|
On March 28 2017 07:08 Dazed_Spy wrote:Show nested quote +On March 28 2017 06:35 ColdLava wrote:On March 28 2017 01:42 Dazed_Spy wrote:On March 27 2017 18:04 ColdLava wrote:On March 27 2017 08:42 Dazed_Spy wrote:On March 27 2017 08:38 ChesterShin wrote:On March 27 2017 08:32 DarkNetHunter wrote:On March 27 2017 08:27 ChesterShin wrote:
1. I hope that we will be able to make units out of more than just one building (same type of building) at a time like in SC2. As in, we could select two or more barracks, and click the hot key for a marine as many times as the number of units we want to/can make.
2. What is keybind? Thanks. 1. The answer is No (we refer to that as Multi-Building Select), this is considered a Cheat(hack) in Starcraft Broodwar and affects racial balance significantly. 2. Keybind means you can rebind your hotkeys to different keys. So if Marine by default is 'M' you could rebind it to 'R' or whatever you wished. Thanks. Regarding the Multi-Building Select: I'm a very low level player, so I cannot see why this would make it racially imbalanced. Which race is better off and which is worse off? As a low level player, this functionality was one of the best things I liked about SC2 as compared to BW. I suppose doesn't matter to me that much, because I loved the BW custom games for which this wouldn't matter too much. P.S. When I first saw "Native support for Fish", I read it as "Native support for Flash" (cause I have no idea what Fish is) and I was thinking what does that even mean.. I don't think Flash really needs any support.. he's good on his own. Zergs use hatcheries for macro, and as a result they need a lot less infrastructure. If a terran or protoss could bind 30 gateways/15 factories etc to one key and macro off it, they would have a large advantage in terms of focus etc. Fish is a private third party ladder where basically all the koreans play. I dont know what kind of support they're offering, but hopefully something that will make it easier for english players to get in there. Currently you have to type in " I am korean" in hangul just to activate their anti hack, which is frustrating/difficult and pointless. We shall see! As someone who's played a lot of both games (as I'm sure you have), I don't think the balance change will be very drastic if you can multiselect buildings. Everyone would have improvements and advantages that would come from the extra amount of time to focus, however, if you played a reasonable amount of BW, you became pretty quick at macroing even from large amounts of buildings, and you knew when to pick your spots. (..Well, that was usually still when I'd lose my entire M&M army to 3 lurkers!!) It would be rather large, yes. If its easy to macro off alot of infrastructure, theres no cause to put in MBS anyway. No one is doing anything boring or difficult or time consuming or distracting themselves momentarily to allow for their mnm to be butchered by three lurkers. Actually yeah now that I've thought about it (as with another reply to my post), TvZ would be quite different. I get nervous because the mechanics having a steep learning curve will probably scare off a lot of people inexperienced with strategy games. That being said, the solution isn't to dumb it down to the point that SC2 became, but it'd be a shame if BW HD becomes a vacuum of only previous BW players. I know theres been a certain cultural shift in gamers-- because its gotten more mainstream, theres a lot of people who want easier games than maybe 20 years ago, when it was more niche. Still, theres always going to be people who want hard games. Either way, I got into bw when I was 6 years old. Not exactly as emotionally mature as most prospective gamers are now, and I happily spent almost a decade playing non melee games most of my time. BW has plenty to offer plenty of different kinds of gamers, though I dont expect it to just explode in the way league did. RTS will never do that in a sustained way imo.
I think the next big resurgence will occur when we see brain-to-computer devices that allow you to bypass peripherals like mouse and keyboard entirely. Then all of the D- Strategic Genius (TM) players will either fulfill their skill promises or get bodied and quit. Most likely the latter, but hey. RTS can be big again for a bit.
|
I knew it!!! Yes there is a God!!! Lets go go go Fam!!
|
On March 28 2017 07:12 Jealous wrote:Show nested quote +On March 28 2017 07:08 Dazed_Spy wrote:On March 28 2017 06:35 ColdLava wrote:On March 28 2017 01:42 Dazed_Spy wrote:On March 27 2017 18:04 ColdLava wrote:On March 27 2017 08:42 Dazed_Spy wrote:On March 27 2017 08:38 ChesterShin wrote:On March 27 2017 08:32 DarkNetHunter wrote:On March 27 2017 08:27 ChesterShin wrote:
1. I hope that we will be able to make units out of more than just one building (same type of building) at a time like in SC2. As in, we could select two or more barracks, and click the hot key for a marine as many times as the number of units we want to/can make.
2. What is keybind? Thanks. 1. The answer is No (we refer to that as Multi-Building Select), this is considered a Cheat(hack) in Starcraft Broodwar and affects racial balance significantly. 2. Keybind means you can rebind your hotkeys to different keys. So if Marine by default is 'M' you could rebind it to 'R' or whatever you wished. Thanks. Regarding the Multi-Building Select: I'm a very low level player, so I cannot see why this would make it racially imbalanced. Which race is better off and which is worse off? As a low level player, this functionality was one of the best things I liked about SC2 as compared to BW. I suppose doesn't matter to me that much, because I loved the BW custom games for which this wouldn't matter too much. P.S. When I first saw "Native support for Fish", I read it as "Native support for Flash" (cause I have no idea what Fish is) and I was thinking what does that even mean.. I don't think Flash really needs any support.. he's good on his own. Zergs use hatcheries for macro, and as a result they need a lot less infrastructure. If a terran or protoss could bind 30 gateways/15 factories etc to one key and macro off it, they would have a large advantage in terms of focus etc. Fish is a private third party ladder where basically all the koreans play. I dont know what kind of support they're offering, but hopefully something that will make it easier for english players to get in there. Currently you have to type in " I am korean" in hangul just to activate their anti hack, which is frustrating/difficult and pointless. We shall see! As someone who's played a lot of both games (as I'm sure you have), I don't think the balance change will be very drastic if you can multiselect buildings. Everyone would have improvements and advantages that would come from the extra amount of time to focus, however, if you played a reasonable amount of BW, you became pretty quick at macroing even from large amounts of buildings, and you knew when to pick your spots. (..Well, that was usually still when I'd lose my entire M&M army to 3 lurkers!!) It would be rather large, yes. If its easy to macro off alot of infrastructure, theres no cause to put in MBS anyway. No one is doing anything boring or difficult or time consuming or distracting themselves momentarily to allow for their mnm to be butchered by three lurkers. Actually yeah now that I've thought about it (as with another reply to my post), TvZ would be quite different. I get nervous because the mechanics having a steep learning curve will probably scare off a lot of people inexperienced with strategy games. That being said, the solution isn't to dumb it down to the point that SC2 became, but it'd be a shame if BW HD becomes a vacuum of only previous BW players. I know theres been a certain cultural shift in gamers-- because its gotten more mainstream, theres a lot of people who want easier games than maybe 20 years ago, when it was more niche. Still, theres always going to be people who want hard games. Either way, I got into bw when I was 6 years old. Not exactly as emotionally mature as most prospective gamers are now, and I happily spent almost a decade playing non melee games most of my time. BW has plenty to offer plenty of different kinds of gamers, though I dont expect it to just explode in the way league did. RTS will never do that in a sustained way imo. I think the next big resurgence will occur when we see brain-to-computer devices that allow you to bypass peripherals like mouse and keyboard entirely. Then all of the D- Strategic Genius (TM) players will either fulfill their skill promises or get bodied and quit. Most likely the latter, but hey. RTS can be big again for a bit.
I used to think this, but I think that removing the mechanical requirements will make the game "harder" similar to how SC2 is harder to win via technical skill alone. It wouldn't have as much replayability because there would be less room for error.
|
On March 28 2017 06:27 Spec1aLisT wrote:
Can someone explain to me, if they will change the Latency completely and make it mandatory to everyone to play at Lan speeds? I Love the latency now(low latency). Because I play a game called Snipers and it needs it to be that way, otherwise the game mechanics are ruined.
There is no reason to think it won't have the same latency as WC3 and SC2; battle.net latency.
Blizzard has never patched LAN latency into SC with any of their patches, nor acknowledged it's importance for SC2.
I get shivers about how everyone in 2017 playing DOTA2, LoL and SC2 is used to playing with 400ms delay.
|
Anyone know if UPnP automatically opens ports? Or does it just not rely on that anymore?
The reason I ask is that I work at a boarding school so I am on their network. Through my router I am not able to open my ports. I think the only way I could open ports would be contacting the school's IT and having them do it. I am hoping this UPnP will just not require these ports to be open. I can play xbox live and other online games fine, bw just lags to hell.
|
On March 28 2017 08:13 Meta wrote:Show nested quote +On March 28 2017 07:12 Jealous wrote:On March 28 2017 07:08 Dazed_Spy wrote:On March 28 2017 06:35 ColdLava wrote:On March 28 2017 01:42 Dazed_Spy wrote:On March 27 2017 18:04 ColdLava wrote:On March 27 2017 08:42 Dazed_Spy wrote:On March 27 2017 08:38 ChesterShin wrote:On March 27 2017 08:32 DarkNetHunter wrote:On March 27 2017 08:27 ChesterShin wrote:
1. I hope that we will be able to make units out of more than just one building (same type of building) at a time like in SC2. As in, we could select two or more barracks, and click the hot key for a marine as many times as the number of units we want to/can make.
2. What is keybind? Thanks. 1. The answer is No (we refer to that as Multi-Building Select), this is considered a Cheat(hack) in Starcraft Broodwar and affects racial balance significantly. 2. Keybind means you can rebind your hotkeys to different keys. So if Marine by default is 'M' you could rebind it to 'R' or whatever you wished. Thanks. Regarding the Multi-Building Select: I'm a very low level player, so I cannot see why this would make it racially imbalanced. Which race is better off and which is worse off? As a low level player, this functionality was one of the best things I liked about SC2 as compared to BW. I suppose doesn't matter to me that much, because I loved the BW custom games for which this wouldn't matter too much. P.S. When I first saw "Native support for Fish", I read it as "Native support for Flash" (cause I have no idea what Fish is) and I was thinking what does that even mean.. I don't think Flash really needs any support.. he's good on his own. Zergs use hatcheries for macro, and as a result they need a lot less infrastructure. If a terran or protoss could bind 30 gateways/15 factories etc to one key and macro off it, they would have a large advantage in terms of focus etc. Fish is a private third party ladder where basically all the koreans play. I dont know what kind of support they're offering, but hopefully something that will make it easier for english players to get in there. Currently you have to type in " I am korean" in hangul just to activate their anti hack, which is frustrating/difficult and pointless. We shall see! As someone who's played a lot of both games (as I'm sure you have), I don't think the balance change will be very drastic if you can multiselect buildings. Everyone would have improvements and advantages that would come from the extra amount of time to focus, however, if you played a reasonable amount of BW, you became pretty quick at macroing even from large amounts of buildings, and you knew when to pick your spots. (..Well, that was usually still when I'd lose my entire M&M army to 3 lurkers!!) It would be rather large, yes. If its easy to macro off alot of infrastructure, theres no cause to put in MBS anyway. No one is doing anything boring or difficult or time consuming or distracting themselves momentarily to allow for their mnm to be butchered by three lurkers. Actually yeah now that I've thought about it (as with another reply to my post), TvZ would be quite different. I get nervous because the mechanics having a steep learning curve will probably scare off a lot of people inexperienced with strategy games. That being said, the solution isn't to dumb it down to the point that SC2 became, but it'd be a shame if BW HD becomes a vacuum of only previous BW players. I know theres been a certain cultural shift in gamers-- because its gotten more mainstream, theres a lot of people who want easier games than maybe 20 years ago, when it was more niche. Still, theres always going to be people who want hard games. Either way, I got into bw when I was 6 years old. Not exactly as emotionally mature as most prospective gamers are now, and I happily spent almost a decade playing non melee games most of my time. BW has plenty to offer plenty of different kinds of gamers, though I dont expect it to just explode in the way league did. RTS will never do that in a sustained way imo. I think the next big resurgence will occur when we see brain-to-computer devices that allow you to bypass peripherals like mouse and keyboard entirely. Then all of the D- Strategic Genius (TM) players will either fulfill their skill promises or get bodied and quit. Most likely the latter, but hey. RTS can be big again for a bit. I used to think this, but I think that removing the mechanical requirements will make the game "harder" similar to how SC2 is harder to win via technical skill alone. It wouldn't have as much replayability because there would be less room for error. How are you using the word harder, here? Theres multiple ways your could understand the word, and in many ways-- the ways I would find interesting to talk about for a game, like complexity of information and difficulty in pulling off a task successfully, sc2 doesnt even rank in comparison to broodwar. sc2 is only difficult in the sense that rock paper scissors is difficult; the game is harsh, but its rules and give and take are also simplistic.
|
Croatia9499 Posts
On March 28 2017 08:28 ted. wrote:
Anyone know if UPnP automatically opens ports? Or does it just not rely on that anymore?
The reason I ask is that I work at a boarding school so I am on their network. Through my router I am not able to open my ports. I think the only way I could open ports would be contacting the school's IT and having them do it. I am hoping this UPnP will just not require these ports to be open. I can play xbox live and other online games fine, bw just lags to hell.
Sup Ted, long time no see!
UPnP can automatically open ports (or the equivalent of that), but the router you're using needs to support it and it needs to be turned on in the router. Which I doubt is true in a place like school, but you never know. You should still be able host/play on ShieldBattery without any problems  .
|
|
|
"Battle.net will be down for maintenance on March 28th in preparation for 1.18 Starcraft."
In preparation, no mention of release. Don't get my hopes up like that!
|
So much hyped for this 
|
On March 28 2017 08:50 2Pacalypse- wrote:Show nested quote +On March 28 2017 08:28 ted. wrote:
Anyone know if UPnP automatically opens ports? Or does it just not rely on that anymore?
The reason I ask is that I work at a boarding school so I am on their network. Through my router I am not able to open my ports. I think the only way I could open ports would be contacting the school's IT and having them do it. I am hoping this UPnP will just not require these ports to be open. I can play xbox live and other online games fine, bw just lags to hell. Sup Ted, long time no see! UPnP can automatically open ports (or the equivalent of that), but the router you're using needs to support it and it needs to be turned on in the router. Which I doubt is true in a place like school, but you never know. You should still be able host/play on ShieldBattery without any problems .
2pac! Whats up man!
Well I really hope I can get it working here. I can log into my router and mess with the settings, but when I opened my ports, it just doesn't seem to actually be opening them. I'm guessing because I'm on a school network.
Anyway, one way or another I plan on playing again. I really
Hope that with bw remastered coming out that we will see a resurgence of the bgh scene!
|
I still can't believe this is real 
|
I can't wait to see the impact of the new patch. In an interview, they said that they were working with many antihack add-on makers. So I believe they are not against them.. and that iccup should continue to work.
|
Pretty sure I saw this floating around before but I wanted to check. Will sc1:r be linked to the bnet app? Or will it be standalone like d1-2 and wc3?
Basically what I am getting at is our usernames. Can we endlessly make new accounts or do we need to stick to one name, and does it HAVE to be unique. Thanks!
|
On March 28 2017 08:28 Philoctetes wrote:Show nested quote +On March 28 2017 06:27 Spec1aLisT wrote:
Can someone explain to me, if they will change the Latency completely and make it mandatory to everyone to play at Lan speeds? I Love the latency now(low latency). Because I play a game called Snipers and it needs it to be that way, otherwise the game mechanics are ruined. There is no reason to think it won't have the same latency as WC3 and SC2; battle.net latency. Blizzard has never patched LAN latency into SC with any of their patches, nor acknowledged it's importance for SC2. I get shivers about how everyone in 2017 playing DOTA2, LoL and SC2 is used to playing with 400ms delay.
Wc3 has the same built in delay. We're waiting on the day it gets fixed, too.
|
On March 28 2017 08:28 Philoctetes wrote:Show nested quote +On March 28 2017 06:27 Spec1aLisT wrote:
Can someone explain to me, if they will change the Latency completely and make it mandatory to everyone to play at Lan speeds? I Love the latency now(low latency). Because I play a game called Snipers and it needs it to be that way, otherwise the game mechanics are ruined. There is no reason to think it won't have the same latency as WC3 and SC2; battle.net latency. Blizzard has never patched LAN latency into SC with any of their patches, nor acknowledged it's importance for SC2. I get shivers about how everyone in 2017 playing DOTA2, LoL and SC2 is used to playing with 400ms delay.
400ms delay? I have a ping of ~30ms on LoL, if I had a ping of 400 I would go insane.
|
On March 28 2017 17:31 LML wrote:Show nested quote +On March 28 2017 08:28 Philoctetes wrote:On March 28 2017 06:27 Spec1aLisT wrote:
Can someone explain to me, if they will change the Latency completely and make it mandatory to everyone to play at Lan speeds? I Love the latency now(low latency). Because I play a game called Snipers and it needs it to be that way, otherwise the game mechanics are ruined. There is no reason to think it won't have the same latency as WC3 and SC2; battle.net latency. Blizzard has never patched LAN latency into SC with any of their patches, nor acknowledged it's importance for SC2. I get shivers about how everyone in 2017 playing DOTA2, LoL and SC2 is used to playing with 400ms delay. 400ms delay? I have a ping of ~30ms on LoL, if I had a ping of 400 I would go insane.
Old Bnet
400ms that's pretty good for pre-lat changer for Bnet, SC:BW and WC3:TFT pre latency changers is what minimum of 450ms with high latency setting being like 1050ms, UDP multiplayer something like 200ms, back in the good old days to get around crappy b.net playing on hamachi, which btw lan was something like 100-125ms not as quick as you'd think. The games don't run off server so it's restrained by who ever had the shittiest connection. Plus latency is call and response so it's more than just ping it's both ways.
That being said server based games like LOL and Dota 2 are vastly different, although who knows what the constant, tick rate is for those servers. I forget if SC2 is actual sever based games or not, i thought it was a hybrid not hosted on the server but acted as an intermediary for some data, but that was at launch have no clue how it is now.
|
On March 28 2017 14:40 lestye wrote:Show nested quote +On March 28 2017 08:28 Philoctetes wrote:On March 28 2017 06:27 Spec1aLisT wrote:
Can someone explain to me, if they will change the Latency completely and make it mandatory to everyone to play at Lan speeds? I Love the latency now(low latency). Because I play a game called Snipers and it needs it to be that way, otherwise the game mechanics are ruined. There is no reason to think it won't have the same latency as WC3 and SC2; battle.net latency. Blizzard has never patched LAN latency into SC with any of their patches, nor acknowledged it's importance for SC2. I get shivers about how everyone in 2017 playing DOTA2, LoL and SC2 is used to playing with 400ms delay. Wc3 has the same built in delay. We're waiting on the day it gets fixed, too.
Well, with SC2 they kept the WC3 delay. Dota2 kept the Dota delay from WC3, to be more authentic. LoL has the same delay.
So most people got used to SC2 build-in delay, which would be completely unacceptable post-lan latency in SC BW.
People got used to it. SC2 players stop caring. They either came from WC3, LoL, Dota2, and are used to it. When they came from LAN lat SC, they either quiit or stopped caring.
People used to build-in delay of SC2, WC3, Dota2, LoL, they say they don't feel it. They don't feel something is wrong.
But when you play HoN or SC, it is obvious something is wrong and it is unplayable 'until you get used to it'.
Blizzard in beta even reduced the build-in delay for a while during SC2. Then they came out and said 'no one noticed it, as no one talked about it', and they promptly turned it back on.
There is 10,000 pages on balance talk on the SC2 page, but almost none on the build-in delay.
For me, there is no reason to 'get used to' a huge build-in delay. But I guess I am weird.
|
On March 28 2017 19:44 Philoctetes wrote:Show nested quote +On March 28 2017 14:40 lestye wrote:On March 28 2017 08:28 Philoctetes wrote:On March 28 2017 06:27 Spec1aLisT wrote:
Can someone explain to me, if they will change the Latency completely and make it mandatory to everyone to play at Lan speeds? I Love the latency now(low latency). Because I play a game called Snipers and it needs it to be that way, otherwise the game mechanics are ruined. There is no reason to think it won't have the same latency as WC3 and SC2; battle.net latency. Blizzard has never patched LAN latency into SC with any of their patches, nor acknowledged it's importance for SC2. I get shivers about how everyone in 2017 playing DOTA2, LoL and SC2 is used to playing with 400ms delay. Wc3 has the same built in delay. We're waiting on the day it gets fixed, too. Well, with SC2 they kept the WC3 delay. Dota2 kept the Dota delay from WC3, to be more authentic. LoL has the same delay. So most people got used to SC2 build-in delay, which would be completely unacceptable post-lan latency in SC BW. People got used to it. SC2 players stop caring. They either came from WC3, LoL, Dota2, and are used to it. When they came from LAN lat SC, they either quiit or stopped caring. People used to build-in delay of SC2, WC3, Dota2, LoL, they say they don't feel it. They don't feel something is wrong. But when you play HoN or SC, it is obvious something is wrong and it is unplayable 'until you get used to it'. Blizzard in beta even reduced the build-in delay for a while during SC2. Then they came out and said 'no one noticed it, as no one talked about it', and they promptly turned it back on. There is 10,000 pages on balance talk on the SC2 page, but almost none on the build-in delay. For me, there is no reason to 'get used to' a huge build-in delay. But I guess I am weird.
So there is a nearly half second delay in all those games and no-one noticed. This is what you are saying.
|
On March 28 2017 19:44 Philoctetes wrote:Show nested quote +On March 28 2017 14:40 lestye wrote:On March 28 2017 08:28 Philoctetes wrote:On March 28 2017 06:27 Spec1aLisT wrote:
Can someone explain to me, if they will change the Latency completely and make it mandatory to everyone to play at Lan speeds? I Love the latency now(low latency). Because I play a game called Snipers and it needs it to be that way, otherwise the game mechanics are ruined. There is no reason to think it won't have the same latency as WC3 and SC2; battle.net latency. Blizzard has never patched LAN latency into SC with any of their patches, nor acknowledged it's importance for SC2. I get shivers about how everyone in 2017 playing DOTA2, LoL and SC2 is used to playing with 400ms delay. Wc3 has the same built in delay. We're waiting on the day it gets fixed, too. Well, with SC2 they kept the WC3 delay. Dota2 kept the Dota delay from WC3, to be more authentic. LoL has the same delay. So most people got used to SC2 build-in delay, which would be completely unacceptable post-lan latency in SC BW. People got used to it. SC2 players stop caring. They either came from WC3, LoL, Dota2, and are used to it. When they came from LAN lat SC, they either quiit or stopped caring. People used to build-in delay of SC2, WC3, Dota2, LoL, they say they don't feel it. They don't feel something is wrong. But when you play HoN or SC, it is obvious something is wrong and it is unplayable 'until you get used to it'. Blizzard in beta even reduced the build-in delay for a while during SC2. Then they came out and said 'no one noticed it, as no one talked about it', and they promptly turned it back on. There is 10,000 pages on balance talk on the SC2 page, but almost none on the build-in delay. For me, there is no reason to 'get used to' a huge build-in delay. But I guess I am weird.
You certainly felt it in the SEA region for sc2. We regularly get 180 - 220+ms to our closest servers in Sydney / Los Angeles and some of us over 350ms to Korea and even worse to EU. It was even worse before they opened up a dedicated server in Sydney, Oceania players were routed through either Singapore or Los Angeles before then but it is still atrocious.
LAN latency would be MUCH appreciated. Playing on iCCup for example, has been great for me.
EDIT: When the Sydney servers came up, some people got significant latency improvements to Korea, the lowest average was around 150ms to my recollection...
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
