omfg p2p sucks, why couldn't stardock learn from wc3 and go with a client server model?

The ladder is somewhat hosted by blizzard.

Custom games in wc3 are p2p.

You're topic titles makes no sense. You say p2p sucks but then confirm how it's used with WC3 a successful game.

It's called mockery.  You may have heard of it.

lol

wow.... just wow....

Sarcasm title, it's all the rage this week. He's ripping into the people who say they should have used host/client like warcraft 3.

wc3 uses a different style of networking where in this games case the host would be basically the NAT once host leaves gets dropped what ever games over stardock didnt want that to happen but obviously this isnt working either.

Can i say, i dont care what model, as long as it works? (And this doesnt work?)

Absolutely.  Demigod has horrible connectivity and you should complain until it's fixed .  You just shouldn't bitch in an ignorant manner, it makes it impossible to take you seriously.

Rookrolled and innociv have both elaborated a little on the variations in WC3's implementation.  It's still p2p at its core though and you need to realize the implication that the problems are due to implementation issues, not p2p itself.

Yeah, you're odd....

aren't ladder games in war3 hosted by blizzard though? Not stating as a fact, just curious as that's how I thought it happened.

i cant say for sure gaping, i dot know if you join a ladder game everyones ip is identical so they could be using a proxy style server setup or they are just using some of the b.net servers to host im not for sure either

I know that in WC3 your connection does not depend on that of other players. So if they are lagging you remain fine. 

Wc3 melee games are hosted upon servers, which players connect to.

In custom games, all players connect to a single server(the host), in which the host sends information to all the other players.  Player(2) and player(3) don't communicate directly I believe.

If the host goes down, than the game searches for a new one.  If it can't find one, than the game ends.

Demigod works by sending information to everyone - no?  Instead of relaying mostly upon the hosts connection, you relay on the average connection of the players?

EDIT: wc3 was also designed around a 48k line I think.

True story. Warcraft technically uses peer to peer but it's not truely peer to peer. P2P in WC involves the peers (everyone else in the game) connecting to a single peer (host). It's far closer to a server client system though. Although the server is a person not battlenet itself.

Everyone connects to the server (host) then the host takes that information and sends it out to the players (clients). Games don't get choppy unless the host is having issues. If a persons computer is giving them chop no one else gets it because he's not connected to anyone besides the host. However if any of the peoples internet lags it will in turn lag other people because their information isn't getting to the host in a timely manner which brings up the drop box.

So, while TECHNICALLY a p2p system since battle.net isn't involved in anything other than getting people in the game it's far closer to a server/client system in actuality.

This is also why I don't think a custom kick program will work in Demigod. In WC you kick someone as the host by terminating that persons IP connection to your computer. In DG that person is connected to multiple people so he should still be hanging on.

This mic on?

Yay, the forums work again =P

Now that the forums are back up and I've lost my reply from before lets try this again =P

My source is 1830+ DotA games hosted. Plus i'm sure over 5000 SC games over the years. Hosting that many games you learn how the system works. In WC3 the host is the server, the players the clients. The only person connected to all players is the host. Compare a DG game to a WC3 game. If someone has a pile of crap computer in DG the entire game is laggy as shit because everyone is taking a beating from that person. If someones comp is a pile in WC3 only that person feels the chop.

The proof of it being Server to client comes in the form of custom kick (visual custom kick, if you host, DL it, learn it, love it). With custom kick a host can sniff the players IPs and then close the connection to that IP. This forces that player from the game. He's gone and people can go on with the game. So if someone's being a douche, feeding intentionally, won't shut up, breaking the rules, etc you as the host can take care of the problem.

The proof part comes in the fact that no matter who has custom kick installed the ONLY person that can kick someone is the host. Everyone connects to him and so he can kick, if this was not the case then custom kick would not work. If you kick someone on a LAN with his friend it'll kick both players.

Also the only person that has to configure their firewall is the host. If you don't open up 10 ports (for the 10 players) you can not host a game. You can join all the games you want but if you want to host you have to be able to accept 10 different connections.

Yeah, that's basically what I said. Maybe they want to call it a p2p because blizzard doesn't host any game as the server. They merely provide the vehicle (bnet) for you to get to a game. Once the game launches the host becomes the server. If they want to call it p2p they can. But when it gets down to it it is a server to client game.

Funny, because when I was playing DotA (and hosting because if I didn't the game usually lagged) I remember that even one player with high ping ruined it for everyone and a single lagger would lag the whole game up. Both are symptons of a p2p system.

Since it's my word against yours, you're going to have to quote a source (preferably a Blizzard website).

Your experience isn't worth much though. Again, i've explained this twice I believe and again, with close to, if not more than 2000 dota games hosted I know what the hell I'm talking about.

If in WC3, if someone lags hard enough they are unable to accept info from the host. This brings up the drop box untill they can catch back up to the host. The only reason other people have to wait for the lagger to drop or get his shit together is because the game can't proceed with someone being 45 seconds behind the game. The entire game has to stop while the lagger attempts to catch back up, if he can not he is dropped from the game.

Ever been in a game of DotA where someone asks "anyone else lagging?" and everyone says no? Thats because the dudes comp/connection is lagging behind the game, not far enough to warrant the game pausing while he trys to get back in sync, but enough where he is in actually running behind the game. If it was truely p2p everyone would be lagging behind since his computer is sending info to everyone equally. This is not the case though, he's only sending/recieving info from one person so he's the only one that feels it.

Seriously, Download visual custom kick. Go into a DotA game as a regular joiner and try and kick someone. It doesn't do anything because you're not connected to them directly. Theres all the proof in the world and it's hard concrete evidence that's plain as day.

Honestly if you want to argue go ahead. I know I've got more experience hosting than most. I know what works, why it happens and who can do what.

They can call it a "variation of peer to peer" but it functions on the server to client level where the host is the server. They're "peers" only in the fact that they're 2 jackasses playing online and not BLIZZARD SERVER 38713092138198 and 2 guys.

Most people don't give a **** what label you put on it ("p2p", "partial p2p", "client-server", etc), all they care about is that it works.

Whatever Warcraft 3 is doing, it works.  Whatever Stardock is doing (and it's very clearly different from W3's system), it doesn't.  If, as the OP claims, Stardock is using the exact same system as War 3, they've plainly implemented it incorrectly.

Here's a comparison between what happens with War 3's custom games setup (i.e., to play DOTA), and Demigod's:

STEP 1: JOINING THE GAME

WAR 3: Click on game name; 1-2 seconds later you are in the lobby.

DEMI: Click on game name; even when it works correctly, you aren't in the lobby until 30 seconds (rare) to 5 minutes later. (And it only works "correctly" about 1 out of every 3-5 attempts; most attempts to join end in a connection error, or just never take you to the lobby even though you appear to be connected.)

STEP 2: FILLING THE GAME

WAR 3: Game room fills up for an average 5v5 in ~20-40 seconds.

DEMI: Even when it works correctly, it takes 5-10 minutes or more to fill up even a 3v3 game.  (Because of all the connection problems people are having, it very rarely works "correctly."  In my experience, at least half of attempted games fail at the lobby stage for one reason or another.  And it's very difficult to get enough people in for a 4v4 who are all properly connected to each other, and almost impossible to do a 5v5.)

STEP 3: STARTING THE GAME

WAR 3: Host clicks GO button; 5 seconds later the game starts.

DEMI: Host clicks GO button.  ~30% of the time, the game starts; ~70% of the time, the host is told the game can't start because two people can't connect to each other.  One or both have to leave; go back to STEP 2.

In sum, War 3's system just works, and works quickly (can usually get a full 5v5 DOTA game going in less than a minute) and seamlessly for the user.  Demigod's system, even when working correctly, is a hassle that wastes players' time.

The basic difference between WC3 and Demigod involves how the peer to peer works.

In Warcraft and Starcraft, the players connect to each other through the host of the game.

In Demigod, the players connect directly to one another.  This does make it a lot more complicated.

The problem in Demigod is that the system worked pretty well - in the beta. But has clearly not been a good experience for lots of people in the general public.

It would take a long time for Gas Powered Games to re-architect Demigod to work like WC3. So what Stardock is working on is setting up Proxy servers so that you connect through those instead of directly to each other.