{"content":"\n \n \n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n Dolphin<\/a>\n\n \n \n \n \n \n <\/span>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n 1,167 posts\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n\n \n ed January 2012<\/strong>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n \n \n \n Dolphin<\/a>\n\n \n 2013-08-20T17:38:22+00:00<\/time>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n Jenny wrote:<\/h4>[Futsuu]00:06:656 (1) - remove finish, there is no reason for this, as there's merely a basic beat in the song here; you should only use big notes for really dominant and outstanding beats, specifically in lower difficulties in taiko but it's not a \"mere basic beat\". I didn't want to keep both 1 and 2 small nor big, so I made a compromise by having the 1 be large. It's also representing the low pitch piano. I also want to be more experimental and creative. No change.<\/span>00:07:323 (1) - ^ This one is dominant to the previous note, it even got a crash in it. No change.<\/span>00:09:323 (1) - ^ Same.<\/span>00:17:323 (1) - ^ Same.<\/span>00:19:990 (1) - ^ Same.<\/span>00:21:323 (1) - replace this with a simple d, there is no reason for a drumroll here and currently you're basically beating on air (also, do not put a finish on this, there is nothing big and monumental here) Someone told me to replace it because of the piano drag-out. Previously used to be a Large Don. Changing to Large Don to represent the Piano.<\/span>00:22:657 (2) - remove finish No, it's to represent the majestic piano.<\/span>00:25:323 (1) - ^ ^<\/span>00:26:657 (1) - same thing as 00:21:323 Doing the same as 00:21:323<\/span>00:27:990 (1) - remove finish no, loud piano + cymbal crash, fits very well.<\/span>00:33:157 (2) - remove finish; I can see why you would put one in standard, but for taiko, the big notes do not suit this beat I think it suits it really well.<\/span>00:37:157 (1) - replace this two ds, each one at 00:37:157 and 00:37:823 Placed second don on 00:37:990 instead. Fit better.<\/span>00:39:323 (1,2,1,2,1,1) - remove all these finishes No, they're following the piano and its very majestic and booming.<\/span>00:46:656 (5) - remove finish Obvious and loud cymbal crash, so no.<\/span>00:59:823 (1) - ^ okay<\/span>01:25:323 (1) - ^ No, Finish is representing the piano boom.<\/span>01:30:657 (1) - ^ ^<\/span>01:31:323 (1) - ^ ^<\/span>01:31:323 (1,1) - ^ repost to previous, same as previous on the first note but no on the second because there is also a cymbal crash.<\/span>01:43:323 (1,2,1,2,1) - remove finishes No, same reason as before.<\/span>01:46:323 (1) - replace this with a d, no finish Did the same as 00:37:157 just with finish on the first note to represent piano in the same fashion as previously.<\/span>01:51:323 (1) - remove finish no, same reason as previous times.<\/span>01:58:990 (1) - ^ No, this finish is here because the piano is 1\/8, so I added finish to reflect on that.<\/span>02:06:657 (3) - ^ okay<\/span>02:12:323 (3) - ^ okay<\/span>[Oni]00:21:323 (1) - remove finish no, it's there to reflect on the booming piano.<\/span>00:31:990 (2) - ^ ^<\/span>00:39:990 (1) - ^ ^<\/span>00:40:657 (1) - ^ ^<\/span>00:41:157 (3) - make this a k sure<\/span>00:42:490 (3) - ^ no, there is nothing here that suits a kat, like a snare.<\/span>00:42:990 (6) - ^ ok<\/span>00:43:573 (10) - ^ nah, it feels betters to play like this and the previous was a dd.<\/span>00:51:990 (5) - remove finish no, the piano is pretty dominant.<\/span>00:58:490 (1) - make this a D, gives a better build-up with the Ks after I totally get your point but a Don just doesn't work with the previous mapping ;; Sorry no change.<\/span>01:14:657 (1) - remove finish Same reason.<\/span>01:15:990 (2) - ^ ^<\/span>01:26:657 (1) - ^ ^<\/span>01:30:657 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17) - I like this stream more as a ddddkkkkddddkkddk rather than just donspam Changed it too ddddkkkkddddkkkkd<\/span>01:35:990 (2) - remove finish Same reason.<\/span>01:37:323 (1) - ^ ^<\/span>01:43:990 (1) - ^ Same reason as before.<\/span>01:44:657 (1) - ^ ^<\/span>02:07:657 (3) - make this a D ok<\/span>02:14:323 (2) - make this a K like you did in Futsuu nah, this note is lower pitch than the previous note anyways. Changed it in Futsuu instead.<\/span><\/blockquote>Sorry for all the disagreement, most of the mod was telling me to remove the finishers anyways :bhttp:\/\/puu.sh\/46xTc.rar<\/a> Here are the updated diffs.<\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n -GN<\/a>\n\n \n Champion Above Champions\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n \n <\/span>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n <\/span>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n 734 posts\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n\n \n ed June 2011<\/strong>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n \n \n \n Topic Starter\n <\/span>\n <\/div>\n \n \n -GN<\/a>\n\n \n 2013-08-20T23:26:15+00:00<\/time>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n <\/span>Jenny<\/a>Jenny wrote:<\/h4>whoop.pngMod request by Dizco o:Just a little polishment before you get this ranked o3o[General]Combo Colours 1 and 2 are very similar to each other (same for 3,4,5), please distinguish them a bit more? It's confusing as it currently is. minor changes only, the colors are somewhat close to each other for the sake of a gimmick - taken a bit more care to use different combo colors adjacent to each other where i want it, though<\/span>box[Beginner]01:02:657 (1) - you can balance this slider more out, fairly easy changed a little bit so it resembles your positions, but to be honest i don't really see much of a change but whatever<\/span>pic01:38:990 (2) - this slider feels too close to 1, you can simply move it up a bit (move to 27|248 and take 3 and 4 along with it) done<\/span>01:47:323 (2) - feels a bit too close to previous 2 that was the original intention, i screwed up somewhere during the last mods i think<\/span>pic01:57:990 (2) - add another sliderpoint before the red one so you can make this blanket 1's end better yeah i see, changed<\/span>pic02:14:323 (2) - just me but i feel like you should move this elsewhere, as where it currently is, there have already been so many objects... 303|297 looks about fine to me the 180 degree flip jump is a recurring feature in the ending that i'd like to keep consistent - i rotated the previous combo so that it's not cluttered anymore, however<\/span>[Light]00:33:157 (1) - i'd say remove this new combo because this is just the end of the musical pattern you mapped before, no new one i'd like to keep this emphasis on the finish, it's present everywhere else<\/span>00:33:657 (1) - you can improve this blanket here done, checked with cs7 and it seems ok<\/span>02:06:657 (3) - this is very picky, but you can improve this aswell without major effort tried, did same thing<\/span>[Hyper]00:26:157 (4,5) - i find this jump a bit sudden, as you didn't have any before, but I suppose it's bearable if you don't want to change anything about it i think it plays well, but i guess it's a bit sudden - reduced the spacing a little, though<\/span>00:51:990 (6) - as this note has quite an impact in the music (and ed by the normal-hitnormal on it), i'd say it would do better right in the middle of 1-5, as that's directly connected to a sharp turn in angle and therefore help it stand out even more well, i guess that works<\/span>pic00:55:157 (1,2) - having these two normal-hitnormals 1\/2 from each other, it feels more like they should be one object, so I'd recommoend you to melt these two and just make a 5*1\/4 slider out of them because currently, it's confusing to play, as only the scond slider has an impact on its start and that's not very optimal, especially when playing this map the first time better than what i had, i think - it solves the weird playability of this part so applied<\/span>01:34:323 (3) - you can make a better slider without a red point ok, removed red point and rearranged the <\/span>01:55:823 (2) - i am not okay with this slider, as it starts on a weaker beat than it ends on; if you want to use a slider in this combo, do it on the white tick before, but do not start it on the red one here, that's rhythmically incorrect<\/strong> and bad to play changed<\/span>02:00:907 (3) - considering that this is 1\/2 after 2, the distance is very little and it currently will very likely<\/strong> be missinterpreted as a 1\/4 distance, so... i'd advise you to move this further away from 2 because of the unpredictability of the song at this point, i reduced the distance by half so that it would leave some room even if you held the 1\/8 slider a bit longer than you should have - i checked and tested this specific part with doubletime, and reducing the distance seemed to be easier to sightread. i increased it by a little bit again, but i'm a bit unsure whether this will be problematic for first-time players still.<\/span>[Another]Drain 8, uh? Sounds a bit high, but the map doesn't seem too demanding, so that should be okay. intended to be a high-pressure map, with some control and stamina needed to . no spamming here <\/span>00:22:490 (6,7,1) - these notes may be overlapped by hitbursts from 00:20:490 (3,4,5,6,7) - so maybe move them away to be absolutely certain no issue with either new or old default hitbursts, no change<\/span>00:24:156 (4,5,6,7,8) - i don't like how you have to play 4 1\/4 notes after this slider, while it should be 5 actively played notes (because that's what it's mapped like), consider removing the reverse arrow and just mapping it as a 1\/2 slider + 5*1\/4? i can't find any solution that would look alright and not be very flow-breaking in this part - no change here<\/span>00:28:990 (9,10,11) - ^similar case you've pointed out a lot of these - i think these are good for both playability and aesthetics. i'm denying them all simply because i don't see the point of changing them and i believe it'd detract from the fun of the map<\/span>00:34:323 (1,2,3) - ^00:34:990 (5,6,7,8,9) - ^00:45:157 (2,3,4) - this, however, is okay, as the emphasis is put on the actively played notes (-> 3,4) by hitsounding 301:08:823 (3) - similar thing as with 00:24:156 and other mentioned cases01:10:657 (1,2,3) - ^01:14:323 (6,7,8,9,1) - ^01:26:657 (1,2,3) - ^01:32:157 (1) - this slider is put the wrong way around, rhythmically: you start it on the weak sound and end it on the strong one, while it should be the other way around - the start of the slider is its strong part, not the end, and therefore you should change this in order to emphasize the song properly changed this as well as its counterpart 00:17:323 (1), with a slight variation considering the old version's improbably convenient location<\/span>01:32:823 (5) - ^ ^<\/span>01:37:657 (3,4,5,6,7) - similar case as with 00:24:156 again01:38:823 (4,5,6,7,1) - ^01:44:323 (2,3,4,5,6) - ^01:45:157 (8) - similar as 01:32:157 this is a mistake in hitsounding on my part - the strongest sound is the middle circle, but with a whistle at the end to represent the piano sound(you can hear the other piano sounds in this part). it would not matter if i made this a triple ending on a slider or made a repeating 1\/4 slider like i do now - but personally i think this flows better<\/span>01:55:490 (1,2,3) - similar to both 00:24:156 and 01:32:157 changed into two circles instead, it adds a bit to the pattern after<\/span>02:09:323 (1,2) - this is wrong. either map it as one one-time reverse 1\/3 slider+ circle\/slider or map it as 4 hits (3 circles + 1 slider or 4 circles). currently, you are mapping this in two sliders, resulting in a 1-2-1-2 pattern, in which each \"2\" is a ive hitsound because there is no active participation of the player required, while the music practically goes 1-2-3-4 or 1-1-1-1, and can be mapped only in either of these ways, so please redesign this i had a bit of a hard time figuring out just what to put, but i decided on a small square and that seemed ok<\/span>02:13:101 (2,3) - ^ (you even map this as 2-1-2-1 here and that's even more wrong :<) ended up having to do 2-1-1-1, removing the slider felt too awkward and harder to read(the stack) so i left it at that <\/span><\/blockquote><\/div><\/div>Good suggestions, and many good points and fixes. Sorry about the disagreements in Another, but that's how i feel about the map.<\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n KanaRin<\/a>\n\n \n \n \n \n \n <\/span>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n 1,886 posts\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n\n \n ed April 2010<\/strong>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n \n \n \n KanaRin<\/a>\n\n \n 2013-08-21T05:27:59+00:00<\/time>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n Let's go.General<\/strong><\/span><\/span>Mod info:<\/strong><\/u>KAT \/ K = Blue note ( Big DON\/KAT = Big notes)DON \/ D= Red note<\/span>I think the volume of hitsound is a bit quite low, especially kiai time. How about increase to 90%? <\/li> Inappropriate diff spread, you must at least add a Muzukashii here.<\/span> <\/li><\/ol>Futsuu<\/strong><\/span><\/span> Nice.<\/span> <\/li><\/ol>Oni<\/strong><\/span><\/span>\uff0a00:15:157 (2) - d sounds better as we can hear the ing sounds is dkdkd easily.<\/span><\/li>\uff0a00:15:407 - so yeah, add a don here!<\/li>00:16:490 (1) - Start from here is the same as ^ , make dkdkd here.<\/li>That means you should change 00:16:573 (2) - to kat and add a kat at 00:16:740 - <\/li>00:43:323 (8,9,10,11) - kk kk sounds better here.<\/li>00:43:823 (12) - as I can hear bass drum, I suggest you use big don here, so the pattern here is kk kk D.<\/span><\/li>01:14:990 (2) - Start from here, I strongly suggest you to follow the drums as it's really obvious.<\/span><\/li>01:15:323 (6) - d is better here as the small drum is End.<\/li>01:15:490 (7) - k , small drum.<\/li>01:15:573 - add a k here.<\/li>01:15:657 (1) - finally, here is d.<\/li>01:17:323 (5,1,2) - better to use dkd here.<\/li>01:36:323 (3) - kat. --- ( for that part it sounds weird if you miss drums, I will suggest the following patterns)<\/span> <\/li>01:36:490 - add a don here<\/li>01:36:573 - and then add a kat here.<\/li>01:36:990 - kat. <\/li>01:47:323 (7,8,9,10,1) - Same, kk kk D.<\/span><\/li>01:48:657 (5) - miss a don here.<\/li>02:02:823 (7) - That part must have some more improvement.<\/span>I have a disagreement with happy30 here, I think you better to follow the drums here because the piano beat is really chaotic. It's not suitable for Taiko map. Maybe you can try to remap that part with your own first. <\/span><\/li>02:12:990 (3,4,5,6,1,2,3,4,1) - 1\/3 xxxooox.<\/span> <\/li><\/ol>That's it. Overall that should be ready to go.The only problem is the last part and the diff spread, maybe you can get some more suggestions from other modder. call me back when you think that's good enough. <\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n Dolphin<\/a>\n\n \n \n \n \n \n <\/span>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n 1,167 posts\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n\n \n ed January 2012<\/strong>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n \n \n \n Dolphin<\/a>\n\n \n 2013-08-21T19:51:36+00:00<\/time>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n KanaRin wrote:<\/h4>Let's go.General<\/strong><\/span><\/span>Mod info:<\/strong><\/u>KAT \/ K = Blue note ( Big DON\/KAT = Big notes)DON \/ D= Red note<\/span>I think the volume of hitsound is a bit quite low, especially kiai time. How about increase to 90%? - okay!<\/span><\/li> Inappropriate diff spread, you must at least add a Muzukashii here.<\/span> - I asked around about this kind of diff spread in #taiko, and a got a few saying its should be acceptable depending on how the diffs are constructed. Risky move, I know, but the Futsuu here is a bit challenging for Futsuu, but still too easy for Muzukashii, whilst Oni is very authentic and simple-esk. It creates a good balance in my opinion. I'll ask around more and see what people think.<\/span> <\/li><\/ol>Futsuu<\/strong><\/span><\/span> Nice.<\/span> <\/li><\/ol>Oni<\/strong><\/span><\/span>\uff0a00:15:157 (2) - d sounds better as we can hear the ing sounds is dkdkd easily.<\/span> - okay<\/span><\/li>\uff0a00:15:407 - so yeah, add a don here! - nah, I want to keep a somewhat consistent rhythmical pattern.<\/span><\/li>00:16:490 (1) - Start from here is the same as ^ , make dkdkd here. - I made the triplet a dkd instead of having 5 notes.<\/span><\/li>That means you should change 00:16:573 (2) - to kat and add a kat at 00:16:740 - ^<\/span><\/li>00:43:323 (8,9,10,11) - kk kk sounds better here. - Changed to kk kd instead, to keep the Big Kat.<\/span><\/li>00:43:823 (12) - as I can hear bass drum, I suggest you use big don here, so the pattern here is kk kk D.<\/span> - I'm mostly following piano for this part, so I want to keep this a Large Kat since the piano is higher pitch than the previous note.<\/span><\/li>01:14:990 (2) - Start from here, I strongly suggest you to follow the drums as it's really obvious.<\/span> - I don't understand quite what you mean, but the map follows the drum mostly on that part.<\/span><\/li>01:15:323 (6) - d is better here as the small drum is End. - nah, I transitioned into following the drill sound which goes k d k d.<\/span><\/li>01:15:490 (7) - k , small drum. - Following drill, ^<\/span><\/li>01:15:573 - add a k here. - That works since it follows the drill well as well as a drum you want me to follow.<\/span><\/li>01:15:657 (1) - finally, here is d. - Nah, following the drill as stated previously.<\/span><\/li>01:17:323 (5,1,2) - better to use dkd here. - nah, ddk is a good way to transition into the smoothened (idk what you call it) snare sounds.<\/span><\/li>01:36:323 (3) - kat. --- ( for that part it sounds weird if you miss drums, I will suggest the following patterns)<\/span> - that works so well because it fits the piano.<\/span><\/li>01:36:490 - add a don here - sure, it blends in well with the piano.<\/span><\/li> 4z2i4g