You could maybe check this thing:
http://www.teamliquid.net/blogs/viewblog.php?topic_id=283483

I use it to switch between servers and it indicates the latency (as I understand it). I'm from Belgium and play on EU and NA. On EU I have a latency of 31 ms usually (between 16 and 47), on NA it usually says 156 or 172. Other servers take way longer (up to about 400 ms at the most, that's the CN region).

Also, your experiment is really flawed. There is no way you can accurately measure ms with human reaction time added in.

misspo

France28 Posts

May 17 2012 22:04 GMT

#22

The thing is that you can have a low ping but still have this lag. I think it's some thing with battlenet and not your network

Ziktomini

United Kingdom377 Posts

May 17 2012 22:23 GMT

#23

you should be taking away your reaction time from the mean time you recorded with the stopwatch, google it and I'm sure you can find it, otherwise your current number of 0.46 is your latency + your reaction time.

Account252508

3454 Posts

May 17 2012 22:44 GMT

#24

--- Nuked ---

vargus

2 Posts

May 17 2012 22:44 GMT

#25

Reaction time has _nothing_ to do with it, unless his would be upwards of 400+ ms, because he doesn't have to actually react to anything (would be different if he tried to watch the marine hp and stopped his watch when he sees it lessen by 10 hp, but he doesn't). He's actually following a process (medivac healing) and extrapolating, which makes it pretty easy to hit the actual timing - fighting game players can hit a 16 ms interval pretty decently. It's well known that BNet added some (pretty significant) artificial lag, back in sc1 and wc3, which is the reason Hamachi was invented in the first place.
Edit: I misread your method, you should probably time your clock to the end of the healing, then find the actual healing time and the delay from something losing hp till the medivac healing (though that would also be pretty interesting to see - does it start later to heal on bnet?)

vindKtiv

United States215 Posts

May 17 2012 22:55 GMT

#26

On May 18 2012 06:03 Zombo Joe wrote:
The problem is we don't even need LAN, the delay just has to be reduced. Its not internet lag that makes things slow, its the artificial delay Blizzard added for some reason.

It's well known that BNet added some (pretty significant) artificial lag, back in sc1 and wc3, which is the reason Hamachi was invented in the first place.

I believe these post hit it on the head.

http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=117158

I found the post by R1CH back in the beta days. Most of the information has been changed and is irrelevant, but

UPDATE: Note that when I refer to latency in this post, I'm meaning network latency over the wire. Starcraft 2 includes a built-in command buffer that also adds input latency to smooth out and jittering or higher ping players - no amount of tweaking will reduce or alter that.

I believe has not changed.

ThePlayer33

Australia2378 Posts

May 17 2012 23:03 GMT

#27

give us lan or an australian server. either is fine

HeavOnEarth

United States7087 Posts

May 17 2012 23:05 GMT

#28

either lan or more servers , both of which SC1 had -insert QQ-

Account252508

3454 Posts

May 17 2012 23:40 GMT

#29

--- Nuked ---

Insane

United States4991 Posts

May 17 2012 23:42 GMT

#30

The only way I'd trust something like this is if you did something like recording yourself with a separate camera pressing the button, and then using the information from the camera, you could see how long elapsed between pressing the key and it actually taking effect.

Account252508

3454 Posts

May 18 2012 00:00 GMT

#31

--- Nuked ---

ColterTV

Argentina163 Posts

May 18 2012 00:15 GMT

#32

This latency issue is more severe to people far from Blizz servers, myself included, as Blizz has no South America server (we play in NA, 200ms lag at the very least). We have less reaction and gameplay is more sluggish, the difference between multi and single player playing from my location is HUGE.

oZe

Sweden492 Posts

May 18 2012 00:16 GMT

#33

If your opponent(s) lag significantly you will also experience lag. If the battle is big enough to max out one of the combatants cpu/gpu, you will experience lag.

Why do I get general error when I ping or traceroute eu.battle.net????

Account252508

3454 Posts

May 18 2012 01:41 GMT

#34

--- Nuked ---

Not_That

287 Posts

May 18 2012 02:01 GMT

#35

Don't use stopwatch. Instead fraps yourself blinking a stalker in unit tester map at known fps rate. Then open up the video and count frames between mouse click and blink in game.

Jacopana

El Salvador210 Posts

May 18 2012 02:03 GMT

#36

I have also felt some latency these days, is really anoying cuz you dont want to lose all your marines to banelings just because you did the command but the marines are retarded so all died.

0.50 is half a second, thats something you can feel on latency.

Dhalphir

Australia1305 Posts

May 18 2012 03:03 GMT

#37

do you....know what latency is?

It takes time for stuff to get across the world. The baseline 100-200ms delay that is built into multiplayer is to level the playing field a bit - so that somebody who has a much shorter distance between them and the server (ie, people living on the west coast of the US) doesn't have a huge advantage over people not living close.

Account252508

3454 Posts

May 18 2012 04:12 GMT

#38

--- Nuked ---

Not_That

287 Posts

May 18 2012 04:23 GMT

#39

If you mean frame count instead of fps in your last sentence, then yes.

Demonhunter04

1530 Posts

May 18 2012 04:26 GMT

#40

On May 18 2012 05:48 RoyAlex wrote:
Yea, there is quite a high latency in SC2, a lot higher than ppl think. Since there is no LAN, you have never tried SC2 with LAN ping so you have never felt the difference.

But, you can experience LAN ping! Just start up map editor and load up a ladder map and try it out, it almost unreal how different it is. Your forcefields happens before you even press, atleast that what it feels like.