Dragontail wrote:

m4m

[Our Story in the Stars]

1. 00:07:767, try doing control j and h and moving to original position No, I want the ciruclar flow I have right now.
2. 00:28:564 rotating triangles would be better instead of dilating them wzhy noit both
3. 00:30:419 press control and j rotate 109 degrees and move back into old position hmm I like the current one more
4. 01:30:912 difficulty spike a little high? not really imo. drum buildup really intense
5. 01:41:276 rotating triangles plz sure
6. 02:14:004 why not put a five note stream before next slider to lead in? there are no sounds upporting that in the song.
7. 02:18:186 another very large diff spike, maybe tone down? again drum buildup fits imo
8. 02:54:549 reshape stream perhaps? why? I like it
9. 03:00:368 change slider so that you should make a stream connecting to 3:01:095 I see your point because of the piano, but I don't think it's necessary in this calm section of the song.
10. 03:32:020 slider should be facing toward the left I think I like the current, and there is not space there really
11. 04:24:393 nc? yeah changed it around a bit
    

Super polished mapset. I really believe this can be ranked soon! owo

_Meep_ wrote:

stop kill mapper spirit
exdee

-LynX- wrote:

returning m4m, from your queue!
love this song, yanagi nagi + monogatari
and btw grats on your new ranked map! sayonara memories was awesome to play and i loved the keysounding you did there took the timing from Mr. Monstrata xdddd

Our Story in the Stars

1. first off, great job on the timing sections, it has to be a lot of work (typical cancercell xd)
2. 00:16:388 (5) - hmm why is this a straight slider instead of a curved slider? i don't hear anything going in the music that needs emphasis sure
3. 00:19:089 (4,5) - you suddenly broke flow from 4->5, didnt do this previously.. maybe ctrl+g for 5? never thought abt that thanks!
4. 00:52:913 (6,1) - a minor suggestion: perhaps if you move 6 to where 00:54:004 (4) - is, then move 1 to somewhere around x:401 y:71 it would flow better? 6->1 is a sharper change in direction to emphasize the downbeat I want the rather shallow angle though, better emphasis
5. 01:08:559 (5,6) - strong sound is on 6 instead of 5, so maybe move 5 to where 1 is so that spacing from 5->6 is bigger than 4->5?
6. 01:11:457 (5,6) - ahh so it's intentional.. but i still think you should do something about the spacing xd yeah, emphasizing the vocals afterwards through that method which for me is much more important.
7. 01:12:912 (4) - i think you can break this into 2 circles instead, both slider-head and slider-tail has pretty strong drum beats I know what you mean, but somehow I am really not a great fan of it.
8. 01:14:912 (1) - similarly, there's a pretty strong piano sound on the slider-tail, weaker than this ^ but maybe also deserving of a clickable note. As 01:14:184 (3,1) - overlaps rather badly as well, i suggest placing a new circle on 01:15:094 - , stack it on 01:14:184 (3) - then move both of them down slightly actually still prioritizing vocals this is a kinda calm thing before the big spacing comes afterwards for those vocals. I like the overlap though ;-;
9. 01:24:548 (4) - ^ D: ;_;
10. 01:25:094 (1,2) - i really like how you transitioned into this slow sv part, fits really well with the music :)
11. 02:01:102 (5,6) - isn't this spacing a bit too large compared to the others it's actually just 2x like the other ones mostly...
12. 02:05:649 (6,1) - maybe you can make this a triplet, since the guitar comes in around the blue tick (so like 6-7-1) the sound of the guitar is to unclear to hear a distinct sound to map that triple to imo
13. 02:12:914 (1,2,3) - don't think a triplet is necessary here, but i'm like deaf sometimes so maybe i can't hear the music that supports this lol There seems to be a quit snare roll here, though I am essentially just following the patter frim the last time that occured.
14. 02:25:640 (4) - 02:37:277 (4) - okay i don't think you'll change this since it's so consistent but please xd yeah sorry, ;-;
15. 03:15:458 (8,1) - minor, but there's a pretty strong sound on 1 and the spacing from 7->8 and from 8->1 is about the same I express emphasis here through the usage of wider and wider angles each time the intensity increases.
16. 03:26:186 (5) - maybe you wanna break this into 2 circles too, it's a pretty intense part of the song after all I don't actually think it's that intesnse and after 4 1/1 rhythm sliders a direct 7 circles would prolly just be overkill imo.
17. 03:28:913 (4,5,6) - perhaps make the spacing from 4->5 smaller than 5->6? i know there's a pretty strong drum beat on 5 as well, but this is personal preference i guess imo these sound eqully important to me.
18. 03:31:293 (2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9) - maybe you should replace some circles with a 1/4 repeat slider and not use a full stream as the piano is not exactly timed perfectly the piano is still tryining to represent a 1/4 rhythm which is what I am doing.
19. 03:38:912 (4,5) - why red anchors? smoother curves would fit the piano better imo yeah, Idk why the suden red anchors.
20. 04:30:915 (4,5) - maybe you should space these 2 further as the same spacing is used before to denote a 2/1 beat gap I thik reading should and will be able to handle this problem perfectly.
21. 04:35:468 (3) - 04:38:377 (3) - , etc. - a 1/2 repeat slider would fit better imo, personal preference mainly emphasizing the tom which is followed by nothing really, so 1/1 fits very well imo
22. 04:57:468 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - this stream shape looks a bit boring for such an intense part, maybe you can use something similar to the previous one you used here 04:22:549 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1) - there is a great different between those tow though, they sound the same, but they fullfill different roles while the first one is the end of an intense part (which should imo be equally intense) the second one is leading into the intense part which would lead into an overkill if making them the same(I'll change the shape a bit though
23. 05:03:468 (4) - plEaSE HAHA HA HA
24. 05:21:473 (1) - maybe ctrl+g this for sharper movement and contrast (and fix subsequent objects) 3.2 ds should do the trick imo
25. 05:28:048 (1) - niceeee

owo

that's all from me, had fun playing it and good luck ranking it

1. 00:14:933 (5,1) - this is the only time you use this backtrack flow thing in this section, stands out a bit too much imo
2. 00:29:110 (4,5,6,7) - might be better as something that isnt a triangle because the triangle implies that (4,5,6) is a distinct group of 3 notes which it isnt (01:41:822 (4,5,6,7) etc - same complaint here)
3. 00:35:320 (4,5) - ctrlg to make flow more intuitive? would also give sharp flow emphasis to 00:35:684 (1) -
4. 00:39:282 (3) - ends on p powerful vocal
5. 01:51:276 (1,2,3,4) - fix triangles
6. 01:53:822 (4) - maybe make this parallel instead of flipping it - would fit nicer with the surrounding objects imo
7. 02:54:549 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7) - i feel like theres not anything worth emphasizing this much with the bend, maybe make the curve more smooth
8. 03:23:276 (4,1) - in previous parts every time you overlapped sliders like this it indicated 1/4 so this might be misread as such
9. 03:24:731 (3) - downbeat should be clickable imo
10. 05:28:048 (1) - dude nice

vekt0r wrote:

returning m4m
sorry it's so late, i borrowed a computer as soon as i could

00:21:651 (5) - you might want to emphasize this like you’re doing with important notes like 00:22:378 (1,5,6) -
maybe not that important, but imo slow sections should still have jumps for emphasis, since you’re already using variable spacing (ex. 00:31:292 (1,2,3) -, 00:35:502 (5,1) - even though 5 is a circle) the first one is 2x then 2.2x and 2.4 since the note value is increasing.
00:54:186 (5,5) - 01:30:730 (4,7) - 02:18:913 (1,7) - 02:43:459 (4,1) - stack off, all in one place because it’s irrelevant other than people (me) highlighting hexgrids (first 3 are only off by a pixel or two)fixed.
01:31:093 (2) - unlike the other two times this occurs, the 1 noticeably holds over this; i think you should remove this, or at least make the 1-2 jump smaller than 2-3 changed
01:33:821 (1,2,3,4,5) - definitely increase this spacing; it’s even more intense than the previous two measures because of the cymbals sure
02:48:186 (2,3) - ctrl+g on these would make it flow nicer and emphasize the 4 that's actually fucking genius
02:58:186 (2) - i would still nc here on the downbeat, because of the three strong notes on 1, 2, and 3, this is the strongest Nope, tihs NC emphasizes the 3 sounds best, other doesn't make sense
03:20:367 (3,3) - nc if you want, i think it’s good for intensity not a fan of 1-2
03:24:731 (3) - i think this should be a 1/2 beat slider, then 03:25:095 - can be clickable because it’s pretty strong I like this less dense rhythm here
03:42:549 (1,2,3,4) - hmm you’ve been following the piano pretty strictly for this section so i think you should here too fixed.
04:23:640 (2,1,1) - (and next (2)), 04:26:563 (2,1,1) - (and next (2)), 04:29:462 (2,3,4,6) - for the drums every two beats, put these in a straight line, which i think was pretty much your intention in the first place yep changed lol
also stack 04:33:829 (2,4) - like 04:32:374 (2,4) - just for aesthetics don't want that ;-;
05:09:650 (1,2,3) - nc on the 3, like 01:30:730 (4,5,1) - / 02:43:459 (4,5,1) - (also increase spacing, it’s lower than the other two) consistency °^°
05:27:109 (3) - there’s some special emphasis here on the last note, so this jump should be the biggest imono, it's the summer triangle

good luck!

newton- wrote:

hi from q

[ our story in the stars]

1. 00:14:933 (5,1) - this is the only time you use this backtrack flow thing in this section, stands out a bit too much imo after 2 measures I switch from counterclockwise to clockwise movement and this is exactly that change.
2. 00:29:110 (4,5,6,7) - might be better as something that isnt a triangle because the triangle implies that (4,5,6) is a distinct group of 3 notes which it isnt (01:41:822 (4,5,6,7) etc - same complaint here) as all notes are the same there is no distinct emphasis on 1,4,7 etc. which would happen by other triangle usage.
3. 00:35:320 (4,5) - ctrlg to make flow more intuitive? would also give sharp flow emphasis to 00:35:684 (1) - sure
4. 00:39:282 (3) - ends on p powerful vocal I think the current rhythm captures the "chi" and the piano better which builds up consistency in contrast for the next part.
5. 01:51:276 (1,2,3,4) - fix triangles I don't get what you mean
6. 01:53:822 (4) - maybe make this parallel instead of flipping it - would fit nicer with the surrounding objects imo doesn't work with the following object
7. 02:54:549 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7) - i feel like theres not anything worth emphasizing this much with the bend, maybe make the curve more smooth 02:54:913 - piano sound.
8. 03:23:276 (4,1) - in previous parts every time you overlapped sliders like this it indicated 1/4 so this might be misread as such before flow was into the slider, now it's away from the slider, I think that does the trick
9. 03:24:731 (3) - downbeat should be clickable imo I don't think so, I like the emptyness and less dense rhythm
10. 05:28:048 (1) - dude nice *bop* NOICE -> thank sdafsf ^^"

nice map, gl!

Pentori wrote:

im here
[Our Story in the Stars]
00:00:764 - the beginning could do with some light hitsounding, such as whistles on every downbeat. as of now its a little empty added a bit
00:09:479 (1,2) - no hitsounds for the entrance here? could do with drum samplesets not using drum anywhere else, added a finish though
00:15:297 (1) - the flow break feels quite expected, since all previous patterns were circular. theres some awkward linear movement going on with 00:14:751 (4,5,1) as in the previous post, I intend switching circular movement every 2 measures since this intro is 4 measures with a special ending it seemed like the best choice and that flow break is the transition between those two.
00:23:105 (5,6) - the music rests here yet u have it mapped in the same way as continuous music 00:21:651 (5,6) . perhaps u could do something like 01:35:821 (4,5) - that shows this better nice idea
00:29:837 - light hitsounding pls xd
00:39:100 (2) - should try be consistent with whether u want to map this or not. 00:36:229 - 00:37:654 - are basically the same changed
01:06:198 (1) - good spot for a finish xd oops
01:09:094 - it seems you forgot to add the x1.10 sv point here, the red line resets the sv to x1.00 causing a pretty big inconsistency compared to other kiais, since u generally stuck to x1.10 yeah hoyl wtf

01:12:912 (4) - 01:24:548 (4) - the problem with these and the others in the map, is that ur hitsounds are emphasising the music better than ur rhythms zz. should really consider making these 2 clickable objects to have them stand out more I guess after countless mentios might aswell .... (still dislike it much)
03:30:731 (3) - the 1/4 slider seems unnecessary for a calm ish piano. a circle would work better sure I guess
03:46:912 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2) - the nc spams feel a bit out of place since you normally kept your jumps in a single combo yeah wanted to change that anyways ^^"

04:24:393 - cant really agree your adaptation of rhythm in this section. you have circles like 04:24:393 (1,2,1,2,1) - that have vocals on them, but then 04:25:837 (2) - gets clicked and the strongest vocal is ignored 04:26:018 . i get ur probably try to do something unique here but it doesnt work that well cus u mix too many tracks it'd be better if u just committed to one track or had some compromise of mapping 04:26:018 - 04:28:927 - with circles as well, though that isn't great either remapped

sort the thing out in bold then call me/xexxar back

Kin wrote:

gratz! ôwô

Mir wrote:

wew another one

sdafsf wrote:

there we go!
finally!
gz!