1. osu! forums
  2. Beatmaps
  3. Beatmap Graveyard

show more
posted
bring back from ded :(
posted
eventually :p
posted
Expert
00:00:850 (1) - there's no sound until the white tick
00:05:650 (1) - For sounds like this I think it would be better to either use use 1/4 snap to map the ticking noise, or use the default soft-hitnormal, since that's better for buzz sliders and sounds more like the sound you're mapping
00:25:300 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2) - This section doesn't follow sounds well. Circles have strong sounds, but the spacing to them is small. Sliders have weak sounds but have large spacing. Reducing the distances of circle -> slider would help this.
00:35:050 (1) - Same issue as above, but now NCs changed pattern too 🤔
01:42:100 (1) - This is what I'd consider good, change the other patterns so they're like this one.

00:49:150 (7,1) - Nerf this a bit, way too much contrast with previous pattern
00:53:800 (1) - There's no sound to emphasise with this stream break / nc, use a normal stream.
(Since you're emphasising sounds with stream breaks, stuff like 00:41:725 (6) - could use it too)
00:58:900 (9) - NC, since this has no emphasis currently
01:02:800 (3,4) - Shouldn't these be 1/6 snap
01:20:950 (2,3,4) - This part felt pretty weak, would have higher spacing here since it's the climax
01:28:150 (1) - no spinner but 01:34:450 (1) - does, both should have or none since it's pretty much the same
01:36:700 (1,2,3,4) - Don't really agree with using 1/8 sliders since there's no sound to support, just using a different stream shape could emphasise this too
01:39:700 (5) - Considering this is an expert diff, you could have easily mapped some of the 1/3s as streams after 1-2 sliders. Would be more fun to play active rather than passive. Applies to other sections
01:45:175 (1) - mapping the ending section like this is a bit zzz, could have done something more interesting with the finale

Nice map but could use a couple more mods first 👍
posted

Sinnoh wrote:

Expert
00:00:850 (1) - there's no sound until the white tick I know, but this has better lead-in to the downbeat. Having a shorter buzz slider is more unexpected imo
00:05:650 (1) - For sounds like this I think it would be better to either use use 1/4 snap to map the ticking noise, or use the default soft-hitnormal, since that's better for buzz sliders and sounds more like the sound you're mapping I want to make it similar to the first buzz slider
00:25:300 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2) - This section doesn't follow sounds well. Circles have strong sounds, but the spacing to them is small. Sliders have weak sounds but have large spacing. Reducing the distances of circle -> slider would help this. I feel this way is more interesting to play
00:35:050 (1) - Same issue as above, but now NCs changed pattern too 🤔 I like to NC for the pattern, I'm not really worried about consistency
01:42:100 (1) - This is what I'd consider good, change the other patterns so they're like this one. I thought this was the worst of the patterns and was considering on changing it actually :p

00:49:150 (7,1) - Nerf this a bit, way too much contrast with previous pattern It feels fine to play
00:53:800 (1) - There's no sound to emphasise with this stream break / nc, use a normal stream. 2edgy
(Since you're emphasising sounds with stream breaks, stuff like 00:41:725 (6) - could use it too)
00:58:900 (9) - NC, since this has no emphasis currently NCing for pattern
01:02:800 (3,4) - Shouldn't these be 1/6 snap They should be 1/4 snap. Someone else mentioned this in previous mod, forgot to change it. Fixed now
01:20:950 (2,3,4) - This part felt pretty weak, would have higher spacing here since it's the climax I'm not really going for high intensity on this part. Otherwise I would have made the rhythm harder. I think just the style change, which is what I had in mind, is fine.
01:28:150 (1) - no spinner but 01:34:450 (1) - does, both should have or none since it's pretty much the same The way I see it, the first of these is a "wind-down" to one of the peaks of the song, so I undermapped it by leaving it empty. The second doesn't require the same wind-down, so I put a spinner there for pretty good movement. The third one at 01:37:750 - I feel needs the same wind-down after the stream, so it's undermapped with a slider. The fourth one at 01:43:900 - is just whatever, I made a pattern out of it
01:36:700 (1,2,3,4) - Don't really agree with using 1/8 sliders since there's no sound to support, just using a different stream shape could emphasise this too I didn't agree either, but I decided to make it anyways to make it a little interesting at least, and maintain the theme of crappy sliderstreams
01:39:700 (5) - Considering this is an expert diff, you could have easily mapped some of the 1/3s as streams after 1-2 sliders. Would be more fun to play active rather than passive. Applies to other sections I'm not a fan of 1/3 streams
01:45:175 (1) - mapping the ending section like this is a bit zzz, could have done something more interesting with the finale I was never really one for epic endings

Nice map but could use a couple more mods first 👍
posted
Greetings.

[Expert]

Main concern is that you're using variable spacing on same sounds (the loud streamy stuff).

  1. 00:07:900 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9) - Okay so essentially these all sound the same yet the spacing is changing. That doesn't happen to 00:03:100 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9) - . I'd really like to discuss this with you as I don't see the logic here. Especially goes to stuff like 00:19:300 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - where you drop the spacing by half even though the music is kinda the same throughout.
  2. 00:25:300 - I don't understand the logic here for spacing since 00:25:750 (1,2) - is noticeably easier than the other 3 counterparts. Unlike 00:35:050 - this section with the same sounds you're not reducing the spacing progressively which makes for a chaotic structure.
  3. 00:35:350 (2,1) - You'd really have to tone down the spacing here because unlike this part 00:25:300 - this one is utilizing one of the uncomfortable movements which makes it that much harder. When the slider is oriented towards the cursor entry direction it forces a hardest snap which breaks all momentum and just plays tediously. Such uncomfortness in movement is smoothened out a lot with lower spacing. Alternatively you can nerf the movement by doing ctrl+g on 00:35:500 (1,1,1) - sliders individually.
  4. 00:50:800 (5,6,1) - The angle is quite obtuse like 120 degrees backed up by large spacing and flowbreak. This overemphasizes the note by a large margin making it a chore to play. This kind of placement will be quite comfortable https://i.imgur.com/7Hwlo8S.png or you could do something like this (inversing the stream) so that https://i.imgur.com/9RGkM8y.png at least the stream orientation will be comfortable relative to the entry angle.
  5. 00:55:300 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1) - One of the things i'm really against of is using this concept when you've used it on completely different sounds the heavy kicks like 00:07:900 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9) -
  6. 01:27:175 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - I don't hear this any particularly louder than lets say 00:22:600 - these sounds for such large spacing to be warranted on this bpm.
  7. 01:36:100 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,5,6,7) - The sounds are quite different than 01:27:175 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - yet mapped about the same :-/. I don't think that's a good option to represent the song tbh.


No major concerns for lower diffs so i'll leave it at this for now.
posted

MaridiuS wrote:

Greetings.

[Expert]

Main concern is that you're using variable spacing on same sounds (the loud streamy stuff).

  1. 00:07:900 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9) - Okay so essentially these all sound the same yet the spacing is changing. That doesn't happen to 00:03:100 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9) - . I'd really like to discuss this with you as I don't see the logic here. Especially goes to stuff like 00:19:300 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - where you drop the spacing by half even though the music is kinda the same throughout. I'm more interested in the visual patterns, rather than the differences in intensity. I'm of the opinion that descending DS streams aren't much different than DSd streams, so I use them interchangeably for their different visual appeal.
  2. 00:25:300 - I don't understand the logic here for spacing since 00:25:750 (1,2) - is noticeably easier than the other 3 counterparts. Unlike 00:35:050 - this section with the same sounds you're not reducing the spacing progressively which makes for a chaotic structure. I don't notice that your timestamp is significantly easier than the rest. Here I tried to map an unorthodox emphasis pattern, with very strong downbeats on easier spacing and their followup on much larger spacing, which remains consistent and tries to serve as the highlight of this pattern... I think small DS deviations aren't really that noticeable compared to this
  3. 00:35:350 (2,1) - You'd really have to tone down the spacing here because unlike this part 00:25:300 - this one is utilizing one of the uncomfortable movements which makes it that much harder. When the slider is oriented towards the cursor entry direction it forces a hardest snap which breaks all momentum and just plays tediously. Such uncomfortness in movement is smoothened out a lot with lower spacing. Alternatively you can nerf the movement by doing ctrl+g on 00:35:500 (1,1,1) - sliders individually. The pattern is similar to before, and I honestly think horizontal movement is easier than vertical movement
  4. 00:50:800 (5,6,1) - The angle is quite obtuse like 120 degrees backed up by large spacing and flowbreak. This overemphasizes the note by a large margin making it a chore to play. This kind of placement will be quite comfortable https://i.imgur.com/7Hwlo8S.png or you could do something like this (inversing the stream) so that https://i.imgur.com/9RGkM8y.png at least the stream orientation will be comfortable relative to the entry angle. I don't really understand what you mean. There are a lot of weird/uncomfortable parts in this whole map (since that's the way I designed it) and this part in particular is much more comfortable in comparison. The only real issue I can think of is the spacing, but I think resetting the flow drastically here is fine to emphasize the melody
  5. 00:55:300 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1) - One of the things i'm really against of is using this concept when you've used it on completely different sounds the heavy kicks like 00:07:900 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9) - Same as first suggestion
  6. 01:27:175 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - I don't hear this any particularly louder than lets say 00:22:600 - these sounds for such large spacing to be warranted on this bpm. This is the crux of the map :) Buildup into the fast spinner and widest stream in the map. Pretty cool right? :)
  7. 01:36:100 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,5,6,7) - The sounds are quite different than 01:27:175 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - yet mapped about the same :-/. I don't think that's a good option to represent the song tbh. And now that the widest stream has gotten out of the way, any lesser stream pales in comparison :)

MaridiuS wrote:

No major concerns for lower diffs
I'm quoting you on this ;)

Other changes:
01:46:300 - deleted the last 4 notes on Expert, to keep it in line with the other diffs

thanks
posted

Frostings wrote:

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
diffnames are labels but e/n are standardized names that have a general meaning for osu. would be better to label diffs closer to their osu definitions (so easy being normal and normal being advanced or some other in between thing). similar situation to https://osu.ppy.sh/beatmapsets/690222/d ... ll#/130697 though not nearly as severe

ez
00:07:900 (1,2,3) - 01:05:500 (1,2,3) - should be making irregular rhythm a bit more obvious to read through spacing. 1/1 and 3/2 stuff are easy enough to figure out with inconsistent spacing because they're more repetitive, but 3/4 feels too weird to be interpreted naturally
00:46:300 (2) - would use 1/1 like 00:41:500 (2) - . 2/1 blends with the surrounding 2/1 sliders that aren't mapped over 1/1 rhythms
00:52:900 (1) - would cover beat 3 rather than skip over it for the same reason
00:28:600 (1,1) - 01:35:800 (1,2) - same comboing would make sense. not seeing any pattern specific thing that supports different combo s

normal
00:27:100 (1) - forgot a hitsound i assume
00:42:700 (2,3) - while being aware of weird spacing i still misread this one lol. consider shrinking to something like 00:44:500 (1,2) - which was easier to interpret for some reason. generic triangle works ok
00:56:650 (2) - would go with a different rhythm. continuous 1/4 sounds kinda weird when song has really distinct gaps. personally would go with something like this and leave the cool 1/4 for 01:00:700 (1) -
01:23:800 (2) - feels a little too sudden with only 1 repeat and object 1/2 after. moving it 1/2 earlier is easier to react to

hard
00:11:200 (2) - seems better to leave out 1/2 until 00:16:000 (1) - . this part with the 1/1 violin things feels better to focus on 1/1 and not have as much filler, like 00:12:400 (5) - .
00:19:150 (1,2,3) - switching to 1/4 like this feels pretty weird, like there's nothing in the song making a rhythm change feel right. would go with 100% long slider or 100% 1/4, not in between
00:57:550 (1,2,3) - same applies to this
00:45:100 (3,4) - would increase spacing after each of these. with low spacing it seems more likely they'd have 2 repeats. 01:16:000 (3,4,5,6,7,1) - this does it well
00:48:100 (5,6) - misread this as 1/2 cuz it's pretty low for 1/1 in this section. would lower it a decent amount

insane
00:34:300 - should be ending the 1/3 stuff with a circle like 01:41:500 (1) - .
00:57:250 (4,1,2,3) - should be starting the stream on the first or second white tick. (or the same way as top diff). really offputting to have a stream start on the one sound here that's not prominent
00:59:050 (2) - comboign should be like 01:03:700 (1,1) - and all the other slow sliders like this
00:48:850 (7) - similar to 56s on normal, would separate this because the song has an obvious stop in the buzzing. 2 of these 00:18:250 (2,3) - would work fine
01:29:800 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7) - 00:22:600 (1,2,3,4,5,1) - should be using the same 1/4 1/8 switch point. first one does it a beat earlier than second (which id say is more fitting)

ex
00:05:650 (1) - 00:00:850 (1) - im sure everyone else has pointed it out already, but starting buildup hold thing before the song has audible stuff is pretty gross. later start >
00:18:850 (1,2,1,2) - previous combos make it seem like this is gonna be the same rhythm cuz spacing is gradually decreasing. would make the 1/4 vs 1/2 gap more obvious in some way
00:19:300 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - 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) - should coordinate comboing stuff. same patterns
01:26:575 (1,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - starting stream from a spinner's end uhhhhhh nobody's gonna play that correctly
01:37:750 (1) - reverse seems kinda arbitrary. makes the slider end later than the sound does and it's not snapped to any sound that's important

Cool
posted

pishifat wrote:

Frostings wrote:

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
diffnames are labels but e/n are standardized names that have a general meaning for osu. would be better to label diffs closer to their osu definitions (so easy being normal and normal being advanced or some other in between thing). similar situation to https://osu.ppy.sh/beatmapsets/690222/d ... ll#/130697 though not nearly as severe
Renamed Easy -> Normal; Normal -> Advanced. RIP the dream :(:(
ez
00:07:900 (1,2,3) - 01:05:500 (1,2,3) - should be making irregular rhythm a bit more obvious to read through spacing. 1/1 and 3/2 stuff are easy enough to figure out with inconsistent spacing because they're more repetitive, but 3/4 feels too weird to be interpreted naturally I changed it, don't know if they're actually closer though lol. It did remove the horrid 5x jump, so that's good
00:46:300 (2) - would use 1/1 like 00:41:500 (2) - . 2/1 blends with the surrounding 2/1 sliders that aren't mapped over 1/1 rhythms nice
00:52:900 (1) - would cover beat 3 rather than skip over it for the same reason My nice long wave slider ;_; Fixed anyways
00:28:600 (1,1) - 01:35:800 (1,2) - same comboing would make sense. not seeing any pattern specific thing that supports different combo s wtf nice catch

normal
00:27:100 (1) - forgot a hitsound i assume Yes
00:42:700 (2,3) - while being aware of weird spacing i still misread this one lol. consider shrinking to something like 00:44:500 (1,2) - which was easier to interpret for some reason. generic triangle works ok Alright
00:56:650 (2) - would go with a different rhythm. continuous 1/4 sounds kinda weird when song has really distinct gaps. personally would go with something like this and leave the cool 1/4 for 01:00:700 (1) - Changed along those lines. Re-positioned 00:57:700 (1) - in return
01:23:800 (2) - feels a little too sudden with only 1 repeat and object 1/2 after. moving it 1/2 earlier is easier to react to Changed. I also moved 01:23:200 (1) - away from the previous object, because wtf was that spacing

hard
00:11:200 (2) - seems better to leave out 1/2 until 00:16:000 (1) - . this part with the 1/1 violin things feels better to focus on 1/1 and not have as much filler, like 00:12:400 (5) - . I thought the rhythm on this part was more on the plain side, especially at 00:13:300 (1,2,3,4) - . Making this change would make it more so. I don't feel too strongly about it to buff the rhythm either though
00:19:150 (1,2,3) - switching to 1/4 like this feels pretty weird, like there's nothing in the song making a rhythm change feel right. would go with 100% long slider or 100% 1/4, not in between I feel ok about it. Going from less dense to more dense with the buildup is intuitive enough
00:57:550 (1,2,3) - same applies to this same as before
00:45:100 (3,4) - would increase spacing after each of these. with low spacing it seems more likely they'd have 2 repeats. 01:16:000 (3,4,5,6,7,1) - this does it well MORE spacing? Say no more
00:48:100 (5,6) - misread this as 1/2 cuz it's pretty low for 1/1 in this section. would lower it a decent amount
Yeah I just noticed that too. Lowered it. Also adjusted 00:50:050 (2,3) - to compensate

insane
00:34:300 - should be ending the 1/3 stuff with a circle like 01:41:500 (1) - . Yes
00:57:250 (4,1,2,3) - should be starting the stream on the first or second white tick. (or the same way as top diff). really offputting to have a stream start on the one sound here that's not prominent This sounds so weird for some reason. Probably because I got used to the way it was. I changed it regardless
00:59:050 (2) - comboign should be like 01:03:700 (1,1) - and all the other slow sliders like this Yep
00:48:850 (7) - similar to 56s on normal, would separate this because the song has an obvious stop in the buzzing. 2 of these 00:18:250 (2,3) - would work fine I don't understand. I think you got the wrong timestamp..?
01:29:800 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7) - 00:22:600 (1,2,3,4,5,1) - should be using the same 1/4 1/8 switch point. first one does it a beat earlier than second (which id say is more fitting) It's unclear if you think the first or second one is better. Lucky for you I'm a great mapper and can decide that the second one is better :)
(Fixed the first one)


ex
00:05:650 (1) - 00:00:850 (1) - im sure everyone else has pointed it out already, but starting buildup hold thing before the song has audible stuff is pretty gross. later start > Yeah, later start
00:18:850 (1,2,1,2) - previous combos make it seem like this is gonna be the same rhythm cuz spacing is gradually decreasing. would make the 1/4 vs 1/2 gap more obvious in some way Moved them further away
00:19:300 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - 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) - should coordinate comboing stuff. same patterns Honestly have no idea how any sane person can notice this
01:26:575 (1,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - starting stream from a spinner's end uhhhhhh nobody's gonna play that correctly I'M gonna play that correctly :):)
01:37:750 (1) - reverse seems kinda arbitrary. makes the slider end later than the sound does and it's not snapped to any sound that's important Probably not the fix you hoped, but I shortend the slider so it actually lands on the beat properly

Cool
Thanks so much for the help :oops:

Other changes:
Easy (now Normal) - 01:19:300 - removed NC
Hard - 01:29:800 (1,2,3,4,5,1) - 00:22:600 (1,2,3,4,5,1) - changed for consistency with Insane
posted
imo i would nerf these in the normal
00:09:400 (3,1) -
00:54:100 (1,2) -

ar 6 would be fine too with this diff imo
posted
00:09:400 (3,1) - fixed
AR -> 6

00:54:100 (1,2) - moved them a liiittle more closer. I don't think I can move them closer still without changing the pattern
posted
tbh i think u should actually keep the ar of normal as 5 and maybe nerf advanced to 7, for spread reasons

having the lowest diff be ar 6 might also be kinda harsh incase any new players wanna play this map but its wayyy too fast
posted
This modding thread has been migrated to the new "modding discussions" system. Please make sure to re-post any existing (and unresolved) efforts to the new system as required.
Please sign in to reply.