|
Germany2896 Posts
LatencyChanger by MasterofChaos
Version 0.2.2 for Starcraft 1.16.0
Features:
Reduces latency on bnet. It is enabled for games which end on
#LL or #L1 ... #L5. All players in such a game have to have the plugin enabled, or a disconnect occurs direcly on beginning of the game.
Example:
MyGame#LL => Latency=LowLatency=2 like on LAN
MyGame#L3 => Latency=3
Latencies used by Blizzard:
1 Singleplayer (Selecting 1 with LatencyChanger is probably still a bit slower than real SP)
2 LAN
5 Battle.net
It only changes the base latency, you can still select between low, high and extrahigh. But for Latency=2 that is not the low/high/extra of battle.net but that of LAN.
Changes Starcraftcode in memory, which is detectable by Antihacktools like Warden, so there is a risk, that blizzard decides to invalidate the users Accounts/CD-Keys.
USE AT YOUR OWN RISK!
For LAN-games there are two different settings:
"Reduce latency to 1 on LAN" this has the same effect as #L1 on bnet
"Reduce userlatency on LAN" this works as if the user has chosen one setting lower in the Network-Settings. So Extra High becomes High, High becomes Low, and Low becomes a new Very Low setting.
These settings are only relevent when playing on LAN. But then all players have to have the same settings, or a disconnect occurs.
This LatencyChanger is not compatible with the one integrated in the ICCup launcher. It works on all gateways(and LAN), whereas the ICCup LAN-Latency only works on ICCup-Server.
Download:
Included with Chaoslauncher
To appoximate the delay you can use the following formula:
(NetWorkModeDelay*UserDelay+1)*42ms
Where Networkmode Delay is 1 to 5 and is set by LatencyChanger
UserDelay is chosen in the config-dialog and is 2 for low, 3 for high, and 4 for extra-high. (empirical data provided by SonuvBob)
|
|
|
|
|
Omg someone go test it (I can't right now cause I gotta go sleep). This sounds totally awesome!
|
|
|
wow nice stuff thanks. i hope they will implement this to the iccup launcher and maybe all those other stuff like rep with text or apm live will be there too.
|
That sounds like a really nice plugin  .
But the all players must have it enable removes the random/public b.net games  (at least in the beginning where most of the people don't know for this plugin (I hope all will learn very soon  )).
|
|
|
Sounds like the holy grail: lan latency on bnet !
|
bye bye hamachi? :D
This sounds really neat, god damn... thank you masterofchaos!
I hope this will be intergrated to iccup launcher :-))
but i have a question:
Does it affect brood war permanently, or is brood war normal again when I run it without launcher?
sry for stupid question 
|
Why isnt this enabled by default?
Latency should be decided by internet connection quality, not some predetermined setting. Damn you blizzard.
|
First test on bnet with #L1 vs. normal on a muta micro map showed a huge difference. I'd like to see it in a multiplayer game though
|
Germany2896 Posts
It only affects starcraft when running with the launcher. If you join a game on bnet with a #LL name, it changes the starcraft code, and unchanges when you either join a normal game or leave bnet.
|
51429 Posts
Do you reckon OGN/MBC will pick up this program and use this for the L1 setting?
But I guess it will make any muta-microers even more godly.
|
Sound really cool. The problem with the disconnect could be solved when this feature would be implemented in (for example) iccupantihack. If it were, everyone with antihack would be lag-free!!!!
omg that would be soooo great
|
yeah would be awesome if included to icc launcher
|
YES!
Time to implement in Clan Art ^_^
|
CruiseR
Poland4014 Posts
so it means that i can micro like on lan playing on bnet?
o.o!
|
Canada7170 Posts
yessssssssssssssssssssssss!
|
On January 31 2008 17:56 MasterOfChaos wrote:
Alphaversion - May still contain bugs
Changes Starcraftcode in memory, which is detectable by Antihacktools like Warden, so there is a risk, that blizzard decides to invalidate the users Accounts/CD-Keys.
USE AT YOUR OWN RISK!
How active is blizzard in banning accounts for using 'hacks' ?
Tbh I don't really see it as a hack and hope blizz feels the same about it. Does their antihacktool distinguish between different kinds of hacks, or do they just ban everyone on sight?
|
|
|
Russian Federation4235 Posts
If it really works, contact the iCCup team immediately, it will be a fucking breakthrough.
Seriously, latency is THE SOLE REASON many good players don't bother online ladders. When you have a good team on LAN, any kind of online training is useless. But with that thing we could have many really good people competing on ladders which is cool.
|
Good Job MasterOfChaos!
Contact Blizzard, iCCup etc and make them implement this.
|
Belgium9947 Posts
oh man you totally need to get a korean release note of this, it'll be all over the place
|
Is this the listchecker of SC? Sounds cool!
|
Godlike, this should be allowed and integrated on the ICC launcher, so you can be sure everyone on ICC is using it.
Oh and yeah, get someone good in Korean to translate it and you'll get worshipped by the Koreans ^^;
On January 31 2008 23:53 parkin wrote:
Good Job MasterOfChaos!
Contact Blizzard, iCCup etc and make them implement this.
There is no reason to contact blizzard, they could've easily removed the bnet latency themselves, its intentional so the old 56k internet users could play SC too.
|
We need to get this on iccup ASAP, who are the admins that surf here? Someone please direct them to this!
|
anyone wanna test this? I'm on east channel 1004
|
Germany2896 Posts
The only thing preventing it from working on ICCup is that the launcher currently checks for changes to the starcraftcode, which this plugin does. Python_Max(the antihack developer) and I are regularily in contact, so he knows about it. Blizzard could do the same in 5minutes and id'd be cleaner.
|
any change? hm, well thats kind of lazy, couldnt they make a change to allow this? or something that says this change in code is ok?
|
Man this is what I have been waiting for since before hamachi even. I knew the network code for LAN play etc was there it was just a matter of time until someone figured out how to utilize it on bnet but I never thought it would happen.
I hope this thing gets implemented in iccup launcher and every other launcher it could revolutionize bnet play
|
If this is implemented on iccup, I can predict half of the players will be using zerg ~_~ instead of protoss now.
|
On February 01 2008 00:56 MasterOfChaos wrote:
The only thing preventing it from working on ICCup is that the launcher currently checks for changes to the starcraftcode, which this plugin does. Python_Max(the antihack developer) and I are regularily in contact, so he knows about it. Blizzard could do the same in 5minutes and id'd be cleaner.
Python_Max also told me that any plugin that modifies code in the least could not possibly be implemented in the launcher, so don't get your hopes up too much.
Very nice job on the plugin though, I thought about making something like this a while back, but obviously you beat me to it by a longshot Good job!
|
On February 01 2008 02:19 nullmind wrote:
If this is implemented on iccup, I can predict half of the players will be using zerg ~_~ instead of protoss now.
Nah I'll still be playing 95% PvP. Fuck I'm so sick of that matchup.
|
I'm a little confused about the #LL concept. Wouldn't everybody want #LL1 so the latency is that of single player mode (and thus maybe slightly better than LAN? I'm not sure if there's actually any difference in latency between them: LAN might have a TINY bit of more latency problem)? I don't understand why anybody would want #LL5 (rofl makes no difference ) either.
|
|
|
Oh BTW. If anybody wants to test this out with me on USEast, come on in ... about four hours? Gonna go eat Subway after school and then head home to check 
|
Every time I try to load ChaosLauncher it tells me this version of SC is not supported. What's up with that?
|
Germany2896 Posts
You need the latest launcher (0.4.1). Simply press the update-button.
Python_Max also told me that any plugin that modifies code in the least could not possibly be implemented in the launcher, so don't get your hopes up too much.
I already talked to him(and as I sometimes help a bit with the AH, I also have the source), and it is possible atm, but might make problems with future launcher versions.
One advantange of this plugin is, is that the patch contains no jump out of the starcraft-code which would require a checking of your plugin too.
The main problem is the little time we both have.
About #L1, I don't know if the average internet connection can handle that, as I have done very little testing with human enemies. And the delay on LAN is short enough for most. I supplied all options from 1 to 5 because it was almost no additional work, and giving the user the choice is not bad imo.
On ICCup there probably will be only one mode which automatically enables itself if all players have the launcher. It may take python some time to create it though.
|
On February 01 2008 04:03 MasterOfChaos wrote:You need the latest launcher (0.4.1). Simply press the update-button. Show nested quote +Python_Max also told me that any plugin that modifies code in the least could not possibly be implemented in the launcher, so don't get your hopes up too much. I already talked to him(and as I sometimes help a bit with the AH, I also have the source), and it is possible atm, but might make problems with future launcher versions. One advantange of this plugin is, is that the patch contains no jump out of the starcraft-code which would require a checking of your plugin too. The main problem is the little time we both have. About #L1, I don't know if the average internet connection can handle that, as I have done very little testing with human enemies. And the delay on LAN is short enough for most. I supplied all options from 1 to 5 because it was almost no additional work, and giving the user the choice is not bad imo. On ICCup there probably will be only one mode which automatically enables itself if all players have the launcher. It may take python some time to create it though.
As an option to make it easier for players to control, couldn't you just modify the values SC uses for low-latency, high, and extra high (on the options screen). That way, if everyone has the launcher, it would default to one value, but they could easily change it up mid-game if they encountered lag.
|
I am confused. How exactly does a program reduce latency? From my understanding latency is based on line-speed and distance from the other party. Now one of those you cannot change so how does a program reduce latency?
|
On February 01 2008 04:17 tec27 wrote:Show nested quote +On February 01 2008 04:03 MasterOfChaos wrote:You need the latest launcher (0.4.1). Simply press the update-button. Python_Max also told me that any plugin that modifies code in the least could not possibly be implemented in the launcher, so don't get your hopes up too much. I already talked to him(and as I sometimes help a bit with the AH, I also have the source), and it is possible atm, but might make problems with future launcher versions. One advantange of this plugin is, is that the patch contains no jump out of the starcraft-code which would require a checking of your plugin too. The main problem is the little time we both have. About #L1, I don't know if the average internet connection can handle that, as I have done very little testing with human enemies. And the delay on LAN is short enough for most. I supplied all options from 1 to 5 because it was almost no additional work, and giving the user the choice is not bad imo. On ICCup there probably will be only one mode which automatically enables itself if all players have the launcher. It may take python some time to create it though. As an option to make it easier for players to control, couldn't you just modify the values SC uses for low-latency, high, and extra high (on the options screen). That way, if everyone has the launcher, it would default to one value, but they could easily change it up mid-game if they encountered lag.
It only changes the base latency, you can still select between low, high and extrahigh. But for Latency=2 that is not the low/high/extra of battle.net but that of LAN.
FYI
|
nice
|
On February 01 2008 04:19 Num wrote:
I am confused. How exactly does a program reduce latency? From my understanding latency is based on line-speed and distance from the other party. Now one of those you cannot change so how does a program reduce latency?
BW has a "built in" latency buffer, presumably for synchronization purposes since the game runs synchronous. When Starcraft came out, high latency dialup was quite prevalent, so this additional latency was needed to stop the game freezing while waiting for sync in the assumption that a constant speed is preferable to a game that slows down or freezes periodically for synchronization. These days, people are on higher bandwidth, lower latency connections, so the additional latency added to the game is not required as much.
How effective this program will be depends on the connections of the people in game, obviously setting a latency for LAN when there are people with high ping in the game will just result in constant freezing while BW waits for sync, but for people playing exclusively on low latency connections, it should work pretty well.
|
Russian Federation4235 Posts
On February 01 2008 03:23 Equinox_kr wrote:I'm a little confused about the #LL concept. Wouldn't everybody want #LL1 so the latency is that of single player mode (and thus maybe slightly better than LAN? I'm not sure if there's actually any difference in latency between them: LAN might have a TINY bit of more latency problem)? I don't understand why anybody would want #LL5 (rofl makes no difference ) either.
LAN is 200 ms latency while SP is below 100. Sometimes you can tell the difference, but that doesn't really matter since "true" StarCraft is LAN latency anyway. Basically, muta micro is very easy in SP and you can perform neat stuff like move&hit with zealots etc.
I'm tempted to know if Korean leagues decide to switch if they can implement SP latency on LAN.
|
Korean leagues are played on LAN right?
Sorry if this is ignorant, but I was of that thought.
|
wait, are you talking about, that people that have too much latency to make games, can finally make games?
wow,
|
On February 01 2008 05:46 BluzMan wrote:Show nested quote +On February 01 2008 03:23 Equinox_kr wrote:I'm a little confused about the #LL concept. Wouldn't everybody want #LL1 so the latency is that of single player mode (and thus maybe slightly better than LAN? I'm not sure if there's actually any difference in latency between them: LAN might have a TINY bit of more latency problem)? I don't understand why anybody would want #LL5 (rofl makes no difference ) either. LAN is 200 ms latency while SP is below 100. Sometimes you can tell the difference, but that doesn't really matter since "true" StarCraft is LAN latency anyway. Basically, muta micro is very easy in SP and you can perform neat stuff like move&hit with zealots etc. I'm tempted to know if Korean leagues decide to switch if they can implement SP latency on LAN.
that would be fucking SICK, it would completely change the game
edit: positively of course
|
On lan SP latency should be no problem, isnt lan latency usually somewhere below 10ms?
And even bnet, I usually ping well below 100ms and so do my friends. So would SP latency work in this case?
|
From an old thread:
On September 12 2007 05:48 SonuvBob wrote:
Game latency FPVOD test results:
Single Player: 83-100ms (5-6 frames)
Multiplayer (UDP): 217-233ms (13-14 frames)
B.net (Low Latency): 450-650ms (27-39 frames)
B.net (High Latency): 667-833ms (40-50 frames)
B.net (Extra Latency): 867-1050ms (52-63 frames)
All testing done with just one person and one computer in melee mode, recording with Camtasia at 60fps. I tried two different tests:
1. SCV movement: The time between first frame in which the right-click circle is visible and the first frame in which the SCV rotates or moves in response.
2. SCV creation: Using the bottom right buttons, which show up as white when the mouse button is pressed, and yellow again when the mouse button is released (the command is not issued until the mouse is released). Used the time between the first frame after mouse-up and the first frame in which the unit appears in the queue.
So the LAN/L2 setting will cut B.net latency by more than half, and the SP/L1 setting will cut LAN/L2 latency by more than half.
|
Tried it with some friends. The SP/L1 mode is orgasmic to play with on b.net <3 <3 <3
|
Germany2896 Posts
On February 01 2008 06:37 Folca wrote:
wait, are you talking about, that people that have too much latency to make games, can finally make games?
wow,
That has nothing to do with latency, that is caused by a blocked port 6112 and not addressed with this plugin.
The current version does not work on LAN, but the older version on http://www.bwprogrammers.com/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&t=1228 does.
+ Show Spoiler [Source] +program LatencyChanger;
{$APPTYPE CONSOLE}
uses
windows,
util,
sysutils,
classes;
var hProcess:THandle;
ProcessID:Cardinal;
Wnd:hWnd;
Written:Cardinal;
Data:String;
Delay:byte;
const Address=$004D925B;
begin
if paramcount>0
then Delay:=strtoint(paramstr(1))
else Delay:=2;
Data:=#$B8+chr(Delay)+#0#0#0#$90#$90;
EnablePrivilege('SeDebugPrivilege');
Wnd:=FindWindow(nil,'Brood War');
if Wnd=0 then raise exception.create('Window not found');
GetWindowThreadProcessId(Wnd, @ProcessId);
hProcess:=OpenProcess(PROCESS_ALL_ACCESS,true,ProcessID);
if hProcess=0 then raise exception.create('Could not open process');
WriteProcessMemory(hProcess,Pointer(Address),@Data[1],length(Data),Written);
end.
|
thanks MasterOfChaos im putting this on the SC Chilean forums :D (in your name of course)
|
this is what scares me the most: Changes Starcraftcode in memory, which is detectable by Antihacktools like Warden, so there is a risk, that blizzard decides to invalidate the users Accounts/CD-Keys.
USE AT YOUR OWN RISK!
=/
|
this works great guys. i hope it doesnt become a bannable thing and if it was in the iccup launcher i would just do something so extreme i dont even know... gj chaos.
|
On February 01 2008 09:28 CapO wrote:
this is what scares me the most: Changes Starcraftcode in memory, which is detectable by Antihacktools like Warden, so there is a risk, that blizzard decides to invalidate the users Accounts/CD-Keys.
USE AT YOUR OWN RISK!
=/
Well we've had that with many programs, like Penguin Plug too. I think it's worth the risk. I tried it but my connection is too crap for it to not be choppy at L3. [Edit] It works with some people well at L2 :D This is awesome.
|
On February 01 2008 07:16 MasterOfChaos wrote:Show nested quote +On February 01 2008 06:37 Folca wrote:
wait, are you talking about, that people that have too much latency to make games, can finally make games?
wow, That has nothing to do with latency, that is caused by a blocked port 6112 and not addressed with this plugin.
Hey speaking of which, would it be possible to make a simple program that changes the port sc uses? I don't need it but it would be hella usefull when im playing with people who dont know how to port forward (which seems to be everyone on b.net with a rounter :\)
|
On February 01 2008 09:52 jimminy_kriket wrote:Show nested quote +On February 01 2008 07:16 MasterOfChaos wrote:On February 01 2008 06:37 Folca wrote:
wait, are you talking about, that people that have too much latency to make games, can finally make games?
wow, That has nothing to do with latency, that is caused by a blocked port 6112 and not addressed with this plugin. Hey speaking of which, would it be possible to make a simple program that changes the port sc uses? I don't need it but it would be hella usefull when im playing with people who dont know how to port forward (which seems to be everyone on b.net with a rounter :\)
The game data port method is pretty easy to carry out for that, but ya a program would be useful I guess.
|
On February 01 2008 09:28 CapO wrote:
this is what scares me the most: Changes Starcraftcode in memory, which is detectable by Antihacktools like Warden, so there is a risk, that blizzard decides to invalidate the users Accounts/CD-Keys.
USE AT YOUR OWN RISK!
=/
The risk is pretty low. Warden only checks certain offsets that are typically overwritten by hacks, and the offsets used by this program don't fall under that. He's just making sure he's covered in case Blizzard completely modifies Warden one day. Even when Warden catches hackers now, all it does is give them a loss.
|
On February 01 2008 10:00 tec27 wrote:Show nested quote +On February 01 2008 09:28 CapO wrote:
this is what scares me the most: Changes Starcraftcode in memory, which is detectable by Antihacktools like Warden, so there is a risk, that blizzard decides to invalidate the users Accounts/CD-Keys.
USE AT YOUR OWN RISK!
=/ The risk is pretty low. Warden only checks certain offsets that are typically overwritten by hacks, and the offsets used by this program don't fall under that. He's just making sure he's covered in case Blizzard completely modifies Warden one day. Even when Warden catches hackers now, all it does is give them a loss.
definately makes me feel better =]
|
I was just using it. And man its pretty awesome lol
|
wow im gonna try this muta micro on bnet
|
My friends have been playing with this like all night long
seriously so awesome.
|
OK i've tested whit a friend and it's ... uff just awesome, in chile we have a little ladder server so i think im going to tell the admins so we can all play this way :D
|
Germany2896 Posts
On February 01 2008 09:52 jimminy_kriket wrote:
Hey speaking of which, would it be possible to make a simple program that changes the port sc uses? I don't need it but it would be hella usefull when im playing with people who dont know how to port forward (which seems to be everyone on b.net with a rounter :\)
The port can be changed in the registry or in the Settings tab of Chaoslauncher. But that doesnt help with forwarding. It only helps if two people behind the same rounter want both to be able to host games.
About the risk: I think it is low,(nobody got banned for several patches, even those who got detected with hacks by Warden), but of course I don't know what Blizzard will do. Technically a simple change of the offsets Warden checks would be enough to detect&ban. But blizzards stance on 3rd party tools is a bit strage. In 1.14 they whitelisted Penguinplugin, in 1.15 they forbid it.
|
Anyone want to try this with me on West? I just wanted to see it in action (:
|
WOW i've just testet it, holy shit, MUTA ORGASM
MasterOfChaos, thx so much <3 =)
|
any update on iccup using this?
|
I think ICCup's popularity would skyrocket if they implented this..
|
51429 Posts
For some reason it's laggy on L1
|
fuck mutas everything else is great too
|
On February 02 2008 10:50 GTR-2-Go wrote:For some reason it's laggy on L1
Lower latency settings aren't going to change the fact that you live on an island prison filled with poisonous spiders, vast deserts, and lousy internet connections.
|
yeah QFT with Bob its only with GTR
it worked fine with me and Equinox_kr
|
Yes, single player latency isn't going to work when the other person's halfway around the world. Probably even lags on L2/LAN (<250ms), it's a shame L3/B.net is such a big step up, 300ms would cover pretty much everyone.
|
lol GTR fails at every new Brood War breakthrough ^^
|
This sounds so sssssexxxxxxxual <3
I'll need to get some friends to download this and try it out.
|
My friend has a problem with this, he can't change the game version in Chaos Launcher to 1.15.2. Anybody have this problem and know how to fix?
|
51429 Posts
I have a question
if your running the game via LAN, and you want to host a game on L1, does your name have to be Frank#L1 (for example)?
|
On February 02 2008 13:39 GTR-2-Go wrote:
I have a question
if your running the game via LAN, and you want to host a game on L1, does your name have to be Frank#L1 (for example)?
im pretty sure it doesnt work on LAN
|
On February 02 2008 13:39 GTR-2-Go wrote:
I have a question
if your running the game via LAN, and you want to host a game on L1, does your name have to be Frank#L1 (for example)?
to host on LAN its game name such as: hx#L3/hx or something like that. the # tag has to be correct though.
|
OK, just so be clear.
I simply move the "LatencyChanger.bwl" file to SC folder. Open chaosluancher and create a game called something like V6#LL//1 and play with my friends who also have LatencyChanger?
thx ^^
Ye im newb
|
51429 Posts
On LAN though, your game name is the host's name.
So if I wanted L1 on LAN, My name/game name will have to be OnGameNet#L1 (for example)?
|
Germany2896 Posts
Version 0.1 does not support LAN. You can use the old version http://www.bwprogrammers.com/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&t=1228 which is harder to use and does not support unpatching. 0.2 will support LAN via a config-dialog, but I have not much time atm.
If the current #L? setting is too low for your connection, you can still swich to high or extra-high in the Network-Settings of starcraft. high increases the latency by about 50%, extra-high doubles it.
On February 02 2008 13:08 SonuvBob wrote:
Yes, single player latency isn't going to work when the other person's halfway around the world. Probably even lags on L2/LAN (<250ms), it's a shame L3/B.net is such a big step up, 300ms would cover pretty much everyone.
BNet=L5, the step from #L2 to #L3 is +50% just like the number suggests.
The AH programmer has not much time atm, but it is planned to add it to ICCup.
I simply move the "LatencyChanger.bwl" file to SC folder. Open chaosluancher and create a game called something like V6#LL//1 and play with my friends who also have LatencyChanger?
yes, but atm only works on BNet. And you have to move it to the Chaoslauncher-folder not the SC-folder. I included the the plugin in the launcher package, so those who don't have the launcher yet, get it automatically with the launcher.
On February 02 2008 13:19 Equinox_kr wrote:
My friend has a problem with this, he can't change the game version in Chaos Launcher to 1.15.2. Anybody have this problem and know how to fix?
If the Update-Button fails(Launcherversion stays below 0.4.1), just redownload the whole launcher-package. If 1.15.2 is just missing from the list, make sure the path to SC is correct in the settings-tab, and that the 1.15.2 exe is in the starcraft directory.
|
Thanks for the launcher. I've been using with all my friends. =]
|
same here, told my clanmates and now almost all of them use it..... and love it ; D
|
This is the most awesome tool ever. I really hope this is put into iccup launcher.
|
cool program. hope it gets implemented soon =]
|
I would also love this being widespread, but am I the only one concerned with the backsides of this? If it got implemented into iccup which whole world plays it means that no-one can ping more than ~200ms to one another right?
But I - for one (and many other europeians) ping almost 400ms to koreans, wouldn't it mean it'd lag the game down?
And if it's implemented, doesn't it mean they have to make the iccup launcher mandatory again?
|
On February 03 2008 08:20 Shauni wrote:
And if it's implemented, doesn't it mean they have to make the iccup launcher mandatory again?
nope
|
On February 03 2008 08:20 Shauni wrote:
I would also love this being widespread, but am I the only one concerned with the backsides of this? If it got implemented into iccup which whole world plays it means that no-one can ping more than ~200ms to one another right?
But I - for one (and many other europeians) ping almost 400ms to koreans, wouldn't it mean it'd lag the game down?
And if it's implemented, doesn't it mean they have to make the iccup launcher mandatory again?
Couldn't you just set it to L5 (BNet latency)? And what's wrong with launcher being mandatory?
|
On February 03 2008 08:20 Shauni wrote:
I would also love this being widespread, but am I the only one concerned with the backsides of this? If it got implemented into iccup which whole world plays it means that no-one can ping more than ~200ms to one another right?
But I - for one (and many other europeians) ping almost 400ms to koreans, wouldn't it mean it'd lag the game down?
And if it's implemented, doesn't it mean they have to make the iccup launcher mandatory again?
Ya it'll just make the game really choppy, but you can just play with normal bnet latency because I'm sur enot everyone is going to be using L1 or L2 settings.
|
Germany2896 Posts
L2 with Extra high latency is probably the same as L4 with low latency, and thus only slightly lower than normal bnet-latency. I don't know yet how the implementation details will look on iccup, but probably there will be a possibility to play higher latency games.
The imo best possibility would be that games without a #L? setting use 2 if all have the launcher, else 5. And games with #L? enforce the given latency and for settings <L5 you can only join with launcher. But I don't know how difficult that is to implement.
If no packet loss occurs, L2 with one of the higher settings should be enough.
It does not make the launcher mandatory, but I admin it will discriminate those who are not using it further, as all games where they take part have to be L5 games.
|
how use this plagin ?
tell me plz
i cant understand
|
Germany2896 Posts
Download Chaoslauncher
Check the Checkbox for LatencyChanger
Press Run
Name your game Mygame#L2
make sure only people with the plugin join
|
oh so you have to write that #L2 in to the game name? thanks :-)
|
I have to bump this.
It's too amazing.
|
On February 03 2008 08:20 Shauni wrote:
I would also love this being widespread, but am I the only one concerned with the backsides of this? If it got implemented into iccup which whole world plays it means that no-one can ping more than ~200ms to one another right?
But I - for one (and many other europeians) ping almost 400ms to koreans, wouldn't it mean it'd lag the game down?
And if it's implemented, doesn't it mean they have to make the iccup launcher mandatory again?
If people prefer to play with lower latency than a clean "low", it is going to divide us all by ping, much how FPS communities are. Koreans will only play with Koreans, Europeans with Europeans, etc. It's opening up pandora's box on international BW.
|
omg, thats true. Scary : (
|
its only b/c we'll know the true joy of playing bw with SP ping over the internet. Maybe itll spawn more off-line tournaments? If FPS players only knew 400ms lag, the game would still be fun, just not AS fun, 400ms lag is a burden, i play hamachi cause its insanely fun playing at lan speeds. SP would be even better... its not like we cant just say ok, ill play my kor friend on normal bnet lag, we still can... but we wouldnt want to. But this is all speculation, who's to say a cable connection from the states, cant ping less than 200 to korea? I ping 150 from Denver to London...
|
And it didnt occur to blizzard to actually make this by themselves? if a person who doesnt have access to the code can make this (and all the godly stuff ashur made), imagine 1person employed by blizzard to constantly improve BW according to the community requests. (TL.net exclusive :p)
|
This is amazing. Thanks alot!
'Tis a shame nothing like this has been created in the past 8 years!
|
masterofchaos you good programmer , big thanks
|
I just thought i'd let you guys know that this has made it to the koreans, I was in op [gm] and saw some [gm] members using the tool, so great job! (they were using L2 for those curious)
|
thats why we need an insider in blizzard oO
|
On February 05 2008 08:51 lugggy wrote:
If people prefer to play with lower latency than a clean "low", it is going to divide us all by ping, much how FPS communities are. Koreans will only play with Koreans, Europeans with Europeans, etc. It's opening up pandora's box on international BW.
QFT.
Later people may be bickering it isn't as responsive as single player. WC3 players I've seen have been whining about ping being too high since they are use to lower latency.
|
I'm going to share this with you guys..
Hello
Thank you for contacting the Blizzard Entertainment Technical Support department with your Issue. My name is xxxx and I will be assisting you.
Blizzard Entertainment considers any third-party program designed to affect the way that a Blizzard game interacts with Battle.net - including seemingly harmless programs designed to make doing things easier, such as changing hotkeys - a hack program. The use of any such program will be detected by the Battle.net staff and may result in the closure of the account tied to the usage of the program, or even the temporary or permanent banning of the CD key tied to that particular account.
Blizzard is especially focused on removing hack programs created with cheating in mind, but as mentioned above, using third-party programs designed to make things easier also puts the user's account and/or CD key at risk. As part of our strict anti-hacking policy, this is our best way to ensure that play on Battle.net is equal for everyone. There are no exceptions to this policy.
While I thank you for diligently submitting this report, please understand Technical Support can only assist with technical issues such as game crashes, connection issues, graphical display issues, etc. We are unable to assist with game bugs or game mechanic-related issues. I will forward your report to the appropriate individuals; moreover, I cannot guarantee a response but I can assure you the report will be read and investigated.
Check our support website http://www.blizzard.com/support for updated information regarding our games. You can also check our forums http://www.battle.net/forums.shtml where you can discuss game issues with other users.
*{1512-1404}*
Thank you,
xxxx x.
Technical Support
Blizzard Entertainment
http://www.blizzard.com/support
The part he forwarded was another question I had - about the b.net games join screen bug im guessing.
|
sweet canned response brah really sheds light on things
|
Where im cant play with this? Server/channel ??.
|
Germany2896 Posts
On February 07 2008 21:28 ocoini wrote:
I'm going to share this with you guys..
Blizzards mail
That's the reason i wrote:
Changes Starcraftcode in memory, which is detectable by Antihacktools like Warden, so there is a risk, that blizzard decides to invalidate the users Accounts/CD-Keys.
USE AT YOUR OWN RISK!
Yet another reason to use ICCup as soon as it supports it.
|
MoC you might like this.
![[image loading]](http://i30.tinypic.com/kp7yu.jpg)
|
i tend to lag on #LL.. can anyone explain plz?
|
51429 Posts
why dont the koreans play L1 =/
they do have super duper internet anyway
|
Germany2896 Posts
On February 08 2008 18:18 stalife wrote:
i tend to lag on #LL.. can anyone explain plz?
Either you suffer from significant packetloss, or your ping is simply too high for #L2. All commands of all players have to arrive at all other players in time for the frame they are sheduled for, or SC has to wait for them to arrive. LC reduces shedules them closer to the present than normal bnet. So the timelimit is harder to fullfill, and the game lags if packets don't make it in time. Packetloss is really bad, as the packet has to be resent, which probably is too long for the timelimit, causing SC to halt.
On February 08 2008 18:03 jimminy_kriket wrote:MoC you might like this.
I didn't know about progamers, but the number of koreans using it exploded, according to my logs. (luckily my admin forgot to enforce the trafficlimit, so I don't have to bug him for more )
|
I have two questions; when would be the best scenario to use the #L1? My friend lives about 5 mins away and we both have the same ADSL isps.
The other is about the Chaosplugin. It doesn't seem to want to auto-save my replays even though I have it enabled. Any suggestions?
|
On February 08 2008 18:35 GTR-2-Go wrote:
why dont the koreans play L1 =/
they do have super duper internet anyway
Official games are on LAN (L2). So now they can get decent practice on B.net.
|
Germany2896 Posts
About #L1 try it, and if it lags either use #L2 or increase the latency in the options dialog. Next version will probably support #L1 on LAN.
About Chaosplugin:
Post the Chaosplugin.log (using spoilertags) in then following thread:
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=54571
make sure you played a game the last time you started sc before taking the log (can be 30secs against comp).
|
Calgary25979 Posts
Wow that's crazy.
Edit: Regarding Jaedong.
|
I have a question, does this thing decrease lag for players that already lag? or does it only make latency better between players who don't lag to begin with
|
|
|
On January 31 2008 17:56 MasterOfChaos wrote:
Features:
Reduces latency on bnet. It is enabled for games which end on
#LL or #L1 ... #L5. All players in such a game have to have the plugin enabled, or a disconnect occurs direcly on beginning of the game.
Example:
MyGame#LL => Latency=LowLatency=2 like on LAN
MyGame#L3 => Latency=3
So on ICCUP I just have to make the game name and end it with #LL, #L3, etc? Also, should I always set it on LL? Or is L3 better in some cases when both players lag like hell.
|
On February 22 2008 02:50 SonuvBob wrote:
The latter.
So let's say a Chinese plays an American and they lag to begin with, using this thing won't make it lag less right?
|
You probably have a 250-300ms ping to America, so try #L3 or #L4. B.net latency (#L5) is almost always overkill, it's meant for dialup.
|
Germany2896 Posts
It only helps if your network connection is good enough. If somebody already lags it does not help at all. If #LL is lags, try first to increase the latency in the SC dialog, and if that does not help use #L4 or sth like that.
|
i have a question... this latency changer its like hamachi or your bnet ping its important? for example if u have a good connection but your ping in europe is 3yellow and the rest are 1green or 2green its gonna matter? i mean if u are 3yellow ping @ europe and u are 1green@east this gonna change anything? east gonna be faster than europe? i wonder this
|
Germany2896 Posts
SC games are always peer to peer, even on battle.net. So it only depends on the connection between the players. So playing with people on your continent is usefull, but the choice of gateway itself does not matter.
At least I believe that is the case. But I don't understand much of starcraft. LatencyChanger only changes a single number which contains the delay. Everything else is like on normal bnet.
|
I have a question, on the chinese ladder you must start bw with the ladder launch game button, can i still use chaoslauncher and latencychanger even if i dont start bw with it?
|
no Well, actually I could be wrong.
|
the chinese ladder is a udp client like gg client
|
so how do you guys use it on iccup
|
Germany2896 Posts
It does not work on ICCup yet. We are waiting for python to finish it.
|
This is AMAZING, you deserve some sort of award
|
Germany2896 Posts
It has now been integrated in ICCup-Launcher.
On ICCup you don't need a special gamename, there it enables the low latency automatically if all users in the game support it.
SMK discovered that low latency increases traffic. If you use the setting n, the traffic increases by the factor 5/n which is 2.5 for the usual #L2 setting.
|
Why isn't everyone on B.net using this yet? I don't see a single #L2 pubby.
|
5390 Posts
On March 05 2008 11:07 BlackStar wrote:
Why isn't everyone on B.net using this yet? I don't see a single #L2 pubby.
You just answered your own question. Pubbies don't know about it because they are PUBBIES
|
On March 04 2008 19:49 MasterOfChaos wrote:
It has now been integrated in ICCup-Launcher.
On ICCup you don't need a special gamename, there it enables the low latency automatically if all users in the game support it.
SMK discovered that low latency increases traffic. If you use the setting n, the traffic increases by the factor 5/n which is 2.5 for the usual #L2 setting.
Ah so you dont need to end it with #LL.
|
On March 05 2008 11:38 pheer wrote:Show nested quote +On March 05 2008 11:07 BlackStar wrote:
Why isn't everyone on B.net using this yet? I don't see a single #L2 pubby. You just answered your own question. Pubbies don't know about it because they are PUBBIES
That's a stupid answer Everyone knows about this.
|
Germany2896 Posts
I created a new version
Changes:
* When joining/creating a low-latency-game a message is sent to all players already in the game, informing them about your LL settings.
* Added two different settings for LAN-games:
"Reduce latency to 1 on LAN" this has the same effect as #L1 on bnet
"Reduce userlatency on LAN" this works as if the user has chosen one setting lower in the Network-Settings. So Extra High becomes High, High becomes Low, and Low becomes a new Very Low setting.
These settings are only relevent when playing on LAN. But then all players have to have the same settings, or a disconnect occurs.
0.2 and 0.1 are compatible on BNet. On LAN 0.1 or no LatencyChanger is the same as both settings disabled.
@some admin: please update the version in the topic
Please test it for some time(especially the LAN-Features). After that I will put it on autoupdate.
Download:
http://winner.cspsx.de/Starcraft/Tool/LatencyChanger.zip
|
Belgium9947 Posts
Uhm, the link gives a corrupt zip file
|
Belgium9947 Posts
|
Germany2896 Posts
Works for me, both with WinRar and the windows shell extension.
|
Belgium9947 Posts
now it does, I tried like 5 times with powerarchiver and windows
|
Germany2896 Posts
0.2 seems to be bugged. So don't use it yet. I'll work on a fix.
|
Yeah, after playing a game and signing out of bnet it wont let you back in.
|
Germany2896 Posts
the method I use to find out if you are in a LAN-game does not work correctly.
|
how do you use it? type #LL?
|
Does 0.2 work with 0.1?
Like if someone is on Bnet and is using 0.2 to change the latency can a person using 0.1 join and not be disconnected?
|
Germany2896 Posts
@[Fin]Vittu
Your game name has to end with #LL. For example you youl name it "MyGame#LL"
@Vasoline73
If version 0.2 works at all, then yes. But 0.2 still has some bugs, so I recommend 0.1.
|
soo dont update the lat changer?
|
Germany2896 Posts
No don't update it atm. I think it has no disadvantages, but it is not tested enough and one of the new featues is buggy.
|
I'm still unsure of how exactly you use latency changer in LAN.
|
glad someone bumped this
maybe some more people will get chaos cuss of this
it sux when a tourney is on west or euro and your opponent doesnt have chaos TT
|
United States11390 Posts
|
Germany2896 Posts
@frozenclaw
If you have version 0.2.1 all players have to set the same settings in the config dialog and then play on LAN.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
