|
So this is a simple game to kinda measure you're reaction time to a very simple stimulus.
As you can imagine the lower the number the better. The average is 215 ms. So if you put this together with the latency of the server which lets assume bnet will give us an average 120-255 latency to play on. 215+120=335ms 215+255=470ms which is not even half a second.
Of course these figures will vary greatly based on you're actual reaction time and the exact server latency at the time of the event you're reacting too. Does anyone have any Data on the latency they had during beta phase 1? My latency is off of my average latency's on World of warcraft when I played.
http://www.humanbenchmark.com/tests/reactiontime/index.php
With blizzard leaving lan latency out of the question these are the kinda things I guess we will have to look more indepth with.
Here is some lovely graphs about human reaction times
http://www.humanbenchmark.com/tests/reactiontime/stats.php
I think if would be fun if people posted there reaction times in this thread after taking the test!
|
Very informative.. which this actually semi helped me understand what MS is, and it hink it was lowered or something in one of the patches?
Your* also btw
|
Nice test. I did the test only once and made the top 100 of week or something :D I dont mind blizzard not giving us lan latency. In starcraft you need to anticipate and predict a lot of things anyways. Thats just my opinion.
|
This doesn't belong in strategy but. . .
LAN >>>> Internet gaming in terms of latency. In FPS, 100ms is about as high as you could go before things start to get really bad. 200ms is bad, 300ms is pretty damn bad.
Even if you have good latency on the internet, LAN is still faster and more preferrable. Even Idra thinks so, too:
http://www.scforall.com/sctv/sc_tv01.asp?mNum=s03&movNum=447
|
Yes arb in one patch they changed from tcp/ip to upd a differnt protocol that actually is used more and more in first person shooters and such becuase it prioritizes speed rather then efficiency. Because it basically spams packets and if one is missed of well there is fresh one right behind it with updated data anyways. I am not a big techno geek thats just the broad strokes of the 2 protocols from my understanding.
|
Latency and reaction time do affect strategy the micro aspect is very hindered by poor latency.
|
TossFloss
Canada606 Posts
Not sure about the validity of this test.
If you stare at the center of the box (were the text is) your mind will subconsciously start to read the text thus reducing your reaction time. I was able to improve my reaction time by 50-70ms by changing my gaze to the top-right corner
|
imo, i think we need to stop focusing so much on Latency on battle.net, i havent really heard of any bad latency or lag (that wasnt caused by server issues during beta that didnt effect everyone).
when the server is running as it should, there is very very little lag, they did a great job with that.
|
tossfloss what you experienced is actually a medical phenomenon. When using you're peripheral you actually skip you're brain in the decision making process and just use what is known as the reflex arc. I won't bore you with the details but reflex arc is substantially faster and generally saves you're ass when say something like a ball comes flying at your head and you dont have time to actually look directly at it.
|
|
|
|
|
Im pretty sure if flash did this test he would get into the negitave. lol
|
|
|
I feel so slow doing this. Every time I click I feel like I should have clicked ages ago already. 
224 is my best so far.
Okay, I managed to get down to 203 but I had to really concentrate.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
back when I played cs a lot there was a test like this going around only instead of giving you your reaction speed in ms it gave you an animal with comparable reaction speed, like over 300ms was a sloth and under 50 was a cobra kinda thing.
|
The problem with latency is it's not about reaction times, it's about the delay between when you send an order and it actually happens. In very very intense micro siutations latency is bad so reaction time isn't really what the problem is here if anything this makes the problem worse. You're trying to micro the average reaction time is around 200ms, add in the 200 latency and the 120 server latency add in another 200 ms for a fast command given out your'e talking almost a full second from action to reaction when it could be under half a second.
|
TossFloss
Canada606 Posts
On July 03 2010 01:19 Meldrath wrote: tossfloss what you experienced is actually a medical phenomenon. When using you're peripheral you actually skip you're brain in the decision making process and just use what is known as the reflex arc. I won't bore you with the details but reflex arc is substantially faster and generally saves you're ass when say something like a ball comes flying at your head and you dont have time to actually look directly at it.
Thanks for this. Filing for future reading.
|
186 average for me. That's after 20 tests. I used to play CS at a high level (Top32 cpl 2003 I think?) and I remember I was pretty slow for a good fps player D: A buddy of mine used to be in the 150 range average.
As far as latency and lag it definitely makes a difference in micro, but not even close to the amount of difference it can make in an fps. IMO the easiest way to illustrate the difference in sc2 is how fast your 2nd worker gets out. If you start your worker just before you send your scv's to the patches there is generally a tiny delay before you can start your second worker when playing online. If you start up a custom game right now so you have 0 latency, that delay is gone.
Edit: My best was 164 :D
|
|
|
Lol I'm so slow... ~240
Maybe it's cuz I just woke up and I'm hella sore from working out!!! =(
|
Very disconcerting that mine is like an average of 250+. No wonder I feel like I can't react the same while playing tennis anymore. Going to have to practice this.
|
On July 03 2010 06:34 ImperialFenix wrote:
Very disconcerting that mine is like an average of 250+. No wonder I feel like I can't react the same while playing tennis anymore. Going to have to practice this.
Don't feel too badly; I'm averaging around 230-250 as well >.<.
Sub 200 is pretty impressive.
|
Damn.... I was not paying attention whatsoever for a second or so and somehow managed to get 2ms reaction time xD Most definitely dumb luck haha but I was surprised when I saw that, and now that I think about it, I should have taken a screenshot
I average around 190, with my best around 170. I dunno, but I feel like I don't actually react that fast in game, maybe it's because of the pretty graphics of sc2, or maybe because this test lets you just focus on one thing.
|
167 average here, but I don't think it really has any connotations on how good you are at SC2 (Obviously, else I might be something other than terrible)
|
Did it about 10 times. My best average was 220. I am sure the type of mouse you are using has a big effect as well. I have tested the time it took for my mice to send a signal or something on another website and my razer diamondback was significantly faster than my mx518, which I use now.
Also, after doing it 10 times I now see a green box floating around.
|
i just did this after a few beers, got like 270 :p
|
210 average with my MX518, 158 average with my salmosa.. what?
|
I had almost no latency during the beta phase while playing on the US servers. I imagine I connect to somewhere on the East Coast of US, to which I have sub 25ms ping. If you double this for sending+return, you only get 50ms, which doesn't affect any micro or unit control at all and barely feels like a delay at all.
With a good fiber-optic connection and playing on the local servers, most of you wouldn't be able to tell the difference between playing on bnet and LAN.
However I did play some games on the euro servers and it was significantly worse. You could really feel the latency in contrast with the US servers. I imagine it was ~200ms which is approximately the reaction time of a person.
So yes, when playing on foreign servers, you will have a delay of ~reaction time and you will feel it, but honestly it's not THAT bad, and is still perfectly playable.
|
i tried so hard, and got so far,
in the end it didn't even matterrrrrr (220, lol...i also played in cal-i for a few seasons btw lmfao)
just imagien how it was back then on USWEST playing BGH
you could actually feel your workers lagging !
let's be happy we're done with that
|
it didnt matter where i looked! i still got 180-210 on all my tries ^_^ maybe my reflexes aren't working :p
|
|
|
215 average
185 with mountain dew lols
I agree this doesn't translate to playing well since my macro is horrible tbh
im 27 too so some hope for us old guys (i smoke weed too)
|
|
|
219 best, 290 average.. whatever
|
48th. your score
sign up or log in 0 seconds ago 25clicks avg 257.3
|
On July 03 2010 17:04 CharlieMurphy wrote:
48th. your score
sign up or log in 0 seconds ago 25clicks avg 257.3
I didn't feel like signin up... but I think I was 48th too! XD
|
150 but I used to play an extensive amount of fps
|
143 but I feel i got lucky. :s
|
This was pretty cool, but I don't see a strong connection to SC2. The idea for testing reaction time is measuring a reaction to a randomly timed stimulus, but when you're in-game, you can predict when and where things will occur.
Consider a situation where you and your opponents have your armies close to each other, and you watch a high templar wander on toward your units. You KNOW a storm is incoming, or you can be pretty damn sure, and you can tell WHEN it's going to happen, since psionic storm has a fixed range, so you can be prepared and send your units off right before or right as the storm is cast.
Latency throws a wrench in the works, because even though you've dealt with your own reaction time, now it's like every unit has a reaction time that you have to deal with, and you need to plan further into the future than you're ready for. It's why microing mutalisks on ICCup is sooooo much easier than microing them on extra high battle.net latency, you have no fucking clue where everything's going to be by the time your commands go through.
|
The test is very one dimensional. It is only testing your ability to react to something your expecting, which would rarely be the case in SC. It would be nice if there were other elements of surprise invoved, so you weren't 100% sure what was coming. Maybe if they designed it so that if it was blue then you had to right click, but green means left click?
|
Something is flawed with this test, I get ~ 230 average with two different mice on my computer, but i get 170-180 every time on my brother's computer...
|
235 average.. God, I feel so slow now
|
record 0.076
avg 0.219
ill try with coffee soon
|
I've taken these tests before, I tended to do better on the ones with audio confirmation. My reaction time to visual stimuli seems to be about average, though.
|
I'm getting 200 flat average and I did this about ten times. I guess I've got OK latency.
|
233 is average, best i got was 188.
i refuse to read anyone elses numbers as i am sure they will make me look bad! :<
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
