All diffs
How about a spinner from 02:24:129 to about 02:24:129 ? Would be nice to have an outro spinner imo, your call though
Easy
Mir
Crowie
[list:1337][] will finish mod later ~
How about a spinner from 02:24:129 to about 02:24:129 ? Would be nice to have an outro spinner imo, your call though
- 00:12:829 (3,4) - how about a reverse slider + circle? be a nice variety and would show some contrast between 1,2
- 00:14:429 (1,2) - I feel like you could omit all 1/2 snaps whilst still making it fit the song and without it being awkward. Instead of all your 3/2 + circles combos how about a 2/1 slider instead? The benefit to this is that it would make it even more beginner friendly as the harder snaps would be eliminated
- 00:24:029 (1,2) - suggestion for similar reasons above https://i.imgur.com/kjyaFxu.png . Same for 01:15:229 (1,2) -
- 00:49:629 (1) - ^ similar
- 01:37:629 (1,2) - A bit weird how these 2 aren't done in pairs when the sliders before it were
- 01:34:429 (1) - This shape is a bit... controversial to have in an easy cos of the way it overlaps with the tail. Consider a more rank friendly shape #probationaryBNproblems
- 01:59:229 (1) - try to avoid stacks in the lowest diff :v
- 02:06:029 - A circle here would nicely map the vocals and add a bit of variety to the rhythm so the whole thing isn't a monotonous slider spam
- 02:11:229 (3,4) - same suggestion as 00:12:829 (3,4)
- 02:13:229 (1,1) - I would deem this unrankable. There just isn't enough recovery time between the end spinner and the circle. The approach circle starts well before the spinner ends
- 02:22:429 (1) - same as 01:34:429 (1) i think, maybe... idk lol
- CS 2.5-3 fits better to me. You'll be able to reduce the DS too and make things more compact this way
- 00:03:029 (4,5) - You have stacked 1/2s all over the map and have this here (well another one at 00:09:429 (4,5) ). idk if you placed this intentionally as a lead in or something
- 00:12:429 (4) - Circle feels more intuitive
- 00:12:829 (1) - special reason for a different NC length?=
- 01:06:429 (2,3,4) - can you have it so that the slider path matches the path from 2>3 ?
- 01:31:229 (1,2,3) - please dont continuosly stack like this.
- 01:36:029 (4) - I think a reverse slider would be better for your rhythm as the vocal as 01:36:829 is quite similar to 01:36:429 and 01:36:029 . And 01:37:229 (5) - feels different from all the other 3
- 01:40:829 (3) - Map vocals for variety? https://i.imgur.com/JSPMlqX.png
- 01:59:629 (2) - recommend to delete. You're mapping the instruments so you take a lot of emphasis away from the rhythm by adding a circle for the vocals
- 02:08:029 (3,1) - consistency 00:48:029 (3,1) - ???
- 02:12:029 (1) - same as 01:06:429 (2,3,4)
- 02:20:029 - mapping this would be nice as there is a piano sound here that's in the same layer as 02:20:029 (3,4,1) . It also reduces the 5/2 gap to a 2/1 making it more intuitive to follow
- AR 6 would make me wet tbh
- 00:00:829 (1,2,1) - pls no, wtf. Ok not trying to mean but the snapping and patterning is just way to harsh for a hard diff
- 00:04:629 (7,1) - ok so here was a nice natural transition from instruments to vocals but it doesn't really feel natural at 00:07:629 (2,1) as it feels rather abrupt since you switch layers when the vocals haven't fully faded out. Switching from vocals to instruments seems more appropriate when the vocals have fully faded out, around about 00:09:429 .This is just an example https://i.imgur.com/bUxOAMz.png
- 00:13:829 (3,4) - ctrl g rhythm
- 00:26:829 (4) - sudden SV change is sudden.
- 00:25:629 (1,2,3,4) - ok so the way you've grouped the 3/4 sliders isn't ideal imo, and here's why. so if you listen to the white ticks of 00:26:029 (2,3,4) - the vocals here are very similar "don't tease me" but 00:25:629 (1) is slightly different from the others which is why I think it's ideal to have the same rhythm for 00:26:029 (2,3,4) - and 00:25:629 (1) - be different from the 3. Example https://i.imgur.com/3NlUxlX.png
- 00:39:229 (1,2) - The spacing makes me see this as a double reverse slider every time
- 00:46:029 (4,5,1) - Blanket?
- 00:49:429 (2) - Circle would be suffice; I don't recall seeing a kick slider anywhere else in the map.
Well there's 02:04:629 (4) - 02:09:429 (4) - and 02:11:029 (5) - but I would recommend to replace these aswellActually, I'm sitting on the fence about these now - 00:51:829 (3,1) - Really recommend to not use spacing this big. Not only does it make the pattern 00:51:229 (1,2,3,1,1) - as a whole quite tricky to read but it's really hard too. Triplets are a new element and for hard players a jump from a triplet is extremely difficult because of the amount of concentration and focus a triple is required from the player. Hard players are bad. https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/9486287 would be fine
- 00:52:429 (1) - deleting this would be nice. Because you've mapped the instruments before and after having a circle here that solely maps the vocals takes A LOT of emphasis away from the rhythm you're mapping. Delete it and try it out for yourself
- 01:02:029 (5,1) - This doesn't suit the structure of the rest of the map
- 01:05:629 (1,2) - This jump is overkill
- 01:16:829 (1,2,3,4) - same suggestion as 00:25:629 (1,2,3,4)
- 01:41:629 (2) - whistle on head? If you're gonna hs other vocals with whistles such as 01:40:829 (1,3) you might as well do it for 2 as well. Same for sliders like 01:44:829 (3) - 01:48:029 (3) - etc
- 02:01:629 (1) - spacing and structure suggests a single reverse
- 02:07:629 (4,1) - Move these a lot closer together. These are snapped 1/4 apart so there is no real reason for these to have the same spacing as 02:07:429 (3,4) -
- 01:18:429 - 2 timing points at the same time