|
On April 01 2009 04:25 ven_ wrote:
As long as you only summon one quillbeast, you'll be fine. Why would you be pressing Alt while summoning a quillbeast anyway?
I played with QWER keys for a very long time now and even though almost everything I train at my buildings is on Q and I press the Alt key pretty much all the time inbetween the other actions I never even once accidentally hit Alt + Q at the same time.
Alt = check health
Q = move
2x Q = move closer (for surrounds)
Do you see a correlation here?
|
Then stop pressing alt when pressing something else ffs... it's not that hard, I do it all the time. I spam a lot and play with 250 - 280 apm while constantly pressing alt inbetween and never even made that mistake a single time.
|
On April 01 2009 06:08 ven_ wrote:
Then stop pressing alt when pressing something else ffs... it's not that hard, I do it all the time. I spam a lot and play with 250 - 280 apm while constantly pressing alt inbetween and never even made that mistake a single time.
I'm not saying I did. But I can certainly see that happening for some players.
|
On March 13 2009 16:51 SearingShadow wrote:
I believe this is why players had the ability to watch SC replays on Bnet and not WC3:
Watching replays with other players online was easy in SC1 because the map file was included in the replay file. Therefore, players without the map that the game was played on would still be able to watch the replay.
In Warcraft 3, map files were a lot larger, some over 4.5 mb. If the map file was included in the replay file, some player's replay folder would be massive.
It's very likely that SC2 map files will be a lot larger than WC3 map files.
Would you rather replays be 100kb or be 5mb but you're able to watch them on Bnet?
Blizzard believes the costs out weigh the benefits.
I also play warcraft and i agree to this 100%.
|
Sweden33719 Posts
On March 13 2009 17:45 SearingShadow wrote:Show nested quote +On March 13 2009 17:06 esla_sol wrote:On March 13 2009 16:51 SearingShadow wrote:
I believe this is why players had the ability to watch SC replays on Bnet and not WC3:
Watching replays with other players online was easy in SC1 because the map file was included in the replay file. Therefore, players without the map that the game was played on would still be able to watch the replay.
In Warcraft 3, map files were a lot larger, some over 4.5 mb. If the map file was included in the replay file, some player's replay folder would be massive.
It's very likely that SC2 map files will be a lot larger than WC3 map files.
Would you rather replays be 100kb or be 5mb but you're able to watch them on Bnet?
Blizzard believes the costs out weigh the benefits. if you are watching a replay of any 1v1 game, the maps wont be over 500 kb (most would run about 200). This is true about standard Blizzard maps, but a lot of WC3 tournaments use Blizzard maps which have been edited to contain sponsors. Some even have custom loading screens. These things will increase the file size of a map by over 1 mb. And what about UMS maps? I am certain that there are going to be some very large custom made maps (> 8mb). With custom music, custom unit models, custom tilesets and a large playable area I wouldn't be surprised if some maps were over 15 mb. The only way Blizzard would allow players to view replays on Bnet is if the map files were not included in the replay file. This may be difficult for Blizzard to do.
I'm sorry to be bumping this but I have to respond.
First of all - 1 mb in this day and age (2009) is NOTHING. It's less than nothing.
Second, even if they insist on sticking with the "must have map to view replay" system (aside from not being able to watch replays online, this is the most annoying thing about WC3 replays), why wouldn't you be able to, I don't know, download the map from the player who created the replay? I mean he must have it after all.
If you can't view replays online in SC2 - the sequel to a game made 10+ years ago, in which you CAN - I'll seriously be beyond pissed off. Watching replays on your own is not fun 
|
I agree, watching replays online while chilling and chatting in obs mode is awesome.
must have, period.
I dont care if im downloading 50 megabite replays, its worth it (specially since it will take 5 min to DL in a bad day and im from brazil, 300-500 kbps usually, 1300 on rapidshare etc...)
|
You know what would be awesome? Being able to obs a tournament at any point in the game (leaving and entering). You can do this with the program Garena to watch other people play DotA even when their game have already started.
|
Yeah, make it like Youtube (but not exactly like it). Like a whole ONLINE gallery of replays is in it. There is a duplicate checker, featured replays, promoted replays, most viewed/rated replays, and replays being watched right now. Also you could comment on them.
|
I don't get what the big deal about maps is. Even if the map isn't included in the replay, anyone who plays on Bnet will have the blizzard mappack, and anyone who plays on an alternate server will have their mappack (whether it be the kespa mappack or an iccup mappack or something). As long as you've got the exact same map that the game was played on, you're good to go. And if you don't, the map will friggin download from the host.
I'm just agreeing with everything that's been said before basically.
On May 28 2009 05:17 Shade692003 wrote:
You know what would be awesome? Being able to obs a tournament at any point in the game (leaving and entering). You can do this with the program Garena to watch other people play DotA even when their game have already started.
That would definitely be awesome, but what kind of issues does that create? Ping? Hardware? I dunno I'm just wondering how that works.
On May 28 2009 05:43 lolaloc wrote:
Yeah, make it like Youtube (but not exactly like it). Like a whole ONLINE gallery of replays is in it. There is a duplicate checker, featured replays, promoted replays, most viewed/rated replays, and replays being watched right now. Also you could comment on them.
You mean like... a database?
But what's the point of having that be handled by Bnet (if that is what your suggesting, since you want to know which replays are being watched right now)? I don't really get it. Do you mean the replays would be watched exclusively online?
I think a website referencing a gazillion replays to download should definitely handle that task as long as it's got an awesome search function. And I'm sure it's the first thing we'll see as soon as some lucky people log on to the beta servers.
|
That would definitely be awesome, but what kind of issues does that create? Ping? Hardware? I dunno I'm just wondering how that works.
IIRC, the way it works in Garena is that you aren't actually in the same game as the players. Yuo create a game, and Garena sends the actions information to your game. So it's kinda like watching a replay, unfolding itself in real-time.
|
Oh that sounds great! And since everything is kinda delayed you don't care if your "instant replay" is a couple of seconds behind. That's a pretty cool system.
|
On May 28 2009 07:09 Hammy wrote:
Oh that sounds great! And since everything is kinda delayed you don't care if your "instant replay" is a couple of seconds behind. That's a pretty cool system.
Much like HLTV
|
Well alt-qq no longer exists because you can see health bars now, same with alt tab.
But yeah windows button and item slots are still lame
|
Bosnia-Herzegovina1437 Posts
On March 17 2009 20:20 nataziel wrote:Show nested quote +On March 15 2009 15:07 lowlypawn wrote:
Feed back so far has been good. Accommodations the colors for color blind players is a good idea, and I remembered one more idea that should definitely be implemented.
* Injured units should bleed! (Or smoke if they are mechanical)…Health bars are ugly and old school. In WC3 they added the feature to always have them on, that was a step in the right direction but they still look terrible. A much better solution that is already partially implemented would be to make injured units bleed (or smoke if they are mechanical). Building already have this feature so it would not be hard for blizzard to add this to all the units. The only problem I can see would be a frame rate issue. If you have a hundred zerglings all bleeding at once I could see that slowing down the game. But then again I’m sure there would be a way to have a simpler bleed animation for slower computers that would not take any more CPU cycles then those ugly heath bars.
You've got to be joking, how would you tell the actual HP of the unit at a glance if there are no health bars? Animations are incredibly imprecise, not to mention the fact that they'll just make the game more confusing to look at. It's the same argument about extended death animations, they add nothing to the gameplay and just confuse players and make it harder to play the game. Sure, with buildings it's ok to have them because it's not very often you need to know the exact HP of a building, but a health bar really isn't very intrusive and makes the whole experience a lot better.
+1. No doubt health bars are ugly, but animations would make it 2x more complicated.
|
On March 13 2009 15:02 lowlypawn wrote:F$%^! lessons “Learned”, and i can't edit the title O well epic fail... Here are a few little flaws in WC3 that really should have been fixed a long time ago. I don't know that Blizzard will repeat the same mistakes but for those lucky few who DO get into the SCII beta please make sure stupid little items like this don't get missed. I know most people will be focused on balance, units and stuff but please try to "see the trees in the forest" if you know what I mean. * Add an option in the menu to disable the god damn windows key! I really don't like the fact I have to edit my registry or use a 3rd party program to do this. * Same thing goes for ALT-TAB ^ * Please add a menu where we can easily configure ALL hot keys to whatever we choose , something similar to Warkeys would be nice! * Add am EASY way to squelch your opponent. When their name “IllIIlIIlIIlIIlllI” (L & i) it's a little difficult. A box you could quickly check in game sure would be nice. * ALT-QQ!?!?! Hello!!! how many countless games have been thrown away on this little gem. Option to disable please... Anything else I missed?
Congrats on your concern being addressed in Blizzard's most recent Q&A! Unfortunately, however, it seems you and I will still be using AutoHotkey to defuse our Windows keys.
|
On May 28 2009 10:36 peidongyang wrote:
Well alt-qq no longer exists because you can see health bars now, same with alt tab.
But yeah windows button and item slots are still lame
i was too used to holding down alt for all those years and never could adjust
|
On May 28 2009 04:07 FrozenArbiter wrote:Show nested quote +On March 13 2009 17:45 SearingShadow wrote:On March 13 2009 17:06 esla_sol wrote:On March 13 2009 16:51 SearingShadow wrote:
I believe this is why players had the ability to watch SC replays on Bnet and not WC3:
Watching replays with other players online was easy in SC1 because the map file was included in the replay file. Therefore, players without the map that the game was played on would still be able to watch the replay.
In Warcraft 3, map files were a lot larger, some over 4.5 mb. If the map file was included in the replay file, some player's replay folder would be massive.
It's very likely that SC2 map files will be a lot larger than WC3 map files.
Would you rather replays be 100kb or be 5mb but you're able to watch them on Bnet?
Blizzard believes the costs out weigh the benefits. if you are watching a replay of any 1v1 game, the maps wont be over 500 kb (most would run about 200). This is true about standard Blizzard maps, but a lot of WC3 tournaments use Blizzard maps which have been edited to contain sponsors. Some even have custom loading screens. These things will increase the file size of a map by over 1 mb. And what about UMS maps? I am certain that there are going to be some very large custom made maps (> 8mb). With custom music, custom unit models, custom tilesets and a large playable area I wouldn't be surprised if some maps were over 15 mb. The only way Blizzard would allow players to view replays on Bnet is if the map files were not included in the replay file. This may be difficult for Blizzard to do. I'm sorry to be bumping this but I have to respond. First of all - 1 mb in this day and age (2009) is NOTHING. It's less than nothing. Second, even if they insist on sticking with the "must have map to view replay" system (aside from not being able to watch replays online, this is the most annoying thing about WC3 replays), why wouldn't you be able to, I don't know, download the map from the player who created the replay? I mean he must have it after all. If you can't view replays online in SC2 - the sequel to a game made 10+ years ago, in which you CAN - I'll seriously be beyond pissed off. Watching replays on your own is not fun
Respectfully disagree with 1 mb isn't worth much. Sure it's not worth much in terms of storage, it is worth a lot in terms of hosting and bandwidth costs. Add in the popularity of SC2 and its subsequent expansion(s), the costs quickly adds up (same way unit weapon and armor upgrades snowballs in BW) to significant amounts.
I think the best option for Blizzard is to give the players the options at the time of saving replays whether to include the map or not.
I am kind of surprised nobody's mentioned this, probably because none of you are DotA players (where the longest games in melee last around 25 mins, dota games last 50 mins on average), but replays are screwed after reloading from saves. It would be nice if we had some kind of ability to keep the replays as whole or in parts even after a save-load scenario.
|
Osaka27146 Posts
I disagree that 1MB is worth much for hosting and bandwidth. I think in the day and age of torrents, 1MB is absolutely nothing. The cheapest hosting packages would allow for thousands of downloads for small sites. Serious sites which would gain more traffic don't have to worry about it much, as they have much larger bandwidth allocations.
Lastly, there are plenty of free hosting sites for casual sharing. Everyone knows about yousendit etc.
|
Sweden33719 Posts
Also, hosting a 1 mb file in 2009, is the price really that different from hosting a 100-300 kb file in 2001?
|
What the hell, you don't need to have the map attached to the replay.. Just add a symbolic link with the map name, and if you don't have the map, well then you just have to get it somewhere! It was this way in Starcraft because the map files were so small, but theres absolutely no need to have this much repeated code (the map) inside every other little file, replay file!
I don't know why online replay viewing wasn't enabled in Warcraft 3, but it certainly wasn't due to the inability to find out what map each replay belongs to, since they do work in single player after all! The replays work fine without the map, as they should! I think it was just programmer lazyness.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
