34 replies to this topic

[Sky]

Mientras la comunidad todavía espera con ansias al próximo StarCraft II, también se lamenta de la información de hace varios meses que el juego de estrategia no incluirá soporte para partidas LAN en el juego. Hubo cierta esperanza de que los desarrolladores de Blizzard podrían implementar algún tipo de sistema que permitiera a los jugadores autenticarse en Battle.net antes de comenzar un juego en LAN, y de ahí en adelante este se desarrollara localmente.

Sin embargo, Computer and Video Games reporta que esto no va a suceder. En una charla con el diseñador principal del juego, Chris Sigaty, afirma, "We've made the choice at this point that we're not including LAN.". Añade que querían hacer la conexión a Battle.net no sólo requerida para el jugador hardcore, diciendo: "You don't have to worry about going and clicking the scary Battle.net button to go do that and login. As a part of that, we feel like LAN is not a necessary feature".

Otro día triste para el gaming, donde el interés comercial y la protección anti-pirata parece dominar el mercado sobre la experiencia de juego.

[Joel]

Ya hice la pre-orden en amazon, pero esto me da un sentiemiento de que el juego no está completo, además de que Blizzard-Activision no quiere escuchar a los consumidores, es decir, después de la revolución que trajo el internet y el feedback que trae para llevar las cosas a lo mejor, no nos escuchan por segunda vez por parte de Activision-Blizzard, porque primero con MW2 y ahora con SC2.

[Slackman]

En mi caso, cada dia que pasa se me evapora la emocion que en un inicio sentia por SC2....

Si en este momento saliera a la venta, junto con Portal2, Diablo III o incluso otro DLC de Borderlands, los compraria antes de meterle billete a SC2

Ya tanta jugadera la verdad cansa e indispone para recibir el juego con la espectativa que habia al inicio...

Y para colmo, que no tenga LAN (al menos en su lanzamiento), creo que con eso nos borra el deseo a muchos...

O quien sabe si el modo LAN vendra en un DLC... je jeje

[b52.Psytechdragon]

Mal hecho

Ni modo, si queremos una MLP 6 con Starcraft 2 tendrá que ser en un lugar donde haya Internet.

[xG.SGT]

Malditos chinos!!!

Q hp sal q colera, ya tire mi bomba de hate en los foros de SC2 Beta.

[Gollo]

 lo que hacia grande ala pc esta muriendo :/ x dicha en mis tiempos hubo lan  

Edited by Gollo, 30 March 2010 - 02:04 PM.

[xG.SGT]

Q porqueria, un duro golpe!

http://forums.battle...Id=240361543285

para los q tienen beta y quieran quejarse un toque talvez si hay muchas quejas la gente haga caso, bueno es lo unico q se puede hacer ahora es quejarse ><

[b52|Hunhau]

xG.SGT, on 30 March 2010 - 03:11 PM, said:

http://forums.battle...Id=240361543285

Creo que el ultimo parrafo era completamente innecesario.

Otra duda que me queda es, donde se hostean los juegos?  En los servidores de B.net siempre?  O hay una opcion para hostear en la compu de alguien?  Que pasa si por ejemplo quiero jugar con alguien que esta en mi misma red?  Los dos tenemos que salir por Internet, o basta con estar conectados, y puedo configurar la vara para que la comunicacion sea por dicha red?  Supongo que "No LAN" significa que todo pasa por B.net, pero no se si alguien tiene mas detalles al respecto.

[xG.SGT]

b52|Hunhau, on 30 March 2010 - 03:23 PM, said:

Creo que el ultimo parrafo era completamente innecesario.

Otra duda que me queda es, donde se hostean los juegos? En los servidores de B.net siempre? O hay una opcion para hostear en la compu de alguien? Que pasa si por ejemplo quiero jugar con alguien que esta en mi misma red? Los dos tenemos que salir por Internet, o basta con estar conectados, y puedo configurar la vara para que la comunicacion sea por dicha red? Supongo que "No LAN" significa que todo pasa por B.net, pero no se si alguien tiene mas detalles al respecto.

Los juegos se hostean P2P, osea como en W3, la compu de uno se convierte en HOST, pero el lag y latency se comparte si no me equivoco, actualmente habia leido en los foros q hay un cap de latency ya incluido aunque uno sea host, esto para hacer q todo sea mas balanceado, y q aunque uno sea host tiene cierta latencia para emparejar con el contrincante.

Su segunda pregunta es lo q no se sabe, no se sabe como se va a hacer el rerutamiento de los paquetes, ni tampoco se sabe como va a ser el producto final, lo q si sabemos actualmente es que si los 2 jugamos el beta en la misma red, nos tenemos q conectar al b.net alguien de los 2 hostea, pero aun asi tenemos q salir por internet.... osea FAIL.

Los rumores eran q iban a mejorar esto con el "pseudo LAN" ahora q anuncian q no hay LAN del todo, hay q ver q demonios pasa.

Edited by xG.SGT, 30 March 2010 - 05:31 PM.

[b52.Psytechdragon]

No SGT wtf, eso no es así.

Re-post de TL:

Quote

Since I see a lot of misinformation flying around, here's some brief information about SC2 and how its networking works.

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.

Architecture
Stacraft 2 games run using a server, similar to HoN - not peer to peer as the original BW does. This means that Blizzard is the one hosting the games, not you (note: custom games were not tested). The protocol is TCP, not UDP. I'm unsure why Blizzard decided to go with TCP/IP, since latency is generally worse over TCP especially with regard to lost packets. Perhaps they didn't want to deal with fragmentation or NAT issues?

"Drop hacks" / Lag
Since other players also connect to Blizzard's server, not you, there is no way to be "drop hacked" in SC2. Drop hacking involves terminating the connection to the other player via some means - trivial in BW since both players are connected to each other - desynchronize the connection and you get a drop. However in SC2, since you are only connected to Blizzard's server, not the other player, the most you can do is disconnect yourself from the server, causing you to drop. Since the server knows who disconnected, it can award the win to the remaining player.

Note that this does not preclude any bugs in SC2 that might allow someone to purposefully cause a drop condition by sending malformed packets that crash the server (thus dropping everyone), but given the server architecture, drop hacking should not be an issue in SC2 provided the servers are reliable and well-coded.

You may notice there is still the "Waiting for players" screen. Rather than allow the server to continue if one player is lagging, it pauses the game for everyone. This was done out of fairness I imagine, since if someone is lagging it would not be fair for them to have to engage the other players army. Technically there is no reason why the game can't keep going similar to how HoN handles latency where only the player lagging experiences any lag. In theory this should allow a large number of spectators to be in a game without impacting the latency for the players - if a spectator lags, who cares?

Port Forwarding
Since Starcraft 2 does not use peer to peer connections, you do not need to open any ports to play nor will doing so "improve" your connection. You connect to Blizzard's server, much like you connect to teamliquid.net every time you click a link - you do not need to open ports for outgoing connections.

Map Hacking
Please keep in mind this is not a thread to discuss map hacking in, just some technical commentary. As some people have argued, since SC2 uses a server, it should be possible for the server to eliminate map hacking by only sending unit data for what a player can currently see. Theoretically, this could work - however as many have pointed out, SC2 is a lot more complex than other games such as HoN that do this - in HoN, there is a very small amount of units you have to consider, with only a few of those (heroes) having any particular state. With SC2, there can be hundreds of units, each in many states. If someone moves into your fog of war with hundreds of units that your game doesn't know about, that will result in a large amount of data required to be sent to your client. TCP doesn't burst particularly well, and if one of those packets in the burst is lost, you have a significant delay. There is also spells such as Scan that reveal part of the map immediately on clicking, which the server has no way to predict you using.

While it is technically possible to reduce map hacking with some clever coding and possibly imperceptible latency compromises, this was not done. The technical requirements for such impose a great deal on the latency of the game, and for an RTS latency is extremely important. Which brings me on to...

Improving Latency
As I've mentioned, SC2 uses TCP. TCP is designed for data transfer with latency as a secondary consideration to bandwidth, so isn't really ideal for real-time games. Almost every FPS game in existence uses UDP for this reason. TCP requires reliable delivery - if a packet is lost, it has to be retransmitted, stalling the rest of the data while this happens. There is a small tweak you can make to improve TCP responsiveness for gaming.

Change TcpAckFrequency to 1:

How
Run registry editor (Start, Run, regedit) and navigate to HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Services\Tcpip\Parameters\Interfaces. You will see a list of random looking keys, find the one that has the "IPAddress" value that matches your current IP. Right click on the right side and go New -> DWORD. Call it TcpAckFrequency with a value of 1.

Why this works
Usually TCP delays sending acknowledgments of received data until either more data has been received OR a timeout period elapses. This timeout period may be because the sending side is waiting for the ack before sending more data. By setting TcpAckFrequency to 1, you send an acknowledgment immediately rather than waiting, preventing miniature "stalls" in the data stream. Note that this WILL reduce your bandwidth, as you will be sending more ack packets, thus using more network resources.


Things that MIGHT help
If you use ADSL, your connection may use interleaving which is a method of error resistance that adds latency to your connection. Look in your ADSL modem settings for an option to turn it off. Note that this may increase the chances of line noise affecting your connection, so it might be required to be on. You may need to contact your ISP as it may be something controlled on their side, but don't expect them to be too accommodating.

Wired vs wireless: A properly configured wireless network should have minimal latency, however if you are in a crowded area with obstructions and other 2.4 GHz noise, the latency caused by retransmissions might add up and cause issues. Try pinging your router - your latency should be 1-2ms at most. If not, try a wired connection while gaming.

If you have a low quality wireless card (common in cheap desktop / laptops), you may experience random periods of lag while it switches frequencies for background scanning (used for roaming between access points). You can turn off background scans with a tool such as WlanOptimizer (Vista / 7 only).

Tweaking your RWIN (Windows XP only) may help - see any number of guides online regarding this.

Things that will NOT help
There is a huge amount of useless information on the Internet that offers supposedly improved performance. The following will NOT improve your network quality at all: Opening your ports. Changing "TCPNoDelay" registry setting. Changing "NetworkThrottlingIndex" registry setting. Changing "TcpDelAckTicks" registry setting. Disabling "QoS Packet Scheduler". In fact, very few registry tweaks will help - there's usually a good reason defaults are the defaults.

Tomado de http://www.teamliqui...topic_id=117158

[xG.SGT]

Psytech, los juegos de LADDER SON DE BATTLE.NET LOS JUEGOS DE CUSTOM NO!

[b52.Psytechdragon]

No mae, por eso puse el link al thread, ahí viene más información. La arquitectura es la misma para los custom games, ahí se discute bastante de eso.

Quote

Nice write-up. I tested the custom games and they are also routed through the server. I may also add one thing on how you can improve your latency: By getting a good add-in NIC. Best ones are the Intels: Intel PRO/1000 MT or GT(old versions) or the newer Intel PRO/1000 CT, they are very good and cheap NICs, under $30. Here are same reviews comparing it with integrated NICs:

http://forum.ncix.co....php?id=1304406
http://www.donutey.com/intelpro.php

Note that the Integrated NICs are evolving and difference is getting narrower but its still good to get one especially if you want to game and torrent at the same time.

Edited by b52|Psytechdragon, 30 March 2010 - 06:49 PM.

[xG.SGT]

Psytech disculpeme pero el mae q probo "custom games" fue otro mae, y no Rich, como sabemos q las pruebas o los conocimientos del otro mae son los mismos?, q en ninguna de las 6 paginas dijo q el mae lo probo, supongo q si lo hubiera hecho ya el articulo se hubiera editado.

Yo podria poner un sniffer de paketes hostear un juego de SC2 y nada mas pq envia paquetes a los servers de Battle.net decir: "si es lo mismo para custom games", pero no sabemos si las pruebas fueron iguales.

El juego pasa enviandole varas al server de battle.net y aun customs vs AI tambien envian info al server de battle.net, si se desconecta el cable el juego se pega, pero como es posible q si el juego estuviera hosteado en el server podemos hostear juegos vs AI con un crack?

Seguramente yo estoy en lo incorrecto y Battle.net si hostea todos los juegos, pero eso no responde las preguntas de: pq vs la compu con crack si podemos hostear? y como vamos a hacer para jugar con latency de lan si todos los juegos tienen q salir por internet?

[Sky]

Yo lo que no entiendo es por qué me ponen -1 por publicar algo que no es mi culpa, sino de Blizzard-Activision... lol

[General_Grievous]

xG.SGT, on 30 March 2010 - 01:39 PM, said:

Malditos chinos!!!

Q hp sal q colera, ya tire mi bomba de hate en los foros de SC2 Beta.

copy paste pls, es de nuestro interes saber con q argumentos se les caga ud, una persona q ha tocado el beta y q sabe mejor q muchos q le falta al juego.


yo sin lan no compro esa porqueria, al igual q mw2 q se vayan al carajo

xG.SGT, on 30 March 2010 - 03:11 PM, said:

Q porqueria, un duro golpe!

http://forums.battle...Id=240361543285

para los q tienen beta y quieran quejarse un toque talvez si hay muchas quejas la gente haga caso, bueno es lo unico q se puede hacer ahora es quejarse ><

<.< *looks at mw2...* no lo creo papillo

[xG.Zinner]

La verdad es que el LAN no es necesario, por mi que ni tenga LAN SC2 por que no lo voy a comprar.

[kenshinboi]

A veces, Hay que matar al mensajero, Skybocker

[xG.SGT]

Mae Psy, Rich ya hizo un update y adivine q

Quote

After some more research it appears SC2 is routed peer to peer rather than server based. Very disappointing .

Quote

If it was true P2P like Brood War, that may be the case. But it's routed P2P, meaning all data travels through Blizzard's server first to overcome NAT and other issues. It's the same model used by War3.

http://www.teamliqui...8&currentpage=7

Edited by xG.SGT, 27 April 2010 - 03:31 PM.

[Sky]

Vamos de mal en peor...

[b52.Psytechdragon]

Eso es una pésima noticia =S