1. osu!community
  2. Beatmaps
  3. Ranked/Approved Beatmaps
posted
yes
posted
bad snog
posted
i love you pishi
posted
chinofat
posted
a
posted
Quality mapping as always <3
posted
star
posted
so loved, rank, or graveyard
posted
what in tarnation
posted
m4

[bor]
00:05:714 (3) - 00:06:057 (4) - (tail) whistle
00:34:857 (3) - nothing is actually here maybe u wanna try to remove this and extend (2) by 1/2?
00:46:000 (4) - cuz polarity and there rly isnt much on the downbeat
00:52:686 (1) - idk bout this //overlap gimmick kinda late to introduce at this point so prob best to leave it out
00:56:114 (3,4) - mebe
00:58:172 (1,2,3) - y do u follow 2 different things with the same melody going on // 01:03:657 (1,2,3) - these all map to vocals so theyre gud but ya
01:20:800 (2) - drum finish on the end 01:22:172 (4) - on head 01:31:772 (2) - etc..
01:36:572 (1) - finish
02:01:257 (1,2) - dont really wanna ruin ur pattern but at least make the spacing more equal? lol

also mite wanna check some blankets
otherwise cool sliders

[normal]
00:11:543 (1) - ok but y tho
00:19:086 (4,1) - not rly a fan of this flow
00:34:857 (5) - if ur gunna do gimmicky stuff like above and 00:24:400 (3) - then Y not here too //actually i think leaving the circle out sounds better too cuz there isnt much there on the downbeat
00:46:514 (1) - doesn't really need an NC to emphasize this tbh, 2 1/2 sliders would prolly be more suitable for the diff too
00:56:286 (3) - maybe a 1/2 slider? missing the downbeat makes me sad
01:36:572 (1) - finish
01:39:143 (5) - 1/2 earlier for the snare plss
01:51:657 (5) - same as earlier
01:55:086 - 01:57:829 - this shouldnt be skipped tho imo

[hard]
00:16:943 - circle here too cuz 00:19:686 (7) - //00:22:172 (6,1) - 00:27:657 (6,1) - same here and maybe 00:33:143 (6,1) -
00:36:057 - y ignore? ;/
00:46:514 (2) - if ur following the vocals it's kinda odd that u don't map the last note
00:57:314 (3) - put it in the 4th quadrant cuz acute angles are cute??
01:21:314 (1,2) - 01:23:715 (4,5) - ik ur following vocals but it really feels empty to me when u completely ignore snares like this
01:28:172 (1) - but crash on the downbeat :s
01:30:400 (3,4,5,6,7) - kinda looks weird the way it's stacked, maybe manually stack it to go left? also the beat after still has the drum roll so it also feels pretty empty
01:34:172 (2) - maybe jump? u hsed the crash too
01:36:572 (1) - finish here
01:44:114 (5) - 01:46:857 (5) - (etc) nothing on the 1/4 here
01:44:714 - tho there is a sound here

[insane]
00:10:686 (1) - 01:39:828 (1) - y nc tho
00:18:743 (3) - clap
00:23:886 (1) - soft finish
00:46:772 (3) - dont rly think this is necessary, esp since the mutliple repeat slider is pretty hard to read already imo lol
00:54:743 (3,4,5) - switch places? the reverse is kinda covered up
01:01:257 (2,3,4) - switch in timeline sounds better to me imo, first 2 downbeats are essentially the same
01:29:714 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2) - this is pretty intense considering the stuff i've seen so far lol
01:36:572 (1) - finish

glhf!!
posted
hi

[borgy]
00:18:400 (2) - sliderend (sampleset-normal | addition-soft) sounds meh since its not consistent
00:23:886 (2) - fix hitsound (copy hs of 00:29:372 (2) - )
00:39:314 (2) - slidertail remove finish
00:54:743 (4) - sliderend sounds weird.. probably because hitsound copier is used and note density is lower so sudden tom drum seems out of place
01:07:772 (2) - sliderend (sampleset-normal | addition-soft) whistle
01:51:657 (2) - (personal suggestion) addition-drum clap
02:01:257 (1) - would really like sliderend (02:02:629 - ) to be clickable tho
02:03:143 (2) - clap instead of finish so that you get higher pitched tom drum and next note is lower one\
02:04:000 (1) - start it on 02:03:743 - just like hard (consistency) and more time for beginner to spin. its win win

[normal]
00:11:543 (1) - rather put it above 00:11:200 (4) - , not squished down below..
00:39:657 (3) - remove sliderend finish
01:02:114 (3,4) - this rhythm feels bit odd... try this https://puu.sh/wgw2s/ef17c3a99c.jpg
01:39:314 (1,2) - you should really should use claps only here instead and 01:40:000 (3,4) - finish hs on only this cuz mixing them up sound really bad.
00:10:172 (1,2,3,4) - ^ (1|2) & (3|4)
02:03:829 (1) - why not just start this spinner on 02:03:743 like hard. more time to spin for new players is good imo

[hard]
00:10:172 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - make this 00:10:172 (1,2,3,4) - clap only and 00:10:857 (5,6,7,8) - finish only
00:18:400 (1,2,3,4) - sounds empty while 00:15:657 (1,2,3,4) - had more full-er hs sound, mind you that second part of repeat also has better sound 00:29:371 (1,2,3,4) -
00:40:000 (4) - remove finish
00:55:086 (4) - remove finish, sampleset-normal
01:17:543 (2,3,4) - clap only rather than entire 01:17:543 (2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - being finish only
01:19:429 (2,3) - aesthetically that look really out of shape from other parts, also you might want players to really move their aim there, for current one, players can just hold aim on same spot which isnt really fun at all
01:30:400 (3,4,5,6,7) - move left more so that its clear enough to see like 01:30:057 (2) - from 01:29:714 (1) -
01:39:143 (1) - really feels off when 01:39:314 - is done passively while 00:33:486 (1) - and 01:17:372 (1) - is actually clickable. make that clickable please :l
01:50:457 (2,3,4) - clap instead of finish

[insane]
00:40:000 (6) - remove finish

c:
posted
hi

[Easy]
  1. 00:52:686 (1) - not stacked properly
  2. 01:29:714 (3) - 2 notes would be nice cus of the 2 syllable vocals here
    neat.
    blanket mod
    00:27:657 (4,1) -
    00:30:743 (1,2) -


[Normal]
  1. 00:03:143 (3) - missed the sound at downbeat but you mapped it at 00:06:057 - ?
  2. 00:08:800 (4,5,1,2,3,4,1) - 1/2 chain seems too long. maybe change 00:09:314 (5) - into 1/1+note? applying this could make a room for 00:11:543 (1) - cause it looks squished down there


[Hard]
  1. 00:16:943 - 00:22:429 - 00:27:914 - 00:33:400 - 01:44:714 - maybe a note in all this ? since you put note at 00:19:686 (7) - and some other parts but it sound the same.
  2. 00:23:886 (1,2) - why is this 1/2 sliders while you use 4 notes like in 00:18:400 (1,2,3,4) - and 00:29:371 (1,2,3,4) -
  3. 00:55:772 (2) - could make the spacing from previous slider bigger since its almost hidden underneath the slider and newbies might find it hard to hit
  4. 01:19:429 (2,3) - the overlap doesnt look good and its kinda hard to read. probably wanna change that 2 slider where its body doesnt overlap 3 that much
  5. 01:19:772 (3,1) - same issue as earlier , if you could make the spacing alittle bigger thatd nice.
  6. 01:21:829 - 01:32:800 - this sounds awkward not to map since the sound is really noticable
  7. 01:30:400 (3,4,5,6,7) - cant almost see the notes. maybe have the same ds as 01:29:714 (1,2) - ?


[Insane]
  1. 00:33:486 (1,1,1) - would be nice if the distance of these 3 looks visually the same with 00:32:972 (3,4,5) - spacing. some like this?
  2. 00:52:343 (1,1) - the jump feels too big and sudden and it looks like 1/1 ds
  3. 01:19:429 (1,1) - this flow is kinda weird. the direction going bottom right corner feels so random


gl~
posted

Gaia wrote:

m4

[bor]
00:05:714 (3) - 00:06:057 (4) - (tail) whistle sounds not strong enough
00:34:857 (3) - nothing is actually here maybe u wanna try to remove this and extend (2) by 1/2? the start of a vocal phrase/break is right here
00:46:000 (4) - cuz polarity and there rly isnt much on the downbeat this rhythm is a difficult one to talk about, firstly polarity doesn't exist for this, but I don't map the red ticks afterwards because I needed to set up for the vocal start on (5) and then to do that I put a 1/1 circle before it (since easy diff should avoid 1/2 rhythm)
00:52:686 (1) - idk bout this //overlap gimmick kinda late to introduce at this point so prob best to leave it out its not a gimmick or even slightly tricky, go watch easy players try this, because I have.
00:56:114 (3,4) - mebe I'm keeping similar sounds to the same object when i can,
00:58:172 (1,2,3) - y do u follow 2 different things with the same melody going on // 01:03:657 (1,2,3) - these all map to vocals so theyre gud but ya its really following one thing, but I noticed this part slows down, so I lowered note density and followed the strong notes that made the most sense.
02:01:257 (1,2) - dont really wanna ruin ur pattern but at least make the spacing more equal? lol Perfect distance snap is not required,
the gap is large enough for an easy player to play it correctly.


also mite wanna check some blankets no
otherwise cool sliders

[normal]
00:11:543 (1) - ok but y tho ?
00:19:086 (4,1) - not rly a fan of this flow I'm a fan of this flow.
00:34:857 (5) - if ur gunna do gimmicky stuff like above and 00:24:400 (3) - then Y not here too //actually i think leaving the circle out sounds better too cuz there isnt much there on the downbeat there is no gimmick, its just movement and the movement changes based on the strong points in the song.
01:55:086 - 01:57:829 - this shouldnt be skipped tho imo very clearly mapping to the vocals here.

[hard]
01:21:314 (1,2) - 01:23:715 (4,5) - ik ur following vocals but it really feels empty to me when u completely ignore snares like this it doesn't feel empty to me
01:28:172 (1) - but crash on the downbeat :s hard players tend to try and follow sliders as best as they can, so this is emphasized
01:30:400 (3,4,5,6,7) - kinda looks weird the way it's stacked, maybe manually stack it to go left? also the beat after still has the drum roll so it also feels pretty empty it doesn't look weird to me.
01:34:172 (2) - maybe jump? u hsed the crash too no jumps
01:44:114 (5) - 01:46:857 (5) - (etc) nothing on the 1/4 here did stuff
01:44:714 - tho there is a sound here hard to really confirm it.

glhf!!

Sidetail wrote:

hi

[borgy]
02:01:257 (1) - would really like sliderend (02:02:629 - ) to be clickable tho whole map is based on movement type rhythm that equalizes slider tails bumps and heads (roughly)
02:04:000 (1) - start it on 02:03:743 - just like hard (consistency) and more time for beginner to spin. its win win I want it to feel slower.

[normal]
00:11:543 (1) - rather put it above 00:11:200 (4) - , not squished down below.. down makes more sense to me since its more of a drastic change (pushing out from a circlular feel instead of pulling in.)
01:02:114 (3,4) - this rhythm feels bit odd... try this I'm doing more of a vocal focus, the string plucking is highlighted by slider bumps
02:03:829 (1) - why not just start this spinner on 02:03:743 like hard. more time to spin for new players is good imo reason stated above,
its "inconsistent" between diffs because pishi and I have different preference.


[hard]
01:19:429 (2,3) - aesthetically that look really out of shape from other parts, also you might want players to really move their aim there, for current one, players can just hold aim on same spot which isnt really fun at all I'm ok with just holding and pushing down a little, though I mentioned above: hard players tend to attempt the entire slider, so it works out.
01:30:400 (3,4,5,6,7) - move left more so that its clear enough to see like 01:30:057 (2) - from 01:29:714 (1) - its clear enough, these players look at approach circles
01:39:143 (1) - really feels off when 01:39:314 - is done passively while 00:33:486 (1) - and 01:17:372 (1) - is actually clickable. make that clickable please :l another point 01:28:343 - has a slider end to a strong sound, explained prior.

c:

Finshie wrote:

hi

[Easy]
  1. 00:52:686 (1) - not stacked properly doesn't matter.
  2. 01:29:714 (3) - 2 notes would be nice cus of the 2 syllable vocals here movement based rhythm for whole map, also 4 circles in a row is hard so I only do that at certain points.
    neat.

    [Normal]
    1. 00:03:143 (3) - missed the sound at downbeat but you mapped it at 00:06:057 - ? the set up for 00:06:057 - is very different because it starts a build up that I chose to highlight here and the vocals take a small break. thus the rhythm focus shifts.
    2. 00:08:800 (4,5,1,2,3,4,1) - 1/2 chain seems too long. maybe change 00:09:314 (5) - into 1/1+note? applying this could make a room for 00:11:543 (1) - cause it looks squished down there its moderate length, though since its super intense part and not super long it isn't that bad, though if super swag people tell me "dude stop" then i will


    [Hard]
    1. 01:19:429 (2,3) - the overlap doesnt look good and its kinda hard to read. probably wanna change that 2 slider where its body doesnt overlap 3 that much
    2. 01:19:772 (3,1) - same issue as earlier , if you could make the spacing alittle bigger thatd nice. both no, its 1/4 gap for hard diff,
    3. 01:21:829 - 01:32:800 - this sounds awkward not to map since the sound is really noticable vocal focus.
    4. 01:30:400 (3,4,5,6,7) - cant almost see the notes. maybe have the same ds as 01:29:714 (1,2) - ? they are visible enough.


gl~
posted
only made changes to hard sorry for late post hitsound copier was bugging out for me

https://bor.s-ul.eu/eu4arpcl.osu
posted
Hi. sorry late.
[Insane]
  1. 00:10:686 (1) - 01:39:828 (1) - why do u have these NC's tho
  2. 00:34:514 (1,2) - Consider adding movement between these because it plays weird after a jumpy part, 01:51:314 (1,2,1) - same
  3. 00:46:857 (1) - You dont need this nc
  4. 01:17:372 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1) - Why is the spacing on this build up is so much smaller compared to the first part 00:10:172 (1,2,3,1,1,2,3,1,2,3) -

[Hard]
  1. 01:19:429 (2,3) - the aesthetics just dont fit in. They are too off here compared to the rest.

[Normal]
  1. 01:06:400 (1,2) - 01:07:772 (4,5) - diff already has a lot of 1/2 and 1/1 stacks mixed and now theres a 3/2 stack. just a normal diff. Dont confuse newbies too much with these

[Easy]
  1. 00:03:314 (3) - u r following vocals right? if yes, this is p wrong since no vocal at 00:03:314 - but then theres a loud vocal at 00:03:829 - which is executed on a slider repeat which is pretty bad for emphasis
  2. 00:10:172 (1,2,3) - do circles here too like 01:17:372 (1,2,3,4,5) - . they fit better with build up
  3. 00:33:486 (1,2,3) - same. like 01:39:314 (1,2,3,4,5) -
  4. 01:50:286 (1) - This is obviously intenser than all those build ups earlier. a simple 3/1 slider is too under done

cool
posted

DeRandom Otaku wrote:

Hi. sorry late.
[Hard]
  1. 01:19:429 (2,3) - the aesthetics just dont fit in. They are too off here compared to the rest. it looks good to me, also there are more obvious aesthetic blemishes to worry about. (if aesthetics mattered)

[Normal]
  1. 01:06:400 (1,2) - 01:07:772 (4,5) - diff already has a lot of 1/2 and 1/1 stacks mixed and now theres a 3/2 stack. just a normal diff. Dont confuse newbies too much with these they are not next to eachother so its not against the guidelines

[Easy]
  1. 00:03:314 (3) - u r following vocals right? if yes, this is p wrong since no vocal at 00:03:314 - but then theres a loud vocal at 00:03:829 - which is executed on a slider repeat which is pretty bad for emphasis the emphasis is occuring through movement since players at this level tend to try to follow sliders exactly.
  2. 00:10:172 (1,2,3) - do circles here too like 01:17:372 (1,2,3,4,5) - . they fit better with build up but this section is weaker, plus sliders like this are still pretty strong
  3. 00:33:486 (1,2,3) - same. like 01:39:314 (1,2,3,4,5) - same
  4. 01:50:286 (1) - This is obviously intenser than all those build ups earlier. a simple 3/1 slider is too under done movement explained prior.

cool
posted
12sp12sp12sp12sp12sp12sp

00:01:600 - shouldn't this be normal hitnormal
00:14:200 - 01:41:972 - should probably be silenced like other overmapped blue tick tails in less intense parts
01:36:572 - finish?

anime
00:23:886 (1,2,3,4,1) - movementhere seemed a bit too "simple", compared to what you did before, even if things are less intense here. this just felt too comfortable lol
the slightly uneven spacing on the pentagon patterns in chorus 2 actually looked really noticeable ingame
like how this diff plays, cute

collab anime
00:47:029 - no idea why this tick is ignored when it seems so similar to the two 1/2 before it
01:08:800 - could probably have soft whistle on this to make it a bit more intuitive, suddenly clicking something that gives so much less feedback seemed weird together with the heavy undermapping
01:22:514 (3,2) - this looked really off with how the map utilizes so much stacking things, if it at least used the autostack direction, or 01:24:057 (5) - continued it if might work better // 01:34:172 (2) -
01:28:857 - with how vocal focued rthythm is, undermapping this seemed really weird, especially if 01:28:343 - basically says "idc about cymbal clicking here" lol

easier collab anime
01:47:543 (1) - very slightly offscreen

bor
00:04:686 (1,2,3,4) - can you use visual spacing instead of ds here? stack makes it look a bit weird (just move 4 a bit left)
01:17:372 (1,2,3,4,5) - seems a bit much of a diff spike compared to the similar 00:10:172 (1,2,3) -
01:39:314 (1,2,3,4,5) - seemed slightly better since music builds up more towards it
01:19:772 - 01:41:714 - should probably map this since it stands out a lot and 00:13:943 (2) -
02:03:143 (2,3) - you usually had 1/1 stacks and the 3/2 before this is distance snapped so this could really throw off beginners

[]

reply to the old mods and poke me when it has 12sp
posted
SPOILER
[normal]
00:46:514 (1) - doesn't really need an NC to emphasize this tbh, 2 1/2 sliders would prolly be more suitable for the diff too feel like song is different enoguh to support nc, and too clam to use 1/2ss
00:56:286 (3) - maybe a 1/2 slider? missing the downbeat makes me sad prefer to use circles only here. fits with rhythm in hte rest of the map more i think
01:36:572 (1) - finish d
01:39:143 (5) - 1/2 earlier for the snare plss vocals more important than snare in this case
01:51:657 (5) - same as earlierfollowing bor's cue


[hard]
00:16:943 - circle here too cuz 00:19:686 (7) - //00:22:172 (6,1) - 00:27:657 (6,1) - same here and maybe 00:33:143 (6,1) - added
00:36:057 - y ignore? ;/ pause makes 1 stand out more
00:46:514 (2) - if ur following the vocals it's kinda odd that u don't map the last note changed
00:57:314 (3) - put it in the 4th quadrant cuz acute angles are cute?? prefer wide here:(

[insane]
00:10:686 (1) - 01:39:828 (1) - y nc tho visuals mostly (dontkillme)
00:18:743 (3) - clap yes
00:23:886 (1) - soft finish sounds too intense for what should be calm
00:46:772 (3) - dont rly think this is necessary, esp since the mutliple repeat slider is pretty hard to read already imo lol sound seems so prominent a
00:54:743 (3,4,5) - switch places? the reverse is kinda covered up gotta keep gameplay as broken as possible
01:01:257 (2,3,4) - switch in timeline sounds better to me imo, first 2 downbeats are essentially the same vocals dont really support that
01:29:714 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2) - this is pretty intense considering the stuff i've seen so far lol nerfed
01:36:572 (1) - finish add


Sidetail wrote:

hi



[normal]

00:39:657 (3) - remove sliderend finish did
01:39:314 (1,2) - you should really should use claps only here instead and 01:40:000 (3,4) - finish hs on only this cuz mixing them up sound really bad. made them all finishes
00:10:172 (1,2,3,4) - ^ (1|2) & (3|4)

[hard]
00:10:172 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - make this 00:10:172 (1,2,3,4) - clap only and 00:10:857 (5,6,7,8) - finish only did
00:18:400 (1,2,3,4) - sounds empty while 00:15:657 (1,2,3,4) - had more full-er hs sound, mind you that second part of repeat also has better sound 00:29:371 (1,2,3,4) - they'rethesamenow i think
00:40:000 (4) - remove finish yes
00:55:086 (4) - remove finish, sampleset-normal finish seesm ok here actually
01:17:543 (2,3,4) - clap only rather than entire 01:17:543 (2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - being finish only prefer keeping it the same
01:30:400 (3,4,5,6,7) - move left more so that its clear enough to see like 01:30:057 (2) - from 01:29:714 (1) -
01:39:143 (1) - really feels off when 01:39:314 - is done passively while 00:33:486 (1) - and 01:17:372 (1) - is actually clickable. make that clickable please :l

[insane]
00:40:000 (6) - remove finish yes

c:

Finshie wrote:

[Hard]
  1. 00:16:943 - 00:22:429 - 00:27:914 - 00:33:400 - 01:44:714 - maybe a note in all this ? since you put note at 00:19:686 (7) - and some other parts but it sound the same. vocals are 1/1 and the other referenced thing is 1/2, so circle density shows that
  2. 00:23:886 (1,2) - why is this 1/2 sliders while you use 4 notes like in 00:18:400 (1,2,3,4) - and 00:29:371 (1,2,3,4) - song got like way calmer
  3. 00:55:772 (2) - could make the spacing from previous slider bigger since its almost hidden underneath the slider and newbies might find it hard to hit i usually keep 1/4 spacing on hards for babies like this :(


[Insane]
  1. 00:33:486 (1,1,1) - would be nice if the distance of these 3 looks visually the same with 00:32:972 (3,4,5) - spacing. so me like this? think it looks cooler smaller, though i did readjust how centered everything was
  2. 00:52:343 (1,1) - the jump feels too big and sudden and it looks like 1/1 ds moved it (but not enough probably)
  3. 01:19:429 (1,1) - this flow is kinda weird. the direction going bottom right corner feels so random idk which direction would be not random a

DeRandom Otaku wrote:

Hi. sorry late.
[Insane]
  1. 00:10:686 (1) - 01:39:828 (1) - why do u have these NC's tho makes the triangles like not look terrible
  2. 00:34:514 (1,2) - Consider adding movement between these because it plays weird after a jumpy part, 01:51:314 (1,2,1) - same contrast between jumps and stacks makes it work as emphasis:(
  3. 00:46:857 (1) - You dont need this nc true
  4. 01:17:372 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1) - Why is the spacing on this build up is so much smaller compared to the first part 00:10:172 (1,2,3,1,1,2,3,1,2,3) - nade it bigger


cool

Lasse wrote:

12sp12sp12sp12sp12sp12sp

00:01:600 - shouldn't this be normal hitnormal yesye
00:14:200 - 01:41:972 - should probably be silenced like other overmapped blue tick tails in less intense partsyesy
01:36:572 - finish?yes

anime
00:23:886 (1,2,3,4,1) - movementhere seemed a bit too "simple", compared to what you did before, even if things are less intense here. this just felt too comfortable lol
the slightly uneven spacing on the pentagon patterns in chorus 2 actually looked really noticeable ingame
like how this diff plays, cute fixed fgixed

collab anime
00:47:029 - no idea why this tick is ignored when it seems so similar to the two 1/2 before it fdfd
01:08:800 - could probably have soft whistle on this to make it a bit more intuitive, suddenly clicking something that gives so much less feedback seemed weird together with the heavy undermapping dfdfdf
01:22:514 (3,2) - this looked really off with how the map utilizes so much stacking things, if it at least used the autostack direction, or 01:24:057 (5) - continued it if might work better // 01:34:172 (2) -
01:28:857 - with how vocal focued rthythm is, undermapping this seemed really weird, especially if 01:28:343 - basically says "idc about cymbal clicking here" lol

easier collab anime
01:47:543 (1) - very slightly offscreen sdsd

bor
00:04:686 (1,2,3,4) - can you use visual spacing instead of ds here? stack makes it look a bit weird (just move 4 a bit left)
01:17:372 (1,2,3,4,5) - seems a bit much of a diff spike compared to the similar 00:10:172 (1,2,3) -
01:39:314 (1,2,3,4,5) - seemed slightly better since music builds up more towards it
01:19:772 - 01:41:714 - should probably map this since it stands out a lot and 00:13:943 (2) -
02:03:143 (2,3) - you usually had 1/1 stacks and the 3/2 before this is distance snapped so this could really throw off beginners

[]

reply to the old mods and poke me when it has 12sp
gl~
posted

Lasse wrote:

bor
00:04:686 (1,2,3,4) - can you use visual spacing instead of ds here? stack makes it look a bit weird (just move 4 a bit left) a
01:17:372 (1,2,3,4,5) - seems a bit much of a diff spike compared to the similar 00:10:172 (1,2,3) - these are very different, there is much more background stuff going on for the 01:17:372 -
01:39:314 (1,2,3,4,5) - seemed slightly better since music builds up more towards it
01:19:772 - 01:41:714 - should probably map this since it stands out a lot and 00:13:943 (2) - a
02:03:143 (2,3) - you usually had 1/1 stacks and the 3/2 before this is distance snapped so this could really throw off beginners noobies are much more likely to rely on the approach circles just like they learned from peppy's tutorial
p
https://bor.s-ul.eu/0mVUNpik.osu

hard: yes
posted
H E L L O T H E R E
Please sign in to reply.