• Log InLog In
  • Register
Liquid`
Team Liquid Liquipedia
EDT 13:44
CEST 19:44
KST 02:44
  • Home
  • Forum
  • Calendar
  • Streams
  • Liquipedia
  • Features
  • Store
  • EPT
  • TL+
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Smash
  • Heroes
  • Counter-Strike
  • Overwatch
  • Liquibet
  • Fantasy StarCraft
  • TLPD
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Blogs
Forum Sidebar
Events/Features
News
Featured News
Team TLMC #5 - Finalists & Open Tournaments2[ASL20] Ro16 Preview Pt2: Turbulence10Classic Games #3: Rogue vs Serral at BlizzCon10[ASL20] Ro16 Preview Pt1: Ascent10Maestros of the Game: Week 1/Play-in Preview12
Community News
StarCraft II 5.0.15 PTR Patch Notes155BSL 2025 Warsaw LAN + Legends Showmatch2Weekly Cups (Sept 8-14): herO & MaxPax split cups4WardiTV TL Team Map Contest #5 Tournaments1SC4ALL $6,000 Open LAN in Philadelphia8
StarCraft 2
General
StarCraft II 5.0.15 PTR Patch Notes SC4ALL: A North American StarCraft LAN Team TLMC #5 - Finalists & Open Tournaments Classic Games #3: Rogue vs Serral at BlizzCon Why Storm Should NOT Be Nerfed – A Core Part of Pr
Tourneys
SC2's Safe House 2 - October 18 & 19 RSL: Revival, a new crowdfunded tournament series Stellar Fest KSL Week 80 StarCraft Evolution League (SC Evo Biweekly)
Strategy
Custom Maps
External Content
Mutation # 491 Night Drive Mutation # 490 Masters of Midnight Mutation # 489 Bannable Offense Mutation # 488 What Goes Around
Brood War
General
BGH Auto Balance -> http://bghmmr.eu/ Soulkey on ASL S20 ASL20 General Discussion BW General Discussion Diplomacy, Cosmonarchy Edition
Tourneys
[ASL20] Ro16 Group D BSL 2025 Warsaw LAN + Legends Showmatch [ASL20] Ro16 Group C Small VOD Thread 2.0
Strategy
Simple Questions, Simple Answers Muta micro map competition Fighting Spirit mining rates [G] Mineral Boosting
Other Games
General Games
Stormgate/Frost Giant Megathread Nintendo Switch Thread Path of Exile Borderlands 3 General RTS Discussion Thread
Dota 2
Official 'what is Dota anymore' discussion LiquidDota to reintegrate into TL.net
League of Legends
Heroes of the Storm
Simple Questions, Simple Answers Heroes of the Storm 2.0
Hearthstone
Heroes of StarCraft mini-set
TL Mafia
TL Mafia Community Thread
Community
General
US Politics Mega-thread The Big Programming Thread Things Aren’t Peaceful in Palestine Russo-Ukrainian War Thread UK Politics Mega-thread
Fan Clubs
The Happy Fan Club!
Media & Entertainment
Movie Discussion! [Manga] One Piece Anime Discussion Thread
Sports
2024 - 2026 Football Thread Formula 1 Discussion MLB/Baseball 2023
World Cup 2022
Tech Support
Linksys AE2500 USB WIFI keeps disconnecting Computer Build, Upgrade & Buying Resource Thread High temperatures on bridge(s)
TL Community
BarCraft in Tokyo Japan for ASL Season5 Final The Automated Ban List
Blogs
Too Many LANs? Tournament Ov…
TrAiDoS
i'm really bored guys
Peanutsc
I <=> 9
KrillinFromwales
A very expensive lesson on ma…
Garnet
hello world
radishsoup
Lemme tell you a thing o…
JoinTheRain
Customize Sidebar...

Website Feedback

Closed Threads



Active: 1684 users

Blizzard: "No plans for chatrooms, crossrealm play" - Page…

Forum Index > SC2 General
2308 CommentsPost a Reply
Prev 1 92 93 94 95 96 116 Next
Subversive
Profile Joined October 2009
Australia2229 Posts
June 01 2010 08:21 GMT
#1861
On June 01 2010 16:53 FrozenArbiter wrote:
Show nested quote +
On June 01 2010 03:03 Magmar wrote:
On May 31 2010 13:11 fuzzehbunneh wrote:
yet another instance of our culture's everybody is a winner attitude creeping into competition and ruining it for everyone.



Consider this: You are not a korean Programer. Korean Progamer could say everybody who is not on our level and earning money with this Game is per definition a stupid loser. How would you feel? And don´t claim that you would shrug this off. Not when you hold up the flag of competition and winner gets it all.




blizzard keeps trying to cater to casual gamers, and honestly this turns off the hardcore gamers when the casual gamers COULDNT CARE LESS about any of it as they are by definition CASUAL



Blizzard knows there are only a few dozen thousands of "hardcore gamers" that look like Count Dracula because they don´t see the sun very often. It would be stupid to cater to these male virgins. Better to make games that appeal to millions of people. It´s not only better for them. Computergames became relevant when companies started to make content for people who knew Sex and Sunlight. The 99,9% of the overall male and female population. Thats the horrible thing about this: WE ALLOW ONLY THE GAME FANATICS TO COMPLAIN ABOUOT B NET 2.0. And thats stupid! The casual gamers have to step up forward too or you and your kind will ruin it for everyone.


Hello.

Good bye.

Lol I just read this and then saw it in the banned thread. Man, what a jerk. 2 posts and already flaming people and abusing. I struggle to pick a favourite mod on this site because you all just get rid of the trash so fast
#1 Great fan ~ // Khan // FlaSh // JangBi // EffOrt //
rS.Sinatra
Profile Joined May 2010
Canada785 Posts
June 01 2010 08:22 GMT
#1862
I sincerely hope that they implement the ability to be a part of multiple groups (not clans) so that u could join say... a tournament group that sort of works like a clan.. with moderators instead of clan leaders.. so that u could coordinate effectively... etc.. if they implemented that i wouldn't care about whether chat channels existed or not... cause then u could have any type of group you wanted (like chat channel) but who could join the group could be moderated.. (no spam or randoms)

might sound sort of elitist.. but i'm sure if they implemented that there could also be "general" groups that have moderation but at the same time allow randoms to join..
www.rsgaming.com
Santriel
Profile Joined May 2010
Belgium33 Posts
June 01 2010 09:26 GMT
#1863
Anyone noticed the irony in the official forum's post ?


Xordiah:

What I wanted to bring up though was, that while having a lot of players have a very strong opinion about something is a good thing, it is a very bad thing if they are not able to communicate this in a constructive manner.


We... have... no... chat... channels.
By fire be purged !
Jaug
Profile Joined February 2010
Sweden249 Posts
June 01 2010 10:39 GMT
#1864
Blizzard are losing their connection to reality, if you can't even take feedback from beta testers then something is seriously wrong.
PobTheCad
Profile Blog Joined July 2006
Australia893 Posts
June 01 2010 10:47 GMT
#1865
just wondering when did blizzard get a hard on for the whole battle.net account structure , linking games to a specific bnet account?

i remember it being after activision took over
Once again back is the incredible!
y8ycgl
Profile Joined May 2010
United States1 Post
June 01 2010 10:51 GMT
#1866
dont forget guys that they also took away numbers in names.
Adun Toridas
Daxten
Profile Joined October 2009
Germany127 Posts
June 01 2010 11:28 GMT
#1867
On June 01 2010 17:22 Paramore wrote:
I sincerely hope that they implement the ability to be a part of multiple groups (not clans) so that u could join say... a tournament group that sort of works like a clan.. with moderators instead of clan leaders.. so that u could coordinate effectively... etc.. if they implemented that i wouldn't care about whether chat channels existed or not... cause then u could have any type of group you wanted (like chat channel) but who could join the group could be moderated.. (no spam or randoms)

might sound sort of elitist.. but i'm sure if they implemented that there could also be "general" groups that have moderation but at the same time allow randoms to join..

I think that is exactly how it will work.. I actualy dont understand all the rage around here..
DiTH
Profile Joined March 2010
Greece116 Posts
Last Edited: 2010-06-01 12:43:38
June 01 2010 12:42 GMT
#1868
On June 01 2010 20:28 Daxten wrote:
Show nested quote +
On June 01 2010 17:22 Paramore wrote:
I sincerely hope that they implement the ability to be a part of multiple groups (not clans) so that u could join say... a tournament group that sort of works like a clan.. with moderators instead of clan leaders.. so that u could coordinate effectively... etc.. if they implemented that i wouldn't care about whether chat channels existed or not... cause then u could have any type of group you wanted (like chat channel) but who could join the group could be moderated.. (no spam or randoms)

might sound sort of elitist.. but i'm sure if they implemented that there could also be "general" groups that have moderation but at the same time allow randoms to join..

I think that is exactly how it will work.. I actualy dont understand all the rage around here..


The rage is because of this being implemented "at a later date" so actually even if it works this way for atleast the first 3 months of battle.net this wont exist in any form according to their statements.A later date may be 3 months or 6 months or at the 1st expansion.And until then you are forced to make an account on another site to have a "community like" feature that is offering actually far less than every other form of battle.net offered in the past.
Archerofaiur
Profile Joined August 2008
United States4101 Posts
Last Edited: 2010-06-01 12:44:07
June 01 2010 12:42 GMT
#1869
People argueing about hardcore vs casual gamers are missing the point. Almost everyone wants chat channels OR at the very least sees nothing wrong with them. WOW the most casual Blizzard game on the planet has chat channels. The BNET forums are raging about no chat rooms. It is not that Blizzard is catering to the casual gamer. I suspect that many are falling back to that old arguement because its been used so much on this site before :p



But that is not the reason. The reason is money.


We are subject to risks associated with the collaborative online features in our games, such as World of Warcraft 's online chat feature, which allows consumers to post narrative comment, in real time, that is visible to other players. Despite our efforts to restrict inappropriate consumer content, from time to time objectionable and offensive consumer content may be posted to a World of Warcraft gaming site or the sites of other games or game services, such as Battle.net, with online chat features or game forums which allow consumers to post comments. We may be subject to lawsuits, governmental regulation or restrictions, and consumer backlash (including decreased sales and harmed reputation), as a result of consumers posting offensive content, any of which could harm our operating results.

http://investor.activision.com/secfiling.cfm?filingID=1047469-10-1649
http://sclegacy.com/news/28-scl/250-starcraftlegacy-macro-theorycrafting-contest-winners
KameZerg
Profile Blog Joined May 2007
Sweden1767 Posts
Last Edited: 2010-06-01 12:50:28
June 01 2010 12:49 GMT
#1870
We can get LAN support and CR play if we want to, all we have to do is not buy the game. And i swear to god that it would most definantly work
asdasdasdasdasd123123123
myopia
Profile Blog Joined June 2009
United States2928 Posts
June 01 2010 12:56 GMT
#1871
I like Bashiok
it's my first day
RaGe
Profile Blog Joined July 2004
Belgium9947 Posts
June 01 2010 13:03 GMT
#1872
On June 01 2010 21:42 Archerofaiur wrote:
People argueing about hardcore vs casual gamers are missing the point. Almost everyone wants chat channels OR at the very least sees nothing wrong with them. WOW the most casual Blizzard game on the planet has chat channels. The BNET forums are raging about no chat rooms. It is not that Blizzard is catering to the casual gamer. I suspect that many are falling back to that old arguement because its been used so much on this site before :p



But that is not the reason. The reason is money.


Show nested quote +
We are subject to risks associated with the collaborative online features in our games, such as World of Warcraft 's online chat feature, which allows consumers to post narrative comment, in real time, that is visible to other players. Despite our efforts to restrict inappropriate consumer content, from time to time objectionable and offensive consumer content may be posted to a World of Warcraft gaming site or the sites of other games or game services, such as Battle.net, with online chat features or game forums which allow consumers to post comments. We may be subject to lawsuits, governmental regulation or restrictions, and consumer backlash (including decreased sales and harmed reputation), as a result of consumers posting offensive content, any of which could harm our operating results.

http://investor.activision.com/secfiling.cfm?filingID=1047469-10-1649


lol, any lawsuit based on that would be won by Blizzard easily. ISPs, Server hosters, and forum hosters are all not responsible for the non endorsed content of their service. Otherwise some random dude could post something on TL and we would be responsible for it. Same goes for Battle.net. It would be an easy win.
Moderatorsometimes I get intimidated by the size of my right testicle
zealing
Profile Blog Joined January 2009
Canada806 Posts
June 01 2010 13:06 GMT
#1873
well im quiting sc2 now. later.
Think you got lag? It took Jesus 3 days to respawn.
Archerofaiur
Profile Joined August 2008
United States4101 Posts
June 01 2010 13:17 GMT
#1874
On June 01 2010 22:03 RaGe wrote:
Show nested quote +
On June 01 2010 21:42 Archerofaiur wrote:
People argueing about hardcore vs casual gamers are missing the point. Almost everyone wants chat channels OR at the very least sees nothing wrong with them. WOW the most casual Blizzard game on the planet has chat channels. The BNET forums are raging about no chat rooms. It is not that Blizzard is catering to the casual gamer. I suspect that many are falling back to that old arguement because its been used so much on this site before :p



But that is not the reason. The reason is money.


We are subject to risks associated with the collaborative online features in our games, such as World of Warcraft 's online chat feature, which allows consumers to post narrative comment, in real time, that is visible to other players. Despite our efforts to restrict inappropriate consumer content, from time to time objectionable and offensive consumer content may be posted to a World of Warcraft gaming site or the sites of other games or game services, such as Battle.net, with online chat features or game forums which allow consumers to post comments. We may be subject to lawsuits, governmental regulation or restrictions, and consumer backlash (including decreased sales and harmed reputation), as a result of consumers posting offensive content, any of which could harm our operating results.

http://investor.activision.com/secfiling.cfm?filingID=1047469-10-1649


lol, any lawsuit based on that would be won by Blizzard easily. ISPs, Server hosters, and forum hosters are all not responsible for the non endorsed content of their service. Otherwise some random dude could post something on TL and we would be responsible for it. Same goes for Battle.net. It would be an easy win.



Lets look at the facts

Fact 1: Activision views chat features as a significant investment risk factor.

Fact 2: Starcraft 2 will not feature chat channels.

Fact 3: At some point in the future chat rooms devoted to specific subjects may be implemented.
http://sclegacy.com/news/28-scl/250-starcraftlegacy-macro-theorycrafting-contest-winners
Takkara
Profile Blog Joined April 2010
United States2503 Posts
June 01 2010 14:01 GMT
#1875
On June 01 2010 22:17 Archerofaiur wrote:
Show nested quote +
On June 01 2010 22:03 RaGe wrote:
On June 01 2010 21:42 Archerofaiur wrote:
People argueing about hardcore vs casual gamers are missing the point. Almost everyone wants chat channels OR at the very least sees nothing wrong with them. WOW the most casual Blizzard game on the planet has chat channels. The BNET forums are raging about no chat rooms. It is not that Blizzard is catering to the casual gamer. I suspect that many are falling back to that old arguement because its been used so much on this site before :p



But that is not the reason. The reason is money.


We are subject to risks associated with the collaborative online features in our games, such as World of Warcraft 's online chat feature, which allows consumers to post narrative comment, in real time, that is visible to other players. Despite our efforts to restrict inappropriate consumer content, from time to time objectionable and offensive consumer content may be posted to a World of Warcraft gaming site or the sites of other games or game services, such as Battle.net, with online chat features or game forums which allow consumers to post comments. We may be subject to lawsuits, governmental regulation or restrictions, and consumer backlash (including decreased sales and harmed reputation), as a result of consumers posting offensive content, any of which could harm our operating results.

http://investor.activision.com/secfiling.cfm?filingID=1047469-10-1649


lol, any lawsuit based on that would be won by Blizzard easily. ISPs, Server hosters, and forum hosters are all not responsible for the non endorsed content of their service. Otherwise some random dude could post something on TL and we would be responsible for it. Same goes for Battle.net. It would be an easy win.



Lets look at the facts

Fact 1: Activision views chat features as a significant investment risk factor.

Fact 2: Starcraft 2 will not feature chat channels.

Fact 3: At some point in the future chat rooms devoted to specific subjects may be implemented.


Which is half of what I was saying 2-3 pages ago that people were flipping out about. A lot of people here that work in mid-to-large companies know far too well about Risk Management. For better or worse it's the mantra that a lot of firms use in their development. All things being equal, it would take a lot of resources to mitigate the potential risks of public chat channels.

All things are not equal in this case, and it's really important for there to be chat channels, but it's a non-trivial add in this case.
Gee gee gee gee baby baby baby
Archerofaiur
Profile Joined August 2008
United States4101 Posts
June 01 2010 14:08 GMT
#1876
On June 01 2010 23:01 Takkara wrote:
Show nested quote +
On June 01 2010 22:17 Archerofaiur wrote:
On June 01 2010 22:03 RaGe wrote:
On June 01 2010 21:42 Archerofaiur wrote:
People argueing about hardcore vs casual gamers are missing the point. Almost everyone wants chat channels OR at the very least sees nothing wrong with them. WOW the most casual Blizzard game on the planet has chat channels. The BNET forums are raging about no chat rooms. It is not that Blizzard is catering to the casual gamer. I suspect that many are falling back to that old arguement because its been used so much on this site before :p



But that is not the reason. The reason is money.


We are subject to risks associated with the collaborative online features in our games, such as World of Warcraft 's online chat feature, which allows consumers to post narrative comment, in real time, that is visible to other players. Despite our efforts to restrict inappropriate consumer content, from time to time objectionable and offensive consumer content may be posted to a World of Warcraft gaming site or the sites of other games or game services, such as Battle.net, with online chat features or game forums which allow consumers to post comments. We may be subject to lawsuits, governmental regulation or restrictions, and consumer backlash (including decreased sales and harmed reputation), as a result of consumers posting offensive content, any of which could harm our operating results.

http://investor.activision.com/secfiling.cfm?filingID=1047469-10-1649


lol, any lawsuit based on that would be won by Blizzard easily. ISPs, Server hosters, and forum hosters are all not responsible for the non endorsed content of their service. Otherwise some random dude could post something on TL and we would be responsible for it. Same goes for Battle.net. It would be an easy win.



Lets look at the facts

Fact 1: Activision views chat features as a significant investment risk factor.

Fact 2: Starcraft 2 will not feature chat channels.

Fact 3: At some point in the future chat rooms devoted to specific subjects may be implemented.


Which is half of what I was saying 2-3 pages ago that people were flipping out about. A lot of people here that work in mid-to-large companies know far too well about Risk Management. For better or worse it's the mantra that a lot of firms use in their development. All things being equal, it would take a lot of resources to mitigate the potential risks of public chat channels.

All things are not equal in this case, and it's really important for there to be chat channels, but it's a non-trivial add in this case.



Can't you just see some investor taking off his glasses and saying "Now Bob Ive been taking a look at our investment risk analysis and do you know what I think could drastically improve investor confidence...."
http://sclegacy.com/news/28-scl/250-starcraftlegacy-macro-theorycrafting-contest-winners
Angryhorse
Profile Joined January 2010
Sweden387 Posts
June 01 2010 14:19 GMT
#1877
Well I'm not gonna buy Starcraft 2 now atleast.
Don't cry blood, the world doesn't revolve around you
L
Profile Blog Joined January 2008
Canada4732 Posts
June 01 2010 14:44 GMT
#1878
On June 01 2010 23:01 Takkara wrote:
Show nested quote +
On June 01 2010 22:17 Archerofaiur wrote:
On June 01 2010 22:03 RaGe wrote:
On June 01 2010 21:42 Archerofaiur wrote:
People argueing about hardcore vs casual gamers are missing the point. Almost everyone wants chat channels OR at the very least sees nothing wrong with them. WOW the most casual Blizzard game on the planet has chat channels. The BNET forums are raging about no chat rooms. It is not that Blizzard is catering to the casual gamer. I suspect that many are falling back to that old arguement because its been used so much on this site before :p



But that is not the reason. The reason is money.


We are subject to risks associated with the collaborative online features in our games, such as World of Warcraft 's online chat feature, which allows consumers to post narrative comment, in real time, that is visible to other players. Despite our efforts to restrict inappropriate consumer content, from time to time objectionable and offensive consumer content may be posted to a World of Warcraft gaming site or the sites of other games or game services, such as Battle.net, with online chat features or game forums which allow consumers to post comments. We may be subject to lawsuits, governmental regulation or restrictions, and consumer backlash (including decreased sales and harmed reputation), as a result of consumers posting offensive content, any of which could harm our operating results.

http://investor.activision.com/secfiling.cfm?filingID=1047469-10-1649


lol, any lawsuit based on that would be won by Blizzard easily. ISPs, Server hosters, and forum hosters are all not responsible for the non endorsed content of their service. Otherwise some random dude could post something on TL and we would be responsible for it. Same goes for Battle.net. It would be an easy win.



Lets look at the facts

Fact 1: Activision views chat features as a significant investment risk factor.

Fact 2: Starcraft 2 will not feature chat channels.

Fact 3: At some point in the future chat rooms devoted to specific subjects may be implemented.


Which is half of what I was saying 2-3 pages ago that people were flipping out about. A lot of people here that work in mid-to-large companies know far too well about Risk Management. For better or worse it's the mantra that a lot of firms use in their development. All things being equal, it would take a lot of resources to mitigate the potential risks of public chat channels.

All things are not equal in this case, and it's really important for there to be chat channels, but it's a non-trivial add in this case.

It wouldn't take "a lot of resources to mitigate the potential risks of public chat channels". It would take a single splash screen that says "ERSB RATING MAY NOT APPLY TO ONLINE PLAY" and bam, you're done.
The number you have dialed is out of porkchops.
DTWolfwood
Profile Joined May 2010
38 Posts
June 01 2010 14:45 GMT
#1879
i have to admit, i am finding myself a lot lonelier in SC2 than i did in SC.

Guess you don't know what your missing till you lose it
No its not Dark Templar
Archerofaiur
Profile Joined August 2008
United States4101 Posts
Last Edited: 2010-06-01 15:50:17
June 01 2010 15:48 GMT
#1880
From the recent SCL iNcontroL interview

iNcontroL:
I think that where the ladder fails, and I use that word in its literal sense, meaning I think it will be a complete failure if it remains the same, is with channels. I think the current system that we see with Battle.net is extremely lonely. It's very hard to socialize. It makes the game feels very void of anything. You know the only thing that keeps me going through it is that I've sit on Ventrilo with my team and we joke around and talk all day. But if i didn't have that, I don't know if I would be able to enjoy multiple hours on Battle.net 2 where it seems like you're alone. And you play these games against people that you know, don't necessarily care for you and every once in a while you hit a friend, but even that's very rare.


http://sclegacy.com/interviews/12-esports/714-scl-interviews-incontrol



When famous pro gamers feel lonely on Battlenet you know you have a problem
http://sclegacy.com/news/28-scl/250-starcraftlegacy-macro-theorycrafting-contest-winners
Prev 1 92 93 94 95 96 116 Next
Please log in or register to reply.
Live Events Refresh
PSISTORM Gaming Misc
16:05
FSL Archon Mode Competition
Freeedom10
Liquipedia
BSL Open LAN 2025 - War…
08:00
Day 1 - Group Stages
ZZZero.O216
LiquipediaDiscussion
[ Submit Event ]
Live Streams
Refresh
StarCraft 2
JuggernautJason123
MindelVK 96
Codebar 69
StarCraft: Brood War
Britney 28389
Calm 3162
Rain 2608
firebathero 284
ZZZero.O 216
Dewaltoss 59
ivOry 57
soO 48
Rock 39
ajuk12(nOOB) 22
[ Show more ]
Hm[arnc] 16
Stormgate
BeoMulf65
Dota 2
qojqva4140
singsing3482
Dendi1518
Fuzer 242
Counter-Strike
fl0m762
ScreaM679
Fnx 86
Heroes of the Storm
Khaldor246
Other Games
tarik_tv26871
gofns25987
FrodaN2482
Grubby2250
KnowMe341
Hui .203
ToD118
XaKoH 108
Trikslyr71
TKL 57
NeuroSwarm39
Organizations
Other Games
EGCTV1244
gamesdonequick539
StarCraft 2
angryscii 27
Blizzard YouTube
StarCraft: Brood War
BSLTrovo
sctven
[ Show 20 non-featured ]
StarCraft 2
• printf 48
• Adnapsc2 12
• intothetv
• Kozan
• sooper7s
• AfreecaTV YouTube
• Migwel
• LaughNgamezSOOP
• IndyKCrew
StarCraft: Brood War
• Airneanach27
• FirePhoenix18
• STPLYoutube
• ZZZeroYoutube
• BSLYoutube
Dota 2
• C_a_k_e 4284
• masondota2141
League of Legends
• Nemesis2832
Other Games
• imaqtpie387
• WagamamaTV253
• Shiphtur234
Upcoming Events
OSC
3h 17m
BSL Open LAN 2025 - War…
14h 17m
RSL Revival
16h 17m
Classic vs TBD
WardiTV Invitational
17h 17m
Online Event
22h 17m
Wardi Open
1d 17h
Monday Night Weeklies
1d 22h
Sparkling Tuna Cup
2 days
LiuLi Cup
3 days
The PondCast
4 days
[ Show More ]
CranKy Ducklings
5 days
Maestros of the Game
6 days
Clem vs Reynor
Liquipedia Results

Completed

Proleague 2025-09-10
Chzzk MurlocKing SC1 vs SC2 Cup #2
HCC Europe

Ongoing

BSL 20 Team Wars
KCM Race Survival 2025 Season 3
BSL 21 Points
ASL Season 20
CSL 2025 AUTUMN (S18)
LASL Season 20
2025 Chongqing Offline CUP
BSL World Championship of Poland 2025
RSL Revival: Season 2
Maestros of the Game
StarSeries Fall 2025
FISSURE Playground #2
BLAST Open Fall 2025
BLAST Open Fall Qual
Esports World Cup 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall Qual
IEM Cologne 2025
FISSURE Playground #1

Upcoming

IPSL Winter 2025-26
BSL Season 21
SC4ALL: Brood War
BSL 21 Team A
Stellar Fest
SC4ALL: StarCraft II
EC S1
ESL Impact League Season 8
SL Budapest Major 2025
BLAST Rivals Fall 2025
IEM Chengdu 2025
PGL Masters Bucharest 2025
Thunderpick World Champ.
CS Asia Championships 2025
ESL Pro League S22
TLPD

1. ByuN
2. TY
3. Dark
4. Solar
5. Stats
6. Nerchio
7. sOs
8. soO
9. INnoVation
10. Elazer
1. Rain
2. Flash
3. EffOrt
4. Last
5. Bisu
6. Soulkey
7. Mini
8. Sharp
Sidebar Settings...

Advertising | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use | Contact Us

Original banner artwork: Jim Warren
The contents of this webpage are copyright © 2025 TLnet. All Rights Reserved.