Yeah, topic sprung up: since there is no LAN play anymore, you'll have to use bnet even for inhouse multi-gaming.
So how much bandwidth does a let's say 2vs2 use? And no speculative answers, only hard facts please.
Thanks a lot :)
Printable View
Yeah, topic sprung up: since there is no LAN play anymore, you'll have to use bnet even for inhouse multi-gaming.
So how much bandwidth does a let's say 2vs2 use? And no speculative answers, only hard facts please.
Thanks a lot :)
i dont think people have bothered looking into this yet
I'm primarily having to use a 144k iDSL connection EDIT: for StarCraft 2 Beta, which works with about 100ms latency and no "Waiting for Player" messages, but through experience with other games every additional player begins to drastically reduce the performance.
An internet modem can only send out so many 1.5kb packets at a time, kind of like a single (really fast) conveyor belt. Every time you add a player, you're increasing the distance between each player's packets (because the packets have to share the same conveyor belt), which means more milliseconds between commands as the number of players increase.
Here's the deal, the developers developed the game on a LAN. They have locked out that functionality for you.
The thing that is so frustrating about this decision to have no LAN is that the people they are trying to stop will not be affected. They will illegally acquire and crack the game anyway. It's punishing the entire class for the actions of a few when the few don't even get the punishment anyway.
We can only hope that eventually they'll patch in a DRM method that requires you to be logged into battle.net but allows the packets to be exchanged via LAN. I'm no tech guy but this seems like the best solution.
Yeah, thanks for the answers though my question was probably poorly phrased:
How much traffic does Starcraft 2 generate, and how much the voicechat part of it?
I don't see how you can expect such specific answers, and the aggressive way you asked the question probably keeps people away.
I've got a slow computer, and have recently (past 2-3 months) been plagued by a slow internet connection. I noticed no slowdown at all while playing StarCraft II beta, even while simultaneously downloading a huge video file. I can't say there was no latency; I didn't see anything saying "you have 30 ms latency" or whatever.
I think he is asking so he doesn't go over his bandwith allotment each month not how fast the game will run on a specific connection.
As for bandwidth allotment, it's on-par or less than any other game on the market. I couldn't gauge for certain without getting a packet-monitor app.
I think they said that they might do something like that...Quote:
Originally Posted by SinsWage
It's technically possible, and it should help a lot of the users who want LAN. :)
I got a technical question. In BW, battle.net was only there to connect people between each other. You can be disconnected from Bnet and the game continue anyway, you are on direct connection whit the host.
Is Battle.net 2.0 working this way? If everyone got to send every info to Bnet server and the server to to route every info from every game it will just explode... If 2 people are on the same LAN, Bnet creat the link between them, but they send packet to each other to there respective adress, inside LAN. I think i am right, but I am not a IT pro, correct me if i'm wrong.
No. SC2 is P2P just like SC1.Quote:
If everyone got to send every info to Bnet server and the server to to route every info from every game it will just explode...
I've monitored the packets, it averages around 5 kbps at a constant rate. I played for over 3 or 4 hours and only collected about 20 MBs.
Peer to peer, but only peer to peer to your own internet IP (from your broadband modem). So you (and everyone else in the room with you) will still be sending a signal to your ISP and back again through the same pipe. Causing latency, etc.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nicol Bolas
That's an assumption. It wouldn't be very difficult for Blizzard to tell if the two machines were on a LAN.Quote:
Peer to peer, but only peer to peer to your own internet IP (from your broadband modem).
Um, and?Quote:
So you (and everyone else in the room with you) will still be sending a signal to your ISP and back again through the same pipe. Causing latency, etc.
Even if you're sending packets to someone in the same room directly, you can expect a 50ms delay just from the fact that you're sending data.
I'm on dial-up @ 26k. I can DL like 2-3 kb/s. 1v1 and 2v2 plays without a hitch. Well, there is an occasional hitch, but it is so so much better than SC1.
But maps need broadband.
Are you seriously on dial up?Quote:
Originally Posted by Gradius
Impressive... most impressive.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gradius
Not everyone is lucky enough to have broadband. Remember that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hav0x
I think I remember reading somewhere Gradius said his Dial Up was temporary (maybe he's somewhere without cable).Quote:
Originally Posted by Nottoway
Regardless, its remarkable this actually works on Dial Up.
A lot less people in the US have broadband than most know. Just take a look at Edfishys little map of Michigan broadband coverage. We have some really, really fast connections in the Detroit metro and Grand Rapids areas. If you don't live close to those places your choices for broadband drop to near nonexistent.
I was only able to get broadband 4 years ago and I am just outside a major city.
The U.S. and Canada are huge expanses of land with small (relatively) pockets of people located far away from each other. Many other developed countries (SEE: S.Korea, Japan, U.K.) have far less land to cover in order to get everyone connected to the broadband infrastructure. In our cases it's just not profitable for ISPs to run cable out to BFE so that they can maybe pick up a few customers, therefore many in outlying rural areas remain without any choice, or WORSE, stuck with Comcast, who will throttle your speed down if they decide what you are doing is unimportant. Also, like Screwball said, even some in suburban areas have only just received access. This whole LAN thing seemed like a non-issue to me at first, and for me it basically is, but I really feel badly for those stuck trying to play together and having that option essentially cut out for them. I know some have said they're playing on a dial up connection but this may not work indefinitely as blizzard has said that broadband is a requirement to play. Anyway, I'll stop complaining now...
Only temporary. The cable guys are taking forever to set up broadband. :/Quote:
Originally Posted by Hav0x
I should mention though that it does help if the other users have broadband. For example, I don't think even a 1v1 with both players on dial-up would work as great.
Many thanks for the specific answer :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Nottoway
Oh, and Gradius, seriously 26k? Even dialup normaly is 56k, what the hell did they do to you? :confused:
In an RTS game (most games for that matter), latency is far more important than bandwidth.
remember that bandwidth is directly related to bit-rate
You revived a 3 month old topic to say that...
Closed.Quote:
Originally Posted by screw_ball69