2019 September/October Set 5

[AutotelicBrown]

First a note about possible 1-framers, at 232bpm they are fairly unlikely to happen and the info from the batch engine confirms it:
1 framers (3):
Note 2354 @ 2:12 (this jack will be removed anyway)
Note 3611 @ 3:13
Note 3858 @ 3:25

>- 3.413: move that [3] arrow to a [4] arrow to prevent the unnecessary 12th note minijack
This jump goes to a different thing than all the [14] following 24ths, so it makes sense to be different.
From a difficulty perspective there are no 16ths afterwards and the minijack is clean on the right hand (not to mention this is nothing in the context of the chart as a whole). Compare to 6.646 where I used [14] to soften the pattern.

>- 7.486/15.697: break these jump-jacks apart, you use separate jumps earlier on for kicks that play on 16th notes
The other 3 note 16ths to the kicks make a jumptrill to avoid a 3 note jack, otherwise I'd rather be consistent with the 8ths and keep repeating isolated kicks on the same jump.

>- 22.033/(etc): the last note of these 3-note sequences has a slightly different sounding pronounced release, making it a bit more appropriate to use a two-note mini-jack into a three note one; besides, at 232, using a 3-note jack may create a situation where a 2-framer and 1-framer come back-to-back
I'm a bit confused because this happens only once but anyway, it should be changed to a 332.

>- 25.912/(etc): not that this is rhythmically incorrect, but when you consider how this is going to be played on FFR, a good majority of this section is literally spamming [34] and [12] (over the course of about 4 seconds) - this is pretty ridiculous to play in general
I did design this section to be played as a controlled jumptrilling making the faster rhythms rolls starting from appropriate notes, and they all happen in isolated short bursts. For reference, this is how it converts to:

As far as I can tell this is perfectly fine to play except maybe the 4231 @28.628s and doesn't even compare to typical hard terminal 11 charts in that difficulty range. If possible I'd ask you for more details with your issues with this section.

>- 49.704 to 1:05.609: while the color gimmick is interesting, I’m absolutely not a fan of the execution at all because the opportunity for pitch relevance is just completely missed
>- 3:10.749: same stuff w/ color gimmick as 49.704
Note that the 48ths go to the actual 48th swing which I didn't step as is to not make this section ridiculous to play. As their pitch is connected to the previous chord I only forced them to be on the anchored 8th.
The pitch relevance of the main melody is followed by the chords themselves within the restrictions o difficulty balance.

>- 2:05.413/2:09.551/(etc): I understand the reason behind doing this, but it’s better off not having a collision; you’d be better off briefly breaking layering and giving attention to the kicks by making the preceding triples opposing doubles or something like that, mostly because some jumps for kicks are ignored in general
I was a bit on the fence on including those but I'll just remove them. I was just worried that this section in general would just be autopilot for most players playing this

>- 2:28.947: disconnect the [3] from the triple to make the pattern difficult but not unmanageable.
Knowing in advance that the [14][23][14][23][134] converts as 2-1-2-2 frames I believe this shouldn't be a problem as it happens in isolation.

>- 3:24.558: disconnect the [4] from the triple to give more accenting power without making the last hard section ungodly less fun having to transition from it
Yes.