00:00:624 (1) - kinda awkward place to start a beatmap? just saying; doesn't matter. it should definitely be on the right! waaagh!
00:28:624 (3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,1) - the spacing might have to be consistent; it doesn't look very straightforward.
01:09:424 (1,2,3) - there is no reason for them to be on the same spot. Not a big problem, though.
01:10:624 (5,1) - that's way too down, and consider separating them as well.
01:36:224 (4,1) - same as 01:09:424
02:15:624 (5) - that one is also way too down.
02:45:590 (2,3,4) - I would make these a slider.
02:47:923 (8) - I can't hear the hitsound?
03:00:823 (5,1) - same as 01:09:424
03:32:623 (1,2,3,4) - their positioning looks kinda random. try making them neat.
03:41:923 (7,8,1) - doesn't really look like the right place for a jump..
03:45:823 (1,2,3,1,2,3) - same as 03:32:623
04:55:022 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2) - way too far? (it's 8 times farther away than it is supposed to be. dayum.)
06:03:285 (1) - I don't think this is a very good idea. what about just giving the player a break instead?
07:02:747 (1) - way too down?
07:05:947 (1) - ^
07:27:747 (5) - too far away? not a good place for a jump.

That's all from me. that's a really hardcore beatmap by the way.

I hope I can make taiko oni diff. Final test ends in like 3 weeks, so yeah.

Zzzz..

Why would I even... Blahbla, this is all my opinion, blahbla,

zare's mod is hot

Zare wrote: 721nu

Why would I even... Blahbla, this is all my opinion, blahbla,

Legend 3q5j1v

1. 00:10:224 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2) - Two things about this:
   
   a) the NCs. The song doesn't really feature such a distinct 2-beat-goruping that would encourage having an NC on every second beat here. It really just feels like dividing the 2 measures would be enough
   
   b) 00:12:424 (2) - weird shit happening here, because on this red tick the guitar pitch gets raised, it doesn't happen on the downbeat as you would expect it, so actually I'd that to be accentuated in the map in some way. (higher spacing, sharper angle, w/e) |
   
   ^removed two NCs in the early part but kept the 2-beat-grouping later on since this does feel most dominant to me as I'm going with the drums here; generally I find them to have the stronger mainlayering here rather than the guitar - sure, the guitar is notable, very much so actually, but it's more of an after-echoing effect while what you hear and focus on at first are drums. at least that's the case for me, anyways
   
2. 00:16:624 (1,2,3,4) - Since the map in general is mainly following vocals and guitars, on this first strong sound that's kind of introducing the map's main rhythms, I'd go for a slider on the vocals instead of a circle + triple on the drums, it just seems more fitting to go with the main layers here and then start with the more complex stuff at like 00:24:624 - when the drums get heavier and more noticeable | tbh, I really like the whole big slider into spinner into snapped single into tripple very much because it draws a lot of attention to the shift in song section; 00:21:424 (1,2,3,4,5) - you see, doing it again here as that's a similar form of re-buildup again
   
3. 00:23:624 (6,7,8,9,10,11,12) - tbh I dont get this whatsoever, like, the strong BUM BUM drums start 00:23:824 - here but you just kept the same guitar-based stuff, and then you go for 1/4 sliders? I'd want to have the strong drums that start on 00:23:824 - much more emphasized, if needed i'd even go as far as saying to map the previous guitar patterns using 1/4 sliders, then transition into circles when the drums kick in, they're just that strong
   (why did you do sliders on them anyway, practically ignoring every second beat) | not very fond of putting the guitar into the background here, but changed the first slider into two circles because the drums are actually very foregroundish there; the latter two are sort of.. losing the tension for me, if that makes sense, so I'll keep it at that as it relaxes the playing speed and gives another sharp snap to the next combo
   
4. 00:27:824 (1) - idk this just seems real weak and lowly scaled, considering how the vocalist like, jumps 3 octaves up.. This doesn't have any kind of patterning going on, either, no sharp, snappy angles, no higher spacing, it's mapped exactly like the rest (tbh i feel like a lot of the map could have some better spacing-oriented emphasis but welp) | gave it a sharper angle from 7 and adjusted spacing (7->1 1.4x, 1->2 1.4x, 2->3 1.0x)
   
5. 00:32:124 - idk, add circle? vocals are kind of on this tick here, or feel that way | neh, there's nothing here.. and I want to keep the general rhythm a bit more focussed on the drums for those parts, anyways (for the most part)
   
6. 00:35:024 (7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14) - this could just be improved visually, and maybe stick to the sliders on the drumclaps? would feel a bit more epic imo | made it a bit more smooth but I prefer the constant 1/4 here
   
7. 00:35:824 - slider for guitar emphasis? | drumfocussed section; also the backwards snapmovement (the streaming ending with a turn to the upper right) into the stack goes veeeeeeery well with what I want here, so keeping that
   
8. 00:39:024 (1,2,3) - personal preferation right here: don't (auto)stack below a slidertail please. If you have to do a stack, at least do it manually so it a) doesnt fuck your spacing and b) won't kill any kind of modplays (i know you dont care about modplays because blabla map is mapped for nomod bleble but if it doesn't harm your map you might as well do it, no?) | it actually works how it's supposed to with sliderends
   
9. 00:39:024 (1) - another point where I'd like too see higher spacing or something | preferably keeping as-is, the straight movement is pretty much enough accentuation for me here since the previous combo was entirely curved
   
10. 00:40:824 (2) - like, you have higher spacing here and it's not significantly stronger than previous one | it's a fairly unique pattern in the song, though, which distinguishes it fairly clearly from the rest of the song up to now
    
11. 00:42:424 (6,7) - you coooouuuuld map these as circles to prevent the slidertail-stream transition at 00:43:024 - | I'm actually fine with the tail-transition here since there's another shift in tonage and it's a little more easing and introducing like this
    
12. 00:43:824 (1) - tbh this feels like 2 circles would fit better to the vocals that are prominent on both white and red ticks here | drummm focus; I don't want a lot of consistent clickage in these sections, but more angling and guide transitions, sorry >:
    
13. 00:56:624 (1,2,3,4) - hngggghhh | u-uh-uguuuu!! >w<
    
14. 01:00:124 (2,3) - I believe I already pointed this out at some point (dont even ) but, despite being somewhat of a funny feature, why is this a 3/4 double while 01:01:624 (2,3,4) - is a 1/2 triple, same for 01:09:724 (2,3) - ofc | the first example is happening in/right at the end of a vocal pause while the rest is fiddled in-between the lyrics, which is why I didn't seem a stop-and-go anywhere as fitting there; the doubletap-y introduction pulls a lot more focus to the new section and combo which is very nice, but it's a thing that rarely fits >this< well, so it's pretty much a one-time occurance
    
15. 01:31:024 (5) - feels weird because it's like delayed after the vocals by 1/2, why not just put the slider on 01:30:824 - | well.. going by accustic guitar here, not vocals.. generally I don't feel you should be too hard on vocals in a lot of sections of DragonForce songs because, while they might stick out, they have little.. continuous focus, to say it like that? PLUS, I absolutely love accustic guitars..
    
16. 01:32:624 (5,6) - W H Y ? ! ? !
    
    Like, I understand that you're following the guitar mainly and that is generally okay with other rhythms in this section but these vocals just entirely conflict with that and it wouldn't hurt the guitar rhythms that aren't even present here if you followed these lyrics properly
    
    - you even did it 01:40:424 (3) - here ;w; | I don't quite get you tbh
    
17. 01:44:624 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - since I believe I know how you map this kind of confuses me because I don't see what you tried to do here.. It's just 1/2 notes in a visually not appealing snake-curve-line-thing without any special stressing on certain beats, even tho the music clearly suggests some guitar strings that clearly stand out | not a snakeline, it's pairs on the guitar; little backsnaps on the pairs of three and an angle of the pairs of two
    
18. 01:49:024 (6,10) - any reason not to with sliders on these? | felt like this would go better with the synth-guitar combo if I didn't stick to breaktimey sliderrhythms for the entire section; would be lying if I said I didn't consider it, though
    
19. 01:55:224 (6,1) - is ths overlap intentional? did you use compleax algorithms to calculate the cursor movement from 01:55:424 (7,1) - which forces (1) to end uo here, overlapping with 6? if not, change this? | my unreadable skin doesn't find this to be a problem (and neither does default); the hitburst is naturally in the middle of the circle, not around it, so this slider pretty much leads exactly 'into' the center of it, which gives it a nice organized-yet-notsuperroomy look, and I quite like that - in other words: Yes.
    
20. 02:11:824 (1,2,3,4,5,1) - hnggghhh | nn-nyan?? >//w//<
    
21. 02:14:224 (6,7) - this sliderpair seems a little forced to me, the second slider should be circles because youknow equal intensitiy on both beats + both feature dominant vocal line | here, have your 2.45x triangle jump :v
    
22. 02:19:424 (5) - Uhm.... what | Yes, a ive significant sliderend hitsound, you're seing this with your own eyes: I had tried around with this for like, half an hour, but I just ended up with valuing the finishing vocal higher than the actual correctness at this point - don't tell anyone, though, or I'll have to use 1/16 snap and speed the slider up by 7% or smth because people are anal.
    
23. 02:22:624 (5,6,1) - do these spacings make sense when (1) is the strongest beat of them all? I'd nerf (5) and (6) | maybe I'll do something.. different (note how the brown combo is entirely up-and-down based now, might go very well with the establishing of the whistle pattern and the sliderwhistles especially)
    
24. 02:25:474 - there's an unmapped 1/8 beat here, you could like just throw a slider here that will catch this | irc-solution: moved 1/4 slider on the whitetick, gets the kicky feeling well enough without being an arsepain
    
25. 02:25:524 (8,9,10) - silence sliderends for optimal experience?!?! | can do
    
26. 02:26:274 (1) - extremely opinionated, but I really dislike these beziers of yours. imo they're just not good looking idk | my opinion differs~
    
27. 02:44:090 - throwing 1/4 here would be the sexiest thing in the whole fucking map (and do it with high spacing because pitch) | neh, 1/4 notes feel too awkward with how this section is rather calm and empty for the most part; sure, there are sounds there but.. I don't feel a full-pressured keyboard rotation makes a lot of sense to this
    
28. 03:06:223 (1,2,3,4,5,1,2,3,1,2,3,4,5,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1) - aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
    
    like
    this is cool
    but it's really hard to read because of the varying amount of circles on the stacks and the streamjumps and the sudden speedup
    and
    aaaaaaaaaaaa
    also the drums at the 03:07:423 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1) - part sound much more.. rolling.. and less... impactfull.. on the white ticks
    idk
    I feel what you did at 03:16:873 (2,3,4,5,6,7,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,1) - just feels much more fitting and that this is currently really just for the wtf aspect that kills the player
    
    
    
29. 03:10:423 (4,5,1) - minimal change? http://puu.sh/b0txi/873a0a1228.jpg would apply the same stuff for 03:13:273 (5,1,2) - (NOT AN OVERLAP FAN OKAY) | NO, EW!!
    
30. 03:14:623 (4) - what's the reason for this sharp edge, i feel like I could cut my fingers when playing these and the song doesnt really give me that kinda feeling | ~ background whistles be sharpin' ~ ; sliderpairs :v
    
31. 03:25:423 - do your eally need to disregard the drums here? I feel like you could do cool stuff even with 1/4s going here | they're so background-echoy, I'd much rather stick to the more apparent guitars and have the drums play their part as a ing character here
    
32. 03:32:623 (1) - if you placed a 1/2 slider here you would get the AHHHHH emphasized aaaand you would get additional stress on the strrrooooong vocals mapped on 03:32:923 (3,4) - because these are currently mapped like the beat before them and that steals from their distinctive epicness | it's strong vocals but they're more echoy, just like the drums in the above mentioned timestamp; now that Drum-chan is in the strong beaty focus, we want to let her have a bit of spotlight for it a change
    
33. 03:35:923 (4) - can't help it but think that this is off beacuse rhythm on tail.. | I beg your pardon? if anything, the vocals might fall on the 1/16 right after this slider's end, yes, but I think we made it clear that Drum-chan deserves a bit of attention for once I:
    
34. 03:45:223 (7,8) - RIP combo, can't you map this a bit friendlier but still keep the emphasis on every single triple? | mirrored 8-10 and added a drum-hitfinish on the last one; might distinguish them a bit better and have slightly less distance on this jump; should give a nice introduction to the next drumpattern with 8910 and 11121 pointing different ways and stuff
    
35. 03:52:356 (1) - I feel like the entire streampart could use some visual refining, namely stuff like this: http://puu.sh/b0unL/5dc194d868.jpg (use polygon circles or do it properly by hand idc | pretty fine as is; if you took a different timestmap, you'd see it is no problem to begin with because you can actually see the entire shape and not just paaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaart (which nobody looks at while the circles are spawning in the first place, because they're busy elsewhere): https://osu-ppy-sh.tvgratuite.org/ss/1951713
    
36. 04:06:356 (6,7) - just questioning your mindset of always forcing players to follow the slidertracks , especially because you applie that sufficiently on 04:03:689 (6,7) - or 04:05:022 (6,7) - etc | well that's why it's spaced so far: if people drop out at where they most likely will (40% in), they will end exactly on the same distance snap as with the other pairs, which is 1.8x - don't believe me? see for yourself: https://osu-ppy-sh.tvgratuite.org/ss/1951719 ((baited and outsmarted))
    
37. 04:12:356 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2) - what the flying fuck Jenny can you please not just skip important drumbeats in the middle of a drum-following stream? this is like super confusing and doesnt make sense whatsoever | sacrifices have to be made.. the only alternative I could see fit with how I feel about this part of the song would be to make a superspaced upleading into the following slider, so.. I'd rather not
    
38. 04:24:856 (4) - slider to go with guitar? | neh; drumfocus is more important than guitarholding here, specifically since the guitarhold fades into the background rather quickly, so there's not much reason to doing that. plus, a 1/4 kickslider would feel.. super weird here, to me.
    
39. 04:35:022 (1,2) - I hiiiighly suggest to boost the spacing here, at this point it might as well be possible to be a 1/4 jump with the spacingincrease before this and knowing it's... well.... a Jenny map. Anyway, raising spacing here would help readability I think | Ok.
    
40. 04:41:689 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16) - http://puu.sh/b0wGX/6f464327ea.jpg this is just sloppy, use ploygon circles to have the circles at the end stack with those at the beginning, it just looks better | I prefer it as-is, actually; polygon circles feels way too static to go with anything here - while you may say "sloppiness" doesn't convey much, either, I feel it kind of does, as you still have the perfect circle movement, just not with hyperclinical stackings, and that's actually very nice for me here (..plus, if I was just making things up for the sake of having it easy, just changing it would take me less time than giving a reason for not doing it, sooooo~)
    
41. 05:04:022 (9) - there's not even anything in the song to suddenly this kind of streamjump, especially if it's that anti-flowish, same for 05:05:356 (11).. These are just inconsistent with the rest of the map | new start of the highly 'electrolyzed' and practically out-of-control feeling guitars here; it's practically the same sound as 05:03:689 (5) - just with more emphasis because it's circle-to-circle, which is actually beneficial since we're at a very high-tensed point here, rather than before where we were just entering this phase of the song
    
42. 06:42:447 (5) - why the fuck is this here place it on 06:42:547 - for correct snap | k.
    
43. 07:19:147 (2) - circles because of lyrics on slidertick, stop forcing these sliderpairing when they dont fit properly | sheeeeeeesh, here, have your jump, but stop swearing already
    
44. 07:24:247 (8) - why is this the stream turning point? (9) would feel muuuuch more approptiate for this, because you know, white tick, makes sense with music etc. | well, 9 is the turning point; 8 is still the same wavemovement from before, 9 is where you actually put the turn in movement, so, well, it already is.
    
45. 08:06:397 - there's a note here that isnt mapped | this last part is actually full 1/6 and
    
46. 08:06:547 (12) - starting here you have 3 1/6s instead of the 1/4s you mapped, put a reverse slider here that leads into 08:06:747 (1) - | did something like that, sort of.
    

Not
convinced
about many of the things

but the map is still better than the majority of stuff out there soooo

Ugh idk let's try this.



As expected, this map is amazing, kd me so I can throw my stars into this already XD

Kaguya Hourain wrote: 522m2e

General

1. Why undeadbananaz in tags?

http://puu.sh/dakdt/c2320b68c7.png

Too hard for me LOL.

Nice map, idk how to give u a star, i don't use forum, but ok

As requested!

[Legend]

1. 00:20:424 (6) - Why not follow the vocals here like you did previously? This slider ends on no beat so it doesn't contribute that much either, I suggest making it a 1/2 slider (or 2 circles) and to remove the Inherited point that lowers the volume.
2. 00:37:424 (1,2) - They're not 100% identical, and I think they should be.
3. 00:39:024 (1,2,3) - Stack properly.
4. 00:46:424 (9,10,1) - You can make this part a bit more enjoyable (in my opinion, at least) by using CTRL+G on 9 then CTRL+G again on 10 and 1 together.
5. 00:56:624 (1,2) - Stack properly.
6. 00:57:224 (3,4) - ^
7. 01:03:024 (1,2) - ^
8. 01:03:624 (3,4) - ^
9. 01:29:224 (4,5) - Not sure if it is intentional, but you can probably blanket it
10. From 01:22:224 to 01:47:824, there are parts that you follow the vocals and some parts' vocals are getting mixed inside the sliders or ignored, try to make it a bit more consistent.
11. 01:54:824 (5,1) - Stack them?
12. 02:11:424 (7,2) - Stack properly.
13. 02:25:424 (7,8,9) - Increase spacing or at least put a NC, you are inconsiderate of the player.
14. 02:34:757 (1,4) - Stack properly.
15. Why not add note at 02:44:173 and 02:44:257? You can stack them with 02:44:090 (4) - and it goes nicely.
16. 04:15:022 (6,7) - I think you should give priority to the irregular sound and start a slider with it on 6, since the timing point 7 starts, a slider unfits there and sounds a bit weird. (Slider 8 is great)
17. 04:21:689 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - I'd love CTRL+G on every second slider, since the movement from side to side is much more fun than the current linear pattern.
18. 04:47:522 (2,3) - Stack properly.
19. 04:51:856 (11) - NC? 10 and 12 stack so I think a NC here is necessary to make it look a bit less messy.
20. 04:57:689 (4,5,6) - Stack properly.
21. 05:00:856 (7) - Why did you start following the (whatever kind of instrument it is) sound in the middle of it? Either don't follow it or start it at 05:00:356 (5) - it will feel much better.
22. 05:29:356 (7) - CTRL+G for two reasons: A small jump for the strong vocal start, and it plays really nicely with the whole pattern.
23. 05:31:022 (1,2,3) - Stack properly.
24. 05:32:356 (7,8,9) - ^
25. 05:36:356 (9,10,11) - ^
26. 05:43:272 (4,1) - Stack them.
27. 05:52:189 (4,5) - I think the blanket can be improved a bit here.
28. 06:03:153 - Are you allowed to use 0.1x on the inherited point? You can't do that using the editor and this is in the Ranking Criteria -

    Do not manually edit anything in an .osu file that cannot be changed through the Editor.

    So you should probably just lower the BPM to get such low SV (Like at Image Material).
29. 06:29:147 (3,4) - They're not 100% identical.
30. 06:54:347 (6,7,8) - Stack properly.
31. 07:02:147 (6,1) - ^
32. 07:02:747 (1) - I think you should CTRL+G, since I think it plays better and to be consistent with the next pattern (07:04:347 (5,6) -)
33. 07:12:947 (2,4) - You can improve the blanket.
34. 07:24:347 (1) - NC?
35. 07:26:347 (7,3) - Stack properly.
36. 07:53:347 (7,1) - ^
37. 07:58:747 (1,2) - This is pretty absurd.. I think this is the first 1/6 slider in the map? It is really unpredictable and you should reduce the spacing, or at least change 2 to a slider.
38. 08:08:547 (4) - CTRL+G for overall better pattern.

Good luck Jenny!

OMG that's too hard I always dead in 1 minute !

postreserving i suppose

so!
i had a short talk with desperate-kun and we discussed some things. the map is pretty good now, but:

・why all of that effort on sliderticks? you could simply use silent slidertick as you are not using silent sliderslide silencing all ticks makes kinda no sense with tick rate 2. consider using tr1? this will also prevent forced sliderbreaks from this slider 06:03:285 (1) - since you just literally has 1st slidertick in the starting circle. and the sv could be a bit higher at least but uhhhhh it will break your neat looking of slider ;_;

and what caught my personal eye:
・07:51:947 (6) - i am pretty sure this slider goes offscreen
・01:35:004 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,5,1,2,3,1,2,3,4,5,6,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - this part was pretty late by timing for some reason. its greatly noticeable there 01:41:424 (1) - and on sliders/notes previously. i am not really good in timing, but if to play objects from there on 1/16 grey ticks, it would sounds better. maybe this calm part needs an addidional timing point?
・probably the epilepsy warning is needed here? o.o due to those white bursts at ~50% of the diff
・04:51:689 (9) - if possible, would be better if you could make the emphazis on this note, if the shape of slider started to change from 9 (or from 13 ), not from 04:51:856 (11) - , it would be more natural to play, since 9 is on white tick and having such stuff started from stronger beat is way better to play than from weaker one
・05:03:939 (8,9) - this will be pain in ass to catch ._... if this 05:03:022 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - structure could be placed a bit down and 9 from 05:03:856 (7,8,9) - would be placed between 8 and 9, instead of 10, i believer it would be a bit less pain to catch and well, overall more comfortable to follow
・06:41:547 (2,3,4,5,6) - 06:47:947 (2,3,4,5) - the same recommendation will go here from me when you caught me ingame, these objects are barely hearable
・07:24:347 (9) - same as 04:51:689 (9) - here. i was always mes on such thing, honestly.. if 9 was more below, like 8 is placed now, it would much more natural to follow. i could suggest adding 1 note before the 07:23:547 (1) - , so placement changing wont need any effort


you can count on my bubububbubbble, so poke me when its ready uwu

Good luck jen!!

Beatmap so goooooooooood

Aka wrote: 4x111f

・why all of that effort on sliderticks? you could simply use silent slidertick as you are not using silent sliderslide silencing all ticks makes kinda no sense with tick rate 2. consider using tr1? this will also prevent forced sliderbreaks from this slider 06:03:285 (1) - since you just literally has 1st slidertick in the starting circle. and the sv could be a bit higher at least but uhhhhh it will break your neat looking of slider ;_; | actually I have yet to see anyone break on the long trainsqueak slider; they usually overwing at the start but breaking doesn't really happen - also, how'd tick 1 help with that? - I like TR2 since it gives you a visual when there's something going on on the weaker beats, without needing the audio impact. you know there's a 1/2 drum rhythm most of the time, so it's reassuring to see something being there and the numbers ticking up on it, but having the kind of "snazzy" ticksound (which quite frankly is just annoying) would just feel dissonant in the song. I don't want it /entirely/ gone but I prefer to have it near-unnoticably in the background, if that makes sense

and what caught my personal eye:
・07:51:947 (6) - i am pretty sure this slider goes offscreen

SPOILER

| moved the pattern a bit to the side (4-5 is now an 1.8x jump), works and looks fine like this - also delivers the pressure more efficiently on 5
・01:35:004 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,5,1,2,3,1,2,3,4,5,6,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - this part was pretty late by timing for some reason. its greatly noticeable there 01:41:424 (1) - and on sliders/notes previously. i am not really good in timing, but if to play objects from there on 1/16 grey ticks, it would sounds better. maybe this calm part needs an addidional timing point? | trying to catch Charles but it seems as though I do not have the badge required as to control him yet
・probably the epilepsy warning is needed here? o.o due to those white bursts at ~50% of the diff | don't think so since it's not repetitive; if it was multiple in a row, sure
・04:51:689 (9) - if possible, would be better if you could make the emphazis on this note, if the shape of slider started to change from 9 (or from 13 ), not from 04:51:856 (11) - , it would be more natural to play, since 9 is on white tick and having such stuff started from stronger beat is way better to play than from weaker one | did change stuff about
・05:03:939 (8,9) - this will be pain in ass to catch ._... if this 05:03:022 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - structure could be placed a bit down and 9 from 05:03:856 (7,8,9) - would be placed between 8 and 9, instead of 10, i believer it would be a bit less pain to catch and well, overall more comfortable to follow | sometimes, pain is good (changed spacing on the 1-2-3-4 sliders to 1.8x and lowered the 5-6-7-8 part to make it 1.8x aswell; should be a bit easier now while keeping the feel)

SPOILER

・06:41:547 (2,3,4,5,6) - 06:47:947 (2,3,4,5) - the same recommendating will go here from me when you caught me ingame, these objects are barely hearable | I'm actually fine with that since the song doesn't deliver a whole lot of impact here; having hitsounds be much louder than the "bare audible minimum" for this section'd feel dissonant with how the feeling of the music goes; maybe I'll try +5/7% or something - let's talk about that on IRC
・07:24:347 (9) - same as 04:51:689 (9) - here. i was always mes on such thing, honestly.. if 9 was more below, like 8 is placed now, it would much more natural to follow. i could suggest adding 1 note before the 07:23:547 (1) - , so placement changing wont need any effort | actually, I really like this one since 9 is when you engage into the upwards motion again - 3-4-5-6 are upwards, 6-7-8 then go down, then you start the upwards curve on the beat of 9 again rather than after it; if I put 9 at the furthest-down point, you'd change your direction of movement after the click instead - also, it contributes to fluidity a lot for me


you can could on my bubububbubbble, so poke me when its ready uwu

[Legend]
AR -> 8

nookls wrote: 4u3623

[Legend]
AR -> 8

https://osu-ppy-sh.tvgratuite.org/s/90716

Jenny wrote: 656v3l

https://osu-ppy-sh.tvgratuite.org/s/90716">https://osu-ppy-sh.tvgratuite.org/s/90716

look at these instead

[Legend]
CS -> 7

О_О

Weird stuff, these probably aren't right, especially the last one
The last one was either varying slightly at random parts or the game was lagging.
One of the two.

618
49418
169421
227022
363545

#1 (╯°□°）╯︵ ┻━┻
make sure aimod is definitely having drunk days before bubble #2

Jenny wrote: 656v3l

https://osu-ppy-sh.tvgratuite.org/s/90716">https://osu-ppy-sh.tvgratuite.org/s/90716

these beatmaps are broken, osu must've corrupted them and made them ar9

here #2

yey

06:03:285 (1) - AIMod says it's unsnapped, is it an error? because it seems like it doesn't land on the whitey whitey.

thing is fix, thank Priti boi

gratz bby

congratz with new dragonforce map, but i highly suggest to DQ it and fix long slider somewhere near 2300 combo as it pretty much drains all HP with HR on
Q.Q

_index wrote: 5w2s1k

congratz with new dragonforce map, but i highly suggest to DQ it and fix long slider somewhere near 2300 combo as it pretty much drains all HP with HR on
Q.Q

DQ for long sliders ? Serious ? This is not a DQ reason _index :/

ByBy_ChAn wrote: 2a4e2c

_index wrote: 5w2s1k

congratz with new dragonforce map, but i highly suggest to DQ it and fix long slider somewhere near 2300 combo as it pretty much drains all HP with HR on
Q.Q

DQ for long sliders ? Serious ? This is not a DQ reason _index :/

did you really finished reading on my post, or just wrote instantly after DQ words?
anyway nvm, Jenny already agreed on HP workaround

disqualified for the above reason (requested by Jenny); please apply all necessary changes and start the approval over
actually, don't, let me check it just to be sure

changed: drain 6 -> 3.7, longslider and following minibreak should now only take about 70% of your HP while playing on HardRock. may the pp farm begin.

Jenny wrote: 656v3l

may the pp farm begin

Implying someone else can fc it with HR.

I dont think its also rankable. Or it is?
00:13:418 (1) -
http://puu.sh/gPmG2/d5d9015235.jpg
03:18:221 (1) -
http://puu.sh/gPmT2/480c0fcf13.jpg
04:26:188 (4) -
http://puu.sh/gPn1R/d3642a9b61.jpg 5:4 i failed

Whatever, good luck reranking!

would be cool if you mentioned aspect ratio, aside from posting screenshots of we don't know what
if that is 5:4 (1280×1024), it may stay

this is a cool map gl on reranking

03:23:021 (1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3,4) - Jenny the mapping goddess

shouldn't have any more issues

Rip the time where people mapped for normal plays.
Say hi to the world where guys ask for a dq to change HP to something ridiculously low cuz a top player can't pp farm it with HR.

Sad day.

Krah wrote: 21v1c

Rip the time where people mapped for normal plays.
Say hi to the world where guys ask for a dq to change HP to something ridiculously low cuz a top player can't pp farm it with HR.

Sad day.

I don't design my maps for modplay either but if it's just and only HP drain, I am okay with it- keep in mind the slider will still punish you (hard) if you screw up right before it, it's just not gonna kill you 100% on it's own but drag you down to ~25-30% instead; won't change a whole lot for nomod play actually, I believe.

#1

EDIT: Re-bubble due to found issue with storyboard (unused file).

Jenny wrote: 656v3l

Krah wrote: 21v1c

Rip the time where people mapped for normal plays.
Say hi to the world where guys ask for a dq to change HP to something ridiculously low cuz a top player can't pp farm it with HR.

Sad day.

I don't design my maps for modplay either but if it's just and only HP drain, I am okay with it- keep in mind the slider will still punish you (hard) if you screw up right before it, it's just not gonna kill you 100% on it's own but drag you down to ~25-30% instead; won't change a whole lot for nomod play actually, I believe.

I believe that maps should be HR-able
unlike MENDES

gl rw-qualifying

Yes I do not think any map should be imable with hr. That's just stupid. DT is understandable of course.

I don goofed
bub #2

　

_index wrote: 5w2s1k

ByBy_ChAn wrote: 2a4e2c

congratz with new dragonforce map, but i highly suggest to DQ it and fix long slider somewhere near 2300 combo as it pretty much drains all HP with HR on
Q.Q

DQ for long sliders ? Serious ? This is not a DQ reason _index :/
did you really finished reading on my post, or just wrote instantly after DQ words?
anyway nvm, Jenny already agreed on HP workaround

Ahhh sorry I checked the map and I didn't found the long sliders and I was fucked up xp

Sorry for inconvenience

hype boys

Congratulations Jenny

PLEASE NO DQ'ERINO THIS MAP

no dq pls

no dq pls

no dq pls

dq pls

Grats Jenny c:

Oh look, I made a pp

dq pls lmao

Yay it's a Jenny

no dq pls

Woddles wrote: x6o48

no dq pls

They'll find a reason.

B-] wrote: 1hw3x

Yes I do not think any map should be imable with hr. That's just stupid. DT is understandable of course.

technically any map is able with DT, if the skill is there, since it can't increase the HP to a point where even an SS is a fail

I think he means humanly able; you aren't going to DT mad machine.

Kheldragar wrote: 1j1v14

I think he means humanly able; you aren't going to DT mad machine.

uh

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YWd-GIhqiQI

My god


Okay, I change it to ing DT FD4D

Oh god, this map is pure beauty.

I really like it alot.

Kheldragar wrote: 1j1v14

My god


Okay, I change it to ing DT FD4D

ya just gotta bullshit the streams, its not necessary to do 405 bpm to them, just like its not necessary to do 270 to the shorter delrio streams :^)

:O

waiting for a Tom(tm) pp weight change to HR that makes the pp go down 60pp or something

[ Space ] wrote: 3t6f68

waiting for a Tom(tm) pp weight change to HR that makes the pp go down 60pp or something

lol tom the "needs less pp now" man

Riince wrote: 3p705k

Kheldragar wrote: 1j1v14

My god


Okay, I change it to ing DT FD4D

ya just gotta bullshit the streams, its not necessary to do 405 bpm to them, just like its not necessary to do 270 to the shorter delrio streams :^)

Timefreeze DT?

Kheldragar wrote: 1j1v14

My god


Okay, I change it to ing DT FD4D

I was so expecting another youtube video after this post

Just stick to DT Rainbow Dash Likes Girls

Tess wrote: 191a2j

Kheldragar wrote: 1j1v14

My god


Okay, I change it to ing DT FD4D

I was so expecting another youtube video after this post

Just stick to DT Rainbow Dash Likes Girls

pretty sure C 1x missed that with relax

Riince wrote: 3p705k

Tess wrote: 191a2j

I was so expecting another youtube video after this post

Just stick to DT Rainbow Dash Likes Girls

pretty sure C 1x missed that with relax

was that before or after he 4mod fc'd that tag4 map?

deleted

Hi Jenny,

We need to disqualify your map due to the massive slowdown slider. Try to make the transition more natural as it is very abrupt as it stands (nearly a magnitude of difference between the BPM and velocity change). A word of advice for your future maps: if you plan on making a slider such as this, I highly recommend that you try to stay within the bounds of the editor first, then look to options beyond it after exhausting standard means. You have .75x available that haven't been used that could also help towards transitioning to this long slider.

Some additional notes:

Your stack leniency is set really low, but there weren't any patterns that really require that and your consecutive 1/2 stacks weren't stacking properly. You should raise this if you don't have any advanced patterns that require this setting.

If possible, could you reduce the intensity of the white transition flashes in the storyboard?

I had a few issues seeing the brown combo color against the cloudy background, but others were fine with it.

RIP 600pp score

rip index

Rank was a nice joke, huh..

rest in peace :C

Slider is well readable though. And sliderpoints help with it, but whatever. Jenny, call me for re-bubble/re-qualify when ready.

I'm usually alright with unranking maps but this one was the most unnecessary unrank ever, and you even made up 'additional comments' that wouldn't improve the map in any way just so you could back up the reason that "this map needs improvement"?

geez..

I'd also argue that the slow but steadily (and quite aggressive) "train squeaking", as I call it, does call for exactly this: a very very slowly progressing hold note, one that forces you to focus again.

This part doesn't sound appropriate for either the glorious "fix-it-all spinner" (since it's a slow and grinding note- seriously, who's mind goes "LET'S SPIN AS FAST AS POSSIBLE RIGHT NOW" when hearing this part?) or a breaktime (break, no pressure at all, no focus, take the pen off the tablet or hand off the mouse, what does it matter what happens, it's a faqqing breaktime) - it's a tense moment between the two sections and that's why it draws so much attention and focus.


One shouldn't be obliged to chose between following/complimenting the music and getting their map ranked, specifically when it's about such a trivial issue, which isn't even one for most people playing (and succeeding at) the map in question, but that's my opinion.

Since this got dq'd. I'd like to point out there's an incorrect timing point about 2/3rds of the song during the 13/25% section. One of the heads is 13% making it impossible to hear. Not to mention that whole section is wxtremely quiet and should be raised.

I'll link the specific spot when I get home if you can't find it. I'm at work right now though.

well, i suggested to lenghten it before.. huh.
Jenny said plenty of testplays were OK with the slider so i dont even know what to think now

The map was already DQ'd one time because of that slider. How is it possible that it took the QAT team 6 days to notice that the slider was still the same?

Also, it doesn't really make sense that the reason for DQ is partly based on an untrue statement (there is a slowdown that uses 0.75x contrary to what the post says). The stack leniency setting has no effect on the map itself so it cannot be a reason for disqualification, neither the white flashes in the storyboard. I haven't heard players complaining about that slider, either. This leaves us with nothing warranting a DQ.

I hope that this is an April fools joke because if it isn't, it might be the most unreasonable disqualification in a long time. If you just want to DQ it, please at least try to find a better argument for the reason to do so.

joolomasta wrote: 54666m

The map was already DQ'd one time because of that slider. How is it possible that it took the QAT team 6 days to notice that the slider was still the same?

different reasons? first DQ was for too drain being too high on HR (fixed by adjusting HP), second was due to 'abruptness'. the slider being the same has no connection to both DQs.

joolomasta wrote: 54666m

Also, it doesn't really make sense that the reason for DQ is partly based on an untrue statement (there is a slowdown that uses 0.75x contrary to what the post says). The stack leniency setting has no effect on the map itself so it cannot be a reason for disqualification, neither the white flashes in the storyboard. I haven't heard players complaining about that slider, either. This leaves us with nothing warranting a DQ.

Garven wrote: 3w455y

Some additional notes:.

fuel your QAT hate somewhere else. (quite sure garven meant using more of the playfield for the slider, not SV)

handsome wrote: 483w1s

joolomasta wrote: 54666m

The map was already DQ'd one time because of that slider. How is it possible that it took the QAT team 6 days to notice that the slider was still the same?

different reasons? first DQ was for too drain being too high on HR (fixed by adjusting HP), second was due to 'abruptness'. the slider being the same has no connection to both DQs.

Actually the first DQ was because I asked for it since there was repeated interest in making the map able on HR; the slider didn't play any role in that at all.

@Lanturn: 06:42:555 (5) - if this is the slider you mean, sure I can fix that. won't for now though, no changes until this entire thing is cleared up.

handsome wrote: 483w1s

fuel your QAT hate somewhere else. (quite sure garven meant using more of the playfield for the slider, not SV)

I had an argument to back my opinion. How you simply dismiss it as "QAT hate" and ignore the argument itself is not how civilised people discuss. You may disagree with me and that's fine but please at least provide a reason you do so instead of trying to play me down. If those points were just additional notes, they should not cause a DQ.

I'm not hating the QATs but i'm questioning the decision made here.

If the DQ is due to the potential readability issues of the .1x SV, then I think the best solution is to stack 06:02:855 (4,5,1) - . This provides nearly half a second of stationary cursor, which is more than enough for the player to make any adjustments to an SV drop.

If the issue is because the SV is below editor boundaries, then you should probably just cut the slider at like 06:09:337 or so. I know that's not what you want to happen, but imo a 15 second long slider is pretty silly. Cutting it at around where the guitar echo dies out gives close to the feeling of intensity you're looking for while not being obnoxiously long and taking up a ton of the screen after the mandatory change to .5x SV.

Happy April fool's...right?

RIGHT?

That slider was ridiculous anyway. You shouldn't need to slider break on a sightread because the mapper made an out of place sudden super slowed down slider after a 2000+ combo. WWW minus 1 because of that unnecessary change in velocity. I'm sure many more messed up by that out of the blue slider.

Ash Marley wrote: 6z2n2m

That slider was ridiculous anyway. You shouldn't need to slider break on a sightread because the mapper made an out of place sudden super slowed down slider after a 2000+ combo. WWW minus 1 because of that unnecessary change in velocity. I'm sure many more messed up by that out of the blue slider.

What do you suggest then? Criticizing and not giving any suggestion that would work better considering the comment from the mapper won't help much.

Ash Marley wrote: 6z2n2m

That slider was ridiculous anyway. You shouldn't need to slider break on a sightread because the mapper made an out of place sudden super slowed down slider after a 2000+ combo. WWW minus 1 because of that unnecessary change in velocity. I'm sure many more messed up by that out of the blue slider.

Hmmmm? Jenny explained her reasoning behind that slider and it makes perfect sense to me.
Go read up on the discussion first dude.

Lax wrote: 4u5s6q

Ash Marley wrote: 6z2n2m

That slider was ridiculous anyway. You shouldn't need to slider break on a sightread because the mapper made an out of place sudden super slowed down slider after a 2000+ combo. WWW minus 1 because of that unnecessary change in velocity. I'm sure many more messed up by that out of the blue slider.

Hmmmm? Jenny explained her reasoning behind that slider and it makes perfect sense to me.
Go read up on the discussion first dude.

It doesn't change that it's too unexpected and inconsistent. The "rhythm" is killed at that point.

Or people could stop aiming for "perfection" and aim for maps that are fun to play. To me, that's the best quality, and it doesn't require a team to assure me about it.

Good evening everyone,

We've cleaned non constructive posts from this topic.
Please, this topic sould be useful for the mapper. At least, give a constructed opinion about the beatmap and not about a player's performance.

I know it's April 1st but you guys should avoid doing that again or we'll need to take actions against some s / locking this topic in the worst case.

Keep in mind that getting a map disqualified isn't something bad, we all want to see ranked/approved beatmaps which will be enjoyed by as many s as possible.

Thank you!

Fun doesn't always means good, please stay on topic and provide map related suggestions that will be helpful for mapper to improve his/her map