Messages

I like it! I'm unable to check note accuracy on my computer right now so I'm hesitant to say you're all clear on the run at the end of measure 16--probably save that for the updaters--but I think what you have there is both elegant and captures the spirit of the original.

Hey Instrumaster! Sorry for the wait on this, hope you're still around and interested in getting this piece on the site.

First things first, your formatting is almost perfect, but the title of the piece needs quotation marks--should say "Uranus Stage", not Uranus Stage.

W/r/t measure 16: When you talk about the string of 16th notes in the left hand, that's perfectly possible and not at all unreasonable to play, I don't think it needs to be changed. When you talk about the quick run down on beat 14 of measure 16 (what you've written as a chromatic run in the right hand), I hear two simultaneous notes in the original. Perhaps you could write it out as a glissando in both hands, or even write out the run precisely in triplet sixteenths in both hands? I understand that 8-bit music like this has the potential to make unreasonable demands on someone playing a perfect transcription, but I think this change is still in the realm of making an arrangement both fancier and more faithful, without sacrificing playability.

Other than that, I think this is a solid arrangement of a catchy tune. Thanks for your work!

Good questions!
Not anymore! By default, MuseScore sheets do look pretty different from sheets made from the Finale template we've been using. But we (@XiaoMigros in particular) have been doing a bunch of investigation around matching the same fonts/styles in MuseScore to meet visual parity. You can get a sneak peek of that with @Static's sheet here, where the PDFs generated from the Finale and MuseScore versions look remarkably similar. We'll have more guidance around this to come soon (tm).

They do look quite similar, but I think this is an example of what I'm talking about--doesn't the Finale PDF look a little sharper? Like, a 720p to 1080p bump in clarity? I've always wondered what causes that.

Thank you (and others who I've been talking to as well) for offering to help I'd say these few things for now:
- If you are able to help check any current submissions at all, that would really help as some of our staff (mostly Xiao and myself) are focusing more of our attention on this transition than reviewing existing submissions. You don't have to be an updater or review everything about a sheet to leave helpful comments!
- If you're not familiar with MuseScore already, you can try and mess around with it to build some familiarity and expertise. We will likely eventually rely partially on community support for help engraving with MuseScore so the more members around who are familiar with it, the better. As for actual sheets to submit, after we finish drafting up guidelines for how to format submissions in MuseScore, we'll need people to run through it and see if the process is smooth so we can refine it. That will need to wait a little bit (a few weeks?) until we finish writing that up though!

o7 Orders received!

Thanks for the update, Latios! Sounds like a ton of work for the staff. Kudos for taking it on. I have a few questions about this:

-Are there any differences between Finale's and Musescore's respective formatting that appear to be unsurmountable? If I remember correctly from seeing some MuseScore sheets back in the day, the notation never appeared as sharp and crisp as sheets that were written natively in Finale, for example.

-Down the road, when Finale versions are more or less unusable because of lack of developer support, will the option to submit .mus files be removed entirely? Or is that a bridge to cross when we get there?

-What can the shock troops in the community (me) do to be helpful for the transition process here?

holy

TZP probably "greenchecked" me to keep me around as my vote was worth .5. Missed opportunity that people didn't look at that harder, as it made TZP obvious in hindsight (being the only one who wasn't trying to wagon me until his hand was forced). Oh well, hindsight bias and all that.

This is actually not quite true. Going into D2, when I realized Specs had checked you, I thought there was a good chance you were my partner. So I faked a green check on you to alert you to the fact that I wasn't on the level—if you were a human, you wouldn't disbelieve it, but if you were the fire wolf, you'd immediately know I was your partner, since you'd show up as red to the fire seer. And when you didn't take the bait I was almost positive it was Xiao. I was going to PM Xiao during N3 to team up...but the very strange vote results on D2 gave me pause about doing that.

STOP ROLLING ME AS A WOLF FOR THESE AAAA

I agree these are the logical lynch candidates based on how the events have unfolded

Also, why frame it this way Xiao? I've read BDS as human all game, but he hasn't done anything to truly clear himself. Why is he on par with Specs as someone above reproach for this phase?

[Xiao]

I'm heading out into the sticks for a hike right now and won't be back for several hours, but I should be able to clock in one more time after that. I'm gonna vote Xiao for now. Subject to change. Specs, something I'd be curious to hear from you while I'm gone: in each of the three worlds from your perspective (wolf!TZP, wolf!Xiao, wolf!BDS) who do you think each of us would be most likely to paint last night?

I read more as a genuine human gambit more than a wolf faking a human gambit, since BDS hasn't really been under scrutiny yet this phase

A'ight, I'm going for broke here, but after mulling all the scenarios over I'm fairly certain you're not just pretending to lie about your seer results. I'm the fire wolf and I painted Xiao red last night so I know you're lying about your seer results. I didn't reduce anyone's vote last night because I figured that if Oricorio wasn't the ice wolf (which I'm pretty sure at this point he wasn't) it was too much of a risk to accidentally hit the other wolf.

If you're indeed the ice wolf and vote reduced anyone other than me, I'm pretty sure we've just won. If you had the same logic as me and didn't reduce anyone, then, well, we can work with that. I feel like Specs could be convinced to vote for Xiao without too much effort, especially if I'm the first one to lead the charge.

got this from BDS lol

You're mixing up conditional and absolute probability. If it was down to three players (you, the person you seer'd and the person who you didn't seer), then it would be a true 50/50 from your perspective, and the blue seering tells you literally nothing since you can be confident both other players would flip blue. But there are more players than that, so it's the probability my blue flip is a wolf GIVEN that you can assume 2 out of 3 players were blue last night. Which is different still from the probability Oricorio's blue flip was a wolf given that you can assume 2 out of 5 players were blue N2.

Aw man that really sucks. Specs you're gonna vote who you have to vote, but I need to point out that a blue flip is less significant at this point in the game than it was earlier. It's highly likely that, from your perspective. two of the other three remaining players were blue last night. Please don't just execute me based on that flip!

My vote's going to BDS or Xiao, I don't think I'm capable of the tinfoil required to mistrust Specs at this point. Leaning toward Xiao because I think he would be more likely to paint me than BDS would.

Also a phase extension is probably worse for me, wedding is on the 5th