Also there is the issue of some ISPs filtering/blocking peer to peer, so that could be a problem.  Plus the whole 'beta server overload' problem(stupid Gamestop) so Stardock had to put the main servers up under pressure.

Check out some of the posts by Frogboy and you can see the problems caused by Gamestop's early release.  Would it have been perfect if everything had gone as planned, no.  But it would have been a lot better.

I've played many custom games with friends and we're not having any problems with net so far. The issue I feel is that many people have overcomplicated network configurations that they are not aware of how to manage or configure.

If most people were running straight off their ISPs modem they would probably not be having many problems, other than software firewalls. Once people start introducing routers, firewalls, wireless bridges, etc it just makes it a much more complex networking topography that your average user does not understand.

This makes it difficult to allow the proper mechanisms for your computer to work in the methods necessary for this game.

The peer to peer networking model is not new, it's a technology that has existed for a long time. The only difference in the structure from a client-server model is that everyone is connecting to everyone else. If you play a two player peer to peer game, a network shouldn't see it much differently than a client-server situation. It's two systems connecting and exchanging data. It gets more complex when you begin adding more systems, because now you have client A connected to client B and C, and B connected to A and C, and C connected to A and B, so on and so forth.

I don't blame it on the technology.

I think something that would help average users that are not familiar with network configurations may be just a Network configuration tester tool. Basically a tool that would perform similar connection mechanisms as the game engine, but be external of the game.

I just don't understand why anyone thought a peer to peer multiplayer model was going to be a good idea in the first place.  Practically everyone's behind at least one router and one firewall.  Arguably the vast majority of users don't even know they're behind them, let alone what either one of those things actually do and how to configure them.

If you're trying to take DOTA's market, how hard would it have been to go on any DOTA forum and see the countless posts about "WHY CAN'T I HOST," which is inevitably because they don't have port 6112 TCP/UDP open and properly forwarded.

P2P was just a really bad idea without that magic bullet Brad was talking about that'd instantly solve all port forwarding woes (some kind of tunneling driver, was it?).

  I use window XP SP3 ,( no tweaks legit copy), intel core duo 6600(45°c max onload) and radeon 4850(latest catalyst drivers, 35°c idle 45°c on load), 2 giga ram, several fans, fans in front the video cards, fans everywhere more and it fly up , the motherboard is a P5W DH deluxe with an onboard HD audio realtek, and a SB2 audigy in backup in case of sound problems. The disks are 2/3 empty , defragmented free of any known viruses or spywares,background processes are all shutdown including firewall, antivirus , and peerguardian.

 Its a clean happy and i dare to say  loved PC, i dont think it ever felt neglected so i cant explain the crashes, i daily remove the dust and clean the components inside with a soft pencil.

 It dont crash during the match itself, but i had lockups just trying to launch the game yesterday,or exiting a match,  not had the problem today so i guess it was activation checkserver  problem. Another problem i get is after a rare ,once in blue moon,successfull online match i must re launch the game cause it dont find reactor anymore  ...

Ps: all the required ports are forwarded

Impulse is suppose to handle all the port forwarding and router issues.  I don't have to configure anything and I can play this game in multiplayer.  The problem arise for people who have older routers. 

This is probably the worst, most inaccurate statement I've yet read on this forum, or any forum for that matter.

The devs knew damn well, in fact EVERYONE knows damn well the state of user networks these days.  It's the whole reason they decided to go with their "cloud" solution. To tell us they intended to develop a technology that would get around the majority of user network configurations to make their game work, and then you tell us it's our fault it doesn't work. Riiiiight.  Get a clue and admit that their software just doesn't work right now.

The op is right.

When the closed internet beta started, we all said the same thing. Connectivity isn't working, and there are some minor flaws with the game beyond that. We were told that the connectivity would be at 99% or close to that at release. Well, here we are, 3 months later, and I'm still spending more time outside games than inside.

In the beta, I used to tell people that they should take a break from the beta if the connection problems were getting to them, and come back when the next patch arrived. Now its retail. I can no longer say that with a good conscience.

The biggest issue with the game hasn't been fixed, and it hasn't been two days since release, its been several months since we started complaining about it.

I'm not discounting or trying to marginalize what you guys are saying, but I've had exactly zero issues with this game and connectivity. I was in the beta and early on I had some graphical issues, but that cleared up by the second major iteration. Whatever networking voodoo Stardock/GPG did with Impulse has worked flawlessly on my rig.

Again, I'm not saying you guys are wrong, but I am just pointing out that your anecdotal experiences don't speak for everyone.

I can't get in any games even with DMZ to my ip.  I can host wc3 games using my port forwarding so I imagine my forwarded ports (6073, 6100-6132) are fine.  Something's gotta give.

Hellgate is not a good example for several reasons.  One is that Flagship had no idea how to run a good company(who ever thought of mixing free play, subsription play, and a big one time fee needs to smacked, hard).  The second is not having enough for subscription people and founders at the start to justify it(they should have held off on the founders offer and subsriptions until after they had a lot of stuff for them).  What sucks the most is that it is still under development but Korean only(plus lack of LAN, if LAN had been in the game would have been much better).

Also, I never had trouble connecting to the server in Hellgate, but I also played solo and never was part of a group so that may be why I never had problems.

Plus. Stardock is responsible for the connectivety and they have a strong history of fixing problems and improving what they make(Heck, they are still releaseing patches for GCII to improve it).  So I can safely say that while there may be problems now, they will eventually get fixed.

As an aside, I think there was an update to the AI in the day 0 patch - of course you as a pirate don't have it.

The fact that you pirated this game means that have exactly ZERO right to complain about any problems or things you don't like.

To all legitimate owners, I think one of the biggest problems with connectivity will be finding out what problems are Stardock's fault and which are not(espcially if a problem is the result of an ISP filtering/blocking peer to peer trafic).

How can you say that the pirated version works better than the bought one? Especially since there isn't any DRM in the pirated version (nothing to crack)

Common even in Bnet you need how to port forward.. and it works since years. X.x