qqqant wrote:move to pending? lol
just because im retarded and i like when things are organized, i moved it there :3c
qqqant wrote:move to pending? lol
Thanks again for the detailed and helpful mod! o/ I've added Hathz' reply too.
- 03:16:363 - 05:05:496 - Stars in a night sky are static, so they should move across the sky at the same speed. But for some reason you have some stars moving faster and overtaking other stars which is eehh.
Good point. I went with variable speeds at first since I felt like it gave the scene a more 3D feel. Didn't think for a second about sticking to realism. Changed appropriately~
- blur2.jpg and mblur2.jpg usused.
Eeeeh how did those get in there. Replaced blur.jpg and mblur.jpg with their lower filesize clones and removed unused ones.
Hathz Applied by Hathz
- 00:19:602 (2,3,4) - I guess I understand why the stacks are different, but I still can't help but feel that it looks weird aesthetically. I think you could get away with stacking them the same since it's early in the map and it's still possible to read based on approach circles, or you could just change the pattern to avoid doing this altogether. changed this one, the one after left the same cause i feel like it fits well with the music
- 01:51:818 (1) - Emphasis on the head of this seems underwhelming since low spacing and previous slider points staight into it. Easiest fix is Ctrl+H and increase spacing, but do whatever. kay
- 02:29:999 - Lower SV would've been cool for this section but I guess it's fine if you don't want to change. keeping as it is, that section is really short and it seems better to keep it same SV
- 04:16:704 (2,4,1) - Stacks are doing weird thinigs here. Turn on View -> Stacking and make it so first two sliders are neatly stacked. fixed
- 06:24:545 (1) - Similar to before, emphasis is kinda lacking because spacing and previous slider flipped dat
- 06:55:568 (5) - Could Ctrl+H so overlap is avoided. sure
- 06:57:272 (1) - Linear slider like this just seems really out of place since most of this section is using regular curve sliders. Something like this I could see as being more suitable fixed
- 07:06:477 (5) - Off blanket, might as well fix. fixed
- 01:36:732 (6) - Stack is broken.
Good eye, fixed!
- 04:23:181 (1,3) - Could avoid this overlap if you wanted.
The overlap was intentional and I'd prefer to keep it like that since I think it looks okay
- 04:25:908 (1) - This sort of slider just seems kinda weird to use especially for a 1/2 without any significant sound on it. I would just keep it a regular shape pointing leftwards.
I was aiming for a shape that prevents the risk of a sliderbreak when doing the sharp 04:25:908 (1,2) - movement and that seemed like the best option (albeit not the best looking one). I've changed the slider into a single curve that should still leave enough room for the sharp jump without risking a missed slider end.
- 04:31:363 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - Would be cooler if the 1/4 spacing was consistent through this.
Sounds fair, unified spacing on all 1/4 stacks to 0.20x
- 05:33:068 (2,3) - Reducing spacing for this thing all of a sudden seems kinda odd.
Reshaped the slider and moved it a bit to stay consistent with the spacing compared to the rest
- 06:50:625 (2) - I think there are better choices than doing an overlap like this. For example, this could be stacked on the tail, and then you could move 06:50:454 (1) to stack with 06:49:772 (3).
That was my initial idea but I tried the half overlaps because I was afraid of the readability aspect. Stacked the notes as suggested~
Pop is for timing concerns, happy to rebubble when that's resolved.
Thanks! I appreciate it! :3/
00:38:181 - 00:27:272 - forgot to emphasize this in SB? reference: 00:32:727 - 00:21:818 - 01:32:726 - etc