Monstrata wrote:

Spark of Light

00:11:360 (4,5) - Not really liking how this is such a big jump while in the intro. Especially when you dont emphasize 00:10:791 (3) - .
00:12:689 (2,3) - It's not necessary to space these out the same as 3>4 imo. 4 Is emphasized so yea it can have a large spacing, but setting the jumps out like this makes it seem like 3>4 is just any other jump and not special.
00:26:360 (1,2,3) - Go for something besides a triangle here to emphasize 3 instead?
00:35:663 (2,3,4) - Emphasize 3 instead of 2 and 4 with your jumps. 00:37:183 (2,3) - Consistency with here.
00:38:512 (1,2,3) - Kinda odd that 2>3 isn't as big as 1>2
00:58:069 (1,2,3,4) - This could be structured better aesthetically imo...
01:03:196 (3,4,5) - Are you sure you want to emphasize 4 over 5? Yes, I want 4 to be emphasized more than 5, but looking at it again, 5 was under-emphasized so I gave it a bit of spacing.

I don't mind the large jumps. But your emphasis control for verse, and sections that aren't particularly emphatic could be a bit better.

Fixed everything else

nasya

01:14:018 (1,2) - Remove NC here and put it on 01:14:588 (3) - ? NC Rhythm seems odd here.
01:14:398 (2) - Also, this jump seems really big for a note that isn't really that special compared to the other notes in the song. Like, its bigger than the jumps on 01:16:297 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - so it feels a bit misplaced imo,.

Insane

00:31:297 (2,3,1) - Odd choice to put the jump on 3, instead of on 1.
00:32:626 (2,3) - Same^

Hard

00:21:613 (1,2,3) - I don't think these need to be jumps... or at least, that spaced.
01:11:550 (1,2,3) - Generally, your choice of jumps seems very irregular. Like you do jumps here. But not on previous downbeats like 01:08:322 (4,1) - 01:09:841 (5,1) -
01:14:398 (4,1) - Then you put jumps here but 01:15:917 (5,1) - here it's not as big.
01:16:297 (1,2) - And then here is really big but then 01:17:436 (3,1) - and 01:18:196 (2,3) - are really small in comparison.

Jumps seem misplaced on this diff.

Monstrata wrote:

nasya

01:14:018 (1,2) - Remove NC here and put it on 01:14:588 (3) - ? NC Rhythm seems odd here.
01:14:398 (2) - Also, this jump seems really big for a note that isn't really that special compared to the other notes in the song. Like, its bigger than the jumps on 01:16:297 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - so it feels a bit misplaced imo,.

1. 00:09:272 (3) - would reccomend using a cirlce and then a 1/2 slider after it so you can click on the change in the song
2. 00:39:272 (1,2) - I feel like stacking these would work better
3. 01:14:588 (1,2,3) - would like to see this pattern fit together much like the previous two

1. 00:35:854 (3) - if you ctrl + g this the implied motion is much nicer and the emphasis on 4 is stronger
2. 01:04:145 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - this is a pretty big diffspike and honestly it's subjectievly harder than the topdiff
3. 01:23:702 (1) - ctrl + h

1. 00:13:829 (1,2) - make this more triangular? you can do that by just movinug literally every object before this down a bit
2. 00:18:575 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - would prefer if you did this, i think variation is nice when the harder version comes last however these stacked circles would be considered the "spike."
   
   d

   
3. 00:23:512 (2,3,1,2,3,4,5,6) - these jumps though they're at a low bpm are a pretty intense spike, especially considering how you go into a short stream afterwards, and there's no real decrease in intensity after the stream (stacked 1/2 into a 1/2 slider) I would prefer if you used a smaller ds on the jumps and also started going with an easier rhythm after the short stream (like using a reverse slider or something along those lines)
4. 00:27:689 (1,1,1) - would prefer same visual distance between the three of these, you did it later on so
5. 00:31:297 (2,3,4,1) - this is pretty linear, you should try and angle it more
6. 01:04:145 (1,2,3,4) - the intensity here is pretty hard and would rather see a leadin to some kidn of jumps instead of just going ham with stars immediately. maybe by making the timestamp into sliders you would be able to achieve that
7. 01:15:348 (3,4) - i would put 4 at the tail of 3 because the current positiong takes away from the power of 5
8. 01:19:335 (1,2) - would ctrl + g 2 because the power on that sound is less than 1 imo so it makes sense for it to be easier
9. 01:21:423 (3,4) - you didn't do any kind of overlap like this until now, so introdcuing a new aesthetic choice so late is kinda bleh. also it doesn't look that great
10. 01:24:272 (2,3,4,5) - could do a slider with 2 circles after it here, for the same reason as earlier. an increase in intensity instead of just consistent difficulty
11. 01:26:170 (3) - i would ctrl g this because the next pattern is much smaller in spacing compared to this one

Logic Agent wrote:

short mod from my stream

[N a s y a's Insane]

1. 00:35:854 (3) - if you ctrl + g this the implied motion is much nicer and the emphasis on 4 is stronger
2. 01:04:145 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - this is a pretty big diffspike and honestly it's subjectievly harder than the topdiff keep
3. 01:23:702 (1) - ctrl + h

[XV] wrote:

Rank when?

KnockOnDood wrote:

[XV] wrote:

Rank when?

My thoughts exactly. RANK PLS

Monstrata wrote:

Kalkililria Pryoitooildjiyjds

00:18:765 (2) - You could probably position this circle a bit better with respect to the visual consistency of 00:19:145 (2,2,2,2) - Yea it was too far left, I changed it.
00:44:778 (2,3) - Stacking really underrepresents the drum that lands on 3. Give it some movement at least? OK, I ctrl+g 3.
01:01:487 (2,3) - Same idea here. You could try stacking 3 with 01:00:727 (1) - 's head, and maybe changing the slider shape or something if it doesn't fit ur aesthetic completely. Changed, but instead of stacking on 1's head I just blanketed 3 to 1.
01:28:449 (1,2,1,2) - Really wouldn't recommend this angle. repetitive topleft - bottom-right movement is really uncomfortable for people who are right-handed (which is the majority of ppl who will be playing this). Try holding a pencil and moving bottom left > top right. it's a lot easier than top left > bottom right. I tried making it more comfortable to play? I think it's better now. I also saved the old version since it has been 2 months and you probably don't remember how the jumps were: http://puu.sh/vUoyU/3d3bebcc74.osu

Hard

00:25:791 (5) - This placement doesn't look too nice with 3. I think you can structure it better. Don't worry so much about the jump here from 4. The positioning and slider leniency allows players to move from 4>5 without feeling like they had to make a jump. Sure
01:27:689 (3,4,5) - Triangle with 3>4>5? the spacing is kinda inconsistent atm Triangle it is!

Normal

00:08:512 (4,1,2) - Spacing is slightly inconsistent between 4>1 Made it consistent.

Should be all now.

fieryrage wrote:

i know you wanna go back to 2 digit but this is probably the stupidest thing i've ever seen bar the original 6.66 star haitai

1) 00:21:613 (1,2,1,2,1,2) - this is the only set of jumps that decrease in spacing (also accounting for 0.1 SR), why? this is literally the same thing as 01:25:411 (1) - this section lol Not quite. First of all, let's break the circles you have highlighted apart. I don't know where you got the 'decreased spacing' vibe from, but 00:21:613 (1,2) - this is the most intense part of the section, and that is why it's so spaced. If you select it, and rotate it by 90 degrees, you get something like this: http://i.imgur.com/CQos0VL.jpg. Which is nowhere near decreased spacing, but rather the opposite.

Also for these 00:21:993 (1,2,1,2) - circles, they are the same spacing as 00:20:094 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2) - those which sound the same and therefore the have the same spacing.

As for 01:25:411 (1,2) - this section that you said is literally the same as 00:21:613 (1,2,1,2,1,2) - this section, I'm sorry but you're wrong. It's actually the same as 00:18:575 (1,2) - this.
01:28:449 (1,2,1,2,1,2) - This section is actually the same as the one you highlighted, 00:21:613 (1,2,1,2,1,2) - this.

2) the kiai besides the ending is underwhelming, the only real "big" jump is 01:17:816 (1,2,3) - despite there being plenty of opportunities for intense jump sections ie 01:10:221 (1,2,3,1,2,3,4) - right here (and no, barely-spaced triangles don't count as intense jumps) And that is because the rest of the kiai DOESN'T feel as intense as the parts I have mapped with 1-2 jumps. I don't agree with you spacing the rest of the kiai time the same as the ending, as there are no supporting instruments for that or climaxing vocals.

01:17:816 (1,2,3,1) - This is the climax of the first kiai, and while it isn't as intense as the second kiai with the drums, the vocals make it so that it called for this spacing.

3) 01:28:449 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1) - this pattern alone accounts for over 0.2 SR and is overspaced for absolutely no reason, like 01:30:158 (1,2,3,4,5) - this is LESS spacing than those jumps and it's the climax????????? Remember how I told you above that 00:21:613 (1,2) - this is the most intense part of the first jump section? Same goes for this 01:28:449 (1,2,1,2,1,2) - part, but this time there are vocals supporting the jumps while the drums go crazy in the background, which in my opinion is perfect.

Also for 01:30:158 (1,2,3,4,5) - this pattern, you said that it has less spacing and is the climax while not the peak in my opinion, it's where the drums change to a different rhythm, and while it doesn't have the same spacing, it still is spaced and enough, and more importantly, it is more awkward to justify for the slightly lesser spacing. At least for me, back and forth jumps are easier to play than star patterns, which is why I did that.


4) map is 5.22 stars with 01:25:411 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1) - this entire jump section removed, why are you increasing the difficulty at the last 5 seconds of the map? what's the purpose of doing that? there's equally as intense sections like this in the map but you opted to put the only hard part at the end? not only that, the patterns are also the most generic and basic thing and easy as hell to hit. considering your past "map" was pp farm (that YOU farmed almost immediately as it got ranked) i think i'm safe in saying that you literally made these jumps to map pp for yourself and nothing else

Why do you keep mentioning star rating, and what does that have to do with anything? You are assuming things and the complications this time are different. I have no intention of playing this map for performance points, and I certainly did not do it to satisfy my needs. I already explained why I decided to use this spacing, and it just happened that the intense part of the song is at the end of it, and how I don't agree with you that the rest of the kiai should be as spaced, so would you please excuse your language.

i shouldn't be able to go into a map and remove 35 notes from it and make it 4.87 stars, it's blatant pp mapping and the fact this got qualified actually pisses me off, no one learned their lesson from haitai's original diff apparently

kid can't get a 500 pp play so he maps his own for it, fucking ridiculous that this is allowed rofl That is not very nice : )

MaridiuS wrote:

[Spark of Light]

Some patterns could use improvement aesthetically, this ones really stood out:
01:12:310 (3,2,1) - In a section where there is big visual spacing, we have this blanket which is really close, and add up to an off-placed pattern.
01:13:639 (2,1,2) - compare their visual spacing to these 01:13:829 (3,3) - , could use tidying up.
01:14:588 (1,2,3) - like this accomplishes nothing, it looks plain, and without connection, just random sliders placed here. Could be made to something like 01:08:512 (1,2,3) - where you use rotation to make up a triangle of 3 sliders. 01:15:348 (3) - + in this state this slider has an offputting angle, isn't even inversed or symmetrical to previous sliders
01:15:917 (2,1) - this could use bigger visual distance.
01:18:955 (2,1) - just compare it to 01:18:385 (1,3) - Generally it seems like you mix visual distance arbitrarily, not really tided up and planned at a first glance, map could be easily revisisted and have simillar visual distance applied. But really who cares about aesthetics, people are mad because of pp this map would give for its difficulty. I checked everything and it seems like you're doing blanket modding at this point, so I'm not going to bother much with it, I personally think that the aesthetics look good.

Difficulty:

01:04:145 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2) - This could use some rescaling to reduce spacing. The snares aren't actually that loud, the hitsounds make them sound loud. 00:45:537 (4) - the peak is as loud as the generic snare in a section before it. I deleted them and listened to just the song, and I do hear a steadily increasing drum, so I don't think they deserve a reduced or equal spacing between them, and the hitsounds are there to accentuate this fact.

01:26:930 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2) - Why is the spacing increasing on every note, when the music, isn't building up, it rather has a barely noticable guitar intensity increasement, that only happens here 01:26:930 - and 01:27:689 - here is another increasmeent in intensity. It isn't linear, therefore jumps should be the same, and not building up 01:26:930 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2) - . There are no increasing pitches in the background, and the kicks/snares aren't getting louder. The spacing steadily increasing because the vocals are climaxing. The drums feel as intense as they can possibly be out of the whole kiai section, and the way it sounds made me map it this way, personally it emphasizes the song very well.

01:30:158 (1,2,3,4,5) - This is a clear snare buildup if you listen a bit to the music, every following note gets stronger, but here it is done like every note is of same intensity. And also, if you listen to these snares, they are quieter than 01:09:841 (5) - or any generic snare happening in the kiai section, I see no real reason for this notes to have such huge spacing since they're not strong, and I don't believe the song is at its peak here. Like when I hear this, I either hear circular pattern building up in spacing (like literal circular, not jumps) or some back and forths with every following note having increased spacing. And the peak shouldn't even be close to what you represented. 01:30:158 (1,2,3,4,5) - Out of all these 5 notes, the only one that doesn't feel equal volume to the others is 01:30:158 - this. The rest sound like they have the same exact volume and that is why I decided to space them equally, and as you can see, you come into this 01:30:158 (1) - note from a slider, with less spacing between them than the actual star spacing, so you have all the convenience you need to hit it without worrying much about it.

I'll just leave this short-ish mod here. When you reply, I will more properly explain stuff if I wasn't clear enough. I was tired when I did this check.