forum

chano & 40mP - Natsukoi Hanabi

posted
Total Posts
224
show more
Ashton
extra:
00:09:841 (2,3) - 00:10:411 (4,5) - these two sets of notes shouldn't have the same spacing as it's confusing. 00:09:841 (2,3) - these set of notes should be lesser spaced than 00:10:031 (3,4) - these
00:12:879 (2,3) - this should have consistent spacing with 00:15:917 (2,3) - this, there's no difference musically in them and it doesn't make sense you emphasize one and leave the other out
00:19:525 (4,5) - emphasis here but not 00:20:854 (3,4) - here? if you're going to emphasize the piano, do it consistently
00:31:107 (2,1) - why is there no emphasis here when there is 00:31:867 (3,1) - here? again, problems with consistency when it comes to spacing
00:37:942 (5,6) - no spacing emphasis for the raise in vocal pitch here, yet you do it 00:35:854 (7) - here?
00:43:259 (2,1) - same thing applies here with this and 00:44:019 (3,1) - and this
01:08:133 (6,7) - the song doesn't justify such a large spacing emphasis
01:12:310 (1,2) - it doesn't make sense to have the spacing so large here
01:21:613 (5,6) - would sound better if it was a 1/2 slider
01:24:082 (1,1,2,3) - nazi suggestion, but this overlap is super messy
01:26:361 (2,3) - this should have consistent spacing with 01:27:120 (2,3) - this and 01:27:879 (2,3) - this

that's all, i think this difficulty isn't ready to be ranked yet due to all these inconsistencies.

The other difficulties look fine to me :)
good luck!
Topic Starter
Net0

Neko-san da wrote:

highest difficulty:

that's all, i think this difficulty isn't ready to be ranked yet due to all these inconsistencies. Your timestamps makes no sense to me when I get their link into Mun's Extra, are you sure you're modding the correct difficulty? For instance the suggestion about using a 1/2 slider when his diff is currently using a 1/2 slider

The other difficulties look fine to me :) Thanks
good luck!
Ashton
edit: my bad, i meant the second hardest difficulty
Topic Starter
Net0

Neko-san da wrote:

extra:
00:09:841 (2,3) - 00:10:411 (4,5) - these two sets of notes shouldn't have the same spacing as it's confusing. 00:09:841 (2,3) - these set of notes should be lesser spaced than 00:10:031 (3,4) - theseThey don't, we can use the same spacing for different rhythm gaps in extra diffs if we want to explore the reading aspect in a pattern
00:12:879 (2,3) - this should have consistent spacing with 00:15:917 (2,3) - this, there's no difference musically in them and it doesn't make sense you emphasize one and leave the other outThey don't, different pattern 00:12:499 (1,2,3) - and 00:15:537 (1,2,3) - so I also changed the spacing idea
00:19:525 (4,5) - emphasis here but not 00:20:854 (3,4) - here? if you're going to emphasize the piano, do it consistently Emphasis can be done with flow, not only spacing, that's why they're different because in the song and map the rhythm is also distinct
00:31:107 (2,1) - why is there no emphasis here when there is 00:31:867 (3,1) - here? again, problems with consistency when it comes to spacing Because the song is building up in intensity and I'm also doing that with the difficulty of the pattern
00:37:942 (5,6) - no spacing emphasis for the raise in vocal pitch here, yet you do it 00:35:854 (7) - here?Do you only emphasize your maps with spacing? I don't do only that sorry, the repeat and the break of the moviment are the emphasis I did for the song there
00:43:259 (2,1) - same thing applies here with this and 00:44:019 (3,1) - and this^
01:08:133 (6,7) - the song doesn't justify such a large spacing emphasisSnare sound mate
01:12:310 (1,2) - it doesn't make sense to have the spacing so large hereLarge spacing? Look at this again wtf; https://puu.sh/AwQ5W.png
01:21:613 (5,6) - would sound better if it was a 1/2 slidernot at all since the single notes contrast a lot with the 1/2 slider I used for the snare hit
01:24:082 (1,1,2,3) - nazi suggestion, but this overlap is super messy https://puu.sh/AwQ7x.png Parallel sliders, using a square in the middle everything done with geometry, sorry if it's not your taste but it is not messy
01:26:361 (2,3) - this should have consistent spacing with 01:27:120 (2,3) - this and 01:27:879 (2,3) - this There's no consistent spacing going with the 1-2 here's they're constantly changing directions and increasing in intensity and difficulty

that's all, i think this difficulty isn't ready to be ranked yet due to all these inconsistencies. I think it's good enough, thanks for checking the map

The other difficulties look fine to me :)
good luck!
Ashton

Net0 wrote:

Neko-san da wrote:

extra:
00:12:879 (2,3) - this should have consistent spacing with 00:15:917 (2,3) - this, there's no difference musically in them and it doesn't make sense you emphasize one and leave the other outThey don't, different pattern 00:12:499 (1,2,3) - and 00:15:537 (1,2,3) - so I also changed the spacing idea Thats the problem, it makes it inconsistent. Choose one pattern and keep consistent with it, don't mix it up unless the song is A) super redundant or B) the song justifies a change
00:19:525 (4,5) - emphasis here but not 00:20:854 (3,4) - here? if you're going to emphasize the piano, do it consistently Emphasis can be done with flow, not only spacing, that's why they're different because in the song and map the rhythm is also distinct
00:31:107 (2,1) - why is there no emphasis here when there is 00:31:867 (3,1) - here? again, problems with consistency when it comes to spacing Because the song is building up in intensity and I'm also doing that with the difficulty of the pattern
00:37:942 (5,6) - no spacing emphasis for the raise in vocal pitch here, yet you do it 00:35:854 (7) - here?Do you only emphasize your maps with spacing? I don't do only that sorry, the repeat and the break of the moviment are the emphasis I did for the song there No, but if you're going to use spacing as the method to emphasize vocals changing it up mid map only creates inconsistencies.
00:43:259 (2,1) - same thing applies here with this and 00:44:019 (3,1) - and this^
01:08:133 (6,7) - the song doesn't justify such a large spacing emphasisSnare sound mate
01:12:310 (1,2) - it doesn't make sense to have the spacing so large hereLarge spacing? Look at this again wtf; https://puu.sh/AwQ5W.png
01:21:613 (5,6) - would sound better if it was a 1/2 slidernot at all since the single notes contrast a lot with the 1/2 slider I used for the snare hit fair enough
01:24:082 (1,1,2,3) - nazi suggestion, but this overlap is super messy https://puu.sh/AwQ7x.png Parallel sliders, using a square in the middle everything done with geometry, sorry if it's not your taste but it is not messy Nobody plays that close attention to detail when playing a map, aesthetics are supposed to look nice without having to be explained why the pattern isn't messy. again, nazi suggestion i wouldn't say it's the biggest thing in the mapset.
01:26:361 (2,3) - this should have consistent spacing with 01:27:120 (2,3) - this and 01:27:879 (2,3) - this There's no consistent spacing going with the 1-2 here's they're constantly changing directions and increasing in intensity and difficulty The problem is inconsistency, 01:26:361 (2,3) - Here is 2.4x spacing with no justification, yet 01:27:120 (2,3) - here and 01:27:880 (2,3) - here is 1.7x spacing. if you're emphasizing the vocal 01:26:550 (3) - here, then also emphasize it 01:27:310 (3) - here, 01:28:069 (3) - and here.

that's all, i think this difficulty isn't ready to be ranked yet due to all these inconsistencies. I think it's good enough, thanks for checking the map

The other difficulties look fine to me :)
good luck!
looking through your map again i see more issues:

00:15:917 (2,3,4) - these should have exact spacing, 00:15:917 (2,3) - if you're going to emphasize this but not 00:16:487 (4) - this it only makes it inconsistent. and no, you dont emphasize it with 'flow'.


01:15:727 (4,5) - yes there is a snare but why is the emphasis 3.10x when othert times you've emphasized the snare hit you only did 2.4x? (specifically,01:08:322 (7) - here and 01:17:436 (5) - here)

01:18:765 (5,6) - these notes shouldn't be emphasized when the song is in a decrescendo?
01:28:639 (2,3) - the song doesn't justify the spacing emphasis
Topic Starter
Net0

Neko-san da wrote:

extra:
00:12:879 (2,3) - this should have consistent spacing with 00:15:917 (2,3) - this, there's no difference musically in them and it doesn't make sense you emphasize one and leave the other outThey don't, different pattern 00:12:499 (1,2,3) - and 00:15:537 (1,2,3) - so I also changed the spacing idea Thats the problem, it makes it inconsistent. Choose one pattern and keep consistent with it, don't mix it up unless the song is A) super redundant or B) the song justifies a changeThat's boring
00:19:525 (4,5) - emphasis here but not 00:20:854 (3,4) - here? if you're going to emphasize the piano, do it consistently Emphasis can be done with flow, not only spacing, that's why they're different because in the song and map the rhythm is also distinct
00:31:107 (2,1) - why is there no emphasis here when there is 00:31:867 (3,1) - here? again, problems with consistency when it comes to spacing Because the song is building up in intensity and I'm also doing that with the difficulty of the pattern
00:37:942 (5,6) - no spacing emphasis for the raise in vocal pitch here, yet you do it 00:35:854 (7) - here?Do you only emphasize your maps with spacing? I don't do only that sorry, the repeat and the break of the moviment are the emphasis I did for the song there No, but if you're going to use spacing as the method to emphasize vocals changing it up mid map only creates inconsistencies.Again, I'm just using different methods that's not wrong and you're basically trying to force me map with your idea of spacing and I don't like your idea
00:43:259 (2,1) - same thing applies here with this and 00:44:019 (3,1) - and this^
01:08:133 (6,7) - the song doesn't justify such a large spacing emphasisSnare sound mate
01:12:310 (1,2) - it doesn't make sense to have the spacing so large hereLarge spacing? Look at this again wtf; https://puu.sh/AwQ5W.png
01:21:613 (5,6) - would sound better if it was a 1/2 slidernot at all since the single notes contrast a lot with the 1/2 slider I used for the snare hit fair enough
01:24:082 (1,1,2,3) - nazi suggestion, but this overlap is super messy https://puu.sh/AwQ7x.png Parallel sliders, using a square in the middle everything done with geometry, sorry if it's not your taste but it is not messy Nobody plays that close attention to detail when playing a map, aesthetics are supposed to look nice without having to be explained why the pattern isn't messy. again, nazi suggestion i wouldn't say it's the biggest thing in the mapset.Aesthetic is done in the details and is not supposed to be noticed in gameplay, then why are you saying it's messy in a mapping perspective? You didn't understand the pattern and now that I actually HAD to explain it you're coming up with a lame excuse that makes no sense
01:26:361 (2,3) - this should have consistent spacing with 01:27:120 (2,3) - this and 01:27:879 (2,3) - this There's no consistent spacing going with the 1-2 here's they're constantly changing directions and increasing in intensity and difficulty The problem is inconsistency, 01:26:361 (2,3) - Here is 2.4x spacing with no justification, yet 01:27:120 (2,3) - here and 01:27:880 (2,3) - here is 1.7x spacing. if you're emphasizing the vocal 01:26:550 (3) - here, then also emphasize it 01:27:310 (3) - here, 01:28:069 (3) - and here.The problem is you not understand why I made things distinct when I did them different and why they're similar when I've done them similar, same flow idea 01:25:411 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - change in direction 01:26:930 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - that's why I modified the spacing in that transition

that's all, i think this difficulty isn't ready to be ranked yet due to all these inconsistencies. I think it's good enough, thanks for checking the map

The other difficulties look fine to me :)
good luck!
looking through your map again i see more issues:

00:15:917 (2,3,4) - these should have exact spacing (I don't use exact same spacing anywhere in the diff, it's mostly free handed mapping), 00:15:917 (2,3) - if you're going to emphasize this but not 00:16:487 (4) - this it only makes it inconsistent. and no, you dont emphasize it with 'flow'. I don't reply comments that are made with irony, that's against the Code of Conduct and unless you make your points in a serious way I can't reply them


01:15:727 (4,5) - yes there is a snare but why is the emphasis 3.10x when othert times you've emphasized the snare hit you only did 2.4x? Again I'm not copy pasting the entire diff(specifically,01:08:322 (7) - here and 01:17:436 (5) - here)

01:18:765 (5,6) - these notes shouldn't be emphasized when the song is in a decrescendo? 01:19:145 (7) - is the decrescendo idea
01:28:639 (2,3) - the song doesn't justify the spacing emphasis01:28:449 (1,2,3) - strong-weak-strong (big-small-big) snare-kick-snare
Ashton
Having a consistent map that makes sense does not equate to a copy pasted geometric map, you can have a super stylized map as long as it still obeys the fundamentals of mapping.

01:29:208 (5) - If you're saying the notes before this are strong-weak-strong (01:28:449 (1,2,3) - ) then why isn't 01:29:208 (5) - this emphasized, it lands on a snare

If you agree with me on a decrescendo, then why do you have the notes increasing in intensity when the a decrescendo means the song is slowing down, which should warrant less emphasis, not more.

Brushing aside my mods with "eh thats ironic and sarcastic, i'm not gonna respond to that lol" is A) is quite annoying
Topic Starter
Net0

Neko-san da wrote:

Having a consistent map that makes sense does not equate to a copy pasted geometric map, you can have a super stylized map as long as it still obeys the fundamentals of mapping.
I agree
Topic Starter
Net0

Neko-san da wrote:

Since you edit your post I have to reply again

01:29:208 (5) - If you're saying the notes before this are strong-weak-strong (01:28:449 (1,2,3) - ) then why isn't 01:29:208 (5) - this emphasized, it lands on a snare 01:28:829 (3,4,5,1,2,3) - Look at the pattern please I don't have time to teach you how 01:29:208 (5) - is being emphasized in contrast with the entire previous 1-4 jump ideas

If you agree with me on a decrescendo, then why do you have the notes increasing in intensity when the a decrescendo means the song is slowing down, which should warrant less emphasis, not more.Stop using only spacing to justify your stuff since I'm not always following your logic

Brushing aside my mods with "eh thats ironic and sarcastic, i'm not gonna respond to that lol" is A) is quite annoyingStop being toxic please
Ashton
You shouldn't be using the excuse "It's my style/logic, so it's correct". Although there's a lot of subjectivity in mapping, when there's inconsistencies that you can't explain more intricately than "I did it because I like it" it becomes an issue.

I try to mod as objectively as I can, and I see objective spacing issues with your map. In an extra difficulty one of the go to ways for emphasis should be spacing, you can try methods like "breaking the movement". The reason for this is because osu! difficulty is based on two main factors: 1)Note intensity and 2) Note spacing and possibly 3) Reading, which only applies to maps which require high concentration to patterns to do well. therefor, as an extra, your go to way for note emphasis should be increased spacing, a change in flow says "hey this note is different from the rest" whereas a change in spacing says "hey this note is more intense then the previous one".


"stop being toxic please"


Yeah, I'm the one who's toxic. I'm the one who messages someone ign to tell them off passive agressively.
Topic Starter
Net0
2018-05-31 22:43 Neko-san da: thanks for taking the time to respond to my mod! i've written a reply however, as i think you've misinterpreted some of my poitns
2018-05-31 22:57 Net0: I think you should learn mapping before trying to DQ a map you don't like
2018-05-31 22:57 Net0: there's a lot of things you tried to show knowlodge but are major mistakes of someone who don't know some stuff about mapping
2018-05-31 22:57 Net0: thanks for checking the map
2018-05-31 23:01 Neko-san da: So you'd rather have an inconsistent map than a consistent map that makes sense?
2018-05-31 23:01 Neko-san da: That's essentially what you're saying
2018-05-31 23:01 Neko-san da: Hell, you even tried to use the CoC against me
2018-05-31 23:01 Net0: What I'm saying is that you only know modern ideas
2018-05-31 23:01 Net0: when I'm using a lot of patterned ideas
2018-05-31 23:01 Net0: and yeah, you made a "flow" comment
2018-05-31 23:01 Net0: that's irony
2018-05-31 23:02 Net0: and I'm not forced to reply people who are sarcastic with me
2018-05-31 23:02 Net0: I've had enough of toxic people
2018-05-31 23:02 Net0: in osu!
2018-05-31 23:02 Neko-san da: Or you're frustrated your maps aren't high quality yet
2018-05-31 23:02 Net0: and I know you quite well and what you did with your neko-san map
2018-05-31 23:02 Net0: if my maps are not quality enough I'd not be able to rank them
2018-05-31 23:03 Net0: so please stop harrasment
2018-05-31 23:03 Neko-san da: emphasis on enough
2018-05-31 23:03 Net0: Or I'll report
2018-05-31 23:03 Neko-san da: My neko-san map is literally going for ranked
2018-05-31 23:03 Neko-san da: And I have a friend working with me
2018-05-31 23:04 Neko-san da: Sure, report me for giving criticism for your map
2018-05-31 23:04 Net0: anyway, if you make serious mod posts I'll reply them
2018-05-31 23:04 Net0: but ironic and sarcastic comments I won't
2018-05-31 23:04 Net0: have a nice day
2018-05-31 23:06 Neko-san da: btw it's not just me who thinks your map is shit
2018-05-31 23:06 Net0: I don't care
2018-05-31 23:06 Neko-san da: I understand how frustrating it is to have people mod your map after it's been qualified
2018-05-31 23:06 Neko-san da: And now everything I try to tell you goes over your head and you are avoidant
2018-05-31 23:06 Net0: Nah
2018-05-31 23:07 Net0: this was disqualified before to improve some stuff
2018-05-31 23:07 Net0: I don't mind
2018-05-31 23:07 Neko-san da: I laugh at the fact you think I'm harassing you, it only shows how resilient you are to proper feedback
2018-05-31 23:07 Net0: but you just trying to DQ because you don't like the map is a big joke
2018-05-31 23:07 Net0: specially when your points shows how much you don't know about mapping
2018-05-31 23:07 Net0: "proper feedback"
2018-05-31 23:07 Neko-san da: I'm trying to get a DQ because there are inconsistencies in your map that should be adressed
2018-05-31 23:07 Net0: lmao
2018-05-31 23:08 Neko-san da: I understand the concept of the map but the spacing inconsistencies are the biggest problems
2018-05-31 23:08 Net0: it would be if it was a map done with a rigid copy paste/geometric logic
2018-05-31 23:09 Net0: what's a flaw in a monstrata map is not in a Elvis map for instance
2018-05-31 23:09 Net0: but since all you know is spacing emphasis
2018-05-31 23:09 Net0: your mapping understand is very limited
2018-05-31 23:09 Neko-san da: You cant get rid of a fundamental in mapping because 'it's your style'
2018-05-31 23:09 Net0: do you want to see a map I did with a very solid and consistent spacing that actually follows your ideas?
2018-05-31 23:09 Net0: I have tons of other styles
2018-05-31 23:10 Net0: so don't think you are shit actually have no idea of what you're talking about
2018-05-31 23:10 Neko-san da: It's ironic you say that considering you said thsi https://imgur-archive.ppy.sh/IHtKjYw.png
2018-05-31 23:11 Neko-san da: the song is in a decrescendo, meaning it should decrease in spacing not increase
2018-05-31 23:11 Neko-san da: it's your scewed logic of spacing that makes your map not consistent
2018-05-31 23:12 Net0: "screwed logic of spacing"
2018-05-31 23:12 Net0: !report Neko-san_da (Insulting people):
2018-05-31 23:14 Net0: just to avoid making you waste your time I won't reply anymore
Here's the entire chat without edits. I'm done replying to this nonsense.
Ashton




:thonkang:

looks like you can shoot the bullets but can't take them.
Nao Tomori
man stop trying to start drama. when you're modding you need to take into account the basis of the map and mod based on what the mapper's intentions were, not what you would do (which is what it seems like.) for example, since the map is pattern based or whatever, point out some patterns that doesn't follow the song structure well (01:10:221 (1,2,3,4,5) - for example which is a pentagon even though 01:10:980 - is in a new vocal phrase).
or point out things that are not related to patterning like rhythm - "01:23:132 - feels weird as clickable since you are focusing on vocals a lot and this doesn't follow any vocal"

what you are doing is basically forcing how you would map it onto his map rather than thinking about why he did what he did and finding issues with that execution.
Uta
Bolded sentences are my comments

Neko-san da wrote:

extra:
00:09:841 (2,3) - 00:10:411 (4,5) - these two sets of notes shouldn't have the same spacing as it's confusing. 00:09:841 (2,3) - these set of notes should be lesser spaced than 00:10:031 (3,4) - these It's not confusing, because it is an extra diff with a high star rating. most players already encountered this kind of pattern so it'll be most likely readable, plus the NC there already giving a hint for the player to spot that Anti-jumps
00:12:879 (2,3) - this should have consistent spacing with 00:15:917 (2,3) - this, there's no difference musically in them and it doesn't make sense you emphasize one and leave the other out It is not a major problem, variation doesn't mean it's inconsistent. its the mappers choice to have these kind of spacing. you never know why did he does that. maybe spacing increases per 2/3 measure but still you can't just force this kind of opinion
00:19:525 (4,5) - emphasis here but not 00:20:854 (3,4) - here? if you're going to emphasize the piano, do it consistently if you listen closely, the piano pitch are different so it'll be most likely to be differientate
00:31:107 (2,1) - why is there no emphasis here when there is 00:31:867 (3,1) - here? again, problems with consistency when it comes to spacing every NC there means there is a stop of 1/1 beat before the next object comes. it's pretty ideal for this section imo
00:37:942 (5,6) - no spacing emphasis for the raise in vocal pitch here, yet you do it 00:35:854 (7) - here? ^both are the same sound with your comments above. it's consistent
00:43:259 (2,1) - same thing applies here with this and 00:44:019 (3,1) - and this ^
01:08:133 (6,7) - the song doesn't justify such a large spacing emphasis there is a new word on the vocal so the spacing changes are comprehensible
01:12:310 (1,2) - it doesn't make sense to have the spacing so large here it's readable cause of the high approach rates. also the nc-ing means that each sliders has different SV. patterns are still readable
01:21:613 (5,6) - would sound better if it was a 1/2 slider it's called a filler rhythm, when the mapper doesnt follow the melody and following drums atm
01:24:082 (1,1,2,3) - nazi suggestion, but this overlap is super messy _- super nazi
01:26:361 (2,3) - this should have consistent spacing with 01:27:120 (2,3) - this and 01:27:879 (2,3) - this not all things should be the same. the changes that these objects has is barely noticable. its not a problem at all
don't force your opinions when its doesnt have a big impact on the map. its just subjective issues plz.
this is an EXTRA diff, means that the map should have challenging aspects and not the same thing over and over

Variation doesn't mean a map is inconsistent!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Uta

Nao Tomori wrote:

man stop trying to start drama. when you're modding you need to take into account the basis of the map and mod based on what the mapper's intentions were, not what you would do (which is what it seems like.) for example, since the map is pattern based or whatever, point out some patterns that doesn't follow the song structure well (01:10:221 (1,2,3,4,5) - for example which is a pentagon even though 01:10:980 - is in a new vocal phrase).
or point out things that are not related to patterning like rhythm - "01:23:132 - feels weird as clickable since you are focusing on vocals a lot and this doesn't follow any vocal"

what you are doing is basically forcing how you would map it onto his map rather than thinking about why he did what he did and finding issues with that execution.
this pretty much
Monstrata
This was a proper mapping discussion until you (neto) decided to try and silence out Neko-chan right after he messaged you in game. Nothing about his message was harassing you, he just wanted to have a conversation? And discussing through IRC is often a lot better for resolving these issues that continue to write back and forth on the forums, perhaps he wanted to explain himself there and try and resolve things, but we'll never know because of how you reacted.

Lesson for future mapping discussions :P. Obviously anyone who posts a mod on a qualified map is trying to get it dq'ed unless the mapper can resolve their concerns... Otherwise why would you post a mod anyways? The mapper obviously can't change anything unless the map gets dq'ed. It's common sense lol,
Ashton

Nao Tomori wrote:

man stop trying to start drama. when you're modding you need to take into account the basis of the map and mod based on what the mapper's intentions were, not what you would do (which is what it seems like.) for example, since the map is pattern based or whatever, point out some patterns that doesn't follow the song structure well (01:10:221 (1,2,3,4,5) - for example which is a pentagon even though 01:10:980 - is in a new vocal phrase).
or point out things that are not related to patterning like rhythm - "01:23:132 - feels weird as clickable since you are focusing on vocals a lot and this doesn't follow any vocal"

what you are doing is basically forcing how you would map it onto his map rather than thinking about why he did what he did and finding issues with that execution.
00:23:322 (1,2,3,4,5) - why aren't these jumps placed in a pattern too keep consistent with the geometric or 'pattern' theme?
00:25:031 (1,2,1,2,3,1,2,3) - these seem just randomly placed, unless there's a blatant pattern i'm completely missing
00:30:727 (1,2,1,2,3,1) - ^
00:36:803 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,1,2,1) - Why did he map something so linear instead of positioning the notes into a formidable shape or pattern?
01:28:829 (3,4,5,1,2,3) - these triangles hardly align with each other, they don't even have equal spacing between notes
00:46:297 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,1,2,3,4,5,6,7) - How does this set of notes correlate to the theme of a "pattern map"?

What I'm trying to say is even if his map was meant to be all patterns and stuff, he only mapped a few areas with the theme noticeable there. (he really only used the theme in most of the kiai and the intro) and when you fail to make a consistent use of patterns and start mapping in a (albeit messy) modern mapping style, I'm going to mod it as if your intentions were to make it that way.


Well since this map is ranked there's really no use to go on with this conversation. This will hopefully be the final post of this discussion
_handholding

Net0 wrote:

Here's the entire chat without edits. I'm done replying to this nonsense.
LOOOOOL, get exposed

@Neko-san in future it would be best to approach things in a more calm manner, no one is going to take you seriously if you just rage and make a massive scene out of nothing. It's also good for your soul ~

anyways grats on the rank Net0 ;)
pw384
Sorry but this is just too far. People can easily ask 2147483647 "Why?"s to a mapper who shares different mindset for mapping. What a discussion really needs are things such as "You shouldn't do that" and reasons applied to it. Asking whys just confuses the mapper and every other person involved in the discussion as it provides no help.


Neko-san da wrote:

00:23:322 (1,2,3,4,5) - why aren't these jumps placed in a pattern too keep consistent with the geometric or 'pattern' theme? :arrow: I found no reason why you asked this. This pattern features an increasing spacing, interpreting the drums really well, and I found no reason against the usage.
00:25:031 (1,2,1,2,3,1,2,3) - these seem just randomly placed, unless there's a blatant pattern i'm completely missing :arrow: I see a "geometry" pattern featuring symmetry, anti-space, linear pattern and regular triangle
00:30:727 (1,2,1,2,3,1) - ^
00:36:803 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,1,2,1) - Why did he map something so linear instead of positioning the notes into a formidable shape or pattern? :arrow: because he thinks it is good for playing and features gimmick aesthetics, and you don't think so, but your opinion doesn't make his own opinion invalid, unfortunately.
01:28:829 (3,4,5,1,2,3) - these triangles hardly align with each other, they don't even have equal spacing between notes :arrow: so? does there exist a player who plays with vernier caliper? and is it worth to be considered as a big issue and therefore comes a disqualification?
00:46:297 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,1,2,3,4,5,6,7) - How does this set of notes correlate to the theme of a "pattern map"? :arrow: parallel patterns with 5-deg tilt, producing a balanced pattern which is a visual enjoyment

What I'm trying to say is even if his map was meant to be all patterns and stuff, he only mapped a few areas with the theme noticeable there. (he really only used the theme in most of the kiai and the intro) and when you fail to make a consistent use of patterns and start mapping in a (albeit messy) modern mapping style, I'm going to mod it as if your intentions were to make it that way.


Well since this map is ranked there's really no use to go on with this conversation. This will hopefully be the final post of this discussion
I could also be picky on your all maps being asymmetric but I don't...

As a quiz question, if you think pattern consistency is important: Given a unit square ABCD on R^2, can we find another point E on the plane such that ||AE||, ||BE||, ||CE||, ||DE|| are all rational numbers?

The above question is an extreme. But what I'd like to say is that maps are produced for playing, and if the aesthetics is interpreted well and the map itself is enjoyable for playing, there's just no need to be picky on such trivial things.
Topic Starter
Net0

Monstrata wrote:

This was a proper mapping discussion until you (neto) decided to try and silence out Neko-chan right after he messaged you in game. Nothing about his message was harassing you

Neko-san da wrote:

this it only makes it inconsistent. and no, you dont emphasize it with 'flow'.
2018-05-31 23:02 Neko-san da: Or you're frustrated your maps aren't high quality yet
2018-05-31 23:06 Neko-san da: btw it's not just me who thinks your map is shit
2018-05-31 23:11 Neko-san da: it's your scewed logic of spacing that makes your map not consistent
Considering how you behave yourself Monstrata definetly nothing here is wrong to you. Anyway, please stop this discussion and replies, what's done is done.
Aurele
Locked by the mapper’s request
Please sign in to reply.

New reply