1. Easy (1,33 stars, 194 notes)
2. Hard (3,68 stars, 492 notes)
3. Mkael's Advanced (2,19 stars, 365 notes)
4. Normal (1,74 stars, 261 notes)
5. Punky Christmas (4,28 stars, 533 notes)

1. I feel like the soft-hitnormal could be louder, I'm hardly ever notice it when playing and often makes me think that a note doesn't have any hitsound at all because it blends in so nicely, do you think you can raise its volume a bit?
2. About the combo colours: 1) I feel like the second colour blends in way too much with the BG when the notes are in the middle, and 2) it seems very imbalanced to me that only one of the colours has a saturation of 80 while all others have 240.. I don't really see the necessity for four different red-tones anyways, maybe just stick to two and make them more matching, or add a grey/silver-tone?
3. BG-res up to 1920x1200 is allowed now, in case you didn't know :^D (idc tho)

1. 01:11:649 (5,6,7,1) - This jump seems much harder than all the others like this to me, afaik it's pretty much the biggest one you've ever used for these patterns, and it flows really hard bc (4-7) are just a straight line and then after the jump on (1) the player immediately needs to turn around 180° again to follow the slider, all in all it just seems a bit too much to me, and I think it would be good if the first of these patterns after the Kiai were easier in order to build a higher contrast to the Kiai
2. 03:06:961 (2,1) - ofc it's just my taste, but I don't find the stack really fitting since those are two very different notes, and the gap between them builds high tension but I feel like not moving at all meets this tension very well :/ I'd just rotate it by 180° or whatever (applies to all diffs ofc)

1. 00:22:430 (3,1) - - Similar to the one in the higher diff, I don't find this stack suitable here since it's a new vocal line and harmony and all that stuff, I feel like stacks like that would fit better inside one combo instead of at the transition
2. 00:32:274 (4,1,2) - Somehow all this breaking-the-flow-of-the-middle-slider makes me feel a bit 'uneasy' here, how about swapping (2) horzitontally and placing it on the right?
3. really minor but you made the last one of the three slow-sliders 01:02:743 (1) - 02:08:368 (1) - 03:04:618 (1) - completely different than the others, is there a reason for that? imo it would make more sense to either make all three the same or all three different, like in the higher diff

1. Generally most of the 1/1-jumps feel pretty overdone to me, I get that you always use x2,0 as DS but using it between slow sliders just so they don't overlap is different than using it for a bigger time-interval since the sliderleniency naturally balances the slow SV with the high DS, but that doesn't happen with the jumps. In the Kiais or at places adjacent to the Kiais like 00:04:149 (4,1) it's reasonable, but in the calmer Verses they feel mostly overdone, especially when the note before the jump is a circle, like at 00:06:961 (2,3) -, or when it's a jump onto an insignificant offbeat, like at 01:14:930 (3,1) -
2. I feel like this diff could have a more meaningful object-choice in many places instead of just rather randomly choosing one of the few possibilities in order to pay more attention to the song:
   
   1. 00:06:493 (1,2,3,4) - At (3,4) there's an 'echo' of the vocals at (1,2), seems like a great opportunity to actually represent that in the map too by repeating the first rhythm -> replacing (4) with circles
   2. 00:51:024 (4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3) - The vocals have a note on every single note here except at the head of the second (4) which would seem like a great place to avoid a monotonous 8-slider-chain and differentiate better by replacing it with circles
   3. I find it weird to use 1/1-reverse-sliders at places where the lyrics are really dense at 01:47:743 (1) - etc but then using multiple objects for just one vocal note at 01:53:368 (1,2,3) - but ok
   4. 01:57:118 (1,2,3,4,1) - Basically the same section as in the first Kiai - The 1/1-slider seems pretty random and I think it would fit much better at 01:58:055 (3) since it would actually follow the vocals instead of just putting 2/3-sliders everywhere. Basically the same applies to 02:04:618 (1,2,3,4,1) where I'd replace 02:05:555 (3,4) with a 1/1-slider and a circle (which would also enable 02:06:493 (1) to be mapped more fitting too)
   I'll stop with the examples now, a lot of it repeats in later sections, the tl;dr is that forcing variation on spots where the song stays the same while mapping monotonous rhythms at a place where the song varies a lot is not ideal and could be avoided easily.
3. 01:39:149 (4,1) - afaik this is the only place every where you spaced a circle&1/3-gap out, plays where different to a stack like everywhere else and I don't see any reason for that so I'm suggesting to stack here too
4. 02:30:399 (5,1) - pls fix blanket :^)
5. 02:37:430 (3,1) - since (1) is just a circle and not a slider this might be hard to catch for many players, and as with the other stack-points I mentioned in the higher diffs I feel like this one doesn't make much sense with the song, this note initiates a very big, empty gap, something completely different than before, so it would make much more sense to me it was separated from the previous objects and stood 'alone' to represent the 'emptiness' of the break
6. 02:46:336 (2,4) - There are no background-choir-shouts anymore but you mapped it like if they still existed, differentiation pls
7. 03:06:493 (1,2) - How about you come up with a solution for this that doesn't scream "I ran out of playfield and didn't know what to do" lol xd sorry

1. 00:47:743 (1,2) - would be a nice opportunity to use a longer slider so the rhythm isn't so monotonouy?
2. 01:04:618 (2,3) - imo stacking this would still be appropriate for a Normal, but up to you ofc ^^
   NVM you actually did it at 02:10:243 (2,3) -, why not here too? O:
3. 01:55:243 (3,4,5) - beware of autostacking making these overlap

1. 00:13:524 (2,3) - when it's so close it's rather noticable that the blanket is slightly off ^^
2. 00:57:118 (1) - NC seems superfluous
3. 02:36:493 (3,1) - not a big fan of that stack again
4. I lack differentiation between Kiai and non-Kiai a bit as you use quite many 1/1-sliders especially in the second Verse, and quite a few 2/1s in the Kiais too, so I would've loved to at least see some more differentiation by slightly changing the SV, but there's nothing to be done about that now, just wanted to mention it for the future~

Bonsai wrote:

Ahoy, from the Christmas-Queue *deliberately not using that weeb-banner lol*

This song kinda reminded my of this one hehe, keeping up the angry Christmas-songs~

General

1. I feel like the soft-hitnormal could be louder, I'm hardly ever notice it when playing and often makes me think that a note doesn't have any hitsound at all because it blends in so nicely, do you think you can raise its volume a bit?
2. About the combo colours: 1) I feel like the second colour blends in way too much with the BG when the notes are in the middle, and 2) it seems very imbalanced to me that only one of the colours has a saturation of 80 while all others have 240.. I don't really see the necessity for four different red-tones anyways, maybe just stick to two and make them more matching, or add a grey/silver-tone?
3. BG-res up to 1920x1200 is allowed now, in case you didn't know :^D (idc tho) :3

Punky Christmas

1. 01:11:649 (5,6,7,1) - This jump seems much harder than all the others like this to me, afaik it's pretty much the biggest one you've ever used for these patterns, and it flows really hard bc (4-7) are just a straight line and then after the jump on (1) the player immediately needs to turn around 180° again to follow the slider, all in all it just seems a bit too much to me, and I think it would be good if the first of these patterns after the Kiai were easier in order to build a higher contrast to the Kiai
2. 03:06:961 (2,1) - ofc it's just my taste, but I don't find the stack really fitting since those are two very different notes, and the gap between them builds high tension but I feel like not moving at all meets this tension very well :/ I'd just rotate it by 180° or whatever (applies to all diffs ofc)

Hard

1. 00:22:430 (3,1) - - Similar to the one in the higher diff, I don't find this stack suitable here since it's a new vocal line and harmony and all that stuff, I feel like stacks like that would fit better inside one combo instead of at the transition
2. 00:32:274 (4,1,2) - Somehow all this breaking-the-flow-of-the-middle-slider makes me feel a bit 'uneasy' here, how about swapping (2) horzitontally and placing it on the right? I did something here but I'm not sure if it helps somehow..
3. really minor but you made the last one of the three slow-sliders 01:02:743 (1) - 02:08:368 (1) - 03:04:618 (1) - completely different than the others, is there a reason for that? imo it would make more sense to either make all three the same or all three different, like in the higher diff There's no reason indeedd :p just me being random.. I would change the second one so the 3 shapes are completely different but it would ruin all the stack thing that I really want to keep since I didn't break it in any difficulty xd

Mkaael's Advanced

1. Generally most of the 1/1-jumps feel pretty overdone to me, I get that you always use x2,0 as DS but using it between slow sliders just so they don't overlap is different than using it for a bigger time-interval since the sliderleniency naturally balances the slow SV with the high DS, but that doesn't happen with the jumps. In the Kiais or at places adjacent to the Kiais like 00:04:149 (4,1) it's reasonable, but in the calmer Verses they feel mostly overdone, especially when the note before the jump is a circle, like at 00:06:961 (2,3) -, or when it's a jump onto an insignificant offbeat, like at 01:14:930 (3,1) - I changed some spots, but I feel like places like 00:38:368 (1,2,1) - this should remain since the song is strong enough and it kinda supports the "jump" there, here too 01:56:180 (3,1) - etc but i changed quite a few ones.
2. I feel like this diff could have a more meaningful object-choice in many places instead of just rather randomly choosing one of the few possibilities in order to pay more attention to the song:
   
   1. 00:06:493 (1,2,3,4) - At (3,4) there's an 'echo' of the vocals at (1,2), seems like a great opportunity to actually represent that in the map too by repeating the first rhythm -> replacing (4) with circles
   2. 00:51:024 (4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3) - The vocals have a note on every single note here except at the head of the second (4) which would seem like a great place to avoid a monotonous 8-slider-chain and differentiate better by replacing it with circles
   3. I find it weird to use 1/1-reverse-sliders at places where the lyrics are really dense at 01:47:743 (1) - etc but then using multiple objects for just one vocal note at 01:53:368 (1,2,3) - but ok
   4. 01:57:118 (1,2,3,4,1) - Basically the same section as in the first Kiai - The 1/1-slider seems pretty random and I think it would fit much better at 01:58:055 (3) since it would actually follow the vocals instead of just putting 2/3-sliders everywhere. Basically the same applies to 02:04:618 (1,2,3,4,1) where I'd replace 02:05:555 (3,4) with a 1/1-slider and a circle (which would also enable 02:06:493 (1) to be mapped more fitting too)
   I'll stop with the examples now, a lot of it repeats in later sections, the tl;dr is that forcing variation on spots where the song stays the same while mapping monotonous rhythms at a place where the song varies a lot is not ideal and could be avoided easily.
   
   I tried to add some variation and I did some of the comments above, to make it better, I do understand your point, it's something that I lack in my mapping, I care much more for asthetics than playability, I tried to fix some spots, but others is just a matter of patterning and cleaness :p
   
   About the 1/1 where there are too much vocals, this is mkguh's part, but I think as it is consistent it shouldn't be a problem...
   
3. 01:39:149 (4,1) - afaik this is the only place every where you spaced a circle&1/3-gap out, plays where different to a stack like everywhere else and I don't see any reason for that so I'm suggesting to stack here too
4. 02:30:399 (5,1) - pls fix blanket :^)
5. 02:37:430 (3,1) - since (1) is just a circle and not a slider this might be hard to catch for many players, and as with the other stack-points I mentioned in the higher diffs I feel like this one doesn't make much sense with the song, this note initiates a very big, empty gap, something completely different than before, so it would make much more sense to me it was separated from the previous objects and stood 'alone' to represent the 'emptiness' of the break
6. 02:46:336 (2,4) - There are no background-choir-shouts anymore but you mapped it like if they still existed, differentiation pls
7. 03:06:493 (1,2) - How about you come up with a solution for this that doesn't scream "I ran out of playfield and didn't know what to do" lol xd sorry

Normal

1. 00:47:743 (1,2) - would be a nice opportunity to use a longer slider so the rhythm isn't so monotonouy?
2. 01:04:618 (2,3) - imo stacking this would still be appropriate for a Normal, but up to you ofc ^^
   NVM you actually did it at 02:10:243 (2,3) -, why not here too? O:
3. 01:55:243 (3,4,5) - beware of autostacking making these overlap

Easy

1. 00:13:524 (2,3) - when it's so close it's rather noticable that the blanket is slightly off ^^
2. 00:57:118 (1) - NC seems superfluous
3. 02:36:493 (3,1) - not a big fan of that stack again I think i'll keep this one :3
4. I lack differentiation between Kiai and non-Kiai a bit as you use quite many 1/1-sliders especially in the second Verse, and quite a few 2/1s in the Kiais too, so I would've loved to at least see some more differentiation by slightly changing the SV, but there's nothing to be done about that now, just wanted to mention it for the future~ oh thank you for advise, I spent 9 months off osu this is like one of my first maps after comming back, and tbh I didn't know that I could change sv in easies xD

Simple and clean for the most part, have a star already NVM I forgot stars need at least 12SP too lol, feel free to call me when you think it's ready to get it bubbled (at least some other mod than mine would be nice )

JeZag wrote:

m4m4m fulfillment

easy

00:23:368 (1,3) - perhaps reconsider this overlap in ez? I think the low bpm makes it fine enough
00:43:993 (1) - i think this would be better curved the other way.
02:24:774 (2,3) - this particularly looks off
02:53:368 (1) - there might be an issue with the body being out of grid. (i think it was for the 4:3 players) As long as AiMod doesn't point , it shouldnt be a problem

normal

00:47:743 (1) - put the red anchor on a red anchor maybe I didn't understand :p
01:58:993 (4) - off grid I guess it's fine, not all off grids are a problem
02:24:774 (3,4) - could make them the same curve so it looks like it would blanket the same thing if it did

advanced

01:02:743 (1) - make straighter and more like a candy cane maybe?
01:11:180 (3) - hmm i would prefer this to be more straightforward. just a regular curved slider pls. I don't see a problem though
01:34:149 (4) - consider making this curved to blanket 01:33:680 (3).
01:43:993 (1) - i would keep some slider body visible after the red anchor. right now, none is showing near the tail I think it's ok :p it's clear enough the slider shape to me
02:40:243 (1) - same with this ^

hard

00:07:899 (4,1) - altho to some it may not feel like a jump, i would not make this a jump cause the rest of the calm section dont got no jumps.
ez remap idea: make 00:07:899 (4) a mirror of 00:07:430 (3) and make blankets blanket and stuff The song changes the intonation i think it's a good reason for a jump
00:22:899 (4,1) - same oppinion here. carry over to all others like this during calmer sections where this is the only "jump" visible. ^ and this is a hard, I am supposed to make the transition to insane better
00:43:524 (6,1) - you can afford to make this gap larger to avoid overlap while having appropriate spacing The overlap is proposital
01:43:055 (3) - that this isnt the same as 01:42:118 (1) +180 bothers me. i get that its horizontal mirror, but i dont think its that approprite when 01:42:586 (2) is skewed should be fine :p
02:45:868 (1) - same point here as brought up earlier I like this overlap :p
03:04:618 (1) - consider doing something christmassy with this like a candy cane idek This shape is lovely :3

insane

00:11:805 (5,6) - i think flow would feel better if these two were ctrl + g
01:13:524 (4,5,6,1) - i dont particularly like the flow here. would be better if the direction 01:13:993 (1) goes to is the same direction coming from 01:13:836 (6) ye i get it but I cant control g here because of the jump that is necessary to keep consistency
03:04:618 (1) - maek christmassy :p

i tried... orz

Arutsuki wrote:

this is gonna be stuck in my head all christmas..
heyo m4m

insane

00:45:868 (1,2) - why not make those the same as 00:38:368 (1,2,3,4,5) -? consistency feels nice on the same sounds i get it but i can't fix this without ruining the pattern :/ sorry
00:58:055 (3,4,5) - sounds on these are about as hearable as 00:32:274 (4,5,6) - nothing too bad since it is in the chorus but consider cutting the spacing down a bit the first is during the kiai, and the sond is the pre-chorus, i think there's a big difference between their intensity
00:59:461 (2) - something like this http://puu.sh/sO6Pv/3ac967e834.jpg would fit the music better imo i will keep for consistency sorry
01:01:336 (2) - ^ ^
^same in second kaiai
02:12:118 - not really sure if this should be a kaiai, seems un its as intense as the others so i'll keep
02:35:243 (3) - not stacked under the sliderend but still a bit harder to read than all the rest

other diffs look good but look at AiMod on hard for some offscreen stuff, gl

UndeadCapulet wrote:

punk (and i guess your other diffs too)

after you first introduce the 00:11:649 (4,5,6) - rhythm, i feel like you just randomly skip over it sometimes. it'd be nice if the 2/3 sliders you sometimes used had a clear thing they were mapping, or if there was a clear pattern to when you use a 2/3 slider instead of the 3 circles, right now it's really.. inconsistent You're right lol, I just randomly skept some because it'd be too dense otherwise

there are a lot of places where you use nice rhythm changes to show off things like vocals (like 00:38:368 (1,2,3,4,5) - and 00:47:743 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7) - are really nice), but then a lot of times where you just dont. like at 00:53:368 (1) - i think you should use the same rhythm as 00:51:493 (1,2) - to show off the vocals better I really don't know what else I could do here, the vocals are nothing special there to me
or like at 00:59:461 (2) - splitting this into 2 circles for better drum emphasis since this is really different from the rest of the instrumental You get a point here but the structure of the map is so DS based that I can't change anything without having to literally remap the whole thing

like you really have your structure and visual style nailed down but it takes more than that to make a fun map, i feel if you put more care into your rhythming your mapping will be a lot lot better I'm sorry I'm new to 1/3 mapping D:

---

mkael

00:58:993 (1,2,3) - maybe try a rhythm like thisto show off the drums better, same for 01:00:868 (1,2,3) - and all similar parts I think this is too complex for an advanced with normal star rating :/
01:02:743 (1,1) - you could probably design this so both sliders are blanketing each other, something like this
01:42:586 (2) - lol this is rly cute xd

---

this song is awesome
best of luck w/ your future mapping \o

1. 02:53:368 (1) - iMod is not what matters for these, what matters is that it shouldn't be offscreen on any resolution, but this is slightly off at 800x600 so please fix that

1. 00:33:211 (2) - to clarify my point: I wanted to suggest this which would be much smoother to play ^^

1. 00:13:524 (4,5) - Since you made 00:11:649 (4,5,6) flow better in a previous mod, I'd ctrl-g these two too to make it a bit better while still keeping the jump (it would also make it 'consistent' with 00:31:805 (3,4,5,6) - ^^)
2. 00:58:055 (3,5) - I feel like ctrl-g'ing these two would make this sligthly better bc then the biggest jump happens onto (6) which is stronger than (5), and (3) doesn't really get emphasized anyways so that doesn'tr change much
3. 02:34:618 (1,3,5) - This looks very messy, would advise to make the spacing even between all of these notes
4. 00:59:461 (2) - Someone has suggested two circles here but you didn't know how - suggestion?

Bonsai wrote:

oke time to recheck

Easy

1. 02:53:368 (1) - iMod is not what matters for these, what matters is that it shouldn't be offscreen on any resolution, but this is slightly off at 800x600 so please fix that

Hard

1. 00:33:211 (2) - to clarify my point: I wanted to suggest this which would be much smoother to play ^^ the other was much more cute but okay :c

Insane

1. 00:13:524 (4,5) - Since you made 00:11:649 (4,5,6) flow better in a previous mod, I'd ctrl-g these two too to make it a bit better while still keeping the jump (it would also make it 'consistent' with 00:31:805 (3,4,5,6) - ^^)
2. 00:58:055 (3,5) - I feel like ctrl-g'ing these two would make this sligthly better bc then the biggest jump happens onto (6) which is stronger than (5), and (3) doesn't really get emphasized anyways so that doesn'tr change much
3. 02:34:618 (1,3,5) - This looks very messy, would advise to make the spacing even between all of these notes
4. 00:59:461 (2) - Someone has suggested two circles here but you didn't know how - suggestion?

Lyrics wrote:

Happy Hanukkah

Kalibe wrote:

oh well, it's bubbled dam. sorry for late, didn't have time to m4m. You have my ticket instead :d

poke me if you want mod on something

1. 00:03:211 (4) - this is also an issue that it's shared along with the normal difficulty, why would you cover a complete different sound 00:03:680 - within one object? personally i would prefer a circle + 1/2 slider because that would follow the music in a more accurate way, watcha think? same would apply to 01:08:836 (4) -
2. 00:04:618 (1,3) - minor, but since you probably will touch the spacing here and there i think mentioning this would be worth it. visually speaking these don't look symmetrical because of where (3) picks off, it's way below (1)'s tail.
3. 01:27:118 (3) - this one is offscreen
4. 02:38:368 (1,2) - i wouldn't really do this that late into the map, scrubs can't read this... it's too sudden for them for two objects popping at the same time into different intervals of time
5. 03:02:274 (2,4) - eh, i guess this was a mistake
6. 03:08:836 (1) - not a bad placement, but moving it further from (2) would be nice and more visually appealing, maybe x383 y360?

1. 00:03:211 (6) - same as in easy, you know my complaints!!! 01:08:836 (6) - yada yada
2. 00:05:555 (2) - could be moved a couple of pixels below, this note was mapped almost entirely on the hp bar.
3. 00:43:993 (1) - this one is offscreen too
4. 01:36:961 (2,3,4) - i don't usually point blankets out because y'know... but this one is too noticeable. it's easy to fix, though

1. 00:34:149 (4) - rotating the tail by 90° would be more intuitive and have a better visual flow towards 00:34:618 (1) -
2. 00:56:649 (5) - auto stacking made this slider be slightly offscreen
3. 01:30:868 (1,2) - spacing!!
4. 02:13:524 (4) - correct me if i'm wrong, but is this the only circle under a slider in the whole map? looks very inconsistent tbh
5. 02:08:368 (1,1) - spacing between these look like a normal 1/3 rhythm pattern instead of the break

1. 00:30:399 (4) - visual effect mostly, but you know a ctrl+g here would work here for newbies to read this properly!!
2. 00:39:774 (6,1) - this is one of a hell jump, you can't even abuse of the slider leniency. i would reduce it a little bit to make it more playable. i also believe you could have made a jump on 00:43:524 (6,1) - since it has the same rhythmical connotation but that's up to you i guess, it's just a suggestion. btw, same would go to 02:41:649 (6,1) - and 02:45:399 (6,1) -
3. 02:00:868 (1) - i'm really not sure if that's offscreen, it doesn't really look like but i would still consider moving its tail a little bit upwards just to stay safe!
4. 02:37:899 (6,7,8,1) - seems like a douche move to do at this point of the map, scrubs will most likely miss no matter what at this point of the map believing it's a triplet instead of a normal 1/3 pattern, either fully stack them or make them more visually recognizable
5. 03:08:836 (1) - interesting jump. since you were my mentee a while ago let me teach you something: follow points don't work with NCs, so even if players have that enabled they won't see it comin'. personally i have always hated the fact of people separating notes that much when there's an NC, but it's all about mapping styles and that. ehhhh, maybe place it in the middle so it's easier to hit?!

1. 00:16:336 (2,4) - aaaaaaa
2. 00:59:461 (2,3) - if you used doubles here it would be nice to have them 01:01:336 (2) - there as well because they have the same sound and y'know the rest
3. 01:13:524 (4,5,6) - weird flow compared to everything else. i would typically suggest a ctrl+g but that would ruin your jump towards (1)... so i am not sure what to suggest you. feel free to leave if you think it's fine, but it does indeed look a bit weird
4. 02:13:993 (1) - stop being so edgy with the offscreen, luma!!! although i'm ont sure if it's 100% offscreen but still
5. 02:37:899 (6,7,8,1) - why don't you try a similar concept as the hard difficulty but instead of doing it there you map it here? just make some sick pattern similar to it and it'd look fantastic

Yuii- wrote:

aaaaaaa

Yuii- wrote:

AQUI E O BRASIL!!

happy new year!! wooo. i'm here cause of bonsai + christmas queue!

it's been a while, luma! how have you been, bud?

cursor: http://i.imgur.com/YDH9pN0.jpg / http://i.imgur.com/xxsRIgQ.jpg
nope, you can't have a kiai on the first red line of the map, that triggers the kiai before the map starts and it's not rankable; it's a technical issue that is very easy to miss but not too many bns know of their existance. this doesn't happen on the insane diff, though... that was weird

using only 2 combo colors looks ehh weird, would suggest adding one more if possible

easy

to be honest i completely misunderstand the concept behind the very low spacing behind the map. it's low spacing combined with low sv and that make the map tedious to play because it requires no movement at all. fairly speaking, i don't think the normal diff is an "okay" diff for being the lowest of the set, so you really need an easy... maybe 1.4x/1.3x (i suggest 1.3x, it's less harsh) overall spacing would be way more professional and would be a bit more comfortable to play to

1. 00:03:211 (4) - this is also an issue that it's shared along with the normal difficulty, why would you cover a complete different sound 00:03:680 - within one object? personally i would prefer a circle + 1/2 slider because that would follow the music in a more accurate way, watcha think? same would apply to 01:08:836 (4) -
2. 00:04:618 (1,3) - minor, but since you probably will touch the spacing here and there i think mentioning this would be worth it. visually speaking these don't look symmetrical because of where (3) picks off, it's way below (1)'s tail.
3. 01:27:118 (3) - this one is offscreen
4. 02:38:368 (1,2) - i wouldn't really do this that late into the map, scrubs can't read this... it's too sudden for them for two objects popping at the same time into different intervals of time
5. 03:02:274 (2,4) - eh, i guess this was a mistake
6. 03:08:836 (1) - not a bad placement, but moving it further from (2) would be nice and more visually appealing, maybe x383 y360?

normal

1. 00:03:211 (6) - same as in easy, you know my complaints!!! 01:08:836 (6) - yada yada
2. 00:05:555 (2) - could be moved a couple of pixels below, this note was mapped almost entirely on the hp bar.
3. 00:43:993 (1) - this one is offscreen too
4. 01:36:961 (2,3,4) - i don't usually point blankets out because y'know... but this one is too noticeable. it's easy to fix, though

great diff this one is

advanced

1. 00:34:149 (4) - rotating the tail by 90° would be more intuitive and have a better visual flow towards 00:34:618 (1) -
2. 00:56:649 (5) - auto stacking made this slider be slightly offscreen
3. 01:30:868 (1,2) - spacing!!
4. 02:13:524 (4) - correct me if i'm wrong, but is this the only circle under a slider in the whole map? looks very inconsistent tbh
5. 02:08:368 (1,1) - spacing between these look like a normal 1/3 rhythm pattern instead of the break

hard

check aimod, there are two very noticeable offscreen objects in this difficulty

1. 00:30:399 (4) - visual effect mostly, but you know a ctrl+g here would work here for newbies to read this properly!!
2. 00:39:774 (6,1) - this is one of a hell jump, you can't even abuse of the slider leniency. i would reduce it a little bit to make it more playable. i also believe you could have made a jump on 00:43:524 (6,1) - since it has the same rhythmical connotation but that's up to you i guess, it's just a suggestion. btw, same would go to 02:41:649 (6,1) - and 02:45:399 (6,1) - I didn't add a jump on the Distance snapped part since its really hard to rearrange this pattern :/
3. 02:00:868 (1) - i'm really not sure if that's offscreen, it doesn't really look like but i would still consider moving its tail a little bit upwards just to stay safe!
4. 02:37:899 (6,7,8,1) - seems like a douche move to do at this point of the map, scrubs will most likely miss no matter what at this point of the map believing it's a triplet instead of a normal 1/3 pattern, either fully stack them or make them more visually recognizable
5. 03:08:836 (1) - interesting jump. since you were my mentee a while ago let me teach you something: follow points don't work with NCs, so even if players have that enabled they won't see it comin'. personally i have always hated the fact of people separating notes that much when there's an NC, but it's all about mapping styles and that. ehhhh, maybe place it in the middle so it's easier to hit?!

insane

1. 00:16:336 (2,4) - aaaaaaa the overlap is kind of intentional and part of my style :p if you see it's placed exacly in the middle of the slider, not touching neither the slider head or slider tail, so I kind of like it
2. 00:59:461 (2,3) - if you used doubles here it would be nice to have them 01:01:336 (2) - there as well because they have the same sound and y'know the rest
3. 01:13:524 (4,5,6) - weird flow compared to everything else. i would typically suggest a ctrl+g but that would ruin your jump towards (1)... so i am not sure what to suggest you. feel free to leave if you think it's fine, but it does indeed look a bit weird no more jump lol xd
4. 02:13:993 (1) - stop being so edgy with the offscreen, luma!!! although i'm ont sure if it's 100% offscreen but still
5. 02:37:899 (6,7,8,1) - why don't you try a similar concept as the hard difficulty but instead of doing it there you map it here? just make some sick pattern similar to it and it'd look fantastic

[]

call me back!!!

1. 00:06:493 (3) - this is still offscreen
2. 00:40:243 (1,1) - i would really like to see these being splitted into two different 1/1 sliders rather than 2/1, neither vocals nor the obejcts are fundamentally extended to make such long slider. same thing would apply to 01:45:868 (1,1) - because it suffers from the same issue
3. 01:06:493 (1) - offscreen
4. 02:26:649 (4,1,2,3,4,1) - there are some problems with this pattern that i want to discuss with you. to begin with, 02:26:649 (4,1,2) - could be a much more flowy and visually better pattern if you would just move (1) to the left, like http://i.imgur.com/BQ39CA2.jpg . that way you don't only get the repeat to look into (2)'s direction, but also, you avoid such a linear transition through the whole section. and then, 02:28:993 (3,1) - these fully stacking is a huge problem because they both pop up into the screen at the same time, so it's most likely from players to click (1) before (4)... would be nice if you could do some tweaks to this pattern!
5. 02:40:243 (1,3) - well, you already know what i think about this pattern

1. 00:34:618 (6) - shouldn't this have a new combo?
2. 01:36:961 (2,3,4) - fix blanket please

1. 00:08:368 (1,2) - this clearly is a spacing mistake, and a huge one actually. same goes to 01:58:055 (3,4) -
2. 00:24:305 (3) - shouldn't this be slider+circle for consistency with 00:21:493 (1,2) - and 00:27:586 (2,3) - ?
3. 01:33:680 (3) - why is this a repeat slider? i cannot really hear anything important landing on 01:33:836 - sadly
4. 02:15:243 (4,5) - autostacking ruined your pattern here, minor fix

1. 00:54:305 (3) - 01:19:618 (1) - 02:55:243 (1,3) - the complete full stack when both objects appear at the same time on the screen isn't very recommendable because you can't tell if it's a slider or a circle, you will have to separate them a little bit like you did on 00:22:430 (3,1) - to have something more easier for such a low difficulty. yet again, this isn't particularly "unrankable" because they are sliiiightly visible, but avoid doing it if possible.
2. 01:28:524 (4) - would rotate the tail by 45° for visuals

1. 00:44:461 (2,3,4) - i think you tried to emphasize the wrong obejcts, according to your patterning 00:44:461 (2,3) - should have a lesser spacing and 00:44:930 (3,4) - should have a bigger spacing due to drums
2. 00:59:461 (2) - missing hitosund?
3. 01:13:836 (6,1) - why isn't this more spaced out, seems super inconsistent with everything else. i know what i said about the flow, but didn't really want you to kill the jump
4. 03:01:336 (2) - 2 circles instead of the sldier maybe? would be nice if 03:01:649 - would be clickable

Yuii- wrote:

hey hey sorry for the huge delay (

you still need to fix the red/green timing issue on normal, advanced and hard
using only 2 combo colors looks ehh weird, would suggest adding one more if possible

[easy]

1. 00:06:493 (3) - this is still offscreen
2. 00:40:243 (1,1) - i would really like to see these being splitted into two different 1/1 sliders rather than 2/1, neither vocals nor the obejcts are fundamentally extended to make such long slider. same thing would apply to 01:45:868 (1,1) - because it suffers from the same issue
3. 01:06:493 (1) - offscreen
4. 02:26:649 (4,1,2,3,4,1) - there are some problems with this pattern that i want to discuss with you. to begin with, 02:26:649 (4,1,2) - could be a much more flowy and visually better pattern if you would just move (1) to the left, like http://i.imgur.com/BQ39CA2.jpg . that way you don't only get the repeat to look into (2)'s direction, but also, you avoid such a linear transition through the whole section. and then, 02:28:993 (3,1) - these fully stacking is a huge problem because they both pop up into the screen at the same time, so it's most likely from players to click (1) before (4)... would be nice if you could do some tweaks to this pattern!
5. 02:40:243 (1,3) - well, you already know what i think about this pattern

[normal]

1. 00:34:618 (6) - shouldn't this have a new combo?
2. 01:36:961 (2,3,4) - fix blanket please

this difficulty is amazing, seriously

[advanced]

1. 00:08:368 (1,2) - this clearly is a spacing mistake, and a huge one actually. same goes to 01:58:055 (3,4) -
2. 00:24:305 (3) - shouldn't this be slider+circle for consistency with 00:21:493 (1,2) - and 00:27:586 (2,3) - ?
3. 01:33:680 (3) - why is this a repeat slider? i cannot really hear anything important landing on 01:33:836 - sadly
4. 02:15:243 (4,5) - autostacking ruined your pattern here, minor fix

[hard]

1. 00:54:305 (3) - 01:19:618 (1) - 02:55:243 (1,3) - the complete full stack when both objects appear at the same time on the screen isn't very recommendable because you can't tell if it's a slider or a circle, you will have to separate them a little bit like you did on 00:22:430 (3,1) - to have something more easier for such a low difficulty. yet again, this isn't particularly "unrankable" because they are sliiiightly visible, but avoid doing it if possible.
2. 01:28:524 (4) - would rotate the tail by 45° for visuals

[insane]

eu acho que há um enorme equívoco aqui em que enfase é, voce tem algumas inconsistencias aqui e ali. Pessoalmente eu nao me importo muito com eles, porque eles nao sao muito que perceptível e/ou eles podem ser totalmente abusáveis ​​graças a slider leniency, mas ainda gostaria de manter essas palavras em mente para mapas futuros!

1. 00:44:461 (2,3,4) - i think you tried to emphasize the wrong obejcts, according to your patterning 00:44:461 (2,3) - should have a lesser spacing and 00:44:930 (3,4) - should have a bigger spacing due to drums I don't really agree here :/ the vocals are very strong on 00:44:930 (3) - which makes me feel like the jump is just as fair as with 00:44:461 (2) -
2. 00:59:461 (2) - missing hitosund?
3. 01:13:836 (6,1) - why isn't this more spaced out, seems super inconsistent with everything else. i know what i said about the flow, but didn't really want you to kill the jump I reverted back so :p
4. 03:01:336 (2) - 2 circles instead of the sldier maybe? would be nice if 03:01:649 - would be clickable

[]

call me back before this tuesday so i can recheck it, else you'll have to wait till february!!

Yuii- wrote:

placeholder