Starcraft 2 Beta

Intel_Hydralisk said:
The biggest problem right now is that AT and RT can play each other... the line gets fuzzier in 3v3 and 4v4 since anything less than 3 or 4 players is technically "RT".
Click to expand...

I started thinking that too after I was done. But then I thought, there's going to be a lot more leagues if that happened. If only RT's played eachother and vice versa.

I did hang around after one of the losses and talked to the other team for awhile. They were arranged and thought we were too. During that match, my partner asked me at about the 12-15 min mark if i was new. I said no, then promptly left.

Perhaps changing match values when there is an arranged team versus a random. With giving the random team extra points in a win, or not as many in a loss.

If you all haven't heard yet. The beta is getting extended past the 1st. Now going until Monday the 8th.

SarCraft 2 Beta test schedule update
 
The biggest thing that bothers me is that... I honestly didn't see anything wrong with the old battle.net system in terms of chatting, friends list, guilds, and custom game creation.

The only reasonable reason to have this whole do away with unique names and identifiers and the need for stuff like name.name .... is because battle.net 2.0 is aimed at multiple games. But it seems that the easiest solution to this naming conflict is to assume that if you're playing sc2 and refer to someone's username, it assumes that it's sc2 unless you use a game identifier like name.sc2 or name.wow or something.

It just baffles the mind how difficult it is to even set up a custom game with people who aren't on your friends list. Doing away with chat channels literally makes no sense. I think 99% of people liked the old battle.net system and new additions like a more detailed friends list is just nice additions, but not REPLACEMENTS to just about everything the old battle.net was capable of.
 
Firebats were pretty fun, although I like how they merged them and the vultures together for the hellion.

They really need to rethink some of the battle.net stuff. I wonder who's bright idea it was to remove chat rooms. Now you can't have clans pretty much, not as many for the average person. There won't be any easy way of meeting and talking with new people.
 
i think eliminating public chat room does more good than harm. if you're in a clan, how is it so hard to create a party channel? it's the same effect as the chat room, except you don't have to worry about uninvited newbs or people coming in just to trash talk and leave. and wasn't it annoying to see so many bots just spam the channel with worthless crap? if you want to create a chat with many people, just invite as many as you want... it's not that hard.
 
WhiteFireDragon said:
i think eliminating public chat room does more good than harm. if you're in a clan, how is it so hard to create a party channel? it's the same effect as the chat room, except you don't have to worry about uninvited newbs or people coming in just to trash talk and leave. and wasn't it annoying to see so many bots just spam the channel with worthless crap? if you want to create a chat with many people, just invite as many as you want... it's not that hard.
Click to expand...

No.

Not including chat rooms is BACKWARDS direction from bnet. If you're not in a clan.. then what? It's just stupid. I don't see why they couldn't make it like the old bnet with added features.
 
WhiteFireDragon said:
if you're in a clan, how is it so hard to create a party channel? it's the same effect as the chat room, except you don't have to worry about uninvited newbs or people coming in just to trash talk and leave. and wasn't it annoying to see so many bots just spam the channel with worthless crap? if you want to create a chat with many people, just invite as many as you want... it's not that hard.
Click to expand...

You seem to be missing the point. There's a limit to the party size, that requires you knowing them pretty much too. Why would there have to be uninvited people that would come into a chat room? it would be very easy to either allow public chat channel, or be able to set a password. Again, you can't invite people if you don't know who would be interested.... Either in a clan or for whatever other reasons. Unless they want it like wow where people randomly invite you for shit.
 
Intel_Hydralisk said:
The biggest thing that bothers me is that... I honestly didn't see anything wrong with the old battle.net system in terms of chatting, friends list, guilds, and custom game creation.

The only reasonable reason to have this whole do away with unique names and identifiers and the need for stuff like name.name .... is because battle.net 2.0 is aimed at multiple games. But it seems that the easiest solution to this naming conflict is to assume that if you're playing sc2 and refer to someone's username, it assumes that it's sc2 unless you use a game identifier like name.sc2 or name.wow or something.

It just baffles the mind how difficult it is to even set up a custom game with people who aren't on your friends list. Doing away with chat channels literally makes no sense. I think 99% of people liked the old battle.net system and new additions like a more detailed friends list is just nice additions, but not REPLACEMENTS to just about everything the old battle.net was capable of.
Click to expand...
Battle.net 2.0 is worse than the original Bnet for SC and WC3. I don't know how things like DotA mods will be possible, since you can't easily change around game configurations or set up large games, and there's no local map storage, so you have to use what developers have put online. That'd be great, except developers are limited to 5 maps/projects which can be no more than 10 (maybe it's 20?) mb. So RPGs are out. You also can't have maps with words like 'black', 'white' or 'Africa' in them because they're on the offensive word filter.

They've basically set it up to be an online store, with premium maps, avatars and other DLC that should be built in already. :/ I think Blizzard is still in control of SC2, but Activision is flexing their muscle with Bnet2.0.

No offense to any of you fine gentlemen or ladies, but I don't want to give you my email address or real name in order to play with you. Chat channels are crucial for that, and simply for socializing. It doesn't make any sense to deny chat functionality. Even for people who don't like being in spammed channels (which the report function and unique account requirements take care of), they could simply make it so you don't join automatically.
 
Samson4EiT said:
I started thinking that too after I was done. But then I thought, there's going to be a lot more leagues if that happened. If only RT's played eachother and vice versa.

I did hang around after one of the losses and talked to the other team for awhile. They were arranged and thought we were too. During that match, my partner asked me at about the 12-15 min mark if i was new. I said no, then promptly left.

Perhaps changing match values when there is an arranged team versus a random. With giving the random team extra points in a win, or not as many in a loss.

If you all haven't heard yet. The beta is getting extended past the 1st. Now going until Monday the 8th.

SarCraft 2 Beta test schedule update
Click to expand...

What is an AT and RT?
 
Arranged team and random team. There's a problem right now where good players enter random 2s and get paired with an idiot and/or grandpa. Either way, random 2s are awful, especially when you have to play arranged teams.
 
Jaerb4 said:
Battle.net 2.0 is worse than the original Bnet for SC and WC3. I don't know how things like DotA mods will be possible, since you can't easily change around game configurations or set up large games, and there's no local map storage, so you have to use what developers have put online. That'd be great, except developers are limited to 5 maps/projects which can be no more than 10 (maybe it's 20?) mb. So RPGs are out. You also can't have maps with words like 'black', 'white' or 'Africa' in them because they're on the offensive word filter.

They've basically set it up to be an online store, with premium maps, avatars and other DLC that should be built in already. :/ I think Blizzard is still in control of SC2, but Activision is flexing their muscle with Bnet2.0.

No offense to any of you fine gentlemen or ladies, but I don't want to give you my email address or real name in order to play with you. Chat channels are crucial for that, and simply for socializing. It doesn't make any sense to deny chat functionality. Even for people who don't like being in spammed channels (which the report function and unique account requirements take care of), they could simply make it so you don't join automatically.
Click to expand...

This makes me extremely sad because custom games are the #1 draw for me to these games as I grow tired of the normal gameplay quickly.

WC3 provided years and years of ridiculously good gameplay with custom games from tower defense to dota to racing games to rpgs.

Are you saying these are nolonger possible? I know there is Spinecrawler defense out there but if there is no local map storage then who hosts/distributes this?
 
All the maps are hosted on Battle.net, presumably so that one day, they can be sold.

I think DotA and the like are still feasible, since they use the same files, just differently, but given the limitations of the current lobby system, they may be a hassle to put together.

I have no idea how the bigger RPGs will work. Here's a much better (and much longer) explanation from more serious map makers.

http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=127066

The awful part is that the map editor is much better and more comprehensive than ever before. People have already started designing things like playable Mario Kart, FF-style RPGs and even first person shooters. The only problem is because everything has to get published through Bnet2.0, these are basically only playable with the local preview function.
 
Jaerb4 said:
No offense to any of you fine gentlemen or ladies, but I don't want to give you my email address or real name in order to play with you.
Click to expand...

While it appears that way now, you can still add them as a basic friend. Where you just see their username and if they are online,in a game, or away. They made it harder though, you can't just type someones username somewhere to add it, at least not that I know of. You have to right click on their name from either a score screen or finding their profile somehow and then click add friend. Which doesn't need to be accepted as it's not a realID request.
 
Samson4EiT said:
While it appears that way now, you can still add them as a basic friend. Where you just see their username and if they are online,in a game, or away. They made it harder though, you can't just type someones username somewhere to add it, at least not that I know of. You have to right click on their name from either a score screen or finding their profile somehow and then click add friend. Which doesn't need to be accepted as it's not a realID request.
Click to expand...

It's ridiculously hard now that they've done away with the name.identifier system. They basically didn't want any commands directly associated with someone's name so everyone can be named John if they wished.

That just seems idiotic given what they had to give up in order to do that. Also, why is it so hard to look up someone's profile? Why does it have to be so secret? - so the bad players can hide their shame or something? Ridiculous. Public profiles like the ones in Warcraft 3 were perfectly fine. I'm really not sure what the problem was.
 
Jaerb4 said:
All the maps are hosted on Battle.net, presumably so that one day, they can be sold.

I think DotA and the like are still feasible, since they use the same files, just differently, but given the limitations of the current lobby system, they may be a hassle to put together.

I have no idea how the bigger RPGs will work. Here's a much better (and much longer) explanation from more serious map makers.

http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=127066

The awful part is that the map editor is much better and more comprehensive than ever before. People have already started designing things like playable Mario Kart, FF-style RPGs and even first person shooters. The only problem is because everything has to get published through Bnet2.0, these are basically only playable with the local preview function.
Click to expand...

This is terribly depressing. War3 custom games are basically my favorite type of gaming...ever. Nothing beats it for the fun and camraderie and variety. Unfortunately, that scene and the number of players has died down over the years. I was hoping that SC2 would revive that.
 
Spare-Flair said:
This is terribly depressing. War3 custom games are basically my favorite type of gaming...ever. Nothing beats it for the fun and camraderie and variety. Unfortunately, that scene and the number of players has died down over the years. I was hoping that SC2 would revive that.
Click to expand...

Totally feel the same way. I enjoy doing melee games in both WC3 and SC2 but some of my friends never liked it. To this day, whenever LANs happen, we all play WC3 custom games. TD's are one of the most amazing custom games WC3 offered. I too was hoping SC2 would bring a fresh look at custom games

like in WC3 and unfortunately it doesnt look good so far. I love Blizzard and all but I think this is going to be one of their first games I am not going to buy on release day; not only because of custom games, but the whole play style just doesnt feel completely right to me. It always feels like a mass fest (to me at

least), while in WC3 it took more of a variety of unit combinations. I do plan on buying SC2, but I dont think I will ever get the same playability as WC3.
 
Say thank you to Bobby Kotik.

I have this pre-ordered and still will buy it, but this will probably be the last Blizzard game I actually buy.
 
Rooble91 said:
Totally feel the same way. I enjoy doing melee games in both WC3 and SC2 but some of my friends never liked it. To this day, whenever LANs happen, we all play WC3 custom games. TD's are one of the most amazing custom games WC3 offered. I too was hoping SC2 would bring a fresh look at custom games

like in WC3 and unfortunately it doesnt look good so far. I love Blizzard and all but I think this is going to be one of their first games I am not going to buy on release day; not only because of custom games, but the whole play style just doesnt feel completely right to me. It always feels like a mass fest (to me at

least), while in WC3 it took more of a variety of unit combinations. I do plan on buying SC2, but I dont think I will ever get the same playability as WC3.
Click to expand...

It really does feel like a mass fest.
 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M-r_uCaFxg8

Ignore the video portion, but the commentary is great about the terrible state of Battle.net 2.0. Just listening to Husky describe the steps they had to take to set up the HDH Invitational based on the current abomination of custom game system makes me cringe.

I seriously hope Blizzard is just messing with this concept in beta and will incorporate better custom game / profile / friends list functions akin to the freedom of the old bnet.
 
Intel_Hydralisk said:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M-r_uCaFxg8

Ignore the video portion, but the commentary is great about the terrible state of Battle.net 2.0. Just listening to Husky describe the steps they had to take to set up the HDH Invitational based on the current abomination of custom game system makes me cringe.

I seriously hope Blizzard is just messing with this concept in beta and will incorporate better custom game / profile / friends list functions akin to the freedom of the old bnet.
Click to expand...

I can't ignore kittens.
 
Intel_Hydralisk said:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M-r_uCaFxg8

Ignore the video portion, but the commentary is great about the terrible state of Battle.net 2.0. Just listening to Husky describe the steps they had to take to set up the HDH Invitational based on the current abomination of custom game system makes me cringe.

I seriously hope Blizzard is just messing with this concept in beta and will incorporate better custom game / profile / friends list functions akin to the freedom of the old bnet.
Click to expand...

Getting a 4v4 with 8 friends, most of whom were on each other's buddy lists, was like herding cats last night. Chat channels would be nice.

The other thing is that the BNet 2.0 UI itself is not very good. It is only through trial and error that I figure out how certain things work, when ideally it should be intuitive. There are other in-game UIs with multiplayer and everything that makes a lot more sense (Steam, the old BNet...)
 
they should of kept the old b.net they way it was for the new b.net just updated the graphics/art and a lil tweaks. but w/e.
 
Syntaxx said:
they should of kept the old b.net they way it was for the new b.net just updated the graphics/art and a lil tweaks. but w/e.
Click to expand...

Why? So people could just bitch about how the game is exactly the same, but with a graphics update? They're trying to be innovative. If you don't like it, and you like the old game, then go play it.
 
Last edited:
Morazl said:
Why? So people could just bitch about how the game is exactly the same, but with a graphics update? They're trying to be innovative. If you don't like it, and you like the old game, then go play it.
Click to expand...

Innovative? Since when was stripping all features innovative? There's literally not a thing that the new Bnet can do that the old bnet couldn't. It's quite the opposite.
 
the party system can be damn nice...personally, I love the facebook feature. I think the bnet 2 hating is a bit out of hand.

The lag and dropping has been gone for a few days for me personally, not an issue at all.

That leaves my only general complaint to the exclusion of lan.
 
is there a command to chat with friends on buddy list quicker like old bnet?

like
/f list
/f msg
/w

etc..

i remember trying this but doesnt work anymore?

i hate how i have to click on there name while in game to chat with them. just takes to long so i usually dont even reply when im busy playing a game.
 
Weird, my SC2 is not loading anymore. Is it something on my end or is it a bnet thing? I was playing earlier no prob, now it won't load and after a restart it still won't load ;_;
 
I am so going to go into starcraft withdrawal if this downtime is any indication.


Hurry up TOR.
 
linjy2 said:
is there a command to chat with friends on buddy list quicker like old bnet?

like
/f list
/f msg
/w

etc..

i remember trying this but doesnt work anymore?

i hate how i have to click on there name while in game to chat with them. just takes to long so i usually dont even reply when im busy playing a game.
Click to expand...

If your in-game, to reply to a friend easier, hit tab after enter and it will cycle to your friends name.
 
linjy2 said:
is there a command to chat with friends on buddy list quicker like old bnet?

like
/f list
/f msg
/w

etc..

i remember trying this but doesnt work anymore?

i hate how i have to click on there name while in game to chat with them. just takes to long so i usually dont even reply when im busy playing a game.
Click to expand...

Not sure if this will help, but when friends message me I just type "/r" and it pulls the name of the last person to message me and I can respond to him.
 
Been playin the hell out if it as well, but I still suck.
Me and a buddy of mine teamed up for 2v2 and have been getting our asses handed to us left and right.
But it's still fun.
 
looking for a relatively mid-high level diamond terran player to practice my ZvT matchup. PM and i'll send you my email and we can get some customs in.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top