, also I can't see a logical reason to have more distance between 00:02:802 (1,2) - than 00:02:202 (2,1) - if instrumental and voice are more pasive.
2. 00:04:002 (2,3,1) - your current pattern shows more distance between 00:04:002 (2,3) - while the strong sound and vocal pitch is on 00:05:202 -, so you could use 1.30x of distance between 00:04:002 (2,3) - and 1.40x between 00:04:902 (3,1) -.
3. 00:05:202 (1,2) - as I told you before about distances, reduce here too, depends of what did you decided on 00:02:802 (1,2) - keep consistency.
4. 00:06:402 (2,3) - 1.30x of distance here will be better too, consistency with 00:04:002 (2,3,1) - if you decided to follow my previous suggestions.
5. 00:07:602 (1,2) - 1.20x of distance between such notes will create a good prelude to the next high pitch on 00:10:002 -, also consistency with 00:02:802 (1,2) - if you decide to follow my suggestions.
6. 00:32:502 (2) - remove pls, consistency with 00:30:102 - 00:20:502 - 00:22:902 - 00:25:302 -
7. 00:43:152 (2) - remove such note for a better spread with higher diffs, remenber that lower diffs like cup and salad should follow only general and basic sounds.
8. 00:43:302 (3,1) - 1.50x of distance pls, I think that your mapping style is based on quality patterns, so try to keep consistency with your distances.
9. 00:51:702 (2,3) - should have the same distance as 00:49:902 (2,1) - cause voice pitch are similar, also for consistency with 00:45:702 (4,1) -
10. 00:57:402 (3) - are u sure about reverse? there is a sound at 00:58:002 - that deserve a note with a little bit of more enphasis, so slider then note with more distance might looks nicer.
11. 01:26:202 (3,1) - try to add a little bit of more distance, maybe 1.70x could be fine.
12. 01:33:402 (4,1) - don't you want to add more distance here? keeping consistency with 01:24:102 (4,1) -
13. 01:38:502 (4,1) - 01:40:602 (4,1) - 01:43:002 (3,1) - you are not enphasizing such high pitches as you were doing previously
14. 01:45:402 (3,1) - same as 01:26:202 (3,1) -
    basically try to be more constant throught the whole diff pls.

Salad

1. 00:08:602 (6,1) - 2.0x of distance as you were doing on 00:08:002 (3,4) - 00:09:202 (3,4) -.
2. 00:10:602 - and 00:11:802 - are very similar, also 00:10:602 - has vocal but... why the distance between 00:10:002 (1,2) - is less than 00:11:202 (3,4) - ? and why at 00:15:402 - you don't enphasize anything... be constant please, I hope that you can rearrange this part based on my advice.
3. 00:16:002 - no jump? no movement? you were following vocal with a little bit of more distance, take a look at 00:11:202 - 00:13:602 - as a reference, 00:15:702 (2) - change into notes and add a movement keeping consistency with my examples or change in your way but the movement is important.
4. 00:22:452 (4,5) - try to reduce -0.20x of distance because you have double jump between 00:22:452 (4,5,6) - and could be annoying for newbies.
5. 00:24:102 (7,1) - don't you want to add more distance here? same as you did on 00:21:702 (8,1) - or viceverse.
6. 00:24:702 (3,4) - stack looks terrible, unsightly pattern tbh, try to move 00:24:852 (4) - a bit to the right but keep or increase the distance between 00:24:852 (4,5) - around 3.70x
7. 00:29:502 (3,4) - stack one more time ? uwu, your mapset have lots of quality patterns but this kind of chains ruin that, 00:29:652 (4) - move a bit to the right
8. 00:29:802 (5,6,7,1) - what a drastic change in your distances, why did you reduce the distances if you are still on kiai part?
9. 00:32:052 (4,5) - catchable without press dash button, if you compare with 00:20:052 (4,5) - 00:22:452 (4,5) - 00:24:852 (4,5) - etc, you need to press the dash button to catch it, keep consistency?
10. 00:32:202 (5,6) - 2.0x of distance is enough if you follow my previous advice cause you will have a double jump between 00:32:052 (4,5,6) -
11. 00:44:802 (4,5) - try to keep the same distance as 00:43:602 (1,2) - cause the sound between 00:44:202 - and 00:45:402 - are very similar and looks weird if they have different distances.
12. 00:49:302 (2) - move to x:200 to make the movement more confortable.
13. 01:11:202 (2) - what do you think about move to x:32? it will create a progresive pattern at 01:07:602 (1,2,1,2) -
14. 01:20:202 (5,6) - why you are breaking your consistency with previous kiai and next patterns? remove 01:20:652 (6) - and finish 01:20:202 (5) - at 01:20:502 -
15. 01:20:802 - Idk what do you think about the previous point but is NC really necessary here? take a look over your previous NC and compare pls.
16. 01:24:402 (1,2,3,4) - when you have this kind of pattern, the best movement is when you increase the distance gradually between each slider for example: between 01:24:402 (1,2) - could be 1.60x, between 01:25:002 (2,3) - 1.70x and so on.
17. 01:43:602 (1,2,3,4) - same as above.
18. 01:40:602 (7,1) - why the difference on distance with 01:38:202 (7,1) - ?
19. 01:46:452 (4,5) - this is supposed to be dash right?

Platter
I'm agree with Xinely about the amount of hyper dashes here, there are some unnecessary and randoms, if you wanna keep it be constant please.

1. 00:01:302 - I'm trying to understand why you skipped this place, but I strongly recommend you to add a note or change 00:01:152 (2) - into slider, there is an audible echo, is very low but still mappable, this is to keep a better spread with Salad and for consistency with next sounds similar to this.
2. 00:16:452 (7,8) - following your previous patterns there shouldn't be a hyper dash, first of all, why you didn't follow voice at 00:16:002 (4,5,6,7,8) - as you did on 00:13:602 (6) - or at least as you did on 00:11:202 (6) -? that's the reason of why you should remove the current hyperdash between 00:16:452 (7,8) -
3. 00:18:802 (3,4) - remove hyperdash as a preference and add between
4. 00:19:002 - keep following vocal and using 1/3 as you did on 00:28:602 (2,3,4) -? tbh I feel that a hyperdash with 00:19:602 (1) - looks much better than 00:18:802 (3,4) -
5. 00:29:202 (1) - 1/4 pls until 00:29:652 -, cause hyperdash should between 00:29:652 - and 00:29:802 -
6. 00:30:402 (3,4,5,6,7) - first of all I wanna suggest you to follow vocal instead of intrumental as you were doing the previous half of the kiai and second remove hyperdash between 00:30:852 (6,7) -.
7. 00:31:002 (7,1) - doesn't deserve hyperdash, be constant pls, if you will emphasize every drum this will be similar as Rain.
8. 00:35:802 (2,1) - you could add hyperdash here as you did on 00:26:202 (4,1) -.
9. 00:37:602 (1,2) - there is an important reason called "spread" to remove the current hyperdash, if you take a look at rain, you didn't add hyperdash at this place, quite the opposite you reduced distances gradually.
10. 00:43:302 (3,1) - Increase the distance a bit, try moving 00:43:002 (1,2,3) - to the right
11. 00:44:802 (4,5) - very short distance compared with 00:43:602 (1,2) -
12. 00:54:252 (6,1) - unnecessary hyperdash,
13. 00:55:002 (2,3) - you could remove 00:55:302 (3) - and add reverse to 00:55:002 (2) - as you did on 00:52:602 (2) -, the main reason is cause 00:55:302 (3,1) - doesn't deserve hyperdash, part from 00:48:402 - to 00:58:002 - feel overdone for a platter diff.
14. 00:56:502 (2,3) - no hyperdash here too please, the enphasis on 00:56:052 (4,1) - is enough.
15. 01:16:902 (8,1) - prelude of kiai, the beginning of the most intense pat of the song, deserve hyperdash for sure, move 01:16:002 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - to x368 and 01:17:202 (1,2) - to x:396.
16. second and third kiai need a lot of work tbh, try to keep a better balance at least in estructure to make something similar as you did in the first kiai, what I mean? for example: decide if you will add hyperdashes to enphasize drums ( 01:18:852 (6,7) - ) or you will add hyperdash to enphasize vocal ( 01:20:202 (3,4) - ), both of them doesn't keep consistency in any way, 01:22:002 (1) - should be 1/4 with a hyperdash between 01:22:452 - and 01:22:602 - because a hyperdash between 01:23:802 (5,1) - looks better than 01:24:802 (3,4) - ( keeping consistency with 00:26:202 (4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1) -) and you currently have a hyperdash between 01:23:502 (4,5) - ( that should be removed ), the pattern will be overdone of hyperdashes, and we don't want it on platter diffs, and so on
17. 01:26:602 (6,1) - you miss a hyperdash to enphasize the beginning of the second half of the kiai.
    I'll stop here cause I want to see this inproved by you, I hope that you can take the best of my mod and understand what I'm trying to do with your diff, pay attention to consistency please, if you want to follow a sound with 1/4, then follow with 1/4 similar sounds please, use 1/2 sliders only when vocal is long and make to follow such vocal every time you hear, not like 01:41:802 (5) - vs 01:37:002 (5,6) - 01:39:402 (5,1,2) -

Rain

1. This diff took my attention cause I really like it but I wanna see the changes on platter first before modding it.

Sorry for being so picky uwu but I really wanna help you to rank this map, I hope that you think in what I said, regards.

omg MBomb I'm too late too xd

sxy62146214 wrote:

Hi-Speed Modding
M4M on this map.
OK

[ Cup]
00:05:202 (1,2) - Make it smoothly?Like if you put the first slider's end at (468,184)?I thought put a slider with 0° is not good in the beginning of the song. I don't see any problems in it's current state
00:43:002 (1,2,3) - Hah? 3: X:156? I don't quite understand what do you want me to do but I did something better ;~;
I notice that you put most of your note in the right-half of the screen.Well,Nothing.
[ Salad]
00:06:252 (3) - Not a good slider.Make it like a "("? (the first grey point put at (80,200) and the last grey point (176,284)?) It is in the gameplay
00:31:602 (1,2,3,4) - Put it like 00:29:202 (1,2,3,4) .Because in CtB they look like a line . Welp fine
00:53:202 (1) - Stright? It doesn't fit in the gameplay screen lol
01:32:802 (6) - Not a good slider.Some sliders you look very well in editor but not good in CtB.Make it like a "("? Oki
01:34:002 (1,2,3) - Same direction? ...Yes?
[ Platter]
00:24:402 (1) - Suddenly a reverse slider O.O ..Variation?
00:31:002 (7) - Maybe we should remake this becasue 3 Hyperdashes here! what
01:24:602 (2,3) - (Nearly) Same Xs.
01:38:802 (1,2,3,4) - A sudden Left-Hyperdash.And these notes looks strange...
01:51:252 (4) - Make a Hyperdash here? Won't reply on these 3 suggestion since I revamped all of this after Sh1n1's mod
[ Escape]
AR looks fast O.O k
00:44:802 (1,2,3,4) - Strange.Make it like "("? Instead of making this flowly, I emphasized zig zag direction a little bit more
01:25:602 (3) - Ctrl+G ? Fine

Hope this can be ready for BNcheck.
GL!

Myle wrote:

But next time make sure you say to me what you want to do m4m, okay?

1. 00:08:802 (1) - No need to NC here tho, since you NC on every downbeat anyways.
2. 00:10:902 - Should be mapped, cuz you didn't skip 00:13:302 (2,2) which have a similar rhythm, also adding a circle here would change the rhythm density which is more proper considering the song's rhythm changed at 00:10:002 .
3. 00:28:602 - Missing clap.
4. 00:48:102 (2,3) - Kinda see you're trying to make an emphasis on 00:48:402 (3) but the pattern itself 00:47:802 (1,2,3) is not really friendly for cup imo, changing 00:48:402 (3) into a slider would give a more comfortable emphasis like 01:17:202 and the sound there is strong anyways. You have to change the rhythm around 00:49:002 (1,2) tho if you apply this.
5. 00:58:002 - Missing whistle.
6. 00:55:002 - Missing finish?
7. As for the last chorus, what I don't understand is why 01:18:402 (3,3,3) - 01:28:002 (3,4,3,4,3,4) - are mapped differently despite having a similar rhythm in the same section. If you want to play with the rhythm density then it would make more sense to increase it on this part 01:36:402 which obviously has a more significant change in from the song's rhythm than 01:26:802 .
8. 01:25:602 (2,3) - Aren't these supposed to be hitsounded in the same way or sth and they’re inconsistent with other diffs too so you might want to recheck it.
9. 01:38:802 (1) - You started every measure(at least in the last chorus) with a 1/1 slider so what happened to this one zz

1. 00:04:602 (4,3) - Unintentional whistle on slider bodies I guess?
2. 00:07:602 (1,2,3,4,5,6,1,2,3,1,2,3) - Not a fan of this tho, sure it might fit the song but this section is calmer than stuff like 00:36:402 (1,2,3,4,5) - 01:34:002 (1,2,3,4,5) and yet the rhythm you used here is a lot denser with circles, so yeah the rhythm here should be nerfed, at least less dense than the other two I mentioned.
3. 00:27:402 (2,3,4) - aaa imo 00:28:002 (3) - 00:28:602 (4) are the same thing so it should receive a similar scale of spacing, so I expect these spacings 00:27:402 (2,3) - 00:27:402 (2,4) to be in a similar scale too.
4. 00:31:002 (7) - Is this intentional? Even if it is I still think it doesn't really fit cuz you didn't do this kind of slider anywhere else in the other choruses which has a pretty much the same rhythm as this section.
5. 00:44:652 - Sure there's a sound here but it's not strong as 00:44:802 so using a whistle instead of a clap would be a better choice here.
6. 00:47:052 - Same as above I guess, not sure if there's any other spots but you get the general idea of what I'm trying to say.
7. 00:55:002 - Was expecting a 4 circle pattern here like 00:50:202 (4,5,6,7) - 00:52:002 (3,4,5,6) for the sake of consistency.
8. 01:07:602 (1,2) - Would be more structurally consistent if these are the same shape like 01:10:002 (1,2) .
9. 01:16:902 (6,1) - aaa would like to see a dash here since 01:17:202 (1) is on a strong sound.
10. 01:32:802 (6) - Hitsounds missing.
11. 01:24:402 (1,2,3,4) - The pattern here isn't stand out as it should be cuz you already have 3 sliders before 01:22:602 (5,6,7) so my suggestion here would be like try having a circle on 01:24:102 so it helps distinguish the pattern 01:24:402 (1,2,3,4) better as they're different kinds of objects.
12. 01:30:402 (6) - 01:51:402 (5) - Pretty much the same idea as what I mentioned at 00:31:002 . I'm kinda cuious why you treated these sliders differently than the others lol

1. 00:19:002 (4,5,6) - Ok so I don't know why you ignored the instruments and go for vocals here, you didn't do this in the highest diff tho
2. 00:20:202 (1) - 00:23:052 (1) - 00:35:202 (1) - These NCs are not intentional right?
3. 00:27:402 (2,3,4) - 00:28:602 (2,3,4) - Should have a more consistent spacing compared to 00:17:202 (1,2,3,4,5,6) .
4. 01:07:602 (1,2,3,1,2,1,2,3,4,5,1,2) - I don't understand your idea on this part. In cup and salad you used a consistent rhythm, which is 4 1/1 sliders. So if that's your main idea of mapping this section then the rhythm in this difficulty should show some signs of consistency too, for instance it would be more consistent if you start these parts 01:08:802 - 01:11:202 with 1/4 rhythms like 01:07:602 (1,2,1,2,3,4) . There are other ways to do this but my point is I want to see some consistency in terms of rhythm which you presented it in lower difficulties.
5. 01:16:902 (8,1) - Eh the hyperdash is kinda overdone here for a platter, I also think the pattern 01:16:302 (4,5,6,7,8) is kinda harsh too since this is clearly harder than other patterns in this difficulty(I know it's for a build up, but still) so my opinion here is that the spacing of that hyperdash and the pattern I mentioned should be decreased.
6. I'm curious about your rhythm choice on this part 01:36:402 until 01:43:302 because it's full of 1/4 rhythms which you didn't do anywhere else in the choruses so I want to know if you have any reason for using a continuously dense rhythm, if not then you should reconsider your rhythm in this section, I was expecting a more variety in terms of rhythm density tho.

Electroz wrote:

[Cup]

1. 00:08:802 (1) - No need to NC here tho, since you NC on every downbeat anyways.
2. 00:10:902 - Should be mapped, cuz you didn't skip 00:13:302 (2,2) which have a similar rhythm, also adding a circle here would change the rhythm density which is more proper considering the song's rhythm changed at 00:10:002 .
3. 00:28:602 - Missing clap.
4. 00:48:102 (2,3) - Kinda see you're trying to make an emphasis on 00:48:402 (3) but the pattern itself 00:47:802 (1,2,3) is not really friendly for cup imo, changing 00:48:402 (3) into a slider would give a more comfortable emphasis like 01:17:202 and the sound there is strong anyways. You have to change the rhythm around 00:49:002 (1,2) tho if you apply this. I don't see many problems in catching this, even for a cup diff, so just decreased a distance between 00:48:102 (2,3)
5. 00:58:002 - Missing whistle.
6. 00:55:002 - Missing finish?
7. As for the last chorus, what I don't understand is why 01:18:402 (3,3,3) - 01:28:002 (3,4,3,4,3,4) - are mapped differently despite having a similar rhythm in the same section. If you want to play with the rhythm density then it would make more sense to increase it on this part 01:36:402 which obviously has a more significant change in from the song's rhythm than 01:26:802 .
8. 01:25:602 (2,3) - Aren't these supposed to be hitsounded in the same way or sth and they’re inconsistent with other diffs too so you might want to recheck it.
9. 01:38:802 (1) - You started every measure(at least in the last chorus) with a 1/1 slider so what happened to this one zz

[Salad]

1. 00:04:602 (4,3) - Unintentional whistle on slider bodies I guess?
2. 00:07:602 (1,2,3,4,5,6,1,2,3,1,2,3) - Not a fan of this tho, sure it might fit the song but this section is calmer than stuff like 00:36:402 (1,2,3,4,5) - 01:34:002 (1,2,3,4,5) and yet the rhythm you used here is a lot denser with circles, so yeah the rhythm here should be nerfed, at least less dense than the other two I mentioned.
3. 00:27:402 (2,3,4) - aaa imo 00:28:002 (3) - 00:28:602 (4) are the same thing so it should receive a similar scale of spacing, so I expect these spacings 00:27:402 (2,3) - 00:27:402 (2,4) to be in a similar scale too.
4. 00:31:002 (7) - Is this intentional? Even if it is I still think it doesn't really fit cuz you didn't do this kind of slider anywhere else in the other choruses which has a pretty much the same rhythm as this section.
5. 00:44:652 - Sure there's a sound here but it's not strong as 00:44:802 so using a whistle instead of a clap would be a better choice here.
6. 00:47:052 - Same as above I guess, not sure if there's any other spots but you get the general idea of what I'm trying to say.
7. 00:55:002 - Was expecting a 4 circle pattern here like 00:50:202 (4,5,6,7) - 00:52:002 (3,4,5,6) for the sake of consistency.
8. 01:07:602 (1,2) - Would be more structurally consistent if these are the same shape like 01:10:002 (1,2) . Revamped the whole section for the better diff spread, should be better now~
9. 01:16:902 (6,1) - aaa would like to see a dash here since 01:17:202 (1) is on a strong sound.
10. 01:32:802 (6) - Hitsounds missing.
11. 01:24:402 (1,2,3,4) - The pattern here isn't stand out as it should be cuz you already have 3 sliders before 01:22:602 (5,6,7) so my suggestion here would be like try having a circle on 01:24:102 so it helps distinguish the pattern 01:24:402 (1,2,3,4) better as they're different kinds of objects.
12. 01:30:402 (6) - 01:51:402 (5) - Pretty much the same idea as what I mentioned at 00:31:002 . I'm kinda cuious why you treated these sliders differently than the others lol

[Platter]

1. 00:19:002 (4,5,6) - Ok so I don't know why you ignored the instruments and go for vocals here, you didn't do this in the highest diff tho
2. 00:20:202 (1) - 00:23:052 (1) - 00:35:202 (1) - These NCs are not intentional right?
3. 00:27:402 (2,3,4) - 00:28:602 (2,3,4) - Should have a more consistent spacing compared to 00:17:202 (1,2,3,4,5,6) . They're located in two different section. Yes, they're build on the same vocals, but I emhpasized them in different ways
4. 01:07:602 (1,2,3,1,2,1,2,3,4,5,1,2) - I don't understand your idea on this part. In cup and salad you used a consistent rhythm, which is 4 1/1 sliders. So if that's your main idea of mapping this section then the rhythm in this difficulty should show some signs of consistency too, for instance it would be more consistent if you start these parts 01:08:802 - 01:11:202 with 1/4 rhythms like 01:07:602 (1,2,1,2,3,4) . There are other ways to do this but my point is I want to see some consistency in terms of rhythm which you presented it in lower difficulties.
5. 01:16:902 (8,1) - Eh the hyperdash is kinda overdone here for a platter, I also think the pattern 01:16:302 (4,5,6,7,8) is kinda harsh too since this is clearly harder than other patterns in this difficulty(I know it's for a build up, but still) so my opinion here is that the spacing of that hyperdash and the pattern I mentioned should be decreased. Well well... Firstly, the thing itself is that the distance for this 1/2 hdash is almost minimal, so if I'll decrease the density of the whole pattern it would dissapear, but I don't wanna too. I tried to decrease the density of 01:16:302 (4,5,6,7,8) - as much as I was able to, but still I think I'll leave this pattern as it is now for now
6. I'm curious about your rhythm choice on this part 01:36:402 until 01:43:302 because it's full of 1/4 rhythms which you didn't do anywhere else in the choruses so I want to know if you have any reason for using a continuously dense rhythm, if not then you should reconsider your rhythm in this section, I was expecting a more variety in terms of rhythm density tho. Just listen to the music and went through all diffs once again and you'll realise it's fine. This part is the most dense part in the music, consequently it's the most dense in patterns, too

The hitsounds are done pretty inconsistently I strongly recommend to recheck them over again and I think this can be improved more before pushing it any further, I would like to see more consistency in terms of what you're trying to present in each sections, which I already pointed some if not most of them above. wwww, I think it's time to fix them
Good luck~

1. 01:34:002 - Wouldn't be ending the kiai here as the chorus' stanza is still going on until 01:35:802 - , so instead I would be ending it there. If you are doing this you should also extend the second kiai until 01:55:602 - instead of 01:53:202 - for consistency.

1. 00:04:602 (5) - Somehow this always felt like an edge for me. Maybe reduce the distance a tad bit, or maybe it's just me lol
2. 00:06:102 (3,4) - This too
3. 00:07:602 (1,2,3) - The movement here should be identical as no explicit build-up is made here; having a dash (3) really doesn't emphasize anything special(nor there is one in the first place) so I would either make a dash at (2) or remove the dash at (3) for consistency.
4. 00:10:602 (5) - Right now this is the only one out of the similar notes that doesn't have a hyper for its snare so for consistency you should add it.
5. 00:11:802 (1) - Remove NC for consistency.
6. 00:10:602 (5,6) - Right now the current movement is very hard to perfectly time to catch all the objects - if the player's timing is off by a little bit they will miss (6)'s tail. The song doesn't call for a dash either, so a dash towards (6) doesn't make sense as well, so reduce the distance here.
7. 00:15:852 (1) - Why the hyper here? The previous 2 measures you only placed a hyper the white tick(at 00:16:002 (2) - for this case) so it doesn't really make sense why you are doing this. I would like to see consistency here, so try to have a hyper on (2) instead of (1). And also if you are applying this swap the NC between those 2 notes.
8. 00:18:202 (4,5) - Like the 3rd point I made, since there's no explicit build-up on the song I don't think a hyper would be justified here. Remove it if you applied my 3rd point(but I still think you should do it nonetheless).
9. 00:23:202 (1) - Remove NC for consistency.
10. 00:32:652 (3) - Previously you placed your hyper on the kicks instead of the vocals, so why go off the consistency? It's not like the music changed during that time so I don't see a valid reason why. You should swap the hyper with (4) to make them consistent.
11. 00:47:202 (4) - While I know this kick is somewhat 'special' I don't think it is that strong to justify as a hyper. I would rather use a dash than a hyper.
12. 00:50:202 (5) - All this while you have been placing a hyper for snares so why use a walk here? I understand this is an 1/1 rhythm so making a hyper is somewhat overdoing it, so at least add a dash.
13. 00:52:602 (4) - Same goes here.
14. 00:54:402 (1) - Remove NC here for consistency again.
15. 00:55:752 (2) - Why only a dash here when all the other similar hi-hats were hypers? Make a hyper instead, this should be consistent.
16. 01:08:202 (2,5) - Quite a prominent sound to miss out on the hypers - I suggest you to add hypers to these 2 notes as they feel quite underemphasized right now.
17. 01:10:002 (1,2,3,4) - There are two things that are wrong with this rhythm :
    First is the fact that the rhythm changed drastically between the previous combo and this. The song have never changed in between - heck their synth is the same. Also the drastic change of note density due to this isn't justified and it makes these notes look lazily made. You should make them consistent to some degree.
    Second is that the hypers on these notes are done weirdly. The strong sound lands on upbeats of every measure, and yet you decided to create a hyper 1/4 tick afterwards - which literally has nothing on it(except the prolonging sound from the prominent sound, which should be emphasized as the main sound was on the white tick), so the gameplay will be really awkward. Especially when this is the most quiet part of the song(except the beginning I guess), missing the hyper on the only prominent sound present could feel weird as no other prominent sound can be heard to 'blanket' this issue. Anyhow, (1) and (3) should be shortened down 1/4 ticks back, and (2) and (4) should be moved back and extended accordingly.
18. 01:17:727 (8,1) - The distance here for a hyper is... really lower than what I've expected. It actually feels like the beginning of the song had stronger hypers than this. Increase the distance.
19. 01:22:527 (8,1) - This is like the only hyper that is this strong in the entire 2 last kiais - as all the downbeats were equal to some degree(exceptions to part transitions and such), I don't think this note singularly requires this much distance, so I would reduce down the distance.
20. 01:29:727 (8,1) - Again this hyper feels really lacking in distance, I would add a little bit more distance to give the emphasis it needs.
21. 01:31:002 (1,2) - Swap NC
22. 01:32:127 (9,1) - Same
23. 01:37:602 (1) - Remove NC aaa
24. 01:45:802 (6,1) - Why didn't you make a hyper to this note? It is in a strong downbeat so I highly suggest you to add it.(Not sure you forgot it or something but still)
25. 01:49:002 (1,2,3) - And again with the misplaced hyper - you've been following the kicks instead of the vocals until now so you should swap the hyper to be at (2) to (3) instead of (1) to (2).
26. 01:52:002 (1) - Another unnecessary NC

1. Check over your hitsounds they are quite inconsistent currently. Also check your NC, they are inconsistent in a similar manner with rain.
2. 00:09:777 (6,1) - This is an edge movement which could be quite devastating especially because this is in this beginning. Make clear of the distance please.
3. 00:12:402 (1,2,3,4,5) - This could be hard for platter level players as the flow of (1,2,3,4) suggests that it goes to the right, but there is a hyper to the left, which can be quite hard to change direction as it is a hyper, and it is somewhat not anticipated. I would flip (1,2,3,4) horizontally then place it back at the original position. Remember that platter is only to give introduction to hypers, so anti-flow hypers like this aren't allowed.
4. 00:14:802 (1,2,3) - The fact that players might have problems adjusting their movement with the vertical sliders(right now just moving only will induce a miss on the tail of (2)), the hyper will become difficult as short stand-still needs to be made in between, which is hard to time and execute. The anti-flow also made by the 1/2 sliders could induce an anti-flow-ish movement, which isn't allowed in platter. To be safe, I would rather go for a pattern like this which is a lot more simpler.
5. 00:16:002 (4,5,6,7,8) - Same with 00:12:402 (1,2,3,4,5) - .
6. 00:17:202 (1,2,3,4,5,6,1,2,3) - Right now the distance between each of the notes feels just like in rain; as they are only introduced to this type of rhythm in this difficulty, having a rain-tier movement will be not intuitive for their level. Reduce the distance between each of the notes so they are clearly walkable.
7. 00:22:902 (4,5,6) - The overall distance of this pattern could induce a dash in the wrong place; I suggest you to reduce down the distance between (4) and (5) a lot more(then move (6) so that the distance between (5) and (6) remains the same) so that the movement won't be as hard to catch all fruits.
8. 00:37:002 (3,1,2) - Either have them all have dashes or don't, right now the movement in (3) and (1) is quite ambiguous with how they are placed, but (2) is the only clear dash.
9. 00:44:652 (3,4) - On face value the snare's sound in this song(in this measure lands in (2) and (5)) is more prominent in terms of pitch and strength than the kick(whilst kick is also prominent, it's dampness doesn't really signify the importance too much), so I believe the movement to (4) shouldn't be a dash. This gets quite inconsistent later on so you've got to set your basis at this part, where a new musical section just started.
10. 00:49:452 (4,5) - Whilst the distance's value shows that this should be a dash, in play they are quite close together so a dash is not necessary. For this, I would bring them closer as this distance increment is not needed.
11. 00:54:252 (6,1) - The distance is a lot more clear here that this is a dash; however the vertical shape of (1) could be quite unintuitive; it's not a movement you used conventionally throughout the section so it kinda comes as a surprise, and just in my opinion it feels weird(not meaning that I absolutely hate this or anything). Increasing the distance, and then making (1) more horizontal would smoothen out the movement.
12. 01:07:602 - 01:12:102 - It's funny that the same type of movement is getting repeated over 2 measures. Sure, the instrument's repeating itself, but you could have at least did some ctrl+h to give a little more variation while keeping the rhythm constant. Of course, it's just 2 measures so it won't be that boring, but to miss out on an obvious way to avoid the same type of movement doesn't feel right - you could've just done it easily.
13. 01:31:002 (8) - Previously on 01:21:402 (8) - you didn't make a hyper so why do you here? They are having the same synth so I think the hyper isn't justified. I would remove it and instead use a walkable distance(so that it is consistent with 01:21:402 (8) - )
14. 01:33:402 (10) - Same here, but this time make a dash instead of a walking distance.
15. 01:38:202 (5) - The previous kiai you made dashes on the 2nd snare of every measure so you should be doing the same here. I know, the song is the most intense here, but hyper every 2 beats will get overwhelming for platter players, especially when there is so little 1/2 spacing to give them a small break. Again, platter is only an introduction to hypers, so hypers every 2 beats(even at this BPM, at least imo) is considered 'overused'. For those reasons I would remove the hyper and instead create a dash instead.
16. The above point also applies for 01:40:602 (5) - and 01:43:002 (5) - as well.
17. 01:43:302 (6) - Due to the dash/hyper from the previous note catching this note becomes a challange as the visual distance is ambiguous on whether or not to dash to it or not; and in fact it is pretty hard to catch it when there is such a strong movement a note before. I would reduce the distance.

Sc4v4ng3r wrote:

Sorry for the late mod aaaaaaaa
Going to take a look at the top 2 diffs for time constraints, I hope you could understand ;w;

[General]

1. 01:34:002 - Wouldn't be ending the kiai here as the chorus' stanza is still going on until 01:35:802 - , so instead I would be ending it there. If you are doing this you should also extend the second kiai until 01:55:602 - instead of 01:53:202 - for consistency.

[Escape]

1. 00:04:602 (5) - Somehow this always felt like an edge for me. Maybe reduce the distance a tad bit, or maybe it's just me lol
2. 00:06:102 (3,4) - This too
3. 00:07:602 (1,2,3) - The movement here should be identical as no explicit build-up is made here; having a dash (3) really doesn't emphasize anything special(nor there is one in the first place) so I would either make a dash at (2) or remove the dash at (3) for consistency. There is a loud sound on (3)
4. 00:10:602 (5) - Right now this is the only one out of the similar notes that doesn't have a hyper for its snare so for consistency you should add it.
5. 00:11:802 (1) - Remove NC for consistency.
6. 00:10:602 (5,6) - Right now the current movement is very hard to perfectly time to catch all the objects - if the player's timing is off by a little bit they will miss (6)'s tail. The song doesn't call for a dash either, so a dash towards (6) doesn't make sense as well, so reduce the distance here.
7. 00:15:852 (1) - Why the hyper here? The previous 2 measures you only placed a hyper the white tick(at 00:16:002 (2) - for this case) so it doesn't really make sense why you are doing this. I would like to see consistency here, so try to have a hyper on (2) instead of (1). And also if you are applying this swap the NC between those 2 notes.
8. 00:18:202 (4,5) - Like the 3rd point I made, since there's no explicit build-up on the song I don't think a hyper would be justified here. Remove it if you applied my 3rd point(but I still think you should do it nonetheless).
9. 00:23:202 (1) - Remove NC for consistency.
10. 00:32:652 (3) - Previously you placed your hyper on the kicks instead of the vocals, so why go off the consistency? It's not like the music changed during that time so I don't see a valid reason why. You should swap the hyper with (4) to make them consistent.
11. 00:47:202 (4) - While I know this kick is somewhat 'special' I don't think it is that strong to justify as a hyper. I would rather use a dash than a hyper.
12. 00:50:202 (5) - All this while you have been placing a hyper for snares so why use a walk here? I understand this is an 1/1 rhythm so making a hyper is somewhat overdoing it, so at least add a dash.
13. 00:52:602 (4) - Same goes here.
14. 00:54:402 (1) - Remove NC here for consistency again.
15. 00:55:752 (2) - Why only a dash here when all the other similar hi-hats were hypers? Make a hyper instead, this should be consistent.
16. 01:08:202 (2,5) - Quite a prominent sound to miss out on the hypers - I suggest you to add hypers to these 2 notes as they feel quite underemphasized right now.
17. 01:10:002 (1,2,3,4) - There are two things that are wrong with this rhythm :
    First is the fact that the rhythm changed drastically between the previous combo and this. The song have never changed in between - heck their synth is the same. Also the drastic change of note density due to this isn't justified and it makes these notes look lazily made. You should make them consistent to some degree.
    Second is that the hypers on these notes are done weirdly. The strong sound lands on upbeats of every measure, and yet you decided to create a hyper 1/4 tick afterwards - which literally has nothing on it(except the prolonging sound from the prominent sound, which should be emphasized as the main sound was on the white tick), so the gameplay will be really awkward. Especially when this is the most quiet part of the song(except the beginning I guess), missing the hyper on the only prominent sound present could feel weird as no other prominent sound can be heard to 'blanket' this issue. Anyhow, (1) and (3) should be shortened down 1/4 ticks back, and (2) and (4) should be moved back and extended accordingly. Actually it's just the same problem I've met in platter, so I've made something with it. I'm sorry you'd written so much on it '~'
18. 01:17:727 (8,1) - The distance here for a hyper is... really lower than what I've expected. It actually feels like the beginning of the song had stronger hypers than this. Increase the distance.
19. 01:22:527 (8,1) - This is like the only hyper that is this strong in the entire 2 last kiais - as all the downbeats were equal to some degree(exceptions to part transitions and such), I don't think this note singularly requires this much distance, so I would reduce down the distance.
20. 01:29:727 (8,1) - Again this hyper feels really lacking in distance, I would add a little bit more distance to give the emphasis it needs.
21. 01:31:002 (1,2) - Swap NC
22. 01:32:127 (9,1) - Same ??? (:
23. 01:37:602 (1) - Remove NC aaa
24. 01:45:802 (6,1) - Why didn't you make a hyper to this note? It is in a strong downbeat so I highly suggest you to add it.(Not sure you forgot it or something but still)
25. 01:49:002 (1,2,3) - And again with the misplaced hyper - you've been following the kicks instead of the vocals until now so you should swap the hyper to be at (2) to (3) instead of (1) to (2).
26. 01:52:002 (1) - Another unnecessary NC

[Platter]

1. Check over your hitsounds they are quite inconsistent currently. Also check your NC, they are inconsistent in a similar manner with rain.
2. 00:09:777 (6,1) - This is an edge movement which could be quite devastating especially because this is in this beginning. Make clear of the distance please. aw again this snapping problem '-' moved back to 1/3 and it fixed to hdash
3. 00:12:402 (1,2,3,4,5) - This could be hard for platter level players as the flow of (1,2,3,4) suggests that it goes to the right, but there is a hyper to the left, which can be quite hard to change direction as it is a hyper, and it is somewhat not anticipated. I would flip (1,2,3,4) horizontally then place it back at the original position. Remember that platter is only to give introduction to hypers, so anti-flow hypers like this aren't allowed.
4. 00:14:802 (1,2,3) - The fact that players might have problems adjusting their movement with the vertical sliders(right now just moving only will induce a miss on the tail of (2)), the hyper will become difficult as short stand-still needs to be made in between, which is hard to time and execute. The anti-flow also made by the 1/2 sliders could induce an anti-flow-ish movement, which isn't allowed in platter. To be safe, I would rather go for a pattern like this which is a lot more simpler.
5. 00:16:002 (4,5,6,7,8) - Same with 00:12:402 (1,2,3,4,5) - .
6. 00:17:202 (1,2,3,4,5,6,1,2,3) - Right now the distance between each of the notes feels just like in rain; as they are only introduced to this type of rhythm in this difficulty, having a rain-tier movement will be not intuitive for their level. Reduce the distance between each of the notes so they are clearly walkable.
7. 00:22:902 (4,5,6) - The overall distance of this pattern could induce a dash in the wrong place; I suggest you to reduce down the distance between (4) and (5) a lot more(then move (6) so that the distance between (5) and (6) remains the same) so that the movement won't be as hard to catch all fruits.
8. 00:37:002 (3,1,2) - Either have them all have dashes or don't, right now the movement in (3) and (1) is quite ambiguous with how they are placed, but (2) is the only clear dash.
9. 00:44:652 (3,4) - On face value the snare's sound in this song(in this measure lands in (2) and (5)) is more prominent in terms of pitch and strength than the kick(whilst kick is also prominent, it's dampness doesn't really signify the importance too much), so I believe the movement to (4) shouldn't be a dash. This gets quite inconsistent later on so you've got to set your basis at this part, where a new musical section just started.
10. 00:49:452 (4,5) - Whilst the distance's value shows that this should be a dash, in play they are quite close together so a dash is not necessary. For this, I would bring them closer as this distance increment is not needed. I increased the distance instead
11. 00:54:252 (6,1) - The distance is a lot more clear here that this is a dash; however the vertical shape of (1) could be quite unintuitive; it's not a movement you used conventionally throughout the section so it kinda comes as a surprise, and just in my opinion it feels weird(not meaning that I absolutely hate this or anything). Increasing the distance, and then making (1) more horizontal would smoothen out the movement. I think you've meant (7) instead of (1).. I hope.
12. 01:07:602 - 01:12:102 - It's funny that the same type of movement is getting repeated over 2 measures. Sure, the instrument's repeating itself, but you could have at least did some ctrl+h to give a little more variation while keeping the rhythm constant. Of course, it's just 2 measures so it won't be that boring, but to miss out on an obvious way to avoid the same type of movement doesn't feel right - you could've just done it easily.
13. 01:31:002 (8) - Previously on 01:21:402 (8) - you didn't make a hyper so why do you here? They are having the same synth so I think the hyper isn't justified. I would remove it and instead use a walkable distance(so that it is consistent with 01:21:402 (8) - )
14. 01:33:402 (10) - Same here, but this time make a dash instead of a walking distance.
15. 01:38:202 (5) - The previous kiai you made dashes on the 2nd snare of every measure so you should be doing the same here. I know, the song is the most intense here, but hyper every 2 beats will get overwhelming for platter players, especially when there is so little 1/2 spacing to give them a small break. Again, platter is only an introduction to hypers, so hypers every 2 beats(even at this BPM, at least imo) is considered 'overused'. For those reasons I would remove the hyper and instead create a dash instead.
16. The above point also applies for 01:40:602 (5) - and 01:43:002 (5) - as well.
17. 01:43:302 (6) - Due to the dash/hyper from the previous note catching this note becomes a challange as the visual distance is ambiguous on whether or not to dash to it or not; and in fact it is pretty hard to catch it when there is such a strong movement a note before. I would reduce the distance.

Wew that's long
Sorry if I misworded or made some weird points, the mod's too long so I lost my focus halfway ;-;
GL!

JBHyperion wrote:

Oh stuff was replied to can I mod this now

Cup

1. 00:31:602 (1,2) - Perhaps try to curve or angle these a bit more? With the low SV they're mostly just vertical sliders so not especially interesting to play atm Sure
2. 00:43:302 (2) - Not much of a sound here, so I'd remove this and make (1) a 1/4 slider like you did with 00:26:802 (1,2,3) - to cover that synth sound instead Oki
3. 00:56:202 (1) - This slider could be spiced up a bit too for the same reasons as I mentioned before There's something wrong with this slider lol. I tried to to something without making this unwalkable ;-;

perhaps a tiny bit on the plain side, but not bad

Salad

1. 00:09:402 (4,1) - Feels like this deserves more distance when you compare it to 00:08:802 (3,4) - for example. Not sure if you want a dash there but you could stand to make the walk a little bigger like 1.7x if not
2. 00:20:052 (4,5) - On the other hand, your introduction to dash being a sharp 1/4 jump is a serious difficulty spike. You could try removing (4), since it's not particularly strong and making a 1/2 dash, or make this walkable and emphasise other sounds with dash such as 00:20:802 (5,6) -. This goes for the other 1/4 dashes in this section also - they're really best left for the later part of the song once the player is more used to dashing The later part of the song uses these 1/4 dashes + more dense patterns in general, so I think it's tottaly fine to have 1/4 dashes in the beginning. Also I don't see any difficulity spikes since it's a simple 1/2 200bpm dash. Every 1/4 jump was less densier when I submitted this mapset, but after receiving some opinions through mods I increased the distance between every dash in salad, so I'll keep them for now
3. 00:28:002 (3,4,1) - Fitting dashes imo, and the 3/4 spacing makes them quite lenient. Try something like (3) at x-184 and (4) at x-400 Changed
4. 00:48:252 (4,1) - Here would be fine to keep (and introduce) the 1/4 dash, since the player has gotten used to dashing and recovered during the break But there is a 1/4 dash?..
5. 00:50:652 (7,1) - Walkable, but a little bigger than your other 1/4 movements such as 00:53:052 (6,1) - 00:55:452 (6,1) -. Looks a bit neater if you reduce this to a similar size Changed
6. 00:57:702 (2,3) - Would prefer to avoid the second direction change here, players will tend to leave (2) early and miss the slider tail. Try (3) on the left side instead Sure
7. 01:20:052 (4,5) - Yikes, antiflow and large spacing will be a real struggle for Salad players. Please reduce this Oki
8. 01:34:002 (1,2,3,4) - Kinda boring to have antiflow 4 times in a row. A change on 01:35:202 (3,4) - would give those drum sounds more emphasis, so perhaps Ctrl+H 01:35:802 (4,5,1,2,3,4,5) - and move to x-444 Nice suggestion, changed
9. 01:46:452 (4,5) - Same as 01:20:052 (4,5) Yup

looks like a lot, but most of it relates to usage of 1/4 spacing. besides that, no major issues

Platter

1. 00:10:002 - 00:19:152 - Mostly concerns as Salad, except this time applying to 1/4 hypers instead of 1/4 dashes. This section is the perfect place to introduce the player to easy 1/2 hypers on beats such as 00:11:802 (7,1) - 00:14:502 (7,1) - but you used a bunch of 1/4 hypers instead that a Platter player will likely be unprepared for. I suggest rethinking this slightly so that your hypers are more comfortable for new players I still think there's no problem in catching this even for a newbie platter players, so will keep them
2. 00:16:602 (8,1) - Hyper into antiflow is a major difficulty spike you should remove Changed
3. 01:45:802 (4,1) - Would have expected a hyper here though for the midpoint of the kiai / strong vocal Sure

nice diff

Rain

1. 00:50:952 (2,3,4,5,6,7) - 00:53:352 (2,3,4,5,6,7) - 00:55:752 (2) - What are you following with these 1/8 sounds? I got their usage in the kiai for the held synth, but there's just vocal and 1/4 percussion here so it feels unfitting. Distinction between the kiai and non-kiai sections is a good thing You can hear clear 1/8 sounds in the music on these patterns. And there is a distinction between this pattern and kiai pattern: 00:50:802 (1,2) - here I used 1/4 for emphasizing exact sounds, when 01:17:202 (1,2) - here I intentionally used 1/8 for better emphasizing dense music in kiai sections
2. 00:55:602 (1,2) - Even with the above, this plays weirdly since you have no spacing to the downbeat (1), then a hyper to a weak sound. Hyper should definitely be switched here Yup, also changed 00:53:052 (7,1,2) -
3. 01:16:602 (5,6,1) - Variably snapped hyperdashes are unrankable in Rain diffs, and on top of that you have a hyper against the screen border at (6). Considering (6) is weak, it'd be best to remove the hyper between 01:16:602 (5,6) - and focus on emphasising 01:17:202 (1) - for the kiai start only Changed
4. 01:25:602 (3,4) - Lack of movement makes these feel kinda plain, I get that you're going with the decreasing intensity and then building back up on 01:26:802 (1) - but a little more movement here would be nice Changed
5. 01:49:602 (3,4,5,6) - Curve looks a bit ugly in play, you could make this smoother for better aesthetic Changed

cool

Hope this helps. Good luck! (:

Deif wrote:

I should've modded this long ago and I remember I had a mod prepared for the last 2 difficulties, but seeing how many people helped out already and after checking your beatmap thoroughly... it went poof.

Your beatmap improved a lot since then and it's definitely worth seeing it into qualified soon. To compensate a bit for my lateness (and because I didn't find anything relevant to get fixed) I'll help you push your beatmap forward:

Bubbled!

1. 01:16:902 (4,1) - and 01:36:102 (3,1) - While I get that these distances are larger because they both start their respective Kiais, they felt a bit large to me. I'd just move the (1) sliders a tiny bit closer to the previous objects, e.g. x:300 for 01:17:202 (1) - and x:280 for 01:36:402 (1) - .

1. 00:02:802 (1) - Can be a bit far from the previous object. I'd move 00:02:802 (1,2,3) - slightly to the left, around x:452.
2. 00:04:602 (4,1) - Kinda ambiguous distance, either reduce it (if you intended it to be a walk) or increase it (if you intended to make it a dash) to make it clearer.
3. 00:20:052 (4,5) - I'd reduce this distance a couple gridpsaces, to make it a bit more lenient. I think x:160 works nice for (5).
4. 00:24:102 (7,1) - A bit ambiguous, so either increase or decrease accordingly.
5. 00:26:502 (8,1) - ^
6. 00:33:702 (7,1) - Another ambiguous distance.
7. 00:36:102 (7,1) - This would be a nice place to add a dash.
8. 00:43:602 (1,2) - Ambiguous distance.
9. 00:44:652 (3,4) - Same here. For this one, personally, I'd prefer a walkable distance so I'd move (4) closer.
10. 00:47:052 (2,3) - I'd put these closer, since it's also ambiguous.
11. 00:51:702 (2,3) - This distance is ambiguous, so increase or decrease it accordingly. If you go for a dash here, maybe it would be good to remove 00:50:652 (7) - and have a nice dash between 00:50:502 (6,1) - .
12. 00:53:052 (6,1) - This distance should also be clarified. A dash here could make sense because it's a downbeat.
13. 01:16:452 (4,5,6) - I'd reduce these distances. It's really ambiguous as it is right now and I don't think having two 1/4 dashes this close is okay in a Salad.
14. 01:19:302 (7,1) - I'd make this distance larger to make the dash clearer.
15. 01:19:902 (3,4,5) - I wouldn't put a 1/4 dash combined with an antiflow movement, so I'd put 01:20:202 (5) - to the left of (4).
16. 01:21:402 (7,1) - It's really weird that you didn't put a dash here. And also on 01:23:802 (7,1) - .
17. 01:32:052 (4,5) - I'd reduce this a bit to add some leniency.
18. 01:32:802 (6,7,1) - These distances don't really make sense with the music. It would be expected that (6,7) is shorter than (7,1) because (1) is stronger.
19. 01:35:802 (4,5) - I'd put these a bit closer by moving (5) to the right. That way the following dash is clearer by comparison.
20. 01:37:002 (5) - I'd move this a bit to the right to reduce the strength and add some leniency.
21. 01:41:652 (4,5) - I'd also reduce the strength a bit here too.
22. 01:46:302 (3,4,5) - Same as previously mentioned, I wouldn't combine an antiflow movement with a 1/4 dash, so I'd move (5) to the left of (4).

1. 00:01:152 (2,3) - 00:03:552 (2,3) - 00:05:952 (2,3) - I'd try to make these a bit larger to make the dash clearer.
2. 00:11:802 (7,1) - Personally I expected a larger distance here, because (1) is stronger than (7) IMO.
3. 00:13:602 (6,7,1) - Again, distances here are weird. I'd put (7) a bit closer to the previous note, considering the antiflow movement, and have a larger distance between (7,1).
4. 00:23:202 (6,7,1) - It's weird to have similar distances on notes that are different strength. I'd move 00:24:102 (7,1) - a bit to the left, to x:372 or so, to make the distances a bit different.
5. 00:32:202 (5,6) - This dash isn't really fitting. Also, (6,7) could have a larger distance. Something like this might work:
   
   SPOILER

   
6. 00:34:602 (5,6,7) - ^Similar stuff here.
7. 00:53:652 (4,5) - The dash feels a bit tight, so I'd make it a bit shorter.
8. 00:54:402 (7,8) - ^Similar stuff. To keep the next dash the way it is, I'd make the (7) slider a bit more vertical.
9. 01:23:202 (6,7) - This dash also feels a bit tight, so I'd move (7)'s head a bit to the right to reduce the distance a bit.
10. 01:43:602 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - Dashes don't feel very defined here. I'd put the circles closer to their previous sliders, increasing the dashes' strength a bit.
11. 01:52:602 (8) - I'd move this a bit to the right, the current dash feels a bit large.

ZiRoX wrote:

Hello there~
Nothing major, just adjusting some distances.

[Cup]

1. 01:16:902 (4,1) - and 01:36:102 (3,1) - While I get that these distances are larger because they both start their respective Kiais, they felt a bit large to me. I'd just move the (1) sliders a tiny bit closer to the previous objects, e.g. x:300 for 01:17:202 (1) - and x:280 for 01:36:402 (1) - .

[Salad]

1. 00:02:802 (1) - Can be a bit far from the previous object. I'd move 00:02:802 (1,2,3) - slightly to the left, around x:452.
2. 00:04:602 (4,1) - Kinda ambiguous distance, either reduce it (if you intended it to be a walk) or increase it (if you intended to make it a dash) to make it clearer.
3. 00:20:052 (4,5) - I'd reduce this distance a couple gridpsaces, to make it a bit more lenient. I think x:160 works nice for (5).
4. 00:24:102 (7,1) - A bit ambiguous, so either increase or decrease accordingly.
5. 00:26:502 (8,1) - ^
6. 00:33:702 (7,1) - Another ambiguous distance.
7. 00:36:102 (7,1) - This would be a nice place to add a dash.
8. 00:43:602 (1,2) - Ambiguous distance.
9. 00:44:652 (3,4) - Same here. For this one, personally, I'd prefer a walkable distance so I'd move (4) closer. Instead I moved (3) closer to (4) by applying previous suggestion
10. 00:47:052 (2,3) - I'd put these closer, since it's also ambiguous.
11. 00:51:702 (2,3) - This distance is ambiguous, so increase or decrease it accordingly. If you go for a dash here, maybe it would be good to remove 00:50:652 (7) - and have a nice dash between 00:50:502 (6,1) - .
12. 00:53:052 (6,1) - This distance should also be clarified. A dash here could make sense because it's a downbeat.
13. 01:16:452 (4,5,6) - I'd reduce these distances. It's really ambiguous as it is right now and I don't think having two 1/4 dashes this close is okay in a Salad.
14. 01:19:302 (7,1) - I'd make this distance larger to make the dash clearer.
15. 01:19:902 (3,4,5) - I wouldn't put a 1/4 dash combined with an antiflow movement, so I'd put 01:20:202 (5) - to the left of (4).
16. 01:21:402 (7,1) - It's really weird that you didn't put a dash here. And also on 01:23:802 (7,1) - .
17. 01:32:052 (4,5) - I'd reduce this a bit to add some leniency.
18. 01:32:802 (6,7,1) - These distances don't really make sense with the music. It would be expected that (6,7) is shorter than (7,1) because (1) is stronger.
19. 01:35:802 (4,5) - I'd put these a bit closer by moving (5) to the right. That way the following dash is clearer by comparison.
20. 01:37:002 (5) - I'd move this a bit to the right to reduce the strength and add some leniency.
21. 01:41:652 (4,5) - I'd also reduce the strength a bit here too.
22. 01:46:302 (3,4,5) - Same as previously mentioned, I wouldn't combine an antiflow movement with a 1/4 dash, so I'd move (5) to the left of (4).

[Platter]

1. 00:01:152 (2,3) - 00:03:552 (2,3) - 00:05:952 (2,3) - I'd try to make these a bit larger to make the dash clearer.
2. 00:11:802 (7,1) - Personally I expected a larger distance here, because (1) is stronger than (7) IMO.
3. 00:13:602 (6,7,1) - Again, distances here are weird. I'd put (7) a bit closer to the previous note, considering the antiflow movement, and have a larger distance between (7,1).
4. 00:23:202 (6,7,1) - It's weird to have similar distances on notes that are different strength. I'd move 00:24:102 (7,1) - a bit to the left, to x:372 or so, to make the distances a bit different.
5. 00:32:202 (5,6) - This dash isn't really fitting. Also, (6,7) could have a larger distance. Something like this might work:
   
   SPOILER

   
6. 00:34:602 (5,6,7) - ^Similar stuff here.
7. 00:53:652 (4,5) - The dash feels a bit tight, so I'd make it a bit shorter.
8. 00:54:402 (7,8) - ^Similar stuff. To keep the next dash the way it is, I'd make the (7) slider a bit more vertical.
9. 01:23:202 (6,7) - This dash also feels a bit tight, so I'd move (7)'s head a bit to the right to reduce the distance a bit.
10. 01:43:602 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - Dashes don't feel very defined here. I'd put the circles closer to their previous sliders, increasing the dashes' strength a bit.
11. 01:52:602 (8) - I'd move this a bit to the right, the current dash feels a bit large.

Sinnoh wrote:

No kudosu
Rain
00:27:202 (3,4) - 00:53:727 (7,1) - 01:23:202 (3) - just pointing out these hypers are below x=16, could move them right a bit so it's a bit more rankable

Platter
Not sure if 00:35:802 (8,1) - counts as dash into antiflow on Platter, could change just to be safe
hitsound appreciation team
00:00:402 (1) - tail here has no hs, the other ones do
00:10:602 (5) - should this be a finish
00:28:602 (2) - ^
00:55:002 (8) - check hitsound
01:25:602 (1) - ^
01:29:802 (3) - should tail have whistle

Enchant wrote:

Hi~
I took a look at your map, only 1 thing I could find. Feel free to change this if your map gets dq'd!

Escape

00:11:945 - Sound is not mapped, but you did map softer versions here 00:11:352 (2,4) -

Myle wrote:

Enchant wrote:

Hi~
I took a look at your map, only 1 thing I could find. Feel free to change this if your map gets dq'd!

Escape

00:11:945 - Sound is not mapped, but you did map softer versions here 00:11:352 (2,4) -

It's actually fine, since it's just a way of emphasizing. oh, also you can hear some sounds at 00:11:352 (2,4), when you actually can't at 00:11:945

Sinnoh wrote:

aaa i wasn't finished, it was late + didn't think it was going to qualify overnight
@enchant ya 00:11:952 (6) - is fine if it's not mapped Yeah, Im dumb and now I got what Enchant was trying to say. fixed xd

Nothing that is specifically unrankable here, but lots of inconsistent stuff

Easy
00:53:202 (1) - Extra whistle comes from where?

Platter
00:21:702 (9) - 01:19:302 (9) - 01:28:902 (9) - ok so these are mapped on salad but not platter. I don't understand what's wrong with it lol Yet they're also mapped in other random places too, like 00:24:102 (7) - 00:31:002 (10) - 00:33:702 (8) - etc. all map the sound. Can you make these consistent. Removed 00:33:702 (8) - due there's no music at all, just vocal. But I won't remove 00:31:002 (10) - since there's some growing sound except vocal and this slider fits tottale fine and 00:24:102 (7) - since this vocal is connected to the end of 00:23:202 (6) - and so without (7) it feels kinda awkward to hear
It also wouldn't be a bad idea to reduce the amount of those mapped in cup/salad just so it's a lower density there.
00:43:602 (1) - to 00:46:002 (1) - Everything in this section is a dash, more movement than kiai areas. Can you reduce one or two of them
01:46:002 (1) - This combo goes to 14 fruits, pretty high for a platter when rc suggests 12 max. I'd suggest you use the same NC pattern as the previous part

Just compare the Hitsounds I modded to the other diffs, rain is probably fine so use that as reference
00:44:652 (3) - No clap, rain/salad do. (Although I'd suggest you actually change them both to a whistle or else that part will be inconsistent with 00:47:052 (3) - and it's not even mapped at 00:49:602 (4) - or elsewhere in this section)
00:47:052 (2) - ^, no whistle
00:57:852 (5) - no clap
01:16:002 (1,2,3,4,5) - Missing quite a few claps here
00:28:002 (1,2) - and 01:44:802 (1,3) - Pattern is Clap -> Finish but 01:25:602 (1,3) - is Clap/Finish -> Clap

Not sure how you're using the whistle in kiai areas for platter. I'd guess you're just following vocal but there's a lot of inconsistencies. Rain is clear though.
Can you just explain what kind of pattern you're going for, then I'll follow up on what could be changed for consistency. I think I just forgot to copy them again after applying some mods there I was forced to remove hitcircles uwu. Copied all hitsound from the rain to all difficulties once again just to be sure everything is fine (but still fixed some of your points since the copier can't copy properly). Also checked all whistles on platter and made them clearer. I was placing whistles on every 1/2 red beat in kiai sections, so yeah

Rain
00:28:602 (4,5) - CtB is a rhythm game, there really isn't a clear indicator that you swapped from 1/3 to a 1/4 hyperdash.
+ it's not mapped in any of the other kiai, so inconsistent here.
also slightly annoying that the restart of kiai at 00:29:202 (1) - has no hyper Yup, fixed both!
00:38:202 (4) - Shouldn't have clap on any diff here, didn't even realise it was different at first, can you reduce the HS volume by 10% so that it's more clear. That + can you reduce the distance of this dash so it's walkable to emphasise this. Welp I got ya and I removed clap, but I still don't think it's necessary to reduce HS volume to 10%. Also I see no problem in this dash

1. 00:36:402 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,1) - I think you need to make the distances clearer here. For 00:36:852 (2,3) - you're really limited based on (3) direction, so I suggest the following:
   
   00:36:402 (1,2,3,4)

   
   00:37:602 (1,2,3,1)

   
2. 01:24:402 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - Same for these. In this case, I suggest the following positions: 01:24:852 (2) - x:228, 01:25:002 (3) - x:384, 01:25:452 (4) - x:276, 01:25:602 (1) - x:116, 01:26:052 (2) - x:220, 01:26:202 (3) - x:384, 01:26:652 (4) - x:292
3. 01:43:602 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - Some of these feel a bit large. Suggesting the following positions: 01:44:202 (3) - x:352, 01:44:652 (4) - x:272, 01:45:252 (2) - x:248, 01:45:402 (3) - x:412, 01:45:852 (4) - x:296

ZiRoX wrote:

Last few things that we couldn't check on IRC because Myle went to sleep. Do not kudosu this.

[Platter]

1. 00:36:402 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,1) - I think you need to make the distances clearer here. For 00:36:852 (2,3) - you're really limited based on (3) direction, so I suggest the following:
   
   00:36:402 (1,2,3,4)

   
   00:37:602 (1,2,3,1)

   
2. 01:24:402 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - Same for these. In this case, I suggest the following positions: 01:24:852 (2) - x:228, 01:25:002 (3) - x:384, 01:25:452 (4) - x:276, 01:25:602 (1) - x:116, 01:26:052 (2) - x:220, 01:26:202 (3) - x:384, 01:26:652 (4) - x:292
3. 01:43:602 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - Some of these feel a bit large. Suggesting the following positions: 01:44:202 (3) - x:352, 01:44:652 (4) - x:272, 01:45:252 (2) - x:248, 01:45:402 (3) - x:412, 01:45:852 (4) - x:296

1. 00:19:152 (2) - It came to my attention that this slider wasn't following the previous 3/8 ones where the vocals were highlighted. Had a small discussion with other modders and it should be okay to leave it like it is now because the rhythm change into the kiai needs to be more intuitive mapped.
2. 00:27:402 (4,5,6) - Try to highlight a bit more that 1/4 jump with a hyper. You can try a similar structure as you used on 00:28:602 (4,5,6) - by placing (5) on x:140 and (6) on x:56.
3. 01:43:602 (1,2,3) - I'm not a huge fan of having (2) and (3) stacked on a very similar position. To have a more natural movement try placing (1) on x:256 and (2) on x:368, a bit more to the left.

1. 00:19:152 (5) - Same as mentioned on the previous difficulty, the current snap of this slider would be acceptable as a transition into the next section. Other than that, nothing else caught my eye in this difficulty.

1. 00:32:202 (5) - Not sure if the direction change after the strong dash on that slider is the most appropriate pattern for this kind of difficulty. Try to curve that slider a bit or move the end of it more to the right. If you apply this suggestion, you'd have to adjust the distance of the next slider by moving the beginning more to the right.
2. 00:44:652 (3) - The beat after this one isn't that relevant to introduce a dash. It feels more natural if you place this note between the end of (2) and the beginning of (4), at x:212.

1. 00:12:402 (1) - The curve of that slider doesn't flow that well with the next notes. Either make that curve softer or place the objects (2,3) at the left side of the screen instead, (4) probably too.
2. 00:26:802 (1) - This slider looks somehow odd being so long and suddenly having at the end a 1/4 distanced note. I prefered the alternative you proposed on 01:24:402 (1) - where you avoided placing a repetition and you added a beat at the white tick to create a double. Mind changing this slider to something like that? You can also avoid the repetition of the next example 01:43:602 (1) - .
3. 00:56:202 (1) - On the other hand, the density of the droplets in this slider is quite high which makes a more conditioned movement of the catcher. Try to soften this one as well by stretching the slider.

Deif wrote:

No insta-icon this time:

[Escape]

1. 00:19:152 (2) - It came to my attention that this slider wasn't following the previous 3/8 ones where the vocals were highlighted. Had a small discussion with other modders and it should be okay to leave it like it is now because the rhythm change into the kiai needs to be more intuitive mapped.
2. 00:27:402 (4,5,6) - Try to highlight a bit more that 1/4 jump with a hyper. You can try a similar structure as you used on 00:28:602 (4,5,6) - by placing (5) on x:140 and (6) on x:56.
3. 01:43:602 (1,2,3) - I'm not a huge fan of having (2) and (3) stacked on a very similar position. To have a more natural movement try placing (1) on x:256 and (2) on x:368, a bit more to the left.

[Platter]

1. 00:19:152 (5) - Same as mentioned on the previous difficulty, the current snap of this slider would be acceptable as a transition into the next section. Other than that, nothing else caught my eye in this difficulty.

[Salad]

1. 00:32:202 (5) - Not sure if the direction change after the strong dash on that slider is the most appropriate pattern for this kind of difficulty. Try to curve that slider a bit or move the end of it more to the right. If you apply this suggestion, you'd have to adjust the distance of the next slider by moving the beginning more to the right.
2. 00:44:652 (3) - The beat after this one isn't that relevant to introduce a dash. It feels more natural if you place this note between the end of (2) and the beginning of (4), at x:212.

[Cup]

1. 00:12:402 (1) - The curve of that slider doesn't flow that well with the next notes. Either make that curve softer or place the objects (2,3) at the left side of the screen instead, (4) probably too.
2. 00:26:802 (1) - This slider looks somehow odd being so long and suddenly having at the end a 1/4 distanced note. I prefered the alternative you proposed on 01:24:402 (1) - where you avoided placing a repetition and you added a beat at the white tick to create a double. Mind changing this slider to something like that? You can also avoid the repetition of the next example 01:43:602 (1) - .
3. 00:56:202 (1) - On the other hand, the density of the droplets in this slider is quite high which makes a more conditioned movement of the catcher. Try to soften this one as well by stretching the slider.

[]
To be honest, I couldn't distinguish where the correct snap was when I checked the beatmap for the first time. The ranked version had either 3/8 or 1/3 sliders for those vocals so they didn't help either. Anyway, keeping 1/2 or 1/1 sliders for the lower difficulties for those sections like you did feels way more natural than introducing 1/8 beats.

That should be it! Call me back after checking my mod.

Nelly wrote:

К Т Б Р А Ш К У С К А Л Е Н