For anyone unaware, there are currently hacks to allow the zoom distance to go up to twice as far out (ie, you can see twice as much).
To me this seems like a pretty game breaking hack... but at the same time the current legit zoom levels seem too low. I feel like I'm still playing on 800x600.
Does anyone feel Blizzard should increase the maximum zoom distance maybe 10-20%? I can't see the hacks being used too much in competitive play simply because zooming out too much causes the already hard to discern units to become even harder to pick apart, but since the ability is clearly there I think a slight zoom distance increase would make the visual real estate feel a bit more up to date.
I've seen some streams look like they're zoomed in while others look widescreen, really good and zoomed out and I think it's just a matter of what resolution your set on rather than how far you zoom out in the game. I don't have beta so I don't know if a larger range would help but in my experience the farther back you can go the better you can play the game, while the units are still decipherable ofc
Just like in BW everyone should have the same cam distance, on the issue on whether it should be farther then BW I don't really care, I try to focus on the game more then the technical stuff, the again I've been using a 17 inch for both games
Imo the highest camera position is ok, but having toe option to zoom 10-20% further out wouldn't be too bad. I also would like to be able to zoom in a bit without changing the angle. During early game micro situations this would be handy, but currently if you zoom in the angle isn't very good for microing imo.
Larger screens don't matter at all btw. It's basically just the same image with higher resolution.
If you want to have the most visible are you currently HAVE to run the game at some 16 : 9 resolution, even if it isn't your screen's native resolution.
Oh and if you would have that zoom hack and hotkeys for switching camera positions with different zoom levels quickly it would be a huge advantage. You basically would not need the minimap anymore.
"Zooming out" is equivalent to "making all the units smaller". If you allow people to do it, and it gives them a competitive advantage, then they will do it all the time. And the feel of the game will suffer as a result.
Somewhat off topic, but let me point out how much it sucks to play the same hacker six games in a row -_- It's kinda funny... I don't come across any hackers in the Platinum league, but I'd say a good 2 out of 3 people I play in Gold hack.
Back on topic, the hacker I just played said the zoom hack makes it so he never has to check his minimap, and has cut his scroll time down to almost nonexistent (scrolling base, fights).
On March 12 2010 01:05 Sere wrote: Somewhat off topic, but let me point out how much it sucks to play the same hacker six games in a row -_- It's kinda funny... I don't come across any hackers in the Platinum league, but I'd say a good 2 out of 3 people I play in Gold hack.
Back on topic, the hacker I just played said the zoom hack makes it so he never has to check his minimap, and has cut his scroll time down to almost nonexistent (scrolling base, fights).
On March 12 2010 00:41 onmach wrote: "Zooming out" is equivalent to "making all the units smaller". If you allow people to do it, and it gives them a competitive advantage, then they will do it all the time. And the feel of the game will suffer as a result.
this is stupid. it's like saying playing sc2 on faster is give people an advantage and that the game suffers as a result.
except that it doesnt. people play what makes the game more competitive.
On March 12 2010 01:05 Sere wrote: Somewhat off topic, but let me point out how much it sucks to play the same hacker six games in a row -_- It's kinda funny... I don't come across any hackers in the Platinum league, but I'd say a good 2 out of 3 people I play in Gold hack.
Back on topic, the hacker I just played said the zoom hack makes it so he never has to check his minimap, and has cut his scroll time down to almost nonexistent (scrolling base, fights).
What was his name? Post some replays
I wish I could. After each game I got sent straight to the lobby and no replay files were saved. I'm guessing it's part of the hack. I believe his name was something like Lucus.
Also, I question whether there is a private mineral hack going around. I just played a TvT where my opponent had one base (no mules) to my two bases (both with mules) and somehow he managed to double my mineral income. He couldn't have had more than 15 SCVs on his minerals.
This was also against a hacker (no scout all game, perfect counters, unit movement, etc) and I was actually dropped from the game at the end. Kicked me all the way to the login screen. A quick chat with a friend that frequents hack sites (lol Diablo 2 hacking) informed me that there is indeed a "crash hack" available, at least privately. He wasn't sure about a mineral hack.
It makes sense, though. People cracked the game for offline play within 24 hours of the beta client release. ~48 hours after that, the first maphack surfaced. We're going on a month now, which is more than enough time for people to write any kind of hacks they can imagine. I give it another week or two before all of these hacks become public, and a private B.Net server pops up.
just wanted to point out that if the zoom distance goes up to twice as far out, you can see four times as much area (since area scales as distance squared) :p
The good thing about SC2 is that with keys bound you your b.net account, blizzard will be perma-banning people found to be using these programs (at least once the game comes out, if not even in beta). Having to go buy another copy of SC2 to play on b.net again will probably discourage hacking the second time around.
On March 12 2010 01:20 Sere wrote: It makes sense, though. People cracked the game for offline play within 24 hours of the beta client release. ~48 hours after that, the first maphack surfaced. We're going on a month now, which is more than enough time for people to write any kind of hacks they can imagine. I give it another week or two before all of these hacks become public, and a private B.Net server pops up.
Took 3-5 days to crack offline play and about a week or two for maphack. Private servers cost money, and I doubt hackers would fork up the cash for a private beta server. I totally believe blizz deliberately left holes in the security system (or didn't include much of it at all) so they can watch how these people crack stuff (or not give them the chance in cracking the real system) in preparation for release.
Another thing to consider is how much zoom to give observers. I'm not a fan of making the zoom level further out for play just because it rocks the skill level required to play a bit towards easier, but for observers and replays I would like having a wider view at times. I especially think of SC1 TvT, being able to spot both tank armies at the same time would really help out for the audience.
If they have time to zoom in and out and still micro/macro as well as I do, then they deserve the win and would most likely have won either way. I don't see the significant benefit in this as I use the minimap for spotting anyways. However, it is always nice to know that everyone is playing by the same rules.
On March 12 2010 01:45 TheHof wrote: Another thing to consider is how much zoom to give observers. I'm not a fan of making the zoom level further out for play just because it rocks the skill level required to play a bit towards easier, but for observers and replays I would like having a wider view at times. I especially think of SC1 TvT, being able to spot both tank armies at the same time would really help out for the audience.
On March 12 2010 01:46 Tef wrote: If they have time to zoom in and out and still micro/macro as well as I do, then they deserve the win and would most likely have won either way. I don't see the significant benefit in this as I use the minimap for spotting anyways. However, it is always nice to know that everyone is playing by the same rules.
Micro and macro is irrelevant, as zooming out actually makes micro easier in most situations (more visible screen means less scrolling around). Sure, if you're doing the whole ball vs ball epic showdown in the center of the map, zooming doesn't do too much. What it does allow, however, is a greater ability to flank and manage the battlefield. Once you split your ball up, you have to start scrolling around a little to keep an eye on each cluster. With the screen zoomed out more, you could see all clusters at the same time, removing the need to scroll entirely.
Yes, in most games this won't matter too much. But in the ones it does, it does so greatly.
On March 12 2010 01:45 TheHof wrote: Another thing to consider is how much zoom to give observers. I'm not a fan of making the zoom level further out for play just because it rocks the skill level required to play a bit towards easier, but for observers and replays I would like having a wider view at times. I especially think of SC1 TvT, being able to spot both tank armies at the same time would really help out for the audience.
I'm not so sure, being able to see the whole map, or in this case a large portion of it, means spectators will be staring at a single unchanging screen. I find it much more exciting to watch the obs flick around the map.
On March 12 2010 01:25 Biochemist wrote: The good thing about SC2 is that with keys bound you your b.net account, blizzard will be perma-banning people found to be using these programs (at least once the game comes out, if not even in beta). Having to go buy another copy of SC2 to play on b.net again will probably discourage hacking the second time around.
maybe it will dscourage some people for some times but when in one year the game's price will drop to 50%, in two year it will be a 10$ game, being banned from SC2 will become cheaper and cheaper. So it's not a viable solution.
On March 12 2010 01:25 Biochemist wrote: The good thing about SC2 is that with keys bound you your b.net account, blizzard will be perma-banning people found to be using these programs (at least once the game comes out, if not even in beta). Having to go buy another copy of SC2 to play on b.net again will probably discourage hacking the second time around.
maybe it will dscourage some people for some times but when in one year the game's price will drop to 50%, in two year it will be a 10$ game, being banned from SC2 will become cheaper and cheaper. So it's not a viable solution.
Hopefully it will be when they have to buy the game and 2 expansion packs ontop of it each time.
On March 12 2010 01:25 Biochemist wrote: The good thing about SC2 is that with keys bound you your b.net account, blizzard will be perma-banning people found to be using these programs (at least once the game comes out, if not even in beta). Having to go buy another copy of SC2 to play on b.net again will probably discourage hacking the second time around.
maybe it will dscourage some people for some times but when in one year the game's price will drop to 50%, in two year it will be a 10$ game, being banned from SC2 will become cheaper and cheaper. So it's not a viable solution.
It's really the same as with any other game. People will hack knowing it might cost them $50 that's just the way it is. I think many just get tired and figure what the hell I might as well load up some imba hacks and get a couple of wins for once, even if I get banned in the process. It's always been especially common in games of extremely competitive nature where noobs stand 0% chance to win against those that take time to actually learn the game
On March 12 2010 02:00 Bane_ wrote:Hopefully it will be when they have to buy the game and 2 expansion packs ontop of it each time.
and how the hell u can tell some one is zooming out ( LOOOL :DD) if u even dont have replay -_- not to mention that this is worthy shit unless u have build in maphack to remove fog of war ;D honstly i think u are just bad and come with some cry shit excusess for lose -_-
any way if u know he hacks u meet him 9 times and know he drops u at the end why the fuck u dont leave earlier and have replay ?? then report him to blizz and then PROFIT !!
On March 12 2010 02:01 MadLag wrote: and how the hell u can tell some one is zooming out ( LOOOL :DD) if u even dont have replay -_- not to mention that this is worthy shit unless u have build in maphack to remove fog of war ;D honstly i think u are just bad and come with some cry shit excusess for lose -_-
any way if u know he hacks u meet him 9 times and know he drops u at the end why the fuck u dont leave earlier and have replay ?? then report him to blizz and then PROFIT !!
The hack is available on multiple blizzard hacking related sites, so no, he is not just whining its a serious problem.
yeah you are wrong here my friend. at 800x600 you see almost the exact amount of stuff as on 1920x1200. Higher resolution just makes it "sharper". Only thing i have noticed, i tend to have a better overview when using 1920x1080, but this might only be my impression
On March 12 2010 01:05 Sere wrote: Somewhat off topic, but let me point out how much it sucks to play the same hacker six games in a row -_- It's kinda funny... I don't come across any hackers in the Platinum league, but I'd say a good 2 out of 3 people I play in Gold hack.
Back on topic, the hacker I just played said the zoom hack makes it so he never has to check his minimap, and has cut his scroll time down to almost nonexistent (scrolling base, fights).
What was his name? Post some replays
It makes sense, though. People cracked the game for offline play within 24 hours of the beta client release. ~48 hours after that, the first maphack surfaced. We're going on a month now, which is more than enough time for people to write any kind of hacks they can imagine. I give it another week or two before all of these hacks become public, and a private B.Net server pops up.
On March 12 2010 02:01 MadLag wrote: and how the hell u can tell some one is zooming out ( LOOOL :DD) if u even dont have replay -_- not to mention that this is worthy shit unless u have build in maphack to remove fog of war ;D honstly i think u are just bad and come with some cry shit excusess for lose -_-
any way if u know he hacks u meet him 9 times and know he drops u at the end why the fuck u dont leave earlier and have replay ?? then report him to blizz and then PROFIT !!
Do you have Down's Syndrome or something? Or perhaps you're just too illiterate to read anything. Either way, I'll spell it out for you because I'm such a nice guy.
a) Hackers admit using zoom hack b) Zoom hack is available on google c) Zoom hack comes bundled with maphack
If you still can't make sense of that, I would recommend doing society a favor and cutting your wrists or something.
Back on topic, I've verified with an acquaintance at a well known BW hack site that there is a public mineral hack in the works, and should be out shortly. In addition, the following hacks are currently available (again, according to my source; I have not personally seen all of these yet)
Public hacks - Map, Zoom, Lag, Drop Private hacks - Mineral (no gas - not sure why this isn't in it), Disconnect (apparently this differs from the public drop hack; the public one times you out of the game (as if you were lagging) and kicks you to the lobby. The private one apparently instantly kicks you to the login screen), Speed, and something called an Ally hack (I'm assuming this may be used for backstabbing in locked teams?)
I would expect private hacks to make it public before too long. That being said, I'm told at least one person has been creating hacks and sending them in to Blizzard, so hopefully between that and whatever information they gather from B.Net, they can use this to create a solid anti-hack for release.
It's a pain in the ass being hacked in a beta, but at least it gives Blizzard a chance to prevent it later on.
Also for zoom, I think the max zoom should be increased to any point (say, twice what it is now) but that it should be locked during ladder matches at maybe 120% of what it is now. One thing to consider with zoom are UMS maps, which could make great use of additional zoom levels.
Maphacks aren't worth shit, because the guy will not have the ability to exploit his information advantage. He is probably a noob WoW player anyways and anyone of us can easily steamroll them.
Now Laghacks and Drophacks are extremely annoying, because they take no skill whatsoever to use.
On March 12 2010 02:27 squ1d wrote: Maphacks aren't worth shit, because the guy will not have the ability to exploit his information advantage. He is probably a noob WoW player anyways and anyone of us can easily steamroll them.
Now Laghacks and Drophacks are extremely annoying, because they take no skill whatsoever to use.
I think you're underestimating how beneficial a maphack can be in SC2. For example, if you're a Terran player you have to juggle between Mules and Scans. With a maphack, you no longer need to worry about that entire mechanic. Units like Roaches, which are great to burrow and sneak around somewhere, become pretty much useless. In fact, maphacks negate the entire Burrow ability (not to mention any cloaked units). And then there's the obvious issue of knowing where expansions are.
It doesn't take a progamer to use information such as that. In fact, the large majority of SC2 players will be SC/BW and WC3 players. Most WoW players are too stupid to take on a computer and will just give up on the game after they can't beat the first campaign level. 90% of the people that will be using hacks will have enough knowledge to put them to use.
Granted, the longer the game is out the wider the skill gap will become (kinda like how in BW now you can steamroll most hackers because of the sheer skill difference). But for the first 6-12 months minimum of retail, hackers will really put a dent in the ladders unless Blizzard finds a way to prevent it now.
On March 12 2010 02:04 MeProU_Kor wrote: as far as i know: - larger monitor = more screen - better hardware = better resolution = more screen - widescreen mointor = more screen
so who cares if he has a hack to see more or just more money to see more. if i am wrong i apologize.
I'm pretty sure the size of the monitor has nothing to do with being able to see more in game - it only has to do with the resolution. I could be wrong though.
They should make it possible to zoom farther imo, I dont think it makes the game worse in any way. And when its already different depending on aspect ratio, that sucks.
But hacking the UI to get an advantage isnt good of course no matter what issue its on.
On March 12 2010 02:04 MeProU_Kor wrote: as far as i know: - larger monitor = more screen - better hardware = better resolution = more screen - widescreen mointor = more screen
so who cares if he has a hack to see more or just more money to see more. if i am wrong i apologize.
I'm pretty sure the size of the monitor has nothing to do with being able to see more in game - it only has to do with the resolution. I could be wrong though.
No, you're correct. Widescreen should give you more viewing area on the sides, but less on the top and bottom. Your viewing area is determined solely by your display resolution.
Bigger monitors generally allow larger resolutions, but it's an indirect effect. It's also limited by the game's supported resolutions.
What the zoom hack does is essentially...
You have a 1280x1024 resolution. If you zoom in all the way, you still have the same resolution, but each unit takes up more pixels. Thus, you may go from being able to see 100 units on screen to being able to see 10. Likewise, if you zoom out each unit would take less pixels (terrain, too) and so you may be able to see 200 units instead of just 100. Also, think of it as the difference between being able to see 1/2 or your base at a time, or zooming out and being able to see your entire base plus some of your natural at once.
On March 12 2010 02:27 squ1d wrote: Maphacks aren't worth shit, because the guy will not have the ability to exploit his information advantage. He is probably a noob WoW player anyways and anyone of us can easily steamroll them.
Now Laghacks and Drophacks are extremely annoying, because they take no skill whatsoever to use.
I think you're underestimating how beneficial a maphack can be in SC2. For example, if you're a Terran player you have to juggle between Mules and Scans. With a maphack, you no longer need to worry about that entire mechanic. Units like Roaches, which are great to burrow and sneak around somewhere, become pretty much useless. In fact, maphacks negate the entire Burrow ability (not to mention any cloaked units). And then there's the obvious issue of knowing where expansions are.
It doesn't take a progamer to use information such as that. In fact, the large majority of SC2 players will be SC/BW and WC3 players. Most WoW players are too stupid to take on a computer and will just give up on the game after they can't beat the first campaign level. 90% of the people that will be using hacks will have enough knowledge to put them to use.
Granted, the longer the game is out the wider the skill gap will become (kinda like how in BW now you can steamroll most hackers because of the sheer skill difference). But for the first 6-12 months minimum of retail, hackers will really put a dent in the ladders unless Blizzard finds a way to prevent it now.
Also, I agree on the lag/drop hacks
I think you're overestimating it. I know a lot of people that will play SC2 and they only play WoW. If they hack, they'll be meat.
It's not true that Maphacks negate burrow and cloaked units - if you kill a cloaked unit without having real sight to it, it will cause problems in-game and probably you'll be dropped because of desync (both clients have all the information, and if one is trying to do something that is impossible to the other the game will be out of sync).
Maphacks are mostly beneficial to players that already have a high enough skill level, and as far as I know, they play to get better at the game. For instance, I'm sure I'd benefit from using a maphack, but at the same time scouting and keeping my observers alive is an important skill to have, so I don't maphack.
And the new Warden for SC2 will most definitely be able to kill a lot of those hacks.
On March 12 2010 02:27 squ1d wrote: Maphacks aren't worth shit, because the guy will not have the ability to exploit his information advantage. He is probably a noob WoW player anyways and anyone of us can easily steamroll them.
Now Laghacks and Drophacks are extremely annoying, because they take no skill whatsoever to use.
I think you're underestimating how beneficial a maphack can be in SC2. For example, if you're a Terran player you have to juggle between Mules and Scans. With a maphack, you no longer need to worry about that entire mechanic. Units like Roaches, which are great to burrow and sneak around somewhere, become pretty much useless. In fact, maphacks negate the entire Burrow ability (not to mention any cloaked units). And then there's the obvious issue of knowing where expansions are.
It doesn't take a progamer to use information such as that. In fact, the large majority of SC2 players will be SC/BW and WC3 players. Most WoW players are too stupid to take on a computer and will just give up on the game after they can't beat the first campaign level. 90% of the people that will be using hacks will have enough knowledge to put them to use.
Granted, the longer the game is out the wider the skill gap will become (kinda like how in BW now you can steamroll most hackers because of the sheer skill difference). But for the first 6-12 months minimum of retail, hackers will really put a dent in the ladders unless Blizzard finds a way to prevent it now.
Also, I agree on the lag/drop hacks
It's not true that Maphacks negate burrow and cloaked units - if you kill a cloaked unit without having real sight to it, it will cause problems in-game and probably you'll be dropped because of desync (both clients have all the information, and if one is trying to do something that is impossible to the other the game will be out of sync).
What I meant is that they allow the sight of cloaked/burrowed units; not targeting. However just the sight alone is enough to counter a burrowed Roach/Infestor push, or selectively place cannons/defenses where the cloaked units are heading. It also allows a Terran player to say "He only has one DT right now on the other end of the map, so I'm going to use this 50 energy on a mule because I have time to wait for my next 50 before scanning"
And yes, there will be a lot of WoW players on B.Net but they sure as hell won't be competitive. The ones to worry about are people in the Platinum/Pro leagues that use them. However, even players in Silver/Gold will be decent at the game, and a hacker in there will dominate their leagues.
hes not me -_- i used google and guess what this awsome topic is 7th so ... not to mention that how the hell i should know what each hack do ? why the hell i would need that sort of info + as i told u moron leave before he drops u since either way u have lost and have the damn replay and send it to blizzard ... on the side note: if u 100% believe what ppl say over internet then u are sucker bro :D
On March 12 2010 02:27 squ1d wrote: Maphacks aren't worth shit, because the guy will not have the ability to exploit his information advantage. He is probably a noob WoW player anyways and anyone of us can easily steamroll them.
Now Laghacks and Drophacks are extremely annoying, because they take no skill whatsoever to use.
I think you're underestimating how beneficial a maphack can be in SC2. For example, if you're a Terran player you have to juggle between Mules and Scans. With a maphack, you no longer need to worry about that entire mechanic. Units like Roaches, which are great to burrow and sneak around somewhere, become pretty much useless. In fact, maphacks negate the entire Burrow ability (not to mention any cloaked units). And then there's the obvious issue of knowing where expansions are.
It doesn't take a progamer to use information such as that. In fact, the large majority of SC2 players will be SC/BW and WC3 players. Most WoW players are too stupid to take on a computer and will just give up on the game after they can't beat the first campaign level. 90% of the people that will be using hacks will have enough knowledge to put them to use.
Granted, the longer the game is out the wider the skill gap will become (kinda like how in BW now you can steamroll most hackers because of the sheer skill difference). But for the first 6-12 months minimum of retail, hackers will really put a dent in the ladders unless Blizzard finds a way to prevent it now.
Also, I agree on the lag/drop hacks
It's not true that Maphacks negate burrow and cloaked units - if you kill a cloaked unit without having real sight to it, it will cause problems in-game and probably you'll be dropped because of desync (both clients have all the information, and if one is trying to do something that is impossible to the other the game will be out of sync).
What I meant is that they allow the sight of cloaked/burrowed units; not targeting. However just the sight alone is enough to counter a burrowed Roach/Infestor push, or selectively place cannons/defenses where the cloaked units are heading. It also allows a Terran player to say "He only has one DT right now on the other end of the map, so I'm going to use this 50 energy on a mule because I have time to wait for my next 50 before scanning"
And yes, there will be a lot of WoW players on B.Net but they sure as hell won't be competitive. The ones to worry about are people in the Platinum/Pro leagues that use them. However, even players in Silver/Gold will be decent at the game, and a hacker in there will dominate their leagues.
On your example, if a Terran that is walled in dies to a DT rush is because he is retarded and should be killed by anyone. Besides, even if he didn't have Maphack he would've seen the dark shrine and put down a turret or two that would completely negate the Dark Templar.
I play on a 36" TV on 1920x1080. The only issue I have with it is that the minimap tends to be all the way in the corner, making it harder for me to pay attention to the minimap as I have to move my head to get an appropriate view of it.
So many hacks on the loose that doesn't sound very comforting. Then again it is beta I hope they will fix this before release, although I doubt a zoom or map hack can be avoided.
On March 12 2010 04:48 LagT_T wrote: There are zoom hacks that modify the camera values of the game only, allowing a broader view but no maphack or whatsoever.
Guess you missed the big maphack thread in this forum. Also, google. There are loads of maphacks out now
On March 12 2010 04:48 LagT_T wrote: There are zoom hacks that modify the camera values of the game only, allowing a broader view but no maphack or whatsoever.
Guess you missed the big maphack thread in this forum. Also, google. There are loads of maphacks out now
I didn't mean that maphacks don't exist, I'm just saying that there are zoom hacks that aren't also maphacks.
On March 12 2010 04:48 LagT_T wrote: There are zoom hacks that modify the camera values of the game only, allowing a broader view but no maphack or whatsoever.
Guess you missed the big maphack thread in this forum. Also, google. There are loads of maphacks out now
I didn't mean that maphacks don't exist, I'm just saying that there are zoom hacks that aren't also maphacks.
Ah ok, gotcha. Yeah I guess I didn't clarify that. It's safe to assume probably 99% of the people that use the zoom hack use it with a maphack though, but you're right. Technically, there could be legit reasons for using the zoom hack, too.
yea, this shit is totally going to ruin SC2. I made a post on the official forums when people were arguing 2D vs 3D and i compared it to dota where 100% of league players use zoom hack because playing zoomed in with the standard wc3 settings is impoissible if you're laned vs anyone who's good with zoom hack.
The bad thing about the zoom hack for wc3 was that it was totally client side which Im going to go out on a limb and say it's probably client side for sc2 as well.
best solution might be to allow anyone to zoom to any level just to make it fair.
Sorry for not reading the whole thread, but did it occur to you guys they may have purposely let the guard down a bit during the beta to try and identify where the hackers will come from? Why would they put their best security up front on a freely distributed partial client? I'm sure their security team has things in place to use the beta as a testing grounds for their role as well. Distract the hackers with all the holes now then they won't have a leg up when the real thing comes out.
I don't want zoom out. Some guy said he liked Supreme Commander - I hated it. It's much more irritating to use than the minimap, personally, and it takes a lot out of the game. Zooming out there then zooming in here is actually more time consuming than just clicking on the map, and it really dumbs down some parts of the game in the instances where it gives you a significant advantage.
SC2's camera is fine. Custom maps and mods will be able to have custom camera settings.
The problem with the game being in 3D is that the camera creates illusions where units on cliffs look bigger than the same units that aren't on cliffs; this especially applies to flying units.
On March 12 2010 03:22 Koffiegast wrote: I play on a 36" TV on 1920x1080. The only issue I have with it is that the minimap tends to be all the way in the corner, making it harder for me to pay attention to the minimap as I have to move my head to get an appropriate view of it.
Why would you play such a beautiful game on a shitty tv? Unless your tv is 120HZ I don't get why you would.
On March 12 2010 06:22 FREEloss_ca wrote: The problem with the game being in 3D is that the camera creates illusions where units on cliffs look bigger than the same units that aren't on cliffs; this especially applies to flying units.
That and the fact that some units just ARE bigger (Thors, Ultralisks, Colossi). If they're going to go for the whole "realism" thing and make units somewhat proportional (though I still don't understand how a Thor is the size of a Carrier or Command Center...), they need to increase the zoom distance to compensate.
Case in point, the zoom hack is a pretty big advantage to anyone using it, and a lot of people feel the screen doesn't zoom out enough by default. The temptation is there, and I'm willing to bet the lack of additional zoom by Blizzard will cause some people to resort to hacks to get what they feel should have been there to begin with.
It's clear people want this feature just from the fact that there's a hack out there for it, which has been downloaded over a thousand times according to the source. That's a huge chunk of players in the beta using it. Might as well increase the distance in a legit way (since a legit zoom increase doesn't come bundled with a maphack and everything else), and if needed lock the zoom to a certain level for ladder games.
imagine how difficult it would be to distinguish and control small units like zerglings or marines. it's difficult as it is now, i couldn't imagine playing when they are even smaller. i think that's probably one of the reasons why blizzard capped the zoom so people wouldn't complain at X zoom they can't see anything and there's not point at all to include it because it's unplayable.
On March 12 2010 02:41 Sere wrote: Most WoW players are too stupid to take on a computer and will just give up on the game after they can't beat the first campaign level.
On March 12 2010 02:01 MadLag wrote: and how the hell u can tell some one is zooming out ( LOOOL :DD) if u even dont have replay -_- not to mention that this is worthy shit unless u have build in maphack to remove fog of war ;D honstly i think u are just bad and come with some cry shit excusess for lose -_-
any way if u know he hacks u meet him 9 times and know he drops u at the end why the fuck u dont leave earlier and have replay ?? then report him to blizz and then PROFIT !!
how come new members don't seem to know that posting like this gets you banned?
On March 12 2010 02:41 Sere wrote: Most WoW players are too stupid to take on a computer and will just give up on the game after they can't beat the first campaign level.
Do you like raging against the world?
I take it you're one of those WoW players?
You act like it's some big secret that the overwhelming majority of WoW players can't tie their own shoes. Thirty seconds on the forums is enough to prove that.
As someone who's been in one of the top raiding guilds in the US for the last two years, I can honestly say the hardest part of that game is finding 24 other people who aren't braindead. We're talking a game where you can macro everything to a single button and spam it to do what you need to do, and STILL people can't do that properly. If you won't call that stupidity, then what?
I have a hard time as it is killing a changeling on the current view distance so I don't get this hack that much at all if it exists.
I also fail to believe that 2/3 people are hacking in the gold league, I googled those hacks just to see if they are readily available and couldn't see anything so to believe that 2/3 people hack when you can barely find them is a joke to me.
Related to this thread: I think blizzard should actually implement zooming out for obs and replays, if it isn't in already. It'll help the observability and help spectators keep track of more things going on at once. Of course, this should be done after figuring out how to prevent exploits that let in-game players do this...
On March 12 2010 07:35 Pape wrote: I have a hard time as it is killing a changeling on the current view distance so I don't get this hack that much at all if it exists.
I also fail to believe that 2/3 people are hacking in the gold league, I googled those hacks just to see if they are readily available and couldn't see anything so to believe that 2/3 people hack when you can barely find them is a joke to me.
Google harder next time
The same 2-3 websites provide about half a dozen different types of hacks, cracked beta clients, and even some tools to make custom maps.
And I feel I should make an amendment to my statement. I'm sure 66% of Gold players don't hack in general. But from my personal experiences, that is the case. As an example, I went 41-0 yesterday. So far today, I am 27-16. Two losses I was just being stupid, but the other 14 losses were all due to maphackers, and I had at least 10 wins against hackers as well (and not just random players... I beat two different #1 Gold players and neither of them scouted all game, but countered me perfectly).
Likewise, on my other account in a Platinum league I have yet to see a hacker. That doesn't mean I haven't played any, but if I did they were smart enough to still scout and not make it blatantly obvious.
My guess is that a fair amount of Platinum players hack as well, but they're good enough on their own to know how to cover it up well. Players in other leagues, however, lack the core gameplay skills, and thus end up letting the hack play most of the game for them, leading to obvious examples of the hack being used (ie, never scouting).
I know people like to think things aren't as bad as they really are, but at times they just are. Nobody wanted to believe Testie hacked back in the day. Nobody wants to believe there are hackers on ICCUP (anti hack launcher, right?) when in reality from personal experience being an admin for 6 months, I banned countless people for hacking; including at least 5-6 A-/A+ players.
Point being, it happens more than any of us want to admit it does.
On March 12 2010 03:22 Koffiegast wrote: I play on a 36" TV on 1920x1080. The only issue I have with it is that the minimap tends to be all the way in the corner, making it harder for me to pay attention to the minimap as I have to move my head to get an appropriate view of it.
Why would you play such a beautiful game on a shitty tv? Unless your tv is 120HZ I don't get why you would.
Refresh rate has never been an issue. And its hardly any shitty tv tbh.
On March 12 2010 07:35 Pape wrote: I have a hard time as it is killing a changeling on the current view distance so I don't get this hack that much at all if it exists.
I also fail to believe that 2/3 people are hacking in the gold league, I googled those hacks just to see if they are readily available and couldn't see anything so to believe that 2/3 people hack when you can barely find them is a joke to me.
Google harder next time
The same 2-3 websites provide about half a dozen different types of hacks, cracked beta clients, and even some tools to make custom maps.
And I feel I should make an amendment to my statement. I'm sure 66% of Gold players don't hack in general. But from my personal experiences, that is the case. As an example, I went 41-0 yesterday. So far today, I am 27-16. Two losses I was just being stupid, but the other 14 losses were all due to maphackers, and I had at least 10 wins against hackers as well (and not just random players... I beat two different #1 Gold players and neither of them scouted all game, but countered me perfectly).
Likewise, on my other account in a Platinum league I have yet to see a hacker. That doesn't mean I haven't played any, but if I did they were smart enough to still scout and not make it blatantly obvious.
My guess is that a fair amount of Platinum players hack as well, but they're good enough on their own to know how to cover it up well. Players in other leagues, however, lack the core gameplay skills, and thus end up letting the hack play most of the game for them, leading to obvious examples of the hack being used (ie, never scouting).
I know people like to think things aren't as bad as they really are, but at times they just are. Nobody wanted to believe Testie hacked back in the day. Nobody wants to believe there are hackers on ICCUP (anti hack launcher, right?) when in reality from personal experience being an admin for 6 months, I banned countless people for hacking; including at least 5-6 A-/A+ players.
Point being, it happens more than any of us want to admit it does.
So you're one of those guys that whine "hacker" everytime they lose. Terrible attitude.
Wow, I hope no one is believing anything Sere is saying. There is no way anything that guy has said is true. He seems like the typical noob who accuses everyone who beats him of hacking and is just pulling numbers out of his ass (41-0 lol).
I am pretty confident blizzard will deal with hacking much better then they did in BW and that it won't be an issue at high levels (Replay POV will help with this even if blizzard doesn't come up with a good solution)
On March 12 2010 07:35 Pape wrote: I have a hard time as it is killing a changeling on the current view distance so I don't get this hack that much at all if it exists.
I also fail to believe that 2/3 people are hacking in the gold league, I googled those hacks just to see if they are readily available and couldn't see anything so to believe that 2/3 people hack when you can barely find them is a joke to me.
Google harder next time
The same 2-3 websites provide about half a dozen different types of hacks, cracked beta clients, and even some tools to make custom maps.
And I feel I should make an amendment to my statement. I'm sure 66% of Gold players don't hack in general. But from my personal experiences, that is the case. As an example, I went 41-0 yesterday. So far today, I am 27-16. Two losses I was just being stupid, but the other 14 losses were all due to maphackers, and I had at least 10 wins against hackers as well (and not just random players... I beat two different #1 Gold players and neither of them scouted all game, but countered me perfectly).
Likewise, on my other account in a Platinum league I have yet to see a hacker. That doesn't mean I haven't played any, but if I did they were smart enough to still scout and not make it blatantly obvious.
My guess is that a fair amount of Platinum players hack as well, but they're good enough on their own to know how to cover it up well. Players in other leagues, however, lack the core gameplay skills, and thus end up letting the hack play most of the game for them, leading to obvious examples of the hack being used (ie, never scouting).
I know people like to think things aren't as bad as they really are, but at times they just are. Nobody wanted to believe Testie hacked back in the day. Nobody wants to believe there are hackers on ICCUP (anti hack launcher, right?) when in reality from personal experience being an admin for 6 months, I banned countless people for hacking; including at least 5-6 A-/A+ players.
Point being, it happens more than any of us want to admit it does.
Lol you can't just go throwing accusations around you like that. Maybe post a replay pack of those 14 "obvious" maphackers that beat you?
On March 12 2010 07:35 Pape wrote: I have a hard time as it is killing a changeling on the current view distance so I don't get this hack that much at all if it exists.
I also fail to believe that 2/3 people are hacking in the gold league, I googled those hacks just to see if they are readily available and couldn't see anything so to believe that 2/3 people hack when you can barely find them is a joke to me.
Google harder next time
The same 2-3 websites provide about half a dozen different types of hacks, cracked beta clients, and even some tools to make custom maps.
And I feel I should make an amendment to my statement. I'm sure 66% of Gold players don't hack in general. But from my personal experiences, that is the case. As an example, I went 41-0 yesterday. So far today, I am 27-16. Two losses I was just being stupid, but the other 14 losses were all due to maphackers, and I had at least 10 wins against hackers as well (and not just random players... I beat two different #1 Gold players and neither of them scouted all game, but countered me perfectly).
Likewise, on my other account in a Platinum league I have yet to see a hacker. That doesn't mean I haven't played any, but if I did they were smart enough to still scout and not make it blatantly obvious.
My guess is that a fair amount of Platinum players hack as well, but they're good enough on their own to know how to cover it up well. Players in other leagues, however, lack the core gameplay skills, and thus end up letting the hack play most of the game for them, leading to obvious examples of the hack being used (ie, never scouting).
I know people like to think things aren't as bad as they really are, but at times they just are. Nobody wanted to believe Testie hacked back in the day. Nobody wants to believe there are hackers on ICCUP (anti hack launcher, right?) when in reality from personal experience being an admin for 6 months, I banned countless people for hacking; including at least 5-6 A-/A+ players.
Point being, it happens more than any of us want to admit it does.
So you're one of those guys that whine "hacker" everytime they lose. Terrible attitude.
I'm one of those guys that has enough common sense to know that when somebody who never scouts but moves his units precisely to pick off any drops, expansions, or scouting that I do... he's not legit.
I'm going to assume you've hacked at one point in your life, thus why you're so overly defensive in regards to the subject.
Case in point, I mentioned that I won at least ten games against hackers as well. I guess I whine "hacker" when I win, too? Or maybe I just call it like it is, and you're just looking to start drama.
On March 12 2010 07:35 Pape wrote: I have a hard time as it is killing a changeling on the current view distance so I don't get this hack that much at all if it exists.
I also fail to believe that 2/3 people are hacking in the gold league, I googled those hacks just to see if they are readily available and couldn't see anything so to believe that 2/3 people hack when you can barely find them is a joke to me.
Google harder next time
The same 2-3 websites provide about half a dozen different types of hacks, cracked beta clients, and even some tools to make custom maps.
And I feel I should make an amendment to my statement. I'm sure 66% of Gold players don't hack in general. But from my personal experiences, that is the case. As an example, I went 41-0 yesterday. So far today, I am 27-16. Two losses I was just being stupid, but the other 14 losses were all due to maphackers, and I had at least 10 wins against hackers as well (and not just random players... I beat two different #1 Gold players and neither of them scouted all game, but countered me perfectly).
Likewise, on my other account in a Platinum league I have yet to see a hacker. That doesn't mean I haven't played any, but if I did they were smart enough to still scout and not make it blatantly obvious.
My guess is that a fair amount of Platinum players hack as well, but they're good enough on their own to know how to cover it up well. Players in other leagues, however, lack the core gameplay skills, and thus end up letting the hack play most of the game for them, leading to obvious examples of the hack being used (ie, never scouting).
I know people like to think things aren't as bad as they really are, but at times they just are. Nobody wanted to believe Testie hacked back in the day. Nobody wants to believe there are hackers on ICCUP (anti hack launcher, right?) when in reality from personal experience being an admin for 6 months, I banned countless people for hacking; including at least 5-6 A-/A+ players.
Point being, it happens more than any of us want to admit it does.
So you're one of those guys that whine "hacker" everytime they lose. Terrible attitude.
I'm one of those guys that has enough common sense to know that when somebody who never scouts but moves his units precisely to pick off any drops, expansions, or scouting that I do... he's not legit.
I'm going to assume you've hacked at one point in your life, thus why you're so overly defensive in regards to the subject.
Case in point, I mentioned that I won at least ten games against hackers as well. I guess I whine "hacker" when I win, too? Or maybe I just call it like it is, and you're just looking to start drama.
So you you're one of those guys that will attack somebody in a completely unrelevant manner for pointing out the obvious flaws in the logic and evidence within your statements. Yeah, you disgust me.
For any serious server (like ICCup) you should be forced to give your real name and verify it by sending scan's of bills and your ID documents. Just as for poker sites. This will reduce the problem greatly. I am not sure online world is ready for this solution though.
On March 13 2010 04:27 sAAvior wrote: For any serious server (like ICCup) you should be forced to give your real name and verify it by sending scan's of bills and your ID documents. Just as for poker sites. This will reduce the problem greatly. I am not sure online world is ready for this solution though.
I'm willing to bet Blizzard's tournaments will be held in this fashion. I'm somewhat confused how that would help the issue of hacking, though. I mean, I suppose you could hunt down the hackers and beat them up or something -_-;;
Also, what poker sites are you using that require IDs and such? I use Pokerstars and all I had to do was give them a card number ~_~ Although at one point they did tell my my country wasn't allowed to play on their website, but I just called back ten minutes later and the next person didn't seem to have an issue with it.
On March 13 2010 03:46 FortuneSyn wrote: So you you're one of those guys that will attack somebody in a completely unrelevant manner for pointing out the obvious flaws in the logic and evidence within your statements. Yeah, you disgust me.
Go troll in another thread. We're having an intelligent discussion in this one and you clearly can't contribute to it.
Also, what poker sites are you using that require IDs and such?
Usually when you deposit/withdraw larger amounts they require you to verify your personal data like street address, name etc by sending copies of passport/id card/utility bills. I play on 5 different sites and went trough this process every time.
Also, what poker sites are you using that require IDs and such?
Usually when you deposit/withdraw larger amounts they require you to verify your personal data like street address, name etc by sending copies of passport/id card/utility bills. I play on 5 different sites and went trough this process every time.
I see. That makes sense. I only ever deposit $50 at a time or so, and just play my way up. It's fun bashing the penny tables
On March 13 2010 04:43 NoNameLoser wrote:
Note the size of the screen on minimap
Thank you for the screenie :o
This is exactly what the current hack enables, and as you can see from that screenshot it's a HUGE advantage to anyone using it.
I feel I should also clarify that most people seem to be under the impression that you're stuck in a zoom or something, and use the argument that it's too hard to select and see units that far out. However, what really makes this hack so exploitable is that you can zoom out real quick to see the big picture, and then zoom back in to normal if you need to micro.
Hence why I also feel the default zoom level should be increased. That's excessive, but maybe 10-20% more than is currently possible just to add more screen real estate, but not so much that you can't click on units.
On March 13 2010 04:27 sAAvior wrote: For any serious server (like ICCup) you should be forced to give your real name and verify it by sending scan's of bills and your ID documents. Just as for poker sites. This will reduce the problem greatly. I am not sure online world is ready for this solution though.
I'm willing to bet Blizzard's tournaments will be held in this fashion. I'm somewhat confused how that would help the issue of hacking, though. I mean, I suppose you could hunt down the hackers and beat them up or something -_-;;
Also, what poker sites are you using that require IDs and such? I use Pokerstars and all I had to do was give them a card number ~_~ Although at one point they did tell my my country wasn't allowed to play on their website, but I just called back ten minutes later and the next person didn't seem to have an issue with it.
On March 13 2010 03:46 FortuneSyn wrote: So you you're one of those guys that will attack somebody in a completely unrelevant manner for pointing out the obvious flaws in the logic and evidence within your statements. Yeah, you disgust me.
Go troll in another thread. We're having an intelligent discussion in this one and you clearly can't contribute to it.
Oh I'm contributing by pointing out just how ridiculously fabricated full of bullshit your statements are. You back up arguments with pure out of your ass evidence. If the format in which I pointed out your disgusting statements displeases you, I honestly couldn't care less.
As for the hacking, yes they are out there. And no, that doesn't give you an excuse to be a douchebag like Sere.
On March 13 2010 05:40 FortuneSyn wrote: Oh I'm contributing by pointing out just how ridiculously fabricated full of bullshit your statements are. You back up arguments with pure out of your ass evidence. If the format in which I pointed out your disgusting statements displeases you, I honestly couldn't care less.
As for the hacking, yes they are out there. And no, that doesn't give you an excuse to be a douchebag like Sere.
Yes. You got me. I have yet to back up that there is a zoom hack out there, and how it creates a huge advantage for anyone using it. Nevermind the giant screenshot two posts up.
I'm amazed a mod hasn't banned you yet. All you're doing is trolling and talking shit for no reason at all.
PS - If you "honestly couldn't care less" then why are you still posting? Go nerd rage elsewhere kid :S
The problem in a 3d game is that you basicly give everything coordinates and you set a camera coordinate. The view of the game is then the projection of the camera. This camara can be hacked in too easily. Just changing a litle variable allows you to change zoom.
On March 13 2010 06:08 Marradron wrote: The problem in a 3d game is that you basicly give everything coordinates and you set a camera coordinate. The view of the game is then the projection of the camera. This camara can be hacked in too easily. Just changing a litle variable allows you to change zoom.
Yup, pretty much. Anyone can make changes like these, even without a StarCraft 2 "crack". Use a program that keeps track of changes in variables. I've never done it, but I've seen it be done to set infinite lives in games before.
On March 13 2010 06:08 Marradron wrote: The problem in a 3d game is that you basicly give everything coordinates and you set a camera coordinate. The view of the game is then the projection of the camera. This camara can be hacked in too easily. Just changing a litle variable allows you to change zoom.
Yup, pretty much. Anyone can make changes like these, even without a StarCraft 2 "crack". Use a program that keeps track of changes in variables. I've never done it, but I've seen it be done to set infinite lives in games before.
A solution for it would be though for the BNserver to request the variables now and then. But this could simply be overwritten by a program to send the wrong data to the server
On March 13 2010 06:08 Marradron wrote: The problem in a 3d game is that you basicly give everything coordinates and you set a camera coordinate. The view of the game is then the projection of the camera. This camara can be hacked in too easily. Just changing a litle variable allows you to change zoom.
Yup, pretty much. Anyone can make changes like these, even without a StarCraft 2 "crack". Use a program that keeps track of changes in variables. I've never done it, but I've seen it be done to set infinite lives in games before.
Technically, you should be able to change the camera zoom simply by modifying a line of code in the game files. That's all the hack does; changes something like "MaxCameraDist=50" to "=100", or any other number.
A lot of hacks are like that, though. Take autogather for example. You can make a simple Autoit script to do that, and Warden cannot detect it because it doesn't run in the memory of the game, which is all Warden checks (at least for WoW). It can also check your process list, but all you have to do is rename the Autoit extension. Point being there are going to be hacks that cannot be prevented.
A lot of hacks are like that, though. Take autogather for example. You can make a simple Autoit script to do that, and Warden cannot detect it because it doesn't run in the memory of the game, which is all Warden checks (at least for WoW). It can also check your process list, but all you have to do is rename the Autoit extension. Point being there are going to be hacks that cannot be prevented.
Actually you can, all it requires is for the B.Net servers to store data on the games played. For instance if someone sends his workers within 100ms of the game starting consistently, then he's probably using a script.
A lot of hacks are like that, though. Take autogather for example. You can make a simple Autoit script to do that, and Warden cannot detect it because it doesn't run in the memory of the game, which is all Warden checks (at least for WoW). It can also check your process list, but all you have to do is rename the Autoit extension. Point being there are going to be hacks that cannot be prevented.
Actually you can, all it requires is for the B.Net servers to store data on the games played. For instance if someone sends his workers within 100ms of the game starting consistently, then he's probably using a script.
How hard do you think it is to make it random so one game it is 100 then 101 ect
A lot of hacks are like that, though. Take autogather for example. You can make a simple Autoit script to do that, and Warden cannot detect it because it doesn't run in the memory of the game, which is all Warden checks (at least for WoW). It can also check your process list, but all you have to do is rename the Autoit extension. Point being there are going to be hacks that cannot be prevented.
Actually you can, all it requires is for the B.Net servers to store data on the games played. For instance if someone sends his workers within 100ms of the game starting consistently, then he's probably using a script.
How hard do you think it is to make it random so one game it is 100 then 101 ect
The bigger issue would be the extra server load and storage it would require. You're talking data on hundreds of thousands of players, and you'd have to store info from a least a few dozen games in order to have a sample size large enough to rule out variables such as lag at the start of the game giving you a second to set up your cursor better, or people that just react extra fast every now and then.
Although in all honesty, the only time something like an autogather is useful is when one novice is playing another novice. Average and better players tend to split quickly anyway, and any lesser skilled player that uses the hack would immediately have his advantage offset by the skill difference between him and his opponent.
Basically, the people who would be using this would most likely all be in Copper/Bronze/Silver leagues anyway. Not saying they don't deserve to have fair matches in those "lesser" leagues, but the benefit is so minimal and the prestige of those leagues is irrelevant, so in the end the best option is to just let people use it if it can't be picked up by conventional means (Warden).
Someone tell me why Blizzard shouldn't just let you zoom to whatever level you want in real-time with the scroll wheel? Do we really need an artificial limitation on the UI that makes the game harder to control?
On March 13 2010 07:58 Gibybo wrote: Someone tell me why Blizzard shouldn't just let you zoom to whatever level you want in real-time with the scroll wheel? Do we really need an artificial limitation on the UI that makes the game harder to control?
This. Why people keep phrasing it like "This hack gives you such a ridiculous advantage it lets you see the game easier then micro easier!!!!!!" i don't know. If the hack indeed makes the game easier to play and more viewable, why shouldn't it be an actual part of the game? To make the game artificially harder to see? Seems retarded imo, let people zoom in however they want.
On March 13 2010 07:58 Gibybo wrote: Someone tell me why Blizzard shouldn't just let you zoom to whatever level you want in real-time with the scroll wheel? Do we really need an artificial limitation on the UI that makes the game harder to control?
This. Why people keep phrasing it like "This hack gives you such a ridiculous advantage it lets you see the game easier then micro easier!!!!!!" i don't know. If the hack indeed makes the game easier to play and more viewable, why shouldn't it be an actual part of the game? To make the game artificially harder to see? Seems retarded imo, let people zoom in however they want.
Here's how things currently stand...
Players that use the zoom hack have a HUGE advantage over players that don't. Common sense here, I guess.
Now, one of three things can happen;
a) The above continues b) Blizzard finds a way to permanently disable this hack c) Blizzard increases the max zoom distance
The first one is self-explanatory. The second one is unlikely, but again self-explanatory.
The third one is what you're proposing (and myself, too). However there's an issue with this; allowing more zoom decreases the overall difficulty of the game by removing the need to scroll. In addition, some computers can't handle zooming out but so far. If they increased the zoom distance, they would need to lock it for ladder play (10-20%, as I mentioned earlier would probably be ideal). If they lock it for ladder play, then hackers would have an advantage.
The ideal solution would be B+C, but I doubt it will happen.
allowing more zoom decreases the overall difficulty of the game by removing the need to scroll.
Why do people consider this as a problem ? I'ts just interface issue. If the game is strategically rich enough being "easier to play" is not a problem. The best games ever invented by humans (chess, go, poker, backgammon etc.) are all super easy to play but still very difficult to play well. Why not focus on decision making instead of fast clicking ?
And its not so useful as you think. because you are so far from ground, you cannot hear any unit sound // shots. so microing at zoomed out will not be as effective; macroing big army on the other had could be.
Also theres FPS drop, so maybe thats why they didnt enable it. A max limit army clash would probably slow any PC down.
And its not so useful as you think. because you are so far from ground, you cannot hear any unit sound // shots. so microing at zoomed out will not be as effective; macroing big army on the other had could be. Also theres FPS drop, so maybe thats why they didnt enable it. A max limit army clash would probably slow any PC down.
Exactly, if they made it a feature everyone would try to turn it on and they would complain their computer doesn't work in the big battles so it's blizzard's fault. Answer? Turn it off.
I'm going to assume you've hacked at one point in your life, thus why you're so overly defensive in regards to the subject.
I don't know who's right, but that's a pretty bold claim. No one should be making claims like that.
Also, you said you were an admin for ICCUP, can you elaborate? ID? When? How many hacks did you see? Were they ever picked up by the anti-hack? Why not? I thought the anti-hack worked pretty well, I didn't know ICCUP players hacked.
I'm going to assume you've hacked at one point in your life, thus why you're so overly defensive in regards to the subject.
I don't know who's right, but that's a pretty bold claim. No one should be making claims like that.
Also, you said you were an admin for ICCUP, can you elaborate? ID? When? How many hacks did you see? Were they ever picked up by the anti-hack? Why not? I thought the anti-hack worked pretty well, I didn't know ICCUP players hacked.
My ID was iCCup.Sere, and no... the anti-hack only picked up probably 10% of maphacks. It basically only got the first one or two you came across searching in google. Most maphacks bypass the launcher (or did... they may have updated it).
There are two types of hacking issues on ICCup. The first is people that use maphacks which are detected (as said above, very few are actually detected; only the 2-3 most well known). These are listed in the admin panel as games being played with a maphack and are auto-submitted to admins to review.
The second type of review are games where both players use the launcher, but one of them (usually the loser, although winners do as well) submits a complaint that the other player used a hack. These are manually submitted by the players, and then reviewed by an admin. If the admin determines a hack was used, the replay is forwarded to a super admin to make a final decision. Basically you looked for things like lack of scouting, suspicious movements, etc. There were a LOT of hack complaints, but not all were actioned. We mostly just banned the people that were blatant... like, dropships coming from 6 > 12 > 3 to attack, and the player at 3 would send two scourge directly into the dropships around 12 without ever seeing them.
I probably banned at least 10 players a day for hacking, and there were 5-6 other admins too. That's a fair amount of people hacking over a "secure" launcher.
Me and a few decently known BW players at the time (Kawaii[Light] and HeavOnEarth are the main two I remember off the top of my head... few people from MYM as well) also tested the launcher by downloading a lot of different hacks directly from a mod on a well known hack website and running them through the launcher. I believe I used somewhere in the neighborhood of ~5 public hacks and ~20 private ones. Not a single private hack was detected, and only four of the five public ones were.
That being said, this was probably between two and three years ago so I'm sure things have changed since then, but I hope that answers your questions.
I was about to make a topic about a replay from one of my games i just watched and stumbled across this topic. Since i believe he had something like the zoom hack this topic is about i thought i could post it here instead of making a new one.
Everything looks normal (except for him doing lots of things at the edge of the screen) until his blink stalker attack. Towards the end of it he warps in units out of screen (could be minimap warp in) and blinks outside of the visible screen (can't explain that). In the end he rebuilds his nexus out of screen aswell.
On November 19 2013 04:19 .oNe. wrote: I was about to make a topic about a replay from one of my games i just watched and stumbled across this topic. Since i believe he had something like the zoom hack this topic is about i thought i could post it here instead of making a new one.
Everything looks normal (except for him doing lots of things at the edge of the screen) until his blink stalker attack. Towards the end of it he warps in units out of screen (could be minimap warp in) and blinks outside of the visible screen (can't explain that). In the end he rebuilds his nexus out of screen aswell.
Anyone know where I can find one of these zoom trainers?
I'm trying to love the game again, but the default zoom distance is straight trash.
I can't believe they never fixed this, and never increased the minimap size... Any game that goes over one or two bases just feels like slogging through mud fighting the interface. No proper maneuvering, flanks etc. are possible with the shitty combo of tiny inaccurate minimap and stupid face-smashed-to-the-ground field of view. (no lecture on drag speed/camera hotkeys is necessary thank you)
I guess I could accept it and just play idiot deathballs for the rest of my career, or stop playing an otherwise great game.. hmm.. I'll be playing low supply strats until I decide I guess.
@blind429, if you feel confined playing SC2: – use camera location hotkey and you can jump back and forward to up to 8 arbitrary spots on the map – double press group keys to get the camera jump to them – consider using other bindkeys for both cams and groups than default
It seems useful but i don't think it would help a lot in practice. It will lower your selection accuracy proportionally. And if you do the zooming actions during the game, you have to spare some of your apm for that. Damn, i am still playing this game on a 15.6 inch screen lol.
I was just tongue-in-cheek 'asking for a trainer' btw.... Thanks for the tips, I get around fine for the most part with a couple camera hotkeys and dragscroll on a mouse button.
But nothing can make up for me pulling my scroll-wheel down and NOTHING HAPPENS. I do it instinctively because it makes 100% sense what should happen, and needs to happen, and am painfully disappointed every time. Meanwhile scroll-wheel up zooms *in* (?!?!) to where nothing but the town hall, not even a full mineral line, fits on the screen - totally expletive useless.
It's 2017 and our FoV is worse than BW. It's just such a false, senseless limitation on playability.
Anybody who's computer can't handle an extra ~15% zoom distance in 2017 isn't playing competitively anyways.
Anyways, I know most people are on the teet and don't care (or blindly disagree), but I have to bring it up every time I try to get back into the game seriously. It's a joke as it stands.
TBH I find the view area to be way too small as well.
Especially in the age of wide screen monitors (16 : 9), the bottom HUD placement makes it way worse than when it was 4:3.. It should be placed on the side if anything.
We see a heavily rectangular main map that favors left-right view more than up-down. I'm guessing the ratio of it is like (horizontal) 16:7 (vertical) when you consider the HUD, if not worse. Why do we see more than 2 times horizontally than vertically?? It's not a movie, it's a fucking map.
If there were two versions of SC2 - one like it is now, and one with 20% more view-able area and a 15% larger mini-map, nobody on Earth would play the inferior version (the one we use now).
I understand limits must be defined. They frame the entire game experience. But we are playing confined inside an aging oxidized copper frame, when we could be playing within a shimmering diamond lattice.
On June 23 2017 06:17 blind429 wrote: Let's put it this way:
If there were two versions of SC2 - one like it is now, and one with 20% more view-able area and a 15% larger mini-map, nobody on Earth would play the inferior version (the one we use now).
I understand limits must be defined. They frame the entire game experience. But we are playing confined inside an aging oxidized copper frame, when we could be playing within a shimmering diamond lattice.
People don't use 4:3, 640x480 in 2017.Assemble.
Err no? I use 1280 x 1024 dual screen with 2nd screen for other stuff. I don't mind if my 2nd screen gets wider as long as it is in viewable range of my head turning 60 degree sideway viewable (dragging windows through a very wide screen is a pain as well even with automatic window arrangers like KDE plasma). I also use a trackball if that makes any difference.
For me I wanted the vertical limit to be increased so I can play 1200 x 1600 on rotated monitor if possible. This is very helpful since most of the game statistics is at top/bottom.
Another thing to consider (that I am certain others have pointed out) is human viewing area and resolution is limited. The range of motion for one's pointing device, or in my case trackball is also limited. It is easier for certain users to move the cursor horizontally than vertically or vice versa. And you can only click on units that you can reliably recognize. Too wide or Too tall a screen is simply a waste and inefficient at controlling. Sure use camera hotkey but when you are microing you might have to use the size of screen to scroll and the travel distance back to the center matters. It can also argued that larger army should be harder to control by design (as opposed to the zoomed out capabilities of Supreme Commander or Planetary Annihilation).
The graphics engine itself is very well built and should support many undefined resolutions. The location of the command card and army stats is not movable in competitive play by default although they do not have to be.
Damn, so many good games in which execution is not important!...And at a good price too!!!!! I would really buy them if I was looking for something like those!!! I would totally not go and ask for a game to be completely changed in nature just for me!!!!!
EPT
![[image loading]](http://img682.imageshack.us/img682/9422/screenshotjw.jpg)
