T+ VS SHARK :: FFR Batch Submission

Queue | Open Batches

storn42 - T+ VS SHARK - t+pazolite [8 / 10]

OT18 Bounty Batch - Courtroom

PublicTokenPurchasedSecretEvents

Accepted

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1goVL1D37TyZKlYBfER-ZIZlssHdWdq9-gLSdX6A2sII/edit?gid=0#gid=0&range=A1409

resub: https://www.flashflashrevolution.com/batch_submission//batch/?id=2763

✔️ This chart has been marked as final and shouldn't receive any more changes.

Simfile Folder Name

t+ vs shark (Storn42)

Note Count

2389

Chart Length

2:47

Average NPS

14.6355

Estimated Difficulty

97.27

First Note

0:04

Ending Note Delay

0:01

Hand Bias

x 15

Framers

0 - 0 1 - 0 2 - 11 3 - 105 4 - 459

Jumps

								x 415
							

Hands

								x 151
							

Quads

x 3

Color Jumps

x 4

Color Hands

x 0

Color Quads

x 0

Most notes in:

1/3 of a Second
11 - 33.00 nps 0.5 Seconds
15 - 30.00 nps 1 Second
28 - 28.00 nps 2 Seconds
50 - 25.00 nps 5 Seconds
115 - 23.00 nps 10 Seconds
220 - 22.00 nps 30 Seconds
590 - 19.67 nps 1 Minute
1112 - 18.53 nps

Color Count

x 979 (40.98%)

x 592 (24.78%)

x 67 (2.8%)

x 488 (20.43%)

x 58 (2.43%)

x 111 (4.65%)

x 7 (0.29%)

x 3 (0.13%)

x 84 (3.52%)

Largest Note Gaps

0.6s0.57s0.43s0.43s0.43s0.43s0.3s0.3s

File is most definitely improved with the added changes, even though by the looks of it feels almost the same when compared side by side.

Approved for the high 90s, cleared for judging.

Tools: Convert Timestamp

T+ VS SHARK (storn42)
>Permission good (Blanket)
>Folder contents good
>Sync good

-Experimental judge note format using labels.
-Open the .sm in a text editor and paste this in after the #STOPS:; line for best results. Don't forget to save!
-Use the new AV version from the thread in #simfiles. Go to Tempo > Labels for a judge note list
-Notes are reproduced in normal format in the next comment if it's weird or doesn't work.

#LABELS:98.500=super nitpick but may not want these bursts to be the same so close to each other,
99.667=only case of fast OHT / [12]2 / 2[12] in the whole chart.. may not be what you wanted,
100.500=(re: .015),
185.000=.,
201.000=reduce jump - compare 1:00.965 / 1:15.365,
217.000=I appreciate this,
233.000=.,
449.000=left OHT motion slightly long here,
451.500=..to here,
517.000=(subjective) jump?,
531.000=Song might be too much of a meme for OT round use but we should still be able to use it somewhere.,
531.500=Chart's been smoothed out nicely.,
532.000=Almost worry it's too smoothed out
;

Judge Score: 8.00 - Accepted

Tools: Convert Timestamp

00:35.015 - super nitpick but may not want this burst and 00:35.615 to be the same so close to each other
00:35.365 - only case of fast OHT / [12]2 / 2[12] in the whole chart.. may not be what you wanted
01:05.765 - reduce jump - compare 1:00.965 / 1:15.365
01:10.565 - I appreciate this
02:20.165 - 02:20.915 - left OHT motion is slightly long here
02:40.565 - (subjective) jump?

Song might be too much of a meme for OT round use but we should still be able to use it somewhere. Chart's been smoothed out nicely. Almost worry it's too smoothed out

Tools: Convert Timestamp

Fixed everything except for the OHTs, not really much i can do about them without creating other bigger problems.

A new chart file was uploaded with the following changes:
----------
Hand Bias changed: 13 => 15

Tools: Convert Timestamp