Alright, let's see...

- Magic Bomb - wrote:

Sorry Deif, I love this map but some things just really stand out as not fitting ;w;

01:30:113 (3) - This shouldn't be a 3/4 slider at all, there's no sound on the 3/4, the 1/2 fits so much better with both this sound, and how you mapped the rest of the section. (Talked with MB about it and agreed to remark the drums by shortening the sliders. Additionally, as I still don't want to get the guitar ignored, added an extra note where those sliders used to end, since the guitar note can be interpreted that way and to add diversity to the rhythm of those sections)
02:04:815 (4,5,6) - The lack of HDash to this sounds very odd considering the strength of the sound, and the drum being there, considering you used a HDash to 02:05:464 (10) - which is a similar strength. (You didn't use a HDash to 02:05:140 (7) - but that makes more sense with the lack of strong drum). Try ctrl+g and then move it to x:336. (Ended up adding hypers to the more relevant drums for the sake of consistency)
02:58:329 (3) - Same as the first one, the drum and guitar are both on the 1/2 here, like the rest of the section.
04:08:383 (3) - And again.
04:18:761 (3) - Same here too.
04:56:545 (5) - Sounds really weird to have a HDash here considering it's so similar to 04:48:761 (5) - , yet you mapped it with different distances. (That's due to the drums being more intense before the end of the section. The intensity change can be heared if you compare them to similar parts of the section)

Alright, that's it, there are a few more minor things that could be changed if this stuff isn't intentional, but none of it is worth dqing over without this.

Since MB and I haven't reached an agreement due to the mentioned 3/4 sliders, as in if there's a hearable sound on the blue ticks or not, I'll let people post their opinion on this matter before going further with the qualification process.

mb why

- Magic Bomb - wrote:

Sorry Deif, I love this map but some things just really stand out as not fitting ;w;

01:30:113 (3) - This shouldn't be a 3/4 slider at all, there's no sound on the 3/4, the 1/2 fits so much better with both this sound, and how you mapped the rest of the section.

I am not an expert in CtB but the song is waaaaaay better represented as a 3/4 slider +2 notes or one 1/2 slider like this

my difficulty has this pattern which goes to mean exactly the same rhythm: focusing the important ticks on 01:30:113 - 01:30:356 - 01:30:599 - and 01:30:761 - plus some improvised notes to make up for the drums

just my useless opinion as a non-ctb guy

01:08:167 (3,4,5,6,7) - Sounds more like 1/4's than 1/3's. I think you can blame the guitarist for being off, but it really sounds like the guitarist makes a pause on 01:08:140 - and again on 01:08:626 - . Also, 01:08:221 - guitar definitely lands on the red and blue tick, but 01:08:464 - and 01:08:545 - are slightly early.
02:36:275 (3,4) - ^

Feel free to get another opinion too~ If its any help, the other ranked set uses 1/4's instead of 1/3's.

Monstrata wrote:

01:08:167 (3,4,5,6,7) - Sounds more like 1/4's than 1/3's. I think you can blame the guitarist for being off, but it really sounds like the guitarist makes a pause on 01:08:140 - and again on 01:08:626 - . Also, 01:08:221 - guitar definitely lands on the red and blue tick, but 01:08:464 - and 01:08:545 - are slightly early.

Feel free to get another opinion too~ If its any help, the other ranked set uses 1/4's instead of 1/3's.

Yeah I was writing something about this too, but monstrata is better at english than me, so I'll say that I'm agree with him, additional I'm in doubt about the current pattern at 00:47:140 (2,3,4,5,6) - cause I don't understand what are you trying to enphasize with hyper dashes like 00:47:788 - or 00:47:464 -, I think that the most relevant sounds are on 00:47:302 - and 00:47:626 -, so I suggest you to re-arrange 00:47:140 (2,3,4,5,6) - with something like this:


and the movements could be something like this:


Acerca del tick azul del que hablaban con Mbomb en Discord, me parece que el actual patron que hiciste esta mucho mejor, yo lo dejaría como esta actualmente.

Ademas...



Buena suerte chicos, espero ayudar en algo, si por casualidad alguno de los BNs que rankearon el mapa ya no quieren Iconear, pues sientete libre de llamarme cuando quieras.

-Sh1n1- wrote:

Ademas...

Raiden's Inner Oni

1. 02:05:572 (36,37,1) - Incomodo el hecho de que D tenga dos dons previos, aparte que voy a coger solo la seccion desde 02:05:788 - hasta 02:24:437 - para explicar un poco lo que senti al jugar esta seccion. D se siente muy repetitivo cuando hay tonadas donde el platillo es muy fuerte, tales como 02:05:788 - 02:06:275 - 02:16:167 - 02:16:653 - 02:23:950 - 02:24:437 - que desde mi punto de vista sonaria mejor con K, aparte que le brinda una muy buena variedad a toda la seccion. hay variedad suficiente en los patrones, los D quedan muchísimo mejor. Para nada incómodo el ddD, es bastante hiteable.
2. ¿Era necesario enfatizar 03:36:761 (18,19,20,21,22) - con big notes? no solo eso, la seccion en si es un poco dudosa, es como un cambio repentino de intensidad, mientras que en la seccion anterior y la posterior usas un gran numero de triplets, en esta parte decides seguir solo guitarra y yo me pregunto, ¿Y los drums que estan en 03:36:923 - 03:37:572 - (mas alla de que 03:37:086 - y 03:37:410 - tambien me parezcan mapeables) van a ser ignorados? comparto la idea de que la guitarra es mas prominente en esta seccion pero ¿acaso no lo fue en 03:32:059 (6,7,8,9,10) - tambien y terminaste combinando guitarra y drums? Creo que podrias agregar unas cuantas notas por ahi quitando los finishers. No voy a quitar los finishers, pero sí a añadir una nota en 03:32:302 - para que la guitarra no pierda ni 1 tick.
   
   
   Bueno eso fue lo único que me incomodo al testearlo, muy buena diff con la calidad a la que ya nos tienes acostumbrados. eso es a Deif o a mí? :^)

Buena suerte chicos, espero ayudar en algo, si por casualidad alguno de los BNs que rankearon el mapa ya no quieren Iconear, pues sientete libre de llamarme cuando quieras.

Deif, puedes añadir un don en 03:32:302 - ?

Monstrata wrote:

01:08:167 (3,4,5,6,7) - Sounds more like 1/4's than 1/3's. I think you can blame the guitarist for being off, but it really sounds like the guitarist makes a pause on 01:08:140 - and again on 01:08:626 - . Also, 01:08:221 - guitar definitely lands on the red and blue tick, but 01:08:464 - and 01:08:545 - are slightly early.

I'd still recommend this snapping since I think that's the guitarist's intention

02:36:275 (3,4) - ^

Feel free to get another opinion too~ If its any help, the other ranked set uses 1/4's instead of 1/3's.

In fact I cannot agree tho. In 1/3 rhythm these circles are snapped to the music (and spreadly evenly to the music). If you make it 1/4 rhythm like you've written in the box, circle 6 and 7 will be highly off-beat. About the circle 01:08:167 (3) - you've complained on, the guitar still feels like it's on 1/3 tick instead of 1/4 one, while the drum is on 1/4 tick so it may sound not clear. Also, I don't think 01:08:275 (4) - it should land on blue tick either. It's just fine as it is.




EDIT: and sorry deif. Even you and MBomb had reached an agreement, I still have to say that your previous version on 01:30:113 (3,4) - is better. It has nothing to do with the drum-emphasizing when you just keep following the guitar (when the guitar sound doesn't exceed 1/1 beat) during the kiai, just as something you've done on 01:25:572 (1,2,3,4,1,2) - . If Mbomb insists that those drums worth emphasizing, I have to say there're other similar drums in Kiai that you didn't map too (i.e. 01:32:869 - 01:25:734 - 01:26:383 - ). Changing all of these will probably break the consistency of your rhythm arrangement imo.

-Sh1n1- wrote:

Monstrata wrote:

01:08:167 (3,4,5,6,7) - Sounds more like 1/4's than 1/3's. I think you can blame the guitarist for being off, but it really sounds like the guitarist makes a pause on 01:08:140 - and again on 01:08:626 - . Also, 01:08:221 - guitar definitely lands on the red and blue tick, but 01:08:464 - and 01:08:545 - are slightly early.

Feel free to get another opinion too~ If its any help, the other ranked set uses 1/4's instead of 1/3's.

[b]Yeah I was writing something about this too, but monstrata is better at english than me, so I'll say that I'm agree with him, additional I'm in doubt about the current pattern at 00:47:140 (2,3,4,5,6) - cause I don't understand what are you trying to enphasize with hyper dashes like 00:47:788 - or 00:47:464 -, I think that the most relevant sounds are on 00:47:302 - and 00:47:626 -, so I suggest you to re-arrange 00:47:140 (2,3,4,5,6) - with something like this:


and the movements could be something like this:

I have to agree on the part of 00:47:140 (2,3,4,5,6) - to some extent. In fact for most similar repression part for the following next bursts, Deif just kept mapping similar things. So it's probably mapped for consistency from my aspect. However, I don't mind his changing the dash point (or not), while I'd still expect an anti-direction dash right before the downbeat like the current one (even if it would be not a HDash but just a regular one, that would be fine).

01:08:221 (3,4,5,6,7) - 02:36:275 (3,4,5,6,7) - Made the first 3 notes 1/4s and the last two were snapped on 1/3s. It's the closest I get to fit with the guitar. Nevermind, went back to 1/3s for the sake of consistency.
00:47:140 (2,3,4,5) - 02:15:356 (2,3,4,5) - Changed as -Sh1n1- suggested.

F D Flourite wrote:

EDIT: and sorry deif. Even you and MBomb had reached an agreement, I still have to say that your previous version on 01:30:113 (3,4) - is better. It has nothing to do with the drum-emphasizing when you just keep following the guitar (when the guitar sound doesn't exceed 1/1 beat) during the kiai, just as something you've done on 01:25:572 (1,2,3,4,1,2) - . If Mbomb insists that those drums worth emphasizing, I have to say there're other similar drums in Kiai that you didn't map too (i.e. 01:32:869 - 01:25:734 - 01:26:383 - ). Changing all of these will probably break the consistency of your rhythm arrangement imo.

Those were the most pronounced guitar beats. The other ones are rather weak or just covered by the drums and can be enough represented by the slider tick, so I'll keep the other 3/4 sliders as they are.

Thanks for your input guys. Let's get this rolling again!

Let's try it again~

Pattern issues are properly addressed, and snap issues are ... hmm ... taken care of carefully and properly

Thanks for your check!

I actually have to question something concerning the quality of the beatmap. I know this is your kind of "thing" that you do Deif, but I'm really wondering that with all your years of experience that you could just do something more creative...

If you'll watch the video I post below, we see a severe flaw in the integrity of the map. I know for me personally, I would never push forward a map where I've copypasted and flipped patterns, but that's just my style, you know. I know that you tend to do this quite often across different maps, but honestly I feel like this is just upsetting in terms of quality. The entirety of the first two kiais are exactly the same.

Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but you aren't a beginner mapper, and with the title of Elite Mapper, and even MORE than that, a Quality Assurance Team member, you surely have some more creativity built up over the past years to at least try to make the kiais different from each other. The song sounds the same, but there really is no reason to copypaste besides the simple fact of laziness. It's really appalling to see this.

Hopefully you can reconsider this mapping stance, I would really like to see this song mapped to the best it can be, not something that's just lazily put together :/

https://youtu.be/j1htRgp-Y14

I won't deny I copypasted entire sections because it's true, nothing new about my lazy uncreative maps. If there's something that works and fits afterwards, I'll surely use it again.

Thanks for testplaying the beatmap!

You should consider learning what "variety" means and how it can improve the quality of a map :< I really love this song and it's a fantastic map, it just hurts to see such little effort put into the climax of the song.. I know and I'm sure you know that you can do something new in that section without ruining your vision of "if it works might as well just make it the same". You can maintain similar emphasis and distances without making patterns (or even the whole section) EXACTLY the same. It's not even an attempted DQ or anything, I'm just.. disappointed.

Your title should be "Elite Copy Paster"

i agree with ascendance and qebrus

my kiais are literally the same except 2 or 3 extra notes for more impact

if something works, you should probably use it again. I'm not a ctb mapper, but I disagree with you guys.

You guys surely raised a controversial argument that cannot be discussed throughly in a specific map thread. In fact whether copy+paste a section is a problem has been discussed in many places for many times. Still, no conclusion that everyone accepts (or even most ppl accept) is made. So I'm pretty sure if such a discussion is made here, it cannot be terminated.

Personally, I neither agree nor disagree with the comment. So, if there's still no common view throughout the community, I'll leave the decision to the mapper, because he/she's the one who creates the map.

p/5806463

The same topic was discussed here and resulted in a bubble-pop. I think it's worth discussing. If this passes though, I think we should refer to Deif's argument for future instances of copy/paste since it's very general and can apply to almost all songs. I'm not agreeing or disagreeing with the issue, but if QAT's involved here are mostly for allowing copy pasting sections, then lets use it more often with the same reasoning until it is discussed in Ranking Criteria i guess.

I think a lot of mappers would be for this tbh, since it definitely saves time and energy especially on mapping long songs. Most mappers don't do this right now because modders tend to point this out as being uncreative, but that stance can always change.

---

Reading F D F's comment, I agree. Whether this is allowed/disallowed cannot be concluded in this mapset.

What i'd like to get at though, is whether this mentality should become more widespread. I'd ideally like to see mappers in the future refer to sets like this as a valid reason to reuse patterns that work well. After all, if it plays perfectly fine, the only reason you wouldn't reuse it is because you fee you aren't being creative, or are being lazy for doing so.

Would love to hear some more opinions about this mentality becoming popularized again. I can start including them in my mapsets too to popularize the idea again. Andrea used to do this a lot if I remember haha.

You shouldn't use an osu! mapset as example in a thread of catch/taiko imo. I do understand that copy pasting better be avoided if possible but you, Monstrata, of all people should know the differences between osu! and osu!catch. osu!catch has a much more limited way of expressing the song, therefore re-using patterns could happen. I personally prefer to avoid copy paste but I know Deif's style and he has this for ages already and you probably won't change this no matter what. We are not forcing anyone to change his way of mapping.

I only see that as soon as ascendance appeared waving his hand, a few other popped in, said nothing creative, then disappeared while the rest of the community do not care at all. Then you, Monstrata, came with an unrelated example. No, whatever will be the conclusion of this thread, this must not be used as an example in other mode or even thread and all of you should understand it.

Also, I expect some trolls to appear with a map where they copy pasted sections to get it ranked fast. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Kurokami wrote:

You shouldn't use an osu! mapset as example in a thread of catch/taiko imo. I do understand that copy pasting better be avoided if possible but you, Monstrata, of all people should know the differences between osu! and osu!catch. osu!catch has a much more limited way of expressing the song, therefore re-using patterns could happen. I personally prefer to avoid copy paste but I know Deif's style and he has this for ages already and you probably won't change this no matter what. We are not forcing anyone to change his way of mapping.

I only see that as soon as ascendance appeared waving his hand, a few other popped in, said nothing creative, then disappeared while the rest of the community do not care at all. Then you, Monstrata, came with an unrelated example. No, whatever will be the conclusion of this thread, this must not be used as an example in other mode or even thread and all of you should understand it.

Also, I expect some trolls to appear with a map where they copy pasted sections to get it ranked fast. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

It isn't used as an example, but more as a reference point. There are thousands of ways to express a song, no two mappers would map something the same way. Laziness should not be a "style" and we shouldn't be making excuses for Deif's design choices. We aren't forcing him to change his way of mapping, only for him to reconsider his stance of emphasis on the most powerful point of the song. Devaluing other people's statements when there's active discussion is the opposite of what a QAT should be doing though. As I remember, the job of the QAT now is to help facilitate discussion where it opens up. Why don't we continue discussing instead of saying "osu! =/= osu!catch so it doesn't matter"? Really, I'd like more opinions from people who aren't the mapper / the gder / the nominator. They're obviously biased, and I think outside opinions are nice.

wew

p/6011180

Another popped example.

As a mapper I want to know the answer too. Since most of the music have similarity in some parts,does it emphasize the music well by copying the same patterns?

Anyway good map and I really enjoy it. gratz for qualified.

I didn't even notice the copypaste while playing it.
I think that copypaste is fine when it fit the song, but no more than one time. (imo)

It fits the song what are you talking about

@Kurokami

I'm not using the standard set as an example of what should or should not be done. That's not my intention. I'm referencing it because other BN's in the past have expressed disapproval of copy/pasting whole sections of music. My intention was to show that there is reasonable disagreement about this topic from the BNG. It has nothing to do with expressing songs between standard and catch, so you really just misread me.

As I already stated. My intention isn't to say "we shouldn't allow copy pasta". I'm raising the question "should we start supporting Deif's reply as a valid reasoning for future cases?" Anyways, I'm interested in how the BN"s nominating this set think about the copy/paste too. Perhaps they aren't aware of it. I didn't notice the copy/paste on Ren's map until some people pointed it out xD.

Well, I do not like copy pasting either, I prefer just marking where the jumps should go (consistency) then make something different but at the same time, I know it is Deif's style of mapping and actually, there are quite some people with the similar style. While I do understand why you pointed out that as an example, in osu! doing something different while maintaining some kind of similarity is easier due to having both axis but catch slightly differs in this matter. I do not like using examples across game modes, to be honest. Each BN and community members have a different viewpoint.

That said, I'm against the idea of making his answer an official one.

@Ascendance

I'm not devaluing anyone's opinion, sorry if it felt that way, but there was a DQ request by Monstrata so I just came to answer. As you said, no two mapper will map something the same way, he likes copy pasting patterns and sections and actually I see no fault in that. He mapped the other 4:30 minute by himself and only copied ~25 sec because he thinks it fits well, I do not think that count as laziness.

Monstrata wrote:

https://osu.ppy.sh/forum/p/5806463

The same topic was discussed here and resulted in a bubble-pop. I think it's worth discussing.

In fact, this example is somehow invalid not due to the mode difference but the situation difference. In the current nomination system, a BN can simply pop a bubble with a reason that he himself believes, even if nobody supports him. But that's not actually the case when a map's going to be disqualified. If a valid conclusion could be barely reached even after the disqualification, I don't see the reason of disqualification.

Besides, if another BN came in after Battle popped that map in the example, the new BN was still allowed to bubble the map with disagreeing Battle's pop. But if a map's disqualified for the same reason, it actually can hardly be bubbled before the discussion is done, which is more harmful to the mapset and the mapper: in the previous case, mappers are still fine to keep their opinions and look for some other BNs that agree with them; while in the latter case, mappers are more likely to be forced to make a change. That's unfair. So I believe bubble pop and disqualification should be considered differently, otherwise those ppl who hold disagreement should allow the mapset to be qualified again even if the "problem" isn't solved.

I'm not biased to support the copy/paste or not. I'm just talking about an available attitude toward controversial arguments. People, and more specificly, nominators, are divided. We all know that we don't easily change our minds during the debate (because we've already had debates and there was no conclusion). And we in fact are actually aware that endless debate on a specific mapset will eventually turn into a gambling: People on each side are hoping that more incoming ppl would support their side, while they know that it's all about luck and the result does not represent the real common sense of this community because most ppl don't even care about this thread. So, I think the real thing we have to do is to make a community discussion (or more badly, community vote), instead of making a specific mapset suffering for this debate.

Ellyu wrote:

As a mapper I want to know the answer too. Since most of the music have similarity in some parts,does it emphasize the music well by copying the same patterns?

The answer is, it depends on different BNs and different cases, as I stated before. BNs are now divided on the opinion of copy/paste and still I believe no general conclusion is made yet.

there is nothing wrong with copy paste if the music is the same then we can call it consistency.

Okay fair enough. Seems there is a good amount of support for stuff like this actually. I had expected this to be more widely considered a negative. I don't have anything against it, was just looking for some more discussion which I got, thanks!

I think I will be using this more in the future now haha.

Natsu wrote:

there is nothing wrong with copy paste if the music is the same then we can call it consistency.

💯 I would do like that too, copypastahhh

its about consistency, if its really repetitive or boring yea variety could be applied ( Optional ), but still better than randomly.