I don't think I've seen a map this flawed fundamentally in a while . . .
00:24:100 (1,2,1) - You can essentially say this right here will probably be the basis for all of the criticisms of the map of the whole, here you have a pretty typical kickslider followed by two circles, the in the form of two hard sounds 00:24:100 (1,2) - and a soft sound 00:24:393 (1) - so as such it would be expected that such hard sounds like 00:24:100 (1,2) - would be emphasised by an increase in spacing and the such to fully highlight the intricacies of the song. What's not expected is that the third, soft sound will for some god forsaken reason be spaced bizarrely disproportionately to the previous notes, so much so that the relative spacing is for these notes as a whole results in a spacing where the spacing of notes increase even though the intensity of the sounds the notes represent decrease.
This is fundamentally flawed and there is literally no reasoning behind why it should be like this in the slightest
One example on its own should be enough to put the whole 5 minutes of the map in to question because if the map is spacing soft sounds with a greater distance spacing than it is loud sounds in the first five seconds then it is no doubt doing this throughout the whole map.
However, we shall plough on, because even though one fundamental flaw should put the map into question there is no guarantee that you will fix every instance of poor emphasis throughout the whole map unless it is pointed straight out to you.
And thus the list beginsAnything in cyan can potentially be ignored.
00:43:418 (3,4,5) - a hard sound, followed by a soft sound, followed by a hard sound and yest this second hard sound 00:43:710 (5) - has the emphasis of one of the softer sounds found in the previous section 00:38:588 (2) -
00:52:491 (1,2,3,4) - For this pattern, for a starters, in this pattern, you have two pairs of notes of equal intensity with varying spacing for seemingly no reason other than a pitch change. We can establish here that there is no reason to actually take part in such an action because of the spacing in the next few notes in the spame section, specifically 00:53:369 (7,8) - 00:53:954 (3,4) - although having a vastly larger intensity than 00:52:783 (3,4) - these four notes seem to share intensity in spacing with the notes in the previous section that I highlighted even though the actual intensity is vastly different which makes no sense to play at all.
00:53:076 (5,6) - 00:53:661 (1,2) - these pair of notes also suffer from this as you can see by the second note in each pair, the first pair has a second note backed by a pitch and intensity change which means it should be spaced higher but the second note in the second pair of notes has the same sound that is found in the section where you decided to remove the spacing entirely on such a sound 00:50:735 (5,6) -
Again, in this same section, we see another pair of notes 00:53:222 (6,7) - 00:53:515 (8,1) - with vastly different intensities on the second note, the second note of the second pair being the most intense, and yet the emphasis is identical throughout all of the notes which does not make any sense.
00:54:978 (2,3,4,5) - 00:55:564 (2,3,4,5) - 00:56:881 (7,8,1) - I can not begin to fathom why a 7.1 star map would be under mapping such sounds. A map of such difficulty should be highlighting a song's full potential and yet it is deciding to ignore parts of the song?
00:57:466 (2,3,4,5) - once again the intensity of the final note is far greater than that of the other three and yet its spacing is less than that of the other three which makes no sense
01:01:564 (3,4,5,6) - this stream is barely audible in comparison to the rest of the sounds found in the music at this time and yet the spacing is greater than or equal to the spacing of the streams found before it, which makes no sense. In addition to this the sound that the stream is representing, a hard melodic sound on the first and third notes and much lighter sound on the second and fourth notes is not correctly represented at all and would work much better when replaced with kicksliders
01:02:735 (4,5,6) - once again 3 hard sounds but the 3rd hard sound is clearly of a higher intensity than the previous two however spacing remains the same which makes no sense
01:04:588 (3,3) - no attempt even made to emphasise the significance of the third note in these triples, an idea would be to have the other two sliders in each of the triples be normal curved sliders, allowing the emphasis of the third, "wubby" slider
01:06:247 (6,1) - the return of this slider is pointing in the opposite direction to the direction of movement
00:47:515 (1,1) - This reverse slider is 1 reverse out from being the correct length which is l i t e r a l l y u n r a n k a b l e
01:10:930 (3,4,5,6) - Again stream is completely inaudible and the sound that the stream is representing, a hard melodic sound on the first and third notes and much lighter sound on the second and fourth notes is not correctly represented at all and would work much better when replaced with kicksliders
01:13:710 (2,3,4,5) - 01:14:296 (2,3,4,5) -01:15:613 (1,2,1) - once again, inexplicably under mapped.
01:20:003 (3,5) - notes of equal intensity, yet the spacing is drastically different for no reason.
01:27:320 (3) - I implore you to take a good listen to this slider at a speed of no greater than 50% to audibly visualise the concept that not only is the first half of the slider not actually following any sound due to the fact that the musical instrument it lands on cuts at the blue tick and does not even suggest a slowing down of the music but the second half of the slider then ignores the red tick entirely as well in order to fake the idea that it is following the music at 100% speed when it very clearly is not. Would work much better as two kicksliders with the second kickslider's speed being reduced.
01:31:710 (1) - This sound very clearly has a much larger intensity than any of the previous sounds in the stream and yet the choice is to reduce the spacing which makes no sense at all
01:53:369 (1) - once again horribly under mapped for a 7.1 star map
02:36:393 (1,2,1) - This issue matches the issue highlighted in the first point above this box
02:40:198 (7,1) - 02:40:491 (3,4) - 02:40:637 (4,5) - I do not understand why such high intensity notes have such low spacing
02:41:588 (2,2,2,2) - no logical reason for any of these jumps
03:25:564 (5,6,1) - Very clear that the last note has the highest intensity here however it has the lowest distance spacing out of all of them, makes no sense
03:27:905 (1,2,3,4) - doing this is lazy and ignores the phenomenal sound of the main instrument of this part that starts on the first note of this stream, this should 100% be increased velocity kicksliders to accurately represent the music.
03:48:247 (2) - no sensible reason as to why this should be ending on a white tick, the start of an extended note
03:48:539 (3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10) - if you which to place a jump here 03:48:832 (7) - then you must place a jump here 03:48:686 (5) - , if thats not possible then the design choice you've made for your stream is wrong
03:49:856 (8,9,10,11,12,13,1) - this doesn't sound right to play, you have why hard notes on 03:49:857 (8,9,10,12) - which would be best accentuated by kicksliders and you have hidden them in a stream where nothing is accentuated and it feels like the music is not being mapped appropriatly
03:52:344 (4,5,6,7) - i do not see how the intensity of this stream matches that of this stream 03:51:613 (1,2,3,4) -
03:52:783 (1,2,3) - anti jumps for absolutely no reason, completely ignoring the pace of the song at this point in addition to under mapping heavily the stream that is underlying these three notes
04:00:979 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2) - the most intense climax of the song and in no way shape or form is the music here comparable to the music found earlier in the kiai 03:42:247 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1) - because this one 03:42:247 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1) - has the purpose of prepairng for the wind down of the song but this one 04:00:979 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2) - is made to give the song its finale and you've mapped them both the same even though they have different goals which makes no sense
04:03:613 (1) - one of these things are not like the other. 04:03:320 (1,2,1) - these sliders climax and 04:03:759 (2,1,2,1,2) - these sliders wind down however with how close and how similar spacing you've mapped them they all look and feel the same even though they have vastly different purposes and your climax of 04:03:759 (2) - does not match the melody
04:04:491 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16) - lazy interpretation of the melody, should be kicksliders
00:38:442 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) -00:47:808 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - It comes as a given that the weakest arguments be given last, even if alone they would cripple a map. The sounds in the first set of notes 00:38:442 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8)- in no way shape or form match the second set of notes 00:47:808 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - and as such there is no logical way of explaining why they sound completely different but are mapped with similar ideas in mind. 00:38:442 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - for a starters, in this set of notes, the first four notes of this section and the second four share the same melodical pattern: a repetition of the initial cords of each quadruplet in the second half of each quadruplet with the pitch of the second chord in the pair within the second quadruplet changing in pitch slightly. This puts into question why such a small change in pitch could be even compared to the second set of notes 00:47:808 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - which although having an identical note spacing in the second quadruplet 00:48:393 (5,6,7,8) - clearly display a lack of any note entirely. Very clearly the spacing of the second quadruplet in the first set of notes 00:39:027 (5,6,7,8) - 00:40:198 (5,6,7,8) - 00:41:369 (5,6,7,8) - should be increased as their current form does not hold any water at all.
01:24:100 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7) - This is the weakest attempt at a star pattern I have seen in my life, followed closely by 03:53:076 (3,4,5,6,7,8,9) -
01:56:588 (5,6) - basics of aesthetics, spacing of 1/2 should be enough to leave spacing between notes, spacing of other notes in the section should revolve around that idea ie larger spaced 1/1
I'll ask you on discord later
