^ That teal ally was irritating there in the beginning w/ his comments about the forge. Not sure how that would stop a 6pool. LOL! Looks like a fun game....waiting for part 3 !

5/27/2010 10:06:23 PM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s0lDXOfZgg4

part 3! Might want to give it a few minutes while it finishes processing the HD version.

Yeah, that shit irritated me too. If i wasn't focused on rebuilding I would have said something lol. I looked over at his base and he had TWO cannons no where near his mineral line so if they had hit him first he'd be just as screwed.

After a little googling, it seems that my problem with capturing performance is bottlenecking in writing to the drive. Capturing to a external HDD should fix this problem next time. I'll also turn down the graphics settings in game for replays to free up some processing cycles.

[Edited on May 27, 2010 at 10:20 PM. Reason : .]

5/27/2010 10:17:07 PM

Well dang, I'd play some 2v2 or 3v3 w/ ya but I can't tonight, hopefully tomorrow I can get back online. We'll see!

5/27/2010 10:34:48 PM

Yeah Bnet is down so hopefully the patch that is being released will fix the turrble lag. I'm looking forward to tomorrow to play a 4v4 with nobody dropping.

5/27/2010 10:39:58 PM

whenever i play 1v1 and the other player rage quits, the game freezes and it says i was dropped/surrender. anyone else seen this?

5/28/2010 1:35:08 AM

That is a known issue for everyone that plays. I get that a shit ton and it has nothing to do with you, it's post-patch behavior.

5/28/2010 8:36:25 AM

almost made it into diamond league tonight! did my 1v1 placements....got Plat, Rank 83, my best yet! I played as T and fought almost all T....odd

5/29/2010 12:38:36 AM

Think a lot of people are trying to learn class by class and they just start with Terran. I actually think if learning Toss is the easier to start with. Zerg has been by far the least played I've seen.

Having some good success going marine drop(Benefit from the healing which works well) and Vikings. 1 Barracks, 2 ports and get an early 8 marine drop with 2 vikings on their minerals. From there just switch to viking/tank. Different approach for me since I never make anything from a barracks in old SC. Just go right to metal. But being able to drop 8 marines and not have to make any medics has made it a much better option than in SC.

5/29/2010 11:19:49 AM

Can anyone confirm if you can play the beta on Linux distros (such as Ubuntu)? I guess you'd have to use WINE or something to run it? Thinking about installing Ubuntu, but I gotta have my sc2

5/29/2010 11:44:10 AM

Beta extended till 6/7

5/29/2010 5:21:01 PM

Silver league, rank 12, woot!

5/29/2010 8:07:12 PM

watching those 1v1 tourney videos makes me not want to play that game, that is such a high level of micro/macro, i don't think my RTS desire or capabilities will be any match for this...I just suck at video games now

at least give me a FPS on the PC and we're in business

5/30/2010 4:47:04 PM

I hear that. Every 1v1 match I've played thus far, I've gotten completely destroyed. I'm quite a bit too thorough with the research and defense and not fast enough to just pump out hordes of units and go on the offensive.

5/31/2010 12:29:28 AM

i love the shit talking in this game lol

5/31/2010 7:15:22 AM

^ Lot of truth in Husky's Bnet 2.0 critique:

http://www.youtube.com/user/HuskyStarcraft#p/u/1/M-r_uCaFxg8

I especially cannot stand the lack of LAN in sc2. What does TWW think of the issues husky mentions:

-no LAN
-no public chat rooms
-no cross-realm chat
-etc.

??

5/31/2010 11:51:52 AM

I could care less about the LAN play or the public chat rooms. I just play with my friends, from different locations, over the net.

Although, i dont know how much my opinion counts when it comes to starcraft 2, I am fucking horrible at this game

I am still in bronze league, lol.

5/31/2010 1:08:05 PM

Placing into Bronze would only make your opinion on balance questionable, not about bnet 2.0.

I pretty much agree with everything Husky said. Bnet 2.0 is like a step backwards from the original. Patch13 made the game unplayable for several days. The only new 'feature' is Facebook integration... Thanks but no thanks, I don't even log into Facebook anymore.

Ever since they merged with Activision Blizzard has been steadily losing what made them such a great company.

5/31/2010 2:14:02 PM

Quote :

"Ever since they merged with Activision Blizzard has been steadily losing what made them such a great company."

i agree very much

5/31/2010 3:39:32 PM

Anyone got a beta key still hangin around?

5/31/2010 5:46:53 PM

NM got one. Zlet on bnet if anyone wants to play with someone horrible but trying to get better

5/31/2010 7:05:18 PM

No LAN is pretty much a deal-breaker. I suck at this anyway.

5/31/2010 9:59:49 PM

^ For real, my internet (even "high speed") sucks balls. I hate being dropped in bnet because of it. I'll look at my router and see no lights blinking and think "well....there goes another loss"

I used to think the LAN thing was all about preventing piracy, but now I think it's a combination of preventing piracy AND to consolidate control on ALL tournaments, period. I'm really disappointed in Blizzard, considering SC1 was the only game I cared about playing since middle school. Now I can't even look at the old SC1 because the graphics look so much worse than SC2.

5/31/2010 11:03:41 PM

Quote :

"No LAN is pretty much a deal-breaker. I suck at this anyway."

Why is no LAN a deal breaker? You can play with your friends online. The year is 2010 not 1998. Broadband is the way to go. I can't tell you the last time I needed LAN capabilities in any game I've played in the last 4 or 5 years.

6/1/2010 1:13:45 AM

LAN is nice to simplify connection/router issues and for tournaments/nerdfests. Though I understand why Blizzard didn't allow it, I am guilty of playing many torrented RTS games via LAN. I would still buy SC2 though. Their gonna make plenty of money regardless.

6/1/2010 2:56:48 AM

I would wager to guess that if Blizzard feels like thier "other" game, WoW, can be one of the most played games ever and solely rely on Battle.net, so can any of thier other games.

I just fail to see the need for LAN play anymore.

6/1/2010 9:45:54 AM

eh LAN is nice to have and preferable IMO.

An active connection for a game like WoW is understandable and required obviously.

It is simply not needed for a game like SC. Its another thing that can go down and interrupt the gameplay experience.

My friends and I still enjoy getting together for LAN parties. This game will obviously be on the top of the list for play time. If the internet happens to go out for a few hours we cant play it, and there is no good reason why. Yes its not very likely but it happens and there is zero reason why it should stop the play of the game.

6/1/2010 9:54:51 AM

True, my internet goes out ~ 10x a day, several times it has happened while I was on BattleNet. We can't even GET internet at my parent's house. Can't play at all there. It seems like Blizzard has tried to smoothly implement an internet-only game (sort of like ubisoft's internet-only DRM thing, but not the same) and not piss off its fans. I wonder how far back in production they knew they were dropping features like LAN and waited to tell fans for fear of backlash?

Did anyone see the vid of Blizzcon '09 (I think), where the blizz rep. said something to the effect of "who doesn't play online anymore (surprise)?" and some guy in the crowd shouted "It's called LAN!" The crowd started cheering and the rep. said "well, for those 5 people, I guess you can just play the offline singleplayer, then."

6/1/2010 10:54:44 AM

Quote :

"True, my internet goes out ~ 10x a day, several times it has happened while I was on BattleNet. We can't even GET internet at my parent's house. Can't play at all there."

So all you do at your parent's house is play LAN-capable games?

I guess I agree with Blizz... I dont see how much value add there is in LAN functionality, given how robust and stable Battle.NET is, and how stable the majority of internet connections out there are.

I also havent had a LAN party since college days, so I don't really see the value there anymore.


At any rate though, I'm sure someone will come up with a fake b.net server for SC2 just like there is for WoW and all the other blizz games. (WC3, SC, etc..)

6/1/2010 11:03:33 AM

Quote :

"I guess I agree with Blizz... I dont see how much value add there is in LAN functionality, given how robust and stable Battle.NET is, and how stable the majority of internet connections out there are."

Yes they are stable, but not perfect. The point being they WILL go down and the game is useless if they do. There is no reason for it.

I mean come on. It is THE biggest multi-player release of the decade, possibly more. The gameplay it offers in no way shape or form requires a connection to a game server like an MMO or dedicated server type game does. There is no reason to not include a LAN mode. Its for control only.

It doesn't hurt the hackers, it just hurts the people that buy the game legitimately.

6/1/2010 11:14:10 AM

just wait until someone releases a battle.net emulator that you can run locally.

6/1/2010 11:15:16 AM

Quote :

"There is no reason to not include a LAN mode. Its for control only. It doesn't hurt the hackers, it just hurts the people that buy the game legitimately."

Amen. I understand that most of my games will be played on battlenet, but to not have the option to play w/ my friends at places w/ crappy internet connections (or more likey, none at all) is disappointing.

I don't feel comfortable atm using an emulator/fake server, cuz I don't understand them well enough and I'd be afraid they'd screw up my computer and/or I'd get IP banned from the legit BattleNet. I remember reading somewhere that SC had a really popular one called bnetZ or soemthing.

And no, at my parents house I don't play games at all, because there is no one there who plays PC games. I play LANs with my cousins and roommates.

Also, this Q&A w/ Frank Pearce caught my eye: http://www.incgamers.com/Interviews/270/blizzards-frank-pearce-interview/3

Any thoughts on what this could mean:

Q: You're taking Battle.net to a very community-like perspective, and a lot of people have been asking if there's any possibility of having a small client, so you don't have to log into the entire Battle.net?

A: That'd be really cool, and I think it's definitely something that we will be evaluating. It sounds like an easy task on the surface, but it's not something that's really trivial. We have to figure out if we were going to do something like that, which resources we would use, and if using those resources for a stand-alone client would detract from implementing some of the features that we still want to implement and deliver to the fans in the existing scope.

6/1/2010 11:31:15 AM

Quote :

"I also havent had a LAN party since college days, so I don't really see the value there anymore."

So just because you aren't in school anymore you are fine with them dropping a feature? What about all of the kids that are still in college?

I think the gaming industry as a whole is driving away from any type of local gaming/co-op/multiplayer, and it really makes me sad. I've definitely had more fun playing with 3 buddies in a local game of halo than by myself in a 16 player game of halo online.

6/1/2010 12:02:06 PM

Quote :

"So just because you aren't in school anymore you are fine with them dropping a feature? What about all of the kids that are still in college?"

Since they just released statistics that raised the average age of gamers to 32, I think that the majority dont fit that category anymore either.

I still don't see how this change stops 40 college kids from getting in a room on campus with thier PCs and playing SC2 with each other. What are some instances of LAN parties that dont have an internet connection available? (Im seriously asking, I cant think of many that arent "wierd")

[Edited on June 1, 2010 at 4:25 PM. Reason : .]

6/1/2010 4:24:35 PM

^There are a few issues. One of which is lag which LAN would completely negate. The other is what if battle.net is down during said LAN party? That makes the game 100% unplayable in multiplayer. It's not an issue of whether or not an internet connection is available. It's an issue of whether or not battle.net is available with no connection issues.

6/1/2010 4:53:15 PM

I can count on one hand the number of times battle.net has been "down" (some kind of issue) since they upgraded it for WoW. I've been playing WoW almost daily since beta.

Saying battle.net is unreliable is an argument that doesnt hold water anymore.

6/1/2010 8:10:54 PM

^I agree actually, I've played WC3 and TFT since they've been out, and they are never down. I haven't even encountered a time when they were down to re-instate a new patch, which means they get it done very quickly, with little interruption to playing time.

6/1/2010 8:42:33 PM

You guys obviously haven't been playing the beta. Bnet 2.0 is extremely unstable. It's only gotten worse each patch.

The LAN support has nothing to do with end user and everything to do with controlling esports. KeSPA and Blizzard have been arguing over royalties and control for a while now (well ever since the Activision merger).

6/1/2010 9:25:37 PM

Quote :

"You guys obviously haven't been playing the beta. Bnet 2.0 is extremely unstable. It's only gotten worse each patch."

6/1/2010 9:57:29 PM

Patch 14 out tonight. Got steamrolled by banelings several times tonight

6/1/2010 10:19:54 PM

it sucks when you are in 3v3 platinum for random but your teammates play like they're in bronze.

6/1/2010 10:25:10 PM

Got put in diamond 1v1, 90% of my placement matches were against people that didn't saturate minerals or expand at all lol =( Had to play 31 placement matches because of that 4 matches remaining bug yesterdayish

6/2/2010 1:33:29 AM

Quote :

"I think the gaming industry as a whole is driving away from any type of local gaming/co-op/multiplayer, and it really makes me sad. I've definitely had more fun playing with 3 buddies in a local game of halo than by myself in a 16 player game of halo online."

I hear that

6/2/2010 3:42:52 AM

Quote :

" "I think the gaming industry as a whole is driving away from any type of local gaming/co-op/multiplayer, and it really makes me sad. I've definitely had more fun playing with 3 buddies in a local game of halo than by myself in a 16 player game of halo online.""

It's sad to me, but probably true

^^^ How's 3v3s goin? The one I played, it seemed like everyone just went straight to air and it was a huge air battle. And it was 2v2 even players w/ 1 low ranked player on each team. Odd

[Edited on June 2, 2010 at 9:52 AM. Reason : ]

6/2/2010 9:50:48 AM

I've had some good and bad runs with 3v3.

from a performance point of view...it still kind of sucks but not nearly as bad as before.

The last day or so I've had to play on low graphics settings (on Mac) because it slows down the game if i don't. Not sure why all of a sudden, maybe its just my computer or its something in the last patch?

From a skills level point of view it blows because even after you are placed you get matched up with the worst of the worst against 3 people that are decent or good. I have no problem with that if both teams had a good mix of skill level but that does not seem to be the case.

6/2/2010 10:44:55 AM

^ Hmm. I didn't notice my PoS laptop bogging down anymore that usual (I have to run on low settings as well). Apparently the jump from "low" to "medium" is the most intensive on the GPU. And above Medium or High, the game becomes CPU-limited more than GPU (According to Tom's Hardware). Good to know!

Did you see Husky's cast of the 4v4 w/ TLO where all 8 players proxied? Pretty funny

6/2/2010 11:54:43 AM

I'm on a Mac (Macbook Pro with the dedicated GPU 512mb) and I've been able to play on Medium just fine except the last 2 days for some reason.

Also don't set your graphics to custom...it has to compile your shaders on the fly if you do which slows down the game if you don't have the hardware for it.


Haven't seen the 4v4 yet but I am watching some of husky/HDStarcrafts games right now.

I actually ended up in a 3v3 with HD but he got dropped 5 min in lol

6/2/2010 12:00:34 PM

^ AHHH No Way! A game w/ HD! That's cool. Weird he dropped. Maybe it was an impersonator? If not that's sweet! I'd love to play in a game w/ HD and/or Husky. Yeah your card should be able to do at least medium. Something must be awry. I have a 128 MB card and 1.66GHz double processors and I have to be on "Low."

6/2/2010 12:39:41 PM

This was when 3v3/4v4 was unplayable because everyone gets dropped and it lagged really bad. There goes my shot at e-Fame

6/2/2010 12:43:32 PM

Quote :

"I am guilty of playing many torrented RTS games via LAN"

haha so true

6/2/2010 12:44:40 PM

Im addicted to day9daily =(

6/2/2010 3:43:54 PM