|
Chill (1:38 July 05 KST): Discussing the cracked Bnet2 is acceptable in this thread.
DO NOT post any links to websites explaining how to install / use the crack.
DO NOT explain in your post how to install / use the crack.
Thank you. |
Will be C&D-ed soon enough. And rightfully so.
|
On July 05 2011 03:42 PhiliBiRD wrote:Show nested quote +On July 05 2011 01:53 Kishuu wrote:
As much as I would love lan, am I the only one who thinks this is bad? I mean, if you wanna play this game professionally and "help e-sports" you are gonna buy it. The kids that are gonna crack it with LAN support are that leechy garena kids who are gonna pirate and hack all day long for two months, then forget about it.
On the cool side, some of my friends that can't buy the game will play now, but for how long? I want more regulars that wanna learn the game for real. buying this game just gives blizz $. $ that they already have, money that they dont spend to make esports better . WE, THE PLAYERS are the only thing esports has. we support it not Blizz. but i do agree, pirating the game overall is bad. realistically, if people liek SC2, $65 for the game is reasonable due to how much play time you get out of it.
You do realize that Blizzard sponsors tournaments all the time and spend alot time and money on developing the game after initial release? Some people on these forums...
|
So as usual, The consumer gets fucked by not getting lan while the pirates get lan.
Thank you Blizzard for enhancing our user experience in a very Orwellian manner.
|
Are the people doubting the better latency just people new to rts or something? Must not have been bw players. Iccup was drastically less lag than bnet. It's proven that it is possible to hugely reduce lag using 3rd party programs. And as this gets more popular, they will certainlycertainly attract others to help with keeping up with patches etc.
Everyone making this possible are heroes. You have my sincerest thanks 
On July 05 2011 03:44 RoyalCheese wrote:
Will be C&D-ed soon enough. And rightfully so.
Just like all of the private wow servers with thousands of users? What are you even talking about? What would make you think Blizzard is even capable of it? If they can't defend their massive cash generator, they can't defend sc2.
|
On July 05 2011 03:44 ChickenLips wrote:Show nested quote +On July 05 2011 03:37 karpo wrote:On July 05 2011 03:35 ChickenLips wrote:On July 05 2011 03:30 Yaotzin wrote:On July 05 2011 03:29 Ryhn wrote:
This will survive in China so long as it's supported -- and with China's quite sizable e-sports community, (Based on the turnouts for Brood War competitions held there) it could get a ton of popularity. The difference is that SC2 is still being actively developed. Blizzard can just release patches and then expansions that completely break this. They certainly will, but - in the future - with their foot already in the door and people using it, the developers will just patch in response and get it to work again. This has happened time and time again in other games and it's almost never the case that patching stops the private servers. People can after all just play the old version if need be. Yet patching is slower and lags behind the real release. WoW/Lineage 2 private servers were like that for ages. Wanna play for free? Then take what you can get and watch paying customers have access to the patches/content way before you do. Kinda sucks in a game where balance changes and expansions will affect playstyles alot. ... It's not about playing for free. At least not for me. This is a good thing, I want to have more choices rather than less, all the ways Blizzard fucked up BattleNet 2.0 can be fixed through this. Many many people have already explained how BNet2.0 is a step backwards with a TON of features missing, so I don't think I have to reiterate, but for chrissakes, we still have Delta Quadrant in the map-pool.
To me it's not a good thing as we might not see all expansions nor the promised improvements if this grows. I really don't understand people who think that a pirated client is somehow going to save the game.
|
Edit: double post sorry! Please delete.
|
I want this to come out, I have more than one acct, and even if I want to play this at a LAN, it lags... -,-
|
On July 05 2011 03:40 Yaotzin wrote:Show nested quote +On July 05 2011 03:36 ChickenLips wrote:On July 05 2011 03:34 Yaotzin wrote:On July 05 2011 03:30 ChickenLips wrote:
Ok, I'm a Korean Zerg and have to play a match in an online tourney with a Zerg from the Ukraine. We both have NA accounts so we try playing there but we both have so much lag that ling/bling micro becomes impossible and we're both getting frustrated. The match won't be broadcasted, we just have to send the replays.
Why do you think the latency would be any better? This thing is a crack, nothing more. It's still Blizzard's code. It just runs a server somewhere other than California or wherever Blizzard keeps their servers. I mentioned the scenario anywho.
See the appeal? This happens very often and if they somehow got match-making to work with a decent map-pool, I'd certainly prefer it over Blizzard ladder because I can just make a ton of smurfs and try other races / new builds / weird strats without the fear of it affecting my ladder ranking that all my friends and practice partners see.
Match making...? That isn't possible..You have to have a centralised server for matchmaking, and then you might as well use Blizzard's. 1) Because they don't have to re-route through Blizzard's server, the connection is direct between the players. A Korean connecting to a Ukrainian by LAN would be pretty much the same latency as a Ukrainian logging onto the Korean server. If the Ukrainian has a shit ping to that server they're going to have a shit (probably shitter) ping to the server in the Korean gamer's house. Direct connections also brings up the problem of the player running the server having no latency.... Show nested quote +
2) Yes it's possible and I already explained why I would use a private server over this one.
How is it possible to have matchmaking without a centralised server 
You're right, the example was bad, yet the point still stands. We had global servers in BW, there's absolutely no reason why we can't enjoy lagless cross-continental play in Starcraft 2. Oh wait, there is, it's called Blizzard's/Activision's greed.
|
Zurich15365 Posts
On July 05 2011 03:40 Yaotzin wrote:Show nested quote +On July 05 2011 03:36 ChickenLips wrote:On July 05 2011 03:34 Yaotzin wrote:On July 05 2011 03:30 ChickenLips wrote:
Ok, I'm a Korean Zerg and have to play a match in an online tourney with a Zerg from the Ukraine. We both have NA accounts so we try playing there but we both have so much lag that ling/bling micro becomes impossible and we're both getting frustrated. The match won't be broadcasted, we just have to send the replays.
Why do you think the latency would be any better? This thing is a crack, nothing more. It's still Blizzard's code. It just runs a server somewhere other than California or wherever Blizzard keeps their servers. I mentioned the scenario anywho.
See the appeal? This happens very often and if they somehow got match-making to work with a decent map-pool, I'd certainly prefer it over Blizzard ladder because I can just make a ton of smurfs and try other races / new builds / weird strats without the fear of it affecting my ladder ranking that all my friends and practice partners see.
Match making...? That isn't possible..You have to have a centralised server for matchmaking, and then you might as well use Blizzard's. 1) Because they don't have to re-route through Blizzard's server, the connection is direct between the players. A Korean connecting to a Ukrainian by LAN would be pretty much the same latency as a Ukrainian logging onto the Korean server. If the Ukrainian has a shit ping to that server they're going to have a shit (probably shitter) ping to the server in the Korean gamer's house.
This is not true. While EU <> Kor will never be really enjoyable, at least it could be playable. Right now it's just completely unplayable, way worse than direct connections would be. So in that case a Korean <> Ukrainian game played with this crack would definitely have better latency.
|
I think the majority of people here are arguing a very moot point, lawsuits. This is in China. China. They can probably pay an official to hold off a lawsuit until the rapture (and i mean a lot longer than 2012)
To sue in China is not the same as to sue in America. It's not easy, and it has a ton of underhanded and shady dealings going on. Lets not forget how truly corrupt China really is. Blizzard will have one hell of a time trying to get this thing "shut down".
The best thing they could do right now in my opinion would be to at the very least, give major tournaments LAN, if not outright, enable it in the game. I'll bet my left pinky finger, that the game has viable and working LAN, but its not in the released versions for whatever reason. (Greed/Piracy)
We'll have to wait and see how good this "crack" is first of all, and then we'll have to wait and see what Blizzard does about it. Right now nobody can really say one way or the other.
|
On July 05 2011 03:44 RoyalCheese wrote:
Will be C&D-ed soon enough. And rightfully so.
Yeah there will be probably some lawsuits and the like as this grows more popular (if it even does), but that won't stop it at that point, and is just used to deter people from hosting servers / distributing the server software in certain legislatures like the US and Europe.
|
i will wait till its more developed and will be able to play on eng versions
i lost faith in blizzard ever implementing decent ladder and mappool
|
On July 05 2011 03:52 zatic wrote:Show nested quote +On July 05 2011 03:40 Yaotzin wrote:On July 05 2011 03:36 ChickenLips wrote:On July 05 2011 03:34 Yaotzin wrote:On July 05 2011 03:30 ChickenLips wrote:
Ok, I'm a Korean Zerg and have to play a match in an online tourney with a Zerg from the Ukraine. We both have NA accounts so we try playing there but we both have so much lag that ling/bling micro becomes impossible and we're both getting frustrated. The match won't be broadcasted, we just have to send the replays.
Why do you think the latency would be any better? This thing is a crack, nothing more. It's still Blizzard's code. It just runs a server somewhere other than California or wherever Blizzard keeps their servers. I mentioned the scenario anywho.
See the appeal? This happens very often and if they somehow got match-making to work with a decent map-pool, I'd certainly prefer it over Blizzard ladder because I can just make a ton of smurfs and try other races / new builds / weird strats without the fear of it affecting my ladder ranking that all my friends and practice partners see.
Match making...? That isn't possible..You have to have a centralised server for matchmaking, and then you might as well use Blizzard's. 1) Because they don't have to re-route through Blizzard's server, the connection is direct between the players. A Korean connecting to a Ukrainian by LAN would be pretty much the same latency as a Ukrainian logging onto the Korean server. If the Ukrainian has a shit ping to that server they're going to have a shit (probably shitter) ping to the server in the Korean gamer's house. This is not true. While EU <> Kor will never be really enjoyable, at least it could be playable. Right now it's just completely unplayable, way worse than direct connections would be. So in that case a Korean <> Ukrainian game played with this crack would definitely have better latency.
Why would it be better? You're connecting to a server in some dude's house instead of a server in a farm in Seoul. That's the only difference...
|
I can understand private servers for subscription based games like WoW where people want to avoid paying for the service, but when you have a free public server that Blizz provides, this makes no sense to me.
No tournament can use this legally, and using it for private practice (say, within a team house) because it gets rid of the built in latency (if it even does that) would be terrible preparation for actual tournaments that use the public server which has the latency. Patches and expansions on on other games usually put private servers a month behind (and often times more), especially on blizz products where the server must check for client versions or else the differing object models will always result in desync problems. That is, you'd have to play on the old client version which, again, is useless in a game that's all about current competition.
Blizz is very active about shutting down unapproved private servers for their other games, especially those from which they're currently making money. When HotS comes out and if they ever add the map marketplace, I have no doubt C&D letters will be sent out much faster than to the groups that broke the sc2 beta server handshakes.
Hosting, emulating and even connecting to another matching-making service is not allowed under 2.f and 2.g of sc2's EULA.
|
I wonder who is gonna pay for this "new ICCUP with no latency", you guys want so much when there is good enough blizzard ladder already, though.
|
Zurich15365 Posts
On July 05 2011 03:56 Yaotzin wrote:Show nested quote +On July 05 2011 03:52 zatic wrote:On July 05 2011 03:40 Yaotzin wrote:On July 05 2011 03:36 ChickenLips wrote:On July 05 2011 03:34 Yaotzin wrote:On July 05 2011 03:30 ChickenLips wrote:
Ok, I'm a Korean Zerg and have to play a match in an online tourney with a Zerg from the Ukraine. We both have NA accounts so we try playing there but we both have so much lag that ling/bling micro becomes impossible and we're both getting frustrated. The match won't be broadcasted, we just have to send the replays.
Why do you think the latency would be any better? This thing is a crack, nothing more. It's still Blizzard's code. It just runs a server somewhere other than California or wherever Blizzard keeps their servers. I mentioned the scenario anywho.
See the appeal? This happens very often and if they somehow got match-making to work with a decent map-pool, I'd certainly prefer it over Blizzard ladder because I can just make a ton of smurfs and try other races / new builds / weird strats without the fear of it affecting my ladder ranking that all my friends and practice partners see.
Match making...? That isn't possible..You have to have a centralised server for matchmaking, and then you might as well use Blizzard's. 1) Because they don't have to re-route through Blizzard's server, the connection is direct between the players. A Korean connecting to a Ukrainian by LAN would be pretty much the same latency as a Ukrainian logging onto the Korean server. If the Ukrainian has a shit ping to that server they're going to have a shit (probably shitter) ping to the server in the Korean gamer's house. This is not true. While EU <> Kor will never be really enjoyable, at least it could be playable. Right now it's just completely unplayable, way worse than direct connections would be. So in that case a Korean <> Ukrainian game played with this crack would definitely have better latency. Why would it be better? You're connecting to a server in some dude's house instead of a server in a farm in Seoul. That's the only difference...
Yepp and that difference is why it's better. Don't ask me why it sucks so much through Bnet, but it just does. Direct connection is going to be way better in any case. See Broodwar which wasn't pretty, but playable EU <> Kor.
|
On July 05 2011 03:45 karpo wrote:Show nested quote +On July 05 2011 03:42 PhiliBiRD wrote:On July 05 2011 01:53 Kishuu wrote:
As much as I would love lan, am I the only one who thinks this is bad? I mean, if you wanna play this game professionally and "help e-sports" you are gonna buy it. The kids that are gonna crack it with LAN support are that leechy garena kids who are gonna pirate and hack all day long for two months, then forget about it.
On the cool side, some of my friends that can't buy the game will play now, but for how long? I want more regulars that wanna learn the game for real. buying this game just gives blizz $. $ that they already have, money that they dont spend to make esports better . WE, THE PLAYERS are the only thing esports has. we support it not Blizz. but i do agree, pirating the game overall is bad. realistically, if people liek SC2, $65 for the game is reasonable due to how much play time you get out of it. You do realize that Blizzard sponsors tournaments all the time and spend alot time and money on developing the game after initial release? Some people on these forums...
Blizzard also takes royalties from certain large tournaments no?
|
On July 05 2011 03:56 Yaotzin wrote:Show nested quote +On July 05 2011 03:52 zatic wrote:On July 05 2011 03:40 Yaotzin wrote:On July 05 2011 03:36 ChickenLips wrote:On July 05 2011 03:34 Yaotzin wrote:On July 05 2011 03:30 ChickenLips wrote:
Ok, I'm a Korean Zerg and have to play a match in an online tourney with a Zerg from the Ukraine. We both have NA accounts so we try playing there but we both have so much lag that ling/bling micro becomes impossible and we're both getting frustrated. The match won't be broadcasted, we just have to send the replays.
Why do you think the latency would be any better? This thing is a crack, nothing more. It's still Blizzard's code. It just runs a server somewhere other than California or wherever Blizzard keeps their servers. I mentioned the scenario anywho.
See the appeal? This happens very often and if they somehow got match-making to work with a decent map-pool, I'd certainly prefer it over Blizzard ladder because I can just make a ton of smurfs and try other races / new builds / weird strats without the fear of it affecting my ladder ranking that all my friends and practice partners see.
Match making...? That isn't possible..You have to have a centralised server for matchmaking, and then you might as well use Blizzard's. 1) Because they don't have to re-route through Blizzard's server, the connection is direct between the players. A Korean connecting to a Ukrainian by LAN would be pretty much the same latency as a Ukrainian logging onto the Korean server. If the Ukrainian has a shit ping to that server they're going to have a shit (probably shitter) ping to the server in the Korean gamer's house. This is not true. While EU <> Kor will never be really enjoyable, at least it could be playable. Right now it's just completely unplayable, way worse than direct connections would be. So in that case a Korean <> Ukrainian game played with this crack would definitely have better latency. Why would it be better? You're connecting to a server in some dude's house instead of a server in a farm in Seoul. That's the only difference...
the difference is the route your connection takes to that server
it's direct, it doesn't hop off the freeway to head into an off the track town where theres a McDonald's to catch some breakfast.
|
On July 05 2011 03:59 zatic wrote:Show nested quote +On July 05 2011 03:56 Yaotzin wrote:On July 05 2011 03:52 zatic wrote:On July 05 2011 03:40 Yaotzin wrote:On July 05 2011 03:36 ChickenLips wrote:On July 05 2011 03:34 Yaotzin wrote:On July 05 2011 03:30 ChickenLips wrote:
Ok, I'm a Korean Zerg and have to play a match in an online tourney with a Zerg from the Ukraine. We both have NA accounts so we try playing there but we both have so much lag that ling/bling micro becomes impossible and we're both getting frustrated. The match won't be broadcasted, we just have to send the replays.
Why do you think the latency would be any better? This thing is a crack, nothing more. It's still Blizzard's code. It just runs a server somewhere other than California or wherever Blizzard keeps their servers. I mentioned the scenario anywho.
See the appeal? This happens very often and if they somehow got match-making to work with a decent map-pool, I'd certainly prefer it over Blizzard ladder because I can just make a ton of smurfs and try other races / new builds / weird strats without the fear of it affecting my ladder ranking that all my friends and practice partners see.
Match making...? That isn't possible..You have to have a centralised server for matchmaking, and then you might as well use Blizzard's. 1) Because they don't have to re-route through Blizzard's server, the connection is direct between the players. A Korean connecting to a Ukrainian by LAN would be pretty much the same latency as a Ukrainian logging onto the Korean server. If the Ukrainian has a shit ping to that server they're going to have a shit (probably shitter) ping to the server in the Korean gamer's house. This is not true. While EU <> Kor will never be really enjoyable, at least it could be playable. Right now it's just completely unplayable, way worse than direct connections would be. So in that case a Korean <> Ukrainian game played with this crack would definitely have better latency. Why would it be better? You're connecting to a server in some dude's house instead of a server in a farm in Seoul. That's the only difference... Yepp and that difference is why it's better. Don't ask me why it sucks so much through Bnet, but it just does. Direct connection is going to be way better in any case. See Broodwar which wasn't pretty, but playable EU <> Kor.
It's better to connect to a random PC vs a server farm? You're joking, right?
the difference is the route your connection takes to that server
it's direct, it doesn't hop off the freeway to head into an off the track town where theres a McDonald's to catch some breakfast.
a) All connections do that. It's how the internet works.
b) Blizzard doesn't control that path.
c) connecting to a suburb in Seoul would take an almost identical route to connecting to a farm in Seoul.
|
On July 05 2011 04:01 Yaotzin wrote:Show nested quote +On July 05 2011 03:59 zatic wrote:On July 05 2011 03:56 Yaotzin wrote:On July 05 2011 03:52 zatic wrote:On July 05 2011 03:40 Yaotzin wrote:On July 05 2011 03:36 ChickenLips wrote:On July 05 2011 03:34 Yaotzin wrote:On July 05 2011 03:30 ChickenLips wrote:
Ok, I'm a Korean Zerg and have to play a match in an online tourney with a Zerg from the Ukraine. We both have NA accounts so we try playing there but we both have so much lag that ling/bling micro becomes impossible and we're both getting frustrated. The match won't be broadcasted, we just have to send the replays.
Why do you think the latency would be any better? This thing is a crack, nothing more. It's still Blizzard's code. It just runs a server somewhere other than California or wherever Blizzard keeps their servers. I mentioned the scenario anywho.
See the appeal? This happens very often and if they somehow got match-making to work with a decent map-pool, I'd certainly prefer it over Blizzard ladder because I can just make a ton of smurfs and try other races / new builds / weird strats without the fear of it affecting my ladder ranking that all my friends and practice partners see.
Match making...? That isn't possible..You have to have a centralised server for matchmaking, and then you might as well use Blizzard's. 1) Because they don't have to re-route through Blizzard's server, the connection is direct between the players. A Korean connecting to a Ukrainian by LAN would be pretty much the same latency as a Ukrainian logging onto the Korean server. If the Ukrainian has a shit ping to that server they're going to have a shit (probably shitter) ping to the server in the Korean gamer's house. This is not true. While EU <> Kor will never be really enjoyable, at least it could be playable. Right now it's just completely unplayable, way worse than direct connections would be. So in that case a Korean <> Ukrainian game played with this crack would definitely have better latency. Why would it be better? You're connecting to a server in some dude's house instead of a server in a farm in Seoul. That's the only difference... Yepp and that difference is why it's better. Don't ask me why it sucks so much through Bnet, but it just does. Direct connection is going to be way better in any case. See Broodwar which wasn't pretty, but playable EU <> Kor. It's better to connect to a random PC vs a server farm? You're joking, right?
surely you are joking? the power of the server means nothing for latency. it just allows for more load. more users. when your talking about 4 players max you can be hosting it on a 486 and it'll be fine.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
