forum

wa. - Black Lotus

posted
Total Posts
32
Topic Starter
Frostings
This beatmap was submitted using in-game submission on Friday, July 24, 2020 at 8:58:39 PM

Artist: wa.
Title: Black Lotus
Tags: bofu2016 of fighters ultimate legendary again BMS instrumental electronic
BPM: 200
Filesize: 3052kb
Play Time: 01:46
Difficulties Available:
  1. Advanced (2.76 stars, 153 notes)
  2. Expert (6.02 stars, 598 notes)
  3. Hard (3.92 stars, 233 notes)
  4. Insane (4.85 stars, 392 notes)
  5. Normal (1.94 stars, 97 notes)


Download: wa. - Black Lotus
Information: Scores/Beatmap Listing
---------------
Dendy
H e l l o T h e r e!

00:00:850 (1,2) - it's really difficult to react, you can improve your flow, move 2 (x:132 y:220)
00:01:450 (3) - why is this slider not straight to the grid?
00:05:650 (1) - there is literally no sound, recommend you to remove it.
00:08:500 (9,1) - it's overlapped, also very uncomfortable flow.
00:10:900 (1,2) - uncomfortable flow, suggest that u can make slider until red tick and place second note little bit left
00:11:500 (4) - why is there slider? sound didn't change
00:19:150 (2,1) - missed blue tick, sound is not missing on blue tick
00:19:675 (6) - any reason why you make them more stacked?
00:20:200 (5) - ^
00:20:425 (8,1) - weird flow, very uncomfortable to play
00:25:750 (1,2) - overlap
00:34:750 (4) - replace red tick by note and make slider on white tick
00:36:850 (1) - this looks really strange, maybe remove reverse arrow?
00:39:100 (5,1) - why you didn't mapped sounds between 5 and 1?
00:41:200 (2,3) - do not space them too much.
01:06:325 (1,1,1) - don't overlap them, increase spacing a bit.
01:07:900 (1,1) - overlap
01:27:175 (1,2,3) - stack them, otherwise player have to singletap them when he sees this
01:28:150 (1) - after 1 there's should be a slider?
01:36:925 (4,5,6) - - why this notes not using the same principle like sliders number 4?

gl in further mapping!
:)
Topic Starter
Frostings
sorry but I didn't make any changes
the suggestions are pretty standard, but this map is far from standard :?
Syph
hi

Easy

check distance snap, everything needs to be distance snapped properly
00:51:400 (2) - i think something like https://sy.phic.al/i/vetnqrz.png would work better so you have the really strong sound on downbeat clickable
00:52:900 (1) - end this on 00:53:500 - ? since it has a pretty strong sound there, not sure why you decided to end it later since you try to catch this sound on most places
Normal

pretty sure here too everything should be distance snapped
rest seems fine
Hard

00:54:700 (1,1,1) - nc's seem a bit unneccesary
00:57:550 (1) - why ignore the downbeat here? https://sy.phic.al/i/wihtrig.png sounds a lot better to me
01:06:325 (1,2,3) - this spacing is a bit confusing since intensity is the same, not sure why you decided to do this
01:22:637 (1) - did something go wrong here s: it should start on 01:22:600 - and end on 01:22:900 -
01:25:300 (1,2) - reverse is basically entirely covered, don't think you're allowed to do this

i think you should try to fit in some more 1/4, like as in actual triples and stuff since it's a bit weird having full streams in insane and not having anything like that in hard
Insane

00:19:300 (3) - nc it for the downbeat and for readability
00:32:500 (5) - would nc here too
00:44:200 (7,1) - i think this is a bit too much spacing, maybe try putting 7 on 46|199 or something
01:39:700 (5) - nc?
Expert

00:01:300 (2) - nc downbeat pls
00:09:400 (1) - why'd you make this a slider and not keep it a circle like the rest, it sounds weird anyway
00:25:150 (4,1) - you should emphasize the jump to 1 more imo
00:34:900 - would like to see this clickable somehow, since you did make this sound clickable all times after
01:07:375 (6,7) - covering reverse sliders is not ok s:

expert is cool but lower diffs need some work

gl~
Topic Starter
Frostings
DS management is a little silly so I don't really consider it that much

I fixed the NC spam in Hard as well as the unsnapped slider (oops!)

I also fixed the distance issue in Insane

I'll look into the reverse sliders being covered. -> Edit: it's been fixed in Expert

Thank you!
Little
[Easy]
  1. Approach rate 7 is a bit too high in my opinion. I think a more friendly approach rate 6 would make it more playable for beginners, especially at parts like 00:54:100 (1,2) and 01:26:500 (3,1)
  2. 00:18:100 (1,1) - Rhythm choice here doesn't make sense to me. There's nothing significant at 00:19:900 so it's kind of weird to start a slider there. Swapping these around might make more sense since it transitions from triple groups to constant 1/4 at 00:19:000 http://puu.sh/uZgC3/3f44e0f7d7.jpg
  3. 00:22:600 (1,1) - Need more time between the spinner and the circle. This is not enough for beginners to recover. Same for 00:32:200 (1,1)
  4. 00:28:600 (1,1) - This is not ok. It doesn't give enough time for beginners to read it properly.
  5. 00:34:900 (1,2,3,4,5) - This is the same part as 00:25:300 (1,2,3,4,1) but you've mapped them differently, with the first one separating the last note from the other four, whereas this one is mapped as a group of five notes. Consistency would be nice.
  6. 00:38:500 - Consider adding a slider from here to 00:39:100 since there's a pretty significant release at 00:39:100 which would be nice to show in the map.
  7. 00:49:000 (2,3) - Why the circle at (3) instead of repeat like 00:51:400 (2)
  8. 01:08:500 (1,2) - It would be more aesthetic if (2) had a shallower curve such that the distance between the slider tracks only increases in one direction: http://puu.sh/uZhbo/5391e06d37.jpg Same for 01:10:900 (1,2)
  9. 01:20:500 (1,2) - This is really tricky to read since the previous pair of sliders were at a similar distance, but the time spacing is halved here. Would be nice if these were closer together to avoid confusion.


[Normal]
  1. 00:01:450 (2,3) - It might look nice if you blanketed these.
  2. 00:03:100 (3) - "Avoid 1/2 sliders with multiple reverses" (Ranking Criteria). Well, it's not a 1/2 slider, so it's ok, right?
  3. 00:05:200 - Why is the break end pulled out here?
  4. 00:09:400 (5,1) - This jump is too extreme for Normal. I would recommend limiting the jump to at most 2.25x distance spacing...
  5. 00:17:500 (4,1) - Can we avoid messy overlaps? This could look nicer: http://puu.sh/uZi9O/5f893bfe76.jpg
  6. 00:19:300 (1,1) - Time between spinner and circle is not enough for players at this level to recover imo. Same for 00:27:100 (1,1)
  7. 00:27:100 - Why not use a circle + spinner like you did at 00:36:700 (1,1)
  8. 00:39:100 - Maybe end the spinner here instead.
  9. 00:48:100 (3,4) - This overlap makes it look cluttered, and can be confusing to read. Any way you can avoid overlapping these?
  10. 00:50:500 (2,3) - This jump is extreme. It's too much of a difference from 00:49:600 (1,2)
  11. 01:09:400 (3,1) - This jump is also too big.
  12. 01:12:100 (1,2,3) - Why this rhythm choice? It doesn't really represent the music well. You'd be better off using the same rhythms as the previous patterns.


[Hard]
  1. 00:01:450 (2,3) - It might look nice if you blanketed these.
  2. 00:36:700 (1,2) - Why map this differently from 00:27:100 (1,1)


[Insane]
  1. 00:19:900 (11) - Consider adding a new combo here for readability.


[Expert]
  1. 00:08:500 (9) - This should have a new combo.
  2. 00:22:600 (1,2,3,4,5,1,2,3,1,2,3,4,5,1,2,3,1,2,3,4,5,1,2,3) - Why are the combos divided this way? It would make more sense to combo in groups of four notes here.
  3. 00:34:750 (4) - Two circles would fit better here. The slider end just doesn't do that downbeat justice.
  4. 00:41:500 (3,4,5,6,7,8,9,1) - Skipping the note at 00:42:025 is just awkward. I really think you should connect it.
  5. 01:07:450 (7) - Consider adding a new combo here for readability.
  6. 01:26:575 (1) - This spinner is unreasonably short. Auto barely achieves 1000 bonus score, and the player is expected to hit a spaced stream starting on a blue tick a 1/4 beat after the spinner ends?
Topic Starter
Frostings

Little wrote:

[Easy]
  1. Approach rate 7 is a bit too high in my opinion. I think a more friendly approach rate 6 would make it more playable for beginners, especially at parts like 00:54:100 (1,2) and 01:26:500 (3,1) ha, I don't know why it's set to 7
  2. 00:18:100 (1,1) - Rhythm choice here doesn't make sense to me. There's nothing significant at 00:19:900 so it's kind of weird to start a slider there. Swapping these around might make more sense since it transitions from triple groups to constant 1/4 at 00:19:000 http://puu.sh/uZgC3/3f44e0f7d7.jpg I tried this but it feels like the second beat comes too early unexpectedly. Maybe I'm just so used to what I have already :( I'll look into it
  3. 00:22:600 (1,1) - Need more time between the spinner and the circle. This is not enough for beginners to recover. Same for 00:32:200 (1,1) I'll get some testplays on it. I'm not sure what the alternative is. I don't really want to substitute the spinner for sliders
  4. 00:28:600 (1,1) - This is not ok. It doesn't give enough time for beginners to read it properly. fixed :)
  5. 00:34:900 (1,2,3,4,5) - This is the same part as 00:25:300 (1,2,3,4,1) but you've mapped them differently, with the first one separating the last note from the other four, whereas this one is mapped as a group of five notes. Consistency would be nice. fixed? I changed the order in which they're hit so it groups the four together and the fifth has more emphasis
  6. 00:38:500 - Consider adding a slider from here to 00:39:100 since there's a pretty significant release at 00:39:100 which would be nice to show in the map. fixed?
  7. 00:49:000 (2,3) - Why the circle at (3) instead of repeat like 00:51:400 (2) so that it's different :(
  8. 01:08:500 (1,2) - It would be more aesthetic if (2) had a shallower curve such that the distance between the slider tracks only increases in one direction: http://puu.sh/uZhbo/5391e06d37.jpg Same for 01:10:900 (1,2) eh, I don't know. I prefer having the same sliders
  9. 01:20:500 (1,2) - This is really tricky to read since the previous pair of sliders were at a similar distance, but the time spacing is halved here. Would be nice if these were closer together to avoid confusion. I think I changed it


[Normal]
  1. 00:01:450 (2,3) - It might look nice if you blanketed these.
  2. 00:03:100 (3) - "Avoid 1/2 sliders with multiple reverses" (Ranking Criteria). Well, it's not a 1/2 slider, so it's ok, right? those are guidelines anyways ;)
  3. 00:05:200 - Why is the break end pulled out here? I don't know, it does it automatically
  4. 00:09:400 (5,1) - This jump is too extreme for Normal. I would recommend limiting the jump to at most 2.25x distance spacing... This was actually the closest I could make it without screwing everything up haha . I wouldn't know how to make it better
  5. 00:17:500 (4,1) - Can we avoid messy overlaps? This could look nicer: http://puu.sh/uZi9O/5f893bfe76.jpg yeah I was actually trying to be mindful of distance there, but I guess since someone suggested otherwise I have no choice but to change it back :)
  6. 00:19:300 (1,1) - Time between spinner and circle is not enough for players at this level to recover imo. Same for 00:27:100 (1,1)
  7. 00:27:100 - Why not use a circle + spinner like you did at 00:36:700 (1,1) I didn't know if a spinner following an object so close was good practice for Normal diffs so I put two kinds to see if someone mentioned it
  8. 00:39:100 - Maybe end the spinner here instead. true
  9. 00:48:100 (3,4) - This overlap makes it look cluttered, and can be confusing to read. Any way you can avoid overlapping these? I mean I can just space it out with the sacrifice of having 100 people calling me out on distance issues
  10. 00:50:500 (2,3) - This jump is extreme. It's too much of a difference from 00:49:600 (1,2)
  11. 01:09:400 (3,1) - This jump is also too big.
  12. 01:12:100 (1,2,3) - Why this rhythm choice? It doesn't really represent the music well. You'd be better off using the same rhythms as the previous patterns. seems fine


[Hard]
  1. 00:01:450 (2,3) - It might look nice if you blanketed these.
  2. 00:36:700 (1,2) - Why map this differently from 00:27:100 (1,1)


[Insane]
  1. 00:19:900 (11) - Consider adding a new combo here for readability.


[Expert]
  1. 00:08:500 (9) - This should have a new combo.
  2. 00:22:600 (1,2,3,4,5,1,2,3,1,2,3,4,5,1,2,3,1,2,3,4,5,1,2,3) - Why are the combos divided this way? It would make more sense to combo in groups of four notes here.
  3. 00:34:750 (4) - Two circles would fit better here. The slider end just doesn't do that downbeat justice.
  4. 00:41:500 (3,4,5,6,7,8,9,1) - Skipping the note at 00:42:025 is just awkward. I really think you should connect it.
  5. 01:07:450 (7) - Consider adding a new combo here for readability.
  6. 01:26:575 (1) - This spinner is unreasonably short. Auto barely achieves 1000 bonus score, and the player is expected to hit a spaced stream starting on a blue tick a 1/4 beat after the spinner ends? pretty cool, right? :)
tyty
Einja
hi from my queue


Normal

AR7 for normal is WAY too high for a 2 star diff, put it to like 5-6

Expert

00:18:250 (1,2,1,2,1,2) - remove circles and extend sliders
00:35:050 (1,1,1,1) - these sliders should decrease in velocity overtime imo
00:44:650 (2) - make this a triple
01:16:225 (5,6) - stack these neatly
01:17:650 (1,2,3,4) - this stream should close in on spacing instead of opening on spacing
01:40:000 (1,1,1,1,1) - sv's here should decrease overtime as well
01:41:800 (3,4) - crtl + g
01:42:250 (2,2,2,2) - decrease sv overtime
Alheak
Hello from our modding queue

  1. Are you sure you want to enable the countdown


[Expert]
  1. 00:00:850 (1) - would be a good idea to progressively raise the hitsound volume here to better reflect what's happening in the music, also you could make the slider repeat until 00:01:225 - since the sound stops here
  2. 00:05:650 (1) - ^
  3. 00:08:500 (9) - NC so it's easier to read that the stream stops here, i often find myself continuing to stream until 00:08:725 (1) -
  4. 00:22:900 (5,1) - i don't really understand why you'd NC like that here, i believe it'd be better to switch NC, kinda confusing to read otherwise and all the other patterns of this type are NCd by group of 4
  5. 00:32:500 (5) - NC
  6. 00:32:500 (5,1,1,1,1,1) - this is more of a personal suggestion but considering the difficulty of the map this in comparison seems quite underwhelming, are you sure you don't wanna use a harder pattern for this?
  7. 01:06:100 (9) - NC like earlier
  8. 01:07:450 (7,8) - NCs on each
  9. 01:21:550 (4,1) - overlap
  10. 01:25:450 (8) - NC
  11. 01:27:700 (8) - NC
  12. 01:28:150 (1) - i don't understand why you didn't map a long slider here like usual
  13. 01:34:450 (1) - ^
  14. 01:39:700 (5,1,1,1,1,1) - like ealier, NC on the first and possibly a harder pattern maybe :3


[Insane]
  1. 00:19:900 (11,12) - NCs on each, also hiding the repeat arrow is unrankable
  2. 00:20:950 (2) - like Expert, why did you stop using a long slow slider here
  3. 00:58:300 (11,12) - NCs on each
  4. 01:28:150 (1) - long slider?


[Hard]
  1. like Expert and Insane, i'd suggest to be consistent with your long slow sliders
  2. 00:49:300 - feels kinda weird to not have this beat actively playable, especially considering how strong it is
  3. 01:22:900 - ^
  4. 01:08:500 - no kiai?


[Normal]
  1. I think the lack of a constant distance spacing is a bit inappropriate for a normal diff, and overall the difficulty is quite a jump from Easy
  2. same long slow sliders issue
  3. 00:49:300 - like Hard
  4. 01:22:900 - ^


[Easy]
  1. 00:22:600 (1) - the pause after the spinner is too short for an easy diff, especially at this BPM, i'd suggest ending it on 00:22:600 (1) -
  2. 00:32:200 (1) - ^


Quite nice, and it's refreshing to finally see a BMS-type song in the queue for once, well mapped on top of that, it wasn't hard to choose heh

That's all from me, good luck!
Topic Starter
Frostings
Einja: I like to be conservative making changes through mods, and I don't really see a good reason to change the rhythms as you suggested. The SV changes are an interesting idea, but I think it's unnecessary

Alheak: I don't really like to NC for the sake of downbeats if they're a continuation of the previous pattern (e.g. the last object in a stream) which is why the NCs are the way they are. I've extended the 1/8 slider in Expert and added kiai to Hard (oops!). I also disabled countdown :)

I do like to switch it up mapping the long held note, which is why I use combinations of long sliders, single circles and spinners
making the 1/3 more difficult seems unnecessary to me
I'll evaluate the spinners in Easy

Thank you!
Kaifin
helo frostings

Metadata/Difficulty Settings

  1. your difficulty settings are super fucked so i made this little section to give suggestions for them
  2. generally you want Easy/Normal to have a MUCH lower AR than you have at the moment
  3. at the minimum, i'd recommend AR 5/AR 7 spread, but for this SR i'd go with AR 4/AR 6 for Easy/Normal respectively
  4. the OD for each difficulty is also incredibly high for the SR/diff level, i'd go with OD 3/OD 5 for Easy Normal respectively, at least somewhere around there to be reasonable for this star rating/contents of each diff

i'm going to skip the lower diffs because i dont know what the fuck is going on down there with ur variable spacing and cross screen ez jumps and like i dont know so hopefully the metadata suggestions are enough, i'm sure you already know that the easy and normal are incredibly non standard and i'm in no position to judge them so i wont, but it certainly is an interesting approach to lower difficulties, be sure to fix stuff like spinner recovery time that has been suggested previously as your current spinner recovery times are 100% unrankable

Hard

  1. 00:19:150 (1,2,3,4) - seems like quite high spacing for this 1/4, especially comparing it to 00:18:250 (2,3,4) - which came just before which would make 00:19:900 (2,3,4) - difficult to read as 1/4 initially for the hard level player, based on the patterns that are upcoming i think the answer is to buff the spacing of 00:18:250 (2,3,4) - to make it discernable from the upcoming patterns for the rest of the map
  2. 00:45:100 (3,4,5) - see how the spacing between these two 1/4 repeats with 1/2 of distance between them is the same as the spacing between your completely normal 1/4 repeats with 1/4 between them earlier? i think this could get very confusing to read
  3. 00:45:100 (3,4,5) - also the shaping of this object implies the distance between these three objects would be even, so i'd either make this even or space out 00:45:700 (5) - more/make it more distinct from this pattern so it doesn't look off like it does right now
  4. 00:48:850 (7) - isn't a rhythm using multiple clickable 1/8 repeats here better then just having a giant 1/8 repeat that doesn't really follow anything specifically for a long time?
  5. 00:56:650 (2,3,4,2,3) - another example of the similar 1/2 ---> 1/4 spacing right next to each other
  6. 01:15:700 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7) - try this rhythm here instead to follow the music quite a bit better, your current rhythm in this pattern seems quite random and switches instruments halfway through which is super confusing to play and listen to in the context of the song
  7. 01:17:650 (4) - why isn't this a repeat like this other ones?
  8. 01:19:450 (1) - the sound you're trying to follow here actually starts on 01:19:300 - definitely find a way to alter this rhythm to make 01:19:300 - clickable as it's the most important note of the section
  9. 01:22:900 - surprised this isn't clickable as well
  10. 01:25:300 (1,2) - hidden repeat due to the stack, unrankable, unstack or increase the sv to avoid

Insane

  1. 00:19:825 (10,11) - hidden repeat, unrankable as said above, also shouldn't this one be NCd if you're going to NC these two 00:20:200 (1,1) -
  2. 01:02:800 (3,4) - these two are 1/6 buzzes
  3. 01:07:750 - since you make 01:07:450 - clickable i find it super weird that this isn't clickable as well
  4. 01:09:400 (5,2) - i'm not sure if this is intentional but it's close enough to do this so

    this diff is a LOT better than the 3 lower diffs

Expert

  1. 00:19:225 - it doesn't make much sense to ignore this note if you're going to map 00:19:075 (1,2) - you could make this a repeat or add it into the stream shape of 00:19:300 (1,2,3,4) - like this or something
  2. 00:19:300 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1) - COOL as fuck
  3. 00:34:900 - make this clickable its the note of most emphasis in the rhythm you are following!1!11!! >:9
  4. 00:40:900 (1,2) - hey why do you only use this repeat slider rhythm once in this entire section? i think its a decent lead in i just don't see how it consistently fits with the sound/other rhythms later in the segment so if theres some sort of reason please explain 2 me
  5. 01:32:350 - see you make the rhythm at 00:34:900 clickable here and it works so much better!
  6. 01:26:575 (1) - This spinner is too short! Auto must be able to score 1000 points etc et c etc
  7. 01:37:750 (1) - why is this a repeat and not a long slider/spinner? seems weird that this one is a repeat to me i don't hear any difference in the sound

    wow that diff was really cool

i hope you're able to get whatever's going on with your lower 3 diffs sorted out because that extra is super cool!

good luck with your set sorry i couldn't be of more help
Topic Starter
Frostings

Kaifin wrote:

helo frostings

Metadata/Difficulty Settings

  1. your difficulty settings are super fucked so i made this little section to give suggestions for them
  2. generally you want Easy/Normal to have a MUCH lower AR than you have at the moment
  3. at the minimum, i'd recommend AR 5/AR 7 spread, but for this SR i'd go with AR 4/AR 6 for Easy/Normal respectively
  4. the OD for each difficulty is also incredibly high for the SR/diff level, i'd go with OD 3/OD 5 for Easy Normal respectively, at least somewhere around there to be reasonable for this star rating/contents of each diff

high AR best AR ;)

i'm going to skip the lower diffs because i dont know what the fuck is going on down there with ur variable spacing and cross screen ez jumps and like i dont know so hopefully the metadata suggestions are enough, i'm sure you already know that the easy and normal are incredibly non standard and i'm in no position to judge them so i wont, but it certainly is an interesting approach to lower difficulties, be sure to fix stuff like spinner recovery time that has been suggested previously as your current spinner recovery times are 100% unrankable I will look into it, but spinner recovery time isn't unrankable

Hard

  1. 00:19:150 (1,2,3,4) - seems like quite high spacing for this 1/4, especially comparing it to 00:18:250 (2,3,4) - which came just before which would make 00:19:900 (2,3,4) - difficult to read as 1/4 initially for the hard level player, based on the patterns that are upcoming i think the answer is to buff the spacing of 00:18:250 (2,3,4) - to make it discernable from the upcoming patterns for the rest of the map
  2. 00:45:100 (3,4,5) - see how the spacing between these two 1/4 repeats with 1/2 of distance between them is the same as the spacing between your completely normal 1/4 repeats with 1/4 between them earlier? i think this could get very confusing to read
  3. 00:45:100 (3,4,5) - also the shaping of this object implies the distance between these three objects would be even, so i'd either make this even or space out 00:45:700 (5) - more/make it more distinct from this pattern so it doesn't look off like it does right now
  4. 00:48:850 (7) - isn't a rhythm using multiple clickable 1/8 repeats here better then just having a giant 1/8 repeat that doesn't really follow anything specifically for a long time? multiple 1/8 sliders is unintuitive in a Hard diff
  5. 00:56:650 (2,3,4,2,3) - another example of the similar 1/2 ---> 1/4 spacing right next to each other
  6. 01:15:700 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7) - try this rhythm here instead to follow the music quite a bit better, your current rhythm in this pattern seems quite random and switches instruments halfway through which is super confusing to play and listen to in the context of the song I did something here
  7. 01:17:650 (4) - why isn't this a repeat like this other ones?
  8. 01:19:450 (1) - the sound you're trying to follow here actually starts on 01:19:300 - definitely find a way to alter this rhythm to make 01:19:300 - clickable as it's the most important note of the section I did this intentionally, but I guess a click there is better
  9. 01:22:900 - surprised this isn't clickable as well This one is intentional and isn't better or worse being clicked
  10. 01:25:300 (1,2) - hidden repeat due to the stack, unrankable, unstack or increase the sv to avoid This one should be rankable

Insane

  1. 00:19:825 (10,11) - hidden repeat, unrankable as said above, also shouldn't this one be NCd if you're going to NC these two 00:20:200 (1,1) - Yeah this one is unrankable
  2. 01:02:800 (3,4) - these two are 1/6 buzzes Actually...these should be 1/4 buzzes. Ugh. I might change it to get the snapping right, but I might choose to keep it because 1/3 is much more intuitive
  3. 01:07:750 - since you make 01:07:450 - clickable i find it super weird that this isn't clickable as well
  4. 01:09:400 (5,2) - i'm not sure if this is intentional but it's close enough to do this so

    this diff is a LOT better than the 3 lower diffs

Expert

  1. 00:19:225 - it doesn't make much sense to ignore this note if you're going to map 00:19:075 (1,2) - you could make this a repeat or add it into the stream shape of 00:19:300 (1,2,3,4) - like this or something
  2. 00:19:300 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1) - COOL as fuck
  3. 00:34:900 - make this clickable its the note of most emphasis in the rhythm you are following!1!11!! >:9 ehh :)
  4. 00:40:900 (1,2) - hey why do you only use this repeat slider rhythm once in this entire section? i think its a decent lead in i just don't see how it consistently fits with the sound/other rhythms later in the segment so if theres some sort of reason please explain 2 me Sorry I don't understand
  5. 01:32:350 - see you make the rhythm at 00:34:900 clickable here and it works so much better!
  6. 01:26:575 (1) - This spinner is too short! Auto must be able to score 1000 points etc et c etc It does score 1000
  7. 01:37:750 (1) - why is this a repeat and not a long slider/spinner? seems weird that this one is a repeat to me i don't hear any difference in the sound

    wow that diff was really cool

i hope you're able to get whatever's going on with your lower 3 diffs sorted out because that extra is super cool!

good luck with your set sorry i couldn't be of more help
Unanswered suggestions I didn't choose to change for some reason or another
Thank you for the mod!
emilia
wow i think i can't mod this objectively, some things might be subjective because everything should be ok
[expert]
  1. 00:07:900 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,1) - im just really sad i can't play this cuz i overstream the number of notes........
  2. 00:18:250 (1,2,1,2,1,2) - you can make the distances more consistent i guess?
  3. 00:18:250 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2) - i think this might play a little weird because the players are used to hitting doubles at that timing distance, which might be misleading for the very last double since its of similar distances apart
  4. 00:19:225 - not sure why there would be a reason to not map this because it sounds exactly like the other notes, would suggest making this whole thing 00:19:075 (1,2,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,5,6,7) - a stream
  5. 00:19:825 (8,1) - i dont think the music here makes it significant enough to warrant stream jump but i guess its up to you
  6. 00:22:600 (1,2,3,4,5,1,2,3,1,2,3,4,5,1,2,3,1,2,3,4,5,1,2,3) - ^
  7. 00:24:175 (1,2,3) - think i hear 1/8th here
  8. 00:25:450 (2,2,2,2) - maybe consider bigger SV since the wubs are so exaggerated there
  9. 00:35:050 (1,1,1,1) - ^
  10. 00:36:850 (1) - imo just halve the SV here and not reverse :^)
  11. 00:49:150 (7,1) - im almost certain i broke here when i played. the distance is kinda insane ngl
  12. 00:57:700 (7) - NC here?
  13. 01:20:500 (1,2,4,5) - i think you can shorten the sliders by 1/4, i kept getting 100s here unless i strained
  14. 01:26:575 (1,1) - might not be enough recovery time even for extra

    tbh everything i mentioned is very minor, its ultimately up to you if you think your style is more important

[insane]
  1. 00:09:700 (1,2) - i misread this as 3/4 slider, maybe suggest not touching these notes?
  2. 00:49:150 (6,1) - couldnt get this on sightread too, i think you can decrease distance a bit more
  3. 00:58:900 (1,1) - might wanna ease up and make it easier like 00:01:300 (1,1) - and not so anti-flow, but its entirely up to you (repeated)

    yea theres really not a lot of things i can point out

[hard]
  1. 00:32:200 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,1) - maybe overlap them to some degree (refer to 00:10:900 (1,2) - ) (repeated)

    at this point im like 99% certain i dont have to mod your lower diffs


cool mapset, though its not my type of songchoice
Topic Starter
Frostings
Expert:
00:19:225 - I changed this into a 1/4 reverse slider, it'll fix the reading issue and hit the extra note -> I changed it to a circle+slider because that made sense more with the rhythm
I shortened the sliders by 1/4
Regarding increasing SV on the jumpy part, it might be a good idea, I'll keep it in mind
00:24:175 (1,2,3) - The 1/8 is there, but it might be better to keep the pattern consistent

Thank you!
moph
Hi there o/
[Expert]
  1. 00:00:850 (1) - maybe gradually increase the volume of this buzz slider so that it fits the music a bit more. Its very very quiet at the beginning and the hitsound can be a bit jarring. Could do here as well but its not as important.
  2. 00:18:550 (1,2) - not sure about the spacing here, might make 00:19:075 (1,2) - trickier to read than it needs to be.
  3. not sure if intentional but you could blanket 00:19:600 (5,6,7,8) - with 00:19:900 (1) - a little better. Same for 00:23:200 (1,2,3,4,5) - and 00:23:125 (3) -.
  4. 00:24:175 (1,2,3,1,1) - feel like rhythm here can be improved. 00:24:175 (1,2,3) - staying consistent with the previous patterns seems a bit weird as it's quite different musically. 00:24:250 - and especially 00:24:550 - could be emphasized more as they seem kinda passed over atm. Hmm try this
    (I listened to it again and lol it's a lot less noticeable at full speed so yeaaaaah, what you have should be fine)
  5. 00:34:900 - should really be clickable like you've done elsewhere in the map, 00:25:300 (1) - 01:32:500 (1) - 01:42:100 (1) -.
  6. 00:41:800 (7) - so far you've done quite a lot of emphasis on musical changes during streams, maybe emphasis this sound a little more. Like what you did here actually 00:46:300 (7,8,9,10) -.
  7. 00:53:800 (1) - on the other hand I feel this might be too much as it lacks the uh sound, making it musically different to this 00:51:400 (1) - so you don't really have to keep it consistent.
  8. 01:28:150 (1) - no slider? ):
  9. very cool map
[Insane]
  1. 00:20:950 (2) - slider?
  2. 00:32:500 (5) - maybe NC every second sliders like you do later for the 1/3s?
  3. 00:49:150 (6) - spacing to (1) seems little too far especially considering how close it is to the previous one.
  4. 00:49:600 (2,3) - try circle then slider instead here as 00:49:750 (3) - really should be mapped.
  5. 01:31:300 (6,7) - I feel like 00:24:100 (1) - may have worked better as 01:31:300 (6) - sounds really different from the previous ones.
  6. 01:39:700 (5) - NC to indicate the change to 1/3?
[Hard]
  1. 00:24:100 (6,1) - same situation here as in Insane.
  2. 00:57:550 (1) - imo this really should start 1/2 later, better off putting a single 00:57:550 - or something
  3. 01:06:550 (2,3) - maybe NC here to help show that its 3/4
  4. 01:09:700 - this downbeat here should be clickable, its pretty much the only one in the kiai that isn't.
  5. 01:31:300 (6,1) - same
[Normal]
  1. Should probably get a second opinion on this but I don't think Normal fits the difficulty correctly. The spacing overall is very high with the addition of jumps, inconsistent spacing and 1/4 rhythms really make this more of an Advanced or higher really.
[Easy]
  1. This should really be called Normal instead. However I think you might have some issues with this as the lowest diff. Rhythm density is fine but the spacing is very questionable. I think the lack of DS really hurt this diff and imo the jumps aren't even necessary for an easy/normal diff. For example, 00:08:725 (1,2,1) - rhythmically different but visually very similar spacing. The decrease in spacing here 00:35:350 (2,3) - doesn't really make sense to me. The pattern can easily be the same spacing throughout as the music is. Stuff like this will make it very hard to read for beginners so try get more opinions on this.
Good luck!!
Topic Starter
Frostings
I fixed the hitsound issue

NC changes are unnecessary, either I NC on starts of patterns or if they're explicitly coupled
Sliders instead of single circles I intentionally didn't map that way every time since a slider gets old quick. I don't like too many SV changes anyways :p
Some of the spacing issues you point out I don't really have a problem with. They're way easier and more intuitive than the actual hard parts of the map (the streams into stacked 1/2s or spaced streams)

also about Easy/Normal, they're really just labels and don't fundamentally change the spread if I change the diff names so I'd like to keep them the same

thanks :oops:
Electoz
Hi, from my modding queue~

[General]

  1. 01:46:300 - Could add a green line with 30% volume in all diffs since you already did that in Expert.


[Easy]

  1. 01:06:325 (2) - NC I guess, since you did so with 00:08:725 (1) .
  2. 00:27:100 (1) - 00:36:700 (5) - Inconsistent NCs?
  3. 00:44:500 (1) - Is there any reason for not using a 4/1 slider like 00:39:700 (1) ? Just curious, is it for variety?
  4. 00:54:100 (1,2) - Quite overdone imo, this one is in a total different scale from other spacings you used and it's not really predictable since time-distance equality thing is still be relied on in Easy.
  5. 01:16:900 (2,1,1) - Not sure if the stacks are intentionally off but I guess I'll mention just in case.
  6. 01:32:950 (2,3,1) - I would prefer sth else cuz most of the things you did don't really cause things to overlap apart from this one so it looks inconsistently stand out.


[Normal]

  1. 00:08:725 - Would be better to use 0.5 SV here because 00:10:900 would be a better spot to introduce a different SV since the rhythm changes there, atm 00:08:725 (4,5,1) - have a different SV from 00:01:300 (1,2) - 00:06:100 (1,2) despite being mapped in the same section.
  2. 00:45:700 - Normal sampleset missing.


[Hard]

  1. 00:08:725 - Same as Normal.
  2. 00:10:900 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - The idea is ok, but this is so stand out in comparison with 00:13:300 (1,2,3,4,5) which isn't really musically different, so would be better if the second measure 00:13:300 is something more interesting to keep up with the first measure 00:10:900 since both of these measures are in the same section so the way these measures are mapped shouldn’t be too different.
  3. 00:32:200 (1) - Quite misleading cuz the way this is patterned is the same as 00:32:500 (2,3,4,5,6,7) but they have different snaps. Same applies to 01:39:400 (1) .
  4. 01:16:600 (7,1) - Not really readable as 1/4 since the way you spaced this is pretty much the same you did with 1/2, probably need an indication for a change in rhythm gap or something.
  5. 01:25:300 (1,2) - Yeah this is probably not rankable with that reverse arrow lol


[Insane]

  1. 00:10:750 (7) - Tbh I didn't really notice the SV change on this lol, it's like if you're emphasizing this by an SV change then there should be something more obvious to indicate the change as well, I tried a few times and I read 00:10:750 (7,1) as 1/2 so maybe ask for more testplays on this I guess?


[Expert]

  1. 00:35:050 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2) - Is this intentional for comboing these musically different from these measures 00:25:300 - 01:32:500 - 01:42:100 ?
  2. 01:31:487 - Actually there's a sound here too, maybe start 01:31:525 (4) at 01:31:450 instead? Or starting it at 01:31:600 like other diffs would still simplify better than the current one which comes on a blue tick.


uhh I guess the spread is fine? The rhythm density is pretty low for a 200 BPM so hopefully it can compensate the rest of things you did. Though this probably needs a lot of modding for opinions on stuff in lower diffs lol
Hope that helped, good luck~
Topic Starter
Frostings

Electoz wrote:

Hi, from my modding queue~

[General]

  1. 01:46:300 - Could add a green line with 30% volume in all diffs since you already did that in Expert. fixed ty


[Easy]

  1. 01:06:325 (2) - NC I guess, since you did so with 00:08:725 (1) . I changed the other one :oops:
  2. 00:27:100 (1) - 00:36:700 (5) - Inconsistent NCs? um I like to NC based on pattern. The NC is in the first one because it stands out from the pattern but the second one doesn't
  3. 00:44:500 (1) - Is there any reason for not using a 4/1 slider like 00:39:700 (1) ? Just curious, is it for variety? yeah variety
  4. 00:54:100 (1,2) - Quite overdone imo, this one is in a total different scale from other spacings you used and it's not really predictable since time-distance equality thing is still be relied on in Easy. I think it's fine
  5. 01:16:900 (2,1,1) - Not sure if the stacks are intentionally off but I guess I'll mention just in case. Not noticeable
  6. 01:32:950 (2,3,1) - I would prefer sth else cuz most of the things you did don't really cause things to overlap apart from this one so it looks inconsistently stand out. I don't really see a reason to change it, but I'll consider it :oops:


[Normal]

  1. 00:08:725 - Would be better to use 0.5 SV here because 00:10:900 would be a better spot to introduce a different SV since the rhythm changes there, atm 00:08:725 (4,5,1) - have a different SV from 00:01:300 (1,2) - 00:06:100 (1,2) despite being mapped in the same section. probably, but I like to use SV changes for patterning, the way I've done
  2. 00:45:700 - Normal sampleset missing. ty


[Hard]

  1. 00:08:725 - Same as Normal.
  2. 00:10:900 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - The idea is ok, but this is so stand out in comparison with 00:13:300 (1,2,3,4,5) which isn't really musically different, so would be better if the second measure 00:13:300 is something more interesting to keep up with the first measure 00:10:900 since both of these measures are in the same section so the way these measures are mapped shouldn’t be too different.
  3. 00:32:200 (1) - Quite misleading cuz the way this is patterned is the same as 00:32:500 (2,3,4,5,6,7) but they have different snaps. Same applies to 01:39:400 (1) . I think it's fine since they all start on white ticks and last almost equally long
  4. 01:16:600 (7,1) - Not really readable as 1/4 since the way you spaced this is pretty much the same you did with 1/2, probably need an indication for a change in rhythm gap or something.
  5. 01:25:300 (1,2) - Yeah this is probably not rankable with that reverse arrow lol I fixed it, thanks


[Insane]

  1. 00:10:750 (7) - Tbh I didn't really notice the SV change on this lol, it's like if you're emphasizing this by an SV change then there should be something more obvious to indicate the change as well, I tried a few times and I read 00:10:750 (7,1) as 1/2 so maybe ask for more testplays on this I guess?


[Expert]

  1. 00:35:050 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2) - Is this intentional for comboing these musically different from these measures 00:25:300 - 01:32:500 - 01:42:100 ?
  2. 01:31:487 - Actually there's a sound here too, maybe start 01:31:525 (4) at 01:31:450 instead? Or starting it at 01:31:600 like other diffs would still simplify better than the current one which comes on a blue tick.


uhh I guess the spread is fine? The rhythm density is pretty low for a 200 BPM so hopefully it can compensate the rest of things you did. Though this probably needs a lot of modding for opinions on stuff in lower diffs lol
Hope that helped, good luck~
thank you :oops:
Winnie
Hello from modding queue



[Expert]
You can make HP 6 or 6.5 It'll fit the natural balance of the difficulty without forcing you to push yourself to make sure you hit every note. plus it seems so weird to have an entire difficulty gap of 1.0 SR to only adjust to insane by only .4 considering how things are mapped in this diff. So it's either you bust while playing or HR is a nuisance.
00:01:450 (1) - I think an NC can work here. Just to give a visual to players that this slider is the start of something possibly new. Considering 00:00:850 (1,2) - is already a fast hit most people would see that long slider as a fast slider.
00:08:500 (9) - What's the reasoning behind not having an NC here. It follows along with 00:08:725 (1,1,1) -
00:11:725 (5) - Does this Normal Sampleset need to be set here? It seems like it stands out so much and ruins the already implement whistles and claps already going on. Doesn't seem like such an important beat to want to have its own thing here
00:16:450 (1,2,3,4,5) - I'm curious as to why you made this a 5 note stream while the music is practically identical to 00:15:850 (2,3,4) - The key beats on that stream or on (1)(3)(5) and it's just being bypassed. I can definitely see it at 00:17:650 (1,2,3,4,5) - since the beats are a lot less mellow and it feels that you can bypass it this way
00:32:500 (5) - Same with NC here it seems like such a rhythm that is could be NC because considering how the stream plays most people would hit that repeat the exact same way the stream is.
00:34:600 (3,4,1) - I think spacing here can be toned a little. It feels so forced to play this and I'm not even concerning the slider ending on a strong beat. I'd move (4) closer and leave the rest as be since I want to have what you already do 00:35:050 (1,2) - have more sense to them instead of just mashing jumps to hit those right after the jump previously mentioned. Just like this or do it your own way http://puu.sh/vQ9qL/a21137bd66.jpg
00:37:900 (2) - Why that pause here instead of continuing the triple pattern. Could even make that a triple but I'll leave it at your idea
00:42:100 (1) - Could this rhythm also work? http://puu.sh/vQ9Cd/71ebcfbb96.jpg Just so it's consistent with 00:43:300 (3) - 00:44:500 (1) - Piano chords
00:56:650 (3,4) - combo killers why you do this to the noobies 8-)
01:07:000 (1,2) - Wait this was a stream, didn't even know.
01:15:850 (2) - normal sampleset on the sliderend? Seems confusing to play without that proper feedback
Really not much to say definitely a lot going on but I'm pretty sure your mind is already set with how you wanted things. You can't not just make a map like this without realizing the feedback you'll get. So I'll leave it at this is how you wanted it.

[Insane]
00:15:100 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9) - Hmm the whole entire stream is mapped out compared to the extra. Definitely can see why but you could NC 00:15:700 (9) - Since extra's NC was on this particular beat as well
00:19:900 (11) - I'd be careful inb4 BNs and QAT says this hides the repeat slider making it unrankable feelsbadman
00:32:500 (1) - Same thing I mentioned in extra to NC these 1/3 sliders or just make NC consistent like in the extra 00:32:800 (6,7,8,9,10) - These were in the extra's but here it's not. I don't see what the problem would be with having them identical and matching one another
00:48:850 (5,6) - This feels much nicer played here than on the extra since there is so much more spacing in between them.
00:57:250 (4,1) - Could be really confusing for just an insane diff
Nice Insane

[Hard]
00:09:700 (1,1) - Spacing here might be relatively too close. Like 1.4 spacing seems like a much nicer thing to DS here
Compare it to how 00:07:900 (3,4,5) - are spaced it might be better to give such a strong beat a little more leniency in spacing as well. Really not a concern though
00:18:100 (1,2) - Could be stackable for an easier time, but it's fine either way
00:57:250 (4) - Couldn't it be like this as well for rhythm please do explain http://puu.sh/vQaPG/b7650e6ecd.jpg Since it'll work corresponding to 01:07:000 (4,5,6,7) -
Not much more to say

[Normal]
Hmm 2.6 stars might be pushing it for a normal especially with implemented spacing like 00:42:700 (2,3,4,5) - Really nothing wrong with the diff but I do think that's what is pushing your SR really high
Topic Starter
Frostings

Kocari wrote:

Hello from modding queue



[Expert]
You can make HP 6 or 6.5 It'll fit the natural balance of the difficulty without forcing you to push yourself to make sure you hit every note. plus it seems so weird to have an entire difficulty gap of 1.0 SR to only adjust to insane by only .4 considering how things are mapped in this diff. So it's either you bust while playing or HR is a nuisance. I purposely made the HP pretty high ... I can't really give a good reason for it other than say it's experimental
00:01:450 (1) - I think an NC can work here. Just to give a visual to players that this slider is the start of something possibly new. Considering 00:00:850 (1,2) - is already a fast hit most people would see that long slider as a fast slider. Should be fine
00:08:500 (9) - What's the reasoning behind not having an NC here. It follows along with 00:08:725 (1,1,1) - I don't put NC there because it's also part of the stream ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
00:11:725 (5) - Does this Normal Sampleset need to be set here? It seems like it stands out so much and ruins the already implement whistles and claps already going on. Doesn't seem like such an important beat to want to have its own thing here I guess not, yeah
00:16:450 (1,2,3,4,5) - I'm curious as to why you made this a 5 note stream while the music is practically identical to 00:15:850 (2,3,4) - The key beats on that stream or on (1)(3)(5) and it's just being bypassed. I can definitely see it at 00:17:650 (1,2,3,4,5) - since the beats are a lot less mellow and it feels that you can bypass it this way It's there because ... it looks cool 8-)
00:32:500 (5) - Same with NC here it seems like such a rhythm that is could be NC because considering how the stream plays most people would hit that repeat the exact same way the stream is.
00:34:600 (3,4,1) - I think spacing here can be toned a little. It feels so forced to play this and I'm not even concerning the slider ending on a strong beat. I'd move (4) closer and leave the rest as be since I want to have what you already do 00:35:050 (1,2) - have more sense to them instead of just mashing jumps to hit those right after the jump previously mentioned. Just like this or do it your own way http://puu.sh/vQ9qL/a21137bd66.jpg I will evaluate it further
00:37:900 (2) - Why that pause here instead of continuing the triple pattern. Could even make that a triple but I'll leave it at your idea Yeah idk I can't really explain it
00:42:100 (1) - Could this rhythm also work? http://puu.sh/vQ9Cd/71ebcfbb96.jpg Just so it's consistent with 00:43:300 (3) - 00:44:500 (1) - Piano chords I'm expressing the whistle in this section
00:56:650 (3,4) - combo killers why you do this to the noobies 8-)I don't know if THAT's the combo killer
01:07:000 (1,2) - Wait this was a stream, didn't even know. yeah
01:15:850 (2) - normal sampleset on the sliderend? Seems confusing to play without that proper feedback yeah I messed up the hitsounds here
Really not much to say definitely a lot going on but I'm pretty sure your mind is already set with how you wanted things. You can't not just make a map like this without realizing the feedback you'll get. So I'll leave it at this is how you wanted it.

[Insane]
00:15:100 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9) - Hmm the whole entire stream is mapped out compared to the extra. Definitely can see why but you could NC 00:15:700 (9) - Since extra's NC was on this particular beat as well
00:19:900 (11) - I'd be careful inb4 BNs and QAT says this hides the repeat slider making it unrankable feelsbadman Should be fine
00:32:500 (1) - Same thing I mentioned in extra to NC these 1/3 sliders or just make NC consistent like in the extra 00:32:800 (6,7,8,9,10) - These were in the extra's but here it's not. I don't see what the problem would be with having them identical and matching one another
00:48:850 (5,6) - This feels much nicer played here than on the extra since there is so much more spacing in between them.
00:57:250 (4,1) - Could be really confusing for just an insane diff
Nice Insane

[Hard]
00:09:700 (1,1) - Spacing here might be relatively too close. Like 1.4 spacing seems like a much nicer thing to DS here
Compare it to how 00:07:900 (3,4,5) - are spaced it might be better to give such a strong beat a little more leniency in spacing as well. Really not a concern though
00:18:100 (1,2) - Could be stackable for an easier time, but it's fine either way Yeah maybe if I were a good mapper I would stack them
00:57:250 (4) - Couldn't it be like this as well for rhythm please do explain http://puu.sh/vQaPG/b7650e6ecd.jpg Since it'll work corresponding to 01:07:000 (4,5,6,7) - Kinda awkward like that since then you'd think the entire stream would be mapped out, instead of just the lead-in to the stream
Not much more to say

[Normal]
Hmm 2.6 stars might be pushing it for a normal especially with implemented spacing like 00:42:700 (2,3,4,5) - Really nothing wrong with the diff but I do think that's what is pushing your SR really high Yeah I might need higher AR ;)
tyty
show more
Please sign in to reply.

New reply