.
i've got a full time job, go to school, have two kids, and other various responsibilities outside of arguing with an inconsiderate beatmapper who wants to have their way and no one else's way, sorry that i put my response to you on the backburner - tbh, you're barely worth the time as it is.YaHao wrote:
5 days later
you're a beatmap nominator. you should understand the process of submitting a beatmap through the system and that you're going to get critiques from people to make your map better. not giving a shit about what anyone thinks is the exact opposite of that, you're basically admitting that you're incapable of accepting change - if you wanted to defend yourself, you should be using logic, not your own opinion.YaHao wrote:
//do you really think i care about people's attention at this point?
"only the catchy part are doubled" - so basically an excuse to cover your inconsistencies; you have a LN + double for the "catchy" part in the first half of the section at 00:24:923 (24923|2,24923|3,24923|1,25154|3,25154|1,25385|2,25385|3) - but you just decide arbitrarily, mid-section, to not do it at 00:25:731 (25731|3,25731|0) - when the music is still presented in the same way; you're also saying that this random note at the end of the section is "catchy" 00:26:539 (26539|0,26539|1) - your structure is not sound and you don't want to admit it.YaHao wrote:
//they are for synth sound, similar with with what i did in Normal, only the catchy part are been doubled
i'm more than aware you're not doubling the hi-hat, that's why i mentioned this in my note ("however, I doubt that was the purpose here"); you're doing no favors trying to tell me that you're not doubling the hi-hat when I'm already aware of that. what i'm telling you is that your structure is inconsistent because you're accenting arbitrary notes with jumps and not sticking to a coherent sequenceYaHao wrote:
//no to this, as i'm not doubling the hihat
... this is like, a total example of you just refusing things because you want to. the LN in question is on a 2 when i'm telling you to move it to a 1, and the previous LN is also on a 1. this would make the pattern easier to read and easier to play, not harder. reminder that i'm a very high level 4-key player that has been judging content here and on other games for a long time, and can easily tell you what works and what doesn't, if you're willing to listen.YaHao wrote:
//pitch is not the focusing here, if i place the short LN all pitch relevant, the pattern will be quite hard to play
you're leaving out a main component of the melody. by the way, here's all the relevant notes:YaHao wrote:
//i'm sure here got no main sound which i was following
like i'm saying, you're wrong and you're arguing with someone who not only has made content for a while but also takes the time to produce music once in a while, i already disproved your point about the melody so let's stop dancing around that, fix it to be two triples so it's more accurate; any responses to my notes about you missing a note in the melody are correct and you're not hearing it. apply the notes as I listed or come up with a fix that includes the note in those gaps filled.YaHao wrote:
//like my last explanation, i'm sure 00:40:731 - got no synth sound, there is clearly a break in between, and the triple was used for double for kick + one LN for the synth sound
... are you serious? your whole layering sequence is into and out of triples, there are implicit 1/2 jacks everywhere. if you're legitimately concerned about that, the 1/4 that you're using are for kicks, which are in this instance atonal and don't have a pitch. switch the pattern to [14] 2 4 3 [124], then it's not only separated but also avoids the additional chaining of 3.YaHao wrote:
//then there will be so little room for the next note, i will have to place two 1/2 jack on the same hand
i implied on my note at 40:731 - that you were missing a LN there and then reiterated that it was a result of you missing a note for the melody in your entire structure; i wasn't ok with it, i just wasn't going to hold your hand and tell you every single time that you're missing a note for the melody, you're capable of putting things together and realizing that you have to correct repeated instances of things, come on now. you're putting your laziness clear on display and you're being defensive over a point that was covered; drop it.YaHao wrote:
//how is this become the main sound, like my LN part, they are the 100% same rhythm and you were fine with it not being LN (00:43:962 - )
so, you’re saying the double which only represents a kick and nothing else is more important than the note that has a cymbal crash, bass kick, and a melodic element that you clearly represent as triples in this same combination earlier. got it.YaHao wrote:
//to me the double on the previous 1/4 line is more important
there's no sound here on either channel at all. there's no hi-hat, there's no kick, there's not even really any sort of granularity that merits you even putting a sound here; the only thing that even gives you any sort of defense is that the synth notes hold out that long, but there's nothing else here. there's literally no difference between 00:52:270 - and 00:52:673 (52673|0) or 00:52:904 (52904|0) or even 00:53:135 - where you actually opt into a break. yet again, you're just making stuff up rather than taking suggestions. there's no need for continuation here at all.YaHao wrote:
//can hear the sound on left channel, not hihat but like wub/echo sound, the notes are added so player can have a "continuing" feeling on the pattern unlike 00:52:270 - which can easily hear the break on the rhythm
so again, no real reason. you're subjectively choosing the first note of the melody as more important than the rest of the melody when every individual note is being played at the same volume, with the same instrumental backing (that backing being pretty much nothing aside from the occasional cymbal). structurally, your triples make no sense at all. you're implying another musical/layering element or some sort of accenting within your current musical element, neither of which are happening.YaHao wrote:
//the first sound of the repeated melody
you didn't read my note properly. i said it should be a single note after the [12][34] jumptrill; you have your [12][34] for your kicks, but the next note at 01:27:231 (87231|3,87231|0) - is barely audible at normal rate as it is, and is not a kick, either. it shouldn't hold the same representation. the reasoning behind having this as a [14] is indefensible because there's only one sound (one layer = one note) and the sound in question is comparatively quiet to the previous blast of kicks you just had (if your super loud kicks are doubles, then this super quiet, single instrument has literally no reason to be anything but a single note).YaHao wrote:
//the kick sound (which mapped as 1/4 trill) are stopped 1/4 ahead of the [14], if i'm keeping the double and make them [34], that will be so wrong because the sounds are totally different, a 1/4 jack here is to show that sudden break on the rhythm, plus the pattern around it are quite easy, shouldnt be hard to play
fair enough, this one I did actually get wrong; I can definitely hear them. I'm not sure why I didn't hear them the first time.YaHao wrote:
//you can hear cymbal sound on both timing
fair enough, i didn't say this was a required change, it was a suggestionYaHao wrote:
//i only used 1/8 3 times in this diff as 1/8 with high BPM like this are usually plays really bad, the least thing i want to do here is to mix the 1/4 with 1/8
still a pretty lame, pseudo-rolly jumpstream. not fun to play through but if that's how you want to approach it, that's your subjective opinion - it's acceptable objectively.YaHao wrote:
//smth thats playable is better than pattern that only looks fancy but less enjoyable, at least for me, this part is remapped, will see how that work
your response to this note and what i'm seeing in the map shows that you might not have understood what I was saying... but what you changed it to is actually ok. the doubles for the accented buzzes at 01:40:212 (100212|1,100212|0,100327|0,100327|1) - are a good choiceYaHao wrote:
//there are all triple now after i remapped it yesterday
it's 3/16 but if you want to approximate to 1/6, that's on you; 1/6 is not the correct rhythm but it's close enough that most people won't notice anywayYaHao wrote:
//change to 1/6 which i feel more accurate
see screenshot aboveYaHao wrote:
//i wouldnt use "pretty clear" on this sound, i didnt map it because there is a break on the melody, and as the 1/2 slowly comes in, then i mapped them fully
what exactly is the structure here starting at 02:48:923 (168923|0,168923|3) - ? what are you following and what are your doubles - are you arbitrarily picking notes from the melody to follow? if so, I can... kinda see what you're going for, I guessYaHao wrote:
//the music start to calm down right after the kiai, making some high intense pattern whouldnt do anything good to this section
ok fine, not copy/paste but it's still the same arbitrary concept of utilizing triples in a way that it isn't needed, and you're still wrong about the melody as well (see screenshot).YaHao wrote:
//funny enough here is like the less copy paste i've done in this map, if you understand it just say the word, instead of calling it a mistake, can also look at my respond for 01:10:846
mmmmmk. my bad.YaHao wrote:
//they are already quad here
Is that soHalogen- wrote:
i've got a full time job, go to school, have two kids, and other various responsibilities outside of arguing with an inconsiderate beatmapper who wants to have their way and no one else's way, sorry that i put my response to you on the backburner - tbh, you're barely worth the time as it is.YaHao wrote:
5 days later
You are the one who said will be back respond my mod, and I respect that so i didnt do any update in the past 5 days. Then here you are saying I'm not worth the time, maybe i should just ignore you and move on my map, save more time for both of us.
anyway:you're a beatmap nominator. you should understand the process of submitting a beatmap through the system and that you're going to get critiques from people to make your map better. not giving a shit about what anyone thinks is the exact opposite of that, you're basically admitting that you're incapable of accepting change - if you wanted to defend yourself, you should be using logic, not your own opinion.YaHao wrote:
//do you really think i care about people's attention at this point?
Like i'm not familiar with the ranking process that i need you to remind me. I reject mod because they are wrong, and i even explain why i didnt change it, not like i just leave a big No Change and thats it. Too bad your mod were rejected"only the catchy part are doubled" - so basically an excuse to cover your inconsistencies; you have a LN + double for the "catchy" part in the first half of the section at 00:24:923 (24923|2,24923|3,24923|1,25154|3,25154|1,25385|2,25385|3) - but you just decide arbitrarily, mid-section, to not do it at 00:25:731 (25731|3,25731|0) - when the music is still presented in the same way; you're also saying that this random note at the end of the section is "catchy" 00:26:539 (26539|0,26539|1) - your structure is not sound and you don't want to admit it.YaHao wrote:
//they are for synth sound, similar with with what i did in Normal, only the catchy part are been doubled
"Inconsistencies", the two part 00:24:923 - and 00:25:731 - are totally different, thats why the pattern is different, 00:26:770 - Here however has the same sound so i used same pattern structure. Ofc i wouldnt admit something thats not even therei'm more than aware you're not doubling the hi-hat, that's why i mentioned this in my note ("however, I doubt that was the purpose here"); you're doing no favors trying to tell me that you're not doubling the hi-hat when I'm already aware of that. what i'm telling you is that your structure is inconsistent because you're accenting arbitrary notes with jumps and not sticking to a coherent sequenceYaHao wrote:
//no to this, as i'm not doubling the hihat... this is like, a total example of you just refusing things because you want to. the LN in question is on a 2 when i'm telling you to move it to a 1, and the previous LN is also on a 1. this would make the pattern easier to read and easier to play, not harder. reminder that i'm a very high level 4-key player that has been judging content here and on other games for a long time, and can easily tell you what works and what doesn't, if you're willing to listen.YaHao wrote:
//pitch is not the focusing here, if i place the short LN all pitch relevant, the pattern will be quite hard to play
Like i cant play this section or judge the playability of this pattern. Again, the pitch is not the focusing here, and the current pattern plays fine and not hard to readyou're leaving out a main component of the melody. by the way, here's all the relevant notes:YaHao wrote:
//i'm sure here got no main sound which i was following
(i mean, if you want to argue more i could export the mp3 of the synth that i used and you can play it side-by-side if you want incontrovertible evidence)
Feel free to do so, I'm not adding the LN because the sound is not significant enough, we are making a map not a music sample notelike i'm saying, you're wrong and you're arguing with someone who not only has made content for a while but also takes the time to produce music once in a while, i already disproved your point about the melody so let's stop dancing around that, fix it to be two triples so it's more accurate; any responses to my notes about you missing a note in the melody are correct and you're not hearing it. apply the notes as I listed or come up with a fix that includes the note in those gaps filled.YaHao wrote:
//like my last explanation, i'm sure 00:40:731 - got no synth sound, there is clearly a break in between, and the triple was used for double for kick + one LN for the synth sound
Using things like "i make music" "i'm pro at playing 4k blah blah blah" doesnt make your mod/point more value to me.... are you serious? your whole layering sequence is into and out of triples, there are implicit 1/2 jacks everywhere. if you're legitimately concerned about that, the 1/4 that you're using are for kicks, which are in this instance atonal and don't have a pitch. switch the pattern to [14] 2 4 3 [124], then it's not only separated but also avoids the additional chaining of 3.YaHao wrote:
//then there will be so little room for the next note, i will have to place two 1/2 jack on the same hand
Because its 1/2 jacks everywhere, so avoiding unnecessary 1/2 jacks is more important instead of abusing them, the new pattern suggestion seems good for me, changedi implied on my note at 40:731 - that you were missing a LN there and then reiterated that it was a result of you missing a note for the melody in your entire structure; i wasn't ok with it, i just wasn't going to hold your hand and tell you every single time that you're missing a note for the melody, you're capable of putting things together and realizing that you have to correct repeated instances of things, come on now. you're putting your laziness clear on display and you're being defensive over a point that was covered; drop it.YaHao wrote:
//how is this become the main sound, like my LN part, they are the 100% same rhythm and you were fine with it not being LN (00:43:962 - )
Then why you didnt point out the LN first in the earlier section, I dont hear any melody hereso, you’re saying the double which only represents a kick and nothing else is more important than the note that has a cymbal crash, bass kick, and a melodic element that you clearly represent as triples in this same combination earlier. got it.YaHao wrote:
//to me the double on the previous 1/4 line is more important
Yupthere's no sound here on either channel at all. there's no hi-hat, there's no kick, there's not even really any sort of granularity that merits you even putting a sound here; the only thing that even gives you any sort of defense is that the synth notes hold out that long, but there's nothing else here. there's literally no difference between 00:52:270 - and 00:52:673 (52673|0) or 00:52:904 (52904|0) or even 00:53:135 - where you actually opt into a break. yet again, you're just making stuff up rather than taking suggestions. there's no need for continuation here at all.YaHao wrote:
//can hear the sound on left channel, not hihat but like wub/echo sound, the notes are added so player can have a "continuing" feeling on the pattern unlike 00:52:270 - which can easily hear the break on the rhythm
00:52:270 - 00:52:846 - They are different in so many way, the synth is different, the kick clearly has a break in between. And its the last section of the kiai, using continuation here can build the intensity up as the song itself goes upso again, no real reason. you're subjectively choosing the first note of the melody as more important than the rest of the melody when every individual note is being played at the same volume, with the same instrumental backing (that backing being pretty much nothing aside from the occasional cymbal). structurally, your triples make no sense at all. you're implying another musical/layering element or some sort of accenting within your current musical element, neither of which are happening.YaHao wrote:
//the first sound of the repeated melody
The triple are not randomly added, yes i do think its more important than other same sound because its the first sound of the repeated melodyyou didn't read my note properly. i said it should be a single note after the [12][34] jumptrill; you have your [12][34] for your kicks, but the next note at 01:27:231 (87231|3,87231|0) - is barely audible at normal rate as it is, and is not a kick, either. it shouldn't hold the same representation. the reasoning behind having this as a [14] is indefensible because there's only one sound (one layer = one note) and the sound in question is comparatively quiet to the previous blast of kicks you just had (if your super loud kicks are doubles, then this super quiet, single instrument has literally no reason to be anything but a single note).YaHao wrote:
//the kick sound (which mapped as 1/4 trill) are stopped 1/4 ahead of the [14], if i'm keeping the double and make them [34], that will be so wrong because the sounds are totally different, a 1/4 jack here is to show that sudden break on the rhythm, plus the pattern around it are quite easy, shouldnt be hard to play
Are you serious about the sound not audible? Its not kick thats what make it special compare with the previous [12][34] trills which for kick. Mapping is not just about kick double cymbal triple and others just using singlefair enough, this one I did actually get wrong; I can definitely hear them. I'm not sure why I didn't hear them the first time.YaHao wrote:
//you can hear cymbal sound on both timingfair enough, i didn't say this was a required change, it was a suggestionYaHao wrote:
//i only used 1/8 3 times in this diff as 1/8 with high BPM like this are usually plays really bad, the least thing i want to do here is to mix the 1/4 with 1/8still a pretty lame, pseudo-rolly jumpstream. not fun to play through but if that's how you want to approach it, that's your subjective opinion - it's acceptable objectively.YaHao wrote:
//smth thats playable is better than pattern that only looks fancy but less enjoyable, at least for me, this part is remapped, will see how that workyour response to this note and what i'm seeing in the map shows that you might not have understood what I was saying... but what you changed it to is actually ok. the doubles for the accented buzzes at 01:40:212 (100212|1,100212|0,100327|0,100327|1) - are a good choiceYaHao wrote:
//there are all triple now after i remapped it yesterday
01:41:539 (101539|0) - you create an entry that requires you to use the same hand as the previous jump - not sure if this was intentional or just not changed, but something i figured i'd tell you
CTRL+Hit's 3/16 but if you want to approximate to 1/6, that's on you; 1/6 is not the correct rhythm but it's close enough that most people won't notice anywayYaHao wrote:
//change to 1/6 which i feel more accuratesee screenshot aboveYaHao wrote:
//i wouldnt use "pretty clear" on this sound, i didnt map it because there is a break on the melody, and as the 1/2 slowly comes in, then i mapped them fullywhat exactly is the structure here starting at 02:48:923 (168923|0,168923|3) - ? what are you following and what are your doubles - are you arbitrarily picking notes from the melody to follow? if so, I can... kinda see what you're going for, I guessYaHao wrote:
//the music start to calm down right after the kiai, making some high intense pattern whouldnt do anything good to this sectionok fine, not copy/paste but it's still the same arbitrary concept of utilizing triples in a way that it isn't needed, and you're still wrong about the melody as well (see screenshot).YaHao wrote:
//funny enough here is like the less copy paste i've done in this map, if you understand it just say the word, instead of calling it a mistake, can also look at my respond for 01:10:846mmmmmk. my bad.YaHao wrote:
//they are already quad here
----------
so yeah, you've still got work to do.
YaHao wrote:
Is that so
"Then here you are saying I'm not worth the time, maybe I should just ignore you and move on my map, save more time for both of us."YaHao wrote:
You are the one who said will be back respond my mod, and I respect that so i didnt do any update in the past 5 days. Then here you are saying I'm not worth the time, maybe i should just ignore you and move on my map, save more time for both of us.
Put up or shut up, then. Find another beatmap nominator who isn't Fresh Chicken, considering he came into this thread and bubbled something AFTER people said there were noticeable issues, and have them look at the things that I've mentioned. I've given them all of the stuff they need to look for and identify as potentially erroneous (hell, I could have easily come up with much more but I didn't really spend all that much time working on it, and it's a good thing that I didn't given the way you're responding). I'm willing to bet that they'll hear the melodic elements that I'm identifying, and if not, I'm willing to bet that they would make a coherent response with analysis of your structure.YaHao wrote:
Like i'm not familiar with the ranking process that i need you to remind me. I reject mod because they are wrong, and i even explain why i didnt change it, not like i just leave a big No Change and thats it. Too bad your mod were rejected
YaHao wrote:
"Inconsistencies", the two part 00:24:923 - and 00:25:731 - are totally different, thats why the pattern is different, 00:26:770 - Here however has the same sound so i used same pattern structure. Ofc i wouldnt admit something thats not even there
- 00:24:920 to 00:32:308
This structure is very unclear; you have repeating doubles for repeating notes in the melody at 00:25:154 and 00:25:385, but then the rest of the section has no doubles at all until the melody restarts. If the doubles are for the purpose of layering hi-hats, then there are doubles missed at 00:25:962 and 00:26:077 - however, I doubt that was the purpose here. Your incorrect representation of the melody continues until the end of the section.
To anyone else who has been reading my mods, does my first mod somehow not make it clear that I understand that the structures are separated? Because I'm starting to feel like I'm being treated as if I don't comprehend the map's structure at all when I've made it super clear that I have more than analyzed and scrutinized this stuff. I will repeat myself again with the issue of this section: you are arbitrarily assigning precedence to pieces of melodic elements and not the whole thing. Your double placement in the earlier section makes no sense at all. If you can't follow through with a layering structure for a section in a way that is coherent, you should be changing it. You can sit here and argue all you want, and you can sit here and say "no change" to this all you want, but realize that this section of the map is being interpreted as erroneous through objective analysis of your own structure, not of my opinion about how it should be done.Halogen- wrote:
[...] but then the rest of the section has no doubles at all until the melody restarts. [...]
Nowhere did I say that you could or couldn't. What I'm saying is that I'm high enough level of a player to tell you that your pattern selection could be improved to better accommodate for a melodic element of the song, and therefore be intersubjectively improved, and you're just settling with what you have. Realize that if you're accommodating for a melodic element of a song, opportunities for pitch relevance should be taken because it makes the map carry more of a resemblance to the music itself.YaHao wrote:
Like i cant play this section or judge the playability of this pattern. Again, the pitch is not the focusing here, and the current pattern plays fine and not hard to read
"We are making a map not a music sample note"YaHao wrote:
Feel free to do so, I'm not adding the LN because the sound is not significant enough, we are making a map not a music sample note
I'm offering myself as someone who has expertise in both playing the game, and as someone who has an extremely well-trained ear to help you identify things that you've missed. You're refusing it. That is entirely your choice and if an expert's opinion isn't more valuable to you, that's to your detriment.YaHao wrote:
Using things like "i make music" "i'm pro at playing 4k blah blah blah" doesnt make your mod/point more value to me.
You don't hear it, but it is in fact there. I don't know how else I can convey it to you.YaHao wrote:
Then why you didnt point out the LN first in the earlier section, I dont hear any melody here
There you have it, guys. This is the kind of thing that I'm talking about with regards to people just doing what they want and not listening to reason.YaHao wrote:
YupHalogen- wrote:
so, you’re saying the double which only represents a kick and nothing else is more important than the note that has a cymbal crash, bass kick, and a melodic element that you clearly represent as triples in this same combination earlier. got it.
There's no synth at 00:52:270 (52270|2,52270|1) - , the note itself plays at 00:52:154 (52154|0,52154|1) - and continues playing once every 1/1 with a melody that goes down one pitch, up two pitches, rinse and repeat, until 00:53:077 (53077|3,53077|2) - . Nothing else happens. Just because it's the last section of the kiai doesn't give you the ability to just add notes wherever you feel like it in this current ranking criteria.YaHao wrote:
00:52:270 - 00:52:846 - They are different in so many way, the synth is different, the kick clearly has a break in between. And its the last section of the kiai, using continuation here can build the intensity up as the song itself goes up
Well, at the very least, now I've gotten you to admit that you are giving random notes more precedence within their given phrase when there is no other merit for adding layering at all. As I've mentioned before (for anyone else who wants to follow along without opening the editor/game), you have these notes in a section where there's literally nothing going on aside from an occasional cymbal crash + bass kick, which would give you the justification for triples/quads with direct and accent-oriented layering, given that you have doubles for every other melodic element in the section aside from the clearly erroneous and arbitrary triples added "just because they're the first notes of the melody." Players that are playing your map might be able to detect pattern sequences that indicate pitch relevance through your double placement, but they're not going to understand why you've gone from doubles to triples when nothing has been added/changed.YaHao wrote:
The triple are not randomly added, yes i do think its more important than other same sound because its the first sound of the repeated melody
I never said the sound wasn't audible, I said that it was barely audible, i.e. it's quiet. And by the way:YaHao wrote:
Are you serious about the sound not audible? Its not kick thats what make it special compare with the previous [12][34] trills which for kick. Mapping is not just about kick double cymbal triple and others just using single
In my mod, and my responses to you, I've mentioned that "if you are doing x, then y should be this, this and this, based off of your structure." I'll tactlessly tell you one more time: stop treating me and other people like we don't know what you're talking about. When you're making obvious mistakes like misrhythms of easily noticeable melodic elements in your first pass, you're in no place to tell me how to mod your map.YaHao wrote:
Mapping is not just about kick double cymbal triple and others just using single
And yea, my map got nothing to do with who i am or who i was, thats totally a different topicHalogen- wrote:
"Then here you are saying I'm not worth the time, maybe I should just ignore you and move on my map, save more time for both of us."
You're basically proving why you're not worth the time. You're responding with "is that so" in a condescending matter when I stated that there were plenty of noticeable things that were identified. You're saying "maybe I should just ignore you and move on my map, save more time for both of us" as a defensive response, as opposed to considering things for the betterment of your map that I'm willing to bet anyone out of your little circlejerk would agree with. I present things in a way that doesn't require me to have any backup/defense from anyone else - and I present things in a way that anyone who has an understanding of content creation/mapping would likely understand in terms of thought process. You don't do that.
You're not saving time for both of us, I've already taken the time to create two really long responses to you. You'd be saving yourself time by being lazy and refusing to do anything. Sitting there and say "maybe I should ignore you" is exceptional proof that you are hard-set in your ways and not willing to make your map better.
If i'm being lazy, i will just add/delete few notes to satisfy you guys, instead of replying this long mod and repeat myself day after day.
Put up or shut up, then. Find another beatmap nominator who isn't Fresh Chicken, considering he came into this thread and bubbled something AFTER people said there were noticeable issues, and have them look at the things that I've mentioned. I've given them all of the stuff they need to look for and identify as potentially erroneous (hell, I could have easily come up with much more but I didn't really spend all that much time working on it, and it's a good thing that I didn't given the way you're responding). I'm willing to bet that they'll hear the melodic elements that I'm identifying, and if not, I'm willing to bet that they would make a coherent response with analysis of your structure.
Now you start attacking the BN huh? The "Noticeable issue" were replied by me, either i agree with them or not, i explain myself well enough and wait for 7days for people who wants drop mod or any farther feedback. No one show up then i asked FC to recheck the map- 00:24:920 to 00:32:308
This structure is very unclear; you have repeating doubles for repeating notes in the melody at 00:25:154 and 00:25:385, but then the rest of the section has no doubles at all until the melody restarts. If the doubles are for the purpose of layering hi-hats, then there are doubles missed at 00:25:962 and 00:26:077 - however, I doubt that was the purpose here. Your incorrect representation of the melody continues until the end of the section.
"Inconsistencies", the two part 00:24:923 - and 00:25:731 - are totally different, thats why the pattern is different, 00:26:770 - Here however has the same sound so i used same pattern structure. Ofc i wouldnt admit something thats not even there
Just gonna copy paste what i said and put it here againTo anyone else who has been reading my mods, does my first mod somehow not make it clear that I understand that the structures are separated? Because I'm starting to feel like I'm being treated as if I don't comprehend the map's structure at all when I've made it super clear that I have more than analyzed and scrutinized this stuff. I will repeat myself again with the issue of this section: you are arbitrarily assigning precedence to pieces of melodic elements and not the whole thing. Your double placement in the earlier section makes no sense at all. If you can't follow through with a layering structure for a section in a way that is coherent, you should be changing it. You can sit here and argue all you want, and you can sit here and say "no change" to this all you want, but realize that this section of the map is being interpreted as erroneous through objective analysis of your own structure, not of my opinion about how it should be done.Halogen- wrote:
[...] but then the rest of the section has no doubles at all until the melody restarts. [...]
Nowhere did I say that you could or couldn't. What I'm saying is that I'm high enough level of a player to tell you that your pattern selection could be improved to better accommodate for a melodic element of the song, and therefore be intersubjectively improved, and you're just settling with what you have. Realize that if you're accommodating for a melodic element of a song, opportunities for pitch relevance should be taken because it makes the map carry more of a resemblance to the music itself.
You were imply that I didnt test the map and have no knowledge about the pattern playability.
"We are making a map not a music sample note"
What I provided in the screenshot above was an identification of the main melody that you were following with your LN; I did it to show you that I had literally transcribed the melody for you, so that you could actually see that the note was in fact there. Yet again, you're hyper-defensive and going "we're making a map not a music sample note." I put that in there to defend my modding decision because I'm trying to help you make the map better. If you don't want your stuff to be more representative of the music, that is entirely on you. And something else that I'd like to point out, actually:
"Because the sound is not significant enough" - so, you've gone from saying that there's no sound at all for the melody to it being "not significant enough." Thanks for basically saying "well, it's here but I don't want to accommodate for it anyway." Modding is to help improve your map - I was able to identify that you were targeting the synth lead in the song and offered a suggestion while informing you that you mispresented the melody. If you want to sit here and ignore something that would make your structure more clear, that's on you, but do us all a favor and don't pretend like it was intentionally avoided, considering you basically admitted in your words that it wasn't. You've made mistakes in representing melodies in this song before; both Protastic and I nailed you for the same thing.
Because you provide the sample note of that section so i assume its correct so i change my word from "There is no sound" to "Not significant enough". The sound was not intentionally ignored as I didnt hear it in the first place not gonna lie, the sound really soft
I'm offering myself as someone who has expertise in both playing the game, and as someone who has an extremely well-trained ear to help you identify things that you've missed. You're refusing it. That is entirely your choice and if an expert's opinion isn't more valuable to you, that's to your detriment.
Given that there are constant discussions about beatmap nominators and their capability of playing the content that they are qualifying/creating, I figured it would be worthwhile to say "hey, I'm able to play your stuff without trouble, if people are saying this is stupid/hard, let me tell you whether or not it is a viable selection." If you want to see that as flaunting my skill around, be my guest.
Mod is mod, its not about who you are. If a #10k player give me a value mod, i will still consider and reply properly
You don't hear it, but it is in fact there. I don't know how else I can convey it to you.
There you have it, guys. This is the kind of thing that I'm talking about with regards to people just doing what they want and not listening to reason.
To those of you mappers who utilize a direct layering structure and base your note placement off of the number of instruments playing, does my note above make sense to you? And to those of you who are more accent-oriented, and base your structures based off of instrumental volumes and overall precedence in their instrumentation? Does my note make sense to you? I'd like to think that regardless of the situation here, this is a perfect example of an indefensible error being ignored simply because they want what they want, and that's it.
You pointed out that i'm using triple for synth, but pls be aware that i'm also keeping the double for the kick thru this section. Just because our priority on sound are different, doesnt mean which one is correct which one is not. There is no right or wrong on this.
There's no synth at 00:52:270 (52270|2,52270|1) - , the note itself plays at 00:52:154 (52154|0,52154|1) - and continues playing once every 1/1 with a melody that goes down one pitch, up two pitches, rinse and repeat, until 00:53:077 (53077|3,53077|2) - . Nothing else happens. Just because it's the last section of the kiai doesn't give you the ability to just add notes wherever you feel like it in this current ranking criteria.
will take a step back on this, change to LN, see how that work out
Well, at the very least, now I've gotten you to admit that you are giving random notes more precedence within their given phrase when there is no other merit for adding layering at all. As I've mentioned before (for anyone else who wants to follow along without opening the editor/game), you have these notes in a section where there's literally nothing going on aside from an occasional cymbal crash + bass kick, which would give you the justification for triples/quads with direct and accent-oriented layering, given that you have doubles for every other melodic element in the section aside from the clearly erroneous and arbitrary triples added "just because they're the first notes of the melody." Players that are playing your map might be able to detect pattern sequences that indicate pitch relevance through your double placement, but they're not going to understand why you've gone from doubles to triples when nothing has been added/changed.
Like i said, "Just because our priority on sound are different, doesnt mean which one is correct which one is not" You get my idea, so at least keep a open mind on this
I never said the sound wasn't audible, I said that it was barely audible, i.e. it's quiet. And by the way:
In my mod, and my responses to you, I've mentioned that "if you are doing x, then y should be this, this and this, based off of your structure." I'll tactlessly tell you one more time: stop treating me and other people like we don't know what you're talking about. When you're making obvious mistakes like misrhythms of easily noticeable melodic elements in your first pass, you're in no place to tell me how to mod your map.
You also in no place to tell me how to make my map, smth that you cant understand doesnt mean its wrong
To everyone that is reading this mod: as tactless as I am in my responses to people, my aim is to typically aid/assist in the map's progress. I hope that this at least open's some of your guys' eyes about the kind of mapper that you're dealing with here.
hiHalogen- wrote:
ask another BN that is actually impartial to you.
Go right ahead, please - I'll be the bigger person and ask someone who is objectively qualified to respond in this situation, rather than hiding in a bubble.Litharrale wrote:
hiHalogen- wrote:
ask another BN that is actually impartial to you.
Being that some of the issues transcend playability and are likely incorrect within YaHao's own structural concept, Lith's ability to play the map isn't that important in this case. I'd like to hope that questions could be generally asked about playability if there's uncertainty.DDMythical wrote:
* who is also competent and able to play this chart
We can't use the 'this is a game' phrase if we're talking about the content of the game. And if we were to, you might as well think that the community wants a content that brings good quality for the players.Insp1r3 wrote:
At the end of the day, this is a game.
I think everyone knows that there's not just one. There's a lot of people who can make a compelling map and of course some people will find some parts not right and stuff. It's an endless loop, honestly.Insp1r3 wrote:
If you want to argue about one map out of hundreds of thousands of maps that will pass through the system, I find that to be quite sad and hard to agree with.
The people who has done this argument exactly knows how to answer stuffs, you can't just go saying yes or no without a proper explanation because that makes something questionable.Insp1r3 wrote:
Please just learn to agree and disagree, not get into a heated argument over it.
Nothing toxic about it at all. People mentioned that what you said held no weight.Insp1r3 wrote:
Woah okay this got more toxic than i thought, leave me out of it
In most cases, I would agree. However, the person in question here is a beatmap nominator - someone who actually has power to control the system, and they're basically advocating for the inclusion/ranking of something that really shouldn't be ranked in its current state (or current structure, as in - even after objective issues are addressed, it's still a pretty bad map in terms of playability). This thread has also generally showcased their inability to actually take any sort of criticism and resolve things that are irrefutably incorrect.Inspi1r3 wrote:
At the end of the day, this is a game. If you want to argue about one map out of hundreds of thousands of maps that will pass through the system, I find that to be quite sad and hard to agree with.
Please just learn to agree and disagree, not get into a heated argument over it.
well then, I hope this is some sort of realization that you've got some actual things to fix to make this a solid map. Best of luck to you; if your attitude doesn't change though, you'll certainly be shot down again.YaHao wrote:
YaHao wrote:
Fresh Chicken wrote:
Just gonna mention some minor issue
[Ultra]
00:03:808 - A extra note pls, the sound is same with 00:03:577 - The previous one is using double is because it include synth sound
00:10:616 (10616|1) - To 3rd col, make it more balance with the rest of the pattern
00:19:154 (19154|0) - To 2nd col, as the 1st col is already quite heavy
01:05:077 - Missing double, for snare drum
01:08:770 (68770|3,68770|2,68827|0,68885|3,68943|0,69000|2,69000|3) - Trills doesnt really fit the rhythm here, change to normal stair pls
02:20:885 - Ghost note? I dont see you adding this note in the previous section, so delete it
I'm gonna rebub this map after this mod
No reply means fixedMaxus wrote:
For ultra diff i guess
[Ultra]
00:10:385 - 00:10:500 - 00:10:616 - felt really missing if these aren't 1/2 LNs like you did after this one. //it plays weird when mixing the 1/2 LN (which is quite short) with the jacks, normal can emphasize the sound better in here
00:19:846 - I think this can be variated a bit by doing much more 14-23 thingy, like https://puu.sh/zgi89/d0df61011b.png
00:31:846 - mapping the rising sound will emphasize it better, try https://puu.sh/zgigk/ef1a529adb.png
00:34:616 - Kinda have an idea for this part, instead of repeating 124 or 134 triple, having 123 or 234 triple will do better for variating, like http://puu.sh/zgims/53e2d09543.png
00:36:462 - you can apply the similar rough idea as above here.
00:47:077 - play with more 1-4 here is quite great imo, try https://puu.sh/zgir1/6a57da4b95.png //i try to separate the 1/2 into two different hand, so the pattern wouldnt that hard to read
00:50:481 - there's a bit of fluctuation here, so i figure change the jumptrill pattern will be quite good, try http://puu.sh/zgity/b171de2300.png //there is a changing sound on the 1/4, but switch double trill here actually will make it harder to player, plus the changing is not that significant, so i dont really want to sacrifice the playability for that sound
01:08:770 - this is a really nice spot to map 1/6 here, and actually it won't be really hard either as the pattern is not tricky to nail, like http://puu.sh/zgiw2/e3fe6ffd24.png //ok, but i stop the 1/6 a bit earlier than you suggested, the 1/6 after 01:09:000 - arent that clear
01:16:616 - I have a bit suggestion to variate this, i think this will make much more appeal, try http://puu.sh/zgiz8/b72dcbda15.png (you may apply until 01:19:846 - , yeah you get the rough idea)
01:20:308 - not really felt nice with this, the pattern felt disturbing somehow.. instead of spam 12-12 or 34-34, i find the pattern much more natural and variated if you do http://puu.sh/zgiBP/c613d0c281.png , you may apply till 01:25:616 - //I want to balance the left and right side as much as possible, as the LN+Double jacks are already quite hard to play
01:25:846 - well, i prefer this one to be jumpstream cause having long jumptrill out of nowhere outside kiai felt unease here, and i'm sure lowering this one will makes the density of note more stable which is the core of what other saying, try https://puu.sh/zgiKy/f4aefc9129.png //change a bit, i still want to keep the consistency here as the music just repeat itself at this point
01:27:693 - This one felt monotone here, i expect differentiation to be more appearing here, try http://puu.sh/zgiOb/d4f87b787a.png and try do the variation till 01:34:500 - //Apply all beside the short LN, testplayed few times, it doesnt go as well as it looks
01:35:077 - i have quite huge idea here, the structure will quite bring new things to the map here, and it emphasize the pattern progression better, i will split into 2 parts: https://puu.sh/zgj28/2f5dc3e2d3.png and https://puu.sh/zgj3L/89fd89ccbd.png
01:58:270 - 02:00:116 - , etc. having this sound becoming 1/2 LN is quite fit in here, as the sound is quite emphasized and louder compared with others, what i mean is https://puu.sh/zgj71/50f3760596.png //it sure will, but it will need to give some current pattern in order to map those LN which its not really what i want it to be design, the piano is double'ed and i think that should give enough emphasize
02:04:846 - same as 00:10:385 -
02:12:231 - quite same as 00:19:846 -
yeah at this point, it's repeated my point i mentioned before, if you accept them, make sure do it at second part of the song too.
----
For me, the map actually already solve the fundamental thing, which is the unstable NPS, and if there's NPS that still low at some places, these are the place where heighten the NPS is quite impossible without overmap it, like 00:54:462 - 02:54:462 - where there's no other specific sound to follow.
so yeah, i think we can retry doing this one.