Cerulean Veyron wrote:

sorry for the huge delay

[- - General - -]

• - There are four files in the beatmap folder seemingly to be some unused custom hitsounds by their file names of it, which are: "nfinish.wav", "no.wav", "t.wav" and "w.wav". I might be wrong if you would use it later, but saying it just in case. - oh right I forgot to delete xD
  - Not bad!

[- - Extra - -]

1. 00:28:705 (2,3) - Compared to 00:25:946 (3,4) - which has quite an opposite sound of pitch, this one is merely a bigger jump than the previous based on the emphasis over these two parts. You might probably need to reduce the extended distance spacing between slider (2) and (3) to emphasize the song track a little better.
2. 01:12:153 (5,1,2) - That anti-jump was merely unnecessary due the approach of notes were previously paced too quick for emphasizing the song track. But speaking about visuals, the jump between (5) and (1) seems seriously unpredictable because of that issue. The least thing I would recommend to change this a way around is to reposition slider (5)'s direction to the left rather than to the bottom. That might fix a bit of flow too.
3. 02:05:774 (1) - I don't really think consistently overusing such slider velocity for pattern designing could do the best thing around this section, whereas the song track actually changes its own density twice. So right here, I think it should probably slowed down like the next ones because the soundwave of the track's pitch is pretty much low as well. So for a better emphasis, it's best for the velocity to be slowed too. Like, at least 1.00x or 1.20x perhaps. - changed to 1.25x, 1.2x with this round shape seemed too short and 1.3x seemed still fast
4. 02:24:739 (4,5) - Shouldn't the sound beat on slider (4)'s end be clickable or something? It's pretty intense by the sound of it, so maybe you could replace these two 1/2 sliders into circles. Or just turn slider (4) into two circles and keep (5) as a slider for a better rhythm composition to follow the song track. - think it's fine because 02:24:567 (3,4,5) - contrasts pretty well with 02:23:187 (2,3,4) - .
5. 02:25:429 (1) - Well, this slider is kinda like the only note that skipped one beat of the section that you're suppose to follow throughout the whole track of it. Probably this one 02:25:601 -, right? You could at least do a repeatable slider here if you don't mind to keep the overlap you're intending, or just 1/2 slider and circle again for consistency with the previous rhythms.
6. 02:44:739 (1) - This slider kinda looked a bit sloppy,and probably not polished quite enough overall. Well, it's not because of how linear the slider is but it's likely not smooth as well. I'd suggest moving the red nodes in a better placing grids than the current ones, because those actually affected the aesthetics mostly. And you may create a little more curves at some point for polishing the long slider a little more. - idk about this, changed it a bit more dynamically.
7. 02:56:463 (1,2) - I don't really know if this slider overlapping each other is really intentional or not, because the distance spacing here is pretty low than the next ones visually. I do know this could possibly be near of some sort of a build up section, but I don't actually think it is. So you might have some stream-distance spacing inconsistency somehow, or just try to space them up a little more for the intensity to extend a bit bigger. Which means, a better emphasis as far as I see. - spaced a little bit, but I like the sliders rather than having a stream here, I wanted to express the drastic intensity change at 02:57:325 (2,3,4) - with circles
8. 03:09:567 (1,2,3) - Okay, based on the rhythm composition on this part, it's actually okay to me personally. But speaking about patterning the rhythm, it looked way a bit confusing by how its executed in placements and approach. For a better visual of the pattern design here, you might want to at least consist the distance spacing merely like the next one on 03:12:325 (1,2) -.
9. 03:31:463 - Just a personal suggestion for this part only, I would rather have this slider end silent for the effect of the normal click hitsound to be low volumed. With that, it would create a better soundwave for the tiny muted part just before the strong beat drops. But it's pretty much up to you if you want to silent this small part of the section. Just something minor.
10. 03:53:705 (1,2) - I might recommend you to swap the new combos here in these two notes, due the colorhaxing here looked pretty much overdone in my opinion. And also the potential beat on (2) really sure shows that it needed a new combo of some sort. So yeah...

The execution towards structural flows was particularly good to me, you've got many patterns and some speed-up sliders on point in emphasis. You kinda had some little issues to some compositions and placements of the notes which probably burdened a bit with construction of the design and maybe a few aesthetics. Nevertheless your concept was really fine to me. Well done!

Rus_Brony_osu wrote:

Hello! ~ From my queue

Find other background 'cuz this bg is bad because of his resolution is 1166x656. - ok probably will be fixed

Extra
What do you think about Stack Leniency 3, because circles under the slider with SL4 looks.. bad? ~ https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/9400760 - umm not really, I like it to be stacked but will consider

00:34:222 (2,3) - (with sl3) Stack. - ^
01:12:325 (1,2) - hard to read, player can get confused and think that this is double - those are meant to be anti jumps and so yeah they are natural
01:23:360 (1,2) - same here
01:29:912 (1,2,3,4,1) - ??? (wtf is this? why is this slider is UNDER the stream?) - why not
01:34:394 (1,2) - hard to read, ... ^^^
01:45:429 (1,2) - ^
03:46:808 (1,2) - ^^
03:57:843 (1,2) - ^^^
04:12:670 (1) - beautiful but unrankable slider - don't think it's unrankable, changed the shape a bit tho
04:30:946 (1,2) - hard to read, ...

Damn, while I was looking at your map, I began to think that the level of mapping is rising higher and higher. This is one of my favoritests map ever. This map is perfect.
I wish you rank it! Good luck!

seselis1 wrote:

o/ from my q
I won't mod all since this is NM xd

[Extra]

00:06:808 (3) - hard to notice - stacked
00:04:049 (3) - instead of repeated slider you could do something like 00:06:636 (2,3,4,5) - here (bc sounds change a very bit) - I did circles only to the strongest(which I think is 00:12:325 (3,4,5) -) sounds at this part, because the music is still very small and therefore being hard to hear it while playing.
00:09:567 (3) - ^ and I would suggest actually to fix these two by putting two 1/2 sliders - ^
00:34:567 (3,4,5,1) - whether you should not map them at all or you should map these sound in the whole section - I wanted this part to be similar with 00:23:532 (5,6,7,1) -
00:40:601 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7) - ^ and I suggest mapping those sounds in the whole section - changed a bit
00:52:670 (4) - 1/2 slider? - I used circles because the specific sound that I'm trying to express with these circles is best with a circle imo, unlike 00:55:429 (4) -
01:04:394 (1,2,3,4) - increasing tension but spacing decreased somewhy. Since you've put slider 01:04:222 (3) - here, maybe just add more close to each other sliders instead of this low-spaced stream (or at least make it more spaced) - It is a short-easy-section for the players, because of the pretty long stream before this 01:02:671 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3), but will consider changing
01:20:946 (2) - imo flow would be better if it was ctrl+g'ed and if curve went down - cool
01:49:567 (1) - I get you want to emphasize it but imo it's too much, it can be confused as 1/2 (I mean just look at 02:00:601 (1) - and compare) - Actually those two are played almost equally when talking about rhythms, so I think it's fine
02:43:705 (1) - such sliders without the specific sound at the beginning (unlike 02:38:360 (2) - ) could have even lower sv (or those with 'the sound' could have a bit higher sv) - It has a lower spacing instead.

lol I'm not expert on such genre songs but map looked cool
GL with approval

Bubblun wrote:

m4m from my queue

This map is really interesting and clean. I couldn't find anything worth mentioning, so instead I'll point out some minor details you may or may-not care about to trying and help as much as I can, is that fine? :3 is fine ofcourse


Extra

00:44:567 (1,2,3,1,1,1,2,3) - omg so clean. Love the parallelism and the aesthetic of the notes aiming at each other. One thing I'm not too sure of is the overlap at 00:45:256 (1,2) - while I understand the aeshetic it makes with 00:46:118 (1) - It looks a little off when you highlight both of the notes. You can see the clickable end of 00:45:256 (1) - isn't perfectly aligned with the center of 00:45:774 (2) - which I personally think would make it look better like how you're having the rest of this pattern 'correlate' by having perfect alignment between notes like 00:45:084 (1,1) - & 00:44:739 (3,1) - https://puu.sh/yf761/0e83346cb8.png I slightly moved the slider to center with the overlapping slider, and thought it looked nicer. It's up to you though, as it's not a huge change, just something I thought looked nice. - stacked instead, I think doing what you did will put 00:45:256 (1) - too far from other notes.

01:12:325 (1,2) - Love how you contrast the distance on the timeline by having these notes partially overlap, but not perfectly like the streams at 01:11:636 (1,2,3) -

01:19:222 (1,2) - Such attention to detail with the curve.

01:21:981 (1,1) - The way this slider curves in and overlaps the next note is beautiful. I think to add onto the aesthetic, maybe ctrl+g on 01:22:498 (2) - so it aims towards 01:22:670 (1) - for a visual gimmick? - Actually, doing so will create an upward-going flow, due to how I used a pair of kick sliders before. eg 01:19:567 (2,3) - into 01:19:912 (1) - / 01:21:636 (4,5) - into 01:21:981 (1) -

01:33:015 (1,2) - Absolutely beautiful.

01:34:912 (1,3,4,5,6) - Pretty shape, and I think the overlap is a good idea. Some mappers might think the overlap was a result of the automatic stacking mechanic, so if you want to make the aesthetic more obvious, I'd distance the overlap to around the distance of your overlaps at https://puu.sh/yf74b/fde4866734.png - not really sure about this, I think both works well.

02:35:084 (1,2) - so clean omg

03:06:808 (1,2) - Think the tension you're building up with this section is well done. Because these 2 notes share a near identical distance to 03:06:463 (3,4) - and both have NC on the first note, the player might confuse both of these as 1/2 jumps, which for the tension you're building up might stick out. I suggest 1 to https://puu.sh/yf7j3/f05d925beb.png like shown so the player has that extra distance to contrast the differences in the timeline. - I think it shouldn't be that confusing, since I always used 1/1 gaps after 03:00:601 (2,3,4) - this kind of patterns. Also I think it's too much tension for this part to make 03:06:808 (1,2) - larger than 1/2 jumps.

03:37:498 (2,3) - orgasmic hitsounds. Never thought these would fit in this song so well, but you proved me wrong.

04:17:498 (2,1,2) - Love the aesthetic with 2,1 and the square created by 2,2

04:29:049 (2,1) - I think because 2 correlates to the note back at 04:28:532 (2) - is quite a detailed way to connect everything visually. Amazing.
I'm worried the player might miss 04:29:567 (1) - because the overlap created by 04:29:049 (2) - gives the player less time to prepare for a 1/4 jump. How about overlapping the tail instead to create https://puu.sh/yf7ym/ec8d81584b.png ? If you like this pattern, you'll have to adjust 2, which I can give you the coords for: x:155 y:76 - really cool idea, I'll have to think about this more.

04:59:998 (1) - Wow, what an interesting map. Could you finish it off with slider art? I know it's not a new idea and it could be tedious, but I think it'd be a nice finisher that you can contrast from the spinner used at 02:14:481 (1) - which will make the player feel refreshing. The spinner works regardless, so it's up to you. - hmm I think I still like the spinner than the slider art, (to me) a long slow slider feels like an build-up part rather than an outro.

Great job on the map. One last thing I'll point out is a more general suggestion. I think the slider tick rate is better at 1 because slider shapes like 01:42:670 (1) - and 03:02:670 (1) - don't have the tick line up with the beat. - sure Edit : rollbacked to 2, I think 2 is still better after looking through the map several times.

Nice map. gl with ranking

Nyukai wrote:

~General~

1. Adding "drum and bass" in tags apart from "dnb" would be nice in order to make easier to find the genre, I guess.
2. I'm afraid Widescreen Support should be disabled since you don't have any storyboard (or maybe my computer is crazy xD). - as long as I remember it doesn't matter, disabled anyway
3. Is it just me or you used default combo colours? I would try some which can fit with the background, so the beatmap becomes more interesting~ - tbh I think the default combo colours look pretty well with this bg, so I want to leave it unless there's a problem.

~Extra~

1. 00:14:395 (1,2) - Ctrl+G these to make a better flow with the following pattern? - nope that will make the distance too uneven and I like to use unnatural flow when changing the combo
2. 00:20:601 (5,6) - Why this sudden anti-jump? Changing spacing is ok but this could be a bit confusing. - I'll see more opinions about this
3. 01:29:912 (1,2,3,4) - Better reverse this stream to make it follow the next slider, at the moment this is hard to read. - imo reading should be easy enough because of the sliderbody.
4. 03:34:912 (3) - Try to place it somewhere further because your whole map is based on huge patterns and jumps and this is really close to the next stream.
5. 04:45:084 (3,4) - I think I haven't seen this overlap anywhere until now, I don't think it looks really clean right now.
6. 04:59:912 (4) - Missing NC? Even the finish makes me feel that I need to put one to finish the map.

I'm sorry it hasn't been really helpful, good luck

newton- wrote:

nm from q

[extra]

1. 00:07:498 (1,2) - dont see why these should be stacked even though this is higher intensity than the last spaced section, stacking kills the intensity buildup imo - instead of unstacking I ctrl+g-ed 00:08:187 (3) -, I wanted to express kinda compressed(?) feeling from the minor scale starting from 00:07:498 -
2. 00:33:705 (1,2) - blanket? - umm I think I like slightly tilted one more than a perfect blanket.
3. 01:09:049 (3,4) - these break circular flow while other sounds similar to this such as 01:10:429 (3,4) - don't, ctrlg 4 for consistency
   - also did at 5
4. 01:16:118 (1) // 01:38:187 (1) // 03:39:567 (1) // 04:17:153 (1) - the wub here is kinda messy but the slider mapping it isnt, maybe make the slider more weird looking to differentiate this sound from the other sliders
   01:16:118 (1) - & 03:39:567 (1) - I think these being the only 3/4 around this part with relatively longer path differentiates them enough from other sliders.
   01:38:187 (1) - changed
   04:17:153 (1) - don't think this sound needs to be emphasized that much
5. 01:23:532 (2) - nc here to prevent misreading (1,2) as 1/4 - nope, because this kind of patterns were used pretty much everywhere,
   and they are diffrentiated from 1/4s, by the amount of being overlapped.
6. 01:35:429 (3,4,5,6) - would prefer if this perfectly overlapped 01:34:912 (1) - without going beyond - umm maybe, I'll think more
7. 01:49:222 (1) - make this sharper looking? would fit since it's a pretty mechanical sound like 01:49:739 (2) -
8. 02:33:705 (1,2,3) - unstack, this is inconsistent with the objects before it even though theyre the same sound - it is to express 02:33:705 - 02:36:118 - this part diffrently
9. 04:12:670 (1) - reshape into something thats not a loop, you never really used loops before so this comes as a surprise - I don't think it should be confusing when playing, because the way it is played are very similar with other wub sliders (twisting the direction) with some amount of visual change (loop) which is because of the part being intenser.

good luck!

[Nemesis] wrote:

Mod from my queue.

00:24:049 (1) - stack on top of 00:25:429 (2) -, it's a huge-ass drop. - moved a bit
00:45:774 (2) - unstacked with 00:45:256 (1) -.
00:55:429 (4) - the curvature doesn't really look too appealing, how about you reduce it a little?
01:04:394 (1,2,3,4) - it's the middle of the buildup, why did you randomly decide to reduce spacing there? - since the stream is kinda long one, I wanted to make a short break for players to adjust their aim.
01:20:429 (5,2) - just for the sake of aesthetics, how about you just ctrl+g the first slider instead of ctrl+j'ing it? - I don't want sliderbody to perfectly overlap later one, especially when the later one's length is same or shorter than previous one.
01:34:912 (1) - the slider shape is pretty much meh. Looks pretty random compared to all the other sliderarts you've done before. -changed a little
01:34:912 (1,3,4,5,6) - on a side note, the stream should line up with the slider for better aesthetics. - ^ same with slider overlapping
01:41:808 (3,1) - stack 'em up so that they become one straight continuous line.
01:50:601 (3,4,5,6,1) - straighten the stream up, no need for a fancy wave there.
01:58:877 (1) - https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/9610882
02:11:808 (2,2,2) - not a big fan of the transition you used there, 02:11:808 (2) - sticks out too much, even though the sound isn't anything so special. - umm, I don't think it sticks out that much, I'll think more.
03:02:670 (1) - you used a standard curve slider on this sound in the previous section, why is this one so different? - they're not that much different imo 03:13:705 (1) - 00:50:256 (1) -
04:09:222 (3,2) - why aren't these stacked up? - ^ same with slider overlapping

everything else without reply = done
gl

Come[Back]Home wrote:

Extra

* 00:06:636 (2,3,4) - 00:12:153 (2,3,4) - why do they differ in spacing? shouldnt they be the same cause there's not really a difference
- changed a bit
* 00:19:912 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,1,2,3,4,5,6,7) - I really dislike this part. I know youre trying to map it so it'll fit with the music, but it's really weird to play and doesn't even look good. For example this part 00:20:256 (3,4,5,6,7,8) - . You've never used this spacing before 00:20:601 (5,6) - and to suddenly switch to it seems inconsistent. The whole part though is really weird. You've used many sliders to emphasize the guitar-like sound like here 00:10:256 (1) - and then you decided to switch to 1/2 circles without focusing on the guitar-like sound anymore. I really dislike the choice you've made here.
- okay, reworked on 00:19:912 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7) - since lots of ppl are complaining here. but keeping 00:21:291 - ~ 00:23:877 -
because the guitar-like sound is coming with snare-popping sound from here (idk how it's called) and i thought circles would fit with it very well.
* 00:42:325 (1,2,3) - This sounds really weird. How about you silence the sliderends? That way there won't be the disturbing slider noise when there is no sound given in the music. And another thing, how about you blank them properly? Will make it look much cleaner and better. (And maybe (3) should be a circle instead) - silenced sliderends
* 01:04:394 (1,2,3,4,1) - Why did you lower the spacing here? There's nothing in the music to indicate such a thing. -it's because i wanted to make a short break for players to adjust their aim.
* 01:10:774 (5,1) - You could stack them pefectly. That way (1)'s end wouldnt stick out beneath (5).
* 01:16:463 (1) - How about you remove the grey anchor after the red one? This slider looks weird tbh
* 01:17:153 (1,3) - Is the overlap intentional? This part would look cleaner without it - rearranged
* 01:27:239 - This snare should be clickable tbh. It way too strong to be ignored. - hmm okay, reworked on it. but made it into a sliderend because i still want the slider to be somewhat long enough.
* 01:34:394 (1,2) - I've seen this before in your map, while I think they are fine, there may be a problem with readability. Maybe you should get some opinions on those~
* 01:38:705 (2,3) - What's this? I'd really like to know what you're trying to emphasize with it, for now it makes no sense to me. The snare which you ignored seems way more important to me than the rest. Same here 01:49:739 (2,3) - 04:02:153 (2,3) - 04:13:187 (2,3) - - it was to emphasize the heavy synth-y sound. changed to 1/2, i guess 1/2 is good enough. also changed 04:24:222 (2) - 04:35:256 (2) -
* 01:44:739 (1,2,3) - How about you stack them properly? Looks better imo - oh it was a mistake lol xd
* 01:51:636 (2) - How about you place this one around 166/283? That way it will go really well with the sliders flow before it - looks nice, but i still like the snappy flow more
* 02:12:929 (3,1) - Spacing seems a bit too much, you have used that kind of spacing before so it seems really unexpected. Just reduce it a little bit
* 02:21:291 (1,2) - Why do you stack those? It really takes out the movement and somehow doesn't fit to the song at all. Same here 02:24:049 (1,2) - 02:25:429 (1,2) - 02:27:153 (3,4) - 02:30:946 (1,2) - - In my opinion, 02:19:912 (1,2) - this and 02:21:291 (1,2) - this doesn't have that much difference when played. they're highly less spaced compared to previous parts, so being spaced by one follow point amount or being stacked should not have too much difference when played. they're pretty much focused on flow change to (3). rearranged some of those tho
* 02:33:532 (7,1) - Why the low spacing? (1) should be clearly emphasized way more by a bigger spacing. Like you did here 02:34:912 (6,1) - - i think it's fine because (1) is reversing flow of 02:32:670 (2,3,4,5,6,7) -
* 03:50:687 - Why did you ignore the strong snare/beat here? It should be clickable or atleast no be ignored.
* 04:53:187 (2) - How about you emphasize this one because of the kick on it? Would fit really well. You could unstack it for example.
i wanted to make a stopping-movement before entering this pattern 04:54:394 - ~ 04:57:153 - , so keeping it


Thtas it, cool map overall!! Good luck~

Mir wrote:

1. 01:43:360 (1,2,3,4) - This seems sort of just thrown in randomly and at that doesn't look very fitting in the context of the kiai. Moreover you didn't even use the same rhythm for 01:32:153 (3,4,1,2,3,4,5,6,1) - lol.
   - i can't see how that was seen as thrown randomly? i don't really feel like this part needs to be changed in some way. imo it's very subjective issue.
   Their rhythm being different is because i found it pretty boring to repeat the rhythm for whole kiai, therefore did differently for variation reason. it's not like its general/basic rhythm changed into something unreasonable, the only varying part is these kind of sounds 01:31:291 (3,4,5,6) - 01:32:670 (3,4,5,6) - , which is i think healthy when considering the variation.
   
2. 01:49:567 (1,2,3,1,2,3,4,5,6) - Here the rhythm density drops so much despite the song still being in kiai-intensity.
   - it's because i wanted to emphasize these 01:49:739 (2) - synthy sounds. it doesn't really feel differentiated enough if i fill up the 1/4s.
   
3. 01:53:877 (2,3,1,2,3) - ^ Sort of same but here visual spacing between these is inconsistent.
   - i guess it's a very subjective issue, i don't think the visual spacing is inconsistent here
   
4. 01:59:222 (1,2,3,1,2,3) - Not only does this not look very coherent but the flow changes here 01:59:567 (3,1,2,3) - in such a weird way. I would recommend ctrl+g 2,3 separately.
   - they do have different visuals and flow movements, but they do share similar structures. the reason why i used different flow is because these 01:53:705 (1,2,3,1,2,3) - are descending tension/nervousness while 01:59:222 (1,2,3,1,2,3) - are ascending tension/nervousness, and the pitch change is much bigger. 01:59:222 (1,2,3) - they're shaped like curving inward the triangle so they're creating stable structure, while 01:59:739 (1,2,3) - are more like surrounding the triangle which doesn't feels as stable as 01:59:222 (1,2,3) - ; which is expressing the nervousness change. same reason for the unnatural flow. (not sure if "nervousness" is the right word tho)
   

Even then looking at 02:08:877 - 02:14:481 - the spacing seems all over the place, there's no clear method as to how these objects are spaced.
- idk why spacing here is a problem, i would say they're spaced more further than previous parts because it's intenser.