Mirash wrote:

whos naiko me.

Naiko's Hard
00:28:320 (3) - hey make this https://i.imgur.com/WSQa2Gh.png you have 00:28:132 (2,3,4,5,6,7) - same rhythm 3 times and it feels bad and boring, also music follows better imo, maybe a little bit too dense though. I feel like it's fine being kind of boring. I'd map those 1/2's with sliders but then there would be no difference to 00:30:945 (1,2,3) - and 00:36:195 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,1,2,3) -. Circles would make that part even intenser even though it being clearly less instense than the mentioned parts. If more people complain I'll change it.
00:32:820 (3) - ye, same ^
00:54:016 (2) - feels out of place, it doesn't belongs to any of current section sliders, something like copy of 00:54:391 (3) - seem better https://i.imgur.com/2PyJmkg.png You're right. Fixed
00:56:266 (2) - and this is somehow acceptable cuz no melody xD totally see that

1. 00:16:320 (1,2,3,4) - one of them is stacked manually as opposed to everything else (which doesn't matter too much but is going to be visible and stand out with hr)
2. 00:28:132 (2,4,6) - since the 1/1 sliders focus on the low long sounds and skip the 1/2 ones, these singles come off as more of a filler than anything of essence and seem to artificially increase the pace by increasing activity density and they're at odds with 00:29:820 (7,1) - . they're not hugely distrubing but it might be in your interest to kill them
3. 00:39:195 (2,3) - with the sound of 3 sort of being a climax it could be nice to give it some standout element. for example using ctrl g on both sliders individually
4. 01:10:141 (6,7,8) - could flip these by 180° in order to give 7 & 8 a differentiating nuance from the preceeding notes
5. 01:13:141 (1) - just as an idea since the pitches work differently on this set, you could ctrl g it. might just need some position rearrangement for the spacing.

1. 00:02:820 (3,1,2) - the sharp angle there can disorient normal level players as it is a bit of an out of concept flow that you don't really use otherwise in the map to this extend, especially not on other similar sounds as well. moving 2 up would counteract it
2. 00:28:695 (2,2) - might not be the best idea to have those. on a normal level mixing song layers that diverge from the focus at hand is already difficult, doing so with a 1/2 slider that doesn't really have anything which belongs to focused instrument on the slider end is probably just confusing. so 'd at least make it just a single
3. 00:37:320 (4,7) - the turns are not consistent with eachother, ending them up nonsensically.
4. 00:48:391 (3,4,5) - just not sure what these are mapped to exactly, either i'm just blanking out or it needs clarification
5. 01:13:141 (5,1,2,3) - suggesting the same as on the hard here, just that it can work out with less tempering around even with the spinner https://puu.sh/yS4YQ/19a50d7c25.png (don't mind the wrong nc on the image)

Deramok wrote:

i was reminded that i said i'd mod the other difficulties on this and since you're still updating this i'm assuming you're still trying to push it forward That one was unexpected, thank you!

I'll include gtfo's replies in this post.

easy

1. 00:36:570 (1,2,3) - from here on things get really slider heavy until the kiai, which is discouraged for easy difficulties and might do well on getting some modifications. specifically these three are too much one way or the other though. easy players have enough trouble dealing with single repeat sliders, so chaining three is a stretch
   The repeat thing is true, fixed.

normal

1. 00:02:820 (3,1,2) - the sharp angle there can disorient normal level players as it is a bit of an out of concept flow that you don't really use otherwise in the map to this extend, especially not on other similar sounds as well. moving 2 up would counteract it
   I cant really see it out of context in any way, probably because I had no concept in mind for 2/1 rythm gaps in this particular difficulty. Altough, I dont feel like it is that confusing to newcomers since its happening in the first 2 seconds of the map.
   Also I'm using sharp angles in 2/1 gaps several times (e.g. 00:22:695 (1,2,3) - which is even sharper, 01:03:016 (3,4,1) - same here).
   
2. 00:28:695 (2,2) - might not be the best idea to have those. on a normal level mixing song layers that diverge from the focus at hand is already difficult, doing so with a 1/2 slider that doesn't really have anything which belongs to focused instrument on the slider end is probably just confusing. so 'd at least make it just a single
   That drum-ish sound is what I'm trying to emphasize here, since its really audible and a single circle sounds very dull and underwhelming to me. (It would sound correct though, to use a single circle.)
   
3. 00:37:320 (4,7) - the turns are not consistent with eachother, ending them up nonsensically.
   Im pretty unsure about that one, but what I tried to emphasize here is the synth and I tried to make it have more focus at the triangle and the overlap in it, which overlaps at the sound where the drum support is appearent.
   I also tried to emphasize the way the synth goes up and down with those turns, it maybe has flaws but I can't seem to notice any.
   
4. 00:48:391 (3,4,5) - just not sure what these are mapped to exactly, either i'm just blanking out or it needs clarification
   Its missing something at 00:52:141 - I tried to fix it, should be better now. (01:01:141 - Same here)
   01:00:766 (6,7,1) - I wonder if that overlap is now problematic though
   Update: changed pattern
   
5. 01:13:141 (5,1,2,3) - suggesting the same as on the hard here, just that it can work out with less tempering around even with the spinner https://puu.sh/yS4YQ/19a50d7c25.png (don't mind the wrong nc on the image)
   The idea here is to resemble the Easy difficulty (You probably noticed it.), whereas Hard and Astray got some more fancy patterns to them, so I'd like to keep it like that.
   It is a good suggestion though, because it would fix the cramped up feeling of what I currently have.

hard

1. 00:16:320 (1,2,3,4) - one of them is stacked manually as opposed to everything else (which doesn't matter too much but is going to be visible and stand out with hr)
   Yep, fixed.
2. 00:28:132 (2,4,6) - since the 1/1 sliders focus on the low long sounds and skip the 1/2 ones, these singles come off as more of a filler than anything of essence and seem to artificially increase the pace by increasing activity density and they're at odds with 00:29:820 (7,1) - . they're not hugely distrubing but it might be in your interest to kill them
   Without them it wouldn't be dense enough rythmically for a hard diff and the filler was actually intended.
3. 00:39:195 (2,3) - with the sound of 3 sort of being a climax it could be nice to give it some standout element. for example using ctrl g on both sliders individually
   Applied.
4. 01:10:141 (6,7,8) - could flip these by 180° in order to give 7 & 8 a differentiating nuance from the preceeding notes
   I... dont get what you mean...
5. 01:13:141 (1) - just as an idea since the pitches work differently on this set, you could ctrl g it. might just need some position rearrangement for the spacing.
   It is a nice idea but I've got to deny it since the pattern was intended to share similarities with the one in astray and applying what you said would make it differ too much imo.

Chriz wrote:

I was asked to mod, so i do.

Astray

00:19:695 (5) - i dislike how you use the strong sound at the end as a slider end
I wanted to have a held note there and the sliderstart is just as strong or even stronger in sound to me, so it shouldn't pose a problem.
00:21:945 (2) - same goes here.

00:36:945 (1,2) - would make these have the kink aswell ( 00:30:945 (1,2,3) - ) because the guitar(?) is almost as loud as in the first
Mhh.. it made me spot an inconsistency, thus I put red ankers on everything that emphasized the guitar pluck thingys.

you highlight these 00:45:754 (3) - and 00:48:391 (3) - differently than these 00:54:766 (3) - , 00:57:391 (3) - , i dont see, why.
The first two flow from the previous sliderend with the same movement towards the circle, the later two break this movement despite being the same sound. On top of that i dont understand why 00:54:766 (3) - has the biggest DS gap.
For variety and because of the first two starting of slower (even in BPM) while the second two start of faster, basicly a build-up.

Realazy wrote:

[gtfo's Easy]

i think AR3 should be more than enough, the song is moderately slow and the diff is pretty sparse as well. Sure.

01:15:391 (1) - you could extend this up to 01:18:766 - since that high pitched note is still held until that point, and you'll still have enough recovery for newer players. Gotta trust you there.

[gtfo's Hard]

00:39:570 (3,3) - i really disagree with the idea of ctrl+g-ing those, the sounds barely stand out because everything in the song has relatively similar intensity. if anything, the song is becoming much calmer considering its bpm slows down a lot, and the pitch also gets much lower. besides, the map has no other jumps besides for those two, and it feels extremely weird to have those at the lowest point of the song. Well it was like that before but after a suggestion I thought it was a good idea... sigh... back it goes!
01:10:891 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2) - i get the idea, and the pattern is decent in itself i guess, but i think it's very confusing at first due to the drastic changes in spacing compared to the rest of the map which uses constant spacing, you could maybe try stacking the sliders on sliderends instead? spacing would be more consistent with the rest of the map, and the idea still remains there. Changed it so the issue should be fixed!

Realazy wrote:

Thank you for looking for the metadata!
(As soon as I saw the mod I went looking for it instantly and would've almost overlooked the box.. kudos to gtfo for pointing it out lol)

[Normal]

00:23:070 (2) - why not make this a 1/1 slider like the previous times? there's still an extended sound on this note so it'd be expected to have the same pattern as the 2 previous times
Gotta disagree with that one because if I were to put the 1/1 slider in there it would sound too continous and wouldn't highlight the change as much as I'd like it to. I did the same in Astray for the same reason, its probably because of my own interpretation of the music if you'd still disagree I'd change it.
00:28:695 (2) - i certainely agree with deramok on that one, emphasis through overmapping isn't recommended on normals at all, plus if you really wanted to emphasize that sound you would have those 1/2 sliders each time it plays. but even if you did, i still wouldn't recommend overmapping for emphasis in lower diffs
Alright, I'll replace it with circles.
00:35:445 - such a huge break really feels weird considering there's no clear stop in the song or anything that suggests it, reversing 00:33:570 (3) - could be a nice idea to make this less boring, and adding a circle afterwards at 00:35:445 - could also be nice to keep the rhythm entertaining.
I agree, changed.
01:00:766 (6,7) - really recommend you unstack them or move 01:01:891 (1) - further away to make sure players don't read it as constant 1/2 since spacing is the same, this is mostly why large spacing differences aren't allowed in lower diffs, to make sure everything is properly readable
Fixed!

[Astray]

00:36:195 (1,2,1,2) - i get the symmetry idea, but you should really consider having lower spacing on those, it feels like a really large spike considering the rest of the map up to this point. i think ctrl+g on 00:36:570 (2,2) - could also be a neat idea? this way you have the high pitched sliders going up, while the low pitched ones go down. either way, consider doing something here to keep the spacing more consistent with the rest of the map
I like the Ctrl+G suggestion and applied it.
I also dropped the spacing a teensy bit in addition to it.

should be it i guess, call me back when you're ready owo

Thank you so much!

Realazy wrote:

not late btw

1. 00:17:820 (2,3) - minor but these slider shapes looked weird given the structure at the rest of the section. Looking at how all the other sliders are previously in the section these don't really fit in
2. 00:44:091 (2,3) - this spacing suggests a different snap than what they actually are
3. 01:01:891 (1) - imho the massive change in SV felt quite forced and slightly unfitting. Both in how it fits the song and the jump from the SV used at 01:00:766 when the intensity between the 2 sections isn't that big. 1x SV would be just fine to me.

1. I honestly think AR 6.5 would be better at this bpm and density, because there isn't a real need to have only 2 objects on screen at a time when it's DS'd so heavily. It makes it easier for people to play with HR too since it doesn't have the AR shoot up to 9.8
2. 00:50:641 (6) - this isn't NC'd but 00:59:641 (1) is
3. 01:05:266 (1) - delete NC

1. AR 4
2. 01:09:766 (3) - how about this rhythm? https://i.imgur.com/Z9Nfwxz.png Follows the song a lot better imo

1. AR2
2. 00:44:980 (1) - even though I know there is a change in bpm here the NC isn't needed
3. 00:49:516 (1) - I think this https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/10298669 or https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/10298676 would be nice rhythms to have. It would make it feel more like a beginner diff and the current rhythm is really similar to that in the normal
4. 00:58:516 (1) - ^
5. 01:15:391 (1,1) - Sorry I can't really agree with this recovery time in the spinner. It's really short give how easier the rest of the diff is. Ending the spinner at the same spot as the normal would be a good alternative

1. 00:17:820 (2,3) - minor but these slider shapes looked weird given the structure at the rest of the section. Looking at how all the other sliders are previously in the section these don't really fit in
   I wanted to emphasize the "dingdong" but at second glance (or the thousandth one tbh) they really look odd and only appear once in the whole map, changed.
2. 00:44:091 (2,3) - this spacing suggests a different snap than what they actually are
   Not sure what you exactly mean but if you're talking about the possibility of missreading it because of the change in bpm then I don't think it should be that problematic, the slow feeling to it was how I intended it to be like.
3. 01:01:891 (1) - imho the massive change in SV felt quite forced and slightly unfitting. Both in how it fits the song and the jump from the SV used at 01:00:766 when the intensity between the 2 sections isn't that big. 1x SV would be just fine to me.
   The change in SV isn't all that massive imo, given the 1/1 gap it just gives off the kick I wanted it to have and with SV 1x it would feel too bland and boring to me.

1. AR 4
   Why not.
2. 01:09:766 (3) - how about this rhythm? https://i.imgur.com/Z9Nfwxz.png Follows the song a lot better imo
   I dont like the repeat on that place because of it looking out of place and inconsistent to me so I'd prefer to let it stay how it is.

CookieBite wrote:

remove "gtfo" in the source

Kisses wrote:

Hard

1. I honestly think AR 6.5 would be better at this bpm and density, because there isn't a real need to have only 2 objects on screen at a time when it's DS'd so heavily. It makes it easier for people to play with HR too since it doesn't have the AR shoot up to 9.8. Well, I don't think many people will play this with hr as its easily dtable. You're right though it feels better with lower ar. Put it down to 6.7.
2. 00:50:641 (6) - this isn't NC'd but 00:59:641 (1) is. Fixed
3. 01:05:266 (1) - delete NC. Fixed

Easy

1. AR2 Sure buddy.
2. 00:44:980 (1) - even though I know there is a change in bpm here the NC isn't needed. Fixed
3. 00:49:516 (1) - I think this https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/10298669 or https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/10298676 would be nice rhythms to have. It would make it feel more like a beginner diff and the current rhythm is really similar to that in the normal. Decreased density for both patterns even though I'm not really happy with how it looks like atm. Hope you'll give me feedback on the new pattern.
4. 00:58:516 (1) - ^
5. 01:15:391 (1,1) - Sorry I can't really agree with this recovery time in the spinner. It's really short give how easier the rest of the diff is. Ending the spinner at the same spot as the normal would be a good alternative. Haha, ironic that one suggestion from another bn leads to the pop. I put it back where it was. You may wanna have a short talk with Realazy about the issue.

popped for the spinner recovery in easy. PM me when responded