Moonlight :: FFR Batch Submission
Rapta - Moonlight - Geoxor [6 / 10]
Nov/Dec 2020
PublicPurchasedEvents
Rejected
http://www.flashflashrevolution.com/vbz/showpost.php?p=4743379&postcount=246
If the intro is too easy I can buff it up in some spots.

Simfile Folder Name

Moonlight (Rapta)

Note Count

747

Chart Length

3:01

Average NPS

4.2467

Estimated Difficulty

33.37

First Note

0:05

Ending Note Delay

0:01

Hand Bias

x -61

Framers

0 - 0 1 - 0 2 - 0 3 - 0 4 - 0

Jumps

x 146

Hands

x 0

Quads

x 0

Color Jumps

x 1

Color Hands

x 0

Color Quads

x 0

Most notes in:

1/3 of a Second
3 - 9.00 nps 0.5 Seconds
5 - 10.00 nps 1 Second
9 - 9.00 nps 2 Seconds
18 - 9.00 nps 5 Seconds
41 - 8.20 nps 10 Seconds
77 - 7.70 nps 30 Seconds
225 - 7.50 nps 1 Minute
383 - 6.38 nps

Color Count

x 571 (76.44%)
x 175 (23.43%)
x 0 (0%)
x 0 (0%)
x 0 (0%)
x 0 (0%)
x 0 (0%)
x 1 (0.13%)
x 0 (0%)

Largest Note Gaps

2.77s1.37s1.37s1.37s1.03s1.03s1.03s1.03s
35
28
21
14
7

Moonlight
---------
- Perms, sync, metadata good.

- 29.809: You were pretty rigid about keeping this on column 4 before, and it creates a rather odd PR collision on column 1. Suggest column 3 instead. 35.326 similarly doesn't sit well with me either.
- 66.188: Nice use of the minijack to bring tension here.
- 120.211, 131.246, etc.: Given the anchors going on here, a little 24th flam wouldn't be out-of-place in terms of difficulty.
- 176.016: Six consecutive notes on column 2, but there's no repeated sound here.

** There is an extreme mismatch between song intensity and chart intensity. At 69.120, the song pretty much goes from lo-fi to dubstep with next to no change in the chart's intensity. Then at 113.257, a little bit of bass gets added to the dubstep and suddenly we're doing full on 8th anchors--just look at Etterna's NPS graph, coupled with the fact that the patterning is pretty nontrivial, to see how wildly spiky this is.

- While there's not a whole lot wrong with this file technically, the above note needs to be addressed before the chart goes in, and this would require too large of a revision for just a CQ. [6/10]