FELT - In my room

posted
Total Posts
39
show more
PyroBear
[General]
  1. 00:12:907 ~ 00:36:180 Add kiai?
  2. Where is the fish in the bg you need fish in bg for the meme


[Hard]
  1. 00:02:543 (4,1) - Make these not overlap 00:08:361 (4,1) -
    Make them similar to this 00:32:543 (1,2,3,4) but with lower spacing
  2. 00:03:452 (1,2,3,4)
  3. 00:06:361 (1,2,3,4)
  4. 00:09:270 (1,2,3,4,1)
  5. 00:15:089 (1,2,3,4)
  6. 00:17:998 (1,2,3,4)
  7. 00:20:907 (1,2,3,4)
  8. 00:23:816 (1,2) - You can change this or not but I'd prefer if you changed it for concistency
  9. 00:26:725 (1,2,3) - ^
  10. 00:29:634 (1,2,3) - ^

I refuse to believe you're a new mapper cause damn I like this set
Topic Starter
ylvy
[General]
00:12:907 ~ 00:36:180 Add kiai? eh not really needed imo as the whole song is almost the same, just with extra layers of sounds and instruments added as song progresses
Where is the fish in the bg you need fish in bg for the meme im sorry pls dont kill hhhgh


[Hard]
00:02:543 (4,1) - Make these not overlap 00:08:361 (4,1) - y tho
Make them similar to this 00:32:543 (1,2,3,4) but with lower spacing across all diffs but easy i have the theme of using a lack of movement in patterns to emphasize certain phrases until 00:24:543 where i start spacing them

00:03:452 (1,2,3,4)
00:06:361 (1,2,3,4)
00:09:270 (1,2,3,4,1)
00:15:089 (1,2,3,4)
00:17:998 (1,2,3,4)
00:20:907 (1,2,3,4)
00:23:816 (1,2) - You can change this or not but I'd prefer if you changed it for concistency its so i can have a spacing gap between it and the next object cause theres a very strong sound and it also helps signify the changes in hte map too
00:26:725 (1,2,3) - ^ i altered the ways i represented each repeated sound/phrase starting from 00:24:543 (1) to reflect progression/build up of song (the theme i mentioned earlier)
00:29:634 (1,2,3) - ^

I refuse to believe you're a new mapper cause damn I like this set tyty also thanks for star! and you still got to keep 1 net kudosu too lol
(although i did pull a wall of deny i can definitely see where your concerns come from and if after more mods my reasoning doesnt hold up ill come back to this)
PencilK
ello, from your m4m queue c:
doing 2 diffs since you did my marathon :P

Insane
right off the bat i gotta say this is some pretty gimmick-esc stuff so you may get a mod under standard ;-; sorry

the gimmick itself is pretty good tho i like it

00:01:271 (1,2) - noticably the insane diff has alot of double overlaps, i don't get why/when they happen though
00:08:725 (2,3,4) - dont overlap unintentionally, this looks pretty ugly imo (overlaps)
00:09:998 (1) - using NC to emphasise this sole sound is a bad idea, the hitsounding will do just fine
00:09:998 (1,1,2,1) - after you fix ^ i suggest making the ncing follow 1234, or 12 12 instead of 123 123, rhythm fits better with the first 2
00:29:816 (4,5,6) - weird ds jump + flow style?
00:30:361 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4) - why the random change in mapping style?
00:33:271 - please add a note here you have no idea how weird this feels


HARD
i cant even map hards so dont expect a very good mod
00:27:089 (3,1) - possible blanket spot?
00:28:180 (2,3) - have these sliders flow into each other in a neater wave (2 seems to be very slightly above where it should be in the pattern)


looked over the other diffs, i would already push this for ranking tbh though i might wanna check with someone on the easy diff

gj n gl~!
Topic Starter
ylvy

Pencil-kun wrote:

ello, from your m4m queue c:
doing 2 diffs since you did my marathon :Ptytyt

Insane
right off the bat i gotta say this is some pretty gimmick-esc stuff so you may get a mod under standard ;-; sorry you say this but its good mod :V

the gimmick itself is pretty good tho i like it

00:01:271 (1,2) - noticably the insane diff has alot of double overlaps, i don't get why/when they happen though primarily they are used to represent this motif 00:01:998 (1,2,1,2) (00:13:634 (1,2,1,2), 00:25:271 (1,2,1,2)), but sometimes they are also used to eliminate movement since i've already established the rhythm for that spacing and dont need to worry as much about how i arrange it (like 00:20:361 (2,3))


00:08:725 (2,3,4) - dont overlap unintentionally, this looks pretty ugly imo (overlaps) i think the spacing is too high if no overlaps, and the overlaps work well to associate it as one musical phrase

00:09:998 (1) - using NC to emphasise this sole sound is a bad idea, the hitsounding will do just fine mm ok

00:09:998 (1,1,2,1) - after you fix ^ i suggest making the ncing follow 1234, or 12 12 instead of 123 123, rhythm fits better with the first 2 its for contrast with the way i presented the before parts, 00:10:725 (2,3,1,2) - grouped as a 1-2 1-2 would feel too similar to before imo cause i want this part to serve as a transition into the section starting on 00:12:907 (1). the shrinking triangle pattern is also to follow the fading-out of 00:09:998 (1)

00:29:816 (4,5,6) - weird ds jump + flow style? its same as 00:05:816 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8), 00:11:452 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9), 00:17:271 (1,2,3,4,5,1,2,3,4); and i think its already more comfortable than the rest of that section like 00:28:180 (1,2,1,2) lol

00:30:361 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4) - why the random change in mapping style? i wasnt happy with it so i remapped the whole ending lol idk it might satisfy you now

00:33:271 - please add a note here you have no idea how weird this feels maybe ill change to 1/2 slider but for now ill keep circle to follow melody cause if i added 1/2 slider it would be the only 1/2 slider in the whole map so i dont think its worth it


HARD
i cant even map hards so dont expect a very good mod
00:27:089 (3,1) - possible blanket spot? blanketed slider tail of 3 with curve of 1

00:28:180 (2,3) - have these sliders flow into each other in a neater wave (2 seems to be very slightly above where it should be in the pattern) fixed i think? im not sure if i've got what you meant sorry


looked over the other diffs, i would already push this for ranking tbh though i might wanna check with someone on the easy diff

these took a lot of thought to answer, good points :vvv
gj n gl~! tyvm!!!!!!
Celektus
hi. I hope I can help

[Overall]
  1. the newest standard for BG size is 1920x1200 (or 1920x1080) you big could be more high res and also has a weird aspect ratio. You could look for a better or upscale with this site: http://waifu2x.udp.jp/
    and maybe resize it later with some random website or a program like GIMP. You can probably ask me or someone else to resize it too
  2. Your play field usage could improve I think. A lot of your diffs don't use the whole screen or stay in some quadrants a bit too long. It can feel and look more crammed if objects are too much in a certain portion of the screen, it can also add addition emphasis you may or may not want. I'll go over it in a bit more detail on Insane.

[Easy]
I can't say much besides some visual suggestions so I'm gonna do that and you can see if you like them or not
  1. overall playfield usage is the worst out of all diff on this one, most objects are more or less in the middle. You can try to move and rotate maybe some of the object arrangements.
  2. The middle of the slider is closer than the rest 00:01:271 (1,2) - example. blanket modding LUL
  3. Blanket modding again. Slider body is further away than end and head 00:18:725 (1,2) - example
    similar thing 00:31:816 (4,1) -
  4. I think it would give more emphasis to the bell sounds to just have 1 red anchor here 00:24:543 (1) -

[ Normal]
  1. 00:25:271 (2,3,1,2) - I think 00:25:634 (3) - stands out less when you repeat the pattern like that. I could actually say that about this one too 00:20:180 (1) - maybe reduce the spacing on this one 00:25:998 (1,2) - since both of those were higher than usual.
  2. I really like how you already introduce the stacking theme in this diff 00:17:271 (1,2,3,1,2,3) -
  3. blanket looks like 00:26:725 (1,2,1) - the head is inside the approach the slider end is on it and then body is outside, so you could choose how to "fix" it. same 00:32:543 (1,2,1) - nothing else

[ Hard]
  1. The Overlaps on faded sliderends could look more similar, like here 00:01:634 (2,4) - and here 00:04:543 (2,4) -
  2. SV might've been cool here 00:24:543 -
  3. this again could stand out more 00:25:634 (2) - I think making it into a circle would be nice, maybe you have other ideas. same I guess if 00:31:452 (2) -
  4. I don't really get why those are spaced out now 00:32:543 (1,2,3,4) -
  5. playfield here seems bettur

[ Insane]
  1. 00:01:271 (1,2,3,4,1,2,1,2,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,1,2,3,1,2,1,2,1,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,1,2,3,1,2,1,2,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - hmmm I get that you tried to emphasize the repetition of the melody, but I think you could've maybe tried to switch between quadrants or make it more apparent by making not as many objects still go into that quadrant.

    I personally would switch for left to right in the intro. I would also suggest to ask some SB'er if you have a specific idea.
  2. Emphasizing the repletion with a jump out of the downbeat I think is not so good 00:04:180 (1,1) - wouldn't stacking like here work? 00:01:271 (1,2) -


pretty much perfect otherwise can't say much tbh cause the execution seems consistent to me.

yea stellar execution, gl with the set
Topic Starter
ylvy

Celektus wrote:

hi. I hope I can help hfjgj ty

[Overall]
  1. the newest standard for BG size is 1920x1200 (or 1920x1080) you big could be more high res and also has a weird aspect ratio. You could look for a better or upscale with this site: http://waifu2x.udp.jp/ and maybe resize it later with some random website or a program like GIMP. You can probably ask me or someone else to resize it too i'm probably gonna use a different bg later on anyways so until then this is gonna be bg www
  2. Your play field usage could improve I think. A lot of your diffs don't use the whole screen or stay in some quadrants a bit too long. It can feel and look more crammed if objects are too much in a certain portion of the screen, it can also add addition emphasis you may or may not want. I'll go over it in a bit more detail on Insane. yeah thats true though i feel like its a bit more justified since its a 30s map and im using low spacing patterns throughout diffs

[Easy]
I can't say much besides some visual suggestions so I'm gonna do that and you can see if you like them or not
  1. overall playfield usage is the worst out of all diff on this one, most objects are more or less in the middle. You can try to move and rotate maybe some of the object arrangements. rotated something to use more of left side; all four corners are visited at least once even if its not rreally really close cause low ds+low sv+short length map lol so i cant really push it much more than this with current patterns
  2. The middle of the slider is closer than the rest 00:01:271 (1,2) - example. blanket modding LUL ww thanks, fix!
  3. Blanket modding again. Slider body is further away than end and head 00:18:725 (1,2) - example
    similar thing 00:31:816 (4,1) - fix first www second i didnt align cause slider looks really flat if you lined up perfectly from that distance and i think that damages visual link
  4. I think it would give more emphasis to the bell sounds to just have 1 red anchor here 00:24:543 (1) - good idea, changed!!


[ Normal]
  1. 00:25:271 (2,3,1,2) - I think 00:25:634 (3) - stands out less when you repeat the pattern like that. I could actually say that about this one too 00:20:180 (1) - maybe reduce the spacing on this one 00:25:998 (1,2) - since both of those were higher than usual. actually i dont need (3) to stand out in particular cause im not making the same motif stand out that i did in the insane with the nc doubles. these 00:25:271 (2,3) things are just a development on these 00:20:180 (1,2), they're meant to be emphasized equally. or maybe i misunderstood what you were talking about ?? you can pm me on discord to talk about it more if you want
  2. I really like how you already introduce the stacking theme in this diff 00:17:271 (1,2,3,1,2,3) - o w o
  3. blanket looks like 00:26:725 (1,2,1) - the head is inside the approach the slider end is on it and then body is outside, so you could choose how to "fix" it. same 00:32:543 (1,2,1) - nothing else you make me realise how disgusting my blankets are wwwwwwwwwwww

[ Hard]
  1. The Overlaps on faded sliderends could look more similar, like here 00:01:634 (2,4) - and here 00:04:543 (2,4) - brought 00:05:452 (4) eversoslightly closer to previous slider head
  2. SV might've been cool here 00:24:543 - i think slidershape+pattern developments are already enough and sv would be inconsistent with spread but yeah could've been :vvvv
  3. this again could stand out more 00:25:634 (2) - I think making it into a circle would be nice, maybe you have other ideas. same I guess if 00:31:452 (2) - again i dont really want (2) to stand out in particular; same deal with normal, they're meant to be emphasized equally. reread above i guess?
    and again you can always tell me if i missed your point ttt
  4. I don't really get why those are spaced out now 00:32:543 (1,2,3,4) - theme of pattern (difficulty) development with each section of song throughout all diffs
  5. playfield here seems bettur owo

[ Insane]
  1. 00:01:271 (1,2,3,4,1,2,1,2,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,1,2,3,1,2,1,2,1,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,1,2,3,1,2,1,2,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - hmmm I get that you tried to emphasize the repetition of the melody, but I think you could've maybe tried to switch between quadrants or make it more apparent by making not as many objects still go into that quadrant.

    I personally would switch for left to right in the intro. I would also suggest to ask some SB'er if you have a specific idea. i think the crammed feeling works well to create contrast, the intro is tight to juxtapose the rest of map; when 00:09:998 (1,2,3,1,2,3) comes up it has more of an effect and works better as a transition between sections of map
  2. Emphasizing the repletion with a jump out of the downbeat I think is not so good 00:04:180 (1,1) - wouldn't stacking like here work? 00:01:271 (1,2) - i want to visually separate the nc circle as it's not connected to the melody line; maybe one can argue that i shouldnt sacrifice gameplay for that, but throughout the map visual arrangement is a big theme, lots of geometric patterns later+ar8.2 so i think its ok in this map.


pretty much perfect otherwise can't say much tbh cause the execution seems consistent to me. :ok_hand: !!!

yea stellar execution, gl with the set tytytytytytytytytytytytytyttytytytytytytytytytytytytytytytytytytyttytytytytytytytytytytytytytytytytyty
FiddleBlue
Sry for the late mod. :(

Easy
  1. 00:01:271 (1) - I think this is better as a spinner as the slider head isn't emphasizing the piano like the tail, 00:05:634 (2) - and 00:07:089 (1) - . I find it better as it shows what're you following.
  2. 00:31:816 (4) - This slider feels out of place as it doesn't seem to emphasize a change on the strings like other sliders. There seems to be a change on 00:30:361 - so how about making 00:27:452 (3) - repeat once?
Normal
  1. 00:03:998 - I don't think this should be treated as 00:03:271 - as it sounds stronger. So perhaps, emphasize it.
  2. 00:03:452 (5) - and 00:09:271 (5) - ^
  3. 00:10:089 (1) - Spinner seems to not following anything here. There's no particular held sound, or anything. The whole spinner (+1 circle from before) can be easily replaced by the rhythm from 00:01:271 (1,2,3,4,5) - and it'll be just fine. There's nothing particular different here than the one before, so a different rhythm choice wouldn't really work.
  4. 00:12:907 (1) - I find that this slider is held too long, and should be cut off by a 1/2 beat. It doesn't really seem balance for 00:12:907 (1,2,3) - as 00:13:634 (2,3) - follow the piano keys, while 00:12:907 (1) - skips two. Sure it may be the longest because of the additional change in the strings, but it's kinda forgetting what else it should be emphasizing. So by making it a 1/1 slider would tell that it's special since the rest are 1/2 sliders, and not forgetting about the piano. Also, I think this rhythm would be better, but it's up to you: https://gyazo.com/01bfdab3c8fe51352f19a92632bd1d85
  5. 00:23:452 (3) - Kinda weird that the sound on 00:23:634 - is emphasized while other same sounds aren't. I don't really understand why would you put a pattern of "no emphasize, yes emphasize…" There's no changes in the piano that supports it, so they all should have the same reasoning.
Hard
  1. 00:03:452 (1,2,3,4) - I think this should be separate instead of stack as it kinda ignores the strong sound in circle 3, but it's ok.
  2. 00:10:089 (1) - Again, why a spinner?
  3. 00:30:361 (1,2) - I think this is better if reverse select its rhythm as 00:30:361 - has a sound that is different than the other similar parts.
  4. 00:32:543 (1,2,3,4,1) - Why are 1/2 beat circles are suddenly spaced here, when similar part before are stacked? :(
Good luck!
Topic Starter
ylvy

FiddleBlue wrote:

Sry for the late mod. :(late mod better than no mod :O ty ty

Easy
  1. 00:01:271 (1) - I think this is better as a spinner as the slider head isn't emphasizing the piano like the tail, 00:05:634 (2) - and 00:07:089 (1) - . I find it better as it shows what're you following. slider tail has just as much effect when its after such a long slider and with such a long gap until next circle
  2. 00:31:816 (4) - This slider feels out of place as it doesn't seem to emphasize a change on the strings like other sliders. There seems to be a change on 00:30:361 - so how about making 00:27:452 (3) - repeat once? uh for the repeat on previous that wouldn't work cause red anchors on sliders throughout the diff follow nuances in the music and that would go against them. and for the slider that feels out of place its just filler rhythm cause i dont want a big gap
Normal
  1. 00:03:998 - I don't think this should be treated as 00:03:271 - as it sounds stronger. So perhaps, emphasize it. ?? wrong timestamps maybe?
  2. 00:03:452 (5) - and 00:09:271 (5) - ^ i don't think that much variation is good for just the intro.
  3. 00:10:089 (1) - Spinner seems to not following anything here. There's no particular held sound, or anything. The whole spinner (+1 circle from before) can be easily replaced by the rhythm from 00:01:271 (1,2,3,4,5) - and it'll be just fine. There's nothing particular different here than the one before, so a different rhythm choice wouldn't really work. the chime melody finishes on 00:09:998 (1) and the spinner splits intro from rest of map
  4. 00:12:907 (1) - I find that this slider is held too long, and should be cut off by a 1/2 beat. It doesn't really seem balance for 00:12:907 (1,2,3) - as 00:13:634 (2,3) - follow the piano keys, while 00:12:907 (1) - skips two. Sure it may be the longest because of the additional change in the strings, but it's kinda forgetting what else it should be emphasizing. So by making it a 1/1 slider would tell that it's special since the rest are 1/2 sliders, and not forgetting about the piano. it's not forgetting what else it should be emphasizing if it doesn't have to be emphasizing those things though, if i emphasize the other stuff with shorter slider length then strings get ignored and that's what i want to prioritize. this rhythm also condenses the clicks around the climax of the phrase so i feel it's better Also, I think this rhythm would be better, but it's up to you: https://gyazo.com/01bfdab3c8fe51352f19a92632bd1d85 i don't really like how the rhythm's clicks center around an area which isn't the strongest in the phrase
  5. 00:23:452 (3) - Kinda weird that the sound on 00:23:634 - is emphasized while other same sounds aren't. I don't really understand why would you put a pattern of "no emphasize, yes emphasize…" There's no changes in the piano that supports it, so they all should have the same reasoning. its not even emphasized though, it's still part of the stack. the slider allows to split this into 2 groups to both emphasize climax of phrase and so that i don't have 8 1/2 circles in a row
Hard
  1. 00:03:452 (1,2,3,4) - I think this should be separate instead of stack as it kinda ignores the strong sound in circle 3, but it's ok. throughout the entire diff until near end i use a lack of movement to emphasize this particular phrase/motif as there's quite a bit of moving in other parts. if i split it into doubles or 2 sliders then it's not as unique
  2. 00:10:089 (1) - Again, why a spinner? answered in normal
  3. 00:30:361 (1,2) - I think this is better if reverse select its rhythm as 00:30:361 - has a sound that is different than the other similar parts. it de emphasizes the (1) though and that's where the strong sounds are
  4. 00:32:543 (1,2,3,4,1) - Why are 1/2 beat circles are suddenly spaced here, when similar part before are stacked? :(there is a theme of pattern (difficulty) development with each section of song throughout every single diff in the set
Good luck! tyty!
Mir
Hitsounds
Where?

You have like nothing hitsounded, like 4-6 whistles per diff. It's not enough. Alternate between drum whistle and soft whistle if you need to, or even use drum hitnormal for downbeats or something? You'll definitely need to do more with hitsounding.

Hard
- 00:01:634 (2,4,1) - 00:08:361 (4,1) - This overlapping thing happens only in the intro then the rest of the map is super clean. I don't really think that meshes too well. I would recommend removing these overlaps just for structural consistency.
- 00:10:089 (1) - Seems like ?_? to have a spinner here when the song is essentially the same as before.

Normal
- 00:02:725 (4) - No NC, 00:05:634 - NC, 00:08:543 - no NC. Choose one method and keep it consistent.
- 00:17:271 (1,2,3,1,2,3) - Pretty high density for a Normal. This seems like too much 1/2 in a row especially with only a 1/2 slider connecting them.

Just DS the diff too, there's 4x jumps that newbies won't be able to follow.

Generally the Normal is too hard. Easy has 15 objects, Normal has 80. The density increase is too steep.

Easy
- You can have NCs every hypermeasure here since the density is so laughably low.

Do more with hitsounding and fix your normal diff then you can call me to take another look.
Topic Starter
ylvy

Mir wrote:

Hitsounds
Where?

You have like nothing hitsounded, like 4-6 whistles per diff. It's not enough. Alternate between drum whistle and soft whistle if you need to, or even use drum hitnormal for downbeats or something? You'll definitely need to do more with hitsounding. oops

Hard
- 00:01:634 (2,4,1) - 00:08:361 (4,1) - This overlapping thing happens only in the intro then the rest of the map is super clean. I don't really think that meshes too well. I would recommend removing these overlaps just for structural consistency. i dont think its a big problem, you get some just-faded overlaps in places like 00:15:634 (4,1,4,2)
- 00:10:089 (1) - Seems like ?_? to have a spinner here when the song is essentially the same as before. i think it makes for a nice transition into 00:12:907 and allows for a better experience, but i agree so i've changed it and hopefully reached something of an acceptable inbetween?

Normal
- 00:02:725 (4) - No NC, 00:05:634 - NC, 00:08:543 - no NC. Choose one method and keep it consistent. uh they're different patterns though, and the NC on 00:08:543 is following chimes
- 00:17:271 (1,2,3,1,2,3) - Pretty high density for a Normal. This seems like too much 1/2 in a row especially with only a 1/2 slider connecting them. aw ok fix

Just DS the diff too, there's 4x jumps that newbies won't be able to follow.

Generally the Normal is too hard. Easy has 15 objects, Normal has 80. The density increase is too steep. i think its okay now

Easy
- You can have NCs every hypermeasure here since the density is so laughably low. i remapped the easy

Do more with hitsounding and fix your normal diff then you can call me to take another look. hitsounded everything
UndeadCapulet
map a notmapped song next time thx ly

2018-02-02 21:47 ylvy: i havent responded to mir's mod cause i have no idea what im doing with the lowdiffs
2018-02-02 21:47 UndeadCapulet: you can just say "ok, remapped with this in mind"
2018-02-02 21:48 ylvy: alright :V
2018-02-02 21:49 UndeadCapulet: 00:31:634 (2,1) - dis jumpbig
2018-02-02 21:49 ylvy: yep
2018-02-02 21:51 ylvy: mir said spread between easy to normal i think
2018-02-02 21:52 UndeadCapulet: 00:10:089 (1) -
2018-02-02 21:53 UndeadCapulet: unrankable spinner
2018-02-02 21:54 ylvy: 00:28:907 (1,2,3,4) -
2018-02-02 21:58 ylvy: 00:10:089 (1) - what do you think of this spinner
2018-02-02 21:58 ylvy: in hard
2018-02-02 21:59 ylvy: alright
2018-02-02 22:00 ylvy: alright i probably will change it
2018-02-02 22:04 UndeadCapulet: 00:20:725 - raise vol setting, this isnt very audible
2018-02-02 22:04 ylvy: uwu yep
2018-02-02 22:07 ylvy: oops
2018-02-02 22:08 UndeadCapulet: copy hitsound greenlines to your lowdiffs
2018-02-02 22:08 ylvy: yes
2018-02-02 22:09 UndeadCapulet: 00:35:998 (4,1) - maybe rearrange to be more like https://puu.sh/zfx1G/7be0710d5e.png ? feels like a more fitting way to end
2018-02-02 22:17 ylvy: alright tyty
2018-02-02 22:18 ylvy: rip no extra pp from mv2
2018-02-02 22:18 ylvy: oops
2018-02-02 22:18 ylvy: kudosu
2018-02-02 22:18 ylvy: wow
2018-02-02 22:53 UndeadCapulet: are you done yet
2018-02-02 22:53 ylvy: uhhh just writing mod response
2018-02-02 22:53 ylvy: and ill be done
2018-02-02 22:53 UndeadCapulet: sweet
2018-02-02 22:56 ylvy: done w
2018-02-02 22:57 ylvy: oh wait shit
2018-02-02 22:57 ylvy: i didnt actually update
2018-02-02 22:59 ylvy: ok its actually done now
2018-02-02 22:59 ylvy: 00:09:998 - for the hard do you think this is ok to replace the spinner
2018-02-02 23:01 UndeadCapulet: 00:10:361 (1) - unrankable spinner in easy
2018-02-02 23:01 ylvy: oh is the oops
2018-02-02 23:03 ylvy: i guess ill get rid of it
2018-02-02 23:03 ylvy: or idk
2018-02-02 23:04 ylvy: its only 4 beats long
2018-02-02 23:04 ylvy: after changes
2018-02-02 23:04 UndeadCapulet: dont use a spinner then ww
2018-02-02 23:07 ylvy: well i got rid of it but bugged update now i guess
2018-02-02 23:13 UndeadCapulet: uh
2018-02-02 23:13 UndeadCapulet: put some objects there
2018-02-02 23:13 UndeadCapulet: then i'll bubble
2018-02-02 23:17 ylvy: updated uwuwuwuwu


normal has a big change in ds but its still rly easy to approach for a normal-level player and fitting to the violin intro, i have no issue with it
Topic Starter
ylvy
<3
Sinnoh
Not even going to bother with subjective issues

General
  1. Having only one hitsound every two measures doesn't provide enough feedback. Even with adding new ones after Mir, it's still not enough.
    Your current hitsound pattern is only following highlights on small sounds. The issue is that these sounds are really infrequent and have little indication of the beat or rhythm of the song. This issue is most noticeable on hard where rhythm density is high, but isn't dense enough to support some of the hitsounds used on insane. You can reference one of the many other ranked sets for this song to get an idea of what hitsound patterns could be added.
  2. Why are all the difficulty settings at random numbers? There's really no point to it, and only makes it harder to judge the difficulty of a map. Simplify your settings so that they're easy enough to understand at a glance.
Easy
  1. The whole map is only made of sliders. Aiming and following many sliders is tiring for new players.
  2. 00:05:634 (2,3,1) - It's difficult for new players to follow sliders when their tail is closer to the previous object than the head. They still have trouble recognising the difference between heads and tails, which causes difficulty and confusion when trying to read distance snap.
  3. 00:09:998 (1,2,1) - Distance snap is at 1.4x, don't break distance snap on easy, and don't go over 1.2x
  4. 00:11:452 (2,1) - Don't overlap slider heads with other objects, they can cause reading issues
  5. 00:12:907 (1) - This slider shape is unreasonably complicated for an easy. New players are still trying to figure out how sliders work, don't make it more complicated for them with slider shapes like this. Change the slider body so it has a less sharp angle
  6. 00:12:907 (1,2) - Again with the first point, try and keep slider heads closer to the previous object than slider tails. New players will confuse the two. Applies for anywhere else this is.
Normal
  1. Distance snap is all over the place. Remove all new combos, then check distance snap in aimod again. It's a normal, stick to distance snap.
  2. Distance snap is at 2.0x during the second half, which is well beyond the guideline of 1.3x. It might be fine playability wise, but the contrast between spacing and slider velocity is unreasonable. It will confuse new players because distance time is entirely based on the relationship between SV and spacing. Raise your slider velocity and lower your spacing, normal players are still learning distance snap.
  3. 00:17:271 (1,2,3,4,1) - 00:23:089 (1,2,3,4,1) - 00:28:907 (1,2,3,4,1) - 00:34:725 (1,2,3,4,1) - Note density should consist of mostly 1/1 and occasional 1/2 rhythm. All of those sections have 1/2 rhythm go on for a whole measure. Regardless of whether it's passive or active rhythm, it's too hard for a normal player. Reduce note density to follow more 1/1 rhythms.

This set still needs a lot of work. I would also suggest that you have a read of osu's ranking criteria before getting more mods, as many basic issues here could have been prevented by reading it. Need to veto since I don't really trust UC renominating after it was bubbled with the issues above.
Spork Lover
Heyo :) - Here with a quick irc I did with ylvy

TL;DR:

I raised my concern regarding the veto, and what parts I agreed and didn't agree with. (In short, I find most parts of the normal diff to be a subjective manner)

On the Easy, I agreed with most of what Sinnoh raised awareness of (not that it's unrankable tho), and gave my own opinion of it in the irc below.

What we fixed:

On the easy, the vast majority of the slidertail reading sections have been removed. I asked about adding density on the easy, which he didn't agree to due to intuitive rhythm and the like.

On the normal, we changed many reverse arrow grid positions, as they would cause issues for newer players trying the diff out.

On the hard and insane, we did some small changes/raised awareness of a few things, but didn't change too much

13:18 Spork Lover: yo - i'm just here to say that the DS rule/guideline thing sinnoh mentions on your point doesn't apply anymore regarding being "forced" to constantly distance snap
13:18 Spork Lover: i liked the non-DS related concept your normal used
13:18 Spork Lover: they mention it as a guideline on easies, but not normals
13:19 ylvy: ah, thanks ;w;
13:19 ylvy: im in the middle of writing the response post rn lol
13:19 Spork Lover: imo his veto is a little extreme
13:19 Spork Lover: lmfao
13:19 ylvy: :V
13:19 Spork Lover: i understand his concerns on the easy
13:20 Spork Lover: 'cause it can be hard to read
13:20 Spork Lover: but your normal is imo fine
13:20 ylvy: ah
13:20 Spork Lover: it's low BPM, so the 1/2 rhythm thing isn't really too problematic
13:21 Spork Lover: the 2.0x distance snap isn't on consecutive notes, so it depends on subjectivity
13:21 Spork Lover: imo it's intuitive
13:21 Spork Lover: the "distance snap all over the place" doesn't matter, 'cause new players don't have a ruler
13:21 Spork Lover: if it's slight differences, it's not a problem
13:21 ylvy: lol exactly
13:22 ylvy: as long as it's presented as just comprehensibly as it would be if distance snap were used, it shouldnt be a problem
13:22 Spork Lover: I agree with his slidertail issues on the easy diff
13:22 Spork Lover: 'cause that's a reading pattern
13:22 Spork Lover: but the normal is good
13:23 Spork Lover: an idea on the easy that you could do
13:23 Spork Lover: is add a single tap between the original sliders
13:23 Spork Lover: like 00:05:271 - here
13:24 Spork Lover: would also make the spread seem more reasonable to most
13:24 Spork Lover: and then make sure the sliderend isn't close to the previous slider like it is here 00:04:180 (1,2) -
13:25 ylvy: hmm i feel the difference in click density would be a bit large compared to sections like 00:14:361 (2,1) -
13:25 Spork Lover: https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/10166340 random idea
13:25 ylvy: cause there isnt anything i can do to make that more dense
13:25 Spork Lover: yeah i get that
13:26 Spork Lover: 00:13:998 - this is a note possibility
13:26 Spork Lover: you don't need to do 2/1 breaks 'cause the song is only 165 BPM
13:26 Spork Lover: the guidelines are used for songs at ~180 bpm, and then apply common sense to other maps at higher/lower
13:27 ylvy: im kinda aiming for this to be the least dense as possible, the 2/1 breaks help make it more comfortable to play the sliders as the angle of entry isnt always that intuitive
13:27 Spork Lover: hmm
13:27 Spork Lover: aight
13:29 ylvy: as for the slidertails being closer than their heads, the whole diff kinda treats sliders like individual entities rather than having a smooth path to follow from one to the other
13:30 ylvy: so i dont think its too much of an issue as it conditions players to look at sliders individually rather than a path
13:31 Spork Lover: I think giving this diff to new players will give you an idea of how they would play it
13:31 Spork Lover: 'cause I can imagine this tripping up several
13:33 Spork Lover: 00:01:271 (1,2,1) - all of this is perfectly fine for example
13:33 Spork Lover: 'cause there's no sliderend issues
13:33 Spork Lover: 00:08:543 (1,1) - same with this
13:34 Spork Lover: 00:09:998 (1,2) - the reason why new players struggle on these things, is because they see the sliderends being really close to each other visually, making them click too early
13:35 Spork Lover: 'cause the "individual entry" thing makes sense to me, but I don't think new players think of them the same way
13:36 ylvy: yeah, when you put it that way makes more sense to me :V
13:37 ylvy: i dont think ill change 00:04:180 (1,2,3) - but ill change 00:09:998 (1,2) -
13:37 Spork Lover: https://i.imgur.com/UpERZLz.jpg
13:37 Spork Lover: here's a funny idea if you want one
13:38 ylvy: :p yeah, ill put something along those lines
13:38 ylvy: 00:17:271 (2) - i dont think ill change the slider shape but ill play around with the placement a little
13:39 ylvy: cause that slider tail points straight to the next slidertail
13:39 Spork Lover: 00:21:634 (1,2,1) - from an aesthetics stand-point, the visual distance is veeery broad
13:39 Spork Lover: compared to most of the map
13:39 Spork Lover: 00:18:725 (1,2,1) - 'cause in places like this you have visual equally on all 3 notes
13:39 Spork Lover: which looks pretty decent
13:40 Spork Lover: https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/10166463
13:40 Spork Lover: here's an idea that brings it to life
13:40 Spork Lover: i didn't change any of your shapes
13:40 Spork Lover: the "invisible one" is the one with the sharp angle
13:41 ylvy: i think having it broad helps for a more impactful transition into 00:24:543 as it's a new section
13:41 Spork Lover: 00:24:543 (1) - just give it a bit more spacing
13:41 ylvy: the movement here is less "momentum-breaking" than the other parts so i think it fits to have it the same way visually
13:41 Spork Lover: while it's an easy, since you have a diff that doesn't follow distance snap
13:41 Spork Lover: i feel this diff could do the same
13:42 Spork Lover: on very strong points
13:42 ylvy: alright
13:42 Spork Lover: just make sure you're consistent in doing that
13:42 Spork Lover: x]
13:42 Spork Lover: so it's not only in that one location
13:42 Spork Lover: 00:05:634 (2,3) - technically this spacing could be higher with the logic
13:43 Spork Lover: 00:07:089 (3) - and at the same time a different shape on this would make sense 'cause it's a downbeat
13:43 Spork Lover: 00:07:089 (3,1) - make it connected to this somehow
13:43 ylvy: well tbh im not sure there's anywhere else as deserving of larger spacing so it i think ill keep it the same
13:43 Spork Lover: 00:11:452 (2,1) - higher spacing
13:43 Spork Lover: this part would for sure
13:43 Spork Lover: 'cause it's the transition to the kiai
13:44 Spork Lover: "kiai"
13:44 ylvy: well i feel that part would be more suited for a normal spacing as the entry of the violins is quite soft
13:44 ylvy: lol kiai
13:44 Spork Lover: kiai is meme
13:44 Spork Lover: c:
13:44 ylvy: yeah i think my previous arrange there was kinda stupid
13:44 ylvy: :V
13:45 Spork Lover: overlaps in general on easies is pretty controversial
13:45 Spork Lover: (background: i'm a gimmick mapper)
13:45 Spork Lover: it's all i do XD
13:45 ylvy: lol
13:45 ylvy: gonna get rid of that overlap
13:45 Spork Lover: i made a CS2.5 hard for one of my friends earlier
13:45 Spork Lover: with SV changes and odd overlaps
13:45 Spork Lover: lmfao
13:45 ylvy: lol ok
13:46 Spork Lover: i love that stuff
13:46 Spork Lover: while still staying within the ranking criteria
13:46 ylvy: that kind of stuff sounds fun to play
13:47 Spork Lover: lemme give some opinions on the normal
13:47 Spork Lover: since it's being discussed about as well on the forum
13:47 ylvy: alright
13:47 Spork Lover: 00:09:998 - everything from here and before it is good
13:47 Spork Lover: 00:13:998 (3,1) - because the reverse arrow is closer than the note itself, the transition can feel a little tough
13:48 Spork Lover: 00:13:998 (3,2) - as well as this overlap
13:48 Spork Lover: reverse arrow is closer than the sliderstart*
13:48 Spork Lover: is what I mean
13:48 Spork Lover: it's a bit like the slidertail thing on the easy
13:48 ylvy: yeah, agreed
13:49 Spork Lover: https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/10166543
13:49 Spork Lover: 00:15:089 (2) - the sliderend logic would apply here too
13:49 Spork Lover: 00:16:907 (3,1) - same
13:50 Spork Lover: lemme give a full fleshed pattern here so you don't have to change much
13:50 Spork Lover: for this one
13:50 Spork Lover: https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/10166557
13:50 Spork Lover: https://i.imgur.com/MMZ9EQl.jpg
13:51 Spork Lover: donno why it doesn't wanna upload more than 1 screenshot at a time
13:51 Spork Lover: zz
13:51 ylvy: uwu
13:51 Spork Lover: 00:23:089 (1,2,3) - this one should be okay I think (?) 'cause players are used to the rhythm by now
13:51 Spork Lover: 00:25:634 (3,1) - same with this, it's a really tiny difference
13:52 Spork Lover: 00:25:998 (1,2) - this is a little too much though I think
13:52 Spork Lover: https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/10166567 this would've made it make more sense, yet it would require a lot of changing
13:53 Spork Lover: 00:31:816 (1,2,3,1) - you actually do it here LUL
13:53 Spork Lover: xd
13:53 Spork Lover: didn't even realize
13:53 ylvy: honestly i feel like by 00:25:998 - the player should be super used to just aiming the sliderheads
13:53 ylvy: but for the earlier ones ill make adjustments
13:54 Spork Lover: 00:34:725 (1,2) - spacing might be a tad too high here 'cause there's two single taps afterwards
13:54 Spork Lover: just make it the 2,1-2,2x ish that you normally have
13:55 ylvy: you mean from 00:34:362 (3) - to 00:34:725 (1) - ?
13:55 ylvy: or between 1 and 2
13:55 Spork Lover: 1 and 2
13:55 ylvy: sure
13:55 Spork Lover: https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/10166589
13:55 Spork Lover: just slightly lower
13:56 ylvy: yeah, done
13:56 Spork Lover: :ok_hand:
13:57 Spork Lover: 00:23:816 (1,2,3) - on hard, two sliders might be less awkward
13:57 Spork Lover: or make a 4 note thing with spacing
13:57 Spork Lover: https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/10166598
13:58 Spork Lover: since this is the kind of emphasis you seem to be wanting in this section
13:58 Spork Lover: 00:33:089 (4,1) - anti-flow might not be the best idea
13:59 Spork Lover: apart from that it seems gucci
13:59 ylvy: i kind of want the spacing difference in playing 00:23:816 (1,2,3) - to jumping to 00:24:543 (1) - to be harsher so it's more emphasised
14:00 Spork Lover: 00:33:089 (4,1) - on insane, switch NC since this is the only time you do this
14:00 Spork Lover: makes the downbeat stand out
14:00 Spork Lover: 00:37:271 - you can keep going I think
14:00 Spork Lover: for like 2 more sliders
14:00 ylvy: still on the hard i think these 00:33:089 (4,1) - are okay as i switch a lot between different spacings to separate phrases more clearly
14:01 ylvy: for nc swap to 00:33:089 (4,1) - , its part of 00:32:543 (1,2,3,4) - as a pattern so i dont think it would work
14:02 Spork Lover: true - seems like unfair reading to me xd
14:02 Spork Lover: the way it is now
14:02 Spork Lover: tho
14:02 Spork Lover: the overlaps add intuitive reading
14:02 Spork Lover: 'cause you do it all the time
14:03 ylvy: not sure what you're talking about xd, lost track of the convo
14:03 Spork Lover: 00:33:452 (1) - people will think this is the downbeat because the slider isn't NC'ed
14:04 Spork Lover: is pretty much it xd
14:04 Spork Lover: and 00:37:271 - you can go on for two more sliders here if you wanna be quirky
14:04 ylvy: let me just finish getting my responses together lol and you can post log for kd
14:05 ylvy: i prefer ending the map here, since im not decreasing spacing between sliders i think the arrange would start feeling a bit harsh for the volume
14:06 Spork Lover: you can rotate the sliderends a bit clockwise so it feels like anti-flow
14:06 Spork Lover: https://i.imgur.com/2H6Bbs4.png
14:08 ylvy: id prefer it to be a bit more weakfeeling for a better ending experience
14:08 Spork Lover: it's aight
14:08 Spork Lover: xd
14:08 Spork Lover: just suggestions c:
14:08 Spork Lover: question: why is the tickrate 2
14:08 Spork Lover: :thinking:
14:08 ylvy: oh lol
14:08 ylvy: from my first mod from UndeadCapulet
14:09 ylvy: he suggested it as the rest is all 1/2 rhythms
14:09 ylvy: im kinda on the fence on how i feel about that
14:09 Spork Lover: i disagree with it, it seems forced
14:09 Spork Lover: xd
14:09 ylvy: yeah, ill put it back at 1
14:09 Spork Lover: it's a calm song
14:10 Spork Lover: and you talk a lot about wanting anti-flow and smooth ends
14:10 Spork Lover: so having really slow sliders with slider-tick-rate 2 is odd to me
14:11 ylvy: yeah, and i think tick 1 works better cause all the sliders' paths in here are all super easy and smooth
14:11 ylvy: thanks!
14:11 Spork Lover: no worries <3
14:11 ylvy: is that all and did i forget to respond to anything
14:11 Spork Lover: shiguma told me about sinnoh's veto and I just felt like i'd help out
14:11 Spork Lover: x]
14:11 Spork Lover: and nah i don't think you skipped anything
14:12 Spork Lover: lol
14:12 ylvy: ah :V
14:12 ylvy: well im not a very good modder but if you ever have anything then feel free to ask!
14:13 Spork Lover: nah it's just 'cause I want to c:
14:13 Spork Lover: if you have something you want me to playtest, feel free
14:13 Spork Lover: whenever c:
14:13 ylvy: alright, thanks for all the help! <3
14:13 ylvy: chatlogs for kd now i guess
UndeadCapulet
would be awesome if bn's didn't spread misinformation to upcoming mappers

Sinnoh wrote:

General
  1. Having only one hitsound every two measures doesn't provide enough feedback. Even with adding new ones after Mir, it's still not enough.
    Your current hitsound pattern is only following highlights on small sounds. The issue is that these sounds are really infrequent and have little indication of the beat or rhythm of the song. This issue is most noticeable on hard where rhythm density is high, but isn't dense enough to support some of the hitsounds used on insane. You can reference one of the many other ranked sets for this song to get an idea of what hitsound patterns could be added. there is nothing wrong with the current hitsounding, this song is a quiet ambient track, highlighting the song's certain notable beats makes perfect sense and definitely provides a nice hitsounding experience here
Easy
  1. The whole map is only made of sliders. Aiming and following many sliders is tiring for new players. this song is 36 seconds long and this diff has plenty of 2/1 gaps, no player is going to tire from playing this difficulty. yes maybe a circle or two would be nice, but before reciting a guideline from rc, please think about whether the guideline actually applies
  2. 00:05:634 (2,3,1) - It's difficult for new players to follow sliders when their tail is closer to the previous object than the head. They still have trouble recognising the difference between heads and tails, which causes difficulty and confusion when trying to read distance snap. this is definitely not true
  3. 00:09:998 (1,2,1) - Distance snap is at 1.4x, don't break distance snap on easy, and don't go over 1.2x uniform distance snap has never been required for easy diffs ever, and distance settings in general are completely irrelevent to lowdiff quality, can't believe a bn wrote this
  4. 00:11:452 (2,1) - Don't overlap slider heads with other objects, they can cause reading issues this form of overlap could not possibly cause a reading issue and has never been seen as unrankable in an easy
  5. 00:12:907 (1) - This slider shape is unreasonably complicated for an easy. New players are still trying to figure out how sliders work, don't make it more complicated for them with slider shapes like this. Change the slider body so it has a less sharp angle there is a clear sliderborder the entire time, and the body is largely a straight shot from one sliderend to the next, no player will have issue with this slider
Normal
  1. Distance snap is all over the place. Remove all new combos, then check distance snap in aimod again. It's a normal, stick to distance snap. normals have absolutely never required uniform distance snap in any sense, this is a ridiculous statement
  2. Distance snap is at 2.0x during the second half, which is well beyond the guideline of 1.3x. It might be fine playability wise, but the contrast between spacing and slider velocity is unreasonable. It will confuse new players because distance time is entirely based on the relationship between SV and spacing. Raise your slider velocity and lower your spacing, normal players are still learning distance snap. what.. if it's ok playabilitywise as you just said, that's literally all that matters, there is no need to follow some arbitrary numbers in rc guidelines set for a different bpm. no normal-level player will have issue playing this difficulty

Need to veto since I don't really trust UC renominating after it was bubbled with the issues above. this isn't how vetos work. if ylvy changes everything then i get to rebubble

Sinnoh wrote:

Not even going to bother with subjective issues you literally only pointed out subjective issues
ylvy can change things as they see fit, but there is really no reason to. instead of reading off ranking criteria guidelines like some robot, take a little bit of time to think about the difficulties
Topic Starter
ylvy
looks like UC finished his response first but

Sinnoh wrote:

Not even going to bother with subjective issues

General
  1. Having only one hitsound every two measures doesn't provide enough feedback. Even with adding new ones after Mir, it's still not enough.
    Your current hitsound pattern is only following highlights on small sounds. The issue is that these sounds are really infrequent and have little indication of the beat or rhythm of the song. This issue is most noticeable on hard where rhythm density is high, but isn't dense enough to support some of the hitsounds used on insane. You can reference one of the many other ranked sets for this song to get an idea of what hitsound patterns could be added. "Your current hitsound pattern is only following highlights on small sounds." that is exactly what the song does, though. there are no important enough points of emphasis between these special sounds, and im not going to add random hitsounds to places where they are not deserved. all objects have their sampleset hitsounds in the first place. these have sounds upon clicking and so provide feedback. i do not see why feedback is the problem here.
  2. Why are all the difficulty settings at random numbers? There's really no point to it, and only makes it harder to judge the difficulty of a map. Simplify your settings so that they're easy enough to understand at a glance. they are not random. simplifying difficulty settings just restricts you from providing what's closest to the best experience you can in gameplay. i agree that it's more annoying to read, so i changed ones that were close to whole numbers and i thought would have minimal impact.
Easy
  1. The whole map is only made of sliders. Aiming and following many sliders is tiring for new players. large gaps are given between many of the sliders, which gives players enough recovery and preparation time. sliders are lenient in accuracy, which partially removes an element of difficulty. i think this is acceptable.
  2. 00:05:634 (2,3,1) - It's difficult for new players to follow sliders when their tail is closer to the previous object than the head. They still have trouble recognising the difference between heads and tails, which causes difficulty and confusion when trying to read distance snap. irc modded with spork lover, changed some stuff but not drastically. slidershapes are the same.
  3. 00:09:998 (1,2,1) - Distance snap is at 1.4x, don't break distance snap on easy, and don't go over 1.2x saying why would be nice. guidelines are not rules
  4. 00:11:452 (2,1) - Don't overlap slider heads with other objects, they can cause reading issues irc modded with spork lover and changed it to a different softerfeeling arrange. it doesnt overlap anymore.
  5. 00:12:907 (1) - This slider shape is unreasonably complicated for an easy. New players are still trying to figure out how sliders work, don't make it more complicated for them with slider shapes like this. Change the slider body so it has a less sharp angle the sv is really low. whether they're somehow confused by the slider shape or not, they will not sliderbreak unless they decide to let go of the slider. the shape is more compact and like a pseudo-low sv, allowing for an easier transition into this section of the map.
  6. 00:12:907 (1,2) - Again with the first point, try and keep slider heads closer to the previous object than slider tails. New players will confuse the two. Applies for anywhere else this is.
Normal
  1. Distance snap is all over the place. Remove all new combos, then check distance snap in aimod again. It's a normal, stick to distance snap. ? its okay not to distance snap as long as its just as comprehensible and playable without distance snap. if you could point out specific sections where this would genuinely cause issues for a normal level player, then that would be a lot more helpful.
  2. Distance snap is at 2.0x during the second half, which is well beyond the guideline of 1.3x. It might be fine playability wise, but the contrast between spacing and slider velocity is unreasonable. It will confuse new players because distance time is entirely based on the relationship between SV and spacing. Raise your slider velocity and lower your spacing, normal players are still learning distance snap. uhhhhhhhh the sliders throughout the whole diff, with exception of the long ones every hypermeasure are not designed to be properly followed. players will click and move on as it is the easiest and most comfortable way to play these. sv doesnt play a big role here, nerfing spacing would just result in a really underspaced diff and raising sv would just fuck up playability.
  3. 00:17:271 (1,2,3,4,1) - 00:23:089 (1,2,3,4,1) - 00:28:907 (1,2,3,4,1) - 00:34:725 (1,2,3,4,1) - Note density should consist of mostly 1/1 and occasional 1/2 rhythm. All of those sections have 1/2 rhythm go on for a whole measure. Regardless of whether it's passive or active rhythm, it's too hard for a normal player. Reduce note density to follow more 1/1 rhythms. the whole difficulty is designed around 1/2 rhythms. the difficulty gap between these full measure 1/2s and everything else is not high. all these sections also have a beat's timing gap before them to ease the player in and allow them to prepare. the player should not have very much issue with these unless they are having issues all of the rest of the map.
    in that case, they are not ready for the difficulty as a whole.


This set still needs a lot of work. I would also suggest that you have a read of osu's ranking criteria before getting more mods, as many basic issues here could have been prevented by reading it. Need to veto since I don't really trust UC renominating after it was bubbled with the issues above. Need to veto
what i originally said was kinda rude
Mir

Sinnoh wrote:

Not even going to bother with subjective issues

General
  1. Having only one hitsound every two measures doesn't provide enough feedback. Even with adding new ones after Mir, it's still not enough.
    Your current hitsound pattern is only following highlights on small sounds. The issue is that these sounds are really infrequent and have little indication of the beat or rhythm of the song. This issue is most noticeable on hard where rhythm density is high, but isn't dense enough to support some of the hitsounds used on insane. You can reference one of the many other ranked sets for this song to get an idea of what hitsound patterns could be added. Honestly what more can you do without killing the ambience of the song? The ranked versions use a lot of different hitsounds and it sort of puts undue emphasis on them than complimenting the song. I'm already satisfied with what was added, so I don't see an issue with this.
  2. Why are all the difficulty settings at random numbers? There's really no point to it, and only makes it harder to judge the difficulty of a map. Simplify your settings so that they're easy enough to understand at a glance. This is a subjective issue.
Easy
  1. The whole map is only made of sliders. Aiming and following many sliders is tiring for new players. Imo, it's not entirely bad since there's a lot of rhythm gaps to recover from playing those sliders. The guideline is mainly for constantly using sliders in a row like https://i.imgur.com/utrGvT5.png but current rhythm 00:04:180 (1,2,3) - or 00:15:816 (1,2,1,2) - definitely do not cause as much strain.
  2. 00:05:634 (2,3,1) - It's difficult for new players to follow sliders when their tail is closer to the previous object than the head. They still have trouble recognising the difference between heads and tails, which causes difficulty and confusion when trying to read distance snap. This simply isn't true, the only way a slider could cause that much confusion is if this were done: https://i.imgur.com/KO0IX1z.png or https://i.imgur.com/3FaVkyL.png since the reverse arrow could be mistaken for where to start the slider.
  3. 00:09:998 (1,2,1) - Distance snap is at 1.4x, don't break distance snap on easy, and don't go over 1.2x I assume this was fixed in the latest update.
  4. 00:11:452 (2,1) - Don't overlap slider heads with other objects, they can cause reading issues. Head and tail are both clearly visible by the time the previous slider is complete, I doubt this would be an issue at all.
  5. 00:12:907 (1) - This slider shape is unreasonably complicated for an easy. New players are still trying to figure out how sliders work, don't make it more complicated for them with slider shapes like this. Change the slider body so it has a less sharp angle. This is irrelevant, players can read that this has a small bump in it and the sliderbody is pretty visible for the duration. I wouldn't call this an issue either.
  6. 00:12:907 (1,2) - Again with the first point, try and keep slider heads closer to the previous object than slider tails. New players will confuse the two. Applies for anywhere else this is.
Normal
  1. Distance snap is all over the place. Remove all new combos, then check distance snap in aimod again. It's a normal, stick to distance snap. Since when? Normals never required DS to be 100% strict. https://i.imgur.com/ALaeGAB.png - from what I can see, the diff itself does use time-distance equality - not precise, but it is a thing. The second kiai is a little bit of a spike but there is an Easy below and Normal players should be able to read this. I would know, I did a similar thing before: https://osu.ppy.sh/b/1445845
  2. Distance snap is at 2.0x during the second half, which is well beyond the guideline of 1.3x. It might be fine playability wise, but the contrast between spacing and slider velocity is unreasonable. It will confuse new players because distance time is entirely based on the relationship between SV and spacing. Raise your slider velocity and lower your spacing, normal players are still learning distance snap. To be honest,
    this doesn't even look that bad. I wouldn't call it unreasonable.
    What I would suggest is raising SV slightly, though. It does feel a little sluggish. (maybe 1.1-1.2x?)
  3. 00:17:271 (1,2,3,4,1) - 00:23:089 (1,2,3,4,1) - 00:28:907 (1,2,3,4,1) - 00:34:725 (1,2,3,4,1) - Note density should consist of mostly 1/1 and occasional 1/2 rhythm. All of those sections have 1/2 rhythm go on for a whole measure. Regardless of whether it's passive or active rhythm, it's too hard for a normal player. Reduce note density to follow more 1/1 rhythms. There's an easy below this so this point really confuses me. The density seems totally fine here. There are 1/1 gaps every so often sooo.. this seems fine. If you really wanted to lower density though,
    ylvy, try removing notes like 00:29:452 (2) - etc.

This set still needs a lot of work. I would also suggest that you have a read of osu's ranking criteria before getting more mods, as many basic issues here could have been prevented by reading it. Need to veto since I don't really trust UC renominating after it was bubbled with the issues above.
Idk, this is a little bit of a questionable veto. The diffs in themselves don't actually cause the problems you claim they do and guidelines are just that - guidelines. They don't have to be followed, and in this map I don't feel like adhering to the guidelines would make it better, it would just take away from the intent of the mapper and the inherent challenge through its uniqueness.

Imho it would definitely be worth reconsidering your points, Sinnoh. While these would normally considered problematic, this song is both lower than the bpm these guidelines were formed around, and more predictable than many tracks (which should aid reading on lower diffs since players get "into the groove" or whatever).

One thing tho on Easy:
00:07:089 (3,1) - should these be swapped since 00:04:180 (1) - is nc'd?

Might be better overall to nc every hypermeasure (4 big white ticks) since the density is so low. Up to you though, isn't that big of a deal but that one nc should probably be swapped.

If you decide to raise the SV of the normal slightly during the latter bit of the map I can probably rebubble this (since I intended to anyways).
Topic Starter
ylvy

Mir wrote:

One thing tho on Easy:
00:07:089 (3,1) - should these be swapped since 00:04:180 (1) - is nc'd? want 00:04:180 (1,2,3) to be grouped as its all part of one pattern which follows chime melody
Nao Tomori
mmm..
normal -
00:08:543 (4,5) - i think these ones are gonna be confusing. if you look at all the other patterns with 1/1 they use clearly different visual spacing to 1/2 but this pattern always uses the same visual spacing that is used for 1/2 later in the map. i feel like a lot of normal players would instinctively just play it as a 1/2 gap since it comes out of a slider end as well. if you watch some replays of actual normal level players then this is the kind of thing that they would definitely fuck up...
so basically i suggest https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/10167335 or something where it is much more clear through visual spacing.
00:17:271 (1) - i agree this one phrase is a bit weirdly dense since it has 6 1/2 gaps in a row and most of the other patterns have 4. combined with use of repeats and stuff it might be a bit challenging...
but its also the "climax" of the song and there's an easy and it's low bpm so it isnt a huge issue. deleting notes like 00:18:543 (4) - works well to resolve this.

easy-
00:07:089 (3,1,1) - this looks kinda bad! you can adjust the visual spacing so that it looks nicer! (even it out)

i do think changing some of the 2/1 sliders into circles would be more interesting.. but still, having sliders is more soothing or whatever and the song is pretty calm...

yea dunno why this was popped lol none of this is actually unrankable..?
Spork Lover
I did a similar suggestion in 00:07:089 (3,1) on the easy diff, where I talked about changing the slider on (3) to a different shape and switching NC, which I forgot the reply to xd I do agree that it's kinda unintuitive as it currently is xd
show more
Please sign in to reply.

New reply