Love the map but imo the MP3 is a bit on the quiet end.
forum
tofubeats - CANDYYYLAND feat. LIZ (Pa's Lam Sys...
posted
Total Posts
320
01:36:805 (2,3,4,5,1,2,3,4,5,1,2,3,4,5,1,2,3,4,5,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,5,1,2,3,4,5,1,2,3,4,5,1,2,3,4,5,1,2,3,4,5,1,2,1,2,1,2,1,1,2,3,4,5,1,2,3,4,5) - delet this
kds pls ok cool
kds pls ok cool
me rn it's actually happening lolF1r3tar wrote:
oSing wrote:
when it's going for ranked lol...
Natsu wrote:
I really like this song, is this going for loved?
- Frontier - wrote:
Natsu wrote:
I really like this song, is this going for loved?
i sexually identified as a x0.10 slider
Topic Starter
blockedv_Yper wrote:
This map is good for loved
Yo kds pl s?
tfw the entire thread is filled with meme
that being said, good luck for loved
that being said, good luck for loved
[Boxart Wongline: FOREVER]
02:07:930 - volume should be 30% i think
02:07:930 - volume should be 30% i think
J_8579 wrote:
oSing wrote:
when it's going for ranked lol...
how did i miss this ewe
iwannamakeagdiwannamakeagdiwannamakeagd :L
Teahc me 2 map hansdome and porbox
Teahc me 2 map hansdome and porbox
so. is this master piece going for loved?
ok lets go
On easy:
00:45:805 (1) - shouldn't there be at least 4 beats of recovery time after a spinner?
00:45:805 (1) - shouldn't there be at least 4 beats of recovery time after a spinner?
might as well give my thoughts on the top diffs
top diff
in all honesty, with the amount of gimmicks that are in this map this should probably be upwards of od 9.6 to avoid any form of notelock, this is essentially a 320 bpm map with how some of these jumps are spaced during the kiais
probox part
might mod fanzhen's diff more thoroughly later, idk
creative map????????? i think??
top diff
in all honesty, with the amount of gimmicks that are in this map this should probably be upwards of od 9.6 to avoid any form of notelock, this is essentially a 320 bpm map with how some of these jumps are spaced during the kiais
probox part
- 00:36:618 (1,1) - probably want to silence sliderends like this, i know there's a note here but the main rhythm you're following doesn't really give emphasis to it
00:40:743 (1,2) - i was personally told trying to rank guilty that these were unrankable due to unreadability, i honestly don't really care but if it's unrankable u should probably change these (even tho its like half the map so yea xd)
00:46:368 (1,1,1,1) - i feel like these are a bit too high of an sv especially since it's 1/8 repeat, makes it really easy to break on these especially on hr
01:01:368 (1,2,3,4) - i honestly think some sort of back-and-forth gimmick would be better here and make it more flowy especially when compared to handsome's part (00:56:305 (1,2,3) - like this) but blah blah personal opinion
01:08:399 - why do u skip this note
01:24:618 (1) - why are the hitsounds here like 0% i can barely hear anythign plz buff sound
02:10:649 (1,2,1,2) - giving the same emphasis to 02:10:649 (1,2) - as you did to 02:10:836 (1,2) - is kinda weird considering the latter has more pitch
02:35:868 (1,2,3,4) - wouldn't it make more sense just to have a spaced stream or something here? 1/8 sliders don't make any sense here to me
02:42:805 (2,1) - i feel like you can just make a simple back-and-forth here rather than complicating it by doing this lol, kinda ruins the emphasis since it's all the same pitch
03:00:993 (1,2,1,2) - a better rhythm to make this play better would be having 03:00:618 (1) - end on 03:00:899 (1) - and having 03:00:993 (1,2) - these two as a slider, having a 1/4 jump here is like e348451hgb
- 00:23:118 (1) - thumbs
00:52:743 (1,2) - are the 1/8 sliderends really needed here? would be better off with just higher sv 1/4s imo
00:59:305 (2,2) - these gaps feel pretty empty, maybe make sliders here instead?
01:36:805 (2,3,4) - bro how am i supposed to know this is a 1/4 jump when the ds changes literally mid pattern, like it's hittable but god damn dude do u want people to kill thesmelf
01:57:711 (1) - could probably extend this spinner to 01:59:680 - instead
02:00:149 (1,1) - both these ncs aren't necessary
02:14:680 (1) - same thing as 00:52:743 (1,2) - idk i don't really find it necessary to just randomly have sliderends on 1/8 ticks despite the entire song not having them at all (if you don't change this at the very least make 02:13:743 (3) - these consistent on ending at 1/8 as well)
02:15:618 (1,2,1,1,2,1,1,2,1,1,2,1) - i like the fast-paced slider into a slowdown but literally end yourself for making this part aids to read properly (it's mainly because of the 1/8 sliders)
02:23:305 (1) - offscreen sliderend
02:49:368 (3) - make this 1/4 slider so it covers the blue tick note
02:52:368 (3) - ^
02:53:118 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - this spacing increase is pretty drastic tbh lol, i'd space out 02:53:118 (1,2,3,4) - this a bit more so it's not as random
02:54:618 (1,1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,1,2,3) - djpop (also some of these aren't stacked properly, and ncs should probably be on 02:54:618 (1,3,3,3,11) - these notes instead)
02:58:368 (9) - nc this
03:21:430 (2,3,1) - why is this not straighta sdfkjagfnkb
03:23:868 (6) - would make more sense to nc this, i mean the entire map is a spam of ncs anyway so
might mod fanzhen's diff more thoroughly later, idk
creative map????????? i think??
Topic Starter
Ty for mod fieryrage!fieryrage wrote:
top diff
in all honesty, with the amount of gimmicks that are in this map this should probably be upwards of od 9.6 to avoid any form of notelock, this is essentially a 320 bpm map with how some of these jumps are spaced during the kiais hmmhmm od 9.6 sounds brutal as hell tho and I'm not very knowledgeable about how notelock works. I'm not opposed to changing the od but I really want to know if it will benefit anything or not so would you mind explaining the difference when it comes to notelock between different od?
probox part
00:36:618 (1,1) - probably want to silence sliderends like this, i know there's a note here but the main rhythm you're following doesn't really give emphasis to it added 20% volumes to slidertails
00:40:743 (1,2) - i was personally told trying to rank guilty that these were unrankable due to unreadability, i honestly don't really care but if it's unrankable u should probably change these (even tho its like half the map so yea xd) Perfectly readable, will keep : )
00:46:368 (1,1,1,1) - i feel like these are a bit too high of an sv especially since it's 1/8 repeat, makes it really easy to break on these especially on hr Lowered sv from 1.7 to 1.5
01:01:368 (1,2,3,4) - i honestly think some sort of back-and-forth gimmick would be better here and make it more flowy especially when compared to handsome's part (00:56:305 (1,2,3) - like this) but blah blah personal opinion I like the current pattern
01:08:399 - why do u skip this note The distance would be brutal as hell if it was for example a stacked double and skipping it makes sense for the following 1/8 sliders
01:24:618 (1) - why are the hitsounds here like 0% i can barely hear anythign plz buff sound made it 40% like the rest of the part (if you want more buff then say)
02:10:649 (1,2,1,2) - giving the same emphasis to 02:10:649 (1,2) - as you did to 02:10:836 (1,2) - is kinda weird considering the latter has more pitch I feel like this back and forth movement captures the rapid lyrics well
02:35:868 (1,2,3,4) - wouldn't it make more sense just to have a spaced stream or something here? 1/8 sliders don't make any sense here to me I feel like these pack more of a punch than having them be a spaced stream
02:42:805 (2,1) - i feel like you can just make a simple back-and-forth here rather than complicating it by doing this lol, kinda ruins the emphasis since it's all the same pitch Having these be simple back and forths would be underwhelming considering the difficulty of the map. The gimmicky nature of these makes it more appropriate for the difficulty
03:00:993 (1,2,1,2) - a better rhythm to make this play better would be having 03:00:618 (1) - end on 03:00:899 (1) - and having 03:00:993 (1,2) - these two as a slider, having a 1/4 jump here is like e348451hgb Sliders would be very underwhelming if overused, which they would be in this case.
Topic Starter
thanks but no kudosuKaifin wrote:
holy SHIT fanzhen's diff is so good
from modreq
modded the version before the last update, so some things may not apply anymore
trying to polish my modding, so if you notice me getting overly stuck on something or am repeatedly neglecting certain things, please tell me about it
modded the version before the last update, so some things may not apply anymore
.Boxart Wongline: FOREVER
professionalbox
fanzhen's Extra
Nathan's Extra
Collab Insane
sing
Plaubbes' Light Insane
professionalbox
- 01:05:118 (1,2,1,2) - those 1/4 seem a bit non-sensical, no idea what they're mapped to. sounds more like a repetition of 01:04:649 (2) - so something like https://puu.sh/y0x5s/89bce069bf.png might be beneficial
- 01:07:930 (1,1) - i think that drum beat is pretty prominent and would be in accordance to the usual rhythm choices if it was mapped. could move the note into the middle of the slider like https://puu.sh/y0x9v/a869f71e29.png or just use another short 1/4 slider positioned to create a contrast with the following pattern
- 01:11:868 (1) - ctrl g this note and the following ones too like https://puu.sh/y1diu/b021eacae9.png . the change of direction would be a nice accent working with the change of the pitch's course and the distance would additionally catch the vocal pitches too
- 02:29:868 (1,2,1,2) - 02:35:868 (1,2,3,4) - 02:35:868 (1,2,3,4) - i honestly don't know why you'd use 1/12 pace on these. the souds don't even appear intense enough to warant overmapping for tension to me, my i just perceive them differently.
- 03:00:899 (1,2,1) - similar to what fieryrage said, those 1/4 jumps doesn't play well and don't really seem to fit in with the map not using any such patterns otherwise either. my option however would be to simply make 03:00:899 (1) - into a 1/2 slider though
- 03:36:430 (1) - could be cool as just a really slow repeat slider/hold note at the pace of the reverb
- 01:37:555 (2,3,5) - 01:43:555 (2,3,5) - not sure if there's some kind of intention behind not forming triples with these as all other instances do
- 02:13:180 (2) - could turn this one into notes as to make the difference of missing and existing vocals apparent and additionally hit the synth triple with active rhythms. atm the slider implies that sliders follow the bass hits which the following three sliders don't
- 02:54:899 (2) - 03:01:086 (2) - overmapped note/missing a note between 02:54:618 (1,1) - . in a stack like this you want to follow things clearly, which it currently doesn't as it cuts a quint into a single and a triple.. somehow. deleting the note would make sense with the vocals and adding another note would stick to the synth that also makes up the other 1/4 timings in the stack
- 02:57:618 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16) - why use 1/8 there but not 02:59:118 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) -, where the build up reaches towards the climax. if anything i'd assume it to be the other way around or throughout (by which i'd prefere it as non-existent myelf as those sounds don't seem very 1/8 to me)
- 03:13:743 (1,2) - 03:16:743 (1,2) - 03:19:743 (1,2) - 03:22:743 (1,2) - sounds like the object order should be the other way around with nothing of importance being on the slider heads unlike on their tails
- 00:20:821 (1) - not sure if this was an accident or if there is some kind of purpose i'm not getting behind having this start an eighth too early
- 00:37:368 (3,4) - maybe ctrl g those to capture the vocal as well. additionall 00:38:868 (3) - could also be ctrl g'd for the accent in the vocals and then the vocalless slider after it and 00:42:243 (4) - also for being vocalless as the only one in the constellation. would be a nice compliance with the later 02:00:243 (4,1,1,1,2) -
- 01:08:493 (1,2) - insteal of having all four sliders unified, deleting 2 and alowing down 1 would cover the difference in sounds more accurately i think
- 01:44:868 (1,2,3) - that double on that really low bg synth seems a bit arbitrary to me since you didn't pay any heed to that synth anyhwere before either
- 01:46:274 (4,1,2,3) - also don't get how this one is supposed to work. starting 2 on a blue, skipping the strong sound on the white and having 4 on nothing in particular. seems like the pattern just wants to be interesting while completely ignoring the given rhythms
- 01:49:930 (3,4,1) - since you're following the low synth with 01:48:618 (1,2,3) - i thin you should stick to it and change up the sliders in the end accordingly https://puu.sh/y18b2/45f6b4a4c8.png
- 02:40:555 (2) - with 02:37:555 (2) - in pace, it seems quite pointless to have that one be a 1/4 slider too
- 03:24:243 (1) - having this be an extended slider sort of kills the purpose of it being a slower version of 03:23:868 (3) - as it is not recognisable as such due to not fitting to the respective sounds. so i'd just keep it at a 1/2
- 03:26:118 (1) - all the sliders of this kind in this stream part have one issue: they put a lot of emphasis on the downbeat notes, which are the least least intense sounds of the part as also indicated by the stream's spacing, so it really doesn't fit to have them split off like that imo. 03:27:618 (1,1,1) - those three arguably have snother sound backing them, but even then, the other ones are even more out of position.
- 00:02:118 (1) - since 00:01:368 (2) - is quite obviously mapped to vocals, i don't see why that slider should be as long as it is as opposed to ending on a vocal it currently skips
- 00:10:930 (3) - why add this filler note at all if you're even going to mute it
- 00:21:618 (1,1,2,3,1,1,2,3) - not really coherent since you swap from mapping vocals to synth in the middle of the pattern. just confuses the focus
- 02:11:868 (1) - i'd add the two notes before this to stick to the instruments and to increase the contrast of the large gaps after it
- 02:14:868 (1,2,3) - those sound very off concidering you've been following the vocal for the pattern. sounds more like https://puu.sh/y19Ok/434f66942e.png 02:20:868 (1) - here it works though with the missing extra beat
sing
- 01:36:899 (2) - the tripples on those sounds are a tad arbitrary sometimes i feel. i don't see the concept according to which they are used
- 02:14:680 (4) - 02:17:680 (4) - 02:20:680 (4) - 02:23:680 (2) - maybe break symmetry and just use a single here as it's a different vocal and
- 02:51:618 (1,2,1,2) - quite jarring and confusing to map those on vocal focus while everyhting around them seems to ignore themsignifies a discontinuation
- 02:43:180 (2) - maybe make theis a circle to aline the sliders with the vocals and to complement the gradual build up with the samount of sliders in each meassure
- 01:38:961 (2) - seems to disregard the song without adding anything of essence to the map
hard
02:39:149 (3) - as vocals seem in focus here with some of the triples skipped, i think this one shouldn't be a thing either
normal - nothing bothering me about it
easy
00:45:805 (1) - according to the rc the recovery time is too low
02:39:149 (3) - as vocals seem in focus here with some of the triples skipped, i think this one shouldn't be a thing either
normal - nothing bothering me about it
easy
00:45:805 (1) - according to the rc the recovery time is too low
trying to polish my modding, so if you notice me getting overly stuck on something or am repeatedly neglecting certain things, please tell me about it
i love monika
Nathan wrote:
i love monika
Monika, as requested.
General: As we told IRC mute slidertails on 1\8. This soft sampleset creating a bit spam of sounds or smthing like this lol.
Recheck stuff with mod assistant. my folder can be broken uhh.
BoxArt Wubgline: 4REVER
00:59:493 - mby place soft sampleset? it will be more sonsistence for this 01:08:493 -
01:07:743 (1) - Rly offscreened
02:01:649 (1) - some pixels offscreen
02:47:118 (1) - mby make angle of this more fitting to pattern? http://puu.sh/y2269/3147ee9583.jpg
02:55:930 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11) - stacking rip. do it manualy or smthing
03:01:930 (1,2) - is it rly needed to emphaze sound on 2? just wanna suggest place slider or be consistency by spacing intead of this 03:01:180 (1,2) -
Alright thats all for this. Recheck offscreens. i could miss smthing.
Godzhen0019:
00:42:618 (1,2,3,4) - not correctly fit for future coneption (i mean 00:43:368 (1,2,3,4) - and etc) or stack rip or im rip
00:45:618 (1,2,3,4) - distance uneven
00:57:805 (2,3,1) - 01:04:180 (2,3,1) - mby not full stacking? guess it can confused
02:41:868 (1) - soudlnt be drumsampled
01:36:618 - 2 greenlines with different sv on one offset timeline
NathAN's:
01:53:211 - add normal whistle on sliderend for consistency
01:56:211 - same
02:38:868 (3,4) - it shouldnt be perfectly symmetrical?
Sing x Toybot ins:
Nothing to say =)
Plaudible x Hobbes2 ins:
02:12:055 (2,1) - can u avoid dat pixel overlap cuz of stacking?
02:52:743 (7,8,9) - all 3 sounds very different to be so linealy and even
03:04:649 (6,7,8,9) - ya same with hobbes
Easy is fine
So Doormat's and Kibbleru's diff ripped by my folder. Hope to cure it today. will update if find smthing to say on normal and hard.
General: As we told IRC mute slidertails on 1\8. This soft sampleset creating a bit spam of sounds or smthing like this lol.
Recheck stuff with mod assistant. my folder can be broken uhh.
BoxArt Wubgline: 4REVER
00:59:493 - mby place soft sampleset? it will be more sonsistence for this 01:08:493 -
01:07:743 (1) - Rly offscreened
02:01:649 (1) - some pixels offscreen
02:47:118 (1) - mby make angle of this more fitting to pattern? http://puu.sh/y2269/3147ee9583.jpg
02:55:930 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11) - stacking rip. do it manualy or smthing
03:01:930 (1,2) - is it rly needed to emphaze sound on 2? just wanna suggest place slider or be consistency by spacing intead of this 03:01:180 (1,2) -
Alright thats all for this. Recheck offscreens. i could miss smthing.
Godzhen0019:
00:42:618 (1,2,3,4) - not correctly fit for future coneption (i mean 00:43:368 (1,2,3,4) - and etc) or stack rip or im rip
00:45:618 (1,2,3,4) - distance uneven
00:57:805 (2,3,1) - 01:04:180 (2,3,1) - mby not full stacking? guess it can confused
02:41:868 (1) - soudlnt be drumsampled
01:36:618 - 2 greenlines with different sv on one offset timeline
NathAN's:
01:53:211 - add normal whistle on sliderend for consistency
01:56:211 - same
02:38:868 (3,4) - it shouldnt be perfectly symmetrical?
Sing x Toybot ins:
Nothing to say =)
Plaudible x Hobbes2 ins:
02:12:055 (2,1) - can u avoid dat pixel overlap cuz of stacking?
02:52:743 (7,8,9) - all 3 sounds very different to be so linealy and even
03:04:649 (6,7,8,9) - ya same with hobbes
Easy is fine
So Doormat's and Kibbleru's diff ripped by my folder. Hope to cure it today. will update if find smthing to say on normal and hard.
nathan
02:00:618 (1,2) - 02:03:618 (1,2) - 02:03:618 (1,2) - 02:09:618 (1,2) - etc. these are unrankable for now? cuz the slider is completely hidden from previous slider until you are partially through next slider.
02:00:618 (1,2) - 02:03:618 (1,2) - 02:03:618 (1,2) - 02:09:618 (1,2) - etc. these are unrankable for now? cuz the slider is completely hidden from previous slider until you are partially through next slider.
since it's from the pm itself
firetruck me for kds farming :^(
Kibb's
- 00:02:118 (3,1) - These are lined up good, but the visual overlap makes it messy. I think it's better you dont make these overlapped.
- 00:08:118 (3,1,2,3) - A bit subjective, but with the suddenly dense note, it would cause an unexpected confusion for normal players trying hard diffs. Plus with that distance snap, visually the same as the 1/1 rhythm you used on the section earlier, can stir up more confusion.
- 00:37:180 (2) - Remove this note? So it'll be the same as 00:20:774 (2,3) - and etc. In addition with no 1/4 rhythm used later on in that section, I think this is a bit inconsistent
- 01:07:930 (1,2) - Personally, I think with this distance, the players might think this is snapped to 1/2 rhythm. Maybe with a play or two it would fix their perspective, but I do think this isn't an optimal choice of mapping the 1/4 rhythm even if it's kiai or not
- 01:27:524 - missing a beat here, a triplet looks good, but covering it with kickslider reflects better as it covers all the rhythm (or repeat sliders if kickslider felt overmapping)
- 02:13:930 (1) - Not sure if it's okay to leave a downbeat unclicked, but whatever
- 02:22:368 (1,2,3,1,2,3) - I think this looks confusing to play, even when you introduce all those offbeat rhythm. Maybe because of the distance used is almost the same, visually, as 02:23:305 (1,2,3) - , compared to 02:22:368 (1,2,3) -
- While at it, remove the green lines from the end? Not like you're using it anyways
firetruck me for kds farming :^(
OD->9NeilPerry wrote:
Godzhen0019:
00:42:618 (1,2,3,4) - not correctly fit for future coneption (i mean 00:43:368 (1,2,3,4) - and etc) or stack rip or im rip
00:45:618 (1,2,3,4) - distance uneven (and above) it's the smaller version of 00:44:868 (1,2,3,4) -
00:57:805 (2,3,1) - 01:04:180 (2,3,1) - mby not full stacking? guess it can confused kay
02:41:868 (1) - soudlnt be drumsampled k
01:36:618 - 2 greenlines with different sv on one offset timeline fixed
rename collab insane to singbot's insane or smthing like that, bc current diff name makes me think ur in the collab pbox
D:
compare with 02:01:930 (1) - 02:04:930 (1) -phaZ wrote:
[Boxart Wongline: FOREVER]
02:07:930 - volume should be 30% i think
Just continue. No kudos.
w1:
00:24:243 (2) - why it's mute and strange sv?
00:59:868 (1,2) - snap sliderends
01:25:555 (2,3,4) - stacking hide tripple visualisation. make it manual or smthing
02:07:039 - whistle on sliderend really randomly
02:17:493 (6,1,2,3,4,5) - try avoid overlap with sliderend. i catch ur idea that it should be symmetrical with this 02:17:118 (2,3,4,5) - but overlap looks rly weird and confusing
03:10:180 (4,5,6) - same abt stacking
03:11:680 (4,5,6) - ^
Kibbleru:
00:16:368 (3) - this is unsnapped
02:01:649 - just my suggestion for this: mby make it clickable? http://puu.sh/y7rSo/3c8d69345e.jpg if u do will need to change all same moments
02:10:743 - why it's skipping?
Doormat's normal seems good for me.
Will be cool if Kibbleru and Doormat will delete all useless greenlines in their diffs. But nvm XD
w1:
00:24:243 (2) - why it's mute and strange sv?
00:59:868 (1,2) - snap sliderends
01:25:555 (2,3,4) - stacking hide tripple visualisation. make it manual or smthing
02:07:039 - whistle on sliderend really randomly
02:17:493 (6,1,2,3,4,5) - try avoid overlap with sliderend. i catch ur idea that it should be symmetrical with this 02:17:118 (2,3,4,5) - but overlap looks rly weird and confusing
03:10:180 (4,5,6) - same abt stacking
03:11:680 (4,5,6) - ^
Kibbleru:
00:16:368 (3) - this is unsnapped
02:01:649 - just my suggestion for this: mby make it clickable? http://puu.sh/y7rSo/3c8d69345e.jpg if u do will need to change all same moments
02:10:743 - why it's skipping?
Doormat's normal seems good for me.
Will be cool if Kibbleru and Doormat will delete all useless greenlines in their diffs. But nvm XD
oh. wow.ProfessionalBox wrote:
Tags : tragic anime top 10 deaths check out my new mixtape at http://www.vinxisgya.com/mixtapes/lit/ProfessionalBox