imo c'est plus impactant de focus le son à 00:39:316 (58), et jtrouve que le triplet se joue pas très bien ici
mais je comprends et je serai pas contre si y'a plus d'opinions dans ton sens !
mmmm I don't really see what you see
I don't think it matches vocals better + it kinda breaks the even pattern structure thingy I want for this section.
I understand what you mean but I truly believe this is not problematic, I'll explain my thoughts on this:
1 - I believe we should not be afraid to give muzu players uncommon patterns. The only reason I have over 900h of playtime is because of muzukashiis that were giving me a "challenge", such as gimmicky patterns.
2 - This pattern is really repetitive, making it easier to learn. (muzu players often spam retry maps)
3 - This pattern can 100% be avoided by just... omitting the big notes.
So yeah, I don't really want to change it but honestly I'm not 100% against your suggestions.
Just need more opinions on your side imo, because right now I just think this plays well !
Once again screen is dead so I'll try (I'd advise to use s-ul if you can)
I agree this section feels a bit off, I took inspiration from zhuosh's oni -w-)b
mmm all of your screens already disapeared so I'll do as I can :s
I kinda see what you mean but I feel like patterns such as 00:20:118 (3,4,5,6,7) are a pretty common impro (I follow melody) in muzus and I like a lot how it plays out (maybe I'm wrong tho, feel free to straight up tell me if you really believe this is wrong)
- deleted note at 00:22:968 and 01:20:568 to keep following melody
mmmm I don't see a problem with a copy pasted section which only happens once in the map. (and I feel like it fits the song pretty well)
This is the kind of stuff I actually liked when I was a beginner so I'll keep -w-)b
I mean yeah I saw that, honestly you can keep as it is you wish. I already explained why I thought it was best to change.
The fact that you explained your intentions here is good for other modders to see if you decline !
**"Should these svs be added on the others as well or should it be different?"**
Exact values probably won't fit all diffs (Oni should be good)
But I'm pretty sure you can use this concept everywhere
**"The sv positioning tho is very weird as it was supposed to be 5 ms early?"**
I'm not exactly sure what you mean, a greeline perfectly snapped on a note will work as intented most of the time.
But if it does not maybe 1ms is fine ??? I'm not sure, could ask someone else :s
"add dons maybe" - it's inner so why not
"dkkd or kkkd with 1/6 snap" - nah, definitely too dense for this section
"add something like "k ddk kdk" & "would be good if there was a spinner?" - I'm a huge fans of these breaks so I'll keep (emphasizes better the start of kiais imo)
and added 1/6s on 00:14:339 & 00:17:006 to contrast better with previous patterns
I think you are right, it does play a bit weird. But I wont map the whole thing because I don't want to decrease the emphasis on 00:49:006 (43) (I think the break feels really great here)
So I'll just delete the note at 00:48:923 so that the focus isn't entirely on synth !
I like current version better:
1- I want to emphasize the note at 00:48:006 (35) more than 00:47:839 (33) - (because of crash sound)
2- `dkk` makes for a really good transitions into those `dk` 2plets
-w-)b
It could work indeed, however I prefer my current pattern for a few reasons:
1- It plays godlike imo
2- There still is a sound here, and it being mapped with a `d` does not interfere with the gabber sounds that are mapped with `k`
3- The oni uses `kk kk` already, so having `kkdkk` in inner oni makes for good spread progression
However, I did not add your other suggestions because I am 100% trying to avoid 1/4 finishers for playability's sake. -w-)b
Trying to enforce spread consistency here would hinder the map's quality imo
If you agree:
- You should change 01:19:296 (134,135,136) `kdd` & 01:19:696 (137,138,139) `kdk`, that way it stays consistent with 01:14:496
- 01:20:896 (146,147,148) `kdd`
ooooook I had a bit of a struggle to find why fading out my sprites sooner didn't affect the awkward wait time at the end.
Turns out I can rewrite my function for the ending's particles much better lol
Should be fixed now, I'll for sure be aware of that next times -w-)b
"3 consecutive 2/1 breaks is reasonable substitute at this BPM imo" okok I wasn't too sure hence why I really wanted to place this break here xd
Applied