forum

Enter Shikari - The Last Garrison

posted
Total Posts
77
show more
Raiyn
From my modding queue!

General
SPOILER
Easy mode please!, i feel like the spacing on normal and object amount isn't too nice or that much simplistic for a normal (1.73* tho)


Normal
SPOILER
No Problems at all but just a suggestion : try following the vocals a bit at 02:20:813 (4) - 02:44:127 (1) cause have a 20 sec break really is too long
03:38:488 (1) - move the spinner end 2 ticks back

Hard
SPOILER
02:21:841 (2,1) - lonnnng pause again, maybe it's just me though
03:38:149 (3,4) - make this into a stack on its own? cause in my opinion since it repeats that in a short time it would flee as if it's detatched from 03:37:810 (1,2) -
03:38:488 (1) - also spinner 2 ticks, move it back

Just a suggestion, but anyhow no problems

Insane
SPOILER
00:11:027 (1) - i know that this is to emphasize but it's a bit loud (since it's in the beginning of a song)
00:20:456 (2) - this slider's reverse arrow is being partly covered by 00:19:941 (1) but if it is intentional, it's fine
00:21:827 (6) - is being covered a bit by 00:21:313 (4) -
00:31:427 (3) - isnt being caught by 00:30:913 (2) -
00:39:071 (2,1) - slider ends overlapping try blanketing them?
00:43:308 (1,1) - nothing i just like this part
02:21:842 (2,1) - 20 seconds breaks still suck since i tried playing through this
03:38:488 (1) - move this 2 white ticks backwards to the actual end sound

Not really much here im just saying that the way how they overlap is just giving me a bit of ocd

Still Alive
SPOILER
03:38:488 (1) - spinner move the end by 2 white ticks
also, that 20 second break feels too long

So that's all i can spot here mostly just stacking or overlapping things that gave me ocd but if it's intentional go ahead and keep that in
Also that 20 second break, this my 5th time saying but, why (at least for me especially if you're trying to fc it or somethin)

And that's all, its a good song too good luck! :)
Topic Starter
Hectic

Zxozmo wrote:

From my modding queue!

General
SPOILER
Easy mode please!, i feel like the spacing on normal and object amount isn't too nice or that much simplistic for a normal (1.73* tho) i really think normal is easy enough :( ill make easy tho, no problem, but if its /really/ needed


Normal
SPOILER
No Problems at all but just a suggestion : try following the vocals a bit at 02:20:813 (4) - 02:44:127 (1) cause have a 20 sec break really is too long i think it fits there quite well
03:38:488 (1) - move the spinner end 2 ticks back i think it would feel unnatural

Hard
SPOILER
02:21:841 (2,1) - lonnnng pause again, maybe it's just me though
03:38:149 (3,4) - make this into a stack on its own? cause in my opinion since it repeats that in a short time it would flee as if it's detatched from 03:37:810 (1,2) - uh, im sorry, i didn't get your point :(
03:38:488 (1) - also spinner 2 ticks, move it back

Just a suggestion, but anyhow no problems

Insane
SPOILER
00:11:027 (1) - i know that this is to emphasize but it's a bit loud (since it's in the beginning of a song) eh?
00:20:456 (2) - this slider's reverse arrow is being partly covered by 00:19:941 (1) but if it is intentional, it's fine yeah, i use overlaps in this diff pretty often
00:21:827 (6) - is being covered a bit by 00:21:313 (4) -
00:31:427 (3) - isnt being caught by 00:30:913 (2) - its ok, plays well
00:39:071 (2,1) - slider ends overlapping try blanketing them? intended
00:43:308 (1,1) - nothing i just like this part im glad :)
02:21:842 (2,1) - 20 seconds breaks still suck since i tried playing through this
03:38:488 (1) - move this 2 white ticks backwards to the actual end sound

Not really much here im just saying that the way how they overlap is just giving me a bit of ocd

Still Alive
SPOILER
03:38:488 (1) - spinner move the end by 2 white ticks
also, that 20 second break feels too long

So that's all i can spot here mostly just stacking or overlapping things that gave me ocd but if it's intentional go ahead and keep that in
Also that 20 second break, this my 5th time saying but, why (at least for me especially if you're trying to fc it or somethin)

And that's all, its a good song too good luck! :) Thanks for modding!
Blan_C
Hello, M4M from my modding queue. For now i haven't map to mod, ill just PM when i have one if its okay with you, and also if you consider things listed below as not helpfull/not enough - treat is as NM.

I know it isnt much, but its not because of my laziness - this map is just really good and i enjoyed playing this a lot. Now onto the mod:

Still alive

  1. 00:36:698 (5,6,1) - I really like how you do emphasis on your map but here something is weird - 00:36:868 (6) - I dont know why you put small DS on this circle. I mean... i get it that you increased spacing here compared to 00:33:647 (2,3,4,5,2,3,4,5) - because you want to emphasize vocal. The thing is that 00:36:868 (6) - there is louder vocal compared to 00:36:359 (3,4,5) - so maybe space it more?
  2. 00:47:207 (3,4) - Similar thing here
  3. 02:52:356 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,1,2,3,4) - Stream fit here really good but i kinda dont like its shape - its...too simple to me. Try placing slider, curve it in some nice way and then ctrl+shift+f. Also i think cracking it two times is too much, try working on it more. In spite of that, incrasing DS on 02:52:356 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13) - is something i cant understand - intensity of instruments is the same. Maybe put the same DS until 02:53:384 - and then make sharp angle+NC with higher DS. Some bursts/repeat sliders would work too.
  4. 03:15:776 (3,4,1) - I read in previous mod that you want to keep this like that but still i see no reason in it - 03:15:776 (3) - there you go with DS x0,75 and then 1/4 gap with x4,84 03:15:946 (4,1) -
Good luck with ranking!

Edit: my english suck. fixed some grammar :V
Topic Starter
Hectic

Blan_C wrote:

Hello, M4M from my modding queue. For now i haven't map to mod, ill just PM when i have one if its okay with you, and also if you consider things listed below as not helpfull/not enough - treat is as NM. yeye, just write me, i'll be happy to mod

I know it isnt much, but its not because of my laziness - this map is just really good and i enjoyed playing this a lot. I'm really glad to hear that, thank you Now onto the mod:

Still alive

  1. 00:36:698 (5,6,1) - I really like how you do emphasis on your map but here something is weird - 00:36:868 (6) - I dont know why you put small DS on this circle. I mean... i get it that you increased spacing here compared to 00:33:647 (2,3,4,5,2,3,4,5) - because you want to emphasize vocal. The thing is that 00:36:868 (6) - there is louder vocal compared to 00:36:359 (3,4,5) - so maybe space it more? i just put circles for vocal, spacing is for drums
  2. 00:47:207 (3,4) - Similar thing here
  3. 02:52:356 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,1,2,3,4) - Stream fit here really good but i kinda dont like its shape - its...too simple to me. i think increasing ds make it not so simple, also shape reflects music pretty well imoTry placing slider, curve it in some nice way and then ctrl+shift+f. Also i think cracking it two times is too much, try working on it more. i did it on purpose, there are differences in volume of drums, if listen to the song In spite of that, incrasing DS on 02:52:356 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13) - is something i cant understand - intensity of instruments is the same. but does overall intensity? Maybe put the same DS until 02:53:384 - and then make sharp angle+NC with higher DS. Some bursts/repeat sliders would work too.
  4. 03:15:776 (3,4,1) - I read in previous mod that you want to keep this like that but still i see no reason in it - 03:15:776 (3) - there you go with DS x0,75 and then 1/4 gap with x4,84 03:15:946 (4,1) - yeah, gap is for snare drum, since it far more powerfull than kick in this section D:
Good luck with ranking! Thanks, I hope I won't need it that much. You too!

Edit: my english suck. fixed some grammar :V :V
Rin Desu
Heyhey :)

Normal:

00:35:681 (1,3) - blanket
01:58:887 (2,3,4,1) - this looks kinda not from your map u never did 90° degrees angles before, change it a bit that it fits better :)
02:59:166 (3) - u can find a better shape xD for example blank the curve towards 1
03:04:590 (2,3) - i would blank them
03:12:726 (2) - place it higher on the playfield

Hard:

AR8 is to high for this diff go for 6 or 7
00:38:393 (1,1) - not parallel
00:54:664 (1) - there is nothing special this shape is kinda random imo
01:45:328 (1,1) - repeat point and the slider curve are to close togheter, that doesnt look that good

Insane:

ar 9 idk... go for 8
thats all for this diff^^

Extra:

Go for Ar 9 here

in general i dont see any objects as a problem but in parts where u did the slow sliders (i like it btw) 01:38:549 (1) - 02:00:243 (1) -
u should space and emphasize more. it feels kinda to boring while playing^^

for example emphasize the voice:
01:46:006 (3) - jump to 01:46:345 (4) -
01:48:718 (2,1,1) - here the same... i would space them


anyway í like your map and gl ranking it fast :D!
Kirylln
asjdosadjasodjsa;lasjdls
Some of these suggestions can be applied to similar sections of the song as it repeats itself quite a few times
[Still Alive]
Not really a fan of the overall aesthetics here, it’s a bit uhm…messy, i suppose
  1. 01:14:721 (3) –maybe shorten this slider to the blue tick and put a circle to the red tick would be better emphasis to the drum
  2. 00:11:713 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) –I feel like the nc doesn’t really do enough emphasis here, maybe try 00:12:398 (1,2,3,4) – space this away from the last 4 to make them 2 separate patterns or sth .Look 00:17:198 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) –you did it right here, although slightly different sounds but similar structure
  3. 00:46:529 (1) –this would be better if represented by a slider, since the guitar stretches out a bit here
  4. 01:20:035 (1,2,3,4) –these represents the same set of sounds, so suddenly putting (4) out of the pattern doesn’t really represent it right, try this http://puu.sh/wQXTR/ced00758d0.png ,also nc 01:20:721 (5) –since it’s a lower pitch set of sound, different from the previous 4,
  5. 02:46:356 (8) –you might want to nc this, to signal the vocal
  6. 02:53:813 (1) –overmap. Also this messes up the drum emphasis of 02:53:899 (2,3,4) –pretty much entirely
  7. 02:58:488 (3) –probably better to change this into 2 circles, to make it consistent with 00:36:359 (3,4,5,6) –
  8. 03:18:488 (2,3,4) –I have no idea what you’re following or emphasizing in here, would be better if you just put a jump like you did 03:19:844 (2,3,4,5,6) –here
  9. 03:27:132 (1,2,3) –spacing might be a bit underwhelming here, maybe space it out a little?
    Sorry for messing up your color hax ><
[Insane]
This diff is somehow better executed than Extra, gj :thumbsup:

  1. 00:38:224 –don’t see much reason to ignore this
  2. 02:52:356 (1,2,1,2,3,1,2,3,4) –wow, this is actually done right here, gucchi
  3. 03:37:810 (1,2) –a bit underwhelming here, why not try to do something similar to 03:16:115 (4,5,6,7) –this?
[Hard]
And the list just getting smaller along with my concentration ~sign~
  1. 00:33:647 (2,1) –this is…uhh, kinda weird, especially when it is 00:35:003 (2) – here since it’ll make 00:35:681 (1) – quite unexpected, here, try this http://puu.sh/wQZr5/b6e1d31995.png
  2. 00:38:393 (1) –have no idea what this is, just follow the guitar, vocal or sth
I’ll skip normal cause I have no idea how those lower diffs work ><
the number of words is actually just a cover up for the actual shitty mod made by a shitty modder
Best of luck~
hohol454
M4M from my queue

Hitsounds:
The normal hitfinish is too goddamn loud. Also the jumps from 35% volume to 75% are too sudden. 02:49:613 - to 02:53:727 - gradually increasing volume would be much better

Still Alive:
00:29:713 (1) - remove NC or add here 01:34:778 (6,7,8) -
01:15:235 (1) - Remove NC. The nc makes it look like it's 1/1 distance from both sides. made me missread the rhythm after I switched to skin with combo colours when I read it correctly before
02:20:813 (1) - same here
02:49:442 (9,1,2) - would flow better if 1,2 went up, right now you have a medium jump into slowdown and then back and forth motion starts at 2. It would be more intuitive if you ctrl+G 1,2 3,4 etc.
02:53:470 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - the changes in direction don't correspond to anything in the music
03:16:793 - SV is too fast imo 1.15x would be enough.

Insane:
NC stuff applies to this as well
00:29:713 (1,2) - lower spacing here. It shouldn't be the same as 00:31:598 (1,2) - for example
01:04:778 (4,5) - move 5 lower please. it just looks super ugly to me for some reason
02:53:384 (2,3,1,2,3) - now this represents the music nicely, much better than this part in Still Alive
03:16:793 - same as highest diff

Nice map and song
Topic Starter
Hectic

Rin Desu wrote:

Heyhey :)

Normal:

00:35:681 (1,3) - blanket oh, fixed
01:58:887 (2,3,4,1) - this looks kinda not from your map u never did 90° degrees angles before, change it a bit that it fits better :) i think its ok as it is
02:59:166 (3) - u can find a better shape xD for example blank the curve towards 1 i can't see anything wrong with this shape, i think its fine
03:04:590 (2,3) - i would blank them eh, i think it doesn't make any difference - the same idea
03:12:726 (2) - place it higher on the playfield why, its ok as it is now D:

Hard:

AR8 is to high for this diff go for 6 or 7 ah, you are low ar lover, but i think these numbers fit fine
00:38:393 (1,1) - not parallel its intended
00:54:664 (1) - there is nothing special this shape is kinda random imo i think if fits pretty well to change of intensity
this helped me fixed something further
01:45:328 (1,1) - repeat point and the slider curve are to close togheter, that doesnt look that good im pretty sure its unnoticable while playing but fixed anyway

Insane:

ar 9 idk... go for 8
thats all for this diff^^

Extra:

Go for Ar 9 here

in general i dont see any objects as a problem but in parts where u did the slow sliders (i like it btw) 01:38:549 (1) - 02:00:243 (1) -
u should space and emphasize more. it feels kinda to boring while playing^^ i think just sv change works fine for these moments and theres no need to make this difficult

for example emphasize the voice:
01:46:006 (3) - jump to 01:46:345 (4) -
01:48:718 (2,1,1) - here the same... i would space them i decided not to make jumps for vocals in this section to keep consistency and made jumps only for drums


anyway í like your map and gl ranking it fast :D! thank you!

Kirylln wrote:

asjdosadjasodjsa;lasjdls
Some of these suggestions can be applied to similar sections of the song as it repeats itself quite a few times
[Still Alive]
Not really a fan of the overall aesthetics here, it’s a bit uhm…messy, i suppose :c they follow some idea, they are consistent, so i think they work fine
  1. 01:14:721 (3) –maybe shorten this slider to the blue tick and put a circle to the red tick would be better emphasis to the drum thats a good suggestion!
  2. 00:11:713 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) –I feel like the nc doesn’t really do enough emphasis here, maybe try 00:12:398 (1,2,3,4) – space this away from the last 4 to make them 2 separate patterns or sth .Look 00:17:198 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) –you did it right here, although slightly different sounds but similar structure ill keep for now because in first case its just instrumental without vocals. also i think nc is needed for hp boost since its relatively hard section. also i just wanted to make some variety
  3. 00:46:529 (1) –this would be better if represented by a slider, since the guitar stretches out a bit here i cant hear it
  4. 01:20:035 (1,2,3,4) –these represents the same set of sounds, so suddenly putting (4) out of the pattern doesn’t really represent it right, try this http://puu.sh/wQXTR/ced00758d0.png ,also nc 01:20:721 (5) –since it’s a lower pitch set of sound, different from the previous 4 i make space to snare drum
  5. 02:46:356 (8) –you might want to nc this, to signal the vocal i think it would be pretty confusing
  6. 02:53:813 (1) –overmap. Also this messes up the drum emphasis of 02:53:899 (2,3,4) –pretty much entirely compare empty gap further to this one - i don't think its an overmap at all. also drum emphasis shown by change of direction
  7. 02:58:488 (3) –probably better to change this into 2 circles, to make it consistent with 00:36:359 (3,4,5,6) – you are absolutely right
  8. 03:18:488 (2,3,4) –I have no idea what you’re following or emphasizing in here, would be better if you just put a jump like you did 03:19:844 (2,3,4,5,6) –here i think its quite obvious, drums in first case, and drums+vocals in second D:
  9. 03:27:132 (1,2,3) –spacing might be a bit underwhelming here, maybe space it out a little? no, its not that hard
    Sorry for messing up your color hax >< eh? i dont know what are you talking about :)
[Insane]
This diff is somehow better executed than Extra, gj :thumbsup:

  1. 00:38:224 –don’t see much reason to ignore this theres no audible sound tho
  2. 02:52:356 (1,2,1,2,3,1,2,3,4) –wow, this is actually done right here, gucchi
  3. 03:37:810 (1,2) –a bit underwhelming here, why not try to do something similar to 03:16:115 (4,5,6,7) –this? i dont like such stuff in the end of the map
[Hard]
And the list just getting smaller along with my concentration ~sign~
  1. 00:33:647 (2,1) –this is…uhh, kinda weird, especially when it is 00:35:003 (2) – here since it’ll make 00:35:681 (1) – quite unexpected, here, try this http://puu.sh/wQZr5/b6e1d31995.png i think its good now
  2. 00:38:393 (1) –have no idea what this is, just follow the guitar, vocal or sth i think those long sliders represent vocal quite well
I’ll skip normal cause I have no idea how those lower diffs work ><
yeye, ill mod it soon
the number of words is actually just a cover up for the actual shitty mod made by a shitty modder
Best of luck~ tons of words <> good mod. yours actually helped quite a lot (at least comparing to others). Thank you and good luck you too!

hohol454 wrote:

M4M from my queue

Hitsounds:
The normal hitfinish is too goddamn loud. Also the jumps from 35% volume to 75% are too sudden. 02:49:613 - to 02:53:727 - gradually increasing volume would be much better didn't have any other mentions on normal hitfinish volumeill make smooth transition,
good point


Still Alive:
00:29:713 (1) - remove NC or add here 01:34:778 (6,7,8) - im following some idea here
01:15:235 (1) - Remove NC. The nc makes it look like it's 1/1 distance from both sides. made me missread the rhythm after I switched to skin with combo colours when I read it correctly before reworked with previous mod
02:20:813 (1) - same here
02:49:442 (9,1,2) - would flow better if 1,2 went up, right now you have a medium jump into slowdown and then back and forth motion starts at 2. It would be more intuitive if you ctrl+G 1,2 3,4 etc. i think its basically the same
02:53:470 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - the changes in direction don't correspond to anything in the music they do, listen to drums
03:16:793 - SV is too fast imo 1.15x would be enough. it would be pretty massive rework basically for nothing since this sv workes well

Insane:
NC stuff applies to this as well
00:29:713 (1,2) - lower spacing here. It shouldn't be the same as 00:31:598 (1,2) - for example space for snare drum
01:04:778 (4,5) - move 5 lower please. it just looks super ugly to me for some reason why :D its ok i think
02:53:384 (2,3,1,2,3) - now this represents the music nicely, much better than this part in Still Alive
03:16:793 - same as highest diff

Nice map and song Thanks for modding!
-Zeraora

h4d0uk3n1 wrote:

Lian- wrote:

M4M

The source song is: '' The Mindsweep '', which is the fourth album from the group, Enter Shikari not sure about this one, ill put it in source if will be mentioned
Albums aren't put as sources of songs. Just to make it clear lol.




Anyway, M4M!
[Still Alive]uhh. i modded this (and insane) before the update you did. there may be things i pointed out that got fixed or changed so idk :(

  1. 00:20:627 (4,5) - imo, aesthetic aspect here could be improved by making 00:20:627 (4) - look like the vertical opposite of (5).
  2. 00:29:541 (8,1,2) - Would be nice if 00:29:713 (1) - were to be put in where the vocal starts (00:29:541 (8) - position). The vocals in 00:29:541 - to 00:29:713 - seems to be more connected and more fitting to be a slider than 00:29:713 - and 00:29:884 - . (01:35:121 (7,8,1) - )
  3. 00:32:798 (10) - I suggest putting this at (440,312). Mostly because of aesthetics (and a bit of emphasis on 00:32:970 (1) - ). Also doing so may lessen the probability of a player to be surprised with the sudden SV drop, due to the low DS.
  4. 00:48:563 (3,4) - Parallel?
  5. 01:29:806 (1,2) - How this entire part is mapped is similar to the first one. And in terms of "structure", 01:29:806 (1) - seems to be the only one different... I think. Reference being 00:24:227 (1,2) - .
  6. 02:46:184 (7) - NC this one to make the change in the part more apparent. Maybe this one too, 02:49:270 (8) - .
  7. 02:53:556 (2,2) - Actual vocals hit in these two objects. I think these should serve as the turning points in the stream instead.
[Insane]
  1. 00:19:941 (1,2,3) - These three could use a bit more space imo.
  2. 00:29:541 (5,1) - 01:35:121 (5,1) - The same thing as the one I said in the previous difficulty.
  3. 00:43:817 (1) - Put this one a bit more to the right for it to be seen more.
  4. 01:29:806 (1,2) - Really minor thing. A blanket seems nice for aesthetics.
    Can't see any glaring issues in this difficulty.
[Hard]
  1. 00:20:284 (2,3) - I feel like these two work better as a stack than 00:20:456 (3,4) - . Reasoning here being kinda the same as my connected-sounds thingy from the first difficulty.
Nothing much here (=w=;
That's all. Hope it helped ;w;

Good luck!
Topic Starter
Hectic

-Harpuia- wrote:

Albums aren't put as sources of songs. Just to make it clear lol. Thanks for clarifying!

Anyway, M4M!
[Still Alive]uhh. i modded this (and insane) before the update you did. there may be things i pointed out that got fixed or changed so idk :(

  1. 00:20:627 (4,5) - imo, aesthetic aspect here could be improved by making 00:20:627 (4) - look like the vertical opposite of (5). i use this shapes quite often
  2. 00:29:541 (8,1,2) - Would be nice if 00:29:713 (1) - were to be put in where the vocal starts (00:29:541 (8) - position). The vocals in 00:29:541 - to 00:29:713 - seems to be more connected and more fitting to be a slider than 00:29:713 - and 00:29:884 - . (01:35:121 (7,8,1) - ) im following drums tho..
  3. 00:32:798 (10) - I suggest putting this at (440,312). Mostly because of aesthetics (and a bit of emphasis on 00:32:970 (1) - ). Also doing so may lessen the probability of a player to be surprised with the sudden SV drop, due to the low DS. made better aesthetics, but differently
  4. 00:48:563 (3,4) - Parallel? no, parallel is too basic
  5. 01:29:806 (1,2) - How this entire part is mapped is similar to the first one. And in terms of "structure", 01:29:806 (1) - seems to be the only one different... I think. Reference being 00:24:227 (1,2) - .oh, this is pretty odd observation, i think their similarity is not critical at all
  6. 02:46:184 (7) - NC this one to make the change in the part more apparent. Maybe this one too, 02:49:270 (8) - .i think it would really confusing in terms of readability
  7. 02:53:556 (2,2) - Actual vocals hit in these two objects. I think these should serve as the turning points in the stream instead. i made turning points for drum sounds tho
[Insane]
  1. 00:19:941 (1,2,3) - These three could use a bit more space imo. i think they are ok atm
  2. 00:29:541 (5,1) - 01:35:121 (5,1) - The same thing as the one I said in the previous difficulty. same response
    this helped with hitsounds tho :)
  3. 00:43:817 (1) - Put this one a bit more to the right for it to be seen more. im pretty sure its readable ingame..
  4. 01:29:806 (1,2) - Really minor thing. A blanket seems nice for aesthetics. i follow another idea there
    Can't see any glaring issues in this difficulty.
[Hard]
  1. 00:20:284 (2,3) - I feel like these two work better as a stack than 00:20:456 (3,4) - . Reasoning here being kinda the same as my connected-sounds thingy from the first difficulty. but druuums dude
Nothing much here (=w=;
That's all. Hope it helped ;w; Thank you!

Good luck! You too~
Crimmi

M4M


General (Metadata, Timing, etc.)


_________________________________________________________



  1. Why are the kiai in "Insane" and "Still Alive" separatedand the ones in "Normal" & "Hard" aren't?

Normal



  1. 00:27:484 (1) - Why not place this 1/2 back like you did with 00:24:570 (1)?
  2. 00:41:105 (1) - CTRL+G this slider, it'll play better flipped.
  3. 01:25:521 (2,3) - Suggestion.
  4. 02:22:184 (x) - Perhaps a note can be added here?

Hard



  1. 00:53:308 (1) - Remove NC.
  2. 00:56:378 (4) - Align this with 00:55:864 (2).
  3. 01:01:864 (4) - Same as above.
  4. 01:25:178 (4,5,1) - Suggestion

Insane



  1. 00:16:513 (1) - Maybe move this to x:408 y:120.
  2. 00:32:970 (1) - This hit sound here is a bit loud, jarring and distracting than the other drum hitsounds you've used.
  3. 00:43:312 (1) - This slider is kind of obscuring the slider maybe this would solve it?
  4. 03:24:590 (4) - Slightly obscured by a slidertail.



The map just needs a rechecking of patterns and hitsounds, especially on the Insane difficulty, sorry for the wait.

Topic Starter
Hectic

Crimmi wrote:

M4M


General (Metadata, Timing, etc.)


_________________________________________________________



  1. Why are the kiai in "Insane" and "Still Alive" separatedand the ones in "Normal" & "Hard" aren't? i thought too many visual effects would confuse beginners

Normal



  1. 00:27:484 (1) - Why not place this 1/2 back like you did with 00:24:570 (1)? i think it represents music better as it is now
  2. 00:41:105 (1) - CTRL+G this slider, it'll play better flipped. i think it doesn't make much difference, some patterns would be ruined tho
  3. 01:25:521 (2,3) - Suggestion. was suggested before, applied now
  4. 02:22:184 (x) - Perhaps a note can be added here? i don't think its needed

Hard



  1. 00:53:308 (1) - Remove NC. reworked nc for this section, should be better now
  2. 00:56:378 (4) - Align this with 00:55:864 (2). yup
  3. 01:01:864 (4) - Same as above. did something better
  4. 01:25:178 (4,5,1) - Suggestion i think it works quite well atm

Insane



  1. 00:16:513 (1) - Maybe move this to x:408 y:120. um, does it really matters?
  2. 00:32:970 (1) - This hit sound here is a bit loud, jarring and distracting than the other drum hitsounds you've used. i guess ill have to make it quieter..
  3. 00:43:312 (1) - This slider is kind of obscuring the slider maybe this would solve it? i still think its easily readable
  4. 03:24:590 (4) - Slightly obscured by a slidertail. yeah, i use this kind of overlap quite a lot



The map just needs a rechecking of patterns and hitsounds, especially on the Insane difficulty, sorry for the wait. you are right, found a few issues with hitsounds. Thanks for modding!

Kurai
I am extremely happy to see some Enter Shikari being mapped! I just have a couple of things I would like to see changed before I can give this a bubble:

[General]
  1. Kiai: The kiai sections you used are not exactly considtent throughout your mapset. Why doesn't normal have the kiai fountains you put in the other difficulties? :'(
    Try being consistent!
[Still Alive]
  1. 00:54:664 - The green line and the red line must have the same volume set.
  2. 02:00:242 - ^
  3. 02:49:613 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - I personally don't like the spacing graduation here. Even if it makes sense, it's not really fun to play, I would even say it is frustrating because the player has to repeat the exact same movement 8 times, the only difference is that the spacing slightly increases each time. Would you mind considering making a different pattern here?
Awesome map, keep up the good work!
Topic Starter
Hectic

Kurai wrote:

I am extremely happy to see some Enter Shikari being mapped! I just have a couple of things I would like to see changed before I can give this a bubble:

[General]
  1. Kiai: The kiai sections you used are not exactly considtent throughout your mapset. Why doesn't normal have the kiai fountains you put in the other difficulties? :'(
    Try being consistent! i thought flashing lights would distract beginners D: made same kiai sections as in final diff for all diffs
[Still Alive]
  1. 00:54:664 - The green line and the red line must have the same volume set.
  2. 02:00:242 - ^ fixed
  3. 02:49:613 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - I personally don't like the spacing graduation here. Even if it makes sense, it's not really fun to play, I would even say it is frustrating because the player has to repeat the exact same movement 8 times, the only difference is that the spacing slightly increases each time. Would you mind considering making a different pattern here? hm, i kinda agree with this but.. not quite. i had troubles with this kind of pattern too, BUT once i learned how to play it properly, it became really satysfying to go through (its not difficult in terms of far cursor movement, only reading those is hard)
also fixed some hitsound volume inconsistencies and 1 broken slider in Hard diff

Awesome map, keep up the good work! Thanks a million.
Zallies
m4m

n o o b m o d i n g s k i l l s

[general]
  1. my eyes are hurting me (i dont know if its good colours)
  2. tags are all good?
  3. also medata?
  4. fix ur preview point
  5. fix bookmark its not balance
[still alive]
  • not really a big fan doing 2.10 + Slider Velocity, its too long = small jumps
  1. 00:13:084 (1,2,3) - really poor aesthetics
  2. 00:13:598 - vocal starts here; 00:13:770 (3) - should be jump because of the flow
  3. 00:15:484 (7,8,1) - ctrl+g for better flow
  4. 00:20:627 (4,5) - hehehe weird pattern
  5. 01:01:864 (6,7) - not shaped
  6. 01:18:664 (1) - no kickslider here tbh
  7. 02:00:074 (4,1) - too close ds
  8. 02:20:642 (1,2,1,2,1,2) - bad flow since the beat are the really the same
  9. 02:52:356 - actually make better this better imo
  10. 02:53:813 (1) - no clircle here; 02:54:413 (2,3,4) - rhythm is bad, reduce it since the beat are the SAME
  11. 03:14:082 - idk why you change sv and color, its still the same
  12. 03:16:793 - sv is too long; color aren't the same as red
    [-]03:40:522 - add 5% time section
i really dont want to say any of the patterns you made, the flow is low and the aesthetics is not good enough though
idk or im just lazy

[insane]
  • sv is fine, maybe doing on 1.7-9 on highest difficulty
  1. 00:17:198 - do some patterns here
  2. 00:25:427 (1,2) - not flow and structure
  3. 00:55:864 (3,4) - too far since u made a low sv section
  4. 01:17:292 - uh yea ds is fine, but how about 01:18:664 (1,2) - this part
  5. 02:49:613 - overkill ds
  6. 02:53:642 (3,1) - just stack this trust me
  7. 03:16:793 - uh i think 53% fine pattern to me, sv is high tbh
  8. 03:40:522 - 5% time section

overall, need to learn more about the patterns. and yes i still need to learn more about mapping ALSO modding too.
its just not really ready for rank.
Kurai
Played the map again this morning, did have any trouble FCing it this time. I guess it's good to go now! Enjoy your bubble!

Metadata source:
  1. http://hopelessrecords.merchnow.com/products/v2/187143/the-mindsweep-cd (Enter Shikari's record label's website, click on "tracks")
  2. https://www.discogs.com/fr/Enter-Shikari-The-Mindsweep/master/785318
  3. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eH4vmNvb7Ik
EDIT: SOMEONE POSTED A MOD WHEN I WAS ABOUT TO BUBBLE LMAO, REMOVING THE BUBBLE FOR NOW
Topic Starter
Hectic

Zallies wrote:

m4m

n o o b m o d i n g s k i l l s

[general]
  1. my eyes are hurting me (i dont know if its good colours) show your eyes whos boss
  2. tags are all good?
  3. also medata?
  4. fix ur preview point its perfect
  5. fix bookmark its not balance fixed, but i don't know if it matters..
[still alive]
  • not really a big fan doing 2.10 + Slider Velocity, its too long = small jumps
  1. 00:13:084 (1,2,3) - really poor aesthetics so.. you are fan of the double ctrl+> thingy?..
  2. 00:13:598 - vocal starts here; but stressed syllable doesn't00:13:770 (3) - should be jump because of the flow im following drums mostly
  3. 00:15:484 (7,8,1) - ctrl+g for better flow flow is great as it is now
  4. 00:20:627 (4,5) - hehehe weird pattern the whole diff is based around this..
  5. 01:01:864 (6,7) - not shaped yes, made it better
  6. 01:18:664 (1) - no kickslider here tbh it fits perfectly here and follows vocal
  7. 02:00:074 (4,1) - too close ds i can't see how is it too close ds..
  8. 02:20:642 (1,2,1,2,1,2) - bad flow since the beat are the really the same i think up-down-up fits there quite well and its even more interesting than just up-up-up
  9. 02:52:356 - actually make better this better imo i think its pretty well made, ds change is smooth enough and direction changes follow drum volume and stressed lyrics
  10. 02:53:813 (1) - no clircle here; you should listen more carefully, just compare actual empty space here 02:54:156 - and at beat which you pointed 02:54:413 (2,3,4) - rhythm is bad, reduce it since the beat are the SAME why would even mod this if you don't feel the song at all?
  11. 03:14:082 - idk why you change sv and color, its still the same try to listen closely
  12. 03:16:793 - sv is too long; color aren't the same as red what does this even mean.. sv is fine tho
  13. 03:40:522 - add 5% time section i don't think its needed
i really dont want to say any of the patterns you made, the flow is low and the aesthetics is not good enough though
idk or im just lazy the fact that these aesthetics vary from what you are used to see in common beatmap doesn't make it bad, its consistent, it plays good, it has idea.

[insane]
  • sv is fine, maybe doing on 1.7-9 on highest difficulty
  1. 00:17:198 - do some patterns here there is already a pattern, im pretty sure..
  2. 00:25:427 (1,2) - not flow and structure ok, i think this picture will give you some idea on whats going on
  3. 00:55:864 (3,4) - too far since u made a low sv section have you spend even a few secons figuring out what im emphasizing?
  4. 01:17:292 - uh yea ds is fine, but how about 01:18:664 (1,2) - this part This part is ok, plays well
  5. 02:49:613 - overkill ds theres a clear reason behind it and its not even hard
  6. 02:53:642 (3,1) - just stack this trust me it would ruin the idea
  7. 03:16:793 - uh i think 53% fine pattern to me, sv is high tbh ?
  8. 03:40:522 - 5% time section

overall, need to learn more about the patterns. and yes i still need to learn more about mapping ALSO modding too.
its just not really ready for rank. one of those mods i guess.. edit: wait a second.. I didn't get it. Anyway, thanks for modding!
Underdogs
got nothing on normal

Hard
  • - There are a few structure that is questionable for me
  1. Structure that deserves questioning
  2. 00:21:998 (1,2,3,4,5,6) -

    As we can see, none of the patterns actually hit up by an aesthetically pleasing pattern. All I see in the editor is just some random circle placement that only supports flow, and that's it. Quality-wise something like this should not be allowed to pass by
  3. 00:49:241 (1,2,3) -

    Having a straight slider and curved slider makes the map aesthetically bad. It's like having one square and suddenly one sphere. It does not connect with each other at all.
  4. 01:33:749 (3,4,5,6) -
    Nothing is good on this section. Even flow itself is in tatters. Even when testing on the gameplay itself I didn't enjoy that section due to the fact it played kind of bad for me
  5. tldr I guess the map itself looked REALLY untidy and you need tons of work on this diff before it can be pushed for rank. Ask any experienced nominator as well as QAT, if they take this mapset seriously then you'll notice tons of work needs to be done before it can be deemed as ready
    -Moving onto modding the diff itself
  6. 00:15:827 (4) - Why is the spacing here increased? There's no strong sound that justifies the increased spacing.
  7. 00:29:198 (5,6) - The flow here looks really untidy. For no apparent reason 00:29:713 (6) - body is pointed towards 00:30:227 (1) - which I think it's not clean at all
  8. 00:32:970 (1) - Starting here, I noticed you are reducing the spacing here. Modding on the objective side, this will be surely be pointed out (I once did that on my bubbled mapset and it got popped since I reduced spacing for no apparent reason
  9. 00:54:664 (1) - Why is this slider shaped differently?
  10. 01:28:264 (4,5) - Why is the flow here changed direction out of the sudden? Put an NC if there is a change of cursor movement that you are planning to put
  11. 01:34:264 (4,5) - ^
  12. 02:20:642 (1,2,1,2,1,2) - I think you can make much more better pattern than this (https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/8671238)

actually this is just one diff. Was planning to add more at later date so call me back and we can discuss more about this beatmap

also Kurai, I'd appreciate it if you can reconsider the bubble on this map since quality is not on an acceptable level (If, by chance this map is not going to get popped, should it be bubbled, I'm going to have conflicted feelings on the mapping standard nowadays)
Topic Starter
Hectic

Winter Story wrote:

got nothing on normal

Hard
  • - There are a few structure that is questionable for me okok, just hold your font size, ok? :)
  1. Structure that deserves questioning
  2. 00:21:998 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - As we can see, none of the patterns actually hit up by an aesthetically pleasing pattern. All I see in the editor is just some random circle placement that only supports flow, and that's it. Quality-wise something like this should not be allowed to pass by ummm, for what purpose did you boost ar on the screenshot? concepts explanatons: 1), 2) (shapes of sliders correspond with each other)
  3. 00:49:241 (1,2,3) - Having a straight slider and curved slider makes the map aesthetically bad. It's like having one square and suddenly one sphere. It does not connect with each other at all. perfect shapes correspond with each other well. your opinion is extremely subjective and has nothing to do with objective sense
  4. 01:33:749 (3,4,5,6) - Nothing is good on this section. Even flow itself is in tatters. Even when testing on the gameplay itself I didn't enjoy that section due to the fact it played kind of bad for me im too lazy to make pictures again since these follow the same idea as in your first statement
  5. tldr I guess the map itself looked REALLY untidy and you need tons of work on this diff before it can be pushed for rank. Ask any experienced nominator as well as QAT, if they take this mapset seriously then you'll notice tons of work needs to be done before it can be deemed as ready
    -Moving onto modding the diff itself ok, i want to clear something up. when i made mod for your map, i read previous mods, and i noticed huge one with pointing out all instances of overmaps (placing object to no sound related). i pointed out overmap too in my mod, but not every single one, since i didn't see any reason to it. You answered "your mod is very subjective with overmaps" to that guy which is.. basically false on every aspect. Also you wrote "try to understand mappers intention" to the guy. As I can see, you don't do what you expect from others. I could see only one intension in your map - pp. Whose mod is subjective - so is yours
  6. 00:15:827 (4) - Why is the spacing here increased? There's no strong sound that justifies the increased spacing. snare on the end of the slider
  7. 00:29:198 (5,6) - The flow here looks really untidy. For no apparent reason 00:29:713 (6) - body is pointed towards 00:30:227 (1) - which I think it's not clean at all well, its your opinion, i think it fits well with the whole diff idea and plays well too
  8. 00:32:970 (1) - Starting here, I noticed you are reducing the spacing here. Modding on the objective woah, im glad that you know this word side, this will be surely be pointed out (I once did that on my bubbled mapset and it got popped since I reduced spacing for no apparent reason apparent reason - drastic change in intensity
  9. 00:54:664 (1) - Why is this slider shaped differently? i think it emphasizes change in intensity quite well (also i do this in next future instance
  10. 01:28:264 (4,5) - Why is the flow here changed direction out of the sudden? Put an NC if there is a change of cursor movement that you are planning to put
  11. 01:34:264 (4,5) - ^ these sounds are quite heavy and i think this kind of movement supports it well
  12. 02:20:642 (1,2,1,2,1,2) - I think you can make much more better pattern than this (https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/8671238) i think its not worse than your suggestion

actually this is just one diff. Was planning to add more at later date so call me back and we can discuss more about this beatmap nah, not interested in this tbh. you are acting passively-aggressively for some unknown to me reason and your sense of self-importance is a bit too high
if you think that i got something I don't deserve, try to keep in mind that i started mapping ~13 months ago, and for this mapset i spent ~8 hours per day for 2 weeks

also Kurai, I'd appreciate it if you can reconsider the bubble on this map since quality is not on an acceptable level (If, by chance this map is not going to get popped, should it be bubbled, I'm going to have conflicted feelings on the mapping standard nowadays) mapping is basically a subjective thing, nowadays ranking section is filled with a huge amount of maps of different variety, from ones concerned about pp to the ones which are unique and don't have any other of their own kind. I still think and hope that this one deserves place there
Underdogs

h4d0uk3n1 wrote:

Winter Story wrote:

got nothing on normal


-Moving onto modding the diff itself ok, i want to clear something up. when i made mod for your map, i read previous mods, and i noticed huge one with pointing out all instances of overmaps (placing object to no sound related). i pointed out overmap too in my mod, but not every single one, since i didn't see any reason to it. You answered "your mod is very subjective with overmaps" to that guy which is.. basically false on every aspect. Also you wrote "try to understand mappers intention" to the guy. As I can see, you don't do what you expect from others. I could see only one intension in your map - pp. Whose mod is subjective - so is yours If that is what on your mind then you are wrong on a few things.. The fact that you are calling my intention in maps as 'pp' and nothing elsec felt wrong in some case. The intention of me mapping a certain mp3 is to reflect a song properly through a clean exhibition of patterns whilst trying to provide a good gameplay experience, albeit a repetitive, seemingly pp farming gameplay (at which you are correct, but deducing my reasoning my rejection of overmapping felt wrong as there are shit ton of maps that is overmapped but still got through the ranking process. If they are being tolerated then why would I still be discriminated with the overmapping bs?)[/color]
)
actually this is just one diff. Was planning to add more at later date so call me back and we can discuss more about this beatmap nah, not interested in this tbh. you are acting passively-aggressively for some unknown to me reason and your sense of self-importance is a bit too high I am doing this in contrary to assist you in ranking this. If I were to call someone who likes to shit on maps then I would gladly call on one. But the reason I am trying to make reasoning is to avoid your seemingly hardwork go to waste, forcing your work to square one again even when a nominator seemed like giving it a chance. And I am doing this because I once had experienced where I thought a map of this quality can get into a ranked section, but a nominator proved me wrong in many level. To the point even other BNs can agree. I reflect on that and strived on improvement. What I am saying is that something like this can be pushed forward (bubble) but expect it to be popped by another BN or QAT.
if you think that i got something I don't deserve, try to keep in mind that i started mapping ~13 months ago, and for this mapset i spent ~8 hours per day for 2 weeks A mapper's quality, or even a map's quality itself, is not calculated based on how long have you mapped. It's how you interpret a quality map. In my case, reviewing positive feedback maps and a handful of ranked section maps help determine my map's quality and, when I compare it to yours, this has a long way to go before nominator nowadays can deem this as ready

also Kurai, I'd appreciate it if you can reconsider the bubble on this map since quality is not on an acceptable level (If, by chance this map is not going to get popped, should it be bubbled, I'm going to have conflicted feelings on the mapping standard nowadays) mapping is basically a subjective thing, nowadays ranking section is filled with a huge amount of maps of different variety, from ones concerned about pp to the ones which are unique and don't have any other of their own kind. I still think and hope that this one deserves place there
]You did your part of work, but for me hoping enough would not be enough. Taking more action to improve your mapping would be the optimal solutionp
riffy
There is no point in saying that something is of low quality and not adding anything to back up your own words. If you thing something should not be bubbled, go ahead and explain your reasons. This will help us understand you as well as improve the quality, so, in the end all of us would only benefit from well-explained concerns.

We did look through things and polishied things up. h4d0uk3n1 basically did pretty much everything all by themselves, but still

So yeah, except for certain things that are sort of unpolished it's all cool in my eyes.
Topic Starter
Hectic
Changelog (mostly minor visual fixes):

still alive
00:41:444 (2,3,4) -
00:52:970 (4) -
01:03:749 (3,4) -
01:39:226 (2,3,4,5) -
01:54:142 (3) -

insane
00:26:456 (4,5,1) -

hard
00:32:284 (4,5) -
01:33:406 (2) -
01:38:206 (5) -

normal
00:43:139 (3,1,2) -

Chatlog saved
Kurai

Winter Story wrote:

also Kurai, I'd appreciate it if you can reconsider the bubble on this map since quality is not on an acceptable level (If, by chance this map is not going to get popped, should it be bubbled, I'm going to have conflicted feelings on the mapping standard nowadays)
If you fail to provide me a proper reasoning as to why the quality of this map should be a hindrance to its nomination, then I am not going to take your opinion into account (i.e. I don't care about your feelings, I want facts). This map is probably one of the best I have modded since I joined the BNG 3 weeks ago as it is extremely well structured: patterns all follow a certain logic that is consistent throughout the music while still providing pattern variety, jumps illustrate intensity variations in the music perfectly, SV changes make sense, etc.
I believe you only have a problem with the aesthetics of this map as it does look pretty old school (somehow this map reminds me of this one which is definitely a good one), and I don't see why this would be an issue.

I'm bubbling this set, if you have anything to add, feel free to do so, h4d0uk3n1 will decide whether or not he wants to listen to your suggestions or not.
riffy
I'd rather compare it with something made by Natteke in terms of the feel of certain patterns, but I have to agree with Kurai, it's most definitely well made and deserves a chance to be ranked.

Too bad I can't place a lovely heart on it!
Underdogs

Kurai wrote:

If you fail to provide me a proper reasoning as to why the quality of this map should be a hindrance to its nomination, then I am not going to take your opinion into account (i.e. I don't care about your feelings, I want facts). This map is probably one of the best I have modded since I joined the BNG 3 weeks ago as it is extremely well structured: patterns all follow a certain logic that is consistent throughout the music while still providing pattern variety, jumps illustrate intensity variations in the music perfectly, SV changes make sense, etc.
I believe you only have a problem with the aesthetics of this map as it does look pretty old school (somehow this map reminds me of this one which is definitely a good one), and I don't see why this would be an issue.

I'm bubbling this set, if you have anything to add, feel free to do so, h4d0uk3n1 will decide whether or not he wants to listen to your suggestions or not.
subjectively speaking, the map still needs polishing on a few perspective, and yes. Mainly on aesthetic (but we all know it's not a must to add aesthetic). But I guess I can't do much if the nominators itself are set on ranking this when there are much more better set that can be exhibited (can't really show a few but surely there are a few that deserves a spot in the ranked section).

In addition to that, quality of the map is still lacking from my point of view so I do hope a veto could be set up from a deeming nominator as someone told me not to complain too much and let the nominator do their job (by quality, i do not mean from my point of view. I am comparing 2016-2017 maps that have much higher quality and comparing them to this map, this needs a lot of work before it can be deem as 'ready for rank').

I do hope I can reach an understanding here, instead of just following the ranking criteria alone. Should I solely following the ranking criteria, then I could have file a complaint as to why my set is popped even when there is nothing in hindrance to make it unrankable (link : t/518872/start=90 )
Topic Starter
Hectic

Winter Story wrote:

Kurai wrote:

If you fail to provide me a proper reasoning as to why the quality of this map should be a hindrance to its nomination, then I am not going to take your opinion into account (i.e. I don't care about your feelings, I want facts). This map is probably one of the best I have modded since I joined the BNG 3 weeks ago as it is extremely well structured: patterns all follow a certain logic that is consistent throughout the music while still providing pattern variety, jumps illustrate intensity variations in the music perfectly, SV changes make sense, etc.
I believe you only have a problem with the aesthetics of this map as it does look pretty old school (somehow this map reminds me of this one which is definitely a good one), and I don't see why this would be an issue.

I'm bubbling this set, if you have anything to add, feel free to do so, h4d0uk3n1 will decide whether or not he wants to listen to your suggestions or not.
subjectively speaking, the map still needs polishing on a few perspective, and yes. Mainly on aesthetic (but we all know it's not a must to add aesthetic). But I guess I can't do much if the nominators itself are set on ranking this when there are much more better set that can be exhibited (can't really show a few but surely there are a few that deserves a spot in the ranked section).

In addition to that, quality of the map is still lacking from my point of view so I do hope a veto could be set up from a deeming nominator as someone told me not to complain too much and let the nominator do their job (by quality, i do not mean from my point of view. I am comparing 2016-2017 maps that have much higher quality and comparing them to this map, this needs a lot of work before it can be deem as 'ready for rank').

I do hope I can reach an understanding here, instead of just following the ranking criteria alone. Should I solely following the ranking criteria, then I could have file a complaint as to why my set is popped even when there is nothing in hindrance to make it unrankable (link : t/518872/start=90 )
tl;dr, mapping is not about how map fits in current meta, its about how things in map show music, about making logical sense and about fun
Underdogs

h4d0uk3n1 wrote:

tl;dr, mapping is not about how map fits in current meta, its about how things in map show music, about making logical sense and about fun
if that's your perspective then you are mistaken. What do you mean by 'logical sense'? How do 'things in map show music' actually interpret in the map? Now I am not that subjective to the fact I am blind to see that you did your part to reflect the song well. But doing so without consistency and actually getting noticed by nominators saddens me when there are much better maps that can be bubbled and ranked. But instead something like this is deemed as 'ready for rank'.

I'm going to stop here and not cause drama because if nominators deem this set as ready then I won't interfere. It's just, subjectively speaking, the map is not yet ready and I am warning you in advance.
riffy

Winter Story wrote:

subjectively speaking, the map still needs polishing on a few perspective, and yes. Mainly on aesthetic (but we all know it's not a must to add aesthetic). But I guess I can't do much if the nominators itself are set on ranking this when there are much more better set that can be exhibited (can't really show a few but surely there are a few that deserves a spot in the ranked section).

In addition to that, quality of the map is still lacking from my point of view so I do hope a veto could be set up from a deeming nominator as someone told me not to complain too much and let the nominator do their job (by quality, i do not mean from my point of view. I am comparing 2016-2017 maps that have much higher quality and comparing them to this map, this needs a lot of work before it can be deem as 'ready for rank').

I do hope I can reach an understanding here, instead of just following the ranking criteria alone. Should I solely following the ranking criteria, then I could have file a complaint as to why my set is popped even when there is nothing in hindrance to make it unrankable (link : t/518872/start=90 )
If you think a change is needed, come and make that change happen. Be specific and point out exact timestamps as well as reasonable explanations on why you think certain aspects should be changed. Please, refer to this map and this map only and explain your concerns. Remember, that none of us have to go ahead and explain anything, unless you specifically address issues and stop overgeneralizing.

Otherwise, there is no point and we might just as well assume that your goal in this case is to personally attack the mapper or nominating BN by purposely and with no reason holding up the set.

Oh, and I'm sure we all could appreciate if -Kazuto could practice their sense of humor somewhere else, unless they have some relevant input concerning the map itself.
Topic Starter
Hectic
*sigh*. I would be a bit happier if Winter Story and his anime loving classmates would not post in this beatmap's thread ever again. I think its quite obvious why I wish such thing - too many words has been spoken without any real evidence. For me it still looks like a personal attack and I actually don't know why I deserved that. I checked post with bubble pop on winter's map and it made me realise quite a lot (this kind of self-advertising is really impudent though and I don't appreciate that at all). Winter was trying to use same ideas as a bn who popped his bubble to "blast" my map. It makes me a bit sad that usually after bubbles and hearts people get congratulations and such stuff, and what I got is this. I hope situation will become better soon
nextplay
Grettings!

I have some concerns about the map

[Normal]

The Overall settings are kinda random make them cs 3 and ar 4 current one don't fit with the overall setting spread
00:11:713 (2,3,4,5) - This is should be sliders considering that the circles only follow the drums here which is kinda not fitting the music imo
00:29:541 (3) - Why is this a sharp slider? The music don't change here and o the red tick there is nothing to emphasize
00:19:256 (1,2,3,4,5) - I don't have really nothing against it but this movement might be a bit too hard for beginners so having those linear would be better
00:29:541 (3,1,2) - this movement is really forced here should consider changing it
00:32:970 (1,2) - this is ending on a strong drum which should be clickable so equal both of this sliders instead 2/1 2 1/1 slider
00:38:393 (1,2) - ^ okay this is rhythm is worse than before the big white tick has a weak sound while the tick has a strong a sound and the sliderend too
00:43:817 (1,2) - ^
00:49:241 (1,2) - ^
00:56:035 (2,3,4,1,2,3,4,5,1,2,3,4,5,1,2,3,4,5) - this complete section feels not finished skipping vocals and only priority the instrumentals is not a bad idea but in this case it don't fit with the music at all
02:00:243 (1,2,3,4,5,1,2,3,4,5,1,2,3,4,5,1,2,3,4) - ^
01:18:664 (6,1,2,3,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,1,2) - delete some slider make them circles this a way too long strain of sliders
<at this point it's just a quick look>

01:54:820 (1,2) - those are way too less curved straight would fit here too
02:44:127 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - this is aesthetically worse with only curved slider
03:36:793 (3,4,5,1,2) - I suggest 4,5 as a slider so the difficulty will not going to increase a lot

side note: If you want to make it harder than would be a smaller cs harder too

[Hard]

00:10:341 - For what is this green line having 00:11:027 (1) - with half of the speed don't fit the song and singer is not slower here too
00:15:827 (4) - why is this a 1/4 reverse? having 2 circles here would fit more 4 would be a clickable vocal and 5 would be a clickable drum the current one starts with the vocal and ends on the drum so the drum is not that clickable
00:21:313 (6) - ^ Note: here is the drum even stronger
00:18:570 (1,2) - this is kinda hard to read for beginners
00:22:513 (2,3,4) - this has the same emphasis as 00:23:198 (5) - my suggestion would be reducing the emphasis on 2,3,4 and the section to 5 would be more noticeable (the change to the 2 1/1)
00:26:456 (5) - make this one into a 1/2 slider because 00:26:798 - has a clickable sound and 5 would follow the music better
idk like I'm not the best in modding hards so that's kinda all I guess

I don't really agree with the map but gratz for bubble if you don't fix anything I guess

h4d0uk3n1 wrote:

My Angel Kanan wrote:

Grettings!
02:44:127 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - this is aesthetically worse with only curved slider uh, you meant "with only straight"?yes xd sorry for miss type tho
00:11:713 (2,3,4,5) - This is should be sliders considering that the circles only follow the drums here which is kinda not fitting the music imo do you mean 1/2 sliders or?.. anyway, i'm following drums 95% of the time in all diffs so ye, also these circles represent high pitched guitar sounds too I meant 1/1 slider and like the drum on 3 and 5 are pretty weak so xd
Topic Starter
Hectic
Bring it on my dude, i'll reply after you point out every one of your concerns

edit: ok, i guess i'll reply to this for now
Topic Starter
Hectic

My Angel Kanan wrote:

Grettings!

I have some concerns about the map

[Normal]

The Overall settings are kinda random make them cs 3 and ar 4 current one don't fit with the overall setting spread i want to keep it relatively challenging for beginners
00:11:713 (2,3,4,5) - This is should be sliders considering that the circles only follow the drums here which is kinda not fitting the music imo do you mean 1/2 sliders or?.. anyway, i'm following drums 95% of the time in all diffs so ye, also these circles represent high pitched guitar sounds too
00:29:541 (3) - Why is this a sharp slider? The music don't change here and o the red tick there is nothing to emphasize i don't think theres need to be something on red tick though, i just use this shape sometime, good vareity. also 00:28:170 (2,3) - singer #2, 00:27:484 (1,2,4,5) - singer #1
00:19:256 (1,2,3,4,5) - I don't have really nothing against it but this movement might be a bit too hard for beginners so having those linear would be better if its challenging - its totally fine as it is now. also it represents vocal stress well
00:29:541 (3,1,2) - this movement is really forced here should consider changing it i can't see how it forced, i think its pretty easy and straight forward
00:32:970 (1,2) - this is ending on a strong drum which should be clickable so equal both of this sliders instead 2/1 2 1/1 slider
00:38:393 (1,2) - ^ okay this is rhythm is worse than before the big white tick has a weak sound while the tick has a strong a sound and the sliderend too
00:43:817 (1,2) - ^
00:49:241 (1,2) - ^ song intensity affects object density (theres pishifat's video about such stuff, check them out)
00:56:035 (2,3,4,1,2,3,4,5,1,2,3,4,5,1,2,3,4,5) - this complete section feels not finished skipping vocals and only priority the instrumentals is not a bad idea but in this case it don't fit with the music at all
02:00:243 (1,2,3,4,5,1,2,3,4,5,1,2,3,4,5,1,2,3,4) - ^ absolutely same idea as above
01:18:664 (6,1,2,3,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,1,2) - delete some slider make them circles this a way too long strain of sliders i don't see it as a problem
<at this point it's just a quick look>

01:54:820 (1,2) - those are way too less curved straight would fit here too i really like this curve, also they correspond to each other nicely
02:44:127 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - this is aesthetically worse with only curved slider uh, you meant "with only straight"? anyway, consistency + this is subjective, looks fine for me
03:36:793 (3,4,5,1,2) - I suggest 4,5 as a slider so the difficulty will not going to increase a lot difficulty changed from 1.73 to 1.72.. really?

will continue later

h4d0uk3n1 wrote:

*sigh*. I would be a bit happier if Winter Story and his anime loving classmates would not post in this beatmap's thread ever again. I think its quite obvious why I wish such thing - too many words has been spoken without any real evidence. For me it still looks like a personal attack and I actually don't know why I deserved that. I checked post with bubble pop on winter's map and it made me realise quite a lot (this kind of self-advertising is really impudent though and I don't appreciate that at all). Winter was trying to use same ideas as a bn who popped his bubble to "blast" my map. It makes me a bit sad that usually after bubbles and hearts people get congratulations and such stuff, and what I got is this. I hope situation will become better soon
I think you kinda don't get it the Bubble is not really deserved with the maps quality. That you wouldn't get congratulations is like the bubble is not deserved with the map quality (what I basically said already) they don't hate you or something. yeah I think you understand what I want to say I don't hate or want to blast your map either We (winter story and I) just want to improve the maps quality
Once I saw interesting thought on the page of some bn or qat member, i'm not sure. The point was that map's quality is mostly about how mapper can explain their choices

-Kazuto wrote:

I posted for rhythm incarnate spam :miku: what does it even mean
Plaudible

h4d0uk3n1 wrote:

*sigh*. I would be a bit happier if Winter Story and his anime loving classmates would not post in this beatmap's thread ever again. I think its quite obvious why I wish such thing - too many words has been spoken without any real evidence. For me it still looks like a personal attack and I actually don't know why I deserved that. I checked post with bubble pop on winter's map and it made me realise quite a lot (this kind of self-advertising is really impudent though and I don't appreciate that at all). Winter was trying to use same ideas as a bn who popped his bubble to "blast" my map. It makes me a bit sad that usually after bubbles and hearts people get congratulations and such stuff, and what I got is this. I hope situation will become better soon
That's the nature of the ranking process, if people disagree with a nomination they can offer mods in efforts to get attention for a veto. You say that it looks like a personal attack, though rarely is that the case - more so just concern with what is being pushed to ranking in an effort to improve the map before it achieves that status. It happens to many sets all the time for whatever reasons. Now, since you seem certain in your reasoning for what you've mapped and have what you need to support it, there's no need to get worked up over the mods being posted. Keep things cool here and just respond with your reasoning for what you have and move on, we don't need to make things personal.

And as others have said, if you believe there's reason to prevent this map from being pushed forward, don't generalize and give thorough reasoning. Being brash and not supporting broad statements isn't very helpful to improve the set.
Kurai
Talked with the mapper in PM as he wanted to improve some patterns in Insane:
  1. 01:38:035 (8,1) - made the transition between those two sliders more intuitive and less sudden. (slider + circle → reverse slider; making the pattern similar to 00:32:456 (8) - ).
  2. 01:07:006 (4,5) - mapped all those patterns the same way for the sake of consistency.
Removed the spam posts in this thread. Stay respectuous if you don't want me to issue sanctions.
Topic Starter
Hectic
If someone needs explanation on certain patterns/objects choices/etc., I suggest talking to me in-game for claryfication (i am very barely afk) (before that I suggest looking through mods, since your concern could be already explained). If your suggestion makes sense, I'd be happy to consider making changes
Shmiklak
lol, I thought this map wouldn't get bubbled. gj.
Topic Starter
Hectic
да ну, прикольная мапа. Спасибо
Celektus
M4M from here. Since this got bubbled I'll only point out possibly unrankable things.

[ Insane]
  1. possibly obscured reverse arrows 00:18:570 (1) - 00:20:456 (2) - 02:52:356 (1) -

If you want a better mod pm me. gl with the mapset~
Topic Starter
Hectic
Took a look with default skin - easily readable because of drastic time period between reverses and objects which overlap them. Why did it take you so long D: Anyway, thanks, you too
Topic Starter
Hectic
What I found on Normal:
  1. 00:25:427 (2,3,4) - (3) really stroke my ear as I was playing since its the only slider throughout the whole diff which is not hitsounded (because neither snare or bass drum land on its head or tail). I figured out that this pattern follows vocal for some reason and I want to change it so it fits drums (just as whole diff). In the second "red" section object choice for the same part of music is pretty correct. wasfix, new looks
  2. 03:09:675 (3,4) - this blanket doesn't seem as made well enough (noticable while playing, at least for me) (picture)
  3. 03:36:793 (3,4,5,1,2) - It is too many circles in a row for unjustified reason (In this diff I use many circles in a row to show really valuable sounds in music, this place doesn't seem like it deseves that). also this pattern is ugly lol Decided to change 1,2 to slider (I understand that I use circles for same sounds in both of choruses 00:53:986 (3,4) - 01:59:565 (3,4) - but since this chorus is quite unique comparing to others, this makes sense) also variety, why not (how it would look after change)
Also there's unneeded green timing point on Hard 00:10:341 - I think removing that would be a good idea (don't know if unrankable though)

I don't want to bother Kurai again since I think I already asked for too much, so I may leave these fixes until discussion with a person, who is responsible for qualifying. If Kurai doesn't mind rebubbling again tho and finds these changes cool, I'd be happy to upload them
show more
Please sign in to reply.

New reply