Koneko- wrote:

트윈포닉스

General

난이도마다 Kiai time이 일치하지 않습니다.
- Yeap 수정하겠습니다

Normal

전반적인 난이도를 봤을때
1. 1/2 스냅이 많이 쓰여서 좀 어려워보이네요.

2. 00:53:578 - 노트가 3개나 쓰였네요.
- 2개로 줄였습니다. 일관성이 안맞았네요 ㄳㄳ

3. 01:11:003 (71003|1,71003|3) - 노트를 하나만 줄여주면 좋겠습니다.
- 동일한부분들은 전부 2개로되어있고 이와같이 변경했습니다 http://puu.sh/vHpw5/476db35a90.jpg

따라서, 한종류의 음이라도 줄여서 난이도를 너프시키는걸 권장합니다.

Insane

00:23:427 (23427|2,23578|2,23730|2,23881|2,24033|2,25851|1,26003|1,26154|1,26306|1,26457|1,26609|1,28275|3,28427|3,28578|3,28730|3,28881|3,29033|3,29790|0,29942|0,30093|0,30245|0,30397|0,30548|0) - 저는... 이 패턴은 별로 추천하고 싶지 않네요. 가급적이면 이렇게 해주시는게 좋을듯합니다. https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/8014881
- 베이스음을 표현하기엔 적합하다 생각합니다

01:13:427 - 이 노트만 3개네요. 다른 노트들은 4개가 쓰였긴 한데 솔직히 4개씩 쓰일 필요가 있나 싶네요.
- 으음.. 저는 4놋이 마음에들긴한데 약간 오버느낌도 강하네요 3개로 전부 수정했습니다.
좋은의견 감사해요

01:19:336 ~ 01:24:942 - 조금 패턴의 변화를 주어야될듯. 너무 일정하네요.
- 기타음으로 롱노트로 변경 및 노트추가도 해봤고 그에맞춰 패턴도 살짝 바꿔봤습니다

그리고 전반적으로 리어레인지해서 조금 더 깔끔한 패턴이 되었으면 하네요.
-?? 꽤 깔끔하게 짜졌다고생각하는데..

Reba wrote:

Hola amigo. 당신의 노예 레바가 왔습니다 - 어서오세요 나의 노예

[General]
- Tags 를 이렇게 추가 해주시면 좋을듯. narimasu 뒤에 점을 빼고. ending neoskylove tv size를 추가했어요 ore 뒤에도 원래는 , 가 있지만 태그에선 안쓰는걸로 알고있으니. 100% 확실한건 아닙니다 븐체크 받으실때 확인 한번 하세요: twintails ore twintail ni narimasu ending neoskylove tv size gonna be the twin-tails!! テイルレッド tail red 上坂すみれ uesaka sumire テイルブルー tail blue 相坂優歌 aisaka

- 감사합니다

- Source 가 잘못 되었어요. 이 애니의 오프닝이 랭곡으로 되어있는맵들이 여러개 있는데 전부 俺、ツインテールになります。로 되어있습니다. 이건 엔딩곡이지만
어쨌든 소스는 같을테니 저걸로 수정해주세요

- 수정완료

- 폰테스님 난이도에는 힛사가 하나도 적용 되어있지 않네요. 적용해주세요 -하아...

- 인세인 난이도에서 00:53:578 - 이 타이밍을 보시면 D7H 힛사가 두개나 적용되어있네요. 안된다는 확정을 Powawa 씨한테서 받았습니다. 수정해주세요. 00:56:003 - 여기도 그렇네요. 00:58:427 - 여기두요. 01:03:275 - 여기두요. 01:05:700 - 여기두요. 01:14:942 - 여기두요.

- 완료!

[Normal]
00:14:336 (14336|2) - 여기에 롱놋이 들어갈게 아니라 단놋이 들어가야해요, 00:14:487 - 베이스의 소리 때문에 여기도 넣으시는거 잊지 마시고. 롱놋으로 수정해야할것은 00:14:790 (14790|3) - 이것입니다. 00:12:366 (12366|1) - 이걸 참고하면 무슨말하는지 아실거에요

- 기타음을 한 롱노트로 표현한겁니다. 보니까 다른부분은 동일하게 표현하질 않았네요 감사합니당

00:16:760 (16760|1,17215|0) - 이전꺼와 같은 케이스입니다. 알아서 수정해주세요

- ^

00:17:821 (17821|0) - 기타음을 따라가려 여기에 노트를 넣은 의도가 보입니다만 전체적으로 기타보단 드럼음을 따라가면서 치는게 좀 더 임팩트 있다고 생각해요, 그러므로 이 노트를 지우시는건 어떤가요. 그리고 그 전 두놋은 1칼럼 3칼럼으로 각각 배치해주시면 플레이하기에 더 찰지지 않을까 생각해봅니다.

- 아래부분에 기타음을 표현했으니 그대로 기타음을 표현하는게 알맞다고 생각합니다

00:23:730 (23730|2,24033|2) - 이것들처럼 둑둥둑둥둑 소리가 끝난 후에 나오는 얘네들은 같은 칼럼말고 내려가는식으로 배치하는게 낫지 않을까라는 개인적인 생각을 해봄. 이렇게 하면 뭔가 노트들이 전체적으로 흘러가는 느낌이 더 부드럽다고 생각함. 이런식으로 00:29:184 - 여기까지 이렇게 하시는거 한번 고려해보세요. 예 :: https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/8043806

- 저는 이대로가 좋네요

00:30:245 (30245|1) - 이걸 4칼럼으로 옮기는게 좋을거같음. 배치를 눈으로 보았을때 1초뒤에 나오는 2놋도 2,3 칼럼이라 다른게 나은거같기도하고. 1레인을 치고나서 2,3 칼럼을 치는것보다, 왼손 한손가락 치고나서 오른손 손가락 두개로 치는게 더 드럼치는 느낌에 가깝다고 생각해요.

- 변경했습니다

00:30:851 - 4칼럼에 노트 추가 해야할거같아요, 00:33:275 (33275|1,35700|2) - 여기를 참고했을때 굉장히 비슷한 느낌이 난다고 생각하는데 우연이 아니라 생각합니다.

- 지적 감사합니다

00:50:700 (50700|1,50851|0,51003|3,51154|2) - 이 패턴은 별로 안어울리는거같아요, 첫번째와 세번째 노트가 소리가같고 두번째와 네번째가 소리가 같다는 가정하에, http://puu.sh/vKLlS/ba3fa6b12f.jpg 이러한 패턴이 좀 더 어울리지 않나 생각합니다

- 변경 완료

00:59:184 (59184|2) - 주위를 보아하니 뒤에 나오는 아주 똑같은 소리들과 비교하였을때 이것도 필수적으로 2놋이여야 할거같은데 1칼럼에 노트를 추가하면 패턴을 파괴하지 않으면서 부드럽게 이어집니다

- 어레인지했습니다

01:23:730 (83730|0) - 전에 늘어지는 기타소리엔 롱놋을 안넣고 이거에만 넣어서 뭔가 이상합니다. 01:19:033 (79033|0) - 01:20:245 (80245|3) -
01:21:457 (81457|0) - 01:22:669 (82669|3) - 이와 같은 곳들은 연관성이 있게 롱놋으로 바꿔주시거나 아니면 마지막 롱놋을 지우는 선택중에 고르세요.

- 젠부 추가했습니다

[Insane]
00:02:063 (2063|2) - 자세히 들어보시면 이것만 더 강하게 베이스 음이 들어갑니다 00:01:987 (1987|1,2139|1) - 이것들과는 달리. 그러므로 4칼럼에 노트를 추가하여 막난이라는것을 확실히 각인 시키는것도 나쁘지 않을거같네요, 하드랑의 차이를 더 벌이기 위해.

- 무슨말씀이신지 이해했지만 우선 이대로 가겠습니다

00:07:366 (7366|0,7518|1) - 1칼럼이 3번씩이나 반복해서 몇몇 플레이어들이 불편해할지도 모릅니다, 저거 두개를 Ctrl+ J 해주시면 패턴이 더 부드러워 짐과 동시에 치기에도 더 맛깔납니다.

- 그러네요 피치도 맞고 굳드

00:09:487 (9487|2) - 이거 방금 전까지의 1놋씩 반복하는 의도가 여기까지 이루어져야한다고 주장합니다. 그러므로 제가 찍은 스샷처럼 하면 훨씬 나아집니다, 이렇게 수정하시는걸 권장합니다 :: http://puu.sh/vLjdT/79a61cc2b8.jpg

- 반복 의도까지는 따라가고 어레인지했습니다

00:12:063 (12063|3,12366|1) - 롱놋 옆의 단놋이 한번 반복해서 치면 여기 파트에서의 드럼과 피니시의 연결고리가 더 잘 맞아떨어진다고 생각합니다. 그러므로 밑에 있는 노트를 2칼럼으로 롱놋 옆에 있는 위에 있는 놋을 4칼럼으로 옮겨주면 더 좋다고 생각해요.

- 확인

00:14:412 - 여기에는 1/4가 안들어가 있는데 00:16:836 (16836|0) - 여기에는 들어가있습니다, 일관성을 유지하기 위하여 어떤걸로 하실지 선택한 후 수정해주세요

- 좋은지적 감사합니다
이거저거 난이도 올릴거 찾다가 찍은거같은데 놓친부분이네요 ^^

00:17:518 - 뭔가 너무 덤덤하고 단순해 보이는 패턴입니다, 이렇게 배치하면 뭔가 좀 더 흥미로운 느낌이 들어요, 이렇게 배치해보시는건 어때요 :: http://puu.sh/vLjub/aeda192d15.jpg

- 감사합니다 좀더 흥미로워 졌네요

00:20:700 (20700|2,20851|0) - 다시 한번 3칼럼이 3번 연속 반복되어 뭔가 이상하게 불편한 감이 있습니다. 저거 두개 Ctrl + J 해주시면 마법처럼 패턴이 더 좋아집니다

- 이곳에 마법이?!

00:23:578 (23578|2,23881|2) - 4칼럼이 너무 휑해요. 그리고 이런 패턴보단 http://puu.sh/vLjIq/30b5b496a9.jpg 개인적으로 이렇게 더 끌리네요. 나중에 나오는 1 칼럼하고 4칼럼반복을 대비하기위한 그런용도로 하면 어떨까요, 처음부터 그렇게 나오면 개인적으로 흐름상 별로라고 생각해요. 만약 적용하셨다면 00:26:003 (26003|1) - 여기에다가 미러버전으로 수정하시면 될듯.

- 의도는 확실한거같아서 안바꾸고 냅두겠습니다

00:41:533 (41533|0) - 제 귀로는 확실하게 고스트 노트라고 생각이 됩니다, 설명따위 필요없이 지워주세요. 그리고 패턴을 고려하여 00:41:609 (41609|2,41609|1,41912|3) - 이것들을 한칸 왼쪽으로 옮겨주세요. 롱놋뒤에 단놋들이 차례대로 흐르는것도 그렇고 밑에 2놋 3놋에서 3놋짜리에 빈 노트가 오른쪽 왼쪽 번갈아가면서 가는 방식으로 가는것을 고려하였을때 그렇게 하는게 맞을거같네요

- 변경했습니다. 저게 왜 있는건지 의문이네요 ㅡㅡ...

Good Luck

Reba wrote:

Hola amigo. 당신의 노예 레바가 왔습니다

[General]
- 스프레드 식으로 가게끔 Fontes' Hard 난이도의 OD 와 HP 를 7.5로 올리시는건 어떤가요 fixed

- 폰테스님 난이도에는 힛사가 하나도 적용 되어있지 않네요. 적용해주세요 Nokson

[Fontes' Hard]
00:13:881 (13881|2) - 이와같은 롱놋에 딱 달라붙어있는 노트 두번 치는건 예전부터 치기 좀 불편한 배치로 알고있습니다. 2칼럼으로 옮겨주시는게 좋을거같네요. 외관상으로 봤을때도 더 좋아보이구요. fixed


00:16:836 (16836|2) - 전에도 이와 같은 소리는 1/2로 처리하셨는데 여기만 1/4에요, 하드난이도상 있어도 될만한 거지만 이걸 지우고 더 나은 패턴으로 바꿔줍시다. 이유는 바로 위에 있는거와 연관을 짓기 위해서죠. 예 :: https://puu.sh/vLi2e/3809c75871.jpg fixed


00:21:154 (21154|0) - 밑에껀 둥이 있어서 단놋 한개가 롱놋이랑 같이 있는데 이것도 동일한데 없네요. 2칼럼에 단놋 하나 추가 하셔도 전혀 어색할게 없습니다. 추가해주세요. 베이스와 킥의 차이를 보여주려고 안넣으신거같은데 그 후에 나오는 기타음만 있는곳이 롱놋 한개 밖에 없어서 추가 하시는 방향이 더 일관성이 유지가 됩니다. fixed


01:00:548 (60548|0) - 이건 들리긴 들립니다만 넣기가 정말 애매한 소리라서 그냥 지워 버리는게 최선입니다, 진짜 엄청 집중하고 들어야 아주 미세하게 들려서 노트를 넣는다면 고스트 노트로 느껴질수밖에 없습니다. 지워주세용 fixed


01:00:851 (60851|2) - 이것도 지우는게 나을거같아요, 소리가 들리더라도 이전에 나오는 패턴이랑 일관성이 있게 이것도 한박자 쉬고 그 다음에 바로 둥둥둥둥 으로 가는게 치는맛에 있어서 더 살아난다고 생각합니다. fixed


01:23:427 (83427|0,83503|1,83578|2) - 이거 다음에 나오는 드럼과 조금 비슷한 성향이 있어 구분지어주는 패턴을 쓴다면 노래를 느끼기에 더욱 효율적이에요, 그러므로 저 2개의 노트를 Ctrl + H 해주시고 난 다음 01:23:578 (83578|1) - 이거를 롱놋으로 만들어준다면 더 낫다고 생각합니다. 롱놋이 들어가야 한다면 전 처럼 01:23:730 - 여기에 들어가야 된다고 생각함니다. 하지만 1/4드럼이있으므로 스킵하고
노트하나 빼주는것으로 결정. 사실 소리가 트릴처럼 있긴한데 지워도 상관없어보이니 난이도에맞게 두번째 모딩집으신것처럼 삭제

Koneko- wrote:

트윈포닉스

Fontes' Hard

01:26:457 ~ 01:26:811 - 1/4스냅보단 1/6스냅이 더 어울리네요.
https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/8014777
25%로 들어보니 1/4스냅이 맞는것같습니다. 스네어1 + 킥2

Wonki wrote:

hi 녹슨.

하드

00:00:397 (397|0,548|2,700|1,851|3,1306|0,1457|2,1609|1,1760|3) - 이거보다는 이렇게해서 느낌도살릴겸 00:01:760 (1760|3,1987|3) - 이거 치기힘드니까 3으로옮겨서 치기수월하게 만드니 이게 더좋은듯
ok fixed 근데 뭐를 3으로 옮기라는건지 모르겟음. 단놋은 그대로

00:21:609 (21609|0,21912|3) - 갑작스럽게 보컬이들어가는건 좀어색한듯 이뒷부분에 보컬을표현하는노트도없고 드럼소리를 강조하는게 더나아보임
보컬이아니라 다 기타음인데 그냥 지웟음. 난이도체감상 지우는게 더나은듯.

00:38:578 (38578|1,38578|0) - 불필요한 2놋인듯 일관성있게 1놋으로
선명하게 들리는 피아노음 표현. 근데뭐 일관되게 하나지우는게 맞는듯

00:40:548 - 여기쪽롱놋 기타음인건알겠는데 너무배치를쉽게하다보니 느낌이안삼 직접쳐봤는데 이게더 곡에 잘맞음
쉽다니 바꿈. 이미지랑 다르게 나름 바꿧음

00:46:306 (46306|3) - 걍력한 심볼소리가 아니므로 삭제권장
fixed

00:51:003 (51003|2,51154|1) - 오른쪽으로 한칸씩 옮기쇼
뾰꼬뾰꼬 소리를 표현하기위해 일부러 반복되게 했음. 옮기니 어색

01:13:275 (73275|0,73427|3,73427|2,73427|1,73578|3,73730|1,73730|2,73730|0,73881|0,74033|3,74033|2,74033|1,74184|3,74336|2,74336|1,74336|0,74487|2,74639|3,74639|1,74639|0,74790|1,74942|3,74942|2,74942|0) - 이거는 3성에서는 도저히 수용안댐 끝에걸 2놋으로 줄이셈

01:15:700 (75700|1,75851|3,75851|0,75851|2,76003|2,76154|3,76154|1,76154|0) - 마찬가지
fixed 하나씩 뺌

Ari Knight wrote:

Yo!
from Ari Knight Modding Qu'eue'

here you go!

|1|2|3|4|

Normal

1. 00:45:396 - can you add a note here? in |3|
   - yeap
   ok, just only that i can MOD :3 the overal was amazing ^_^

Insane

1. 00:23:881 (23881|2) - can you move this to |2| it better be there[i think for balance]
   - that's a repetitive guitar expression
   00:26:306 (26306|1) - and this to|3|?
   - ^
2. 01:26:684 - can you add 1 note in blue line and 1 in white line?
   -why? snap miss.

ok that's it sorry if that wasn't enough

waiting this to be ranked, my FAV song XD

Good Luck!

Wonki wrote:

hi 녹슨.

노말

00:13:427 (13427|3) - 롱놋으로 체인지 기타음? 같은데 단놋으로하면 뭔가 끊기는 느낌때문에 안어울리는듯
- 조금 그런느낌이 있긴하네요 변경했습니다
00:15:851 (15851|2) - 마찬가지

00:22:215 (22215|2,22518|2,22821|2,23124|2,23427|2,23730|2,24033|2,24336|2) - 여길 두파트로 나눠서 이런다면 좀더 치기가 편할거에요
이거 바꾸셨다면 위에도 고쳐주시길
- 전부 변경했습니다

00:32:215 (32215|1,32215|2) - 00:33:427 (33427|0,33427|3) - 이런걸 보았을때 00:32:821 - 여기에도 노트가 있어야하네요 (00:37:669 - 여기보시면 롱놋이 없는파트지만 킥사운드에 노트를 넣으셨네요)00:32:972 (32972|2,33427|0) - 이거 위치바꾸시고 00:32:821 - 여기에 3,4 추가하면 될거같네요

00:35:245 - 여기도마찬가지
- 노말 난이도이기도하고 저부분은 보컬부분만 살려놓고싶습니다

00:41:003 (41003|0) - 삭제 베이스사운드는 1놋으로 하셨기때문에 일관성유지하셔야합니다
- 그렇네요 삭제했습니다

00:51:912 (51912|0,51912|1,52063|3,52063|2,52215|1,52215|0) - 여기도 1놋으로 1 4 1로바꾸면 될거같네요
- 롱노트를 사용하여 기타음을 살려봤습니다 (어레인지)

01:03:124 - 여기쪽을 2놋으로두기보다는 01:03:275 - 여기에 2놋을두는게 맞는거같습니다00:53:578 - 여기를보면 알수있네요
- 두개 다 2놋 사용하는 방향으로 가겠습니다


01:25:093 (85093|2) - 롱놋 01:26:836 - 여기에 드럼이끝나기때문에 헷갈리지않게 드럼이 끝나는부분까지 올려주면 좋겠네요
- 드럼은 1/8스냅인거같네요 우선 기타소리를 표현한거니
맵에서는 기타음을 표현했는데 플레이어가 기타에 초점을 안맞추고 드럼에 초점을 맞출경우에 햇갈리는 것 같고
그것은 맵 자체의 문제라고 생각되진 않으니 보류해두겠습니다

막

막난은 변속만보겠음

00:22:215 - ,00:41:609 - 이거졸라 의미없는듯 지우셈
- 변속 정리가 덜됐었네요 ㄹㅇ 졸라 의미없네요

00:53:503 - 여기 2배속 00:53:540 - 여기로옮기셈
- 너무 뚝 끊기는거같아서 살짝 추가해봤습니다

00:59:487 - ,00:59:639 - 여기 변속두개는 지우는게 좋을듯 00:59:790 - 여기랑 다른 파트기때문에 그리고 0.5 1.4 말고 뒤집어서 1.5 0.5로
- ㄳ 뭔가 이상한 느낌이였는데 괜찮아졌어요!!

Beomsan wrote:

태그 어디서 복붙해오신거면 겟난 닉네임같은거 정리하셔야 합니다.
무슨 맵인진 모르겠지만 ex)Neoskylove <- 이 맵셋의 태그에 들어갈 이유가 없는걸로 보이는?
우연히 발견해서 남기고 가요.

Raveille wrote:

hi i use old banner xd

|1|2|3|4|

Normal

00:01:912 - make either 1 or 4 a LN to 00:02:215 - for the drumming part
- yap change long note Xd

00:06:760 - same thing here but choose 2 or 3 and make LN to 00:07:063 -
- change long note and some arrange

00:09:487 (9487|2,9487|3) - swap these? (so it is 3 with the LN and 4 is the normal note)
- ok

00:22:215 - hitsounding here is a bit weird. suddenly theres notes which is default and some with piano keysound... sounds weird (advice you make a mute hitsound and change those default sounds to mute)

01:13:730 - LN should end here
- drum sound emphasis
01:16:154 - ^

01:25:093 - make this a double for a good ending
- ok D

Insane

not much to say but I suggest if you could make

00:14:336 (14336|0) - this an LN to blue snap, and make every same sound the same LN snap?
e.g. 00:16:760 (16760|3) - and 01:21:003 (81003|2) -
- nope. i think that's a strange
but thank you for your feedback!

good luck DDDD

Raveille wrote:

hi i use old banner xd

|1|2|3|4|

Hard

00:26:760 - make 1 an LN to 00:26:912 -
00:29:184 (29184|1) - LN to 00:29:336 -
this is wat i intended, usaully LN is normal in that sound, but i think sometimes blank expression is quiet nice.

00:39:184 (39184|1,39336|2,39487|1,39639|2,39790|1,39942|2,40093|1,40245|2) - this pattern may be a bit uncomfortable... 00:39:790 (39790|1,39942|2) - move these to 1 and 4?
Ok, il move them.

01:14:790 (74790|1,74942|2,74942|0,75018|1,75093|3,75169|2,75245|1,75245|0) - uhmmm I think this can be made better... see here
i did that at first time like ur example, cuz i wanted avoid being 2notes jack with upper notes which mean two hand, but it looks better now.

01:26:836 (86836|1) - this shd be on a 1/6 snap, 01:26:811 -
il fix it.

good luck DDDD

Jungdongjin wrote:

M4M 왔습니다

Normal

00:30:548 (30548|0) - 이 롱노트가 보컬을 표현한건가요 아니면 기타를 표현한건가요? 이거 음이 저는 00:30:851 - 여기까지만 들리는데
그 외에 다른 롱노트들도
00:32:972 (32972|2) - 00:35:396 (35396|1) - 조금 길게 느껴지네요
- 제 미스네요 감사합니다

00:51:912 -

이렇게 넣는편이 치는 느낌이 더 좋을거같네요 쾅 하고 끝나는 부분인데 13 번은 개인적으로 느낌이 잘 안산다고 생각해서요.
- 무슨말씀인지 이해했습니다
변경완료!

Insane

00:36:230 (36230|2) - 무슨 음인가요?
- 피아노음이에요

00:53:124 (53124|3) - 이거 00:53:427 - 여기까지 늘려서 아래에 있는거처럼 만드는게 좋을거같네요.
-롱노트 부분은 깔끔하게 짜고싶은 스타일이라서 패스

01:01:003 - ~ 01:02:063 - 개인적으로 쿼드랑 트리플이랑 밸런스가 잘 안맞는다고 생각합니다. 강하게 느낌을 주는건 이해를 했지만 쿼드가 들어갈만한
상황은 아니라고 생각이 들어요.
- 드럼노트를 3개로 이어왔는데 거기에 이어 일반적으로 나오는 보컬이아니라 힘주는 부분이라 4개를 쓴거고 충분하다 생각됩니다

01:01:306 - 여기는 왜 3노트인지 잘 모르겠어요.
-윗부분을 말한것처럼 보컬이 이유가됩니다

01:03:200 (63200|1,63200|0) - 하드랑 마찬가지로 잘 안들리는데 저기서 끝내는게 좋을거같아요.
- 저는 저부분을 저렇게 트릴로 잇고싶네요
저부분을 끊으면 01:02:896 - 이부분도 끊어야해서요

01:26:646 (86646|0,86722|0,86798|0) - 여기 음 들리는데 기타반주로 그냥 끝낸거같은데 조금 허전하게 느껴지네요
- 저는 롱놋으로 끝내는게 깔끔하다생각해서 랭크에 문제가 될 시에만 추가할생각입니다

Garalulu wrote:

Talked about chart except fontes' diff

IRC

18:45 Niks: halo
18:45 Garalulu: no
18:45 Garalulu: olah
18:45 *Garalulu is editing [https://osu.ppy.sh/b/714057 Twin-Tails - Twintail Dreamer! [Normal]]
18:45 *Niks is listening to [https://osu.ppy.sh/b/714057 Twin-Tails - Twintail Dreamer!]
18:45 Niks: ah.
18:45 Garalulu: 왜 체크하는 맵마다
18:45 Garalulu: 죄다 키사운드여
18:46 Garalulu: 00:12:369 - 00:22:218 -
18:47 Garalulu: 여서 보면
18:47 Niks: ㅇㅇ
18:47 Garalulu: 00:13:430 (13430|3) - 00:15:854 (15854|2) - 요런데는 롱놋인데
18:47 Niks: 기타 음 피치랑 관계있음
18:47 Garalulu: 00:14:642 (14642|1) - 00:17:066 (17066|1) - 요런덴 왜 아뇨
18:47 Niks: 숏노트는 같은 피치
18:47 Niks: 롱노트는 다른피치
18:48 Garalulu: 00:14:339 (14339|2,14642|1) - 이런거 보면
18:48 Garalulu: 피치 다른거 같은뎀
18:48 Garalulu: 00:16:763 (16763|0,17066|1) - 요거도
18:48 Niks: 어 그러네
18:48 Niks: ;;;
18:49 Garalulu: :O
18:49 Niks: 롱노트하나로 여러음 표현한다거 신경쓰느라 못본듯..
18:49 Niks: 다 수정했슴
18:53 Garalulu: 00:12:369 - 00:21:612 - 랑 01:19:036 - 01:24:036 - 가
18:53 Garalulu: 비슷한 구간이긴 한데
18:53 Garalulu: 후반에 추가한건 괜찮을 것 같구만유
18:54 Garalulu: 구성 자체가 다르긴 하넴
18:54 Garalulu: 패턴
18:54 Garalulu: 뭐 문제될건 없고
18:54 Garalulu: 노말은 잡기도 어렵다
18:54 Niks: 아싸
18:54 Niks: 역시 2년차맵
18:54 Garalulu: 뭐 굳이 잡자면
18:54 Niks: 3년이네
18:54 Garalulu: 00:28:430 - 요런데도 기타 음이 있긴 한데
18:54 Garalulu: 패턴 구조상
18:54 Garalulu: 넘어가~
18:55 Niks: 하드로?
18:55 Garalulu: 하드는
18:55 Garalulu: 아조시가
18:55 Garalulu: 봐야하지않남
18:55 Niks: 아 맞다
18:55 Niks: 내난이도 아니지
18:56 Garalulu: 그럼 오늘은 일단 아얄로 하드만 빼고 하고
18:56 Garalulu: 나중에 아조시꺼 따로 포스팅하는걸로
18:56 Niks: ㅇㅋ
18:56 Garalulu: 아니면 아조시를 불러부러~
18:56 Niks: 인세인 넘어가는거 맞지?
18:56 Garalulu: 예아
18:56 Niks: 으로*
18:56 Niks: 아저씨 인터넷 안되는 환경이라
18:56 Garalulu: 레츠고
18:56 Niks: ㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋ
18:56 *Garalulu is editing [https://osu.ppy.sh/b/714053 Twin-Tails - Twintail Dreamer! [Insane]]
18:56 Garalulu: 아그러넴
18:56 Garalulu: 저런
18:56 Niks: 할꺼면 피방가서하겠네
18:58 Niks: 00:17:824 - 이부분
18:58 Garalulu: 음악의 진행 구조를 보아 00:17:218 - 00:18:430 - 랑 00:18:430 - 00:19:642 - 가 비슷한 구조를 보이는 게 좋지 않을까유
18:58 Niks: 아
18:58 Niks: 반전 구조도 좋겠다
18:58 Garalulu: 메인 멜로디 롱놋을 강조하고, 드럼을 부가적으로 넣는 방안도 괜찮을듯
18:58 Garalulu: ㅇㅇ
18:59 Niks: 좋은듯
18:59 Niks: 바로 수정하겠슴
18:59 Garalulu: 고치면 보여주소
18:59 Niks: 그리고
18:59 Niks: 00:17:824 - 드럼노트없어서 노트 한개를 뺐는데
18:59 Niks: 노트 하나 넣는건 어떻게생각함?
18:59 Garalulu: 흠 굳이 넣을 필요는 없다고 봅네다
18:59 Garalulu: 넣으면 이쁘긴 한데
19:00 Garalulu: 없는 걸 넣을 필요는 없을듯
19:00 Niks: ㅇㅇ
19:00 Niks: 패턴이 좀 안이뻐보여서
19:01 Niks: 컹스
19:05 Niks: 이거 사진을 보여주는거보다
19:05 Niks: 업뎃하는게 빠를거같은데
19:05 Garalulu: ㅇㅋㄷㅋ
19:06 Niks: 북마크해뒀슴
19:07 Garalulu: 00:19:642 - 00:21:309 - 여긴
19:07 Garalulu: 롱놋 없어도 괜찮아요
19:07 Niks: 그거
19:07 Niks: 숏노트만있다보니
19:07 Niks: 이전패턴이랑 안어울리던데
19:07 Niks: 그래서 바꿈
19:08 Garalulu: 오히려 이러면 이제 00:19:642 - 00:20:096 - 랑 00:20:854 - 00:21:309 - 여기도
19:08 Garalulu: 같은 구조니깐
19:08 Garalulu: 그 점 고려하면서 패턴 짜야할듯
19:08 Niks: 같은 구조인가
19:09 Garalulu: 00:20:854 (20854|2,20854|3) - 그 전까지는 롱놋 1개인데 여기서만 더블로 표현하면
19:09 Garalulu: 고거대로 이상한 느낌
19:10 Niks: 그러면 이전 패턴이 낫다?
19:10 Niks: https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/9995510 롱노트 2개가 어색하다면 한개로 바꾸는거야 어렵진않은데..
19:12 Garalulu: https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/9995517
19:12 Garalulu: 저는 요런식으로 짜봤음
19:15 Niks: 더 깔끔하고 패턴이라는게 있네
19:16 Niks: 아
19:16 Niks: 이제 같은구조라는게 뭔말인지 이해가됐네
19:16 Niks: :blobfacepalm:
19:16 Garalulu: :O
19:17 Niks: 저 사진 그대로 붙여놓음
19:17 Garalulu: oki
19:18 Garalulu: 저 잠시 밥 먹고 와도 됩니까
19:18 Garalulu: 호호
19:18 Garalulu: 롤 한판 땡기고 있으쇼
19:19 Niks: 음
19:19 Niks: 다른거 매핑하고있어야지
19:19 Garalulu: 뿅
19:40 Garalulu: hi
19:41 Garalulu: I'm back
19:45 Niks: ok
19:45 Niks: ㄱㄱ
19:45 Garalulu: :ㅒ
19:45 Niks: 00:21:612 -
19:45 Niks: 요기서 멈췄음
19:45 Garalulu: 00:26:612 (26612|1) - 이거 보면
19:45 Garalulu: 6연타인데
19:46 Garalulu: 5연타가 보기 이뻐요 제 생각엔
19:46 Garalulu: 00:23:430 - 00:24:036 - 에서도 5연타고
19:46 Garalulu: 조거 하나 옮기면 나을듯
19:46 Niks: 그러면
19:46 Niks: 피치도 하나 낮으니까
19:46 Niks: 1번으로 옮김
19:46 Garalulu: 00:29:036 (29036|3) - 요것도 같은 이치
19:47 Niks: 3번이동
19:47 Garalulu: 00:36:233 - 여기 고스트인거 같은디유
19:47 Garalulu: 주변 파트를 봤을때 이런 배치는 없었음
19:48 Niks: 25%로 들어보면
19:48 Niks: 확실하게 피아노소리가들리는데
19:49 Garalulu: 근데 그 이상 속도로 들으면 거의 있는듯 없는듯 해요
19:49 Garalulu: 치다가 여기만 딱 1/4가 있으니까 어색하기도 하고
19:50 Garalulu: 꼭 안 넣을 필요는 없지만 저는 안 넣는게 어울린다고 봄
19:50 Niks: 나는 100%로 들었을때도그렇고
19:50 Niks: 플레이할때도 없는게 어색하니까
19:50 Niks: 그냥 유지하는방향으로 가고싶음
19:50 Garalulu: ㅇㅋ
19:51 Garalulu: 00:37:521 (37521|2,37672|2,37824|2) - 이전과 다르게 여기만 3연타 구조네요
19:52 Garalulu: 동일한 멜로디 구성이라면 00:32:672 - 00:32:975 - 여기와 일치하는 것 같은데
19:52 Garalulu: 여기서는 00:32:975 (32975|3) - 노트 한개
19:53 Garalulu: 00:35:399 - 여기서는 두개
19:53 Garalulu: 00:37:824 - 여기선 두개
19:53 Niks: 미스인듯
19:54 Niks: 00:33:127 (33127|1) - 이노트는 삭제하겠음
19:54 Garalulu: 예아
19:54 Niks: 그리고 3연타 구조
19:54 Niks: 00:37:824 (37824|2) - 1번라인으로 옮겼음
19:54 Garalulu: 고럼 00:37:824 (37824|2) - 여기도 2개?
19:55 Niks: ㅇㅇ
19:55 Niks: 00:37:369 (37369|1) - 요거도 삭제
19:55 Niks: 튀는느낌이없네
19:56 Niks: 아 미이ㅏㄴ
19:56 Niks: 저거 유지
19:56 Garalulu: ghgh
19:56 Garalulu: 한번 그 부분 전체적으로 고치고
19:56 Garalulu: 업뎃 해주쇼
19:57 Niks: ㅇㅋㅇㅋ
19:57 Niks: 나 지금 형이 혼자빨래널고있어서
19:57 Niks: 잠깐 도와주고올겡 ㅜㅜ
19:57 Niks: 일단 업뎃하고
19:58 Niks: 완료
19:58 Garalulu: :O
19:59 Garalulu: 00:32:369 - 랑 00:34:793 - 도 노트 하나 추가하는게 좋을듯
19:59 Garalulu: 기타 음이랑 메인 멜로디 있으니깐
19:59 Niks: 미안
19:59 Niks: 컹스..
19:59 Garalulu: 00:37:218 - 요거처럼
20:04 Niks: 왔음
20:04 Garalulu: halo
20:04 Niks: 00:34:793 -
20:04 Niks: 여기에서는 드럼사운드가 없는데
20:05 Niks: 00:32:369 - 여기는 너무 작고
20:05 Garalulu: 00:34:793 - 아 여긴 없넴
20:05 Garalulu: 흠 그렇다면 파스
20:06 Niks: 00:50:854 (50854|2,50854|3,51157|1,51157|0) - 얘들을 23번에두는건 어떻다고 생각해?
20:06 Niks: 4키같은부분에선
20:06 Niks: 느낌이 확 안와닿던데
20:07 Niks: 7키라면 쓰겠다만..
20:07 Garalulu: 고것도 괜찮을듯
20:07 Garalulu: 00:48:884 - 여기 갠적으로 트릴 후 3 패턴을 별로 안좋아해서
20:07 Garalulu: 추천드리진 않음
20:07 Garalulu: 01:12:521 - 01:12:824 - 여기처럼
20:07 Garalulu: 클린하게 트릴로 구성하는건 어떄요
20:07 Niks: 01:03:278 -
20:07 Niks: 여기도 마찬가지겠네
20:08 Garalulu: 예아
20:08 Niks: 최근에 난이도좀 올리려는 목적으로 쓴거니까
20:08 Niks: 2놋해도 상관없음
20:08 Niks: 변경완료
20:08 Garalulu: ㅇㅋㄷㅋ
20:09 Garalulu: 00:53:581 - 01:08:127 - 요기
20:09 Garalulu: 패턴 구성을 할 때 노트 col 겹치는 수를 신경쓰시면 좋을듯
20:09 Garalulu: 00:55:551 (55551|2,55703|2,55854|2,56006|2) - 요런덴 4번 겹치는데
20:10 Garalulu: 00:58:278 (58278|0,58430|0) - 요건 한번
20:10 Garalulu: 딱 겹치는 위치를 규칙 정해놓고
20:10 Garalulu: 배치하는게 좋아보입니다
20:10 Niks: 일리있는말이긴한데
20:10 Niks: 노래느낌살리려면
20:10 Niks: 지금 라인 그대로가야하는데
20:11 Niks: 내가 마음에 드는 느낌*
20:11 Garalulu: 좀 랜덤 스러워서 다음 븐 때 지적 당할 수 있긴 한데
20:11 Niks: ㅇㅋ
20:11 Garalulu: 01:01:460 (61460|2,61612|2,61763|2,61915|2,62066|2) - 요런 5연타라던지
20:11 Niks: 한번 확인해볼게
20:12 Niks: 01:01:309 (61309|1,61309|0,61612|2,61612|1,61915|2,61915|3) - 이패턴때문에
20:12 Niks: 5연타가 된건데
20:12 Niks: 우선
20:12 Niks: 쿨 겹치는거
20:12 Niks: 다 확인해보고 개선해놓을게
20:13 Garalulu: 예아
20:13 Garalulu: 01:01:309 - 여기 같은 경우는
20:13 Garalulu: 01:01:006 - 만큼 소리가 강렬하지 않고 오히려 01:01:157 - 에 가깝다고 생각합니다
20:16 Niks: 보컬의 세기에는 차이가있긴한데
20:16 Niks: 3놋으로는 문제가 됨?
20:16 Niks: 나는 보컬 자체로 3놋을 넣은건데
20:16 Niks: 사운드가 작아지는게 아니라
20:17 Garalulu: 그렇다면 ㅇㅋ
20:17 Niks: 맞다
20:17 Niks: 이거도 원기님이였나
20:17 Niks: 누가 빼면좋겠다길래 빼긴한건데
20:17 Niks: 노트 3개쓰면 이상함??
20:17 Niks: ㅜㅜ
20:17 Niks: 00:59:793 - 01:00:399 -
20:18 Niks: 드럼놋때문에 이상한가
20:18 Garalulu: 예 드럼 때문에
20:18 Garalulu: 노트 수 같으면 이상함
20:18 Niks: ㅇㅋ..
20:20 Garalulu: 아 아까 트릴 후 3놋
20:20 Garalulu: 3놋을 2놋으로 교체하는 방안 or 바로 그 전 2놋을 1놋으로 교체하는 방안
20:20 Garalulu: 맘에 드는 방안 고르시면 될듯
20:21 Niks: 2놋으로 다 바꿈
20:21 Garalulu: ㅇㅋ
20:21 Niks: 01:03:733 -
20:21 Niks: 여기서부터도
20:21 Niks: 쿨 겹치는라인
20:21 Niks: 다 손봤음
20:21 Garalulu: 한번 업뎃 해주소
20:22 Niks: dhksfu
20:22 Niks: 완려
20:25 Garalulu: 01:23:733 - 01:24:036 - 요기는 01:23:960 (83960|2,83960|3) - 를 하나로 줄이는 방안이 더 어울릴듯
20:26 Niks: 어 뭐지
20:26 Niks: 3놋 지웠었는데
20:26 Niks: ;;;;
20:26 Garalulu: :O
20:26 Niks: 되돌리기 잘못썼나..
20:26 Niks: 한개로 줄임
20:26 Garalulu: ghgh
20:26 Garalulu: ㅇㅋ
20:27 Garalulu: 고럼 끝
20:27 Niks: 업뎃하겠음
20:27 Garalulu: 호호
20:27 Garalulu: 남은건 아조시~

coming soon~

Garalulu wrote:

첵스

Maxus wrote:

hello niks moe

• [Insane]
  00:09:945 (9945|3) - better move to col 3 to avoid too many minijack at col 4

1. I do not think change this part is required
   
   00:13:581 (13581|2) - move to col 4 to avoid triple jack at col 3
2. ok
   
   00:14:642 (14642|1,14793|2) - move to col 3 and col 1 to also avoid triple jack here.
3. ok
   
   00:27:369 (27369|3) - should be at col 3 here, because you usually use double jack at 00:25:096 - , but at 00:27:369 - you use triple jack, which is inconsistent.
4. ok! change!
   
   00:29:793 - why the jack here is much more compared with 00:28:278 - ? i think you should make 00:30:400 (30400|0,30551|2) - at col 3 and col 2 instead.
5. ok
   
   00:32:672 (32672|0,32824|0,32975|0) - quite sure this one is not intended, cause you don't use this triple jack at 00:35:248 - , better make 00:32:975 (32975|0,33127|1) - at col 2 and col 1 instead.
6. 00:32:975 (32975|0) - move to the 3col
   
   00:36:460 (36460|1,36763|0) - make these col 1 and col 2 to avoid triple jack at 00:36:157 (36157|1,36309|1,36460|1) -
7. ok..
   
   00:39:187 - how (a)bout try https://puu.sh/zc7mi/fb58572c17.png , its better pattern here.
8. yeap change
   
   00:40:551 - I think having repeated pattern here is awkward, considering the sound is definitely isn't the same for each instances, how about try https://puu.sh/zc7qA/e82e32cb13.png instead
9. I like this repeating patterns, but I follow your opinion.
   
   00:48:884 - Should have another LN here, try https://puu.sh/zc7sN/a033639122.png
10. it's better good, ok!
    
    00:55:096 (55096|1,55096|2,55248|0) - try making [12] 2 for more variation
11. yeap
    
    00:57:218 (57218|2) - better move to col 1 so that the vocal is more emphasized.
12. ok, and 00:58:430 - here is same too change
    
    01:00:703 (60703|1) - move to col 1 so the pattern would be more neater here.
13. ok
    
    01:01:006 - i believe this is kinda overchorded when we compared with how you patterned at 01:13:430 - , at 01:13:430 - has much louder sound, but the density is less compared with 01:01:006 - , so i suggest to reduce the amount of chord you have, like https://puu.sh/zc7D9/186daf0546.png
14. I mapped it mainly the vocals and drum
    01:01:006 - (Ge)(3 note) 01:01:309 - (Te)(3 note) 01:01:460 - (E)(4 note) 01:01:763 - (Ko)(4 note) 01:02:218 - (O)(4 note)
    i'm not think believe this is kinda overchorded
    i think a little less overchorded
    
    01:07:218 - this one also doesn't fit to have repeated pattern, try https://puu.sh/zc7EN/393d79b3a4.png
15. Change
    
    01:18:581 - hmm, i need to say something bout this, the guitar snap is actually not 1/4, it has unstable snap which is dangerous to map, since the snap ruling is to be accurate with the sound, so i suggest you to just map with LN similar with fontes' Hard.
16. i am agree your mind. this guitar sound snap is not 1/4
    but i think that this note expressed the sound of the guitar sufficiently.
    I would like to keep it like this.
    
    [Normal]
    00:13:884 (13884|3,16309|0) - Actually, these 2 sound has really loud high pitch synth like 00:13:430 (13430|3,15854|2) - , i recommend you change both of them into 1/2 LN.
17. Your words are right too
    But i want to give it a 'cutting' feel to player and
    actually, the tone is also short on the guitar.
    
    00:20:854 - Pattern here kinda a bit awkward here, try https://puu.sh/zc87I/7ba8bbbf0d.jpg
18. ok
    
    00:31:612 (31612|0,31612|1) - better switch column between the LN and the note so the structure is better.
19. ok, also other pattern too same change
    
    00:39:945 (39945|2,40096|3) - make these 4-3 so the pattern is more balanced.
20. ok, change
    
    00:42:369 (42369|1,42521|0) - mini trill seems unnecessary here, move these to col 3 and col 2.
21. actually your right, i see. Thank you Xd
    
    00:52:369 (52369|0) - move to col 2 so its much more neater.
22. I would like to use 1col and 4col notes to express drum,
    so change 00:51:915 (51915|1,52066|0) - this 2col, 1col notes -> 1col, 2col note
    
    00:52:824 (52824|3,53127|0) - make these col 1 and col 3 so the pattern would be neater too.
23. I dont want long notes from 00: 52: 824 - and 00: 53: 581 (53581 | 2) to be on the same line.
    Change some pattern
    
    01:11:309 - kinda too heavy on left side, try https://puu.sh/zc8eU/b695f1a410.png
24. i do move right 1col 2col -> 2col 3col
    
    call me back~

Maxus wrote:

hello niks moe

[Fontes' Hard]
00:29:793 - kinda felt this is more heavy on left side, i will recommend pattern like http://puu.sh/zc7NL/93a4acdde9.png instead.
ok seems good.

00:37:218 - The minitrill at left kinda awkward being so sudden appear here, i will do https://puu.sh/zc7QQ/a0f51e6ceb.png instead here, its more neater imo.
the placement of this note is a gentle representation of guitar notes. these notes hav 1/2 snap, and i think these do not disturb the flow of play. so il keep this.

01:00:399 (60399|2) - move to col 2 here, the stack at 00:59:490 (59490|2,59793|2,60096|2,60399|2,60703|2) - is awkward here cause it seems for no purpose.
ok. at fisrt i intended to start LN (2notes with a single note) with one hand but il move 00:59:187 (59187|1,60399|2) - these notes to 3 and 2 col as ur mod.
actually it seems to be difficult to avoid a certain 1/1 jack in the structure cuz this part has only 3 repeat interval.


01:02:066 - well it seems inconsistent you use double LN here, cause at places like 01:03:278 - you only use single LN, better change one of the LN into ordinary note.
il make 2 col note to single.

01:04:793 (64793|1,64945|0) - make this col 1 and col 2, so the pattern doesn't becoming too same with 01:05:399 (65399|1,65551|2,65551|3,65551|0) -
ok wil fix it.

01:06:460 (66460|2,66612|3,66763|2,66915|3,67218|2,67369|3,67521|2,67672|3,67824|2) - well people might won't like the long OH trill here, try https://puu.sh/zc7Z1/36fb7e5026.png (it started from 01:06:006 - )
01:07:369 - this part 14/23 trills are i intended. even though the previous stream structure is trill i don wanna change this concept.
and i doesent look interfere with playing in this part. when we look at the editor, the structure looks like a continuous trill but the notes u linked is just 1/2 beats containing blank term, i feel it just simple stream flow when play.
i dont think that we 'must' balance both hands in any section, giving up a pattern we conceived unless the overall balance goes down.
instead of ur mod, il move 01:07:218 (67218|2) - this note to 2 col.

01:26:668 - well, I think its better for you to not map drum here and end it the same as Insane diff here, the drum snap is too unstable here, i'm not even sure if this is really the correct snap, unless you can confirm with someone, i'd say it's too risky to map it.
ok. il delete those.

Thank you for ur mod maxus
Surely you seem to be able to confirm what we have not seen before.

Maxus wrote:

thank you niks for the understanding
Seem fine now, will leave the rest to lulu.

Garalulu wrote:

Maxus off probation when

Surono wrote:

duhh..
does someone hv reportd this?

Asherz007 wrote:

Hi there,

Congrats on the qualification, but I believe that there is an issue present that needs to be dealt with before this map can progress any further.

After having a discussion with Protastic, we've decided that the hitsounds, or lack thereof, in this map is insufficient for rank. While there are keysounds that are not present in the song itself providing feedback to the player, this is minimal and only exists in certain parts of the chart (it is absent from 00:12:369 to 00:21:612 and 01:18:581 to the end for example), which essentially leaves some parts completely unhitsounded.

This would not be as big an issue if the hitnormal were louder, but as it stands, it is incredibly difficult to hear feedback from the hitnormal in louder sections of the song, even with the music at 20% and sound effects at 100%. Similarly, in the quieter sections, the music needs to be turned down to around 30% for the hitnormal to become remotely audible. This is a problem since every note needs to have audible feedback for the player.

A possible solution for this issue would be to additionally hitsound the map using more conventional hitsounds (such as a kick or snare), as well as increasing the volume of the hitnormal. The keysounds as they are are fine and can be kept.

Protastic101 wrote:

Alright, I suppose since it's a grey area, it's fine to leave the hitsounds as is. Still, the problem with the hitsounds being inaudible is still there with the hitnormal because increasing the volume of it in game doesn't really do anything when the sample itself is almost inaudible. Please raise the volume through audacity or some other software so that it can be heard. Currently, there is almost no feedback from the hitnormal still, but it has improved.

Protastic101 wrote:

Raised the volume of the sample and also adjusted green line volume settings in all diffs, should be better now. Here's the heart back

error_exe777 wrote:

i have to agree with myka.

this hitsounding is backwards, very much so. using justification like "and many people like it" isn't good enough to write off the lack of feedback. the ranking criteria is there for a reason, not to be written off by personal opinions of players. to be more specific, keysounding just for vocals gives no valid feedback to the player, and having literally the rest as some loud drum sound is completely disregarding any sort of acknowledge that the song exists and you aren't ignoring it. focusing on vocals is literally the opposite of what you want to be emphasising here. the vocals do not affect gameplay and the hitsounds should enforce that. also, skipping drum hitsounds because it feels "unnecessary"? seriously, the entire point of hitsounds is to provide feedback and you not adding these hitsounds is literally doing the opposite. there is no acknowledgement that they exist within the song and similarly to above, and what myka said, it doesnt bloody harm to add them.

you cannot back up a unconventional choice with personal opinions, specifically when it disregards both the music and the ranking criteria (to a degree).

just.. add some K-S hitsounds. it takes less to no effort and it completely eliminates any problems regarding feedback.


actually really surprised the QAT didnt question this further.

Wonki wrote:

태클걸꺼면 디퀄댈때 한번에해라 븅신드라

Maxus wrote:

Saying that feedback in this map is non-existent is really really awkward.. this map DOES have feedback in ALL notes, and the feedback issues are why the hitnormal are to be made really audible in the first place, it backs up the condition that every note needs to be audible enough in the RC, which this map actually already did. So technically from RC perspective, this map doesn't break any rule.

Having another loud and hard HS like snare or drum thing destroys how the keysound plays in the first place and It completely disrupt how the way that the keysound supposed to be the main thing here. Emphasizing vocal in this kind of song does making sense as this is an anime song where the vocal supposed to be the main star in the whole song (which obviously all anime song supposed to be? lmao..), and it's just like how the keysound works in this map.

Wanting to have more loud hitsound in the map with keysound is too subjective to be enforced to the mapper (just like if some people prefer to play map with specific pattern over other map, which is a matter of liking), and it kinda disregard how the mapper try to work around their planning for this map.

Kamikaze wrote:

If you clearly map to the drums in this map, why are you so opposed to making any kind of drum hitsounding and instead use a tiny hat sound along with piano for vocals?????????????

Wonki wrote:

태클걸꺼면 디퀄댈때 한번에해라 븅신드라

Kamikaze wrote:

although the hitsounds are a thing already discussed I'll just chip in to say that soft sampleset in general works really badly on any type of song that's fast, intense, or Not Piano Actually as the tiny hat sounds are more annoying than actually helping, normal sampleset with a standard hitnormal would already be way better, you could also raise the volume of the keysounds a bit to make them more important and more distinct since they're not really now

but that's not why I came here

SVs in this map are pointless and badly executed, you are just putting SVs so you have something interesting in your map and it has very bad effects on it.

Starting with the fact that you have only three spots in the map where you put any SVs and the first one is at 41 seconds into the map, it's incredibly inconsistent. Then to make it all consistent do the map really need SVs all over the place then? I don't really get this kind thinking. Usually SVs for most map are treated as additional properties instead of becoming the main thing of the map, and having couple places SVs in this map does make sense to me instead of compelling all the way to make SVs for other spots, which doesn't only felt forced when playing, but deviating from map's intention from the start.

The slowdown at 00:41:612 - albeit not that noticeable makes no sense as this section is not that much less intense than the previous one, more to that, you revert to 1,0x SV at 00:48:884 - where an EVEN LESS INTENSE PART HAPPENS, which is a nail in the coffin, the slowdown SV makes no sense and serves no purpose The instrument fading here, it has much less hard instrument compared with upbeat part before, and the vocal signify by singing in a much lower key to support the less intense instrument, i think it gives more than enough reason to do so.
For the part at 00:48:884 - , it's actually more intense for me because It gains additional instrument that's not exist in previous section (the guitar here much much more loud suddenly) , and this part serves as the bridge before going through the Reff or we usually call by kiai section, I do think it's reasonable enough tbh.

00:53:581 - This SV comes out super randomly, there is no other place in the entire map where you have an SV at this sound, then you have the execution which I can see that you might've tried to normalize the SV jump to 1x but you have the placement which is this:

This makes it so you don't have a normalized SV jump that's okay to play but there's a sudden slowdown that you cannot sightread because even if you expect SVs from the song (I didn't) you don't get any SVs in the first half and also you don't expect a sudden slowdown there so you automatically let go of LNs and miss. There are couple things that justify this part.
1. If there's already slowdown happening before, doesn't it strike player that this map will have SV in later part and then prepare for that?
2. This is the very first where the kiai or the reff of the song appear here, when the main entertainment appear, it's natural for me to have more exciting thing appear.
3. For number 1, Even if you want to say this need more than one time to be nailed, isn't most of SV map generally like that? I don't think the nature of SV in general can be immediately nailed by people who never play the map at all tbh. moreover i remember couple years ago when i was non-BN, i remember you stating https://puu.sh/ztOmu/4acdca2e63.png to public, so this somehow gives impression that you double-standard things so subjectively.
4. The leaderboard have many of the tester nailing the map to the point top rank player get SS or 998k+ effortlessly, usually we stating that something is silly/dumb when players constantly can't nail specific part properly, but leaderboard results contradicts that.

00:59:490 - This is also the only point in the song where you use this type of SVs and for some reason you don't use them on the first chord and use it on all other chords????? consistency?????????????????? if you say that the first chord is not suitable for putting this SV there because of whatever reason you will be correct but it will also apply to all of the SVs here
you are just putting SVs for vocal syllabes with no further context, this is not okay.At the same time, this part is the only part where the vocal syllables comes out consistently at 1/1 beat, no other part in the music does this, So having this particular SV doesn't make it not reasonable considering the fact we have here.

01:01:460 - why are you suddenly using quads for those drums? you only use quads otherwise when there are also LNs going alongside (which I also don't really agree with since there's no sound as strong as to support a quad imo) Niks did answer me before. http://puu.sh/ztOCP/960d54d6b2.png

and then I got struck by a really good question regarding the hitsound usage there was an argument for:

If you clearly map to the drums in this map, why are you so opposed to making any kind of drum hitsounding and instead use a tiny hat sound along with piano for vocals?????????????
Because mapper generally will map more than one instrument?
in the end of the day, there will be other kind of instrument to be mapped in the process, but it doesn't really mean it was in the mapper intention to highlight that instrument in general.

error_exe777 wrote:

I think a couple people are missing the point

Just because something is fun or just because you are able hit the notes accurately doesn’t justify anything. Essentially a baseless arguement

error_exe777 wrote:

we need to keep a level of quality in the ranked section and yknow, having non-sensical SVs “playing fine” doesn’t really give any argument for keeping them as they are

Maxus wrote:

Kay, Felt like i really need to reply cause this felt so wrong. will reply again after sleep.

error_exe777 wrote:

I think a couple people are missing the point

Just because something is fun or just because you are able hit the notes accurately doesn’t justify anything. Essentially a baseless arguement

I'm really confused right now, How does something that is fun and play well doesn't justify things? it is a really major component in determine whether the map actually pose the problem from the start or not. in fact if the map can satisfy the target audience the map's try to direct , I don't see the reason to over-analyze things too much if each element has its purpose and other stranger personally said its nice, as it is by itself hits a very grey area of perception.

uhm well, yes i can agree the playability of a map is a very important factor in the "quality" of a map but its not the only factor. just because a map plays well does not mean it adheres to the level needed to reach the ranking criteria. you could create a completely overmapped beatmap and even if its "fun" it doesnt means its rankable per se. i just think blaming everything on just whether it plays well is a really narrow-minded way of looking at the map because quality is not just decided by whether it plays well. if a map has problems, it cannot be disregarded just because it isnt objectively bad to play. if you were to make a vibro map or something that people found fun to play, that doesnt immediately mean its rankable. you have to take into consideration the other factors rather than just immediately assuming something is okay because it plays well. if a section of a map is inconsistent, or illogical, or disregarding the music or false emphasis whatever you want to label, it cannot be brushed to the side just because the target audience doesnt have a problem with it. this map has a problem, and just because it plays well doesnt mean we can just brush it to the side, you know?

error_exe777 wrote:

we need to keep a level of quality in the ranked section and yknow, having non-sensical SVs “playing fine” doesn’t really give any argument for keeping them as they are

quality is very very subjective and differ for each person, and you know it. it is not something you can "keep the level" on cause each interpretation can lead to really biased thing. i remembered back then that "overchorded" and "overmap" were an issues that been brought multiple time as "quality" issues, and now it actually got into the rank section and we see it doesn't get posed as an issue from either player / mapper anymore. It is just one of the strong proof on how we can't really bring quality as the reason very easily.



quality isnt subjective?? okay, the level of quality differs for each persons map but there is a level of quality you need to reach for a map to be rankable. even pishifat mentioned this in one of his earlier videos iirc. the problem at hand is that there are problems with the map that dent the "quality" of it and letting maps with these problems slip through is where the problem lies. we need to keep this level of quality because the ranked section needs to have that quality. its not subjective at all, anyone can look at a map and determine its quality (if you know what you're doing) and its not like the objective quality of a map differs from person to person. the only thing that differs is the ability to determine the quality of a map. quality is not a person to person basis, its something that is set in stone. and thats why we need to fix these problems because its quite obviously a hinder to the maps quality (in my eyes) and myself and kami have justified why it is. its not like the actual quality of the map is different between me and you for instance, its just down to how we view the map and what we determine as acceptable and not acceptable.

error_exe777 wrote:

uhm well, yes i can agree the playability of a map is a very important factor in the "quality" of a map but its not the only factor. just because a map plays well does not mean it adheres to the level needed to reach the ranking criteria. you could create a completely overmapped beatmap and even if its "fun" it doesnt means its rankable per se. i just think blaming everything on just whether it plays well is a really narrow-minded way of looking at the map because quality is not just decided by whether it plays well. if a map has problems, it cannot be disregarded just because it isnt objectively bad to play. if you were to make a vibro map or something that people found fun to play, that doesnt immediately mean its rankable. you have to take into consideration the other factors rather than just immediately assuming something is okay because it plays well. if a section of a map is inconsistent, or illogical, or disregarding the music or false emphasis whatever you want to label, it cannot be brushed to the side just because the target audience doesnt have a problem with it. this map has a problem, and just because it plays well doesnt mean we can just brush it to the side, you know?

error_exe777 wrote:

quality isnt subjective?? okay, the level of quality differs for each persons map but there is a level of quality you need to reach for a map to be rankable. even pishifat mentioned this in one of his earlier videos iirc. the problem at hand is that there are problems with the map that dent the "quality" of it and letting maps with these problems slip through is where the problem lies. we need to keep this level of quality because the ranked section needs to have that quality. its not subjective at all, anyone can look at a map and determine its quality (if you know what you're doing) and its not like the objective quality of a map differs from person to person. the only thing that differs is the ability to determine the quality of a map. quality is not a person to person basis, its something that is set in stone. and thats why we need to fix these problems because its quite obviously a hinder to the maps quality (in my eyes) and myself and kami have justified why it is. its not like the actual quality of the map is different between me and you for instance, its just down to how we view the map and what we determine as acceptable and not acceptable.

Maxus wrote:

Well, if the map get dq then so be it, but i really feel i need to make some couple important remarks here.

although the hitsounds are a thing already discussed I'll just chip in to say that soft sampleset in general works really badly on any type of song that's fast, intense, or Not Piano Actually as the tiny hat sounds are more annoying than actually helping, normal sampleset with a standard hitnormal would already be way better, you could also raise the volume of the keysounds a bit to make them more important and more distinct since they're not really now

but that's not why I came here

SVs in this map are pointless and badly executed, you are just putting SVs so you have something interesting in your map and it has very bad effects on it.

Starting with the fact that you have only three spots in the map where you put any SVs and the first one is at 41 seconds into the map, it's incredibly inconsistent. Then to make it all consistent do the map really need SVs all over the place then? I don't really get this kind thinking. Usually SVs for most map are treated as additional properties instead of becoming the main thing of the map, and having couple places SVs in this map does make sense to me instead of compelling all the way to make SVs for other spots, which doesn't only felt forced when playing, but deviating from map's intention from the start.

The thing is, I was not vouching for adding more SVs. I'm of the opinion that this map doesn't need ANY SVs and it would be better off not having those sparse random changes for the sake of map looking cooler. It's what I refer as making SVs for the sake of having SVs in the map. The SV feels forced, each one of those three SVs feels forced just to have it. Maybe apart from the third one but more to that later.


The slowdown at 00:41:612 - albeit not that noticeable makes no sense as this section is not that much less intense than the previous one, more to that, you revert to 1,0x SV at 00:48:884 - where an EVEN LESS INTENSE PART HAPPENS, which is a nail in the coffin, the slowdown SV makes no sense and serves no purpose The instrument fading here, it has much less hard instrument compared with upbeat part before, and the vocal signify by singing in a much lower key to support the less intense instrument, i think it gives more than enough reason to do so.
For the part at 00:48:884 - , it's actually more intense for me because It gains additional instrument that's not exist in previous section (the guitar here much much more loud suddenly) , and this part serves as the bridge before going through the Reff or we usually call by kiai section, I do think it's reasonable enough tbh.

We have differing opinions then because the instrument is indeed fading but then more of the intensity is fading as it's slowing down to then make a bigger return for the chorus. That being said the slowjam only really serves as sort of an annoyance because the layering is not really taken into account, the scroll speed slows down but you have trickier LNs to handle which is impractical while also it's not big enough to force a diffrent reading technique so it's pretty awkward.


00:53:581 - This SV comes out super randomly, there is no other place in the entire map where you have an SV at this sound, then you have the execution which I can see that you might've tried to normalize the SV jump to 1x but you have the placement which is this:

This makes it so you don't have a normalized SV jump that's okay to play but there's a sudden slowdown that you cannot sightread because even if you expect SVs from the song (I didn't) you don't get any SVs in the first half and also you don't expect a sudden slowdown there so you automatically let go of LNs and miss. There are couple things that justify this part.
1. If there's already slowdown happening before, doesn't it strike player that this map will have SV in later part and then prepare for that?
2. This is the very first where the kiai or the reff of the song appear here, when the main entertainment appear, it's natural for me to have more exciting thing appear.
3. For number 1, Even if you want to say this need more than one time to be nailed, isn't most of SV map generally like that? I don't think the nature of SV in general can be immediately nailed by people who never play the map at all tbh. moreover i remember couple years ago when i was non-BN, i remember you stating https://puu.sh/ztOmu/4acdca2e63.png to public, so this somehow gives impression that you double-standard things so subjectively.
4. The leaderboard have many of the tester nailing the map to the point top rank player get SS or 998k+ effortlessly, usually we stating that something is silly/dumb when players constantly can't nail specific part properly, but leaderboard results contradicts that.

It's funny that you mention Batting Show because this is a perfect example of a map that's built SPECIFICALLY FOR SVS. This map is not. This map only has a jump that's too powerful for what the song provides just to have some effect. The concept of this map and it's patterning are not built specifically for SVs. Batting Show is.
The slowdown happening before argument is also not logical because it might make a player think "huh there are SVs here?" but also if you expect players to guess that they will have an uneven 3,1x->0,3x jump after a 0,92x slowjam then you are wrong.
I also don't get the point about it being an excitement factor, the excitement factors are kiai, harder patterning, but not a single SV that starts off this "hype" section. Also funny how you mention that when you later mention that you dislike heavy SV maps.
As for 4. of course that it's a hyperboly, it's a 3,8* acc map mostly 1/1 rhythms, remembering two seconds is nothing for top rank players, same for me, it took me 4 tries to SS the map, even though it didn't beat my 1x200 score due to not focusing that much on ratio. If you expect that on a map like that leaderboards will show clearly stuff like that then it's not. I've asked a couple of fairly good people to play the map and give me their opinions and while they have differing opinions about the patterning and third SV, I've only heard "wtf" "why is this so strong lmao it doesn't fit here" and so on comments about this particular SV. Also if it wasn't for this SV the whole mod of mine would just consist of saying that the third SV is inconsistent while asking for a fix

00:59:490 - This is also the only point in the song where you use this type of SVs and for some reason you don't use them on the first chord and use it on all other chords????? consistency?????????????????? if you say that the first chord is not suitable for putting this SV there because of whatever reason you will be correct but it will also apply to all of the SVs here
you are just putting SVs for vocal syllabes with no further context, this is not okay.At the same time, this part is the only part where the vocal syllables comes out consistently at 1/1 beat, no other part in the music does this, So having this particular SV doesn't make it not reasonable considering the fact we have here.

Okay, I can agree with that point, but there is next to no lead in to that as in there is no other SV like that in the entire map even if it was way less intense so you can't possibly expect that without hearing about what the map has beforehand. And also that doesn't solve the issue of he's accenting four vocal syllabes and forgets about the first one.

01:01:460 - why are you suddenly using quads for those drums? you only use quads otherwise when there are also LNs going alongside (which I also don't really agree with since there's no sound as strong as to support a quad imo) Niks did answer me before. http://puu.sh/ztOCP/960d54d6b2.png

Besides the fact that the reasoning (probably due to the language barrier) is basically "I think it's not overchorded, I think it's less overchorded" I guess it's subjective, not gonna push hard on that one

and then I got struck by a really good question regarding the hitsound usage there was an argument for:

If you clearly map to the drums in this map, why are you so opposed to making any kind of drum hitsounding and instead use a tiny hat sound along with piano for vocals?????????????
Because mapper generally will map more than one instrument?
in the end of the day, there will be other kind of instrument to be mapped in the process, but it doesn't really mean it was in the mapper intention to highlight that instrument in general.

Yeah but also if he does make notes for the drum and drum notes sometimes paired with vocals give even quads is it really that much to ask for to just add some (even light)
drum sample? Especially with the first point that I've mentioned - the soft hitnormal sounds REALLY jarring on this map, it's hard to concentrate on accuracy for me as someone who uses hitsounds for timing because the hat sample is clashing really hard with the song. I get that Niks does the piano keysounds for the vocals, it's a novel idea, but the fact that it's novel doesn't mean that it should always be done by all means necessary because hey I want my map to have that swag most people won't even notice.

Personally for me as BN, I like to thinking on what mappers try to planning first for certain part (it even stated at code of conduct, and i agree with it). So for most part, i put my personal opinion aside towards other mapping approaches if i do think it makes sense in accordance to many other factors i considered within the range of the song.
I myself have personal opinion that i don't really like heavy SV map that have really unpredictable nature that i need to go editor for like tenth times or more to nail properly, but i saw many others like it and even say its amazing, so i don't really pursue that if none has problem to begin with. I appreciate the concern, but i do think this can be done more respectfully.

If you're going for code of conduct as an argument so will I:
"When making suggestions, try to differentiate between what is intersubjectively / objectively bad or wrong, and what you simply dislike on a personal level. All types of suggestion are fine as long as they are put forward accordingly."

"Unless the concept behind a beatmap is fundamentally flawed from the start, modding should aim to improve the map in its current design - not force your own style upon it. If you truly believe the map has too many significant issues to address individually, try to give a general statement of why this is the case and what direction you think the map should go in to get back on track."

I believe that the concept behind the SV usage is fundamentally flawed from the start as the song does not provide the instrumental feedback for SVs that are presented in the map and said SVs are flawed in their construction:
- first SV does not make much sense if you just cut the slowjam when the intensity of the song drops from the section that the slowjam was presented on
- second SV has literally no introduction or follow up, it's a once per map SV and it's way too intense while also not properly distanced
- third SV is not consistent with itself as the SV jumps accent the lyrical syllabes but they do it for 4 syllabes out of 5 before the denser part which is a flawed execution of said concept

Also regarding the second point here, everyone has their own opinion and more people dislike SV heavy maps even if they have solid justification for each of the gimmicks presented and the gimmicks are polished to the point of representing the song's nature perfectly just because they either can't play them or just dislike gimmicks, same goes for LN charts. This is not the problem here. The SVs aren't hard, they're not representing the nature of the song, this song doesn't really have a climax, it just has a slightly more intense chorus, as with a lot of anime songs and this also shows with the fact that Niks put the SVs in only three places and the first one is 41 seconds into the map.
The other thing is that there's is no introduction, there is no cue for the fact that there will be any SVs in the map, this map is literally what you would expect from a TV size chart except it just throws random stuff at you in the second half. Which is not okay.

DE-CADE wrote:

Jump SV doesn't really trouble me anyway its fun challenge for me since its used at 1 spot only and the slowdown is pretty fit there i like it very much,it doesn't ruin my accuracy. i like this map lmao

Kamikaze wrote:

The thing is, I was not vouching for adding more SVs. I'm of the opinion that this map doesn't need ANY SVs and it would be better off not having those sparse random changes for the sake of map looking cooler. It's what I refer as making SVs for the sake of having SVs in the map. The SV feels forced, each one of those three SVs feels forced just to have it. Maybe apart from the third one but more to that later.

Kamikaze wrote:

We have differing opinions then because the instrument is indeed fading but then more of the intensity is fading as it's slowing down to then make a bigger return for the chorus. That being said the slowjam only really serves as sort of an annoyance because the layering is not really taken into account, the scroll speed slows down but you have trickier LNs to handle which is impractical while also it's not big enough to force a diffrent reading technique so it's pretty awkward.

Kamikaze wrote:

It's funny that you mention Batting Show because this is a perfect example of a map that's built SPECIFICALLY FOR SVS. This map is not. This map only has a jump that's too powerful for what the song provides just to have some effect. The concept of this map and it's patterning are not built specifically for SVs. Batting Show is.
The slowdown happening before argument is also not logical because it might make a player think "huh there are SVs here?" but also if you expect players to guess that they will have an uneven 3,1x->0,3x jump after a 0,92x slowjam then you are wrong.
I also don't get the point about it being an excitement factor, the excitement factors are kiai, harder patterning, but not a single SV that starts off this "hype" section. Also funny how you mention that when you later mention that you dislike heavy SV maps.
As for 4. of course that it's a hyperboly, it's a 3,8* acc map mostly 1/1 rhythms, remembering two seconds is nothing for top rank players, same for me, it took me 4 tries to SS the map, even though it didn't beat my 1x200 score due to not focusing that much on ratio. If you expect that on a map like that leaderboards will show clearly stuff like that then it's not. I've asked a couple of fairly good people to play the map and give me their opinions and while they have differing opinions about the patterning and third SV, I've only heard "wtf" "why is this so strong lmao it doesn't fit here" and so on comments about this particular SV. Also if it wasn't for this SV the whole mod of mine would just consist of saying that the third SV is inconsistent while asking for a fix

Kamikaze wrote:

Okay, I can agree with that point, but there is next to no lead in to that as in there is no other SV like that in the entire map even if it was way less intense so you can't possibly expect that without hearing about what the map has beforehand. And also that doesn't solve the issue of he's accenting four vocal syllabes and forgets about the first one.

Kamikaze wrote:

Yeah but also if he does make notes for the drum and drum notes sometimes paired with vocals give even quads is it really that much to ask for to just add some (even light)
drum sample? Especially with the first point that I've mentioned - the soft hitnormal sounds REALLY jarring on this map, it's hard to concentrate on accuracy for me as someone who uses hitsounds for timing because the hat sample is clashing really hard with the song. I get that Niks does the piano keysounds for the vocals, it's a novel idea, but the fact that it's novel doesn't mean that it should always be done by all means necessary because hey I want my map to have that swag most people won't even notice.

Kamikaze wrote:

If you're going for code of conduct as an argument so will I:
"When making suggestions, try to differentiate between what is intersubjectively / objectively bad or wrong, and what you simply dislike on a personal level. All types of suggestion are fine as long as they are put forward accordingly."

"Unless the concept behind a beatmap is fundamentally flawed from the start, modding should aim to improve the map in its current design - not force your own style upon it. If you truly believe the map has too many significant issues to address individually, try to give a general statement of why this is the case and what direction you think the map should go in to get back on track."

I believe that the concept behind the SV usage is fundamentally flawed from the start as the song does not provide the instrumental feedback for SVs that are presented in the map and said SVs are flawed in their construction:
- first SV does not make much sense if you just cut the slowjam when the intensity of the song drops from the section that the slowjam was presented on
- second SV has literally no introduction or follow up, it's a once per map SV and it's way too intense while also not properly distanced
- third SV is not consistent with itself as the SV jumps accent the lyrical syllabes but they do it for 4 syllabes out of 5 before the denser part which is a flawed execution of said concept

Kamikaze wrote:

Also regarding the second point here, everyone has their own opinion and more people dislike SV heavy maps even if they have solid justification for each of the gimmicks presented and the gimmicks are polished to the point of representing the song's nature perfectly just because they either can't play them or just dislike gimmicks, same goes for LN charts. This is not the problem here. The SVs aren't hard, they're not representing the nature of the song, this song doesn't really have a climax, it just has a slightly more intense chorus, as with a lot of anime songs and this also shows with the fact that Niks put the SVs in only three places and the first one is 41 seconds into the map.

Kamikaze wrote:

The other thing is that there's is no introduction, there is no cue for the fact that there will be any SVs in the map, this map is literally what you would expect from a TV size chart except it just throws random stuff at you in the second half. Which is not okay.

Kamikaze wrote:

Also if there are any concerns, any problems, anything to change (the third SV objectively needs to have one more jump to be consistent with itself if it's not gonna be deleted) there should be a DQ happening. And I feel like y'all are just treating disqualifications as some sort of stigma like it was in the older days. It's really not a big deal to take the map down to make some changes that the community wants (not specifying myself here), you are not mapping for yourself but for the community when going for ranked.
I might be wrong about that and if I am, treat it as a PSA for other mappers.

shionelove wrote:

idk whether 00:53:581 this is good or bad,but i think you might want to add same SV to 00:56:006 / 00:58:430 / 01:03:278 and so on.
about 00:59:793 this SV change one note to LN.it would be more predictable and consistent.

01:26:612 add here!

SVs

Sinnoh wrote:

Just a reminder that the ranking criteria applies to all modes and that the current hitsounds aren't sufficient. Hitsounds must be frequently heard when playing. You don't have to place them on every note, but having multiple 10 second sections of high-intensity music without any hitsounds is unrankable.

This set can't be rebubbled until this is fixed

DDMythical wrote:

fuck happened?

i assume theres some sort of language barrier issue here aswell but none of these mods are directed to you as a person but to your work -- none of it is aggressive. do not take it personally and do not apply it to yourself or feel that you are useless for trying something (SVs) and having it not work

i (and many others) would rather you try something interesting and fail than never try anything at all

go back for rank with this -- there's no reason to drop everything here, you can learn something from this and better yourself.