|
This thread is to give you information on how it can be possible to create an ICCup-like ladder system in SC2.
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/x18MV.jpg)
remember?
But wait... why would we want a customladder?
>To implent community maps
>We don't have the annoyingness of the bonus pool bothering us
The idea behind this is to use SC2Banks to communicate between SC2 and an external program (and a server).
Maps can store information in .SC2Bank files, likely located in (C\User\Username\Documents\StarcraftII\Accounts\AccNr\AccNrAgain\Banks\OneOfThoseFolders). An expamle for this is Marine Arena, it stores stats like total kills and games played in a bank and display it ingame on the leaderboard.
This is how a hypothetical customladder could work:
>Registers at some site and download a program.
>Use your login information to access the program. It will create a SC2Bank file with your Nickname stored in it (one file for each map in the pool).
>The program also shows your current rank and stats.
>Now you're ready to go. Go to the join custom game menu in SC2 and set the filter to "Tug of War" (This is because there are very few Tug of War overall games so the customladder maps wont be burried).
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/Ul40d.jpg)
The Tug of War section is a wasteland
>Join a map according to your rank. Expample: "Metalopolis - Custom ladder rank D".
>Depending on the outcome of the game the map will save something along the lines of <ID Joe123 wins against ID Adam456> in the SC2Bank file.
>The program notices when the game is finished, reads out the result of the game from the SC2Bank and sends it to the server where your stats and your rank will be updated accordingly and send back to the program.
Problems with this method:
>Obviously won't work if both parties don't have the program running, but this can be easily detected so that you can leave the current game and join anotherone without ruining your stats.
>Cheating: SC2Banks can be edited with notepad to fake results. This too can be prevented. The easiest method would be to let the map create a hash file for the result and let the server validate it. This can be done with STARCODE (1)
This is how far i got on my own:
(Note that this is NOT an already working customladder, its just a basic attempt)
Created a map: "Metalopolis - Custom Ladder" (EU), it can be found by putting the filter on 'Tug of War'. It's unlocked so you can freely steal code.
Filefront link:
http://www.filefront.com/17745285/Metalopolis-test-backup.SC2Map/
Difference between this map and normal Metalopolis:
>The stuff i did in the triggers
>Changed some stuff arround in Map>Game Variants
>You can only spawn cross or close-air position
Created a program (with my shitty pascal programming skillz) to perform simple tasks with the SC2Bank.
Filefront link:
http://www.filefront.com/17745468/customladder.exe
Link of the Source:
http://www.filefront.com/17745477/reader.zip
Code:
+ Show Spoiler +unit Unit1;
{$mode objfpc}{$H+}
interface
uses
Classes, SysUtils, FileUtil, LResources, Forms, Controls, Graphics, Dialogs,
ExtCtrls, StdCtrls, Menus;
type
{ TBcopyresults }
TBcopyresults = class(TForm)
bcopyresults: TButton;
bnewid: TButton;
Edit1: TEdit;
procedure bcopyresultsClick(Sender: TObject);
procedure bnewidClick(Sender: TObject);
procedure FormCreate(Sender: TObject);
private
{ private declarations }
public
{ public declarations }
end;
var
Bcopyresults: TBcopyresults;
implementation
{ TBcopyresults }
procedure TBcopyresults.bcopyresultsClick(Sender: TObject);
var f,g,q:textfile; store:array[1..100] of string ; s,text1:string; u,i:integer;
begin
assignfile(f,'.\info.SC2Bank');
assignfile(g,'results.txt');
assignfile(q,'importantpartofresults.txt');
Reset(f);
i:=1;
while not eof(f) do begin
Readln(f,store[i]);
text1:=text1+store;
i:=i+1;
end;
edit1.text:=text1;
rewrite(g);
for u:=1 to i-1 do begin
write(g,store[u]);
writeln(g);
end;
rewrite(q);
write(q,store[5]);
writeln(q);
write(q,store[10]);
closefile(q);
closefile(g);
closefile(f);
end;
procedure TBcopyresults.bnewidClick(Sender: TObject);
var f:textfile; r:integer;
begin
r:=random(9999);
assignfile(f,'info.SC2Bank');
Rewrite(f);
write(f,'<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>');
writeln(f);
write(f,'<Bank version="1">');
writeln(f);
write(f,' <Section name="ID">');
writeln(f);
write(f,' <Key name="of player">');
writeln(f);
write(f,' <Value string="'+inttostr(r)+'78917"/>');
writeln(f);
write(f,' </Key>');
writeln(f);
write(f,' </Section>');
writeln(f);
write(f,'</Bank>');
closefile(f);
end;
procedure TBcopyresults.FormCreate(Sender: TObject);
begin
randomize;
end;
initialization
{$I unit1.lrs}
end.
How it works:
Run the map one time on Bnet against an AI.
Go to the banks directory and search for the folder with the bank "Thisbankhelpsyoufindthefolder.SC2Bank" in it.
Copy the program in it. Run it. Click "Create new ID". A Bank file with a random ID is created.
Play the map again. If you play against an AI the warning "This game is not ranked" will appear (ignore it). When you win the result will be saved in the Bank. Click "Copy result" in the program. 2 Textfiles will be created. One contains a replica of the content of info.SC2Bank, the other one only the result and a low security hash line.
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/4YtbU.png)
[i]The content of your bank folder should now look like this
Hopefully someone (who knows more than pascal lol) will pick up on the idea and can make something useful happen.
(1): STARCODE can be found here:
http://forums.sc2mapster.com/resources/trigger-libraries/5091-library-starcode-v1-4/
Credits go to the mapster guys
Edit #1:
Feel free to post this on the US Blizzard forums (the EU ones are abandoned afaik) or somewhere else Blizzard will notice it, but i don't think they'll have a problem with it since there is 0 code injection happening.
You could basically construct the whole thing in a way that the program would just copy the SC2Bank and then screw arround in the copy and doesn't change a thing in the SC2 directory.
Example:
At the end of the match the result is saved in the SC2Bank. This will increase it's size. The program notices that and copys the bank. When you start a new map the previous results will be deleted from the bank during the Melee initialization process.
Thats the equivalent of you copying a Replay to your desktop, opening it with notepad and screwing arround in it and then never let it get in contact with SC2 again.
And:
On January 04 2011 06:59 dementrio wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2011 06:40 Keitzer wrote:
you wouldn't need 100 of each map... just 1. 1 that connected with the server and added or subtracted based on the results and who was playing against who.
and no i've never heard of wgt. looking it up now. the point of a ladder would be that players are ranked and you play people who are around your skill level. you can't do that with how the custom game lobby works; you have to create and invite people, or play whoever decides to join the map otherwise. a bot that hears you saying "i want to play" and answers "random guy around your level is waiting for a game" would help. One that creates games itself and invites players would be better but if the chat channels work under some known protocol a channel bot would be much easier to script.
I had also thought about a chatlobby based ladder first. The system could work similar to the one i posted only that there is just 1 version of the map floating arround instead of one for each rank and people arrange games in the appropriate channels. Much like here:
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/cmr5Z.jpg)
Edit #2:
Contacted ICCup.diamond and the Blizzard copyright department (since they don't seem to have a department for Third Party software).
Edit #3:
No response from Blizzard yet (8 days after i wrote them).
+
On January 12 2011 13:25 Lakai wrote:
A good point of reference for the client would be ESEA. You might even be able to try contacting lpkane and get a hold of the dev team behind ESEA if you are so inclined.
I've thought a bit about this and everything besides the editable sc2banks(which are just xml files which is awesome) seems good.
I'd like to clean up your ideas and add some of mine:
- Customs maps with a simple trigger to create a temporary sc2bank which stores the winner (I did this in 30 seconds without ever using the sc2editor)
- Client that would let you see the online players and their respective custom ladder ranking
- For now you would probably use the client to find the player/id and contact them through bnet
- Set up match in the client by entering the opponents name.
- The client sends the match request to the server and then to the opponents client
- Opponent accepts request and the match is ready.
- Create the custom game on the custom map and play.
- Once done both users click finish on the client
- The client then opens the tempBank.sc2bank and parses the XML, encrypts it and sends the results to the server and deletes the temp bank. There could be a 15 minute period to click finish until the server nullifies the match. Once the server receives both results and if they match up we are done.
- If they don't match the match would be marked as 'invalid' and would require the winner to upload a replay on the site and have an admin confirm the win.
This seems legit and as far as the editable banks go we have replays for confirmation and it's very easy to ban abusers. Just a minor annoying for the admins.
Here what my 30 seconds sc2bank looked like:
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<Bank version="1">
<Section name="gameData">
<Key name="winner">
<Value int="2"/>
</Key>
</Section>
</Bank>
|
is this even possible with B.Net 2.0? I was under the impression that not only is the system meant for things like iCCup on BW not to work but that it's also agaisnt the terms of use?
|
YEAH!
This is what im talking about, what a great idea.
I'm in full support of this
|
United States5162 Posts
Blizzard will never allow this until they stop caring about SC2 like they did Broodwar.
|
On January 04 2011 04:52 PlaGuE_R wrote:
is this even possible with B.Net 2.0? I was under the impression that not only is the system meant for things like iCCup on BW not to work but that it's also agaisnt the terms of use?
There is no such thing as an unhackable system.
Yes it is against terms of use, but so was iCCup bw ladder.. Blizzard just didn't care.
This kind of thing will only work then blizzard have given up on sc2 (might take a while). I suggest you discuss this in a darker place of the internetz.
Until then, row row fight the power for a better map pool (and real chat channels  )
|
The people that would use it would be people who want to play different maps against players they dont know. I would definitely play there, but I dont know if there are enough people wanting to play. It is worth a try, but I cannot help you there.
|
What prevents someone from editing the file and regenerating a new hash?
|
On January 04 2011 05:02 Bey wrote:
What prevents someone from editing the file and regenerating a new hash?
Encrypting the files really isn't the main issue to overcome. Anti-cheat is the last thing to implement imho.
|
Why will blizzard not allow this? You still will not be able to play on a custom ladder made this way without buying a starcraft 2 key so blizzard won't lose money. The problem was that players could play BW for free on servers like iccup.
|
hmm...
very interesting...
idk if blizzard will let this fly although your method is basically the same way custom maps work now that interact with another server that just has rankings (whether they're related to Starcraft or not, it's just Letters / Numbers)
hmm.... it might work.
|
ya, cuz with iCCup, you could illegally download SC:BW, then DL the iCCup client and never have to pay a cent, yet you play with the pros.. with this you still ahve the buy the full game (at a whopping $60 still)
|
On January 04 2011 05:00 Ludwigvan wrote:
The people that would use it would be people who want to play different maps against players they dont know.
Or Pirates, which is why Blizzard may release the lawyers, I would trade carefully if I was the code monkey who did this. Our blue friends don't have the most merciful attitude when it comes to things like that, for example, look at WoW.
It would truly be wise to wait for Blizz to loose interest, if that happens.
But good work to the creator of this, we truly need it.
|
1v1 play/obs python.... good times..
|
On January 04 2011 05:06 sqrt wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2011 05:00 Ludwigvan wrote:
The people that would use it would be people who want to play different maps against players they dont know. Or Pirates, which is why Blizzard may release the lawyers, I would trade carefully if I was the code monkey who did this. Our blue friends don't have the most merciful attitude when it comes to things like that, for example, look at WoW. It would truly be wise to wait for Blizz to loose interest, if that happens. But good work to the creator of this, we truly need it.
pirates? what?
no, you'd still have to buy the full game, because it would use the same system the Custom maps have now, just that after the game is over, it sends data to another server, which keeps a separate rating, that's it.
aka, you can't pirate and win.
|
Canada13387 Posts
This is how a hypothetical customladder could work:
>Registers at some site and download a program.
>Use your login information to access the program. It will create a SC2Bank file with your Nickname stored in it (one file for each map in the pool).
>The program also shows your current rank and stats.
>Now you're ready to go. Go to the join custom game menu in SC2 and set the filter to "Tug of War" (This is because there are very few Tug of War overall games so the customladder maps wont be burried).
My only problemwith this is I sign into a program I downloaded off the internet with my Bnet identifier and password to make a file on my computer ... and IDK where this program came from and who wrote it but it needs internet access to rank me on a non blizzard ladder. Now I dont have a problem with this in the future if it was safe and reliable but right now IDK if I could trust it since I like my account and dont want to lose it.
|
well thats what the crazy play testers do, they see if it's a reliable program... although $60 per account is kind of a big deal if you were to lose that information.
then again, the only reason someone would want to steal your account is if you had a WoW account attached which they could sell the characters, but even then they wouldn't know unless they signed in......
which in my case required an authenticator and i heard it's quite difficult to remove, so i might be OK with that.
|
I'm not even sure this is against the T&C.
It's just custom maps and a program to analyse the results. No client mod, no piracy involved. This is a great idea, it's nice to see this is technicaly possible.
|
This is against the terms of usage. Blizzard has explained this very clearly since before the beta I believe. If you've actually found a loophole here, then I'm all for it though!
|
this is a brilliant idea!
seriously it has huge potential... just be aware that everything depends on the map pool.
make it awesome!
|
I fully support this, the community mapmakers aren't getting enough credit with the current system, this is a great way to increase the use of custom maps while still being somewhat competitive.
|
On January 04 2011 05:31 prodiG wrote:
This is against the terms of usage. Blizzard has explained this very clearly since before the beta I believe. If you've actually found a loophole here, then I'm all for it though!
and how is it against the usage... i'm not saying you're wrong, just that i don't think that using THEIR custom map settings (and editor to make SC2Bank files) is against the ToS....
the only *maybe* sketchy part is the server that keeps the "data"... but even then it's just numbers/letters/other stuff that isn't SC2 specific, it could be CS data for all they know (ofc it's going to be Starcraft, but doesn't HAVE to be Starcraft).
|
i would love to help work on this if people actually want to use this. I can imagine it would work great with iccup maps etc. Can you actually do file operations from sc2 map?
|
If you can hide build orders from the bnet system that would be exceptionally useful and be a more enticing option.
I would enjoy playing on new maps. Blizzard maps are kinda garbage and while I'm not pro, I'm good enough that it does still effect me in 1v1s. Think most people feel that way
|
On January 04 2011 05:38 Stiver wrote:
If you can hide build orders from the bnet system that would be exceptionally useful and be a more enticing option.
I would enjoy playing on new maps. Blizzard maps are kinda garbage and while I'm not pro, I'm good enough that it does still effect me in 1v1s. Think most people feel that way
there is a way to hide build orders.. someone posted about it here:
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=153120
|
There is nothing wrong with this as long as the ladder gets a http://eu.battle.net/sc2/en/forum/topic/283442813 license if it's going to be handing out prices as far as I can tell.
You can start a ladder on a website and just do everything manually (report games, verify through replays etc.). This is just a kind of smart way to automate things.
Indeed kind of cool.
|
wow i all ways thought that there would be no real way to do this, but you outline a very clever solution i would really hope to see this get worked out in some way or blizzard start churning out some good and balanced maps
|
why would the external program need the bnet credentials?
and, to "convert" existing maps to work with such a system you would need their source, right? I think e.g. iccup maps are closed source.
|
I think Blizzard did mention that they are considering custom ladder support sometime in the future, possibly for HoTS or LotV or later.
Until then, I guess the only alternatives are these work-arounds or cryogenically freezing yourself for ten years.
|
I think this would be a great idea, I hope Iccup picks this up and does something with it.
|
I'm not sure this would be again the terms of use.
It's just basically using banks like any other map does, except that a third party programs sends them to a separate server, but, unlike a hack or whatever, this program has no interaction with the game itself, only with the SC2 bank files.
And I'm not sure Blizzard would mind anyone manipulating banks.
According to its charts, Blizzard seems to define hacks (ie. bannable third party software) as software that either
- Grants you access to information that is not available.
- Changes a particular in-game mechanic.
- That interacts with the game's files.
- That alters or manipulates data that is being transmitted between the client and the server.
Whether bank files are deemed game files or not is indeed a question. Though, I assume they wouldn't be considered as such, or replays and w/e would do so too.
At least, that's how I understood it.
|
with the upcoming chat channels will it be possible to connect to the channels using a client other than starcraft (one that would allow a bot to be scripted)?
|
Interesting work around. Id give it a try if someone could get it to work. Id definitely be for it if the iccup guys were able to figure it out and get their maps on it.
|
On January 04 2011 05:47 dementrio wrote:
with the upcoming chat channels will it be possible to connect to the channels using a client other than starcraft (one that would allow a bot to be scripted)?
what does that have to do with a custom ladder?
|
I think you'd be more successful trying to get iccup maps on the ladder
|
On January 04 2011 06:00 Playguuu wrote:
I think you'd be more successful trying to get iccup maps on the ladder
this, plz use iccup maps
|
On January 04 2011 06:00 Playguuu wrote:
I think you'd be more successful trying to get iccup maps on the ladder
Blizz official stance is they dont care about maps, and would prefer the community deal with it. Evidence: stale map pool since release, with maps with obvious positional advantages and some which are just straight up imbalanced. If Blizzard isnt going to do simple things like fix crap station, how can they be expected to keep a map pool fresh, balanced, and worthy of competitive play?
I think some sort of solution like this will at least work as a testing facility for maps: if lots of people start to use a ladder such as this with good maps, blizz will have more incentive to import fresh maps in order to attract people back to their ladder.
|
If someone can prove to me that Blizzard is fine with this sort of thing, I am willing to consider it.
|
Yeah, you should probably contact iccup and present your idea to them, to get an iccup map ladder, and then contact blizzard and ask them if your ladder method is ok by their terms.
|
Blizzard will never ever allow this before 2020.
|
On January 04 2011 06:08 prodiG wrote:
If someone can prove to me that Blizzard is fine with this sort of thing, I am willing to consider it.
see, prodiG, that's where i'd love to come in and show you a full transcript of blizzard's words, but i just don't have that...
i know that it seems oh see legit, but at the same time oh so sketchy.
|
imo, the OP should contact Blizzard and see what's up.. or maybe prodiG, since hey, everyone who keeps asking to contact iCCup, he's part of iCCup....
|
|
|
On January 04 2011 06:10 Keitzer wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2011 06:08 prodiG wrote:
If someone can prove to me that Blizzard is fine with this sort of thing, I am willing to consider it. see, prodiG, that's where i'd love to come in and show you a full transcript of blizzard's words, but i just don't have that... i know that it seems oh see legit, but at the same time oh so sketchy.
When I say proof I mean reaching out to blizzard and asking them if that sort of thing is okay. I might actually just do it myself 8)
|
On January 04 2011 06:12 prodiG wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2011 06:10 Keitzer wrote:On January 04 2011 06:08 prodiG wrote:
If someone can prove to me that Blizzard is fine with this sort of thing, I am willing to consider it. see, prodiG, that's where i'd love to come in and show you a full transcript of blizzard's words, but i just don't have that... i know that it seems oh see legit, but at the same time oh so sketchy. When I say proof I mean reaching out to blizzard and asking them if that sort of thing is okay. I might actually just do it myself 8)
yaya, i know what you mean, just that i don't think anyone has contacted them about this (since it's fairly recent post i'm not surprised)
if we really wanna hear their say, the sooner the better since so many people are getting (and will get) hyped about this whole project.
|
On January 04 2011 06:14 Keitzer wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2011 06:12 prodiG wrote:On January 04 2011 06:10 Keitzer wrote:On January 04 2011 06:08 prodiG wrote:
If someone can prove to me that Blizzard is fine with this sort of thing, I am willing to consider it. see, prodiG, that's where i'd love to come in and show you a full transcript of blizzard's words, but i just don't have that... i know that it seems oh see legit, but at the same time oh so sketchy. When I say proof I mean reaching out to blizzard and asking them if that sort of thing is okay. I might actually just do it myself 8) yaya, i know what you mean, just that i don't think anyone has contacted them about this (since it's fairly recent post i'm not surprised) if we really wanna hear their say, the sooner the better since so many people are getting (and will get) hyped about this whole project.
I can't really see why they would be against it. It's almost the same thing as having in-game leaderboards/stats that save between games, except you need a client to collect the information as it is happening across different maps. This can also easily exist within the framework of Bnet 2.0, so it's not like Blizzard is going to be losing any money. In fact, they may be making money, if word of mouth spreads and this attracts people who wouldn't want to play the Blizz ladder, but are fans of Iccup.
|
On January 04 2011 06:22 Mr. Wiggles wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2011 06:14 Keitzer wrote:On January 04 2011 06:12 prodiG wrote:On January 04 2011 06:10 Keitzer wrote:On January 04 2011 06:08 prodiG wrote:
If someone can prove to me that Blizzard is fine with this sort of thing, I am willing to consider it. see, prodiG, that's where i'd love to come in and show you a full transcript of blizzard's words, but i just don't have that... i know that it seems oh see legit, but at the same time oh so sketchy. When I say proof I mean reaching out to blizzard and asking them if that sort of thing is okay. I might actually just do it myself 8) yaya, i know what you mean, just that i don't think anyone has contacted them about this (since it's fairly recent post i'm not surprised) if we really wanna hear their say, the sooner the better since so many people are getting (and will get) hyped about this whole project. I can't really see why they would be against it. It's almost the same thing as having in-game leaderboards/stats that save between games, except you need a client to collect the information as it is happening across different maps. This can also easily exist within the framework of Bnet 2.0, so it's not like Blizzard is going to be losing any money. In fact, they may be making money, if word of mouth spreads and this attracts people who wouldn't want to play the Blizz ladder, but are fans of Iccup.
You'd be surprised how the mind of a huge ass company works... 
|
Its interesting.. and I see so much potential.. I am just not sure now is the right time to introduce this. I think the ladder is doing its purpose as of now, and blizzard will be in full support of it for a while.
|
this is so weird i was thinking of something similar to this last night while taking a shower crazy how the next day you made this post.
|
I think a chat bot would be handy for matchmaking. since the custom games section wont let you decide who you play against, and you can't really have 100 versions of every map to split up skill levels, what we are left with is having everyone spam "D+ msg me" in a chat room
|
I like the idea a lot whether or not it will come through is something else, gogo F-A rankings.
|
On January 04 2011 05:59 Keitzer wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2011 05:47 dementrio wrote:
with the upcoming chat channels will it be possible to connect to the channels using a client other than starcraft (one that would allow a bot to be scripted)? what does that have to do with a custom ladder?
ever heard of wgt?
|
On January 04 2011 06:26 dementrio wrote:
I think a chat bot would be handy for matchmaking. since the custom games section wont let you decide who you play against, and you can't really have 100 versions of every map to split up skill levels, what we are left with is having everyone spam "D+ msg me" in a chat room
you wouldn't need 100 of each map... just 1. 1 that connected with the server and added or subtracted based on the results and who was playing against who.
and no i've never heard of wgt. looking it up now.
|
I have a question about this, I realize Blizzard didn't care about iCCup for BW, what would Blizzard stand to lose should they partner with iCCup and create an iCCup ladder all official like and on the up and up?
Would it be a lost in terms of reputation (lol), rather than a financial loss?
|
On January 04 2011 06:46 echO [W] wrote:
I have a question about this, I realize Blizzard didn't care about iCCup for BW, what would Blizzard stand to lose should they partner with iCCup and create an iCCup ladder all official like and on the up and up?
Would it be a lost in terms of reputation (lol), rather than a financial loss?
It would essentially be a slap to the face for all of blizzards mapmaking and ladder designers, as well as bnet .02 in general. Basically it would be akin to them saying: "ok, we fucked up, battle.net sucks and we are completely inept, so we'll have the people who actually know what they are doing help us out."
It also gives them less control over the ladder system, and destroys their planned bnet ladder into supertournament strategy.
|
On January 04 2011 06:52 Two_DoWn wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2011 06:46 echO [W] wrote:
I have a question about this, I realize Blizzard didn't care about iCCup for BW, what would Blizzard stand to lose should they partner with iCCup and create an iCCup ladder all official like and on the up and up?
Would it be a lost in terms of reputation (lol), rather than a financial loss? It would essentially be a slap to the face for all of blizzards mapmaking and ladder designers, as well as bnet .02 in general. Basically it would be akin to them saying: "ok, we fucked up, battle.net sucks and we are completely inept, so we'll have the people who actually know what they are doing help us out." It also gives them less control over the ladder system, and destroys their planned bnet ladder into supertournament strategy.
I hope Blizzard considers Starcraft 2's HEALTHY longevity while they consider their own reputation. Say they decide to partner with iCCup, while they suffer a slap to the face now, I'm certain in 5-6 years down the line we'll look back and applaud a decision to partner with iCCup.
Lets hope they actually think long and hard about this and not just brush it off.
|
On January 04 2011 06:40 Keitzer wrote:
you wouldn't need 100 of each map... just 1. 1 that connected with the server and added or subtracted based on the results and who was playing against who.
and no i've never heard of wgt. looking it up now.
the point of a ladder would be that players are ranked and you play people who are around your skill level. you can't do that with how the custom game lobby works; you have to create and invite people, or play whoever decides to join the map otherwise. a bot that hears you saying "i want to play" and answers "random guy around your level is waiting for a game" would help.
One that creates games itself and invites players would be better but if the chat channels work under some known protocol a channel bot would be much easier to script.
|
On January 04 2011 06:57 echO [W] wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2011 06:52 Two_DoWn wrote:On January 04 2011 06:46 echO [W] wrote:
I have a question about this, I realize Blizzard didn't care about iCCup for BW, what would Blizzard stand to lose should they partner with iCCup and create an iCCup ladder all official like and on the up and up?
Would it be a lost in terms of reputation (lol), rather than a financial loss? It would essentially be a slap to the face for all of blizzards mapmaking and ladder designers, as well as bnet .02 in general. Basically it would be akin to them saying: "ok, we fucked up, battle.net sucks and we are completely inept, so we'll have the people who actually know what they are doing help us out." It also gives them less control over the ladder system, and destroys their planned bnet ladder into supertournament strategy. I hope Blizzard considers Starcraft 2's HEALTHY longevity while they consider their own reputation. Say they decide to partner with iCCup, while they suffer a slap to the face now, I'm certain in 5-6 years down the line we'll look back and applaud a decision to partner with iCCup. Lets hope they actually think long and hard about this and not just brush it off.
which might be the reason we don't hear back from them for a few days (that or they just don't feel like answering due to laziness)
|
sure i would love to join it after i get all my wanted protriats
|
Blizz wont like you, using the amazing Bnet 2.0 and not playing on its ladder, thats a big minus 50 dkp
|
this would be really cool and not only make matches more enjoyable (pick map/race) but also give a better scope on your skill. I'm sorry but diamond rankings under about 3100 its a crap shoot if the player is good or not.
A custom ladder with another A-D system would be so much fun. Also NO BLIZZARD MAPS!!
|
wouldn't this kind of mess up their statistics and such? since the ladder itself helps them alot balance-wise.
|
This can be awesome.
Since blizzard dont want to make a decent map pool ( lol steppes of war , hey ,we delete shakuras, we dont want macro games !!!11), do one by yourself.
Anyway this dont modify the game itself so i think its legal, but ask blizzard to see watsup
|
Blizzard will never allow this.
There is not a lot more to say about this subject.
|
On January 04 2011 07:19 Roggay wrote:
Blizzard will never allow this.
There is not a lot more to say about this subject.
Seems like a lot of people are saying this without any evidence. Subject is not ended until someone actually, you know, talks to someone at Blizzard. They're staffed by humans, you know.
|
we could go behind their back?
|
basically want something similar to this for my SC2BW maps
look forward to seeing how it goes
|
How would this system account for such a varried skill level? IMO matchmaking would be terrible with this system. The skill gap in "d" was way too wide on iccup. I would rather play on blizzards maps than get rolled/ roll my opponent every game. The competitive play blizzards mmr system gives outweighs any map balance qq IMO.
|
On January 04 2011 07:28 Fusionbomb wrote:
How would this system account for such a varried skill level? IMO matchmaking would be terrible with this system. The skill gap in "d" was way too wide on iccup. I would rather play on blizzards maps than get rolled/ roll my opponent every game. The competitive play blizzards mmr system gives outweighs any map balance qq IMO.
are you serious? it would compare your ELO (or whatever rating system the server hosts want to use) to your opponent, and adds or subtracts based on a win/loss.
the higher or lower the points are dependant on your rating comparison
|
as for the legallity of this software. it doesn't actually modify or hook into SC2 process? if so it's fine.
if it doesn't actually modify the sc2banks file and only reads from it. it's probably fine.
frankly im hoping this is legal because im in desperate need of something like this.
a good way of incorporating this may be something similar to an external chat client based on mIRC.
you would organise matches there and then go in game play them. client would then read the results after the game is over. this way nothing hooks into sc2.
|
On January 04 2011 07:20 Redmark wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2011 07:19 Roggay wrote:
Blizzard will never allow this.
There is not a lot more to say about this subject. Seems like a lot of people are saying this without any evidence. Subject is not ended until someone actually, you know, talks to someone at Blizzard. They're staffed by humans, you know.
Use your common sense. Sure Blizzard doesn't sell any less copies of SC2, but they lose popularity on their ladder, something they will not let happen.
|
only problem with using banks to save stats is that anyone can edit it so you have to make an algorthrim to encrypt it but it has to be a dam good algorthrim cuz this would need to be released to the public. But from experience with the editor thats isn't possible to create a good one.
therefore anyone with enough time on their hands will be able to crack the bank and edit it so that they win all the time
|
On January 04 2011 07:48 gfever wrote:
only problem with using banks to save stats is that anyone can edit it so you have to make an algorthrim to encrypt it but it has to be a dam good algorthrim cuz this would need to be released to the public. But from experience with the editor thats isn't possible to create a good one.
...
maybe if you read the OPs post.
|
Blizzard is going to do legal jujitsu and never give LAN support to anybody. Nice job...
|
On January 04 2011 07:49 MavercK wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2011 07:48 gfever wrote:
only problem with using banks to save stats is that anyone can edit it so you have to make an algorthrim to encrypt it but it has to be a dam good algorthrim cuz this would need to be released to the public. But from experience with the editor thats isn't possible to create a good one. ... maybe if you read the OPs post.
idk man, reading is tough, lolol
|
On January 04 2011 07:49 MavercK wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2011 07:48 gfever wrote:
only problem with using banks to save stats is that anyone can edit it so you have to make an algorthrim to encrypt it but it has to be a dam good algorthrim cuz this would need to be released to the public. But from experience with the editor thats isn't possible to create a good one. ... maybe if you read the OPs post.
even with hash files to protect it just delays it but it still able to crack
|
On January 04 2011 07:51 gfever wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2011 07:49 MavercK wrote:On January 04 2011 07:48 gfever wrote:
only problem with using banks to save stats is that anyone can edit it so you have to make an algorthrim to encrypt it but it has to be a dam good algorthrim cuz this would need to be released to the public. But from experience with the editor thats isn't possible to create a good one. ... maybe if you read the OPs post. even with hash files to protect it just delays it but it still able to crack
technically anything is crackable if created by humans....
|
On January 04 2011 07:51 gfever wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2011 07:49 MavercK wrote:On January 04 2011 07:48 gfever wrote:
only problem with using banks to save stats is that anyone can edit it so you have to make an algorthrim to encrypt it but it has to be a dam good algorthrim cuz this would need to be released to the public. But from experience with the editor thats isn't possible to create a good one. ... maybe if you read the OPs post. even with hash files to protect it just delays it but it still able to crack
briefly looking at starcode it seems to be able to add integers into a string and encrypt them.
isn't that what you said was needed?
|
On January 04 2011 07:52 Keitzer wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2011 07:51 gfever wrote:On January 04 2011 07:49 MavercK wrote:On January 04 2011 07:48 gfever wrote:
only problem with using banks to save stats is that anyone can edit it so you have to make an algorthrim to encrypt it but it has to be a dam good algorthrim cuz this would need to be released to the public. But from experience with the editor thats isn't possible to create a good one. ... maybe if you read the OPs post. even with hash files to protect it just delays it but it still able to crack technically anything is crackable if created by humans....
the editor doesn't give us enough tools to create a program to protect the banks well enough, i am talking about a normal person can crack this, thats how easy it is
|
On January 04 2011 07:47 holynorth wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2011 07:20 Redmark wrote:On January 04 2011 07:19 Roggay wrote:
Blizzard will never allow this.
There is not a lot more to say about this subject. Seems like a lot of people are saying this without any evidence. Subject is not ended until someone actually, you know, talks to someone at Blizzard. They're staffed by humans, you know. Use your common sense. Sure Blizzard doesn't sell any less copies of SC2, but they lose popularity on their ladder, something they will not let happen.
Huh, why would they care. They have already basically stated that tournaments and players should sort out their own maps. That's the same as saying "don't use ladder for anything other than lolz".
|
On January 04 2011 07:53 MavercK wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2011 07:52 Keitzer wrote:On January 04 2011 07:51 gfever wrote:On January 04 2011 07:49 MavercK wrote:On January 04 2011 07:48 gfever wrote:
only problem with using banks to save stats is that anyone can edit it so you have to make an algorthrim to encrypt it but it has to be a dam good algorthrim cuz this would need to be released to the public. But from experience with the editor thats isn't possible to create a good one. ... maybe if you read the OPs post. even with hash files to protect it just delays it but it still able to crack technically anything is crackable if created by humans.... briefly looking at starcode it seems to be able to add integers into a string and encrypt them. isn't that what you said was needed?
i said nothing of the sort, however it may be damn good...
but why are we even discussing that, which may only be a minor issue if we actually are allowed to do it... lol
|
i quoted the wrong post. my bad.
|
|
|
I am ecstatic. I was anxiously awaiting the day when great and talented members of the community with the knowledge to do so, would create a custom ladder. This, more than anything else, should let Activision-Blizzard know that they will never be able to control how and where the community plays. I would play on this ladder the moment it's created.
|
you should get with iccup diamond about this, maybe they could provide you with additional resources, and know how.
I don't see how having a private server keep its own ranks for custom games would be an issue. Isn't this what sc2ranks does with ladder?
If Blizzard is against this, it is simply because they know how poor their ladder system and maps are, and they know their would be a mass exodus from ladder. Their already irrelevant ladder and point system would be completely abandoned and ignored. Their strangle hold on esports would diminish. As soon as something like this gets implemented they will probably change the eula as well. If a real ladder system with good maps gets created it would be a huge step towards major tournaments using maps that arn't 6 month old trash.
|
well, like i've said (if you haven't noticed his name or signature) .. prodiG is from iCCup. He's (i think) one of the map makers for iCCup, and he would like this idea but isn't sure if Blizzard will agree
Also, he wanted proof, and was thinking about asking Blizzard himself so he can control what gets asked and how the answer gets interpreted.
|
and no thats not was SC2ranks.com does.. they just organize the data that is collected from the sc2 blizzard ladder
|
Feel free to post this on the US Blizzard forums (the EU ones are abandoned afaik) or somewhere else Blizzard will notice it, but i don't think they'll have a problem with it since there is 0 code injection happening.
You could basically construct the whole thing in a way that the program would just copy the SC2Bank and then screw arround in the copy and doesn't change a thing in the SC2 directory.
Example:
At the end of the match the result is saved in the SC2Bank. This will increase it's size. The program notices that and copys the bank. When you start a new map the previous results will be deleted from the bank during the Melee initialization process.
Thats the equivalent of you copying a Replay to your desktop, opening it with notepad and screwing arround in it and then never let it get in contact with SC2 again.
And:
On January 04 2011 06:59 dementrio wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2011 06:40 Keitzer wrote:
you wouldn't need 100 of each map... just 1. 1 that connected with the server and added or subtracted based on the results and who was playing against who.
and no i've never heard of wgt. looking it up now. the point of a ladder would be that players are ranked and you play people who are around your skill level. you can't do that with how the custom game lobby works; you have to create and invite people, or play whoever decides to join the map otherwise. a bot that hears you saying "i want to play" and answers "random guy around your level is waiting for a game" would help. One that creates games itself and invites players would be better but if the chat channels work under some known protocol a channel bot would be much easier to script.
I had also thought about a chatlobby based ladder first. The system could work similar to the one i posted only that there is just 1 version of the map floating arround instead of one for each rank and people arrange games in the appropriate channels. Much like here:
I'll add this to the OP.
|
On January 04 2011 07:15 WniO wrote:
wouldn't this kind of mess up their statistics and such? since the ladder itself helps them alot balance-wise.
well, the statistics wouldn't be included in the same batch as the blizz ladder's, since all of the games played here would be custom maps. i don't see why they would care about the stats of another ladder anyway- it doesn't seem like they have any concern for using maps that the community has been clamoring for.
to OP: really innovate stuff, can't wait to find out how far u can actually go with this. hopefully we'll have a great custom ladder up on sc2 soon!
|
sweet deal... im still hoping Blizz says yes to this....
|
On January 04 2011 09:36 Keitzer wrote:
sweet deal... im still hoping Blizz says yes to this....
If he formulates it like this I don't believe Blizzard can really say no.
They can be dicks however and try to prevent the custom maps from bein playable etc.
|
On January 04 2011 09:39 ChickenLips wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2011 09:36 Keitzer wrote:
sweet deal... im still hoping Blizz says yes to this.... If he formulates it like this I don't believe Blizzard can really say no. They can be dicks however and try to prevent the custom maps from bein playable etc.
that's what we're all hoping (at least the people who have hope are hoping)
|
Come to think of it, isn't this basically how gamebattles works? Except players report the winner of each battle and they use crappy blizzard maps. Instead of it automatically finding out. Check it out.
|
This is a very good idea, and you have a pretty good argument for it being allowed by the TOS. I think this could develop into something pretty interesting if you can get the logistics worked out.
|
I've been awaiting an idea like this since I've realized how shit the blizzard maps are. 100% support for this project! If you need any testers or administrative help I would love to lend a hand!
|
This is an amazing idea, but... 5 posts i wont download until I have confidence that you wont steal my password lol...
|
you guys seriously need to chill out about the maps. Seriously, you guys are bitching about sooo many things and yet expect blizzard to handle everything at once and within the few hours that they come up with it?
It's only been like 4 months since release and most of blizz's focus is probably on balance atm, introducing a new map pool would probably throw a wrench in their data collecting. Also, the evidence supports Blizzard in this instance, people bitched about Kulas, it was removed, people wanted new maps? Xel'Naga, Jungle Basin and Shakuras. a possibly game breaking bug on shakuras was discovered and they take the map down.
I say give them a chance, after all, you wouldn't be playing SC2 or BW if it weren't for them.
|
On January 04 2011 10:04 PlaGuE_R wrote:
you guys seriously need to chill out about the maps. Seriously, you guys are bitching about sooo many things and yet expect blizzard to handle everything at once and within the few hours that they come up with it?
It's only been like 4 months since release and most of blizz's focus is probably on balance atm, introducing a new map pool would probably throw a wrench in their data collecting. Also, the evidence supports Blizzard in this instance, people bitched about Kulas, it was removed, people wanted new maps? Xel'Naga, Jungle Basin and Shakuras. a possibly game breaking bug on shakuras was discovered and they take the map down.
I say give them a chance, after all, you wouldn't be playing SC2 or BW if it weren't for them.
Everyone realizes the game is fairly young in terms of development. I think the heart of the issue lies in the fact that blizzard is reluctant to acknowledge that there are some serious balance issues as a result of certain maps/match ups and whether or not they will implement community maps into the ladder.
|
On January 04 2011 10:21 StayFrosty wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2011 10:04 PlaGuE_R wrote:
you guys seriously need to chill out about the maps. Seriously, you guys are bitching about sooo many things and yet expect blizzard to handle everything at once and within the few hours that they come up with it?
It's only been like 4 months since release and most of blizz's focus is probably on balance atm, introducing a new map pool would probably throw a wrench in their data collecting. Also, the evidence supports Blizzard in this instance, people bitched about Kulas, it was removed, people wanted new maps? Xel'Naga, Jungle Basin and Shakuras. a possibly game breaking bug on shakuras was discovered and they take the map down.
I say give them a chance, after all, you wouldn't be playing SC2 or BW if it weren't for them. Everyone realizes the game is fairly young in terms of development. I think the heart of the issue lies in the fact that blizzard is reluctant to acknowledge that there are some serious balance issues as a result of certain maps/match ups and whether or not they will implement community maps into the ladder.
that, AND they have literally said they won't change the map pool for at least a few months as it is one of the lowest of their priorities....
|
The only problem i see is, that this ladder won't be able the prevent people from joining that don't have this software or just want to check out the map.
If the system really kicks off you will have these maps on page 1 of popular custom maps and a lot of people will join them, even if they don't know about the system. This will result in every 2nd game getting dropped because the other person didn't know what this map was about.
I don't know if there is the possiblity to access sc2bank files in the lobby, if there is it could prevent this from happening.
|
On January 04 2011 11:03 zyax wrote:
The only problem i see is, that this ladder won't be able the prevent people from joining that don't have this software or just want to check out the map.
If the system really kicks off you will have these maps on page 1 of popular custom maps and a lot of people will join them, even if they don't know about the system. This will result in every 2nd game getting dropped because the other person didn't know what this map was about.
I don't know if there is the possiblity to access sc2bank files in the lobby, if there is it could prevent this from happening.
hmm, i see your point, say, 50,000 people all trying to join some custom game and it keeps kicking them..
maybe in the description of the map tell them they have to get the program?
|
best thread i've ever read on tl since beta
i think blizz wants this... serious, they want to make it cost 0 dollars for them, get free "qualified" people dying to do it to do it for free
just to clarify: the op is asking for help from people capable of doing it with him... so quit the "great man keep at it", rather advertise this issue around you, convincing people it would be worth a try, remember until further notice, we HAVE NO NEW MAPS
he needs help.. hopefully someone gets it and tries to do it with him through and through (should scout sc2mapster for ums' freakgenius coders , they love a challenge and this is as guaranteed a hit right out of the gates as you can get...
+ Show Spoiler +as for "security", please drop it and admit that only constant players/admins/observers 'awareness and mobilization keep cheats of the www, no code is "secured" on earth and that's fine with me
|
If this idea comes into play I will be ecstatic since over half the map pool is garbage and the maps that aren't garbage I've seen and played FOR OVER HALF A FREAKING YEAR. Seriously.
|
Yeah, as of now the use of ICCUP maps on sc2 isn't nearly as high as it should be. Also it would be nice to have a competition with the ICCUP maps rather than the garbage blizzard ones.
|
I would love this! I'm sure it would work and be allowed, I'm fairly certain there's a similar system set up on WC3 for DOTA or some such game. It has stats, info about leavers, etc... If this can be done on Bnet2.0 we can solve the entire Custom Maps/Tourneys/Ladder problem. Let's hammer this shit out.
|
On January 04 2011 11:22 Zim23 wrote:
I would love this! I'm sure it would work and be allowed, I'm fairly certain there's a similar system set up on WC3 for DOTA or some such game. It has stats, info about leavers, etc... If this can be done on Bnet2.0 we can solve the entire Custom Maps/Tourneys/Ladder problem. Let's hammer this shit out.
well idk about tourneys, but def custom ladder / maps
|
sure is people still thinking they can do better than blizzard..
you guys are never happy with what you got if blizzard had made exactly what you say you would find some reasons to criticize it anyway
|
Great idea, im a bronze player that aready got bored with blizz maps and I watched on youtube a 2 games from iccup maps and they were great. I want to quit laddering and only get sparing partners on iccup maps.
A ladder would be a great addition
|
On January 04 2011 11:27 GizmoPT wrote:
sure is people still thinking they can do better than blizzard..
you guys are never happy with what you got if blizzard had made exactly what you say you would find some reasons to criticize it anyway
it's not like blizzard tried to give us new maps.... they literally said "no we're not doing that"
so since we don't like the miniature imbalanced maps, we're deciding to make our own ladder
|
On January 04 2011 11:27 GizmoPT wrote:
sure is people still thinking they can do better than blizzard..
you guys are never happy with what you got if blizzard had made exactly what you say you would find some reasons to criticize it anyway
It wouldnt hurt so bad if they hadnt TAKEN AWAY everything that we already had that we all agreed we really liked.
|
On January 04 2011 11:05 Keitzer wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2011 11:03 zyax wrote:
The only problem i see is, that this ladder won't be able the prevent people from joining that don't have this software or just want to check out the map.
If the system really kicks off you will have these maps on page 1 of popular custom maps and a lot of people will join them, even if they don't know about the system. This will result in every 2nd game getting dropped because the other person didn't know what this map was about.
I don't know if there is the possiblity to access sc2bank files in the lobby, if there is it could prevent this from happening.
hmm, i see your point, say, 50,000 people all trying to join some custom game and it keeps kicking them.. maybe in the description of the map tell them they have to get the program?
You could solve this by making it so that in game and in the description it urged the user to download the client so that they can track progress. To the other player, the player without the program would be a fresh account. So say the bottom rating is 1600 and you have moved up. Playing a person that doesn't have the client is like beating a 1600 player. The 1600 player doesn't start accumulating points/rise in the ladder until they download the client.
|
i would totally rather play on this ladder
|
awesome, sign me up. Can't wait to play on decent sized maps.
|
This is exactly what will kill SC2... imo....
|
On January 04 2011 15:18 PheNOM_ wrote:
This is exactly what will kill SC2... imo....
how would it kill it?
this is helping it if anything
|
On January 04 2011 11:30 Keitzer wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2011 11:27 GizmoPT wrote:
sure is people still thinking they can do better than blizzard..
you guys are never happy with what you got if blizzard had made exactly what you say you would find some reasons to criticize it anyway it's not like blizzard tried to give us new maps.... they literally said "no we're not doing that"
they removed kulas and desert which everyone complained about and then added shakuras and jungle basin.
|
On January 04 2011 15:20 Kojak21 wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2011 15:18 PheNOM_ wrote:
This is exactly what will kill SC2... imo.... how would it kill it? this is helping it if anything
"Kill it" was bad word choice. The GSL is SC2's premier tournament. It is run by GOMTV with permission from Blizzard, don't know if that is the correct word choice, but because of this, all of these tournament games will be played on maps chosen/made by Blizzard, unlike BW tournaments which are run by kespa, on maps not made by Blizzard, without permission from Blizzard. Now if Blizzard actually started to care about the map pool, at this point they don't, and started to recruit "iCCUP or Korean" map makers or started to make better maps themselves that pleased players, then the GSL would be run on these maps. Now maybe this custom ladder would help to spur Blizzard to care about the maps and know how displeased we players are with the maps. I just think playing on the maps you like in Customs is the best way to support the using of new maps on the ladder and support Blizzard at the same time, which I think is our main responsibility as SC2 players.
|
On January 04 2011 15:37 WniO wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2011 11:30 Keitzer wrote:On January 04 2011 11:27 GizmoPT wrote:
sure is people still thinking they can do better than blizzard..
you guys are never happy with what you got if blizzard had made exactly what you say you would find some reasons to criticize it anyway it's not like blizzard tried to give us new maps.... they literally said "no we're not doing that" they removed kulas and desert which everyone complained about and then added shakuras and jungle basin.
whoah... 2.... T_T
i feel you're being sarcastic, so i'll stay safe and go bm
|
On January 04 2011 15:44 Keitzer wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2011 15:37 WniO wrote:On January 04 2011 11:30 Keitzer wrote:On January 04 2011 11:27 GizmoPT wrote:
sure is people still thinking they can do better than blizzard..
you guys are never happy with what you got if blizzard had made exactly what you say you would find some reasons to criticize it anyway it's not like blizzard tried to give us new maps.... they literally said "no we're not doing that" they removed kulas and desert which everyone complained about and then added shakuras and jungle basin. whoah... 2.... T_T i feel you're being sarcastic, so i'll stay safe and go bm
im just showing that what you said was incorrect. they added 2 maps. do you want them to add 10 every week or something?
|
On January 04 2011 15:40 PheNOM_ wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2011 15:20 Kojak21 wrote:On January 04 2011 15:18 PheNOM_ wrote:
This is exactly what will kill SC2... imo.... how would it kill it? this is helping it if anything "Kill it" was bad word choice. The GSL is SC2's premier tournament. It is run by GOMTV with permission from Blizzard, don't know if that is the correct word choice, but because of this, all of these tournament games will be played on maps chosen/made by Blizzard, unlike BW tournaments which are run by kespa, on maps not made by Blizzard, without permission from Blizzard. Now if Blizzard actually started to care about the map pool, at this point they don't, and started to recruit "iCCUP or Korean" map makers or started to make better maps themselves that pleased players, then the GSL would be run on these maps. Now maybe this custom ladder would help to spur Blizzard to care about the maps and know how displeased we players are with the maps. I just think playing on the maps you like in Customs is the best way to support the using of new maps on the ladder and support Blizzard at the same time, which I think is our main responsibility as SC2 players.
How about GSL is already experimenting with non ladder maps? Gisado was streaming that yesterday on GomTV. So I will rephrase Kojak21. How will this feature contradict / "kill it" what GOMTV or Blizzard is doing?
Oh and Blizzard doesn't care what maps are used by GOM btw. David Kim explicitly said in his interview (from some time ago) about GSL having the choice to use custom non ladder maps for GSL. It's just that there aren't suitable maps yet or has been found out by GOM to have them in their ladder pool yet. Hence they started testing new maps yesterday on the stream.
|
On January 04 2011 15:47 WniO wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2011 15:44 Keitzer wrote:On January 04 2011 15:37 WniO wrote:On January 04 2011 11:30 Keitzer wrote:On January 04 2011 11:27 GizmoPT wrote:
sure is people still thinking they can do better than blizzard..
you guys are never happy with what you got if blizzard had made exactly what you say you would find some reasons to criticize it anyway it's not like blizzard tried to give us new maps.... they literally said "no we're not doing that" they removed kulas and desert which everyone complained about and then added shakuras and jungle basin. whoah... 2.... T_T i feel you're being sarcastic, so i'll stay safe and go bm im just showing that what you said was incorrect. they added 2 maps. do you want them to add 10 every week or something?
I, along with many others, would love to have more than 2 new maps since release....
say... 3 shift each month?
|
On January 04 2011 15:49 Keitzer wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2011 15:47 WniO wrote:On January 04 2011 15:44 Keitzer wrote:On January 04 2011 15:37 WniO wrote:On January 04 2011 11:30 Keitzer wrote:On January 04 2011 11:27 GizmoPT wrote:
sure is people still thinking they can do better than blizzard..
you guys are never happy with what you got if blizzard had made exactly what you say you would find some reasons to criticize it anyway it's not like blizzard tried to give us new maps.... they literally said "no we're not doing that" they removed kulas and desert which everyone complained about and then added shakuras and jungle basin. whoah... 2.... T_T i feel you're being sarcastic, so i'll stay safe and go bm im just showing that what you said was incorrect. they added 2 maps. do you want them to add 10 every week or something? I, along with many others, would love to have more than 2 new maps since release.... say... 3 shift each month?
yeah for sure... they should soon. but they need to balance the game out completely first.
|
On January 04 2011 15:53 WniO wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2011 15:49 Keitzer wrote:On January 04 2011 15:47 WniO wrote:On January 04 2011 15:44 Keitzer wrote:On January 04 2011 15:37 WniO wrote:On January 04 2011 11:30 Keitzer wrote:On January 04 2011 11:27 GizmoPT wrote:
sure is people still thinking they can do better than blizzard..
you guys are never happy with what you got if blizzard had made exactly what you say you would find some reasons to criticize it anyway it's not like blizzard tried to give us new maps.... they literally said "no we're not doing that" they removed kulas and desert which everyone complained about and then added shakuras and jungle basin. whoah... 2.... T_T i feel you're being sarcastic, so i'll stay safe and go bm im just showing that what you said was incorrect. they added 2 maps. do you want them to add 10 every week or something? I, along with many others, would love to have more than 2 new maps since release.... say... 3 shift each month? yeah for sure... they should soon. but they need to balance the game out completely first.
which is probably one of the many reasons blizzard sees map pool as low priority atm
|
On January 04 2011 11:57 EnderPR wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2011 11:05 Keitzer wrote:On January 04 2011 11:03 zyax wrote:
The only problem i see is, that this ladder won't be able the prevent people from joining that don't have this software or just want to check out the map.
If the system really kicks off you will have these maps on page 1 of popular custom maps and a lot of people will join them, even if they don't know about the system. This will result in every 2nd game getting dropped because the other person didn't know what this map was about.
I don't know if there is the possiblity to access sc2bank files in the lobby, if there is it could prevent this from happening.
hmm, i see your point, say, 50,000 people all trying to join some custom game and it keeps kicking them.. maybe in the description of the map tell them they have to get the program? You could solve this by making it so that in game and in the description it urged the user to download the client so that they can track progress. To the other player, the player without the program would be a fresh account. So say the bottom rating is 1600 and you have moved up. Playing a person that doesn't have the client is like beating a 1600 player. The 1600 player doesn't start accumulating points/rise in the ladder until they download the client.
That won't work. People are retarded and will join the game anyway. I'm not saying it's a bad idea, but keep in mind how many people would join iCCup games without an antihack. The only way to realistically keep what has been said above from happening is to figure out a way that makes it impossible for people to join the game in the first place without the program, or to make it so that they can't see the map, although I don't know how you would do that since I'm not a very experienced programmer.
Furthermore, how are you planning on matchmaking? is it going to be like the ladder is now, where you have an excludes list and beyond that get paired with people with comparable skill? or would it be similar to iCCup where you sort of had to pick and choose? personally I prefer the SC2 ladder system, as I've always gotten good matches quickly and easily.
Finally, I'd suggest contacting the iCCup people. tofu and diamond regularly patrol the forums, and I bet they'll be able to direct you to some people who will be able to help. Also, even though it was already suggested, you should scour the map making forums and see who's out there and would want in. Finally if all goes well, I would suggest even contacting Blizzard, showing them a finished product, and ask if they would be willing to implement it into the system, so you can avoid the extensive workaround altogether.
And always, good luck
|
On January 04 2011 15:57 Keitzer wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2011 15:53 WniO wrote:On January 04 2011 15:49 Keitzer wrote:On January 04 2011 15:47 WniO wrote:On January 04 2011 15:44 Keitzer wrote:On January 04 2011 15:37 WniO wrote:On January 04 2011 11:30 Keitzer wrote:On January 04 2011 11:27 GizmoPT wrote:
sure is people still thinking they can do better than blizzard..
you guys are never happy with what you got if blizzard had made exactly what you say you would find some reasons to criticize it anyway it's not like blizzard tried to give us new maps.... they literally said "no we're not doing that" they removed kulas and desert which everyone complained about and then added shakuras and jungle basin. whoah... 2.... T_T i feel you're being sarcastic, so i'll stay safe and go bm im just showing that what you said was incorrect. they added 2 maps. do you want them to add 10 every week or something? I, along with many others, would love to have more than 2 new maps since release.... say... 3 shift each month? yeah for sure... they should soon. but they need to balance the game out completely first. which is probably one of the many reasons blizzard sees map pool as low priority atm
There are some relatively reasonable maps that are not on the ladder that are on the custom melee and team games suitable for 1v1
They are just trying to force small maps down everyone's throat
|
I guess many people in this thread missed out on the info that came from Blizzard and from Kennigit in the SotG podcast: Blizzard has said they are leaving it up to the community to solve the map problem. The map pool isn't low priority, it isn't even on their list. So basically it's up to us to fix the problem, and ideas like this are a huge step in that direction.
|
On January 04 2011 15:57 Keitzer wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2011 15:53 WniO wrote:On January 04 2011 15:47 WniO wrote:
im just showing that what you said was incorrect. they added 2 maps. do you want them to add 10 every week or something? yeah for sure... they should soon. but they need to balance the game out completely first. which is probably one of the many reasons blizzard sees map pool as low priority atm
iCCup regularly shifts about 8 different maps around as maps of the week, EVERY WEEK! There's absolutely no reason why Blizzard can't draw from community made maps as well as their own (and make new ones, it's not like their map making team does anything else, besides maybe Blizzard DoTA atm) and make a rotation of 10 or so different maps every 2 weeks to a month. They fact that we've only had two new maps since beta is absolutely unnacceptable, not to mention the fact that they haven't even bothered to correct obvious mistakes in their maps, especially when we consider that it's some people's job to play this game and they get screwed out of money due to positional imbalances as well as a slew of minimal mistakes in the map design.
Furthermore, maps should be the number one priority. It keeps the game fresh and keeps creativity in the game. Better designed maps also goes very far towards balancing the game, and is probably the most important piece in a balanced rts. there are many clear racial imbalances in BW, but most, if not all of these are erased due to good map design. Just think about it, if Blizzard is trying to balance the races based on the results of matches on maps that are clearly imbalanced and sub-par, then they are doing it wrong.
|
Blizzard should just add a feature where people or organizations can create custom ladders. If people request it enough, as they did chat channels, it will get implemented. This should be the next big thing people whine over.
|
So. The sections of the EULA that would (possibly) take issue with this:
You agree that you will not, under any circumstances:
d. Use any unauthorized third-party software that intercepts, “mines”, or otherwise
collects information from or through the Game or the Service, including without limitation any
software that reads areas of RAM used by the Game to store information; provided,
however that Blizzard may, at its sole and absolute discretion, allow the use of certain third party
user interfaces
f. Host, provide or develop matchmaking services for the Game or intercept, emulate or
redirect the communication protocols used by Blizzard in any way, for any purpose, including
without limitation unauthorized play over the internet, network play (except as expressly
authorized by Blizzard), or as part of content aggregation networks;
Both sections DO state that blizzard can grant exceptions however.
|
Pfft, go for it OP. Worst comes to worst you get banned by blizzard, causing an uprising from the community.
|
Wow, this is actually a really good idea. Best of luck, I hope it works out.
|
On January 04 2011 15:47 shannn wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2011 15:40 PheNOM_ wrote:On January 04 2011 15:20 Kojak21 wrote:On January 04 2011 15:18 PheNOM_ wrote:
This is exactly what will kill SC2... imo.... how would it kill it? this is helping it if anything "Kill it" was bad word choice. The GSL is SC2's premier tournament. It is run by GOMTV with permission from Blizzard, don't know if that is the correct word choice, but because of this, all of these tournament games will be played on maps chosen/made by Blizzard, unlike BW tournaments which are run by kespa, on maps not made by Blizzard, without permission from Blizzard. Now if Blizzard actually started to care about the map pool, at this point they don't, and started to recruit "iCCUP or Korean" map makers or started to make better maps themselves that pleased players, then the GSL would be run on these maps. Now maybe this custom ladder would help to spur Blizzard to care about the maps and know how displeased we players are with the maps. I just think playing on the maps you like in Customs is the best way to support the using of new maps on the ladder and support Blizzard at the same time, which I think is our main responsibility as SC2 players. How about GSL is already experimenting with non ladder maps? Gisado was streaming that yesterday on GomTV. So I will rephrase Kojak21. How will this feature contradict / "kill it" what GOMTV or Blizzard is doing? Oh and Blizzard doesn't care what maps are used by GOM btw. David Kim explicitly said in his interview (from some time ago) about GSL having the choice to use custom non ladder maps for GSL. It's just that there aren't suitable maps yet or has been found out by GOM to have them in their ladder pool yet. Hence they started testing new maps yesterday on the stream.
Shoot man, this is news to me. Good news. I eat my words. +1 for you my friend.
|
On January 04 2011 16:27 PrinceXizor wrote:
So. The sections of the EULA that would (possibly) take issue with this:
You agree that you will not, under any circumstances:
d. Use any unauthorized third-party software that intercepts, “mines”, or otherwise
collects information from or through the Game or the Service, including without limitation any
software that reads areas of RAM used by the Game to store information; provided,
however that Blizzard may, at its sole and absolute discretion, allow the use of certain third party
user interfaces
f. Host, provide or develop matchmaking services for the Game or intercept, emulate or
redirect the communication protocols used by Blizzard in any way, for any purpose, including
without limitation unauthorized play over the internet, network play (except as expressly
authorized by Blizzard), or as part of content aggregation networks;
Both sections DO state that blizzard can grant exceptions however.
From a programmer's perspective; I would say that this does not conflict with what the OP is suggesting.
|
I truly love this idea.
But its just an idea, so lets go and make this an effort and not stand around saying "wut a great idea".
|
On January 04 2011 04:52 ChickenLips wrote:
YEAH!
This is what im talking about, what a great idea.
I'm in full support of this
agreed
|
On January 04 2011 15:57 Keitzer wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2011 15:53 WniO wrote:On January 04 2011 15:49 Keitzer wrote:On January 04 2011 15:47 WniO wrote:On January 04 2011 15:44 Keitzer wrote:On January 04 2011 15:37 WniO wrote:On January 04 2011 11:30 Keitzer wrote:On January 04 2011 11:27 GizmoPT wrote:
sure is people still thinking they can do better than blizzard..
you guys are never happy with what you got if blizzard had made exactly what you say you would find some reasons to criticize it anyway it's not like blizzard tried to give us new maps.... they literally said "no we're not doing that" they removed kulas and desert which everyone complained about and then added shakuras and jungle basin. whoah... 2.... T_T i feel you're being sarcastic, so i'll stay safe and go bm im just showing that what you said was incorrect. they added 2 maps. do you want them to add 10 every week or something? I, along with many others, would love to have more than 2 new maps since release.... say... 3 shift each month? yeah for sure... they should soon. but they need to balance the game out completely first. which is probably one of the many reasons blizzard sees map pool as low priority atm
"balance" and maps go hand in hand in a rts and even moreso in starcraft.
example
look at bw where some maps have hugely favored statistics in some matchups. the game was fine but the map sucked. now imagine people wouldve judged bws balance only by such maps and demanded balance changes.
suddenly the almost perfect bw would get changed for the worse cause of shitty maps.
|
This is a really brilliant solution to an atrocious situation.
If this were implemented I would participate.
|
"This is exactly what will kill SC2... imo...."
you guys are really sweet...
people should surf more "soundly" (sc2mapster hint hint!)
hundreds of talented people are at work, granted mapmakers are still mostly "solo oriented", but the major sc2 crowd that everyone is being so optimist about, is bound to leave sc2...
the op (who's hard at work but NEEDS help) and many vocal posters everywhere might agree that :
who cares?
A great community will sustain a competitive scene regardless of mass migration to a mod...
at least blizz knows that... I hope you agree too.
@kill order
"you should scour the map making forums and see who's out there and would want in"
no he shouldn't... he's preoccupied and busy enough, WE should be helping, not directing him how to do useless stuff... We should feel the gruntwork is our responsibility!
edit:
@Nizaris
mapmaking chant + Show Spoiler +
|
I'm a web developer willing to help if you need it. PHP / Ajax is what i do everyday. I could see this working from a web server?
This regardless if Blizzard will allow it or not.
|
ALLEYCAT BLUES49975 Posts
I like this Idea very much,but I don't really want to get involved if its illegal and that I might lose my account.
You really should contact blizzard before doing anything.
|
On January 04 2011 16:32 Bswhunter wrote:
Pfft, go for it OP. Worst comes to worst you get banned by blizzard, causing an uprising from the community.
Replace "banned" with "sued".
|
I really like the whole idea you've come up with, and I saw in the OP that you're contacting Blizzard too so I REALLY support it now. This is a potentially delicate area you're treading out into, so you've gotta make sure to be as safe as possible about it.
Make sure to keep us posted on any responses you get from Blizzard or iCCup
|
On January 05 2011 02:35 AJMcSpiffy wrote:
I really like the whole idea you've come up with, and I saw in the OP that you're contacting Blizzard too so I REALLY support it now. This is a potentially delicate area you're treading out into, so you've gotta make sure to be as safe as possible about it.
Make sure to keep us posted on any responses you get from Blizzard or iCCup
I really hope he emphasised that the community has come down to this due to their poor poor map pool
|
On January 04 2011 20:04 ParasitJonte wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2011 16:27 PrinceXizor wrote:
So. The sections of the EULA that would (possibly) take issue with this:
You agree that you will not, under any circumstances:
d. Use any unauthorized third-party software that intercepts, “mines”, or otherwise
collects information from or through the Game or the Service, including without limitation any
software that reads areas of RAM used by the Game to store information; provided,
however that Blizzard may, at its sole and absolute discretion, allow the use of certain third party
user interfaces
f. Host, provide or develop matchmaking services for the Game or intercept, emulate or
redirect the communication protocols used by Blizzard in any way, for any purpose, including
without limitation unauthorized play over the internet, network play (except as expressly
authorized by Blizzard), or as part of content aggregation networks;
Both sections DO state that blizzard can grant exceptions however. From a programmer's perspective; I would say that this does not conflict with what the OP is suggesting.
With f. I agree. The OP is doing something different. People are needed to find their opponents the old fashioned way (chatchannels 'D+ P looking for Z opponent'). It's similiar to using a chatchannel for "2000+ P looking for Z opponent". This is not a matchmaking service.
d. is discussable. He collects data through the game (who won the match) though not with unauthorized thirdparty software but with the map which is authorized.
The external software accesses the Banks files though (which are plain XML) - it is discussable if those are part of the "Game or Service".
If they are - replays are too - making SC2Gears "illegal" as well.
|
On January 04 2011 16:10 KiLL_ORdeR wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2011 15:57 Keitzer wrote:On January 04 2011 15:53 WniO wrote:On January 04 2011 15:47 WniO wrote:
im just showing that what you said was incorrect. they added 2 maps. do you want them to add 10 every week or something? yeah for sure... they should soon. but they need to balance the game out completely first. which is probably one of the many reasons blizzard sees map pool as low priority atm iCCup regularly shifts about 8 different maps around as maps of the week, EVERY WEEK! There's absolutely no reason why Blizzard can't draw from community made maps as well as their own (and make new ones, it's not like their map making team does anything else, besides maybe Blizzard DoTA atm) and make a rotation of 10 or so different maps every 2 weeks to a month. They fact that we've only had two new maps since beta is absolutely unnacceptable, not to mention the fact that they haven't even bothered to correct obvious mistakes in their maps, especially when we consider that it's some people's job to play this game and they get screwed out of money due to positional imbalances as well as a slew of minimal mistakes in the map design. Furthermore, maps should be the number one priority. It keeps the game fresh and keeps creativity in the game. Better designed maps also goes very far towards balancing the game, and is probably the most important piece in a balanced rts. there are many clear racial imbalances in BW, but most, if not all of these are erased due to good map design. Just think about it, if Blizzard is trying to balance the races based on the results of matches on maps that are clearly imbalanced and sub-par, then they are doing it wrong.
the reason why iCCup is able to shift so many maps so fast is because
1. the game is already considered balanced
2. iCCup ONLY works on maps, not balancing the game like Blizzard does
3. Blizzard is also working on 2 more expansions, HoTS and LoTV
|
On January 04 2011 04:48 Prfx wrote:
>Cheating: SC2Banks can be edited with notepad to fake results. This too can be prevented. The easiest method would be to let the map create a hash file for the result and let the server validate it. This can be done with STARCODE (1)
Is there a way to monitor results without storing a file on a persons computer?
In my match history I can see all the custom games I've played, the result and who the other players were.
If I played a custom 1v1, could a program look up my profile and my opponents, confirm we played each other on the same map at the same time and record the result?
|
On January 05 2011 05:04 Keitzer wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2011 16:10 KiLL_ORdeR wrote:On January 04 2011 15:57 Keitzer wrote:On January 04 2011 15:53 WniO wrote:On January 04 2011 15:47 WniO wrote:
im just showing that what you said was incorrect. they added 2 maps. do you want them to add 10 every week or something? yeah for sure... they should soon. but they need to balance the game out completely first. which is probably one of the many reasons blizzard sees map pool as low priority atm iCCup regularly shifts about 8 different maps around as maps of the week, EVERY WEEK! There's absolutely no reason why Blizzard can't draw from community made maps as well as their own (and make new ones, it's not like their map making team does anything else, besides maybe Blizzard DoTA atm) and make a rotation of 10 or so different maps every 2 weeks to a month. They fact that we've only had two new maps since beta is absolutely unnacceptable, not to mention the fact that they haven't even bothered to correct obvious mistakes in their maps, especially when we consider that it's some people's job to play this game and they get screwed out of money due to positional imbalances as well as a slew of minimal mistakes in the map design. Furthermore, maps should be the number one priority. It keeps the game fresh and keeps creativity in the game. Better designed maps also goes very far towards balancing the game, and is probably the most important piece in a balanced rts. there are many clear racial imbalances in BW, but most, if not all of these are erased due to good map design. Just think about it, if Blizzard is trying to balance the races based on the results of matches on maps that are clearly imbalanced and sub-par, then they are doing it wrong. the reason why iCCup is able to shift so many maps so fast is because 1. the game is already considered balanced 2. iCCup ONLY works on maps, not balancing the game like Blizzard does 3. Blizzard is also working on 2 more expansions, HoTS and LoTV
1. The game is already considered balanced for the Blizzard mapmakers as well.
2. There's different teams working on different things, the mapmaking team doesn't balance the game, the art department doesn't code battle.net, the sound guys doesn't draw kerrigan.
The mapmaking team creates maps.
3. Pretty valid point, the mapmakers are probably focusing most of their resources on heart of the swarm and projects like DotA2, but then they should really reprioritize some or open up a few positions there for people dedicated to keeping the ladder pool healthy.
Edit; No matter what anyone says, you can't justify Blizzard not correcting simple stuff on some maps, like the Scrap Station distance from main to ramp being different for each side.
Such things should have been fixed two hours after they got noticed.
Oh, and I hope Blizzard totally doesn't shut the OP down, I'd love for someone to create a custom ladder as long as they did it good :p
|
On January 05 2011 08:11 SixtusTheFifth wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2011 04:48 Prfx wrote:
>Cheating: SC2Banks can be edited with notepad to fake results. This too can be prevented. The easiest method would be to let the map create a hash file for the result and let the server validate it. This can be done with STARCODE (1)
Is there a way to monitor results without storing a file on a persons computer? In my match history I can see all the custom games I've played, the result and who the other players were. If I played a custom 1v1, could a program look up my profile and my opponents, confirm we played each other on the same map at the same time and record the result?
that would require memory reading. which is against blizzard's ToS.
also the post above me should realise the team for sc2 is very very very small.
they dont have an "art" department for example.
Blizzard does and i bet your ass it's more of a World of Warcraft Art Department that occasionally does things for other stuff aswell.
|
On January 05 2011 08:23 MavercK wrote:
also the post above me should realise the team for sc2 is very very very small.
they dont have an "art" department for example.
Blizzard does and i bet your ass it's more of a World of Warcraft Art Department that occasionally does things for other stuff aswell.
Never said it was big, only that they have dedicated people who does the jobs, Blizzard mapmakers being slow and terrible because they are balancing the game is just wrong because they're not, they're making maps while other people are dedicated to balancing the game.
|
This would be really cool to see happen, though I'm fairly certain that using the SC2 memory banks is against the ToS.
Although now that I think about it, Sc2gears reads your replays and determines whether you won or lost something. Not sure if it works for Custom games, but if it did then maybe a similar method could be used.
|
On January 05 2011 08:17 Ighox wrote:Show nested quote +On January 05 2011 05:04 Keitzer wrote:On January 04 2011 16:10 KiLL_ORdeR wrote:On January 04 2011 15:57 Keitzer wrote:On January 04 2011 15:53 WniO wrote:On January 04 2011 15:47 WniO wrote:
im just showing that what you said was incorrect. they added 2 maps. do you want them to add 10 every week or something? yeah for sure... they should soon. but they need to balance the game out completely first. which is probably one of the many reasons blizzard sees map pool as low priority atm iCCup regularly shifts about 8 different maps around as maps of the week, EVERY WEEK! There's absolutely no reason why Blizzard can't draw from community made maps as well as their own (and make new ones, it's not like their map making team does anything else, besides maybe Blizzard DoTA atm) and make a rotation of 10 or so different maps every 2 weeks to a month. They fact that we've only had two new maps since beta is absolutely unnacceptable, not to mention the fact that they haven't even bothered to correct obvious mistakes in their maps, especially when we consider that it's some people's job to play this game and they get screwed out of money due to positional imbalances as well as a slew of minimal mistakes in the map design. Furthermore, maps should be the number one priority. It keeps the game fresh and keeps creativity in the game. Better designed maps also goes very far towards balancing the game, and is probably the most important piece in a balanced rts. there are many clear racial imbalances in BW, but most, if not all of these are erased due to good map design. Just think about it, if Blizzard is trying to balance the races based on the results of matches on maps that are clearly imbalanced and sub-par, then they are doing it wrong. the reason why iCCup is able to shift so many maps so fast is because 1. the game is already considered balanced 2. iCCup ONLY works on maps, not balancing the game like Blizzard does 3. Blizzard is also working on 2 more expansions, HoTS and LoTV 1. The game is already considered balanced for the Blizzard mapmakers as well. 2. There's different teams working on different things, the mapmaking team doesn't balance the game, the art department doesn't code battle.net, the sound guys doesn't draw kerrigan. The mapmaking team creates maps. 3. Pretty valid point, the mapmakers are probably focusing most of their resources on heart of the swarm and projects like DotA2, but then they should really reprioritize some or open up a few positions there for people dedicated to keeping the ladder pool healthy. Edit; No matter what anyone says, you can't justify Blizzard not correcting simple stuff on some maps, like the Scrap Station distance from main to ramp being different for each side. Such things should have been fixed two hours after they got noticed. Oh, and I hope Blizzard totally doesn't shut the OP down, I'd love for someone to create a custom ladder as long as they did it good :p
1. hmm
2. see, i didn't know they had a special team for map making... or are you just assuming?
3. ya a few new people dedicated to better maps, say, a few from iCCup?
anyways, i think i'd much rather have a custom ladder anyways...
|
On January 05 2011 09:07 HollowLord wrote:
This would be really cool to see happen, though I'm fairly certain that using the SC2 memory banks is against the ToS.
Although now that I think about it, Sc2gears reads your replays and determines whether you won or lost something. Not sure if it works for Custom games, but if it did then maybe a similar method could be used.
we've discussed this over the past 7 pages...
SC2Bank files are used in EVERY custom game... Battlecraft, SOTIS, etc... any game that saves data that can be used later...
all this program would do is read the data from the file... that's it.
nothing about reading a file (not modifying or enhancing, just analyzing the data) is against their ToS. If it was, then why the hell did they make SC2Bank files anyways?
|
Im so down, i like iccup so much more than i like this ladder. I want to have the old ranks back not this diamond garbage. The diamond range is like iccups D-A in one division.
|
On January 05 2011 09:07 Keitzer wrote:
2. see, i didn't know they had a special team for map making... or are you just assuming?
..
They've said they have that at least, but yes they're probably spread out over a lot of things, DotA2 and similar projects, expansions, probably even D3 as the editor there probably is just a modified version of the SC2 one.
But anyways, I think we can all agree on that they really need to focus their attention on the ladder pool at least instead of completely ignoring it :p
On January 05 2011 09:12 shtdisturbance wrote:
Im so down, i like iccup so much more than i like this ladder. I want to have the old ranks back not this diamond garbage. The diamond range is like iccups D-A in one division.
You're not the only one missing ranks that actually means something, sadly the majority (the casual battle.net crowd who doesn't even know fansites exist) seems to like the Diamond way
|
On January 05 2011 09:19 Ighox wrote:Show nested quote +On January 05 2011 09:07 Keitzer wrote:
2. see, i didn't know they had a special team for map making... or are you just assuming?
.. + Show Spoiler +They've said they have that at least, but yes they're probably spread out over a lot of things, DotA2 and similar projects, expansions, probably even D3 as the editor there probably is just a modified version of the SC2 one.
But anyways, I think we can all agree on that they really need to focus their attention on the ladder pool at least instead of completely ignoring it :p Show nested quote +On January 05 2011 09:12 shtdisturbance wrote:
Im so down, i like iccup so much more than i like this ladder. I want to have the old ranks back not this diamond garbage. The diamond range is like iccups D-A in one division. You're not the only one missing ranks that actually means something, sadly the majority (the casual battle.net crowd who doesn't even know fansites exist) seems to like the Diamond way
so these casuals will get promoted to diamond while all the "good" players will play on this custom ladder?
|
this would be amazing if you could get iccup in on it.
|
8748 Posts
On January 04 2011 11:27 GizmoPT wrote:
sure is people still thinking they can do better than blizzard..
you guys are never happy with what you got if blizzard had made exactly what you say you would find some reasons to criticize it anyway
people already have done better than blizzard. you joined in 2010 so im guessing you dont know the history of servers like gamei, pgtour and iccup. blizzard's services for the interests of the users of those servers was nearly non-existent. to say that those servers were better than blizzard's servers is not a big enough compliment to those servers. we got low latency play from those servers, something that blizzard still hasnt delivered to SC:BW. we got low latency play between Korea, NA, SA and Europe, something blizzard still hasn't delivered to SC2. we got ladders, something blizzard stopped providing since around 2000.
for sc2, i'd imagine these servers could provide a ladder that works better for a smaller group of people. they could also provide lower latency play across continents
|
At the very least this forces Blizzard to implement a similar system if this is successful
|
On January 05 2011 09:30 Liquid`Tyler wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2011 11:27 GizmoPT wrote:
sure is people still thinking they can do better than blizzard..
you guys are never happy with what you got if blizzard had made exactly what you say you would find some reasons to criticize it anyway people already have done better than blizzard. you joined in 2010 so im guessing you dont know the history of servers like gamei, pgtour and iccup. blizzard's services for the interests of the users of those servers was nearly non-existent. to say that those servers were better than blizzard's servers is not a big enough compliment to those servers. we got low latency play from those servers, something that blizzard still hasnt delivered to SC:BW. we got low latency play between Korea, NA, SA and Europe, something blizzard still hasn't delivered to SC2. we got ladders, something blizzard stopped providing since around 2000. for sc2, i'd imagine these servers could provide a ladder that works better for a smaller group of people. they could also provide lower latency play across continents
well i've got a question for you Tyler (since you play at MLG and other events)
would you play with this system if they had better maps ?
-OR-
would only if they used the same maps at the tournaments? aka, would you still use Blizzard's ladder over this new one since it has the maps you need to practice on?
|
On January 05 2011 08:11 SixtusTheFifth wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2011 04:48 Prfx wrote:
>Cheating: SC2Banks can be edited with notepad to fake results. This too can be prevented. The easiest method would be to let the map create a hash file for the result and let the server validate it. This can be done with STARCODE (1)
Is there a way to monitor results without storing a file on a persons computer? In my match history I can see all the custom games I've played, the result and who the other players were. If I played a custom 1v1, could a program look up my profile and my opponents, confirm we played each other on the same map at the same time and record the result?
Can maps be made "private" so that people cannot see the details / triggers / scripts of the map?
If yes, I think it should be possible to make it save.
When 1st installing the software & setting up an account for this "external" ladder, create an unique Banks file (should be possible, it's plaintext) which the user has to download and store in his folders. These Banks files can contain unique keys for each user.
With these keys and additional "secret" information stored in the map itself it should be possible to encrypt the results. Those are transmitted and restored on the ladder server which checks if everything is in order.
Since your opponent "should" report the results as well, you can even mark accounts which often report different results compared to their opponents. If the accounts have enough marks ban them.
|
If this would lead to a ladder with a proper ranking system and a map pool that is handled by someone else than Blizzard, then I would most definitely use this on a regular basis.
I love the idea of a larger amount of people play maps like the iCCup ones competitively.
|
ALLEYCAT BLUES49975 Posts
Any updates on this?We need something like this for the sake of development of the game as a community.
|
Maybe I am a stick in the mud, or maybe I just don't share some peoples' hatred of anything Blizzard, but I really don't want this.
|
I would love a custom ladder with proper balanced maps that receive attention like the iccup maps do(from the creators). I have played a few games on the maps (hard to just custom since no one is playing them) and enjoyed them very much. The problem that I have with blizz's map making squad is the fact that maps have shown the obvious balance problems and yet they haven't fixed them. Creap spread is what I am referring to, not talking about shelves designed for siege tanks, blords and colossi.
@ the comments about "blizz not allowing /thread" if it's not modifying/writing any of the files that are just being read by the game already, then blizz technically would have no way of knowing what is going on. I wouldn't go as far as to say the current ladder system is "broke" or even to say it's "working", it definitely could see some improvements. Something like this Blizzard would be smart to pick up a few devs to work on, test it out or to let it go, see how it works if it works then integrate it into their system. There is already auto save on replays and auto naming etc based on the file. I see this as being possible.
I want to believe that they have a lot of tricks up their sleeve this coming year. Blizz in the past 6 years has catered to everyone with WoW and already has done so with SC2. I wouldn't doubt some ladder improvements around the time Master/Grand Master hits to "improve" the game for the people outside of the Top 200 etc.
|
Blizzard will impede such developments with all means in order to control and deceive the player base.
They neither care about transparency nor a proper map pool and balance. They don't even pay some students a few bucks to create sufficient manuals.
It's all a farce. They crap on the educated players and want them to be misinformed consumer slaves, which are only allowed to watch professional players, which are picked by Blizzard.
|
On January 07 2011 02:09 Perscienter wrote:
Blizzard will impede such developments with all means in order to control and deceive the player base.
They neither care about transparency nor a proper map pool and balance. They don't even pay some students a few bucks to create sufficient manuals.
It's all a farce. They crap on the educated players and want them to be misinformed consumer slaves, which are only allowed to watch professional players, which are picked by Blizzard.
These kind of posts are ridiculous. Blizzard, whether you believe it to be ineffective or not, is not evil. Attempting to cast it as some sort of villain for not catering to an entertainment audience in a way you find pleasing is insulting to those who actually have to deal with injustices around the world.
|
would totally be up for this. Bizzards current map pool is depressing and boring. I love ICCup maps and it would be awesome if this allowed those maps to acutely be played for rank
|
If this server only takes people who bought original copy of the game and prevents people with pirate copies, I don't think blizzard will be against this. You say that blizz doesn't give a damn to maps or any such things like LAN latency, cross realm, etc. as Tyler stated.
If this project gets big, and people start playing on this server instead of bnet 2.0, and piracy is somehow blocked, i think blizz will fully support such a thing and they will just focus on making new patches and balancing units. But i'm afraid, i can't see a way to block piracy, so i don't think blizz will give support.
|
I would love it if Blizzard allowed people to make maps and then implemented in the ladder system which already exists, or something. For instance, by adding the maps to one's map folder and having some function* to add them to Ladder Maps-list. I don't really care for Custom Games, though, as it only seems like laddering only more work to find a game 
More maps or simply add new("new" as in the iCCup maps remade) maps to tournaments making people play new ones more =D
*A function similar to the Save Replay or something.
|
As far as updates on this go, Blizzard has not responded yet but it's only 2 days since i wrote them.
and @Djagulingu: It won't be a new server, it will run on Bnet 2.0.
|
This is my only hope left. The game combined with the current map pool is an imbalanced piece of shit. This might allow one to play with players that do not only get by by cheesing and all inning every single game and actually have the SLIGHTEST understanding of strategy and macro.
Please make this happen.
|
I like this idea. But instead of placing maps in tug of war, if you do it through iccup, just do a filter search for iccup maps. Would work the same exact way as iccup ladder, only ranks would be harder to discern. You could also have bonus points for motw and such things, just like good ole iccup
|
On January 07 2011 03:50 Djagulingu wrote:
If this server only takes people who bought original copy of the game and prevents people with pirate copies, I don't think blizzard will be against this. You say that blizz doesn't give a damn to maps or any such things like LAN latency, cross realm, etc. as Tyler stated.
If this project gets big, and people start playing on this server instead of bnet 2.0, and piracy is somehow blocked, i think blizz will fully support such a thing and they will just focus on making new patches and balancing units. But i'm afraid, i can't see a way to block piracy, so i don't think blizz will give support.
it's not a separate server, good thing you read the OP.
|
On January 07 2011 02:48 FrostOtter wrote:
These kind of posts are ridiculous. Blizzard, whether you believe it to be ineffective or not, is not evil. Attempting to cast it as some sort of villain for not catering to an entertainment audience in a way you find pleasing is insulting to those who actually have to deal with injustices around the world.
Well I'm also deadly serious when it comes to entertainment (while sports and the like really belongs to the professional health, too) and I do not forget all the lies by Blizzard Activision, a 13.7b $ corporation, which could accomplish anything they want.
|
On January 07 2011 05:42 Perscienter wrote:Show nested quote +On January 07 2011 02:48 FrostOtter wrote:
These kind of posts are ridiculous. Blizzard, whether you believe it to be ineffective or not, is not evil. Attempting to cast it as some sort of villain for not catering to an entertainment audience in a way you find pleasing is insulting to those who actually have to deal with injustices around the world. Well I'm also deadly serious when it comes to entertainment (while sports and the like really belongs to the professional health, too) and I do not forget all the lies by Blizzard Activision, a 13.7b $ corporation, which could accomplish anything they want.
This kind of hyperbole serves no purpose. While I am not necessarily the biggest fan of modern capitalism, I am also not of the opinion that success = tyranny, or being predisposed toward tyranny.
|
Most problems with our economic systems don't stem from capitalism per se, but of some form of distorted capitalistic systems.
Human beings as a zoon politikon have a duty to influence their companions and care about their environment.
Such companies rather tend to not care for much except a few key numbers. That is a structural flaw I've observed. Blizzard is like a teacher who doesn't care if there is order in his classroom and this has a negative effect on the community.
It's especially daunting, because in the software business they could easily apply structural solutions to most of the problems and even play around with new, breathtaking inventions. There are countless possibilities of well-thought-out map pool systems and Blizzard could bless us with tons of statistics and a slick, efficient user interface. Instead they've apparently chosen to go the cheap way of introducing phoney features once in a while.
|
Current ladder is fine. There is no reason for this since all tournaments use the same maps atm and bonus pool only affects points. nothing else. Points doesn't have anything to do with who u play. its stupid to divide the community. Dont do it. dont try. I don't understand why your trying to make a better system with an inferior model. Matchmaking by chat? cmon this isn't iccup anymore.
matchmaking is rly good in sc2 and in time there are going to be lots of new maps. I believe GSL is starting to incorporate maps outside of blizzards pool, so its only a matter of time.. and With blizzard being extremely vigilant in my honest opinion about there attention towards SC2 im sure maps will follow suit into the pool quickly
|
Well I'm just wondering, if this is against the terms of service what's to stop blizzard from picking up on the third party app with warden and banning players who use it?
Honestly, part of the reason ICCUP worked is because blizzard didn't actively try to shut it down.
|
Why do so many people support this... The bonus pool is not a big enough deal to warrant a new server, all you would do is separate the players because some would go to the new server and some would stay out.
|
On January 07 2011 08:42 DonKey_ wrote:
Well I'm just wondering, if this is against the terms of service what's to stop blizzard from picking up on the third party app with warden and banning players who use it?
Honestly, part of the reason ICCUP worked is because blizzard didn't actively try to shut it down.
and partly because you can illegally re-download BW and play on the iCCup servers
where as this system REQUIRES the game to be bought AND to be played on the Blizzard servers....
|
in response to the recent hate, I support this because:
- I do not enjoy the ladder anymore, because I've grown tired of using the same strategies again and again, which I am forced to use against people who use their own same strategies again and again, on the same maps, again and again. Will this solve everything? I doubt it, but it will bring me back some interest in the game. Will Blizzard solve this, maybe better? It can be, but why should I wait months, maybe years, if things can be better now?
- without community mods and related development, the game will die much much sooner than it would otherwise. Saying that this kind of an effort will hurt the community downright stupid or in mala fide. Without a thriving mod scene there will simply be no community very soon; blizzard will let the game die when its focus will shift on the next game. imagine if the only multiplayer scene for brood war would have been battle.net. We probably wouldnt even have starcraft 2 today.
|
On January 07 2011 09:26 dementrio wrote:
in response to the recent hate, I support this because:
- I do not enjoy the ladder anymore, because I've grown tired of using the same strategies again and again, which I am forced to use against people who use their own same strategies again and again, on the same maps, again and again. Will this solve everything? I doubt it, but it will bring me back some interest in the game. Will Blizzard solve this, maybe better? It can be, but why should I wait months, maybe years, if things can be better now?
- without community mods and related development, the game will die much much sooner than it would otherwise. Saying that this kind of an effort will hurt the community downright stupid or in mala fide. Without a thriving mod scene there will simply be no community very soon; blizzard will let the game die when its focus will shift on the next game. imagine if the only multiplayer scene for brood war would have been battle.net. We probably wouldnt even have starcraft 2 today.
Actually with the new features in SC2 And with it being much more new user friendly it allows SC2 to grow beyond its predecessor. Could you imagine logging into sc2 then going into a chat channel and showing off ur uber ladder icon only to hear people say, lol ladder sucks you gotta play this custom ladder if u want to play good people. i mean cmon? why not just have it all in front of us instead of having to jump through hoops to get into the sc2 community. Thats just bad development and i think SC2 has come a long way in that regard so that the community can stay within the system that blizzard designed for us. Do not forget that blizzard is adding a huge patch that will finally allow chat channels. And in the future im sure we're going to see alot new maps coming from GSL and other tourneys that will get integrated into the map pool. They did it with wc3 and that wasn't nearly as big as sc2.
|
i think you just found a loophole, my friend. blizzard specifically forbids 3rd party servers in their EULA... but this is different. this is played on blizzard's servers. an outside program reads and records the results of the game and publishes it to an outside ladder...
very interesting idea. i think that a custom ladder like this could become very popular if blizzard continues to do nothing about the current map pool.
|
On January 07 2011 09:35 universalwill wrote:
i think you just found a loophole, my friend. blizzard specifically forbids 3rd party servers in their EULA... but this is different. this is played on blizzard's servers. an outside program reads and records the results of the game and publishes it to an outside ladder...
very interesting idea. i think that a custom ladder like this could become very popular if blizzard continues to do nothing about the current map pool.
While I'm not against the idea of starting our own ladder I just find it hard to believe Blizzard would allow such a thing since it's not "blizzard sanctioned".
Also even if there is a loophole in the EULA they could just instantly change it to suit their needs.
|
On January 07 2011 08:52 GreEny K wrote:
Why do so many people support this... The bonus pool is not a big enough deal to warrant a new server, all you would do is separate the players because some would go to the new server and some would stay out.
It's not about the bonus pool. The player pool is large enough to sustain a split. The bad players wouldn't feel the need to play on a custom ladder anyway so this would be a rather small community anyway (which is a good thing, rather than a bad thing)
On January 07 2011 09:40 DonKey_ wrote:Show nested quote +On January 07 2011 09:35 universalwill wrote:
i think you just found a loophole, my friend. blizzard specifically forbids 3rd party servers in their EULA... but this is different. this is played on blizzard's servers. an outside program reads and records the results of the game and publishes it to an outside ladder...
very interesting idea. i think that a custom ladder like this could become very popular if blizzard continues to do nothing about the current map pool. While I'm not against the idea of starting our own ladder I just find it hard to believe Blizzard would allow such a thing since it's not "blizzard sanctioned". Also even if there is a loophole in the EULA they could just instantly change it to suit their needs.
Yeah they're gonna make every single player on every server agree to the new EULA because some1 publishes a map that allows for a rating to be generated elsewhere. I don't think so.
On January 07 2011 09:33 FindingPride wrote:Show nested quote +On January 07 2011 09:26 dementrio wrote:
in response to the recent hate, I support this because:
- I do not enjoy the ladder anymore, because I've grown tired of using the same strategies again and again, which I am forced to use against people who use their own same strategies again and again, on the same maps, again and again. Will this solve everything? I doubt it, but it will bring me back some interest in the game. Will Blizzard solve this, maybe better? It can be, but why should I wait months, maybe years, if things can be better now?
- without community mods and related development, the game will die much much sooner than it would otherwise. Saying that this kind of an effort will hurt the community downright stupid or in mala fide. Without a thriving mod scene there will simply be no community very soon; blizzard will let the game die when its focus will shift on the next game. imagine if the only multiplayer scene for brood war would have been battle.net. We probably wouldnt even have starcraft 2 today. Actually with the new features in SC2 And with it being much more new user friendly it allows SC2 to grow beyond its predecessor. Could you imagine logging into sc2 then going into a chat channel and showing off ur uber ladder icon only to hear people say, lol ladder sucks you gotta play this custom ladder if u want to play good people. i mean cmon? why not just have it all in front of us instead of having to jump through hoops to get into the sc2 community. Thats just bad development and i think SC2 has come a long way in that regard so that the community can stay within the system that blizzard designed for us. Do not forget that blizzard is adding a huge patch that will finally allow chat channels. And in the future im sure we're going to see alot new maps coming from GSL and other tourneys that will get integrated into the map pool. They did it with wc3 and that wasn't nearly as big as sc2.
Yes I can imagine that. Ladder sucks. The current map pool is a piece of shit and Blizzard actively prevents the largest tournament in the world from using customs maps (and by effect makes it INCREDIBLY hard for smaller tournaments to do so). While this is happening we have had maps that are universally hated like Steppes, Blistering and Delta in the map pool FOR CENTURIES. Blizzard doesn't care. You could very clearly hear in their Blizzcon panels that they don't really care for map making. "eh, yeah we wanted people to have rushy games when they first played too" "if the community wants other maps they can make em no prob ezpz" (while disallowing GSL from doing the same thing) Their team is so small and they have such a large player base that map balance & the map pool is not one of their top priorities, they dont really see it as their job after they have released this awesome map editor that allows for 10mb map uploads that officially belong to them....
Just because Bnet2.0 was shitty in the beginning doesn't mean we have to praise it because it is less shitty now. Things like no LAN, frequent lag, and still having to re-log at least every week because bnet just bugs out is not something that we must protect with all our effort. If Blizzard doesn't deliver in the way the community wants, the community will help itself with all available means.
So far Blizzard is showing no signs of wanting to actively maintain a map pool with the input of the community. As such it isn't surprising that people want to take matters in their owns hands, since the success and prosperity of the BW scene depended so heavily on the maps the game was played on.
|
+ Show Spoiler +On January 07 2011 09:56 ChickenLips wrote:Show nested quote +On January 07 2011 08:52 GreEny K wrote:
Why do so many people support this... The bonus pool is not a big enough deal to warrant a new server, all you would do is separate the players because some would go to the new server and some would stay out. It's not about the bonus pool. The player pool is large enough to sustain a split. The bad players wouldn't feel the need to play on a custom ladder anyway so this would be a rather small community anyway (which is a good thing, rather than a bad thing) Show nested quote +On January 07 2011 09:40 DonKey_ wrote:On January 07 2011 09:35 universalwill wrote:
i think you just found a loophole, my friend. blizzard specifically forbids 3rd party servers in their EULA... but this is different. this is played on blizzard's servers. an outside program reads and records the results of the game and publishes it to an outside ladder...
very interesting idea. i think that a custom ladder like this could become very popular if blizzard continues to do nothing about the current map pool. While I'm not against the idea of starting our own ladder I just find it hard to believe Blizzard would allow such a thing since it's not "blizzard sanctioned". Also even if there is a loophole in the EULA they could just instantly change it to suit their needs. Yeah they're gonna make every single player on every server agree to the new EULA because some1 publishes a map that allows for a rating to be generated elsewhere. I don't think so. Show nested quote +On January 07 2011 09:33 FindingPride wrote:On January 07 2011 09:26 dementrio wrote:
in response to the recent hate, I support this because:
- I do not enjoy the ladder anymore, because I've grown tired of using the same strategies again and again, which I am forced to use against people who use their own same strategies again and again, on the same maps, again and again. Will this solve everything? I doubt it, but it will bring me back some interest in the game. Will Blizzard solve this, maybe better? It can be, but why should I wait months, maybe years, if things can be better now?
- without community mods and related development, the game will die much much sooner than it would otherwise. Saying that this kind of an effort will hurt the community downright stupid or in mala fide. Without a thriving mod scene there will simply be no community very soon; blizzard will let the game die when its focus will shift on the next game. imagine if the only multiplayer scene for brood war would have been battle.net. We probably wouldnt even have starcraft 2 today. Actually with the new features in SC2 And with it being much more new user friendly it allows SC2 to grow beyond its predecessor. Could you imagine logging into sc2 then going into a chat channel and showing off ur uber ladder icon only to hear people say, lol ladder sucks you gotta play this custom ladder if u want to play good people. i mean cmon? why not just have it all in front of us instead of having to jump through hoops to get into the sc2 community. Thats just bad development and i think SC2 has come a long way in that regard so that the community can stay within the system that blizzard designed for us. Do not forget that blizzard is adding a huge patch that will finally allow chat channels. And in the future im sure we're going to see alot new maps coming from GSL and other tourneys that will get integrated into the map pool. They did it with wc3 and that wasn't nearly as big as sc2. Yes I can imagine that. Ladder sucks. The current map pool is a piece of shit and Blizzard actively prevents the largest tournament in the world from using customs maps (and by effect makes it INCREDIBLY hard for smaller tournaments to do so). While this is happening we have had maps that are universally hated like Steppes, Blistering and Delta in the map pool FOR CENTURIES. Blizzard doesn't care. You could very clearly hear in their Blizzcon panels that they don't really care for map making. "eh, yeah we wanted people to have rushy games when they first played too" "if the community wants other maps they can make em no prob ezpz" (while disallowing GSL from doing the same thing) Their team is so small and they have such a large player base that map balance & the map pool is not one of their top priorities, they dont really see it as their job after they have released this awesome map editor that allows for 10mb map uploads that officially belong to them.... Just because Bnet2.0 was shitty in the beginning doesn't mean we have to praise it because it is less shitty now. Things like no LAN, frequent lag, and still having to re-log at least every week because bnet just bugs out is not something that we must protect with all our effort. If Blizzard doesn't deliver in the way the community wants, the community will help itself with all available means. So far Blizzard is showing no signs of wanting to actively maintain a map pool with the input of the community. As such it isn't surprising that people want to take matters in their owns hands, since the success and prosperity of the BW scene depended so heavily on the maps the game was played on.
Well the thing is, this isn't just publishing a map, it's trying to set up a ladder that will directly compete with blizzards.
Yes I do believe they would make every single player agree to a new EULA. Because the VAST majority doesn't care what it says and will simply skip to the bottom of it and click accept.
I just don't see how blizzard would let something like this go when they are so concerned about having everything under their control.
|
On January 07 2011 09:56 ChickenLips wrote:Show nested quote +On January 07 2011 09:40 DonKey_ wrote:On January 07 2011 09:35 universalwill wrote:
i think you just found a loophole, my friend. blizzard specifically forbids 3rd party servers in their EULA... but this is different. this is played on blizzard's servers. an outside program reads and records the results of the game and publishes it to an outside ladder...
very interesting idea. i think that a custom ladder like this could become very popular if blizzard continues to do nothing about the current map pool. While I'm not against the idea of starting our own ladder I just find it hard to believe Blizzard would allow such a thing since it's not "blizzard sanctioned". Also even if there is a loophole in the EULA they could just instantly change it to suit their needs. Yeah they're gonna make every single player on every server agree to the new EULA because some1 publishes a map that allows for a rating to be generated elsewhere. I don't think so..
totally agree with this.
its a BLIZZARD server using BLIZZARD'S editor and requiring to BUY the game...
all this does (like pretty much every page and the OP states) is make an SC2Bank file (like many other customs) and a 3rd party PROGRAM (NOT SERVER) reads this data, and does stuff with it there..
it doesn't interfere with blizzard's server, purchase rate, or activity.
sure a few people might switch to this custom ladder but what really is going to happen is a few "dedicated" players will switch while the rest stay on ladder since tournaments use that instead of the custom maps (which would be the next big change which WILL require others besides just the community.)
|
On January 07 2011 10:02 DonKey_ wrote:
Yes I do believe they would make every single player agree to a new EULA. Because the VAST majority doesn't care what it says and will simply skip to the bottom of it and click accept.
I just don't see how blizzard would let something like this go when they are so concerned about having everything under their control.
refer to my post above ^^
and if you're confused because i said "program, not server"
is because it doesn't connect to a server like iCCup does... the program does, not starcraft
|
On January 07 2011 10:04 Keitzer wrote:Show nested quote +On January 07 2011 10:02 DonKey_ wrote:
Yes I do believe they would make every single player agree to a new EULA. Because the VAST majority doesn't care what it says and will simply skip to the bottom of it and click accept.
I just don't see how blizzard would let something like this go when they are so concerned about having everything under their control.
refer to my post above ^^ and if you're confused because i said "program, not server" is because it doesn't connect to a server like iCCup does... the program does, not starcraft
Hmmm I misunderstood the data bank thing
But then that leads me to the question: how much can you store in the data banks?
|
On January 07 2011 10:02 DonKey_ wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On January 07 2011 09:56 ChickenLips wrote:Show nested quote +On January 07 2011 08:52 GreEny K wrote:
Why do so many people support this... The bonus pool is not a big enough deal to warrant a new server, all you would do is separate the players because some would go to the new server and some would stay out. It's not about the bonus pool. The player pool is large enough to sustain a split. The bad players wouldn't feel the need to play on a custom ladder anyway so this would be a rather small community anyway (which is a good thing, rather than a bad thing) Show nested quote +On January 07 2011 09:40 DonKey_ wrote:On January 07 2011 09:35 universalwill wrote:
i think you just found a loophole, my friend. blizzard specifically forbids 3rd party servers in their EULA... but this is different. this is played on blizzard's servers. an outside program reads and records the results of the game and publishes it to an outside ladder...
very interesting idea. i think that a custom ladder like this could become very popular if blizzard continues to do nothing about the current map pool. While I'm not against the idea of starting our own ladder I just find it hard to believe Blizzard would allow such a thing since it's not "blizzard sanctioned". Also even if there is a loophole in the EULA they could just instantly change it to suit their needs. Yeah they're gonna make every single player on every server agree to the new EULA because some1 publishes a map that allows for a rating to be generated elsewhere. I don't think so. Show nested quote +On January 07 2011 09:33 FindingPride wrote:On January 07 2011 09:26 dementrio wrote:
in response to the recent hate, I support this because:
- I do not enjoy the ladder anymore, because I've grown tired of using the same strategies again and again, which I am forced to use against people who use their own same strategies again and again, on the same maps, again and again. Will this solve everything? I doubt it, but it will bring me back some interest in the game. Will Blizzard solve this, maybe better? It can be, but why should I wait months, maybe years, if things can be better now?
- without community mods and related development, the game will die much much sooner than it would otherwise. Saying that this kind of an effort will hurt the community downright stupid or in mala fide. Without a thriving mod scene there will simply be no community very soon; blizzard will let the game die when its focus will shift on the next game. imagine if the only multiplayer scene for brood war would have been battle.net. We probably wouldnt even have starcraft 2 today. Actually with the new features in SC2 And with it being much more new user friendly it allows SC2 to grow beyond its predecessor. Could you imagine logging into sc2 then going into a chat channel and showing off ur uber ladder icon only to hear people say, lol ladder sucks you gotta play this custom ladder if u want to play good people. i mean cmon? why not just have it all in front of us instead of having to jump through hoops to get into the sc2 community. Thats just bad development and i think SC2 has come a long way in that regard so that the community can stay within the system that blizzard designed for us. Do not forget that blizzard is adding a huge patch that will finally allow chat channels. And in the future im sure we're going to see alot new maps coming from GSL and other tourneys that will get integrated into the map pool. They did it with wc3 and that wasn't nearly as big as sc2. Yes I can imagine that. Ladder sucks. The current map pool is a piece of shit and Blizzard actively prevents the largest tournament in the world from using customs maps (and by effect makes it INCREDIBLY hard for smaller tournaments to do so). While this is happening we have had maps that are universally hated like Steppes, Blistering and Delta in the map pool FOR CENTURIES. Blizzard doesn't care. You could very clearly hear in their Blizzcon panels that they don't really care for map making. "eh, yeah we wanted people to have rushy games when they first played too" "if the community wants other maps they can make em no prob ezpz" (while disallowing GSL from doing the same thing) Their team is so small and they have such a large player base that map balance & the map pool is not one of their top priorities, they dont really see it as their job after they have released this awesome map editor that allows for 10mb map uploads that officially belong to them.... Just because Bnet2.0 was shitty in the beginning doesn't mean we have to praise it because it is less shitty now. Things like no LAN, frequent lag, and still having to re-log at least every week because bnet just bugs out is not something that we must protect with all our effort. If Blizzard doesn't deliver in the way the community wants, the community will help itself with all available means. So far Blizzard is showing no signs of wanting to actively maintain a map pool with the input of the community. As such it isn't surprising that people want to take matters in their owns hands, since the success and prosperity of the BW scene depended so heavily on the maps the game was played on. Well the thing is, this isn't just publishing a map, it's trying to set up a ladder that will directly compete with blizzards. Yes I do believe they would make every single player agree to a new EULA. Because the VAST majority doesn't care what it says and will simply skip to the bottom of it and click accept. I just don't see how blizzard would let something like this go when they are so concerned about having everything under their control.
No you have absolutely no idea how big of a deal it is to make 3 million people agree to a new EULA.
I plainly don't think they will care and it isn't like iccup that involves a completely new system + allows for illegal downloads this is just a server somewhere that generats a rating and people play on maps that sends data to that server. nothing special and i frankly dont see why they would give a shit
|
On January 07 2011 10:12 ChickenLips wrote:Show nested quote +On January 07 2011 10:02 DonKey_ wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On January 07 2011 09:56 ChickenLips wrote:Show nested quote +On January 07 2011 08:52 GreEny K wrote:
Why do so many people support this... The bonus pool is not a big enough deal to warrant a new server, all you would do is separate the players because some would go to the new server and some would stay out. It's not about the bonus pool. The player pool is large enough to sustain a split. The bad players wouldn't feel the need to play on a custom ladder anyway so this would be a rather small community anyway (which is a good thing, rather than a bad thing) Show nested quote +On January 07 2011 09:40 DonKey_ wrote:On January 07 2011 09:35 universalwill wrote:
i think you just found a loophole, my friend. blizzard specifically forbids 3rd party servers in their EULA... but this is different. this is played on blizzard's servers. an outside program reads and records the results of the game and publishes it to an outside ladder...
very interesting idea. i think that a custom ladder like this could become very popular if blizzard continues to do nothing about the current map pool. While I'm not against the idea of starting our own ladder I just find it hard to believe Blizzard would allow such a thing since it's not "blizzard sanctioned". Also even if there is a loophole in the EULA they could just instantly change it to suit their needs. Yeah they're gonna make every single player on every server agree to the new EULA because some1 publishes a map that allows for a rating to be generated elsewhere. I don't think so. Show nested quote +On January 07 2011 09:33 FindingPride wrote:On January 07 2011 09:26 dementrio wrote:
in response to the recent hate, I support this because:
- I do not enjoy the ladder anymore, because I've grown tired of using the same strategies again and again, which I am forced to use against people who use their own same strategies again and again, on the same maps, again and again. Will this solve everything? I doubt it, but it will bring me back some interest in the game. Will Blizzard solve this, maybe better? It can be, but why should I wait months, maybe years, if things can be better now?
- without community mods and related development, the game will die much much sooner than it would otherwise. Saying that this kind of an effort will hurt the community downright stupid or in mala fide. Without a thriving mod scene there will simply be no community very soon; blizzard will let the game die when its focus will shift on the next game. imagine if the only multiplayer scene for brood war would have been battle.net. We probably wouldnt even have starcraft 2 today. Actually with the new features in SC2 And with it being much more new user friendly it allows SC2 to grow beyond its predecessor. Could you imagine logging into sc2 then going into a chat channel and showing off ur uber ladder icon only to hear people say, lol ladder sucks you gotta play this custom ladder if u want to play good people. i mean cmon? why not just have it all in front of us instead of having to jump through hoops to get into the sc2 community. Thats just bad development and i think SC2 has come a long way in that regard so that the community can stay within the system that blizzard designed for us. Do not forget that blizzard is adding a huge patch that will finally allow chat channels. And in the future im sure we're going to see alot new maps coming from GSL and other tourneys that will get integrated into the map pool. They did it with wc3 and that wasn't nearly as big as sc2. Yes I can imagine that. Ladder sucks. The current map pool is a piece of shit and Blizzard actively prevents the largest tournament in the world from using customs maps (and by effect makes it INCREDIBLY hard for smaller tournaments to do so). While this is happening we have had maps that are universally hated like Steppes, Blistering and Delta in the map pool FOR CENTURIES. Blizzard doesn't care. You could very clearly hear in their Blizzcon panels that they don't really care for map making. "eh, yeah we wanted people to have rushy games when they first played too" "if the community wants other maps they can make em no prob ezpz" (while disallowing GSL from doing the same thing) Their team is so small and they have such a large player base that map balance & the map pool is not one of their top priorities, they dont really see it as their job after they have released this awesome map editor that allows for 10mb map uploads that officially belong to them.... Just because Bnet2.0 was shitty in the beginning doesn't mean we have to praise it because it is less shitty now. Things like no LAN, frequent lag, and still having to re-log at least every week because bnet just bugs out is not something that we must protect with all our effort. If Blizzard doesn't deliver in the way the community wants, the community will help itself with all available means. So far Blizzard is showing no signs of wanting to actively maintain a map pool with the input of the community. As such it isn't surprising that people want to take matters in their owns hands, since the success and prosperity of the BW scene depended so heavily on the maps the game was played on. Well the thing is, this isn't just publishing a map, it's trying to set up a ladder that will directly compete with blizzards. Yes I do believe they would make every single player agree to a new EULA. Because the VAST majority doesn't care what it says and will simply skip to the bottom of it and click accept. I just don't see how blizzard would let something like this go when they are so concerned about having everything under their control. No you have absolutely no idea how big of a deal it is to make 3 million people agree to a new EULA. I plainly don't think they will care and it isn't like iccup that involves a completely new system + allows for illegal downloads this is just a server somewhere that generats a rating and people play on maps that sends data to that server. nothing special and i frankly dont see why they would give a shit
it's done all the time
you agree to the EULA if you want to play the game
if they update it they make you re-accept the EULA to login to the game
simple. they do it ALL THE TIME.
|
On January 07 2011 10:19 MavercK wrote:Show nested quote +On January 07 2011 10:12 ChickenLips wrote:On January 07 2011 10:02 DonKey_ wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On January 07 2011 09:56 ChickenLips wrote:Show nested quote +On January 07 2011 08:52 GreEny K wrote:
Why do so many people support this... The bonus pool is not a big enough deal to warrant a new server, all you would do is separate the players because some would go to the new server and some would stay out. It's not about the bonus pool. The player pool is large enough to sustain a split. The bad players wouldn't feel the need to play on a custom ladder anyway so this would be a rather small community anyway (which is a good thing, rather than a bad thing) Show nested quote +On January 07 2011 09:40 DonKey_ wrote:On January 07 2011 09:35 universalwill wrote:
i think you just found a loophole, my friend. blizzard specifically forbids 3rd party servers in their EULA... but this is different. this is played on blizzard's servers. an outside program reads and records the results of the game and publishes it to an outside ladder...
very interesting idea. i think that a custom ladder like this could become very popular if blizzard continues to do nothing about the current map pool. While I'm not against the idea of starting our own ladder I just find it hard to believe Blizzard would allow such a thing since it's not "blizzard sanctioned". Also even if there is a loophole in the EULA they could just instantly change it to suit their needs. Yeah they're gonna make every single player on every server agree to the new EULA because some1 publishes a map that allows for a rating to be generated elsewhere. I don't think so. Show nested quote +On January 07 2011 09:33 FindingPride wrote:On January 07 2011 09:26 dementrio wrote:
in response to the recent hate, I support this because:
- I do not enjoy the ladder anymore, because I've grown tired of using the same strategies again and again, which I am forced to use against people who use their own same strategies again and again, on the same maps, again and again. Will this solve everything? I doubt it, but it will bring me back some interest in the game. Will Blizzard solve this, maybe better? It can be, but why should I wait months, maybe years, if things can be better now?
- without community mods and related development, the game will die much much sooner than it would otherwise. Saying that this kind of an effort will hurt the community downright stupid or in mala fide. Without a thriving mod scene there will simply be no community very soon; blizzard will let the game die when its focus will shift on the next game. imagine if the only multiplayer scene for brood war would have been battle.net. We probably wouldnt even have starcraft 2 today. Actually with the new features in SC2 And with it being much more new user friendly it allows SC2 to grow beyond its predecessor. Could you imagine logging into sc2 then going into a chat channel and showing off ur uber ladder icon only to hear people say, lol ladder sucks you gotta play this custom ladder if u want to play good people. i mean cmon? why not just have it all in front of us instead of having to jump through hoops to get into the sc2 community. Thats just bad development and i think SC2 has come a long way in that regard so that the community can stay within the system that blizzard designed for us. Do not forget that blizzard is adding a huge patch that will finally allow chat channels. And in the future im sure we're going to see alot new maps coming from GSL and other tourneys that will get integrated into the map pool. They did it with wc3 and that wasn't nearly as big as sc2. Yes I can imagine that. Ladder sucks. The current map pool is a piece of shit and Blizzard actively prevents the largest tournament in the world from using customs maps (and by effect makes it INCREDIBLY hard for smaller tournaments to do so). While this is happening we have had maps that are universally hated like Steppes, Blistering and Delta in the map pool FOR CENTURIES. Blizzard doesn't care. You could very clearly hear in their Blizzcon panels that they don't really care for map making. "eh, yeah we wanted people to have rushy games when they first played too" "if the community wants other maps they can make em no prob ezpz" (while disallowing GSL from doing the same thing) Their team is so small and they have such a large player base that map balance & the map pool is not one of their top priorities, they dont really see it as their job after they have released this awesome map editor that allows for 10mb map uploads that officially belong to them.... Just because Bnet2.0 was shitty in the beginning doesn't mean we have to praise it because it is less shitty now. Things like no LAN, frequent lag, and still having to re-log at least every week because bnet just bugs out is not something that we must protect with all our effort. If Blizzard doesn't deliver in the way the community wants, the community will help itself with all available means. So far Blizzard is showing no signs of wanting to actively maintain a map pool with the input of the community. As such it isn't surprising that people want to take matters in their owns hands, since the success and prosperity of the BW scene depended so heavily on the maps the game was played on. Well the thing is, this isn't just publishing a map, it's trying to set up a ladder that will directly compete with blizzards. Yes I do believe they would make every single player agree to a new EULA. Because the VAST majority doesn't care what it says and will simply skip to the bottom of it and click accept. I just don't see how blizzard would let something like this go when they are so concerned about having everything under their control. No you have absolutely no idea how big of a deal it is to make 3 million people agree to a new EULA. I plainly don't think they will care and it isn't like iccup that involves a completely new system + allows for illegal downloads this is just a server somewhere that generats a rating and people play on maps that sends data to that server. nothing special and i frankly dont see why they would give a shit it's done all the time you agree to the EULA if you want to play the game if they update it they make you re-accept the EULA to login to the game simple. they do it ALL THE TIME.
Nice job completely shutting off your brain after the first sentence in my post. Maybe try again? I said 1 custom map doesn't warrant 3 million ppl agreeing to a new EULA. Got it now?
|
On January 07 2011 10:21 ChickenLips wrote:Show nested quote +On January 07 2011 10:19 MavercK wrote:On January 07 2011 10:12 ChickenLips wrote:On January 07 2011 10:02 DonKey_ wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On January 07 2011 09:56 ChickenLips wrote:Show nested quote +On January 07 2011 08:52 GreEny K wrote:
Why do so many people support this... The bonus pool is not a big enough deal to warrant a new server, all you would do is separate the players because some would go to the new server and some would stay out. It's not about the bonus pool. The player pool is large enough to sustain a split. The bad players wouldn't feel the need to play on a custom ladder anyway so this would be a rather small community anyway (which is a good thing, rather than a bad thing) Show nested quote +On January 07 2011 09:40 DonKey_ wrote:On January 07 2011 09:35 universalwill wrote:
i think you just found a loophole, my friend. blizzard specifically forbids 3rd party servers in their EULA... but this is different. this is played on blizzard's servers. an outside program reads and records the results of the game and publishes it to an outside ladder...
very interesting idea. i think that a custom ladder like this could become very popular if blizzard continues to do nothing about the current map pool. While I'm not against the idea of starting our own ladder I just find it hard to believe Blizzard would allow such a thing since it's not "blizzard sanctioned". Also even if there is a loophole in the EULA they could just instantly change it to suit their needs. Yeah they're gonna make every single player on every server agree to the new EULA because some1 publishes a map that allows for a rating to be generated elsewhere. I don't think so. Show nested quote +On January 07 2011 09:33 FindingPride wrote:On January 07 2011 09:26 dementrio wrote:
in response to the recent hate, I support this because:
- I do not enjoy the ladder anymore, because I've grown tired of using the same strategies again and again, which I am forced to use against people who use their own same strategies again and again, on the same maps, again and again. Will this solve everything? I doubt it, but it will bring me back some interest in the game. Will Blizzard solve this, maybe better? It can be, but why should I wait months, maybe years, if things can be better now?
- without community mods and related development, the game will die much much sooner than it would otherwise. Saying that this kind of an effort will hurt the community downright stupid or in mala fide. Without a thriving mod scene there will simply be no community very soon; blizzard will let the game die when its focus will shift on the next game. imagine if the only multiplayer scene for brood war would have been battle.net. We probably wouldnt even have starcraft 2 today. Actually with the new features in SC2 And with it being much more new user friendly it allows SC2 to grow beyond its predecessor. Could you imagine logging into sc2 then going into a chat channel and showing off ur uber ladder icon only to hear people say, lol ladder sucks you gotta play this custom ladder if u want to play good people. i mean cmon? why not just have it all in front of us instead of having to jump through hoops to get into the sc2 community. Thats just bad development and i think SC2 has come a long way in that regard so that the community can stay within the system that blizzard designed for us. Do not forget that blizzard is adding a huge patch that will finally allow chat channels. And in the future im sure we're going to see alot new maps coming from GSL and other tourneys that will get integrated into the map pool. They did it with wc3 and that wasn't nearly as big as sc2. Yes I can imagine that. Ladder sucks. The current map pool is a piece of shit and Blizzard actively prevents the largest tournament in the world from using customs maps (and by effect makes it INCREDIBLY hard for smaller tournaments to do so). While this is happening we have had maps that are universally hated like Steppes, Blistering and Delta in the map pool FOR CENTURIES. Blizzard doesn't care. You could very clearly hear in their Blizzcon panels that they don't really care for map making. "eh, yeah we wanted people to have rushy games when they first played too" "if the community wants other maps they can make em no prob ezpz" (while disallowing GSL from doing the same thing) Their team is so small and they have such a large player base that map balance & the map pool is not one of their top priorities, they dont really see it as their job after they have released this awesome map editor that allows for 10mb map uploads that officially belong to them.... Just because Bnet2.0 was shitty in the beginning doesn't mean we have to praise it because it is less shitty now. Things like no LAN, frequent lag, and still having to re-log at least every week because bnet just bugs out is not something that we must protect with all our effort. If Blizzard doesn't deliver in the way the community wants, the community will help itself with all available means. So far Blizzard is showing no signs of wanting to actively maintain a map pool with the input of the community. As such it isn't surprising that people want to take matters in their owns hands, since the success and prosperity of the BW scene depended so heavily on the maps the game was played on. Well the thing is, this isn't just publishing a map, it's trying to set up a ladder that will directly compete with blizzards. Yes I do believe they would make every single player agree to a new EULA. Because the VAST majority doesn't care what it says and will simply skip to the bottom of it and click accept. I just don't see how blizzard would let something like this go when they are so concerned about having everything under their control. No you have absolutely no idea how big of a deal it is to make 3 million people agree to a new EULA. I plainly don't think they will care and it isn't like iccup that involves a completely new system + allows for illegal downloads this is just a server somewhere that generats a rating and people play on maps that sends data to that server. nothing special and i frankly dont see why they would give a shit it's done all the time you agree to the EULA if you want to play the game if they update it they make you re-accept the EULA to login to the game simple. they do it ALL THE TIME. Nice job completely shutting off your brain after the first sentence in my post. Maybe try again? I said 1 custom map doesn't warrant 3 million ppl agreeing to a new EULA. Got it now?
it does if it's something they dont want to happen? i dont understand why this is even an issue.
|
On January 07 2011 10:11 DonKey_ wrote:Show nested quote +On January 07 2011 10:04 Keitzer wrote:On January 07 2011 10:02 DonKey_ wrote:
Yes I do believe they would make every single player agree to a new EULA. Because the VAST majority doesn't care what it says and will simply skip to the bottom of it and click accept.
I just don't see how blizzard would let something like this go when they are so concerned about having everything under their control.
refer to my post above ^^ and if you're confused because i said "program, not server" is because it doesn't connect to a server like iCCup does... the program does, not starcraft Hmmm I misunderstood the data bank thing But then that leads me to the question: how much can you store in the data banks?
Just take a look at your own bank files:
C:\Users\<user>\Documents\StarCraft II\Accounts\<number>\<number>\Banks
They're normal XML files. So their size is basically unlimited. Though to save the needed information I doubt it to be bigger than 3kb 
Of course if you would want to save your whole history of all games it would be bigger - but just saving the most recent one would be enough.
On January 07 2011 10:27 MavercK wrote:Show nested quote +On January 07 2011 10:21 ChickenLips wrote:On January 07 2011 10:19 MavercK wrote:On January 07 2011 10:12 ChickenLips wrote:On January 07 2011 10:02 DonKey_ wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On January 07 2011 09:56 ChickenLips wrote:Show nested quote +On January 07 2011 08:52 GreEny K wrote:
Why do so many people support this... The bonus pool is not a big enough deal to warrant a new server, all you would do is separate the players because some would go to the new server and some would stay out. It's not about the bonus pool. The player pool is large enough to sustain a split. The bad players wouldn't feel the need to play on a custom ladder anyway so this would be a rather small community anyway (which is a good thing, rather than a bad thing) Show nested quote +On January 07 2011 09:40 DonKey_ wrote:On January 07 2011 09:35 universalwill wrote:
i think you just found a loophole, my friend. blizzard specifically forbids 3rd party servers in their EULA... but this is different. this is played on blizzard's servers. an outside program reads and records the results of the game and publishes it to an outside ladder...
very interesting idea. i think that a custom ladder like this could become very popular if blizzard continues to do nothing about the current map pool. While I'm not against the idea of starting our own ladder I just find it hard to believe Blizzard would allow such a thing since it's not "blizzard sanctioned". Also even if there is a loophole in the EULA they could just instantly change it to suit their needs. Yeah they're gonna make every single player on every server agree to the new EULA because some1 publishes a map that allows for a rating to be generated elsewhere. I don't think so. Show nested quote +On January 07 2011 09:33 FindingPride wrote:On January 07 2011 09:26 dementrio wrote:
in response to the recent hate, I support this because:
- I do not enjoy the ladder anymore, because I've grown tired of using the same strategies again and again, which I am forced to use against people who use their own same strategies again and again, on the same maps, again and again. Will this solve everything? I doubt it, but it will bring me back some interest in the game. Will Blizzard solve this, maybe better? It can be, but why should I wait months, maybe years, if things can be better now?
- without community mods and related development, the game will die much much sooner than it would otherwise. Saying that this kind of an effort will hurt the community downright stupid or in mala fide. Without a thriving mod scene there will simply be no community very soon; blizzard will let the game die when its focus will shift on the next game. imagine if the only multiplayer scene for brood war would have been battle.net. We probably wouldnt even have starcraft 2 today. Actually with the new features in SC2 And with it being much more new user friendly it allows SC2 to grow beyond its predecessor. Could you imagine logging into sc2 then going into a chat channel and showing off ur uber ladder icon only to hear people say, lol ladder sucks you gotta play this custom ladder if u want to play good people. i mean cmon? why not just have it all in front of us instead of having to jump through hoops to get into the sc2 community. Thats just bad development and i think SC2 has come a long way in that regard so that the community can stay within the system that blizzard designed for us. Do not forget that blizzard is adding a huge patch that will finally allow chat channels. And in the future im sure we're going to see alot new maps coming from GSL and other tourneys that will get integrated into the map pool. They did it with wc3 and that wasn't nearly as big as sc2. Yes I can imagine that. Ladder sucks. The current map pool is a piece of shit and Blizzard actively prevents the largest tournament in the world from using customs maps (and by effect makes it INCREDIBLY hard for smaller tournaments to do so). While this is happening we have had maps that are universally hated like Steppes, Blistering and Delta in the map pool FOR CENTURIES. Blizzard doesn't care. You could very clearly hear in their Blizzcon panels that they don't really care for map making. "eh, yeah we wanted people to have rushy games when they first played too" "if the community wants other maps they can make em no prob ezpz" (while disallowing GSL from doing the same thing) Their team is so small and they have such a large player base that map balance & the map pool is not one of their top priorities, they dont really see it as their job after they have released this awesome map editor that allows for 10mb map uploads that officially belong to them.... Just because Bnet2.0 was shitty in the beginning doesn't mean we have to praise it because it is less shitty now. Things like no LAN, frequent lag, and still having to re-log at least every week because bnet just bugs out is not something that we must protect with all our effort. If Blizzard doesn't deliver in the way the community wants, the community will help itself with all available means. So far Blizzard is showing no signs of wanting to actively maintain a map pool with the input of the community. As such it isn't surprising that people want to take matters in their owns hands, since the success and prosperity of the BW scene depended so heavily on the maps the game was played on. Well the thing is, this isn't just publishing a map, it's trying to set up a ladder that will directly compete with blizzards. Yes I do believe they would make every single player agree to a new EULA. Because the VAST majority doesn't care what it says and will simply skip to the bottom of it and click accept. I just don't see how blizzard would let something like this go when they are so concerned about having everything under their control. No you have absolutely no idea how big of a deal it is to make 3 million people agree to a new EULA. I plainly don't think they will care and it isn't like iccup that involves a completely new system + allows for illegal downloads this is just a server somewhere that generats a rating and people play on maps that sends data to that server. nothing special and i frankly dont see why they would give a shit it's done all the time you agree to the EULA if you want to play the game if they update it they make you re-accept the EULA to login to the game simple. they do it ALL THE TIME. Nice job completely shutting off your brain after the first sentence in my post. Maybe try again? I said 1 custom map doesn't warrant 3 million ppl agreeing to a new EULA. Got it now? it does if it's something they dont want to happen? i dont understand why this is even an issue.
How would they want to change the EULA to prevent the reading of those files?
"Third party software is not allowed to access any files related to the game"?
Virus scanners, defragmentation programs, compression programs, the OS itself.
And no they cannot just go ahead and say "all forbidden" - because some countries (i.e. Germany) has same pretty good laws concerning EULAs / TOS and their legality.
So it's not that easy for them to just add something to prevent it
|
On January 07 2011 13:22 Zocat wrote:Show nested quote +On January 07 2011 10:11 DonKey_ wrote:On January 07 2011 10:04 Keitzer wrote:On January 07 2011 10:02 DonKey_ wrote:
Yes I do believe they would make every single player agree to a new EULA. Because the VAST majority doesn't care what it says and will simply skip to the bottom of it and click accept.
I just don't see how blizzard would let something like this go when they are so concerned about having everything under their control.
refer to my post above ^^ and if you're confused because i said "program, not server" is because it doesn't connect to a server like iCCup does... the program does, not starcraft Hmmm I misunderstood the data bank thing But then that leads me to the question: how much can you store in the data banks? Just take a look at your own bank files: C:\Users\<user>\Documents\StarCraft II\Accounts\<number>\<number>\Banks They're normal XML files. So their size is basically unlimited. Though to save the needed information I doubt it to be bigger than 3kb Of course if you would want to save your whole history of all games it would be bigger - but just saving the most recent one would be enough. + Show Spoiler +On January 07 2011 10:27 MavercK wrote:Show nested quote +On January 07 2011 10:21 ChickenLips wrote:On January 07 2011 10:19 MavercK wrote:On January 07 2011 10:12 ChickenLips wrote:On January 07 2011 10:02 DonKey_ wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On January 07 2011 09:56 ChickenLips wrote:Show nested quote +On January 07 2011 08:52 GreEny K wrote:
Why do so many people support this... The bonus pool is not a big enough deal to warrant a new server, all you would do is separate the players because some would go to the new server and some would stay out. It's not about the bonus pool. The player pool is large enough to sustain a split. The bad players wouldn't feel the need to play on a custom ladder anyway so this would be a rather small community anyway (which is a good thing, rather than a bad thing) Show nested quote +On January 07 2011 09:40 DonKey_ wrote:On January 07 2011 09:35 universalwill wrote:
i think you just found a loophole, my friend. blizzard specifically forbids 3rd party servers in their EULA... but this is different. this is played on blizzard's servers. an outside program reads and records the results of the game and publishes it to an outside ladder...
very interesting idea. i think that a custom ladder like this could become very popular if blizzard continues to do nothing about the current map pool. While I'm not against the idea of starting our own ladder I just find it hard to believe Blizzard would allow such a thing since it's not "blizzard sanctioned". Also even if there is a loophole in the EULA they could just instantly change it to suit their needs. Yeah they're gonna make every single player on every server agree to the new EULA because some1 publishes a map that allows for a rating to be generated elsewhere. I don't think so. Show nested quote +On January 07 2011 09:33 FindingPride wrote:On January 07 2011 09:26 dementrio wrote:
in response to the recent hate, I support this because:
- I do not enjoy the ladder anymore, because I've grown tired of using the same strategies again and again, which I am forced to use against people who use their own same strategies again and again, on the same maps, again and again. Will this solve everything? I doubt it, but it will bring me back some interest in the game. Will Blizzard solve this, maybe better? It can be, but why should I wait months, maybe years, if things can be better now?
- without community mods and related development, the game will die much much sooner than it would otherwise. Saying that this kind of an effort will hurt the community downright stupid or in mala fide. Without a thriving mod scene there will simply be no community very soon; blizzard will let the game die when its focus will shift on the next game. imagine if the only multiplayer scene for brood war would have been battle.net. We probably wouldnt even have starcraft 2 today. Actually with the new features in SC2 And with it being much more new user friendly it allows SC2 to grow beyond its predecessor. Could you imagine logging into sc2 then going into a chat channel and showing off ur uber ladder icon only to hear people say, lol ladder sucks you gotta play this custom ladder if u want to play good people. i mean cmon? why not just have it all in front of us instead of having to jump through hoops to get into the sc2 community. Thats just bad development and i think SC2 has come a long way in that regard so that the community can stay within the system that blizzard designed for us. Do not forget that blizzard is adding a huge patch that will finally allow chat channels. And in the future im sure we're going to see alot new maps coming from GSL and other tourneys that will get integrated into the map pool. They did it with wc3 and that wasn't nearly as big as sc2. Yes I can imagine that. Ladder sucks. The current map pool is a piece of shit and Blizzard actively prevents the largest tournament in the world from using customs maps (and by effect makes it INCREDIBLY hard for smaller tournaments to do so). While this is happening we have had maps that are universally hated like Steppes, Blistering and Delta in the map pool FOR CENTURIES. Blizzard doesn't care. You could very clearly hear in their Blizzcon panels that they don't really care for map making. "eh, yeah we wanted people to have rushy games when they first played too" "if the community wants other maps they can make em no prob ezpz" (while disallowing GSL from doing the same thing) Their team is so small and they have such a large player base that map balance & the map pool is not one of their top priorities, they dont really see it as their job after they have released this awesome map editor that allows for 10mb map uploads that officially belong to them.... Just because Bnet2.0 was shitty in the beginning doesn't mean we have to praise it because it is less shitty now. Things like no LAN, frequent lag, and still having to re-log at least every week because bnet just bugs out is not something that we must protect with all our effort. If Blizzard doesn't deliver in the way the community wants, the community will help itself with all available means. So far Blizzard is showing no signs of wanting to actively maintain a map pool with the input of the community. As such it isn't surprising that people want to take matters in their owns hands, since the success and prosperity of the BW scene depended so heavily on the maps the game was played on. Well the thing is, this isn't just publishing a map, it's trying to set up a ladder that will directly compete with blizzards. Yes I do believe they would make every single player agree to a new EULA. Because the VAST majority doesn't care what it says and will simply skip to the bottom of it and click accept. I just don't see how blizzard would let something like this go when they are so concerned about having everything under their control. No you have absolutely no idea how big of a deal it is to make 3 million people agree to a new EULA. I plainly don't think they will care and it isn't like iccup that involves a completely new system + allows for illegal downloads this is just a server somewhere that generats a rating and people play on maps that sends data to that server. nothing special and i frankly dont see why they would give a shit it's done all the time you agree to the EULA if you want to play the game if they update it they make you re-accept the EULA to login to the game simple. they do it ALL THE TIME. Nice job completely shutting off your brain after the first sentence in my post. Maybe try again? I said 1 custom map doesn't warrant 3 million ppl agreeing to a new EULA. Got it now? it does if it's something they dont want to happen? i dont understand why this is even an issue. How would they want to change the EULA to prevent the reading of those files? "Third party software is not allowed to access any files related to the game"? Virus scanners, defragmentation programs, compression programs, the OS itself. And no they cannot just go ahead and say "all forbidden" - because some countries (i.e. Germany) has same pretty good laws concerning EULAs / TOS and their legality. So it's not that easy for them to just add something to prevent it
ahh, however, the OP said the program (im assuming currently) only check the file when it notices a size increase (due to data addition)
so my guess is that it'll have the entire history.. of which will get very massive after say, 500 games?
and if it keeps EVERY GAME... why not keep the ratings on the file like it does in any other custom? (assuming you don't move computers)
|
bank files can be used to save anything
a comprehensive ladder would be able to do amazing things
be able to produce almost unlimited stats about a game or player.
you'd be able to count workers/units/minerals/upgrades anything
you'd be able to display all this information on the ladder website
you could have player averages displayed on the players profile
obviously some plays wouldn't want this a simple on/off option on their ladder account.
seriously the possibilities for this for the community are massive.
almost everything thats wrong with battle.net 2.0 can be fixed externally.
this stuff has me super excited
i dont give a damn about sc2 ladder
but this lets me do a ladder for my brood war remake mod
this lets other custom maps do some sort of competitive ladder. like sotis or star battle.
power to the community. let it happen. you'll be amazed.
|
On January 07 2011 09:26 dementrio wrote:
in response to the recent hate, I support this because:
- I do not enjoy the ladder anymore, because I've grown tired of using the same strategies again and again, which I am forced to use against people who use their own same strategies again and again, on the same maps, again and again. Will this solve everything? I doubt it, but it will bring me back some interest in the game. Will Blizzard solve this, maybe better? It can be, but why should I wait months, maybe years, if things can be better now?
- without community mods and related development, the game will die much much sooner than it would otherwise. Saying that this kind of an effort will hurt the community downright stupid or in mala fide. Without a thriving mod scene there will simply be no community very soon; blizzard will let the game die when its focus will shift on the next game. imagine if the only multiplayer scene for brood war would have been battle.net. We probably wouldnt even have starcraft 2 today.
Well hot damn You hate using the same strategies over and over again? Well then you're playing the wrong game. You are wrong you should have to keep using the same strat and perfect it much like SC1. On another note, I would not support a custom ladder on Bnet 2.0 because unless tournaments run off those maps it would hurt the player base as a whole looking to practice on the blizzard maps. Also the map pool isn't that bad right now with the removal of older maps such as kulas and desert oasis.
Ninja Edit: We need to give SC2 more than 5 months to get actual balanced maps. Even BW had redonc maps during the first 10 years of its life and look at it now its doing pretty well with its map pool good maps take a hell of a lot of testing to actually balance out custom maps or blizzard maps.
|
On January 07 2011 14:00 Fdragon wrote:Also the map pool isn't that bad right now with the removal of older maps such as kulas and desert oasis.
and shakuras!
|
On January 07 2011 14:06 Keitzer wrote:Show nested quote +On January 07 2011 14:00 Fdragon wrote:On January 07 2011 09:26 dementrio wrote: Also the map pool isn't that bad right now with the removal of older maps such as kulas and desert oasis. and shakuras!
D= Noooo We liked that one!
|
On January 07 2011 14:10 Fdragon wrote:Show nested quote +On January 07 2011 14:06 Keitzer wrote:On January 07 2011 14:00 Fdragon wrote:On January 07 2011 09:26 dementrio wrote: Also the map pool isn't that bad right now with the removal of older maps such as kulas and desert oasis. and shakuras! D= Noooo We liked that one!
mhmm, yet b/c of one bug, they removed it... NOT HOTFIX... REMOVED!
|
On January 07 2011 14:11 Keitzer wrote:Show nested quote +On January 07 2011 14:10 Fdragon wrote:On January 07 2011 14:06 Keitzer wrote:On January 07 2011 14:00 Fdragon wrote:On January 07 2011 09:26 dementrio wrote: Also the map pool isn't that bad right now with the removal of older maps such as kulas and desert oasis. and shakuras! D= Noooo We liked that one! mhmm, yet b/c of one bug, they removed it... NOT HOTFIX... REMOVED!
Accursed Toss ruin everything =(
Last post for me don't want to spam to hard.
|
I support any initiative to implement playable maps.
Gw sir.
|
If you can get iCCup to get behind this, things will get big very, very fast.
edit: Actually if GSL doesn't support the maps from this hypothetical custom ladder and no other large tournaments use these same maps, you most likely will not get the support of professional gamers. Sorry, but it's true.
|
this seems like a realy good project!
full support from me!
|
There is no way to prevent score cheating with this method, and a hash isn't going to do it, they can just edit the file and then regen the hash.. Encrypting won't work either, as the encryption code has to be hardcoded somewhere and available for the client to use. Sure, most people don't know how to do this, but it doesn't matter as it only takes a single person to write a script for it and bang, its available to everybody.
|
I heard server emulator is coming out soon (maybe within the next month). Might help a bit, but it would probably have too many bugs to serve a lot of players (might not even have the functionality to do more than 8 I think).
|
On January 07 2011 20:15 Xapti wrote:
I heard server emulator is coming out soon (maybe within the next month). Might help a bit, but it would probably have too many bugs to serve a lot of players (might not even have the functionality to do more than 8 I think).
got a source? couldnt find anything using google
|
On January 07 2011 19:41 FrostedMiniWeet wrote:
There is no way to prevent score cheating with this method, and a hash isn't going to do it, they can just edit the file and then regen the hash.. Encrypting won't work either, as the encryption code has to be hardcoded somewhere and available for the client to use. Sure, most people don't know how to do this, but it doesn't matter as it only takes a single person to write a script for it and bang, its available to everybody.
It's enough to block the majority. There's a different level of effort required to change the results when they're protected by encryption. Sure - some people will encouraged to break the system because of the challenge. Also you can change the hardcoded stuff whenever you want.
And then you can check the reported results if they still use the old encryption -> ban.
100% protection cannot be achieved of course - but isnt neccessary.
Also the most important factor: since you get results from both players you can check for integrity.
If some player often reports different results compared to his opponents you'll see that. What happens then is open to administration.
|
On January 07 2011 22:11 Zocat wrote:Show nested quote +On January 07 2011 19:41 FrostedMiniWeet wrote:
There is no way to prevent score cheating with this method, and a hash isn't going to do it, they can just edit the file and then regen the hash.. Encrypting won't work either, as the encryption code has to be hardcoded somewhere and available for the client to use. Sure, most people don't know how to do this, but it doesn't matter as it only takes a single person to write a script for it and bang, its available to everybody. It's enough to block the majority. There's a different level of effort required to change the results when they're protected by encryption. Sure - some people will encouraged to break the system because of the challenge. Also you can change the hardcoded stuff whenever you want. And then you can check the reported results if they still use the old encryption -> ban. 100% protection cannot be achieved of course - but isnt neccessary. Also the most important factor: since you get results from both players you can check for integrity. If some player often reports different results compared to his opponents you'll see that. What happens then is open to administration.
This is a very good point.
Also there isn't a strong incentive to cheat this custom ladder. It's not going to get you sponsorship deals, tournament invitations or wide recognition from the public. You also can't just cheat the heck out of it since irregularities will cause suspicion and what is a slightly higher rank gonna do for you, you'll just get destroyed more by better players.
|
On January 07 2011 22:18 ChickenLips wrote:Show nested quote +On January 07 2011 22:11 Zocat wrote:On January 07 2011 19:41 FrostedMiniWeet wrote:
There is no way to prevent score cheating with this method, and a hash isn't going to do it, they can just edit the file and then regen the hash.. Encrypting won't work either, as the encryption code has to be hardcoded somewhere and available for the client to use. Sure, most people don't know how to do this, but it doesn't matter as it only takes a single person to write a script for it and bang, its available to everybody. It's enough to block the majority. There's a different level of effort required to change the results when they're protected by encryption. Sure - some people will encouraged to break the system because of the challenge. Also you can change the hardcoded stuff whenever you want. And then you can check the reported results if they still use the old encryption -> ban. 100% protection cannot be achieved of course - but isnt neccessary. Also the most important factor: since you get results from both players you can check for integrity. If some player often reports different results compared to his opponents you'll see that. What happens then is open to administration. This is a very good point. Also there isn't a strong incentive to cheat this custom ladder. It's not going to get you sponsorship deals, tournament invitations or wide recognition from the public. You also can't just cheat the heck out of it since irregularities will cause suspicion and what is a slightly higher rank gonna do for you, you'll just get destroyed more by better players.
he brought this up because on iCCup and blizzard's ladder, you CAN'T cheat...
|
On January 08 2011 00:22 Keitzer wrote:Show nested quote +On January 07 2011 22:18 ChickenLips wrote:On January 07 2011 22:11 Zocat wrote:On January 07 2011 19:41 FrostedMiniWeet wrote:
There is no way to prevent score cheating with this method, and a hash isn't going to do it, they can just edit the file and then regen the hash.. Encrypting won't work either, as the encryption code has to be hardcoded somewhere and available for the client to use. Sure, most people don't know how to do this, but it doesn't matter as it only takes a single person to write a script for it and bang, its available to everybody. It's enough to block the majority. There's a different level of effort required to change the results when they're protected by encryption. Sure - some people will encouraged to break the system because of the challenge. Also you can change the hardcoded stuff whenever you want. And then you can check the reported results if they still use the old encryption -> ban. 100% protection cannot be achieved of course - but isnt neccessary. Also the most important factor: since you get results from both players you can check for integrity. If some player often reports different results compared to his opponents you'll see that. What happens then is open to administration. This is a very good point. Also there isn't a strong incentive to cheat this custom ladder. It's not going to get you sponsorship deals, tournament invitations or wide recognition from the public. You also can't just cheat the heck out of it since irregularities will cause suspicion and what is a slightly higher rank gonna do for you, you'll just get destroyed more by better players. he brought this up because on iCCup and blizzard's ladder, you CAN'T cheat...
Yeah very funny, there's no map or loss hacks for sc2 ? get a clue
There will always be people trying to abuse the system. The challenge is to make it as hard and as unattractive as possible while trying to minimize the effects this has on the 'good' players.
|
Waiting very very eagerly for this!
|
On January 08 2011 00:36 ChickenLips wrote:Show nested quote +On January 08 2011 00:22 Keitzer wrote:On January 07 2011 22:18 ChickenLips wrote:On January 07 2011 22:11 Zocat wrote:On January 07 2011 19:41 FrostedMiniWeet wrote:
There is no way to prevent score cheating with this method, and a hash isn't going to do it, they can just edit the file and then regen the hash.. Encrypting won't work either, as the encryption code has to be hardcoded somewhere and available for the client to use. Sure, most people don't know how to do this, but it doesn't matter as it only takes a single person to write a script for it and bang, its available to everybody. It's enough to block the majority. There's a different level of effort required to change the results when they're protected by encryption. Sure - some people will encouraged to break the system because of the challenge. Also you can change the hardcoded stuff whenever you want. And then you can check the reported results if they still use the old encryption -> ban. 100% protection cannot be achieved of course - but isnt neccessary. Also the most important factor: since you get results from both players you can check for integrity. If some player often reports different results compared to his opponents you'll see that. What happens then is open to administration. This is a very good point. Also there isn't a strong incentive to cheat this custom ladder. It's not going to get you sponsorship deals, tournament invitations or wide recognition from the public. You also can't just cheat the heck out of it since irregularities will cause suspicion and what is a slightly higher rank gonna do for you, you'll just get destroyed more by better players. he brought this up because on iCCup and blizzard's ladder, you CAN'T cheat... Yeah very funny, there's no map or loss hacks for sc2 ? get a clue There will always be people trying to abuse the system. The challenge is to make it as hard and as unattractive as possible while trying to minimize the effects this has on the 'good' players.
map and loss hacks are different than just editing a file and saying you're A+ (or in blizzard's case, 3k diamond)... you can't... you still have to play all the games
|
On January 08 2011 04:53 Keitzer wrote:Show nested quote +On January 08 2011 00:36 ChickenLips wrote:On January 08 2011 00:22 Keitzer wrote:On January 07 2011 22:18 ChickenLips wrote:On January 07 2011 22:11 Zocat wrote:On January 07 2011 19:41 FrostedMiniWeet wrote:
There is no way to prevent score cheating with this method, and a hash isn't going to do it, they can just edit the file and then regen the hash.. Encrypting won't work either, as the encryption code has to be hardcoded somewhere and available for the client to use. Sure, most people don't know how to do this, but it doesn't matter as it only takes a single person to write a script for it and bang, its available to everybody. It's enough to block the majority. There's a different level of effort required to change the results when they're protected by encryption. Sure - some people will encouraged to break the system because of the challenge. Also you can change the hardcoded stuff whenever you want. And then you can check the reported results if they still use the old encryption -> ban. 100% protection cannot be achieved of course - but isnt neccessary. Also the most important factor: since you get results from both players you can check for integrity. If some player often reports different results compared to his opponents you'll see that. What happens then is open to administration. This is a very good point. Also there isn't a strong incentive to cheat this custom ladder. It's not going to get you sponsorship deals, tournament invitations or wide recognition from the public. You also can't just cheat the heck out of it since irregularities will cause suspicion and what is a slightly higher rank gonna do for you, you'll just get destroyed more by better players. he brought this up because on iCCup and blizzard's ladder, you CAN'T cheat... Yeah very funny, there's no map or loss hacks for sc2 ? get a clue There will always be people trying to abuse the system. The challenge is to make it as hard and as unattractive as possible while trying to minimize the effects this has on the 'good' players. map and loss hacks are different than just editing a file and saying you're A+ (or in blizzard's case, 3k diamond)... you can't... you still have to play all the games
I don't have much expertise in programming, I will leave that to those that have more of a clue, however I very much doubt that a custom ladder system wouldn't get suspicious of a new ID suddenly being A+ without having played the games. (Or other players reporting different results in those games)
|
On January 08 2011 06:17 ChickenLips wrote:Show nested quote +On January 08 2011 04:53 Keitzer wrote:On January 08 2011 00:36 ChickenLips wrote:On January 08 2011 00:22 Keitzer wrote:On January 07 2011 22:18 ChickenLips wrote:On January 07 2011 22:11 Zocat wrote:On January 07 2011 19:41 FrostedMiniWeet wrote:
There is no way to prevent score cheating with this method, and a hash isn't going to do it, they can just edit the file and then regen the hash.. Encrypting won't work either, as the encryption code has to be hardcoded somewhere and available for the client to use. Sure, most people don't know how to do this, but it doesn't matter as it only takes a single person to write a script for it and bang, its available to everybody. It's enough to block the majority. There's a different level of effort required to change the results when they're protected by encryption. Sure - some people will encouraged to break the system because of the challenge. Also you can change the hardcoded stuff whenever you want. And then you can check the reported results if they still use the old encryption -> ban. 100% protection cannot be achieved of course - but isnt neccessary. Also the most important factor: since you get results from both players you can check for integrity. If some player often reports different results compared to his opponents you'll see that. What happens then is open to administration. This is a very good point. Also there isn't a strong incentive to cheat this custom ladder. It's not going to get you sponsorship deals, tournament invitations or wide recognition from the public. You also can't just cheat the heck out of it since irregularities will cause suspicion and what is a slightly higher rank gonna do for you, you'll just get destroyed more by better players. he brought this up because on iCCup and blizzard's ladder, you CAN'T cheat... Yeah very funny, there's no map or loss hacks for sc2 ? get a clue There will always be people trying to abuse the system. The challenge is to make it as hard and as unattractive as possible while trying to minimize the effects this has on the 'good' players. map and loss hacks are different than just editing a file and saying you're A+ (or in blizzard's case, 3k diamond)... you can't... you still have to play all the games I don't have much expertise in programming, I will leave that to those that have more of a clue, however I very much doubt that a custom ladder system wouldn't get suspicious of a new ID suddenly being A+ without having played the games. (Or other players reporting different results in those games)
well that's what im saying... Custom Game yes could EASILY have that... however, for you to get to say, 3k Diamond and be considered "good"... you still need to play all the games, even if you auto-win all of them.
Since i take programming, i know how easy files are to edit, but skilled enough to actually edit them myself (sometimes). However, that's the point of encrypting and hashing and all this other stuff since it's not a separate server that keeps the data, but rather the file which can easily be edited.
What they could do is TRY to make it like the blizzard authenticator where it randomly generates and 8-digit code (or something like that) that syncs with the server every 30 seconds. But even then it might be too much work for such little increased security.
|
I think security should become an issue when we have something that works and that people use. It's still a lot of work until that happens and we should focus instead of theorycrafting what problems we might encounter in the future.
|
On January 04 2011 04:55 tnud wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2011 04:52 PlaGuE_R wrote:
is this even possible with B.Net 2.0? I was under the impression that not only is the system meant for things like iCCup on BW not to work but that it's also agaisnt the terms of use? There is no such thing as an unhackable system. Yes it is against terms of use, but so was iCCup bw ladder.. Blizzard just didn't care. This kind of thing will only work then blizzard have given up on sc2 (might take a while). I suggest you discuss this in a darker place of the internetz. Until then, row row fight the power for a better map pool (and real chat channels )
Actually technically iCCup wasn't against the ToS, as far as I know. However, Blizzard has explicitly said that they will aggressively shut down anything like iCCup for SC2.
|
I hope Blizzard would just take over and make something let iccup or other individual create their own ladder with their own ladder map or rank.
|
Wait wont blizzard stomp something like this? I do support it 100% though.
|
On January 08 2011 11:06 miDnight_SC wrote:
I hope Blizzard would just take over and make something let iccup or other individual create their own ladder with their own ladder map or rank.
they would never.
|
i 100% support you!
do us a favor and make this really happening
but how are you going to manage that other tournaments use "your" mappool?
|
On January 07 2011 14:00 Fdragon wrote:Show nested quote +On January 07 2011 09:26 dementrio wrote:
in response to the recent hate, I support this because:
- I do not enjoy the ladder anymore, because I've grown tired of using the same strategies again and again, which I am forced to use against people who use their own same strategies again and again, on the same maps, again and again. Will this solve everything? I doubt it, but it will bring me back some interest in the game. Will Blizzard solve this, maybe better? It can be, but why should I wait months, maybe years, if things can be better now?
- without community mods and related development, the game will die much much sooner than it would otherwise. Saying that this kind of an effort will hurt the community downright stupid or in mala fide. Without a thriving mod scene there will simply be no community very soon; blizzard will let the game die when its focus will shift on the next game. imagine if the only multiplayer scene for brood war would have been battle.net. We probably wouldnt even have starcraft 2 today. Well hot damn You hate using the same strategies over and over again? Well then you're playing the wrong game. You are wrong you should have to keep using the same strat and perfect it much like SC1. On another note, I would not support a custom ladder on Bnet 2.0 because unless tournaments run off those maps it would hurt the player base as a whole looking to practice on the blizzard maps. Also the map pool isn't that bad right now with the removal of older maps such as kulas and desert oasis. Ninja Edit: We need to give SC2 more than 5 months to get actual balanced maps. Even BW had redonc maps during the first 10 years of its life and look at it now its doing pretty well with its map pool good maps take a hell of a lot of testing to actually balance out custom maps or blizzard maps.
That was 10 years ago. We're in 2011 to wait this long with this much uprage about the map pool is almost criminal all it requires is Blizzard to read a forum count the map pool whine posts look for some map makers and go here's Shakuras make this exact map in 5 shades of red.
|
Although I don't expect much...
Has there been any reply from Blizzard on this issue?
|
well at least we're making some progress
|
On January 09 2011 01:02 linduxed wrote:
Has there been any reply from Blizzard on this issue?
|
They didn't answer to my email yet.
Though we still cannot be 100% certain about the legality of this, we atleast know they do not care enough to respond in a timely manner (6 days).
Someone should try to post it on the B.net forums and see if we get a response there, or maybe someone who actually has the resources and knowledge to finish the project might want to try to contact Blizzard themselve.
|
I'm surprised nobody has mentioned this yet, but why isn't there more pressure on blizzard to simply allow the creation of player-made ladders directly within the client?
I assume we can all agree that the ladder itself, and the ability to press a single button and find a player near your skill level almost instantly, is pretty amazing. But if Blizzard is as adamant about leaving the map issues to the playerbase as they say they are, it seems like creating an easy time for custom ladders is the most reasonable next step. Just think of the possibilities: variable amount of map vetoes; different bonus pool mechanics (or no bonus pool at all); private ladders for you and your friends, or your colleagues at work or school; separate rankings for different match-ups or different maps, or even rankings as specific as "PvZ on iccup God's Garden" vs. "PvT on iccup Fury".
I think we can all agree that Blizzard doesn't want to spend time worrying about creating maps when they could be improving the actual infrastructure of the game itself. Now that the chat channels are finally on the way, I think it's time to make known what's next on the list.
|
I don't know if this has already been posted but there is a very simple solution to this which doesn't require complex custom maps. It only takes 4 steps:
1) You create a website similar to sc2ranks.com which scrapes freely available Bnet 2.0 match history from the web
2) You upload your desired maps with names like "ICCup Ladder - Refined Metalopolis"
3) People register their name and character code/bnet profile link with your ladder website
4) Periodically your website scrapes their profiles for wins/losses on "ICCup Ladder" maps and computes the current standings
No complex maps or local client needed, and since online blizzard profile data is impossible to fake the custom ladder system will be as secure as the normal Bnet 2.0 ladder.
|
On January 11 2011 05:51 GameEnder wrote:
I don't know if this has already been posted but there is a very simple solution to this which doesn't require complex custom maps. It only takes 4 steps:
1) You create a website similar to sc2ranks.com which scrapes freely available Bnet 2.0 match history from the web
2) You upload your desired maps with names like "ICCup Ladder - Refined Metalopolis"
3) People register their name and character code/bnet profile link with your ladder website
4) Periodically your website scrapes their profiles for wins/losses on "ICCup Ladder" maps and computes the current standings
No complex maps or local client needed, and since online blizzard profile data is impossible to fake the custom ladder system will be as secure as the normal Bnet 2.0 ladder.
how's it gonna know if you won or lost on an iccup map... is it going to check your entire game history for the entire week? that seems very inefficient
|
On January 11 2011 06:41 Keitzer wrote:how's it gonna know if you won or lost on an iccup map... is it going to check your entire game history for the entire week? that seems very inefficient
Yes it will find victories and defeats by parsing the win and loss records from the profiles. You would probably update once a day for each registered player, and on-demand at player request. If you wanted to get fancy you can update less frequently on players that don't player that often.
It really doesn't take them much computational power, it just like viewing a few thousand webpages a day. You could probably even used the SC2 Ranks API: http://www.sc2ranks.com/api so you would not actually have to do any having text processing.
|
On January 11 2011 07:32 GameEnder wrote:Show nested quote +On January 11 2011 06:41 Keitzer wrote:how's it gonna know if you won or lost on an iccup map... is it going to check your entire game history for the entire week? that seems very inefficient Yes it will find victories and defeats by parsing the win and loss records from the profiles. You would probably update once a day for each registered player, and on-demand at player request. If you wanted to get fancy you can update less frequently on players that don't player that often. It really doesn't take them much computational power, it just like viewing a few thousand webpages a day. You could probably even used the SC2 Ranks API: http://www.sc2ranks.com/api so you would not actually have to do any having text processing.
Good idea, but battle net only shows on which map you won, not against whom (or is there a way?). So, you cannot figure out how many points to give the player for a win.
|
On January 11 2011 07:53 Ludwigvan wrote:Show nested quote +On January 11 2011 07:32 GameEnder wrote:On January 11 2011 06:41 Keitzer wrote:how's it gonna know if you won or lost on an iccup map... is it going to check your entire game history for the entire week? that seems very inefficient Yes it will find victories and defeats by parsing the win and loss records from the profiles. You would probably update once a day for each registered player, and on-demand at player request. If you wanted to get fancy you can update less frequently on players that don't player that often. It really doesn't take them much computational power, it just like viewing a few thousand webpages a day. You could probably even used the SC2 Ranks API: http://www.sc2ranks.com/api so you would not actually have to do any having text processing. Good idea, but battle net only shows on which map you won, not against whom (or is there a way?). So, you cannot figure out how many points to give the player for a win.
Ok so this is a problem which essentially brings us almost all the way back to square one (at least until they update the online version of battle.net). You can at least use online data to make sure they are playing the games their client says they are playing, and winning the ones they say they win. You just can't verify they played with the person the local client reports them playing with.
In order trust a client you have to establish a secure way of knowing the information the players local client sends you is true. The issue you have is that you can't have any secrets (in the cryptography sense) inside the map or the local client. With my limited cyrpto knowledge this makes it almost impossible to sign results and send them to the server.
Given you can't trust the information anyone one client sends to you just need both clients to report the match results to the server (along with the replays) so that one individual player can't game the system. If you are worried about groups gaming the system they could just as easily message each over something like MSN and agree to throw games.
In fact this whole system could be easily implemented in something like SC2 Gears.
|
On January 11 2011 07:53 Ludwigvan wrote:Show nested quote +On January 11 2011 07:32 GameEnder wrote:On January 11 2011 06:41 Keitzer wrote:how's it gonna know if you won or lost on an iccup map... is it going to check your entire game history for the entire week? that seems very inefficient Yes it will find victories and defeats by parsing the win and loss records from the profiles. You would probably update once a day for each registered player, and on-demand at player request. If you wanted to get fancy you can update less frequently on players that don't player that often. It really doesn't take them much computational power, it just like viewing a few thousand webpages a day. You could probably even used the SC2 Ranks API: http://www.sc2ranks.com/api so you would not actually have to do any having text processing. Good idea, but battle net only shows on which map you won, not against whom (or is there a way?).
That's what I wondered. I was told it requires memory reading. I don't know what that is but apparently it's bad.
On January 05 2011 08:23 MavercK wrote:Show nested quote +On January 05 2011 08:11 SixtusTheFifth wrote:On January 04 2011 04:48 Prfx wrote:
>Cheating: SC2Banks can be edited with notepad to fake results. This too can be prevented. The easiest method would be to let the map create a hash file for the result and let the server validate it. This can be done with STARCODE (1)
Is there a way to monitor results without storing a file on a persons computer? In my match history I can see all the custom games I've played, the result and who the other players were. If I played a custom 1v1, could a program look up my profile and my opponents, confirm we played each other on the same map at the same time and record the result? that would require memory reading. which is against blizzard's ToS.
Ninja Edit: New question. If Blizzard could be convinced to add who you played against to the public information, would that solve the problem - legally I mean?
|
On January 11 2011 08:31 SixtusTheFifth wrote:Ninja Edit: New question. If Blizzard could be convinced to add who you played against to the public information, would that solve the problem - legally I mean?
Well the only problem is an easy and verifiable way to track games and yes it would solve that problem. The other option is to just have program like SC2 gears which uploads replays of games played on certain maps to a central server would also work since you can cross check the two replays.
|
The bigger problem is actually finding games.
Though I guess with chat channels that isn't that big a deal anymore since your custom ladder can simply have a chat channel for each rank or something.
|
Can't you see who someone played against by checking their match history and then clicking the specific match? Or are we talking about something else?
|
The program should archive your replays for you and also keep track of your game history. If one match gets reported as win from both players, then you should get noticed and be given the choice to automatically upload the replay to the server, or accept defeat. the replay should then be reviewed by an admin, who would take actions like warn/ban the player that was trying to cheat.
now that i think again, the cheating player could propably change the replay being uploaded to one where he wins against the opponent in another match, so this means it could just as well be cheated this way.
another thing that could be done is the admin adding both/one player as their friend, and looking at the match history of that day, which could unfortunately be very time consuming :/
one last idea would be just dropping the game from being rated if the replays dont clear the case, but logging the incident. if it happens often for a player, he is propably trying to cheat the system.
the last idea is very little work for the admins, while the friendlist thing would be 100% secure.
|
On January 11 2011 11:09 FrostOtter wrote:
Can't you see who someone played against by checking their match history and then clicking the specific match? Or are we talking about something else?
Yes you can click on it in Starcraft 2, but not on their webpage, that would be needed for crawling.
|
|
|
On January 11 2011 05:51 GameEnder wrote:
I don't know if this has already been posted but there is a very simple solution to this which doesn't require complex custom maps. It only takes 4 steps:
1) You create a website similar to sc2ranks.com which scrapes freely available Bnet 2.0 match history from the web
2) You upload your desired maps with names like "ICCup Ladder - Refined Metalopolis"
3) People register their name and character code/bnet profile link with your ladder website
4) Periodically your website scrapes their profiles for wins/losses on "ICCup Ladder" maps and computes the current standings
No complex maps or local client needed, and since online blizzard profile data is impossible to fake the custom ladder system will be as secure as the normal Bnet 2.0 ladder.
This doesn't work.
Replay solution is also bad, inefficient and people don't want their replays automatically sent elsewhere.
So far the sc2banks file solution seems to be the best one. I'd love to help but I'm pretty clueless when it comes to coding. It certainly looks very possible and awesome, someone just needs to do it
|
Somehow, I don't see the point of this.
While BNet 2.0 isn't perfect by a long shot, and the matchmaking system can be a little broken at times, doesn't playing games on a seperate ladder complicate things more than they need to be? Is this not why there are tournaments?
|
On January 12 2011 00:38 dUTtrOACh wrote:
Somehow, I don't see the point of this.
While BNet 2.0 isn't perfect by a long shot,
It's pretty terrible actually
and the matchmaking system can be a little broken at times
That's the only good thing about it lol
, doesn't playing games on a seperate ladder complicate things more than they need to be?
If you don't like it, you can leave it, this is for those of us who want to play a custom ladder with our own maps and not the garbage Blizzard puts out. As seen time and time again they don't give a shit about the ladder mappool.
Is this not why there are tournaments?
Uhh, what?
|
Also to people say: Why cant you use chat channels to find people to play on maps you like?
Because there is no sense of urgency in normal custom games.You don't have much incentive for winning and you are most of the time familiar with who you play against. If there was a system to pit against each other similiarly skilled players on a random (BUT GOOD) map, in a game that will determine their future ranking and who they play against (+ bragging rights since it's actually a 'serious' game) then that will make for a much more exciting gaming experience.
I've now played about 1k ladder games and 1.3k in customs, there is a big difference and I frequently find myself scouting less / being less wary of my oppenents gameplay and playing blindly, which is never a good thing.
|
I hate playing on ladder for so many reason (and one of the most important is bad maps) so I have stopped playing ladder and just continued to play against friends. I would LOVE to play on a custom ladder system with good and fun maps.
|
On January 05 2011 09:30 Liquid`Tyler wrote:
we got ladders, something blizzard stopped providing since around 2000.
Don't be so mean to blizzard, they actually provided a ladder for warcraft 3
It's just for SC2 where they followed their successful way of thinking/saying:
"Do you really want a ladder?"
To the OP: this would be just so amazing, a ladder-system that actually depended solely on skill with good maps. Kinda what you expect from a gamedesigner, but Blizz has continuously proven to be incapable of providing this, so I'd be really excited to play on such ladder.
|
On January 12 2011 00:35 ChickenLips wrote:Show nested quote +On January 11 2011 05:51 GameEnder wrote:
I don't know if this has already been posted but there is a very simple solution to this which doesn't require complex custom maps. It only takes 4 steps:
1) You create a website similar to sc2ranks.com which scrapes freely available Bnet 2.0 match history from the web
2) You upload your desired maps with names like "ICCup Ladder - Refined Metalopolis"
3) People register their name and character code/bnet profile link with your ladder website
4) Periodically your website scrapes their profiles for wins/losses on "ICCup Ladder" maps and computes the current standings
No complex maps or local client needed, and since online blizzard profile data is impossible to fake the custom ladder system will be as secure as the normal Bnet 2.0 ladder. This doesn't work. Replay solution is also bad, inefficient and people don't want their replays automatically sent elsewhere. So far the sc2banks file solution seems to be the best one. I'd love to help but I'm pretty clueless when it comes to coding. It certainly looks very possible and awesome, someone just needs to do it
The local client could just parse the replay to determine the winner just like SC2 gears and report only that information, instead of the entire replay to the custom ladder site. Replay submission could only be done on games where there is some kind of dispute. This would mean you really don't have to code any complex maps, just a simple local client and website.
EDIT: To all the people ragging on Blizzard I would say their match making system is pretty amazing and really the only flaw in the current ladder is the map setup. I foresee some kind of in client tournament or ladder setup in the future, but this is fun to think about for now.
|
On January 12 2011 07:28 GameEnder wrote:Show nested quote +On January 12 2011 00:35 ChickenLips wrote:On January 11 2011 05:51 GameEnder wrote:
I don't know if this has already been posted but there is a very simple solution to this which doesn't require complex custom maps. It only takes 4 steps:
1) You create a website similar to sc2ranks.com which scrapes freely available Bnet 2.0 match history from the web
2) You upload your desired maps with names like "ICCup Ladder - Refined Metalopolis"
3) People register their name and character code/bnet profile link with your ladder website
4) Periodically your website scrapes their profiles for wins/losses on "ICCup Ladder" maps and computes the current standings
No complex maps or local client needed, and since online blizzard profile data is impossible to fake the custom ladder system will be as secure as the normal Bnet 2.0 ladder. This doesn't work. Replay solution is also bad, inefficient and people don't want their replays automatically sent elsewhere. So far the sc2banks file solution seems to be the best one. I'd love to help but I'm pretty clueless when it comes to coding. It certainly looks very possible and awesome, someone just needs to do it The local client could just parse the replay to determine the winner just like SC2 gears and report only that information, instead of the entire replay to the custom ladder site. Replay submission could only be done on games where there is some kind of dispute. This would mean you really don't have to code any complex maps, just a simple local client and website. EDIT: To all the people ragging on Blizzard I would say their match making system is pretty amazing and really the only flaw in the current ladder is the map setup. I foresee some kind of in client tournament or ladder setup in the future, but this is fun to think about for now.
this actually should work pretty well
i dont see why this should fail, from the technical point of view
|
On January 12 2011 07:37 borlee wrote:Show nested quote +On January 12 2011 07:28 GameEnder wrote:On January 12 2011 00:35 ChickenLips wrote:On January 11 2011 05:51 GameEnder wrote:
I don't know if this has already been posted but there is a very simple solution to this which doesn't require complex custom maps. It only takes 4 steps:
1) You create a website similar to sc2ranks.com which scrapes freely available Bnet 2.0 match history from the web
2) You upload your desired maps with names like "ICCup Ladder - Refined Metalopolis"
3) People register their name and character code/bnet profile link with your ladder website
4) Periodically your website scrapes their profiles for wins/losses on "ICCup Ladder" maps and computes the current standings
No complex maps or local client needed, and since online blizzard profile data is impossible to fake the custom ladder system will be as secure as the normal Bnet 2.0 ladder. This doesn't work. Replay solution is also bad, inefficient and people don't want their replays automatically sent elsewhere. So far the sc2banks file solution seems to be the best one. I'd love to help but I'm pretty clueless when it comes to coding. It certainly looks very possible and awesome, someone just needs to do it The local client could just parse the replay to determine the winner just like SC2 gears and report only that information, instead of the entire replay to the custom ladder site. Replay submission could only be done on games where there is some kind of dispute. This would mean you really don't have to code any complex maps, just a simple local client and website. EDIT: To all the people ragging on Blizzard I would say their match making system is pretty amazing and really the only flaw in the current ladder is the map setup. I foresee some kind of in client tournament or ladder setup in the future, but this is fun to think about for now. this actually should work pretty well i dont see why this should fail, from the technical point of view
because you can copy+paste replays and edit them with ease...
|
A good point of reference for the client would be ESEA. You might even be able to try contacting lpkane and get a hold of the dev team behind ESEA if you are so inclined.
I've thought a bit about this and everything besides the editable sc2banks(which are just xml files which is awesome) seems good.
I'd like to clean up your ideas and add some of mine:
- Customs maps with a simple trigger to create a temporary sc2bank which stores the winner (I did this in 30 seconds without ever using the sc2editor)
- Client that would let you see the online players and their respective custom ladder ranking
- For now you would probably use the client to find the player/id and contact them through bnet
- Set up match in the client by entering the opponents name.
- The client sends the match request to the server and then to the opponents client
- Opponent accepts request and the match is ready.
- Create the custom game on the custom map and play.
- Once done both users click finish on the client
- The client then opens the tempBank.sc2bank and parses the XML, encrypts it and sends the results to the server and deletes the temp bank. There could be a 15 minute period to click finish until the server nullifies the match. Once the server receives both results and if they match up we are done.
- If they don't match the match would be marked as 'invalid' and would require the winner to upload a replay on the site and have an admin confirm the win.
This seems legit and as far as the editable banks go we have replays for confirmation and it's very easy to ban abusers. Just a minor annoying for the admins.
Here what my 30 seconds sc2bank looked like:
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<Bank version="1">
<Section name="gameData">
<Key name="winner">
<Value int="2"/>
</Key>
</Section>
</Bank>
|
"match making system is pretty amazing and really the only flaw in the current ladder is the map setup"
+1
until then: bumping cause i think within the hundreds of cool threads on tl, i think this the coolest tl "map issues" thread ever
|
A good point of reference for the client would be ESEA. You might even be able to try contacting lpkane and get a hold of the dev team behind ESEA if you are so inclined.
I've thought a bit about this and everything besides the editable sc2banks(which are just xml files which is awesome) seems good.
I'd like to clean up your ideas and add some of mine:
- Customs maps with a simple trigger to create a temporary sc2bank which stores the winner (I did this in 30 seconds without ever using the sc2editor)
- Client that would let you see the online players and their respective custom ladder ranking
- For now you would probably use the client to find the player/id and contact them through bnet
- Set up match in the client by entering the opponents name.
- The client sends the match request to the server and then to the opponents client
- Opponent accepts request and the match is ready.
- Create the custom game on the custom map and play.
- Once done both users click finish on the client
- The client then opens the tempBank.sc2bank and parses the XML, encrypts it and sends the results to the server and deletes the temp bank. There could be a 15 minute period to click finish until the server nullifies the match. Once the server receives both results and if they match up we are done.
- If they don't match the match would be marked as 'invalid' and would require the winner to upload a replay on the site and have an admin confirm the win.
This seems legit and as far as the editable banks go we have replays for confirmation and it's very easy to ban abusers. Just a minor annoying for the admins.
Here what my 30 seconds sc2bank looked like:
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<Bank version="1">
<Section name="gameData">
<Key name="winner">
<Value int="2"/>
</Key>
</Section>
</Bank>
Sounds like a good system to me but woudnt it be abusable by simply not clicking finish in the client when you loose and let the server nullify the match?
|
Something simmulair to old WGtour will prob pop up within the next month with Chat channels inc.
|
On January 13 2011 02:22 Rotwang wrote:Show nested quote +
A good point of reference for the client would be ESEA. You might even be able to try contacting lpkane and get a hold of the dev team behind ESEA if you are so inclined.
I've thought a bit about this and everything besides the editable sc2banks(which are just xml files which is awesome) seems good.
I'd like to clean up your ideas and add some of mine:
- Customs maps with a simple trigger to create a temporary sc2bank which stores the winner (I did this in 30 seconds without ever using the sc2editor)
- Client that would let you see the online players and their respective custom ladder ranking
- For now you would probably use the client to find the player/id and contact them through bnet
- Set up match in the client by entering the opponents name.
- The client sends the match request to the server and then to the opponents client
- Opponent accepts request and the match is ready.
- Create the custom game on the custom map and play.
- Once done both users click finish on the client
- The client then opens the tempBank.sc2bank and parses the XML, encrypts it and sends the results to the server and deletes the temp bank. There could be a 15 minute period to click finish until the server nullifies the match. Once the server receives both results and if they match up we are done.
- If they don't match the match would be marked as 'invalid' and would require the winner to upload a replay on the site and have an admin confirm the win.
This seems legit and as far as the editable banks go we have replays for confirmation and it's very easy to ban abusers. Just a minor annoying for the admins.
Here what my 30 seconds sc2bank looked like:
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<Bank version="1">
<Section name="gameData">
<Key name="winner">
<Value int="2"/>
</Key>
</Section>
</Bank>
Sounds like a good system to me but woudnt it be abusable by simply not clicking finish in the client when you loose and let the server nullify the match?
If only one player had to submit the results (in other words, all win/loss data sent by each person), surely the winner would make sure it happened each time. This would also combat exploitation, as the results between the two players could be compared.
|
On January 13 2011 02:46 AndrewZorn wrote:Show nested quote +On January 13 2011 02:22 Rotwang wrote:
A good point of reference for the client would be ESEA. You might even be able to try contacting lpkane and get a hold of the dev team behind ESEA if you are so inclined.
I've thought a bit about this and everything besides the editable sc2banks(which are just xml files which is awesome) seems good.
I'd like to clean up your ideas and add some of mine:
- Customs maps with a simple trigger to create a temporary sc2bank which stores the winner (I did this in 30 seconds without ever using the sc2editor)
- Client that would let you see the online players and their respective custom ladder ranking
- For now you would probably use the client to find the player/id and contact them through bnet
- Set up match in the client by entering the opponents name.
- The client sends the match request to the server and then to the opponents client
- Opponent accepts request and the match is ready.
- Create the custom game on the custom map and play.
- Once done both users click finish on the client
- The client then opens the tempBank.sc2bank and parses the XML, encrypts it and sends the results to the server and deletes the temp bank. There could be a 15 minute period to click finish until the server nullifies the match. Once the server receives both results and if they match up we are done.
- If they don't match the match would be marked as 'invalid' and would require the winner to upload a replay on the site and have an admin confirm the win.
This seems legit and as far as the editable banks go we have replays for confirmation and it's very easy to ban abusers. Just a minor annoying for the admins.
Here what my 30 seconds sc2bank looked like:
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<Bank version="1">
<Section name="gameData">
<Key name="winner">
<Value int="2"/>
</Key>
</Section>
</Bank>
Sounds like a good system to me but woudnt it be abusable by simply not clicking finish in the client when you loose and let the server nullify the match? If only one player had to submit the results (in other words, all win/loss data sent by each person), surely the winner would make sure it happened each time. This would also combat exploitation, as the results between the two players could be compared.
Yep the most basic way is, if their is a dispute the match doesn't count for either person but a single player comes up for dispute multiple times, he is quicked from the ladder system. Your view system is also a good idea, it might just take a little too much man power.
|
On January 04 2011 05:03 tnud wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2011 05:02 Bey wrote:
What prevents someone from editing the file and regenerating a new hash? Encrypting the files really isn't the main issue to overcome. Anti-cheat is the last thing to implement imho. Not really... This is one of the things you'll need to tackle directly, not when the whole system is done.
|
There is no need to void the result if only 1 result was submitted. I'm sure the winner will want his win to be registered (and this can be done automatically)
|
On January 13 2011 07:55 ChickenLips wrote:
There is no need to void the result if only 1 result was submitted. I'm sure the winner will want his win to be registered (and this can be done automatically)
My bad. What I meant by nullified is that it would also be treated the same as if the results didn't match. ie the match is 'invalid' till the winner uploads a replay.
It's doable but seems like a lot of work just to avoid bnet. I have the knowledge to create a basic client, website and database but it would be in my free time which I have absolutely none of.
|
Asking a player to upload a replay just because his opponent was pissed and closed the program before it could send the result is not a feasible solution.
I'm pretty sure that there is no way to really abuse the system if you accept even incomplete reports (i.e. only 1 player submitted). There's no reason for a player to submit a loss and if both players submit a win you can just collect data and ban people that have f.e. 3 or more inconsistencies.
|
I very much support this. I actually had this idea as well, and posted about it along time ago, but noone noticed it.
Are you only looking for those map names? One issue that might cause trouble are players practicing on these different maps.
Also, perhaps some sort of web interface as well? And how about some sort of chat bot that keeps track of the player ratings in the database, that you could send commands to. like /whois JimBo, and it would spit rating info back out at you.
I myself am a pretty competent web UI and general web designer. Let me know if you want any help with the front end of a web-page.
Also, perhaps have some sort of results crawler that goes around blizzard's web page (lets say you need to input your profile link), and gets your match results from there, and compares them with whats on record to stop cheating and abusing.
You would also have to check if both players are indeed in the ladder.
|
You can use md5 hash checks to make sure the result of the game is valid. Each player has a private string (ID) (only public to the player) , the game adds a unique value for that specific game along with using a global key, the two players IDs, and the value of the game result (0,1,-1) and then you md5 it. That value is stored in the bank file along with the ID of the player and the unique game value. The server checks the md5 to make sure it is the same as it expects. Since the math to do the md5 is obscured and is done in the client it will be really hard to decrypt and fake and only one player would need to report the result.
The only way to fake it is if you figure out the global key, the rules for the unique key, access another players key and figure out the correct formula to md5 the string (order of addition), the odds of this are basically 0.
|
A way to build on this might be to have a search opponent feature on the webpage. It then searches among those currently searching and gives you a map and player name with id. You two then can play. Not sure if that is needed though, if it is very popular such a feature could make matchmaking possible as well, kind of like how dota-league and other dota sites does it.
|
On January 14 2011 10:02 Yurie wrote:
A way to build on this might be to have a search opponent feature on the webpage. It then searches among those currently searching and gives you a map and player name with id. You two then can play. Not sure if that is needed though, if it is very popular such a feature could make matchmaking possible as well, kind of like how dota-league and other dota sites does it.
This stuff is prohibited by the EULA, I think the system can go as far as providing a rating & rank for a player but not match him up against someone else.
On January 14 2011 09:54 darmousseh wrote:
You can use md5 hash checks to make sure the result of the game is valid. Each player has a private string (ID) (only public to the player) , the game adds a unique value for that specific game along with using a global key, the two players IDs, and the value of the game result (0,1,-1) and then you md5 it. That value is stored in the bank file along with the ID of the player and the unique game value. The server checks the md5 to make sure it is the same as it expects. Since the math to do the md5 is obscured and is done in the client it will be really hard to decrypt and fake and only one player would need to report the result.
The only way to fake it is if you figure out the global key, the rules for the unique key, access another players key and figure out the correct formula to md5 the string (order of addition), the odds of this are basically 0.
Interesting stuff, sounds pretty foolproof.
|
|
|
On January 14 2011 10:30 ChickenLips wrote:Show nested quote +On January 14 2011 10:02 Yurie wrote:
A way to build on this might be to have a search opponent feature on the webpage. It then searches among those currently searching and gives you a map and player name with id. You two then can play. Not sure if that is needed though, if it is very popular such a feature could make matchmaking possible as well, kind of like how dota-league and other dota sites does it. This stuff is prohibited by the EULA, I think the system can go as far as providing a rating & rank for a player but not match him up against someone else.
Interesting stuff, sounds pretty foolproof.[/QUOTE]
There are some "leagues" that provide a new match every week (nationalESL for example). Is this so different? It's just clicking a button and having a webpage show you who you're supposed to play (or an app that runs independently of sc2 and you have to be logged in to), and maybe the page makes a sound when it finds a match and you have so many seconds to confirm.
|
I think this ladder system would be amazing for other map sets as well. Each custom game could have its own ladder, or even different organizations doing their own ladders.
I would really love some sort of SC2BW, ICCUP, GSL?, or SmashCraft ladder. that would be awesome.
|
Prfx:
Edit #3:
No response from Blizzard yet (8 days after i wrote them).
i hope someone is working on this...+ Show Spoiler +
:hc just to show that such a ladder can be done, who wants to wait for blizz?
biased resume:
+ Show Spoiler +it's a friggin new ladder with player pool mapsit's not against the ulllalaaa since blizz would approve of free "under control"extra extra it's doablea fuck ton of work, op needs + Show Spoiler + good will towards all men including himself no security issues if this ladder is made of players dedicated mods etc... a community it would not separate players but it would add to the play
|
bouhou, no more news on this awesome "experiment"
still [hope]
anyone noticed this?
|
New maps for the ladder are out. Many members of teamliquid seem to not like them. I think more and more players want this. A shame that Blizzard didn't answer.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
