forum

Au5 - Shock Diamond (ft. Cristina Soto)

posted
Total Posts
34
show more
Topic Starter
Shadren

Mirash wrote:

from m4m
03:10:935 (2) - НУ СТРАННО ЭТО тут не фиксили

CookieBite wrote:

from m4m

[Howl Into The Moon]
  1. 00:06:107 (2) - move it a bit left to improve flow fixed
  2. 00:06:969 - missing note I think not, cause I've emphasized piano sounds here
  3. 00:07:486 (1,2,3,4) - this part is weird, I can't feel any rhythmic here. fixxed
  4. 00:10:073 - missing note no, as I told previously
  5. 00:38:348 (3,5) - overlap it's says nothing
  6. 00:39:728 (6) - clone 00:39:383 (5) - to replace this is better (ctrl+h) I think not
  7. 00:40:417 (2) - not a must but moving the red nod onto the slider tick the visual would improve fixed
  8. 00:40:417 (2,1) - unnatural flow, recommend improve this it's okay, cause NC
  9. 00:42:831 (1) - make it straight instead of curve no, sry

    rest of the part looks fine

sorry if the mod is bad
gl with your map!

Zer0- wrote:

General


  1. The light blue combo colour seems a bit bright idk
  2. This seems fine :)

Howl Into The Moon



blue for neil
orange for yellowmanul
red for shadren

  1. 00:39:383 (5) - this overlaps 00:38:348 (3) - maybe move it slightly k, fixed
  2. 04:04:555 (5) - perhaps end the slider earlier and place a circle on 04:04:900 - to emphasize the kick as right now the slider ends on a strong beat and then (6) is on a way weaker beat yet is more emphasized okay
  3. 04:15:590 (3) - same here fixed
  4. 04:55:935 (4) - maybe make this a 1/4 slider as the blue tick (04:56:021 -) has a sound too, either that or make it a double as right now it feels weird missing that sound
fixed

Sorry for smol mod, couldn't find very much :P
GL with the map though o/
BeatofIke
Map too strong for my level lol.
Have a star instead owo
Topic Starter
Shadren

NP to Zer0- wrote:

01:28:866 (1) - 01:31:624 (1) - 01:32:659 (1) - 01:34:383 (1) - i dont think these are very audible, but the two after are, but its up to you if you wanna keep it or not (nah, it's godd)
01:38:348 (3,4,5) - sounds like (4) is overmapped? idk (nope, it's consistency for each same pattern)
maybe make 01:50:762 (2) - like (yup)
pic
instead? :D
01:59:555 (2,3,4) - maybe make the distance between 2 and 3 the same as 2 and 4 visually? would look better, I know i'm nitpicking x) (ye tryed to fix
02:28:693 (4,5,6) - maybe space it like this instead? (no, no need to emphasze last bit like that)
Namki
Howl Into The Moon
  1. Унюзед drum-hitfinish2.wav и soft-hitclap2.wav
  2. И там дилей есть у хса, прогони через прогу зига.
  3. Два одинаковых комбоколора? Зачем, если ты все равно юзаешь хексинг.
  4. БГ юзал шиирн же в своей мапе. Если так, то лучше найти другое бг, нет?
  5. Оффскрин в 4:3 — следовательно, анранк.
    01:41:969 (1) - и 01:44:900 (1) - .
    Первый и второй.
  6. НКинг вначале, думаю, стоит по-другому сделать. Выделяя фортепиано, например.
    00:01:452 (1,2) - поменять НК тут.
    00:05:590 (1,2) - и тут.
    00:10:417 (1) - а тут убрать, пиано же продолжается там.
    00:13:521 (1) - если такое происходит, то ставится НК на некст объект после апбита.
    00:15:590 (5) - да.
  7. 00:06:107 (2,3,4,5,6) - маленький спейсинг вне контекста, да и линейный флоу не вписывается.
    Во так.
  8. Когда начинается вокал, мне тоже не очень НК нравится.
    Лучше каждый новый вокальный парт отделять. То есть, убрать тут 00:24:728 (1) - , поставить тут 00:25:590 (7) - , убрать тут 00:26:279 (1) - и так далее. Ведь мапаешь под вокал.
  9. Если решил юзать кастомные хсы, то не очень стоит их юзать с дефолтными, создается очень неприятный микс. 00:41:624 - типа этого. Нормалхит там не очень подходит.
  10. 00:44:555 - если не ставить хс, значит выделяешь его так же как 00:44:728 - , однако музыка этого не подразумевает, тут явно 00:44:555 - сильнее, мб какой-нибудь хитхат взять на нормалхит, чтобы и к предыдущему фитало.
  11. 00:58:521 (3,4) - не делал таких стаков на сильны бит, а тут, почему-то, стоит. Лучше, конечно, убрать.
  12. 01:28:004 - странный НК какой-то.
  13. Спейсинг в части рукури очень плохой, без преувелечений.
    01:28:866 - на что тут делаешь акцент, бит очень слабый, а спейсинг большой.
  14. 01:30:762 (2,1) - паттерны и так тяжелые с большим спейсингом, а ты делаешь их еще и сложными для чтения. Вместе это не очень хорошо работает.
  15. 01:30:935 (1,1) - из-за сломанного флоу очень тяжело заснапать второй слайдер. Попробуй сохранить спейсинг, но опустить слайдер вниз.
  16. 01:31:624 (1) - / 01:34:383 - при том, что имеем сейчас, из-за скорости слайдера, самая первая нота плохо снапается, это во-первых. Во-вторых, ты ломаешь флоу, то есть, по мне, лучше юзать круговое.
  17. 01:32:141 (1,1,2,3) - это работает намного лучше, потому что спейсинг маленький.
  18. 01:33:176 - нк-то ты выделил, но вот хексинг странный, интенсивность же меняется и св ==> цвет должен быть явно не серый.
    Поработай над ним в этой части, надо ввести третий цвет, который будет обозначать вот такие кикслайдеры 01:45:590 - .
  19. Алсо, 01:45:590 (2,3) - плохо играется. Вроде понимание есть, что два слайдера заснапаны в тейлах, но вот такое играется на порядок лучше.
  20. 01:47:659 (1,2,3,4) - из-за того, что ломаешь спейсинг, играется этот переход 01:47:831 (2,3) - сложновато, мб спейсинг не так разбросай.
  21. 01:49:728 (1) - не стоит, думаю. Он сбивает сильно.
  22. В принципе, там все повторяется, что я указал. Но мне лично не очень нравится эта часть, слишком неаккуратно, ты же лучше можешь, ну.
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    Как-то неаккуратно тут, как-то неопрятно там, и все это складывается в очень нехорошую картину.
    Тут надо проделать огромную работу над улучшением плейсмента объектов в киай-части.
    Удачи!
Едит: сори, что написал по-простому, без особого объяснения. Слишком устал, голова не варит.
Mun
Mostly subjective, m4m

Howl Into The Moon
00:06:107 (2,3,4,5,6) - If you're angling a few of these, shouldn't you do that to all of them? 00:06:279 (3,5) - These two feel inconsistently curved to me.
00:08:004 (2,3) - Parallels like this look better when they're cleaner.
00:11:452 (2,3) - The rest of this section is so cleanly done, why do these overlap?
00:14:555 (3,4) - Same here, it just doesn't seem to fit with the mapping of the section.
00:30:762 (1) - lazy spinner. Maybe map the drums a little bit?
00:33:866 (3) - This seems to be placed a bit randomly. It doesn't blanket with 00:33:521 (2) - , it is not equidistant from the two, its sliderend doesn't form any shape with the rest of the pattern, and it simply feels disassociated with the rest of this part.
00:35:762 (1) - I would probably end this slider at 00:36:107 - and start a new one at 00:36:279 -.
00:43:348 (2,3,4,5) - Are you sure you want to end a calm, slow section with what is effectively a 261bpm burst? I would recommend making this a repeat slider instead of a stack, simply for the sake of playability.
00:52:831 (2,3) - Most of the other 2-circle patterns here associate with the preceding and subsequent sliders in some way, but these two do not. They seem random.
01:06:279 (1) - Rather than above the interesting burst, I would personally put the start of this slider in the center of the 2 stacks, like so.
01:16:969 (1) - This slider shape is a bit too tight to fit in this section of sliders that are largely straight. This shape will likely look and flow much more cleanly than the donut that's there now.
01:24:038 (1,2) - Aesthetically, these kinds of parallel sliders work much better when the angles at which they oppose each other are closer to perpendicular to the line of symmetry over which they are reflected. See this graphic. The black lines are the directions of the sliders, the blue line is the meridian over which they reflect each other, the red line is the good angle, and the green line is the objectionable one. You can see that the sliderends form a line very close to 45 degrees in relationship to the meridian. This causes a negative visual response in the player. This graphic shows a better-looking parallelism. The red lines show the sliderend-sliderhead relationships this time. Note that they are almost exactly perpendicular to the line of symmetry. This causes positive visual response in the player. There are other ways to make good parallel sliders, too, but the way that these sliders look here is visually disconcerting.
01:24:038 (1) - Sliders should start on strong beats and end on beats of equal or lesser strength.
01:39:210 (2,1) - To make this into a better-looking semicircle, try moving the start of 01:39:383 (1) - and sharpening the curve here.
The entire wub part is very cool!
02:17:659 (4,5,6) - This triple has too sharp of a curve for its low spacing. While not affecting flow or playing at all, it gives negative visual feedback.
02:27:141 (1,2,3) - Try to make the circle between these equidistant from the sliderends. 02:27:659 (1,2,3) - executes this well, but the first one does not.
02:28:693 (4,5,6) - As I stated before, this triple has too sharp of a curve for its low spacing.
02:38:866 (2,3) - This section has 1/4 parts with much higher spacing. Why make 2/4 spacing so unusually low?
02:38:521 (1) - This is a held sound, why is it a circle and not a slider anyway?
02:42:486 (3) - This seems to ignore a note and then end on nothing.
02:58:004 (1,2,3) - It'd be best to keep visual distance the same between these 3.
03:07:486 (1,2,3,4,5) - After a section of largely 1/4 and 2/4, it is very hard to read 3/4 with no stimulation. Maybe use sliders instead of circles?
03:10:935 (2) - I fail to understand why this complex slider is here. Certainly the wub part merited some interesting slider shapes, but this one looks out of place and random, especially since all of the sliders around it are simple shapes.
03:16:452 (2,1) - Blanketing the bodies of these two would look excellent.
03:38:004 (1) - This is a suboptimal way of making wave sliders. On top of that, the wave itself is imbalanced.
03:43:348 (8) - In a section of straight kick sliders, randomly disrupting those with a sharply curved slider like this one is uncalled for by the song and looks poor.
03:51:107 (6,7,1,1,1,1,2,1,2) - This entire section has confusingly inconsistent flow. Why?
05:11:797 - The song has ended by this point, the spinner is mapped practically to nothing at any point beyond this. There's no reason to keep it, and it's a pain to play.

Generally it's a cool map! Good luck.
Topic Starter
Shadren

Namki wrote:

Howl Into The Moon
  1. Унюзед drum-hitfinish2.wav и soft-hitclap2.wav (fixed)
  2. И там дилей есть у хса, прогони через прогу зига. (fixed
  3. Два одинаковых комбоколора? Зачем, если ты все равно юзаешь хексинг. (this is needed for emphazing moments like this http://puu.sh/tNWni/065517c53d.jpg)
  4. БГ юзал шиирн же в своей мапе. Если так, то лучше найти другое бг, нет? (mby. but i think this is real not great problem)
  5. Оффскрин в 4:3 — следовательно, анранк.
    01:41:969 (1) - и 01:44:900 (1) - .(fixed)
    Первый и второй.
  6. НКинг вначале, думаю, стоит по-другому сделать. Выделяя фортепиано, например.
    00:01:452 (1,2) - поменять НК тут. (+)
    00:05:590 (1,2) - и тут. (+)
    00:10:417 (1) - а тут убрать, пиано же продолжается там. (+)
    00:13:521 (1) - если такое происходит, то ставится НК на некст объект после апбита. (+)
    00:15:590 (5) - да. (+)
  7. 00:06:107 (2,3,4,5,6) - маленький спейсинг вне контекста, да и линейный флоу не вписывается. (i think it's okay)
    Во так.
  8. Когда начинается вокал, мне тоже не очень НК нравится.
    Лучше каждый новый вокальный парт отделять. То есть, убрать тут 00:24:728 (1) - , поставить тут 00:25:590 (7) - , убрать тут 00:26:279 (1) - и так далее. Ведь мапаешь под вокал. (nc unnecaccary to emphaze vocal)
  9. Если решил юзать кастомные хсы, то не очень стоит их юзать с дефолтными, создается очень неприятный микс. 00:41:624 - типа этого. Нормалхит там не очень подходит. (i will think about it)
  10. 00:44:555 - если не ставить хс, значит выделяешь его так же как 00:44:728 - , однако музыка этого не подразумевает, тут явно 00:44:555 - сильнее, мб какой-нибудь хитхат взять на нормалхит, чтобы и к предыдущему фитало. (no, custom soft here is good)
  11. 00:58:521 (3,4) - не делал таких стаков на сильны бит, а тут, почему-то, стоит. Лучше, конечно, убрать.
  12. 01:28:004 - странный НК какой-то. (it's okayy)
  13. Спейсинг в части рукури очень плохой, без преувелечений.
    01:28:866 - на что тут делаешь акцент, бит очень слабый, а спейсинг большой. (it's part of concept, im dont wanna change it tbh)
  14. 01:30:762 (2,1) - паттерны и так тяжелые с большим спейсингом, а ты делаешь их еще и сложными для чтения. Вместе это не очень хорошо работает. (dont see problem here)
  15. 01:30:935 (1,1) - из-за сломанного флоу очень тяжело заснапать второй слайдер. Попробуй сохранить спейсинг, но опустить слайдер вниз. (nope. just your own playability think)
  16. 01:31:624 (1) - / 01:34:383 - при том, что имеем сейчас, из-за скорости слайдера, самая первая нота плохо снапается, это во-первых. Во-вторых, ты ломаешь флоу, то есть, по мне, лучше юзать круговое. (nope, it's good)
  17. 01:32:141 (1,1,2,3) - это работает намного лучше, потому что спейсинг маленький.
  18. 01:33:176 - нк-то ты выделил, но вот хексинг странный, интенсивность же меняется и св ==> цвет должен быть явно не серый.
    Поработай над ним в этой части, надо ввести третий цвет, который будет обозначать вот такие кикслайдеры 01:45:590 - .(im ephazed only sv with nc, not spacing dynamic)
  19. Алсо, 01:45:590 (2,3) - плохо играется. Вроде понимание есть, что два слайдера заснапаны в тейлах, но вот такое играется на порядок лучше. (it's okay for me)
  20. 01:47:659 (1,2,3,4) - из-за того, что ломаешь спейсинг, играется этот переход 01:47:831 (2,3) - сложновато, мб спейсинг не так разбросай. (again just useless playbility think)
  21. 01:49:728 (1) - не стоит, думаю. Он сбивает сильно. (same)
  22. В принципе, там все повторяется, что я указал. Но мне лично не очень нравится эта часть, слишком неаккуратно, ты же лучше можешь, ну.
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    Как-то неаккуратно тут, как-то неопрятно там, и все это складывается в
    очень нехорошую картину.
    Тут надо проделать огромную работу над улучшением плейсмента объектов в киай-части.
    Удачи!
(im disagree with this position. the whole concept on wub is good following sound with creative emphazing.
Едит: сори, что написал по-простому, без особого объяснения. Слишком устал, голова не варит.
thx for mod
Topic Starter
Shadren

Mun wrote:

Mostly subjective, m4m

Howl Into The Moon
00:06:107 (2,3,4,5,6) - If you're angling a few of these, shouldn't you do that to all of them? 00:06:279 (3,5) - These two feel inconsistently curved to me. (it's okay)
00:08:004 (2,3) - Parallels like this look better when they're cleaner. (nah, it's aesthetically enough)
00:11:452 (2,3) - The rest of this section is so cleanly done, why do these overlap? (same)
00:14:555 (3,4) - Same here, it just doesn't seem to fit with the mapping of the section. (same)
00:30:762 (1) - lazy spinner. Maybe map the drums a little bit? (nope)
00:33:866 (3) - This seems to be placed a bit randomly. It doesn't blanket with 00:33:521 (2) - , it is not equidistant from the two, its sliderend doesn't form any shape with the rest of the pattern, and it simply feels disassociated with the rest of this part. (not blanket)
00:35:762 (1) - I would probably end this slider at 00:36:107 - and start a new one at 00:36:279 -. (it's good emphazed enough)
00:43:348 (2,3,4,5) - Are you sure you want to end a calm, slow section with what is effectively a 261bpm burst? I would recommend making this a repeat slider instead of a stack, simply for the sake of playability. (yea)
00:52:831 (2,3) - Most of the other 2-circle patterns here associate with the preceding and subsequent sliders in some way, but these two do not. They seem random. (nope)
01:06:279 (1) - Rather than above the interesting burst, I would personally put the start of this slider in the center of the 2 stacks, (it wil be hard to red tho and wanna leave it like that)like so.
01:16:969 (1) - This slider shape is a bit too tight to fit in this section of sliders that are largely straight. This shape will likely look and flow much more cleanly than the donut that's there now. (nvm)
01:24:038 (1,2) - Aesthetically, these kinds of parallel sliders work much better when the angles at which they oppose each other are closer to perpendicular to the line of symmetry over which they are reflected. See this graphic. The black lines are the directions of the sliders, the blue line is the meridian over which they reflect each other, the red line is the good angle, and the green line is the objectionable one. You can see that the sliderends form a line very close to 45 degrees in relationship to the meridian. This causes a negative visual response in the player. This graphic shows a better-looking parallelism. The red lines show the sliderend-sliderhead relationships this time. Note that they are almost exactly perpendicular to the line of symmetry. This causes positive visual response in the player. There are other ways to make good parallel sliders, too, but the way that these sliders look here is visually disconcerting. (this is really nazi thing xd i think it's trying to change conception of mapstyle)
01:24:038 (1) - Sliders should start on strong beats and end on beats of equal or lesser strength. (will think)
01:39:210 (2,1) - To make this into a better-looking semicircle, try moving the start of 01:39:383 (1) - and sharpening the curve here. (fixed)
The entire wub part is very cool!
02:17:659 (4,5,6) - This triple has too sharp of a curve for its low spacing. While not affecting flow or playing at all, it gives negative visual feedback. (it's okay)
02:27:141 (1,2,3) - Try to make the circle between these equidistant from the sliderends. 02:27:659 (1,2,3) - executes this well, but the first one does not. (conception of this pattern was like make smaller spacing of each thing. so it's looks consistency enough)
02:28:693 (4,5,6) - As I stated before, this triple has too sharp of a curve for its low spacing.
02:38:866 (2,3) - This section has 1/4 parts with much higher spacing. Why make 2/4 spacing so unusually low? (cuz of
beat of 3)
02:38:521 (1) - This is a held sound, why is it a circle and not a slider anyway? (tryed to emphazed whistles)
02:42:486 (3) - This seems to ignore a note and then end on nothing. (?)
02:58:004 (1,2,3) - It'd be best to keep visual distance the same between these 3. (it's okay)
03:07:486 (1,2,3,4,5) - After a section of largely 1/4 and 2/4, it is very hard to read 3/4 with no stimulation. Maybe use sliders instead of circles? (nope, it's good emphazed)
03:10:935 (2) - I fail to understand why this complex slider is here. Certainly the wub part merited some interesting slider shapes, but this one looks out of place and random, especially since all of the sliders around it are simple shapes. (fixed)
03:16:452 (2,1) - Blanketing the bodies of these two would look excellent. (nope)
03:38:004 (1) - This is a suboptimal way of making wave sliders. On top of that, the wave itself is imbalanced. (it's okay)
03:43:348 (8) - In a section of straight kick sliders, randomly disrupting those with a sharply curved slider like this one is uncalled for by the song and looks poor. (it's okay)
03:51:107 (6,7,1,1,1,1,2,1,2) - This entire section has confusingly inconsistent flow. Why? (i dont rly see inconsistancy with flow here)
05:11:797 - The song has ended by this point, the spinner is mapped practically to nothing at any point beyond this. There's no reason to keep it, and it's a pain to play.(fixed)


Generally it's a cool map! Good luck.


thanks for mod!
sahuang
300th kds

[Long Name]
  1. nanomortis_original_polychromatic_scenic_silhouette_stairs_1833x900.jpg (1833x900)
    fuk u.jpg (1833x900)
    Can you resize them to regular size? (1920*1080 etc), 1833x900 is kinda odd.
    Also better change the name in SB.
  2. 00:09:728 (1) - silence slider end? Music is much softer than 00:16:452 (8) -
  3. 00:30:073 (4) - the slider seems too simple, you can try ending it at 00:30:417 - and add a circle 00:30:590 -
  4. 00:42:141 (4,5) - i think you shouldn't use same ds as 00:41:797 (3,4) - ,actually 00:42:486 - clearly a down beat here.
    You can use spacing similar to 00:41:452 (1,2,3) -
  5. 00:55:935 (3,4,5,1) - flow is very weird, especially 00:56:279 (4,5,1) - .Spacing is a bit big and the blunt angle can kill ppl. Try putting 00:56:279 (4) - at around 89|125 (left of slider) so flow is better.
  6. 00:56:624 (1,2,3) - too straight imo, can put 00:57:141 (3) - around 442|332 (down 00:57:314 (4) - )
  7. 00:53:866 (1) - 00:59:383 (1) - hmm inconsistent
  8. 00:58:693 (4,5) - increase ds? 00:59:038 (5,1) - is twice bigger.
  9. 01:04:555 (1) - separate slider end and head a bit,they almost stacked. also you can improve blanket for 01:04:555 (1,1) -
  10. 01:16:279 (3) - put it right a bit,spacing is too big.
  11. 01:19:728 (5,6,1,2) - kinda messy here...the pattern can be better aesthetically
  12. 01:20:417 (3,3) - avoid overlap?
  13. 01:20:417 (3,1,2) - too casual imo, the spacing and angle is random.
  14. 01:25:245 (5,1,4,5) - very random sliders..
  15. 01:59:383 (1,2,3,4) - the spacing is confusing.tho it's basically 1/2 clicks 01:59:383 (1,2,3) - ppl can really think it's 1/2+1/4.
  16. 02:17:659 (4,5,6) - 02:28:693 (4,5,6) - 1/6.
  17. 03:20:590 (2,3,4) - this doesnt fit music,especially in calm part. Just keep consistency with 03:20:073 (1,5) -
  18. 03:48:004 (2,8) - messy
  19. 03:50:245 (9,1,2,3,4) - these are very random and big jumps
  20. 03:59:038 (3) - reduce spacing

The wub wub part by neilperry impressed me a lot. Shadren's part is safe and solid. Sorry but I have to say that I think YellowManul's part isn't so ready yet. It's kinda random and the spacing/pattern is not pleasing for me. I pointed out a few. I hope your parts can be improved further xd

Good luck :d
Left
ok gratz 300 kudos sahu

[Sha]
ya solid man

[Yellow]
00:56:624 (1,2,3) - flow too linear, bad to play, can improve it
03:08:693 - missing beat here which looks important
03:45:504 (5,7) - can use 1/4 slider considering your 03:42:831 (5,6,7) - rhythm use before
03:56:452 (3,4,5,6) - ^
04:00:935 (4,5,6) - is triplet sound there?

[Neil]
01:43:176 (1) - strong sound and also SB changed, can use fast slider? same with 01:42:486 (1) - isn't make sense i think
02:13:004 (3,1) - isn't too easy considering beat here? can give more space but hard to fix owo
u god mapper?


I entirely agree with Azusa, Shadren is super solid and style is obvious. NeilPerry has really impressive slider and SV use. YellowManul was also not that bad but need some improvement overally. in your second part, rhythm use was quite hard to read. third part your 1/4 slider use and overall rhythm use wasnt consistent. can think more about these :)

Good luck!
Shmiklak
I dont feel this sprite name as a problem but ok
Topic Starter
Shadren

My Angel Azusa wrote:

300th kds

[notice][Long Name]
  1. nanomortis_original_polychromatic_scenic_silhouette_stairs_1833x900.jpg (1833x900)
    fuk u.jpg (1833x900)
    Can you resize them to regular size? (1920*1080 etc), 1833x900 is kinda odd. (think this size okaysh)
    Also better change the name in SB. (Shmiklak will change it soon)
  2. 02:17:659 (4,5,6) - 02:28:693 (4,5,6) - 1/6. (NP said: rly dont think this is 1\6, i cleary heared 1\4 rythmic which im emphazed whistle sounds)

    Other fixed. YellowManul radicaly reworked his parts, now it's more structurised and looks much better. Hope you will recheck tho x)




Left wrote:

ok gratz 300 kudos sahu

[Sha]
ya solid man

[Yellow]

03:45:504 (5,7) - can use 1/4 slider considering your 03:42:831 (5,6,7) - rhythm use before (there nice doubles as well, sound really different)


[Neil]
01:43:176 (1) - strong sound and also SB changed, can use fast slider? same with 01:42:486 (1) - isn't make sense i think (nope, sound different for me as previously same slider. dont wanna brake consistency)


I entirely agree with Azusa, Shadren is super solid and style is obvious. NeilPerry has really impressive slider and SV use. YellowManul was also not that bad but need some improvement overally. in your second part, rhythm use was quite hard to read. third part your 1/4 slider use and overall rhythm use wasnt consistent. can think more about these :)

Good luck!


Thanks for mod. All deleted accepted. As i told: YellowManul reworked his parts after Sahu's mod. xd
PandaHero
I'm too weak for modding your map, here my star for you ☆
riffy


[Storyboard]
  1. У тебя имена не по центру полосы стоят, из-за этого справа масса пустого пространства. Даже на 5:4 дисплее выглядит странно. Может стоит подвинуть имена? Или саму полосу? Она овердапается с хп баром еще и выглядит неаккуратно.
  2. 05:13:348 - часть закончилась, а полоска с именем гасится еще секунд 5. Попробуй убирать ее раньше, чтобы к концу спиннера ее не было видно.
  3. Я очень долго пытался понять, что значат треугольники, почему они летят в спину этому силуэту на фоне и как это связано с треком. Не получилось. Разъяснишь?
[General]
  1. В первом софтовом самплсете одновременно заглушены слайдертик и слайдерслайд. Т.е. от слайдеров нет никакого фидбэка в принципе. В чем смысл использования таких слайдеров?

    Shadren
    1. 00:05:590 (7,1) - странно, что тут нет джампа, а между значительно более слабыми слайдерами 00:05:073 (6,7) - есть. Попробуй выделить и (1) тоже
    2. 00:24:210 (3) - тут нет 3/4 слайдера в музыке. На красном тике четко слышен удар, там и логично было бы закончить слайдер.
      Note: 00:37:314 (1,3) - а тут 3/2, которых в музыке тоже нету. Вокалы кончаются на белом тике, продолжение слайдера после этого кажется притянутым и неестественным.
    3. 00:35:762 (1) - в этй части такой изгиб, как тут на хвосте играть неприятно, да и незачем. К тому же он единственный на всю часть, я бы просто выпрямил хвост у слайдера.
    4. 00:39:728 (6,1) - а еще вот тут нужен джамп для выделения вокалов и ритма и для читабельности, чтобы 1-2 не был слишком уж похож на 1/2.
    5. 00:42:486 (6,1) - тут тоже почему-то не выделил инструменты. 03:23:004 (4,5) - а потом тут. Давай я не буду дальше каждый паттерн указывать, а просто скажу, что дальше много подобного. Может, я просто что-то упускаю в твоей структуре? Если ты все же согласишься с джампами можно поработать больше, чтобы они выделяли музыку аккуратнее.
    6. 03:25:245 (6) - тут может быть трудно прочитать второй реверс. Может как-то перестроить паттерн, чтобы это было очевиднее?
    [YellowManul
    1. 01:01:107 (3,4) - 00:59:900 (2,3) - очень похожие биты и такая разница в спейсинге. Почему?

      Точнее, даже не так. Я понимаю, почему, тебе хочется выделить хлопки, но не получается из-за того, что дс и так под двойку через всю часть идет, а регулярно ставить выше будет уже перебор. Попробуй в принцепе ужать паттерны и уходить в x2.5-3.0 тогда, когда что-то действительно сильное и выделяющееся звучит. Тогда не придется так сильно выкручивать джампы, как например на 00:47:314 (3,4).
    2. 01:05:935 (1,2,1,2) - там дальше нигде ничего подобного не было, да и читать такое внезапно появляющееся чудо немного тяжеловато. Попробуй как-то перестроить паттерн?
    3. 03:56:969 (1,1) - cтранный переход, спираль уводит вниз по кругу, а слайдер в другую сторону идет. Может как-то так?
    NeilPerry
    1. 01:51:452 (3) - тут реверс не очень читается. Стоит пофиксить для наглядности.
    2. 02:27:486 (3) - 02:28:004 (3) - 02:30:762 (1,2,3) - используя спейсинг меньший чем на 1-2 ты как-бы делаешь (3) слабее. А в музыке это не так. Почему бы не поссотреть на 02:15:590 (1,2,3) - и сделать что-то такое же?
      Note: тут еще куча подобных паттернов.
    3. 02:45:935 (1) - если убрать тот красный пойнт, что левее, то получится идеальная волна.
    Ну не знаю. Я не согласен со спейсингом во многих местах. Какое-то смешанное чувство.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Удачи!

side comment for anyone questioning what this huge post is all about and being unable to speak a word of russian: concerns on spacing emphasis, minor comments on things, general issues.
riffy
Namki

Bakari wrote:

concerns on spacing emphasis
I agree!
Topic Starter
Shadren

Bakari wrote:



[Storyboard]
  1. У тебя имена не по центру полосы стоят, из-за этого справа масса пустого пространства. Даже на 5:4 дисплее выглядит странно. Может стоит подвинуть имена? Или саму полосу? Она овердапается с хп баром еще и выглядит неаккуратно. (Подумаем на этот счет)
  2. 05:13:348 - часть закончилась, а полоска с именем гасится еще секунд 5. Попробуй убирать ее раньше, чтобы к концу спиннера ее не было видно. (да)
  3. Я очень долго пытался понять, что значат треугольники, почему они летят в спину этому силуэту на фоне и как это связано с треком. Не получилось. Разъяснишь? (ИДея строилась из концепции бг)


[General]
  1. В первом софтовом самплсете одновременно заглушены слайдертик и слайдерслайд. Т.е. от слайдеров нет никакого фидбэка в принципе. В чем смысл использования таких слайдеров?

    Shadren
    1. 00:05:590 (7,1) - странно, что тут нет джампа, а между значительно более слабыми слайдерами 00:05:073 (6,7) - есть. Попробуй выделить и (1) тоже (Не такая уже большая разница в волюме между слайдерами которую стоит выделять)
    2. 00:24:210 (3) - тут нет 3/4 слайдера в музыке. На красном тике четко слышен удар, там и логично было бы закончить слайдер. (Здесь структоризованная ритмика(во всем парте) + выделение вокала.)
      Note: 00:37:314 (1,3) - а тут 3/2, которых в музыке тоже нету. Вокалы кончаются на белом тике, продолжение слайдера после этого кажется притянутым и неестественным. (Четко слышу как делей от вокала тянется на красный тик. Вполне логично выделить весь вокал момент)
    3. 00:35:762 (1) - в этй части такой изгиб, как тут на хвосте играть неприятно, да и незачем. К тому же он единственный на всю часть, я бы просто выпрямил хвост у слайдера. (не вижу в нем ничего не приятного и выделяющегося)
    4. 00:39:728 (6,1) - а еще вот тут нужен джамп для выделения вокалов и ритма и для читабельности, чтобы 1-2 не был слишком уж похож на 1/2. (подвинул чуток)
    5. 00:42:486 (6,1) - тут тоже почему-то не выделил инструменты. 03:23:004 (4,5) - а потом тут. Давай я не буду дальше каждый паттерн указывать, а просто скажу, что дальше много подобного. Может, я просто что-то упускаю в твоей структуре? Если ты все же согласишься с джампами можно поработать больше, чтобы они выделяли музыку аккуратнее. (четко слышни звуки которые выделются же)
    6. 03:25:245 (6) - тут может быть трудно прочитать второй реверс. Может как-то перестроить паттерн, чтобы это было очевиднее? (да вроде нет никаких проблем с ним. паттерн чист, оверлапов нету.)


    [YellowManul
    1. 01:01:107 (3,4) - 00:59:900 (2,3) - очень похожие биты и такая разница в спейсинге. Почему? (разница не особо большая. Вполне консистентно)

      Точнее, даже не так. Я понимаю, почему, тебе хочется выделить хлопки, но не получается из-за того, что дс и так под двойку через всю часть идет, а регулярно ставить выше будет уже перебор. Попробуй в принцепе ужать паттерны и уходить в x2.5-3.0 тогда, когда что-то действительно сильное и выделяющееся звучит. Тогда не придется так сильно выкручивать джампы, как например на 00:47:314 (3,4). (дс строился исходя из структуры, я не вижу здесь ничего рандомного)
    2. 01:05:935 (1,2,1,2) - там дальше нигде ничего подобного не было, да и читать такое внезапно появляющееся чудо немного тяжеловато. Попробуй как-то перестроить паттерн? (нормально передает саунд и так)
    3. 03:56:969 (1,1) - cтранный переход, спираль уводит вниз по кругу, а слайдер в другую сторону идет. Может как-то так? (согласен)


    NeilPerry
    1. 01:51:452 (3) - тут реверс не очень читается. Стоит пофиксить для наглядности. (обсуждали этот момент, я не вижу других вариантов)
    2. 02:27:486 (3) - 02:28:004 (3) - 02:30:762
      (1,2,3) - используя спейсинг меньший чем на 1-2 ты как-бы делаешь (3) слабее. А в музыке это не так. Почему бы не поссотреть на 02:15:590 (1,2,3) - и сделать что-то такое же? (вроде логичность есть)
      Note: тут еще куча подобных паттернов.
    3. 02:45:935 (1) - если убрать тот красный пойнт, что левее, то получится идеальная волна. (мне не нужна здесь идеальная волна)


    Ну не знаю. Я не согласен со спейсингом во многих местах. Какое-то смешанное чувство.


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Удачи!

side comment for anyone questioning what this huge post is all about and being unable to speak a word of russian: concerns on spacing emphasis, minor comments on things, general issues.


Thanks for mod! I disagree with most things on spacing "inconsistency". All patterns good structured and have logical discription.
riffy
Mind explaining the logic you follow commenting on the suggestions posted? Apparently, it is not just me, but there're more modders who share the same concerns.

As always, detailed feedback is appreciated.
Ksardas
ну ебаный в рот, только нашел годный трек, а вы его уже давно замапали, пидарасы
L u m ii n a
How about changing the diff. name to the actual lyrics right before the drop ( 01:47:659 - )
Lyrics are "Howlin' to the Moon" and not "Howl into the Moon" ~
Pentori
neil called me
[Shadren]
00:15:073 (4) - dont think this slider overlap looks particularly good, all this stuff 00:12:486 (4,5,1,2) - was spaced
00:30:762 (1) - place a beat first before spinner? most people will anticipate a circle for the strong vocal, while just having a spinner causes a few seconds of confusion
03:27:314 (2,3,4) - seems quite underwhelming compared to 03:26:107 (2,3,4) . maybe try the same rhythm? the sounds are the same
03:38:004 (1,2,3) - silence those slider ends? they're very audible because the music is quiet here
04:03:521 (2) - nc? new section
04:17:314 (4) - unsnapped
04:56:624 (2,3,4,1) - addressing the piano triplets would be pretty cool here

[YellowManul]
00:44:555 (2) - finish seems a bit random, removing it and adding one to 00:44:210 (1) - for the cymbal crash would suit the music better
00:54:555 (6) - snapping this to the 1/4 is more appropriate, since extended slider ends should be snapped to the songs beat structure. also gives you the opportunity to space these a bit more
00:55:245 (1) - finish?
00:58:693 (4,5) - seems like ctrl h'ing these individually works better with implied flow
01:16:624 (7) - 01:27:659 (6) - should snap these to 1/4 as well
01:22:141 (3) - the drum sampleset doesn't really work with the clap, since this is just an normal snare
02:56:624 - rhythm felt really shaky in this section, it feels like you are trying to follow too many tracks at once and therefore isn't intuitive
03:03:521 (3,4) - should add whistles to these as well to indicate the 3/4 rhythms
03:04:555 (6) - not entirely sure what this is following
03:06:624 (4,5) - the extended slider doesn't achieve anything, since there is nothing to emphasise on 03:06:969 - and no sound on 03:06:883 . the offbeat vocals are on 03:07:055 - so you aren't following that either. imo a 1/1 reverse slider works fine
03:08:521 (1,2,3) - previously, 03:01:969 (1,2,3,4) - lasted much longer than this pattern, and it ignored the sounds on the 1/2. breaking this consistency really makes it difficult to follow, and since they're all circles it isn't intuitive either
03:10:935 (2) - can you smoothen out the first curve? looks really sharp http://puu.sh/ulXVs/f854483f6a.jpg
03:13:004 (1,1,2,3,4) - same thing about switching tracks
03:52:486 (1,2,1,2,1,2) - i dont think anything calls for this pattern, since this implies you're placing emphasis on the nc'ed notes 03:52:486 (1) - 03:52:831 (1) - 03:53:176 (1) - but they're all different in the music so..
04:00:935 (4,1) - maybe use a 1/2 slider? would fit better to address the offbeat drum on 04:00:935 (4) . also 04:00:935 (4) - deserves a soft clap
04:33:004 (1) - these sounds are playing all throughout 04:30:935 (1,2,3,4,5) - so to suddenly give up on following the piano to catch these sounds was very strange

[NeilPerry]
01:28:866 (1) - 01:31:624 (1) - 01:32:659 (1) - 01:34:383 (1) - these kinda beats aren't even significant enough to be mapped imo. if you kept rhythms to the stronger beats 01:29:038 (2,3) - then this is more in line with how 01:30:073 (2,3) - 01:35:590 (2,3) - 01:41:107 (2,3) - etc. plays
01:32:141 (1,1) - the contrast in spacing is pretty big, maybe try space this more to be more similar to 01:31:107 (1,1) - ?
01:36:624 (1) - missing soft clap? also try increasing the volume
01:41:969 (1,1) - spacing seems a bit excessive
01:43:176 (1) - sounds very different to 01:42:486 (1) - so i dont think u should use the same slider, else they can't be differentiated
01:47:831 (2,3) - the huge jump here doesn't really emphasise anything, so i dont think u should do something like this
01:51:797 (1,2,3,1,2) - seems like you could shift this all upwards a little so you can fit 01:53:004 (1) - in the groove of 01:52:486 (1) - better
01:53:176 (1) - missing finish? other strong beats like these had finishes
01:56:969 (5) - curve looks a little awkward around the red node you could probably smoothen it out a bit
02:09:728 (1,2) - might be better to do something like 01:58:693 (1) - since nothing really deserves to be clicked on 02:09:900 (2) .
02:10:417 (1,2,3,1,1,1) - regarding colorhaxing here, i think it'd be better if u kept 02:10:417 (1) - blue since the music is pretty intense, then switched to the darker colours at 02:10:935 (1,1) - then blue on 02:12:141 (1) - for the upbeat
02:12:486 (1) - clap seems pretty random, this is a kick drum not a snare
02:22:055 (3) - the drum finish really put me off, the sound is the same as 02:21:969 (2) - so use the same hitsound?
02:36:624 (1,2,3) - ctrl g rhythm? since there are two sounds at 02:36:969 (3) - while only one at 02:36:624 - so 02:36:797 - is clicked to nothing
02:42:141 (1,2,3) - ^ and yeh same for rest of these if you agree

good luck
Topic Starter
Shadren

Pentori wrote:

neil called me
[Shadren]
00:15:073 (4) - dont think this slider overlap looks particularly good, all this stuff 00:12:486 (4,5,1,2) - was spaced (the distance between notes observed the same, just flow rotation dont think it's rly critical)
03:27:314 (2,3,4) - seems quite underwhelming compared to 03:26:107 (2,3,4) . maybe try the same rhythm? the sounds are the same (tryed to emphase vocal, but alright, fixed rythmic according of beats)
04:56:624 (2,3,4,1) - addressing the piano triplets would be pretty cool here (rly dont hearing triplets here)

[YellowManul]
02:56:624 - rhythm felt really shaky in this section, it feels like you are trying to follow too many tracks at once and therefore isn't intuitive
03:04:555 (6) - not entirely sure what this is following (background whistle)
03:08:521 (1,2,3) - previously, 03:01:969 (1,2,3,4) - lasted much longer than this pattern, and it ignored the sounds on the 1/2. breaking this consistency really makes it difficult to follow, and since they're all circles it isn't intuitive either (for me it's good. like i choose more linear flow to show rythmic changes and nc)
03:13:004 (1,1,2,3,4) - same thing about switching tracks (as i told)
04:00:935 (4,1) - maybe use a 1/2 slider? would fit better to address the offbeat drum on 04:00:935 (4) . also 04:00:935 (4) - deserves a soft clap (nope, but clap rly deserved.)
04:33:004 (1) - these sounds are playing all throughout 04:30:935 (1,2,3,4,5) - so to suddenly give up on following the piano to catch these sounds was very strange (piano part ends, and i start emphase another sound, when piano parts come back i start emphase it again. looks rly consistency. i fix spacing a bit to give more intutively while playing)

[NeilPerry]

01:41:969 (1,1) - spacing seems a bit excessive (dunno what you wanna explain. trying to emphase strong bit. dunno how to make spacing less and is it real needed?)
01:43:176 (1) - sounds very different to 01:42:486 (1) - so i dont think u should use the same slider, else they can't be differentiated (i agree that wub sound rly different. first more soft, second sounds more brighter. but there no beatsd which i emphase before. so i dont wanna make hish sv slider or smthing different cuz it will break overall structure.)
01:47:831 (2,3) - the huge jump here doesn't really emphasise anything, so i dont think u should do something like this (it's culmination of intro before kiai. it's was vreative way to make the finish point of jumps like this. rly dont wanna make them in the same DS plz ;( )
02:36:624 (1,2,3) - ctrl g rhythm? since there are two sounds at 02:36:969 (3) - while only one at 02:36:624 - so 02:36:797 - is clicked to nothing (there are rly three different sounds which i wanna to emphase. 02:36:797 (2) - this emphase one wub 02:36:969 (3) - this next wub)
02:42:141 (1,2,3) - ^ and yeh same for rest of these if you agree (i explained)

good luck


Deleted = fixed

Thanks for mod Pentori, Neil will ask you in discord some positions which he can't understand. Sorry for random finishes, it was buged or smthing like that. Thanks a lot ❤
olc
at 00:06:107 (1,2,3,4,5,1) the sounds that occur after the lead melody stops aren't mapped
the entire song should be mapped, not just the lead melody, like 00:02:831 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7), for example

at 00:09:728 (1), the acciaccatura before the lead note is weaker than the lead note itself
a better way to do this type of rhythm would be to use two circles, with one falling 1/8 before the note, and representing the note with a slider, which can be used to represent the quieter notes that follow

i feel like the sv should decrease in the section starting at 00:22:141 (1), and increase starting at 00:37:314 (1) to properly represent the changes in the song

the four notes at 00:43:348 (2,3,4,5) are a bit confusing to the player in the way they are presented
better ways this could be expressed include separating the circles to show all four, or using a unique pattern to signify 1/6

01:05:935 (1,2,1,2) should be centered over the slider for optimal movement between objects

i would personally express the song at 01:24:728 (3,4,5) by emphasizing the chords instead of the tambourine

using 1/2 gaps instead of 3/4 at 03:08:521 (1,2,3) can come off as confusing, as 3/4 gaps were used at the same spot a few notes earlier

i would not suggest using overlaps from the previous notes for the 1/4 notes at 03:45:245 (3,4,5,6,7), as it makes reading the changed rhythm harder
03:56:452 (3,4,5,6) is an example of carrying out this rhythm properly
BanchoBot
This modding thread has been migrated to the new "modding discussions" system. Please make sure to re-post any existing (and unresolved) efforts to the new system as required.
Please sign in to reply.

New reply