Natsu wrote:

Yales yes your mp3 can be from the same source, but hear the quality difference and the enconde difference

yours:

SPOILER

mine:

SPOILER

I'm not the best encoding audio, but someone maybe can get an even better one from nicovideo, unless you want to keep a really low quality one. I wouldn't talk too much about the spread, but I have same feeling as Beazrim and Sieg

Yales wrote:

For the spread... I just can't take it. Sorry. I mapped the whole thing just to rank "freeze" in a way that it, at least, follow the ranking criteria... If after that there's some unspoken rules... I'm just like "no"
... If you want to get an idea of the feel I have about this set. Try to drink 4L of millk at once... no fun

Bearizm wrote:

@Desp I've always thought spreads are supposed to be balanced throughout all the difficulties being made (?)

Desperate-kun wrote:

Bearizm wrote:

@Desp I've always thought spreads are supposed to be balanced throughout all the difficulties being made (?)

Then why do mapsets with 5 Extra difficulties get ranked? Things like E--N---------H-----I are bad because the Normal could clearly be harder to create a more polished spread (just an example) but the spread here is reasonably focused on the higher difficulty-tier.
If the spread rule change that was proposed and hugely dismissed by the community a few weeks ago got through, this would be an issue, but as it is right now, not really.

Smoothie World wrote:

00:32:699 - Does anyone else think the hitsounds hear are nearly impossible to hear? I have mine pretty loud and I had trouble hearing them I don't know, I can hear them just fine tbh.

00:04:708 (2,1) - Why is this 6.71x spacing? I don't get it. At 00:06:851 (2,1) you have 3.5x and 00:08:994 (2,1) is even smaller, meanwhile the song is getting more and more intense. Well, it's still the same flow so I don't think it plays bad. Well, I don't even "think" it plays bad. It does play good to me. Now if you want to know exactly why I did that. It's because the music before this part feels flat, like it doesn't get more intense. Until this part where the song does get more intense (it's like a new section in the same section if you want.. a new pattern basically.) This is why I want a jump to those sliders. Now about 00:08:994 (2,1) - this your own interpretation. To me it actually gets less intense to be finally cut by this sound 00:10:199 (1) - which is really intense for that matter.

00:12:811 - You don't have a triple on this tick anywhere else in the song. It's mapped to nothing. When you want to emphasize the music with a triple it's usually "overmapped". You could probably have point them all out by the way (and not only my map). About this one 00:12:744 (3,4,5) - it's obviously to recall 00:12:208 (6,7,1) - which follows the same sound. It's just a gimmick to create some game, pretty sad you didn't see it tbh Now, "why it's not always the same on similar parts" because if I think it's fun to play I don't think it's a good thing to overuse this technique (not for this map at least).

Shiirn wrote:

on Freeze:

02:25:199 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,1,2,1) - this stanza is in 1/3, not 1/4. Pretty sure it's debatable. I asked MUTLIPLE players (from average to expert) as well as modders/mappers and the majority told me it was fine and I should keep it (I still have some screenshots xD) For my part I feel that 1/4 is way more fitting, also you have no clue what you're hitting when it's put 1/3.


I'm sure there's more that can be worked out. Freeze is fairly good overall, but there are some, to me, major oversights that should be ironed out before qualification. You might actually want to detail a bit more. Like... that's your point of view, and I'm thankful for that. But to me it's fine and after 9 months spamming #modreq, 46 checks (not counting the hundreds of testplays) your remark feels like a stone in my face.

Bonsai wrote:

Also, minor but imo unfitting nonetheless, 02:16:628 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,3,4,1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,3,4,5) - the music is kinda going half-BPM but you just throw jumps around anyways, I don't think that represents the music very well

Yales wrote:

edit: I'll re-answer later actually maybe. Maybe not I'm sorry but when I read this:

Bonsai wrote:

Also, minor but imo unfitting nonetheless, 02:16:628 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,3,4,1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,3,4,5) - the music is kinda going half-BPM but you just throw jumps around anyways, I don't think that represents the music very well

I just don't know what to say... It fits perfectly to me. To me, this section is the highlight of the whole map... If you don't like it fine, but don't come here to ask a DQ because you dont "think it reprensents the music well" for this case you can map your own set. really. I think this is really inapropriate.

Bonsai wrote:

That was just one minor thing I noticed when looking at it, that's not what I'm getting worked up about / asking a DQ for, I just wanted to mention it D:

Yales wrote:

I think you just didn't get the whole idea of my mapping. And... before it pops up (I know this community now) don't even tell me "your point is just to overmapped" otherwise I would have incorporate this map https://osu.ppy.sh/s/291154

Okoratu wrote:

Isn't that what Tengaku did? I'm pretty sure that's what Tengaku did lol

Shiirn wrote:

I can't believe that this even has the potential to be argued over. DQ, fix it, requalify. If the DQers refuse to recheck your map then they're doing their job wrong.

Bonsai wrote:

And I see absolutely no reason for 01:46:092 (3,3,3,2,1,2) - being 1/8s, there's not even a single 1/4 on any of them, and just mapping some random sounds with 1/8 just bc you feel like it is just ?!

Shiirn wrote:

For what it's worth, the only time I think using the wrong snapping in terms of 1/3 vs 1/4 is when the music has a 1/6 quad and it is mapped as a triple. That is the only case. Period.

Bonsai wrote:

And yeah, starting to tell us your reasons for all those sliders and overmaps instead of "I think it fits" would be a great way to start rational discussion too btw

Bonsai wrote:

How about you guys wait for the mapper's response before trying to put words in their mouth?

Bonsai wrote:

not saying your map is stupid, just saying that player's opinions don't mean anything) That's pretty good to mention, because when you say that my overmapping or w/e are "ridiculous" this is the message you're bringing.

I like how you're bringing "If you map could fit in other songs with the same BPM, then your map is bad" when you are literally overmapping tons of stuff just to make it exciting to play. Your triplets and streams would fit in any other song just as well simply because they aren't even existing in this song in the first place. Actually this map is way easier than what most mappers would make nowadays for a song like that, so saying I mapped this way to make it exciting is so-so.

"I even feel you checked the map without even listening to the music." Yeah right, that's why I'm pointing out overmaps. ok
I know what you want to represent with those sliders and other overmaps of all sorts, I just think that overmapping is a very bad way to do that. There are thousands of ways to emphasize everything you want without resorting to overmapping, and that's what I want to encourage, because it seems like you are just overmapping to make the map be exciting when that could be done in so many other ways. But what if it fits to me? I mean.. My favourite mappers tend to do that as well, I have more faith in them than 2 or 3 modders.

A 1/2-slider, maybe with one reverse, would be a hold note too, and would not ignore the fact that that 'low' instrument actually has a 1/2-beat inbetween which is being completely ignored this way. Why does it need to be 1/8 when there is no 1/8 in the music? I don't even want to asnwer that because this is way too subjective, the music is defenitely not flat 1/1 or 1/2. To me if you map like this you miss a chance to show the potential of those sounds my sliders are following

It doesn't seem like he's 'ovbiously' knowing that when all he says is "I asked players and they said 1/4 is fine". The question was already mentioned (on another stream actually) and from that I asked multiple people to be sure of myself. At the end Desperate-kun checked the streams and said: " I really like the 'overmapped' stream and the 1/8 gimmicks you used, they fit the song well for me, I wouldn't worry about those. " So no, your point of view isn't general.

(maybe because the rest didn't fit that well in the first place?!? deep thoughts ikr) Actually no, to me 1/4 fits great, and I really, sincerly doubt you found this part was 1/3 by looking the map at first sight and without deleting the whole stream put the audio at 25% speed etc... Like "it's so obvious it's 1/3.."

Your point of view is welcome. But I won't change my style because of it. As I said (or as I wanted to say lol) the feedbacks I got from some specific mappers have way more impact than some random modders (which are, don't get me wrong, interesting to hear, but won't necessarily make a difference).

Shiirn wrote:

Didn't Loctav say something about not using other maps as justification for other maps?

Liiraye wrote:

http://puu.sh/nExzW/f6ae693ecc.jpg
is how I'd map it

edit: actually this fits the synth better

Yales wrote:

Liiraye wrote:

http://puu.sh/nExzW/f6ae693ecc.jpg
is how I'd map it

edit: actually this fits the synth better

Thanks for your suggestion, really much appreciated. But then it doesn't follow the melody, and the last downbeat not being hit isn't smthing I like.

Also, we shouldn't forget that if there's kick sliders here 02:25:735 (1,2,1,2) - it's because the music gets more intense in this whole section.
Therefore since it seems we don't need the thoughts of players (as they could "simply mash their keyboard" mhmh), we should just follow the music in a way that it makes sense I found this meanwhile http://puu.sh/nEBoW/d275bec69e.jpg (I'm dead serious about this btw). I mean pace seems approrpiate, most audible beats (I'll keep saying there's a drumroll behind) are followed too. I'm like why not. Or can I ask someone to edit mp3? Pretty sure it's possible to be fixed this way. I mean it's not like we would actually hear something different ...

Yales wrote:

Liiraye wrote:

http://puu.sh/nExzW/f6ae693ecc.jpg
is how I'd map it

edit: actually this fits the synth better

Thanks for your suggestion, really much appreciated. But then it doesn't follow the melody, and the last downbeat not being hit isn't smthing I like.

Also, we shouldn't forget that if there's kick sliders here 02:25:735 (1,2,1,2) - it's because the music gets more intense in this whole section.
Therefore since it seems we don't need the thoughts of players (as they could "simply mash their keyboard" mhmh), we should just follow the music in a way that it makes sense I found this meanwhile http://puu.sh/nEBoW/d275bec69e.jpg (I'm dead serious about this btw). I mean pace seems approrpiate, most audible beats (I'll keep saying there's a drumroll behind) are followed too. I'm like why not. Or can I ask someone to edit mp3? Pretty sure it's possible to be fixed this way. I mean it's not like we would actually hear something different ...

Liiraye wrote:

isn't that pic you did like making a 1/8 stream on a 1/4? using 1/6 triples on 1/3 notes...

generally a rule of thumb is to start a stance shift with sliders/repeat sliders so that the player doesn't get suddenly thrown off by going from 1/4 to 1/3, especially in a fast map like this in the middle of stream (not sure how much good this will do in scorev2 tho lol)

since the 1/3 is hard to hear, I'd suggest following the synths as I did, since they are more audible than the 1/3 while playing. Try it out and see what you think, good luck regardless!

HappyRocket88 wrote:

It's somehow weird QATs haven't come yet, even after there was a healthy discussion here and there are few points to fix. o.o

Smoothie World wrote:

00:32:699 - Does anyone else think the hitsounds hear are nearly impossible to hear? I have mine pretty loud and I had trouble hearing them

00:04:708 (2,1) - Why is this 6.71x spacing? I don't get it. At 00:06:851 (2,1) you have 3.5x and 00:08:994 (2,1) is even smaller, meanwhile the song is getting more and more intense.

00:12:811 - You don't have a triple on this tick anywhere else in the song. It's mapped to nothing.

Liiraye wrote:

If he edits it accordingly I have no issues here. We are talking about the rule saying no unsnapped notes, isn't that as objective as it gets?

Claiming it should be mapped ignoring this rule is a subjective statement. You say it's easier/more intuitive to play, I ask when did we start catering to players instead of striving to do justice to it's composers work & the actual sounds it provides us?

The composer made it 1/3 for a reason. This is for example why sometimes, having empty sliderends is fine because they aren't ignoring the music, instead adding an aspect to it. There's a clear distinction there.

Or am I missing something here?

Yales wrote:

What I mean with this pattern is clearly that it's not because you're following the music perfectly that it's for the best. The triples are the proof of it as handsome explained "both the composition and 1/6 triples in that section is pretty much unreadable" yet the triples are correct and could be totally plausible by following the logic a few people told me to. But for the reason Desperate-kun gave, and because hansome gave valid arguments (and because everyone seems helpful e.e) I won't keep it.

I did explain myself about it though. Yes the beats are snapped 1/3, yet the music, as Desperate-kun said is really "noisy" I would even say there's a drumroll behind this which allows a full stream. Once more, sounds like this 02:25:467 - (until the end) are not 1/3. it might feel low compared to the 1/3 beats but in full speed this is actually what you hear. And it actually goes the same for the beginning of this "1/3 section"

I mean the 1/3 are clearly not that obvious, you kinda have to delete all notes, play audio at 25% and focus quite a little bit to find it (which makes me kinda wonder about the intentions of the first guy who found it....... That's another subject I guess). Adding to it, that because the 1/3 are unexpected and inaudible it's really awkward not only to play but to look at (especially considering the pace of this section).

As Desperate-kun said as well " Yales could just have the mp3 edited so the sounds are on 1/4, and nobody would even notice the difference ingame (or when listening to the map at normal speed)" that's also what I said and this is the reason why I disagree with this point.

Thanks for being supportive >.<

PS: While it's DQ I'll ask there, d'you think the offset is ok? I feel that 1642~ might actually be better???)

Liiraye wrote:

What no, the 1/6 is not comparable as a substitute to 1/3 at all. What logic are you applying here? If you wanted to prove me wrong, use 1/3..

You're trying to make excuses for a clear error and undermine it by hinting that the guy who found it did so to mess with you? I mean even if that is the case, wouldn't you be happy that he helped improve your map by finding it? I myself have found errors in my own ranked map and wish someone would've found them in time thinking back, because now I regret it.

If you want to edit it go ahead, I'm sure nobody will mind, but the fact that you keep defending it in every way you can while all of us here knows there's an objective error in the map is a bit silly to me.

Bonsai wrote:

Also, minor but imo unfitting nonetheless, 02:16:628 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,3,4,1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,3,4,5) - the music is kinda going half-BPM but you just throw jumps around anyways, I don't think that represents the music very well

handsome wrote:

just one more thing i'd like to point out.

Bonsai wrote:

Also, minor but imo unfitting nonetheless, 02:16:628 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,3,4,1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,3,4,5) - the music is kinda going half-BPM but you just throw jumps around anyways, I don't think that represents the music very well

i really think you should take this into consideration, although it sounds very similar to the section here: 01:20:359 - , the drum pattern is going half time and the music definitely changes. in my opinion, and i think many people will agree with me here, it should be represented with slightly lower slider velocity as well as less rhythm density than you have going on. yes i do understand where you're coming from, it could be interpreted as 'tension' and therefore you threw some jumps here and there. however you could keep in mind the context of the song and its adjacent sections and show that the music drops in intensity from here: 02:17:145 - , so that it gives more impact to the stream section from 02:23:573 - onwards. it's more of a buildup with lots of tension rather than a really intense part that requires lots of movement.

similarly, you could try adjusting this section 02:21:430 - to something like http://i.imgur.com/PQnS4c4.png without the usage of 1/2 jumps or long streams (the 9 note stream seemed off) because the music hasn't switched back to normal time yet (snares kick in at 02:23:573 - ). the main point would be to similarly reduce the rhythm density, so that the section afterward feels more difficult and thus, give more impact.

yes i wrote a lot of words for this because i feel strongly about it and i didn't really like the reason of 'i prefer this'.

Net0 wrote:

Man I really want to see this ranked \o/ . I've been playing this map since it came out and a lot changed. It makes me think how trying to rank a beatmap involves changing, sometimes to better stuff sometimes to worst stuff. Well I'll try to give you some help Yales, but I'm new in this mod think and my style of mod is not convencional, so feel free to use this the way you prefer

Insane:

1)This slider 00:11:520 (3) - - can end at 00:11:653 - instead of 00:11:520 (3) - , makes it easier from a player perspective, but if you want to keep this section hard, then don't mind it. Same applies to this slider 00:32:431 (8) - I'm just following the music though. It might be surprising if you expect a triple but it's not really hard to play.
2)I have a question. In this part of the music you made the sliders in sequence 00:15:002 (1,2,3,4) - but in this part that is similar 00:23:573 (1,2,3,4) - on the song you changed the order of the sliders. If it's because of compose purposes there's no need to change it, but remember that making sections similar always help with the flow. This part is a great example of that:00:19:823 (1,2,3,4,1) - - and here00:41:386 (1,2,3,1) - I'm not sure it gives a better flow to take the same parts over and over again. It might sounds easier to you right now, because you're already used to a certain movement. But it's not harder or something, it's just slightly different to give a little bit of variations (otherwise the map would be pretty boring)
3)This hit circle 01:24:128 (1) - could be an unique combo, it would be great since the final part of this also finishes with an isoleted hitcircle 01:26:270 (1) - Considering the fact that it's also what I did on extra+freeze, this is actually a good point and I take that.
4) I don't know what to think about this 03:14:485 (1,1) - . As a mapper I love this, as a player this is hell hard IGNORE THIS
5)For some reason I didn't feel this part with as much flow as the rest of the chorus, I can't explain it tho, but it felt slow somehow, total personal perspective tho 03:29:332 (3,1) - . That's the only part of the entire map I think you could actually make any changes on the compose, the rest is GREAT!!! Ya.. I somehow decided to give the emphasize by undermapping those sliders to give something different to play to the player. This is just another way to map this part. I personally prefer this way by the way
Now I'll point things that I hope you don't change in the future:
DUDE THIS LOOKS SO COOL 01:58:930 (1,1,1,1,1,1,1) - PLS DON"T LISTEN TO PPL, KEEP THIS!!!

I'm new in modding so I can't help with the other diff. But I mean it when I say I really like your Omoi trilogy. Really want it ranked. Take my star senpai o/

->I've edited, it seems it wasn't updated, sorry about that.

But.. Did you delete and redownload the map? It doesn't seem we have the same offset. I tried to check each of your point but I can't really see what you were talking about because of that

Okorin wrote:

Anything happening here?

Did the discussion resolve?

AlneCraft wrote:

bloody hell, like no offense to any of you people out there, but... the only reason why this map got dq'd got fixed (mp3 quality). why can't literally any bn other than yuii- (ESPECIALLY since he is no longer a bn) come up and bubble -> qualify this map??? yo Yales, i legit find this map very fun to play, and i believe most other people do too. just go ahead and ask for a rank! unless something else happened behind the scenes that i have no idea about, there should be no problem with that right??

like, come on, if minakami yuki's maps can get ranked, yours should too right??? by that i mean that your mapping style really resembles their's, not that yuki is a bad mapper (luv your maps <3). just because some booger decided to act like a child, it shouldn't stop you from ranking a good map. that's what xexxar does to hollow wings, and we all know xexxar's attitude to LITERALLY ANYTHING DIFFERENT right?

so please rank this masterpiece!

edit: so til, the official profiles no longer show if a person is a bn or not, so you have to check any of their forum posts to do it.

Okorin wrote:

so wanna get back on track or do you wanna write another depressed post? x)

1. AR got boosted by 0.1. I think a higher AR might indeed help with a vast majority of players. Do you think it needs to be setted higher? (I'd like to stay proportionate with other diffs obvisouly). I don't mind mind putting it even higher though but is it fine the way it is or 9.6 won't hurt? What do you think fits the best?
2. About adding the other version's MP3, I tried and some parts sounds bad as hell. Shall I still give it away anyway? (If yes, do you actually know someone who could fix the other version MP3's offset?) I guess there's time for it though. I'm not going to change my own version.
3. 00:13:662 (6,7,1) - Not changing this pattern because the fact you have to move the cursor by a pretty sharped angle gives enough impact on the new stenza to me. Adjusted a bit the look of it though x)
4. 00:16:073 (1,2,3,4) - I find it really fine to play tbh, it's the kind of pattern that I don't even pay attention while playing cause it plays by itself x) Also really like it. I did change this one 03:39:645 (1,2,3,4,5) - as you suggested though, because it was a pretty nice example and offers some variations as well.
5. 01:11:787 (1,2,1,2,1,2,3,1,2,3) - Not changing it; It's so cool, come on! xD Also I really have no problem to play it. Not sure if it's because I already know it but it does sound readable to me anyway x) The replays I've checked seemed fine with it as well.
6. I think I fixed all of the NCs you suggested as well.

Spork Lover wrote:

01:11:787 (1,1) - Yo, I just wanna throw it out that I needed to memorize this to play it (Literally took me 3 tries lol) :p
02:05:359 (1,2,3,4,1) - If you want a stream here, why don't you start on the white tick, so the slider is extended like the previous ones? (Was a 100 fest for me lol)

Looking forward to see this ranked buddy, so your trilogy is complete :^)

Edit: I saw that you discussed the 1:11 section with oko :p Just feel free to ignore that suggestion then lol