strickluke wrote:

henlo, from my queue t/594747

Kantan

1. None of these points are needed to get this ranked. They were just suggested due to the fact that players at this level will likely still be having trouble with hitting the right keys, so rhythm should remain very consistent. This difficulty is perfect otherwise.
2. 1. 00:10:883 (1,1,2) - ctrl+g for consistency with the earlier pattern 00:03:719 (2,3,1) - Seems good to me
3. 2. 01:21:181 (1) - delete this note for rhythm consistency (01:17:151 (3,4) - ) I'd say they're from different song sections. 01:13:122~01:16:256 and 01:16:704~01:19:838 are same in song structure (#1), but 01:20:286~01:23:420 (#2) and 01:23:868~01:27:450 (#3) are both different. Hence I'll say it's fine to use different note pattern
4. 3. 01:24:763 (3) - add a note here for rhythm consistency as well (01:08:196 (3,4,1,2) - ) ^
5. 4. 02:18:495 (1) - same as suggestion 2 ^
6. 5. 02:22:077 (1) - same as suggestion 3 ^

Futsuu

1. Perfect! Nice to hear that

Muzukashii

1. 1. 00:16:256 (1) - to 00:30:584 (5) - I feel that patterns like 00:17:151 (1,2,1) - should all be changed to either dd d or kk k. You can keep the patterns on the last kiai time, though. (This drops the sr like ~0.03) If possible I'd like to keep the current setup. dd d/kk k doesn't correspond to the music well
2. 2. 00:44:913 (1) - to 00:55:659 (1) - Imo make sure that every white tick has a note on it in this section just for consistency Do you mean sections like 00:48:047? If so, I'd prefer leaving them empty because a) vocal doesn't exist there. A consideration of style consistency b) not to make this part significant harder than others, including kiai
3. Looks good otherwise

Oni

1. 1. 00:06:517 (1) - change this to k? The frequent use of kd gets kind of boring The consistent kd is for instrument pitch consideration (same falling pitch at similar sections). You can notice the hitsounds of entire mapset is pitch-oriented
2. 2. 00:13:681 (1) - ^ ^
3. 3. 00:20:845 (1) - ^ ^
4. 4. 00:28:010 (1) - ^ ^
5. 5. 00:58:681 (1,2,1,2) - dkkd sounds better to me Possible, but ddkk is used with consideration of the vocal. I'd like to keep {00:58:793, 00:59:017, 00:59:241} dkk for consistency with vocal, and ddkk helps show the rising pitch as a whole well
6. 6. 01:55:995 (1,2,1,2) - ^ ^
   
   Also changed hitsounds at section 02:05:062 - to fit vocal better

nice sv changes kappa Thanks

this seems beyond my modding skill, great map!

Blackener wrote:

Hi! from modding queue you asked here
I had been sick for a week, sorry for being late! ;w; [color=#8000FF]Still pretty quick, so never mind :3
Accept as you agree![/color]

General

02:25:211 - Spinner is good idea but this point, there's also a really strong sound enough to put D here. Just like Oni. Yeah but I don't prefer having one single note (after spinner) to end a map. Such spinner represents the end of song well already imo

----------------

Kantan

00:30:584 (3) - I prefer D, I think when I have to finish something that's not high-pitched (Excluding vocal). I will put D personally. It's also for keeping 00:34:166 (1) consistent. But it's exactly vocal that makes the important criterion. 00:34:166 is d due to lower-pitched vocal

00:52:525 (1) - Delete? to keep consistency for 00:48:495 - 00:49:390 I see 00:44:913 as part 1, 00:48:495 as part 2, 00:52:077 as part 3,
and 00:55:659 as part 4. Partly due to song structure, I think consistency should be made on part 1 and 3, while 2 and 4 can be made slightly different (2 has one note less also due to difficulty spread)

01:49:838 (1) - Delete? like 00:52:525 (1) ^

02:18:495 (1) - Delete? like 00:52:525 (1) and 01:49:838 (1) (If you agree above ;p) ^ :p

Overall is perfect, I think :3 :3

----------------

Futsuu

00:25:659 (3,1) - Ctrl+g? I think the note at 00:26:107 (1) is clearer, swapping it maybe good in my opinion. Seems true. Changed

00:47:375 (1) - It's already okay, I just prefer deleting it personally (for consistency for 00:49:838 (2,1,1,1) ;3) But it's part of note arrangement consistency with previous part (00:44:913 - and 00:46:704 - both include notes of same rhythm)

00:56:554 (2) - Change it to d to emphasize 00:57:002 (3) or you change 00:56:107 (1) to d is also nice because the ascending vocal actually starts at 00:56:554 (2). No, the ascending vocal starts at 00:56:107 - instead. However, using d at 00:56:107 - fails to address any pitch rise at 00:55:659 (3,1) - which doesn't sound close to the music imo

01:08:868 (3,1) - Ctrl+g? I think vocal at 01:09:316 (1) needs to be emphasized by swapping them. Considering it's a falling pitch, I'll keep the k d here

01:23:196 (1) - k? Vocal pitch actually drops at 01:23:420 (2). No, its drop occur at 01:22:972 (1,1,2) -. kdd is a better representation than kkd in this case because 01:22:972 (1,1) - has a larger drop than 2

01:25:211 (2,1,1) - ddk or dkk, I think 01:25:659 (1) needs to be emphasize by keeping 01:25:211 (2) as d in my opinion. Keeping kdk as representation of high-low-high vocal

01:52:972 (3,1,2,3) - like 00:56:554 (2) ^

02:06:181 (3,1) - Ctrl+g, like 01:08:868 (3,1) ^

02:20:510 (1) - k? like 01:23:196 (1) ^

02:22:525 (2,1,1) - like 01:25:211 (2,1,1) ^

----------------

Muzukashii

00:47:151 (1) - k? The vocal actually drops at 00:47:375 (2) True, but I'd like a contrast with 00:44:913 - (dkkdk vs dkddk due to overall lower pitch)

00:51:181 (1) - k? The pitch is lower but still high. See oni, 00:50:286 (2,1,1) - suggests low-high-low

01:03:495 (1) - d? I think this will get the better flow. It's part of consistency with 00:59:689 -, and ddk doesn't represent such pitch rise as close as dkk

01:08:868 (3,1) - Ctrl+g? I think the note at 00:26:107 (1) should be emphasized, swapping it maybe good in my opinion. I prefer consistency on style (following pitch), so I'll keep k d

01:48:495 (1) - k? like 00:51:181 (1) ^

01:53:644 (1) - d? to emphasized the high-pitch vocal at 01:53:868 (2) Similar to what I said above regarding 01:03:495. dkk is the consistency with 00:56:107 and better representation of vocal as a whole. ddk omits the rise at 01:53:644 - and suggests only two levels of pitch (one at 01:53:420 (1,1), another at 01:53:868 (2,3,4)) which isn't the case

02:05:286 (1,2,3,1) - like 01:08:868 (3,1) I don't see any issues of dk k k d in representing vocal pitch? Again I'll prefer consistency here

02:15:137 (1) - d? to emphasized vocal at 02:15:360 (2) and to prevent too many k's. ^ see what I wrote at 01:03:495

----------------

Oni

00:34:502 (4) - d? - To emphasize itself and also emphasize vocal at 00:34:838 (5) Current hitsound is the compromise I get. Consider continuous rising pitch at 00:33:942 (1,1,2,3,4,5) -, (2,3,4) has same elevated pitch compared with (1,1), but still lower than (5). Taiko has only d/k so I chose to show the more significant pitch difference at (1,1,2) instead of (4,5). The opposite (dkk dd k d) would sound quite badly compared to current ones

00:42:898 (1) - Change to k to emphasize drum sound at 00:43:122 (2) The vocal drop at 00:42:674 (2,1) - is so significant that I shouldn't change from k d imo

00:44:353 (1,1,1,1) - I think dkkk or dkkd has a better flow in my opinion. dkkk sounds reasonable to me, but it seems dkdk fits slightly better to background drum hits (00:44:465, 00:44:689 have slightly higher pitched hits)

00:51:181 (1) - k? The pitch is lower but still high. Considering low-high-low vocal at 00:50:286 (2,1,1) -, this should be quite obvious?

00:54:763 (3,1) - Ctrl+g? k at 00:54:763 (3) will be emphasize the clear vocal and d at 00:55:211 (1) will prepare 00:55:435 (1) to emphasize incoming high-pitch vocal. High-low-high vocal at 00:55:211 (1,1,1) - should be quite obvious. Also consider falling pitch at 00:54:092 (1,1,2,3) -, changing 3 to k doesn't seem fitting

00:58:793 (2,2) - Ctrl+g? K at 00:59:241 (3) needs to be emphasize by previous d in my opinion. Emphasis is already done by finish. ddkk is used because of rising vocal at 00:58:681 (1,1) -

01:01:704 (2,3,4) - I don't know how to explain, but I really prefer dkk personally. Would prefer kkk to show the consistent high vocal at 01:01:704 (2,3) -

01:09:316 (1,1,2,3) - kkdk or kddk or something that the last note is k to emphasize incoming ddk. I probably need some lengthy explanation here. I don't treat 01:09:316 (1,1,2,3) - as one entity, but rather split between 01:09:316 (1,1,2) - and 01:09:987 (3,4,5,1) -. The former part kdd is to show a contrast (even lower pitch) with 01:08:420 which uses kkd. The latter aims at keeping overall pitch low (mostly d) while responding to background drum (hence k at 01:10:435)

01:16:032 (2,3,4) - Like 01:01:704 (2,3,4). ^

01:23:420 (3,1) - Like 00:54:763 (3,1) ^

01:41:666 (1,1,1,1) - Like 00:44:353 (1,1,1,1) ^

01:56:107 (2,2) - Ctrl+g, like 00:58:793 (2,2) ^

01:59:017 (2,3,4) - I prefer dkk personally again ;3 ^ :3

02:07:077 (2) - k? to follow vocal. It's the lowest pitch compared with 02:05:286, 02:05:734, 02:06:181 and 02:06:629

02:15:584 (3,1,1,1) - kd dk? I don't know about this point. Didn't expect that. After some more rechecks it seems kd dk k d k fits quite well.
Also changed 01:18:271 - to kd k k d k

02:20:734 (3,1) - Ctrl+g? Like 01:23:420 (3,1) ^

Just this helps you a bit. Almost forget to tell you that I really like the song! :3 Same here, broken moon is probably the best touhou song :3
Good luck on ranking!

JUDYDANNY wrote:

Hello, via M4M Queue.
[Kantan]

1. 00:33:047 - , 00:40:211 - remove, its really surprised than 00:58:122 (1,2) - .Players become cool down. Seems fine to me

[Muzukashii]

1. 00:18:271 - change to k? to follow the high synthesizer. Keeping ddk because considering 00:18:047 (1,2,1) where the last note is significantly higher pitched
   
   Made some pattern changes on 01:10:435 and 02:07:748

[Oni]

1. 01:09:316 (1,1) - change to dk? to follow the vocal waves.. I think I get your argument. But I prefer keeping kdd to 1. keep a lower-pitched contrast with kkd at 01:08:420, and 2. show pitch difference at 01:09:316 (1,2) -
   
   Also made minor hitsound changes for consistency

The set seems to be your style as usual, and cleaned the set as usual lol.
Nice mapset! Call me back after solved them(¦3[___]
Nice to hear that (¦3[___]

Tyistiana wrote:

Hi~
No excuse for the late. Sorry ;;w;; At least you're in time before rank =w=

[ Overall]

1. A finisher color on 00:44:913 aren't related. Kantan and Futsuu used K meanwhile Muzukashii and Oni used D. I think that the dominate point like this should make it same on all difficulty. To not make the player confused. It's because note at 00:45:137 is absent in kantan and futsuu, where K alone serves as a better approximation to the vocal. While in muzu and oni, I want to show the rise of pitch when that note is present, hence D k 00:44:913 (1,1) - are used.

[ Kantan]
00:33:271 - Why not d? , it's not match to the other difficulty in this point. Seems nice

[ Futsuu]
01:42:674 - How about change this one to k to emphasize the vocal here , just like the thing you've done at this point in Muzukashii I guess. Seems good to me

[ Muzukashii]
02:15:584 - The vocal here is powerful. Shouldn't miss a note here imo. Powerful, but it's better to keep the pattern consistency with 02:01:256.

Here is only my opinion so you might rejected it all, your map is really flawless right now! Thx :3
Good luck! :3

Nardoxyribonucleic wrote:

Hi, here comes the mod as requested.

• [Kantan]

1. 00:58:122 (1,2) - consider removing these notes for a 4/1 break before the kiai ? Currently the pattern chain is too long from 00:39:539 to 01:27:898 - , which is rather tiring and demanding for beginners. Is it fine to make 00:57:450 (1,1,2) - a slider instead? Other sliders like 01:09:987 (3,4)
   - should be a reasonable rest of notes for beginners as well, and hence I don't think rests are completely absent.
2. 01:55:435 (1,2) - similar to ^ , I would strongly recommend you to remove these as well for a rest. ^

• [Futsuu]

1. 00:57:786 (2) - you may want to delete this note to make a better spread with Muzukashii at this spot. Then 00:58:122 (2) - could be changed to k as 1/2 variation. Compared with muzu futsuu already has shorter 1/1.5 section since 00:56:554 (2,3,1) - has 1/1 used. Also given the frequent use of multi-colored 1/2 at kiai, I think current setup can be kept for better representation of vocal? After all these 4 notes 00:57:450 (1,2,3,1) - are quite important
2. 01:55:099 (2) and 01:55:435 - same as ^ ^

• [Muzukashii]

1. 01:22:077 - maybe add k here to form a longer chain ? I think this would enhance contrast with the intensity 01:06:405 (1,1,1,2,1,1,2,3,1,2,3,1,1,1,1,2,1,2) - possesses. Did the other way instead by adding d at 01:22:301, which fits closest to the vocal while adding reasonable difficulty
2. 02:19:390 - same as ^ ^

• [Oni]

1. 01:31:816 - consider adding d here to accompany the vocal ? This could also differentiate a bit from Muzukashii. Valid point, but I think keeping this empty is better. This is to keep 01:30:584 (1,2,1) - not to have sudden density change because (2) is still part of stance 49 and should remain a more constant rhythm. In current case, (2,1) still keeps a rather big spacing which I think fits the density transition better
2. 01:38:980 - same as ^ ^, the difference between oni and muzu can be seen at 01:40:435

You may call me back after that~ :3