-Mo-d queue thing
..!
- 00:18:382 (1) - In this section you're leaving a 2/3 gap before every NC, except here. I think it would look less out of place if this wasn't a NC in my opinion.
- 00:35:915 (2,3,4) - This has a weird overlap from the stacking when in game.
- 00:41:943 (4,1) - I don't feel it's appropriate to stack this since killing the momentum seems pretty out of place with how you've mapped this section so far.
- 00:44:135 (9,10,11) - I'd shorten this spacing to look like 00:44:409 (12,13,14) so it's easier to read as a triple (or if you want it to be difficult to read, make that latter triple spaced the same).
- 00:57:422 (1,2) - It seems more appropriate to keep the flow moving rather than stacking these to be honest, since the music doesn't really change too much. Stacking this below 00:57:148 (5) would be cool.
- 01:03:176 (2) - Covering the reverse arrow like this is against the ranking criteria rules now.
- 01:25:778 (7) - NC here too.
- 01:37:833 (1,3) - Another unrankable stack.
- 01:47:970 (1) - Yeah.
- 02:05:025 (1,2,3,4) - This sort of rhythm is already very hard to predict after all the rhythm changes that have been happening here. I would make these sliders so that the rhythm is easier to follow, or at least make overlap these to indicate that the rhythm is changing again.
- 02:17:558 (10) - The flow is already very hard to follow, so I would rather this be more forgiving in the reading too by unstacking this.
- 02:20:641 (2,4) - Unrankable stack.
- 02:25:367 (3,5,6,7,8,9,1) - This also just looks really cluttered and I don't think many players will find deciphering this fun. The flow overall could be considered pretty uncomfortable too because of the speed changes required to hit 8-9-1.
- 02:26:189 (1,1) - You might aswell avoid this overlap.
- 02:30:195 (2,3,4,5,6,7) - I would space the pairs (2,3 ; 4,5 ; 6,7) out further so that the flow is a bit easier to read.
- 02:42:421 (9,1,2) - This is pretty confusing since the 1-2 stack makes it look like the 1/4 rhythm is played from the 9 rather than there being a seperate two notes beneath this. Same for the other places in this section too.
- 02:50:024 (3,4,5) - I'd reduce this spacing either further to indicate the 1/6 better.
- 03:33:586 (5) - It makes more sense to end the slider on 03:36:051 to me.
- 04:29:784 (2,3) - I'd say you might aswell avoid the overlapping with the slider bodies.
- 04:43:756 (3) - The hitsounds on this is too quiet compared to the other notes around it so the feedback from it is very minimal.
- Silencing the slider bodies would be worth it for places like 05:49:739 in my opinion.
..!
- 00:18:382 (1) - In this section you're leaving a 2/3 gap before every NC, except here. I think it would look less out of place if this wasn't a NC in my opinion.
- 00:35:915 (2,3,4) - This has a weird overlap from the stacking when in game.
- 00:41:943 (4,1) - I don't feel it's appropriate to stack this since killing the momentum seems pretty out of place with how you've mapped this section so far.
- 00:44:135 (9,10,11) - I'd shorten this spacing to look like 00:44:409 (12,13,14) so it's easier to read as a triple (or if you want it to be difficult to read, make that latter triple spaced the same).
- 00:57:422 (1,2) - It seems more appropriate to keep the flow moving rather than stacking these to be honest, since the music doesn't really change too much. Stacking this below 00:57:148 (5) would be cool.
- 01:03:176 (2) - Covering the reverse arrow like this is against the ranking criteria rules now.
- 01:19:203 (7) - I think the NC is supposed to be here.Ranking Critera wrote:
Reverse arrows on sliders must not be completely visually obstructed by other hitobjects with the default or beatmap-specific skin. Covering up reverse arrows on sliders can result in sliders being ambiguous to read.
- 01:25:778 (7) - NC here too.
- 01:37:833 (1,3) - Another unrankable stack.
- 01:47:970 (1) - Yeah.
- 02:05:025 (1,2,3,4) - This sort of rhythm is already very hard to predict after all the rhythm changes that have been happening here. I would make these sliders so that the rhythm is easier to follow, or at least make overlap these to indicate that the rhythm is changing again.
- 02:17:558 (10) - The flow is already very hard to follow, so I would rather this be more forgiving in the reading too by unstacking this.
- 02:20:641 (2,4) - Unrankable stack.
- 02:22:079 (2,3,4,5,6,7) - As before, the flow is already difficult to follow so I wouldn't make this so cluttered.Ranking Criteria wrote:
Every slider must have a clear and visible path to follow from start to end. Sliders which overlap themselves in a way that makes any section unreadable or ambiguous cannot be used, such as burai sliders and hold sliders without straightforward slider borders. When perfectly overlapping two slider bodies, the first slider must be fully faded out before the second slider is fully faded in.
- 02:25:367 (3,5,6,7,8,9,1) - This also just looks really cluttered and I don't think many players will find deciphering this fun. The flow overall could be considered pretty uncomfortable too because of the speed changes required to hit 8-9-1.
- 02:26:189 (1,1) - You might aswell avoid this overlap.
- 02:30:195 (2,3,4,5,6,7) - I would space the pairs (2,3 ; 4,5 ; 6,7) out further so that the flow is a bit easier to read.
- 02:42:421 (9,1,2) - This is pretty confusing since the 1-2 stack makes it look like the 1/4 rhythm is played from the 9 rather than there being a seperate two notes beneath this. Same for the other places in this section too.
- 02:50:024 (3,4,5) - I'd reduce this spacing either further to indicate the 1/6 better.
- 03:33:586 (5) - It makes more sense to end the slider on 03:36:051 to me.
- 04:29:784 (2,3) - I'd say you might aswell avoid the overlapping with the slider bodies.
- 04:43:756 (3) - The hitsounds on this is too quiet compared to the other notes around it so the feedback from it is very minimal.
- Silencing the slider bodies would be worth it for places like 05:49:739 in my opinion.