1. osu!community
  2. Beatmaps
  3. Pending Beatmaps
posted
This beatmap was submitted using in-game submission on Samstag, 3. Februar 2018 at 18:30:36

Artist: LiLA'c Records
Title: Aimless Voyage
Source: 東方永夜抄 ~ Imperishable Night.
Tags: Irus Yuuki Aihara Neeshe Eternize LLAC-0011 RTS9 Reitaisai Voyage 1969 Final Stage Kathayaka
BPM: 190
Filesize: 9098kb
Play Time: 04:07
Difficulties Available:
  1. Futsuu (2,34 stars, 586 notes)
  2. Kantan (1,7 stars, 358 notes)
  3. Kathayaka's Muzukashii (3,03 stars, 922 notes)
  4. Lost (4,85 stars, 1869 notes)
  5. Oni (3,9 stars, 1406 notes)


Download: LiLA'c Records - Aimless Voyage
Information: Scores/Beatmap Listing
---------------
Additional mods found here: https://osu.ppy.sh/forum/t/652117

Distorted vocals = Low SV
Normal vocals = Normal SV
Angelic vocals = High SV

Progressively more intense SV changes to ease the player into the gimmick, making it not unfair but still not too easy by the time the 3rd kiai is around :3

Hope its fun c:
R I P Breakcore hitsounds :)

Lost = Inner with lotso SV stuff, by me!
Oni = Simple oni with slight SV described above, by me!
Muzukashii = Muzukashii by Kathayaka, few 1/4, mainly 1/2 rhythms!
Futsuu = Done by me!
Kantan = Done by me! Inflated SR; Angry

People who FC'd Lost diff with a mod (Please do Try it!)

Greenshell (HD)
-Kazu- (HR)

Where is my HDHR?
posted
henlo

[General]
Kantan has HP6, while the other diffs (excluding Kathayakas Muzukashii) only have HP5.5. Is this intended?
Also for Kathayakas Muzukashii, I'd suggest using a different Beat Snap Divisor than 1/16, though it's optional, just preference.

[Kantan]
I think the Kantan is visibly overmapped, that's probably why the SR is so high. Therefore most of my suggestions will be "delet this"

00:07:435 (9) - shouldn't this be a Don?
00:11:856 (10,11) - delete? I don't think neither Don or Kat could fit this noise at that difficulty level
00:14:698 (17) - delete? imo, this note is unnecessary, even without that, it still sounds good.
00:19:120 (26) - delete? ^
00:18:804 (25) - change to k? the guitar pitch is going up here
00:24:172 (29) - delete? also unnecessary imo
00:29:856 (37) - delete? ^
00:34:909 (45) - delete? ^
00:39:962 (52) - ^
01:05:225 (97) - ^
01:27:330 (126,128) - delete? I think the pattern is too dense for a Kantan and therefore should be nerfed
01:32:383 (133,135) - ^
01:37:435 (140,142) - ^
01:42:488 (147,149) - ^
01:48:172 (156) - unnecessary imo. the same with: 01:52:594 (163) - 01:52:594 (169) - 02:03:330 (185) - .
02:55:751 (244) - ^
02:58:277 (248,250) - delete? Also too dense imo
03:03:330 (255,257) - ^
03:08:382 (262,264) - ^
03:13:435 (269,271) - ^
03:39:329 (5) - unnecessary imo, same with: 03:43:751 (12) - 03:48:804 (20) - 03:54:487 (29) -
04:02:382 (40) - change to Don? fits better with the strong sound in the background.

[Futsuu]

02:05:698 (284) - consider changing it to Kat, since you did pretty much the same pattern as here 00:12:014 - .

Seems fine to me.

[Kathayakas Muzukashii]

Nothing in particular that bugs me. Pretty solid, I guess.

[Oni]

00:19:435 (37) - change to Don? flows better imo
00:24:172 (6) - change to Don? sounds better than the dkd
00:29:541 (39) - change to Don? for the sake of some consistency
00:39:014 (104) - change to Don? kdk is kinda repetitive in this difficulty, so why not some variety?
maybe you can take these and also apply them to some parts in the map, it's up to you.


[Lost]

Also looks pretty good and polished. Nothing that bugs me.



Overall, I must say that I don't really like your concept of the SV changes, but well it's your map. But I still enjoy playing it though!

Good Luck! :)
posted

-Leafeon wrote:

henlo

[General]
Kantan has HP6, while the other diffs (excluding Kathayakas Muzukashii) only have HP5.5. Is this intended? //intended
Also for Kathayakas Muzukashii, I'd suggest using a different Beat Snap Divisor than 1/16, though it's optional, just preference. //Doesnt change anything tbh so whatever ^^

[Kantan]
I think the Kantan is visibly overmapped, that's probably why the SR is so high. Therefore most of my suggestions will be "delet this" //Its the offbeats in the last kiai probably.

00:07:435 (9) - shouldn't this be a Don? Theres a finisher sound here, so a kat finisher suits this the most tbh
00:11:856 (10,11) - delete? I don't think neither Don or Kat could fit this noise at that difficulty level Its a noise that almost every difficulty recognizes as a difficulty spike so i decided to keep it consistent.
00:14:698 (17) - delete? imo, this note is unnecessary, even without that, it still sounds good. I wanted this part to contain some 1/1 because thats what i need in the current spread.
00:19:120 (26) - delete? ^ See above.
00:18:804 (25) - change to k? the guitar pitch is going up here Applied
00:24:172 (29) - delete? also unnecessary imo need some 1/1 here, as said; Compared with the Futsuu it would result in a gap thats too large difficulty wise
00:29:856 (37) - delete? ^ see above
00:34:909 (45) - delete? ^ Removing this note would remove kat emphasis on the guitar here, which i want to keep.
00:39:962 (52) - ^ Same goes for here
01:05:225 (97) - ^ Again i dont want to lose guitar emphasis.
01:27:330 (126,128) - delete? I think the pattern is too dense for a Kantan and therefore should be nerfed I agree, its too dense compared too the futsuu aswell, nerfed accordingly.
01:32:383 (133,135) - ^
01:37:435 (140,142) - ^
01:42:488 (147,149) - ^
01:48:172 (156) - unnecessary imo. the same with: 01:52:594 (163) - 01:52:594 (169) - 02:03:330 (185) - . Again i need atleast some 1/1 here.
02:55:751 (244) - ^ I hear very strong cymbals here, and every diff acknowledges this part as a diff spike, so i am keeping it for consistencies' sake.
02:58:277 (248,250) - delete? Also too dense imo I agree, changed
03:03:330 (255,257) - ^
03:08:382 (262,264) - ^
03:13:435 (269,271) - ^
03:39:329 (5) - unnecessary imo, same with: 03:43:751 (12) - 03:48:804 (20) - 03:54:487 (29) - Again i need some 1/1 here.
04:02:382 (40) - change to Don? fits better with the strong sound in the background. Kept as kat together with the finisher at the start.

[Futsuu]

02:05:698 (284) - consider changing it to Kat, since you did pretty much the same pattern as here 02:05:698 (284) - . I know what timestamp you mean, i changed it to a bit different pattern though, they are different musical parts so i want to keep the patterns in the map different too.

Seems fine to me. yay


[Kathayakas Muzukashii]

Nothing in particular that bugs me. Pretty solid, I guess.

[Oni]

00:19:435 (37) - change to Don? flows better imo Would keep as a kat, its a violin sound i would like to represent with a kat.
00:24:172 (6) - change to Don? sounds better than the dkd I gotta keep it as kat to capture the 1/1 violin sounds.
00:29:541 (39) - change to Don? for the sake of some consistency Consistent to what? It was mapped to the violin so i will keep it for now.
00:39:014 (104) - change to Don? kdk is kinda repetitive in this difficulty, so why not some variety? This pattern actually comes not that often, and the base 1/2 rhythm changes up every combo, in addition to some 1/4, so the gameplay should be varied enough.
maybe you can take these and also apply them to some parts in the map, it's up to you.


[Lost]

Also looks pretty good and polished. Nothing that bugs me.



Overall, I must say that I don't really like your concept of the SV changes, but well it's your map. But I still enjoy playing it though! :dabs:

Good Luck! :)
Thank you for the mod you banause!
posted
test
posted
test 2 , hi nep nep!
posted
meow

[General]
  1. There are inconstistencies in diff's endings:
    here
    04:07:120 - Kantan
    04:07:120 - Futsuu
    04:07:120 - Kathayaka's Muzukashii
    04:07:277 - Oni
    04:07:356 - Lost


[Futsuu]
  1. 00:36:488 (69,70,71,72) - i found this moment strange in rhythmics. 00:41:541 (82,83,84,85) - here you have don between them, so better to put here don,
    because this gap will confuse player (cause this part already has a bit complex rhythm).
  2. 00:52:277 (110) - don sounds better here, also it follows vocal (conatined same tonality on two beats) as one color pattern.
  3. 01:04:909 (140,141) - what is the reasone of making here two kats? There are no emphasizing here then, plus those two are not so high tonality.
  4. 01:08:383 - well, this empy space confuses. Better to put here something, really. Plus, you mapped vocal here, as i thought, so this is clearly vocal sound. 01:13:435 - here you have note.
  5. 02:14:698 (303,304) - this part looks so strange for me, idk. I mean, i can't get sounds which you emphasize. Firstly vocal, then strange gaps and e.t.c. Even this one. I can suggest you 02:14:541 - kat here and 02:14:856 - done here, also delete 02:14:698 - this one. It will follow 02:12:014 (297) - that rhythm and make 02:14:856 - 02:15:014 - those sounds emphasized better, imo.
  6. 02:30:172 - part, that i mentioned before.
  7. Slow parts is a bit inconsistent in kats using. Some of them really should be dons. I guess you won't change that part, just wanted to remind.


[Kathayaka's Muzukashii]
  1. 00:24:646 (92) - is this kat for diversifying? If not, then it should be don.
  2. 01:00:014 - well, i feel lose of sound here. Maybe it will break a bit density, but you can try don here.
  3. 01:26:856 (39) - don is better, see no reason for kat. 01:29:383 - plus you didn't do that here. 01:31:909 - if here we can clearly hear high vocal, but here we are not.
  4. 01:36:962 (81) - ^.
  5. 01:42:014 (102) - ^.
  6. 02:15:488 (3,4,5) - why you missed sound here? 02:15:804 - i thought here should be don 😨
  7. 02:24:015 (1) - what about moving it to 02:24:172 - ???
  8. 02:35:226 (34) - for Muzu this part isn't enough dense, so i recommend you to fill it by some notes.
  9. 03:09:962 (124) - for me this sounds as don, maybe because of deafnees of "ku". Don here will follow 03:10:277 (125) - this one greatly, just try it.
  10. 03:16:277 - didn't think about note here?


[Oni]
  1. 00:11:856 (55,56,57,58,59,60) - logically, the second pattern has to be continuation of the first as sounds of the first "echoes" right to the end of the second. You should think about changing second one, imo. Maybe ddk kkd.
  2. 00:19:751 (39) - this should be kat in therms of consistency.
  3. 00:19:751 (39) - if you look at this part and track each 1/1 rhythm of kats, you can see that this is the only place you mapped by don. 00:12:804 (62,1,5,10,13,16,21,25,27,30,35,39) - i mean those and further.
  4. SVs are a bit confusing again due to their return to previous SV before those changes. Idk how to properly explain, but i hope you'' get it.
  5. 01:26:067 - this part has almost the same triple density as kiai parts and even lasts almosty 2 times longer. I swear that you won't change it, but i hope that maybe with some mods this place will be balanced a bit better than it is now. For me it's totally okay, because i think that kiai shouldn't be the most dense part, but how can you explain that to some pedantic BNs which adore opposite? :^)
  6. 01:30:093 - maybe i got wrong your concept of making triples here, but here you should do triple. 01:27:014 (104,105,106,108,109,110,111,112,113) - are right on the bass(?)
  7. 01:32:620 - the same place. There are a lot of similar further, so i guess i won't mark out all of them, because i am sure i just didn't understand the concept here. But in case i am right, you should change some places of this part to better consistency and rhythmics. If you did here vocal, thatn why 01:32:777 - this sound was lost?
  8. 01:45:409 (220) - what about moving it to 01:45:251 - ? It will emphasize vocal better.
  9. 01:53:225 (39) - as mentioned before
  10. 02:35:225 (70,71,72,73) - i guess it's just for me, but this transition seems a bit confusing. 02:36:962 - maybe doubles in this kind of places will suit. Anyway, rest is so simple and lose so much sounds that could be mapped here.
  11. 02:48:962 - for what? Almost alone triple here. 02:51:488 - or put here additional note to follow that triple.
  12. next part 02:56:698 - and further (as i said before) need to polished too imo, because i still don't get mixing of vocal and other sounds here. Is that thing called filling? But then it should be done more constantly.
  13. 03:37:435 (401,402,403) - SV is already useless here and will confuse only, because new musical part started from 03:37:120 (400) - there.
  14. That boost of SV in kiai btw is really high in my opinion (comparing with other parts), 1.2 already looks like half of HR lul. I won't suggest any SV changes (because i like it,hehe) because i am really not experienced in that and will only spend your time for nothing.


[Lost]
  1. 00:07:120 (50) - this really should be don, just listen to it with 50% (as other snares here 00:06:646 (46,47,48,51) - ).
  2. 00:21:883 (168) - what about moving it to 00:22:041 - .
  3. 00:26:541 (203,204,205,206,207,208,209,210,211) - don't you think, that 3 ddk in a row is boring? They contains different sounds, try to diversify them.
  4. 00:54:883 (32) - this sound isn't enought long to be mapped with two kats. It's the same as 00:54:646 (29,35) - , so better to 00:54:804 (31,32) - kd here.
  5. 01:27:330 (167,168,169,170,171,172,173,174) - just suggestion : you can try swap them. Firstly triple comes, and then 5-note stream. You will also follow 01:32:698 (212,213,214,215,216) - this one and further stream rhythmics. 01:37:277 (250,251,252,253,254,255,256,257) - same.
  6. 02:00:014 (435,436,437,438,439,440,441,442,443) - boring triples, meeeeh.
  7. 02:14:698 (8,9,10,11,12) - REALLY strange place. 02:14:698 - after this, you should do stream due to drums, but you mapped 2 beat sounds 02:15:014 (10,11,12) - there as triple. Why? My suggestion 02:14:698 - from there : kdddd d.
  8. 02:50:698 (195,196,197,198) - i thought you didn't want to put doubles in this part, but you did it here. What's reason? :^)
  9. 02:58:277 (245,246,247,248,249,250,251,252) - comparing with previous one, this is another cause of vocal, so for diversifying you can leave it as it is here.
  10. Same opinion about SV as in Oni. But rhythmics of Lost is a way better than Oni :^)


Damn, now we can post only by quoting other messages to thread and only to old threads? Confusing.
Good luck with map, Nepuri. My mod is a way smaller and less useful as yours on my map, so i shoot some stars to compencate it:3
posted
hi, just a tease before I go and mod this map. move the red line -20ms to 1100 offset, this map is long behind the song.
posted

Remus wrote:

meow

[General]
  1. There are inconstistencies in diff's endings:
    here
    04:07:120 - Kantan
    04:07:120 - Futsuu
    04:07:120 - Kathayaka's Muzukashii
    04:07:277 - Oni
    04:07:356 - Lost

An issue i cant really prevent, its only a few ms so its fine.

[Futsuu]
  1. 00:36:488 (69,70,71,72) - i found this moment strange in rhythmics. 00:41:541 (82,83,84,85) - here you have don between them, so better to put here don,
    because this gap will confuse player (cause this part already has a bit complex rhythm). I dont think this will cause much problems. I used the 3/2 gaps predictably to cause the least confusion possible. Also the Inconsistency you pointed out is actually extra emphasis on the guitar near the end of a section as it is more clear at that spot.
  2. 00:52:277 (110) - don sounds better here, also it follows vocal (conatined same tonality on two beats) as one color pattern. Sounds good!
  3. 01:04:909 (140,141) - what is the reasone of making here two kats? There are no emphasizing here then, plus those two are not so high tonality. Applied for to keep consistency.
  4. 01:08:383 - well, this empy space confuses. Better to put here something, really. Plus, you mapped vocal here, as i thought, so this is clearly vocal sound. 01:13:435 - here you have note. Ah, mightve been an oversight, fixed!
  5. 02:14:698 (303,304) - this part looks so strange for me, idk. I mean, i can't get sounds which you emphasize. Firstly vocal, then strange gaps and e.t.c. Even this one. I can suggest you 02:14:541 - kat here and 02:14:856 - done here, also delete 02:14:698 - this one. It will follow 02:12:014 (297) - that rhythm and make 02:14:856 - 02:15:014 - those sounds emphasized better, imo. Another inconsistency that was accidental, nice catch!
  6. 02:30:172 - part, that i mentioned before. Dont understand what you mean, sorry.
  7. Slow parts is a bit inconsistent in kats using. Some of them really should be dons. I guess you won't change that part, just wanted to remind.


[Kathayaka's Muzukashii]

  • I will be quoting Kathayaka on this Replying.
  1. 00:24:646 (92) - is this kat for diversifying? If not, then it should be don. Yes, it is for variety.
  2. 01:00:014 - well, i feel lose of sound here. Maybe it will break a bit density, but you can try don here. I wanted to make some breaks for player that are needed, plus it gives emphasis on a stronger guitar note.
  3. 01:26:856 (39) - don is better, see no reason for kat. 01:29:383 - plus you didn't do that here. 01:31:909 - if here we can clearly hear high vocal, but here we are not. Thanks, fixed.
  4. 01:36:962 (81) - ^. ^
  5. 01:42:014 (102) - ^. Not fixed. This goes against your original argument as there are high vocals present again.
  6. 02:15:488 (3,4,5) - why you missed sound here? 02:15:804 - i thought here should be don 😨 I did not want a relatively unbacked sound go by a relatively dense pattern, that is why i chose to simplify it.
  7. 02:24:015 (1) - what about moving it to 02:24:172 - ??? Done.
  8. 02:35:226 (34) - for Muzu this part isn't enough dense, so i recommend you to fill it by some notes. Every diff is relatively sparsely mapped here, even the oni, so this is not a valid argument.
  9. 03:09:962 (124) - for me this sounds as don, maybe because of deafnees of "ku". Don here will follow 03:10:277 (125) - this one greatly, just try it. Done.
  10. 03:16:277 - didn't think about note here? No background sounds to make vocal mapping sensible here, sorry. Piano is very silent too.


[Oni]
  1. 00:11:856 (55,56,57,58,59,60) - logically, the second pattern has to be continuation of the first as sounds of the first "echoes" right to the end of the second. You should think about changing second one, imo. Maybe ddk kkd. Sounds like its revving up pitch twice so i chose ddk ddk, think i have to disagree.
  2. 00:19:751 (39) - this should be kat in therms of consistency. I was merely varying the base 1/2 structure to diversify, so its okay.
  3. 00:19:751 (39) - if you look at this part and track each 1/1 rhythm of kats, you can see that this is the only place you mapped by don. 00:12:804 (62,1,5,10,13,16,21,25,27,30,35,39) - i mean those and further. I know, i have done that on purpose for diversification together with the kat structure change in the 2nd half.
  4. SVs are a bit confusing again due to their return to previous SV before those changes. Idk how to properly explain, but i hope you'' get it.
  5. 01:26:067 - this part has almost the same triple density as kiai parts and even lasts almosty 2 times longer. I swear that you won't change it, but i hope that maybe with some mods this place will be balanced a bit better than it is now. For me it's totally okay, because i think that kiai shouldn't be the most dense part, but how can you explain that to some pedantic BNs which adore opposite? :^) Yea this map is supposed to be a "no thank you"
    to mapping conventions.
  6. 01:30:093 - maybe i got wrong your concept of making triples here, but here you should do triple. 01:27:014 (104,105,106,108,109,110,111,112,113) - are right on the bass(?) More or less overmapping to my base kat structure to not make this section too long and also boring.
  7. 01:32:620 - the same place. There are a lot of similar further, so i guess i won't mark out all of them, because i am sure i just didn't understand the concept here. But in case i am right, you should change some places of this part to better consistency and rhythmics. If you did here vocal, thatn why 01:32:777 - this sound was lost? Ah, Fixed!
  8. 01:45:409 (220) - what about moving it to 01:45:251 - ? It will emphasize vocal better. No thank you, this focusses more on the strong drum buildup, hence the 5lets placed in such manner.
  9. 01:53:225 (39) - as mentioned before
  10. 02:35:225 (70,71,72,73) - i guess it's just for me, but this transition seems a bit confusing. 02:36:962 - maybe doubles in this kind of places will suit. Anyway, rest is so simple and lose so much sounds that could be mapped here. That the purpose of this section, its a loosely mapped section,
    which i dont believe are fit to 1/2 doublets in such a silent part.
  11. 02:48:962 - for what? Almost alone triple here. 02:51:488 - or put here additional note to follow that triple. Followed extra triple thanks!
  12. next part 02:56:698 - and further (as i said before) need to polished too imo, because i still don't get mixing of vocal and other sounds here. Is that thing called filling? But then it should be done more constantly. Yes, its improvisation on the vocals and a base kat rhythm.
  13. 03:37:435 (401,402,403) - SV is already useless here and will confuse only, because new musical part started from 03:37:120 (400) - there. No, the contrary. I need a smooth change so it doesnt confuse too much in the first place.
  14. That boost of SV in kiai btw is really high in my opinion (comparing with other parts), 1.2 already looks like half of HR lul. I won't suggest any SV changes (because i like it,hehe) because i am really not experienced in that and will only spend your time for nothing.


[Lost]
  1. 00:07:120 (50) - this really should be don, just listen to it with 50% (as other snares here 00:06:646 (46,47,48,51) - ). I keep what i have here, its emphasized similarily as 00:05:698 (38,39) - which sounds coherent and consistent to me.
  2. 00:21:883 (168) - what about moving it to 00:22:041 - . I prefer to keep a ddk heavy rhythm to have the sharp synth captured better than a kdd rhythm can.
  3. 00:26:541 (203,204,205,206,207,208,209,210,211) - don't you think, that 3 ddk in a row is boring? They contains different sounds, try to diversify them. They contain sounds, which is right. Those lie outside of my focus and i believe this captures the sharp synth very well.
  4. 00:54:883 (32) - this sound isn't enought long to be mapped with two kats. It's the same as 00:54:646 (29,35) - , so better to 00:54:804 (31,32) - kd here. I deliberately mapped it like this to have some contrast to 00:55:120 (35) - , which is the same sound but more silent. Will keep for now.
  5. 01:27:330 (167,168,169,170,171,172,173,174) - just suggestion : you can try swap them. Firstly triple comes, and then 5-note stream. You will also follow 01:32:698 (212,213,214,215,216) - this one and further stream rhythmics. 01:37:277 (250,251,252,253,254,255,256,257) - same. Did some pattern changes on my own, thanks though!
  6. 02:00:014 (435,436,437,438,439,440,441,442,443) - boring triples, meeeeh. Eeeee see my last point.
  7. 02:14:698 (8,9,10,11,12) - REALLY strange place. 02:14:698 - after this, you should do stream due to drums, but you mapped 2 beat sounds 02:15:014 (10,11,12) - there as triple. Why? My suggestion 02:14:698 - from there : kdddd d. did kdd ddd to not interrupt any emphasis on wubs but to acknowledge the drums.
  8. 02:50:698 (195,196,197,198) - i thought you didn't want to put doubles in this part, but you did it here. What's reason? :^) Basically a beefier version of 02:40:751 (169,170) - in the previous part, but only beefed up to a doublet pair.
  9. 02:58:277 (245,246,247,248,249,250,251,252) - comparing with previous one, this is another cause of vocal, so for diversifying you can leave it as it is here. Yesi, i need the diversifying a bit here.
  10. Same opinion about SV as in Oni. But rhythmics of Lost is a way better than Oni :^) Was kind of limited in my options in oni ;w;


Damn, now we can post only by quoting other messages to thread and only to old threads? Confusing.
Good luck with map, Nepuri. My mod is a way smaller and less useful as yours on my map, so i shoot some stars to compencate it:3 Thanks!!!
Thanks for your mod!
posted
HI IM MODDING THIS

l(a)ost diff
◾ bro you need to change the offset to 1100.
◽ 00:12:784 - you could use something other than ddk in these parts, like a ddk d kdd pattern or something to spice it up.
◾ 00:31:968 - don't be afraid, u can note here
◽ all the slow kiai are different sv :/ broo
◾ 02:40:889 - / 02:50:994 - add d, it's out of whack since you've been mapping d here this whole time
◽ 02:46:257 - there's a kick here, so yeah
◾ 03:14:994 - it would be nice to have these not be the same exact thing
◽ 03:16:415 (403) - this sound is not deserving of a slider, better as a spinner or just one note
◾ 03:29:521 - wow, that's an annoying progression
◽ 04:06:152 - make stream, i dare
I don't enjoy the gimmick but people don't enjoy my gimmicks 90% of the time so
posted

Nifty wrote:

HI IM MODDING THIS

l(a)ost diff
◾ bro you need to change the offset to 1100. Sounds even more wrong to me that way @_@ I should get someone to testify my timing someday
◽ 00:12:784 - you could use something other than ddk in these parts, like a ddk d kdd pattern or something to spice it up. There are quite a few kkddk, ddkkd and kdk for such purpose.
◾ 00:31:968 - don't be afraid, u can note here No, I always keep every buildup as 2 7-lets near the end in order not to make it too hard/unfairish
◽ all the slow kiai are different sv :/ broo For Progression purposes.
◾ 02:40:889 - / 02:50:994 - add d, it's out of whack since you've been mapping d here this whole time I think you meant k and, changed
◽ 02:46:257 - there's a kick here, so yeah Yup, changed
◾ 03:14:994 - it would be nice to have these not be the same exact thing Yea, its vocal emphasis where the kats lie on the vocals, together with the 7-lets to emphasize the drum buildup here, so i think its fine.
◽ 03:16:415 (403) - this sound is not deserving of a slider, better as a spinner or just one note A spinner would be much more confusing/obfuscating the playfield, else id put one there gladly. I want to keep as slider because the voice distorts and i want some kind of emphasis.
◾ 03:29:521 - wow, that's an annoying progression It fits her vocals tho @_@
◽ 04:06:152 - make stream, i dare w
I don't enjoy the gimmick but people don't enjoy my gimmicks 90% of the time so yes
Thanks for the mod!
Please sign in to reply.