1. normal-hitwhistle12.wav and soft-hitfinish13.wav have a delay at the beginning so here are the updated files you can use: https://puu.sh/wGkYF/53a2b5d077.zip

1. 00:33:357 (7) - 00:34:882 (7) - 00:36:408 (7) - 00:37:806 (5) - (tail) 00:39:458 (7) - 00:40:730 (6) - (tail)
   i don't understand the usage of crash hitsounds on the beat right before the big downbeat in the music?
   
2. 00:56:365 (1) - the clap hitsound due to soft additions doesn't seem to fit with the kiai section as the other big downbeats don't have that kind of sound, for example 00:53:314 (1) - and 00:47:213 (1) - .

1. 00:45:687 (1) - probably a little mistake you made with the slider's length.

1. 00:31:196 (4) - still touching the hp bar.

sheela wrote:

[general]

1. normal-hitwhistle12.wav and soft-hitfinish13.wav have a delay at the beginning so here are the updated files you can use: https://puu.sh/wGkYF/53a2b5d077.zip

They were not delayed, I saw that warning on the moddingbot but I checked on audacity and there was no major delay, but since you re-worked then I'll take your hitsounds and replace. Thanks for the editing
[Kerage]

1. 00:33:357 (7) - 00:34:882 (7) - 00:36:408 (7) - 00:37:806 (5) - (tail) 00:39:458 (7) - 00:40:730 (6) - (tail)
   i don't understand the usage of crash hitsounds on the beat right before the big downbeat in the music?It wasn't a crash cymbal, but a splash cymbal. I did that to add a cool effect with the snares after 1/1 gaps, but the result wasn't that good and it really sounded like a crash. I removed those and changed with hi-hat and ride cymbal sounds to add more pacing to the patterning instead. Hopefully this will make this first kiai sounds more continuous and not stopping the phrases like the first attempt.
   
2. 00:56:365 (1) - the clap hitsound due to soft additions doesn't seem to fit with the kiai section as the other big downbeats don't have that kind of sound, for example 00:53:314 (1) - and 00:47:213 (1) - .I removed the addition here 00:56:365 (1) - , this wasn't intended at all, it was there because there was another effect on the soft addition added before that was deleted. It was an effect similar to the cheer, but after some testplays from a frew friends it was actually standing out too much. Thanks for noticing.

[Collab Hard]

1. 00:45:687 (1) - probably a little mistake you made with the slider's length.Fixed

[Advanced]

1. 00:31:196 (4) - still touching the hp bar.I moved it to 1,04x to fix that, hopefully just this bit of DS inconsistency is justified to avoid touching hp bar.

pretty happy with the outcome of the hitsounding in the top difficulty, though i was wondering if it'll be applied to the other difficulties? otherwise just call me back whenever you're done with this recheck for another outcome!Thanks a lot. The hitsound on top diff I've worked in a way that it fits mostly with that diff, not the others. I don't think it would be beneficial to the other diffs applying so many custom hitsounds, especially on lower levels.

sheela wrote:

bubbubub

Ataraxia wrote:

acho que até voce conseguir BN o cara da reply no meu mapa xd

MkGuh wrote:

parabéns pela bolha :3

DragoNHunTeR51 wrote:

Bad name of map ...

DragoNHunTeR51 wrote:

Bad name of map ...

Seto Kousuke wrote:

if there is something bad with this map, is that laugh hitsound coming out of nowehere in the kiai and i don't really know why it still there @o@

[A L P H A] wrote:

porno means porn in spanish


...

[A L P H A] wrote:

porno means porn in spanish


...

1. i don't think it's a good idea to include your current normal-hitsound. it blends in way too much with the music at times that i can't tell if i'm actually hitting the note or not
2. why does the timing signature go from 3|4 to 6|4? i get that there's a metronome reset at the first kiai, but i don't think that the 3|4 time signature at the beginning is reflective of the actual timing, since the phrasing of the guitar at the beginning suggests a 6|4 timing signature, with the metronome reset at 00:19:755 - . quite frankly, i think your actual timing setup is wrong, actually. i think something like the image below is more accurate:
   
   SPOILER

   

1. 00:31:196 (1) - don't think a repeat slider is the best choice here; vocal emphasis falls really flat cause it ends up being on the repeat
2. 00:40:603 (4) - 01:11:111 (5) - this is 236 bpm. don't be putting 1/2 repeats like this; they're very difficult to read for beginners due to how condensed it is
3. 00:55:221 (4) - why is this on the offbeat instead of the white tick 00:55:348 - ? previous combos had vocal emphasis, and breaking that phrasing here feels really out of place

1. 00:01:069 (2) - 00:02:594 (2) - 00:04:120 (2) - 00:05:645 (2) - i feel that these sliders are too short to be able to represent guitars that well. would work better as 1/1 sliders
2. 00:30:433 (3,4,5) - kind of difficult to read 4->5 since the (3)'s slider end is still covering it up. at 236 bpm i don't really recommend a pattern like this
3. 00:46:450 (2) - slider shape isn't ideal; not a good idea to make the slider borders so close together near the end like that
4. 00:47:975 (3,4,1) - honestly this is some pretty bad lead in; the (3) suggests that the next note is going to be where the (1) is. it looks more less awkward at 00:48:738 (1,2,3) - since the (1) is leading into the (2) and not the (3)
5. 00:55:348 (6) - again, why the repeat? you broke vocal consistency from the previous patterns
6. 00:58:653 (5) - repeat slider doesn't really fit with the music here either, since music has different phrasing for 00:58:653 - and 00:58:908 -

1. 00:30:687 (2,3) - i kind of expected a 1/2 slider like before since it's the same phrasing
2. 00:32:340 (2,3) - 00:33:865 (2,3) - 00:38:441 (2,3) - 00:39:966 (2,3) - Ctrl + G would fit the music much better tbh
3. 00:40:601 (4,5) - plays kind of awkward here; the movement feels kind of forced. why not try stacking the notes here?
4. 00:43:653 (5,6,1) - really sharp shift in spacing looks and feels awkward to play
5. 00:47:594 (2,3,4) - 00:50:645 (2,3,4) - 00:53:696 (2,3,4) - etc. triple stack here doesn't play that smoothly.. quite frankly i don't think it represents the music that well either, cause there's too much blending between the instruments and vocals
6. 01:02:975 (2,3) - 01:09:077 (2,3) - i don't think the double circle works here either, since there's too much mixing between instruments and vocals. also feels inconsistent with the previous rhythms of putting emphasis on the white ticks, and feels inconsistent with 01:03:738 (5) -
7. 01:03:230 (4,5,6,7) - 01:09:840 (5,6,7,8) - spacing here is pretty erratic, it makes it harder to read
8. 01:20:772 (1,2,3,4) - the stack here feels like really lazy mapping. each note has significant drum/guitar emphasis, so spacing them out would i feel would better reflect that

1. 00:01:196 (3,4) - 00:02:722 (3,4) - etc. really awkward place to put the repeat slider, cause it's being placed literally right after the repeat in the guitars. try a rhythm like this:
   
   SPOILER

   
2. 00:12:128 (4,5,6,1) - 00:18:230 (4,5,6,1) - i'm going to assume that the decreasing distance between 3/4s is intentional, but holy does it look really off when compared to 00:31:196 (4,5,6) -
3. 00:25:094 (4,5,6) - why the spacing change here?
4. 00:56:365 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - this looks really cluttered, i can't really recommend placing them all so close like that. i get that the slider ends are all stacked with each other, but this pattern looks so out of place with the rest of the map
5. 00:58:018 (2,3,4) - too many filler notes here, doesn't really feel all that good to play
6. 00:59:416 (1,2,3,4,5) - 01:10:857 (3,4,5,6,1) - i actually don't mind reading gimmicks like this, but seeing it only done at the beginning and end of this section makes it lose its effect and feel inconsistent with the rest of this section of the map
7. 01:03:611 (4) - 01:09:713 (4) - don't feel the repeat slider is the best choice; music is placing emphasis on the white tick and here you've gone and ended up placing no emphasis on it due to the repeat
8. 01:03:992 (1,2,3,4) - why is the rhythm here so radically different from the rest of the section?

1. 00:03:738 (1,2,3,4,5,1,2,3,1,2,3,4,1,2,3) - this rhythm doesn't even match what the guitars are doing. a rhythm sense like what you did with 00:00:688 (1,2,3,4,5) - would make much more sense
2. 00:07:552 (3,4,5) - 00:09:077 (3,4,5) - 00:10:603 (3,4,5) - honestly i feel these should be more consistent. they're the same sounds, so having the middle pattern be represented with small spacing but the other two with high spacing feels really off. especially when later on at 00:13:654 (3,4,5) - 00:15:179 (3,4,5) - 00:16:704 (3,4,5) - these are all consistent
3. 00:36:281 (6,1) - this is really awkward movement that doesn't really play that well. the pattern you made is moving in a clockwise direction, and then (6,1) is the only movement here that's counter-clockwise
4. 00:44:035 (4,5) - why is this stacked? it breaks the momentum you have going here really suddenly when your patterning suggests that momentum is going to be kept
5. 00:49:501 (4,5,6) - 00:52:552 (4,5,6) - this rhythm sense is terrible. what are you following here? it sure as hell isn't the instrumentals, vocals or drums. too much blending like this makes your rhythm sense sound incoherent
6. 00:55:603 (4,5,6) - ^read the above, although here it's not as bad since it sort of follows vocals more smoothly
7. 00:57:636 (6) - a 1/4 repeat honestly doesn't fit here; there's no sound on the blue tick
8. 01:05:518 (3) - forgot NC by chance?
9. 01:23:569 (8) - repeat slider doesn't really fit here either; there's no sound on the red tick

1. 00:00:688 - to 00:06:789 - can you follow the guitars more closely? your current rhythm sense doesn't match the guitars all that well, although it certainly is better than the other insane.
   
   SPOILER

   guitars are doing something more inline with this:
   
2. 00:10:221 (2,3) - double whistle doesn't sound that great; sounds too excessive. if anything, remove the whistle on 00:10:349 (3) -
3. 00:13:908 (1,2) - 00:16:959 (1,2) - 1/4 distance is kind of extreme in comparison to your previous extended sliders. i can't recommend this high spacing here, especially since it's a really high bpm song
4. 00:57:636 (6,7,8) - can't recommend the triple here since there's no discernable sound on the blue tick.
5. 01:23:314 (3,4) - distance between sliders is really extreme, i can't really recommend this high spacing, especially right at the end of the map.

1. 00:22:806 (1,1,1) - 00:28:908 (1,1,1) - kind of curious why you chose to make these ones the vocal sliders instead of sticking to the drums
2. 00:31:959 (1,3) - 00:33:484 (1,3) - 00:40:348 (4,6) - these are really dangerous reading hazards because you can't make out half of the slider's path due to the high AR and bpm.
   
   

   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.

3. 00:41:492 (3,5,7,9) - 00:43:018 (3,5,7) - i honestly don't mind filler rhythm, but i think this is overdoing it. i don't think your current pattern/rhythm setup represents the song that well here
4. 00:47:213 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - what the hell are the whistles following here? it's so incoherent compared to 00:50:264 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7) -
5. 00:59:416 - to 01:11:620 - i can't recommend the constant switching between 40% volume and 70% volume. even with your current normal-hitnormal the hitsounds are barely audible, you don't need to go making them even less audible..

Ataraxia wrote:

I'm not bn, but if I were you, I would not POP just because "I want" I would say a good reason, I read the mod ... and I did not find it lol, most things there are easy to fix (when they're issues). i will just say one thing about timing; if you listen to the beginning, you will see change in the guitar, if it was 6/4, that change would not have relevance, but, YES, IT HAS A RELEVANCE HAHAHAHA

net0 esse cara é piada , como pode um BN não saber escutar uma musica ?? ta explicado porque ele só faz "speed mapping"

Doormat wrote:

m4m

[General]

1. i don't think it's a good idea to include your current normal-hitsound. it blends in way too much with the music at times that i can't tell if i'm actually hitting the note or not Hmm no one has EVER complained about that in testplays... But FIXED, since you think it blends too much I'm adding a sample with more gain.
2. why does the timing signature go from 3|4 to 6|4?Because songs do that sometimes i get that there's a metronome reset at the first kiai, but i don't think that the 3|4 time signature at the beginning is reflective of the actual timing, since the phrasing of the guitar at the beginning suggests a 6|4 timing signature, with the metronome reset at 00:19:755 - . quite frankly, i think your actual timing setup is wrong, actually. i think something like the image below is more accurate:
   
   SPOILER

   

I'll move the 6/4 signature here 00:19:755 - but the signature at the start is 3/4 as far as I can listen to the song and mostly the guitar itself. I'm not sure how you got so confused in not understanding how the start is 3/4 , sounds pretty obvious
[Normal]

1. 00:31:196 (1) - don't think a repeat slider is the best choice here; vocal emphasis falls really flat cause it ends up being on the repeatYou didn't suggest anything here, but I'll add a circle for the snare and make a 1/2 slider for the vocals, I suppose that's better, FIXED
2. 00:40:603 (4) - 01:11:111 (5) - this is 236 bpm. don't be putting 1/2 repeats like this; they're very difficult to read for beginners due to how condensed it isFIXED, simplified to 1/1 slider
3. 00:55:221 (4) - why is this on the offbeat instead of the white tick 00:55:348 - ? previous combos had vocal emphasis, and breaking that phrasing here feels really out of placeFIXED, it's now on 00:55:348 (4) - as it should be considering the DS of it, probably I messed up during some previous update
4. You didn't mention this 01:11:111 (5) - but since it has a similar idea to the repeat I'll fix it too!

[Advanced]

1. 00:01:069 (2) - 00:02:594 (2) - 00:04:120 (2) - 00:05:645 (2) - i feel that these sliders are too short to be able to represent guitars that well. would work better as 1/1 slidersThey're able to represent that pitch because they're small. I don't see an issue here
2. 00:30:433 (3,4,5) - kind of difficult to read 4->5 since the (3)'s slider end is still covering it up. at 236 bpm i don't really recommend a pattern like this It's kinda simple to read, but FIXED, by moving slider 00:30:433 (3) -
3. 00:46:450 (2) - slider shape isn't ideal; not a good idea to make the slider borders so close together near the end like that "they're going to play the same regardless; this is largely down to visual preference"
4. 00:47:975 (3,4,1) - honestly this is some pretty bad lead in; the (3) suggests that the next note is going to be where the (1) is. it looks more less awkward at 00:48:738 (1,2,3) - since the (1) is leading into the (2) and not the (3)don't really see the issue here, people are just going to follow the notes there in a
   regular way, slider poiting in this speed is not a matter in that case.
5. 00:55:348 (6) - again, why the repeat? you broke vocal consistency from the previous patternsFIXED, I don't know what's your problem with reverse emphasis, but I'm changing that lol
6. 00:58:653 (5) - repeat slider doesn't really fit with the music here either, since music has different phrasing for 00:58:653 - and 00:58:908 - FIXED,
   instead of making a simplification I see you suggest make distinction here, I'll make 00:58:653 - section circles instead

[Collab Hard]

1. 00:30:687 (2,3) - i kind of expected a 1/2 slider like before since it's the same phrasing"in terms of rhythm choice, there's a distinction between the two parts, so the change in some rhythm choices makes sense to me"
2. 00:32:340 (2,3) - 00:33:865 (2,3) - 00:38:441 (2,3) - 00:39:966 (2,3) - Ctrl + G would fit the music much better tbhDifferent ideas, both work the same tbh, but FIXED
3. 00:40:601 (4,5) - plays kind of awkward here; the movement feels kind of forced. why not try stacking the notes here?It plays like, a linear flow? I don't see an issue here
4. 00:43:653 (5,6,1) - really sharp shift in spacing looks and feels awkward to playActually what you said is not an issue, but I found something that IS an issue and I didn't see it before, the distance snap there is OFF big time because of the SV change. I'll FIX this but I'll keep the linear motion
5. 00:47:594 (2,3,4) - 00:50:645 (2,3,4) - 00:53:696 (2,3,4) - etc. triple stack here doesn't play that smoothly.. quite frankly i don't think it represents the music that well either, cause there's too much blending between the instruments and vocalsWell you didn't suggest anything, so I assume you don't have any idea of how to map this? I'll explain again why is mapper like this; 00:47:594 (2,3,4,5) - if you listen to he music, you will realize that there's a lot of vocal happening in the circles here, like a really fast paced vocal 00:47:594 (2,3,4) - and then there's this ONE specific word that's more prolonged 00:47:975 (5) - ,
   that's what I went with while mapping this part. If you have ANOTHER way of mapping I'm willing to change if it's better, but just saying it doesn't work and not presenting not even a suggestion I won't change it.
6. 01:02:975 (2,3) - 01:09:077 (2,3) - i don't think the double circle works here either, since there's too much mixing between instruments and vocals. also feels inconsistent with the previous rhythms of putting emphasis on the white ticks, and feels inconsistent with 01:03:738 (5) - Fixed by making it consistent with 01:03:738 (4) - as well as making full DS since spacing variation here was off according to you.
7. 01:03:230 (4,5,6,7) - 01:09:840 (5,6,7,8) - spacing here is pretty erratic, it makes it harder to readFixed, read previous reply ^
8. 01:20:772 (1,2,3,4) - the stack here feels like really lazy mapping. each note has significant drum/guitar emphasis, so spacing them out would i feel would better reflect thatFIXED

[Collab Light Insane]

1. 00:01:196 (3,4) - 00:02:722 (3,4) - etc. really awkward place to put the repeat slider, cause it's being placed literally right after the repeat in the guitars. try a rhythm like this:
   
   SPOILER

   
   FIXED...
2. 00:12:128 (4,5,6,1) - 00:18:230 (4,5,6,1) - i'm going to assume that the decreasing distance between 3/4s is intentional, but holy does it look really off when compared to 00:31:196 (4,5,6) - Because they're suppose to be different? Different song sections mapped in distinct ways, I don't think this is an issue
3. 00:25:094 (4,5,6) - why the spacing change here? Because this two 00:25:349 (5,6) - sound different compared to 00:25:094 (4) -
4. 00:56:365 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - this looks really cluttered, i can't really recommend placing them all so close like that. i get that the slider ends are all stacked with each other, but this pattern looks so out of place with the rest of the mapThis is the key point of the song in this kiai, the place where it should stand out the most, and if you see Kegare diff you will that this is my interpretation of this part in the song as the most emphatic one, that's the pattern here is so special, personally it might clusttered to you, but as you said, "honestly i think this comes down to visual preference more than anything. i don't see anything wrong with the current design."
5. 00:58:018 (2,3,4) - too many filler notes here, doesn't really feel all that good to playFeels amazing to me playing this stack, so again you're at a personal taste preference here.
6. 00:59:416 (1,2,3,4,5) - 01:10:857 (3,4,5,6,1) - i actually don't mind reading gimmicks like this, but seeing it only done at the beginning and end of this section makes it lose its effect and feel inconsistent with the rest of this section of the mapSO I suppose that if I make them here too 01:05:391 (5) - it's consistent and FIXED right?
7. 01:03:611 (4) - 01:09:713 (4) - don't feel the repeat slider is the best choice; music is placing emphasis on the white tick and here you've gone and ended up placing no emphasis on it due to the repeatFIXED by changing it to a circle in the red tick and slider on the white to add the emphasis you want.
8. 01:03:992 (1,2,3,4) - why is the rhythm here so radically different from the rest of the section?Collab, we have different rhythm approach to the song,
   Kal is more focused on instrumentals when he maps, I'm more focused on vocals.

[Kegare]

1. 00:22:806 (1,1,1) - 00:28:908 (1,1,1) - kind of curious why you chose to make these ones the vocal sliders instead of sticking to the drumsBecause vocals are the THEME of the map? Like, in case you didn't play the map or paid attention to the hitsounding, it's a map focused on vocals...
2. 00:31:959 (1,3) - 00:33:484 (1,3) - 00:40:348 (4,6) - these are really dangerous reading hazards because you can't make out half of the slider's path due to the high AR and bpm.
   
   

   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.

   You do realize that the map is readable otherwise it wouldn't get a bubble or modders wouldn't have accepted the replies and the final results. This overlaps are REALLY simple compared to other stuff presented in ranked section in the past few years. Another good thing worth metioning is that you're poiting out a perfect two sliders overlap rule to talk about distinct sliders that overlaps partially each other, each means you didn't quite understand that rule on the RC, since this is the case that the RC is talking about; http://puu.sh/xPaIV.jpg not the same case in my map
   
3. 00:41:492 (3,5,7,9) - 00:43:018 (3,5,7) - i honestly don't mind filler rhythm, but i think this is overdoing it. i don't think your current pattern/rhythm setup represents the song that well hereit does, you just need to stop thinking of 1/2 circle only section related to jumps and you can understand why it's linear stream motion in 1/2 to represent alternating guitar pitch continuous sound
4. 00:47:213 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - what the hell are the whistles following here? it's so incoherent compared to 00:50:264 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7) - It's following vocals, and the vocals in this part are incoherent in each phrase, you need to stop thinking every song follows clear patterns and phrases and listen to the song here if you really want to understand it.
5. 00:59:416 - to 01:11:620 - i can't recommend the constant switching between 40% volume and 70% volume. even with your current normal-hitnormal the hitsounds are barely audible, you don't need to go making them even less audible..I'll improve this by adding 70% audio to all clickable objects instead of just the slider heads, hopefully this will improve the "audible" issue you have with the map that no one else has

Out of the 33 problems/suggestions pointed, I applied totally 14 and partially changed other 2. Hopefully we can come up with an agreement ^^ . Since you pooped this I suppose you're going to re-checking it?

popping this due to timing and quality concerns. quite frankly i'm wondering how this got bubbled in the first place.Was this last line really necessary? Do you see me complaining on your Forfolium maps about quality concerns of how badly that represent the music you're mapping? I don't think so, because I respect the fact that you're a pp mapper who make generic stuff, I get it, that's how you perceive mapping and how you like the game to be, so you should be allowed to map like that and have fun with it ^^ , but saying to me, Tarrasky, LwL, Kalindraz, sheela and a bunch of other people involved with this project that this is not worth a bubble because of your own personal taste in what "quality" is, when tons of people already think this mapset is great is just... :/

Ataraxia wrote:

I'm not bn, but if I were you, I would not POP just because "I want" I would say a good reason, I read the mod ... and I did not find it lol, most things there are easy to fix (when they're issues). i will just say one thing about timing; if you listen to the beginning, you will see change in the guitar, if it was 6/4, that change would not have relevance, but, YES, IT HAS A RELEVANCE HAHAHAHA

net0 esse cara é piada , como pode um BN não saber escutar uma musica ?? ta explicado porque ele só faz "speed mapping"

Doormat wrote:

Ataraxia wrote:

I'm not bn, but if I were you, I would not POP just because "I want" I would say a good reason, I read the mod ... and I did not find it lol, most things there are easy to fix (when they're issues). i will just say one thing about timing; if you listen to the beginning, you will see change in the guitar, if it was 6/4, that change would not have relevance, but, YES, IT HAS A RELEVANCE HAHAHAHA

net0 esse cara é piada , como pode um BN não saber escutar uma musica ?? ta explicado porque ele só faz "speed mapping"

read the mod properly then; i explicitly stated my reasoning for the pop at the very end of the mod, and i gave a pretty detailed account on every issue i have with the map itself..

if you think the timing is fine, give a better reason other than "IT HAS RELEVANCE HAHAHA"... this answer is so vague i actually have no idea what you mean by this.

learn to have some human decency instead of harassing somebody because they popped your friend's bubbled map....

p.s: if you think i'm a joke then don't bother asking me for a mod ever. don't think you can get away with insulting me in another language when we have online translations available.

Monstrata wrote:

Just saying, but Doormat asked for other people's opinions on the time signature before pointing it out (one of them was me, hi!).

Net0 wrote:

Was this last line really necessary? Do you see me complaining on your Forfolium maps about quality concerns of how badly that represent the music you're mapping? I don't think so, because I respect the fact that you're a pp mapper who make generic stuff, I get it, that's how you perceive mapping and how you like the game to be, so you should be allowed to map like that and have fun with it ^^ , but saying to me, Tarrasky, LwL, Kalindraz, sheela and a bunch of other people involved with this project that this is not worth a bubble because of your own personal taste in what "quality" is, when tons of people already think this mapset is great is just... :/

Net0 wrote:

Out of the 33 problems/suggestions pointed, I applied totally 14 and partially changed other 2. Hopefully we can come up with an agreement ^^ . Since you pooped this I suppose you're going to re-checking it?

Net0 wrote:

Can you ALL like, stay on topic?

Doormat wrote:

sorry, but i genuinely don't think this map is ready for rank yet; i have too many issues with the mapping concepts you used.

pimpG wrote:

i was asked to check the timing so...

the guitar is not the most accurate instrument to determine the metronome.

we all agree about the timeline with 6/4 being moved to 19.755 and the guitar didn't changed since the beginning of the song so it's safe to assume that the metronome is 6/4 in the beginning too.

also for nightcore difficulty multiplier fix (making the cymbal sounds be on the correct spots), an uninherited timeline should be added at 47.212. we don't even have an specific rule in the ranking criteria about that but this should not be ignored imo.

Kisses wrote:

Given that the normal is the easiest diff in the set I think a number of changes could be made to make it easier and more beginner friendly
[]

For the intro I think a rhythm such as this would be more appropriate https://i.imgur.com/AVA0fpF.png The rhythm is less dense and would portray the contrast between the calm intro and the heavy,intense part after. Te reduced density makes it easier to ease into and to be quite honest I didn't think your current rhythm matched the song at all.There's a constrast already between 00:00:688 - ~ 00:06:789 - compared to 00:06:789 - ~ 00:18:993 - both in rhythm density and visual slider design.

00:18:993 (1,1) & 00:31:196 (1,2) & 00:56:365 (1,2) - I would try to avoid any use of stacks at all in the lowest difficulty as it can prove fairly difficult for beginners to read as it obscures their view of the approach circle. Stack circle+slider 00:18:993 (1,1) - 3/1; slider+circle 00:56:365 (1,2) - 4/1 gap. Both of them are really okay in terms of reading because of the lengh in gap and playability is easy too, it just requires the player attention about the approach circle, which is pretty important if he want to go to the next difficulties. The 1/1 stack 00:31:196 (1,2) - I fixed

00:19:755 (1,2) - For slider pairs such as these I would recommend restructuring in a way similar to this https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/9237651 . Patterns are easiest to read when the slidertail to sliderhead isn't obstructed so they can see all of the arrows and having a better view at where the object will be on the timeline because of time distanceI'm not sure if you saw it, but your suggestion the slider is offscreen o.O, as far as I can tell the slider shapes are pretty simple and straightfoward, nothing complex and even if I wanted to make them more ugly like in higher diffs I could, but i choose to make them simplified so it should be good to go.

00:22:806 (1,2,3) - This isn't 100% necessary but I thought a 3/1 reverse slider would have fit your current rhythm choice better3 vocal lines, two similar 00:22:806 (1,2) - and one distinct 00:24:332 (3) - all of them with same rhythm length. Probably both ways work, but considering the visual patterning I like my way more, specially because I can make symmetry here 00:22:806 (1,2) - to contrast with 00:24:332 (3) -

00:34:501 (4) - I thought it was a bit weird that you mapped this as a 1/1 slider instead of a circle despite there being no vocal sound on the tail; but you have 00:37:552 (4) as a circle when if you mapped it as a slider there would be a vocal on the tail. tl;dr turn 00:34:501 (4) into a circle and 00:37:551 (4) - into a slider. It would also make your rhythm more harmonious as it would make each combo 00:31:959 (1,1) consistent with themselvesI used to have only circles, but modders didn't approve of it, changing AGAIN to circles for the sake of simplification...

00:41:238 (1,1) - I personally would deem this unrankable as I don't believe there is enough recovery time after the spinner for the lowest difficulty. The approach rate 00:43:653 (1) - starts well before the spinner finishes and doesnt give players enough reaction time4/1 gap is the guideline for easy diffs and I'm applying it in a normal diff, so I think 1 second is a pretty nice range for a normal diff.

00:46:450 (2) - suggestion, a circle would suit here better imho. Since the music pauses here I think it'd be more fitting if the objects stopped here too. It would create more of a contrast between when the instruments stop and start playing.Sure, why not

01:21:534 (8,9) - suggest to delete 9 and turn 8 into a circle for similar reasons aboveSure

01:22:297 (1,2,3) - since the sounds on 1 are very similar to 2 and 3 I would personally just map it as 2 reverse sliders.This is just personal preference, there's a lot of possibilities for this ending pattern

01:10:857 (4) - to 01:23:568 (3) - I get that this is the climax of the song but all objects have a 1/1 gap within each other. Consider adding some breaks here and thereThere are sliders with bigger length in which the main idea was that the clickable objects are not as dense, such as this 01:16:195 (4) -
[] w ~

Aeril wrote:

just saying, u ask for another bns opinion, he gave it dd