The massively extensive patch notes for the coming Patch 3.0 are now available in the Starcraft 2/Battle.net launcher. They are also available to view on imgur.
So no more FFA at all, period, thats it. Thats a shame was fun to mess around with ppl from clans or old friends that want to dick around oh well rest looks cool.
So no more FFA at all, period, thats it. Thats a shame was fun to mess around with ppl from clans or old friends that want to dick around oh well rest looks cool.
FFA is still available in custom games, FFA Matchmaking has been removed.
The massively extensive patch notes for the coming Patch 3.0 are now available in the Starcraft 2/Battle.net launcher. They are also available to view on imgur.
The massively extensive patch notes for the coming Patch 3.0 are now available in the Starcraft 2/Battle.net launcher. They are also available to view on imgur.
On October 06 2015 14:35 Mistakes wrote: Is there a place to view this without being through imgur? I don't see it posted on Blizzard's website anywhere.
Its in the battlenet launcher. Go to options and click patch notes.
FFA IS STILL THERE!! It says it got removed from the standard matchmaking but it is still on the "Custom Games"
BTW I can't believe they released the patch... like seriously... and suddenly all the games I don't play from Blizz in like a whole life are updating but still no signal of SC2 lol
Anyway I am glad with the new UI and I hope I can find people to play StarBow easier than before now... but still I am surprised on how they delivered it now so fast, like they put some effort there, maybe some faith could be restored... (specially on the subject of better SC2 features and design changes after LotV release)
I'd love for someone who is technologically competent to explain what the 64 bit change will mean.
Obviously now on our 64 bit processors the game should increase in performance, however with the engines well known problems with murdering CPUs could this increase of usage capability (wording??) make little to no difference?
On October 06 2015 15:17 Thaniri wrote: I'd love for someone who is technologically competent to explain what the 64 bit change will mean.
Obviously now on our 64 bit processors the game should increase in performance, however with the engines well known problems with murdering CPUs could this increase of usage capability (wording??) make little to no difference?
It could perform better, it could perform worse, depends on their implementation. Probably will perform better.
On October 06 2015 14:16 Incognoto wrote: I shall wait for Cyro to come to this thread and give us a good knowledge bomb on what we can expect from a 64 bit game of SC2.
On October 06 2015 15:17 Thaniri wrote: I'd love for someone who is technologically competent to explain what the 64 bit change will mean.
Obviously now on our 64 bit processors the game should increase in performance, however with the engines well known problems with murdering CPUs could this increase of usage capability (wording??) make little to no difference?
Heroes of the Storm has a 64bit version and it's worse than the 32bit for a lot of people myself included(no idea why) so I wouldn't expect much.
"The following Gameplay options have been removed and are now permanently enabled"
I hate reading sentences like that
Fixed a performance issue relating to CPU thread balancing on newer CPU's that lessened performance over time
I wonder if that's live on beta yet - i've noticed a significant performance degradation and some inconsistency when trying to benchmark in the last few weeks! I re-run the same part of the replay as always, get the same results within 0.1% for 3 tests in a row but then the same thing a little later can give 15% different FPS. That didn't happen (as least as much) on earlier versions of the game
Fixed a performance issue relating to CPU thread balancing on newer CPU's that lessened performance over time
I wonder if that's live on beta yet - i've noticed a significant performance degradation and some inconsistency when trying to benchmark in the last few weeks! I re-run the same part of the replay as always, get the same results within 0.1% for 3 tests in a row but then the same thing a little later can give 15% different FPS. That didn't happen (as least as much) on earlier versions of the game
Pretty sure patch 3.0 is a significantly newer build than beta. Keep in mind the beta build hasn't been updated since July 29th.
On October 06 2015 15:17 Thaniri wrote: I'd love for someone who is technologically competent to explain what the 64 bit change will mean.
Obviously now on our 64 bit processors the game should increase in performance, however with the engines well known problems with murdering CPUs could this increase of usage capability (wording??) make little to no difference?
The biggest advantage is that it(SC2) has more memory available from operating system. If you have 16 GB RAM then, in theory, the whole SC2 can be loaded into it(I hope I remember the SC2 size correctly, is it 9 GB, isn't it? ). 32bit application has 1.75 GB limit of RAM usage(can be exceeded, but this type of compilation is not used that often).
There are other benefits too, but that's just nitpicking compared to this boost(from your view)
If it works properly( ) it should be faster and smoother. RAM is the fastest large memory place you have in PC. (CPU cache is small(MB) and graphic memory is not generally accessible like RAM)
"Purchase of campaigne ingame" does this my friend who has no sc2 can buy lotv then buy the wol and hots campaigne for a bit less then the real games? Would be awesome since he is only interested in the campaignes.
On October 06 2015 16:29 Cyro wrote: "The following Gameplay options have been removed and are now permanently enabled"
I hate reading sentences like that
Fixed a performance issue relating to CPU thread balancing on newer CPU's that lessened performance over time
I wonder if that's live on beta yet - i've noticed a significant performance degradation and some inconsistency when trying to benchmark in the last few weeks! I re-run the same part of the replay as always, get the same results within 0.1% for 3 tests in a row but then the same thing a little later can give 15% different FPS. That didn't happen (as least as much) on earlier versions of the game
Pretty sure patch 3.0 is a significantly newer build than beta. Keep in mind the beta build hasn't been updated since July 29th.
That's interesting
Also worthy of note, i'm getting ~6-7% higher performance on 32-bit than 64-bit at the moment on beta
On October 06 2015 16:29 Cyro wrote: "The following Gameplay options have been removed and are now permanently enabled"
I hate reading sentences like that
Fixed a performance issue relating to CPU thread balancing on newer CPU's that lessened performance over time
I wonder if that's live on beta yet - i've noticed a significant performance degradation and some inconsistency when trying to benchmark in the last few weeks! I re-run the same part of the replay as always, get the same results within 0.1% for 3 tests in a row but then the same thing a little later can give 15% different FPS. That didn't happen (as least as much) on earlier versions of the game
Pretty sure patch 3.0 is a significantly newer build than beta. Keep in mind the beta build hasn't been updated since July 29th.
That's interesting
Also worthy of note, i'm getting ~6-7% higher performance on 32-bit than 64-bit at the moment on beta
On October 06 2015 16:29 Cyro wrote: "The following Gameplay options have been removed and are now permanently enabled"
I hate reading sentences like that
Fixed a performance issue relating to CPU thread balancing on newer CPU's that lessened performance over time
I wonder if that's live on beta yet - i've noticed a significant performance degradation and some inconsistency when trying to benchmark in the last few weeks! I re-run the same part of the replay as always, get the same results within 0.1% for 3 tests in a row but then the same thing a little later can give 15% different FPS. That didn't happen (as least as much) on earlier versions of the game
Pretty sure patch 3.0 is a significantly newer build than beta. Keep in mind the beta build hasn't been updated since July 29th.
That's interesting
Also worthy of note, i'm getting ~6-7% higher performance on 32-bit than 64-bit at the moment on beta
What is your measurement?
Just ran my benchmark on 32-bit and my performance was actually 10% higher than i've managed to record it before (while always benching in 64-bit), though my CPU is clocked 100mhz up and maybe has some other settings tweaked now.
tl;dr not a great scientific tests but obviously no huge performance improvements with 64
Ran both now to check without restarting system or changing other variables:
64 bit = 75 min, 106 average. 32 bit = 80 min, 113 average.
My regular benchmarks with a small range of settings were giving very exact results between about 65-72 min - so i've improved performance a little above my max on 64-bit already and then the 32 bit is significantly above that.
On October 06 2015 16:29 Cyro wrote: "The following Gameplay options have been removed and are now permanently enabled"
I hate reading sentences like that
Fixed a performance issue relating to CPU thread balancing on newer CPU's that lessened performance over time
I wonder if that's live on beta yet - i've noticed a significant performance degradation and some inconsistency when trying to benchmark in the last few weeks! I re-run the same part of the replay as always, get the same results within 0.1% for 3 tests in a row but then the same thing a little later can give 15% different FPS. That didn't happen (as least as much) on earlier versions of the game
Pretty sure patch 3.0 is a significantly newer build than beta. Keep in mind the beta build hasn't been updated since July 29th.
That's interesting
Also worthy of note, i'm getting ~6-7% higher performance on 32-bit than 64-bit at the moment on beta
Just ran my benchmark on 32-bit and my performance was actually 10% higher than i've managed to record it before (while always benching in 64-bit), though my CPU is clocked 100mhz up and maybe has some other settings tweaked now.
tl;dr not a great scientific tests but obviously no huge performance improvements with 64
Ran both now to check without restarting system or changing other variables:
64 bit = 75 min, 106 average. 32 bit = 80 min, 113 average.
My regular benchmarks with a small range of settings were giving very exact results between about 65-72 min - so i've improved performance a little above my max on 64-bit already and then the 32 bit is significantly above that.
So basically FPS only? Because I would expect lower FPS on 64bit but faster loading times and smoother play. I honestly don't care that much, I have 140+ FPS and SC2 is on Samsung 840Pro, so it is fast and furious But I hate waiting on other people loading so if that gets better for them with 64bit I would be thrilled
Nothing against you, I know that loading tests are annoying and smooth play testing is highly subjective, I was just curious, not nitpicking or anything
On October 06 2015 16:29 Cyro wrote: "The following Gameplay options have been removed and are now permanently enabled"
I hate reading sentences like that
Fixed a performance issue relating to CPU thread balancing on newer CPU's that lessened performance over time
I wonder if that's live on beta yet - i've noticed a significant performance degradation and some inconsistency when trying to benchmark in the last few weeks! I re-run the same part of the replay as always, get the same results within 0.1% for 3 tests in a row but then the same thing a little later can give 15% different FPS. That didn't happen (as least as much) on earlier versions of the game
Pretty sure patch 3.0 is a significantly newer build than beta. Keep in mind the beta build hasn't been updated since July 29th.
That's interesting
Also worthy of note, i'm getting ~6-7% higher performance on 32-bit than 64-bit at the moment on beta
What is your measurement?
Just ran my benchmark on 32-bit and my performance was actually 10% higher than i've managed to record it before (while always benching in 64-bit), though my CPU is clocked 100mhz up and maybe has some other settings tweaked now.
tl;dr not a great scientific tests but obviously no huge performance improvements with 64
Ran both now to check without restarting system or changing other variables:
64 bit = 75 min, 106 average. 32 bit = 80 min, 113 average.
My regular benchmarks with a small range of settings were giving very exact results between about 65-72 min - so i've improved performance a little above my max on 64-bit already and then the 32 bit is significantly above that.
So basically FPS only? Because I would expect lower FPS on 64bit but faster loading times and smoother play. I honestly don't care that much, I have 140+ FPS and SC2 is on Samsung 840Pro, so it is fast and furious But I hate waiting on other people loading so if that gets better for them with 64bit I would be thrilled
Nothing against you, I know that loading tests are annoying and smooth play testing is highly subjective, I was just curious, not nitpicking or anything
Loading felt the same, i didn't feel need to benchmark it considering it takes a couple seconds (would be very hard to get an exact result without a high speed camera) and just loading 1 replay doesn't hit RAM limits for 32 bit. I can't see why it would really be different and if it is, it's not significant.
Smoothness of play is absolutely not subjective, it's quite easily measurable by checking the frametime of every frame. I've done that quite a lot for sc2.
I have 140+ FPS
You don't maintain it and it's easy to tell the difference between 80fps and 120fps in sc2 even on a 60hz monitor because the frametimes are extremely uneven
On October 06 2015 16:29 Cyro wrote: "The following Gameplay options have been removed and are now permanently enabled"
I hate reading sentences like that
Fixed a performance issue relating to CPU thread balancing on newer CPU's that lessened performance over time
I wonder if that's live on beta yet - i've noticed a significant performance degradation and some inconsistency when trying to benchmark in the last few weeks! I re-run the same part of the replay as always, get the same results within 0.1% for 3 tests in a row but then the same thing a little later can give 15% different FPS. That didn't happen (as least as much) on earlier versions of the game
Pretty sure patch 3.0 is a significantly newer build than beta. Keep in mind the beta build hasn't been updated since July 29th.
That's interesting
Also worthy of note, i'm getting ~6-7% higher performance on 32-bit than 64-bit at the moment on beta
What is your measurement?
Just ran my benchmark on 32-bit and my performance was actually 10% higher than i've managed to record it before (while always benching in 64-bit), though my CPU is clocked 100mhz up and maybe has some other settings tweaked now.
tl;dr not a great scientific tests but obviously no huge performance improvements with 64
Ran both now to check without restarting system or changing other variables:
64 bit = 75 min, 106 average. 32 bit = 80 min, 113 average.
My regular benchmarks with a small range of settings were giving very exact results between about 65-72 min - so i've improved performance a little above my max on 64-bit already and then the 32 bit is significantly above that.
So basically FPS only? Because I would expect lower FPS on 64bit but faster loading times and smoother play. I honestly don't care that much, I have 140+ FPS and SC2 is on Samsung 840Pro, so it is fast and furious But I hate waiting on other people loading so if that gets better for them with 64bit I would be thrilled
Nothing against you, I know that loading tests are annoying and smooth play testing is highly subjective, I was just curious, not nitpicking or anything
Loading felt the same, i didn't feel need to benchmark it considering it takes a couple seconds (would be very hard to get an exact result without a high speed camera) and just loading 1 replay doesn't hit RAM limits for 32 bit. I can't see why it would really be different and if it is, it's not significant.
Smoothness of play is absolutely not subjective, it's quite easily measurable by checking the frametime of every frame. I've done that quite a lot for sc2.
You don't maintain it and it's easy to tell the difference between 80fps and 120fps in sc2 even on a 60hz monitor because the frametimes are extremely uneven
Well I don't know what are my frames during the game, it's not lagging and it feels OK all the time, so I don't care
Hmm, you're right about the smoothness.
Loading - that's the problem of our high tech machines, we don't see the difference Difference in 0.3 s can be 4 s for someone with worse PC. (it is similar with our DB performance tuning at work, our general working DB has so few records that lowering by 10 reads can be 250,000 reads on customers side >< I spent 4 years arguing we need a bigger RD DB and we still don't have it)
On October 06 2015 16:29 Cyro wrote: "The following Gameplay options have been removed and are now permanently enabled"
I hate reading sentences like that
Fixed a performance issue relating to CPU thread balancing on newer CPU's that lessened performance over time
I wonder if that's live on beta yet - i've noticed a significant performance degradation and some inconsistency when trying to benchmark in the last few weeks! I re-run the same part of the replay as always, get the same results within 0.1% for 3 tests in a row but then the same thing a little later can give 15% different FPS. That didn't happen (as least as much) on earlier versions of the game
Pretty sure patch 3.0 is a significantly newer build than beta. Keep in mind the beta build hasn't been updated since July 29th.
That's interesting
Also worthy of note, i'm getting ~6-7% higher performance on 32-bit than 64-bit at the moment on beta
I have access to a newer than the beta build of the game (but older than live patch 3.0) and can confirm performance is vastly improved on 64bit client.
On October 06 2015 16:29 Cyro wrote: "The following Gameplay options have been removed and are now permanently enabled"
I hate reading sentences like that
Fixed a performance issue relating to CPU thread balancing on newer CPU's that lessened performance over time
I wonder if that's live on beta yet - i've noticed a significant performance degradation and some inconsistency when trying to benchmark in the last few weeks! I re-run the same part of the replay as always, get the same results within 0.1% for 3 tests in a row but then the same thing a little later can give 15% different FPS. That didn't happen (as least as much) on earlier versions of the game
Pretty sure patch 3.0 is a significantly newer build than beta. Keep in mind the beta build hasn't been updated since July 29th.
That's interesting
Also worthy of note, i'm getting ~6-7% higher performance on 32-bit than 64-bit at the moment on beta
What is your measurement?
Just ran my benchmark on 32-bit and my performance was actually 10% higher than i've managed to record it before (while always benching in 64-bit), though my CPU is clocked 100mhz up and maybe has some other settings tweaked now.
tl;dr not a great scientific tests but obviously no huge performance improvements with 64
Ran both now to check without restarting system or changing other variables:
64 bit = 75 min, 106 average. 32 bit = 80 min, 113 average.
My regular benchmarks with a small range of settings were giving very exact results between about 65-72 min - so i've improved performance a little above my max on 64-bit already and then the 32 bit is significantly above that.
So basically FPS only? Because I would expect lower FPS on 64bit but faster loading times and smoother play. I honestly don't care that much, I have 140+ FPS and SC2 is on Samsung 840Pro, so it is fast and furious But I hate waiting on other people loading so if that gets better for them with 64bit I would be thrilled
Nothing against you, I know that loading tests are annoying and smooth play testing is highly subjective, I was just curious, not nitpicking or anything
Loading felt the same, i didn't feel need to benchmark it considering it takes a couple seconds (would be very hard to get an exact result without a high speed camera) and just loading 1 replay doesn't hit RAM limits for 32 bit. I can't see why it would really be different and if it is, it's not significant.
Smoothness of play is absolutely not subjective, it's quite easily measurable by checking the frametime of every frame. I've done that quite a lot for sc2.
I have 140+ FPS
You don't maintain it and it's easy to tell the difference between 80fps and 120fps in sc2 even on a 60hz monitor because the frametimes are extremely uneven
Well I don't know what are my frames during the game, it's not lagging and it feels OK all the time, so I don't care
Hmm, you're right about the smoothness.
Loading - that's the problem of our high tech machines, we don't see the difference Difference in 0.3 s can be 4 s for someone with worse PC. (it is similar with our DB performance tuning at work, our general working DB has so few records that lowering by 10 reads can be 250,000 reads on customers side >< I spent 4 years arguing we need a bigger RD DB and we still don't have it)
Thanks for details!
Green = 32 bit, blue = 64 bit.
My start time on these 2 benchmarks was a tiny bit off so i moved one result ~10 pixels to match them up more. The other benchmarks showed the same performance increase and you can see that green is clearly higher (especially on the slow frames) so that doesn't change my confidence in the results. The gap between the fast and the slow frames is notably smaller on 32-bit as well - looks like it spends less time whatever it's doing with the CPU on the game tick frames.
Well I don't know what are my frames during the game, it's not lagging and it feels OK all the time, so I don't care
You would almost certainly care if you knew what "better" looked and felt like!
As you can see from looking at the pic, this is literally an "80fps" minimum for the green - the FPS display never drops below 80 - yet a TON of frames come in at 1/40'th to 1/60'th of a second. 80 min, 113 average and it's still very noticably unsmooth on 60hz. That's not even a maxed battle; it's an engagement with carriers in the midgame of a 1v1 map.
I didn't even notice some performance improvements myself, but when making a 40% performance upgrade there were so many "wow this is way smoother than i expected" moments. Two of the major ones were games with a lot of zerglings and flying a mutalisk flock around missile turrets but it affects the majority of games
On October 06 2015 16:29 Cyro wrote: "The following Gameplay options have been removed and are now permanently enabled"
I hate reading sentences like that
Fixed a performance issue relating to CPU thread balancing on newer CPU's that lessened performance over time
I wonder if that's live on beta yet - i've noticed a significant performance degradation and some inconsistency when trying to benchmark in the last few weeks! I re-run the same part of the replay as always, get the same results within 0.1% for 3 tests in a row but then the same thing a little later can give 15% different FPS. That didn't happen (as least as much) on earlier versions of the game
Pretty sure patch 3.0 is a significantly newer build than beta. Keep in mind the beta build hasn't been updated since July 29th.
That's interesting
Also worthy of note, i'm getting ~6-7% higher performance on 32-bit than 64-bit at the moment on beta
What is your measurement?
Just ran my benchmark on 32-bit and my performance was actually 10% higher than i've managed to record it before (while always benching in 64-bit), though my CPU is clocked 100mhz up and maybe has some other settings tweaked now.
tl;dr not a great scientific tests but obviously no huge performance improvements with 64
Ran both now to check without restarting system or changing other variables:
64 bit = 75 min, 106 average. 32 bit = 80 min, 113 average.
My regular benchmarks with a small range of settings were giving very exact results between about 65-72 min - so i've improved performance a little above my max on 64-bit already and then the 32 bit is significantly above that.
So basically FPS only? Because I would expect lower FPS on 64bit but faster loading times and smoother play. I honestly don't care that much, I have 140+ FPS and SC2 is on Samsung 840Pro, so it is fast and furious But I hate waiting on other people loading so if that gets better for them with 64bit I would be thrilled
Nothing against you, I know that loading tests are annoying and smooth play testing is highly subjective, I was just curious, not nitpicking or anything
Loading felt the same, i didn't feel need to benchmark it considering it takes a couple seconds (would be very hard to get an exact result without a high speed camera) and just loading 1 replay doesn't hit RAM limits for 32 bit. I can't see why it would really be different and if it is, it's not significant.
Smoothness of play is absolutely not subjective, it's quite easily measurable by checking the frametime of every frame. I've done that quite a lot for sc2.
I have 140+ FPS
You don't maintain it and it's easy to tell the difference between 80fps and 120fps in sc2 even on a 60hz monitor because the frametimes are extremely uneven
Well I don't know what are my frames during the game, it's not lagging and it feels OK all the time, so I don't care
Hmm, you're right about the smoothness.
Loading - that's the problem of our high tech machines, we don't see the difference Difference in 0.3 s can be 4 s for someone with worse PC. (it is similar with our DB performance tuning at work, our general working DB has so few records that lowering by 10 reads can be 250,000 reads on customers side >< I spent 4 years arguing we need a bigger RD DB and we still don't have it)
Thanks for details!
Green = 32 bit, blue = 64 bit.
My start time on these 2 benchmarks was a tiny bit off so i moved one result ~10 pixels to match them up more. The other benchmarks showed the same performance increase and you can see that green is clearly higher (especially on the slow frames) so that doesn't change my confidence in the results
Well I don't know what are my frames during the game, it's not lagging and it feels OK all the time, so I don't care
You would almost certainly care if you knew what "better" looked and felt like!
I am pretty sure it is high enough for my lame playing
Edit: Also it is worth noting that I play protoss and my Zerg is somewhere on a silver level, so I just play the zerg as it is supposed to be. Just build a shitton of stuff and amove it! For the motherland! (also known as the Zapp Brannigan tactic - I send wave after wave after wave...! )
The framepacing issue has been there since WoL beta and no improvements were made on that front I believe. All the engine improvements are put towards multithread optimization, better shading efficiency and maybe something minor I didn't notice.
On October 06 2015 19:00 digmouse wrote: The framepacing issue has been there since WoL beta and no improvements were made on that front I believe.
They use an engine which sits around and does nothing for about 50 milliseconds (so the CPU doesn't have much to do, you get a super high framerate) and then does everything for the game simulation in a single tick - which apparantly stops any new frames from being rendered while that's happening so we get a pronounced stutter in the animation.
All the engine improvements are put towards multithread optimization, better shading efficiency and maybe something minor I didn't notice.
With all of the simulation being done on 1 thread, there's basically nothing AFAIK in terms of multithreaded optimization that will actually make any real difference. I'm still seeing one core maxed and another at ~15-40% load. I actually have a funny picture from HOTS-era showing hardware usage.
Competitive settings - 8% load on a gtx770 that's not GPU boosted (so it's at stock reference clock speeds). One CPU core maxed, minor load on a second core (4770k@4.6ghz)
On October 06 2015 19:01 Firkraag8 wrote: What happened to the ladder revamp that we were supposed to be getting? I was sure it would come in the UI update?
I think we might see them talking about it at Blizzcon, if it is coming. And my bet is on a Heroes/Hearthstone style ranking system.
On October 06 2015 19:01 Firkraag8 wrote: What happened to the ladder revamp that we were supposed to be getting? I was sure it would come in the UI update?
I think we might see them talking about it at Blizzcon, if it is coming. And my bet is on a Heroes/Hearthstone style ranking system.
hmmmmm interesting insight.
i'd say 1/8 at worst and 1/20 at best of my wins are 15 second victories. people just quit.
are players intentionally taking 2 or 3 twenty second losses in a row to keep their rank down? if so the ladder supplies them a steady stream of "sparring partners".
if this is going on i don't think Blizz will solve it.
Why are they taking away FFA? WTF I love that format. I have 550/800 wins for the achievement with it and that's a really hard fought number to get to =\ Even as a high masters player who plays tons of FFA. This is a huge bummer and I hope that they will reconsider..
On October 06 2015 22:31 Lumi wrote: Why are they taking away FFA? WTF I love that format. I have 550/800 wins for the achievement with it and that's a really hard fought number to get to =\ Even as a high masters player who plays tons of FFA. This is a huge bummer and I hope that they will reconsider..
The reality is there aren't really a lot of people playing it.
On October 06 2015 22:31 Lumi wrote: Why are they taking away FFA? WTF I love that format. I have 550/800 wins for the achievement with it and that's a really hard fought number to get to =\ Even as a high masters player who plays tons of FFA. This is a huge bummer and I hope that they will reconsider..
The reality is there aren't really a lot of people playing it.
Still don't see the point in completely killing it. Search times for FFA in War3 were also super long past some point, it's not a reason to prevent the few players who still want to play it from trying to find a game. I mean, what does it cost to maintain FFA in the matchmaking system? By force of circumstance, people who wanted to play FFA were already fully aware of the search times anyway
On October 06 2015 22:31 Lumi wrote: Why are they taking away FFA? WTF I love that format. I have 550/800 wins for the achievement with it and that's a really hard fought number to get to =\ Even as a high masters player who plays tons of FFA. This is a huge bummer and I hope that they will reconsider..
I have 80+ wins and even that took a while. my guess is they will make your highest achievement reached in FFA a Feat of Strength, like they did in Diablo 3 with all achievements that you could no longer be getting. so in my case, feat of strength "50 FFA wins", in your case "400 FFA wins"
On October 06 2015 22:31 Lumi wrote: Why are they taking away FFA? WTF I love that format. I have 550/800 wins for the achievement with it and that's a really hard fought number to get to =\ Even as a high masters player who plays tons of FFA. This is a huge bummer and I hope that they will reconsider..
The reality is there aren't really a lot of people playing it.
Still don't see the point in completely killing it. Search times for FFA in War3 were also super long past some point, it's not a reason to prevent the few players who still want to play it from trying to find a game. I mean, what does it cost to maintain FFA in the matchmaking system? By force of circumstance, people who wanted to play FFA were already fully aware of the search times anyway
The mode is still available in custom games, there's just not official ladder matchmaking for it any more. I see their point - people who want to play can still find people with an open custom game and even chat channels, the ladder had so few people that there was no reasonable way to match players by skill.
On October 06 2015 23:36 EatingBomber wrote: Are all these changes applicable to players who only own Wings of Liberty?
Yes, the update is also coming to WoL and even starter edition.
Unfortunately I am one of such people, and nothing has changed for me. The patch notes say that the patch is live for Heart of the Swarm though, at the top of the post.
On October 06 2015 23:36 EatingBomber wrote: Are all these changes applicable to players who only own Wings of Liberty?
Yes, the update is also coming to WoL and even starter edition.
Unfortunately I am one of such people, and nothing has changed for me. The patch notes say that the patch is live for Heart of the Swarm though, at the top of the post.
On October 06 2015 23:36 EatingBomber wrote: Are all these changes applicable to players who only own Wings of Liberty?
Yes, the update is also coming to WoL and even starter edition.
Unfortunately I am one of such people, and nothing has changed for me. The patch notes say that the patch is live for Heart of the Swarm though, at the top of the post.
It's live in SEA but not yet in the other regions
Well, I play in the SEA region, and nothing appears to be changed. Singapore, to be specific.
Don't agree with them removing FFA, they should incentivise it instead by adding exclusive portraits that you can earn and a proper ladder system. The ladder might be abused by some but things like this will make more people play FFA. "Nobody is playing it" isn't a valid reason, nobody is playing it because it never got the support it needed.
On October 06 2015 23:36 EatingBomber wrote: Are all these changes applicable to players who only own Wings of Liberty?
Yes, the update is also coming to WoL and even starter edition.
Unfortunately I am one of such people, and nothing has changed for me. The patch notes say that the patch is live for Heart of the Swarm though, at the top of the post.
It's live in SEA but not yet in the other regions
Well, I play in the SEA region, and nothing appears to be changed. Singapore, to be specific.
Oh that's weird. Have you not even downloaded the update?
They even said in their preview blog
The changes below will be released with Patch 3.0 and everyone will be receiving the update, whether you only own Wings of Liberty, Heart of the Swarm, or even just the Starter Edition.
I hope they fix that soon and follow up with their plans.
On October 06 2015 13:08 geokilla wrote: I wonder what changes 64 bit will bring.
Did anyone play FFA on SC2? Anything outside of 1v1 felt so weird to me.
Ofc, FFA is really fun, i have so around 400 wins or more. Wanted to get that 800 win achievement, but seems its over now ;(. Or can u get it even if it is custom game?
On October 07 2015 00:49 Firkraag8 wrote: Don't agree with them removing FFA, they should incentivise it instead by adding exclusive portraits that you can earn and a proper ladder system. The ladder might be abused by some but things like this will make more people play FFA. "Nobody is playing it" isn't a valid reason, nobody is playing it because it never got the support it needed.
Super true.. and there were enough people playing it that you can still play it, and that's something. A lot of long-time dedicated FFAers are going to be saddened by this. They might not be everybody but hey i don't see 3v3 being shut down either and it's about as fair to say that nobody plays that either, honestly?
What is the perceived gain of removing FFA? I don't see anything remotely meaningfully productive coming of this.
Lobby chat in previous position was much better. No browse open games by genre in arcade. Some arcade maps seems to be broken. Lost about half FPS after update. This patch sucks so far...
So the new patch causes a lot of problems for me. The Whispers of Oblivion missions give me like 1fps, and maxs my CPU right out, and trying to open the multiplayer caused my game to crash. My CPU is a piece of shit but it never did anything like this before.
Did anyone else notice that they completely fucked the mappool for active seasons? In both 2v2 and 1v1 they re-added old maps, some of which are down right terrible, all of which mess up people's vetos. I can't think of a single logical reason why they would have done this.
fyi they didn't just turn the old FFA achievements into feats of glory as some users suggested.. they just plain removed them. This is the most insensitive game change I think I've seen them make?
On October 07 2015 07:12 Lumi wrote: fyi they didn't just turn the old FFA achievements into feats of glory as some users suggested.. they just plain removed them. This is the most insensitive game change I think I've seen them make?
It's definitely really weird. I don't understand why they did it. "Not many people played it" is not a reason to take the effort to remove it. Leaving it as is takes less effort than removing it.
So no more FFA at all, period, thats it. Thats a shame was fun to mess around with ppl from clans or old friends that want to dick around oh well rest looks cool.
Theres still FFA, just not in matchmaking, you can still play it in custom games, so its really not a big deal.
On October 06 2015 14:35 Mistakes wrote: Is there a place to view this without being through imgur? I don't see it posted on Blizzard's website anywhere.
On October 07 2015 07:12 Lumi wrote: fyi they didn't just turn the old FFA achievements into feats of glory as some users suggested.. they just plain removed them. This is the most insensitive game change I think I've seen them make?
man I would be piiiiisssed if I actually did that 800 FFA achievement lol.
Also, this new update is causing a lot of stuttering and lag. And I see a lot of people in chat complaining about their rigs heating up. My laptop (brand new) was cold as ice during HoTS, but is actually getting a bit warm for this 3.0.... so... that's bad.
On October 07 2015 07:12 Lumi wrote: fyi they didn't just turn the old FFA achievements into feats of glory as some users suggested.. they just plain removed them. This is the most insensitive game change I think I've seen them make?
man I would be piiiiisssed if I actually did that 800 FFA achievement lol.
I only got 5, so works out for me pretty well. Those who went all the way should AT LEAST receive a FoS for it...
For me, the arcade change is the best thing to happen to SC2 since release.
I played thousands upon thousands of hours on wc3/tft custom maps, generally because of the great variety. There were tons of maps, not many of them were polished except for the big ones like footmen frenzy or dota, but there was always something new and interesting to try!
Despite the more powerful editing tools in sc2, the active mappool has stagnated greatly, and I don't think it's any surprise this is due to the front-page system, where only top 20 (if that) games see play. Despite all their attempts, nothing was coming close to the tft system of having open rooms for promoting a diversity of custom maps. Nexus wars, squadron, all decent in their own right, but they aren't deep enough to played for so long, yet are the only games you can play without waiting hours in a lobby for.
This patch is a godsend! I've already played a couple of games today that would have taken hours to fill up previously! The open lobby system is glorious! I was hoping they'd go back to the room system, where at least the lesser-known maps got some screen time, but this is the same with 1 additional advantage; massive maps like dota/squadron td won't take up half of the listings because they're consolidated into 1 listing. The only disadvantage I can see vs TFT is not being able to advertise different types of games. For example if you were hosting a footmen frenzy game and wanted to let everyone joining know it would be the all-random selection.
Now just hoping some of my favourites get remakes..... 'Mercy TD' seems like a dodgy Wintermaul Wars. Hopefully someone finds the WMW Tournament Edition and bases it on that, had mad polish and balance. Also had a good game of line tower wars, fun just trying to remember what the best kind of maze is!
3 UI iterations in and the replay screen is still an inconsistent mess. It looks bad, the table layout is different from all other tables in the game (e.g. custom games, arcade), the fonts are different, the font shadows are different, the font size are different, the window sizes are different. Compared with the rest of the UI it still sticks out like a sore thumb.
Hopeless. Literally hopeless, in the sense that there is literally no more hope that this will ever be fixed.
On October 07 2015 16:03 paralleluniverse wrote: 3 UI iterations in and the replay screen is still an inconsistent mess. It looks bad, the table layout is different from all other tables in the game (e.g. custom games, arcade), the fonts are different, the font shadows are different, the window sizes are different. Compared with the rest of the UI it still sticks out like a sore thumb.
Hopeless. Literally hopeless, in the sense that there is literally no more hope that this will ever be fixed.
Somehow I am glad I don't really notice these things
On October 07 2015 15:29 -Genome- wrote: Despite the more powerful editing tools in sc2, the active mappool has stagnated greatly, and I don't think it's any surprise this is due to the front-page system, where only top 20 (if that) games see play.
It is also due to how horribly conceived the editor is. After you open Galaxy for the first time to do some stuff, the first thing you want to do is throw your PC out of the window. You can do a lot indeed, probably almost anything, but some things are so convoluted/time-consuming for nothing that it's simply discouraging.
Is there a good reason why new 3D objects (artanis, hydralisk etc) are rendered depending on user settings and are not a prerendered video at max settings (much better visuals, less lag)?. I can't imagine those few second animations would take too much disk space.
can someone with knowledge explain why this patch is not applied to lotv beta?
because as a mere game enthusiast (not much knowledge about coding and technical stuff) I find it stupid. There must be a reason. I mean shouldn't there be a way to apply these UI changes to beta without enabling september 10 content?
I like the part where i could play Vaani research for a moment again and not the current mappool. The UI is laggy, feels clunky with menu's, no xp level during loading screen, names are cut off etc. Some things are improved. But not able to see my old replays is really what makes me unhappy.
On October 07 2015 20:37 Grusalugg wrote: can someone with knowledge explain why this patch is not applied to lotv beta?
because as a mere game enthusiast (not much knowledge about coding and technical stuff) I find it stupid. There must be a reason. I mean shouldn't there be a way to apply these UI changes to beta without enabling september 10 content?
hots client is a secondary priority and they probably want to test on the less important one without messing up people's beta experience. lotv is what people are returning to the game for and practicing for whereas hots is going to slowly die off so it's not really as important if they screw something up on hots
On October 07 2015 20:37 Grusalugg wrote: can someone with knowledge explain why this patch is not applied to lotv beta?
because as a mere game enthusiast (not much knowledge about coding and technical stuff) I find it stupid. There must be a reason. I mean shouldn't there be a way to apply these UI changes to beta without enabling september 10 content?
hots client is a secondary priority and they probably want to test on the less important one without messing up people's beta experience. lotv is what people are returning to the game for and practicing for whereas hots is going to slowly die off so it's not really as important if they screw something up on hots
Test something on a real server but not in the actual beta test? Really?
can someone with knowledge explain why this patch is not applied to lotv beta?
because as a mere game enthusiast (not much knowledge about coding and technical stuff) I find it stupid. There must be a reason. I mean shouldn't there be a way to apply these UI changes to beta without enabling september 10 content?
The patch HAS to go to live, as it's reworking the client again like 2.0 did. It's adding/changing a bunch of features.
The only question is if the patch should go to beta AS WELL, which would take extra work and beta is gonna be up for another month or so at absolute most
And I see a lot of people in chat complaining about their rigs heating up. My laptop (brand new) was cold as ice during HoTS, but is actually getting a bit warm for this 3.0.... so... that's bad.
Not neccesarily, it just means that your hardware is being utilized more than before. Hardware is designed to be ran at 100% and cooling systems are designed to keep it within operating temperatures while it's doing that (and sometimes in the case of laptops, keep the laptop at a comfortable temperature for touching) so if your system can't manage that, it's actually the fault of the hardware and not SC2.
-why- it's utilizing hardware more is up for discussion, i can see the menu's loading GPU more because of changed/added stuff
Fan-fucking-tastic. So I update SC2 and now I cannot watch old replays. Is there anyway to get around this, by re-installing, or something along those lines? I'm positively incensed right this minute.
I REALLY like the new UI. But I really DON'T like the lag that came with it. Not sure if Blizz tweaked something in graphic settings or was just experiencing a lot of users downloading content that might have impacted play, but last night the game was crazy laggy. Even though my graphic settings had not changed from the day before when everything ran very smooth, I turned them down anyway but didn't impact play. Still laggy. Hope will be resolved soon!
On October 07 2015 21:18 DSK wrote: Fan-fucking-tastic. So I update SC2 and now I cannot watch old replays. Is there anyway to get around this, by re-installing, or something along those lines? I'm positively incensed right this minute.
No, that's intentional. You need to use an older version of the client.
Is there a way to download the major portion of patch 3.0 (the ~2gb or so) an external way and use that .exe file or whatever to install that patch, then use the launcher to download anything that was missed? I was currently up to date with my patches but also will be limited with my internet (download cap zzzz) for the time being. I also don't really want to go to a starbucks or something and download the entire game on my laptop (more like 10+ gigs rather then just the 2 or so from 3.0)
I Sometimes hate living in NA because of the whole internet situation. Living with a friend for the time being and both charter & comcast end about 200 yards away and it'd be a ridiculous charge for them to run the cable so currently stuck with good ol' 3g/4g and their data caps!
On October 07 2015 21:18 DSK wrote: Fan-fucking-tastic. So I update SC2 and now I cannot watch old replays. Is there anyway to get around this, by re-installing, or something along those lines? I'm positively incensed right this minute.
No, that's intentional. You need to use an older version of the client.
How would I go about doing this, if you don't mind my asking? I'm afraid I'm ignorant of such matters
It is painfully obvious to me this was a PR move to get ppl to buy LOTV. Bnet desperately needed a face lift for years.
Negatives: Mouse movement percentage value is now gone! (WTF) Went in to make sure it was still @ 54% and now there is no value. Hope this is a mistake and not some kinda sick joke.
Positives: weirdly enough getting LESS lag despite many ppl complaining.
On October 07 2015 22:09 madmegatron wrote: Where do you select 32-bit vs 64-bit? I just use the b.net launcher to launch the game and didn't see any options...
You click on Options (next to "Redeem Code"), then go to Game Settings. There is a tick box where in the "Game Settings" sub-section where you can select 32 bit instead of 64 bit. I hope that helps.
It is painfully obvious to me this was a PR move to get ppl to buy LOTV. Bnet desperately needed a face lift for years
They remade the UI in patch 2.0 and 3.0 - it got completely remade 2 years ago (though i didn't like it).
Negatives: Mouse movement percentage value is now gone! (WTF) Went in to make sure it was still @ 54% and now there is no value. Hope this is a mistake and not some kinda sick joke.
This percentage value didn't do anything aside from manipulate the windows mouse sensitivity slider. This is an awful way to change sensitivity! It makes mouse movement highly inconsistent. You can replicate its function by alt tabbing and dragging the windows mouse sensivity slider, but anything other than a 1.00x multiplier will skip pixels or drop sensor counts, most of the settings doing so inconsistently. It's way better to change the counts per inch of your sensor than it is to multiply the amount of pixels that each sensor count moves.
The main thing that option did was mess with users that didn't understand how mice worked and why it was bad to change sens in that way
Negatives: Mouse movement percentage value is now gone! (WTF) Went in to make sure it was still @ 54% and now there is no value. Hope this is a mistake and not some kinda sick joke.
This percentage value didn't do anything aside from manipulate the windows mouse sensitivity slider. This is an awful way to change sensitivity! It makes mouse movement highly inconsistent. You can replicate its function by alt tabbing and dragging the windows mouse sensivity slider, but anything other than a 1.00x multiplier will skip pixels or drop sensor counts, most of the settings doing so inconsistently. It's way better to change the counts per inch of your sensor than it is to multiply the amount of pixels that each sensor count moves.
The main thing that option did was mess with users that didn't understand how mice worked and why it was bad to change sens in that way
Can you elaborate on this? " It's way better to change the counts per inch of your sensor than it is to multiply the amount of pixels that each sensor count moves."
Have anyone figured out how to watch old repays? Why did they remove the "load with old client" or whatever it said? I really enjoy watching my old games. First they made all 3v3 maps disgusting shared bases and I only enjoy 3v3, now they fuck me over on the replays too. Likely to go back to wings since the 3v3 maps are playable.
On October 07 2015 23:35 Eatme wrote: Have anyone figured out how to watch old repays? Why did they remove the "load with old client" or whatever it said? I really enjoy watching my old games. First they made all 3v3 maps disgusting shared bases and I only enjoy 3v3, now they fuck me over on the replays too. Likely to go back to wings since the 3v3 maps are playable.
SC2Switcher doesn't work for me; It just comes up with an error message saying that "Files are missing from your Starcraft II installation".
On October 07 2015 21:18 DSK wrote: Fan-fucking-tastic. So I update SC2 and now I cannot watch old replays. Is there anyway to get around this, by re-installing, or something along those lines? I'm positively incensed right this minute.
No, that's intentional. You need to use an older version of the client.
How would I go about doing this, if you don't mind my asking? I'm afraid I'm ignorant of such matters
I'm quite ignorant as well, maybe someone could upload the outdated folder?
- Lag issues... but perhaps it was (also) because the system kindly put my settings back to everything on "High" without telling me (before it used to warned me that settings had been resetted). - Can you make it so the Protoss guy just stops yelling each time I open the game? I mean, c'mon... - Still no custom lobbies... Just merge custom games with the Arcade list please, and allow us to write our own titles please. - The merged chat is impractical/confusing. Lobbies should have their own chat like before. - The "Open games" window for the Arcade is too small, titles are too small (the font in chats is too small as well). - Hotkeys like F2/F10 etc. don't work anymore? Why?
Otherwise, nice to see people talking in the General, and nice to find players for things like BGH or the War3 mod. But it's still beyond stupid that 17 years after, we're still stuck with an inferior Battle.Net lacking key features
On October 08 2015 01:18 TheDwf wrote: Also, I don't understand why the lobby often doesn't appear when you join a game...
If you are playing on Arcade there is a setting that's default the mapmaker needs to uncheck that disables the creation of Lobbies, so it could be that the map creator didn't knew about it/forgot. Or it could be that you are stuck in a hellish limbo of arcade bugs.
Ok, one issue I've just discovered with this new build. You cannot view old replays AT ALL. A friend of mine tells me they changed from one file type to another or something like that and now you just can't load up any old replay which just, sucks...
On October 07 2015 22:08 digmouse wrote: The prologue campaign performance is still pretty terrible, definitely worse than the other build I've played.
Yeah, the first mission is lag city. It's much better on casual, but on brutal, drops to 10-15 fps.
On October 08 2015 03:33 Destructicon wrote: Ok, one issue I've just discovered with this new build. You cannot view old replays AT ALL. A friend of mine tells me they changed from one file type to another or something like that and now you just can't load up any old replay which just, sucks...
This was known months before hand. There have been multiple threads on b.net, and reddit about it. Pretty sure the first thread popped up way back in february.
On October 08 2015 03:33 Destructicon wrote: Ok, one issue I've just discovered with this new build. You cannot view old replays AT ALL. A friend of mine tells me they changed from one file type to another or something like that and now you just can't load up any old replay which just, sucks...
Chat system totally chaotic and counter intuitive. Clan tags messed up, every message contains the clan the name of hte player the name of the chatroom so that one worded responses take up 3 lines on the screen. Everytime a player on your friendslist enters the game or leaves, everytime they get an achievement you are notiified in chat window, flooding your screen with useless information.
Loading screen art is too so that any player name with a clan tag and more than 6 characters is not wholly displayed, instead there are dots.
Alt-tabbing to desktop now takes 5 seconds on windows 7 instead of 1 seconds. 64 bit version lags like hell on windows 7 for me. Especially map scrolling.
Mos timportantly: Key repeat on smart command has been switched off. This is the reason I never played lotv because this annoyed me so much. The smart command is integral to my play, I use it for rallys, for worker stack, for move command micro, mostly on scvs, for spam, for jitter-dancing my units, it's been deactivated so if you have smart command (right mouse click) on a keyboard key you now would have to press the keyboard key up and down every time you want to use it, while yesterday in hots/wol you could just hold it down to stick your workers for instance.
In game chat is now default to all, so if you're playing teamgames at the start of the game you have to switch recipients to ally before typing.
So I've tried reinstalling/repairing a few times now and I still have the crashing problem. It doesn't crash until I try and select a unit/building though.
It is painfully obvious to me this was a PR move to get ppl to buy LOTV. Bnet desperately needed a face lift for years
They remade the UI in patch 2.0 and 3.0 - it got completely remade 2 years ago (though i didn't like it).
Negatives: Mouse movement percentage value is now gone! (WTF) Went in to make sure it was still @ 54% and now there is no value. Hope this is a mistake and not some kinda sick joke.
This percentage value didn't do anything aside from manipulate the windows mouse sensitivity slider. This is an awful way to change sensitivity! It makes mouse movement highly inconsistent. You can replicate its function by alt tabbing and dragging the windows mouse sensivity slider, but anything other than a 1.00x multiplier will skip pixels or drop sensor counts, most of the settings doing so inconsistently. It's way better to change the counts per inch of your sensor than it is to multiply the amount of pixels that each sensor count moves.
The main thing that option did was mess with users that didn't understand how mice worked and why it was bad to change sens in that way
Can you elaborate on this? " It's way better to change the counts per inch of your sensor than it is to multiply the amount of pixels that each sensor count moves."
What setting do you use? Cheers.
51-54% = 6/11 in windows.
6/11 in windows and 51-54% are both 1.00x - they don't multiply.
If you put it 1 notch down to 5/11, it decreases mouse sensitivity to 0.75x. The way that it does this is actually making each four sensor counts only move three pixels - as you move each count, it will move one pixel - then another pixel - then another pixel - then you move the mouse the same distance a fourth time and nothing happens, the OS/program just makes the mouse movement not register that time. If you make a smooth swipe motion, the cursor will be visibly slightly unsmooth.
For lowering - or especially raising your sensitivity, it's best to do so on the mouse sensor level. If you want the mouse to move 1200 pixels per inch and it's only moving 1000 pixels per inch, you should just set the DPI/CPI to 1200 instead of 1000. Increasing the sensitivity by software multiplication won't give good results.
I use ~400-1200dpi on 1920x1080. Usually about 700-800 at the moment
Is the patch live already? I only have LOTV Beta installed but it still says Version 2.5.5... WHY Do I have to install hots again? EU Player here Want to finally play Whispers of Oblivion
On October 08 2015 09:12 Rollora wrote: Is the patch live already? I only have LOTV Beta installed but it still says Version 2.5.5... WHY Do I have to install hots again? EU Player here Want to finally play Whispers of Oblivion
The patch wasn't for the beta, which is probably good considering how broken it is.
On October 08 2015 09:12 Rollora wrote: Is the patch live already? I only have LOTV Beta installed but it still says Version 2.5.5... WHY Do I have to install hots again? EU Player here Want to finally play Whispers of Oblivion
The patch wasn't for the beta, which is probably good considering how broken it is.
but... the reason you do a beta is to test and fix broken things. So this patch SHOULD have been for the beta I guess. I don't understand why I have a beta account for testing and then I don't get the latest changes... hmm but ok then, I will uninstall the beta and reinstall hots...
So, basically my entire hotkey setup is completely bugged out now. And every time I try to play around with it to get it working again, something else important goes completely wonky. The game is literally unplayable for me and I'm so frustrated spending the last hour trying to fix my hotkeys I've just completely given up.
First, there is the annoying mini-map ping every time I am trying to create a new camera hotkey location, so I go to try and fix that. Then, in so doing, it somehow makes it so that I can't even click on the mini-map at all. Next thing I know, I can't even put the same units or structures into more than one hotkey group........ And to think that's as bad as it gets, I'm actually not even able to select or command my units half the time because trying to fix one simple hotkey issue leads to many other hotkey issues.
Is anyone else having all these issues with their hotkeys since the last update? I don't even know where to start because when I try to start over from scratch, the basic setup is even completely messed up and unusable...
Which retard coder(s) published this shit&$@#%#^%$^& You need to fucking wait to see menu, then everything goes black and blinks which makes invisible everything, graphics set to low. I don't really like that tiny lobby at all. So, changing menu/list from left to right means update - left to right everything = PROFIT? I'm not going further to count over 9000 errors, I will just wait before they will fix this shit... Just freaking return old patch only then apply new thing after checking it 9000 times, Blizz, or you're killing it!!!
As far as i know most lag issues can be fixed by switching the game to 32 bit, you do this by going to settings in the battle.net launcher (click the blue globe icon) then settings, then in the side menu go to Game settings click the box that says "Launch 32 bit client". Beware switching to 32 bit will create a 3-5 second delay when you go to your desktop or back into the game. This is very annoying, since the game was running fine for mostly everyone before, now I just have to live with this delay on my Win7 machine. 64 bit seems to run aok on windows 8.
*Another bug or "improvement" is the removal of the globe from the options menu in game which could be used to change server regions. Logging out and changing it is time consuming.
Clantags look horrible with the <Clan>Name instead of [Clan] Name was it was before. There was absolutely no need for this. It looks amateurish and temporary.
After playing 30 games today and using the new chat and social features I'm inclined to agree with Protech. I can't see 1 good thing about this patch. Starting from thousands of ppl's replays never to be seen again, moving to you need to press TAB to switch from all chat to ally chat in team games, and then of course, the chat system where all messages are in the same box and you need to tab like 20 different times if having multiple conversations.
All this time I been pushing for micro transactions and cool new bnet features. Never knew blizz were incapable.
little things like the mouse settings percentage display being removed and my hotkey menu displaying HotS beta hotkeys, (void siphon and warhound, lol) absolutely infuriate and disappoint me. who decides that those details are not important? like build grid and game timer used to be off by default, why? those things are important. give me my numbers, i'm not a child.
i'm supposed to believe they know what's best? the old replay thing is utter nonsense and the worst thing they could have done with a patch.
the removal of FFA ladder without ever touching things like its map pool and the screwed up 2v2 and 3v3 maps are another example of the dismal state that this entire thing known as starcraft 2 is in.
on top of all of this, the patch was never even publicly tested in LotV beta beforehand, as if that kind of preparation was deemed unnecessary...
the only thing i like is that now, after 5 long years, we have an open games list for both custom maps and within the arcade. this feature would be even better with an actual player counter in the title display... who are these people and what did they do with the blizzard employees they are impersonating?
Am I the only one who thinks they have someone bad at user things? what I would expect: A question about what kind of version I want to use(32bit vs 64bit) at the 1st start of the game. A question about deletion of my old useless replays at the 1st start of the game. Saved video settings from previous version.
What actually happened - I have old replays still in the folder, they show the information, I haven't tried them to load but I guess they should fail(I clicked on the replay button during testing the client before playing any game on v.3). My graphic settings were reseted, I don't remember what I set up there previously!!! Am I supposed to save a screen shot or what? Seriously??
Also why the heck it started with LotV intro?! WHY? If I won't see the intro again after I install the LotV I will be seriously disappointed.
These are all small annoying things which can happen when you are a small beginning company, not Blizzard, company in the business for decades.
I like to end positively - I like the overall redesign.
On October 08 2015 18:15 Bloody wrote: how do you access 64 bit starcraft 2?
by default. If you want 32bit, you can change that at bnet launcher. 32bit is still better than 64bit.
On windows 10, 10547, 64 bit is super smooth, no lag at all. I didnt try 32bit, but performance with 64 is significantly better now compared to a week ago.
They just should have tested the patch on some non-blizzard computers. Seems like almost everyone has performance problems and I don't understand why they roll out a patch which makes a well-working game unplayable for many people.
Concerning the replays: Why didn't they just develop a converter from old to new format? There are well-working replay analysis tools made by externals in their free time. Blizzard knows its replay format(s) and could have done this pretty easily I think
can someone tell me how one is supposed to jitter move / dance your units without key repeat on smart command /right mouse click. I'm finding it incredible hard to even stack my workers without it.
On October 08 2015 22:32 SiorasSC wrote: I want the numbers on the Mouse sensitivity settings, I put that to a very specific number and now i can't anymore. Please add this
Try setting your windows up/down some notches. 4/11 is half sens, 8/11 is double. If you can, it's better to just change DPI
It's unfortunate to have a lack of clarity there but you could take this as a good time to drop some bad habits with regards to mouse sens and set a new properly adjusted one
For all the people talking about the FFA achievements, I noticed today that mine are still there actually, not the wins achievement (cuz I only had like.. 7 lol), but the FFA Gladiator and the other easy one. They're still under the competitive tab, but they just don't give any "points" now.
How do I leave general chat? Granted, it's just a bunch of people spewing their vitriol about how sc2 sucks now, but I would rather not see these diatribes spamming my screen every second.
On October 09 2015 04:27 MockHamill wrote: Due to the 3.0 update I can no longer drag box select my workers or other units. I have to select each unit individually in order to control them.
Guess Blizzard though micro was too easy with drag box select?
You can at least play the game
Someone told me how to fix it, yay. Turning off indirect shadows solved the problem.
On October 09 2015 04:27 MockHamill wrote: Due to the 3.0 update I can no longer drag box select my workers or other units. I have to select each unit individually in order to control them.
Guess Blizzard though micro was too easy with drag box select?
works fine for me.Please check your mouse settings in Win and unchecked the mouse tails if you have that on,GL
"Game ready" bug is still here lol. For those who don't know it , it's a bug with certain internet connections which makes you stuck at game ready after a queue, then you lose 12 points (even if you have unspent bonus pool) and nothing appears in the match history.
cant play the old sc1 campaigns (old save games). And, the chat now....dudes....this is soooooooooooo bad. Really, this chat reminds me of the "good" old times with a 56 k modem...
Had terrible fps when I started the game, switched to the 32-bit edition and things went back to normal.
I'm just wondering how to disable the damn game and world tooltips that are apparently auto-enabled now, I mean the game has been out for 5 years I know what a Pylon does. It's really annoying seeing these tooltips whenever you hover over something.
EDIT: Apparently you can't get the Predator portrait anymore too since they removed FFA :/
EPT![[image loading]](http://bnetcmsus-a.akamaihd.net/cms/blog_header/m0/M0CMXOAWHVFX1443670416440.jpg)
Didn't like the old one so far...
). 32bit application has 1.75 GB limit of RAM usage(can be exceeded, but this type of compilation is not used that often).
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/tTaO3KO.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/MOvBDvJ.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/ZWjFbwk.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://puu.sh/kByZv/3147206401.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/0fncwXK.jpg)
