• Easy
  

1. This diff is missing an Audio Lead-In. Make it 1000 please. (:

• Normal
  

1. Spacing is a bit high for a Normal Diff. But that's just me.
   
   
2. 01:28:614 (6,1) - Replacing these two notes with a slider would be better.

• Hard

1. 00:44:926 - I believe you are missing a note here.
   
   
2. 01:00:864 (6) - New combo. Then remove new combo at 01:02:926.
   
   
3. 01:17:176 (1) - The slider end already crossed over the corner. Please move it away from it.
   
   
4. 01:21:489 (1) - Making this slider a better blanket for the previous note would look better.

• D.N.Angel

1. 00:20:364 (2,3,4,5) - Why not make this a perfect square shaped pattern?
   
   
2. 00:40:989 (1,2,3) - The spacing for these notes are just confusing. Try to make them closer at least?
   
   
3. 01:19:426 (1) - Not sure about this one, remove new combo?

1. 00:47:364 (2) - how about making that covering with 00:45:114 (4)

1. 00:43:614 (2,3,4) - I strongly prefer to avoid making something like that in Normal, I'd rather have it stacked or make slider with repeat there.
2. 01:01:989 (4) - slider repeat on there sounds awkward, there rather vocals prevails than guitar so makes feel kinda out of place IMO.
   There 01:06:489 (1) - for example it sounds ok due to vocal matches with 1/4 snapped guitar. So putting repeat on slider which I've mentioned before on 1/2 snap would sound much better. ( to make two repeats then)
3. 01:13:239 (2,3,4) - again, wouldn't recommend that for Normal diff
4. 01:16:426 (4) - move it back to x: 256 y:56 , looks much better.

1. 00:14:176 (5) - nc
2. 00:19:051 (2) - move that to x: 96 y: 192 don't forget to fix spacing after then
3. 00:38:364 (3,4) - move these to x: 172 y: 320, then:
4. 00:38:926 (5,6) - move these x: 340 y: 320, it will look then kind of symetrical.
5. 00:44:176 (2,3,4) - this triplet doesn't follow anything, I suggest removing 00:44:270 (3)

1. 00:41:176 (2,3,4,5,6,7) - are you really sure about this? It's a bit confusing

[General] 162k1y

1. Change AudioLeadIn : 2000 pls(now fast with start),without easy and taiko diff.

[Yasora's Easy] 94k37

1. 00:28:614 (1,2,3) - Try like this rhythm,sound much better.
   

• just a pointer, but...
  

1. 00:00:489 (1,1) - this is a bit hard to play, maybe end the spinner two ticks earlier (previous white tick)?

1. a few things in each diff are slightly hard to predict and read.
2. even while sitting in the editor you can hear the offset is off. I'm still averaging a pretty high number for being late, how much did you actually fix it (since you didn't specify)?

• Beatmap Design/Arrangement
  (The basis of the map, such as flow, consistency, and aesthetic design are found here.)
  

1. 00:14:757 (4) - this is something that would increase difficulty, you could just as easily have made use of this part (because this clearly does not fit in the first place) by using a 1/1 slider.
2. 01:02:007 (4) - not exactly perfect, fix it a bit so it's even?
3. 01:13:632 (3,4,5) - this section is hard to read because it stands out so much from the rest and breaks the flow of the map. You should continue to follow the vocals instead of ea the difficulty by using notes and leaving blanks, so maybe try using a 1/1 slider?
4. 01:21:507 (3) - blanket since you've been blanketing the whole map.

1. 01:10:632 (4) - no finish on the end.

1. not sure if the slider body hitsounds are good... I mean, they might confuse the player because those are technically sounds you should be hearing when you hit a note or the start/end of a slider body... at least turn them down more than 70% if you like them (because they do fit the song, really).

• Song Setup
  (Suggestions for appropriate difficulty based on the song to offer more fluent and comfortable playing.)
  

1. slider velocity is really high for a song like this...I would expect you to use a lower one but because it would take so much work to fix and it's already up to this point, I guess it's not too big a deal and is fine to keep. It's not like it's completely outrageous or anything, just highly suggested.
2. HP drain +1?

1. spacing in itself is a bit much... next time consider using 1.0 or something much smaller @_________@
2. 00:07:819 (3,4) - you could turn this into a 1/1 slider (starting at 3) so it's easier to read.. the high SV and spacing makes this a bit unpredictable to start. (you'll have to fix the placement too)
3. 00:10:632 (2,3) - this kind of thing will definitely increase star rating. you could replace with a note and 1/1 slider to fit the rhythm whiled decreasing the amount of pausing and predicting a player will need to do here.
4. 00:16:257 (1,2,3) - huge gaps are hard to predict even if the spacing is correct. fill this in (you can be creative, just make sure it flows because this really does break it).
5. 00:22:819 (3) - remove? or you could just make this stack a 1/1 slider...
6. 00:24:882 (1,2,3) - you wouldn't have to do this to lower star difficulty if your settings were properly adjusted to suit a normal...you could just use a series of 1/1 sliders o.o
7. 00:36:882 (1,2,3) - ^
8. 00:38:944 (4) - to be consistent with the previous part like this, make it one repeat and then add a note on the downbeat. repeat sliders with more than one repeat used like that while also using repeat sliders with only one repeat can become confusing. Instead of adding a note to fill this emptiness, you could start a 1/1 slider on the downbeat, and a note in the middle of the two downbeats here.
9. 01:25:632 (x) - note?
10. 01:28:632 (6) - this plays really awkwardly after the previous sequence of 1/1 sliders and notes in-between. replace it with a 5/6 repeat slider possibly, it fits the song but not sure if you want this...

1. 00:47:944 (5) - no finish on the end or anything?
2. 01:03:507 (1) - finish on the end to keep consistent?

1. 00:15:132 (5,1) - new combo, remove new combo?
2. 01:20:007 (3,1) - ^

• Beatmap Design/Arrangement
  (The basis of the map, such as flow, consistency, and aesthetic design are found here.)
  

1. 00:00:507 (1,1) - I cannot stress enough how annoying this is to play. My first playthrough without looking and I instantly was caught off-guard. I had two other people test it for me and the same thing happened and both agreed that this should be moved two ticks back. I do agree it's a hard, but this, it's more for an insane. It's quite ambiguous, but really... it should be moved so it's easier to read and less restarting at the beginning (there's no excuse, people who tested are not noobs either). Even more so, the insane diff (rather, D.N.Angel's diff) is easier to read because of the timing between the spinner and the first note, which should indicate to you what you should do about this.
2. 00:43:069 (2,3,4) - triple is kinda unnecessary and sounds sort of weird here.
3. 00:53:944 (4,5,6) - instead of doing this, you could try a note where (4) is and a 1/4 repeat at (6)?
4. 01:09:694 (1,2,3) - much better to play if they were aligned straight like most other triples and 5 note streams o.o
5. 01:23:007 (1) - the inconsistency from here makes the map hard to read. it takes any map from a high to a low, so I suggest you try making it more consistent somehow. here's an idea of how to fix the first phrase of the end. listen to the music, I know you can come up with something a lot better than this to end this diff.

1. 00:41:569 (5) - finish.
2. 00:56:757 (6) - remove? no finish is called for.
3. 01:08:757 (8) - ^

1. 00:47:007 (4,1) - new combo, remove new combo? this section here you should notice the way you started new combos, starting on downbeats.
2. 01:00:319 (5) - new combo?
3. 01:14:382 (1,2,3) - remove new combo on (1), new combo on (3)?

• Beatmap Design/Arrangement
  (The basis of the map, such as flow, consistency, and aesthetic design are found here.)
  

1. 00:09:882 (2) - for better flow, reverse the start/end.
2. 00:10:444 (4,1) - ^ both of these, too.
3. 00:23:569 (3) - ^
4. 00:32:569 (3) - ^
5. 00:50:007 (1) - ^
6. 00:52:444 (x) - a note here so it's consistent and adds to flow.
7. 00:58:069 (x) ^
8. 00:59:382 (2,3,4,5,6) - done so wrong. half of it is following something and the other half isn't. a good idea would be to move this whole highlighted section back two ticks and work with it from there, just follow the music then fix the placement of things.
9. 01:02:194 (1,2) - flip these two or rearrange them? the flow here is really off.
10. 01:16:632 (x) - for the sake of consistency, fill this in please.
11. 01:21:882 (2) - flip this around? you'll need to fix 01:22:444 (3) too if you follow, if you do (which I hope), fix it so you can allow more room for flow and consistency.
12. 01:23:007 (1) - from here to the end is really inconsistent and hard to follow; no comment... ._.

1. 00:07:444 (4) - remove?
2. 00:08:944 (5,6,7) - clap should be on (5), not (7).
3. 00:12:038 (6,7) - whistle on (7) instead of (6)?
4. 00:12:882 (3) - remove on the end?
5. 00:14:382 (1) - remove on the end?
6. 00:47:569 (2,3) - flip whistle placement?
7. 01:27:694 (1) - are you sure the whistles from here to the end fit?

1. 00:52:632 (1,2) - remove new combo, new combo?
2. 01:00:319 (8,1) - new combo, remove new combo?
3. 01:12:319 (5,1) - ^
4. 01:13:819 (6,1) - ^
5. 01:17:382 (1) - remove new combo?

• Taikomap Design
  (The basis of the map, such as flow, consistency, and structure are found here.)
  

1. 00:12:882 (38,39,40) - blue tick should be silent, remove (39). you can make a triple 00:13:538 since it follows the music.
2. 00:14:757 (x) - note?
3. 00:14:944 (x) - starting here, a 5 note stream would work well.
4. 00:15:319 (x) - a note?
5. 00:17:757 (66,67,68,69,70) - how about ooooo?
6. 00:29:944 (x) - o please? you can hear it in the drums and it'll add to the consistency.
7. 00:32:007 (x) - add a o? it sounds off and plays strange. then delete 00:32:194 (124).
8. 00:35:007 (135) - o instead?
9. 00:40:069 (x) - definitely in need of a o here.
10. 00:41:944 (164,165,166) - somewhat hard to play and actually, the sound is on the next red tick, not the blue tick. I suggest the pattern o ooo O
11. 00:43:257 (170) - change to a o, vocals indicate a rise (which is fine) and straight dons is quite boring here.
12. 00:44:382 (174) - optional o
13. 00:45:413 (181) - remove this note. It's really inconsistent and strange to play because it stands out so much (the whole map is easy and then this?) It really makes this part play much much better if you at least remove this note and break up this small stream into something more manageable.
14. 00:47:944 (x) - please add a o for the sake of consistency and readability.
15. 00:54:694 (217) - o instead.
16. 00:55:257 (221) - ^
17. 00:57:225 (x) - a note would be nice... if not the next suggestion, then please place a o here at least.
18. 00:57:413 (x) - you should really place a note here... it's in the music and this spot calls for more density.
19. 00:59:194 (xx) - again, this should be a 5 note stream... right now it's half of what it should be and plays awfully with the music.
20. 01:00:132 (x) - the finish is hard to predict without a o here, and it's played in the drums, it should be here :v
    
21. 01:02:944 (266,267) - just noting that if you listen here at 25%, you can hear the offset is off.
22. 01:03:038 (x) - in continuation, there should be a o here o.o
23. 01:05:382 (x) - why are there notes missing where there should be... x~x
24. 01:09:319 (x) - ^
25. 01:12:132 (x) - okay this one is even more obvious ><
26. 01:14:944 (x) - o please ._.
27. 01:16:632 (x) - ^
28. 01:17:194 (x) - ^
29. 01:17:475 (xx) - oo
30. 01:23:007 (350) - from here to 01:28:257 (371), not only does it play awkwardly with the bad offset, it's really hard to play this and the sounds are completely off because of it, it must've been hard to map, too... please try making this part easier to play, it's so difficult with so many notes on blue ticks... create some triples to add some structure and consistency and to accentuate this last part of the map well, it calls for a higher note density.

1. 00:42:507 (166) - this inherited has no purpose. did you intend to use a slowdown here? if you did, I recommend x0.80, otherwise remove it.
2. 00:48:319 (189) - same thing here. either use it to bring the map back up to speed or remove it.

1. I'm not sure how exactly this setup works since it seems pretty random to me, so I can't really pinpoint anything xD
2. you should've distinguished parts by new combos, it would've been nice to see who mapped what parts :<