congrats nold!! enjoy the post osu life
forum
S3RL feat Harri Rush - Nostalgic (Nightcore Mix) [CatchTheBe
posted
Total Posts
362
Finally this set is going to be ranked. Very good job nold! Best luck to your future life!
Congratulations Nold. Wish you all the best!
Congratulations!
You can quit now apparently.
Topic Starter
Thank you! Some facts about the SB:
1. The SB is entirely made in my university library because I do not have a PC and osu does not run properly on my Mac.
2. The SB wouldn’t have been made successful without yf_bmp's and Irrevisible's help!
1. The SB is entirely made in my university library because I do not have a PC and osu does not run properly on my Mac.
2. The SB wouldn’t have been made successful without yf_bmp's and Irrevisible's help!
gj my friend
YOOOO
Nice to see all the support on this map. Glad to see you getting this into ranked nold, thanks a lot for the map ^^
yf's Insane
01:24:729 (1,2) - Forgot to add a green line here with 0.75x SV, these sliders are unsnapped
Also:
I guess ï wasn't supported by your font
01:24:729 (1,2) - Forgot to add a green line here with 0.75x SV, these sliders are unsnapped
Also:
I guess ï wasn't supported by your font
Nice job! Wish you fantastic trip through academic life!
Disqualified for missing for a green timing point in yf’s difficulty.
Please check Monstrata’s post above. Confirmed by Mir.
Please check Monstrata’s post above. Confirmed by Mir.
While this is dq'd can we talk about posthumous? The reverse slider streams are technically justified but the flow and spacing into the sliders at the end is ridiculous. I suggest that the sliders spiral with flow from the stream, smaller jump, and are visually arranged so they aren't hidden under slider tails/reverse arrows from earlier (maybe blanketed by the stream, since it is already circular arc).
Then there is the 0-stack part... I have come to terms with the fact that the middle notes of the triples are not mapped to any sound, but even then, the choice of where triples are inserted is inconsistent with the song, and the new combo structure is inconsistent with itself.
From 24-32 seconds, triples follow the high note of the scale, or mark the descending part of the scale. This much is fine, but then the last 2 triples break the pattern, as the scale does not descend on those. 00:32:344 (1) - needs to be removed, and 00:32:960 (1) - is maybe ok, but since the note following the triple actually goes up in pitch rather than down, this deserves different treatment from the others, I would suggest move 00:33:190 (1) - off of the stack, to around 38,100.
And maybe adjust the hitsounds and combos around that, i cant even tell what you were trying to do with the combos, but it should follow a consistent pattern through the stack.
Then there is the 0-stack part... I have come to terms with the fact that the middle notes of the triples are not mapped to any sound, but even then, the choice of where triples are inserted is inconsistent with the song, and the new combo structure is inconsistent with itself.
From 24-32 seconds, triples follow the high note of the scale, or mark the descending part of the scale. This much is fine, but then the last 2 triples break the pattern, as the scale does not descend on those. 00:32:344 (1) - needs to be removed, and 00:32:960 (1) - is maybe ok, but since the note following the triple actually goes up in pitch rather than down, this deserves different treatment from the others, I would suggest move 00:33:190 (1) - off of the stack, to around 38,100.
And maybe adjust the hitsounds and combos around that, i cant even tell what you were trying to do with the combos, but it should follow a consistent pattern through the stack.
eww this isn't in loved. :/ but I already had plays and stuff :c dummy
Topic Starter
Thank you monstrata. Added a green line.
(Sorry Ascendance and Bubblun)
(Sorry Ascendance and Bubblun)
Karoo13 wrote:
While this is dq'd can we talk about posthumous? The reverse slider streams are technically justified but the flow and spacing into the sliders at the end is ridiculous. I suggest that the sliders spiral with flow from the stream, smaller jump, and are visually arranged so they aren't hidden under slider tails/reverse arrows from earlier (maybe blanketed by the stream, since it is already circular arc).The spacing in the spaced stream is not that big. Replace all reversed sliders with circles and you will see what players actually play when doing this seemingly impossible stream. When it was loved, quite a few players had FC'd this part. For the spiral slider, I am very hesitant to put it in space with the stream in question because the sound where the slider hits is sudden and does not, subjectively speaking, fits if I put it in flow. Rather, a position at which it is not quite expected where the spiral slider is (but not unreadable) suits the sound perfectly.
Then there is the 0-stack part... I have come to terms with the fact that the middle notes of the triples are not mapped to any sound, but even then, the choice of where triples are inserted is inconsistent with the song, and the new combo structure is inconsistent with itself.
From 24-32 seconds, triples follow the high note of the scale, or mark the descending part of the scale. This much is fine, but then the last 2 triples break the pattern, as the scale does not descend on those. 00:32:344 (1) - needs to be removed, and 00:32:960 (1) - is maybe ok, but since the note following the triple actually goes up in pitch rather than down, this deserves different treatment from the others, I would suggest move 00:33:190 (1) - off of the stack, to around 38,100.
And maybe adjust the hitsounds and combos around that, i cant even tell what you were trying to do with the combos, but it should follow a consistent pattern through the stack.
Since it was fixed, rebubbled!
Good luck
Good luck
While it is still in pending, is there a reason why the taiko difficulties have the 'Taiko' in their difficulty names?
Topic Starter
Gabe wrote:
While it is still in pending, is there a reason why the taiko difficulties have the 'Taiko' in their difficulty names?
It is the early naming system but has become obsolete. I include the word because I think it brings nostalgia seeing something obsolete being used again, matching the theme of the song.
Alright, all good! Thanks for the explanation.nold_1702 wrote:
It is the early naming system but has become obsolete. I include the word because I think it brings nostalgia seeing something obsolete being used again, matching the theme of the song.Gabe wrote:
While it is still in pending, is there a reason why the taiko difficulties have the 'Taiko' in their difficulty names?
Topic Starter
I made one change after Gabe’s bubble. I made the inner edge of fruit-drop-overlay.png transparent. Apart from this image, nothing in the map was changed after Gabe’s bubble. May Gabe rebubble?
rank it plz.
Awesome work on map and storyboard.
btw
Maybe it's time to uninstall osu for me.
There was no living way for sber using editor anymore since many osu sbers use programmer code to make the storyboard.
讲个搞笑的nold图都已经是last map了我还是打不过nold 1st的posthumous难度.
Awesome work on map and storyboard.
btw
Maybe it's time to uninstall osu for me.
I’m off to school soon so I’ll just rebubble instead
I will trust you on the taiko combo structure, but this part explains why the rhythm is not fine. The second to last triple 00:32:344 (1) - is unjustified in the context of the rest of the pattern, as it is the only one mapped to an ascending scale. And I would like you to consider my comment on 00:33:190 (1) -nold_1702 wrote:
The rhythm is perfectly fine.Karoo13 wrote:
From 24-32 seconds, triples follow the high note of the scale, or mark the descending part of the scale. This much is fine, but then the last 2 triples break the pattern, as the scale does not descend on those. 00:32:344 (1) - needs to be removed, and 00:32:960 (1) - is maybe ok, but since the note following the triple actually goes up in pitch rather than down, this deserves different treatment from the others, I would suggest move 00:33:190 (1) - off of the stack, to around 38,100.
Topic Starter
Karoo13 wrote:
nold_1702 wrote:
Karoo13 wrote:
From 24-32 seconds, triples follow the high note of the scale, or mark the descending part of the scale. This much is fine, but then the last 2 triples break the pattern, as the scale does not descend on those. 00:32:344 (1) - needs to be removed, and 00:32:960 (1) - is maybe ok, but since the note following the triple actually goes up in pitch rather than down, this deserves different treatment from the others, I would suggest move 00:33:190 (1) - off of the stack, to around 38,100.
The rhythm is perfectly fine.
I will trust you on the taiko combo structure, but this part explains why the rhythm is not fine. The second to last triple 00:32:344 (1) - is unjustified in the context of the rest of the pattern, as it is the only one mapped to an ascending scale. And I would like you to consider my comment on 00:33:190 (1) -
There are changes in the rhythm and that’s the reason I made it ascending instead of repeating the rhythm before otherwise players may play the same pattern with different rhythms (that’s how taiko does it as well).
Any reason for you suggestion for movig (1) to 38,100?
If you listen to the song only, and not the hitsounds you have inserted, 00:27:190 (1,1,2,3) - and 00:32:114 (1,2,1,2,1) - are exactly the same, yet mapped differently. The entire piano scale repeats itself, until 00:33:190 (1) - which is why it should be tapped the same way until that object. Since that object is where it stops repeating, I think it should be off the stack or distinguished in some other way.nold_1702 wrote:
There are changes in the rhythm and that’s the reason I made it ascending instead of repeating the rhythm before otherwise players may play the same pattern with different rhythms (that’s how taiko does it as well).
Any reason for you suggestion for movig (1) to 38,100?
I am running out of ways to rephrase this, but 00:32:344 (1) - is an error and "but in taiko it is normal to overmap and change rhythm arbitrarily" is not a good justification.
Topic Starter
Karoo13 wrote:
nold_1702 wrote:
There are changes in the rhythm and that’s the reason I made it ascending instead of repeating the rhythm before otherwise players may play the same pattern with different rhythms (that’s how taiko does it as well).
Any reason for you suggestion for movig (1) to 38,100?
If you listen to the song only, and not the hitsounds you have inserted, 00:27:190 (1,1,2,3) - and 00:32:114 (1,2,1,2,1) - are exactly the same, yet mapped differently. The entire piano scale repeats itself, until 00:33:190 (1) - which is why it should be tapped the same way until that object. Since that object is where it stops repeating, I think it should be off the stack or distinguished in some other way.
I am running out of ways to rephrase this, but 00:32:344 (1) - is an error and "but in taiko it is normal to overmap and change rhythm arbitrarily" is not a good justification.
Thank you for your suggestion. The rhythm in question is not arbitary as explained. The paino sound ends at the slider. I will take your comments into account when deciding whether or not to change the patterns in question. Thank you.
Topic Starter
24 hours have passed.
Ready when you are
gl dude xp
Topic Starter
Thank you again!
hell yea hopefulyl this time it all goes well
So whats up with the taiko custom hitsounds? Are they actually any different? I can't tell the difference between them and the default hitsounds. If they aren't custom, please remove them and change the sampleset to the default soft sample set. (I believe you were using the custom soft sampleset1). Thank you c:
Topic Starter
tatatat wrote:
So whats up with the taiko custom hitsounds? Are they actually any different? I can't tell the difference between them and the default hitsounds.
If they aren't custom, please remove them and change the sampleset to the default soft sample set. (I believe you were using the custom soft sampleset1).
Maybe a little bit too late but thank you and wish you all the best in the future!
The custom difficulty name is unrelated to the song? You can't have the naming become a way of determining the mapper.
The storyboard is really well made. However I just need to ask
It's not as if there's anything after the main SB that's worth leaving in anyway, and this is probably the source of why this map keeps crashing people's games.
While this is down I have a few other minor things to point out:
Kloyd's Extra
- 03:59:806 (1,1) - Should this not be spaced out like you did at 00:15:806 (1,1) ?
- 01:40:344 (3) - 01:41:883 (3) - 01:44:037 (3) etc - These places where the second object in a triple is using a soft sampleset sounds really weird for feedback to me, since surrounding this with objects that use the normal sampletset kinda drowns out the sound of these.
- 01:51:652 (3,4,5) - I get that your stacks are all supposed to be custom, but I think this came out in an a less than ideal way.
Storyboard
- 03:44:114 - The Bad Apple reference seems to have a noticable amount of aliasing, which is out of place when the other silhouettes in this scene have decent quality.
- 03:43:960 - There's some particles in the lower right that seems to have snuck their way in from the previous scene. Same kind of thing happens over at 02:13:883 too.
This map is actually one of the best I've seen all year, but leaving a gravity simulation at the end of the map for 11+ hours is just... yeah.
It's not as if there's anything after the main SB that's worth leaving in anyway, and this is probably the source of why this map keeps crashing people's games.
While this is down I have a few other minor things to point out:
Kloyd's Extra
- 03:59:806 (1,1) - Should this not be spaced out like you did at 00:15:806 (1,1) ?
- 01:40:344 (3) - 01:41:883 (3) - 01:44:037 (3) etc - These places where the second object in a triple is using a soft sampleset sounds really weird for feedback to me, since surrounding this with objects that use the normal sampletset kinda drowns out the sound of these.
- 01:51:652 (3,4,5) - I get that your stacks are all supposed to be custom, but I think this came out in an a less than ideal way.
Storyboard
- 03:44:114 - The Bad Apple reference seems to have a noticable amount of aliasing, which is out of place when the other silhouettes in this scene have decent quality.
- 03:43:960 - There's some particles in the lower right that seems to have snuck their way in from the previous scene. Same kind of thing happens over at 02:13:883 too.
This map is actually one of the best I've seen all year, but leaving a gravity simulation at the end of the map for 11+ hours is just... yeah.
The storyboard may cause crushes and you should fix that so it can be a nicer experience to play this map!
About the diff name, I'd like to defend for Nold since I find it valid with reasons list as follows.
Original Rule
A difficulty’s name must be unrelated to a username. Guest difficulties, however, may indicate possession with its mappers’ username or nickname. (e.g. Guest Mapper’s Insane). Words that happen to be usernames are acceptable within difficulty names as long as they relate to the song.
Reasons
0) Rule is defined as "unrelated to a username" instead of "unrelated to a user".
1) Nold has many maps that are not named after "Posthumous";
2) some other mappers also use "Posthumous" as their diff names;
Combining 1) 2), it is not fair to correlate Posthumous with the mapper, according to the philosophy of F-test.
3) Posthumous can indicate the difficulty as it is often related with death, hell, or something just like that. If it was unrankable, common diff names like "Hell" should also be considered unrankable;
4) Nold has never claimed that Posthumous is his sole diff name, and so is with mappers like Sotarks (Melancholy), CLSW (Nervous Breakdown), fort (Game Over), etc.
Conclusion
Posthumous is a valid diff name. Even though Nold uses it frequently, there does not exist a proper reason to discourage him from using this diff name. Otherwise, if the "relation" were a reason for the prevention, we would also forbid everyone to use a diff name for more than four times, and "Posthumous" would become a diff name that everyone except for Nold can employ, both of which are apparently unreasonable.
About the diff name, I'd like to defend for Nold since I find it valid with reasons list as follows.
A difficulty’s name must be unrelated to a username. Guest difficulties, however, may indicate possession with its mappers’ username or nickname. (e.g. Guest Mapper’s Insane). Words that happen to be usernames are acceptable within difficulty names as long as they relate to the song.
0) Rule is defined as "unrelated to a username" instead of "unrelated to a user".
1) Nold has many maps that are not named after "Posthumous";
2) some other mappers also use "Posthumous" as their diff names;
Combining 1) 2), it is not fair to correlate Posthumous with the mapper, according to the philosophy of F-test.
3) Posthumous can indicate the difficulty as it is often related with death, hell, or something just like that. If it was unrankable, common diff names like "Hell" should also be considered unrankable;
4) Nold has never claimed that Posthumous is his sole diff name, and so is with mappers like Sotarks (Melancholy), CLSW (Nervous Breakdown), fort (Game Over), etc.
Posthumous is a valid diff name. Even though Nold uses it frequently, there does not exist a proper reason to discourage him from using this diff name. Otherwise, if the "relation" were a reason for the prevention, we would also forbid everyone to use a diff name for more than four times, and "Posthumous" would become a diff name that everyone except for Nold can employ, both of which are apparently unreasonable.
Kuron-kun
A few additions to Mo's post:
[General]
[General]
- Might consider adding a higher volume to this section 01:05:344 - since it blends with the song a bit, specially in lower diffs, where you don't have a lot of triples to stand out. Would suggest 50% so you don't have to rework much of the volume later.
- I'm really unsure about this diff's density, specially that it's more confusing and more dense than an usual Normal. Patterns like 01:40:421 (2,3,1) - and 02:03:190 (1,2,1) - might be really confusing to new players. You're also using 3 different snaps (1/2, 1/1 and 1/4) and adding too much complexity in these rhythms isn't the best idea. I'd suggest to nerf sections where you mixed a lot of snaps/rhythms but at least consider increasing the AR to 5.
- 00:32:575 (1,2,3,1,1) - Cool section but stacking kinda makes it look REALLY messy https://i.imgur.com/NhvGUGN.png. Consider adjusting these.
- 02:32:883 (2) - More than 1 reverse in a slider is already unexpected enough but adding a circle there might be unrankable as it's covering the repeat arrow and it makes it even more unexpected. Moving this slider a bit more to the right, where 02:32:729 (1) - doesn't cover the arrow is the best idea.
- AR is way too low for diff's density... it's already confusing enough and I don't see much reasoning in lowering the AR to make it more less readable as the mapset isn't focusing in this. AR9 (or higher?) is much better.
- 00:16:960 (1,1) - I'm pretty sure you didn't want to use this kind of snap here since it's impossible to sightread it.