Hey!
[Collab]
00:08:009 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1) - This seems to be a huge spike, especially because of the back'n'forth flow, compared to how simple are the previous rhythms/patterns. I advise making the flow more smooth and not using back'n'forth.
00:14:343 (4,5) - CTRL+G, so rhythm will be more intuitive and coherent with how you mapped this previously (especially at 00:10:676 (1,2,3,1,2) - ).
00:19:676 (5,6) - Same, etc.
00:32:009 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - This feels really slow compared to 00:21:343 (1,2,3,1,2,3) -, 00:24:009 (1,2,3,4,5,1,2,3,4) - etc. Same issue here 00:34:676 (1,2,3,1,2,3) -
00:42:176 (2,3,4) - What about making a 90° angle ? It would fit better with the squared stream.
00:43:676 (1,2,1) - Consider reducing spacing between them so (1) can have a proper emphasis.
00:47:676 (5,6,1,2) - This will be inintuitive to play and isn't necessary since it's the only time this rhythm appears in the whole section. Consider adding a kickslider at 00:48:009 - to make it more fluid to play.
00:56:843 (8,9,10) - Spacing should be consistent between them if you listen properly to the music. Same issue at 01:18:176 (6,7,8) - .
01:07:259 (5,6) - CTRL+H ? Makes more sense with your style.
02:11:343 (1,2,3) - Here you give priority to blue tick but you don't do it at 02:14:009 (1,2,3,4) - when it's even louder.
02:17:843 (4,1) - I don't really understand why they are not spaced when 02:12:509 (4,1) - are spaced. And doing it consistently is not really a reason.
03:05:177 (4,1) - You usually don't increase spacing on downbeat.
03:36:009 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - Not really confident on how they flow.
04:11:676 (3) - Make it straight ?
04:22:925 (4,1,2) - Does it deserve to be that hard ? Pure antiflow is really difficult to perform while streaming.
04:34:176 (6,1,2,1) - Could look cleaner.
05:00:676 (1,2,3,4) - This rather deserves consistent spacing.
Pretty cool map but I honestly feel like moph and Ambient's styles don't fit really well, except in last kiai time... good luck.