No LAN Play For Starcraft II


Recommended Posts

That's a little disappointing. Most of my family (meaning my brothers etc.) loved playing Starcraft via LAN in my house being we are all connected to the same network.

Now I have to deal with Battle .NET just to get a game in. With that said they better fix the 1 person per network on Battle .NET issue that plagued the first Starcraft.

I suppose we can thank all the pirates for this. Abusing Hamachi, Garena and other LAN-over-Internet software for internet play with pirated copies.

And how will this thwart piracy? They'll crack battle.net authentication out of the product alongside any copy protection, quickly develop a server emulator and whoosh they'll be playing just like they were before. Poor excuse is a poor excuse.

The only people who will be butt-funked here will be the legit owners who now have to resort to dubious hacked servers/software to allow LAN gaming. Hooray for that.

Seriously, it's 2009. There's Internet everywhere, or well, if there's a place without Internet there probably won't be Starcraft 2 either anyway.

What happens if battle.net goes down during a tournament? What if the customers ISP goes down? What if Blizzzard decides to ban you from their battle.net? What if..

Yes, there are several reasons why having a non-auth-LAN-only gameplay is a good idea and having 0 ping vs your opponent is a good reason if any.

If it was really that easy to just hack LAN gameplay in to a game we'd see more games with that kind of hacks, but we don't. Besides, Blizzard will most likely supply tournaments (the big ones with cash prizes etc) with special LAN enabled copies of the game, like they have those WoW Arena things used at tournaments.

Now I have to deal with Battle .NET just to get a game in. With that said they better fix the 1 person per network on Battle .NET issue that plagued the first Starcraft.

The old battle.net was 4 connections per IP (network, that is), I had no problem playing online (Starcraft or Diablo II) with me and 2 friends being on the same IP. If we tried launching more clients, 4 would connect fine, 5 would cause 1 client to randomly disconnect.

Ok to clear up a few misconceptions in this thread...

Battle.Net 2.0 is working in the same way Battle.Net 1.0 is, its P2P. So, if all players are on the same network.. then players will send the information over LAN, not the internet.. The same it did in the original starcraft.

The only thing that has changed, is that there is no direct LAN option.. You are required to login to Battle.NET first for authentication and thats it. So you can still get LAN speeds, without disconnects.. As long as you have a intnernet connection.

Ok to clear up a few misconceptions in this thread...

Battle.Net 2.0 is working in the same way Battle.Net 1.0 is, its P2P. So, if all players are on the same network.. then players will send the information over LAN, not the internet.. The same it did in the original starcraft.

The only thing that has changed, is that there is no direct LAN option.. You are required to login to Battle.NET first for authentication and thats it. So you can still get LAN speeds, without disconnects.. As long as you have a intnernet connection.

Still, what if your internet is down or b.net is down? It's pretty shoddy if you ask me :/.

Edited by Guest
Still, what if your internet is down or b.net is down? It's pretty shoddy if you ask me :/.

It's like MMOs, if the servers are down or your net is, you don't play. But Blizzard tend to have fairly good uptime on the servers, leaving downtime to a minimum.

Wonder if single player is gonna demand you to be logged in too.

but I thought SC2 battle.net was supposed to be free? or at least for the basic gameplay modes?

AFAIK, there will be no charge for playing SC2 on Battle.net (there wasn't, and still isn't, for the original SC (now SC Anthology) on BattleNet today).

Has AB said differently?

I don't really think this is a "money hungry" gimmick. Blizzard has stated many times before that Battle.Net will always remain free. It's certainly not about stopping piracy, because the game still has a single player mode, and although Blizzard's spawn technology was incredible back in the day, it's just not practical anymore.

Blizzard wants to capture as much of a 'community' feel as it possibly can with the new Battle.net, because it promotes striving for goals, which boosts the replay factor. It's purely about stat tracking...

I don't really think this is a "money hungry" gimmick. Blizzard has stated many times before that Battle.Net will always remain free. It's certainly not about stopping piracy, because the game still has a single player mode, and although Blizzard's spawn technology was incredible back in the day, it's just not practical anymore.

Blizzard wants to capture as much of a 'community' feel as it possibly can with the new Battle.net, because it promotes striving for goals, which boosts the replay factor. It's purely about stat tracking...

But they also said that there may be some paid services, like creating custom leagues/tournaments and stuff related to pro gaming.

hmm well the game data would only travel between the clients, it shouldn't route through bnet. So the pings for a LAN game should still be 1ms, I hope

I don't think so. Without any LAN play, you're forced to log into Battle.net to play against other users. That means any online activity will be carried out with that service. Essentially, you won't get the same reduction in latency as you would in a LAN game.

On the plus side, this will mean more players on Battle.net at any given point in time. And more players means Blizzard will put more money and resources into powering Battle.net. Hopefully, this will translate into better ping, features, etc.

Thankfully, Real-Time Strategy games aren't 'sensitive' to ping times as much as other games, like First Person Shooters. Yes of course you'd want smooth gameplay and that you will have, even by going through Battle.net when in a LAN "environment".

Indeed. Unfortunately, the side effect is quite daunting. For example: If Player A joins with a ping of 200ms and plays, he'll slow down Players B, C, and D. Fortunately, there's an option to drop a "laggy" player from the game.

It could be an issue with a regular game over Battle.net, but I don't think that'll be an issue with pseudo-LAN games. Why? Well, think of it this way: If you're with a bunch of friends who want to play some StarCraft II, then chances are you'll be playing from the same Internet connection. Logically, one would assume that each person's ping would be similar.

I think battle.net will be free, as long as you pay for the game.

Its like this, my teacher who got me to play SC(yes a teacher, 7th grade social studies) hooked us on SC becuase 1 day close to summer we were done and had old school macbooks(yes ibooks) haha and he had 1 copy but installed it on all 10 lappys.

He wasnt pirating or anything since he installed a "spawn" i think its called and we played local.

But I dont play blizzard becuase I know a few people who lately passed around 1 copy between 15 people to install it and play and its working just fine.

I have a legal copy so im fine. But I undersatnd what there doing. Now if they truly DO make battle.net paid service like WOW is, then **** that. I dont need SC that bad.

Then they will put a bad taste in 1/2 of the SC Fan Group.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • The quantum search for Time's origin had an equally mind-boggling conclusion by Sayan Sen Image by Steve Johnson via Pexels A theoretical study from researchers at the University of Surrey suggested that the direction of time may not be fundamentally fixed in certain quantum systems. The work, published in Scientific Reports, examined how the “arrow of time” could emerge from microscopic physics and found that time-reversal symmetry can remain intact even in models used to describe processes such as energy loss and thermalisation. The arrow of time refers to the observed one-way direction from past to future in everyday life. In macroscopic processes, this is easy to see. Spilled milk spreads across a table and does not gather back into a glass, and heat flows from hotter objects to colder ones. These processes shape the common sense idea that time moves in a single direction. However, at the level of fundamental physics, many equations do not prefer a direction of time. Time-reversal symmetry means that the same physical laws can describe a system whether time moves forward or backward. This has made it difficult to explain why irreversible behaviour appears in the large-scale world even when the underlying rules do not require it. Dr Andrea Rocco, Associate Professor in Physics and Mathematical Biology at the University of Surrey, described this contrast: "One way to explain this is when you look at a process like spilt milk spreading across a table, it's clear that time is moving forward. But if you were to play that in reverse, like a movie, you'd immediately know something was wrong – it would be hard to believe milk could just gather back into a glass. However, there are processes, such as the motion of a pendulum, that look just as believable in reverse. The puzzle is that, at the most fundamental level, the laws of physics resemble the pendulum; they do not account for irreversible processes. Our findings suggest that while our common experience tells us that time only moves one way, we are just unaware that the opposite direction would have been equally possible." The study focused on open quantum systems, which are quantum systems that interact with a surrounding environment. This environment, often described as a heat bath, can exchange energy and information with the system. The researchers used this framework to study how a direction of time might appear even when the underlying physics does not enforce one. A key part of the analysis involved the Markov approximation. This is a simplification used in many models where the system is assumed not to retain memory of its past states. The idea is that changes depend only on the current state, not on earlier history. This is commonly used when studying thermalisation, which is the process where a system settles into equilibrium with its environment. The study also used concepts such as master equations, including the Lindblad and Pauli equations, which describe how probabilities of different quantum states change over time. Another related model discussed was quantum Brownian motion, which describes the random-like movement of a quantum particle interacting continuously with its environment. In these descriptions, a “memory kernel” can appear, which is a mathematical term that accounts for how past states influence current behaviour. The researchers found that applying the Markov approximation did not break time-reversal symmetry. Even when the system interacted with an effectively infinite heat bath, the resulting equations of motion remained symmetric in time. This meant that the same mathematical description could, in principle, run forward or backward in time without contradiction. The study further showed that standard frameworks used in open quantum systems, including quantum Brownian motion and master equations like the Lindblad and Pauli forms, could be written in a time-symmetric way. These equations are typically used to describe processes that look irreversible, such as dissipation and thermalisation, but the results suggested they can also be interpreted as allowing evolution in both time directions. Thomas Guff, Research Fellow in Quantum Thermodynamics, said: "The surprising part of this project was that even after making the standard simplifying assumption to our equations describing open quantum systems, the equations still behaved the same way whether the system was moving forwards or backwards in time. When we carefully worked through the maths, we found that this behaviour had to be the case because a key part of the equation, the "memory kernel," is symmetrical in time. We also found a small but important detail which is usually overlooked – a time discontinuous factor emerged that kept the time-symmetry property intact. It’s unusual to see such a mathematical mechanism in a physics equation because it's not continuous, and it was very surprising to see it appear so naturally." The researchers also noted that deriving a one-way arrow of time from time-reversal symmetric microscopic dynamics remains an open problem across fields such as thermodynamics, statistical mechanics, particle physics, and cosmology. Their results suggested that some standard descriptions of irreversible behaviour in open quantum systems may be better understood using a time-symmetric formulation of Markovianity. According to the study, processes such as thermalisation, which are usually treated as irreversible, could in theory be described in a way that allows evolution in either time direction under the same rules. This does not imply that time reversal occurs in everyday life, but rather that the underlying equations do not strictly enforce a single direction. Overall, the findings suggested that the perceived direction of time may emerge from how physical systems are modelled and approximated, rather than from a fundamental asymmetry in the laws themselves. The researchers noted that this perspective could have implications for ongoing work in quantum mechanics, thermodynamics, and cosmology on the origin of time’s arrow. Source: University of Surrey, Nature This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing
    • A bit premature... 100% Marketing. Bizarre.
    • A $300 price hike is insane! No one is going to want to pay that much!
    • Since the 1st one flopped, there is really no reason to make another one. It's just losing money left and right.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Reacting Well
      BizSAR earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • First Post
      AndreaB earned a badge
      First Post
    • Week One Done
      Huge Trailer earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      Classifyskilleducation earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      eurospharma62 earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      580
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      182
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      75
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      71
    5. 5
      neufuse
      64
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!