00:20:219 (1,1,1) - Players will read these NCs as 1/3s (instead of 1/2) considering you led with a 1/3 snapping earlier 00:19:870 (1) - .

00:46:033 (1,2,3,4,1) - Can you spice this up a bit?
Spacings throuhgout 00:46:033 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,5,6,7) - are a bit monotonous to play.

02:02:076 (1,2,3) - This looks like a pattern rather than 02:02:250 (2,3,4) - tbh. 01:48:123 (1,2,3,4) - has a much clearer pattern arrangement for example.

(I know it's a minor thing but given you have been super consistent with this I figured I should at least point this out.)

02:14:983 (3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10) - What about instead of these, you use the same rhythm from 02:09:402 (3,1,2,1,2) - ?

1. The bass(?) landed like a 1/8 earlier than 02:15:070 - anyway so you don't need to map 02:15:070 (4) - .
2. 02:15:332 - Is pretty strong so it would be a shame to just map it like a middle of the stream.

03:03:995 (1,2) - Swap NC? Based on 03:06:785 (4,1) - 03:09:576 (4,1) - .

03:49:518 (1,2,1,2) - Could you fix up the visuals here a bit?

1. 03:50:216 (1,2) - 03:54:402 (1,2) - Song's rhythm is not the same for both of these, so they shouldn't play the same way.

2. 03:49:518 (1,2) - Looks super sloppy since they don't have any visual relation whatsoever (unlike 04:00:681 (1,2,1) - which is more typical of your style).

03:51:611 (4) - 04:02:774 (1) - Inconsistent NCs?

OD should be bumped up, I am thinking of 9:

1. 8 is quite low for expert at this BPM.

2. The map itself requires player to be accurate with a lot of 1/4 jumps between sliders, so a smaller hit window would give a more accurate gameplay feedback.

00:07:557 (1,1,2,1,2,1,2) - Grouping should have been something like:

So that the transition between all these is 3-3-3, which is the same grouping you did in Insane as well.

01:03:136 (2) - Is on a different sound + a lot stronger than 01:02:820 (1) - so these should not be grouped in the same pattern.

01:05:978 (2,1) - 01:06:926 (1,1) - Kinda wish the spacings could be bigger to reflect that the song has been trying to ramp up since 01:05:347 - .

01:41:662 (1,2,1,2) - 01:43:241 (1,2,1) - Get the idea but this also ended up using only minimal movement when the song is reaching climax.

Could swap 01:41:978 (2,1) - to create some sort of back-and-forth jumps like:

So that it at least retains your original pattern idea while keeping the gameplay challenging (if you agree then a similar idea can be applied to 01:43:241 (1,2,1) - as well).

Could silence the blue tick sliderends considering you already did on on top diff?

OD should be at least 8 (or 7.5 if you wanna keep the OD on top diff).

00:23:662 (1) - Different rhythms started here so 00:23:031 (2,3,1) - could be something more interesting than just using the same small spacings throughout.

01:03:136 (2) - Same as 2236105#4836431.

01:27:136 (1,1) - 01:27:768 (3,1) - Are very confusing to read with 01:27:768 (3,1) - being 1/2 with a smaller spacing.

Spacing for 01:27:136 (1,1) - should be something with a similar scale to 01:34:715 (1,1) - 01:35:347 (3,1) - .

01:29:978 (1,2,1,2,1,2) - Very easy to misread as 1/2s since this map has a lot of 1/2 stacks placed in the same way.

Should have a different kind of visual indication (e.g. overlapping instead of stacking?) or just change 01:29:978 (1,2,1,2,1,2) - into 1/3 reverse sliders to help players adapt to the snapping.

01:41:662 - Same as 2236105#4836433.

02:01:715 - Is not the same sound as 02:02:031 so maybe change 02:01:557 (1) - into two circles instead? Just like 02:00:768 (1,2) -

00:41:504 (3) - 00:49:083 (3) - 00:56:662 (3) - Can be removed? There are no sounds + higher diffs didn't do this anyway.

01:53:662 (2,3) - Prefer the rhythm below since that way you can highlight all of 1/2s starting from 01:53:978 - as a pattern.

01:56:504 (1,2) - Overlap doesn't look intentional?

00:15:136 (4) - Could be two circles? Tail is mappable and wouldn't hurt to create some rhythm variation between the two measures 00:11:978 (1,2,3,4) - 00:13:873 (1,2,3,4) - .

00:22:715 (4) - Same as 2236105#4836445.

HP2, can be a bit more forgiving since normal has HP3

00:48:294 - You sure you're not mapping this? Same thing as 00:55:873 (1) - though.

01:40:083 (2,3) - Maybe a 1/1 slider + two circles for cymbals at 01:40:715 - 01:41:031 - since the song is peaking here?

01:31:557 (4) - Can be two circles?
Based on your logic of making the pattern stand out from: 2236105#4836399/12811424

00:06:610 (2) - 1/3 stuff starts shere so this should be NC'd instead of 00:07:557 (1) - .

01:52:715 (1) - This is super close to offscreen can you move up.

HP5? 4 is a bit too lenient gameplay-wise and should be higher than Hard anyway.

00:39:126 (2,3) - This is just too big to the point where it can be misread as 1/4 instead though.

OD5, you have some triplets so it should be at least this much.

00:03:900 (3,4) - 00:16:288 (3,4) - Could be 1/2 reverse sliders instead to create some rhythm variation vs. 00:10:094 (3,4,5,6,7) - 00:16:288 (3,4,5,6,7) - .

(The pitches are kinda different so having a slight rhythm variation would at least reflect that.)

00:38:739 (5,6) - 00:41:836 (5,6) - Just use denser rhythms, even Normal is denser here.

02:22:215 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13) -
04:10:847 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,1) -
Could you nerf these parts a bit?

Nerfing would make the actual build-up parts 02:24:742 - 04:13:373 - more highlighted.
Right now I can hear the snares picking up at 02:24:742 - 04:13:373 - but there are no notable changes in mapping.

03:21:548 - 03:26:127 - 05:10:969 - What are these manual breaks doing here?

00:59:952 (4,1) - Snare here deserves a bigger spacing though.

01:49:057 (2,3,4) - Broken stack?

02:14:636 (1,2,3,4,5) - Is this just me or the stream is not cleanly straight?

02:56:636 (2) - Ctrl+G?

02:55:057 (3,4,5,6) - The spacing is scaling up here so having small spacings throughout 02:56:320 (1,2,3) - is just anti-climatic.

04:35:952 (2,1) - This is pretty big compared to your other 1/4 spacings though.
Even the last chorus 06:49:847 (2,1) - is not as big as this.

04:36:978 (6,1) - Wish there is some sort of direction change on top of spacings as well (for vocal, obviously).

05:39:899 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - Any thoughts on using the same spacing as 05:39:268 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - ?

If you're not scaling the spacings here then the scaling would happen on 05:40:531 instead, which is where the drumrolls are considerably stronger.

01:26:636 (1,2,3,4) - Could add whistles for guitar?
Similar to how 06:22:215 (1,2,1,2,1,1,1,2,1,2) - was done.

03:12:346 - Is this meant to be silenced or...?

06:01:057 (1) - I can't tell if the drumslide on 06:01:215 - is intentional, considering you put a green line here.

07:27:899 (1) - 07:28:531 (1) - 07:29:163 (1) - If you are silencing the sliderends anyway then might as well use 1/3 snap on these, no?

07:57:899 (3,1) - Just to make sure - the finishes are intentional right?

08:24:742 (1) - Remove drum sampleset from sliderslide?

01:24:333 (6,1) - 02:51:606 (6,1) - These are readable but suddenly small spacings at the end of the kiais are quite underwhelming.

01:25:697 (7,1) - This should be bigger, especially when compared with 02:52:970 (7,1) - 03:36:777 (8,1) - .

01:29:958 (5) - NC?

04:10:015 (2,3,4,5,6,7,1,2,3,4,5) - Should mix in a slider or two.

1. These are consecutive jumps that made the gameplay harder than everything else around that part when the intensity has not really changed.

2. Vocals on stuff like 03:56:038 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - 04:17:856 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - etc. don't feel exclusively highlighted anymore because you did similar consecutive jumps here on entirely different rhythms.

01:06:180 (5) - 02:11:635 (3) - 02:33:453 (5) - 02:55:271 (5) - 03:38:907 (5) - 04:00:725 (5) - 04:22:544 (5) -

Can you confirm again that the current snapping choice of these is what you intended instead of 1/6s?

00:35:798 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - These are visually reflecting the increase in intensity, but gameplay-wise they are not that much different

At least 00:37:204 (1,2,3,4) - should be much more difficult than 00:35:798 (1,2,3,4) - (Insane did pretty ok on this).

00:42:243 - This is too strong to skip though, why don't just do the same thing you did with 01:11:891 (3,4,5) - ?

01:09:548 (1,2) - Should have a different way to differentiate these from 01:09:079 (1,2) - .
Right now 01:09:079 (1,2,1) - look + play like a same pattern but 01:09:548 (1) - is on a different section.

00:14:704 (2) - 2108064#4303062
(Just migrating the old post to here so that nothing is unaddressed.)

00:15:173 (1,2,5) - 2108064#4303063
(Just migrating the old post to here so that nothing is unaddressed.)

00:41:188 (5,1) - 00:47:048 (3,4) - Why suddenly big spacings?

First one is sort of justifiable but you didn't do the same at 01:10:954 (7,1) - either, so I'll just assume both of these are not intentional.

00:45:641 (1,2,3) - Broken stack?

Metadata in Normal conflicts with other diffs.

Did you copy the new hitsound + volume stuff to this diff yet?

00:17:723 - Why is there a manual break here?

HP5 at least. I get being forgiving to compensate but HP3 is just way too extreme.

Difficulty name is a bit misleading.

This is the only diff that is actually a custom name, so it gives an impression that this is on a higher hierarchy than Insane when they are actually on the same level.

To reflect that, this could be renamed as Insane: Precision (or Special, up to you) 64 and then Insane: [xxx] 64 for another highest diff.

00:32:387 (3) - Is this supposed to be stacked with 00:32:660 (4) - based on your previous patterns?

00:32:387 (3,4) - Why is this spacing suddenly big out of nowhere?

02:25:031 (1) - Would remove NC on this.

Otherwise it could be confusing to play considering you are using only two combo colours and the NC just killed the followpoints on top of that.

The rhythm density is so sparse (and the low BPM makes this even more sparse) that I don't want to consider this a rhythm game level. There are like...40-ish objects over the course of almost two minutes.

I don't see it realistic to even make one considering you already have a lot of lower difficulties, and even the newest players would be able to breeze through your Easy diff anyway.

02:05:121 - So this little gap is mapped in Hard/Hyper but not here?

From 00:23:114 - until 00:40:570 - You could still map this part?
I mean, you already did this in Easy so why not here?

01:30:599 - Is the break intentional? Only diff in the entire set that has a manual break set here.

02:24:758 (1,2) - Should swap NC so that the grouping 02:23:122 (1,2,3,4,1,2,1,2,1) - matches with how each combos are placed horizontally.

00:44:934 (1,2) - Just use the same rhythm from 00:53:661 (1,2,3) - , what you have now is not dense enough.

01:14:390 (1,2,3,4,5) - Could be nerfed a bit since this is Easy now, maybe 2 1/2 sliders + circles instead?

01:49:301 (1,2,3,4,5) - Same as 2049651#4787132.

02:11:121 (3,4) - This could be a 2/1 slider so that circles will be used exclusively on the same sound at 02:12:757 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7) - .

(i.e., 02:12:212 (4) - is not the same sound as the rest so you might as well make it a sliderend.)

AR2 would help reading the stuff with more consecutive objects like 02:20:940 (1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1) - .

01:55:302 (1) - Use the following rhythms instead of a spinner? Just my personal preference over a spinner since you can still map to some rhythms here:

02:12:757 (1) - Same as 2049651#4787136.

What's the reason for using slider tick rate 2 (especially when Beginner has 1)?

01:04:708 - NC?

01:36:210 (2,1) - Distance snapping.

00:38:933 (3,5) - A rather untidy overlap no? 00:30:205 (3,5) - Is similar but cleaner (for example).

00:47:116 (9) - Might as well NC this thing since 00:42:752 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - 00:49:298 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - are NC'd every measure anyway.

01:10:400 - 01:15:897 - 02:33:265 - These breaks are not snapped to anything, intentional?

01:10:051 (5) - Unsnapped.

01:56:794 (2) - This is correct right? Just want to make sure since this is the only 1/6 object in kiai.

I am pretty sure this is expert and not anywhere near "Another" territory? The naming is kinda misleading here.

01:56:729 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - 01:58:308 (1,2) - 01:59:887 (1) - 02:01:465 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - Are these actually 1/3 stuff?

Personally these sound like either 1/4 or 1/8 + host and scub seem to be using 1/4s on these spots.

00:09:664 (1) - Could do a gradual increase in volume here through the green lines?

Hearing the sliderhead+repeat sound much louder before the song fades in is pretty jarring.

00:16:051 (1) - Should be something different here since the sound landed here is not that strong compared to 00:14:309 (1) - 00:14:889 (1) - 00:15:470 (1) - .

02:28:308 (1,2,3) - Pretty underwhelming considering that this is supposed to be built up from 02:25:939 (1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3) - .

00:38:696 (1,2) - Fix stack.

00:42:180 (1,2,3,1) - These deserve more spacings considering how high the pitch is.

00:46:825 (1,2,3) - This could also be more challenging to reflect the increasing intensity from vocals.

01:03:083 (6,7) - Should use the same rhythms from 01:05:405 (6,7,8,9) - because the overall intensity is increasing.

At least 01:03:083 (6,7) - should be something more active than 01:00:760 (3,4,5) - .

02:00:479 (8,1) - Spacing on this should be bigger than 02:00:281 (7,8) - and not the other way around.

02:04:229 (2,3) - Nerf the spacing a bit, there's nothing strong on 02:04:426 (3) - .

02:05:808 (3,4) - Spacing should be much higher, at least in a similar scale to 02:05:215 (3,1) - .

02:25:939 (1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3) - I thought you were gonna do the "Scales of Justice" patterning thing like your higher diff, not the case here?

00:57:276 (1,2,1,2) - Rhythm density should be more like 00:59:599 (1,2,3,4) - .

I mean sure 00:59:599 (1,2,3,4) - has choirs but overall both of these are still pretty similar intensity-wise.

01:06:567 (1) - 01:07:728 (1) - Should be 1/2 sliders.
The song is hyping up yet 01:06:567 (1,2,3,1,2,3) - as a whole is currently less dense than earlier measures.

01:36:992 - Should do a 1/2 slider + 1/1 slider here.
Currently 01:36:597 (4,5,6,1) - has more rhythm gaps + is less dense than everything else around it.

02:28:308 (1,2,3) - Spamming NCs where will help with readability considering these are 3/4s.

AR 5 is enough, BPM is not that high + rhythms are not that complicated.

02:28:308 (1,2,3) - 2183295#4768110

AR 3-3.5, similar to 2183295#4768111

01:35:413 (1,2,3,4,5,1,2,3,4,5,1,2,3,4,5,1,2,3) -
You have to ignore some stuff and reduce rhythm density. Otherwise this would be as difficult to play as the kiai 01:54:360 - which is obviously more intense.

00:20:115 - Should be mapped considering the intensity of this section is not really different from 00:24:760 - .

Duplicated green lines.

00:54:954 (4) - NC.

00:58:438 (1) - Remove NC? Based on 01:00:760 (3) - 01:03:083 (3) - etc.

00:43:572 (3,4,5) - 01:39:151 (3,4,5) - Are these triplets broken here or...?

02:18:413 (1) - Could be misleading? I thought this was going to come after 02:18:519 (1,2,3) - when I was playing.

Maybe change into some other shape 02:18:519 (1,2,3) - ? Or at least the angles should not be a continuation from angles of 02:17:466 (1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3) - at least.

02:30:730 (1) - 02:30:940 (2) - Swap NC?

02:31:887 (1,1,2,3) - 2293896#4766281

01:35:151 (3,4,5) - Fix stack.

02:20:203 (4) - Why is this hitsounded differently from other diffs though?

02:44:737 - The sound lands here rather than 02:43:737 (3) - though.

Keeping the current rhythm choice should still be ok as simplification if you remove whistle and mute the repeat?

02:43:737 (3) - 2293896#4767254

02:30:264 (1,2) - Is the DS here supposed to be 1.4x like 02:23:527 (1,2) - 02:38:685 (1,2) - etc. ?

01:32:579 - 01:39:316 - 02:21:843 (1) - Claps missing?

02:19:106 - 02:22:474 - 02:32:579 - 02:39:316 - Inconsistent hitsounds with other diffs (drum sampleset + clap thingy).

Can you confirm again whether these are intended?

02:38:685 (1) - Somehow finish only exists in this diff but not others.

00:16:645 - Vocal kinda too strong for just a sliderend.

Would go for rhythms choices like 00:27:145 (3,4,5,1) - where you mapped vocals over the downbeat kick.

00:25:811 (6) - Should be circles like 00:26:145 (7,8) - since both are the same thing.
If you're worried about diff spike then just keep the spacings low.

00:46:645 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7) - These are on different drums than 00:46:645 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,1) - so at least flows/angles should be more different.

Right now flows on both are pretty much mirrored (Insane did fine on using different flows for different rhythms here, so you can refer to that).

01:01:978 (2,3,4,1) - There's nothing here so spacings should be smaller than the actual vocal stuff 01:00:478 (3,4,5) - 01:04:478 (2,3,4) - 01:05:811 (3,4,5) - etc.

01:13:478 (2) - Should be two circles since 01:13:645 - has a drum while 01:13:311 - doesn't.

01:35:145 - End the slider here since this is where the vocal faded out?

00:18:811 (2,3) - Ctrl+G rhythm to prioritise vocals over the kick?
At least that's what you did in other diffs.

00:39:811 (1,2,1) - Fix stack.

00:57:645 (3) - Too passive for chorus though.
Personally would do a circle + 1/2 slider starting at 00:57:645 - but up to you.

01:16:478 - Can still be mapped?

01:35:145 - 2252460#4765587

00:16:645 (5,1) - ทำไมเป็นสีเดียวกัน
00:54:145 (3,1) - อันนี้อีกอัน

ลองเช็คทั้ง set อีกทีนะ ผม ขก. มานั่งหา

00:41:145 - Spinner should have ended here?
There's nothing on 00:41:311 - .

01:14:478 - Should nerf rhythm density in this section, at least this should be significantly less dense than Hard.