Omoi - Chiisana Koi no Uta (Synth Rock Cover) [Osu|Taiko]

posted
Total Posts
224
show more
OnosakiHito
Sorry for being so late. University. Work. Alumni. :|

hikikochan wrote:

wow i haven't used mv1 in a while. similarly, i haven't seen an ono map being pushed for rank in a while -- okaeri! thx thx
also lol @ each of the difficulties being one diff icon up
[General]
re: spread - i kind of hesitate to call the muzu a muzu given its bpm and patterning in the kiais. if anything it leans on the side of being a "light oni." either way the oni is definitely an inner oni given the density and the length of some of the streams, especially at 220-240bpm
i hate to say this but i would suggest duplicating the current muzu, then buffing one and nerfing the other so that you have a proper muzu and oni for spread purposes
in the "new" muzu i'd also advise nerfing the sv changes, if not remove them entirely, since in their current state they're definitely pretty drastic for the lowest taiko diff in the set I don't know how much the meaning of Oni changed during my absence as well as mapping in general, so see my words as past ones: There is no real determination as in what makes an Inner Oni beside the possible change in density compared to another Oni of the same set. Usually you have either one Oni, nvm how hard it is, or two Onis which one of them is the stepping stone from Muzu to the "real Oni" aka Inner Oni. So for current case, it doesn't matter whether you call it just Oni or Inner Oni.

As for that spread problem, first it must be said that there is no spread. You can't have a spread between two difficulties; only with three and up going. But to address to your actual concern, if people think another Muzukashii is needed, then we need another Mapper since I can't make another difficulty on this set (would have more maps than the uploader)(edit: okay, I just saw that val actually made more difficulties during by absence LOL). I would argue about whether this is or is not a Muzukashii since the patterns in itself are not naturally hard but rather harder because of the BPM which I can agree with. As compromise I can make some patterns a bit shorter, but that would be it. We could either go for two diffs which represent their difficulty but have a high difference between each other, or we just add another difficulty. I wouldn't be able to make one tho since I don't have the time anymore for it.



[Ono's Muzukashii]
in general this diff feels like a lot of sparser drum-based mapping with a bunch of noticeably denser bars interspersed throughout the kiais. the disparity isn't *that* large but it's definitely there, so you could probably alleviate it by buffing some of the scarcer portions and evening things out
01:48:793 (2,3,4) - why are these three all 1/2 triplets in the muzu but 1/1 doublets in the oni? should probably get flipped instead I just deleted them in the muzu
02:39:140 - this passage needs a rest moment somewhere; probably easiest to delete 02:42:390 (1) - To be honest, I don't see why a rest moment is needed while this is one of the most easiest parts in the Muzukashii. It is not difficulty nor very draining. Yet I removed it because it works with the vocal nicely.
03:05:765 - from a cursory glance, you don't seem to have a break longer than 1/1 from here to the end so that would be something to consider when revising the spread 03:02:390 (2) - deleted

[Ono's Oni]
this'll mostly be patterning things
00:18:876 (1,1,1) - having this as ddd would flow better since the pattern wouldn't be d k dkd k d (alternating colors with a snapping change) instead I moved 00:18:876 (1,1) - one 1/4 backwards. I just placed them wrong.
general question about your sv usage: why is 00:20:785 - this section 1.20x when the build up to the kiai @ 00:38:239 - and the kiai itself @ 00:50:239 - are both 1.00x? you've got the section with the lowest density having the highest sv, and then when the buildup hits (the part with the highest density) your sv actually drops There are different ways you can give parts a certain impact and layer them by importance. In this case I use a higher SV for the first section to be fair to the higher tone in voice which is more dynamic. The second part however contains more 1/4 and hence has a higher density which gives this part a more importance especially since it should forcast the upcoming kiai. The kiai itself is more of a compromise between the tone and use of vocals as well as the beats in the song by having not too many notes which can work as "reversed impact" by having less notes than more.
01:08:239 (5,6) - , 01:10:421 (5,6) - , 01:12:603 (5,6) - you could change these all to d to follow the drums. if your goal with having them all be ks was to emphasize the held vocal, the consecutive 1/2 already has that effect. alternatively if you wanted to have some variation, only change note 5 to a d @ 01:10:421 - Yeah, the reason were the held vocals but also to give the dons more impact when in use. It gives the whole section a nice structure and give the dons more impact the more frequently they are used.
01:22:421 (1,2) - these notes are definitely less impactful than the kiai that just finished so they don't really need to be Ks (although i guess if you wanted it to forecast what's to come then it makes sense) Yep, that's right.
01:59:814 (1) - 02:00:206 (1) - 02:00:597 (1) - 02:00:858 (1) - (i can't highlight these all at the same time bc of your combo system LOL) - changing these two k would make this part play a bit better bc the patterns would have more forward momentum Jesus, this is good. Thanks
02:51:140 - you could do a smooth sv transition up to 0.75x here, since with the addition of the held guitar note the pace of the song picks up here I listened to this part now a few times, but somehow I can't arrange myself with the idea to add an increase of x0.75 here. The pace seems to be pretty much the same until 02:55:140 - kicks in.
03:22:640 - similarly i'd suggest doing kkddkkk here instead of dkdkddk using dkddkkk instead.
03:27:140 - also refer to the point from 00:56:239 here
call me back and i can look at stuff again, gl
Thank you for now for your mod. It was quite good. Everything I didn't answer to was applied.
Download: https://puu.sh/AwnRH/d1e8e860c6.7z
Topic Starter
val0108

OnosakiHito wrote:

Sorry for being so late. University. Work. Alumni. :|

hikikochan wrote:

wow i haven't used mv1 in a while. similarly, i haven't seen an ono map being pushed for rank in a while -- okaeri! thx thx
also lol @ each of the difficulties being one diff icon up
[General]
re: spread - i kind of hesitate to call the muzu a muzu given its bpm and patterning in the kiais. if anything it leans on the side of being a "light oni." either way the oni is definitely an inner oni given the density and the length of some of the streams, especially at 220-240bpm
i hate to say this but i would suggest duplicating the current muzu, then buffing one and nerfing the other so that you have a proper muzu and oni for spread purposes
in the "new" muzu i'd also advise nerfing the sv changes, if not remove them entirely, since in their current state they're definitely pretty drastic for the lowest taiko diff in the set I don't know how much the meaning of Oni changed during my absence as well as mapping in general, so see my words as past ones: There is no real determination as in what makes an Inner Oni beside the possible change in density compared to another Oni of the same set. Usually you have either one Oni, nvm how hard it is, or two Onis which one of them is the stepping stone from Muzu to the "real Oni" aka Inner Oni. So for current case, it doesn't matter whether you call it just Oni or Inner Oni.

As for that spread problem, first it must be said that there is no spread. You can't have a spread between two difficulties; only with three and up going. But to address to your actual concern, if people think another Muzukashii is needed, then we need another Mapper since I can't make another difficulty on this set (would have more maps than the uploader)(edit: okay, I just saw that val actually made more difficulties during by absence LOL). I would argue about whether this is or is not a Muzukashii since the patterns in itself are not naturally hard but rather harder because of the BPM which I can agree with. As compromise I can make some patterns a bit shorter, but that would be it. We could either go for two diffs which represent their difficulty but have a high difference between each other, or we just add another difficulty. I wouldn't be able to make one tho since I don't have the time anymore for it.



[Ono's Muzukashii]
in general this diff feels like a lot of sparser drum-based mapping with a bunch of noticeably denser bars interspersed throughout the kiais. the disparity isn't *that* large but it's definitely there, so you could probably alleviate it by buffing some of the scarcer portions and evening things out
01:48:793 (2,3,4) - why are these three all 1/2 triplets in the muzu but 1/1 doublets in the oni? should probably get flipped instead I just deleted them in the muzu
02:39:140 - this passage needs a rest moment somewhere; probably easiest to delete 02:42:390 (1) - To be honest, I don't see why a rest moment is needed while this is one of the most easiest parts in the Muzukashii. It is not difficulty nor very draining. Yet I removed it because it works with the vocal nicely.
03:05:765 - from a cursory glance, you don't seem to have a break longer than 1/1 from here to the end so that would be something to consider when revising the spread 03:02:390 (2) - deleted

[Ono's Oni]
this'll mostly be patterning things
00:18:876 (1,1,1) - having this as ddd would flow better since the pattern wouldn't be d k dkd k d (alternating colors with a snapping change) instead I moved 00:18:876 (1,1) - one 1/4 backwards. I just placed them wrong.
general question about your sv usage: why is 00:20:785 - this section 1.20x when the build up to the kiai @ 00:38:239 - and the kiai itself @ 00:50:239 - are both 1.00x? you've got the section with the lowest density having the highest sv, and then when the buildup hits (the part with the highest density) your sv actually drops There are different ways you can give parts a certain impact and layer them by importance. In this case I use a higher SV for the first section to be fair to the higher tone in voice which is more dynamic. The second part however contains more 1/4 and hence has a higher density which gives this part a more importance especially since it should forcast the upcoming kiai. The kiai itself is more of a compromise between the tone and use of vocals as well as the beats in the song by having not too many notes which can work as "reversed impact" by having less notes than more.
01:08:239 (5,6) - , 01:10:421 (5,6) - , 01:12:603 (5,6) - you could change these all to d to follow the drums. if your goal with having them all be ks was to emphasize the held vocal, the consecutive 1/2 already has that effect. alternatively if you wanted to have some variation, only change note 5 to a d @ 01:10:421 - Yeah, the reason were the held vocals but also to give the dons more impact when in use. It gives the whole section a nice structure and give the dons more impact the more frequently they are used.
01:22:421 (1,2) - these notes are definitely less impactful than the kiai that just finished so they don't really need to be Ks (although i guess if you wanted it to forecast what's to come then it makes sense) Yep, that's right.
01:59:814 (1) - 02:00:206 (1) - 02:00:597 (1) - 02:00:858 (1) - (i can't highlight these all at the same time bc of your combo system LOL) - changing these two k would make this part play a bit better bc the patterns would have more forward momentum Jesus, this is good. Thanks
02:51:140 - you could do a smooth sv transition up to 0.75x here, since with the addition of the held guitar note the pace of the song picks up here I listened to this part now a few times, but somehow I can't arrange myself with the idea to add an increase of x0.75 here. The pace seems to be pretty much the same until 02:55:140 - kicks in.
03:22:640 - similarly i'd suggest doing kkddkkk here instead of dkdkddk using dkddkkk instead.
03:27:140 - also refer to the point from 00:56:239 here
call me back and i can look at stuff again, gl
Thank you for now for your mod. It was quite good. Everything I didn't answer to was applied.
Download: https://puu.sh/AwnRH/d1e8e860c6.7z
Thanks ono.
Topic Starter
val0108
Thanks 500 fav.
hikiko-
taiko diffs look good to go!
Sinnoh
@val
https://puu.sh/Ax5pe/bbaa795881.png
slider multiplier needs to be set to exactly 1.4 on oni
Topic Starter
val0108

Sinnoh wrote:

@val
https://puu.sh/Ax5pe/bbaa795881.png
slider multiplier needs to be set to exactly 1.4 on oni
Fixed
Sinnoh
add (TV Size) to the title

(don't)
Topic Starter
val0108

Sinnoh wrote:

add (TV Size) to the title

(don't)
TVSize? why?

Edit: LOL I did not notice the presence of bubbles since I was watching from the smartphone.Thanks.
Frey
finally! gogogo!
hikiko-
qualified! congrats and good luck
Topic Starter
val0108

hikikochan wrote:

qualified! congrats and good luck
thanks.

Here we go!
pw384
val2018!!!!!! gratz!!!
tutuhaha
YEAH!!!!
UndeadCapulet
hi

kroytz
00:49:694 (1) - seems pretty much inaudible to me bc there's no addition and the hitnormal blends in too much esp after all the 80% streams

marianna
almost all of this diff has volume settings at 100% which is really loud esp for sections like 00:20:785 - which have no business being loud, please lower your average volume setting

also 60% for that custom3 sample is absurdly loud, use 30 like higher diffs do

kawa
same as marianna

alphabet
ar4 is rly low for 240bpm and 4 > 8 in the hard is a super questionable ar spread, upping it to 5 or 6 would be way better
80% custom3 hurts my ears, use 30 like higher diffs do

shmik
60% custom3 also hurts my ears, use 30 like higher diffs do

sorry i got here so late :s
Lasse
points above make a lot of sense and should really be addressed
some of the volume settings are pretty questionable, like the nearly inaudible note on top diff and overall settings on marianna's/kawa's diff

ar 4 on normal is also really low with how this is mapped, would consider 5.5 or 6 personally, but definitely nothing below 5
Hobbes2
I recommend lowering volume of normal-hitfinish3. this way the hitnormal is audible cause you wont have to reduce the volume to 30%. also this solves the issue of it being too loud on alpha and shmik's diffs.
Kroytz
volume changed from 20% -> 40%
Alphabet
Will get val to change the ar on my diff
Topic Starter
val0108
okay I reduced the volume of normalhitfinish3.

and Normal diff is 5.5AR now.
Frey

val0108 wrote:

okay I reduced the volume of normalhitfinish3.

and Normal diff is 5.5AR now.
ummm if you don't mind, could you please do me a favor? I only want to rise the volume a bit, the hit sounds kinda weak compared with Kroytz's

http://puu.sh/AFa6N/dc7ffd581d.rar
show more
Please sign in to reply.

New reply