1. Insane (4.9 stars, 1258 notes)
2. IOException's Gale (6.01 stars, 1585 notes)
3. Uplift (5.81 stars, 1494 notes)

support the album!

23:48 JeZag: flame me
23:48 JeZag: but not too hard
23:48 JeZag: im sensitive
23:48 [[Pika]]: 00:01:323 (2) - 00:02:009 (2) - 00:02:352 (1) - 00:01:666 (1) - for example, in the intro
23:48 [[Pika]]: you should probably have a scheme in terms of sliders
23:49 [[Pika]]: i.e. 1/1 sliders are red points, 1/2 are white points
23:49 [[Pika]]: or something similar
23:49 JeZag: oh i think a scheme is not necessairy for that
23:49 [[Pika]]: it creates coherency w
23:49 JeZag: because then it actually becomes too boring
23:49 JeZag: too coreographed
23:49 [[Pika]]: 00:07:838 (1,2) - why u do this when the other stuff is like 00:07:152 (1,2,3) - this in the few bars
23:50 JeZag: 00:06:466 (1) -
23:50 [[Pika]]: 00:13:323 (1) - 00:14:009 (1) - i'd do some fancy stuff to reflect the whirring stuff in background
23:50 JeZag: starting from here, density "increases"
23:50 JeZag: so i vary between using hitcircles and using 1/2 sliders with larger DS
23:50 [[Pika]]: 00:07:838 (1,2) - so why have this here
23:50 JeZag: 1/2 slider with larger DS
23:51 [[Pika]]: it's hardly noticeable lol
23:51 [[Pika]]: feels out of place imo
23:51 JeZag: compare it to the 3/4 + 1/2 combos before
23:51 JeZag: i dont want to make it 100% hitcircles otherwise it will be too dense compared to the previous section
23:51 [[Pika]]: how 'bout alternating between two circles & slider
23:51 [[Pika]]: 1 bar = 3/4 and 2 circles
23:51 [[Pika]]: 1 bar = 3/4 and 1/2
23:52 JeZag: again, i dont want to be too predictable with that either
23:52 JeZag: later on in the kiai time and in other sections
23:52 JeZag: i swap between equally valid rythms
23:52 [[Pika]]: yeah but it's basically the calmest section in the song
23:52 [[Pika]]: some consistency is preferred so there's more of a contrast 
23:53 JeZag: even though its calm, i dont think that consistency is something that needs to be contrasted to
23:53 JeZag: its not like this part is particularly dull imo
23:53 [[Pika]]: it's one chord and a repeating bass kick for 16 bars ;/
23:53 JeZag: well actually it is, but not so monotone that i want to repeat the same thing
23:53 JeZag: i guess that comes down to a personal bias,
23:53 [[Pika]]: true that
23:54 JeZag: because i dont want to repeat it predictablly unless i stylistically want to emphasize it
23:54 [[Pika]]: seemsgood
23:54 [[Pika]]: 00:14:009 (1) - 00:13:323 (1) - i suggest making these a little "fancier" to emphasize the whirring stuff in the background
23:54 JeZag: ah ive gotten scarred from my crazy sliders in GHOST
23:54 [[Pika]]: lol
23:55 [[Pika]]: i mean like
23:55 [[Pika]]: simpler 5 point sliders
23:55 JeZag: personally, i think these round sliders signal the "bouncy" sounds well enough
23:55 JeZag: like "jumpy"
23:55 [[Pika]]: 00:14:695 (1) - yeah but round sliders :/
23:56 [[Pika]]: https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/9361881 something like this perhaps
23:56 JeZag: oh are you asking why its 1/2 not 1/1?
23:56 JeZag: or why is it that shape?
23:56 JeZag: hmm, i dont like that one because it seems to imply that there are two bounces
23:56 [[Pika]]: so that it captures the bounciness without being too extra
23:56 JeZag: i like having a smooth curve cause its one smooth sound
23:56 [[Pika]]: yeah but the sounds peaks in the middle
23:57 JeZag: another personal bias, but i view the emphasis in a different way
23:57 JeZag: i definitely see how you think though
23:57 [[Pika]]: fair enough
23:58 JeZag: i just dont think its "crazy" enough to merit more than a simple shape
23:58 [[Pika]]: just my bias of emphasizing the less monotone stuff i guess xd
23:58 JeZag: since ghost ive been very reserved on using non standard shapes
23:58 JeZag: call me a conservative
23:58 [[Pika]]: 00:19:495 (1,2,1,2) - shouldn't the second pair be higher spaced than the first
23:59 [[Pika]]: as supported by the rampup siren in the background & ur usage of continually higher spacing in this jumpsection
23:59 JeZag: it should, but for me when i was doing it i just wanted to make every 4 be grouped together
23:59 [[Pika]]: how about have (1) at 405\121
23:59 [[Pika]]: and have 2 be at 137/92
00:00 JeZag: so even though strictly speaking it should, i was afraid that too much DS ramping up consistnely would be not good
00:00 JeZag: for 00:19:838 (1,2) - ?
00:00 [[Pika]]: 00:19:838 (1,2) - yeah
00:00 [[Pika]]: ds rampup continously :thinking:
00:00 [[Pika]]: while that makes for some good pp
00:00 [[Pika]]: it's countered by the jumpstream spam in first kiai lol
00:00 JeZag: that is true
00:01 JeZag: hmmmmm
00:02 JeZag: yeah ill probably change it a tiny bit
00:03 [[Pika]]: 00:21:038 (1,2,3,4) - preference thing, but i would probably map (4) in the same path as (1,2,3)
00:03 [[Pika]]: so at around 86/319
00:03 JeZag: yeah i agree moving it left more is only a good thing
00:05 [[Pika]]: 00:44:181 (5) - another preference thing, i'd ctrl g this to prevent an awkward angle transitioning from 00:44:009 (4,5,1) - and 00:44:181 (5,1,2) - 
00:06 JeZag: wait i feel like its even more awk as ctrl G'd
00:06 JeZag: the flow in my mind is like this
00:06 [[Pika]]: 00:43:838 (3,4,5) - u right because of this jump
00:06 JeZag: from 00:44:009 (4) -  to
00:06 JeZag: 00:44:181 (5) -
00:06 JeZag: then back to 00:44:352 (1) -
00:06 JeZag: seems like good back and forth
00:07 JeZag: then you go immediately to 00:44:523 (2) - up and down jump
00:07 [[Pika]]: 00:44:352 (1) - if i didn't care about sr i'd position this at 294/318
00:07 [[Pika]]: 00:43:666 (2) - so that this blankets it
00:07 [[Pika]]: 00:43:838 (3,4,5,1) - this is good flow
00:07 [[Pika]]: 00:44:181 (5,1,2) - and this doesnt feel like dumpster fire
00:07 [[Pika]]: 00:44:352 (1,2) - but then you have this :/
00:08 JeZag: oh personally i think thats good because 00:44:181 (5,1,2) - establishes up and down jumps
00:09 JeZag: i think of it like drawing a "V" backwards
00:09 JeZag: topleft then down middle then top left
00:09 [[Pika]]: ay nice
00:09 [[Pika]]: next thing
00:09 [[Pika]]: if you're ready?
00:09 JeZag: ye
00:10 [[Pika]]: 00:44:866 - in this section i find your usage of redpoint sliders kinda sporadic
00:10 [[Pika]]: while you do use them, they only appear in two cases
00:10 [[Pika]]: 00:52:666 (2) - here
00:10 JeZag: haha they are
00:10 [[Pika]]: 00:53:781 (1) - here
00:11 JeZag: unfortuantely, i wanted to use more
00:11 [[Pika]]: you could probably incorporate more redpoint sliders into this section through the same methodology to create something a little more coherent
00:11 JeZag: but due to my previous patterns of perfect symmetry and rotation i couldnt really
00:11 [[Pika]]: no worries then
00:12 JeZag: even so, i dont think that is a problem if there isnt a pattern with it
00:12 [[Pika]]: 00:53:781 (1) - this one is fine because 00:53:094 (5,6,1) - 
00:12 JeZag: both from a variety and the fact that i dont have the IQ to make good patterns that have good coherence too haha
00:12 JeZag: oh if it makes sense, i wanted 00:52:409 (1,2) -  to parallel 00:51:038 (1,2) -
00:12 [[Pika]]: 00:52:666 (2) - but this one feels off because out of the rest of the patterns, this is the only one that doesn't utilize a transformation of the slider before 00:52:409 (1) - 
00:12 JeZag: except be a tiny bit different
00:13 [[Pika]]: https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/9361970 why not this then 
00:13 [[Pika]]: they're even the same pitch lol
00:13 JeZag: i wanted the tail to flow into the next one
00:13 JeZag: and with a curved slider
00:13 JeZag: its obvious that is not perfect rotation
00:13 JeZag: and looks very sketch
00:14 [[Pika]]: https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/9361973 you could do something like this
00:14 JeZag: personally then, i just dont quite like the aesthetic between 00:52:066 (5,1) -
00:15 JeZag: for me, its cause then, 00:52:409 (1) - isnt "straight" enough
00:15 [[Pika]]: 00:50:695 (2,1) - but this'd be the same situation too :/
00:15 JeZag: although your position of 00:52:666 (2) - counters that
00:16 JeZag: oh what i mean by straight
00:16 JeZag: is that the head and tail are too far up/down for a left/right slider
00:16 [[Pika]]: ah
00:16 [[Pika]]: https://puu.sh/y3jFb/8b2c5aa18c.jpg i was gonna suggest something like this xd
00:17 JeZag: ooh i see
00:18 JeZag: but 00:52:923 (3,4,5) - would have to be down a lot
00:18 [[Pika]]: https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/9361988 yeah it'd be like this
00:18 JeZag: ooh i dont want that much space for a triple yet
00:18 JeZag: but i get what you mean
00:19 [[Pika]]: 00:51:552 (1,2,3) - but you basically have same spacing here for triple lol
00:19 [[Pika]]: 00:52:923 (3,4,5) - you could probably nerf this by x amount
00:19 JeZag: wait your triple looks almost twice as large
00:19 JeZag: looks like /7
00:19 JeZag: .7
00:20 [[Pika]]: 0.64 xd close
00:20 [[Pika]]: https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/9362004 how bout dis
00:20 JeZag: later on right here i use larger 00:55:666 (1,2,3) -
00:20 JeZag: but thats cause next section
00:21 JeZag: yea that looks good, ill definitely consider
00:21 [[Pika]]: aight
00:22 [[Pika]]: 01:07:838 (1,2,1,2) - i found these jumps kinda uncomfortable to play
00:22 [[Pika]]: 01:07:838 (1,2,1) - linear jump into 01:08:009 (2,1,2) - square jump lol
00:22 JeZag: ye
00:23 JeZag: i did try to angle it a tiny bit less, say 80 degrees
00:23 JeZag: i think this case of uncomfortable movement should be k
00:23 JeZag: make them live hard life a bit :^)
00:23 [[Pika]]: 01:10:581 (1,2,1,2) - yeah but this is same sound and a lot easier to play ://
00:23 JeZag: later on in the slider section
00:23 JeZag: 01:09:895 (1,2,1,2,1,2) -
00:24 JeZag: i use wide angle jumps, which is also harder to play
00:24 [[Pika]]: tru that
00:24 [[Pika]]: 01:15:980 (12,1) - oof nazi'd
00:24 JeZag: but also 01:10:581 (1,2,1) - is 90 degree
00:24 [[Pika]]: ah ok
00:25 JeZag: the style i chose to map this was very left/right  vs up/down
00:25 [[Pika]]: 01:15:895 (11,12,1) - shouldn't 11 -> 12 and 12 -> 1 be equidistant
00:25 [[Pika]]: aight gotchu
00:25 JeZag: wtf that should be
00:26 JeZag: idk why its so much less
00:26 [[Pika]]: lol
00:27 JeZag: "oops"
00:30 [[Pika]]: 01:47:781 (2) - ctrl g for reading and rampup stuff
00:31 JeZag: oh i didnt wanna ctrl G
00:31 JeZag: cause every other was supposed to be "in a row"
00:31 JeZag: 01:45:552 (1,2) -
00:31 JeZag: 01:46:238 (1,2) -
00:31 JeZag: ye
00:32 [[Pika]]: https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/9362039 howboutdis
00:33 JeZag: perosnally, i think the emphasis should be on the 01:47:266 (1,2) - more so than the 01:47:609 (1,2) -
00:33 JeZag: because 01:47:266 (1,2) - starts the repetition
00:34 JeZag: and 01:47:609 (1,2) -  follows through
00:34 [[Pika]]: fair enough
00:35 [[Pika]]: 02:49:666 (3,4) - 02:50:352 (3,4) - these kinda tip my ocd b/c the slider tails aren't perfectly overlapped lol
00:36 JeZag: oh for me its even better haHAA
00:36 JeZag: i guess ive grown to love it
00:36 [[Pika]]: lol
00:36 JeZag: also stacked tails is too close i think
00:37 JeZag: ive grown to love overlaps a lot more than i used to
00:40 [[Pika]]: ye the rest is fine w

Kayne wrote:

[Uplift]
00:21:552 (1) - About all those sliders, I think they fit better with 1.0x SV i agree (other ones are 1.0x too)
01:09:209 (1,2) - I don't like these overlaps so much, I mean okay theyre not hard too read and they fit with the music but ewww haha i will keep it and make the player retry >:)
02:22:923 (4,5) - Ctrl+g? (ofc not talking about timeline, I mean just their position in space lol) i like the simple circle flow so stay
02:37:323 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - I dont like this spacing change, you're going from 0,6x to 0,7x and than from 0,7x to 1,2x, idk I think it could be better like 0,6x > 0,9x > 1,2x i will consider more even change, but i wanted it to be more sudden, thus large increase immediately
03:44:095 (2) - Ctrl+j? i will keep this left/right symmetry instead of flip because i want to cut left to right and not have circle flow
04:15:638 (4) - Stack with 04:15:723 (1) i will think about it, but right now i like no stack because it is more smooth. (i know i did stack before, but i wanted more snap for those ones) also whatever i do in the end, i will also apply to 04:10:152 (4) -
04:27:038 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - I think you can buff a bit the spacing here i will buff it, but i dont want it to be toooo large (so just a bit and ill wait and see

Not too much to say, very nice map, sorry ;; ~

Kisses wrote:

ticket

so yeah. when you finish the set just link me here buddy

Einja wrote:

00:58:323 - missed sound

ItsSurreal wrote:

id do a gd but the map is out of my skill level

AJamez wrote:

[General]
the audio is higher than 192, so i compressed it for you (。^_・)ノ click u might wanna adjust the offset to 1,055 after and snap the sliders, as well as the green lines c: yo thanks for the audio compress, but i hit someone up on reddit that i have do the audio compression (from the OG FLAC thing) so i'll wait for that
add drum and bass to tags? i will
remove countdown w ooooops

[Uplift]

would increase the hp, it's pretty low for this diff ;w; hp will increases as soon as rest of set is done, but until then its low so i can pass heh
00:43:495 (1,2,3,4,5,1) - would be cool if you'd place them like this cus atm it kinda lacks the aesthetics u know like overlaps and stuff xd i overlapped 5 and 00:44:866 (1) - btw to follow like what u did on 02:39:381 (5,1) - and made 4 a blanket with 2 to have atleast the same movement as 03:44:866 (3,4) - perhaps and overlapped 1 with 4 like 02:38:695 (1,1) -
i dont want to change this pattern too much because it looks aesthetic to me. 00:43:495 (1,2,3,4) - is a square thing and 00:44:009 (4,5) - are on opposite sides of 00:43:495 (1) - and form a symmetry.

01:27:381 - would be nice if you'd lower the volume for this stream by like 40% to make the drum/bass standout i can do this for now,
but ill pay much more attention when i do hitsounding for real (still waiting on hitsounds zzz)
02:11:266 (1) - same here xd maybe lower vol again like 20 i did not want to make this 20 because the other buzz sliders are not that quiet.
I will take another look when i hitsound it though, and then reconsider.
03:08:866 (1,2) - not sure why'd u stop following similar sliders like 03:06:123 (1,2) - 03:11:609 (1,2) - on this specific sound, kinda breaks the consistency imo or idk im not sure if intended ;w; ive gotta be honest, consistency was not on the top of my mind for this specific section. i map with contrast and consistency in a pattern (not across patterns) in mind, so i thought those particular ones would better contrast with before/after. for example, 03:03:381 (1,2) - is the same sound, but not kicksliders because the previous ones are all same direction. meanwhile for 03:08:866 (1,2) - i wanted a more twisty pattern cause of the sliders before that,
and i cant really get it with two things in a row.
03:14:352 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - i feel like these are kinda dull like what i mean is i think it could be improved more and creative like idk same as for the others orz your streams are definitely more interesting, but i think its good to be boring for that one part.
03:18:123 (1) - hmm i feel like u could curve this slider a bit more liek extend it just a bit hooh boy now its curved to the max (for this SV,
and head/tail not overlap)
03:18:466 (1,1,1,1) - these streams are not that aligned ;A; like what u did with 03:18:981 (1,1,1) - they are not properly aligned, but i want the alignment to shift, and have the streams be further and further down which (imo) makes the distance seem lots more and more bigger
03:47:609 (5) - shouldn't this be NC'd cus it's a different sound like 03:40:409 (1) - 03:42:466 (1) - i use NC pretty poorly, but for this section it is good to use NC every two big white ticks. in the examples you give, both of those lie on the big big white tick, while the object in question doesnt.(even though its still a big beat!)
03:58:238 (1,2,3,4) - idk but i'd replace this with 2 1/4 sliders that way the specific sound like 03:56:866 - could be emphasized better i guess i agree that 03:56:866 (1) - definitely works as 2 kicksliders, but im afraid for playability right after the stream. its a 1/2 slider right now as a break, but i will consider making it in to a kickslider pattern.
to add more reason behind the first place, i think its ok as a 1/2 too because i want there to be a difference between the "KEEP IT"
and the "MOVE ING MOVE ING MOVE ING" afterwards

04:28:409 (1) - same as what i saiid earlier on 02:11:266 (1) - so the the sound can be ye xd tho if u dont mind imma drop my suggesetion for this part, im thinkin why not make this a stream instead rather than just a repeat for uw u it was originally a stream, but unfortuantely 1/6 streams are like 230 bpm and not very healthy also i will consider the sound hereeeeeee

kewl map kewl mapper good luck~

6th wrote:

Hi.

[Hard]
Overall this is a really interesting difficulty but I wonder how it can so much underrated considering how dense is the rhythm lol.

00:10:581 (1,2,3) - This doesn't make much sense. You increase SV but the stack makes the pattern lack of movement, which might confuse players (including me, I got confused lol). You may want to rework this one. fixed
00:19:838 (5,6) - Not stacked properly oops
00:56:523 (3,4) - This is a Hard diff. Stacking them like you did for 01:02:009 (3,4) - 01:03:381 (5,6) - would improve consistency and make this much easier to sightread. Same applies for 02:51:723 (4,5) - keeping this in mind for the rest of the diff
01:03:895 (1,2,4) - Having them overlapped is a bit annoying actually shifted a bit
01:12:295 (1,2) - 1/2 was unpredictable here, I thought it was 1/4. You may want to end 01:11:952 (8) - on red tick to prevent that from happening. alright
01:17:095 (3) - What does it cover exactly ? Better replacing it by a circle or extending it to 01:17:609 - imo. Same goes for 03:23:266 (3) - Even an 1/1 like here 01:50:009 (3) - would be acceptable. the purpose is to spell out the vocals "tor NADO", although it might make reading a bit hard. ill see
01:35:266 (3) - You should create some variety by using reverse sliders instead of those 1/1 that look like the others. Having a different shape is not enough to represent the music well. i think that 3/4 sliders represent the rhythm well
01:36:981 - This section feels really undermapped considering how dense the map is overall. Rhythm like this http://puu.sh/yoxJP/4316c38ac8.jpg could work better. i like that
02:03:809 (4,5,1) - I don't really get why spacing is inconsistent here. It really ruins 02:04:409 (1) -'s emphasis. i think that the spacing emphasis is the emphasis, but i will make it consistent
02:01:666 (1,2,3,4,1,2) - Minor, but having consistent spacing between 02:01:666 (1,2) - and 02:02:352 (3,4) - and 02:03:038 (1,2) - would be appreciable. i agree
03:15:381 - 03:18:123 - ??? Really subjective but I don't really like the idea, and I doubt that any player will tbh lol (+ spacing is inconsistent). What does it bring ?
By the way, why are rhythm different here 01:45:209 - and here 03:12:981 - ? You use consistency a lot in your diff, especially with rhythms, so you should make them consistent. these are inconsistent because they have different emphasis and lyrics. in the earlier one, theres "keep it" and then theres "moving" and i give them different emphasis. here, theres only one emphasis and hence they are all the same here
03:21:895 (3,4) - Their shapes should be similar, this currently looks unpolished. fixed
03:29:438 (1,2,3) - Most players will just hold them since following their paths make the flow really annoying and doesn't fit a Hard difficulty. I don't think it was your intention. Same here 03:43:153 (3,4,5) - alright
03:41:781 (3) - Seems to work better with 2 circles instead, since 03:41:952 - deserves to be clickable aswell because it has the same intensity. i agree, but i dislike 1/2 clicks after a triplet (maybe im too conservative on this issue)
03:43:838 (5,6,1,2,3,4,5,1,2,3,4,5) - This feels really clustered and this 03:44:095 (6,1,2,3) - makes that section really too dense for a Hard difficulty. Needs a nerf. nerfed it a bit
04:03:038 (3,4) - This could be read as 1/2. Slighty spacing out circle and slider should work. alright

[Uplift]
Great map and concepts.

00:10:923 (2,1) - Line them up ? Looks better I prefer the skewed look, and i think its better to go down then up to 00:11:438 (2) - and go back down to 00:11:609 (1) (it helps make flow feel a tiny bit better i think)
00:57:895 (1,2,3,4,1) - Flow could be improved here. The current antiflow makes that kickslider a bit annoying to play. found a fix
00:48:981 (3,4,1,2) - I can't stop telling myself this is so underwhelming btw lol, especially if you compare it with 00:54:466 (3,4,1,2,3,4) - i agree that it feels a bit underwhelming, but i think its good to be less whelming compared to the next one (and on top of that theres definitely more movement for HR cause less slider leniency)
01:16:409 - Silent the slider ends. Same goes for 01:49:323 - yeh good idea
01:38:695 (3,4,1) - Reverse (3) instead. That circle doesn't provide a good lead-in for the stream, it is a bit awkward.
02:08:095 (3) - Why is this clickable exactly ? I mean, yeah I understand why, but you should neglect that sound (nobody would notice it since it's less intense than the others)) and use an 1/2 slider instead. Works so much better. I agree that 02:08:095 (3) - feels awkward to play especially cause it comes at a contrast to 02:09:295 (2) - , but i like the distinction in the music (albeit subtle) and with NC, i think its ok especially given that the previous section has such an emphasis on finger control
03:18:466 (1,2,3,4,5,1,1,2,3,4,5,1,1,2,3,4,5,1,1,2,3,4,5,1) - Idk, this looks a bit unpolished and seems to lack of structure. haha maybe my sense of aesthetics needs some polishing up but i think this is good for expressing what i want to express in the song. lmk if any alternatives look good that also express this well
03:59:266 (1) - Hey, could look better lol
i feel like its a stokholm syndrom with osu where to other people it looks bad, but ive lived with this long enough to like it. i like how its more curved at the beginning and dampens down towards 03:59:609 (1) -

That should be all. Good luck !

hi-mei wrote:

hello

from my queue:

Uplift

so uhhh i played it twice and it felt like some patterns arent connected to the actual melody so uh

I would suggest to increase the CS to 4.2, since its a HDHR tech map and it feels way better and easy to read complex stuff. i will consider this and ask testplayers on their opinions

00:11:609 (1,2,3,4) - starting from this 2 and 4 shud not be clickable, the entire pattern shud be like 1/4 kicksliders. I would suggest to reconsider it. i will reconsider, but to me this pattern (and the later ones) are a good representation of this rhythm
00:16:066 - so from here you got an escalating melody, 00:21:381 - till here its nice, the peak of the sound measure is 00:21:552 - this. Whis is a... reverse slider that covers all the prominent 1/4 sounds? Cmon you can make it more interesting and more reflecting the melody. unfortunately,
that stream is 1/6 so i cant put a stream there so this 1/6 repeating slider will have to do
00:23:009 - from here i suggest you to make a break till 00:33:895 - or 00:33:552 - , from my experience it will fit more. just try and see. i willi consider it
00:44:866 - this part in comparison with 00:28:495 - lacks spacing, like +15% or so i think spacing is fine. if you are looking at DS, keep in mind SV is larger too, so it all scales up
00:58:409 (4) - i would suggest to remake it into 2 notes like u did 00:56:952 - 00:59:781 - would more fit and balance the gameplay though two notes would work (well too), i like having this as a kickslider because i think it has better contrast to 00:58:152 (2,3) -
01:12:295 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2) - can you make this pattern more clean? I mean its playable but is a hell to read. Maybe add a different angle in rotation. i will consider it
01:18:123 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - these things uhhh. can u make them as a triplets with a kickslider on 3th note? Its really hell to play. i really enjoy this pattern, and i think it is fine in the spread as the hardest diff because i will be (hopefully) getting a 5.1* or so GD
01:20:866 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - etc
01:28:409 (1) - mentioned about this place above
01:44:781 (4) - this note is a bit off from stream oops fix
01:48:637 (1) - i think here should be NC, remove the nc 01:48:981 (1) - here i think this is good for NC because it marks change in curvature, which i did because starting at 01:48:981 (1) - is different sound (1/4 repeat of the "ke ke ke ke")
02:06:895 (2) - fix this note to fit the stream? the stream shape is messed up on purpose to show that the 1/4 rhythm isnt "straightforward",
and i dont think the playability is affected despite its weird shape so i will keep it
02:11:266 - i think here is the same problem like you did before, reverse sliders doesnt reflect the escalation of intensity again unforunately i cannot use a 1/6 stream cause thats too broken for a 5.77* extra
02:12:895 - nice you did a break haha i didnt have much of a choice here
02:23:266 (5) - nc here maybe? its a different sound that doesnt belong to this sound phrase 02:22:066 (1,2,3,4) - ill choose not too jsut cause i dont like one note NCs (esp for a slow part like this)
02:30:123 - i think you shud remove this note because you kept the static rhythm on things like 02:27:723 (3) - 02:27:295 - etc
its called rhythm filtering, its nothing wrong if u will not emphasize the alternate rhythm since its a calm section, also it felt like 02:34:238 - visually, which is wrong cuase theres no clap or something.
normally i would agree, but this section introduces light notes on the white beats, which i really want to bring out (being different from before)
02:31:495 - same
02:32:866 - etc
02:43:495 (1,2,3) - why is this a stream but not 1/2 slider? it visually seems like 02:48:123 - this or 02:42:638 - w/e. from this section,
the music has very light 1/4 rhythm on some parts, which i bring out with streams. the exception to this is at 02:48:981 (2) - because i considered this the apex of the melody and thought a slider would be fitting.
02:46:238 - same etc
03:42:123 (3,1) - i think it lacks spacing, compare it to 03:45:038 (4,1) - , but here you got a drop 03:42:466 (1) - i think the spacing is fine because its fine that 03:41:781 (1,2,3) - has large spacing relative to 03:42:466 (1) - due to finish hitsound spam, meanwhile at 03:45:038 (4,1) - , though the spacing is large, i still think it fits due to momentum of the cursor and flow.
03:49:581 (2) - i think it lacks hitsounds like 03:49:581 (2) - 03:49:581 (2) - 03:47:609 - 03:48:295 - 03:48:981 -
it just breaks what you constructed in the past. so i think the slider shud be 03:49:666 - here, since you always emphasizing the vocals here i agree, but i still want to diversify the rhythm. i will see what i will do when i fully hitsound the diff.
04:18:466 - mentioned above
04:24:294 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - it doesnt feel like the spacing is escalating here, but intensity in music suggests that instead. the spacing is much more constant here to make the buildup feel bigger at 04:27:038 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) -
04:28:409 - mentioned above

good luck!

unfortunately,
that stream is 1/6 so i cant put a stream there so this 1/6 repeating slider will have to do