1. Shroud (4.87 stars, 1168 notes)

Halfslashed wrote:

Separated by who mapped what.

[General]
00:16:744 - It sounds to me that the time signature for this section is 3/4 with some metronome resets at places like 00:21:976 - 00:22:325, and your NCing also seems to agree with that. I'm not entirely sure on this though, so please seek out some additional opinions for this. My personal philosophy regarding 3/4 vs 4/4 metronomes is this: "If it sounds like it could be 3/4, but still fits a 4/4 structure (e.g. it uses 4 repeats of 3 instead of 3 repeats of 4) then fuck it, leave it alone." This section fits that philosophy to a T.

[Mir]
00:00:000 (1) - I might be deaf, but I can't hear anything here, and I hear the sound starting instead on 00:00:348. Additionally, i'd suggest a slower SV here for some contrast with 00:03:023 (1) - which has a more prominent sound. Check your audio settings. It absolutely starts from 00.
00:09:186 (2,3,4) - Maybe you could experiment with some sort of decreasing SV here, since the pitches are decreasing here.
00:11:162 (1) - I'm not the greatest fan of this, since though it does capture the increasing intensity here, it just doesn't have the same effect that continuing the pattern at 00:09:186 (2,3,4) would.
00:17:790 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - I suggest making these three 1/2 sliders to have a smoother progression from 00:16:744 (1,2) to 00:18:837 (1,2,3,4,5,6). It seems like a big jump from the previous pattern as is, though it does stress the following measure more.
00:21:279 (3,1) - I don't really see why this deserves the spacing increase when there is no difference here than 00:18:837 (1,2,3,4,5,6), at least in terms of what you're following.
00:57:209 (1) - Seems like quite a weak beat that you skipped before at places like 00:48:837. Consider removing this.
01:23:721 (1,2,3,4) - It seems like you have a directly contradicting movement concept from what Shiirn does for this at 04:00:001 (1,2,3,4). His emphasis for the bass drums come from anti jumps while your emphasis comes from jumps. Additionally, what you have here adds a ton of stress to 3 due to the anti jump + direction change. I suggest trying to use movement similar to what Shiirn did in order to avoid disproportionate emphasis on beats you don't want to stress.
01:26:512 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2) - Love it.
01:28:605 (1) - Holds for wubs this strong are kind of lame, I suggest an SV increase to have some more movement here.
01:52:151 (1,1) - Your slow slider combined with the low spacing to it takes away a lot of stress from the otherwise strong beat on 01:52:674 (1). I suggest increasing spacing and having the player pull off the slider earlier. I'd probably do something along these lines but you can probably find something better.
01:53:634 (1) - Kinda similar to the above, but i'd do something like this to add some more emphasis to 01:54:070 (2). Rip your aesthetics though.
01:54:331 (5,1) - I'd suggest incorporating something similar to what you did with 01:59:912 (5,1) here for some emphasis on this strong beat.
02:53:721 (1) - This slider stands out quite a bit for a sound that isn't that special, since you used nice curvy shapes earlier in this section.
02:56:163 (1) - I hate spinners like this, since the sound is decreasing but the spinner causes increased stress on the movement. I'd suggest a slider that has higher SV that increases in curvature (as the player follows the slider they have to move less), then mapping the decreasing intensity wubs or whatever they are.
03:13:256 (1,2) - This is legit amazing.

[Shiirn]
00:29:302 (3,1) - Seems to be the only set of 3 that doesn't have a spacing increase between them. A solution to this would be Ctrl+G with 00:28:953 (1,3), but you might still want to keep the movement concept between 00:28:779 (2,1) - 00:30:349 (3,1) - . I see what you're saying, but these sets of 3s have a pattern to their movement, the point of the section is to have angular movements change on the rhythm, not necessarily the spacing. That said, if anything springs to mind i'll be modifying it.
00:35:930 (3,1) - Yeah i'm not really seeing the need for this spacing increase compared to 00:33:837 (3,4) . Seems like a Ctrl+G would fix this so i'd like to know your reasoning for this. Again, this is the change in movement more than the spacing. At this speed, the spacing hardly constitutes a difficult jump. The point of the section is to have the player "feel" the difference in movement/pattern every 3 or 6 beats, be it via spacing, movement changes, or both. This one does both. And it fits with the pattern of 6 that was there before. Again, hat said, if anything springs to mind i'll be modifying it.
00:42:558 (3,4) - Here's a pitch increase you didn't do a spacing increase for. Yeah i actually noticed that the pitch does spike here but I felt it would ruin the "downup" (the buildup going down? i'm good at names) to do the usual momentum/spacing changes.
02:15:000 (2) - Honestly, this slider made my day, I love it. thx
03:32:093 - I'd suggest increasing the rhythm density gradually, since your spacing indicates that the song is increasing in intensity, but its a bit too subtle of an effect imo, which makes the transition to 03:43:256 seem a bit large. I'll think about it some more over time.

A lot of the mod is just suggestions on incorporating some more movement concepts into the map, so I'd suggest discussing any changes you're interested in applying with each other before applying them.

Good luck!

Halfslashed wrote:

Separated by who mapped what.
[Mir]
00:00:000 (1) - I might be deaf, but I can't hear anything here, and I hear the sound starting instead on 00:00:348. Additionally, i'd suggest a slower SV here for some contrast with 00:03:023 (1) - which has a more prominent sound.
00:09:186 (2,3,4) - Maybe you could experiment with some sort of decreasing SV here, since the pitches are decreasing here. - cool idea
00:11:162 (1) - I'm not the greatest fan of this, since though it does capture the increasing intensity here, it just doesn't have the same effect that continuing the pattern at 00:09:186 (2,3,4) would. - I do agree but snapping this would be UGHHHH, as much as I wanted to, I decided a spinner would be better since the
00:17:790 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - I suggest making these three 1/2 sliders to have a smoother progression from 00:16:744 (1,2) to 00:18:837 (1,2,3,4,5,6). It seems like a big jump from the previous pattern as is, though it does stress the following measure more. - the revereses are there to solidify rhythm and then you're on your own to acc this, I think making 1/2 sliders would be too smooth for my tastes
00:21:279 (3,1) - I don't really see why this deserves the spacing increase when there is no difference here than 00:18:837 (1,2,3,4,5,6), at least in terms of what you're following. - the beat structure actually switches to 1,2,3,1,2,3 and each 1 is stressed more imo
00:57:209 (1) - Seems like quite a weak beat that you skipped before at places like 00:48:837. Consider removing this. - yeah
01:23:721 (1,2,3,4) - It seems like you have a directly contradicting movement concept from what Shiirn does for this at 04:00:001 (1,2,3,4). His emphasis for the bass drums come from anti jumps while your emphasis comes from jumps. Additionally, what you have here adds a ton of stress to 3 due to the anti jump + direction change. I suggest trying to use movement similar to what Shiirn did in order to avoid disproportionate emphasis on beats you don't want to stress. - we discussed this and decided that since it's a collab, it makes sense to have these emphasized in our own individual ways. The song also starts of relatively tame and gets weirder over time so the emphasis and whatnot does as well
01:26:512 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2) - Love it. - Love you.
01:28:605 (1) - Holds for wubs this strong are kind of lame, I suggest an SV increase to have some more movement here. - agreed
01:52:151 (1,1) - Your slow slider combined with the low spacing to it takes away a lot of stress from the otherwise strong beat on 01:52:674 (1). I suggest increasing spacing and having the player pull off the slider earlier. I'd probably do something along these lines but you can probably find something better. - i just moved the thing
01:53:634 (1) - Kinda similar to the above, but i'd do something like this to add some more emphasis to 01:54:070 (2). Rip your aesthetics though. - tbh just the stream makes enough emphasis through the clicking for me
01:54:331 (5,1) - I'd suggest incorporating something similar to what you did with 01:59:912 (5,1) here for some emphasis on this strong beat. - yep
02:53:721 (1) - This slider stands out quite a bit for a sound that isn't that special, since you used nice curvy shapes earlier in this section. - yeah
02:56:163 (1) - I hate spinners like this, since the sound is decreasing but the spinner causes increased stress on the movement. I'd suggest a slider that has higher SV that increases in curvature (as the player follows the slider they have to move less), then mapping the decreasing intensity wubs or whatever they are. - I really can't do anything about this, the snapping goes up and it would feel like I'm only mapping the increase in pitch, but a spinner maps everything, which is why it's a double-edged sword in this case imo. I'd rather keep it
03:13:256 (1,2) - This is legit amazing. - thank you sir <3

A lot of the mod is just suggestions on incorporating some more movement concepts into the map, so I'd suggest discussing any changes you're interested in applying with each other before applying them.

Good luck!

Anxient wrote:

False Noise, how appropriate

Shroud

01:45:698 (2) - ctrl g. from my little understanding on how the map actually works, every pattern so far has flowed(or played) into each other rather comfortably. i feel like this break felt out of place. ctrl g would make it the same as the rest of the map, unless theres a reason why this is out of place? This is consistent to how every other one of these pairs are mapped, even if the motion before them doesn't have a fixed angle or style. I think they're fine as-is, but if its mentioned again i can change it.

01:53:459 (2) - ctrl g this as well. i has regressed into my 2013 modding form. i feel like it would be better if you maintained the 01:53:023 (1,2,1,2) - circular movement, instead of having it change, even though 01:53:459 - has a distinct sound. changing the slider form from jagged to smooth curve is enough imo. As it stands this jerking change in direction atually is consistent with how these noises are mapped every time.

02:56:163 (1) - i feel like you could do something for fancy than just this. ehhhhhhhhh

03:03:663 (4) - i dont think you should give this much distance when the sound is this much weaker than 03:03:140 (1,2) - this. ctrl g'ing this would make it more reasonable imo. The noise from 1->2 is actually consistent with how the others are spaced (03:02:093 (1,2,1,2) - ) which is what is important. The change in spacing helps emphasize that they are now on-beat 1/4 sliders, along with the additional click.

03:10:640 (3,2) - something something blanket fix

03:29:302 - i think you should map this the same way you mapped this 03:25:116 (1,2,1) - you even did the same later on 03:30:698 (1,2,1) - yeah idk if it's not apparent but i stuck with the 3-beat rhythms the entire time those chimes actually don't mean shit LOL i don't really see any way to make that chime clickable without completely restructuring the entire section

04:00:524 (4,1,4,1,4,1,4,1) - idk if its just me, but the transition to the next pattern is really weak imo. maybe make it more impactful? Part of the entire point of these patterns is the lack of power between 1->2s and 4->1s, which make the 2,3,4 patterns that much more of a focus.

04:26:164 (1,2,3) - call me crazy, but i think its better if you made these jagged sliders instead. fits better with the whatever-that-sound-is. ,makes sense

04:29:739 (2) - ok this one again. this has to be intentional. maybe make it follow the same circular movement as 04:29:303 (1,2) - ? ctrl+g pls Again, this is specifically for the jerking change in movement. The exact amount varies, but every time it's a flowbreaker.

04:48:751 - i really expected something here lol the first section didnt have anything either, but having an errant clickthere is wierd. ill think about it

how do you even map this

sdafsf wrote:

[ Insane]

1. 00:18:837 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - what is this shape. it looks pretty bad. it looks like some kind of weird emphesis on 6 but 5 is the only one that would be reasonable to emphesise kind of an awkward shape that just got missed, it's a flat set of 6 now.
2. 01:37:674 (1,3) - these are kinda close to each other doesnt look very nice ok
3. 01:51:105 (4) - this one is mistimed it starts too early This is for playability rather than 25% speed precision
4. 01:50:756 (2) - ^ ^
5. 02:04:360 (2,3,4,5) - move it odwn a bit so 2 doesnt overlap with 02:03:924 (2) - what if i said i don't hate overlaps like this when its fairly consistent?
6. 02:32:529 (4,1) - pretty cluttered here. at least find room for the head of 1 The click pattern is consistent and the clutter is part of the purpose of these patterns.
7. 02:32:529 (4,1) - dont wanna blanket mod but this is pretty badly blanketed i assume you linked the wrong set of objects but at the same time: any blanket that is obviously off is probably intentional
8. 03:29:302 - why not map this sound? you did here 03:26:512 - (and everywhere else) Actually, I didn't. The sliders follow a very predictable pattern completely unrelated to that chime. 's the chime's fault for being off-key :eyes:
9. 04:04:187 (1) - move this slider down a bit for less clutter sure i guess, i guess its barely touching the other combo

edgy. i think it's rather tastefully plain for a neurofunk map

Okorin wrote:

does hp 5 break anything drain wise? most of the map is awfully spampassable FUCK HP DRAIN IT'S A SHITTY MECHANIC what do u want it at i don't care lol 7? fuck it 7 it is

01:15:275 (1) - and the other one: should maybe do the same as 00:43:953 (1) - and be somehow extended to something no wait its timing is kinda blocking that or what ? The timing is really blocking it as it's a mere 20BPM and even a 1/16 would end a full comparative 1/2 earlier at 172 bpm, i can't shorten it without it being like 1/64 or something which is unrankable no? I can do it but I don't want to do it if its unrankable

01:28:605 (1) - might need different snapping, 3/8 sounds more accurate to me A recurring theme of this map is that we're just going with 1/3 or 1/6 for more even representation rather than being 100% accurate at 25% playback speed. It doesn't need to be exactly right as long as it feels right and fits the structure of the music
01:48:489 (1) - should feel more like a streamjump in accordance with the rest of patterns like it Moved slightly
01:50:756 (2,4) - seem incredibly off timingwise Again, it's made to be playable rather than perfect. This plays far better than being exact (I tried both with playtests, this has almost no sliderbreaks)
01:51:628 - mir's version of this part looks more aesthetic than shiirn's especially in regards to slidershapes and i dunno if this is intended irreconcilable differences xddddddd

02:04:360 (2,3,4) - rhythm is out of line with what you usually do for these i mean shiirn just repeats doesnt make it any less unfitting in comparison to your other 1/4 streams these happen consistently and exactly, specifically because of an additional drum at 02:04:448 - . If it's really necessary, I will change it with Mir's approval, but it boils down to choice here.

02:20:145 (5,6) - 02:25:727 (5) - and others suddenly switches layer and idk why, more reasonable rhythm would be http://i.imgur.com/tCElv2y.png I did a lot of thinking about these patterns, and basically what I came down to was that in this section of the music, False Noise has the same "style" of noise (4 windy noises) in two seperate patterns - one that is bluetick, bluetick, bluetick, bluetick, the other bluetick, bluetick, bluetick, slightly later but not white tick. Both patterns have a seperate instrument butt in and change the style, namely 02:20:320 (6) - . Generally speaking, every single one of these noises is mapped with a full 1/4 slider with the rotational movement. But it's next to impossible to have the second variation have a "slider" still represent the same identical sound and still have a slider start on the interjecting noise. So, given the options, I decided to have the second variation play exactly the same as the first, which, while not perfectly accurate, is very hard to notice at 100% speed and actually makes it play better in general due to the already-awkward difficulty of playing such an offbeat section. This is probably the only part of the map that I really feel like I shouldn't back down on; as I spent a lot of time judging all possible choices including completely changing up the style of movement/pattern choice and this is what i feel is the best result. It's not perfect, but a perfect solution doesn't exist due to the limitations this game has.

03:00:436 (2) - begin and end of this should to be more clearly apart so that direction of it is readable without snaking nonsense sure thing

03:10:116 (1,2) - sesign wise this is like the only time this happens with a break or non object after and it just looks incredibly lol true, i noticed that but didn't care, if it's that noticeable ill change it

03:51:555 (1) - that this is turning around midslider isnt too readable judging by sliderborders, i think this needs more clarity it has more clarity now

04:33:489 (1,2,3) - 04:34:885 (1,2,1,2) - 04:39:071 (1,2,3,1) - while this is essentially doing similar patterns to mir all part long these patterns are using way more harsh angles than mir's do (mostly related to how in mirs part sliders ere pointing towards the next objects to play usually, while shiirn's require you to do rapid back forths or just linear movement thoughtout something which may be unintentionally harder to execute This was actually intentional. Mir's was far more natural to allow for players to get used to the rhythms, mine introduces more advanced movements while retaining an identical rhythm.

04:46:047 (1,2,1,2) - clutter reading spike which doesn't seem to have any reason for it looking at what mir did for this, especially 04:46:396 (1) - is way more hidden this time around changed

04:50:408 (2) - seems early I agree but mir thinks it's more playable this way. I agree with that as well, and it's his choice in this section.

seems ok generally

Okorin wrote:

you argue with playability of snapping simplifications but i struggle on them because they sound so noticably off lol

Nuolong wrote:

OmG who did SB!!1111?

Lasse wrote:

mir
02:36:279 (1) - these sliderticks are so loud. you could lower volume. or, since you use default soft set (no muted sliderslide) you could even add 5% lines on the sliderbody with the same sampleset http://i.imgur.com/NEs3QUe.jpg, it will only change volume of the ticks, slide will stay at audible 40% - changed it to 15%
02:53:721 (1) - why does it end on that blue tick. ending on the downbeat or maybe extending until before the slider would make sense - for the off-feeling that the map is built around, it's very inconsequential since there's no audible beat on the downbeat or anything after it so no player would notice

things related to both parts:
02:24:331 (1,2) - sounds are quite different so I think a change in sv for 2 would fit well, same for 05:00:611 (1,2) - on mir's part
01:26:512 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - 04:02:792 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - some more consistency in how these are executed would be nice, probably making the 1's stand out a bit more in the second or making the first one more evenly spaced during combos (http://i.imgur.com/DQxPsrp.jpg)

other things that bothered me were brought up already and the replies to them seem acceptable to me

overall I'm fine with giving this a try, poke me when ready

Lasse wrote:

let me just pretend the bn group thing actually works for once

shiirn
01:46:046 (1) - bit too nearly burai for my taste, could be http://i.imgur.com/nJ0FYuO.jpg k
02:23:110 (6,1) - having this as a stack seemed really out of place with how you usally handled similar 1/4. something like http://i.imgur.com/mTqnsez.jpg would keep the much higher emphasis on 2 but fit better into the map I think. you also did something similar on spots like 02:26:163 (1,2) - mistake while cleaning or something, it wasn't stacked like this before
03:02:093 (1,1) - looking at some other sliders these are probably intentionally bezier, just making sure. though I think they could either be more "balanced" or more noticeably off fix

things related to both parts:
02:24:331 (1,2) - sounds are quite different so I think a change in sv for 2 would fit well, same for 05:00:611 (1,2) - on mir's part pointlessly confusing, the noise is there but it's not being emphasized due to the repetitive nature of the track, it wouldn't really do anything
01:26:512 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - 04:02:792 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - some more consistency in how these are executed would be nice, probably making the 1's stand out a bit more in the second or making the first one more evenly spaced during combos (http://i.imgur.com/DQxPsrp.jpg) sure, first made less intense

other things that bothered me were brought up already and the replies to them seem acceptable to me

overall I'm fine with giving this a try, poke me when ready