Masayoshi Minoshima feat.nomico - Lost Emotion (Amane UK Har

posted
Total Posts
90
show more
Celektus
I just wanted to clear up some possible misconceptions and explain myself shortly, No Drama or anything just reiterating some points. Anything I didn't mention either ties into other points or is just fine.



MaridiuS wrote:

some feedback on the mod: Please bear in mind that people don't want to go gimmicky if they initially don't show on such patterns such gimmicks. Therefore suggesting wild ways to emphasize the little things will almost never going to work, and you're probably wasting your energy and the mappers. You had good points in few parts, but imo should tone down a bit on wild suggestions. Even though I like new perspectives and such, it feels like a chore needing to explain basics of your map really often, and you should be a bit more selective in pointing out suggestions. Thanks for the mod, I saw effort and i appreciate it, have a nice day.
  • first off thanks for the feedback, yet I think there is something worth pointing out about this. There were 2 main reasons why I suggested points like this and also why I suggested so many of them.
    [list:1337]

    1. The map has some more techy wub sections which you even mentioned yourself in the description and so on.

    2. this specific pattern which only occurs 1:30 minutes into the song 01:32:875 (1,2,1,2) - 01:38:361 (1,2,1,2) - You mention that you aren't HanzeR and thus I assume you don't intend to use patterns like I suggested, yet they were specifically suggested by me to "also imply early on that later sections might have more complex design" this can also be applied to your jump streams. Because of that I do think that suggestions like the ones I made are not that far off in terms of you putting them in when I made the mod.


[]

MaridiuS wrote:

Celektus wrote:

Sorry to have kept you waiting.

  1. If I'm not mistake this is the first 1/2 stack in the map so far 01:27:218 (3,4) - which is in case I'm right maybe a bit too unpredictable. Spacing them barely out would make them less unexpected. If that is your intention I would still argue that it's just a bit annoying to sight-read as players expect 1/2 to never be stacked until this point. This comes up again 03:41:275 (2,3) - and this one is not justified by the moment it is in being as special as before and it's even later than before so consider spacing these out. never seen anybody failing that, so keeping. I want it to have as little as intensity possible, stacking them would be lame.

    I suggested spacing them out and not stacking them. I these are kind of fine in retrospect because of the difference in section, yet implementing them early on would make 'em more predictable.
  2. removing 1 reverse might be more fitting 02:25:161 (7) - since it's landing on a blue tick which is a bit less intuitive to release on... and overall 1/4 gaps after buzz sliders can be a bit annoying. 1/4 gap is completely enough, you want it on 1/8 timing or what?

    I suggested to remove 1 reverse not add one. Aka this not this
  3. I don't get why this is a slider? 03:09:218 (11) - ugh 02:41:790 (10) - ? hello?

    hi. 02:41:790 (10) -has a Vocal on the slider 03:09:218 (11) -has not thus I assumed that was supposed to represent the Vocal while the other doesn't. Also I don't see a reason in putting a slider there just for consistency if it represents nothing and isn't needed for leniency shenanigans.

that's all hope it isn't too much, gl with the map~
Topic Starter
MaridiuS
I just wanted to clear up some possible misconceptions and explain myself shortly, No Drama or anything just reiterating some points. Anything I didn't mention either ties into other points or is just fine.



MaridiuS wrote:

some feedback on the mod: Please bear in mind that people don't want to go gimmicky if they initially don't show on such patterns such gimmicks. Therefore suggesting wild ways to emphasize the little things will almost never going to work, and you're probably wasting your energy and the mappers. You had good points in few parts, but imo should tone down a bit on wild suggestions. Even though I like new perspectives and such, it feels like a chore needing to explain basics of your map really often, and you should be a bit more selective in pointing out suggestions. Thanks for the mod, I saw effort and i appreciate it, have a nice day.
  • first off thanks for the feedback, yet I think there is something worth pointing out about this. There were 2 main reasons why I suggested points like this and also why I suggested so many of them.
    [list:1337]

    1. The map has some more techy wub sections which you even mentioned yourself in the description and so on.

    2. this specific pattern which only occurs 1:30 minutes into the song 01:32:875 (1,2,1,2) - 01:38:361 (1,2,1,2) - You mention that you aren't HanzeR and thus I assume you don't intend to use patterns like I suggested, yet they were specifically suggested by me to "also imply early on that later sections might have more complex design" this can also be applied to your jump streams. Because of that I do think that suggestions like the ones I made are not that far off in terms of you putting them in when I made the mod.
Basically I don't want to do such things, since they don't fit there in comparasion to what i did in the wub section for hanzer streams. I didn't base my map around them, I've used them to emphasize certain notes, which is kinda different. The intro section, and jumpstream 00:41:875 (8,1) - should at least tell that this isn't the most usual map.

[]

MaridiuS wrote:

Celektus wrote:

Sorry to have kept you waiting.

  1. If I'm not mistake this is the first 1/2 stack in the map so far 01:27:218 (3,4) - which is in case I'm right maybe a bit too unpredictable. Spacing them barely out would make them less unexpected. If that is your intention I would still argue that it's just a bit annoying to sight-read as players expect 1/2 to never be stacked until this point. This comes up again 03:41:275 (2,3) - and this one is not justified by the moment it is in being as special as before and it's even later than before so consider spacing these out. never seen anybody failing that, so keeping. I want it to have as little as intensity possible, stacking them would be lame.

    I suggested spacing them out and not stacking them. I these are kind of fine in retrospect because of the difference in section, yet implementing them early on would make 'em more predictable. I apologize for not wording correctly, I thought that stacking would be lame, and spacing them out to not touch is not something i want to do for vocals without background music backing them out.
  2. removing 1 reverse might be more fitting 02:25:161 (7) - since it's landing on a blue tick which is a bit less intuitive to release on... and overall 1/4 gaps after buzz sliders can be a bit annoying. 1/4 gap is completely enough, you want it on 1/8 timing or what?

    I suggested to remove 1 reverse not add one. Aka this not this that's even more unusual, blue tick is the hotspot, check all ranked maps, nobody releases it before the blue tick.
  3. I don't get why this is a slider? 03:09:218 (11) - ugh 02:41:790 (10) - ? hello?

    hi. 02:41:790 (10) -has a Vocal on the slider 03:09:218 (11) -has not thus I assumed that was supposed to represent the Vocal while the other doesn't. Also I don't see a reason in putting a slider there just for consistency if it represents nothing and isn't needed for leniency shenanigans. consistency is a nice thing to have. And it follows the strongest beat, since the next 1/4 isn't really audible, and this is the peek, i made it a kickslider.

that's all hope it isn't too much, gl with the map~
Zexous


M4M p/6140138

lol @ your audio file's genre being labeled "Blues"

[Despondency]
rrrreeeeee those S:C1 and N:C1 hitnormals trigger me everytime, it makes me think of a duck quacking in my face

  1. Things that aren't snapped: 00:39:216 (1) - 00:39:387 (2) - 00:39:558 (1) - 00:39:729 (2) - 02:30:477 (2) - 02:30:820 (2) - 02:45:731 (5) - 02:45:845 (6) -
  2. 00:10:590 (2) - ctrl+G? leads better into next combo
  3. 00:15:390 (2,3) - This section so far was doubles, so a player might not interpret that this is a 1/4 gap instead of a 1/2 gap, perhaps space them closer
  4. 00:44:018 - This section is really dull with the lack of hitsounds, also 00:54:990 - 01:05:961 - 02:11:790 - 03:39:561 - . Use some regular whistles or something bruh, your custom whistle is so quiet I literally didn't even know it was there until I clicked on an object
  5. 00:49:504 - The SV switches in this section are absolutely not merited imo. It's the exact same intensity, same sounds going on, literally all that's even different is vocal's pitch, and that's not at all enough to suggest these SV changes (and if you wanted SV changes by pitch to be a thing, then you should have like a million more SV switches in the map lol). Same for all other instances of this stuff, like 01:11:447 -
  6. 01:00:818 (2,3,4) - This and the other patterns like this play really awkwardly for some reason
  7. 01:11:104 (4,5,1) - Awkward motion, I'd suggest something more like this http://puu.sh/wOVqT/4590b4043d.jpg (rough idea)
  8. 01:28:590 (1,2,3) - Really don't think the S:C1 fits this part lol
  9. 01:28:590 (1,2,3) - 01:28:590 (1,2,3) - This is really bad spacing imo, the fact that 01:28:933 (3) - is 1/2 even though the previous objects were a large 1/4 gap just feels really disjointed
  10. 01:30:475 (5) - ctrl+G? Makes more sense in just about every way
  11. 01:31:504 (2,3) - This is a really difficult gap to cross in 1/6
  12. 01:32:190 (1,2) - Very strange pattern that the 1/4 slider is longer than the 1/3 reverse but with no clear indication of such
  13. 01:32:875 (1,2,1,2) - wew lad, total counter-flow streamjumps play like total ass and aren't really fun at all, imo you should map these differently. Same for all other instances of these
  14. 01:37:504 (2,1,1) - This is really hard to read as all being 1/4 gaps, and is also really awkward to play, I really think something like this would be better http://puu.sh/wOVQt/4d338081e4.jpg
  15. 02:14:533 (1,2,3) - This is probably readable because the rhythm is predictable, but this is pretty bad spacing
  16. 02:33:475 (3,4) - imo these should be spaced closer
    {*]02:34:590 (4,5) - Same as before, this is a really awkward spacing for a 1/6 gap, same goes for the other instances too
  17. 03:10:933 (1,2) - These two also have no reason to be different SV
  18. 03:19:168 - I don't usually like sliderart because a lot of people just want to make cool sliders but don't make them relevant, so for example I like that this slider 03:17:618 (1) - has this sharp turn 03:18:304 - exactly here, but then you have a bunch of random parts to all the sliders that don't really mean anything. tl;dr I think you should work on changing the sliders to actually correspond to the music beyond just the start and end points, it's really cool to see and hear, and makes the slider actually meaningful
  19. 03:50:533 - there's a lot of unmapped 1/4 in this section, it feels very weird because it's so audible
  20. 04:21:733 (1,2,3,4) - For this last part of this stream pattern, it looks kinda messy, why not do something like this instead? http://puu.sh/wOYoW/bf60938c96.jpg


gl
Topic Starter
MaridiuS

Zexous wrote:



Your picture looks like a tag of an elite queue that has come to say a casual Greetings, and proceed to completely demolish your map and reasons to live.

M4M p/6140138

lol @ your audio file's genre being labeled "Blues"

[Despondency]
rrrreeeeee those S:C1 and N:C1 hitnormals trigger me everytime, it makes me think of a duck quacking in my face that's cute, if you have hitsounds that could replace them better, please call me ;d. Maybe, I'll remove custom normal hitsounds completely.

  1. Things that aren't snapped: 00:39:216 (1) - 00:39:387 (2) - 00:39:558 (1) - 00:39:729 (2) - 02:30:477 (2) - 02:30:820 (2) - 02:45:731 (5) - 02:45:845 (6) - tfw you do some copy paste mapping, and this happens.
  2. 00:10:590 (2) - ctrl+G? leads better into next combo woooosh, flow doesn't exist, I like the movement that is done here.
  3. 00:15:390 (2,3) - This section so far was doubles, so a player might not interpret that this is a 1/4 gap instead of a 1/2 gap, perhaps space them closer doesn't seem like a problem to move it a bit closer, so i did.
  4. 00:44:018 - This section is really dull with the lack of hitsounds, also 00:54:990 - 01:05:961 - 02:11:790 - 03:39:561 - . Use some regular whistles or something bruh, your custom whistle is so quiet I literally didn't even know it was there until I clicked on an object i'll use some random whistle i have for this section. My custom whistle is used for hardcore sounds on red ticks, isn't meant to be loud. Maybe increase overall hitsound volume by 10%?
  5. 00:49:504 - The SV switches in this section are absolutely not merited imo. It's the exact same intensity, same sounds going on, literally all that's even different is vocal's pitch, and that's not at all enough to suggest these SV changes (and if you wanted SV changes by pitch to be a thing, then you should have like a million more SV switches in the map lol). Same for all other instances of this stuff, like 01:11:447 - that's simply my interpretation of intensity contrast etc
  6. 01:00:818 (2,3,4) - This and the other patterns like this play really awkwardly for some reason actually, there's a reason, i fked up, should've used smaller 1/4 spacing.
  7. 01:11:104 (4,5,1) - Awkward motion, I'd suggest something more like this http://puu.sh/wOVqT/4590b4043d.jpg (rough idea) you're right, it was a bit too awkard for its own good, so i changed it a bit.
  8. 01:28:590 (1,2,3) - Really don't think the S:C1 fits this part lol ww
  9. 01:28:590 (1,2,3) - 01:28:590 (1,2,3) - This is really bad spacing imo, the fact that 01:28:933 (3) - is 1/2 even though the previous objects were a large 1/4 gap just feels really disjointed it all boils down to 1/2 jumps, since those are kicksliders, completely playable.
  10. 01:30:475 (5) - ctrl+G? Makes more sense in just about every way wooosh, flow is an abstract concept that doesn't exist. Well, look at the triple that is a bit tilted towards the left, that gives an idea that the next object will be more to the left, and not going to the right, or simply under, above which would make it unfitting.
  11. 01:31:504 (2,3) - This is a really difficult gap to cross in 1/6 since there is only one reverse arrow, it will surely happen while the cursor is going downwards, meaning there's little chance for a combo break. Haven't seen many 100's in gameplay. This looks much prettier than if it were stacked.
  12. 01:32:190 (1,2) - Very strange pattern that the 1/4 slider is longer than the 1/3 reverse but with no clear indication of such mmh who cares about indication, it's completely playable by people spotting the approach circle of the next slider. I did biggest spacing on the 1/4 becuase of the strong af snare with added noise
  13. 01:32:875 (1,2,1,2) - wew lad, total counter-flow streamjumps play like total ass and aren't really fun at all, imo you should map these differently. Same for all other instances of these I don't know if you testplayed this map or something, but I did clear circular flow with them, I have no problems except if I missaim the first note in testplay.
  14. 01:37:504 (2,1,1) - This is really hard to read as all being 1/4 gaps, and is also really awkward to play, I really think something like this would be better http://puu.sh/wOVQt/4d338081e4.jpg wooosh, awkarndess and flow doesn't exist, but I find it cool that kicks are that close, and is a rather unique pattern, as such sounds are not repeated.
  15. 02:14:533 (1,2,3) - This is probably readable because the rhythm is predictable, but this is pretty bad spacing u're a bad spacing lul
  16. 02:33:475 (3,4) - imo these should be spaced closer imo they should be spaced further, but I kept this distance not to be surprising too much.
    {*]02:34:590 (4,5) - Same as before, this is a really awkward spacing for a 1/6 gap, same goes for the other instances too w
  17. 03:10:933 (1,2) - These two also have no reason to be different SV givin biggest spacing to strong snare with added noise . .
  18. 03:19:168 - I don't usually like sliderart because a lot of people just want to make cool sliders but don't make them relevant, so for example I like that this slider 03:17:618 (1) - has this sharp turn 03:18:304 - exactly here, but then you have a bunch of random parts to all the sliders that don't really mean anything. tl;dr I think you should work on changing the sliders to actually correspond to the music beyond just the start and end points, it's really cool to see and hear, and makes the slider actually meaningful mmmh, okay will think bout it.
  19. 03:50:533 - there's a lot of unmapped 1/4 in this section, it feels very weird because it's so audible maybe i need new headphones or something, but I don't find them as audible.
  20. 04:21:733 (1,2,3,4) - For this last part of this stream pattern, it looks kinda messy, why not do something like this instead? http://puu.sh/wOYoW/bf60938c96.jpg wew lad, no. It's fine


gl thanks for the mod
Yamicchi
Hi as the deal we made few days ago :3
[General]
• You wanna have the countdown for this map? I see it turned on
• Might wanna use JPEG file for smaller beatmap size. Here you go
[Despondency]
• Ok I think there're a few spot you mapped kinda overdone. For example 00:00:304 (3,4) - has no specific sound on the sliderend, but you still used a 1/4 slider instead of a circle. Idk if you're trying to increase the density of the map or not but lemme tell you it's not quite a good idea, at least for the soft intro like this
• Some more examples to help you understand more of what I'm trying to say:
  • 00:00:904 (7,8) - should be 1/4 slider to express the vocal better than 5 notes, eventho it's a bit harder to tap
    00:01:675 (3,4) - circles
    00:01:161 (1) - could be like this http://puu.sh/wPLYe/d2878714e9.jpg
    00:02:533 (9,10) - And for these there's an option for you where you could just make 10 a circle while keeping 9 as 1/4 slider, to emphasize the drum but also not overdone the pattern
    00:07:675 (7,8,9) - well yeah, I like this pattern

Ok moving on
• 00:12:047 (8,9) - stacking
• 00:13:503 (9,10) - Flow is quite harsh as 00:13:161 (6,7,8,9) - doubles are kinda hard already, so you should place 10 somewhere easier to tap, like what you did on 00:12:132 (9,10) - maybe
• 00:16:590 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - I really wanna see the buildup you can make here. Well simply my suggestion is to lower the spacing of the first 8 circles, that might be the easiest way to do
• 00:20:533 (1) - I would end this on 00:21:733 - because it's a more audible sound. I think the spinner represents the vocal am I right? So ending it on where the vocal ends would be a better idea
• 00:22:933 (7,8) - pattern should be like http://puu.sh/wPMoH/eab33916fd.jpg to follow the rhythm better? If you apply this make sure you check all the triples after this because I found a lot of unmapped triples tho (ofc just the section before the kiai part)
• 01:23:790 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - Same thing I said before, but this time you make these smaller spacing instead? :d I think buff the last 8 or nerf the first 8 would be a better solution
• 01:27:904 (1,1,2) - Awkward flow, as you're pointing the long slider straightly to (2) instead of (1), so it's pretty confusing to me. Yes some can pass this easily but it's still uncomfy to me
• 01:49:504 (3) - not a fan of this kind of slider, just saying xd
• 02:12:133 (2) - Might wanna move this to somewhere X292 Y20 for better flow?
• 02:28:590 (1,2) - why is these circle's spacing suddenly enormous?
• 04:10:418 (1) - is the whistle on the sliderbody intentional?
• 04:32:018 (1,2) - Same problem I talked about lately, these pitch are not even higher than others, but 04:32:361 (1,2) - instead. So why is the spacing?

Ok, some suggestion might be applied more than just the one I spot, so it's better to check the map out again for a few times. Good luck boi owo
Topic Starter
MaridiuS

Yamicchi wrote:

Hi as the deal we made few days ago :3
[General]
• You wanna have the countdown for this map? I see it turned on will disable
• Might wanna use JPEG file for smaller beatmap size. Here you go will probs apply.
[Despondency]
• Ok I think there're a few spot you mapped kinda overdone. For example 00:00:304 (3,4) - has no specific sound on the sliderend, but you still used a 1/4 slider instead of a circle. Idk if you're trying to increase the density of the map or not but lemme tell you it's not quite a good idea, at least for the soft intro like this possibility for a remap, will ask for more opinions, cus i really like the patterning, although filling up 1/4's on some places.
• Some more examples to help you understand more of what I'm trying to say:
  • 00:00:904 (7,8) - should be 1/4 slider to express the vocal better than 5 notes, eventho it's a bit harder to tap
    00:01:675 (3,4) - circles
    00:01:161 (1) - could be like this http://puu.sh/wPLYe/d2878714e9.jpg
    00:02:533 (9,10) - And for these there's an option for you where you could just make 10 a circle while keeping 9 as 1/4 slider, to emphasize the drum but also not overdone the pattern
    00:07:675 (7,8,9) - well yeah, I like this pattern

Ok moving on
• 00:12:047 (8,9) - stacking
• 00:13:503 (9,10) - Flow is quite harsh as 00:13:161 (6,7,8,9) - doubles are kinda hard already, so you should place 10 somewhere easier to tap, like what you did on 00:12:132 (9,10) - maybe woosh flow doesn't exist, think it plays fine.
• 00:16:590 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - I really wanna see the buildup you can make here. Well simply my suggestion is to lower the spacing of the first 8 circles, that might be the easiest way to do I don't think that the map has this much of a contrast, think my intepretation is fine.
• 00:20:533 (1) - I would end this on 00:21:733 - because it's a more audible sound. I think the spinner represents the vocal am I right? So ending it on where the vocal ends would be a better idea meh it kinda is okay on both
• 00:22:933 (7,8) - pattern should be like http://puu.sh/wPMoH/eab33916fd.jpg to follow the rhythm better? If you apply this make sure you check all the triples after this because I found a lot of unmapped triples tho (ofc just the section before the kiai part) they're all unmapped right before a NC to give it a jump / emphasis. Happens consistently.
• 01:23:790 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - Same thing I said before, but this time you make these smaller spacing instead? :d I think buff the last 8 or nerf the first 8 would be a better solution will rescale
• 01:27:904 (1,1,2) - Awkward flow, as you're pointing the long slider straightly to (2) instead of (1), so it's pretty confusing to me. Yes some can pass this easily but it's still uncomfy to me woooooosh flow doesn't exist, you should've gave a look to my previous mod.
• 01:49:504 (3) - not a fan of this kind of slider, just saying xd sliders can have fans?
• 02:12:133 (2) - Might wanna move this to somewhere X292 Y20 for better flow? woosh
• 02:28:590 (1,2) - why is these circle's spacing suddenly enormous? song is stronger on 02:28:590 (1,2,1,2) - , it gets blended in / non existant when i stopped the big spacing
• 04:10:418 (1) - is the whistle on the sliderbody intentional? nope


Ok, some suggestion might be applied more than just the one I spot, so it's better to check the map out again for a few times. Good luck boi owo thanks for the mod
Also as for this • 04:32:018 (1,2) - Same problem I talked about lately, these pitch are not even higher than others, but 04:32:361 (1,2) - instead. So why is the spacing? I will now explain: The following pattern has strong pitches on both red and white tick. I wanted to consistently give them the most spacing, the following pattern 04:37:847 (1,2) - Has a strong pitch on (1). For variety and fun factor, I decided to sometimes not give (1) full emphasis to make new kinds of patterns, as it will be impossible with the way it is without breaking the structure.
Ohwow
m4m thing:

01:27:904 (1,1) - Hmm not liking how this flows (even though it might player okay cause of slider leniency) I suggest make the path of the sliders more meaningful to the flow and not rely on slider leniency for long sliders like this.

01:29:618 (1,2,3,4,1) - mm kinda kitpicky but i don't like how the slider is almost aligned with the stream. maybe put it around x353 y337

01:31:504 (2) - I see why this is 1/3 repeat slider, but i don't know why this 01:31:904 (5) - is repeating. Maybe you can Half the SV so it's the save size slider without the repeat.

01:38:533 (1,2,1) - Don't like how this is all a linear flow while 01:38:361 (1,2,1,2) - as that sharp turn. I wish you could have done something like https://i.gyazo.com/b48a96c6cac487c8c41 ... 0ac256.jpg Applies to all other instances, I think it would be a cool pattern throughout your map.

01:41:275 (4,5,1,2) - This doesn't look like it has good flow

01:44:361 (1,2,3,4) - Maybe put a 1/2 or 3/4 slider somewhat to map to the wub like how you did previously. Seeing that now there's a clap at the white tick, you decided to put a triple there, but it's kinda weird to completely ignore the wub that you mapped on 01:27:904 (1) - 01:33:390 (1) - 01:38:875 (1) - The wub is less powerful there, but I feel like there should at least be a 1/2 slider to map to it.

01:53:618 (5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4) - Not hearing anything that would support this stream.
01:56:447 (6,7,8) - ^
01:58:075 (1,2,3,4) - ^
01:59:447 (1,2,3,4) - ^


02:10:761 (4) - gotta make sure u NC SV change unless there's a good reason not to
01:49:504 (3) - ^

02:11:447 (1,1) - line up? and maybe possibly ctrl+g the slider to continue the counter-clockwise flow from 02:10:761 (4,5,6,7,8) -

02:12:133 (2,3) - you'd want the curved sliders to provide a rotational flow, but the way the circle is placed, it's not starting up that flow very well. Placing (2) somewhere to the left of the slider would improve the flow. Same with 02:12:818 (4,5) - 02:14:875 (2,3) -

02:17:275 (1,2,3) - i see wut ur trying to do. Try to keep the sliderends of thsoe sliders aligned like 02:20:018 (2,3,4) - (<-- the sliderhead of the first 2 is aligned to the sliderend of the last one in this case)

03:16:590 (4,5,6,7) - slightly not aligned in a straight line, would look better if it did.

03:17:104 (8,1) - would look better if they line up.
Right now, 03:16:933 (7,8,1) - has this awkward wide angle jump pattern.

03:23:104 (2) - I think you should NC this imo. Since after 03:28:590 (1) - , you NC' the next object so, it should be the same after 03:17:618 (1) -

03:41:275 (2,3) - is there a reason to overlap these 2?

03:47:104 (3,4, 5) - Hmm, (5) is the weakest/most quiet and (4) is the loudest (it has a vocal and that electric sound that repeats every red tick), so there should be a jump between 3-4 to emphasize the 4, not 4-5
03:48:304 (3,4) - Similar case as above, Although emphasizing 4 is okay since there's a vocal there, but i have a feeling you're trying to map to the electric sound.

04:07:675 (1,2) - should ctrl+g to follow vocals better. Applies similar instances in this section.

04:44:018 (1) - how bout putting this where (2) is so you have that stream jump like 04:43:247 (8,1) -

04:47:447 (6) - 04:52:933 (7) - 04:58:418 (5) - Why is this not NC like the others?

That's it from me. Cool song, GL C:
Topic Starter
MaridiuS

Ohwow wrote:

m4m thing:

01:27:904 (1,1) - Hmm not liking how this flows (even though it might player okay cause of slider leniency) I suggest make the path of the sliders more meaningful to the flow and not rely on slider leniency for long sliders like this. idc, I want to make the player do some movement here,
not just go with the flow, that's boring.


01:29:618 (1,2,3,4,1) - mm kinda kitpicky but i don't like how the slider is almost aligned with the stream. maybe put it around x353 y337 sorry, no change! (ugh this ain't a problem, really.)

01:31:504 (2) - I see why this is 1/3 repeat slider, but i don't know why this 01:31:904 (5) - is repeating. Maybe you can Half the SV so it's the save size slider without the repeat. it follows the same sound, and I want something to be on the white tick.

01:38:533 (1,2,1) - Don't like how this is all a linear flow while 01:38:361 (1,2,1,2) - as that sharp turn. I wish you could have done something like https://i.gyazo.com/b48a96c6cac487c8c41 ... 0ac256.jpg Applies to all other instances, I think it would be a cool pattern throughout your map. meh i like its current flow, i'm aware how hanzer streams work, hitting the slider is not hard at all, and the pattern starts as a circular. If i make the slider also a part of circular flow i'll gouge my eyes out because of the aesthetics.

01:41:275 (4,5,1,2) - This doesn't look like it has good flow you don't look like you flow well.

01:44:361 (1,2,3,4) - Maybe put a 1/2 or 3/4 slider somewhat to map to the wub like how you did previously. Seeing that now there's a clap at the white tick, you decided to put a triple there, but it's kinda weird to completely ignore the wub that you mapped on 01:27:904 (1) - 01:33:390 (1) - 01:38:875 (1) - The wub is less powerful there, but I feel like there should at least be a 1/2 slider to map to it. nop since the rhythm is kinda two times faster,
I will go with the densest rhythm possible.


01:53:618 (5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4) - Not hearing anything that would support this stream. synth / piano
01:56:447 (6,7,8) - ^
01:58:075 (1,2,3,4) - ^
01:59:447 (1,2,3,4) - ^


02:10:761 (4) - gotta make sure u NC SV change unless there's a good reason not to my reason is i hate using NC, I want to make all of that in one pattern no reason for a NC.
01:49:504 (3) - ^ same reason, I don't want a NC on sounds that are connected.

02:11:447 (1,1) - line up? and maybe possibly ctrl+g the slider to continue the counter-clockwise flow from 02:10:761 (4,5,6,7,8) - adjusted the pattern in my way.

02:12:133 (2,3) - you'd want the curved sliders to provide a rotational flow, but the way the circle is placed, it's not starting up that flow very well. Placing (2) somewhere to the left of the slider would improve the flow. Same with 02:12:818 (4,5) - 02:14:875 (2,3) - jesus, woosh

02:17:275 (1,2,3) - i see wut ur trying to do. Try to keep the sliderends of thsoe sliders aligned like 02:20:018 (2,3,4) - (<-- the sliderhead of the first 2 is aligned to the sliderend of the last one in this case) ah I see, think that i'll adjust.

03:16:590 (4,5,6,7) - slightly not aligned in a straight line, would look better if it did. i like how non perfectly aligned patterns look.

03:17:104 (8,1) - would look better if they line up. i don't like lining up that much.
Right now, 03:16:933 (7,8,1) - has this awkward wide angle jump pattern. who cares? 8 deserves the emphasis, please notice how small of a jump from 7 to 8 is, making any next note viable on any position.

03:23:104 (2) - I think you should NC this imo. Since after 03:28:590 (1) - , you NC' the next object so, it should be the same after 03:17:618 (1) - ncd

03:41:275 (2,3) - is there a reason to overlap these 2? i've found that (3) to be the weakest vocal of the pattern.

03:47:104 (3,4, 5) - Hmm, (5) is the weakest/most quiet and (4) is the loudest (it has a vocal and that electric sound that repeats every red tick), so there should be a jump between 3-4 to emphasize the 4, not 4-5 i've found 4 to not be the loudest, since it lands on the repeating red tick electro sound, I've stacked specifically that note.
03:48:304 (3,4) - Similar case as above, Although emphasizing 4 is okay since there's a vocal there, but i have a feeling you're trying to map to the electric sound.

04:07:675 (1,2) - should ctrl+g to follow vocals better. Applies similar instances in this section. doing so will not make the pattern repetetive,
which I want, emphasizing the white tick vocal is not a mistake, just 2 times this gets ignored in order to show the repetitiveness of the song.


04:44:018 (1) - how bout putting this where (2) is so you have that stream jump like 04:43:247 (8,1) - no, it has no strong finish sound on it that i'm hitsounding.

04:47:447 (6) - 04:52:933 (7) - 04:58:418 (5) - Why is this not NC like the others? ncd

That's it from me. Cool song, GL C: thanks for th emod.
Linada
hi from q


[General]
  1. nice bg
  2. Add 2000 audio lead-in since your mp3 starts really early
  3. Disable Countdown ?


[Despondency]
  1. 00:32:361 (3) - could have make this 2 circles since there is 2 kicks there
  2. 00:42:647 (1,2,3) - the flow here is really uncomfortable since it's a really wide angle with different spacing, you could make a sharper angle with 3
  3. 00:45:218 (6) - minor but i'd ctrl-h this slider, it's in my opinion more appealing visually
  4. 00:48:990 (1) - remove this nc
  5. 01:31:675 (3,4,5) - the reading and playability here is really bad, you could make the sliders closer to help. also muting 1/6's sliderend would be better
  6. 01:32:361 (2) - really hard to notice here that it's 1/3
  7. 02:33:304 (1) - mute sliderend here aswell
  8. 04:10:418 (1) - remove whistle on slider body
  9. 04:44:018 (1,2) - why that antijump so cruel :(


really nice map but something that bug me really hard on some parts is that your aesthetics are really "visually boring" since you're just copy/pasting the same slider and rotating :/
01:50:704 (6) - 01:52:075 (6) - 02:03:047 (6) - 02:03:904 (3) - 02:04:761 (1) - 02:05:275 (3) -
this kind of thing make the map really boring meanwhile it's not :/ try to add some variety instead of using the same slider through the whole map

good luck !
Topic Starter
MaridiuS

Linada wrote:

hi from q


[General]
  1. nice bg thanks
  2. Add 2000 audio lead-in since your mp3 starts really early how do i do that?
  3. Disable Countdown ? sure


[Despondency]
  1. 00:32:361 (3) - could have make this 2 circles since there is 2 kicks there I usually do that, but here it's kept as a slider to give more emphasis to the section to come.
  2. 00:42:647 (1,2,3) - the flow here is really uncomfortable since it's a really wide angle with different spacing, you could make a sharper angle with 3 woosh, its such a small jump, and I find this angle fitting, not too hard, only kinda hard if you fk up the stream.
  3. 00:45:218 (6) - minor but i'd ctrl-h this slider, it's in my opinion more appealing visually will do, and also on a similar pattern
  4. 00:48:990 (1) - remove this nc wtf okay
  5. 01:31:675 (3,4,5) - the reading and playability here is really bad, you could make the sliders closer to help. also muting 1/6's sliderend would be better hmm, think that its a good idea, will think bout it
  6. 01:32:361 (2) - really hard to notice here that it's 1/3 players just need to notice when will the next circle appear tbh
  7. 02:33:304 (1) - mute sliderend here aswell nah, it has a sound
  8. 04:10:418 (1) - remove whistle on slider body oops, didn't update when i fxed it
  9. 04:44:018 (1,2) - why that antijump so cruel :(idk


really nice map but something that bug me really hard on some parts is that your aesthetics are really "visually boring" since you're just copy/pasting the same slider and rotating :/
01:50:704 (6) - 01:52:075 (6) - 02:03:047 (6) - 02:03:904 (3) - 02:04:761 (1) - 02:05:275 (3) - you could've just linked this section xdd, now, this section is peaceful, so I decided to do curved blanket structure here, you can notice a change here 02:06:304 - when the song also goes wham that I'm using red anchor sliders, and straight ones to show the change of music.
this kind of thing make the map really boring meanwhile it's not :/ try to add some variety instead of using the same slider through the whole map well the problem is, that is my usual style not to use same slidershapes. However in this song/map, I've found it fitting, in order to make the players fully recognize the notes that i've put to be important, I've only done different structuring and placement, but not different sliders, as you can recognize on dubstep sections. This kind of song i feel like requires keeping same slidershapes for sections.

good luck ! thanks for the mod!
CucumberCuc
Hi

[Despondency]
00:01:504 (1,2,3) slightly different range
00:08:361 (1,2) maybe circle 1 move to x:394 y:354 and circle 2 move to x:376 y:338?
00:42:818 (2,3) maybe do this? or move circle 2 slightly up
01:51:561 (3) move up for better flow?
02:11:018 (5) maybe unstack and move to x:446 y:131?
03:05:875 (5) almost the same ^
03:22:247 - 03:22:761 - 03:27:733 - 03:28:247 - 03:33:218 - 03:33:733 maybe put circles?
Topic Starter
MaridiuS

CucumberCuc wrote:

Hi

[Despondency]
00:01:504 (1,2,3) slightly different range fixd
00:08:361 (1,2) maybe circle 1 move to x:394 y:354 and circle 2 move to x:376 y:338? done
00:42:818 (2,3) maybe do this? looks nice, but i want to give emphasis to (3) or move circle 2 slightly up
01:51:561 (3) move up for better flow? done
02:11:018 (5) maybe unstack and move to x:446 y:131? nah, that's boring.
03:05:875 (5) almost the same ^ nah, that's boring.
03:22:247 - 03:22:761 - 03:27:733 - 03:28:247 - 03:33:218 - 03:33:733 maybe put circles? don't want to make it dense at all.
Thanks for the mod: some feedback; Please don't do coordinates this much, its really annoying to move stuff in such a way, you have imgur so taking pictures shouldn't be a chore. And also please don't post in [img] format, just give the link.
Mismagius
[Despondency]
  1. 00:15:561 (3) - maybe place this around 280;336 for direct flow with previous slider?
  2. 00:20:533 (1) - i'd probably shorten the spinner by 1/1 to make it end in the previous red tick since it gives some resting time + the vocal "hittable" part is actually there, while the current spinner end-position is just kind of the fade out in the song
  3. 00:24:818 (1,2,3) - maybe place around 296;280 for direct flow with next slider?
  4. 00:26:190 (1,2,3) - ^ 429;213 (these things happen throughout the difficulty so i'll just stop mentioning them)
  5. 00:43:675 (1,1) - i couldn't really guess this was 1/4, i personally think something like this would be more intuitive
  6. 01:05:447 (6,1) - same here, i'd personally shorten (6) by 1/4 since it'd be more intuitive and also would fit better with the song as the 1/2 filler note would make more sense musically than the 1/4 filler here
  7. 01:25:161 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3) - shouldn't the spacing here progressively increase instead of decreasing (then increase at the end)? seems contradictory with the song
  8. 01:44:533 (2,3,4) - random question, but why is this such low spacing? considering it's a strong drumbeat it should make sense to make this more spaced
  9. 03:00:818 (3,4,5,6,1) - spacing gets kinda awkward here, probably because of grid, but i'd probably disable grid & raise spacing a bit to avoid these 1pixel overlaps that look awkward
  10. 03:50:533 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,1,2,3,4,5,6,1,2,3,4,5,6,7) - really disappointed that you skipped the 1/4s in this part, they really help build the intensity here instead of the constant jumping. i'd really recommend considering mapping these 1/4s to follow the song more properly


i'm not really good at modding technical mapping so sorry if i wasn't of much help lol
Deramok
took me a while to get to it and another while.. like 8 hours to write
note that a lot of points are meant for multiple occasions of the same issue, i merely didn't point out every single one as for once cbb and it would have gotten a tad long that way
also i'm assuming you can handle the terminology and concept explanations from our short exchanges of words before this
  1. first off is the entire intro which is to me sitll the worst part of the map solely through the choice of objects already, which makes sense since you did say you dind't really change the part since the last message except if i misunderstood that. i'll try to get the point across with more specific examples this time around. 00:00:304 (3,4,5) - these sliders are a bit of a mush of various sound combinations, yet they all seem kind of the same, making no distiction between the different instruments used. 3 is a filler rhythm that can work for both the 1/2 synth and vocal. 4 is the same kind of slider and covers a downbeat bass and the same synth sound as 3. it stands out a bit for having movement which emphasises the downbeat, at this point i assume you follow the synth thing with these sliders. then 5 happens which covers two seperate synth sounds, uses the same kind of movement through being a back and forth as a downbeat that however doesn't exist on this one. it also covers another vocal which i assume is why this one is in the concept of another filler slider? but if it focused on vocals 4 is out of place for playing the same way as 5, which it is too for the sake of the synth. this kind of rhythm is unclear at best to me, i can't make sense of it unless i go and assume it's just a simplification, which by the build of the rest of the map, i doubt. 00:00:990 (9,10,11,1,2,3,4) - it goes on which things like this where the same sounds are covered in vastly differently conceptuated object choices. like 00:00:904 (8,10) - these vocals are just notes withing a regular burst with 10 not even being backed by a synth sound which makes this a very weird mush of things that don't really belong together and makes it be unenticing to play and look at as a result. then the synth after 11 is completely skipped, seemingly at random. especially so if you then have parts like 00:01:504 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10) - that can be understood on their own as having a focus on the synth as it conveys that in a structured and unified way. but having notes on just vocals like the previous 10 kills off even that idea. you can think up how this is another, even stronger yet singular example of the same issue 00:04:933 (1,2,3,4) -. you keep the object choices consistent through this first section, but that doesn't make it a better choice. so what this first part needs, is a clearer division, not an easy task with how the song works, but definitely worthwile
  2. the second section has similar issues but it's more apparent on how they could be fixed as in my example via slider usage. another way that can work in the part is to just skip one part of the instrumentals entirely or only including it sequencially whenever called for in unique segments, as you did with the synth already. 00:11:275 (2,3,4) - starts on a vocal and proceeds with two drum beats. a simple way to do this could be just a 1/4 slider plus a note. it differentiates the two elements quite naturally even if it has one of the drums on a slider end. if having a drum on a slider end is not an option for you options like http://puu.sh/x6BNn/d517f63a34.jpg that bridge gaps can work too, though different slider shapes for different occasions might be recommendable, albeit not a necessity. similar structures carry out thoughout this section as well. btw i don't understand why this needs to be a slider 00:20:361 (5) -
  3. the main thing to go on about in the next part is yet again a rhythmical one. the first two tripples make it quite apparent how they're on the sharp synth sounds. but then 00:23:104 (8,1) - already skips one but adds a note on the downbeat, which does not contain one instead. so as a result that rhythm that i'm supposed to be following doesn't even come to use, where it's the most interesting. 00:23:104 (8,1,2,3) - actually features two doubles with a left out downbeat. now many will bring the argument of how important that note is because it is said downbeat, i'd differ on that opinion. a downbeat such as this, which doesn't mark any transition with fro example cymbal crashes in other songs, but just a bass kick that comes up every half a meassure is just more of a means to be a metronome and rhythm keeper to the song. it's a supporting element to the melody that is formed by the sharp synth and the other building synth that is still in the background at this point. so skipping the note before it and then mapping the downbeat itself (as part of a tripple stack that muddles said downbeat and the second double together, which to me is also repelling as described earlier) just takes away anything of interest about the part other than the occasional focus shifts of the nature of 00:24:133 (1,2,1,2) - (which btw should have their spacing inverted due to pitches correlating to intensity and thus spacing). furthermore it makes it ambiguous on what is being followed in the first place. the slider usage could be different with that in mind too, but i can appreciate the current usage of them with snares in this part, so i won't outright complain about that. smaller things like 00:27:047 (2,1,2,3,4,1,2,3) - also occur where you start a quint in the middle of what is actually a 6 note burst starting on two which i can only explain by assuming you tried using the same focus shift as with the 2on2 jumps, just that you map the sharp synth anyway, but just starting in the middle of it. also here i appreciate the differentiation on the downbeat, but it's misleading to me anyway because the note itself still plays like the sharp synth notes before it while the same sharp synths after it are what plays differently while they'd logically be the same again, but this is a minor thing.
  4. 00:33:047 (1,2,1,2,1) - the spacing on these is messed up especially if you compare it to it's counterpart of 00:35:790 (1,2,1,2,1,2) - by which there 00:36:819 (1) - also doesn't fit in quite well. on the jump parts in general i'll reinforce what others have said already, it lacks a clear structure, or construction rather. a clear structure only makes a part boring if the structure and it's idea and execution are boring, so "structuring them perfectly and accordingly will result in a rather boring map" is not an excuse to me. by which "perfectly and accordingly" is ofc more of an overstatement as things have their leniency if you want to construct them in such a fashion. so this means to work with overarcing shaps and constructions like gradual or constant angle or spacing changes between sections of a pattern or following a geometrical form, reusing positions or connecting each section of a pattern in a certain way that you are free to chose. you somewhat do it with the in- and decrease of spacing of each jump and 00:38:875 (1,2,1,2,1,2) - . what all this does is making the map look more organized, less messy and more enticing to look at. hopefully you get the point.
    all things concidered though, a certain amount is there, but in seperate ways taking 00:33:047 (1,2,1,2,1,2) - as an example; it keeps up a direction of circular back and forth movement with thefirst three pairs (though purple one kind of goes against that already), forming a set of two trinagles the notes alternate between, which is a fairly cool idea, while the descending part is in a less flowy but more crumbling fashion with it's direction changes and forming a thape of two semi-parallel pairs of three again. though the connection between the two is improvable. nice conept.. if they were intentional, which i hope, which however is not seen again in the other iterations in any form. the second pattern has a sort of hexagonal thing going on within it, but it doesn't look to have more to it than that sadly. this puts a dent in the parts coherency with itself and the flow structure as result as well beond the visual aspects. maybe it was pointless to go into detail on those two specific examples to make things clearer, but i tried.
  5. 00:41:961 (1) - why is this split necessary. especially with 00:41:618 (5,5) - being just regular turning points in a coherent stream it doesn't strike me as a good idea to map a split which goes on the same drum beat, the same cymbals and the same kind of synth climax as the other notes. even if it's the turning point from increasing to decreasing pitches of the synth, this is overemphasised imo and might just as well be a regular, maybe sharp, but definitely coherent stream turn. atm it just looks like you did it that way due to running out of space to the side, which i won't dare accusing you of though as i might be missing any intention, but in that case it would be simple to just move the entire stream and linked objects after it, maybe with a little rotation, to the right since it's a seperated entity from it's surroundings
  6. 00:48:904 (4,6) - i don't know why these are a thing after you even skip the synths the entire thing. this just takes away from the transitioning vocals you've been building the part around. it just adds some out of place rhythm density.
  7. 00:50:190 (3) - i'd just use two notes instead as they are two distinct vocals (that aren't even ve syllables). doesn't really increase activity density noticably and even decreases rhythm density if that's a concern of yours. i don't know why you'd use a repeat in the first place either as the end of it doesn't carry any significance aside being.. a filler, which i don't think is fitting with a low density part in either
  8. in turn things like 00:50:704 (1,2) - could just be a 1/1 slider for slight alerations of the reasons in the previous point
  9. 00:56:533 (1,2,3) - even if you come with the argument of "variety".. this is just overmapped in every sense of the term. there isn't even any of the sharp synths that make up al the 1/4 rhythms in the section on that 2. a simple contrast pattern does the job just as well without overmapping and artificial attention grabbing
  10. 00:58:761 (2,3) - a little flow thing; it's nice how 00:54:990 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3) - share a direction and feel like a reiterating unit, which certainly fits with the vocals. but 00:58:590 (1,2,3) - puts that concept to waste as it just breaks the angular momentum in a similar part, which could easily be avoided with something as simple as a turn around in the fashion of http://puu.sh/x6OkF/d0cf6fa81f.jpg , ofc with the minor adjustments of the objects after it
  11. 00:59:961 (2,3,4,5,1,2,3,4) - whith these you try to incorporate the sharp synth again, which is a good idea to build up tension again, but it comes off as arbitrary if you shortly after pull things like on 01:01:675 (1,3,7,1,2) - . it is also weird how you remove most of that again in the next part except for some that are overmapped in the same fashion as the one from two points ago. on the part of 01:11:447 (1) - it gets a bit better because they are more recognisable as just fillers between the vocals that are mapped in a clear way on sliders (except for the repeat again01:12:133 (4) - )
  12. 01:18:990 (1,2) - could be a tripple since you do focus on the drums a lot as well
  13. 01:24:304 (4,1) - should be a tripple since the part exclusively focuses on the drum (good example of a structured pattern btw 01:22:418 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1) - albeit the first one doesn't connect with the latter two and those two only have one reused position connecting them as well, but the splits are comprehensible and have some degree of connection and overall structure, even if it's a basic one)
  14. 01:25:161 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3) - two things with this stream aside of the idea of the decreasing angle being interesting if it weren't broken by both of the last ones being straight rather than just the last one. why is the spacing decreasing? it's the same drum hit throughout and the building pitch is increasing rather than decreasing and also doesn't really do anything more special for the last three notes to justify them being highly spaced again in contrast. it's a nice contrast idea, but it doesn't represent the song. secondly 01:25:761 (4,4) - are overmapped
  15. 01:28:590 (1,2,3) - the sliders seem like they are starting too early for the electronic sounds. while the first one has a drum supporting it, it becomes apparent with the second one starting on nothing while ending on the sound and also being preceeded by an unmapped one. gonna be hard to cover everything properly on this but the current version doesn't make much sense to me. something like http://puu.sh/x7oMh/0986a57609.jpg comes about the closest to it without skipping instruments, which might be the preferable option nonetheless
  16. 01:29:961 (1) - this would be a great place for a split stream as the sound you're covering is a momentary one and the the ones you have the burst on continues right over it. on the same note it would make sense to twist 01:30:218 (3,4) - apart from the burst as they're of the same kind and stand out from the ones making up the stream and the current version takes away from taht distinction even more by adding just one note before it.
  17. 01:31:904 (5) - why a repeat
  18. 01:36:133 (1) - might want to make it into a note plus a 1/3 slider as the 1/3 sound only picks up at where the repeat arrow is now. current version overgoes that and is thus misrepresentative
  19. 01:36:990 (2) - either map al of this sound or just skip it. as it is, it's confusing. having that slider there implies you'd follow it only to then not do so one object and a gap later. i see how you want to capture the bass hits on the next 1, but there are better ways to go about it by either filling or skipping the 1/3 thing. skipping is probably the better option as you do so with the following objects as well
  20. 01:47:104 (1,2,1,2,3,4,1,2) - a decent way of handling it as is and it's befitting to the map as well. i'll just mention how this would be a good place to use contrasts for future reference as i've seen some other mods have talked about it as well in regard of how just everything has high spacing.
  21. 01:50:533 (5) - what makes this more special than the other vocals i wonder. there ought to be something since its a slider, but i don't see it. if it's the the backgrund synth thing that peaks in pitch there, it's still a distinct sound and has no reason to be extended on imo
  22. 01:51:047 (7,1) - how about making a slider out of these as they just sort of feel like jump spam atm while they could be emphasising a longer vocal instead. if the down beat is still a concern to you after what i said earlier, i guess that's that.. unfortunate
  23. 01:53:275 (3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4) - about all these 1/4 bits in this part.. i can't figure them out. you seem to just throw them in and skip every now and then, differing even within the same sets, and i don't see a system behind it. doesn't really work with consistent vocal sliders either
  24. 02:16:590 (6) - would ctrl g for a more rounded flow as it currently breaks momentum and i'm not sure if that is in your interest
  25. 02:21:047 (4) - also concider flipping that one on it's straight axis for similar reasons
  26. 02:23:961 (9) - 02:25:161 (7) - ?? no matter how many times i listen to it i can't hear any 1/8 and the buzz is omni-present in the part anyway
  27. 02:27:390 (4,5,6,7) - the start of 6 isn't on any particular beat and even less so resembling of 4. you missed a note in between instead of the instrument you usually map through this part though so i assume you might just have have overheard it (also missing one between 02:28:075 (8,1) - which would serve as a good transition as well)
  28. 02:28:247 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2) - nice construct but the spacing seems random
  29. 02:30:133 (2,1) - 02:30:818 (2,1) - along with a possible tripple here you could have used some accents on vocals to make this whole build part less stagnant
  30. 02:33:475 (3,4) - ctrl g to actually capture the impact of the snare
  31. 02:35:070 (1) - also this one could profit of a simple crtl g as it plays with the same impact as the previous sliders atm
  32. 02:35:447 (3,4) - changing this into another set of 1/3 sliders would come off as less arbitrary in sound change as you focused those over vocals before as well. especially since the current things plays on sounds that you skipped in the beginning of the very same meassure and you don't have a focus on teh vocals anyway. a change like that could further profit of a removal of 02:35:790 (1) - since the main sound the stream follows starts a tick later in correlation to just those sounds
  33. 02:36:475 (1) - different sounds, but it's the same occasion as with the previous set of two repeats. the first one starts too early and shouldn't be a repeat
  34. 02:38:533 (6) - having a gap after this makes this play really weirdly as it does not follow the sounds that make up the foreground 1/4. so the tick after it takes another note. i myself would work around it so current 6 isn't a clickable in either the form of a gap or a slider end
  35. 02:43:333 (1,2,3,4) - only three is different in terms of it having a different drum hit on it (also with a vocal on it). one can stay a single as it doesn't have the electro sound but two i'd make into a slider with the same position as current 2, matching up in direction with the other sliders. on top a change of direction on 3, perhaps with a simple ctrl g could give credit to the different hits as well. would just perhaps need some readjusting on the following tripple
  36. 02:49:504 (1,2) - they are completely different sounds from what makes up the rest of the stream and should not connect them along with the surrounding notes into the same entity, certainly not with the same spacing and shape as the following two notes, it's just muddling, which is always unpleasant
  37. 03:57:304 (8,1) - i can't imagine a linear split playing well in a map like this , it's unprecedented and nothing about the music is unique enough to call for something like this. a split in general is alright, even if i'd personally still not recommend it, but the way this one is executed is highly disagreeable.
  38. 04:00:818 (1,2,3,4,1) - just a curve that is dented by a just about noticable amount
  39. 04:02:961 (8,1) - the tripples in this part seems pretty random to me. the first one makes sense as the first note isn't an electric one and being on a sliderend with that. but then the second one has an actual note in the same stack. furthermore.. there's so many tripples that are upright skipped while they sounds virtually the same and are not hindered by any other focus you are taking
  40. 04:06:990 (1,2,3) - i don't like the repetition of these. they feel spammy. reason being that they completely ignore the vocals that make up the melody except with minor spacing differences if that is even intentional, which doesn't really do much anyway either though since contrast isn't a thing in this part. the sharp electric sounds are also skipped completely and instead a simple, metronome like background kick-snare rhythm is in focus.
  41. 04:23:447 (1,2,1,2,1,2) - spacing is not on pitch (mainly just the third pair in each iteration)
have fun red-walling, hopefully some green can slip in between
ah, and you don't need to mod my other map, i might have one that is more in need of regular mods in the nearish future instead. i'll message you about that if it happens and if you even do tickety stuff
Topic Starter
MaridiuS

Deramok wrote:

took me a while to get to it and another while.. like 8 hours to write
note that a lot of points are meant for multiple occasions of the same issue, i merely didn't point out every single one as for once cbb and it would have gotten a tad long that way
also i'm assuming you can handle the terminology and concept explanations from our short exchanges of words before this
  1. first off is the entire intro which is to me sitll the worst part of the map solely through the choice of objects already, which makes sense since you did say you dind't really change the part since the last message except if i misunderstood that. i'll try to get the point across with more specific examples this time around. 00:00:304 (3,4,5) - these sliders are a bit of a mush of various sound combinations, yet they all seem kind of the same, making no distiction between the different instruments used. 3 is a filler rhythm that can work for both the 1/2 synth and vocal. 4 is the same kind of slider and covers a downbeat bass and the same synth sound as 3. it stands out a bit for having movement which emphasises the downbeat, at this point i assume you follow the synth thing with these sliders. then 5 happens which covers two seperate synth sounds, uses the same kind of movement through being a back and forth as a downbeat that however doesn't exist on this one. it also covers another vocal which i assume is why this one is in the concept of another filler slider? but if it focused on vocals 4 is out of place for playing the same way as 5, which it is too for the sake of the synth. this kind of rhythm is unclear at best to me, i can't make sense of it unless i go and assume it's just a simplification, which by the build of the rest of the map, i doubt. 00:00:990 (9,10,11,1,2,3,4) - it goes on which things like this where the same sounds are covered in vastly differently conceptuated object choices. like 00:00:904 (8,10) - these vocals are just notes withing a regular burst with 10 not even being backed by a synth sound which makes this a very weird mush of things that don't really belong together and makes it be unenticing to play and look at as a result. then the synth after 11 is completely skipped, seemingly at random. especially so if you then have parts like 00:01:504 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10) - that can be understood on their own as having a focus on the synth as it conveys that in a structured and unified way. but having notes on just vocals like the previous 10 kills off even that idea. you can think up how this is another, even stronger yet singular example of the same issue 00:04:933 (1,2,3,4) -. you keep the object choices consistent through this first section, but that doesn't make it a better choice. so what this first part needs, is a clearer division, not an easy task with how the song works, but definitely worthwile
  2. the second section has similar issues but it's more apparent on how they could be fixed as in my example via slider usage. another way that can work in the part is to just skip one part of the instrumentals entirely or only including it sequencially whenever called for in unique segments, as you did with the synth already. 00:11:275 (2,3,4) - starts on a vocal and proceeds with two drum beats. a simple way to do this could be just a 1/4 slider plus a note. it differentiates the two elements quite naturally even if it has one of the drums on a slider end. if having a drum on a slider end is not an option for you options like http://puu.sh/x6BNn/d517f63a34.jpg that bridge gaps can work too, though different slider shapes for different occasions might be recommendable, albeit not a necessity. similar structures carry out thoughout this section as well. btw i don't understand why this needs to be a slider 00:20:361 (5) -
  3. the main thing to go on about in the next part is yet again a rhythmical one. the first two tripples make it quite apparent how they're on the sharp synth sounds. but then 00:23:104 (8,1) - already skips one but adds a note on the downbeat, which does not contain one instead. so as a result that rhythm that i'm supposed to be following doesn't even come to use, where it's the most interesting. 00:23:104 (8,1,2,3) - actually features two doubles with a left out downbeat. now many will bring the argument of how important that note is because it is said downbeat, i'd differ on that opinion. a downbeat such as this, which doesn't mark any transition with fro example cymbal crashes in other songs, but just a bass kick that comes up every half a meassure is just more of a means to be a metronome and rhythm keeper to the song. it's a supporting element to the melody that is formed by the sharp synth and the other building synth that is still in the background at this point. so skipping the note before it and then mapping the downbeat itself (as part of a tripple stack that muddles said downbeat and the second double together, which to me is also repelling as described earlier) just takes away anything of interest about the part other than the occasional focus shifts of the nature of 00:24:133 (1,2,1,2) - (which btw should have their spacing inverted due to pitches correlating to intensity and thus spacing). furthermore it makes it ambiguous on what is being followed in the first place. the slider usage could be different with that in mind too, but i can appreciate the current usage of them with snares in this part, so i won't outright complain about that. smaller things like 00:27:047 (2,1,2,3,4,1,2,3) - also occur where you start a quint in the middle of what is actually a 6 note burst starting on two which i can only explain by assuming you tried using the same focus shift as with the 2on2 jumps, just that you map the sharp synth anyway, but just starting in the middle of it. also here i appreciate the differentiation on the downbeat, but it's misleading to me anyway because the note itself still plays like the sharp synth notes before it while the same sharp synths after it are what plays differently while they'd logically be the same again, but this is a minor thing.
  4. 00:33:047 (1,2,1,2,1) - the spacing on these is messed up especially if you compare it to it's counterpart of 00:35:790 (1,2,1,2,1,2) - by which there 00:36:819 (1) - also doesn't fit in quite well. on the jump parts in general i'll reinforce what others have said already, it lacks a clear structure, or construction rather. a clear structure only makes a part boring if the structure and it's idea and execution are boring, so "structuring them perfectly and accordingly will result in a rather boring map" is not an excuse to me. by which "perfectly and accordingly" is ofc more of an overstatement as things have their leniency if you want to construct them in such a fashion. so this means to work with overarcing shaps and constructions like gradual or constant angle or spacing changes between sections of a pattern or following a geometrical form, reusing positions or connecting each section of a pattern in a certain way that you are free to chose. you somewhat do it with the in- and decrease of spacing of each jump and 00:38:875 (1,2,1,2,1,2) - . what all this does is making the map look more organized, less messy and more enticing to look at. hopefully you get the point.
    all things concidered though, a certain amount is there, but in seperate ways taking 00:33:047 (1,2,1,2,1,2) - as an example; it keeps up a direction of circular back and forth movement with thefirst three pairs (though purple one kind of goes against that already), forming a set of two trinagles the notes alternate between, which is a fairly cool idea, while the descending part is in a less flowy but more crumbling fashion with it's direction changes and forming a thape of two semi-parallel pairs of three again. though the connection between the two is improvable. nice conept.. if they were intentional, which i hope, which however is not seen again in the other iterations in any form. the second pattern has a sort of hexagonal thing going on within it, but it doesn't look to have more to it than that sadly. this puts a dent in the parts coherency with itself and the flow structure as result as well beond the visual aspects. maybe it was pointless to go into detail on those two specific examples to make things clearer, but i tried.
  5. 00:41:961 (1) - why is this split necessary. especially with 00:41:618 (5,5) - being just regular turning points in a coherent stream it doesn't strike me as a good idea to map a split which goes on the same drum beat, the same cymbals and the same kind of synth climax as the other notes. even if it's the turning point from increasing to decreasing pitches of the synth, this is overemphasised imo and might just as well be a regular, maybe sharp, but definitely coherent stream turn. atm it just looks like you did it that way due to running out of space to the side, which i won't dare accusing you of though as i might be missing any intention, but in that case it would be simple to just move the entire stream and linked objects after it, maybe with a little rotation, to the right since it's a seperated entity from it's surroundings
  6. 00:48:904 (4,6) - i don't know why these are a thing after you even skip the synths the entire thing. this just takes away from the transitioning vocals you've been building the part around. it just adds some out of place rhythm density.
  7. 00:50:190 (3) - i'd just use two notes instead as they are two distinct vocals (that aren't even ve syllables). doesn't really increase activity density noticably and even decreases rhythm density if that's a concern of yours. i don't know why you'd use a repeat in the first place either as the end of it doesn't carry any significance aside being.. a filler, which i don't think is fitting with a low density part in either
  8. in turn things like 00:50:704 (1,2) - could just be a 1/1 slider for slight alerations of the reasons in the previous point
  9. 00:56:533 (1,2,3) - even if you come with the argument of "variety".. this is just overmapped in every sense of the term. there isn't even any of the sharp synths that make up al the 1/4 rhythms in the section on that 2. a simple contrast pattern does the job just as well without overmapping and artificial attention grabbing
  10. 00:58:761 (2,3) - a little flow thing; it's nice how 00:54:990 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3) - share a direction and feel like a reiterating unit, which certainly fits with the vocals. but 00:58:590 (1,2,3) - puts that concept to waste as it just breaks the angular momentum in a similar part, which could easily be avoided with something as simple as a turn around in the fashion of http://puu.sh/x6OkF/d0cf6fa81f.jpg , ofc with the minor adjustments of the objects after it
  11. 00:59:961 (2,3,4,5,1,2,3,4) - whith these you try to incorporate the sharp synth again, which is a good idea to build up tension again, but it comes off as arbitrary if you shortly after pull things like on 01:01:675 (1,3,7,1,2) - . it is also weird how you remove most of that again in the next part except for some that are overmapped in the same fashion as the one from two points ago. on the part of 01:11:447 (1) - it gets a bit better because they are more recognisable as just fillers between the vocals that are mapped in a clear way on sliders (except for the repeat again01:12:133 (4) - )
  12. 01:18:990 (1,2) - could be a tripple since you do focus on the drums a lot as well
  13. 01:24:304 (4,1) - should be a tripple since the part exclusively focuses on the drum (good example of a structured pattern btw 01:22:418 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1) - albeit the first one doesn't connect with the latter two and those two only have one reused position connecting them as well, but the splits are comprehensible and have some degree of connection and overall structure, even if it's a basic one)
  14. 01:25:161 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3) - two things with this stream aside of the idea of the decreasing angle being interesting if it weren't broken by both of the last ones being straight rather than just the last one. why is the spacing decreasing? it's the same drum hit throughout and the building pitch is increasing rather than decreasing and also doesn't really do anything more special for the last three notes to justify them being highly spaced again in contrast. it's a nice contrast idea, but it doesn't represent the song. secondly 01:25:761 (4,4) - are overmapped
  15. 01:28:590 (1,2,3) - the sliders seem like they are starting too early for the electronic sounds. while the first one has a drum supporting it, it becomes apparent with the second one starting on nothing while ending on the sound and also being preceeded by an unmapped one. gonna be hard to cover everything properly on this but the current version doesn't make much sense to me. something like http://puu.sh/x7oMh/0986a57609.jpg comes about the closest to it without skipping instruments, which might be the preferable option nonetheless
  16. 01:29:961 (1) - this would be a great place for a split stream as the sound you're covering is a momentary one and the the ones you have the burst on continues right over it. on the same note it would make sense to twist 01:30:218 (3,4) - apart from the burst as they're of the same kind and stand out from the ones making up the stream and the current version takes away from taht distinction even more by adding just one note before it.
  17. 01:31:904 (5) - why a repeat
  18. 01:36:133 (1) - might want to make it into a note plus a 1/3 slider as the 1/3 sound only picks up at where the repeat arrow is now. current version overgoes that and is thus misrepresentative
  19. 01:36:990 (2) - either map al of this sound or just skip it. as it is, it's confusing. having that slider there implies you'd follow it only to then not do so one object and a gap later. i see how you want to capture the bass hits on the next 1, but there are better ways to go about it by either filling or skipping the 1/3 thing. skipping is probably the better option as you do so with the following objects as well
  20. 01:47:104 (1,2,1,2,3,4,1,2) - a decent way of handling it as is and it's befitting to the map as well. i'll just mention how this would be a good place to use contrasts for future reference as i've seen some other mods have talked about it as well in regard of how just everything has high spacing.
  21. 01:50:533 (5) - what makes this more special than the other vocals i wonder. there ought to be something since its a slider, but i don't see it. if it's the the backgrund synth thing that peaks in pitch there, it's still a distinct sound and has no reason to be extended on imo
  22. 01:51:047 (7,1) - how about making a slider out of these as they just sort of feel like jump spam atm while they could be emphasising a longer vocal instead. if the down beat is still a concern to you after what i said earlier, i guess that's that.. unfortunate
  23. 01:53:275 (3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4) - about all these 1/4 bits in this part.. i can't figure them out. you seem to just throw them in and skip every now and then, differing even within the same sets, and i don't see a system behind it. doesn't really work with consistent vocal sliders either
  24. 02:16:590 (6) - would ctrl g for a more rounded flow as it currently breaks momentum and i'm not sure if that is in your interest
  25. 02:21:047 (4) - also concider flipping that one on it's straight axis for similar reasons
  26. 02:23:961 (9) - 02:25:161 (7) - ?? no matter how many times i listen to it i can't hear any 1/8 and the buzz is omni-present in the part anyway
  27. 02:27:390 (4,5,6,7) - the start of 6 isn't on any particular beat and even less so resembling of 4. you missed a note in between instead of the instrument you usually map through this part though so i assume you might just have have overheard it (also missing one between 02:28:075 (8,1) - which would serve as a good transition as well)
  28. 02:28:247 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2) - nice construct but the spacing seems random
  29. 02:30:133 (2,1) - 02:30:818 (2,1) - along with a possible tripple here you could have used some accents on vocals to make this whole build part less stagnant
  30. 02:33:475 (3,4) - ctrl g to actually capture the impact of the snare
  31. 02:35:070 (1) - also this one could profit of a simple crtl g as it plays with the same impact as the previous sliders atm
  32. 02:35:447 (3,4) - changing this into another set of 1/3 sliders would come off as less arbitrary in sound change as you focused those over vocals before as well. especially since the current things plays on sounds that you skipped in the beginning of the very same meassure and you don't have a focus on teh vocals anyway. a change like that could further profit of a removal of 02:35:790 (1) - since the main sound the stream follows starts a tick later in correlation to just those sounds
  33. 02:36:475 (1) - different sounds, but it's the same occasion as with the previous set of two repeats. the first one starts too early and shouldn't be a repeat
  34. 02:38:533 (6) - having a gap after this makes this play really weirdly as it does not follow the sounds that make up the foreground 1/4. so the tick after it takes another note. i myself would work around it so current 6 isn't a clickable in either the form of a gap or a slider end
  35. 02:43:333 (1,2,3,4) - only three is different in terms of it having a different drum hit on it (also with a vocal on it). one can stay a single as it doesn't have the electro sound but two i'd make into a slider with the same position as current 2, matching up in direction with the other sliders. on top a change of direction on 3, perhaps with a simple ctrl g could give credit to the different hits as well. would just perhaps need some readjusting on the following tripple
  36. 02:49:504 (1,2) - they are completely different sounds from what makes up the rest of the stream and should not connect them along with the surrounding notes into the same entity, certainly not with the same spacing and shape as the following two notes, it's just muddling, which is always unpleasant
  37. 03:57:304 (8,1) - i can't imagine a linear split playing well in a map like this , it's unprecedented and nothing about the music is unique enough to call for something like this. a split in general is alright, even if i'd personally still not recommend it, but the way this one is executed is highly disagreeable.
  38. 04:00:818 (1,2,3,4,1) - just a curve that is dented by a just about noticable amount
  39. 04:02:961 (8,1) - the tripples in this part seems pretty random to me. the first one makes sense as the first note isn't an electric one and being on a sliderend with that. but then the second one has an actual note in the same stack. furthermore.. there's so many tripples that are upright skipped while they sounds virtually the same and are not hindered by any other focus you are taking
  40. 04:06:990 (1,2,3) - i don't like the repetition of these. they feel spammy. reason being that they completely ignore the vocals that make up the melody except with minor spacing differences if that is even intentional, which doesn't really do much anyway either though since contrast isn't a thing in this part. the sharp electric sounds are also skipped completely and instead a simple, metronome like background kick-snare rhythm is in focus.
  41. 04:23:447 (1,2,1,2,1,2) - spacing is not on pitch (mainly just the third pair in each iteration)
have fun red-walling, hopefully some green can slip in between
ah, and you don't need to mod my other map, i might have one that is more in need of regular mods in the nearish future instead. i'll message you about that if it happens and if you even do tickety stuff
Woah dude that was a bit unexpected, I'm just a bit worried that I won't able to respond, if I dont respond on sunday, you'll have to wait till september. There's a slight chance i'll have a pc on the vacation though.

For mismagius, i'll have a reply ready on sunday, will apply maybe one suggestion. And will also add a bit of a small followup to my mod on your map.
Topic Starter
MaridiuS

Mismagius wrote:

[Despondency]
  1. 00:15:561 (3) - maybe place this around 280;336 for direct flow with previous slider? I don't like direct linear movement
  2. 00:20:533 (1) - i'd probably shorten the spinner by 1/1 to make it end in the previous red tick since it gives some resting time + the vocal "hittable" part is actually there, while the current spinner end-position is just kind of the fade out in the song the hithat buildup or whatever pitch sound is also being added, so i prefer to make it on a red tick before the pattern to better follow vocals + that new sound.
  3. 00:24:818 (1,2,3) - maybe place around 296;280 for direct flow with next slider? don't like that
  4. 00:26:190 (1,2,3) - ^ 429;213 (these things happen throughout the difficulty so i'll just stop mentioning them) yeah should've realized by now that its on purpose.
  5. 00:43:675 (1,1) - i couldn't really guess this was 1/4, i personally think something like this would be more intuitive From a playable perspective, I believe that players should be able to judge the approach circle and rhythmically understand when will the next hit be for them to be prepared. It gives a nices emphasis this hard movement from a slow slider on the beggining of a new section.
  6. 01:05:447 (6,1) - same here, i'd personally shorten (6) by 1/4 since it'd be more intuitive and also would fit better with the song as the 1/2 filler note would make more sense musically than the 1/4 filler here I like the impact that it gives, and I also have faith in players.
  7. 01:25:161 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3) - shouldn't the spacing here progressively increase instead of decreasing (then increase at the end)? seems contradictory with the song listened to the song tons of times, and I've judged the sounds to get quieter until the last 3 notes, which are sounding like snares.
  8. 01:44:533 (2,3,4) - random question, but why is this such low spacing? considering it's a strong drumbeat it should make sense to make this more spaced compared to the section, this was never used as 1/4 when the beat was double slower. Here I use it in a friendly way to introduce sped up rhythm, and since its nothing special except drum hithats, it doesn't need bigger spacing.
  9. 03:00:818 (3,4,5,6,1) - spacing gets kinda awkward here, probably because of grid, but i'd probably disable grid & raise spacing a bit to avoid these 1pixel overlaps that look awkward wtf okay, will apply XDX
  10. 03:50:533 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,1,2,3,4,5,6,1,2,3,4,5,6,7) - really disappointed that you skipped the 1/4s in this part, they really help build the intensity here instead of the constant jumping. i'd really recommend considering mapping these 1/4s to follow the song more properly I am kinda against that, but I will try remapping on a new version, I don't see the appeal of following the 1/4's when the jumps fit more following the intensity of the song. doing 1/4's will slow down movement, and be more blend for all the constant kicks going in the background.


i'm not really good at modding technical mapping so sorry if i wasn't of much help lol
Thanks for mod.
neonat
Hello

Despondency

00:02:704 (10) - using a circle instead of a slider here, it helps with matching with how the sounds cut short here and leaves a sudden short break in the song. Similarly at 00:08:190 (10)
00:09:733 (1,2,3) - start the slider at 00:09:733 and the 2 circles at 00:09:904 and 00:09:990 - the voice holds at 00:09:733 while there are 2 independent beats at 00:09:904 and 00:09:990 would coincide better with circles
00:25:504 (6,7) - could 00:25:675 (7) be shifted more to the left, so that the angle from 00:25:504 (6) is not that acute. Quite often in this section the movement is quite restricted and small, like around 00:26:875 (1,2,1,2) - and that would make things harder to move around
00:32:361 (3) - separate and use 2 circles? 00:32:533 is a strong beat
00:33:218 (2,1) - largest spacing in this pattern, but wouldn't it be more appropriate for the largest spacing to be at 00:33:561 (2,1) - where the peak pitch is at? Like 00:36:305 (2,1)
00:43:675 (1) - because of how 00:42:990 (3,4,5,6,7) is angled, the movement to 00:43:675 (1) feels irregular, possibly shift it lower, curve it to face more to the right rather than left for example
02:04:247 (4,5,6) - especially the spacing for 02:04:247 (4,5) - unlike the others with the held vocals the spacing here is the odd one out
03:15:561 (3) - why finish here rather than 03:15:218 (2) - like 03:13:847 (2) - ? The cymbals don't seem to be heard at 03:15:561
03:17:618 (1) - 03:28:590 (1) - 03:39:561 (1) - hitsounds for these?
04:01:504 (1) - 04:12:475 (1) - 04:23:447 (1) - finish?
04:23:790 (1,2,1) - bigger spacing for 04:23:961 (2,1) rather than 04:23:790 (1,2) - match with the peak pitch in the song
04:24:647 (2,1,2) - could try to portray the increase in pitch in the song again at 04:24:647 (2,1) with a change in spacing comapred to what is around it, have it bigger than the rest
04:26:704 (2,1) - similarly about the spacing, 04:27:218 (1,2,1) - this one actually somewhat shows that, with 04:27:390 (2,1) - bigger than all those around it, albeit just slightly
04:29:447 (2,1) - 04:30:133 (2,1) - 04:32:190 (2,1) - 04:34:933 (2,1) - 04:35:618 (2,1) - ^ etc.
04:38:533 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - could do some spacing emphasis here for the tune change and increase in song pressure/intensity
04:47:961 (5) - 04:53:447 (5) - 04:58:933 (5) - similar to 00:02:704 (10)
04:50:190 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - could be like 05:01:161 (1,2) - starting with sliders matches the vocal in the song
04:54:990 (1,2,3,4) - similar to 00:09:733 (1,2,3)

All the best
Topic Starter
MaridiuS

Deramok wrote:

took me a while to get to it and another while.. like 8 hours to write
note that a lot of points are meant for multiple occasions of the same issue, i merely didn't point out every single one as for once cbb and it would have gotten a tad long that way
also i'm assuming you can handle the terminology and concept explanations from our short exchanges of words before this
  1. 1. first off is the entire intro which is to me sitll the worst part of the map solely through the choice of objects already, which makes sense since you did say you dind't really change the part since the last message except if i misunderstood that. i'll try to get the point across with more specific examples this time around. 00:00:304 (3,4,5) - these sliders are a bit of a mush of various sound combinations, yet they all seem kind of the same, making no distiction between the different instruments used. 3 is a filler rhythm that can work for both the 1/2 synth and vocal. 4 is the same kind of slider and covers a downbeat bass and the same synth sound as 3. it stands out a bit for having movement which emphasises the downbeat, at this point i assume you follow the synth thing with these sliders. then 5 happens which covers two seperate synth sounds, uses the same kind of movement through being a back and forth as a downbeat that however doesn't exist on this one. it also covers another vocal which i assume is why this one is in the concept of another filler slider? but if it focused on vocals 4 is out of place for playing the same way as 5, which it is too for the sake of the synth. this kind of rhythm is unclear at best to me, i can't make sense of it unless i go and assume it's just a simplification, which by the build of the rest of the map, i doubt. 00:00:990 (9,10,11,1,2,3,4) - it goes on which things like this where the same sounds are covered in vastly differently conceptuated object choices. like 00:00:904 (8,10) - these vocals are just notes withing a regular burst with 10 not even being backed by a synth sound which makes this a very weird mush of things that don't really belong together and makes it be unenticing to play and look at as a result. then the synth after 11 is completely skipped, seemingly at random. especially so if you then have parts like 00:01:504 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10) - that can be understood on their own as having a focus on the synth as it conveys that in a structured and unified way. but having notes on just vocals like the previous 10 kills off even that idea. you can think up how this is another, even stronger yet singular example of the same issue 00:04:933 (1,2,3,4) -. you keep the object choices consistent through this first section, but that doesn't make it a better choice. so what this first part needs, is a clearer division, not an easy task with how the song works, but definitely worthwile
  2. 2.the second section has similar issues but it's more apparent on how they could be fixed as in my example via slider usage. another way that can work in the part is to just skip one part of the instrumentals entirely or only including it sequencially whenever called for in unique segments, as you did with the synth already. 00:11:275 (2,3,4) - starts on a vocal and proceeds with two drum beats. a simple way to do this could be just a 1/4 slider plus a note. it differentiates the two elements quite naturally even if it has one of the drums on a slider end. if having a drum on a slider end is not an option for you options like http://puu.sh/x6BNn/d517f63a34.jpg that bridge gaps can work too, though different slider shapes for different occasions might be recommendable, albeit not a necessity. similar structures carry out thoughout this section as well. btw i don't understand why this needs to be a slider 00:20:361 (5) -
  3. 3.the main thing to go on about in the next part is yet again a rhythmical one. the first two tripples make it quite apparent how they're on the sharp synth sounds. but then 00:23:104 (8,1) - already skips one but adds a note on the downbeat, which does not contain one instead. so as a result that rhythm that i'm supposed to be following doesn't even come to use, where it's the most interesting. 00:23:104 (8,1,2,3) - actually features two doubles with a left out downbeat. now many will bring the argument of how important that note is because it is said downbeat, i'd differ on that opinion. a downbeat such as this, which doesn't mark any transition with fro example cymbal crashes in other songs, but just a bass kick that comes up every half a meassure is just more of a means to be a metronome and rhythm keeper to the song. it's a supporting element to the melody that is formed by the sharp synth and the other building synth that is still in the background at this point. so skipping the note before it and then mapping the downbeat itself (as part of a tripple stack that muddles said downbeat and the second double together, which to me is also repelling as described earlier) just takes away anything of interest about the part other than the occasional focus shifts of the nature of 00:24:133 (1,2,1,2) - (which btw should have their spacing inverted due to pitches correlating to intensity and thus spacing). furthermore it makes it ambiguous on what is being followed in the first place. the slider usage could be different with that in mind too, but i can appreciate the current usage of them with snares in this part, so i won't outright complain about that. smaller things like 00:27:047 (2,1,2,3,4,1,2,3) - also occur where you start a quint in the middle of what is actually a 6 note burst starting on two which i can only explain by assuming you tried using the same focus shift as with the 2on2 jumps, just that you map the sharp synth anyway, but just starting in the middle of it. also here i appreciate the differentiation on the downbeat, but it's misleading to me anyway because the note itself still plays like the sharp synth notes before it while the same sharp synths after it are what plays differently while they'd logically be the same again, but this is a minor thing.
  4. 4. 00:33:047 (1,2,1,2,1) - the spacing on these is messed up especially if you compare it to it's counterpart of 00:35:790 (1,2,1,2,1,2) - by which there 00:36:819 (1) - also doesn't fit in quite well. on the jump parts in general i'll reinforce what others have said already, it lacks a clear structure, or construction rather. a clear structure only makes a part boring if the structure and it's idea and execution are boring, so "structuring them perfectly and accordingly will result in a rather boring map" is not an excuse to me. by which "perfectly and accordingly" is ofc more of an overstatement as things have their leniency if you want to construct them in such a fashion. so this means to work with overarcing shaps and constructions like gradual or constant angle or spacing changes between sections of a pattern or following a geometrical form, reusing positions or connecting each section of a pattern in a certain way that you are free to chose. you somewhat do it with the in- and decrease of spacing of each jump and 00:38:875 (1,2,1,2,1,2) - . what all this does is making the map look more organized, less messy and more enticing to look at. hopefully you get the point.
    all things concidered though, a certain amount is there, but in seperate ways taking 00:33:047 (1,2,1,2,1,2) - as an example; it keeps up a direction of circular back and forth movement with thefirst three pairs (though purple one kind of goes against that already), forming a set of two trinagles the notes alternate between, which is a fairly cool idea, while the descending part is in a less flowy but more crumbling fashion with it's direction changes and forming a thape of two semi-parallel pairs of three again. though the connection between the two is improvable. nice conept.. if they were intentional, which i hope, which however is not seen again in the other iterations in any form. the second pattern has a sort of hexagonal thing going on within it, but it doesn't look to have more to it than that sadly. this puts a dent in the parts coherency with itself and the flow structure as result as well beond the visual aspects. maybe it was pointless to go into detail on those two specific examples to make things clearer, but i tried.
  5. 5.00:41:961 (1) - why is this split necessary. especially with 00:41:618 (5,5) - being just regular turning points in a coherent stream it doesn't strike me as a good idea to map a split which goes on the same drum beat, the same cymbals and the same kind of synth climax as the other notes. even if it's the turning point from increasing to decreasing pitches of the synth, this is overemphasised imo and might just as well be a regular, maybe sharp, but definitely coherent stream turn. atm it just looks like you did it that way due to running out of space to the side, which i won't dare accusing you of though as i might be missing any intention, but in that case it would be simple to just move the entire stream and linked objects after it, maybe with a little rotation, to the right since it's a seperated entity from it's surroundings
  6. 6.00:48:904 (4,6) - i don't know why these are a thing after you even skip the synths the entire thing. this just takes away from the transitioning vocals you've been building the part around. it just adds some out of place rhythm density.
  7. 7.00:50:190 (3) - i'd just use two notes instead as they are two distinct vocals (that aren't even ve syllables). doesn't really increase activity density noticably and even decreases rhythm density if that's a concern of yours. i don't know why you'd use a repeat in the first place either as the end of it doesn't carry any significance aside being.. a filler, which i don't think is fitting with a low density part in either
  8. 8.in turn things like 00:50:704 (1,2) - could just be a 1/1 slider for slight alerations of the reasons in the previous point
  9. 9. 00:56:533 (1,2,3) - even if you come with the argument of "variety".. this is just overmapped in every sense of the term. there isn't even any of the sharp synths that make up al the 1/4 rhythms in the section on that 2. a simple contrast pattern does the job just as well without overmapping and artificial attention grabbing
  10. 10. 00:58:761 (2,3) - a little flow thing; it's nice how 00:54:990 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3) - share a direction and feel like a reiterating unit, which certainly fits with the vocals. but 00:58:590 (1,2,3) - puts that concept to waste as it just breaks the angular momentum in a similar part, which could easily be avoided with something as simple as a turn around in the fashion of http://puu.sh/x6OkF/d0cf6fa81f.jpg , ofc with the minor adjustments of the objects after it
  11. 11. 00:59:961 (2,3,4,5,1,2,3,4) - whith these you try to incorporate the sharp synth again, which is a good idea to build up tension again, but it comes off as arbitrary if you shortly after pull things like on 01:01:675 (1,3,7,1,2) - . it is also weird how you remove most of that again in the next part except for some that are overmapped in the same fashion as the one from two points ago. on the part of 01:11:447 (1) - it gets a bit better because they are more recognisable as just fillers between the vocals that are mapped in a clear way on sliders (except for the repeat again01:12:133 (4) - )
  12. 12. 01:18:990 (1,2) - could be a tripple since you do focus on the drums a lot as well
  13. 13. 01:24:304 (4,1) - should be a tripple since the part exclusively focuses on the drum (good example of a structured pattern btw 01:22:418 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1) - albeit the first one doesn't connect with the latter two and those two only have one reused position connecting them as well, but the splits are comprehensible and have some degree of connection and overall structure, even if it's a basic one)
  14. 14. 01:25:161 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3) - two things with this stream aside of the idea of the decreasing angle being interesting if it weren't broken by both of the last ones being straight rather than just the last one. why is the spacing decreasing? it's the same drum hit throughout and the building pitch is increasing rather than decreasing and also doesn't really do anything more special for the last three notes to justify them being highly spaced again in contrast. it's a nice contrast idea, but it doesn't represent the song. secondly 01:25:761 (4,4) - are overmapped
  15. 15. 01:28:590 (1,2,3) - the sliders seem like they are starting too early for the electronic sounds. while the first one has a drum supporting it, it becomes apparent with the second one starting on nothing while ending on the sound and also being preceeded by an unmapped one. gonna be hard to cover everything properly on this but the current version doesn't make much sense to me. something like http://puu.sh/x7oMh/0986a57609.jpg comes about the closest to it without skipping instruments, which might be the preferable option nonetheless
  16. ? 01:29:961 (1) - this would be a great place for a split stream as the sound you're covering is a momentary one and the the ones you have the burst on continues right over it. on the same note it would make sense to twist 01:30:218 (3,4) - apart from the burst as they're of the same kind and stand out from the ones making up the stream and the current version takes away from taht distinction even more by adding just one note before it.
  17. 16. 01:31:904 (5) - why a repeat
  18. 17. 01:36:133 (1) - might want to make it into a note plus a 1/3 slider as the 1/3 sound only picks up at where the repeat arrow is now. current version overgoes that and is thus misrepresentative
  19. 18. 01:36:990 (2) - either map al of this sound or just skip it. as it is, it's confusing. having that slider there implies you'd follow it only to then not do so one object and a gap later. i see how you want to capture the bass hits on the next 1, but there are better ways to go about it by either filling or skipping the 1/3 thing. skipping is probably the better option as you do so with the following objects as well
  20. 01:47:104 (1,2,1,2,3,4,1,2) - a decent way of handling it as is and it's befitting to the map as well. i'll just mention how this would be a good place to use contrasts for future reference as i've seen some other mods have talked about it as well in regard of how just everything has high spacing.
  21. 19. 01:50:533 (5) - what makes this more special than the other vocals i wonder. there ought to be something since its a slider, but i don't see it. if it's the the backgrund synth thing that peaks in pitch there, it's still a distinct sound and has no reason to be extended on imo
  22. 19. 01:51:047 (7,1) - how about making a slider out of these as they just sort of feel like jump spam atm while they could be emphasising a longer vocal instead. if the down beat is still a concern to you after what i said earlier, i guess that's that.. unfortunate
  23. 19. 01:53:275 (3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4) - about all these 1/4 bits in this part.. i can't figure them out. you seem to just throw them in and skip every now and then, differing even within the same sets, and i don't see a system behind it. doesn't really work with consistent vocal sliders either
  24. 02:16:590 (6) - would ctrl g for a more rounded flow as it currently breaks momentum and i'm not sure if that is in your interest Momentum and flow on a slow section, with low spacing 175 bpm don't really exist.
  25. 02:21:047 (4) - also concider flipping that one on it's straight axis for similar reasons ^, plus i'm giving emphasis to it smh
  26. 02:23:961 (9) - 02:25:161 (7) - ?? no matter how many times i listen to it i can't hear any 1/8 and the buzz is omni-present in the part anyway they just feel right on that spots.
  27. 02:27:390 (4,5,6,7) - the start of 6 isn't on any particular beat and even less so resembling of 4. you missed a note in between instead of the instrument you usually map through this part though so i assume you might just have have overheard it (also missing one between 02:28:075 (8,1) - which would serve as a good transition as well) damn i really like the pattern but i guess i'll change.
  28. 02:28:247 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2) - nice construct but the spacing seems random 02:28:590 (1) - this sound here and 02:29:275 (1) - kinda give of a stronger feeling, thus giving more space for 02:28:761 (2) - , if I would listen to it on 100% speed this sounds stronger than 02:28:418 (2) - , so I kinda made this construct to follow that, feels better imo.
  29. 02:30:133 (2,1) - 02:30:818 (2,1) - along with a possible tripple here you could have used some accents on vocals to make this whole build part less stagnant vocals don't feel dominant at all here, and following them would make no sense, since it would be arbitarilly done. Also I don't want triples, wish you didn't listen to the whole song on 25% speed lmao.
  30. 02:33:475 (3,4) - ctrl g to actually capture the impact of the snare very sweet, I was wondering for a while how to capture the impact,
    finally found it, or I was too retarded to think of a way, I just knew that the current one is not what I wanted.
  31. 02:35:070 (1) - also this one could profit of a simple crtl g as it plays with the same impact as the previous sliders atm it'd become literally unplayable.
  32. 02:35:447 (3,4) - changing this into another set of 1/3 sliders would come off as less arbitrary in sound change as you focused those over vocals before as well. especially since the current things plays on sounds that you skipped in the beginning of the very same meassure and you don't have a focus on teh vocals anyway. a change like that could further profit of a removal of 02:35:790 (1) - since the main sound the stream follows starts a tick later in correlation to just those sounds will actually consider this, sounds fun, but I assume it won't work well for the 1/2 tapping rhythm choices.
  33. 02:36:475 (1) - different sounds, but it's the same occasion as with the previous set of two repeats. the first one starts too early and shouldn't be a repeat will consider redoing it if I like new version.
  34. 02:38:533 (6) - having a gap after this makes this play really weirdly as it does not follow the sounds that make up the foreground 1/4. so the tick after it takes another note. i myself would work around it so current 6 isn't a clickable in either the form of a gap or a slider end (6) catches a really nice note imo, the hihat or whatever it is, that also feels a bit like a vocal. Also ignoring the 1/4 after because its too weak for me too care, and I would have to make a less interactive pattern.
  35. 02:43:333 (1,2,3,4) - only three is different in terms of it having a different drum hit on it (also with a vocal on it). one can stay a single as it doesn't have the electro sound but two i'd make into a slider with the same position as current 2, matching up in direction with the other sliders. on top a change of direction on 3, perhaps with a simple ctrl g could give credit to the different hits as well. would just perhaps need some readjusting on the following tripple this could be explained better right. But assuming what you mean, I'll defend the pattern anyways, 02:43:675 (3,4) - follow electronic sounds, since the snare is on (3) it feels like there's no electronic sound, but it certainly feels nice imo, I don't want to defend every single 1/4 kickslider usage,
    its made for the sole reason of making the section/map interactive. Having them on a logical rhythmical order that is nice to hit, like tap kickslider tap kickslider, or tap tap kickslider kickslider like idk. Having stuff like 1 2 2 1 is bad, if its in a 1 2 1 2 or 1 1 2 2 state it makes more sense.
  36. 02:49:504 (1,2) - they are completely different sounds from what makes up the rest of the stream and should not connect them along with the surrounding notes into the same entity, certainly not with the same spacing and shape as the following two notes, it's just muddling, which is always unpleasant will remap
  37. 03:57:304 (8,1) - i can't imagine a linear split playing well in a map like this , it's unprecedented and nothing about the music is unique enough to call for something like this. a split in general is alright, even if i'd personally still not recommend it, but the way this one is executed is highly disagreeable. wwww finish emphasis
  38. 04:00:818 (1,2,3,4,1) - just a curve that is dented by a just about noticable amount oops
  39. 04:02:961 (8,1) - the tripples in this part seems pretty random to me. the first one makes sense as the first note isn't an electric one and being on a sliderend with that. but then the second one has an actual note in the same stack. furthermore.. there's so many tripples that are upright skipped while they sounds virtually the same and are not hindered by any other focus you are taking hmm will revisit, seems I did some structural errors here
  40. 04:06:990 (1,2,3) - i don't like the repetition of these. they feel spammy. reason being that they completely ignore the vocals that make up the melody except with minor spacing differences if that is even intentional, which doesn't really do much anyway either though since contrast isn't a thing in this part. the sharp electric sounds are also skipped completely and instead a simple, metronome like background kick-snare rhythm is in focus. musically it is highly repetitive. Following the vocals in the usual occasion will result in the maps rhythm not being repetitive fully. So just here I decided to it like that to follow the nature of the songs repetitiveness in this part
  41. 04:23:447 (1,2,1,2,1,2) - spacing is not on pitch (mainly just the third pair in each iteration) The following pattern has strong pitches on both red and white tick. I wanted to consistently give them the most spacing, the following pattern 04:37:847 (1,2) - Has a strong pitch on (1). For variety and fun factor, I decided to sometimes not give (1) full emphasis to make new kinds of patterns, as it will be impossible with the way it is without breaking the structure.
    Edit Quote
have fun red-walling, hopefully some green can slip in between
ah, and you don't need to mod my other map, i might have one that is more in need of regular mods in the nearish future instead. i'll message you about that if it happens and if you even do tickety stuff
Okay so, you will get your posts marked, and I will discuss multiple stuff by that. with a bold number.

- Will remap.
- Full or partial agreement.
- Disagree.

  1. 1. My idea was to follow the high speed that the synth suggests, but it ends up being a mess holding up a lot of stuff back, will remap and think if I like the new version. I'm still okay with my current version.
  2. 2. That slider shenanigans seems nice, I'll experiment with it a bit.
  3. 3. I'm okay with this section, the synth 1/4 is not really audible, nobody while playing will tell you, hey dud, why is there no 1/4 here?!?! The section ignores consistently synth 1/4's right before a note that I found important, always made as new combo starter in order to give it spacing emphasis. If I were to make some stream jumps it would be annoying. I've heard your opinion, but I'm afraid its too different to mine, as I found the downbeats and white ticks to be more important. The synth isn't really that sharp, the one that is ignored is only really noticeable on lower speeds. I will not inverse the notes because then nothing in the section would be emphasized.
  4. 4. Everyone else said that before the remap btw. Before this it just had flow and some consistent spacing, however it now has much better placement and obvious back and forth flow throughout. I want this to be more loose, are you saying that the ideal way is to make one pattern and copy paste it? Do you know that its nearly impossible to make many simillar patterns play differently while keeping an identical concept to them. Yes one is hexagonal and the other one is back and forth triangles or w/e, but it ends up being diverse and not feel the same. Every player will be able to grasp both of the patterns and not look back twice on what was going on. I understand all of your concepts, but its too farfetched and too robotic in my opinion. I value putting heart in the map as much as putting brains to it, and we all know brain would be boring without a heart.
  5. 5. I fking hate that split, I will burn it, long story why its happening just now.
  6. 6. The synth sounds more intense here, idk it doesn't even matter that much, it adds diversity while also following the volume increasment of the synth.
  7. 7. Done for variety, really. Mapping things a bit unconventional freshens the map a bit, since the following 2 patterns do it like you said.
  8. 8. Could, will consider but I dont guarantee.
  9. 9. Fuuck, it fits so nice there. asdasdasdasdasdasdasdasdasdasfsdfs
  10. 10. Woooosh, flow doesn't exist, I've done that on purpose, its too different patterns and too different flows, I haven't established an obvious flow system to make them both have circular, I like irregularities, and a "little flow thing" shouldn't really mean anything important in terms of quality.
  11. 11. Actually I'll consider incorporating more 1/4 rhythm in all the sections.
  12. 12. Nah, I want vocals to be emphasized here
  13. 13. Disagree, the triples aren't audible to me, and would rather keep the jumps to emphasize the buildup, random 1/4 usage for the sake of being used will negate all of that.
  14. 14. Fuck its an overmap, will remap.
  15. 15. It does, and it's done on purpose. From a playable perspective this opens up the section really well and gets people expecting some 1/2 tapping. I've tried multiple things, but it ends up making further patterns being weird for being dense on short notes. This rhythm was actually suggested by probox. The second slider actually feels like it accomplishes stuff even though not properly following the rhythm, feels like it holds something to it, like it carries everything. I find it very important to start up the section as dense.
  16. 16. To end on a white tick, easing the rhythmic sense.
  17. 17. Sounds good, will experiment.
  18. 18. It doesn't really feel weird because it is snapped to regular 1/2 timings, and keeps the regular rhythmic sense up. Humans always tend to rhythmically follow stuff, and 1/2 rhythm is the most natural for it to be weird.
  19. 19. Okay, fuck this, I've been mapping to speakers, and for some reason speakers make the sounds inconsistent, so when I've put my headphones on, I instantly realized what's going on.
Topic Starter
MaridiuS

neonat wrote:

Hello

Despondency

00:02:704 (10) - using a circle instead of a slider here, it helps with matching with how the sounds cut short here and leaves a sudden short break in the song. Similarly at 00:08:190 (10) I disagree, its done like that for a filler, and not planning on doing single circles in the first section
00:09:733 (1,2,3) - start the slider at 00:09:733 and the 2 circles at 00:09:904 and 00:09:990 - the voice holds at 00:09:733 while there are 2 independent beats at 00:09:904 and 00:09:990 would coincide better with circles nice idea
00:25:504 (6,7) - could 00:25:675 (7) be shifted more to the left, so that the angle from 00:25:504 (6) is not that acute. Quite often in this section the movement is quite restricted and small, like around 00:26:875 (1,2,1,2) - and that would make things harder to move around I don't find them particularly troubling, seems to work fine for me.
00:32:361 (3) - separate and use 2 circles? 00:32:533 is a strong beat k will do
00:33:218 (2,1) - largest spacing in this pattern, but wouldn't it be more appropriate for the largest spacing to be at 00:33:561 (2,1) - where the peak pitch is at? Like 00:36:305 (2,1) for structural and aesthetical purposes it will be kept on this way. No emphasis is really lost there.
00:43:675 (1) - because of how 00:42:990 (3,4,5,6,7) is angled, the movement to 00:43:675 (1) feels irregular, possibly shift it lower, curve it to face more to the right rather than left for example fixed
02:04:247 (4,5,6) - especially the spacing for 02:04:247 (4,5) - unlike the others with the held vocals the spacing here is the odd one out i'll see what happens when I remap the section
03:15:561 (3) - why finish here rather than 03:15:218 (2) - like 03:13:847 (2) - ? The cymbals don't seem to be heard at 03:15:561 mistake on (2)'s, will take a second look
03:17:618 (1) - 03:28:590 (1) - 03:39:561 (1) - hitsounds for these? oops
04:01:504 (1) - 04:12:475 (1) - 04:23:447 (1) - finish? sure
04:23:790 (1,2,1) - bigger spacing for 04:23:961 (2,1) rather than 04:23:790 (1,2) - match with the peak pitch in the song I will copy paste something at the end of the mod reply.
04:24:647 (2,1,2) - could try to portray the increase in pitch in the song again at 04:24:647 (2,1) with a change in spacing comapred to what is around it, have it bigger than the rest will do
04:26:704 (2,1) - similarly about the spacing, 04:27:218 (1,2,1) - this one actually somewhat shows that, with 04:27:390 (2,1) - bigger than all those around it, albeit just slightly
04:29:447 (2,1) - 04:30:133 (2,1) - 04:32:190 (2,1) - 04:34:933 (2,1) - 04:35:618 (2,1) - ^ etc. yes yes
04:38:533 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - could do some spacing emphasis here for the tune change and increase in song pressure/intensity yeah I could increase spacing a bit.
04:47:961 (5) - 04:53:447 (5) - 04:58:933 (5) - similar to 00:02:704 (10)
04:50:190 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - could be like 05:01:161 (1,2) - starting with sliders matches the vocal in the song disagree, second one has kicks on both sliders.
04:54:990 (1,2,3,4) - similar to 00:09:733 (1,2,3) yeah

All the best
Thanks for the mod ;3

edit: I forgot this
04:23:790 (1,2) - The following pattern has strong pitches on both red and white tick. I wanted to consistently give them the most spacing, the following pattern 04:37:847 (1,2) - Has a strong pitch on (1). For variety and fun factor, I decided to sometimes not give (1) full emphasis to make new kinds of patterns, as it will be impossible with the way it is without breaking the structure.
DeRandom Otaku
[Despondency]
  1. 01:14:018 (1,2) - All the other triples in this section, i understand. But this one is definitely overmapped to my ears because i can legit not head any audiable sound on the blue tick. Same with 01:15:390 (1,2,3) -
  2. 01:16:590 (8,1) - Dont you think the spacing is quite harsh for such a calm section? On the surrounding parts you have spacing almost similar to this for 1/2 and this, This is 1/4. This could totally be misread. Even the visuals kinda make this look like a 1/2 pattern so yeah
  3. 01:24:475 (1) - Dont think you need NC because its not at 01:23:104 (5) - Even tho the cymbal exists at 01:24:475 - but still :eyes:
  4. 01:29:161 (4,5) - Try listening to this on 25% , The wubs actually land on 1/3 snap which is at 01:29:390 - 01:29:504 - Same for others like this
  5. 01:29:104 (4) - Also you kinda decreased SV quite alot so an NC would help reading that
  6. 01:34:075 (1,2,3,4,5) - quite questionable rhythm here because the sound at 01:34:161 - is ignored and instead of that ,01:34:247 - this is mapped
  7. 02:35:447 (3,4) - This is also 1/3. Same goes to other patterns like this
  8. 04:46:075 (1) - In this whole section you had some NC's like this one which you didnt have in the intro at all so yeah probably make them consistent (?)

Can't say much about it since its quite above my playing level. Also i believe the overall structure could use some work other than that its a fine map.
Good luck
show more
Please sign in to reply.

New reply