oh sorry i forgot to check 
ok i will check the next week then flkjds
ok i will check the next week then flkjds
forum
Tatsh - IMAGE -MATERIAL- <Version 0> [CatchTheBeat]
posted
Total Posts
181
Go get this ranked!
Good Luck CLSW!
Good Luck CLSW!
never disappoint me
clsw johayo
clsw johayo
lets just do another check. then after we have finished checking, we can wait. so after it finished we can immediately qualify it
Topic Starter
I don't care on hype, just I wanna qualify this as soon as possible.Mindwaves wrote:
But if this map is going to be used for CWC Finals TieBreaker, it should take 2 more weeks for waitBut...
FUCK NO PLEASE I DON'T WANT TO BE DELAYED MORE
What about the HYPE?
This shit take time to built up, and to have this map ranked is a big milestone for CTB.
I'm sure you can wait 2-3 more year
Okay let's begin!
HOWhoohwhwohWWhwhwoHWOHOwhoWHOwoh
mod
2016-06-26 15:07 koliron: kek
2016-06-26 15:08 CLSW: KEK
2016-06-26 15:09 koliron: `go
2016-06-26 15:09 CLSW: gogo
2016-06-26 15:14 koliron: 01:07:512 (1,2) - why are they different? i think is better to make 01:07:859 (2) - like (1) to not have random distances
2016-06-26 15:15 CLSW: hmm
2016-06-26 15:15 CLSW: alright
2016-06-26 15:15 CLSW: done
2016-06-26 15:17 koliron: 01:30:936 (2) - i think the sound in 01:30:936 - deserves an hyper too, like in 01:34:282 (1,3) - , mmh maybe a 01:30:936 (2) - ctrl+g and some grids to the right would be a better movement
2016-06-26 15:18 CLSW: added hyper
2016-06-26 15:21 koliron: 01:56:436 - about the sb, reduce the light here seems weird, i mean i dont think is a place to do it :s
2016-06-26 15:21 CLSW: ah
2016-06-26 15:21 koliron: i tried to find another way but i think is better to remove it
2016-06-26 15:22 CLSW: that's actually a reference from Scorpiour's original std mapset's SB
2016-06-26 15:22 koliron: the sb is yours right?
2016-06-26 15:22 koliron: oh
2016-06-26 15:22 CLSW: it also fades out and in
2016-06-26 15:22 koliron: ok then xD
2016-06-26 15:22 CLSW: xD
2016-06-26 15:24 koliron: 02:29:205 (1) - hyper to this(? to make a noticeable difference in the ned of this section :/
2016-06-26 15:25 CLSW: it'll be pretty hard
2016-06-26 15:25 CLSW: but let me testplay a bit more
2016-06-26 15:25 koliron: ok
2016-06-26 15:25 CLSW: k not bad, gogo
2016-06-26 15:26 koliron: 02:37:051 (1,1,1) - is it necessary to put all of them in the same position? :/ why not 02:37:974 (1) - ctrl+h
2016-06-26 15:26 koliron: wait
2016-06-26 15:26 koliron: forget it
2016-06-26 15:26 koliron: aaa
2016-06-26 15:27 CLSW: koli noob \:D/
2016-06-26 15:27 koliron: xdxd
2016-06-26 15:29 koliron: 02:42:128 (2,3,1,2,3) - this pattern looks a little ugly imo, i noticed that there are seeds when the slider has a reverse, like in 02:41:666 (1) - so why not make a circle in 02:41:666 (1) - and slider with reverse in 02:42:474 -
2016-06-26 15:29 koliron: rip nc
2016-06-26 15:30 koliron: if you want to keep the nc then could be a sldier with reverse in 02:42:128 -
2016-06-26 15:30 koliron: jzjzjzj
2016-06-26 15:30 CLSW: hmm
2016-06-26 15:32 CLSW: what should I do...
2016-06-26 15:32 CLSW: I'm taking some remake on there
2016-06-26 15:32 koliron: oko
2016-06-26 15:34 CLSW: okay
2016-06-26 15:34 CLSW: please recheck 02:40:743 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,5,6,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - this section after the update :3
2016-06-26 15:34 koliron: 04:30:120 (3,4,5,6,1) - aaaa this movement could be improved, i'd suggest to make 04:30:466 (6) - a little more vertical
2016-06-26 15:35 koliron: even in aesthetic it looks weird
2016-06-26 15:36 CLSW: 04:30:466 (6) - this one is a symmetric pattern with 04:30:581 (1,2) - for natural flow in my sight
2016-06-26 15:36 CLSW: doesn't it look good?
2016-06-26 15:37 koliron: no, is a different stanza so i think it would plays much better :/ but if you want to keep its fine
2016-06-26 15:37 koliron: 04:34:273 (1,2) -
2016-06-26 15:37 koliron: kek
2016-06-26 15:38 koliron: this would kill a lot of players -__ -
2016-06-26 15:38 koliron: i'd add an hyper or at least a dash
2016-06-26 15:38 CLSW: okay added a bit more distances
2016-06-26 15:40 koliron: 04:36:004 (4) - ctrl+g would make 04:36:120 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - this pattern easier to notice, currently looks like random distances :C
2016-06-26 15:43 CLSW: uh I don't think so rofl
2016-06-26 15:43 koliron: oko
2016-06-26 15:43 CLSW: it'll be instakill pattern instead imo
2016-06-26 15:43 koliron: 05:12:581 (3) - i'd ctrl+g this and x384 again to vary with the movement
2016-06-26 15:43 koliron: 05:12:120 (1,2,3,4,1) - because this pattern is just a line :/
2016-06-26 15:44 CLSW: good
2016-06-26 15:45 CLSW: uh wait
2016-06-26 15:45 CLSW: http://osu.ppy.sh/ss/5479755 how about this instead
2016-06-26 15:46 koliron: sure
2016-06-26 15:46 CLSW: cool, I would like to follow with this
2016-06-26 15:49 koliron: ok thats all :3
2016-06-26 15:49 koliron: update!
2016-06-26 15:49 CLSW: just a notice
2016-06-26 15:49 CLSW: 06:23:197 (1,2,3,4) - this one has changed to leftrightleftright style
2016-06-26 15:49 CLSW: that's why the SR has been boosted to 9.59
2016-06-26 15:50 CLSW: updating
logs
2016-06-26 15:21 CLSW: go ahead
2016-06-26 15:21 Ascendance: wawawa
2016-06-26 15:22 CLSW: I've tried to discuss about CS4 or CS4.2
2016-06-26 15:22 Ascendance: i checked this map like 4000000 times
2016-06-26 15:22 CLSW: and #ctb said it was 50:50 lol
2016-06-26 15:22 CLSW: and I've asked same thing to chinese and indonesian community
2016-06-26 15:22 CLSW: and both said CS4 is better lol
2016-06-26 15:23 CLSW: wow the whole CtB community is contributing
2016-06-26 15:23 CLSW: anyways waiting for mods~
2016-06-26 15:24 Ascendance: can you link me to the parts youve changed
2016-06-26 15:24 CLSW: 06:23:197 (1,2,3,4) -
2016-06-26 15:24 CLSW: the SR boost
2016-06-26 15:24 Ascendance: well
2016-06-26 15:24 CLSW: 01:07:282 (3,1,2,3) -
2016-06-26 15:24 Ascendance: before that
2016-06-26 15:25 Ascendance: 04:33:350 - I fail at this curve every single time
2016-06-26 15:25 Ascendance: remember when you spectated lol
2016-06-26 15:25 CLSW: hmm, was that really hard
2016-06-26 15:25 Ascendance: I think you could make the curve wider so it has more long-term movement rather than a sharp inwards curve
2016-06-26 15:26 CLSW: okay scaled a bit more
2016-06-26 15:28 Ascendance: 06:18:120 (3,1) - might wanna low distance here, it's kinda bordering a too far movement
2016-06-26 15:28 CLSW: but after I scaled more
2016-06-26 15:28 CLSW: 04:33:523 (4,5,6,7,8,1) - this one became harder lol
2016-06-26 15:28 CLSW: oh then
2016-06-26 15:28 Ascendance: you could do this https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/5480079
2016-06-26 15:29 CLSW: can I remove HDash on 06:18:004 (2) - ?
2016-06-26 15:29 Ascendance: yeah
2016-06-26 15:29 CLSW: alright
2016-06-26 15:31 Ascendance: you may want to do the same in other places like 06:13:389 (2) -
2016-06-26 15:31 Ascendance: it kinda feels like additional rhythm which isn't needed at the end here imo
2016-06-26 15:32 Ascendance: also 06:48:017 (1) - maybe silence the slider ticks here?
2016-06-26 15:33 CLSW: ah yes
2016-06-26 15:33 CLSW: decreased the volume to 5%
2016-06-26 15:33 Ascendance: did you remove the note at 06:13:389 (2) - ?
2016-06-26 15:33 CLSW: no
2016-06-26 15:33 Ascendance: ok:V
2016-06-26 15:34 CLSW: also I removed HDash on 06:12:466 (2) -
2016-06-26 15:34 CLSW: to keep consistency
2016-06-26 15:34 Ascendance: 05:04:043 (2) - maybe a more horizontal slider for a more fluid movement between 05:03:812 (1,3) -
2016-06-26 15:35 CLSW: since the violin(?) sound's pitch is higher on 05:04:273 (3) -
2016-06-26 15:35 CLSW: so I would like to keep vertical shape on there
2016-06-26 15:36 Ascendance: fuck verticals
2016-06-26 15:36 Ascendance: okay
2016-06-26 15:36 CLSW: so I have an idea
2016-06-26 15:36 Ascendance: hm?
2016-06-26 15:37 CLSW: how about this? https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/5480144
2016-06-26 15:37 CLSW: it'll emphasis more better with violin pitch
2016-06-26 15:37 Ascendance: sure, that can be fine
2016-06-26 15:38 Ascendance: 01:34:282 (1,2,3,4) -
2016-06-26 15:38 Ascendance: sucks
2016-06-26 15:38 CLSW: <3
2016-06-26 15:38 CLSW: aww
2016-06-26 15:38 Ascendance: it forces a hold at the end of a really strong horizontal slider
2016-06-26 15:38 Ascendance: 01:34:628 (2) - x:128 01:35:089 (4) - x:384 would be better here
2016-06-26 15:39 CLSW: http://osu.ppy.sh/ss/5480157
2016-06-26 15:39 CLSW: yea as you said I fixed
2016-06-26 15:39 Ascendance: 02:14:436 (1) - I think this should start on 02:14:320 -
2016-06-26 15:40 CLSW: timing stuff is pretty important
2016-06-26 15:40 CLSW: I'll poke JBH
2016-06-26 15:40 Ascendance: you can change to something like this https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/5480168
2016-06-26 15:40 Ascendance: you can hear in the music =w=
2016-06-26 15:40 Ascendance: actually
2016-06-26 15:40 Ascendance: its on the blue tick LOL
2016-06-26 15:40 Ascendance: 02:14:262 -
2016-06-26 15:42 CLSW: alright done
2016-06-26 15:42 Ascendance: its on the blue tick?
2016-06-26 15:42 CLSW: oops lol
2016-06-26 15:44 Ascendance: you might want to add a similar finish like at 02:13:512 (1) -
2016-06-26 15:44 CLSW: you mean finish sound?
2016-06-26 15:45 Ascendance: yes
2016-06-26 15:45 CLSW: added normal finish instead :3
2016-06-26 15:49 Ascendance: https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/5480229
2016-06-26 15:49 Ascendance: after you fix that, you can update
2016-06-26 15:49 Ascendance: and i qualify
2016-06-26 15:50 CLSW: okay so the slider should be started on 02:14:262 (1) - , right?
2016-06-26 15:50 CLSW: or 02:14:205 (1) -
2016-06-26 15:50 Ascendance: 02:14:262 -
2016-06-26 15:51 CLSW: okay then I'm done
2016-06-26 15:51 Ascendance: so
2016-06-26 15:51 Ascendance: you have the 5-plet
2016-06-26 15:51 Ascendance: 02:13:974 (1,2,3,4,5) -
2016-06-26 15:52 Ascendance: then an hdash to the slider?
2016-06-26 15:52 Ascendance: and you added a circle at 02:14:897 - ?
2016-06-26 15:52 CLSW: yep so I added HDash on 02:14:205 (5) -
2016-06-26 15:52 CLSW: 02:14:897 - in this place slider's end
2016-06-26 15:52 Ascendance: kk
2016-06-26 15:52 Ascendance: update~
Topic Starter
updated!
Game over.
hype coming owo
congrats
congrats
Ascendance wrote:
Game over.
May Tom94 and his broken pp system rest in peace.
what
edit: what
edit: what
wat de fak dat pp?!?!
legit BPM, k life. I regret to leave the fruits
this make me more want to play fruits..
E P I C
legit BPM, k life. I regret to leave the fruits
this make me more want to play fruits..
E P I C
Oh my god you did it
Holy Fort
Holy Fort
H A R D E S T M A P B O Y Z
Wing my way is still the heardest :^)Battle wrote:
H A R D E S T M A P B O Y Z
Congrats clsw! \o/
Hr hd 1702pp hype
yasssss grats!!
JBHyperion wrote:
May Tom94 and his broken pp system rest in peace.
Sorry everyone but I had to do this
Lince Cosmico_old
ok game over time to rip thisAscendance wrote:
Game over.
lol jk
no rip because he don't care about thisRockageek wrote:
JBHyperion wrote:
May Tom94 and his broken pp system rest in peace.
Sorry everyone but I had to do this
from tom94 ask
Even I can't CTB but after I saw the exhibition I feel it really really Fantastic !
Congratulations !
Congratulations !
9.58 stars op gg bro for rank lol
GOD
IS
DEAD
IS
DEAD
hmm, i'm wondering about metadata
I need some confirmation
from: http://www.konamistyle.jp/sp/tatsh_material/index.html
Title: IMAGE -MATERIAL-(新曲）
from: album
Title: IMAGE -MATERIAL-(新曲）
yeah, I knew 新曲 mean new song
from: https://itunes.apple.com/jp/album/material/id471200721
Title: IMAGE -MATERIAL- -Version 0-
from: https://www.google.com.vn/webhp?sourcei ... rial+album
title: IMAGE -MATERIAL- <Version 0>
from: https://remywiki.com/IMAGE_-MATERIAL-_( ... AT_Edition)
title: IMAGE -MATERIAL- <Version 0>
In my opinion, title should be named as IMAGE -MATERIAL- <Version 0>
For the love of KONAMI and BEMANI, why they didn't write <Version 0> in his album insteal, and just (新曲) [this could be mistaken, <Version 0> should be the correct one]
And since this song being used from REFLEC BEAT limelight (even it's short version), so I think source should be REFLEC BEAT limelight too
Correct me if i'm wrong then
Thanks! And congrats
I need some confirmation
from: http://www.konamistyle.jp/sp/tatsh_material/index.html
Title: IMAGE -MATERIAL-(新曲）
from: album
Title: IMAGE -MATERIAL-(新曲）
yeah, I knew 新曲 mean new song
from: https://itunes.apple.com/jp/album/material/id471200721
Title: IMAGE -MATERIAL- -Version 0-
from: https://www.google.com.vn/webhp?sourcei ... rial+album
title: IMAGE -MATERIAL- <Version 0>
from: https://remywiki.com/IMAGE_-MATERIAL-_( ... AT_Edition)
title: IMAGE -MATERIAL- <Version 0>
In my opinion, title should be named as IMAGE -MATERIAL- <Version 0>
For the love of KONAMI and BEMANI, why they didn't write <Version 0> in his album insteal, and just (新曲) [this could be mistaken, <Version 0> should be the correct one]
And since this song being used from REFLEC BEAT limelight (even it's short version), so I think source should be REFLEC BEAT limelight too
Correct me if i'm wrong then
Thanks! And congrats
According to your post, with this album cover: http://auctions.c.yimg.jp/images.auctio ... qf8160.jpg
It should be: IMAGE -MATERIAL- <Version 0>
Not only from konamistyle
It should be: IMAGE -MATERIAL- <Version 0>
Not only from konamistyle
Sure, but if you follow the link in my post you'll see there's an official confirmation of the artist just calling the song IMAGE -MATERIAL-. Either Version 0 or Shinkyoku are remarks that don't belong to the current title. KwaN got it confirmed too.
Alright! I understood!
In REFLEC BEAT, the song is titled "IMAGE-MATERIAL- <REFLEC BEAT Edition>".
The phrase inside the brackets might be refering to what version it is. the artist wouldn't have to state the version of the song in a sneak peek. (the blog post was a sneak peek, not an actual review of the album) or maybe they planned on using it in REFLEC BEAT after he posted the post and changed the title.
The important thing is that it was a sneak peek, and the song wasn't even officially released when the artist posted it.
You guys should have more consistency, if every evidence points out it should be titled as IMAGE -MATERIAL- <Version 0>(or -Version 0-) and you just confirm it by the artists' words that was when the song wasn't even officially released, these is a problem.
According to your words this map should just be titled Dynasty as well : https://osu.ppy.sh/s/434695 and it is just one of the many ranked maps to list.
Also, the album was released first and then it came to REFLEC BEAT, so the source should be fine.
Just stating my thoughts, no need for drama or anything.
The phrase inside the brackets might be refering to what version it is. the artist wouldn't have to state the version of the song in a sneak peek. (the blog post was a sneak peek, not an actual review of the album) or maybe they planned on using it in REFLEC BEAT after he posted the post and changed the title.
The important thing is that it was a sneak peek, and the song wasn't even officially released when the artist posted it.
You guys should have more consistency, if every evidence points out it should be titled as IMAGE -MATERIAL- <Version 0>(or -Version 0-) and you just confirm it by the artists' words that was when the song wasn't even officially released, these is a problem.
According to your words this map should just be titled Dynasty as well : https://osu.ppy.sh/s/434695 and it is just one of the many ranked maps to list.
Also, the album was released first and then it came to REFLEC BEAT, so the source should be fine.
Just stating my thoughts, no need for drama or anything.
SB is weird. Other than that its awesome for CtB
DQ because I didn't give my star~~ loool
Gratz CLSW, this map is soooooo epic!!
Gratz CLSW, this map is soooooo epic!!
i seeHibari wrote:
no rip because he don't care about this
from tom94 ask
Topic Starter
- Magic Bomb -, if you have some concern about this map please don't hesitate to write down them on here. If the major issues exist in this map then I'll fix.
But do not make such kinda filibuster mod like in HW's TSUBAKI please, it's not a good way for both of us. Since we all know that your and my directivity of mapping is completely different.
But do not make such kinda filibuster mod like in HW's TSUBAKI please, it's not a good way for both of us. Since we all know that your and my directivity of mapping is completely different.
Requested by CLSW.
Topic Starter
Thanks kwan!
Sorry everyone, so after the discussion with QATs I've decided to change the title as IMAGE -MATERIAL- <Version 0>. In fact the composer of this song mentioned as 'IMAGE -MATERIAL-, but it was mentioned before the album release which is following 'IMAGE -MATERIAL- <Version 0>' so I'd like to follow this 'up-to-date' metadata with this newest information. And don't worry, this is going to be back soon!
Sorry everyone, so after the discussion with QATs I've decided to change the title as IMAGE -MATERIAL- <Version 0>. In fact the composer of this song mentioned as 'IMAGE -MATERIAL-, but it was mentioned before the album release which is following 'IMAGE -MATERIAL- <Version 0>' so I'd like to follow this 'up-to-date' metadata with this newest information. And don't worry, this is going to be back soon!
I think I have to clarify a bit here.Serena- wrote:
In REFLEC BEAT, the song is titled "IMAGE-MATERIAL- <REFLEC BEAT Edition>".
The phrase inside the brackets might be refering to what version it is. the artist wouldn't have to state the version of the song in a sneak peek. (the blog post was a sneak peek, not an actual review of the album) or maybe they planned on using it in REFLEC BEAT after he posted the post and changed the title.
The important thing is that it was a sneak peek, and the song wasn't even officially released when the artist posted it.
You guys should have more consistency, if every evidence points out it should be titled as IMAGE -MATERIAL- <Version 0>(or -Version 0-) and you just confirm it by the artists' words that was when the song wasn't even officially released, these is a problem.
According to your words this map should just be titled Dynasty as well : https://osu.ppy.sh/s/434695 and it is just one of the many ranked maps to list.
Also, the album was released first and then it came to REFLEC BEAT, so the source should be fine.
Just stating my thoughts, no need for drama or anything.
First of all, IMAGE -MATERIAL- <REFLEC BEAT Edition> is a rearranged game size version of IMAGE -MATERIAL- <Version 0> / IMAGE -MATERIAL- . That is, they are completely different songs with different duration.
Similar case to Dynasty, Dynasty -da capo- and Dynasty -al fine-.
For the song we have here, the official uses two titles for the same song in this case.
One is IMAGE -MATERIAL- (claimed by the composer, you can't really doubt it as the composer writes the song and they have the right to name a song; and the KONAMI website), the other is IMAGE -MATERIAL- <Version 0> (as shown on the CD back). Both of them are referring to the same song from the same album, so the song probably has alternative names.
So, both are acceptable equally as they are statements quoted by the official. Song names are weighed uniformly only when they are the same song. I hope thing is settled and doubts are cleared.
call me back when I'm needed again, though I won't icon until the community has had their thoughts raised on the map itself before pushing it forward.
IamKwaN wrote:
I think I have to clarify a bit here.Serena- wrote:
In REFLEC BEAT, the song is titled "IMAGE-MATERIAL- <REFLEC BEAT Edition>".
The phrase inside the brackets might be refering to what version it is. the artist wouldn't have to state the version of the song in a sneak peek. (the blog post was a sneak peek, not an actual review of the album) or maybe they planned on using it in REFLEC BEAT after he posted the post and changed the title.
The important thing is that it was a sneak peek, and the song wasn't even officially released when the artist posted it.
You guys should have more consistency, if every evidence points out it should be titled as IMAGE -MATERIAL- <Version 0>(or -Version 0-) and you just confirm it by the artists' words that was when the song wasn't even officially released, these is a problem.
According to your words this map should just be titled Dynasty as well : https://osu.ppy.sh/s/434695 and it is just one of the many ranked maps to list.
Also, the album was released first and then it came to REFLEC BEAT, so the source should be fine.
Just stating my thoughts, no need for drama or anything.
First of all, IMAGE -MATERIAL- <REFLEC BEAT Edition> is a rearranged game size version of IMAGE -MATERIAL- <Version 0> / IMAGE -MATERIAL- . That is, they are completely different songs with different duration.
For the song we have here, the official uses two titles for the same song in this case.
One is IMAGE -MATERIAL- (claimed by the composer, you can't really doubt it as the composer writes the song and they have the right to name a song), the other is IMAGE -MATERIAL- <Version 0> (as shown on the CD back). Both of them are referring to the album, so the song probably has alternative names.
So, both are acceptable equally as they are statements quoted by the official. I hope thing is settled and doubts are cleared.
yeah im totally fine with that.
I thought you guys were stating IMAGE -MATERIAL- <Version 0> is the wrong title, and i see no reason in that, and still don't get why the other version that got ranked got disqualified.
MBomb
Yo, to avoid having to get this dqed again, I had a mod that I was gonna post when it's finished, but I think it's best to post it now before someone gets this requalified, to avoid drama. All stuff was written whilst this was still qualified, so if you did actually change anything since then, some of these points may be irrelevant. Also, the beginning part, like the rest, was written before the rest of the mod, so yeah.
Ok, before I start, I would like to say that my previous mod on this was completely ignored. This was on the other mapset, but considering this was the same difficulty, it is relevent to mention here. Link: p/4559661
Now let's start with the actual mod. A lot of people told me to check this, as they are too scared of posting themselves for fear of being insulted by the community. I may repeat some stuff from my old mod, I brought that up simply as a point beforehand, I'm not expecting a reply to that now.
[Envision]
00:13:051 (1) - No sound here on head or tail, please remove this.
00:13:513 (2) - Make this a circle instead, there's no sound on the tail and it just sounds off to have it like this.
00:30:590 (1) - Maybe increase distancing to this? It feels kinda strange right now because of the really strange distancing, and a dash would sound nicer here so try x:144.
00:36:590 (2) - I can't hear any sound at all here... Remove this slider, it's noticably not mapped to anything.
00:37:513 (3) - No sound on this either.
00:56:897 (3) - Sound on this isn't that strong comapred to other sounds around here, would recommend getting rid of the HDash to make it sound better with the song.
00:57:820 (3) - Flow to this feels kinda off right now, underdashing due to inconsistent distancing is a problem here, it'd be easily fixed by moving this slider to x:80.
00:58:974 (3) - Seems pretty inconsistent to not have a HDash to this considering the previous HDash pattern. Rearrange this to add a HDash to it.
00:59:666 (3) - Note isn't really strong enough for a HDash either, considering there are stronger notes around it which you didn't use a HDash for, so it ends up feeling really bad with the music.
01:00:820 (3) - Distance to this feels a tad bit too strong causing some awkward movements right now, would be best to move it to x:352.
01:01:051 (1) - HDash strength to this doesn't have to be so strong, in fact it makes it feel kinda strange that it is because it differs it from other notes which have the exact same sounds. Try x:192 with a less tilted slider, instead.
01:01:743 (4) - Distance to this feels too strong for a non-dash, resulting in awkward movement, try x:288 instead.
01:03:359 (3) - This note's tail is actually stronger than it's head... Really not sure why you used a HDash to this, in fact it'd be best to split this up instead, and have a HDash to the tail, for the stronger guitar sound and drum here.
01:03:820 (1) - Make this a curved stream instead of a repeat slider? It'd flow a lot nicer and sound nicer with the music too.
01:04:282 (1) - ^.
01:05:782 (2) - This note is pretty weak, please get rid of the HDash to it because it just doesn't fit and sounds really bad with the song. The guitar here is weak at best.
01:06:244 (2) - Same here.
01:06:936 (2) - This note definitely isn't strong enough for a HDash, it is really weak in general, and should be reduced preferably to normal movement, even a dash here feels strange.
01:07:859 (2) - Tilting this slider a slight bit more vertical feels better from a flow perspective, I understand you want the jump to be difficult, and it still will be, but this is just not fun.
01:08:666 (2) - Not that strong compared to other notes around it where you have HDashes, I don't understand why there's one here, make it a normal dash, especially considering you don't even have a HDash to 01:08:897 (3) - which is a lot stronger.
01:09:359 (1) - Reduce HDash strength by moving this to x:144, the current HDash strength leads to some unnecessary awkward movement afterwards in the form of a HDash followed by an edge dash.
01:10:051 (2,1) - Neither of these notes are very strong, just remove the HDashes and it sounds a lot better.
01:10:628 (4) - This is not any stronger than the other notes in the slider, there is no need to add a HDash to it. Reduce this to a normal movement like the rest of the slider, it is the same sound, mapping it different is very bad consistency.
01:11:551 (2) - This is nowhere near as strong as the sound on the end of the previous slider, having a HDash to this after having that as just a normal slider end just feels bad with the music.
01:11:897 (1) - And again, not having a HDash to this after having a HDash to the previous note sounds really off musically, because this note is a lot stronger.
01:12:243 (2) - The head of this isn't that strong, and you're missing a very important strong beat in the middle of this slider which leaves the player feel unsatisfied by the feedback of this note.
01:12:820 (2) - Maybe best to not have a HDash to this one either, sounds better for the leadup if this is just a normal dash.
01:13:051 (1,2) - Same as earlier.
01:13:743 (1,2) - Again here.
01:14:666 (2) - And again, note here isn't that strong, best to avoid a HDash (Especially considering how strong the HDash to the next slider is, the antiflow is just uncomfortable to play and should be nerfed through a reduction of HDash strength, which can be achieved by making the movement to this weaker anyway).
01:14:897 (1,2) - Again, sliderend on 1 is a lot stronger so this sounds strange.
01:15:936 (2) - To further strengthen my previous points, there is no HDash to this, so having a HDash to previous notes sounds even worse when compared to this spot which is the same musically.
01:16:512 (2) - Again, to better emphasise this leadup, get rid of the HDash to it.
01:16:743 (1,2) - Sliderend stronger again.
01:17:666 (1) - This note is not strong at all, there is no need for there to be a HDash to it.
I don't think I need to repeat myself about the slider ends, but this is a consistent problem throughout this section.
01:19:628 (2) - You emphasised the beat on the white tick here, showing that you know you should, again proving you should map that for consistency in previous parts.
01:20:205 (2) - Again, this isn't really strong enough for a HDash, would be nicer to leave it as a normal dash for a nicer feeling buildup.
01:21:474 (2) - Slidertick here for the really strong beat feels off.
01:22:051 (2) - No HDash here would make buildup feel better.
01:23:320 (3) - White tick would sound a lot better mapped, again, not enough emphasis on the strong beat.
01:23:897 (2) - Again, no HDash to this please, buildup sounds a lot better without it.
01:26:436 (2) - There is barely any sound here, why is there a HDash here? Getting rid of this HDash sounds a hell of a lot better with the song.
01:27:128 (2) - Reduce distance to this, current distance is way too strong and results in very uncomfortable movements considering the stop-start motion of this section. Try x:368 instead, feels a lot better to play.
01:27:589 (2) - Same as above, x:144 feels better on this one.
01:28:166 (7) - This note really isn't strong enough to suggest a HDash, it sounds really bad with the song because of how weak this note is. Try getting rid of the HDash here, it fits the song a lot better.
01:28:512 (3) - This note isn't really that strong either, something like x:240 would feel a lot better with the music, and fit the music a lot better.
01:28:743 (1) - HDash strength to this is far too strong, I understand this note is stronger than others in the song, but the 7.59x distance snap is overkill, and a lot weaker of a HDash would be better from a flow perspective.
01:29:205 (3) - This note isn't that strong, there's no need for a HDash here.
01:29:897 (2) - I find it strange that you have no HDash to this despite the fact you have HDashes to weaker notes...
01:30:359 (4) - This note is really weak, there's no reason to have a HDash to it, please remove it.
01:30:589 (1,2) - Another case of the slider end being stronger than the actual HDash which results in very strange gameplay.
01:31:282 (3) - Again, note isn't really that strong, you can get rid of the HDash to it.
01:32:378 - There is definitely a note here, and there's no reason to ignore it, add a circle here.
01:32:897 (3) - No strong sound at all here, get rid of the HDash.
01:33:589 (2) - No HDash to this when you've had HDashes to a lot weaker sounds throughout? It sounds ridiculously strange and needs to be changed.
01:34:050 (4) - ^
01:34:743 (3) - HDash strength to this needs to be weakened considering the antiflow movements afterwards, forcing flow to feel strange.
01:35:436 (2) - This sound is stronger than the previous one, why is there no HDash to this?
01:36:474 (2) - This sound is really weak, no reason to even have a dash to this, let alone a HDash.
01:37:512 (3) - Again, sound is pretty weak here, no reason for a HDash.
01:38:205 (2) - You've missed out HDashes to a lot stronger note, having a HDash to this sounds odd in comparison, best to remove for consistency.
01:38:897 (1) - Same with this.
01:40:282 (3) - No reason for such a strong HDash strength to this, it can be reduced slightly.
01:40:974 (2) - This note isn't that strong, you can get rid of the HDash to it.
01:42:012 (4) - There is barely any sound here at all, let alone enough for you to have mapped this as a HDash... I'd really recommend just removing this note entirely, it's unnecessary.
01:42:185 (2) - No sound on this at all, remove it.
01:42:301 (4,5,6) - 4 is the same sound as 5 and 6, so I really don't understand your HDash usage here. It'd be best to just remove HDashes to both 5 and 6.
01:42:762 (4,5,6) - ^
01:43:051 (1,2,3,4) - And again, there's no need here to have HDashes to any sound other than 4, the other heads aren't even very strong, I'd just have a normal stream with no dashes for that.
01:44:436 (1) - Firstly, reduce the strength of the HDash to this, it feels odd, especially considering how this note isn't very strong compared to a lot of your other HDash usages, and secondly, the repeats here would sound a lot better as actual mapped sounds, they're definitely strong enough to warrant that.
01:45:936 (4) - This sound is very weak, there is no need to have a HDash to this and it just feels like pure overmapping.
01:46:512 (2) - On the other side, this sounds like it should have a HDash to it, but you decided not to, despite the strongness of the sound. Add a HDash to this sound.
01:46:973 (4) - Maybe a normal dash would sound better for more of a buildup effect.
01:47:666 (3) - Vocal here really isn't strong enough to be indicitive of a dash, and there's not really any other strong instrument here either, so maybe best to remove.
01:48:128 (1) - Same as earlier, would be best to map the repeats of this seperately, sounds a lot better considering the strength of the notes on those.
01:49:974 (1) - This note isn't really that strong, would be fine to get rid of the HDash to it.
I can't finish this now, because it's my birthday, so I'm going out later, but I'll try to continue tomorrow.
Ok, before I start, I would like to say that my previous mod on this was completely ignored. This was on the other mapset, but considering this was the same difficulty, it is relevent to mention here. Link: p/4559661
Now let's start with the actual mod. A lot of people told me to check this, as they are too scared of posting themselves for fear of being insulted by the community. I may repeat some stuff from my old mod, I brought that up simply as a point beforehand, I'm not expecting a reply to that now.
[Envision]
00:13:051 (1) - No sound here on head or tail, please remove this.
00:13:513 (2) - Make this a circle instead, there's no sound on the tail and it just sounds off to have it like this.
00:30:590 (1) - Maybe increase distancing to this? It feels kinda strange right now because of the really strange distancing, and a dash would sound nicer here so try x:144.
00:36:590 (2) - I can't hear any sound at all here... Remove this slider, it's noticably not mapped to anything.
00:37:513 (3) - No sound on this either.
00:56:897 (3) - Sound on this isn't that strong comapred to other sounds around here, would recommend getting rid of the HDash to make it sound better with the song.
00:57:820 (3) - Flow to this feels kinda off right now, underdashing due to inconsistent distancing is a problem here, it'd be easily fixed by moving this slider to x:80.
00:58:974 (3) - Seems pretty inconsistent to not have a HDash to this considering the previous HDash pattern. Rearrange this to add a HDash to it.
00:59:666 (3) - Note isn't really strong enough for a HDash either, considering there are stronger notes around it which you didn't use a HDash for, so it ends up feeling really bad with the music.
01:00:820 (3) - Distance to this feels a tad bit too strong causing some awkward movements right now, would be best to move it to x:352.
01:01:051 (1) - HDash strength to this doesn't have to be so strong, in fact it makes it feel kinda strange that it is because it differs it from other notes which have the exact same sounds. Try x:192 with a less tilted slider, instead.
01:01:743 (4) - Distance to this feels too strong for a non-dash, resulting in awkward movement, try x:288 instead.
01:03:359 (3) - This note's tail is actually stronger than it's head... Really not sure why you used a HDash to this, in fact it'd be best to split this up instead, and have a HDash to the tail, for the stronger guitar sound and drum here.
01:03:820 (1) - Make this a curved stream instead of a repeat slider? It'd flow a lot nicer and sound nicer with the music too.
01:04:282 (1) - ^.
01:05:782 (2) - This note is pretty weak, please get rid of the HDash to it because it just doesn't fit and sounds really bad with the song. The guitar here is weak at best.
01:06:244 (2) - Same here.
01:06:936 (2) - This note definitely isn't strong enough for a HDash, it is really weak in general, and should be reduced preferably to normal movement, even a dash here feels strange.
01:07:859 (2) - Tilting this slider a slight bit more vertical feels better from a flow perspective, I understand you want the jump to be difficult, and it still will be, but this is just not fun.
01:08:666 (2) - Not that strong compared to other notes around it where you have HDashes, I don't understand why there's one here, make it a normal dash, especially considering you don't even have a HDash to 01:08:897 (3) - which is a lot stronger.
01:09:359 (1) - Reduce HDash strength by moving this to x:144, the current HDash strength leads to some unnecessary awkward movement afterwards in the form of a HDash followed by an edge dash.
01:10:051 (2,1) - Neither of these notes are very strong, just remove the HDashes and it sounds a lot better.
01:10:628 (4) - This is not any stronger than the other notes in the slider, there is no need to add a HDash to it. Reduce this to a normal movement like the rest of the slider, it is the same sound, mapping it different is very bad consistency.
01:11:551 (2) - This is nowhere near as strong as the sound on the end of the previous slider, having a HDash to this after having that as just a normal slider end just feels bad with the music.
01:11:897 (1) - And again, not having a HDash to this after having a HDash to the previous note sounds really off musically, because this note is a lot stronger.
01:12:243 (2) - The head of this isn't that strong, and you're missing a very important strong beat in the middle of this slider which leaves the player feel unsatisfied by the feedback of this note.
01:12:820 (2) - Maybe best to not have a HDash to this one either, sounds better for the leadup if this is just a normal dash.
01:13:051 (1,2) - Same as earlier.
01:13:743 (1,2) - Again here.
01:14:666 (2) - And again, note here isn't that strong, best to avoid a HDash (Especially considering how strong the HDash to the next slider is, the antiflow is just uncomfortable to play and should be nerfed through a reduction of HDash strength, which can be achieved by making the movement to this weaker anyway).
01:14:897 (1,2) - Again, sliderend on 1 is a lot stronger so this sounds strange.
01:15:936 (2) - To further strengthen my previous points, there is no HDash to this, so having a HDash to previous notes sounds even worse when compared to this spot which is the same musically.
01:16:512 (2) - Again, to better emphasise this leadup, get rid of the HDash to it.
01:16:743 (1,2) - Sliderend stronger again.
01:17:666 (1) - This note is not strong at all, there is no need for there to be a HDash to it.
I don't think I need to repeat myself about the slider ends, but this is a consistent problem throughout this section.
01:19:628 (2) - You emphasised the beat on the white tick here, showing that you know you should, again proving you should map that for consistency in previous parts.
01:20:205 (2) - Again, this isn't really strong enough for a HDash, would be nicer to leave it as a normal dash for a nicer feeling buildup.
01:21:474 (2) - Slidertick here for the really strong beat feels off.
01:22:051 (2) - No HDash here would make buildup feel better.
01:23:320 (3) - White tick would sound a lot better mapped, again, not enough emphasis on the strong beat.
01:23:897 (2) - Again, no HDash to this please, buildup sounds a lot better without it.
01:26:436 (2) - There is barely any sound here, why is there a HDash here? Getting rid of this HDash sounds a hell of a lot better with the song.
01:27:128 (2) - Reduce distance to this, current distance is way too strong and results in very uncomfortable movements considering the stop-start motion of this section. Try x:368 instead, feels a lot better to play.
01:27:589 (2) - Same as above, x:144 feels better on this one.
01:28:166 (7) - This note really isn't strong enough to suggest a HDash, it sounds really bad with the song because of how weak this note is. Try getting rid of the HDash here, it fits the song a lot better.
01:28:512 (3) - This note isn't really that strong either, something like x:240 would feel a lot better with the music, and fit the music a lot better.
01:28:743 (1) - HDash strength to this is far too strong, I understand this note is stronger than others in the song, but the 7.59x distance snap is overkill, and a lot weaker of a HDash would be better from a flow perspective.
01:29:205 (3) - This note isn't that strong, there's no need for a HDash here.
01:29:897 (2) - I find it strange that you have no HDash to this despite the fact you have HDashes to weaker notes...
01:30:359 (4) - This note is really weak, there's no reason to have a HDash to it, please remove it.
01:30:589 (1,2) - Another case of the slider end being stronger than the actual HDash which results in very strange gameplay.
01:31:282 (3) - Again, note isn't really that strong, you can get rid of the HDash to it.
01:32:378 - There is definitely a note here, and there's no reason to ignore it, add a circle here.
01:32:897 (3) - No strong sound at all here, get rid of the HDash.
01:33:589 (2) - No HDash to this when you've had HDashes to a lot weaker sounds throughout? It sounds ridiculously strange and needs to be changed.
01:34:050 (4) - ^
01:34:743 (3) - HDash strength to this needs to be weakened considering the antiflow movements afterwards, forcing flow to feel strange.
01:35:436 (2) - This sound is stronger than the previous one, why is there no HDash to this?
01:36:474 (2) - This sound is really weak, no reason to even have a dash to this, let alone a HDash.
01:37:512 (3) - Again, sound is pretty weak here, no reason for a HDash.
01:38:205 (2) - You've missed out HDashes to a lot stronger note, having a HDash to this sounds odd in comparison, best to remove for consistency.
01:38:897 (1) - Same with this.
01:40:282 (3) - No reason for such a strong HDash strength to this, it can be reduced slightly.
01:40:974 (2) - This note isn't that strong, you can get rid of the HDash to it.
01:42:012 (4) - There is barely any sound here at all, let alone enough for you to have mapped this as a HDash... I'd really recommend just removing this note entirely, it's unnecessary.
01:42:185 (2) - No sound on this at all, remove it.
01:42:301 (4,5,6) - 4 is the same sound as 5 and 6, so I really don't understand your HDash usage here. It'd be best to just remove HDashes to both 5 and 6.
01:42:762 (4,5,6) - ^
01:43:051 (1,2,3,4) - And again, there's no need here to have HDashes to any sound other than 4, the other heads aren't even very strong, I'd just have a normal stream with no dashes for that.
01:44:436 (1) - Firstly, reduce the strength of the HDash to this, it feels odd, especially considering how this note isn't very strong compared to a lot of your other HDash usages, and secondly, the repeats here would sound a lot better as actual mapped sounds, they're definitely strong enough to warrant that.
01:45:936 (4) - This sound is very weak, there is no need to have a HDash to this and it just feels like pure overmapping.
01:46:512 (2) - On the other side, this sounds like it should have a HDash to it, but you decided not to, despite the strongness of the sound. Add a HDash to this sound.
01:46:973 (4) - Maybe a normal dash would sound better for more of a buildup effect.
01:47:666 (3) - Vocal here really isn't strong enough to be indicitive of a dash, and there's not really any other strong instrument here either, so maybe best to remove.
01:48:128 (1) - Same as earlier, would be best to map the repeats of this seperately, sounds a lot better considering the strength of the notes on those.
01:49:974 (1) - This note isn't really that strong, would be fine to get rid of the HDash to it.
I can't finish this now, because it's my birthday, so I'm going out later, but I'll try to continue tomorrow.
워... 모딩이 무슨 1초에 한개씩...ㅋㅋㅋ
happy birthday
Since this is out of qualified, CLSW asked me to take a look at the timing for the piano ending. Code is included below, though I would like a second opinion on it before this gets pushed forward again just to confirm. Metronome is 3/4 and everything is intended to snap to white ticks.
Aside from this, let's hear what MBomb and CLSW have to say before rushing back into qualification. Please keep discussions civil and on-topic.
TimingPoints
410969,326.086956521739,3,2,0,30,1,0
411890,240,3,2,0,30,1,0
412603,288.461538461538,3,2,0,30,1,0
412891,230.769230769231,3,2,0,30,1,0
414020,244.897959183673,3,2,0,30,1,0
414721,210.526315789474,3,2,0,30,1,0
414931,240,3,2,0,30,1,0
415362,235.294117647059,3,2,0,30,1,0
416054,214.285714285714,3,2,0,30,1,0
416696,240,3,2,0,30,1,0
417407,292.682926829268,3,2,0,30,1,0
417699,255.31914893617,3,2,0,30,1,0
418330,461.538461538462,3,2,0,30,1,0
420898,461.538461538462,3,2,0,30,1,0
Aside from this, let's hear what MBomb and CLSW have to say before rushing back into qualification. Please keep discussions civil and on-topic.
MBomb
Topic Starter
Thank you very much jbh! Gonna update after I take a break.
Oh, here comes the same people who wants “Visibility”
SOMEONE want to say "Now You See Me".....oh, sorry, should I plus 2 to this? I mean "Now You See Me 2"
PS: "Now You See Me 2" will be released in the UK on July 4 2016 ( Should I also "congrats" for you choosing the same time to mod?)
有些人真是呵呵
Hope SOMEONE understand this.
SOMEONE want to say "Now You See Me".....oh, sorry, should I plus 2 to this? I mean "Now You See Me 2"
PS: "Now You See Me 2" will be released in the UK on July 4 2016 ( Should I also "congrats" for you choosing the same time to mod?)
有些人真是呵呵
Ascendance wrote:
so leave it to CLSW to reply to the mod when it's finished and don't cause any dramas.
MOD IS NOT MAPHollow Wings wrote:
mappers even told some unbelieveble ideas or various suggestions as other styles' mappers.
Hope SOMEONE understand this.
I'm on both sides. On the first point, MBomb, there's no reason to turn this map into your own creation. Everyone's mapping style is different, there's really no need to textwall this hard, especially since the a lot of things on there are subjective as hell, or quite minor.
On the other hand, being rude to MBomb is unacceptable. He's doing his job as not only a nominator, but also a member of the community in every right. He wants to improve the map, so leave it to CLSW to reply to the mod when it's finished and don't cause any dramas.
CLSW, call me back when you're ready / if you need a 3rd BN again.
On the other hand, being rude to MBomb is unacceptable. He's doing his job as not only a nominator, but also a member of the community in every right. He wants to improve the map, so leave it to CLSW to reply to the mod when it's finished and don't cause any dramas.
CLSW, call me back when you're ready / if you need a 3rd BN again.
Topic Starter
00:13:051 (1) - the sound like 'whoaaah' actually exists with 1/2 so it's okay.
00:13:513 (2) - guitar sound change exists here, also it's okay.
00:30:590 (1) - so I increased SV here and also I think the distance is enough.
00:36:590 (1,2,1,2,3,4,5) - This is the reference from Scorpiour's original std mapset, which is really creative rhythm usage with fits very well flow and listening. Respect to him, so I would like to keep this.
00:56:897 (3) - *
00:58:974 (3) - *
00:59:666 (3) - *
01:00:820 (3) - Disagree, it doesn't feel awkward for me.
01:01:051 (1) - *
01:01:743 (4) - Symmetrical pattern with 01:01:051 (1,2) - , and I cannot find any reason to increase the distance though.
01:03:359 (3) - design balance with 01:03:820 (1) - , and the main reason is *.
01:03:820 (1) - 01:04:282 (1) - It's my own favorite so no change.
01:05:782 (2) - I don't think this is weak though.
01:06:244 (2) - ^
01:06:936 (2) - *
01:07:859 (2) - In my sight this is fun <3
01:08:666 (2) - *
01:09:359 (1) - It needs to be. Accent here will give much better experience of gameplay.
01:10:051 (2,1) - *
01:10:628 (4) - Normal movement sucks here, it doesn't flow good without HDash. Just my taste.
01:11:205 (1) - At least I can accept your style here because the song's intensity is a bit lower than usual and the guitar sounds were spotlighted pretty much. so I remapped in this section. Please recheck.
01:27:128 (2) - , 01:27:589 (2) - No reason to reduce here, I like this 'uncomfortable'. People should be adapted to some those kind of patterns because recent people love too much with living in comfort. And that's why recent CtB maps are too easy confirmed.
01:28:166 (7) - It's good. And strong enough with overall pitch.
01:28:512 (3) - *
01:28:743 (1) - *, HDash system in CtB has its revision so not an overkill as well.
01:29:205 (3) - *
01:29:897 (2) - *
01:30:359 (4) - *
01:30:589 (1,2) - It doesn't feel strange for me though?
01:31:282 (3) - *
01:32:378 - I know but not really necessary for me.
01:33:589 (2) - *
01:34:050 (4) - *
01:34:743 (3) - *
01:35:436 (2) - *
01:36:474 (2) - *
01:37:512 (3) - *
01:38:205 (2) - *
01:38:897 (1) - *
01:40:282 (3) - *
01:40:974 (2) - *
01:42:012 (4) - I don't think so. HDash here feels really nice for me.
01:42:185 (2) - I would like to add this as continuous-additional rhythm to complete the whole design and flow. I never want to get rid of this stream flow though. No. Pretty similar reason as Ascendance's 176 - ikazuchi Destroyer diff.
01:42:301 (4,5,6) - *
01:42:762 (4,5,6) - *
01:43:051 (1,2,3,4) - *
01:44:436 (1) - Chorus pitch up ayy
01:46:512 (2) - What? The sound isn't that strong for me.
01:46:973 (4) - Chorus pitch up
01:48:128 (1) - It's enough to get HDash here. Chorus pitch up.
01:49:974 (1) - Volume is pretty high here so I would like to keep this.
* : I'm pretty sure that if the song's intensity is enough the boundaries between normal jump and HDash are going to be broken as well, those spacings are really common in ranked CtB maps nowadays, it has no strange issues. For example, just take a look at some Spec's maps first. Can you make wall of text again like this? I hope you can understand all mappers' mapping style since you're BN now, right?
In general CtB HDashes have its revision to get them easy, so just a single usage of HDashes cannot make the map difficult. So the only the 'intensity' is the important, and so your HDash rules can be more strictly observed in calm songs, but if the song's intensity is high enough like this song, it's not really an obvious rule here. And I mapped this with more focusing on gameplay. Find the issue, then I'll fix. Thank you.
CtB is not a communistic world, mappers don't have to satisfy 'ALL' people though. I won't deal with nonsense.
00:13:513 (2) - guitar sound change exists here, also it's okay.
00:30:590 (1) - so I increased SV here and also I think the distance is enough.
00:36:590 (1,2,1,2,3,4,5) - This is the reference from Scorpiour's original std mapset, which is really creative rhythm usage with fits very well flow and listening. Respect to him, so I would like to keep this.
00:56:897 (3) - *
00:58:974 (3) - *
00:59:666 (3) - *
01:00:820 (3) - Disagree, it doesn't feel awkward for me.
01:01:051 (1) - *
01:01:743 (4) - Symmetrical pattern with 01:01:051 (1,2) - , and I cannot find any reason to increase the distance though.
01:03:359 (3) - design balance with 01:03:820 (1) - , and the main reason is *.
01:03:820 (1) - 01:04:282 (1) - It's my own favorite so no change.
01:05:782 (2) - I don't think this is weak though.
01:06:244 (2) - ^
01:06:936 (2) - *
01:07:859 (2) - In my sight this is fun <3
01:08:666 (2) - *
01:09:359 (1) - It needs to be. Accent here will give much better experience of gameplay.
01:10:051 (2,1) - *
01:10:628 (4) - Normal movement sucks here, it doesn't flow good without HDash. Just my taste.
01:11:205 (1) - At least I can accept your style here because the song's intensity is a bit lower than usual and the guitar sounds were spotlighted pretty much. so I remapped in this section. Please recheck.
01:27:128 (2) - , 01:27:589 (2) - No reason to reduce here, I like this 'uncomfortable'. People should be adapted to some those kind of patterns because recent people love too much with living in comfort. And that's why recent CtB maps are too easy confirmed.
01:28:166 (7) - It's good. And strong enough with overall pitch.
01:28:512 (3) - *
01:28:743 (1) - *, HDash system in CtB has its revision so not an overkill as well.
01:29:205 (3) - *
01:29:897 (2) - *
01:30:359 (4) - *
01:30:589 (1,2) - It doesn't feel strange for me though?
01:31:282 (3) - *
01:32:378 - I know but not really necessary for me.
01:33:589 (2) - *
01:34:050 (4) - *
01:34:743 (3) - *
01:35:436 (2) - *
01:36:474 (2) - *
01:37:512 (3) - *
01:38:205 (2) - *
01:38:897 (1) - *
01:40:282 (3) - *
01:40:974 (2) - *
01:42:012 (4) - I don't think so. HDash here feels really nice for me.
01:42:185 (2) - I would like to add this as continuous-additional rhythm to complete the whole design and flow. I never want to get rid of this stream flow though. No. Pretty similar reason as Ascendance's 176 - ikazuchi Destroyer diff.
01:42:301 (4,5,6) - *
01:42:762 (4,5,6) - *
01:43:051 (1,2,3,4) - *
01:44:436 (1) - Chorus pitch up ayy
01:46:512 (2) - What? The sound isn't that strong for me.
01:46:973 (4) - Chorus pitch up
01:48:128 (1) - It's enough to get HDash here. Chorus pitch up.
01:49:974 (1) - Volume is pretty high here so I would like to keep this.
* : I'm pretty sure that if the song's intensity is enough the boundaries between normal jump and HDash are going to be broken as well, those spacings are really common in ranked CtB maps nowadays, it has no strange issues. For example, just take a look at some Spec's maps first. Can you make wall of text again like this? I hope you can understand all mappers' mapping style since you're BN now, right?
In general CtB HDashes have its revision to get them easy, so just a single usage of HDashes cannot make the map difficult. So the only the 'intensity' is the important, and so your HDash rules can be more strictly observed in calm songs, but if the song's intensity is high enough like this song, it's not really an obvious rule here. And I mapped this with more focusing on gameplay. Find the issue, then I'll fix. Thank you.
^ this.Hollow Wings wrote:
i know my maps may be questionalble, and still here those are. believe it or not, i've almost considered all possible points of people even in the last drama, by asking bunches of peoples' opinions much more than ones appeared in this thread. for that, you can regard my works as depending on - i can say, like at least 100 persons' - opinions in every map i've made. they can be short irc mods, tests or even detail checking by tools, double tests after those. noobs have complained those tricky patterns to let me low down some ridiculous spikes, pros have given personal opinions to let me provide more confortable settings to play, mappers even told some unbelieveble ideas or various suggestions as other styles' mappers. then i choose what i wanna insist and what really should be changed: just like seeking mods and giving feedback, but i think lots of people didn't remind how important that is. you may say this map is not perfect and i haven't think deep, just test me, find the issue and convince me. if you really can do that, it'll be always welcomed.
CtB is not a communistic world, mappers don't have to satisfy 'ALL' people though. I won't deal with nonsense.
osu!catchCLSW wrote:
CtB is not a communistic world, mappers don't have to satisfy 'ALL' people though. I won't deal with nonsense.
kudosu please
BSS still calls it CatchTheBeat, not osu!catch
hahahaAscendance wrote:
osu!catchCLSW wrote:
CtB is not a communistic world, mappers don't have to satisfy 'ALL' people though. I won't deal with nonsense.
kudosu please
:3
Now I have chance to shoot a star
I also shooted a star
magic bomb... ctb is not ur mode..... just respect "all ppl"CLSW wrote:
CtB is not a communistic world, mappers don't have to satisfy 'ALL' people though. I won't deal with nonsense.
please enjoy mapping
hmm, since you changed the metadata
why not change source too?
Yes, i argee that this song is first release and after that, REFLEC BEAT limelight used the short ver
so same case with this one https://osu.ppy.sh/s/267767
This song once full version and from the album ad:pianoⅢ which hasn't official from Deemo yet
But after then, Deemo used it as offcial but with short version
So i think this one is same case with this
I'm glad that you used the "<Version 0>" in the title
Good luck then
why not change source too?
Yes, i argee that this song is first release and after that, REFLEC BEAT limelight used the short ver
so same case with this one https://osu.ppy.sh/s/267767
This song once full version and from the album ad:pianoⅢ which hasn't official from Deemo yet
But after then, Deemo used it as offcial but with short version
So i think this one is same case with this
I'm glad that you used the "<Version 0>" in the title
Good luck then
MBomb
No need for rude responses.Len wrote:
magic bomb... ctb is not ur mode..... just respect "all ppl"CLSW wrote:
CtB is not a communistic world, mappers don't have to satisfy 'ALL' people though. I won't deal with nonsense.
Anyway, as I've said, these were concerns brought up to me by many people, not just myself, so I wanted to bring up these issues with you myself, specifically the ones I agreed with. Now that you've given reasoning for stuff, it makes it a lot clearer in my head as to why you were doing things. Now I would ask you please get your fans to stop this bullying, as it is unnecessary.
I'll finish my mod soon, getting a lot of requests.
Topic Starter
I never asked anything? They commented with themselves. Don't make me as a circlejerk member please. And I never found where's the rude point on Len's post. Isn't that just a small advice to you? Probably it'll be a sarcasm but who's able to judge it though.
Also I haven't find any proofs that your mods were based with concerns from 'many people', where are they? If then, why don't they post here with their opinions and mods? It'll be better than your single post imo.(also they can get rewarded kudosu) I won't believe the existence of those 'many people' if you haven't any proofs of it. If then, I won't regard your opinion as multiple opinions.
@Kuo Kyoka : It's from album so I guess just keeping the source as blank seems better. Anyways thanks for your help on metadata!
Also I haven't find any proofs that your mods were based with concerns from 'many people', where are they? If then, why don't they post here with their opinions and mods? It'll be better than your single post imo.(also they can get rewarded kudosu) I won't believe the existence of those 'many people' if you haven't any proofs of it. If then, I won't regard your opinion as multiple opinions.
@Kuo Kyoka : It's from album so I guess just keeping the source as blank seems better. Anyways thanks for your help on metadata!
if u want to make clsws map to yours style, then just make one and try to get ranked
no need to make drama for this and no need to post rude things on here
magic bomb, i was very disappointed maybe you need a change in attitude..
thats why i dont want to join ctb mapping community and i want to quit
anyway goodluck i hope it get ranked asap >.<
no need to make drama for this and no need to post rude things on here
magic bomb, i was very disappointed maybe you need a change in attitude..
thats why i dont want to join ctb mapping community and i want to quit
anyway goodluck i hope it get ranked asap >.<
We're getting off-topic here. If you guys want to argue in PM go right ahead, but let's keep it out of the thread shall we?
Suggestions for further improvement are still very welcome!
Suggestions for further improvement are still very welcome!
have my 5 stars m8 \:3/
Stars Stars Stars~~
I want to rank it but..... I'm not BN :'c
I want to rank it but..... I'm not BN :'c
MBomb
Sorry, but due to stuff going on as a result of my opinions on this map (Details aren't important here) I won't be checking the rest of the map. You can just call other BNs back for now, sorry for delaying you longer than necessary.CLSW wrote:
OMG thanks!SnowNiNo_ wrote:
have my 5 stars m8 \:3/
@ - Magic Bomb - : I don't want to make long delay with this map, so please take it asap if you are a certain BN. Also don't forget that most kind of '*' stuffs which I've mentioned on p/5281844 will be rejected automatically.
Topic Starter
at least I fixed some parts with your mod, so kudosu awarded 8)
Topic Starter
Thank you very much! \:D/\:D/Taeyang wrote:
Mult-bpm
http://puu.sh/pYXFn/aa824d472b.zip
Here is the iirc log
dadadadadadadada
17:53 Razor Sharp: i will mod Envision now
17:53 CLSW: orly
17:53 Razor Sharp: yes
17:53 CLSW: okay then ww
17:53 Razor Sharp: want me to go Magic Bomb style? :^)
17:53 CLSW: you can do irc mod
17:53 Razor Sharp: yes sure
17:54 Razor Sharp: have played the map so many times, love it.
17:54 CLSW: wait for a while when ascendance finishes to testplay
17:54 CLSW: oh pls
17:54 Razor Sharp: sure
17:54 CLSW: you can write down the suggestions for now
17:54 CLSW: I'll take a time to check it
17:54 Razor Sharp: i can wait for you, but ill look for stuff meanwhile
17:54 CLSW: yes yes
17:54 CLSW: cuz I should go sleep asap ww
17:55 Razor Sharp: sure
17:57 CLSW: okay I'm ready!
17:57 Razor Sharp: 00:39:359 (4,5,1) - I feel like the distance between the notes here should be equal. But i do understand that the distance from (5) too (1) is higher due to empathizing. If so, the distance feels too short for me. Maybe increase the distance by 2 more grids?
17:58 CLSW: just 1 grid is enough imo
17:58 CLSW: whatever increased
17:59 Razor Sharp: alright then
17:59 Razor Sharp: 01:03:820 (1) - Why "no move" stream? The jump from 01:03:589 (4) - might throw people off here. Maybe add a small curve?
17:59 CLSW: that's what I intended
17:59 Razor Sharp: To throw people off?
17:59 CLSW: first one with full vertical, second one with curve
17:59 CLSW: and third one with HDash
17:59 CLSW: the transition was intended yep
17:59 Razor Sharp: well fair enough
18:00 CLSW: oh
18:00 CLSW: maybe I'll use curve for 1st one
18:00 Razor Sharp: yeah
18:00 Razor Sharp: thats what i ment
18:00 CLSW: and vertical for 2nd one
18:00 Razor Sharp: thats exactly what i ment :p
18:00 CLSW: then players can react better
18:00 CLSW: okay wait a sec
18:02 Razor Sharp: alright
18:03 CLSW: done
18:03 Razor Sharp: aight
18:03 Razor Sharp: 01:18:359 (4) - This one here plays really weird for me. I feel like the slider should go right instead of left (according to the music atleast). Considder ctrl+g and move to x40? This will also create a hyper between 01:18:128 (3,4) - and 01:18:359 (4,1) - as the sound here will get empathized
18:04 CLSW: I think just move (4) to x : 160 seems better
18:04 CLSW: it'll meet the requirements of HDash intensity
18:04 Razor Sharp: hmm, yeah it might
18:05 Razor Sharp: 02:00:012 (6,1) - This transition feels very awkward. I would suggest to curve 02:00:128 (1) - some more, to make this more smooth of a movement, and the transition will then be more fitting imo
18:06 CLSW: ctrl+g 02:00:128 (1) -
18:07 Razor Sharp: alright
18:08 Razor Sharp: 02:45:820 (1,2) - just for the looks. Make these too more vertical, as it will compliment the song by gradualy gaining distance. so having 02:46:051 (3,4) - as they are now and 02:45:820 (1,2) - more vertical (45 degrees) would add up to the intensity of the song here.
18:09 CLSW: I've tried with vertical before
18:09 CLSW: but it doesn't feel good for me
18:09 CLSW: (actually the vertical design was existed during Sangzin's one)
18:09 Razor Sharp: oh really? well i see
18:10 Razor Sharp: well then, lets move on
18:10 Razor Sharp: 02:49:051 (1,2,3,4,6) - add clap sound?
18:11 CLSW: clap sound seems awkward for me
18:11 Razor Sharp: if you change the sound sample, to be more of a "clap" it might fit
18:12 CLSW: I used drum finish sound instead
18:13 Razor Sharp: sweet
18:13 Razor Sharp: 03:45:359 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,5,6) - Here i do not understand why 03:45:359 (1,2,3,4,1) - are left rights, and 03:46:512 (2,3,4,5,6) - is not. For me, it seems more logical to have 03:46:512 (2,3,4,5,6) - as the only leftrights here?
18:13 Razor Sharp: it clearly would fit more
18:14 CLSW: I love that pattern, it flows amazing
18:14 CLSW: that will make the extreme flow with the high distance jumps
18:14 CLSW: I mean long jump between (3) and (6)
18:14 Razor Sharp: well you got a valid point there tho
18:14 Razor Sharp: but still feels wrong for me
18:15 Razor Sharp: but your map, you decide :D
18:15 CLSW: thank you for respect :3
18:15 Razor Sharp: :3
18:18 Razor Sharp: 05:09:235 (6) - move this to x280, then move 05:09:350 (1,2,3,4) - as a block too x376. This makes a sweet buildup
18:19 CLSW: I have an idea
18:19 CLSW: this is gonna be a huge fix
18:19 Razor Sharp: exiting
18:20 Razor Sharp: tell me when you have fixed
18:20 CLSW: done
18:21 Razor Sharp: alright
18:21 Razor Sharp: 05:24:581 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7) - lets try something fun with this stream. take 05:24:811 (5,6,7) - and ctrl+h hit, and move it too x144 and give it a nicer curve
18:22 CLSW: uh...
18:23 CLSW: if the bpm was lower like 180s it'll be useful
18:23 CLSW: but this is 260, not very much players can handle that kinda streams
18:23 CLSW: also I don't like the design
18:23 Razor Sharp: mmm fair enough
18:25 Razor Sharp: 05:50:889 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - while i respect what you did here, and can understand it. I find it pretty much useless to have 16 sliders with constant left rights here. I would suggest making as 05:50:889 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - are all straight sliders, making it 2 notes, left, 2 notes right etc. then have 05:52:735 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - as they are
18:25 Razor Sharp: this is a major killing point you know. and is very risky
18:26 CLSW: if you have played various kind of rhythm games
18:26 CLSW: this is like the consistency fight
18:26 CLSW: you'll know
18:26 Razor Sharp: yeah i know that
18:27 CLSW: I don't think this is a risky because
18:27 CLSW: I've watched CWC 2016 glory match and everyone passed that part
18:27 Razor Sharp: yeah i noticed that myself
18:27 Razor Sharp: but personal preference really :p
18:28 CLSW: pls enjoy game :(
18:28 Razor Sharp: trying to do :p
18:28 Razor Sharp: 06:24:120 (7) - make this into a slider that ends on 06:24:582 - maybe?
18:30 CLSW: keep the originality and the tense break
18:30 CLSW: with its SB
18:30 CLSW: so it'll be fine
18:30 Razor Sharp: true true
18:30 Razor Sharp: 06:28:749 (1) - make this the preview point, just to trick everyone into "clsw made 9* calm map"? :^)
18:31 CLSW: NO ALIEN PLS
18:31 Razor Sharp: :v
18:31 Razor Sharp: welp, thats all i have for the map when it comes to modding. Everything else seem fine for me tbh
18:32 Razor Sharp: will post this to the forum now
Qualify... when? R.I.P DDDD:
1405pp SS
re-qualify hype
re-qualify hype
06:22:273 (1,2,3,4,5,6,1,2,3,4,5,6,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,5,6,7) - streams at the ending part are way a bit cancerous lol (just mentioning)
Topic Starter
afb and Deif MIA 
wo this is BPM28 gonna fc this with no difficulty
█ Optional to change --- █ Suggested to change --- █ Unrankable
Call me after the fix.
Good luck!
AFB
[
General]
Inherited Sections (Green Lines)
- The followings are redundant, they are repeated
dem u: 00:59:782 - , 01:00:128 - , 01:26:205 - , 01:26:897 - , 01:50:897 - , 01:54:589 - , 02:40:743 - , 03:07:743 - .
[
Envision]
Gameplay
- 01:03:820 - 01:06:474 - This is actually fine but I think the build-up here can actually be better, as the movement of 01:03:820 - 01:05:551 - is quite easy comparing to the other two at the back, and the curve patterns at 01:03:820 - 01:04:628 - are having more movements comparing to the next two starting at 01:04:743 - . So I suggest swapping the timeline of the two parts with static stream, i.e. 01:04:743 (1,2,1,2) - , to the first two parts with curve streams. Doing so can create a more gradual build-up and it won't be too surprising to see more HDashes later on for the next two parts.
and they really killed me when I testplay :C - 01:14:666 (2,1) - I think it is still fine to incline or curve (1) a bit as it is not yet at chorus parts, so the players won't get lost after the strong HDash.
- 02:00:128 (1,2) - Remove the HDash, it is not here for the previous parts with the same rhythm, for example 01:11:205 (1,2) - and etc. Maybe *this works?
- 02:12:243 (2,1) - Omit the HDash as well because there are no HDashes for the previous parts with the same rhythm. You may try *this or any better pattern you can find.
- 03:04:051 (2,3) - ^
- 05:57:120 (4,1,2,3,1) - I think the HDash should be at 05:58:158 (3,1) - instead of 05:57:120 (4,1) - so to emphasize the Finish and at the correct rhythm.
- 05:59:773 (2,3,1) - ^ so add HDash at (3,1) and remove the one at (2,3).
- 06:06:812 (2,3) - This sounds a bit strange as it is not matching the song, it should be something like *this.
New Combo - 02:36:359 (2) - Add NC like what you did for the parts with same rhythms in this stanza.
Call me after the fix.
Good luck!
AFB
Topic Starter
03:04:051 (2,3) - Chorus pitch is pretty high so its HDash usages are fine imo.
The others have been fixed, thank you!
The others have been fixed, thank you!
Hype
Recheck
█ Optional to change --- █ Suggested to change --- █ Unrankable
Call me once again after the update!
Good luck!
AFB
[ General]
- Good to go!
[ Envision]
Gameplay
- 02:59:897 (4,1) - What about a HDash here? It is consistent with 02:59:436 (2,3) - in my opinion so maybe the add will be good here. You may move 02:59:666 (3,4) - to x:400 and 03:00:128 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7) - to x:448 if you desire. It plays well.
- 03:21:359 (1,2,3,1,2,3) - I just noticed that this is exactly the same as 05:28:735 (1,2,1,2) - , however the former one is harder as the circle distances are bigger. What about changing the previous one to have the same difficulty level as the latter one? Or if you want to have a little bit challenge, change the latter one to have larger gaps in between.
- 03:25:974 (1,2,3,4,1) - Firstly, 03:25:974 (1,2,3,4) - feels a bit boring as it is repetitive, and the later parts are having more diverse patterns within a stanza, so what about changing something here to look a little bit different? Secondly, if a HDash is put at 03:26:666 (4,1) - , that would be really nice as it matches the song pretty well. Perhaps you can make use of these two prompts to change the pattern that fits here.
- 03:38:897 (1,2,3) - This is also same as 05:46:273 (1,1,1,1) - in the song rhythm, but the former pattern is a bit too easy comparing to the next one. What about adding a little more challenges here? In addition, changing this part to 3/4 sliders also work, but with less-intense HDashes. That would definitely do a great job.
- 05:46:273 (1,1,1,1) - Actually I think it is strange here that 05:46:735 (1,1) - are having less movement than 05:46:273 (1,1) - . In my opinion this part should be gradually ramping up with the difficulty, so maybe the first two 3/4 sliders are with less curvature, and the latter two with larger curves.
New Combos - 02:36:359 (2) - You forgot to add a NC? You may refer to 02:32:551 (1) - , 02:39:820 (1) - , they are NC'ed so I think you may want to do the same here.
Call me once again after the update!
Good luck!
AFB
Topic Starter
05:46:273 (1,1,1,1) - The part here was based with its violin pitch, I made first two having larger distance and the last two with shorter scale.
the other fixes : 05:49:043 (1,2,3,4,1,2) - A bit of rework for avoiding repetitive boring leftright movements.
06:52:589 (1,1) - Added NC
Rest were fixed!
the other fixes : 05:49:043 (1,2,3,4,1,2) - A bit of rework for avoiding repetitive boring leftright movements.
06:52:589 (1,1) - Added NC
Rest were fixed!
Bubble #1 
Topic Starter
gogogogo
DREEEEEEEEEAMERRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
ftfyAscendance wrote:
MEEEEEEEEEMERRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
Topic Starter
IMAAAAAAAAAGINEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
Ascendance the alpha and omega of this map :^)
Ascendance the alpha and omega of this map :^)
oh shit aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
i mean congrats
i mean congrats
YOU CAAANT IMAGINEEEEEEEEEAscendance wrote:
DREEEEEEEEEAMERRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
HE CAN'T IMAGINEEEEEEEEEE
GL from standard
GG
truCLSW wrote:
Ascendance the alpha and omega of this map :^)
Shhooowwww meeee the
Wwwwwwwwaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy!!
Wwwwwwwwaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy!!