👀
forum
YUI - again
posted
Total Posts
139
Topic Starter
It seems I must have made some mistake so I edited the timing to better fit the vocal line and the original 1/1s
00:10:310 - Change this bpm to 132.25 so it aligns with the next white tick.
Also on Easy, 00:10:738 (1) - is wrongly snapped.
Normal
00:17:810 (1,2,3,1,2,3,4,5) - The drum rhythm becomes denser towards the end so I don't think this is a good approach. You make the note density sparcer for those 1/1 gaps.
00:25:953 (3,4,5) - This is on the wrong polarity. You should be putting the clicks on the white ticks atleast for the sliders. You can hear the syllabic emphasis is on white ticks.
00:37:095 (2) - Should make this a 1/2 slider instead. It's not like the other rhythms, theres a vocal on 00:37:310 - ... Compare it to 00:39:024 - 00:44:167 - etc
00:41:810 - ^Something here too?
00:49:095 (3) - These are just a mistake imo... You can't capture vocals using this type of rhythm and it totally doesn't capture the vocal intensity with a weak gameplay element like a repeat slider.
00:57:667 (3) - 00:59:381 (3) - These ones especially stand out because clicking on 3 is already really weird as the vocals aren't even present there. The vocals are on blue ticks
. I would rethink the rhythm here. I don't think you can afford to map both instrument and vocal when working within the constraints of a Normal diff.
01:20:595 (5,1,2,3,4,1) - Weird way to shift into instrumental layer here. You don't even map the drum on 01:22:095 - . Also the orientation between 01:20:595 (5,1) - and 01:21:667 (2,3) - make the DS seem too similar imo so it really baits people into thinking this is a 1/1 gap as well.
[]
Man, the more I look the more I find xd. Probably better that you find new BN's for this anyways, I think it can still benefit from more work, or at least more perspectives.
Also on Easy, 00:10:738 (1) - is wrongly snapped.
Normal
00:17:810 (1,2,3,1,2,3,4,5) - The drum rhythm becomes denser towards the end so I don't think this is a good approach. You make the note density sparcer for those 1/1 gaps.
00:25:953 (3,4,5) - This is on the wrong polarity. You should be putting the clicks on the white ticks atleast for the sliders. You can hear the syllabic emphasis is on white ticks.
00:37:095 (2) - Should make this a 1/2 slider instead. It's not like the other rhythms, theres a vocal on 00:37:310 - ... Compare it to 00:39:024 - 00:44:167 - etc
00:41:810 - ^Something here too?
00:49:095 (3) - These are just a mistake imo... You can't capture vocals using this type of rhythm and it totally doesn't capture the vocal intensity with a weak gameplay element like a repeat slider.
00:57:667 (3) - 00:59:381 (3) - These ones especially stand out because clicking on 3 is already really weird as the vocals aren't even present there. The vocals are on blue ticks
. I would rethink the rhythm here. I don't think you can afford to map both instrument and vocal when working within the constraints of a Normal diff. 01:20:595 (5,1,2,3,4,1) - Weird way to shift into instrumental layer here. You don't even map the drum on 01:22:095 - . Also the orientation between 01:20:595 (5,1) - and 01:21:667 (2,3) - make the DS seem too similar imo so it really baits people into thinking this is a 1/1 gap as well.
[]
Man, the more I look the more I find xd. Probably better that you find new BN's for this anyways, I think it can still benefit from more work, or at least more perspectives.
For the topdiff:
- 00:35:810 (5,6) - Agreed with Monstratos, this seems quite odd to map this then not map 00:37:738 (8) - 00:42:667 (7) - etc
- 01:01:095 (3,1,2,3,4,5,6,7) - https://i.imgur.com/T7x6nE2.png ?
- 01:04:095 (2,3,4,1) - Kinda agree with Monstratos here, I think doing something like this might be nicer whilst still being somewhat harsh.
All the other flow stuff seems to be intentionally awkward to emphasize notes so I don't think making it "play better" is actually the solution, rather the anti-solution to what the mapper wants.
Uhhh that seems to be all the stuff I think Monstratos pointed out that I agree with to some extent + some possible solutions.
@Monstrata - are you vetoing this? Might be worth to state that on the thread explicitly so people know what the current status of the map is.
Was suggested to look at the Normal:
- 00:17:810 (1,2,3,1) - Snares on 1 and 2 toms on 3 snares > toms = this rhythm makes sense to me.
- 00:25:953 (3,4,5) - Yea agreed here with Monstratos, whites seems stronger here, try this maybe?
- 00:37:095 (2,3) - The note between here on 00:37:310 - is fairly weak and uninteresting so I can see why it's skipped in favor of 00:37:524 (3,4) -
- 00:41:810 - I agree with this too, this note and 00:42:024 (1) - sound fairly similar in intensity so maybe a circle here would be nice or a slider depending on what you wanna do
- 00:48:453 (1,2,3) - Nah these're not mistakes, they're mapped to the cymbal sounds in the back as well as the 1,2 being drums. I don't think vocals are the focus here anymore. Same as 00:57:667 (3) - and the others mentioned.
- 01:20:595 (5) - I agree here too I think 01:21:024 - should at least be clickable to have a nicer more coherent transition. The rest is okay tho imo since 01:22:095 - seems more like a pick-up note which isn't a focus of the map overall as seen by 00:37:310 - etc
Other stuff for discussion I suppose.
- 00:35:810 (5,6) - Agreed with Monstratos, this seems quite odd to map this then not map 00:37:738 (8) - 00:42:667 (7) - etc
- 01:01:095 (3,1,2,3,4,5,6,7) - https://i.imgur.com/T7x6nE2.png ?
- 01:04:095 (2,3,4,1) - Kinda agree with Monstratos here, I think doing something like this might be nicer whilst still being somewhat harsh.
All the other flow stuff seems to be intentionally awkward to emphasize notes so I don't think making it "play better" is actually the solution, rather the anti-solution to what the mapper wants.
Uhhh that seems to be all the stuff I think Monstratos pointed out that I agree with to some extent + some possible solutions.
@Monstrata - are you vetoing this? Might be worth to state that on the thread explicitly so people know what the current status of the map is.
Was suggested to look at the Normal:
- 00:17:810 (1,2,3,1) - Snares on 1 and 2 toms on 3 snares > toms = this rhythm makes sense to me.
- 00:25:953 (3,4,5) - Yea agreed here with Monstratos, whites seems stronger here, try this maybe?
- 00:37:095 (2,3) - The note between here on 00:37:310 - is fairly weak and uninteresting so I can see why it's skipped in favor of 00:37:524 (3,4) -
- 00:41:810 - I agree with this too, this note and 00:42:024 (1) - sound fairly similar in intensity so maybe a circle here would be nice or a slider depending on what you wanna do
- 00:48:453 (1,2,3) - Nah these're not mistakes, they're mapped to the cymbal sounds in the back as well as the 1,2 being drums. I don't think vocals are the focus here anymore. Same as 00:57:667 (3) - and the others mentioned.
- 01:20:595 (5) - I agree here too I think 01:21:024 - should at least be clickable to have a nicer more coherent transition. The rest is okay tho imo since 01:22:095 - seems more like a pick-up note which isn't a focus of the map overall as seen by 00:37:310 - etc
Other stuff for discussion I suppose.
Topic Starter
Monstrata wrote:
00:10:310 - Change this bpm to 132.25 so it aligns with the next white tick.
Also on Easy, 00:10:738 (1) - is wrongly snapped.
yes
Normal
00:17:810 (1,2,3,1,2,3,4,5) - The drum rhythm becomes denser towards the end so I don't think this is a good approach. You make the note density sparcer for those 1/1 gaps. changed approach here
00:25:953 (3,4,5) - This is on the wrong polarity. You should be putting the clicks on the white ticks atleast for the sliders. You can hear the syllabic emphasis is on white ticks. changed something here too
00:37:095 (2) - Should make this a 1/2 slider instead. It's not like the other rhythms, theres a vocal on 00:37:310 - ... Compare it to 00:39:024 - 00:44:167 - etc yes
00:41:810 - ^Something here too? yes
00:49:095 (3) - These are just a mistake imo... You can't capture vocals using this type of rhythm and it totally doesn't capture the vocal intensity with a weak gameplay element like a repeat slider. honestly, when originally mapping this I thought for a while how to map the vocals, but they are so so dense it was hard to think of something so I just increased the SV for this section and mapped to the drums instead since they are a clear and easy to follow rhythm
00:57:667 (3) - 00:59:381 (3) - These ones especially stand out because clicking on 3 is already really weird as the vocals aren't even present there. The vocals are on blue ticks
01:20:595 (5,1,2,3,4,1) - Weird way to shift into instrumental layer here. You don't even map the drum on 01:22:095 - . Also the orientation between added rhythm for the drum thing
01:20:595 (5,1) - and 01:21:667 (2,3) - make the DS seem too similar imo so it really baits people into thinking this is a 1/1 gap as well. yeah I made some mistake with my DS concept I was doing LOL
[]
Man, the more I look the more I find xd. Probably better that you find new BN's for this anyways, I think it can still benefit from more work, or at least more perspectives.
Topic Starter
fix rest from previous modMir wrote:
For the topdiff:
- 00:35:810 (5,6) - Agreed with Monstratos, this seems quite odd to map this then not map 00:37:738 (8) - 00:42:667 (7) - etc I mapped them with slider ends, clicking density was already high enough for my liking
- 01:01:095 (3,1,2,3,4,5,6,7) - https://i.imgur.com/T7x6nE2.png ? that would make me skip the snare sound on white tick
- 01:04:095 (2,3,4,1) - Kinda agree with Monstratos here, I think doing something like this might be nicer whilst still being somewhat harsh. I tried something here I might need ur guy's approval
Was suggested to look at the Normal:
- 01:20:595 (5) - I agree here too I think 01:21:024 - should at least be clickable to have a nicer more coherent transition. The rest is okay tho imo since wait I don't see why this would need to be clickable, its an open slider end which is pretty strong already
01:22:095 - seems more like a pick-up note which isn't a focus of the map overall as seen by 00:37:310 - etc
Other stuff for discussion I suppose.
Topic Starter
Forgot to mention this I guess, but I still can't really agree with the way the highest diff was mapped so can you get another BN to check? I'll veto either Nao or Lasse, you can get the other, but I think the map could benefit from a new BN being involved. I won't try and veto 2 people I think that's unfair now that I think about it, and that rule should probably be changed lol.
Topic Starter
thanks dad <3
Okay let's give this another shot.
As messy as it is the map itself still has a semblance of structure enoughso that I can understand what's going on. We talked about some stuff extra in the Normal + topdiff below.
Metadata already fine I presume.
Catlogs:
Rebubbled.
As messy as it is the map itself still has a semblance of structure enoughso that I can understand what's going on. We talked about some stuff extra in the Normal + topdiff below.
Metadata already fine I presume.
Catlogs:
SPOILER
06:30 Mir: 01:01:095 (3,1) - i really dont like this
06:30 Mir:
06:30 _83: in easy
06:30 _83: or again
06:30 Mir: again
06:30 _83: o
06:30 Mir: just extending it to white would be fine
06:31 Mir: cuz atm
06:31 Mir: you're neither putting focus on drums or vocals
06:31 Mir: if you would put focus on drums that end should be clickable
06:31 Mir: and if vocals it should be extended one tick
06:32 _83: uh
06:32 _83: wait
06:32 _83: you said extend to white tick
06:32 _83: you meant the next one?
06:32 Mir: mhm
06:32 Mir: i mean
06:32 Mir: nonono
06:32 _83: hoyl
06:32 Mir: extend to the
06:32 Mir: blue
06:32 _83: brether
06:33 Mir: extent
06:33 Mir: 01:01:417 - here
06:33 _83: brether...
06:33 Mir:
06:33 Mir: brethern
06:33 _83:
06:33 _83: I don't think I can extend it to the blue tick cuz then what's the point in mapping the stream if I'm ignoring part of it
06:34 Mir: true then i suggest making the end clickable instead
06:34 Mir: i mean
06:34 Mir: yea
06:34 _83: I think it has about the same strength clickable or not
06:34 _83: I just think it better compliments the vocals as is
06:34 Mir: oh
06:34 Mir: i see the problem
06:34 _83: its like a mix
06:34 Mir: 01:01:310 - remove clap probably
06:35 Mir: cuz in the song there is no clap there
06:35 Mir: claps start on 01:01:417 -
06:35 _83: then it would be kick tho
06:35 Mir: so it creates a misleading start
06:35 Mir: yeah whatever you want just get rid of the clap
06:35 _83: ok
06:36 Mir: i think the rest is fine
06:37 Mir: 00:20:167 (4,5,6,1,2) - on normal probably questionable?
06:37 Mir: the variable stack thing so close to each other
06:39 _83: I think
06:39 _83: that I would normally agree
06:39 _83: if the second one is 1/1
06:39 Mir: mm tbh that's even more of a reason to be cautious imo
06:39 _83: hm
06:40 Mir: probably just unstacking 00:20:167 (4,5) - is an easy fix
06:40 _83: yeah I'll try
06:40 Mir: gives more emphasis to the stop on 00:21:024 (1,2) - anyways too
06:40 _83: makes sense
06:40 _83: I did a something
06:41 Mir: alright
06:41 _83: tell me when i updoot
06:42 Mir: 00:54:667 - i think this should be covered somehow
06:42 Mir: song is still fluid but you have some gap here
06:43 Mir: maybe a circle
06:43 Mir: 00:58:524 - also intentional whistle?
06:43 _83: I don't want to have a circle
06:43 Mir: meh it's not a big deal anyways
06:43 _83: also diff is hitsound copied
06:46 Mir: 01:20:917 (5,1,2) -
06:46 Mir: did you do this elsewhere in hard
06:46 _83: HAHAHAHAA
06:46 Mir: nvm found it
06:46 _83: 01:07:203 (5,1,2) -
06:46 _83: AAAAA
06:46 Mir: im blind
06:46 Mir: lol
06:46 _83: that part is funny
06:46 _83: yuii made me do it like that :p
06:46 _83: cuz he sang the song
06:52 _83: B \o/
06:52 Mir: you didn't do anything with 00:20:167 (4,5,6,1,2) -
06:52 Mir:
06:52 _83: which diff
06:52 Mir: nvm
06:53 _83: bepis imo
06:53 Mir: it didn't update properly
06:53 Mir: agre
06:53 _83: i ain't no lia
06:30 Mir:
06:30 _83: in easy
06:30 _83: or again
06:30 Mir: again
06:30 _83: o
06:30 Mir: just extending it to white would be fine
06:31 Mir: cuz atm
06:31 Mir: you're neither putting focus on drums or vocals
06:31 Mir: if you would put focus on drums that end should be clickable
06:31 Mir: and if vocals it should be extended one tick
06:32 _83: uh
06:32 _83: wait
06:32 _83: you said extend to white tick
06:32 _83: you meant the next one?
06:32 Mir: mhm
06:32 Mir: i mean
06:32 Mir: nonono
06:32 _83: hoyl
06:32 Mir: extend to the
06:32 Mir: blue
06:32 _83: brether
06:33 Mir: extent
06:33 Mir: 01:01:417 - here
06:33 _83: brether...
06:33 Mir:
06:33 Mir: brethern
06:33 _83:
06:33 _83: I don't think I can extend it to the blue tick cuz then what's the point in mapping the stream if I'm ignoring part of it
06:34 Mir: true then i suggest making the end clickable instead
06:34 Mir: i mean
06:34 Mir: yea
06:34 _83: I think it has about the same strength clickable or not
06:34 _83: I just think it better compliments the vocals as is
06:34 Mir: oh
06:34 Mir: i see the problem
06:34 _83: its like a mix
06:34 Mir: 01:01:310 - remove clap probably
06:35 Mir: cuz in the song there is no clap there
06:35 Mir: claps start on 01:01:417 -
06:35 _83: then it would be kick tho
06:35 Mir: so it creates a misleading start
06:35 Mir: yeah whatever you want just get rid of the clap
06:35 _83: ok
06:36 Mir: i think the rest is fine
06:37 Mir: 00:20:167 (4,5,6,1,2) - on normal probably questionable?
06:37 Mir: the variable stack thing so close to each other
06:39 _83: I think
06:39 _83: that I would normally agree
06:39 _83: if the second one is 1/1
06:39 Mir: mm tbh that's even more of a reason to be cautious imo
06:39 _83: hm
06:40 Mir: probably just unstacking 00:20:167 (4,5) - is an easy fix
06:40 _83: yeah I'll try
06:40 Mir: gives more emphasis to the stop on 00:21:024 (1,2) - anyways too
06:40 _83: makes sense
06:40 _83: I did a something
06:41 Mir: alright
06:41 _83: tell me when i updoot
06:42 Mir: 00:54:667 - i think this should be covered somehow
06:42 Mir: song is still fluid but you have some gap here
06:43 Mir: maybe a circle
06:43 Mir: 00:58:524 - also intentional whistle?
06:43 _83: I don't want to have a circle
06:43 Mir: meh it's not a big deal anyways
06:43 _83: also diff is hitsound copied
06:46 Mir: 01:20:917 (5,1,2) -
06:46 Mir: did you do this elsewhere in hard
06:46 _83: HAHAHAHAA
06:46 Mir: nvm found it
06:46 _83: 01:07:203 (5,1,2) -
06:46 _83: AAAAA
06:46 Mir: im blind
06:46 Mir: lol
06:46 _83: that part is funny
06:46 _83: yuii made me do it like that :p
06:46 _83: cuz he sang the song
06:52 _83: B \o/
06:52 Mir: you didn't do anything with 00:20:167 (4,5,6,1,2) -
06:52 Mir:
06:52 _83: which diff
06:52 Mir: nvm
06:53 _83: bepis imo
06:53 Mir: it didn't update properly
06:53 Mir: agre
06:53 _83: i ain't no lia
Rebubbled.
Catlogs. okay mir.
i think you also did a few things i said in discord before?
new timing seems to work great
01:02:810 (3,4) - miss additional hitsounds on all diffs that map those?
[hard]
00:07:096 (6,1) - triple would probably work better i guess? just 1/2 feels weird with so many vocal things
[normal]
00:00:239 (1) - delete this? starting map off with a circle is pretty mean especially since they have no point of reference, doing this would make it same as 00:01:953 - so that people are given a fair amount of time to get into the map
00:03:881 (1) - any special reason for dumb red anchors?? they look odd as heck
00:19:310 (1,2,3) - this is generally a meh idea, people at this level can read stuff if it stacks like two circles, but 3 completely stacked usually just makes everyone spam the pattern especially since you have more 1/1 or slower stacks surrounding it
00:28:953 (3,5) - overlap is more unaesthetetic than usually and doesnt even look that intended
introducing quad 1/2 into the diff later on doesnt really help
nothing too major though
i think you also did a few things i said in discord before?
new timing seems to work great
01:02:810 (3,4) - miss additional hitsounds on all diffs that map those?
[hard]
00:07:096 (6,1) - triple would probably work better i guess? just 1/2 feels weird with so many vocal things
[normal]
00:00:239 (1) - delete this? starting map off with a circle is pretty mean especially since they have no point of reference, doing this would make it same as 00:01:953 - so that people are given a fair amount of time to get into the map
00:03:881 (1) - any special reason for dumb red anchors?? they look odd as heck
00:19:310 (1,2,3) - this is generally a meh idea, people at this level can read stuff if it stacks like two circles, but 3 completely stacked usually just makes everyone spam the pattern especially since you have more 1/1 or slower stacks surrounding it
00:28:953 (3,5) - overlap is more unaesthetetic than usually and doesnt even look that intended
introducing quad 1/2 into the diff later on doesnt really help
nothing too major though
Topic Starter
Okorin wrote:
Catlogs. okay mir.
i think you also did a few things i said in discord before?
new timing seems to work great
01:02:810 (3,4) - miss additional hitsounds on all diffs that map those? aaaa
[hard]
00:07:096 (6,1) - triple would probably work better i guess? just 1/2 feels weird with so many vocal things when I was making this I was thinking very spread like, so between the expert, insane, and this its supposed to go down in rhythm density. I'll change it if you still find it appropriate to do so.
[normal]
00:00:239 (1) - delete this? starting map off with a circle is pretty mean especially since they have no point of reference, doing this would make it same as 00:01:953 - so that people are given a fair amount of time to get into the map true
00:03:881 (1) - any special reason for dumb red anchors?? they look odd as heck its supposed to be like "oh bounce to the beat" since players at this level roughly will follow the slider shape like this and 00:13:310 (4) - 00:16:738 (3) -00:17:810 (1) -
00:19:310 (1,2,3) - this is generally a meh idea, people at this level can read stuff if it stacks like two circles, but 3 completely stacked usually just makes everyone spam the pattern especially since you have more 1/1 or slower stacks surrounding it changed second circle to 1/2 slider
00:28:953 (3,5) - overlap is more unaesthetetic than usually and doesnt even look that intended its supposed to mimic the angular idea of 00:22:738 (4,5) - but since there wasn't a lot of room, 00:28:953 (3) - is pointing down instead of sideways
introducing quad 1/2 into the diff later on doesnt really help
nothing too major though
so is there anything stopping you from moving 00:28:953 (3,4) - up abit instead? should solve the issue you have with it https://puu.sh/xCLUz/bad448a76d.png
01:08:810 (4,2) - reading hazard that you do once in the map - i really think this can be avoided and would be so much clearer for people to not panic on if it
01:08:810 (4,2) - reading hazard that you do once in the map - i really think this can be avoided and would be so much clearer for people to not panic on if it
bor fixed stuff
Topic Starter
wa
wa