1. Easy (1.62 stars, 223 notes)
2. Extra (5.27 stars, 866 notes)
3. Extreme (6.13 stars, 971 notes)
4. Hard (3.53 stars, 488 notes)
5. Insane (4.68 stars, 754 notes)
6. Nardo's Inner Oni (5.34 stars, 1426 notes)
7. Nardo's Muzukashii (3.46 stars, 1002 notes)
8. Nardo's Oni (4.56 stars, 1282 notes)
9. Normal (2.16 stars, 336 notes)

1. your choice of not NCing 00:05:202 (3) - made your initial NC system be somehow different and you got 4 consecutive downbeats without NC 00:06:986 (1,2,3,4) - lmao
2. 01:02:445 - would be nice to cover this sound with something non-sliderbody as you did on the other chorus
3. 01:44:932 (2,3,4) - hm flow is a bit lol, noobs might go to the slidertail instead

1. 00:44:283 (1,2,3) - maybe you can set a similar system as used on 01:36:175 (1,2,3) - (just noticed that there are many more that you didn't use it, maybe 01:36:175 (1,2) - is the wrong one lol)
2. 01:18:337 - normal whistles here felt really overdone since the normal hs is pretty louder than the soft one. I mean, you avoided spamming it on other sections of the song, and sounds really weird to have a bunch here

1. 00:19:310 (3) - not a nice place to put a reverse at all, 00:19:959 - on a slider tail is lol when u consider u were followin' vocal
2. 00:40:391 (4,5) - maybe increase a bit the spacing between these two? looks like the same patterning but still has a damn strong sound
3. mayb ar7 would create a more consistent mapset since it has no real jumpy stuff and easy is 3 normal is 5 and insane is 9 but meh

1. 00:30:824 (4,5) - feels empty with nothing on 00:30:905 - and 00:31:472 (8,9,10) - following drums perfectly
2. 00:32:445 (4) - pattern isn't bad but feedback didn't reach my expectations
3. 00:51:418 (1,2,1,2,1,2) - hmm any objective behind spacing here? the first pattern is notable bigger than the others, the second one is smaller but the last one isn't the smallest so i get a bit tilted
4. 01:17:040 - this section is lol cuz u made it streammy but.. a really long streammy section with rest time only at the end. Kinda weird cuz streams aren't really a thing on the diff, so making it that heavy is unexpected
5. 01:39:013 (1,2) - hm you always use 1/2 rhythm on that part and it still exists, why u just ignored it and followed a random sound on the blue tick? looks like choke material
   
   rest lookin' badass

1. 00:10:878 (5,6) - aw i expected u to fit the vocal better as you did on 00:16:067 (1) - 02:47:851 (1) - 02:53:040 (3) - etc. Anyway, even if you follow the instrumental or something is pretty z to have 00:11:202 - as a slider tail if on most parts it is clickable. (I know you hate clickable mod tho, sorry )
2. 00:32:445 (5,1) - i'd swap NCing here so the pattern could be more effective visually
3. 00:59:445 - undermap this when u did a bunch of triplets before is sortak no jutsu
4. 01:33:905 (1,2) - not a big fan of spacing here since it's one of the strongest parts of the section, but nothing extremely retard tho
5. 02:04:391 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9) - MyAngelDelisha
6. 02:36:337 (1,2,3,4,5) - aw no feedback at all? maybe you can ctrl g 02:36:662 (3,4) - to match with your previous 90º patterns and make things nic
7. 02:52:716 (1,2,3) - kinda weird to read cuz slider + circle underlap and circle + slider overlap, that's gonna make ur aesthetic and reading be z, maybe manual stack and gg
8. 02:58:229 - a bit disappointed on jump spacing here, it is literally small than the previous section when you consider parts as 02:50:770 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - or something, but since it's getting bigger i think it's not a problem at all so

1. 00:15:256 (6,7,8) - i dont quite understand why there is triple. judging from what i've seen previously in a map you do stream only when there is a drum support for this sound, right? I dont hear any drum on a blue tick.
2. 00:19:797 (4,5,6) - i dont understand this too.
3. 00:40:391 (1,2,3,4) - this trick is not used anywhere else in the map except this time. what's so special about this case? why not putting something like this somewhere else on the map too, or maybe just get rid of it at all?
4. 00:45:743 (3,4,5) - why triple here? i dont hear any significant sound on the blue tick. is it to keep the circle-circle-triple pattern for that phrase?
5. 00:54:256 - , 00:59:445 - , 01:46:148 - this skipped intentionally? You may have done something interesting with a big larger rhythm variety than just 1/2 stuff.
6. 01:22:878 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9) - maybe you would like to do this as a little wave? https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/8411154 imo it will be better visually and because of that will cause i little less pressure on a player because this thingie will look more player-friendly.
7. 01:37:797 (5,6) - i think if you keep here the 1x distance, but 01:38:445 (3,4) - make here ~1.15x and 01:38:770 (1,2) - around 1.30x. yes i understand you have some kind of a grid for certain parts of a song, but why not developing the idea for something better? Or maybe even reverse the idea with spacing if you want to have more pressure on a player at that moment?
8. 02:01:148 (1) - you forgot to put soft sampleset on the sliderend
9. 02:25:472 (1,2,3,4) - awesome example of overmapping, i like it

1. 02:20:770 (1,2,3,4) - i'd like to see this pattern at least once more in this difficulty, in the same instance or something similar

1. 02:36:986 (5) - ctrl+g it twice to fix the shape, i think it looks better after such procedure.

1. 00:58:229 (3) - I feel like this might be questionable for a difficulty of this level. If you stack it on 00:58:391 (4) - it might be better.
2. 00:46:554 (9,10,11,12) - I find more sense in doing this moment with sliders and this one 00:59:527 (7,8) - with circles to better emphasize the climax of the chorus.
3. 01:49:148 (8) - Stack it under 01:48:824 (7) - this slider's end? because thats what you were doing all the time in this map when there is 1 tick gap after it.
4. 03:02:121 (4,5,6,7) - maybe increase spacing between left and right sides of this pattern? it's a personal preference, but i think it will look better without those small overlaps.

Kaifin wrote:

GOOD BG LEGS

Easy

1. 00:14:445 (2) - you could bring this note down a bit to make a triangle with 00:13:148 (4,1,2) - to avoid cramped overlap fixed sotarks
2. 01:43:635 (3) - imo bringing this note a bit more to the left would improve the flow here, the player has to double back so much to hit this slider after following 01:42:824 (2) - all the way through kek
3. 03:00:824 (1,2,3,4) - why not make this the same spacing as 02:58:229 (1,2,3,4) - but flipped? because im edgy in easier diffs? I actually like to not copy pasting sliders so they all look differently

Normal

1. 01:39:905 (2,5) - i wish you could find a way to just stack these i did it!!
2. 03:03:418 (2,3,4,5) - imo this kind of flow is really confusing to new players because of the slider flow, might want to consider ctrl ging 03:04:067 (3,5) - and adjusting the pattern accordingly well let's see if this could be a problem since it's a normal diff which has an easy diff before, I think newbies that attempting to play it can play this ok imo.

Hard

1. 01:27:094 (4,5) - consider using a rhythm like this to better fit the drums/vocal, it doesn't make sense to skip mapping this triple when you map the others
   SPOILER

   
2. 01:36:986 (5,8) - blanket nitpick
   SPOILER

   
3. 01:38:770 (11) - you didn't extend this slider in the first chorus, why extend it here?
4. 01:49:472 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - this rhythm sort of loses touch with the rhythm of the vocals, try this rhythm imo it fits a lot better with the song + represents the vocals a lot better than what you have right now
   SPOILER

   
5. 02:56:283 (2,3) - blank
   SPOILER

   

changed everything on this diff

Extra

1. hp 8 when top diff is hp 7? well, this diff doesn't contain any real hard pattern but extreme has, I always want high hp on extra diffs so players can easily fall once they fucked up.(for example, one of my maps: Love your enemies is hp8 and the map is intended to make failure at spaced streams) but when compare to love your enemies I didn't map any tricky pattern in this diff so this setting could be more fair than that, hp8 on extreme is kinda brutal -_
2. 00:10:716 - i hear what you might be going for with the drums, but it sounds super awkward to skip the really loud note at 00:10:716 - especially when you map streams over next to nothing later in the map made a stream instead of doublets
3. 00:26:445 (1,2) - buff this spacing to match the spacing of 00:23:851 (1,2) - or something similar? 00:23:851 (1,2) - has a LOT more emphasis than 00:26:445 (1,2) - and the low to high spacing effect was really cool I was retarded at this moment
4. literally thats it

Extreme

1. 00:23:527 (3,4,5,6,7) - i know that it's part of a line, but it would feel a lot better if 00:23:364 (2,3) - this had more emphasis increased spacing a bit
2. 01:12:499 (3,4,5) - imo this would look a lot better if it was either straight, or more curved kinda prefer mine
3. 03:04:716 (1,2) - giving more spacing between these two objects would map is 100% more readable than it is rn alright

please note that i spent a lot of time modding this and just couldn't find a lot thankss

do you use stack view? if you don't you should, a lot of the triples/stacks look kind of funny but the map is so good playability wise

delis saves mapping nic meme

1. pretty neat but there's some inaccurate things as 00:17:689 (2,3) - etc
2. 00:38:121 (3,4) - I'd like to see smoother transition to the (4) slider as the whole pattern 00:33:905 (4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - has pretty smooth flow unlike this certain slider
3. 01:37:635 - definitely forgot a finish

1. 00:31:310 (8) - hitcircle goes for nothing here, there's no such audible sound tbh. It looks great if you make this 00:30:986 (7) - 1/1 to emphasis this weird continious sound.
2. 00:40:391 (4) - it has such a specific sound under it, like both vocals and this violin, try to make it vary from 00:39:418 (1,2,3) - .
3. u could make spacing somehow there a bit in an interesting way 02:41:364 (1) - like ctrl+g'ing it or somthing.
4. 01:36:013 (1,2,3) - three 1/2 clickable stacked objects are introduced only once for the whole diff, you kno that consistency thing kinda works here and I don't think it's a good idea to make this stack tbh

1. 00:05:445 - huh
2. 00:18:337 (1,2,3) - you're making nc here kinda strangely idk really what were you accoring to but this looks meaninglessly.
3. 00:24:986 (8,1) - such a small spacing for the new strong measure, bigger spacing workd better here.
4. mind explaining me why are you playing around with spacing here, like, 00:27:743 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - there's no pretty reason in music to make spacing bigger at the end, 00:33:581 (6,7) - the same 1.6x makes more sense. Maybe this repeats maybe not, I died at the very end.

1. 00:36:004 (155) - Since the vocal's pitch is lower than before, you may change it to d.
2. 01:27:896 (425) - ^
3. 02:19:788 (705) - ^
4. 00:46:382 (208,209,210) - you may reverse the color to ddd and change 00:51:572 (233,234,235) - kkk. i think i would be more fit the vocal's pronunciation (like you did on 00:54:166 (247,248,249) - and 00:56:761 (261,262,263) - ).
5. 02:30:166 (765,766,767) - , 02:35:355 (793,794,795) - ^

1. 00:49:058 (275,276) - how about exchange them? To follow the vocal's pitch
2. 01:40:869 (625,626,627) - ^
3. 02:32:761 (985,986,987) - ^
4. 00:51:896 (295) - you may change it to d consider there isn't any snare sounds, and vocal doesn't emphasize here.
5. 00:31:626 (163,164,165,166,167,168,169,170,171,172,173,174,175,176) - consider the vocal, it may a bit different with 01:23:518 (505,506,507,508,509,510,511,512,513,514,515,516,517,518) - , you could use another patterns.

1. 00:31:626 - ~00:33:409 - same as oni.
2. 00:21:247 - ~00:28:058 - how about change to this, consider the vocal's pitch get higher and higher.
3. 00:29:518 - you may add triple here consider this section is the bridge to upcoming part that is more density . there is example.

qoot8123 wrote:

Hi , here comes my taiko mod as request.

[Nardo's Muzukashii]

1. 00:36:004 (155) - Since the vocal's pitch is lower than before, you may change it to d. I think keeping it as k could maintain a better flow and texture compared to the d at 00:35:355 (152) - . The pitch change occurs at 00:35:355 (152) - which has already mapped as d.
2. 01:27:896 (425) - ^ same as ^ for consistency.
3. 02:19:788 (705) - ^ same as ^
4. 00:46:382 (208,209,210) - you may reverse the color to ddd and change 00:51:572 (233,234,235) - kkk. i think i would be more fit the vocal's pronunciation (like you did on 00:54:166 (247,248,249) - and 00:56:761 (261,262,263) - ). fixed
5. 02:30:166 (765,766,767) - , 02:35:355 (793,794,795) - ^ ^

[Nardo's Oni]

1. 00:49:058 (275,276) - how about exchange them? To follow the vocal's pitch I think kkd could represent the suddenly increased vocal pitch accordingly.
2. 01:40:869 (625,626,627) - ^ same as ^
3. 02:32:761 (985,986,987) - ^ ^
4. 00:51:896 (295) - you may change it to d consider there isn't any snare sounds, and vocal doesn't emphasize here. fixed
5. 00:31:626 (163,164,165,166,167,168,169,170,171,172,173,174,175,176) - consider the vocal, it may a bit different with 01:23:518 (505,506,507,508,509,510,511,512,513,514,515,516,517,518) - , you could use another patterns. The lyrics are different but the pitch changes are actually similar. I would prefer keeping it for consistency while having some variations regarding pattern density.

[Nardo's Inner Oni]

1. 00:31:626 - ~00:33:409 - same as oni. Refer to above.
2. 00:21:247 - ~00:28:058 - how about change to this, consider the vocal's pitch get higher and higher. I think both set of patterns would work while the current one could feature a polarity change to spice the three layers up.
3. 00:29:518 - you may add triple here consider this section is the bridge to upcoming part that is more density . there is example. Good idea, fixed.

Good Luck!

Namki wrote:

hi
i promised to mod this like 10 years ago so here it is

[Easy]

1. pretty neat but there's some inaccurate things as 00:17:689 (2,3) - etc but what's wrong with it :?:
2. 00:38:121 (3,4) - I'd like to see smoother transition to the (4) slider as the whole pattern 00:33:905 (4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - has pretty smooth flow unlike this certain slider tried to fix
3. 01:37:635 - definitely forgot a finish I think it already has one

[Hard]

1. 00:31:310 (8) - hitcircle goes for nothing here, there's no such audible sound tbh. It looks great if you make this 00:30:986 (7) - 1/1 to emphasis this weird continious sound. but theres clearly a drum
2. 00:40:391 (4) - it has such a specific sound under it, like both vocals and this violin, try to make it vary from 00:39:418 (1,2,3) - . thats why the slider changes its flow from 1, 2, 3
3. u could make spacing somehow there a bit in an interesting way 02:41:364 (1) - like ctrl+g'ing it or somthing. i dont want 3 jumps in a row main emphasis goes to 02:40:707 (7,8) - like i did in top diffs the cymbal sound doesn't have to be emphasized
4. 01:36:013 (1,2,3) - three 1/2 clickable stacked objects are introduced only once for the whole diff, you kno that consistency thing kinda works here and I don't think it's a good idea to make this stack tbh but it's fine

[Insane]

1. 00:05:445 - huh
2. 00:18:337 (1,2,3) - you're making nc here kinda strangely idk really what were you accoring to but this looks meaninglessly. it's obviously for patterning
3. 00:24:986 (8,1) - such a small spacing for the new strong measure, bigger spacing workd better here. it might be changed from few updates but the current pattern looks completely okay
4. mind explaining me why are you playing around with spacing here, like, 00:27:743 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - there's no pretty reason in music to make spacing bigger at the end, 00:33:581 (6,7) - the same 1.6x makes more sense. Maybe this repeats maybe not, I died at the very end. I'd rather ask why you only stick to "what the music does" I've been saying this for whole time but the mapping, at least mine isn't only following the song to decide everything rhythm, patterns etc. the first pattern is because I found that a jump would be interesting with the vocals, the second pattern is an anti-jump because simply keeping the circular flow at the same spacing is a boring pattern especially that's not how I'd map for most of patterns

zzzz
gl

Yuii- wrote:

hardestest

00:59:193 (2,1) - more spacing as done in 00:56:761 (4,1) - would be better kinda changed the jump to fit to the patterns
01:06:977 (3,4) - i also don't get this angle, it's one of those patterns you only get to see once in the whole map and it doesn't even look good. i believe https://i.imgur.com/7PWtzUp.jpg that is much better but i like this pattern a lot the way cursor stops at 01:06:977 (3) - once and jumps to the triplet
02:01:139 (1,2) - this is also another example of things you don't get to see often. sure, these aren't hard whatsoever, but why would you map these things only once throughout the entire map? or maybe, they are mapped more oftenly, but they aren't /consistent/. triplets would be fine, and even extending the slider would make more sense fixed this because you're right 3/4 sucks.
03:09:896 (1,2,1,2) - p sure these need more spacing as you have done it in the rest of the mappppp but it's after a 1/4 slider so big spacing won't make it enjoyable

i also have other things to complain such as your placement not matching your hitsounding. non-hitsounded sounds get the same relevance as finish hitsounds? not sure
same happens with sliders and circles. why are some things clickable, it seems overdone at times id say it's just how i map usually and to map more enjoyable for me , i dont find finish is more important than other hitsounds also i didn't put any hitsounds for vocals but i map for vocals rather than drums (where hitsounds are on)

imo, the way extra was mapped seems more reasonable in terms of density, but okkkk

also, since i brought up that difficulty, 01:17:031 - is more dense than extreme... and way harder due to those doubles. consider rechecking that section as extra is way cooler than extreme during that timestamp. making them equally cool would be nicer!!!!!!!! woooo ikr the hardest diff had originally streams in the place, but i decided to purge them to make it simpler, to make the extra more rhythmic diff and the extreme more jump heavy diff obvious.

[]

otherwise? great stuff

1. 00:36:815 (1) - Would be cool if you do in this section the same thing you did here 00:31:950 (1) - as they try to follow the same thing but in the first one you added some 1/1 and 2/1 circles and in the second one you didn't do anything special.

1. 00:20:680 - This is a nice spot to add a triplet and would be really cool, since you aren't ignoring them in this diff. Would be really consistent with everything else.
2. 01:36:004 (1,2,3) - This is the only spot where you added 1/2 triplets (?) and that might be a bit confusing since you were only stacking 3 notes together when there's a triplet. May be better if you try this.

1. 00:31:788 (1,2) - I don't know if it's just me but they visually look really close to each other compared to the rest ant the vocals don't really change their intensity there.
2. 02:30:166 (3,4,5,6,7) - This stream feels a bit out of place since there's nothing really noticeable to follow and yet you spaced it more than in some other places like 01:53:842 (1,2,3,4,5,6) -, where you can clearly hear the 1/4. Would either recommend add a triplet instead of a stream or space it a bit less.

1. 00:40:382 (1,2,3,4) - Triplet here is a bit unexpected as you've been stacking a lot of 1/2 circles, so this might be a bit misleading. Would be better if you could space the triplet from the circle instead of stacking it there.
2. 01:42:490 (1,2,3) - Try spacing these a bit more as the vocal get stronger and kinda creates a build up pattern for the next pattern. Might be just be but I feel that spacing would be much better.
3. 02:40:707 (1,2,3,4) - Would really love if you could make the spacing here increase with a back and forth jump, instead of a straight line jump. The spacing would be more consistent with the other jumps and would fit your style. Example: https://i.imgur.com/pUJkcNr.png

Kuron-kun wrote:

hehehehehhhhh
just a few things because this is really good, please teach me how to map like this owo

[Easy]

1. 00:36:815 (1) - Would be cool if you do in this section the same thing you did here 00:31:950 (1) - as they try to follow the same thing but in the first one you added some 1/1 and 2/1 circles and in the second one you didn't do anything special. hell yea 2/1 sliders

[Hard]

1. 00:20:680 - This is a nice spot to add a triplet and would be really cool, since you aren't ignoring them in this diff. Would be really consistent with everything else. i removed the circle when i was young lmao its back boys
2. 01:36:004 (1,2,3) - This is the only spot where you added 1/2 triplets (?) and that might be a bit confusing since you were only stacking 3 notes together when there's a triplet. May be better if you try this. ok uhh that doesnt matter but yea changed

[Insane]

1. 00:31:788 (1,2) - I don't know if it's just me but they visually look really close to each other compared to the rest ant the vocals don't really change their intensity there. not rly sure it looks fine to me but the spaccing amont tmhe is a bit larger now
2. 02:30:166 (3,4,5,6,7) - This stream feels a bit out of place since there's nothing really noticeable to follow and yet you spaced it more than in some other places like 01:53:842 (1,2,3,4,5,6) -, where you can clearly hear the 1/4. Would either recommend add a triplet instead of a stream or space it a bit less. the other streams are because they're more than 5, which work out with smaller spacing. i honestly think this spices up the density in the last chorus so its cool i guess

[Extreme]

1. 00:40:382 (1,2,3,4) - Triplet here is a bit unexpected as you've been stacking a lot of 1/2 circles, so this might be a bit misleading. Would be better if you could space the triplet from the circle instead of stacking it there. but if this were out of the star the pattern would look like messed
   and 1/2 note + triplet stacked together is pretty easy to read as it looks different from either a stream of 5 or 1/2 stacks
2. 01:42:490 (1,2,3) - Try spacing these a bit more as the vocal get stronger and kinda creates a build up pattern for the next pattern. Might be just be but I feel that spacing would be much better. reworked the jumps to do that easier
3. 02:40:707 (1,2,3,4) - Would really love if you could make the spacing here increase with a back and forth jump, instead of a straight line jump. The spacing would be more consistent with the other jumps and would fit your style. Example: https://i.imgur.com/pUJkcNr.png ok thats a cool suggestion ma decreasing the spacing tho its 2 hard rn

Aloda wrote:

Hi. Just a couple of small suggestions for the taiko diffs.

Metadata checks out http://psp-queensgate.channel.or.jp/movie.html

[Muzukashii]
Maybe you could add more 3/2+ gaps to better adhere to the ranking guidelines? That said, there weren't really particular places that felt overly dense, so you're probably okay as-is. I am going to keep it intact as there is one effective break every 15 to 30 seconds. Oni and Inner Oni are also relatively hard so the spread would be acceptable too.

[Oni]
03:07:788 (165,166,167,168,169,170,171) - & 03:08:923 (176,177,178,179,180,181,182) - These patterns seem very different from the other 7-note patterns you've used throughout the map. They're a little more complex compared to the simple ddkdkkd type patterns you've used elsewhere, and considering the relatively high density of this section these feel more like Inner Oni patterns than Oni patterns to me. Again, it's not a huge deal, but maybe these could be simplified a bit. Rearranged them into simpler patterns.

Inner Oni is good.

That's all~ Nice map

1. 00:10:869 (5) - This definitely should use a NC here.
2. 00:13:463 (6,1) - Swap them, vocals start there, but it's more consistent going with the white tick.
3. 00:14:761 (4) - Same here. Just as you did it 00:12:166 (1) - here.
4. 00:18:653 (6,1) - Again the NC thing.
5. 00:19:950 (6,1) - And so on...
6. 00:21:247 (7,1) - It's clear that the where the NC should be placed. Also 00:21:247 (7,1) - why such a small spacing between those notes, I mean increasing it a bit wouldn't hurt to help the mouse movement a bit.
7. 00:32:274 (4,1) - It looks great regarding aesthetics, but vocals are being sacrificed to avoid using NCs on the right places.

1. 00:17:518 (2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - It looks nice but it doesn't follow the music properly due that there's nothing in the background sounds that ask for such kind of jumps even if this is an Extreme difficulty.
2. 00:20:436 (3,1) - You're emphasizing the strong sound in the music, but I don't think you should use such a high spacing because it's not that strong to do something like this.
3. 00:51:409 (1,2,3,4,1) - Same here.
4. 01:12:815 (1,2) - Kinda overdone, full screenjumps aren't that neccesary for this section in my opinion. 02:30:166 (1,2,3,4,5) - The same issue basically. Having this while you have 02:31:626 (5,6) - this next it's kinda weird. Don't you think so?
5. 00:29:031 (1,2,1,2,1,2,3,4,1) - Why not keeping the same idea about the placement as you did it 00:24:166 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1) - here? I mean song is slightly different yet vocals are still powerful, so I see no reason why not going with the same, or at the least do those (1,2) more consistent against the previous pattern.
6. 00:40:382 (1,2,3,4) - Why stacking it instead keeping the jump consistent to avoid such uncomfortable kind of movement?
7. 01:37:463 (2,3,4,5,6) - What I've mentioned above.
8. 00:47:031 (4,1) - This isn't being emphasized correctly. I'd like to increase that spacing more. Something like this would work just fine. But I noticed that you probably forgot to add a circle 00:47:112 - here, just as you did it on Extra which seems more like an issue for me. So feel free to add it back instead just increasing the spacing.
9. 01:51:896 (3,1) - ^ Yeah.
10. 00:49:788 (1,2) - Same issue, increase the spacing a bit more to avoid such uncomfortable movements. You can also just stack it under the previous circle, but up to you.
11. 00:54:896 - Ignored beat.
12. 01:06:653 (2,3,4) - I really don't get why breaking the flow/spacing like this while you had 00:15:085 (5,6) - this, which is more decent than this.
13. 01:51:247 (1,2,3) - What's doing this spam here? there's nothing in the song that asks for it or even nothing technical or difficult to play to add that. Just remove it from 01:51:572 (1) - here and it'll be okay. You didn't do it on Extra so it's more like an issue for me. (02:25:301 (1) - Same here).
14. 02:16:707 (1,3,4,5) - Kinda subjective, but it looks a bit awful regarding aesthetics, I'm pretty sure that you can just unstack them to make a clean pattern instead keeping this.
15. 02:21:572 (3,4) - Not stacking them would be ideal due that the vocals are being consistent each other, so this is breaking your idea on 02:20:761 (1,2,3,1,2,3,4) - these circles.
    02:36:166 (3,4,5,6,7) - 00:52:382 (4,5,6,7) - Are the same yet you didn't do them equally, I guess it's to bring some kind of variation regarding patterns and rhythm, but at the least try to make the first ones a clean jump, otherwise doing the same rhythm as you did it on the first chorus.
16. 03:05:193 (5,6) - Those looks similar against 03:04:869 (2,3,4) - these. Do you mind making them a bit different to avoid confusing while playing?

Gero wrote:

Hello, unfortunately I'm here to advice you some things regarding the quality of your mapset. Alright let's get in.

General (All difficulties):

The usage of combos are somehow inconsistent and inconsistent with each other, because some parts use combos of (2) (this is kinda justified due that it helps for reading, but it's not the same here) when in the last difficulty you use (4), besides that apparently you emphasize in a strange way the change of stanza either in the music or in the voice, because you do not use the NCs where they should go.

For example, let's focus on top difficulty:

1. 00:10:869 (5) - This definitely should use a NC here.
2. 00:13:463 (6,1) - Swap them, vocals start there, but it's more consistent going with the white tick.
3. 00:14:761 (4) - Same here. Just as you did it 00:12:166 (1) - here.
4. 00:18:653 (6,1) - Again the NC thing.
5. 00:19:950 (6,1) - And so on...
6. 00:21:247 (7,1) - It's clear that the where the NC should be placed. Also 00:21:247 (7,1) - why such a small spacing between those notes, I mean increasing it a bit wouldn't hurt to help the mouse movement a bit. what larger spacing would look like? that's drastically different from what i currently have, it doesn't allow what this should look like in my opinion so that totally makes no sense
7. 00:32:274 (4,1) - It looks great regarding aesthetics, but vocals are being sacrificed to avoid using NCs on the right places.

I really suggest you to check all difficulties more carefully to avoid such inconsistencies. If you want me to post all of them let me know. But this applies on the whole set (standard) actually. If you need some help let me know so we can discuss it in game, or if you want me to post all the inconsistencies, but I'm pretty sure you already got the idea. i have no idea if you're doing this seriously, the new combos are "obviously" focused on pattern-looking in the first place. next is to follow the vocals, that's why they're not often on every measure. plus I personally quite dislike having new combos on stacked notes, the end of streams, otherwise this is super consistent among my other maps.

02:09:572 - Manual breaks are fine, as long as they're required or actually following something specific in the song, but this is not the case, so make sure to check them through all difficulties to avoid using them. Not neccesary unrankable but wouldn't hurt to fix them at all. wait nobody would care of them what the fuck lol. it DOES hurt this is way too minor thing for a dq

1. 00:17:518 (2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - It looks nice but it doesn't follow the music properly due that there's nothing in the background sounds that ask for such kind of jumps even if this is an Extreme difficulty. but this is not like too hard to hit? i dont know what u think in terms of following music though this is literally what i thought of the section would contain some expansion in a pattern so this is quite fine
2. 00:20:436 (3,1) - You're emphasizing the strong sound in the music, but I don't think you should use such a high spacing because it's not that strong to do something like this. this is not too big. since the patterns right before/after are pretty simple thats pretty sure a common idea to do a jump
3. 00:51:409 (1,2,3,4,1) - Same here. its a good introduction into the second half of the chorus?
4. 01:12:815 (1,2) - Kinda overdone, full screenjumps aren't that neccesary for this section in my opinion. 02:30:166 (1,2,3,4,5) - The same issue basically. Having this while you have 02:31:626 (5,6) - this next it's kinda weird. Don't you think so? why are u talking about another place for an example when you're trying to discuss different section? it's not overdone at all, that spacing makes a good kick to go a calmer section, and fits to the map concept where using higher spacing for the important stuff in song rather than taking emphasis on every single sound ^^ 02:31:626 (5,6) - is basically just a small spacing for the sake of flow/aesthetic otherwise it will look gross as fuck. that cant relate to the previous jump because they share obviously different section musically.
5. 00:29:031 (1,2,1,2,1,2,3,4,1) - Why not keeping the same idea about the placement as you did it 00:24:166 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1) - here? I mean song is slightly different yet vocals are still powerful, so I see no reason why not going with the same, or at the least do those (1,2) more consistent against the previous pattern. because doing the same shit for 10 seconds is super boring lol? i have no idea why you're this nitpicky in terms of consistency but keeping the consistency on this section totally makes no sense unless ur trying to make them more underwhelming. im not even mapping to the same instrumental over the place, I wouldn't come up with a word but WHY NOT.
6. 00:40:382 (1,2,3,4) - Why stacking it instead keeping the jump consistent to avoid such uncomfortable kind of movement? just u. that just breaks the star patterns out and nothing benefits when the pattern is not uncomfortable as it is.
7. 01:37:463 (2,3,4,5,6) - What I've mentioned above. i dont know what ur trying to tell
8. 00:47:031 (4,1) - This isn't being emphasized correctly. I'd like to increase that spacing more. Something like this would work just fine. But I noticed that you probably forgot to add a circle 00:47:112 - here, just as you did it on Extra which seems more like an issue for me. So feel free to add it back instead just increasing the spacing. what? this is obviously to do an anti-emphasis and to make a small pause-ish movement. dont compare it with a diff with a different concept -_- I'll definitely not make any change here since this is what is supposed to look, play like.
9. 01:51:896 (3,1) - ^ Yeah. you found another place doing this yet you're trying to get me to fix it, nice consistency
10. 00:49:788 (1,2) - Same issue, increase the spacing a bit more to avoid such uncomfortable movements. You can also just stack it under the previous circle, but up to you. why would stacking make it less uncomfortable? i dont get it
11. 00:54:896 - Ignored beat. its because im doing huge jumps to keep the concept which is stolen from the old mapset of this song. a triplet would just ruin it.
12. 01:06:653 (2,3,4) - I really don't get why breaking the flow/spacing like this while you had 00:15:085 (5,6) - this, which is more decent than this. it's just small spacing difference, what more to do with it? either would work because i mapped the both sections kinda differently
13. 01:51:247 (1,2,3) - What's doing this spam here? there's nothing in the song that asks for it or even nothing technical or difficult to play to add that. Just remove it from 01:51:572 (1) - here and it'll be okay. You didn't do it on Extra so it's more like an issue for me. (02:25:301 (1) - Same here). you meant the combo or what this is pretty needed for the followpoints to vanish out, so they could stand out cooler way.
14. 02:16:707 (1,3,4,5) - Kinda subjective, but it looks a bit awful regarding aesthetics, I'm pretty sure that you can just unstack them to make a clean pattern instead keeping this. no. i prefer the way how it's a broken stack and thats pretty common in old days. hint: what kind of sliders i made the diff with?
15. 02:21:572 (3,4) - Not stacking them would be ideal due that the vocals are being consistent each other, so this is breaking your idea on 02:20:761 (1,2,3,1,2,3,4) - these circles. 02:21:734 (4) - is a vowel which doesn't have a impressive sound as well as the other vocals there, i dont know if you just wanted to use "consistency" word right here or you actually had an idea about it
    02:36:166 (3,4,5,6,7) - 00:52:382 (4,5,6,7) - Are the same yet you didn't do them equally, I guess it's to bring some kind of variation regarding patterns and rhythm, but at the least try to make the first ones a clean jump, otherwise doing the same rhythm as you did it on the first chorus. whats wrong about doing drastically different stuff in the last chorus this is quite common, otherwise id just spam tv size songs since doing same as the first chorus in the last chorus is just pointless doing a full size. the reason is way too weak to change my mind.
16. 03:05:193 (5,6) - Those looks similar against 03:04:869 (2,3,4) - these. Do you mind making them a bit different to avoid confusing while playing? honestly thats more of your reading problem. this is completely different and ok to distinguish whether or not its 1/4. 03:03:734 (4,5,6) - had the concept first, and 03:04:869 (2,3,4) - comes out with the same spacing as that which is enough to have the time recognizing the change of 1/4 usage in here.