Sonnyc wrote:

Insane.
00:53:847 (3,4,5,6,7,1) - ee looks even worse right now. High spaced 1/4 only appear at the preview section. Using this concept here is just breaking the consistency. The one I was previously asking was to give a consistent 1/4 spacing on 00:53:847 (3,4,5) as you did at 01:08:247 (3,4,5). really dont know what i was thinking when i made the change, i fixed it as it shouldve been the whole time

Also why are high diffs having such a low hp drain? the slow part from 00:44:246 - 01:13:047 is very taxing on HP, especially with HR. edit: discussed with others and changing HP values slightly for spread

1. timing is wrong... i asked a few people and we agreed on that the 13/4 time signature is definitely not correct, the 13 measures should be divided into three 3/4 measures followed by one 4/4 measure (something like this)
2. about the hitsounding... i find it kinda disconnected from the song, the claps are currently being used for both snares and kicks, it doesn't feel too good imo. other things would be that you might want to use a more suitable sound for the claps, as an actual clap doesn't fit too well with this type of music, normal-hitnormal might work better

1. i think that the main core "issue" in this map are rhythm choices, most of the times you're using super dense rhythms that doesn't go well with the background music. i'll list you some examples:
2. 00:07:218 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - sounds super overmapped tbh, there are no important sounds on 00:07:475 - and there's no reason to extend the slider imo. something similar happens on 00:07:647 - but this is even worse because such high note density kinda ruins the emphasis 00:07:732 - should be receiving. it would be a lot better if you remove 00:07:647 (5) -, so that the note receives proper emphasis
3. 00:16:647 (4,5,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - the background music is far from being that intense, there are some 1/4 beats indeed, but the way it's mapped makes them feel nonexistent because the only thing you catch when playing is a long stream. i believe that deleting 00:16:904 (2,4,4) - makes a lot more sense
4. 00:18:018 (3,5,7) - extended 1/4 sliders is not a good representation of music imo, from i can see, i guess you're trying to use the extended sliders to emphasize the kicks? problem about this is that it adds way too much density and it doesn't correctly represent the music. if your intention is to emphasize the kicks, then something like this works a lot better, not only because it's sounds better, but it also adds an extra emphasis because these sliders allows you to experiment with slider leniency
5. 00:31:389 (5) - this must be fully faded out before 00:31:903 (7) - is fully faded in (tbh i'd just convert that into a circle lol)
6. 00:32:932 (3,4,5,6,7) - it doesn't fit the song too well because you were previously following guitar, and... as there is no sound on 00:33:017 (4) - it sounds pretty bad
7. 01:11:247 (8) - not sure about how intuitive is this, although the song features tricky rhythms, i think it would be nice to use sliders for the sake of playability
8. 01:54:703 - this section is pretty hard to read because you're using the same visual concepts for different time gaps. i also think that there are some notes that could be deleted, if we pick this 01:59:160 (1,2) - , for example, you would notice that 01:59:331 (2) - is way less intense than 01:59:160 (1) -, but it feels the same when playing. i think it makes sense to delete some notes, as this section in particular is pretty calm.
9. 02:23:158 (1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1) - as the guitar sounds are fading out, you could use reverse arrow sliders in order to reflex such change, as it's now there's no contrast between volume or intensities.
10. 02:25:215 (6,7,8,9,10,11) - this could be an example of sounds that are in the music but shouldn't necessarily be mapped
11. as the music is repetitive i won't be mentioning all over again so yeah

Kagetsu wrote:

i got asked to check this, but i don't really agree with the top diff design so i'll just voice my opinion lol

[General]

1. timing is wrong... i asked a few people and we agreed on that the 13/4 time signature is definitely not correct, the 13 measures should be divided into three 3/4 measures followed by one 4/4 measure (something like this) to say its "wrong" its a bit disingenious because this is just a reduction of a compound measure and the first 3 measures are hardly 3/4 at all, this is just a different reduction that is just the same, especially since 13/4 is used elsewhere in the song. applied tho since i guess its wanted to be more reduced
2. about the hitsounding... i find it kinda disconnected from the song, the claps are currently being used for both snares and kicks, it doesn't feel too good imo. other things would be that you might want to use a more suitable sound for the claps, as an actual clap doesn't fit too well with this type of music, normal-hitnormal might work better the claps are used to accent the drums, i think its quite alright the way it is, and using hitnormal would create too much of a 1:1 expectation with the drums which i feel would undermine the hitsounding on some level, especially given the presence of ghost notes

[Bloom]

1. i think that the main core "issue" in this map are rhythm choices, most of the times you're using super dense rhythms that doesn't go well with the background music. i'll list you some examples:
2. 00:07:218 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - sounds super overmapped tbh, there are no important sounds on 00:07:475 - and there's no reason to extend the slider imo. something similar happens on 00:07:647 - but this is even worse because such high note density kinda ruins the emphasis 00:07:732 - should be receiving. it would be a lot better if you remove 00:07:647 (5) -, so that the note receives proper emphasis disagree here, the first slider is extended to accent and simplify the full pattern, it sounds much cleaner extended than without, and 00:07:647 has a part of the drum roll which would be pretty random to not map to since its mapped to elsewhere, as well, i dont see any reason that 00:07:732 should receive more emphasis than it already receives since its a weak flute note and the drums have no strong sound?
3. 00:16:647 (4,5,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - the background music is far from being that intense, there are some 1/4 beats indeed, but the way it's mapped makes them feel nonexistent because the only thing you catch when playing is a long stream. i believe that deleting 00:16:904 (2,4,4) - makes a lot more sense the entire bit here has 1/4, its a drum roll, if you cant hear it you can see it in the music video https://vimeo.com/193838741 as well, many parts of this map are rhythmically oriented to the drums given how strong and present they are compared to the wispy-ness of the guitar, flute, vocals, etc..
4. 00:18:018 (3,5,7) - extended 1/4 sliders is not a good representation of music imo, from i can see, i guess you're trying to use the extended sliders to emphasize the kicks? problem about this is that it adds way too much density and it doesn't correctly represent the music. if your intention is to emphasize the kicks, then something like this works a lot better, not only because it's sounds better, but it also adds an extra emphasis because these sliders allows you to experiment with slider leniency again, there are drum notes (snare) here, but rather than give them a circle, the kick/hi-hat combo is given a kickslider on every occurance for emphasis.
5. 00:31:389 (5) - this must be fully faded out before 00:31:903 (7) - is fully faded in (tbh i'd just convert that into a circle lol) fixed, really thought i went through and caught all of these
6. 00:32:932 (3,4,5,6,7) - it doesn't fit the song too well because you were previously following guitar, and... as there is no sound on 00:33:017 (4) - it sounds pretty bad there is a sound on 4, osu's time stretching artifacts obscure it. visible in music video and audible if you slow down the bit instead: http://vocaroo.com/i/s0PlK5LBGxLR
7. 01:11:247 (8) - not sure about how intuitive is this, although the song features tricky rhythms, i think it would be nice to use sliders for the sake of playability it's been read well in testplays tho i could get more opinions
8. 01:54:703 - this section is pretty hard to read because you're using the same visual concepts for different time gaps. if you could cite specific ones i'd appreciate it cause i tried to make them all equal. stack = 3/4 + NC, 1/1 and 1/2 are >=1.0x but <=1.5x, except when the guitar chords change where there's 1/2 stacked but not NC'd for emphasis on the guitar. i testplayed this fairly decently and players were fine with thisi also think that there are some notes that could be deleted, if we pick this 01:59:160 (1,2) - , for example, you would notice that 01:59:331 (2) - is way less intense than 01:59:160 (1) -, but it feels the same when playing. i think it makes sense to delete some notes, as this section in particular is pretty calm. i don't agree with the notion of only following the drums when its convenient, i think choosing to not map some sounds would make this bit even more confusing
9. 02:23:158 (1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1) - as the guitar sounds are fading out, you could use reverse arrow sliders in order to reflex such change, as it's now there's no contrast between volume or intensities. the guitar is 1/2 here + this bit follows the drums like this full bookmark section
10. 02:25:215 (6,7,8,9,10,11) - this could be an example of sounds that are in the music but shouldn't necessarily be mapped again i strongly disagree with the notion of oversimplifying something to this degree
11. as the music is repetitive i won't be mentioning all over again so yeah

nao can rebubble once the bold things are fixed

gl

02:10:816 (1) - this red line is unused?

Lasse wrote:

02:10:816 (1) - this red line is unused?

^ seems like it, offset and time signature/downbeat placement is the same ya

also agree with kagetsu's thing on hitsounding

top diff
00:07:219 (1,2,4,5) - think both of these would be better as 1/4 sliders cause you follow melody before and after, sudden drum rhythm felt unfitting would undermine the rhythmic complexity of the instrumentation of the song, oversimplification would completely sell out the rhythmic intensity of the song, as well, the drums are mapped rhythmically with spacing used to emphasize the melody in conjunction
at least 00:07:647 (5) - would make sense since drums are so much weaker than on 00:07:304 (2) - , just seemed really unnatural to click this
also (2) should be hitsounded with a snare both are drum rolls, just because a note is weak doesnt mean it shouldnt be mapped
00:12:704 (1,2,4,5) - ^
00:16:818 - I just can't really agree with this par. there might be sounds on some of the 1/4 ticks, but a lot of the streams seem just unfitting like 00:16:818 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - , even more so if you compare the spacing to 00:18:703 (1,2,3,4,5) - which has really audible snares both are drum rolls, one has crash cymbals as well. further, overcomplicating the usage of spacing would only hinder the map from expressing the rhythms well and feel convoluted. further, the second example has no vocals and little melodic emphasis while the first is the beginning of the chorus and carries more energy than all
main issue here are the spaced streams on barely audible 1/4 sounds (if they even exist) like 00:20:931 (1,2,3,4) - they just don't feel very fitting to me
things like the other one mentioned above or 00:22:818 (1,2,3,4,5) - are nice though not trying to be rude but the 1/4 on especially 00:20:931 are completely audible. perhaps i misinterpret what you're saying

00:17:332 (3,1,2,3) - should be more careful with autostacking fixed
also your drum things really lack hitsounding, like for the snares on 00:18:703 (1,2,3,4) - the song has so many interesting drum rhythms, which you also mapped, but your hitsounding doesn't really reflect that hitsounding all drum sounds would be completely overwhelming and distracting imo, given the dramatic rhythmic density in the music

overall I can't really agree with lots of the rhythm choices, looking at things like 00:53:847 (1,5) - being emphasized in the song but not in how you map, even if you did stacking thing. I think something like http://lasse.s-ul.eu/5EytxBk3.jpg could fit to focus the melody a bit more while keeping your 1/4s this would undermine the very tight rhythmic relationship with the rhythm choices and the song and make the relationship less 1:1
00:56:932 - similarly here something like http://lasse.s-ul.eu/tdKaYT5K.jpg could fit the make the snares stand out more instead of having multiple layers together again there's a very 1:1 relationship between the rhythms of the song and the taps / rhythms of the map that things like this would undermine
same for when both of these things occur again like 01:08:247 (1,2,3,4,5,6) -
01:10:818 - would make more sense empty or as sliderend cause blue tick after is much more important agree here

02:08:074 (1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1) - don't think this needs the nc spam, even if it uses 1/6 and 1/3, the only 1/6 snap clicking is on the sliderhead and should make rhythm clear enough to go with 3-3-3-3- ok

03:13:899 (4) - is this the only normal whistle in the whole map? sounds a bit out of place whoops

same things obviously also apply to repeated parts
[]

don't really want to qualify this, patterns are nice, but I can't agree with rhythm and hitsounding is quite lacking
maybe at least hitsounding what your 1/4s are supposed to follow could help?