1. 00:11:692 (8) - Comapred to the previous jumps, this jump is too huge, combined with the missleading slider it even flows not so good
2. 00:16:996 - consider adding a Slider here instead, 00:17:161 - here is not even a sound on the tick and on (1) is nothin special which explains why the direction change
   ^ also if you plan to keep those 2 Circles, i would go with something like this, it keeps the pattern with the straight flow pattern consistent 00:17:327 (3,4,5,6,7) - here
   
   SPOILER

   
3. 00:24:288 (2,3) - Pretty sharp angle here, might be hard to snap, consider lowering the objects
4. ^00:40:697 (2,3) - Basicly the same
5. 00:48:487 (3) - how about ctrl+g Them to let the slider end lead to the next object?
6. 00:54:123 (6) - ^
7. 01:09:537 - The Rhythm here is completly off and i would recommend a pattern like you've used here 00:58:598 (2,3,4) -
8. 01:14:841 - ^lol you dont even follow this rhythm anymore
9. 01:31:913 (2,3) - You are out of the intense part but are still using the same spacing, decrease spacing abit to represent the more calm part of the song
10. 01:45:504 (4) - now spacing feels like not existing lol
    ^ maybe something more like this?
    
    SPOILER

    
11. 01:47:493 (1,2) - ^
12. 02:52:963 (5,6,7,8) - why did you space them so extrem apart? i didnt even use so much spacing in the more intense part lol
13. 04:31:250 (4) - If you are following a circular flow here, (4) should be where (5) is
14. The Biggest Problem i see in this map are the Different flows you try to mash together on the same part of the songs
    - Like here you go from reverse circular flow 01:39:869 (3,4,5) - to 01:41:195 (1,2,3,4) - linear? to 01:42:852 (5,6) - ? missleading sliders to 01:45:172 (3,4,5,6,1) - circular flow? its pretty hard to sideread which object comes next because youve used in 6 seconds 4 different flows, it feels like you are changing it randomly or if we go by the exact same sound
    -01:50:145 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - circular flow follow with missleading slider to emphasize the more stronger sounds, fine so far
    01:55:449 (1,2,3) - Now the exact part of the song its missleading slider follow by nothing because you mapped the exact same part different

FlobuFlobs wrote:

From q

1. 00:11:692 (8) - Comapred to the previous jumps, this jump is too huge, combined with the missleading slider it even flows not so good You're right, I moved (7) to a bit to the right. I think it flows fine because of slider leniency, but now the slider leniency will be less strict as more vertical movement is needed to get to (8)..
2. 00:16:996 - consider adding a Slider here instead, 00:17:161 - here is not even a sound on the tick and on (1) is nothin special which explains why the direction change at 00:17:161 (2) -
   ^ also if you plan to keep those 2 Circles, i would go with something like this, it keeps the pattern with the straight flow pattern consistent 00:17:327 (3,4,5,6,7) - here I do hear a sound, as there is a pitch change at 00:17:161 (2) - . However, I like the pattern you suggestion more than my own, so I'll do that.
   
   SPOILER

   
3. 00:24:288 (2,3) - Pretty sharp angle here, might be hard to snap, consider lowering the objects I think it plays fine as it is rn
4. ^00:40:697 (2,3) - Basicly the same I changed this though.
5. 00:48:487 (3) - how about ctrl+g Them to let the slider end lead to the next object? I'll keep it as it is. Because of the curves on these sliders, slider leniency would allow the player to simply hold onto the note and then move to the next one. I can't notice a gameplay difference with either way when I test play it.
6. 00:54:123 (6) - ^ ^
7. 01:09:537 - The Rhythm here is completly off and i would recommend a pattern like you've used here 00:58:598 (2,3,4) -
8. 01:14:841 - ^lol you dont even follow this rhythm anymore
9. 01:31:913 (2,3) - You are out of the intense part but are still using the same spacing, decrease spacing abit to represent the more calm part of the song The increase in spacing here is fine because it expresses the pitch increase with the melody. On these notes specifically, I can feel the intensity start to build back up.
10. 01:45:504 (4) - now spacing feels like not existing lol
    ^ maybe something more like this? yeah sure lol
    
    SPOILER

    
11. 01:47:493 (1,2) - ^ ^
12. 02:52:963 (5,6,7,8) - why did you space them so extrem apart? i didnt even use so much spacing in the more intense part lol Hmm.
    The music gets intense here for a brief period of time, so I use a sudden increase in spacing to express that
13. 04:31:250 (4) - If you are following a circular flow here, (4) should be where (5) is Done because I wanted the concept of the circular flow changing direction on the squares to be consistent.
14. The Biggest Problem i see in this map are the Different flows you try to mash together on the same part of the songs
    - Like here you go from reverse circular flow 01:39:869 (3,4,5) - to 01:41:195 (1,2,3,4) - linear? to 01:42:852 (5,6) - ? missleading sliders to 01:45:172 (3,4,5,6,1) - circular flow? its pretty hard to sideread which object comes next because youve used in 6 seconds 4 different flows, it feels like you are changing it randomly or if we go by the exact same sound
    -01:50:145 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - circular flow follow with missleading slider to emphasize the more stronger sounds, fine so far
    01:55:449 (1,2,3) - Now the exact part of the song its missleading slider follow by nothing because you mapped the exact same part different Hmm. This kind of gameplay is intentional because I feel like dynamically changing the flow would make the map more interesting. I do take care to make sure it suits the music though. Like in the part you listed, many different instruments increase and decrease in intensity, so to reflect on that I shift the flow.

Flobs o/

1. 00:42:355 (5,6,7,8,9) - didn't quite get why spacing here is so big, here its much smaller 00:45:172 (1,2,3,4,5) -
2. 01:55:117 (7,8,9,10,1) - make stream so it would be part of the arc visually?
3. 01:56:443 (3) - perhaps make it blanket 01:55:946 (2) - just like you did with these 01:55:449 (1,2) -
4. 01:59:095 (3) - i think would be better if you just blanket this 01:58:101 (1) - same as these 01:58:101 (1,2) -
5. 03:41:858 (2,3) - maybe make them look like part of the same arc better or just beginning of (3) upper
6. 04:12:023 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16) - this seems like its the same as 02:20:642 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - but you didn't divide it and put nc
7. 04:45:172 - im pretty sure you could place some objects in this section
8. 05:07:714 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - is this really needed?.. i mean, maybe better actually follow music and not make something unjustifiably high sr?
   
   Sorry for short mod, map seems pretty much ready (ill shoot a star), so i think you need to look for a bn or maybe ask someone to testplay (someone who actually can play it, or an ez player). Good luck!
   
   edited first concern

h4d0uk3n1 wrote:

hello, m4m here, sorry for forgeting

1. 00:42:355 (5,6,7,8,9) - didn't quite get why spacing here is so big, here its much smaller I chose to make the spacing here big because every other stream in this section is mapped to some form of drum. Here though, the stream is mapped to some sort of synth sound, so I make the spacing big to reflect on that.
2. 01:55:117 (7,8,9,10,1) - make stream so it would be part of the arc visually? Yeah I neatened it up.
3. 01:56:443 (3) - perhaps make it blanket 01:55:946 (2) - just like you did with these 01:55:449 (1,2) - Doesn't seem that necessary tbh.
   I have the pattern like this because the tone of the robot's voice resets, so I reflect the gameplay by having the cursor move down instead of up.
4. 01:59:095 (3) - i think would be better if you just blanket this 01:58:101 (1) - same as these 01:58:101 (1,2) - Sure, I toned down the curve on 01:59:095 (3) -
5. 03:41:858 (2,3) - maybe make them look like part of the same arc better or just beginning of (3) upper Done
6. 04:12:023 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16) - this seems like its the same as 02:20:642 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - but you didn't divide it and put nc On the first stream the piano at 04:12:686 (9) - isn't nearly as strong, so I don't increase the spacing or put an NC.
7. 04:45:172 - im pretty sure you could place some objects in this section Hmm. I would rather leave this part empty, because it signifies the fact that the main instruments I am mapping to have come to a stop
8. 05:07:714 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - is this really needed?.. i mean, maybe better actually follow music and not make something unjustifiably high sr? I am following the music. If you listen to the piano, then you'll notice that the spacing in the stream changes with the pitch of the instrument. Because it is the longest piano 1/4 in the song, and it also happens to be the most intense as a result of it, I ramp up the difficulty of the stream in response.
   
   Sorry for short mod, map seems pretty much ready (ill shoot a star), so i think you need to look for a bn or maybe ask someone to testplay (someone who actually can play it, or an ez player). Good luck!

-Space- wrote:

Something smells fishy.

I wasn't trying to provoke any argument either, I was just trying to reason why the map is getting so much consistent pressure put against it. Said pressure being mainly negative reception on its use of cs7 rather than a "normal" circle size.

One of my biggest points of concern in mapping is the mentality of: if one person does xyz with their map then everyone has to follow otherwise it's unrankable/not suitable. How?

If I try and do yxz instead of xyz on my map I get told it's not "right", nice.

Edit: Sorry for perhaps coming off as hostile, I can't really express my emotions through text that well ;-;

Thanks for the nice comments though Chewin

Cerulean Veyron wrote:

Hello! M4M~ Sorry for that huge delay...

Circle Size 7? Not bad! lmao
[- - Melancholy - -]

1. 00:51:305 (2,1) - You could've spaced this out a little more though, it's probably for consisting with the previous notes' distance spacing... Well, mostly. It's not that bad if you're trying to do some anti-jump or something. But to me, it visually looks pretty close overall. I agree, it'll play better if I formed an isoceles triangle with 00:51:139 (1,2,1) - .
2. 01:01:747 (9) - 01:22:963 (9) - How about adding a new combo here? As far as I see, there are some streams like this around the section with two or maybe three new combos, which excessively is used for some colorhax reasons or something about differing patterns. So why not try it out here too, even if it's just two repeating sliders? yeah sure
3. 01:39:206 (5,6) - Okay, it's notgonna be a huge change here or whatso. But looking at this stream's angle and the curve after circle (5) is kinda unpolished, or a bit awkward at some point. The simple way of giving this a twek is rotating 01:39:288 (6,7,8,1) - , probably anti-clockwise by 15 or 20deg. If you don't really mind rotating it, you can alter the pattern by changing the curve's position aside from rotating it as long as the stream would look polished enough. It's up to you. Done, the stream and the pattern after looks/plays nicer now.
4. 02:16:830 (2,3) - Just a personal suggestion, so it can be optional or not. You could try out swapping the placement of these two circles from the square pattern in order to flow much smoother with the back-and-forth movement towards the next few notes on 02:17:161 (4,5,6) -. Not sure if you wanna keep it for some reasons, so... Honestly, doing this would botch the flow at 02:16:664 (1,3) - since the player has to make quite an obtuse angle after the fluid motion from the stream. Also, I think doing this would make the flow at 02:17:161 (4,5) - far too sharp. Rough flow plays nice here because the slider is going in the same direction the cursor is travelling.
5. 03:15:007 (1,2) - I don't really have any idea what you're trying to do here, it's just that the flow angle is too sharp, not broken of course. I think moving circle (2) somewhere else than the current placement would be best to tweak in the structural flow, if you wanted to keep the smooth curves on the previous stream. I agree, changed it up a bit.
6. 03:55:283 - 03:55:449 - I wonder why would you totally skip these two beats just after you've followed like... many tracks that sounds really similar previously until here. You could possibly add a 1/2 (or maybe an extended one, tail ends on 1/4 blue tick) slider here to fill out the rhythm composition, and keep up a bit of the emphasis in between the notes in the section. I'll keep this as it is. On this part of the song, I am following the vocals primarily. This gap emphasises the sudden stop in the singer's vocals. Also, the other sliders I've placed in this section weren't because I was mapping to other rhythms, but rather because I was emphasising how the voice was held for half a beat. Here though, it completely stops, so I leave a gap in the rhythm to emphasise that.
7. 04:21:305 - I would rather suggest making the stream a little more different in design shape, because somehow it looks way too similar to one of the previous streams, likely 04:12:023 -. It kinda makes it a bit repetitive reusing the same concept again and again. You could actually do two times which suffices of course, but it gets less interesting overtime. So I'd recommend using just a few variation or redo the patterning around the stream. I couldn't specify one because you could change it into many ways, so maybe you'll alter it on your own way. I actually couldn't differentiate the streams unless I looked at the timestamp, or the patterns before/after. Changed.

Well, I find this map really stellar~ With a smaller circle size, it made most patterns a lot more neat in terms of aesthetics. Decent map for sure!
Best of luck!

Aeril wrote:

-Space- wrote:

Something smells fishy.

I wasn't trying to provoke any argument either, I was just trying to reason why the map is getting so much consistent pressure put against it. Said pressure being mainly negative reception on its use of cs7 rather than a "normal" circle size.

One of my biggest points of concern in mapping is the mentality of: if one person does xyz with their map then everyone has to follow otherwise it's unrankable/not suitable. How?

If I try and do yxz instead of xyz on my map I get told it's not "right", nice.

Edit: Sorry for perhaps coming off as hostile, I can't really express my emotions through text that well ;-;

Thanks for the nice comments though Chewin

Most of the pressure comes the fact that CS 7 maps are just so intense on the snapping requirements that changing snap from note to note with little to no room for error and is difficult and annoying to play. The current ranked CS 7 maps (usually) have a consistent use of distance snap and sparing use of jumps in a row that aren't just back and forths because it takes off some of that strain from the constant changing in snapping, which is what conventional meta 4-5 CS maps do because there is quite a bit of room for error in not hitting the middle there. Doesn't really matter in my opinion whether someone uses CS 7 or CS 5 or whatever, the way Irre maps CS 7 is actually quite nice and I prefer it that way but either works.

Renquiem wrote:

Hello Hello~

00:09:703 (3,4) - Slider end of 3 doesn't quite lead into 4's slider head. Dunno if this was a design choice or not Yeah, it forms an isoceles triangle with the ends of (4). If I changed it to lead into (4)'s head, then it wouldn't be noticeable in gameplay anyway.
00:13:681 (6,7,8) - There is no intensity or rhythm change here. I don't think there is a need for these kick sliders :/ The rhythm changes to a rather high pitched synth sound, which is very different compared to the rest of the song in this area. Therefore I express it with kick sliders.
00:16:333 (6,7,8,9) - Objects 6 and 7 don't have quite the same spacing as 8 and 9? If they are to change size I believe it might be better for them to get larger since the following jump also increases in size. Tweaked a bit.
00:22:631 (1,2,3,4,5) - The sounds you are mapping to are so faint this might come off as overmapping. I suggest either lowering the hit sounds for this beginning or just not mapping to that rhythm. I agree. Lowered the hitsound volume more here.
00:26:940 (2,3,4,5,1,2) - Use the shape generator! It'll help make the patterns look pretty . (ctrl+shift+D) guess I made that pattern neater, done.
00:29:095 (7,1,2,3,4) - Same dealio Changed it in another way, wasn't too happy with it in the first place.
00:50:476 (1,2,1,2,1,2) - Each jump has a different length. Is this intentional? ye
01:56:443 (3) - Doesn't quite line up with 01:55:946 (2). Rotating -5 worked. Done
02:11:029 (3,4,1) - Since the player was doing back and forth prior to this, for the sudden need to go at a wide angle away from this motion is very uncomfortable. If the wide angle wasn't there this would work but this breaks the fluid motion this map was having :/
It might be better to put the object 1NC up where the back and forth would have continued, or at least lessen that wide angle. I agree, so I sharpened the angle and adjusted the pattern after.
03:01:084 (4,5,6) - Not a perfect triangle Moved (5) down 1 grid.
03:50:311 (5,6,7) - 5 isn't quite in the middle of those circles. Slight nudge up and right. Done
04:34:399 (7,8,1) - 8 might indent left a bit too much here. Moved (1) a bit to smoothen the indent
04:38:874 (5,6,7,8,1,2) - Small fix with that shape tool Tweaked a bit
05:05:725 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1) - This is the only stream I have a problem with LOL. It's a bit of an oval shape and might need some tweaking. Changed

All in all, I really liked your map! Your absolutely evil choosing CS 7 but that's up to the mapper's choice right?... Kind of wish it was a lower CS so HR plays were a possibility. hey this map is pretty fun with hr
Also I loved your streams! Good luck with ranked!

TheKingHenry wrote:

Hello M4M from my queue~

Melancholy

1. God bless CS7
2. 00:04:399 (3,4) - wouldn't this be fairly good place to blanket? Also could be cool to additionally have the head of 00:04:399 (3) - on top of the body of 00:04:730 (4) - instead of the current overlapping type of stuff. (Tuning it according to these will make the spacing quite lower though, so if you want to keep that you're going to need to change the shape of the slider too and so on Alright, moved 00:04:067 (1,2,3) - to the left a bit.
3. 00:16:996 (1,2) - I think it would play better if these were back and forth in the same directions as the 2 couples before, just kinda emphasised with more spacing to them from the last pattern due the NC and stuff. Basically just change their places, althought could then slightly tune the DS down after that Made it play better, but in a different way.
4. 00:20:642 (4,6) - if ya wanna this to blanket, 00:21:139 (6) - needs to be more curved (or 00:20:642 (4) - farther away ¯\_(ツ)_/¯) done
5. 00:24:288 (2) - NC this instead of the current one? It's not like 00:24:206 (1) - is on the white tick, which the NCing would indicate currently. It's also difficult for the player to see how it is due the long slider before these. And I'd use the same NCing logic at 00:34:896 (7) - since the pattern is same (or if you decide to not change to what I said, atleast have the same NCing logic in the same place in the music) sure why not
6. 00:44:427 - fairly strong sound here, perhaps map smth that catches it? (The music feels very much like doubles type pattern tbh Yeah,
   but I want to primarily stick to mapping the melody. I feel that placing a 1/4 here would catch the player off-guard since it would be so inconsistent with the rest of this section.
7. 01:07:051 (3) - NC this instead? Nah, I use pattern based comboing here to separate the two stream patterns. It'll look nicer my way imo.
8. 01:16:167 (3) - fairly distinct sound under this slider as well Actually seems like you are somewhat following vocals or smth so I guess it's up to you what you do then. Similarly for many following ones as well Mapping to vocals here.
9. 01:26:526 (4,5,6,7,8,1) - curve looks kinda broken, fix it? Done
10. 01:33:239 (2) - I'd prefer NC on this here as well No because I want the stream to be the same colour throughout.
11. 01:51:471 (1,3) - fix stack Done
12. 01:57:769 (4,5,6,7,1) - lol lol
13. 02:01:250 (3,4) - blanket seems little off (okay, pretty slightly, but it looks fairly obvious when going through the map)
14. 02:30:587 (1,2,3,4,5) - kinda what is easily onlooked with CS like this, even though the small size of the circles makes curves look as if they were fine, this ain't really looking too good. Full circle with only 5 circles isn't shape that looks smooth like most of your streams here are (looks like supposed to atleast). I kinda wanted to comment already little above where I said "lol" but due the combination with the slider I think it was fair enough. Anyways here inside longer stream pattern this curve looks way too strong, I'd say 6 circles and above is what'd work if you want it to look smooth enough like most of the streams you've used (see 02:31:498 (4,5,6,7,8,1) - kinda here and there but it looks fitting enough imo). And additively, due the strong curve of those forementioned 5, the curve of 02:30:835 (4,5,6,7,8) - looks kinda crude too, the curve changing from very strong to almost straight at 02:30:835 (4) - . So keep this explanation in mind on more overall level, since I'm fairly sure there are similar pattern later on which you could give a look as well I think my 5 note loops play nice, and I don't think the changes in curve that they bring aren't too much of a problem because visually, the shapes still make it appear smooth. I'll think about it some more though.
15. 03:54:786 (1,2,3,1,2,3) - mmmm 03:54:786 (1,2,3) - is fine, but what's the idea behind 03:55:614 (1,2,3) - ? If you want to solely follow vocals for this measure for some kind of effect, the latter one should have 4 circles instead of the current 3? And following instrumentals this just makes no sense so I'm leaning towards teh vocals explanation. But anyways the current one feels very random, like with no clear basis in the music, so tune it a lil' Sure I changed it then. Everyone kept complaining about it and originally I thought it was fine, but now that I listen to it again then I do indeed hear a vocal at 03:55:449 -, so I guess it'll sound a bit off if someone hasn't listened to the song before. So I added a slider at 03:55:117 (3) - . (
16. 04:12:603 (8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16) - stream shapes look broken (they seem to have some kind of back and forth in there, so if you want smth like that, make it more clear so it doesn't look like accident. That being said I think fairly simple smooth would be better according to what you've done usually. Or then I have just missed all the ones before :thinking:) Sure, I made the curve stronger.
17. 04:38:543 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - allright so it really seems like you like your polygon based streams, like there are many of those of 5 or 6 circles that end up completely where they begun. This idea is fine in and of itself, and I guess overall fine due how you've used it constantly (aside from those 5 circle ones looking pretty crude), but just smth little to think about is that with these kind of patterns, it easily makes the transitioning stream parts fucked up in shape (see 04:38:874 (5,6,7,8,1) - for example), when, due how they are in the same combo, it'd look better to have same/atleast similar curve for all of them. The earlier example of the change in curve strength is basically this problem as well. I think the flow/shape is fine. I wouldn't have the curves be the same/similar because I find that it's good to have variety. The spacing and concepts are consistent throughout though.
18. 04:55:366 (1) - is this intentional? Anyways, by all means, NC 04:55:449 (2) - instead done

Good luck!

paydayzcool wrote:

M4M from your queue, sorry for being so late -_-

I seriously love it when people use circle sizes greater than 4, it allows more space to represent the map!

01:25:946 (6,7,8,9) - I reckon that every stream that starts like this should be changed to a repeating kickslider to better represent the weaker 1/4 beats before the downbeat afterwards. hmm, the drastic change in spacing here is enough imo
01:32:742 (6) - You've skipped a downbeat that starts a stream with this pattern and makes 01:33:156 (1,2,3,4,5) feel more dull. Are you sure you want to do that? I agree, changed the rhythm here.
01:44:509 (3,4,5,6,1) - This stream is less spaced than 01:46:830 (2,3,4,5) and they both have significantly different spacings to represent the same sounds. The sounds are different here. The first one is mapped to the vocals whilst the second one is mapped to the synth piano.
04:12:023 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16) - Why is this stream less spaced than the other streams that have the same intensity? Because here the piano isn't nearly as strong in comparison to the other places, so it's compressed throughout the whole stream. Generally speaking, I've made it so that the piano results in spaced streams, and the drums result in compressed streams.

I'm really sorry if you thought that this is a short mod, but whatever other people may see as errors are not the case for me when I mod.

Whatever happens, do not EVER lower the CS, it is as good as it is. Those who complain about it are not focused on the excellent styles which your map has to offer! aw, thanks. And I will NOT lower the CS at all, so don't worry. Doing that would defeat the entire concept behind the map.

Sotarks wrote:

triggered

pinataman wrote:

Hey Faded. CS 7 made this map fun. I rarely see new maps that challenge me in terms of spacing without being way too high in bpm, so this map stretched my limits, and I enjoyed that.

Some of the discussion in this thread made me think of this, and that made me want to rant about the CS issue more, but based off some of the positive feedback from this thread, I don't think my rant is necessary. It should be clear to BN's/QAT's that there is a strong subset of the community that enjoys CS 7 maps, especially one as nicely made as this.

[Melancholy]

00:10:034 (4) – On my small screen size this is kind of off screen: http://puu.sh/xASpg/47b1251390.jpg. Can you find a way to move it up? Moved it up a bit

03:36:222 (1) – VS 03:46:830 (1) – Why go from mapping the harmony to mapping the melody? It wasn't clear to me what about the music is different that would suggest that kind of change. Personally, I really enjoyed the vocals, so I loved the second half of this section and wish the first were also on the vocals. But maybe that's biased and some people would like going with the harmony. But what players want to follow both? Usually a player following a certain track of the music continues to follow that track of the music. What change do you feel in the music that leads you to change the rhythm? This is what I want a real answer to. My main reason for this is so that players can notice a build up. I reflect on this by having the two halves different in intensity, which is done by mapping to different parts of the song. This can be justified in the music because at 03:46:830 (1) - , the melody becomes a lot more prominent over the harmony. The vocals become a lot stronger and sharper, whilst the harmony becomes quieter. I also think this adds variety, because following the exact same rhythm for 30 seconds can get a bit boring, so again I capitalise on this change in music.


Nice map. I'm pretty happy with it, but I don't have to tell you that ranking a map can be hard. Keep up the good work and good luck!

1. Cs7 is fun and all but after playing this countless of times with and without cs7 its safe to say that the current cs you use doesn't really offer much to the map other than difficulty. Changing it to cs6, and the experience was practically the same (although without the arbitrary difficulty). Honestly, even cs5 would work well for this map but that ruins the precision thing you're going for here with the streams so i'd suggest using cs6, or 6.5 if you must, to kind of get rid of the forced precision difficulty that comes from the cs alone, and not the map.

1. 00:04:233 (2) - there's barely an audible sound here, so I find it a bit weird for the spacing between the first three combos to be equivalent. Slightly stacking these would give (2) a proper introduction considering it's a very quiet sound in the song.
2. 00:06:056 (7) - ctrl+g here would kind of ruin the flow for the next combo but it really fits the song playability wise. It's a very nice comfortable flow with it ctrl + g'd which fits the smooth and slow song in the background, as opposed to the sharp, strong aim required with how its currently mapped.
3. 00:07:880 (5) - pretty significant sound here, yet it doesn't get much attention in the map I'd suggest a slightly unique slider shape, or ctrl + g for a stronger effect.
4. 00:13:681 (6,7,8) - these are kind of too intense for the very quiet 1/4 in the background, a very low ds stream would fit more and better introduce the streams coming ahead later in the map. also the stream should end with a kick slider to give emphasis on the sound on 00:14:675 (1) -
5. 00:17:161 (2) - eh i don't really see the need of this being apart of the jumps, would make more sense if it was a slider end
6. 00:30:090 (4,5) - very huge distance for a reason i can't seem to find.
7. 00:30:255 (5,1) - pretty underwhelming distance between these two
8. 00:37:217 (1) - i really like the 1/1 circles after this but this slider is also underwhelming, i think it could be way more interesting with that huge bass sound in the background
9. 01:04:233 (4,5,6) - i find it kind of weird that you give attention to the drum triple here but not the one that starts on (6) considering that (6) is stronger
10. 01:09:371 (2,3) - distance here could be reduced a bit, i don't see the need for such high spacing
    
11. 01:28:929 - starting around here, since the vocals are gone i think it would be best to not ignore the prominent bass in the background, you don't really use any rhythms to give attention to it
    
12. 01:31:416 (4) - this circle really takes away intensity from (3), which i think deserves attention. this pattern i made gives more attention to it which i think fits better
13. 01:39:869 (3,4) - you could put a circle in between these two, to shine some light on that bass in the background that i mentioned
14. 01:41:858 (1) - slider end would be better if it was clickable since the bass doesn't stop here, so continuing the jumps would make most sense
15. 01:42:686 (4,5) - triple here would fit better although i wouldn't know how to implement it without ruining your flow
16. 01:43:515 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1) - can't tell if these are more spaced than the previous streams but even if they aren't, this weird shape isn't really called for. it forces stronger movements despite the 1/4 in the song being pretty soft and quiet
17. 02:19:316 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - idunno why the second set of squares is a lot higher spaced than the first, considering the pitch of her voice is at its peak during the first square. would make more sense if it was higher spacing first, then lower
18. 02:23:294 (1,2,3,4,5) - cool structure but i dont see the point of the high spacing here starting on (3) other than to keep the pattern
19. 03:04:399 (1) - i can't tell but it really sounds like the volume of the audio lowers here a bit, and it seems intentional... would be cool to give that some attention
20. 04:01:250 (6,1,2,1,2,3,1,2,3) - this is a real big spike in difficulty and i get that its a build up but relative to the rest of the map it feels a bit too much
21. 04:10:200 (1,2,3) - sudden increase in spacing here, which would make sense if the singing started on (1) but it returns on (2) so it isn't as fitting as it could be

mithew wrote:

returning the favor~

[General]

1. Cs7 is fun and all but after playing this countless of times with and without cs7 its safe to say that the current cs you use doesn't really offer much to the map other than difficulty. Changing it to cs6, and the experience was practically the same (although without the arbitrary difficulty). Honestly, even cs5 would work well for this map but that ruins the precision thing you're going for here with the streams so i'd suggest using cs6, or 6.5 if you must, to kind of get rid of the forced precision difficulty that comes from the cs alone, and not the map. I don't think the difficulty feels forced at all. The map is designed around cs7 by the precise jumps and sophisticated stream shapes, and reducing the CS would get rid of that concept.

[Melancholy]

1. 00:04:233 (2) - there's barely an audible sound here, so I find it a bit weird for the spacing between the first three combos to be equivalent. Slightly stacking these would give (2) a proper introduction considering it's a very quiet sound in the song. I'll leave it as it is. I think it's fine because it's still quite a tame part of the song.
2. 00:06:056 (7) - ctrl+g here would kind of ruin the flow for the next combo but it really fits the song playability wise. It's a very nice comfortable flow with it ctrl + g'd which fits the smooth and slow song in the background, as opposed to the sharp, strong aim required with how its currently mapped. done
3. 00:07:880 (5) - pretty significant sound here, yet it doesn't get much attention in the map I'd suggest a slightly unique slider shape, or ctrl + g for a stronger effect. I agree. Done and made the pattern nicer.
4. 00:13:681 (6,7,8) - these are kind of too intense for the very quiet 1/4 in the background, a very low ds stream would fit more and better introduce the streams coming ahead later in the map. also the stream should end with a kick slider to give emphasis on the sound on 00:14:675 (1) - I think it's fine because the 1/4 sounds come up quite suddenly in the map, justifying the increased difficulty.
5. 00:17:161 (2) - eh i don't really see the need of this being apart of the jumps, would make more sense if it was a slider end I think it's fine. I justified the change in the song by changing the angle of the jump. The sound is strong, so I think making it a slider end wouldn't be good.
6. 00:30:090 (4,5) - very huge distance for a reason i can't seem to find. It's because the music is strong, and I'm gradually increasing the spacing between the jumps as part of the build up.
7. 00:30:255 (5,1) - pretty underwhelming distance between these two The sound isn't strong here, so I think it's fine as it is. The sharp stream angle gives it enough emphasis.
8. 00:37:217 (1) - i really like the 1/1 circles after this but this slider is also underwhelming, i think it could be way more interesting with that huge bass sound in the background Hmm, I think it's fine. I already have an sv change here to represent the bass sound.
9. 01:04:233 (4,5,6) - i find it kind of weird that you give attention to the drum triple here but not the one that starts on (6) considering that (6) is stronger. Of course. I made a stream here instead.
10. 01:09:371 (2,3) - distance here could be reduced a bit, i don't see the need for such high spacing Done
    
11. 01:28:929 - starting around here, since the vocals are gone i think it would be best to not ignore the prominent bass in the background, you don't really use any rhythms to give attention to it At the same time, the main melody also gets stronger. I think it's fine.
    
12. 01:31:416 (4) - this circle really takes away intensity from (3), which i think deserves attention. this pattern i made gives more attention to it which i think fits better Changed, but I just reduced the spacing instead.
13. 01:39:869 (3,4) - you could put a circle in between these two, to shine some light on that bass in the background that i mentioned I think it's fine as it is right now.
14. 01:41:858 (1) - slider end would be better if it was clickable since the bass doesn't stop here, so continuing the jumps would make most sense I agree, made into two circles
15. 01:42:686 (4,5) - triple here would fit better although i wouldn't know how to implement it without ruining your flow I think it's fine, as the sub-bass isn't really a priority for me.
16. 01:43:515 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1) - can't tell if these are more spaced than the previous streams but even if they aren't, this weird shape isn't really called for. it forces stronger movements despite the 1/4 in the song being pretty soft and quiet I agree, reduced spacing and made the shape smoother.
17. 02:19:316 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - idunno why the second set of squares is a lot higher spaced than the first, considering the pitch of her voice is at its peak during the first square. would make more sense if it was higher spacing first, then lower Because I am primarily mapping to the synth that occurs in the background. The increased spacing is part of the build up towards the strong sound at 02:20:642 (1) - .
18. 02:23:294 (1,2,3,4,5) - cool structure but i dont see the point of the high spacing here starting on (3) other than to keep the pattern Another instrument gets introduced on (3), albeit briefly. So I think it's good.
19. 03:04:399 (1) - i can't tell but it really sounds like the volume of the audio lowers here a bit, and it seems intentional... would be cool to give that some attention Not really necessary tbh, I don't think there's a good way to give that attention besides mapping to the echoed vocals, which isn't what I want to do.
20. 04:01:250 (6,1,2,1,2,3,1,2,3) - this is a real big spike in difficulty and i get that its a build up but relative to the rest of the map it feels a bit too much Yeah, but the build up is very strong, I can easily say that it's the apex of the map. Also, despite the spacing, the pattern is actually easy to play considering how sharp the angles are.
21. 04:10:200 (1,2,3) - sudden increase in spacing here, which would make sense if the singing started on (1) but it returns on (2) so it isn't as fitting as it could be I reflect on this by making the angle here more obtuse, so it's fine tbh.

its still really fun to play as cs7 so i can see the appeal and justification to keeping it, the map is great either way though so good luck~

GalenTori wrote:

Hi o/ I'm not nazi lmao :v // sorry to late ;w; (from M4M)
[General and Metadata]
Tag: form jubeat plus it not full version ->> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oL8ih4arisc "Jubeat" and "Plus" are already in the tags though.
Difficulty: everything balance but in my opinion you can change something // reduce or expand
Ex ->> Hp4 and Cs5
or ->> Hp2 and Cs7 :3 I think my diff settings are good, if I make the hp any lower then it won't be satisfying to pass at all.

[Melancholy]
overall no problem :3 your map and rhythm so good
01:27:603 (1) - You forgot nc it? lol done
01:32:907 (7) - actually, You should nc form the downbeat and 01:33:156 (1) - remove nc because the rhythm not change and not aim stream In terms of patterns, I wanted to make sure that a triangle was visible with 01:32:576 (5,6,7) - . However, I added an NC at 01:33:239 (1) - instead, as it's on a beat.
01:41:526 (3) - 01:41:858 (5) - In anti jump and stress should nc Not really necessary imo.
01:54:454 (3) - 01:54:454 (3) - ^ ^
(imo) ->> 01:57:769 (1,1,1,1) - nc for good looking // https://i.imgur.com/p12rCxD.png It looks fine as it is
02:12:686 (6) - don't skip nc downbeat please It's pattern based NCing, so it's fine because it looks nicer that way.
why??? you not nc 02:05:393 (9) - same 01:22:963 (1) - Done
02:58:432 (9) - ^ ^
^ I think in stress it should nc more than no nc :v Good luck, I hope my mod is not useless ;w;

[Miko] wrote:

Melancholy
reply to your m4m

00:13:681 (6,7,8) - I know this is supposed to build up for the incoming change in music, but I don't think this is the best possible way try you might want to consider this or this. I just don't think it compliments the music I agree, changed it so it complements the melody more, whilst still emphasising the 1/4.
00:46:498 (1,2,3,4,5) - All of these sliderbodies have different shape, yet here 00:49:150 (1,2,3,4,5) - they are all the same. even slider bodies should somewhat compliment the music The general movement and rhythm is still the same so it's fine tbh. The shape of sliders generally don't have much of an impact in gameplay here.
02:13:349 (3,4) - These sliders feel weird, but that could just be me It's just you
02:23:294 (1,2,3,4) - Jump from 3 to 4 feels unnatural It plays fine for me though, no change.
02:46:333 (3,4) - I feel like these could be closer together to create a more full blanket - see here Not really necessary. It looks good because the spacing between the notes is consistent throughout the whole pattern, and just changing this would ruin that consistency, making it look worse imo.
02:53:791 (1) - Other notes have been off the playfield a little bit, but this feels like to much It doesn't go off the playfield in gameplay though, so it's fine.
01:37:880 (5) - might want to make it a tick shorter, same here 01:48:487 (5) - The blue tick right before the downbeat has a drum, so I express that with a slider end. Because it's a passive hit object, it's not at all hard to get to 01:38:211 (1) - , as the player won't be actively clicking on the slider end.

I couldn't find many one time mistakes, but the biggest problem that I can see is the changes in sliderbodies that share the same sound and the lack of slider velocity variety

Slider velocity suggestions
00:15:835 (5) - on notes like these (This is just an example), I suggest slowing the sliders down for more emphasis on the longer note. I've learned that this makes the note feel longer when you follow the slider
Its only one problem, but it is very consistently appearing throughout the song.
I made a list of all the times I saw it
note: some of these you might not want to change to compliment a changing rhythm or stress on a note

SPOILER

List of these sliders
00:04:730 (4)
00:07:382 (4)
00:10:034 (4)
00:12:686 (4)
00:15:835 (5)
00:18:487 (8)
00:21:139 (6)
00:23:791 (9)
00:26:443 (1)
00:29:095 (7)
00:31:747 (3)
00:33:902 (4)
00:39:206 (4)
00:41:858 (4)
00:47:990 (2)
00:58:598 (2)
01:00:255 (3) - This one is different from the other note, you might have a reason to not change this
01:08:211 (3)
01:09:537 (3)
01:10:863 (3)
01:14:841 (3)
01:18:819 (3)
01:20:145 (3)
01:21:471 (3)
01:24:951 (1)
01:30:090 (6)
01:40:697 (6)
01:46:001 (6)
01:50:642 (3)
01:51:471 (1)
01:52:797 (1)
01:53:294 (2)
01:55:449 (1,2,1)
01:58:598 (2)
02:01:250 (3)
This is taking a really long time but I think you get the idea
Also, please don't change all of them, I'm just including the ones I find because you might want to only change some (or none if you don't like this idea).

Nothing appears in the music to justify an sv change at all. The length of the sliders is good here because the player holds on to a longer time. I don't see a need at all to slow the sliders down. If you look at the sv changes I do have, then you'll notice that I have very specific reasons for them.

1. 00:37:217 (1) - A reverb effect is added, which isn't seen anywhere else within the song. Therefore I slow the slider down.
2. 00:39:703 (1) - A screech effect is heard, so I increase the sv to reflect on that. This screech effect isn't heard anywhere else in the song either, so this is the only speed-up I use.
3. 04:23:957 (1,1,2,3,4) - The song slows down massively here, so I use an abrupt sv change to reflect on that. I then have the sliders gradually get faster,
   which reflects on the way the song picks up pace again.

So, this isn't an sv centric map, and I have very specific reasons for the sv changes I do have. I can't just add an sv change for every prolonged sound in the music, because that is unnecessary and will probably cause more harm than good.

-Jordan- wrote:

hi

Melancholy

1. I don't see much reason in your mapping for such an extreme CS like 7, other than you just wanted to set it to the smallest CS possible. But I do think this mapping compliments small CS well, something like CS6 would be FAR better (and actually playable). Just consider it, I know you mentioned before but yeah the style suits small CS very well, but not this ridiculous CS. I wonder how many times you've tried to justify this in mod responses lmao, sorry had to mention it. Would probably remove a lot of barriers too when ranking it. Yeah, this has been mentioned a lot of times. I won't change the CS though. I think it's perfectly playable to the intended target audience of my map (really high rank players and these who enjoy small CS)
   
   
2. 00:17:327 (3) - Shouldn't the NC for this pattern start on the downbeat like 00:14:675 (1) - 00:19:979 (1) - since the circles at 00:16:996 (1,2) - aren't really a lead in to the melody. Done
   
   
3. 00:19:648 (1) - I guess you added NC here because you didn't want the combo numbers to get too high. THen why not just NC these 00:16:333 (6) - 00:18:985 (9) - etc.Done
   
4. 00:23:791 (9) - The sound mapped to the slider head of this slider is weaker than the sound at 00:23:957 - that you skip over. This doesn't really make for a good transition to the next section. You should add a 1/2 beat slider at 00:23:957 - and change 00:23:791 (9) - to just a circle. No change,
   because I want to put focus on the melody here.
   
   
5. 00:25:283 (1,2,3,4,5,1) - Emphasis seems really weird here, with the kick at 00:26:112 - landing on a slider end then completely ignoring the crash at 00:26:609 - but the patterning is nice. You should try a rhythm like this and keepy your object arrangement the same because rn rhythm choices don't match the song well. I want to keep this because like I said above, the melody is what I am primarily mapping to. I think the crash is emphasised fine by the curvature of the slider. (the image also doesn't seem to be loading for me)
   
   
   
   
6. 00:34:399 (5) - Similar thing here than what i said above, although not as bad, so it'd be safe to ignore this one if you chose to. ^
   
   
7. 00:30:587 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - The noise you map on this stream actually begins at 00:30:753 - Intentional overmap, it is justified because (1) starts on a very strong, prolonged sound. To an average player, it'll sound like as if (1) is where the sound starts.
   
   
8. 00:32:907 (7) - 00:33:405 (2) - 00:33:902 (4) - Fix stacking error please. Done
   
   
9. 00:42:355 (5,6,7,8,9) - Why is this stream really spaced when 00:45:172 (1,2,3,4,5,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - with the much more dominent sounds is way closer. It's spaced like that because of how "chaotic" this instrument is in comparison to the drums. Because this sound appears scarcely in the music, I want to distinguish it from the streams that are mapped to the drums. Also, I feel that the sounds are a lot more individualised in comparison to the drums, which also justifies increased spacing.
   
   
10. 00:43:847 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - I reccomend using this rhythm to represent the new sounds on the blue and red tick since they are fairly audible, idnoring them doesn't make sense to me. Like I mentioned before, I want to prioritise the melody over everything else.
    
    
11. 00:54:454 (1,2,3,4,5) - Why do you ignore the sounds here? IN fact, throuought this section you skip over both sounds lie this, and sounds from the melody that I dont understand what you're even trying to follow. (Stuff like what I mentioned, 00:57:438 (2,3) - 00:58:598 (2) - the snare here, 01:00:255 (3) - the snare on the beat and the synth on the blue tick 01:00:255 (3) - , 01:02:907 (3) - ). Here I am mapping to the harmony (the high pitched bell sounds) with influences from the drums and melody when they get powerful. I also use circles as filler rhythm, because the harmony isn't dense at all.
    
    
12. 01:32:907 (7,8,9,10,1,2,3,4) - Doesn't follow your stream combo patterns from before. If 01:33:239 (1) - is a NC then 01:32:907 (7) - should be too. Done
    
    
13. 01:36:885 (1,2,3,4,5) - Similar point as 00:43:847 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - . No change
    
    
14. 01:57:769 (4,5,6,7,1) - umm first time i see something like this in the map, and its not on any unique sound i haven't heard yet or anything. You're right, but I like it and a few other modders pointed it out saying that they liked the pattern as well. It also didn't cause reading concerns to the people I had testplaying. If more people complain then yeah I'll probably change this. No change for now.
    
    
15. 02:11:360 - 02:43:184 - Really nice stream and jump patterns here, cool! Thanks!
    
    
16. 02:35:228 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1) - In all previous stream patterns you made distance and direction changes on the downbeat, so here it should be the same too. By this, I mean 02:35:891 (1) - should be in line with 02:35:228 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - so movement starts on the beat, not before it. Done
    
    
17. 02:47:161 (1,2,1,2,1,2) - Why did you NC this, i think all your other 1/2 jump patterns so far didn't have any 1,2 combo jumps. 03:22:963 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2) - Oh you did some here but idk why. Yeah, it's pattern based comboing for the ladder jumps. It looks nicer like that.
    
    
18. I literally can't say anything about your kiai sections other than they are so cool uwu. ty uwu
    
    
19. 04:12:023 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16) - Shouldn't this have a change of direction and/or spacing like 03:13:681 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - 02:20:642 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - . Maybe add a change at 04:21:305 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16) - too. In the examples you linked, the spacing increases in accordance to the increased pitch/amplitude of the piano. However, this isn't the case here, so I keep the spacing low.
    
    
20. 04:50:476 - Is that long break lead in intentional? idek, changed anyway.
    
    
21. 05:11:029 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1) - How this stream trails off at the end doesn't really match your stream aesthetic so far where you use a lot of circle shaped streams. Maybe having 05:11:692 (1) - at a position like x:188, could be better I don't really think it's that needed, both mine and yours are fine imo.

Einja wrote:

9.3 is better than 9.2

19:44 Einja: hi
19:44 Einja: sorry that i haven't returned the m4m yet, can we do it now via irc
19:46 -Faded-: oh alright, sure ^^
19:51 Einja: oof
19:51 Einja: the map is fun to playu
19:52 Einja: ok first
19:52 Einja: i don't see why the diff is called melancholy
19:52 Einja: it doesn't relate to the song or where it's from i don't think
19:53 Einja: 00:33:239 (1,2,3) - poor 1/4 sounds get ignored ;-;
19:53 -Faded-: well on here http://popnmusic.wikia.com/wiki/Nia it says "the diva of melancholy" under a caption
19:53 Einja: okie
19:53 -Faded-: but i've been thinking about changing it tbh
19:53 Einja: that's not a big deal so don't worry over it
19:54 Einja: 00:39:206 (4) - slider head stack
19:54 -Faded-: 00:33:239 (1,2,3) - i ignore the 1/4 here because it is really faint, and ignoring them will draw out contrast for 00:35:062 (2,3,4) - , where the 1/4 gets really intense
19:54 Einja: 00:30:587 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - why'd you draw them out here tho
19:55 Einja: 00:34:896 (1,1) - also stack
19:55 Einja: 00:48:487 (3,4) - wonky shapes, they look cool but i don't see why they are like dat
19:56 Einja: 00:53:791 (5,6) - same here
19:56 -Faded-: the music is kinda bouncy here, so these shapes represent that
19:57 Einja: 01:39:869 (3) - ctrl h would be much better here flow wise
19:57 Einja: with a 30-50 degree rotate
19:58 Einja: 01:51:471 (1,3) - e
19:58 Einja: 02:00:753 (1,3) - broken stack
19:59 Einja: 02:05:725 (2) - ctrl g here would make this hot to play
19:59 Einja: 02:11:360 (1) - a ctrl g and h here would make much more emphasis upon hitting this slider head
20:00 Einja: 02:27:272 (1,2,1,2,1,2) - why'd you suddenly change to 1-2 jump patterns here
20:00 Einja: 02:36:554 (1,1) - imperfect stack
20:01 Einja: 02:41:858 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - man i wish you were still using circles instead of kicksliders here :/
20:01 Einja: 02:44:509 (1,3) - slider tail stacks
20:02 Einja: 03:20:311 (1,2,3,4,5) - not a perfect star triggered
20:03 Einja: 04:12:023 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16) - why is this stream so much less spaced than others
20:04 Einja: 04:25:283 (1,2,3,4) - i really like this transition of sv changes
20:04 -Faded-: 01:39:869 (3) - I think this flows fine since the player won't follow the slider all the way, thanks to slider leniency. 02:27:272 (1,2,1,2,1,2) - Each set of circles represent a vocal phrase, which is better for emphasis. 02:41:858 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - while these are tough to play, I think they're still appropriate considering the intended difficulty of the map 04:12:023 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16) - Unlike the others, the piano sec... (message truncated)
20:05 -Faded-: everything else is done
20:05 Einja: 02:41:858 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - these are actually quite easy to play
20:05 Einja: i just wanted these to be streams since the same sound is still playing from 02:41:195 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - 
20:06 Einja: 02:27:272 (1,2,1,2,1,2) - and if you did that here, shouldn't you also do it at 02:24:620 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - 
20:08 Einja: ok also one more thing
20:08 -Faded-: the patterns are just laid out differently, so i don't notice much of a problem tbh
20:08 Einja: i think 9.2 for an ar is quite low, especially for a stream map
20:08 Einja: 9.4 or 9.5 would be a bit better?
20:09 Einja: https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/9214113 also this is what i did with 02:24:620 (1,2,1,2,1,2) - 
20:09 Einja: the spacing's different because of the higherpitch in vocals
20:09 -Faded-: I originally had the ar at 9 xd. I'm really hesitant for increasing the ar because with the small cs, I think a low ar would be better for players to notice the patterns
20:09 Einja: also the number 9.2 is ugly
20:10 Einja: 9.3 is pretty
20:10 Einja: xd
20:10 -Faded-: okay, raised it by .1 xd
20:10 Einja: yay
20:10 Einja: now it's pretty
20:10 -Faded-: and I really like your example for that pattern, so I'll change it to that
20:10 Einja: okay that's all i have for this map

squirrelpascals wrote:

Hi! Sorry this is like, 2 months? late D:
here is the mod

ddd

- 00:12:686 (4,5,6,7) - I think this spacing can be misleading because the 1/2 jump from 4 to 5 is spaces smaller, while the 1/4 jump from 6,7 is larger Hmm. I think this gets indicated by the sudden change in rhythm, and because (7) is on a stronger sound than the end of (6), players should naturally assume that it's a 1/4 jump.

- 00:16:333 (6,7,8,9,10,11) - Feels like pretty random jumps here after you use a lot of slider-based rhythms for the melody. For example, where is the note on 00:17:161 (11) - ? (same with the note on 00:27:769 (2) - but the jumps here make more sense) I agree, made 00:16:996 (10,11) -
a slider.

- 00:24:951 (5) - 00:35:559 (5) - since there's nothing on this red tick it feels misrepresentative to put a reverse slider over this whole beat
The reverse sliders emphasise the main sounds in the melody, along with the drums given by the reverse. I don't see anything wrong with it imo.

- 00:44:509 (4,5) - I feel like this deserves more exageration because the note suddenly gets louder here and you seemed to downscale spacing for this for some reason ;p Yeah, I increased the spacing of the triangle here.

- 01:29:095 (2) - Since this beat is pretty quiet and the player just got done playing that more stressful kickslider pattern, i think 01:28:929 (1,2) - would work well as a slider I want to differentiate the pattern from the next two sliders though. Although the beat is quiet, the music is still noticeably different then on 01:29:261 (3,4) -

- 01:33:902 (6,1) - suprised theres nothing here to represent that 1/4 kick pattern The 1/4 kick seem barely audible in gameplay, I didn't even know there was a 1/4 there until I slowed it down. I prefer to map to the main melody and prominent drums, so I won't change this.

- 01:42:521 (2,3,4) - would be a lot more comfortable if 2,3 went to the left, also considering the spacing and percision needed for the map in general Alright, moved it a bit

- 01:55:034 (6,7,8,9,10,1) - looks like the slider should be rotated like 11 degrees to flow with the direction of this stream Done

- 02:12:686 (6) - shouldnt you nc here instead because of the downbeat? Done

- 02:47:824 (1,2,1) - i feel like you a sharper angle here would better represent the sound at 02:48:156 - because of the way you handled this with 02:47:161 (1,1,1) - Done

- 02:53:294 (7,8) - seems like quite the large jump compared to 02:52:465 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7) - i can see that this might be the last jump before the downbeat but there no real exaggeration in the music here to show this Alright, reduced the spacing a bit

- 03:20:228 (4,1,2) - would also be easier to hit this with an angle. the momentum from the previous stream makes it feel more natural to go to the right. maybe put 2 where 03:20:974 (5) - is now Sure, changed the trajectory of the stream

- 03:46:084 (6,7) - you break ths smaller 1/4 spacing you previously used here, would recommend changing 6 to a 1/4 slider and 7 to a circle, or just not breaking that pattern because it kind of shocks the player after you use it often. The music is abnormally different here. Because of the large build up, I think this kind of pattern is warranted.

- 04:07:217 (4,5,6) - the triple doesn't feel as necessary as when you used it during the breakcore samples, like at 01:59:427 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7) - . the sound you use this over is pretty silent expecially considering the large spacing at 04:07:051 (3,4) - This is because (3) is on a powerful sound, so there's a jump because of that. The sound is pretty prominent, the new instrument only just gets introduced so the map should definitely reflect on that.

- 04:30:255 (5) - a ctrl+g here would lead in to the next object better and help the player handle the spacing change Done

- 04:32:410 (4,1) - 04:33:073 (4,1) - not a fan of this forced spacing change to accomodate for the rotating square pattern. I feel like you can find a smoother transition between each square shape while keeping the same idea I think it's fine. It isn't really forced because 04:32:576 (1,1) - are on very strong vocals.

- 04:38:211 (5,1) - 04:39:869 (1,2) - dont like the transitions in and out of this stream. you use the 1/2 sliders and put the next one behind the sliderhead, which seems to contradict the type of flow you use in most of the map I'll keep this. I don't really see anything wrong with it, and the flow is different but this kiai also sounds pretty different in comparison to the others. (

- 04:53:128 (1,2,3) - Its a cool pattern, but it feels forced because there's no change in the song here that would specifically call for this hold rhythm. same for 04:58:432 (1,2,3) - In the background, I can hear a synth going over these sounds in the background. It's still pretty prominent, so this represents it well.

- 05:07:714 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4) - definitely feels overmapped. the synth this stream goes too starts where the pattern i linked ends. The pattern you linked still goes over 1/4 synth, but it's just a bit more muffled. This is why I represent it with a much lower spacing.

Although its a fun map and i love these percision challenges, it feels too overrepresentative of the song for a ranked map. Although a higher level player might be able to handle this map well, the spacing you use throughout the kiais feels overused, although you used it consistently. The spacing feels like it should be used instead as a necessity.

Still a fun map tho, and sorry i kept you waiting again :L Good luck! Yeah that's fine, I didn't mind the waiting.