Chalwa wrote:

o/ m4m from your queue!
General

1. Remove countdown and widescreen support, because widescreen support is useless, since you haven't made storyboard and countdown is useless, when you are starting a beatmap with a slider and it looks old too >.< k
2. Your BG has 1273x857 resolution which is unrankable tbh, because it's not 4:3, when you can use something like this and it's not 16:9, where you should use 1366:768 or more. yeh this is a temp bg til I can find one i like with the proper res

Normal

1. 00:27:581 (1) - I think it's NC here is unreasonable, because you didn't make it it before and after in this part. Also here it not started any new sound and no SV (in Normal, SV change pls...) change is here. So you should to remove it, altrough it isn't unreadable. fixed
2. 00:37:653 (3) - In this slider you skipped a strong beat 00:37:867 here, which is stronger than both where you made start and end of slider. So you can add circle in 00:37:653 and then make 1/2 slider in 00:37:867. It will be more comfortable to play i think. intentional
3. 00:44:510 (3) - The same as above (fix it in the same pasted patterns).
4. 00:51:581 (3,1) - What do you think about blanket this two objects? In my personal opinion it looks better then, because you have two sliders with a bigger curve and 00:51:581 (3) with less. Also it's as comfortable as flow here, because you haven't changed a curve much. So you can end 00:51:581 (3) slider at 48/200 in example. I don't want to blanket them, I also like using variation in curves
5. 01:25:010 (2,3,4) - This pattern looks a bit weird tbh, because from 01:25:867 (3,4) you have a nice transition, but 01:25:867 (3) this curve is a little confusing for newbies. I think you can make something like on img for make this pattern a little nicer. i dont understand why this would be confusing
6. 01:46:438 (3,1) - The same like on 00:51:581 (3,1), so I won't write the same thing two times.
7. 02:24:153 (1) - You should to remove NC here, because in 00:48:153 (4) and 01:43:010 (4) you haven't put it. Altrough it's a simmiliar sound to both, i can hear they aren't the same you can remove NC, cause the nyou make this part more readable. done

Hard

1. Only one thing which i will point in this (ideal for me) diff it's NCs in one part in end, cause they are inconsistent with all in map:
   
   1. 02:29:724 (1) - remove NC
   2. 02:31:010 (7) - NC here
   3. 02:32:510 (3) - NC here too fixed all
   After my changes it's more readable right now. In objescts it's ideal for me, so GJ

Insane

1. 00:37:010 (5,6,7) - I think you can make this jump a bit bigger, because it's kiai part, and you have before a bis stacked jumps. This small jump right now it's a bit uncomfortable. Altrough it can be harder to jump, but more fit to song and hard enough to play. This seems fine to me
2. Make between 00:44:295 (7,8) this jump and 00:43:867 (5,6) this jump the same, because there you have simmiliar sounds and this may be more polite. Made some adjustments
3. 01:03:367 (8,1) - In my opininion you can put here a triplet, cause it will emphasise better a strong sounds in end. It's a little suggest too. the blue tick isn't accentuated so I prefer to cover it with a slider tail
4. 01:58:224 (8,1) - The same as above
5. A solid diff too

Ohhh...
Sorry for my shitty mod, but I haven't got thet much time. I'm so sorry, if you don't want you can skip my map .
But anyway, GOOD LUCK

Lapis Aoki wrote:

M4M from your Q.

I edited the BG and made it 1366x768. So, here you go.

Easy

1. 00:11:295 (3,1) - Copy (3) and paste it into (1) (or the opposite) for pattern? Because here at 00:14:724 (3,1) and 00:18:153 (3,1) - they're copy pasted. So, it didn't make sense for me that 00:11:295 (3,1) - are not copy-pasted.. im ok with varying slider shapes
2. 00:22:483 (4) - NC here. Because you add an NC here after 2 downbeats.
3. 00:55:010 (3,1) - Pretty much the same thing as the first point. same
4. 01:49:867 (3,1) - ^

Normal

1. 00:01:867 (1,2,3) - I can't say I really like the pattern here, so how about this pattern? Because IMO, its somehow weird to switch from a curvy slider to a less curvy slider. variation
2. 00:37:653 - There's no vocal here, its only her breath, meanwhile there's a strong vocal here at 00:37:867 that you skipped. Maybe try this rhythm?
3. 01:22:438 (4,5,1) - Also the same thing as the first point in easy, maybe this? i like variation in slider shapes
4. 01:32:510 - Same thing as the second point.
5. 02:13:653 - ^

Hard

1. 00:35:081 (4,5) - The flow here seems weird because the two are really close. How about you stack them are move them apart? 01:29:938 (4,5) - I want to keep the same effect of reducing distance like I did at 01:29:938 (4,5) -
2. 00:53:295 (3,4) - Kinda same as above.. pointing out similar patterns, here at 00:56:724 (3,4) and 01:00:153 (3,4) - aren't really close as 00:53:295 (3,4) are. Maybe move (3,4) a bit apart like the ones I pointed out?
3. 01:48:153 (3,4) - Same as above.
4. 02:49:867 (3,4,5) - ^

I have nothing to say for insane, it's solid. Catchy song, good luck. ^^ Also, I miss your maps. <3 aww ty

-NanoRIPE- wrote:

m4m (my english is bad)

[Easy]
00:22:438 (4) - nc
00:49:438 - the beat looks strong here so why not add circle instead? because im keeping a balance between 2/1 and 1/1 gaps for beginners
01:27:581 (1) - the spinner goes well here but you skipped this beat 01:29:724 and 01:30:153 - that needs more emphatize (because the cymbal looks strong here) its realy odd when you leave it blank imo (maybe just map this part i think as you did at 00:32:724 (1,2,3) ) its ok
01:44:295 - same as 00:49:438 same
02:05:295 (1) - finish here? but the finish volume is low
02:08:724 (1) - same issue as 01:27:581 (1) - same response
02:25:438 - same as before same
02:56:295 - why just you map this part? im feel odd when you leave it blank (idk how to explain this one sorry,my english is weak)

[Normal]
00:36:153 (1,2,3,4,5) - i know you try to emphatize the instrumen but player would be confused cause player play,they will focus on the vocal not the instrument (the instrument looks strong but the vocal more strong than instrument and player always based on vocal imo) my suggestion : http://prnt.sc/e7d7bh (ignore the pattern)
00:39:581 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7) - too dense,especially at (4,5,6,7).try to nerf it.my suggestion http://prnt.sc/e7d6rd
00:44:081 (1,2,3,4,5) - same as first point
01:24:153 (1) - finish here cause cymbal?
01:31:010 (1,2,3,4,5) - same as before
01:34:438 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7) - same as 00:39:581 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7)
01:37:867 (1,2,3,4,5) - same as before
02:05:295 (1) - same as easy
02:57:581 - i think circle here it would be better cause its a bit awkwward when you leave it blank imo not really

[hard]
00:25:010 (3) - ctrl g for better flow between (2,3,1)
00:34:438 (1,2) - maybe just make the ds same as (3,4)? for consistency? its ok
00:41:724 (2,1,2) - imperfect stack
00:55:010 (1,2,3,4,5) - theres no particular meaning for make the circles closer like this,why not just make 1/2 sliders instead? (and also player would be confused with this pattern) just being creative also its hard difficulty, its not a hard pattern to read
01:29:295 (1,2) - same as 00:34:438 (1,2) no
01:49:867 (1,2,3,4,5) - same as 00:55:010 (1,2,3,4,5) same response
02:05:295 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - i think its quite boring if you just make 1/3 reverse slider,make a variation rhythm here would be better imo i think you mean reverse 1/4 also its fine
02:35:295 (3,1) - bad overlap imo (why not stacked it instead?) its fine
02:41:724 (2,1,2) - overlap a bit not that bad
02:48:581 (2) - 248,174 for blanket?
02:53:724 (1,2,1,2,3) - it looks harder if you just pu circles for emphatize the instrument imo,why not change it to slider instead? circles are fine, changed some NCs to make it easier to readhttp://prnt.sc/e7decv
02:57:795 (1,2) - ^

[Insane]
00:05:295 (1,3,5) - nc this object same as you did on hard diff
00:20:295 (4) - i think 1/1 slider would be better here cause at 00:20:724 (1) - theres no beat so you dont need a circle there is a beat
00:33:581 (5) - nc here? dont think its needed for this pattern
00:48:153 (1,2) - make it farther? cause i think finish would be better if you make a jump or farther like 02:24:153 (1,2) it plays fine so id like to keep it
01:03:367 - i think a circle is enough here (the slider doesnt fit with the music imo) i think it does
01:25:867 (1,2) - too far imo if you compare with previous pattern its just slider jumps and it plays fine
01:43:010 (1,2) - same as before same response
01:47:295 (4,1) - the overlap just make the pattern looks bad imo not everything is about how a pattern looks, i like how this plays
01:58:224 (8) - same as 01:03:367 same
02:05:295 (1) - finish cause cymbal

nice map ~
GL!

crystalinfusion wrote:

Hello, nm req from my q

> I don't exactly know if there is a reason why you will be using countdown, if there isn't any then try removing it removed
> Widescreen support is disabled on Insane, but is enabled on Easy, Normal and Hard. made consistent

> 01:28:010 (3,1) - is there a reason for the large spacing? They both have constant sound and also because you are following the vocals on this part. keep the pattern but reduced spacing
> 00:48:153 (1,2) - emphasize the crash cymbal here. this is fine

Graffin wrote:

nm from my queue

00:19:224 (4,5,6,1,2,3) - this can be kind of awkward considering the way the triple is going plays fine to me
00:01:869 (1) - not snapped? good catch
01:19:867 (3) - blanket around 2 not my intention to
01:27:581 (1,2,3,1,2,3) - spacing between these 2 combos doesnt make much sense considering the song, a jump or just linear flow with equal spacing would be better imo well it plays fine to me but i reduced the spacing

i like your jumps thanks!
GL

ailv wrote:

insane

i notice in quite a few places their are issues with spacing emphasis. Notably, these patterns, 00:40:438 (1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2) - while aesthietically really pleasing, don't really make sense to me, a) i don't feel like the song is really waning in intensity, and you use higher spacing for the same sounds later on. other areas include 00:47:510 (6,7) -, 01:51:153 (2,1) - , 02:13:224 (6,7) - where spacing is really low, even though the song doesn't really justify it. vocal emphasis lol, the rotating triangles are meant to accentuate the vocals while gradually drowning them out so that 2 claps that follow have a more impactful feeling

imo 00:38:724 (3,4) - this pattern, and the othertimes its used, the note following the slider tail is kind of weak and unaccentuated. but the way it currently is looks a lot like a 1/4 gap like 00:58:438 (1,2) - instead. i'd recommend either stacking or increasing the spacing of all of these patterns. it feels fine, i disagree that this looks like a 1/4 gap it being only 140bpm and all 1/4 notes up until this point appear overlapped with other objects

00:35:295 (3,4) - stack 4 under the slider or over 1 for more emphasis? nah I don't feel it needs more emphasis

01:25:653 (7) - stack under 01:24:581 (2) - instead? no thanks

hard

stack 00:25:867 (1) - under the tail of 00:25:010 (3) - ? sharper angles are nicer ok

00:27:581 (1) - this jump is kinda big not really

00:40:438 (5,1) - this overlap is kind of unsightly yeah i meant to fix these eventually

00:51:581 (1,2,3) - this reads like a 1/4 instead of a 1/2, same here 00:58:438 (1,2,3) - and you do use this pattern again. The misleading spacing is really difficult and unifitting. well it is 1/4 so I don't think there's an issue here

01:22:438 (1,3) - imo this stack is kinda ugly esp with 01:23:295 (3,4) - after it's just an editor overlap, this is barely noticeable in gameplay

Lissel wrote:

Hello!

[Insane]

00:05:295 (1,2) - I know that this is a Insane diff, but these notes can be separated for a little more of difficulty sure
00:06:153 (1,2) - Same here
00:20:724 (1,2) - Unconfortable that these notes are stacked its fine i think
00:21:153 (3,4) - Same here
00:29:295 (3,4,5,6) - Not necessary that these sliders stay a lot separate, It's a lot of difficulty for an Insane Diff ok changed
00:34:867 (2) - this slider-reverse arrow are very far of 1, because you are using 1/8, It's a lot of difficulty for an Insane Diff well it's called insane for a reason haha
00:39:581 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2) - No problems here, I really like this part!
01:20:724 (1,2) - don't stack, for me is uncomfortable fine for me
01:26:295 (2,3) - not necesary for a great jump doesnt feel too big since its between sliders
02:25:224 (4) - this note is near to leave the screen thats just in the editor
02:28:010 (2,3) - not necesary for a great jump, could be more better if you stack with he slider-end of here 02:27:581 (1) its ok

I know I'm bad at Modding, but I really like it's a map, just like the song.
I could not stand the desire to mod this map.
This Song make my body Dance xD

GL

Gabe wrote:

hitsounds.. where?

Normal

1. 00:01:867 (1) - Add a finish hitsound here
2. 00:13:010 - Normal-Samplet set on the slider's head
3. 01:32:081 - Add a 1/2 slider starting here to emphasize the vocals and make a distinction from the next four circles. good catch
4. 02:16:438 - Normal-Sampleset here

Hard

1. 00:01:867 (1) - Where is the finish hitsound? D:
2. 00:13:010 (6) - Normal-Sampleset on this circle
3. 01:17:295 (1) - A finish hitsound could be added
4. 01:25:867 (1) - Add a Normal Sampleset here to follow the previous hitsounds, it feels weird to skip it.
5. 02:27:153 (4) - The slider does the reversed emphasis effect. I believe it should have more emphasis from this object to the next one instead of the other way round. did stuff

Insane

1. 00:09:367 (5) - If you follow your consistency on 00:12:795 (1) - and 00:16:224 (1) - , you would be adding a new combo here as well. i do this consistently w/ rhythms that have 2 consecutive triplets so that when I use circles instead of 1/4 repeat sliders to cover these rhythms, the combos don't go for longer than i would like
2. 00:11:724 - a clap could be added here to make it consistent with 00:18:581 - added
3. 00:22:438 (1) - Considering the kick here, I believe the spacing could be larger. What about moving it to x:360 y:256? It will also make an angle with the last two objects. ok
4. 00:29:724 (4,6) - Why are there whistles here? I know you are doing it around this part toward the difficulty, but what is the reasoning? idk just for some flavour, i like how they reflect a more upbeat tone from the previous stanza
5. 00:49:867 (1,1) - I don't really understand why you are choosing to have a second new combo in the same measure. If you are making things consistent, you would normally go on by doing new combos on every measures. Delete the new combo on the second object and apply the same on the other ones from this part. (00:56:724 (3,4) - For an example, these do not have new combos) Recheck the whole difficulty for these. did stuff
6. 01:17:295 (1) - A finish hitsound could be added
7. 01:25:867 (1) - Add a Normal Sampleset here to follow the previous hitsounds, it feels weird to skip it.
8. 02:35:938 (4,5,1) - ncs inconsistent with 02:32:510 (1,2,3) -
9. 02:53:295 - I enjoy the finish hitsounds here, however, you broke your consistency on 02:57:795 (1) - by replacing them with whistles. The intonation is the same, so it would make more sense to keep it going. -Recheck this for the other difficulties- i prefer using whistles for thesealso added all missing hs in all diffs

call me back to recheck