Queue/Batch Discussion Thread v2

[Wayward Vagabond]

Re: Queue/Batch Discussion Thread v2 (Submissions CLOSED)

Haha don't worry rayward the same thing happened to other people. Get some clarification from judges if you feel thebratingsbare weird or aomething

[Xx{Midnight}xX]

Re: Queue/Batch Discussion Thread v2 (Submissions CLOSED)

Well now that I am unbanned I'm gonna try out the same thing as Alex.

But before that, thank you for the notes, and please don't take anything the wrong way, I'm not trying to insult you or argue with you. I'm just kind of commenting / questioning a few things and it's easier just to post this in a spoiler where you're all going to see it... ect.

The only one I really have anything to reply to, is Nekomimi Switch. Mostly because I feel the judges where a little to harsh with it. Most of these are explanations, I'm not making excuses for it being the way it is. I just think maybe posting this might help or something along that line.

Halogen:

- 3.110 to 15.110: aside from the jumps for snares, the 8th notes seem like they're just dumped in to fill space without creating jacks, as they're not relevant whatsoever [-1]

This is what feels to me like simple layering. This section of the chart is simply the snare and the beep sound. Snares are jumped because they overlap the beeps.

I suppose I should explain this: The first thing I do when I start stepping after syncing is use quads to divide the chart between what I think I'll be charting in the section. Then as I am charting, I remove them and attempt my best to transition in what I feel is a proper way. This chart really kind of shows this approach I suppose. It starts with the beep + snare and then it gets easier as the song lyrics and a change to the beat of the beeping noises (as I'll be describing them) because the pattern got harder. The layering scheme tends to change with what I'm charting in the section and how I want the section to flow I will always try to make it flow and disregard PR if it makes it flow like ass. I've never read anything on layering "rules" so this may or may not sound like utter crap to you though. Hopefully this makes sense, and doesn't sound like an excuse or something along that line.

- 15.110 to 39.110: the pitch relevance isn't quite right because you have a constantly descending piano but your chart fails to reflect that constantly; also, what's with the missing steps at 16.235/22.235/28.235/(etc)? [-1]

I don't know how to explain the PR. The PR I used for the piano and the beeps are completely separate entities in my brain. Such as the beeps do scale in their own way and the piano tends to scale in a simplistic 3 2 1 4 3 2 1 (the 4 to lead it is actually a beep) or some other pattern that shows the less conventional scaling (again I am not an expert with piano so sometimes it's hard to decide how to chart the scale so it's not always so static, I tired to avoid lots of 4 3 2 1 but still used a deal of it due to the easier nature of the chart and because it fit.)

As to the missing notes:

16.235 / ect: No beep which is what is being charted at the preceding moments of all of the mentioned times. This is because when you slow it to about .5 or so, (I stepped at .3 I think for the most part) you can hear the held note very clearly (I felt it was pretty clear though to be honest, apparently I am quite wrong.) The note after the small pause is located on 4 was located mostly for convenience. I should probably change it?

- 39.110 to 51.110: same as 3.110 to 15.110 [-1]

See above. In case you're curious why I've ignored the bass pedal: That's because I wanted to step what was mostly prominent. I hear the beeps before everything else due to the pitch. So It's charted as such, minus when the piano comes in. I purposely didn't jump it however. I didn't want to wreck the more "fun" nature of the chart I was aiming for to the song. This also is my explanation for why when the piano comes in the beeping is ignored, I stop hearing the beep and focus on the piano while it exists and it's charted the same way.

- 57.110: random jump? [-0.5]

I think I may have put that there because of the new sound, more of a mistake than anything. Happily removed.

- 73.860: misrhythm (should be at 73.891) [-0.5]

Ouch!

- 75.110 to 99.110: same PR issues as earlier, although not quite as frequent since 88.610 and 94.610 since that would be correct [-1]

Not sure how to comment on this...

- ending is same, jumps with no real relevance, etc. [-1]

Again, see above. I honestly think you over analyzed it, or didn't really look at it hard enough. I'm usually stupidly precise with the fact I try to step every note I can hear, but this chart is a step out of that norm you're used to seeing from me. I tried to keep it fun rather than always "correct."

Kommi:

-end of m10 missed 16ths

I don't know if you noticed, But in general, all the 16ths were ignored MINUS when they pertained to Miku singing. Then I charted them. I felt the lyric's simplicity in execution pattern wise warranted the few that exist. This again, was completely on purpose.

-m11 you really should step the vocals. the hole at beat 43 is super awkward.

I could, but I thought that by doing it the first and second half the chart (or doing the other way around ect) it would become really static, so I settled that I would midway through alternate to keep it interesting. But if this is that big of an issue, I'd probably have to step the beeps more so than the vocals. I rarely touch the vocals. Should I really change the whole chart around this in your opinion?

-this whole section feels really underlayered compared to the rest of the file.

No time or beat mentioned? But chances are it's underlayered on purpose. It's a fun chart not a technical chart.

The idea of the chart is fun, not nearly as much technicalities. I tried to be somewhat technical, but not like HOLY **** PR YEAH.

-m34 16ths missed again

See above

-m39 when the synth kicks in again, you should layer this

No thank you. I don't want to spike the difficulty which is why I didn't.

-m43 this 16th note is wrong and should be an 8th.

Well, that seems to fit better. Changed.

-layering consistency is pretty odd in this file. pitch relevancy in obvious spots is relatively ignored.

It seems a lot weirder to you than to me I suppose? I find it pretty straightforward (the layering.) The only questionable time being I guess M10 where the jumps exist in abundance.

As for the PR, I'm not quite sure what to make of it in an explanation.

Woker:

16.235 - Missing note in the jack. Also, 16.422 is part of the jack too. This is repeated at: 22.235 , 28.235

There's actually no beep there. It's a held beep, that in SM would appear as a hold. Mentioned this in the Halogen section.

18.860 - I think this is not part of the jack, but 19.422 IS part of the jack.

I think you may be right, I'm gonna play with it and see which one fits better.

24.672 - Ghost note. and 25.422 is part of the up-jacks. This is repeated at: 30.672, 36.672

The ghost note is an awkward sound, I'm gonna listen to it a couple hundred times and fix accordingly.

Though the other two times you mention sound the same as the ghost note to me?

Thanks for any time you spend on answering me in the future, on top of the time you already spent on it. I do appreciate all the help, as I want to get a great chart out rather than a messy one.

[VisD]

Re: Queue/Batch Discussion Thread v2 (Submissions CLOSED)

Well, 3rd/4th batch now I've been trying seriously, still no dice. I'm kinda surprised at how poorly The Big Bang Theory rock cover did, since it received better scores in the last batch, and this time it has all the fixes recommended by the judges of that batch. Oh well, next batch maybe <:

[jimerax]

Re: Queue/Batch Discussion Thread v2 (Submissions CLOSED)

yeah current judgement system can't completely eliminate luck factors (due to not enough # of judges and judges differ everytime basically), so results won't be perfectly consistent everytime.

so sometimes you need to deal with this and submit again.

[AlexDest]

Re: Queue/Batch Discussion Thread v2 (Submissions CLOSED)

Sending a fix for 'Louder!! Louder!!!! Louder!!!!!!'.

May do the same for both Cutthroat and Posers soon (this weekend most likely).

[bmah]

Re: Queue/Batch Discussion Thread v2 (Submissions CLOSED)

Sending a fix for 'Louder!! Louder!!!! Louder!!!!!!'.

May do the same for both Cutthroat and Posers soon (this weekend most likely).

Post your fixes here too: http://www.flashflashrevolution.com/...d.php?t=121031

[AlexDest]

Re: Queue/Batch Discussion Thread v2 (Submissions CLOSED)

Figured I'd help get rid of some from the queue that have been released into the game.

Files queue'd from Feb 2012 batch (0)

Files queue'd from Apr 2012 batch (15)
All Of Me (iironiic)
S (MarioNintendo)
The Earth Blew Up v2 (Choofers) - difficulty similarity with v1
Walking on Water (Silvuh)
White Walls Part 1 (dore) - some spikey/awkward patterns can be improved
Breakbeat Acid (DossarLX)
cheerful forest (bmah) - quite heavily layered
Internet Heroes (YOSHI)
Shadows (iironiic)
White Walls Part 2 (dore) - some spikey/awkward patterns can be improved
jelly (Choofers)
MLPFiM Medley [Standard] (megamon88)
MLPFiM Medley [Heavy] (megamon88)
World End's Yama Xanadu (0)
R176 v2 (MrPopadopa)

Files queue'd from Jun 2012 batch (1-9 batch) (13)

Carrots (yo man im awesome)
Colors of the Wind (iironiic)
Countdown (DarkZtar)
Exotic Matter (Tidus810)
Glaciate (DarkZtar)
Mabi v2 (woker-X)
New Rave (Silvuh)
Pollyanna (YOSHl)
Pork and Beans [Scintill]
Redirected Moonlight (FFR Cut) (MarioNintendo)
Tokimori Uta (bmah)
ULTRAnumb (MarioNintendo)
With a Cherry On Top (Reshiram)

[bmah]

Re: Queue/Batch Discussion Thread v2 (Submissions CLOSED)

I finally updated the song queue list. Also updated are the 10 files that are eligible for resubmissions in the following batch.

[Tristana]

Re: Queue/Batch Discussion Thread v2 (Submissions CLOSED)

awesome

should also update SAPs

[bmah]

Re: Queue/Batch Discussion Thread v2 (Submissions CLOSED)

jx keeps track of SAPs, so I'll let him do that, whenever he gets around to it.

[jimerax]

Re: Queue/Batch Discussion Thread v2 (Submissions CLOSED)

Okay updated the SAP, we tightened the submission cap of higher ranges this time, since we've got a lot of submissions last time.

[Tristana]

Re: Queue/Batch Discussion Thread v2 (Submissions CLOSED)

fuuuuuuuuuu

just when i made the 4 submission mark

i get booted to 3

ggggggggggggg

[DossarLX ODI]

Re: Queue/Batch Discussion Thread v2 (Submissions CLOSED)

fuuuuuuuuuu

just when i made the 4 submission mark

i get booted to 3

ggggggggggggg

Haha I got bumped down to 4 as well

[Xx{Midnight}xX]

Re: Queue/Batch Discussion Thread v2 (Submissions CLOSED)

also since this is probably the best thread to ask,


why hasn't undiscovered colors been taken out of the game yet?

This.

[Tristana]

Re: Queue/Batch Discussion Thread v2 (Submissions CLOSED)

ill answer it for u

because some admins dont give a rats ass about what others have to say about the lack of proper administration and fairness in file submissions