1. Easy (1.54 stars, 101 notes)
2. Expert (4.79 stars, 546 notes)
3. Hard (3.07 stars, 245 notes)
4. Insane (3.97 stars, 377 notes)
5. Normal (2 stars, 162 notes)

Kisses wrote:

Easy

1. Slidertickrate of 2 seems unnecessary it is necessary for the slider bounces
2. 00:09:826 (3) - Because this is the lowest diff reducing the object density could never hurt in places where appropiate. For example deleting this circle would lower the density and still follow the melody well what is problem with density, for spread this is least dense difficulty.
3. 00:12:735 (3) - ^
4. 00:40:735 (3,4,5,6) - There are sounds on every beat but this just doesn't follow the song well imo, I also feel this is inappropiate for an easy diff. Try this http://puu.sh/vqMpc/1df745b87b.jpg its intense like the isolated strong beats its supposed to mimic. I don't see how its innapropriate for easy diff since I got testplay from 2 players, 1 500k rank and 1 1mil rank and they played these just fine.
5. 00:51:280 (1) - I feel like you should mix this measure with 00:52:371 in the same spinner since they are very, very different. If you still want to keep the spinner what do you think of this position? http://puu.sh/vqMyD/5186def930.jpg they are the buildup to the drop off I don't see issue.
6. 01:33:098 (2,3,4,5) - same as 00:40:735 (3,4,5,6)

[]Only have time to mod 1 diff. Spread between normal and hard seem fine overall tho hard can get really complicated in some places. GL!

kookoo11 wrote:

from my nm q

EXPERT
00:15:280 (2) - pull this closer to 00:14:917 (1) - 's end why, its DS'd to 1.00
00:30:917 (1,2,3,4) - inconsistent distance .02 is not inconsistent.
00:32:008 (1,2,3,4) - looks more pleasing if it were mapped like 00:33:098 (1,2,3,4) - disagreed
00:40:735 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9) - make this passage softer sounding than the kiai, so like 50 or 60% its' basically the kiai, I only turned it off because of the focus on instruments and kiai restart
00:41:826 (9,1) - looks bad ;/ disagreed
00:48:008 (1) - pull this a littttle away from the 4 no, its DS'd
01:22:189 (7) - make this slider look fancier ;o, it also overlaps 01:22:917 (1) - weirdly i don't care.
01:24:371 (1,2,3,4) - same thing same thing as what???
01:31:098 (2) - overlap this better overlap is fine to me
01:33:098 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10) - softer its' basically the kiai, I only turned it off because of the focus on instruments and kiai restart
01:40:371 (1) - move this away a little like 01:38:008 (2,1) - no

"sliders don't give pp ;(" ~rank 100k

Yahuri wrote:

m4m

General
-preview point is unsnapped not unrankable
00:07:297 - the feedback here is insufficient, try raising the volume gradually. also, suggestion: gradual increase of SV here (for any diff except Easy/Normal) applied volume not sv

Normal
01:02:570 (1) - suggestion: make this slider more "weird" to match up with 01:00:388 (3) and 01:04:025 (3) since they have the same instrument for the melody the fit since they both curvy
01:04:025 (3) - red anchor doesnt line up with the beat exactly fixed
01:31:661 - if im not mistaken, this should have the soft addition, not normal you are mistaken, i spam normal whistle
01:40:388 (1) - ^ ^
01:42:570 (5,1) - this kind of looks like a really bad blanket rip, you can move the wave slider down not sure why you would think that LOL

Hard
01:04:025 (1) - i liked the slider shape change you did in Normal, it would be nice if you did it here too, the rapid pitch changes are pretty audible ???? no ? its different how sliders work in normal(and below) between hard(and above)
01:29:843 (4,1) - move so that the head and tail of 1 are equidistant from 4, looks cleaner imo this is overlapped, its clean enough how it is.

01:34:570 (1) - 01:35:297 (3) - would look better if these were the same shape imo fixed

Insane
00:08:388 - this doesn't sound like 1/4. it's 1/6 applied 1/6 to appropriate diffs
00:16:934 (4,5) - increase DS for cymbal crash? it has enough emphasis.
01:46:025 (8,1) - there's a jump here. but in the Expert diff 01:46:025 (2,3) there isn't a jump, make it consistent pls because expert diff has much more of a controlled basis, and for this spacing is relative since i stacked prior notes

Expert
00:49:752 (3,1,2,3,4,1) - dont like the shape of this stream, there's nothing that sounds too special except at 00:50:206 (1) yet theres a really sharp turn at 00:50:025 (3) shape is arbitrary because of 1/4 slider jumps working for emphasis.
01:22:206 (7) - red anchor doesn't line up exactly with the tick fix
00:11:115 (8) - ^ f ix
01:46:252 (1) - fix spinner length, extend to 01:49:115 fix

good luck~

Gabe wrote:

hi, this is a check from Not Ephemeral's Super Featured Artist Modding/Feedback Queue

general

1. clean!
2. you should consider adding some tags. for an example, since the song is from a featured artist, I'm always suggesting to add 'featured artist' in the tags.
   also, you might wanna add 'electronic video game videogame' aswell.

easy
for the first breaktime, you don't need to make it end that far, there's pretty nothing you can 'emphasize' or anything. as for the second breaktime, you can maybe do like normal and make it end at 01:15:661 - ? *or simply don't touch at the breaktime at all and leave it the way the game made it at first*

1. 00:13:115 (4,5) - over here, you can improve the rhythm a bit, by making something like this as the predominant sounds are on the red ticks in this case I did something in between what I have and what you suggested, which was making them both 3/2 sliders because I really like the second 3/2 slider where it ends, and you made a good case for having the other slider be 3/2
2. 00:45:115 (1,2,3)- (That's just my opinion, I'm not really asking you to change anything) That's pretty cool the way these are placed, however, I believe there could be an issue with the overlap of (2) over the slider (3). In this case, maybe the path might be leading to confusion, for beginner players. This is a good point, though I've gotten a couple of testplays from newer players to whom the audience of this would be. the overlapping isn't significant enough to confuse players, just the end of the first slider is partially overlapping with the body of the latter one. There is a decent balance here.
   

I am not really a big fan of the slider shapes you used for this Easy difficulty, however, it is always interesting to see. The rhythm is great also, so why not.

normal

1. 00:41:661 - A circle would be nice in this place, mainly because the previous object lands on a red tick and it will have a nice measure transition with the next object. (01:34:025 (4) - Just like you've done here? lol) I see why you would suggest this, though for me, I hear a distinct difference between 00:41:843 (5) - and 01:34:025 (4,5) - , this difference being, in the first link, the slider is supported by a sound that is not a continuation of the previous objects, so I highlighted that with a gap in rhythm, the second example is a continuation so it has the circle like you have pointed out.

hard

1. 00:06:752 (2) - I'm thinking that maybe, you can unstack this circle with the previous slider? if you decide to do this, it'll be more consistent with these objects 00:07:297 (3,4,5) -

insane

1. 01:26:206 (3) - I'm pretty sure the head of this slider should have a normal sampleset instead of a drum. reference: 00:33:843 (3) -
2. 01:39:479 (1) - there shouldn't be a new combo here. just look at this object for a reference: 01:27:843 (4) -
3. 01:42:206 (3) - this circle should have a normal sampleset as well, to keep the consistency within your previous object.
4. 01:42:388 (1) - there shouldn't be a new combo here, same reason as mentioned earlier.

expert

1. 00:14:843 (12) - to make sure the flow is great enough with the previous and the next objects, maybe you can move it to x:12 y:192?
2. 01:42:206 (1) - normal sampleset instead of drum?

woo

Pentori wrote:

wow!
[General]
countdown seems a bit pointless, theres nothing really that leads into the song I like it because there isn't something before the song and it kind of fits the genre/theme

[Expert]
00:09:661 (8,9) - 00:12:570 (8,9) - etc. i'd aim to put more spacing on these, the gaps feel a lot more like 3/4 gaps rather than 1/2 because of what actually gets clicked and this kinda disrupts the flow from the rhythms beforehand 00:08:752 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7) . also this seperates it from similar visual patterns u used later on 00:23:661 (4,5) . http://puu.sh/w7b8x/4906dc476f.jpg could work The reason these are so linear and evenly spaced is to match previous doubles, its supposed to have a somewhat jarring space in between them similar to the doubles, which the rhythm gap with spacing emphasizes.
01:03:661 (1) - would look a lot nicer if u angled this down or something subjective (I like it how it is )

[Insane]
00:09:661 (6,7) - same thing about these patterns as mentioned in expert. i guess ctrl g'ing 00:09:934 (7) - would work in these cases same comment as expert.
00:21:115 (4) - 00:26:934 (4) - perhaps use a 1/4 reverses here for the blue tick good idea.

definitely wouldve been nice to see more rhythm variation in the kiais that further sets it apart from sections like 00:18:934 . as of now the rhythms feel very repetitive to me they seem fairly different from that section due to the 1/2 rhythm used to follow the melody, if you have some better suggestions for how to change it I'm open to ideas.

[Hard]
00:29:843 (5) - this ignores too many sounds imo and i dont think it needs to considering you have similar patterns mapped later on 00:40:752 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7) . http://puu.sh/w7cRH/6c9134a9fb.jpg would workthere is a different of sounds, the melody stops at the link you provided and there is some weird other sound, my differentiation is supposed to highlight this.
00:33:479 (1,2) - seems kinda undermapped considering the music is doing more than normal here. http://puu.sh/w7cyE/ad93da51c9.jpg couple of things, I wanted to make sure this was noticably different than the parts before it, also because a hard player follows the slider all the way through and the angle these sliders at are just off linear I think it has a nice effect and the movement follows the rhythm appropriately.

00:52:388 (1,2) - should avoid the consecutive 1/2s, replacing these with a slider would work better to balance this out and have all the emphasis on 00:53:115 (4,5,6,7,1) I made some 1/2 sliders in places that follow the melody better.

[Normal]
01:34:025 (4) - 01:45:661 (5) - dont think u need the circles. consistency with 00:41:661 I made a similar comment prior: I think 00:41:843 (5) - is different because there is a lack of melody line here so I tried to highlight this with such inconsistency pointed out.

Pentori wrote:

tag bor I don't need too because when you search bor this still comes up because of borborygmos.

expert
00:08:691 (6,1,2,3) - the transition is kinda super difficult now lol. maybe make 00:08:752 (1,2,3) - a slider so it isn't as harsh I did realize this when making it, though I still found it quite appropriate and didn't want to change the integrity of 00:08:752 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9) -

insane
i guess i mushed two comments together. basically what i meant was your rhythms in kiai are all mostly repetitions of this pattern 00:30:843 (2,3) - making it seemingly easier than sections like 00:18:934 - as the earlier section requires more reading. i get that the rhythms in the kiai are more repetitive, but i think u could do more rhythm-wise to make it more interesting eg. http://puu.sh/w7AHU/1a9d65b953.jpg

not rly a necessity to change but something to think about I tried a extending a couple more sliders and then having a repeat thrown in there also.
[]
also u should copy ur hitsounds again, some things you changed but forgot to re-hitsound u rite i did

call me bak for quali

UndeadCapulet wrote:

Super Featured Artist Qualify

Sonnyc wrote:

General.
I see countdowns are setted and was discussed before the qualification but imo the usage wasn't really perfectly great in this case imo. To start with, due to the lack of time, "are you ready?" part just suddenly pops out wihtout the usual fade it effect. This means, the countdown effect was broken in the current usage which could've been fixed through setting an audio lead-in or adding some extra mute section in the mp3 file. Also there wasn't really musical support along this count down imo, but well this point is subjective afterall. Removing it would work better personally, but if you insist to use, I think you should make some adjustment to make the countdown effect fully work. tried to fix?

Normal.
01:21:479 (4) - SV change happens here, and other higher diffs have a new combo here. Wouldn't adding one here work better for consistencies and indicating the musical change? fix

Hard.
00:08:752 ~ 00:14:025 - So, I'm having trouble in understanding the rhythm concepts you were expressing here. The biggest difference in this part with the higher diffs was the expression of 00:09:297. None of the higher ones are having an rhythmic expression there, but hard is expressing that part as a slider tail while 00:09:388 being a blank. Not sure if the intentions were to simplifiy rhythms or not, but considering the way you've composed at 00:40:752 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7) etc, I'm pretty sure a rhythm fitting the stronger beats of the song could be possible enough and it's simple anyways. Please let me know if I'm missing some point. these are quite different, the part I'm making clickable in the first section is the bass or kick part because its the most prominent, The second part has the beep beep thing most prominent so those are prioritized.

Insane.
Overall, I don't really see the difference of spacing concepts when it comes to 1/4 circles after sliders and some regular 1/2 spacings. Things like 00:19:661 (4,5,6,7) for example, (4,5) is a 1/4 spacing after the slider while (6,7) is 1/2 and the spacing concpet of both rhythms were the same. I see the rhythmic context of 1/4 spacings happening after sliders and 1/2 spacings happening after circles, they kinda contradict with the concepts of 00:20:661 (2,3,4) - 00:27:661 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7) - 01:04:025 (1,2,3,4) - which felt like a design error.
The high ar makes thing readable enough, but in terms of design itself, it wasn't really telling the rhythmic difference by the spacing concept which didn't felt good. If you can show some spacing difference based on the rhythms from the beginning as the way you've done at expert, it would give a better structure in differentiating different aspects of the map better imo. you noted there will never be a 1/4 gap between circles that is spaced like a 1/2 gap, which is correct, then there is a tossup between whether or not the 1/2 spaced gap after a 1/2 hold slider is either rhythmically 1/4 or 1/2, if I am mistake by your comment please correct me. I'm also fairly sure there is no 1/4 gap between 2 sliders that doesn't look like a 1/2 gap ever, so its clear to see why those are not an issue. I use this to create the spacing ambiguity you speak of with the 1/4 and 1/2 spacing looking a little confusing at points like 00:20:752 (3,4) - . Because of the 1/2 spacing being set between sliders, this allows for gaps like this to exist and be readable.

Expert.
Insane and Expert has same the ar and od setting. While this is fine as it is, mind giving a difference to show some difficulty variance? optional. I discussed this with pentori IRC and I decided to change the HP since it was also the same as the insane
00:41:843 (9,1) - Oh no. The slider of (9) completely hides up (1) without enough time between, which doesn't really give a clue that (1) is a slider or something. Well at least it isn't completely overlapped each other, but room of improvement is quite obvious imo. this is incorrect, refer to lasse's post, if there is further feedback required please state so.
01:31:934 (4) - There is no clear beat existing here in the song but it was expressed as the same with 01:31:661 (1,2,3). This feels to be overmapped. there is a pitch change on this beat, since its roughly a 1/4 track it would make sense to include this beat.

Cool to see a beatmap from the featured artist, yet I think you could consider these points.

Desperate-kun wrote:

I agree completely with Sonnyc's comments, especially the one about 1/4 and 1/2-spacings in Insane. I think that spacing 1/4 after sliders very similar to general 1/2 can work fine in many maps, but here it's not the case. I'll try to explain a bit more clearly why.
00:33:479 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7) - What these (and many other similar patterns) achieve is emphasis on the white tick beats due to the spacing. Even though the jump is between the sliders and the circle on the blue tick, it still stresses mainly the white ticks because the movement is similar to the movement in 1/2 jump patterns (atleast if the player snaps a lot). This emphasis fits very well since it puts stress on the strong beats of the song here, being the melody. However, right after that you put a pattern like this 00:34:934 (1,2,3,4,5) - which has the same melody sounds than the part before, but now on every half beat (and not significantly less strong). The only way to emphasize these beats as strongly as the previous ones (without changing the rhythm) would be to put jumps here, since 1/2-spacings of this distance feel much less strong than the 1/4-jumps after sliders you've used before. The current pattern doesn't force the player to snap to these beats as fast as the previous patterns did, leading to an underwhelming feeling while clicking these circles.
What I would recommend to fix this issue is simply putting 1/2-jumps for parts like these 00:34:934 (1,2,3,4,5) - 00:46:570 (1,2,3,4,5) - etc. or reducing the 1/4-spacings after sliders that are used throughout the map.

so i increase spacing

Here are some further points I'd like to throw into the discussion:

Hard

00:05:843 (1,2) - The spacing between these reads like 1/1 to me due to 00:04:388 (3,4) - having a very similar visual distance. Maybe you could shorten this spacing? fix?

Insane

Overall, it strikes me as odd how low spacing you're using for parts like 00:[/color]08:752 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7) - , 00:40:752 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7) - etc. The song makes these parts stick out a lot due to the strong sounds with same pitch on every note, making them feel a lot more sharp. With how low your current spacing for these is, there isn't much movement here so they feel underwhelming compared to the rest of the map. the angle change provided here requires a decent amount of control for the players at this level, which would create the emphasis you might find
00:17:297 (5) - This beat doesn't feel emphasized enough due to the low spacing after 00:16:934 (4) - compared to the previous jump. Place this circle somewhere more far away from (4)? its naturally emphasized because its the last note and then there is a spinner afterwards. so the player will either stop and hold on that place for a really small time, though longer than normal, or still hold and go for spinner.
00:26:934 (4,5,6) - This pattern is the only time you're using such a sharp angle for 1/4-notes like that. It doesn't have an influence on the gameplay in this case but it looks out of place aesthetically. aesthetically it looks good to me

Expert

This has mostly similar problems to Insane. 00:08:752 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9) - etc, these parts feel similarly underwhelming to me, but there's also some notes within the other sections fo the map that could get some more spacing emphasis I there is a difference of approach here, so I think I gave each little block uniqueness which you may call emphasis by doing a couple of things, 1. the angle you must move between the notes of the block is different from the angle you must do between them 2. rhythm gap, which is more of a natural break in continuity of player input.
00:24:388 - The beat suddenly breaks and you have this very strong sound effect (not sure what it's called) so I'd like to see a jump towards this note. as of right now what happens with this note is a reduction in note density and cursor pacing, which both differ from what is going on, (plus with the visual empahsis it does. with the wiggles)
01:45:843 (1,2,3) - The same applies for these notes which have a cymbal sound on each. similar comment as above though these are more stressed.

I really hope you can look into these points.

Sonnyc wrote:

insane.
"I use this to create the spacing ambiguity you speak of with the 1/4 and 1/2 spacing looking a little confusing at points like 00:20:752 (3,4) - ." // and can I ask the reason for your decision about this ambiguity to start with? Thanks to your explanation, I've understood that the rhythm transtition between 1/2 and 1/4 happens in sliders and no 1/2 circles were spaced in that way. Just clarifying the reason of this design would be enough for now. The reason for the ambiguity is just for the sake of having it as a difficulty element for spread so the concepts in the extra are much more approachable. (those concepts being the slider-stream things and the similar ambiguity)

expert.
00:41:843 (9,1) - Well I think you can still make some improvement on this imo. The explanation Lasse provided has its timeline at 00:42:115 which is only 1/4 before (1). Considering the approach circle of (1) gets visible since around 00:41:752, giving only 100ms to understand 'this is a slider' feels way too short which I considered an unfair gameplay design. Maybe you can change the placement more in a way to clearly indicate that (1) is a slider. Following image is just a rough example.
What lasse explained was meh, basically players read approach circles, and the head of the slider's approach circle starts to appear 00:41:661 - at this time. This means an object that would exist 00:42:297 - would have an approach circle appearing at 00:41:752 - because there is no approach circle the player assumes it is a slider. also note the tail is still visible from 00:41:661 - (even if it is this arbitrarily small amount) the player can read this object. And yes, players read ahead.

Other than these, I'm pretty fine with the explanation existing.