Phylo's mod
Sakurauchi Riko wrote:
Hey, my end of M4M
ruin
00:01:646 (1,3) - fix this blanket here - adjusted
00:02:751 (6,1) - maybe you can somwhow manage to blanket them aswell since you blanket 00:02:909 (7,1) - this. it would give you a lot of additional structure - indeed is a lot better, also improved a few of the next patterns, much more cleaner and polished now
00:04:962 (2,3,4) - not a fan of this wide angled placement here (plays awfully if not used behind a good concept) since you also used sharp angles (and actual jumps) for 00:02:120 (2,3) - which is basically the same sound/pattern. - yes, me neither....Adjusted
00:08:909 (3) - these 2 red anchors seem really random to me, like almost you ran out of ideas for a good slidershape (since you used a lot good sldierhshapes before). you could so something like https://puu.sh/wTBQ7/0974ccc6c4.png eventually, looks way more intended than the current one imo - that's exactly what happened HAHAHA and yeah, opted for yours
00:24:383 (3,4) - how about 2 1/4 sliders hear instead to emphasize the background noise that shows up here? i think it's wasted if you just ignore this noise. you would have to do that on similar spots aswell to be consistent, so idk if you really wanna do that - ..I liked your idea, i'll put some tests on that, I think i know how to handle that without changing ''too much'' of the overall structure and rythm...if it doesn't work i'll leave as it is
00:26:356 - 00:26:514 - 00:26:672 - and so on .. these sounds: i think you should somewhat try to represent them, i mean you map a lot this basic 1/2 sounds so why not choose a different rhythm the song provides to create more variety. i tihnk its a bit wasted potential here. also this appears in the music quite often e.g. in 00:28:488 - this measure too. especially you should consider this because you map a similar sound 00:29:120 (1) - here
00:29:988 - i dont hear any sound - but there is, although a bit lower, it's the same rythm from 00:29:120 (1) -
00:31:251 - ^ the sound that was on the blue tick before is actually on the white tick along with the really noisy sound now
yea.. i tihnk for 00:29:751 (1,2,3,4,5,6,1,2,3,4,5) - this whole thing you should listen to the song really carefully and map only specific sounds (since you obviously cant map all sounds) because you map different sounds and skip sounds you mapped before. - yup, that's why I teach the player the new rythm with 00:29:120 (1) - so he gets ready for it
00:32:593 (3,4) - 00:33:225 (3,4) - and similar ones deserve more spacing for a better emphasis imo hmm, i think it's good enough compared to the whole map o:
00:44:277 (6) - 00:45:541 (3) - 00:48:067 (2) - 00:49:330 (6) - add more spacing towards those, you do this at 00:43:804 (4) - 00:46:330 (1) - 00:46:804 (3) - and so on.. aswell, so you should be consistent here - indeed, adjusted section
some blankets here and there could also be improved, for example 00:02:909 (7,3) - 00:04:488 (1,3) - 00:07:804 (4,1) - and so on.. there are a lot more
some things appear on similar spots that got repeated, i guess you are aware of that
insane
00:01:488 (4,1) - this spacing should be higher than 00:01:172 (2,3,4) - for DS emphasis towards the strong and special sound at 00:01:646 -
00:04:330 (4,1) - same thing here, you actually do it better at 00:05:909 (6,1) - or 00:06:856 (4,1) - which makes a lot more sense indeed,
reworked a bit few notes and now it's more consistent
00:19:172 (4,5,1) - yeah you get it - here actually I think it's fine because of the whole pattern
similar blue tick thing here aswell as i mentioned it top diff, it does not make sense if you map 00:29:120 (1) - this blue tick rhythm but ignore the other blue ticks before, at least for me it doesnt. - it's because the blue tick rythm gets more important only after this note for this section, and well,
I did map the blue tick ? xD00:29:751 (1,2,3,4) - it's the exact same sounds as the reverse arrow
00:37:330 (1,3) - this is kinda hard to read, too hard for insane if you ask me - i would easily think that 00:37:804 (3) - is not a 1/1 slider - indeed, even because I didn't do that in the last diff, reworked pattern
00:46:330 - dont think its a good idea to hide this sound behind the sliderend since it is the only one, better to be consistent here and make this clickable - indeed, fixed
00:58:646 (4,1) - deserves more spacing, looks visually almost the same as 00:58:172 (3,4) - . basically another ds emphasis issue - re-arranged angles, DS is similar but angles now are better giving proper emphasiz
01:03:225 (3,4,1) - same here, 01:03:699 (4) - is not important at all but it has a spacing of 3.2x towards itself and 01:03:856 (1) - which is objectively stronger only 2.1x ds towards it. - indeed, reworked angles, but DS is slightly similar because the sudden change of flow from 01:03:699 (4,1,2) - gives enough intensity imo
hard
00:05:435 (7,1) - im not quite sure but this may be too hard to read for this difficulty. the player has barely time to notice the stacked sliderhead - re-made section
00:10:804 (1) - you should make a much different shape for this to be seperated from the other sliders (because it has very slow sv) - done
00:24:383 (6,7) - why you have here a jump but a bit later at 00:28:488 (1,2,3,4) - it is spaced equally? you should do this consistent, i'd rather not suggest you to do such huge and sudden jump in a hard - because i've placed the intensity at 00:28:488 (1,2) - which makes the whole 00:28:488 (1,2,3,4,1) - have enough intensity imo, and those 5 single taps give an awesome momentum for 00:29:120 (1,1) -
00:34:172 (4,5,6,7) - this and the patterns after are more consistent in terms of jumps/slight ds emphasises - indeed
00:39:856 (1,2) - same spacing between those like you did for 00:40:488 (3,4) - and so on to be consistent - indeed, fixed
01:08:751 (3,1) - stack maybe for better structure - stacked
apart from the few inconsistencies a really good hard diff - c:
advanced
00:05:277 (2,3) - is there a reason to not stack them? since you usually stack circle on top of next sliderhead if it has 1/1 gap before - going to explain below
00:16:014 (5,6) - here aswell, i see that this inconsistency is consistent but you'd rather wanna keep everything as a whole consistent to be as straightforward as possible in low diff - explaining below
00:17:593 (3,4) - you get it, because then at 00:19:488 (7,1) - you get back to stacking. there are more spots in the diff - yeah, there's actually a reason xD lemme try to explain: So, the song gets a lot of rythm breaks with the ''BZZZ'' sound (example: 00:04:488 (1) - ) that makes the rythm have a lot of inconstant logic, the difference between stacked and not stacked, is that stacked notes imo feel more ''harsh''. You take ''STOP''.''GO AGAIN''. on your aim and flow...that's why I only stack notes when the transitional reverse slider happens, because the song's rythm ''resets'' 00:02:435 (2,3,1) - 00:07:804 (2,3,1) - 00:13:172 (5,6,1) - 00:18:541 (6,7,1) - etc etc....and I do the unstacked notes for moments of the song where it's either hapenning a kind of transition or simply common continuous rythm 00:05:277 (2,3,4,1) - 00:16:014 (5,6,7,1) - etc etc ^^. I know that these low star diffs should be as consistent as possible, but some loyalty to the song is appreciated i think hehe. that's my way of putting feeling and variety in these diffs o:
00:21:541 (6) - you rather wanna put this slider a little bit up so the movement towards it isnt that harsh - makes sense, adjusted
00:36:699 (6,7,1) - same idea here, the movement is really harsh and awkward for newbies, they rather tend to follow the slidershape until its end, so they have to move back to the next object - indeed, I didn't think about that, fixed and going to pay atention to future times
00:31:014 (1,2,3,1) - maybe line those up for straight flow instead of curved flow to make it different from 00:28:172 (3,4,5,6) - 00:26:277 (5,6,7,1) - being curved and they have a different sound than 00:31:014 (1,2,3,1) - . dont have to do that since nobody gives a shit anyways in low diffs but would be cool - oh nice one, didn't thought about that, adjusted
00:52:014 (3) - this circle is unneccessary imo since the sound is really weak (and 2 1/2 circles in a row is hard for a 2.3* diff), same for the others ofc - Agree, adjusted all the moments
alright thats it for me, I hope my mod was useful in any way ! really solid set, GDs look nice aswell (although i didnt mod 'em) - yeah, thank you very much <3
Best of Luck
thanks mate o/