My Angel MinG wrote:

I want this to be dq. This isn't pp map in a pp map meta and the map is really a hard map maybe to hard map to be a ranked map !!!!!!

lazyboy007 wrote:

My Angel MinG wrote:

I want this to be dq. This isn't pp map in a pp map meta and the map is really a hard map maybe to hard map to be a ranked map !!!!!!

!!!!!!

FruityEnLoops wrote:

gz lazy

SpectorDG wrote:

drum-hitnormal, soft-hitnormal are same?

Forgot to add tag : 嬬武器烈風刀

Fycho wrote:

Tags could be added online without a disqualification but if you want to fix it I can help you.

_DT3 wrote:

Holy shit I forgot to mod this xddd SHAME

Gratz dude!!

C00L wrote:

bg is in png form its size is just under a half of the mp3's file lol
if it gets DQ'ed consider changing to https://puu.sh/zxX6e/a8d084e0a5.jpg saving urself 2.5mbs Sure if it gets dq'd I'll do that

Also 03:52:637 (8,1) - representation is really similar to 03:54:539 (1,2) - visual spacing wise. 2 different snapping gaps, 2 really similar patterns The play vastly different, also given the context they're in (one is a kick slider, hence plays like a 1/2 jump almost, so the actual pattern the players play doesn't include the sliderpath whereas the second does) they're actually pretty different. Also both of them are 1/4 gaps, so they kinda should be similar in spacing.
03:27:905 (1,2,3,4) - what does this follow? there's no clear 1/4 beats here it's just pitch bends from 03:27:906 (1,3) - really overmapped I know it's a pitch bend, but the drums + bass do play 1/4 here, so I believe what I did makes sense
03:48:759 (6) - this doesn't follow anything major like 03:48:539 (3,4,5) - did, yet you represented it in the same way. 03:49:051 (10) - same here The synth plays 1/4 all along, and even though I know the drums are missing on both of these notes, I think it'd be very out of place and very awful to play if I suddenly had a spacing drop there. I also do no think a kickslider would work as well as this streamjump does here, though if a dq happens I may play with spacing and kicksliders to address this, and see if I can get something fitting ^^
00:19:710 (1) - this part is less dense than the previous part, yet it's more intense in terms of the music. So many sounds that you're missing on, why is that? Calm before the storm feeling is the main idea, plus the contrast for when the drums kick in. The previous part is pretty easy to play, it's actually exactly as dense if you consider only what the player has to click. I don't think mapping the other sounds makes sense here either, as they're very much in the backdrop of the song. Also, this adds a sort of calm before the storm feeling which I really think fits, as in, while the entire song rises you're sitting there taking the rhythm in from the background filtered synth and are waiting for something much more intense to come along ^^

Just a couple of examples where the map could be worked on a bit more. It was just a quick glance on the map. Mostly read what Nao wrote and expand on these too yea I gave nao a full reply to every point, and those he wanted to enforce were discussed further, so a priori should be fine like this ^^

Monarch wrote:

I don't think I've seen a map this flawed fundamentally in a while . . .

[Lets start with the objective flaws in this map]

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.

I shall dub this section prolog. Refer to this whenever I say see prolog.

If you know anything about how people snap to notes while playing, you should be understand what I'm going for here. The entire map plays on flow concepts, and NOT spacing concepts, so modding the map on spacing while discarding flow is essentially flawed as an argument on your side. In short, when a player snaps, he rushes to a note at full speed, then has to slow his cursor in the opposite direction to come to a full stop. Doing so allows for accurate aim, and pretty much the entire playerbase does this. Once you have come full stop, if you play a sharp angle, it's easy to continue, just accelerate in the direction you were decelerating at. In the case of wide angles however, like is the case here, you have to accelerate BACK in the direction you were going before, which puts quite a strain on your hand, mostly if you're not used to it. This is why on patterns like this, the actual strain and emphasis is on 00:24:247 (2) - and not on 00:24:393 (1) - , because 2 is where the players feels the heavy strain in his hand. Plus 1 has a ton of time for recovery, so the fact that he has to rush to it isn't followed by anything else, meaning there is basically no strain at all here. The second reason this pattern is there is to establish said gimmick. This is meant as a warning to players to the sort of "emphasis doesn't work by spacing only here, so be prepared" or something of the sort. Thus what you call the essential "flaw" of the map is just the gimmick, which you seem to have missed.

This is fundamentally flawed and there is literally no reasoning behind why it should be like this in the slightest Maybe you shouldn't be so quick to judge idk. Not understanding a reasoning and criticizing it is one thing. Doing so while saying there is "no reasoning" is narrow minded. Please take a while to respect the mapper's work before modding.

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. Kind of the idea behind a gimmick is that it's there throughout the whole map :thinking:

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. Damn that's condescending, I guess I'm in for a treat on this mod

And thus the list begins

Anything 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) - not in the slightest, 00:38:442 (1,2) - playing this amounts to just a tiny spacing wide angle, which isn't that hard (still uncomfortable for most players but yea) while 00:43:418 (3,4,5) - this is snapping for a stationary position straight to a wide angled movement. Playing 4-5-6 actually puts all the strain on 5. While yea, spacing IS low, like I said earlier, emphasis doesn't happed by spacing only on this map. Also keeping the idea behind this entire section section was playing to the violin, and this is imo quite fitting to how the melody was arranged.

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. First of all, there's drums, not only pitch. Second of all, why this pattern and not any previous ones? The same ideas are used throughout this entire section. Stacks on low intensity, snappings on uncomfortable patterns on the rest. Drums get bonus emphasis, and high pitch violin does too.

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) - see above

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. z

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? There's never a point where a map HAS to follow every sound. I am following the important ones, and constructing my map around a set of concepts. This set of concepts led me to making a 7*, 7* was not the intention from the start. Also, the main purpose of this map is to make the player feel the song, which (surprisingly) IS undermined if I try to map every possible sound.

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 try playing 5-6 you'll quickly realize it's the hardest of the sliderpairs in terms of flow. That the contradictory circular flow help emphasize 5.

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 2+2 streams are not part of the first kiai, and putting out of place 2+2 would make no sense. Also, compared ot the other snare rolls in the section, the snare is louder and the pitch is higher. So yea the spacing is deserved.

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 see prolog

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 Pattern is regular because the rhythm is different,
hence I do not want to add bonus difficulty to the reading spike here. Also it's not wubby, it's a snare, so if anything I'd just space it out a but more.

01:06:247 (6,1) - the return of this slider is pointing in the opposite direction to the direction of movement because you follow these sliders while playing? ._. This is stationary movement, so it doesn't matter at all where I go next

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 Whoops, this will probably get the map dq'd, thanks for pointing this out.

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 again see above

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. see above

01:20:003 (3,5) - notes of equal intensity, yet the spacing is drastically different for no reason. 3 is higher pitch.

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. I implore you to learn what sidechaining means.

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 no kick, pitch stays the same.

01:53:369 (1) - once again horribly under mapped for a 7.1 star map what even do you want me to do there ._.

02:36:393 (1,2,1) - This issue matches the issue highlighted in the first point above this box see prolog

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 spacing matches the first section. Also the hitsounded drums make this sound much more intense than it is. Plus we're transitioning from a calm section.

02:41:588 (2,2,2,2) - no logical reason for any of these jumps Except the fact that've never stacked 1/4's that weren't part of the same stream before.

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 Considering the drum this is quite subjective. The snare on 5 is very strong in the song + pitch is quite high. I do agree that 1 does have higher pitch, but the drum lacks emphasis compared to 5.

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. what no ?_? there's no audible 1/2 here. Just a pitch bending synth and a drum roll.

03:48:247 (2) - no sensible reason as to why this should be ending on a white tick, the start of an extended note Tell that to naotoshi :^)
There's no drum on the white tick.

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 does your lack of respect know any bound? No, the stream jumps are on the snares.
Also refer to EVERY SINGLE STREAMJUMP in the map. Suddenly you'll notice a weird coincidence. Wait... They all jump on drums or snares! Dang, quite a revelation.

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 How are you not able to notice that the entirety of this section is mapped to the drums with spacing dictated by the synth.

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) - It's literally the same drums and the same pitch

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 1/4's are dead, and pitch is low.

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 Same rhythms, intensity is comparable, etc. The two spots suggest the same pattern to me. The part that serves as transition in the first one is 03:45:174 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,1,2,1,2,1) - this part, while the second one's finale is the stream.

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 Spacing goes down, without mentioning the tails of the sliders that gradually point towards flow rather than 90° away from flow, making it so that it's actually much easier to play.

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 don't see why. Synth does play at 1/2, but the drums are going completely wild. Kicks would be broing and missrepresentative of the intensity.

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. Same melody at different pitches means same concepts. Add the change in drums to it, that explains the differences.
I won't go into detail because it's basically the same thing I've explain 20 times in this mod already.

[P.S.]

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) - Think just one second, if it's not a star pattern, how is that an "attempt" at a star pattern >_> Making one is just taking a pentagon and exchanging notes. There are not star patterns because the spacing is meant to be uneven.

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 The entire point of that section is to warn the people of later patterns like 02:59:954 (7,8,1) - or 03:46:637 (1,2,1,2,1) -

1. Respect the mapper, don't be condescending, you're not better because you were born special or anything.
2. If a map gets modded by a total of 3 BN's plus other reputable mappers such as Kite and Alheak, you should probably question yourself as to why you're the one who finds the most issues in the map.
3. Maps do not have to follow conventional means to be good or enjoyable, and you do not specifically need to be a fan of a map for it to be good.
4. Just because you would do something doesn't mean it's the right thing. It also doesn't mean anyone else should. Unless you're god and above and beyond all of humanity, then maybe you may have authority to tell us what to think.
5. When modding a map, make sure you actually have the intellect needed to understand it. Or at least try to think about what the mapper intended with the map.
6. If you plan on conveying your ideas of a map to someone else, do so nicely and with a smile. Not while telling them that "they're stupid and therefore you will be a nice person and point out everything cuz you're clearly the superior one in this exchange". Acting like an asshole will never put the mapper in a mood to listen to you.

Fycho wrote:

mapper requested a DQ

JBHyperion wrote:

Friendly reminder that if you have nothing constructive to say, don't say anything at all or come back later when you're calmer and not about to tilt off the face of the Earth. Throwing shade at people is, funnily enough, not the best way to get people to listen to you.

Friendlier still reminder that just because someone is rude to you doesn't mean you're entitled to be rude back. That doesn't help anyone ):

Shiguma wrote:

00:59:369 (4,1) - Shouldn't the (1) be emphasized either by a flow change or spacing? I found it odd that it was both easy flow and low spacing here Not really, it's a downbeat, but it's quite a low pitch low intensity part so I don't think it deserves more emphasis than a standard flowy circle to slider jump ^^

I like your stream arranges, more maps should do more than just simple slider to stream convert tool Thanks

AncuL wrote:

looking at the editor, it feels like that the map has a lot to polish. i'm a beginner mapper though so i can't point out exact things. it's just that it feels... unpolished

though i have something that i want to discuss


this is a fast slider, but you gave it some sharp angles even though the slider is basically a linear movement. to be honest, it looks bad

that being said, there are a lot of things i can't point out do to my lack of experience in modding

1. If a map gets modded by a total of 3 BN's plus other reputable mappers such as Kite and Alheak, you should probably question yourself as to why you're the one who finds the most issues in the map.

Monarch wrote:

Hi it's me again a smile much better :3

Just a few things I felt weren't quite as covered as I think they should have been, and just looking for a slightly more in depth follow up to your comments really sure thing

01:02:442 (3,4,5,6) - So in this pattern you told me to refer to prolog, which clearly states that a lot of the map has a focus on flow as a mechanic for emphasis as opposed to spacing, ie you will make hard notes harder not by increasing spacing but by using the subsequent movement to make the strain on the previous note harder. If I have understood incorrectly please do correct me.



Pardon my crude illustration of player movement throughout this section, but from my rough understanding of gameplay I can hypothesise that this is the general movement a player will be engaging with while playing this section of notes. An assumption has quite clearly been made here that the player is sufficiently skilled to adequately engage in the difficult parts of this map, namely the cross screen jumps, with ease and as such it is expected that snapping will be at a minimal in regards to spacing as small as this. Yup sound correct

As such, bearing your prolog in mind, we can see that the jump from the slider end to four would be considered by your standards, rather easy in fact. Then we can see, judging by the obtuse angle that the jump from four to five would be rather strenuous, relatively, due to the nature of how movement is handled around obtuse angles. And then once again, in the jump from five to six, we see another obtuse angle, with the distance spacing from four to five being replicated in the jump from five to six.

There is no problem with this at all, I am more than welcome to accept the explanation for this choice of jump style between notes and how you have chosen to emphasise the notes, however, the emphasis does not match the music in my humble and honest oppinion.

As your prolog explains, the jump from four to five is emphasised by the obtuse angle, forcing an acceleration in a similar direction to the flow of the map in this section and then in the jump from five to six, note number five is emphasised by the obtuse angle from five to six and the subsequent directional acceleration. The problem therein lies that it is impossible, by your standards and with this pattern, to emphasise note number six due to the nature of the jumps as in their current form.

The symbol crash on slider six suggests that this note deserves extended spacing similar to what you provide here 01:03:320 (7,1) - however, any attempt to increase spacing in six will disrupt the balance between four five and six altogether very clearly since any space increase in six means that the acceleration in five to six will be higher and thus the strain on five will be undeservingly high.

This is my reasoning behind why this small section should be changed and I hope you can see how I came to this conclusion through my understanding of your prolog. Valid concerns, I will actually move 5 a bit closer to 4, and 6 a little further away.

~~

My next point, although not present in my first post in this map, is nonetheless something that I believe deserves some urgent attention specifically with the part highlighted here 03:29:954 (3,4,5,6) - specifically the concept that this is in its own right one of the most intense parts of the map and, in reference to your prolog, not only have you made this as easy as possible by not only making the angles acute and reducing the spacing drastically but some consitency concerns also arise with the first half of the kiai, specifically with the spacing of this particular note 03:25:564 (5) -. We can hear clearly that this note five is building up to an intense notes in the form of the slider that follows it, my qualm is not with this note but how it relates to this note three 03:29:954 (3) - which very audiably has a much higher pitch is mapped giving the impression that it is infact less intense than the larger of the two.

This problem was highlighted with the idea in mind that both of these jumps follow the acute style of jumping so a more/equally intense jump should not be completely overshadowed by any of its counterparts. This goes for the rest of the jumps in the small section i highlighted too, 03:29:954 (3,4,5,6) - this is the middle of the kiai and yet the intensity of the jumps do not seem to be matching up with the intensity of the map at this point in time. Yep I agree, increased the spacing somewhat here.

This overshadowing can also be seen slightly later in the map at 03:39:320 (1,2,3,4) - and 03:41:662 (1,2,3,4) - where the original notes i highlighted are of a higher pitch and intensity and yet lower spacing too however this may be due to the lack of strain caused by the long pauses in this later section but I would still like to hear your response nonetheless. In this section the idea was more on the contrast between the low rhythm density and the higher one. I am not 100% sure the spacing is totally adapted, it feels like it is imo. If mentionned again I'll definitely look over it again.

~~

1. If a map gets modded by a total of 3 BN's plus other reputable mappers such as Kite and Alheak, you should probably question yourself as to why you're the one who finds the most issues in the map.

This is flawed logic which has lead scientists with the mental capacity far beyond you and me to come to conclusions incorrectly, biased on selective peer review. If people in the top 0.0001% of the population, when dealing with factual evidence, are not immune to such an occurrence then neither is any one else. You missunderstood what I mean here I do not mean that you shouldn't voice your opinion. I am always open to suggestions (though I can be stubborn I well know that). I just meant that if you're going against the ideas of people prominent in such a field, you should question yourself before running in headfirst and stating objectivity and wrong or right. Your mod gave me the impression you knew all and everything and were trying to teach me how to make a basic map Now you have seemingly taken a good step back and are actually being polite and thoughtful, which I definitely appreciate a lot, so thanks ^^
~~

That is all for now

Monarch wrote:

1. If a map gets modded by a total of 3 BN's plus other reputable mappers such as Kite and Alheak, you should probably question yourself as to why you're the one who finds the most issues in the map.

AncuL wrote:

Monarch wrote:

1. If a map gets modded by a total of 3 BN's plus other reputable mappers such as Kite and Alheak, you should probably question yourself as to why you're the one who finds the most issues in the map.

i agree with this. it feels like that nobody really touched the fundamental issue the map is bad on. i think i'll try to find reasons to it later on. i just feel like that this isn't on the rankable quality

Naotoshi wrote:

01:05:369 (1,2,1,2,3,4,5,6) - oh right, fixed NC
00:46:637 (1,2,1,2,3,4,5,1) -

03:48:760 (6,10) - these dont rly hav prominent sound, replacing note before by kickslider or hitsounding sound in works well Ok messed around with it some more and went with kicksliders

also consider like flipping 04:00:978 - that pattern so it isnt a literal copy paste but instead its a copy paste flip! Magic!

Pachiru wrote:

Where is the super beginner? I can't play over 0.90* so I don't know why this map should be ranked. Please think about new players before always thinking about your PP. I'm losing faith in humanity while being in this community, I always feel like weaks are left behind. I'm very disgusted wow. Welcome to 2018, not the year of the dog, but the year of the firetrucking PP and bulldog maps.

Naotoshi wrote:

rebub

ancul decided not to say anything

AyanokoRin wrote:

alright, let's try again

Hailie wrote:

um why is this still in pending and not in the qualified section (no scoreboard either)? think u forgot a step XD