Yukiyo wrote:

m4m from q ;-;
http://puu.sh/whTOx/be3732d990.png LUL seriously though, aimod is drunk

seems like a fun map thanks.
00:01:333 - don't you think is note should be clickable? Idk it very much feels like it mmh i want to make rhythm less dense than final section.
00:04:075 - ^
00:06:818 - ^
00:09:561 - ^
00:05:275 (1,2,3,4) - is this supposed to be ugly? lol jk but either make it straight or let it have a good curve gonna fix
00:05:533 (4,1) - I don't think this streamjump is good emphasis for the downbeat, kickslider would fit better imo gonna fix
00:12:047 - missing note? 00:12:047 - having a 2 1/4 beat gap really messes up rhythm and expectation causing 100s and misses in remap list
00:13:418 - ^
00:14:790 - ^ D:
00:44:018 (1) - finish? hitsounds are wip, gonna get to them once i remap few parts
00:46:933 (2) - random drum sample?? oops, my program malfunctioned xd
00:48:647 (3) - ^ ;_; ^
00:53:962 (3,4) - why does this not have the same flow as 00:51:047 (2,3,4,5) - and 00:52:418 (2,3,4,5) - but rather straight flow? because why not? It proves no problem to a player, and that slider ends a section.
00:58:161 - where does this triple suddely come from? if you listen closely you can hear it xd

01:17:190 (2,3) - why are these triples suddenly stacked differently 01:17:704 (4,5) - 01:19:932 (2,3) - 01:20:447 (5,6) - etc. because giving such spacing to doubles would be obnoxious, and the triples emphasize snares. Think its fine.
01:37:161 - missing important sounds why not use the samne rhythms like 01:31:504 (2,3,4,5) - since it is essentaiyll y the same sounds. there's an added kick in that pattern compared to the previous one.

01:54:647 - I get thte switch in circular flow but why do it so soon again at 01:57:047 - at least let it be consistant in switching
in further parts you seem to have the same problem sections flow is easy, some variability is okay right, if it was consistant this would be seriously boring.
02:17:790 (2,3) - instead of completly stacking them I'd have the same shift as the sliders befroe nice
02:21:047 (4) - ^ ^
02:58:247 (7,1) - blanket fix
04:01:504 - rip hitsaounding? no bass drum no snare? use normal-hitnormal for bass and soft-hitclap for snare or smt wip
the flow all in all seems pretty arbitrary Don't really want to make dubstep sections to have obvious flow system, just doing comfy stuff and placing stuff where i feel like it. Kick jump sections insist on not having circular flow (think its linear im unsure). 04:23:447 - this section is kinda obvious to understand, clockwise into anticlockwise. 04:01:504 - this was done without a system, but focusing mostly on not having circular flow to show to randomness of the vocals, and to be emphasized compared to other sections which sound mostly the same. Sections before first dubstep part will be remapped a bit

shiro_Chaos-ryu wrote:

Not really a mod , more like suggestions of style. maybe you can see what i mean

21 sec - 42 sec can significantly higher slider speed with slight curves in them , because of how "hype" the beginning is , after that the next sections sliderspeed makes more sense for a slowdown. what the, fully disagree.

some wub sections dont feel fast , the stacked notes makes you not flow the song well enough. what the

3:39-3:49 flow is totally not building up and it feels bland to play this section when you can make a very technical flow out of it. i can always make a very technical flow, but do i want to? Implying there is flow on jumping from stacked notes lmao

4:34-4:39 and onwards , could have mapped to the flow of the main changing sound , this felt the most "unpersonal" or "unadjusted" pattern to the song
what the
the follow up stream isnt really required , but kind of works. i would have mapped this in trippes stacks. what the


done,
and damn u for stealing the song D:

Neoskylove wrote:

Q

[asdf]
00:42:647 (1) - how about add a jump here for consistency with 00:41:961 (1) - ? If nothing i might add a low spacing, as it doesn't have a finish.
00:44:018 (2) - Add NC here yes yes
02:54:475 (2,1) - this antijump looks werid. intentionally made weird, to show the awkwardness of the part.
04:22:075 - add a beat here? m don't really feel like it.

GL thanks

1. 00:09:733 (1,2,3) - is this mistake? i think it should be straight
2. 00:10:761 (3,4,5,6,1) - i think its visually better if u give these 1.1x or 0.9x
3. 00:12:647 (2,3,4) - flows better imo if you angle this upwards instead
4. 00:19:933 (8,1,2) - can you make this curve a bit smoother? it sticks out quite a bit
5. 00:31:675 (1,2,3) - im sure you can come up with better ideas for patterning here
6. 00:42:647 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - is this meant to be straight? the dsing/placements seems a bit strange
7. with the wub section, i suggest you nc your sv changes eg 01:28:590 (2) - 01:29:104 (5) -
8. 01:31:675 (3,4,5) - dont really like this, feels like a bit of wasted potential
9. 01:32:875 (4,5,6,7) - i think these play better as spaced streams instead, seems to fit better with the map since this patterning doesnt in any other sections
10. 03:06:304 (9,1) - jump here would be quite fitting imo for transitioning
11. 03:16:761 (5,6,7) - ctrl+g?
12. 04:20:704 (3,4,5,6,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - i think its better with sharper curves, might be too hard for what you want tho
13. dont really understand why your outro is intentionally(?) difficult to read it goes against what your intro built on, 00:03:047 (3,5) - 00:05:790 (3,5) - compared to 04:45:561 (3,5) - 04:46:932 (3,5) - 04:48:304 (3,5) - etc , why make them different?

kwk wrote:

from q
[dance]

1. 00:09:733 (1,2,3) - is this mistake? i think it should be straight its on purpose, as you see 0.7 DS
2. 00:10:761 (3,4,5,6,1) - i think its visually better if u give these 1.1x or 0.9x hmm maybe will ask bout this
3. 00:12:647 (2,3,4) - flows better imo if you angle this upwards instead not my intention to make circular flow here.
4. 00:19:933 (8,1,2) - can you make this curve a bit smoother? it sticks out quite a bit pressed NC therefore it would make sense to make it stick out
5. 00:31:675 (1,2,3) - im sure you can come up with better ideas for patterning here if you can comeup with better placement whilst also keeping this movement, i would appreciate it.
6. 00:42:647 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - is this meant to be straight? the dsing/placements seems a bit strange mm did some remapping and fked up a bit, will fix.
7. with the wub section, i suggest you nc your sv changes eg 01:28:590 (2) - 01:29:104 (5) - I NC on pattern changes.
8. 01:31:675 (3,4,5) - dont really like this, feels like a bit of wasted potential if you can think of something without making playing them annoying then please do, because I don't want to make this annoying, just to make it filler or something.
9. 01:32:875 (4,5,6,7) - i think these play better as spaced streams instead, seems to fit better with the map since this patterning doesnt in any other sections i'm using spaced streams for kicks, this one has really squeaky sounds on red and white tick therefore stream jump. And does this dubstep section actually resemble any other setion of the song? I say no.
10. 03:06:304 (9,1) - jump here would be quite fitting imo for transitioning ctrl+gd 03:06:304 (9) -
11. 03:16:761 (5,6,7) - ctrl+g? no
12. 04:20:704 (3,4,5,6,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - i think its better with sharper curves, might be too hard for what you want tho i will see if i think of patterning this better but keeping similar curve.
13. dont really understand why your outro is intentionally(?) difficult to read it goes against what your intro built on, 00:03:047 (3,5) - 00:05:790 (3,5) - compared to 04:45:561 (3,5) - 04:46:932 (3,5) - 04:48:304 (3,5) - etc , why make them different? one reason, variety; 2nd reason its a longer section; 3rd reason the music is actually different as the outro contains snares compared to the intro

gl

1. hitsounds aren't rly that neat and not sync based on the song from its beat
2. 00:33:046 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,3,1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2) - what's up with this jumps, even it is not the same as 00:38:533 - which is suit better to have a jump gap from its intense part. just do the same thing as 00:22:075 - but a bit harder rather than having 1/2 notes spam there
3. 01:17:275 (3) - weird choice here. i'd just use a circle + 1/2 slider to follow the vocal well enough there
4. 01:25:761 (4,4) - overmapped due to an absent snare beat there
5. 01:39:561 (2) - NC
6. 01:46:075 (3,5,6,1,3) - i'd make it more linear and tidy if i were u
7. 01:53:961 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3) - what are you trying to follow here? i heard some notes from a blue tick, but this kind of rhythm feels like a bit off from such beat and somehow a bit weird rhythm choice here. would you like to check the rhythm here again? 01:59:447 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3) - 01:58:075 (1,2,3,4) -
8. 02:07:161 (2) - 02:08:533 (2) - 02:09:904 (2) - and the rests - this kind of hitsound doesn't suit so well for a remix song like this, or it's not rly suit for a part like this
9. 02:11:018 (5) - what are u trying to map here? 02:10:675 (3) - too. it's like an overmap for me
10. 02:17:275 (1,2,3) - i don't totally get it why u made such overlap, despite from the look that isn't look like a pattern ish. also, 02:18:304 (3) - why is the slider ending at a blue tick, instead of white tick? 02:20:018 (2,3,4) - is a perfect example that u did
11. 02:49:161 (3,4,5,6,1) - transition here is rly weird for a stream and the notes. would just do like http://puu.sh/wsQzn/6d1b6ceb8f.jpg better for example
12. 02:54:475 (2,1) - big question. why's the transition from 02:54:304 (1,2) - and 02:54:647 (1,2) - looks cool enough, but 02:54:475 (2,1) - feels like a confusing part that players might think 02:54:818 (2) - as (1)? i'd move 02:54:647 (1) - away somewhere for players not to make themselves confused from its transition
13. 02:56:704 (7) - you usually would do like 02:40:075 (4,5,6,7) - as u were following this all the time, but this time, u didn't
14. 03:05:532 (3,5) - what are u trying to follow here? clearly an overmap here
15. 03:49:161 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1) - the jumps here feel like random ish for me, and i don't think this pretty emphasize well with such pitch from low to high. would do sth like http://puu.sh/wsQSP/4a6054af9a.jpg for example
16. 03:50:533 - here we go, such random jumps with a huge gap around here. it's rly different from the rests of the part of this song, from this 1/2 spam jumps
17. 04:23:447 - i like the fact that u used such 1/2 note spam jumps that u were following a synth sound from high to low pitch, but this is pretty too much here. would use a bit of 1/2 sliders somewhere. same goes to 04:34:417 -
18. 04:52:761 (5,6,7,8,9,10,11,1) - try this since it follows the rhythm well, including following an emphasize vocal http://puu.sh/wsR1i/08a9286aa7.jpg

lit120 wrote:

[x]

1. hitsounds aren't rly that neat and not sync based on the song from its beat
2. 00:33:046 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,3,1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2) - what's up with this jumps, here's the deal, compared to the previous section we have this pitchy sounds added. Flow is circular, meaning they are not hard to land. Justification for having it all in 1/2 is that every beat is either a kick, clap. Every red tick is followed by the usual hardcore sound, which i hitsounded. I follow the intensity of pitches with jumps.
   00:38:533 - on here we have kicks as a main form, and to emphasize them from the previous jumps, they don't have circular flow (i don't know how their flow is called), and they're a bit larger, harder to do since no circular flow, the contrast can be easily grasped.
3. 01:17:275 (3) - weird choice here. i'd just use a circle + 1/2 slider to follow the vocal well enough there I think adding a reverse slider is really cute here, really like how it plays.
4. 01:25:761 (4,4) - overmapped due to an absent snare beat there i can hear something on (4)'s, think its the regular drum hit on the left,
   
5. 01:39:561 (2) - NC oki
6. 01:46:075 (3,5,6,1,3) - i'd make it more linear and tidy if i were u i did, and also made the previous similar pattern tidy.
7. 01:53:961 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3) - what are you trying to follow here? i heard some notes from a blue tick, but this kind of rhythm feels like a bit off from such beat and somehow a bit weird rhythm choice here. would you like to check the rhythm here again? 01:59:447 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3) - 01:58:075 (1,2,3,4) - following the piano when i felt that it got a bit more dominant. Thought it was a good way to make the section not boring.
8. 02:07:161 (2) - 02:08:533 (2) - 02:09:904 (2) - and the rests - this kind of hitsound doesn't suit so well for a remix song like this, or it's not rly suit for a part like this ugh think it sounds well, but weird when you slow it down or something.
9. 02:11:018 (5) - what are u trying to map here? 02:10:675 (3) - too. it's like an overmap for me cant you hear a 1/4 there?
10. 02:17:275 (1,2,3) - i don't totally get it why u made such overlap, despite from the look that isn't look like a pattern ish. thought it looks neat? Much more fun to play than generic patterns smh also, 02:18:304 (3) - why is the slider ending at a blue tick, instead of white tick? ugh i did some remapping and seems i fked up. fixed02:20:018 (2,3,4) - is a perfect example that u did
11. 02:49:161 (3,4,5,6,1) - transition here is rly weird for a stream and the notes. would just do like http://puu.sh/wsQzn/6d1b6ceb8f.jpg better for example alright, i'll see if there are more complaints.
12. 02:54:475 (2,1) - big question. why's the transition from 02:54:304 (1,2) - and 02:54:647 (1,2) - looks cool enough, but 02:54:475 (2,1) - feels like a confusing part that players might think 02:54:818 (2) - as (1)? i'd move 02:54:647 (1) - away somewhere for players not to make themselves confused from its transition hmm i kinda wanted that part to be a bit confusing, as you can see i also broke the usual 15 degree rotation, complain noted will see.
13. 02:56:704 (7) - you usually would do like 02:40:075 (4,5,6,7) - as u were following this all the time, but this time, u didn't i thought that doing 1/6 here would be annoying.
14. 03:05:532 (3,5) - what are u trying to follow here? clearly an overmap here mmmmm there's 1/4 there okay? :v
15. 03:49:161 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1) - the jumps here feel like random ish for me, and i don't think this pretty emphasize well with such pitch from low to high. would do sth like http://puu.sh/wsQSP/4a6054af9a.jpg for example oh thanks, did it exactly like the picture, wonderful!
16. 03:50:533 - here we go, such random jumps with a huge gap around here. it's rly different from the rests of the part of this song, from this 1/2 spam jumps basically we have kicks with added vocals here, wanted to make it different as we have no kicks with added vocals in other parts of the song righT?
17. 04:23:447 - i like the fact that u used such 1/2 note spam jumps that u were following a synth sound from high to low pitch, but this is pretty too much here. would use a bit of 1/2 sliders somewhere. same goes to 04:34:417 - well that's what i'd usually, but not on hardcore/techno songs,
    reason being song is repetetive, and i don't want to really make on 6.35* some things to make it easier just for the sake of it, not for following the song.
    
18. 04:52:761 (5,6,7,8,9,10,11,1) - try this since it follows the rhythm well, including following an emphasize vocal http://puu.sh/wsR1i/08a9286aa7.jpg hm i used that rhythm on the following section therefore denied. Feel like the next pattern needs it more, since the 5stack fits really well there, at least better than it would here.

i'm not rly into wub wub songs a lot tbh, but that wub wub part is a bit difficulty there, and i couldn't feel the wub parts there well. something like 01:32:875 (4,5,6,7,8) - would be better like http://puu.sh/wsR7C/af31410d61.jpg for example. for an emphasize note like 01:34:075 (2) - should be NC after that wub from 01:33:390 (1) - , same goes to the rest from this part alright, i will apply the nc suggestions. Think that the hanzer streams flow well, will keep, i hit them fairly easily, they're on a circular flow, your suggestion is a bit more interesting, will decide later.

i'm not saying that i suck on this map so hard since i failed it somewhere, but i couldn't just feel the wub parts there tbh

gl

gary00737 wrote:

From my Q

00:00:304 (3,5,6) -Aligned ? doesn't really need to be

00:14:790 (8,9,10,11,1) - i think 00:14:533 (6,7) - ctrl+g 00:14:790 (8,9) - ctrl+g can put them on https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/8425321 , flow will be better both work

00:31:675 (1,2,3,4) - i think 00:32:018 (2,3,4) - flow not good you can try 00:32:018 (2) - http://i.imgur.com/9XwXJjl.png it works, on gameplay you won't feel the curves, they go right as fully straight sliders.

00:41:875 (8,1) - why jump? i think overlap will be better to show.http://i.imgur.com/7zBhuFB.png makes no sense to curve 8 like that

04:44:018 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - i like this part ! thanks


I can't pass this map , but i think it is cool !! thanks

GL! thanks

FruityEnLoops wrote:

hi

mod in a box cuz no forum spam

not snapped objects on aimod
00:10:761 (3,4,5,6,1) - seems weird because 00:10:247 (5) - sliderhead is still visible it doesnt give a bad feeling in gameplay
00:12:132 (9,5) - ugly overlap not visible
00:22:075 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - align these I don't want to, this looks more appealing to me.
00:22:933 (7,8) - ^
00:23:447 (1,2,3,4) - ^
00:24:133 (1,2,1,2) - ^
01:05:447 (6) - ctrl +j i like it in its current state
01:18:990 (1,3) - mb stack since you stack 01:20:447 (5,6) - 01:18:990 (1,2,3,4) - i like how the pattern looks, stacking it will mean it won't look as well.
01:22:590 (2,4,6,8) - not perfect aligned, seems ugly fixed
01:50:875 (5,3) - doesn't seem stacked perfectly to me it seems
01:54:133 (3,4,1,2,3) - bruh ever seen stream overlapping itself? xd
01:56:704 (1,2,3,4) - feels weirdly not aligned fixed
01:59:619 (3,4,1,2,3) - bruh bruh
02:29:447 (2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2) - ugly non perfect triangle, but fine how is this ugly dude? I don't want a perfect triangle, 30-45 degrees works here better, i want sharp movement her
02:41:704 (9,3) - meh not viisble in gameplay
03:09:218 (11,1) - ugly k
03:51:047 (4,8,9,1) - ^ jesus
04:42:647 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1) - stack like 05:04:590 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - will not, the first stream has bigger emphasis on 9th beat 04:43:333 (1) -

good map, it has potential thanks
gl thanks

• [Dance]
  

1. 00:09:733 (1,2,3) - inconsistent spacing, there isnt specific sound here dat need to used differnet spacing to express
2. 00:19:333 - lower spacing at the intense part conpare with 00:10:761 - , i think u should just decreased the spacing at 00:10:761 - since rn the spacing is rly kinda large
3. 00:27:218 (3) - should NC for consistent
4. 00:27:647 (2,3) - should stack there instead for consistent structrue
5. 00:55:847 (5) - should NC here for consistent
6. 01:02:190 (4,5,6) - 01:03:819 (4,5) - 01:05:190 (4,5) - difficulty spike here, should just stack it with the sliderend like the previous structure
7. 01:18:475 - spacing is overdone imo, x0.7 is enough to express the music here
8. 01:21:218 (1) - pretty unnecessary NC
9. 01:32:875 (4,6) - 01:33:218 (8) - 01:38:361 (3,5,7) - 01:43:847 (4,6,8) - NC for emphasis
10. 01:47:104 - NC is pretty messy here, rather NC every 2 notes or dont
11. 01:48:475 (1,2) - u should probably make the 1/1 gap more clear since the spacing now is the same as the 1/2
12. 02:11:018 (5) - 03:05:875 (5) - this notes seem pretty unnecessary imo since its expressing nothing, theres no sound here
13. 02:54:647 (1) - https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/8433199, try this, lot better then stacking
14. 03:01:847 (3,3,3) - 03:12:818 (3,3,3) - u should NC here like wat uve done in the previous patterns 02:06:990 -
15. 03:41:104 (4) - should be NC on here instead of 03:40:418 (1) - to stay consistent with this part
16. 04:20:704 (3) - NC
17. 04:38:875 (3,5,7) - keep NC for consistent
18. 04:54:990 (1,2,3,4,5) - inconsistent spaicng

SnowNiNo_ wrote:

M4M

• [Dance]
  

1. 00:09:733 (1,2,3) - inconsistent spacing, there isnt specific sound here dat need to used differnet spacing to express increased it a bit to follow the increase of intensity of vocals.
2. 00:19:333 - lower spacing at the intense part conpare with 00:10:761 - , i think u should just decreased the spacing at 00:10:761 - since rn the spacing is rly kinda large made em the same, increased one, decreased other.
3. 00:27:218 (3) - should NC for consistent done
4. 00:27:647 (2,3) - should stack there instead for consistent structrue stacking it feels weird, used 0.1 to make it not look weird
5. 00:55:847 (5) - should NC here for consistent hm now that i took a look i fked up some NCing, will fix.
6. 01:02:190 (4,5,6) - 01:03:819 (4,5) - 01:05:190 (4,5) - difficulty spike here, should just stack it with the sliderend like the previous structure not sure what you mean by placing on slider end like previous structure, but diff spike is intended.
7. 01:18:475 - spacing is overdone imo, x0.7 is enough to express the music here did 0.9x instead
8. 01:21:218 (1) - pretty unnecessary NC fixed
9. 01:32:875 (4,6) - 01:33:218 (8) - 01:38:361 (3,5,7) - 01:43:847 (4,6,8) - NC for emphasis
10. 01:47:104 - NC is pretty messy here, rather NC every 2 notes or dont keeping, because 1,2,3,4 contains kicks.
11. 01:48:475 (1,2) - u should probably make the 1/1 gap more clear since the spacing now is the same as the 1/2 its not the same it even got lowered, and if you can't read this 1/1 gap then there's something wrong with the player ;d
12. 02:11:018 (5) - 03:05:875 (5) - this notes seem pretty unnecessary imo since its expressing nothing, theres no sound here there is a sound there, and i planned on it to express nothing, just to be a filler somewhat, giving emphasis on the decrease of slider speed and 3stack.
13. 02:54:647 (1) - https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/8433199, try this, lot better then stacking alright did something
14. 03:01:847 (3,3,3) - 03:12:818 (3,3,3) - u should NC here like wat uve done in the previous patterns 02:06:990 - was i always this bad in NCing lol
15. 03:41:104 (4) - should be NC on here instead of 03:40:418 (1) - to stay consistent with this part fixed
16. 04:20:704 (3) - NC yes
17. 04:38:875 (3,5,7) - keep NC for consistent mm don't want to here, something else is getting emphasized here.
18. 04:54:990 (1,2,3,4,5) - inconsistent spaicng what the actual fuck

• 
  [General]
  

1. So for metadata people usually use the vocalist as the artist, so in this case the artist would be nomico. Refer to the official website.
2. soft-hitnormal8.wav and soft-hitwhistle8.wav are unused. If you're not going to be using them I'd suggest removing them.
3. normal-hitwhistle11.wav, soft-hitnormal3.wav and soft-hitnormal6.wav have >5 ms delays, might want to cut to where they start with something like audacity.
   
   [Dance]
4. 00:09:904 (3,1) - Could keep this straight like the other streams were done for visual consistency.
5. 00:09:733 (1,2,3) - Could also avoid this overlap probably, doesn't look very visually pleasing.
6. 00:14:018 (2,3,4,10,11,1) - Is the spacing between streams consistent? Looks like these two are different despite the first circle being stacked here. If it's increasing in intensity then same should probably go for 00:15:904 (5,6,7,8) - or whatnot. tbh I'd just suggest for it to be the same, unless it's really noticeable there's no need to gradually increase the spacing like this, especially not for single instances.
7. 00:20:361 (5) - Slider here seems strange, as nothing is really changing in the song compared to when it was just circles. Would just replace it with two circles to continue the pattern and avoid 00:20:447 - being skipped, as players are likely to just keep holding the key from that note on.
8. 00:33:046 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2) - So I like the idea for these patterns but it would probably reflect the pitch better if 00:33:733 (1,2) - was the climax instead of 00:33:046 (1,2) - , as it's starting off weak.
9. 00:42:647 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - I noticed a lot of these patterns aren't really straight visually. Pretty sure things would look neater and more structured if the circles held some linear relation to each other like most other things seem to do.
10. 00:44:018 (1,2,3,4) - 00:46:761 (1,2,3,4) - Probably a good idea to keep spacing consistent throughout patterns like these. Especially considering how 00:46:933 (2,3) - is currently larger than 00:47:104 (3,4) - despite (4) having the vocal on it. Generally the less you space things like 00:46:761 (1,2) - , the more powerful actual jumps become in comparison due to contrast.
11. 00:49:333 (8,1,2) - This looks a bit odd aesthetically, something like 00:50:704 (1,2,3,4,5) - looks a lot cleaner. Additionally, why is 00:49:504 (1,2,3) - so different from 00:50:704 (1,2,3,4,5,1,2,3,4,5,1,2,3,4) - ? The others seem to have a defined pattern but not this first one.
12. 01:00:475 - There's something weird about the structure here. So considering that 01:01:675 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7) - is basically a flipped version of 01:03:047 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - , and that's a flipped version of 01:04:418 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - , I'd say 01:00:475 (1,2,3,4) - is what is out of pattern. Could solve that by flipping 01:01:675 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7) - over and then adjusting for rhythm, sort of like this. That way all repeating vocals here will be matched by a respective repeating pattern in the map.
13. 01:07:675 (3,4,5,6,7,1,2,3,4) - So from here spacing is starting to get a little crazy. I realize intensity is getting higher in the background, and increasing spacing does make sense in that regard, but the way it's executed here kills the contrast that each jump should have in turn. Jumps like 01:08:018 (5,6) - are really large and basically overemphasize the sounds. Compare the spacing to something like 01:06:304 (2,3) - or 01:06:990 (5,6) - , which are stronger, for example.
    
    This is recurring issue in the map as far as I've seen; individually, spacing is fine, but contrast suffers because of the way it's done as a whole. By increasing the base spacing this much, it's hard to differentiate weaker sounds from stronger sounds as easily, which is generally bad. Usually maps would have frequent smaller spacings in between to build contrast properly, for example for 01:06:475 (3,4) - or 00:59:447 (2,3) - . Anyway this probably mostly has to do with the constant beats that the song has, which, if focused on too much, makes things monotonous and jump-heavy. In worst-case scenario you'll also end up skipping distinct vocals that are off-beat, for instance.
    
    
14. 01:11:447 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - So the first two combos and the other two, 01:14:018 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,1,2,3,4,5,6,7) - , are pretty different both in spacing and rhythm. Would be cool imo if parts like these would appear in the same sort of patterns and just vary slightly perhaps, like the other one mentioned.
15. 01:17:447 - The way this is skipped, but 01:18:133 - is emphasized through the insane spacing at 01:17:790 (5,6,1) - , makes the emphasis feel a bit inconsistent. Could otherwise try something along the lines of 01:19:675 (1,2,3,4) - .
16. 01:47:447 (1,2,3,4,1,2) - Would be interesting if the snares could stand out more in some way, maybe Ctrl G 01:47:618 (2,3) - and 01:48:133 (1,2) - . Additionally, could start the new combo on 01:47:961 - instead of 01:48:133 - , as 01:47:447 (1,2,3) - 01:47:961 (4,1,2) - are grouped in the song.
17. 01:49:847 - This section is mostly following the drums which makes it a bit repetitive and monotonous in rhythm, could try following vocals at parts, like swapping 01:50:875 (5,1) - 01:56:190 (5,6) - rhythmically. Accentuating things like 01:52:418 - 01:52:761 - 02:03:390 - etc. There's no need to do so when a slider is followed by a stream, as ending sliders on strong beats can be used for switching instrumental layer. Just feels a bit unnecessary to do so when it's all just the same beat over and over. Atm it just feels like sliders and circles are switched between a bit randomly just to be there rather than to follow the song, even if the intention may have been different.
18. 01:53:961 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3) - 01:56:704 (1,2,3,4) - 01:58:075 (1,2,3,4) - 01:59:447 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3) - These are overall pretty weak and makes 02:00:475 (3,4,5,6,1) - lose contrast, but I'm guessing it is to add variety. Only problem here is that they're a bit randomly placed on the timeline and they're not really following any pattern in that regard from what I can see. Later on they're used as triples as well without anything really changing in the song. Basically try arranging things in patterns rhythmically, so perhaps the first and third measures are identical but first has a triple and fourth has a longer stream, etc, just so things become a bit more recognizable and feel like it's actually meant to be there rather than just being added for variety here and there.
19. 02:11:447 (9) - Could NC this to represent a transition.
20. 02:54:904 - 1/4 is ignored here. Would turn 02:54:818 (2,3) - into a triple so it's presented differently from 02:54:647 (1) - in accordance with the song.
21. 03:10:933 (1) - There's a bit too many different sliders going on here, would try incorporating this into 03:11:104 (2,3) - . Then NC the snares as to separate the groups.
22. 03:50:533 (1,2,3,4) - 03:51:390 (5,6,7) - So from here on it's mostly just about spacing and contrast. If you're aiming to emphasize things like 03:51:047 - 03:51:733 - , spacing should preferably reflect that in some way rather than becoming lower. There's also the concern that things are getting more and more random as spacing increases. Preferably all objects should be visually supported and included in some kind of visual pattern or whatnot, but here circles are seemingly just placed after spacing and sharp flow than anything else. Even star patterns like 03:54:818 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7) - aren't balanced very well. This applies especially for 04:01:504 - .
23. Things like vocals could be emphasized at 04:04:761 - etc. Think I've already mentioned most things so won't go into much more detail.
24. 04:32:523 (2) - Over 5 ms unsnapped, nudge it a bit on the timeline and it'll snap into place.
    
    So overall I think it would be great if some more contrast could be made so not everything is high spacing all the time. It'd be a good idea to make some parts lower spacing so that others can stand out more. Hardstyle and hardcore maps usually have strong and constant beats, but prioritizing them too much would make things repetitive in rhythm, so I'd suggest focusing a bit more on vocals and trying to make the rhythm more elaborate. For example swapping 04:12:990 (4,5) - rhythmically or accentuating 04:15:733 - more, not just having all sliders on white ticks.

Naxess wrote:

Greetings

• 
  [General]
  

1. So for metadata people usually use the vocalist as the artist, so in this case the artist would be nomico. Refer to the official website.
2. soft-hitnormal8.wav and soft-hitwhistle8.wav are unused. If you're not going to be using them I'd suggest removing them.
3. normal-hitwhistle11.wav, soft-hitnormal3.wav and soft-hitnormal6.wav have >5 ms delays, might want to cut to where they start with something like audacity.
   Alright will make nomico the artist, and probably successfully fix hitsounds.
   
   [Dance]
4. 00:09:904 (3,1) - Could keep this straight like the other streams were done for visual consistency. mm alirght, guess it looks better
5. 00:09:733 (1,2,3) - Could also avoid this overlap probably, doesn't look very visually pleasing. alright
6. 00:14:018 (2,3,4,10,11,1) - Is the spacing between streams consistent? Looks like these two are different despite the first circle being stacked here. If it's increasing in intensity then same should probably go for 00:15:904 (5,6,7,8) - or whatnot. tbh I'd just suggest for it to be the same, unless it's really noticeable there's no need to gradually increase the spacing like this, especially not for single instances. since this timing for a 3stack is first used, I thought that minor increase in spacing will tell a bit that something is a bit different here. I hitsounded with my whistles to show what's going on.
7. 00:20:361 (5) - Slider here seems strange, as nothing is really changing in the song compared to when it was just circles. Would just replace it with two circles to continue the pattern and avoid 00:20:447 - being skipped, as players are likely to just keep holding the key from that note on. mm its a bit different, it looks weirder imo to keep 6 circles there, when i want the stream to be like 180degree turn and have something good on the overlap.
8. 00:33:046 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2) - So I like the idea for these patterns but it would probably reflect the pitch better if 00:33:733 (1,2) - was the climax instead of 00:33:046 (1,2) - , as it's starting off weak. oh that's a nice catch, now the question is how much to nerf 00:33:046 (1,2)
9. 00:42:647 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - I noticed a lot of these patterns aren't really straight visually. Pretty sure things would look neater and more structured if the circles held some linear relation to each other like most other things seem to do. i need a ruler.
10. 00:44:018 (1,2,3,4) - 00:46:761 (1,2,3,4) - Probably a good idea to keep spacing consistent throughout patterns like these. Especially considering how 00:46:933 (2,3) - is currently larger than 00:47:104 (3,4) - despite (4) having the vocal on it. Generally the less you space things like 00:46:761 (1,2) - , the more powerful actual jumps become in comparison due to contrast. will adjust.
11. 00:49:333 (8,1,2) - This looks a bit odd aesthetically, something like 00:50:704 (1,2,3,4,5) - looks a lot cleaner. Additionally, why is 00:49:504 (1,2,3) - so different from 00:50:704 (1,2,3,4,5,1,2,3,4,5,1,2,3,4) - ? The others seem to have a defined pattern but not this first one. the first one contains different rhythm, and a bit less intensity on the song, than the other 3 patterns. But I think it look nice aesthetically, not sure what would make it unappealing.
12. 01:00:475 - There's something weird about the structure here. So considering that 01:01:675 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7) - is basically a flipped version of 01:03:047 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - , and that's a flipped version of 01:04:418 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - , I'd say 01:00:475 (1,2,3,4) - is what is out of pattern. Could solve that by flipping 01:01:675 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7) - over and then adjusting for rhythm, sort of like this. That way all repeating vocals here will be matched by a respective repeating pattern in the map. hmm i kinda intended the first pattern to be more different, and out of the pattern, maybe I could make it be more similar, but I don't really want it to be identical.
13. 01:07:675 (3,4,5,6,7,1,2,3,4) - So from here spacing is starting to get a little crazy. I realize intensity is getting higher in the background, and increasing spacing does make sense in that regard, but the way it's executed here kills the contrast that each jump should have in turn. Jumps like 01:08:018 (5,6) - are really large and basically overemphasize the sounds. Compare the spacing to something like 01:06:304 (2,3) - or 01:06:990 (5,6) - , which are stronger, for example. adjusted spacings to make more contrast ( I HOPE )
    
    This is recurring issue in the map as far as I've seen; individually, spacing is fine, but contrast suffers because of the way it's done as a whole. By increasing the base spacing this much, it's hard to differentiate weaker sounds from stronger sounds as easily, which is generally bad. Usually maps would have frequent smaller spacings in between to build contrast properly, for example for 01:06:475 (3,4) - or 00:59:447 (2,3) - . Anyway this probably mostly has to do with the constant beats that the song has, which, if focused on too much, makes things monotonous and jump-heavy. In worst-case scenario you'll also end up skipping distinct vocals that are off-beat, for instance. I'll take a look over in the map and spot such errors.
    
    
14. 01:11:447 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - So the first two combos and the other two, 01:14:018 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,1,2,3,4,5,6,7) - , are pretty different both in spacing and rhythm. Would be cool imo if parts like these would appear in the same sort of patterns and just vary slightly perhaps, like the other one mentioned. will adjust, wanted to go for some diversity, but I guess i went too diverse here.
15. 01:17:447 - The way this is skipped, but 01:18:133 - is emphasized through the insane spacing at 01:17:790 (5,6,1) - , makes the emphasis feel a bit inconsistent. Could otherwise try something along the lines of 01:19:675 (1,2,3,4) - . adjusted 01:17:790 (5,6,1), but will keep 01:17:447 since i really like how it plays, till i become brave enough to remap it
16. 01:47:447 (1,2,3,4,1,2) - Would be interesting if the snares could stand out more in some way, maybe Ctrl G 01:47:618 (2,3) - and 01:48:133 (1,2) - . Additionally, could start the new combo on 01:47:961 - instead of 01:48:133 - , as 01:47:447 (1,2,3) - 01:47:961 (4,1,2) - are grouped in the song. your pattern suggestion is neat, and fits the section, however in the map i usually give emphasis to kicks, so giving them here 0 emphasis could make a contrast, and that would be unwanted, no?
17. 01:49:847 - This section is mostly following the drums which makes it a bit repetitive and monotonous in rhythm, could try following vocals at parts, like swapping 01:50:875 (5,1) - 01:56:190 (5,6) - rhythmically. Accentuating things like 01:52:418 - 01:52:761 - 02:03:390 - etc. There's no need to do so when a slider is followed by a stream, as ending sliders on strong beats can be used for switching instrumental layer. Just feels a bit unnecessary to do so when it's all just the same beat over and over. Atm it just feels like sliders and circles are switched between a bit randomly just to be there rather than to follow the song, even if the intention may have been different. okay I will experiment with your rhythm suggestion a bit.
18. 01:53:961 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3) - 01:56:704 (1,2,3,4) - 01:58:075 (1,2,3,4) - 01:59:447 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3) - These are overall pretty weak and makes 02:00:475 (3,4,5,6,1) - lose contrast, but I'm guessing it is to add variety. Only problem here is that they're a bit randomly placed on the timeline and they're not really following any pattern in that regard from what I can see. Later on they're used as triples as well without anything really changing in the song. Basically try arranging things in patterns rhythmically, so perhaps the first and third measures are identical but first has a triple and fourth has a longer stream, etc, just so things become a bit more recognizable and feel like it's actually meant to be there rather than just being added for variety here and there. I'll see if i can think of a better patterning to represent the streams/triples, but overall they feel floaty and I don't think they actually have a consistent place rhythmically.
19. 02:11:447 (9) - Could NC this to represent a transition. applied
20. 02:54:904 - 1/4 is ignored here. Would turn 02:54:818 (2,3) - into a triple so it's presented differently from 02:54:647 (1) - in accordance with the song. I don't want to add a generic tripple here, I wanted to add 30 degree rotated sliders to introduce a change in music and begin a new section.
21. 03:10:933 (1) - There's a bit too many different sliders going on here, would try incorporating this into 03:11:104 (2,3) - . Then NC the snares as to separate the groups.
22. 03:50:533 (1,2,3,4) - 03:51:390 (5,6,7) - So from here on it's mostly just about spacing and contrast. If you're aiming to emphasize things like 03:51:047 - 03:51:733 - , spacing should preferably reflect that in some way rather than becoming lower. There's also the concern that things are getting more and more random as spacing increases. Preferably all objects should be visually supported and included in some kind of visual pattern or whatnot, but here circles are seemingly just placed after spacing and sharp flow than anything else. Even star patterns like 03:54:818 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7) - aren't balanced very well. This applies especially for 04:01:504 - . will do some remapping.
23. Things like vocals could be emphasized at 04:04:761 - etc. Think I've already mentioned most things so won't go into much more detail. yes
24. 04:32:523 (2) - Over 5 ms unsnapped, nudge it a bit on the timeline and it'll snap into place. yes
    
    So overall I think it would be great if some more contrast could be made so not everything is high spacing all the time. It'd be a good idea to make some parts lower spacing so that others can stand out more. Hardstyle and hardcore maps usually have strong and constant beats, but prioritizing them too much would make things repetitive in rhythm, so I'd suggest focusing a bit more on vocals and trying to make the rhythm more elaborate. For example swapping 04:12:990 (4,5) - rhythmically or accentuating 04:15:733 - more, not just having all sliders on white ticks.I in fact noticed that it should be done like that after going through the map many times, but i was seriously wondering when will somebody actually point it out, thanks for doing that, will adjust. I will try to bring more contrast to the map.

Anyway I probably won't be nominating the map, but after this it'll be rankable at least. Also some pointers to what I think other nominators would notice. Not nominating but really improving the quality of the map, after I do some more adjustments especially. Really appreciated, thanks for the mod, helped me a lot.

Shiirn wrote:

00:20:361 (5) - Just make this two notes. nuu, really like how the 1/4 slider fits there.

01:00:818 (2,3,4) - Remember the whole "pattern" thing? well, this isn't fitting the pattern of all the segments after it. This combo is the start of the musical and vocal pattern that you represent with this setup: 01:03:047 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - , but it's completely different here. mm alright will change the first pattern, guess the difference between sounds is not obvious enough to have different patterning

01:16:933 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - These have a sharp angle after the slider's momentum to hit the following two notes, but 01:19:675 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - are less so, with the final one being... relatively natural. Consistency would help here. adjusted

01:25:161 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3) - these would probably work better as triples with the last click being a 1/4 slider, rather than outright 4-4-4-3, as it makes it pretty awkward. nah, i emphasize white ticks because of the finish, having them on triples emphasizes nothing.

01:31:904 (5) - This doesn't really need a repeat, does it? i'll keep, its okay to have it on, ending on the 1/3 feels weird
01:42:876 (5) - ^etc

04:02:704 (7,8,1) - vs 04:05:447 (7,1,2,3) - , pick one and stick with it


I didn't do a really exhaustive or more than a surface check because I don't really like this map due to its reliance on massive 1-2 barely structured jumps for most of the buildups and non-wub choruses. It's artificial and straining when the wub sections are hard enough. idk though its a techno/hardcore song, repetetive 1-2 jumps imo fit in this map. Since there are a lot of them, structuring them perfectly and accordingly will result in a rather boring map.