New Affiliate: MakeMeHost

Level 32
Joined
Apr 2, 2013
Messages
3,951
Hive Workshop Affiliation News

logo.png


Splendid news. MakeMeHost.com has become our most recent affiliate! MakeMeHost is a popular site that allows anyone to host and find games for free across US WEST, US EAST, and Europe battle.net realms, all at once. This affiliation allows users on Hive who don't know about MMH to navigate battle.net much easier. It also allows those, especially non-modders, who use their site to find the Hive for the first time.

We encourage map makers to add their maps to this website so testing would be much more efficient. Go over, find and host a game or two!


 
Last edited:
MakeMeHost is a standard go-to to check out maps that are less popular than the big ones yet you still want to play them.

Unfortunately, it requires you to wait for an approval of a map at MMH before you can host, which can take 2-3 days.

Could we get something done to speed up this process? I could imagine a close collaboration between hive and MMH and a script which uploads all maps with a 4.5-5 star rating automaticly to the MMH database.
 
Level 32
Joined
Apr 2, 2013
Messages
3,951
MakeMeHost is a standard go-to to check out maps that are less popular than the big ones yet you still want to play them.

Unfortunately, it requires you to wait for an approval of a map at MMH before you can host, which can take 2-3 days.

Their FAQ explains how long it will take. It states maps are accepted at 7am and Arty confirmed this for me. I forgot to ask 7am in what timezone, but it's probably German time.

Zwiebelchen said:
Could we get something done to speed up this process? I could imagine a close collaboration between hive and MMH and a script which uploads all maps with a 4.5-5 star rating automaticly to the MMH database.
I suggested something very similar to this, just not with the ratings. Sounds like a good idea!
 
Their FAQ explains how long it will take. It states maps are accepted at 7am, probably German time.


I suggested something very similar to this, just not with the ratings. Sounds like a good idea!
Yeah, we should bring this to Ralle's attention. Maybe he can work something out with the MMH admin.

I mean how cool would that be if you update an existing map on hive and can instantly test it on MMH?
 

Dr Super Good

Spell Reviewer
Level 59
Joined
Jan 18, 2005
Messages
26,643
Sigh kids these days. Back when I was young all you you needed to host was to be able to read. Now other people host for you even if you are illiterate.

What next? Other people play for you?

Port forwarding is not that complex and makes total sense if you read up about Network Address Translators (NAT for short). All the "firewall" nonsense people sprouted is a lie, it is entirely the NAT not knowing which local IP address to send the incoming packet to since it usually relies on outgoing packets first to create the mapping.
 
Level 11
Joined
Jun 2, 2013
Messages
614
Sigh kids these days. Back when I was young all you you needed to host was to be able to read. Now other people host for you even if you are illiterate.

What next? Other people play for you?

Port forwarding is not that complex and makes total sense if you read up about Network Address Translators (NAT for short). All the "firewall" nonsense people sprouted is a lie, it is entirely the NAT not knowing which local IP address to send the incoming packet to since it usually relies on outgoing packets first to create the mapping.

That's all fine and dandy unless you can't access your router/modem because of your ISP. In most cases getting your ISP to actually set it up is like running your brain into a meat grinder and not even worth the headache.
Not to mention the features GHost++ bots come with as opposed to standard hosting are all the more reasons not to worry about it (For example hosting a game across all realms, auto kicking people with high ping, auto-refreshing the game so people can actually join it etc etc) Hosting manually now is pretty much impossible mainly because of how many users still play compared to back in the day.

With all that being said, the affiliation itself is brilliant and I can't wait to see where it goes.
 
Level 32
Joined
Apr 2, 2013
Messages
3,951
DSG said:
Sigh kids these days. Back when I was young all you you needed to host was to be able to read. Now other people host for you even if you are illiterate.

What next? Other people play for you?
Sad, I know. Kids these days X)

Nice slippery slope, btw.

DSG said:
Port forwarding is not that complex and makes total sense if you read up about Network Address Translators (NAT for short). All the "firewall" nonsense people sprouted is a lie, it is entirely the NAT not knowing which local IP address to send the incoming packet to since it usually relies on outgoing packets first to create the mapping.
I think many people who use MMH already know this. Maybe even the majority does. The biggest issue with hosting that way was is that you simply won't get the amount of players to compete with bots. Why wouldn't you get enough players? First off, it won't show as much in the server. Second off, you're only hosting in one server instead of three or four. Hell, even some of the ENT bots partnered with MMH even connect to GArena.

So when makemehost became popular, much of the infamous autohosting bots, yes, the old GHost++ ones which spammed DotA and 0/12s 24/7, declined in numbers and popularity drastically. User hosting now worked better than ever in the past maybe six or seven years. It's essentially a way to user host that could for once, compete with the autohosted bots.

Not to mention I love the commands the bots have.
 

Dr Super Good

Spell Reviewer
Level 59
Joined
Jan 18, 2005
Messages
26,643
They should just ban all robots. That way manual hosting would work again.

I have no problem filling games in SC2. That is because you can filter for lobbies with players in them. WC3 used to be like that but now with robots all you get are literal ghost lobbies with 0 players in them. How I miss a full house SWAT Aftermath game.
 
Level 1
Joined
Jul 7, 2015
Messages
6
The maps are automatically synced with the servers each 7am GMT (+- depending on summer time).

Hive Workshop did get a map maker account from me, allowing it to instantly upload maps. However, I dont know who is in charge of hive's contact communication nor who is the head of the map projects here.

I did tell him/her the possible options and it is now up to you to negotiate how to do it best among all HWS mappers. :)
 
Level 32
Joined
Apr 2, 2013
Messages
3,951
They should just ban all robots. That way manual hosting would work again.

I have no problem filling games in SC2. That is because you can filter for lobbies with players in them. WC3 used to be like that but now with robots all you get are literal ghost lobbies with 0 players in them. How I miss a full house SWAT Aftermath game.

Alright, fine. Let me host a SWAT Aftermath via makemehost right now. It's like you didn't even read what I said about the 0 player lobbies. You acknowledge that hosting without a bot isn't ideal anymore, right?

@Arty
Hey man. Ralle is probably the one you're looking for. You might also want to take a look at this thread.
 
Last edited:

Dr Super Good

Spell Reviewer
Level 59
Joined
Jan 18, 2005
Messages
26,643
Alright, fine. Let me host a SWAT Aftermath via makemehost right now. It's like you didn't even read what I said about the 0 player lobbies. You acknowledge that hosting without a bot isn't ideal anymore, right?
Except I do not want to play WC3 right now?

Hosting without a robot would be perfectly fine if not for there being so many robots it becomes impossible to tell which is a real game or not. This is the old SC2 problem, but where as SC2 solved it, WC3 has just made it worse (from it never having the problem in the first place) all thanks to robots.

When I join a game, I do not want to be the only player in there. I want to be able to see games which have actual people in them waiting to start. If I wanted an empty lobby I would host myself after all.
 
Level 32
Joined
Apr 2, 2013
Messages
3,951
Except I do not want to play WC3 right now?

Hosting without a robot would be perfectly fine if not for there being so many robots it becomes impossible to tell which is a real game or not. This is the old SC2 problem, but where as SC2 solved it, WC3 has just made it worse (from it never having the problem in the first place) all thanks to robots.
Indeed it would be perfectly fine if there we're no bots, but we can't undo the past. Maize / Arty / Whoever else was involved in the creation of makemehost we're brilliant and successful in trying to restore the user hosting experience.

My intentions we're not to force or pressuring anyone to join, it was just an invite to play SWAT and show you that these bots work great.
DSG said:
When I join a game, I do not want to be the only player in there. I want to be able to see games which have actual people in them waiting to start. If I wanted an empty lobby I would host myself after all.
Then use the site if you don't want that to happen in Warcraft 3. There is a decent sized list here: http://makemehost.com/games.php if you click ALL. It shows the number of players and if it's user hosted or autohosted.
 
Hosting bots are better, they can bypass Battle.net map limit, auto connect to multiple servers to find more people. Kick, ban, auto-refresh, mute, auto-start and all those incredible useful commands that you couldn't do normally.

It even allows the player who lagged out to reconnect back into the game. I wouldn't be playing Warcraft 3 multiplayer if it wasn't for the bots, there's just so much that has been improved.

This affiliation is very much appreciated!
 

Dr Super Good

Spell Reviewer
Level 59
Joined
Jan 18, 2005
Messages
26,643
Then use the site if you don't want that to happen in Warcraft 3. There is a decent sized list here: http://makemehost.com/games.php if you click ALL. It shows the number of players and if it's user hosted or autohosted.
Or I could just go to SC2 and play a session by browsing the open game list and clicking on any of the entries as they all have at least 1 real human player waiting in them. Which is more convenient?

As an example, I just joined a game right now called "Swat Zombies #41" and the lobby was completely empty and robot was set to start at 3 players (far from full house).

It even allows the player who lagged out to reconnect back into the game.
How on earth can that work? Third party executable to convert a replay session into a real session once the replay stream ends? I mean I know the mechanics (SC2 and HotS support it) however how can a non-hacked WC3 do that?

Or does it start a new session, stream the replay commands like live commands (ignoring all user commands) and then set game speed to something insane while/until it catches up?
 
Level 32
Joined
Apr 2, 2013
Messages
3,951
Or I could just go to SC2 and play a session by browsing the open game list and clicking on any of the entries as they all have at least 1 real human player waiting in them. Which is more convenient?

As an example, I just joined a game right now called "Swat Zombies #41" and the lobby was completely empty and robot was set to start at 3 players (far from full house).

Eh, why compare it to SC2?
Then user host SWAT via MMH and don't join those the autohosted ones. Simple as that.
 

Dr Super Good

Spell Reviewer
Level 59
Joined
Jan 18, 2005
Messages
26,643
Eh, why compare it to SC2?
Two reasons. Firstly SC2 had the exact same problem since it uses its own robotic hosting system (all games run through BattleNet 2.0) however they solved it unlike WC3 where it got worse and worse. Secondly it also has a lot of user made content, and even all original WC3 assets. WC3 has to be compared with SC2 because SC2 brings a similar experience when played.

Then user host SWAT via MMH and don't join those the autohosted ones. Simple as that.
Or I could play something else which is easier to do and does not require third party sites. SC2 where I can do all that in-game. Diablo III where I could join a session at the touch of a button. HotS with an auto matching system.

Usability is a big problem, and WC3 custom game multiplayer is pretty much unusable at the moment. Gone are the days where you could browse the in-game list and feel like trying something new. Instead you need to arrange your game outside the game.
 
Level 32
Joined
Apr 2, 2013
Messages
3,951
Two reasons. Firstly SC2 had the exact same problem since it uses its own robotic hosting system (all games run through BattleNet 2.0) however they solved it unlike WC3 where it got worse and worse. Secondly it also has a lot of user made content, and even all original WC3 assets. WC3 has to be compared with SC2 because SC2 brings a similar experience when played.
Ah, of course. I haven't played SC2 but I'll take your word for it. I am not arguing that the old bots made things better, hell no. I'm arguing that the MMH bots restored user hosting better than any other. At least that's what I and everyone else I've talked to about this matter have observed.

DSG said:
Or I could play something else which is easier to do and does not require third party sites. SC2 where I can do all that in-game. Diablo III where I could join a session at the touch of a button. HotS with an auto matching system.

Usability is a big problem, and WC3 custom game multiplayer is pretty much unusable at the moment. Gone are the days where you could browse the in-game list and feel like trying something new. Instead you need to arrange your game outside the game.
MakeMeHost is extremely easy to use! Yes it's third party but it's not much harder nor time consuming than forwarding your ports once and hosting. You already know you can't do that anymore and get players.

WC3 custom game multiplayer is absolutely not unstable at the moment. Five years ago, of course it was. Now, it's going great. The player base is small but the proportion between hosts and players is ideal.

I don't see how telling people that SC2 and Diablo work better proves your points.
 

Dr Super Good

Spell Reviewer
Level 59
Joined
Jan 18, 2005
Messages
26,643
I don't see how telling people that SC2 and Diablo work better proves your points.
It is all about the experience. With them you can just casually drop into the game and then find something to play. In Diablo III this is done almost instantly, or it will tell you that you will not find anyone there try another mode/setting.

In SC2 you are given a huge list to choose from with lobbies which have 1 or more other players waiting for you. If these maps do not suit you then you can browse the full map library and choose a map to hose and wait. Players will join (time varies from 1-2 minutes to 15 minutes depending on time of day and map popularity) and then you can play.

In WC3 because as you admit the in-game lobby is useless you need to resort to third party sites. Gone are the days of stating the game casually and finding something. Now you need to plan. You either need to start your own map using a third party service or you need to locate a map to play with the third party service. God help you if you do not know such services exist since they certainly are not part of the game.

As such I still stand by a full ban wave for all hosting robots. People could then solve the population problem simply by converging all on a single region (usually Azeroth, that was always the most popular next to Northerend during the EU day).
 
Level 32
Joined
Apr 2, 2013
Messages
3,951
DSG said:
It is all about the experience. With them you can just casually drop into the game and then find something to play. In Diablo III this is done almost instantly, or it will tell you that you will not find anyone there try another mode/setting.
Trust me, it is not a hassle to use that site. Every single active person I know on battle.net knows about the site. Many people on Hive don't and having them to be able to enjoy battle.net with that site is good.

DSG said:
In SC2 you are given a huge list to choose from with lobbies which have 1 or more other players waiting for you. If these maps do not suit you then you can browse the full map library and choose a map to hose and wait. Players will join (time varies from 1-2 minutes to 15 minutes depending on time of day and map popularity) and then you can play.
That's exactly, exactly the same scenario when using the makemehost site just on a smaller scale. SWAT took 15 minutes but Uther Party usually takes 4 minutes.
In WC3 because as you admit the in-game lobby is useless you need to resort to third party sites. Gone are the days of stating the game casually and finding something. Now you need to plan. You either need to start your own map using a third party service or you need to locate a map to play with the third party service. God help you if you do not know such services exist since they certainly are not part of the game.
This is why we affiliated :)
As such I still stand by a full ban wave for all hosting robots. People could then solve the population problem simply by converging all on a single region (usually Azeroth, that was always the most popular next to Northerend during the EU day).
You ban all the bots, you destroy the player base. The individual servers are to little on there own. One of the main reasons the MMH bots are favored nowadays is because of the commands, and cross server experiences. I already stated the other reasons.

I'm willing to bet people are going to ask Blizzard for them to return instead of migrate to one server.
 
Level 1
Joined
Jul 7, 2015
Messages
6
The concept of MMH is exactly to counter your fears. MMH doesn't autohost with 60 bots - it lets users host and play on demand. We wont spam the game list like other hosting communities.

Getting rid of bots would be a bad idea, besides for all the technical aspects, it is also about the latency and ping.

Anyway, you are 10 years too late starting that discussion. :D

@StoPCampinGn00b Thanks for the thread. However, I will rely on the Hive Workshop administration to manage this by themselves. If they need anything, they should email me. Something like this wont work if I talk to 10k mappers separately.
 
Level 32
Joined
Apr 2, 2013
Messages
3,951
MMH sucks. I remember how i was playing Titan Land KoT and people were dcing like every 4 minutes. Then we had like 6 people left and then like 10 minutes later the titan dced too. Overall its pretty shit.

You know it could be the map, right? One experience is enough to call something overall pretty shit I guess.

ARtY said:
@StoPCampinGn00b Thanks for the thread. However, I will rely on the Hive Workshop administration to manage this by themselves. If they need anything, they should email me. Something like this wont work if I talk to 10k mappers separately.
Oh, of course. I'm not managing the partnership terms itself anyway.
 
Last edited:
I completely agree with StoPCampinGn00b and aRtY. MMH is an excellent service for easier hosting, it doesn't require the player to forward the ports. It would kill online multiplayer if bots were banned these days, Warcraft 3 is already old for Blizzard to keep supporting Battle.Net. We must pray that if Blizzard closes Battle.Net there will be private pvpgn severs out there. :/

MMH should support non-official private servers such as Eurobattle.net
 

TKF

TKF

Level 19
Joined
Nov 29, 2006
Messages
1,267
Unfortunately, it requires you to wait for an approval of a map at MMH before you can host, which can take 2-3 days.
You can upload pretty instant with mappers priority upload (Contact form) at bottom at suggest map and do upload your updated map immediately and delete older versions. However you must apply for a mappers priority upload, and you get it in 1 or 2 days.

I put my maps there, otherwise I don't get feedback. Unfortunately its completely impossible to host outside bots nowadays. On the other hand multi realm support is a really great feature with these bots since few players plays wc3, that get the other players from other realms joining your game.
 
You can upload pretty instant with mappers priority upload (Contact form) at bottom at suggest map and do upload your updated map immediately and delete older versions. However you must apply for a mappers priority upload, and you get it in 1 or 2 days.

I put my maps there, otherwise I don't get feedback. Unfortunately its completely impossible to host outside bots nowadays. On the other hand multi realm support is a really great feature with these bots since few players plays wc3, that get the other players from other realms joining your game.

Ah, cool; didn't know that... thanks for explaining how that works.
 
Well i guess every rp map is fucked up then. Since i have seen so many people complain about dc-s. Pretty much this crap happens with any rp map so im pretty sure its MMH fault.

You have no screen-shot, no proof? If you don't then please don't throw pointless accusations. I've never encountered such problems. Don't like MMH? Don't use it. :p
 
They are not pointless -.- You must be the luckiest person ever if nobody ever dced in your games. Oh and even worse some people load maps for like 300-500 damn seconds.

Yes I did encounter people loading maps for 10 minutes or so, never understood how they take so long (wood pc's?). Usually if I encounter this again I just exit Warcraft 3. That' s not the fault of MMH.
 

Dr Super Good

Spell Reviewer
Level 59
Joined
Jan 18, 2005
Messages
26,643
If they are running the hosting robots from the same server/connection traffic could be a problem.

Yes I did encounter people loading maps for 10 minutes or so, never understood how they take so long (wood pc's?).
Usually it is the case of insufficient memory or hard disk performing badly (end of life). It could also be a "Press enter to continue" messing up with the person not pressing entre. Additionally if you alt + tab from the game during loading it can become stuck until you maximize. Also if a client crashes during loading (often no fault of theirs, for example a power outage or internet outage) then it might also hang.
 
Level 17
Joined
Nov 26, 2007
Messages
1,963
I'm surprised it took this long. MMH is not a periphery tool any more. It's practically essential if you want to find anything to play, or want any hope of having your hosted game actually attract players.

They should just ban all robots. That way manual hosting would work again.

The problem is that the Ghost+ bots allow maps to be hosted across the servers, meaning people from US West can join your game even if you host it from US East. This effectively connects the dwindling online Wc3 community, where as without it finding players for your game would be very difficult.

MMH and Ghost+ bots are sort of a funny case for Wc3. I'd argue that all of these superficial games being hosted neutered the closeness of the community and the personal aspect of, say, seeing some map developer hosting his own map for people to play. At the same time, it's also the only reason Wc3 custom games are still alive.

Life support. Would've been better without it in the first place, but now that it has tethered itself to the community it would be too damaging to remove it.
 

Dr Super Good

Spell Reviewer
Level 59
Joined
Jan 18, 2005
Messages
26,643
The problem is that the Ghost+ bots allow maps to be hosted across the servers, meaning people from US West can join your game even if you host it from US East. This effectively connects the dwindling online Wc3 community, where as without it finding players for your game would be very difficult.
Without robots all people would naturally gravitate to the same server.
 
Level 7
Joined
Feb 16, 2014
Messages
326
Well i used to host via mmh sometime ago. Its nice and all but u might want to check out ent if
1. You dont have original warcraft
2. Have friends that dont have original warcraft
3. Need dc protection (180s buffer)

I use eurobattle.net to play multiplayer but there are some others that do the job too. Just that ent is advanced than mmh for me. And all people with java problem, using eurobattle.net frees u of opening tabs to connect to game.

What I wanted to ask here to aRty was will this mean same thing to ent? (all maps being already there). Other people might want to know as well :) After all the time hosting I still dont know how mmh and ent are related and separated.
 
Level 7
Joined
May 30, 2013
Messages
207
Two reasons. Firstly SC2 had the exact same problem since it uses its own robotic hosting system (all games run through BattleNet 2.0) however they solved it unlike WC3 where it got worse and worse.

[ .. ]
Hm? SC2 is pretty much all about 'robot host games' - there`s no possibility to host one yourself at all, last time I checked (that was late WoL; didn`t bother about SC2 after that, but am I correct to assume that they didn`t change that?), and we`re about to reclaim the private lobbies for War3, thanks to sites like MMH. And I don`t agree that War3`s deteriorating, after all, didn`t we just make private lobbies viable again with MMH? (And the ghost bot games are usually pretty easily recognisable, so you could simply avoid those)
Secondly it also has a lot of user made content, and even all original WC3 assets. WC3 has to be compared with SC2 because SC2 brings a similar experience when played.
[ .. ]
That cannot possibly be true, unless you could magically play any given War3 map on SC2. War3`s got what, 13 years of mapping depth? That alone is something that SC2 can hardly compensate, if at all.
Plus, last time I`ve checked, the SC2 modding scene`s rather dead, which doesn`t help at all.
 

Dr Super Good

Spell Reviewer
Level 59
Joined
Jan 18, 2005
Messages
26,643
What I wanted to ask here to aRty was will this mean same thing to ent? (all maps being already there). Other people might want to know as well :) After all the time hosting I still dont know how mmh and ent are related and separated.
ENT want to kill WC3 so that no one plays it anymore by filling the game listing with empty unpopulated games. MMH is trying to stop them from killing WC3 by providing players a means of locating games with actual players in them. Unfortunately it is likely only a matter of time before MMH have their servers blown up and their owners thrown off a pier by ENT.

(And the ghost bot games are usually pretty easily recognisable, so you could simply avoid those)
The ghost robots themselves are not a problem. The problem is with "ghost" lobbies. These are like ghost towns, no body in them. One can laugh at the poor naming choice by the robot developers but at the time they did not think this would ever be a problem.

Basically you should not be shown lobbies with nobody in them. The robot owners themselves should not run empty lobbies with exception of very popular maps (which fill super fast). If people want to play a less popular game they should request the robot to host it. If no one is in the lobby after 1-2 minutes it should de-host to free up lobby space.

War3`s got what, 13 years of mapping depth? That alone is something that SC2 can hardly compensate, if at all.
Except one has played those ancient maps. Most of the every old ones do not even work due to the type casting exploit being fixed. People do not play the same maps forever. Both WC3 and SC2 get new maps however currently SC2 has a much easier time getting players for such new maps than WC3 due to the problem of lists filled with ghost lobbies (again, lobbies with nobody in them and not that they are hosted by ghost robot system).

Plus, last time I`ve checked, the SC2 modding scene`s rather dead, which doesn`t help at all.
Much like most of the lobbies shown in the game list on BattleNet in WC3. I have no idea why seeing how unlike WC3 it is completely free to play SC2 Arcade maps and soon you just need any licence (WoL, HotS or LotV) to be able to make maps using all the assets.
 
Level 7
Joined
May 30, 2013
Messages
207
ENT want to kill WC3 so that no one plays it anymore by filling the game listing with empty unpopulated games. MMH is trying to stop them from killing WC3 by providing players a means of locating games with actual players in them. Unfortunately it is likely only a matter of time before MMH have their servers blown up and their owners thrown off a pier by ENT. [ .. ]
Care to back that one up?
[ .. ]

The ghost robots themselves are not a problem. The problem is with "ghost" lobbies. These are like ghost towns, no body in them. One can laugh at the poor naming choice by the robot developers but at the time they did not think this would ever be a problem.

Basically you should not be shown lobbies with nobody in them. The robot owners themselves should not run empty lobbies with exception of very popular maps (which fill super fast). If people want to play a less popular game they should request the robot to host it. If no one is in the lobby after 1-2 minutes it should de-host to free up lobby space.
[ .. ]
Sorry, I didn`t clarify this. I actually meant 'ghost lobbies', ie bot games that don`t (and won`t) fill up. They`re easily recognisable. (MyAwesomeMap! #123) You could just avoid them, you know. Private ('man-made') lobbies are usually easily recognisable, too.
(Them filling up space is an issue, but we`ll probably have to deal with that just now.)
[ .. ]

Except one has played those ancient maps. Most of the every old ones do not even work due to the type casting exploit being fixed. People do not play the same maps forever. Both WC3 and SC2 get new maps however currently SC2 has a much easier time getting players for such new maps than WC3 due to the problem of lists filled with ghost lobbies (again, lobbies with nobody in them and not that they are hosted by ghost robot system).

[ .. ]
I`m aware of patch 1.24b, thank you very much. It`s still easier to fix your map for that than to port it all over to SC2; you don`t have to do that yourself, in fact there`re quite some maps that`ve been fixed by third-parties. Porting them over to SC2? That`s another entirely different story.


[ .. ]
Much like most of the lobbies shown in the game list on BattleNet in WC3. I have no idea why seeing how unlike WC3 it is completely free to play SC2 Arcade maps and soon you just need any licence (WoL, HotS or LotV) to be able to make maps using all the assets.
Yes, I`m aware of that too.
There`s just the issue with SC2 being a centralised system (along with issues some people have with the Editor), which is kinda unappealing, to me at the very least. Not being able to play your favorite version of a map sucks.
 

Dr Super Good

Spell Reviewer
Level 59
Joined
Jan 18, 2005
Messages
26,643
Care to back that one up?
Log into BattleNet and see for yourself. Without their robots hosting empty lobbies 24/7 the game would be a lot better (certainly easier to find a populated session). The fact they devote so many resources to all the hosting robots that are being detrimental to WC3 must mean they have some malicious motive behind it. Either that or their owners are blind to/ignorant of the damage they are causing.
 
Level 10
Joined
Jan 4, 2014
Messages
505
Love Makemehost! Plus they are partnered with Ent, which is the dream! Without both of those sites i would have probably given up on making my map more than a year ago, because no one would join when i hosted. Because of them im able to play my map whenever i want and im pretty proud of what i was able to do. I owe those guys a bunch for keeping the wc3 custom scene alive!
 
Level 7
Joined
May 30, 2013
Messages
207
Log into BattleNet and see for yourself. Without their robots hosting empty lobbies 24/7 the game would be a lot better (certainly easier to find a populated session). The fact they devote so many resources to all the hosting robots that are being detrimental to WC3 must mean they have some malicious motive behind it. Either that or their owners are blind to/ignorant of the damage they are causing.
That`s hardly a definite proof, if one at all, for such a bold claim as yours. It`s annoying, yes, but these games do get played sometimes (I`ve seen it happen!), and besides that, why`d they want to kill off the War3 BNet anyways? What`d they gain from that?
 

Dr Super Good

Spell Reviewer
Level 59
Joined
Jan 18, 2005
Messages
26,643
There is also another problem with SC2: even on my PC, which had been updated recently with more RAM, an SSD and a new GPU, the game still has severe FPS drops in many custom maps I played.
Just like mine does in many custom maps in WC3. Badly made is badly made be it in something 5 years old, or 13 years old.
That`s hardly a definite proof, if one at all, for such a bold claim as yours. It`s annoying, yes, but these games do get played sometimes (I`ve seen it happen!), and besides that, why`d they want to kill off the War3 BNet anyways? What`d they gain from that?
Their actions are the proof. If someone is destroying a car while shouting out their name proudly what more proof do you need?

As I said it is more a question of whether or not it is malicious (purposely set out to destroy the car) or just ignorance of what they are doing (driving a huge bulldozer and not noticing the car is in the way).
 
Last edited:

Rui

Rui

Level 40
Joined
Jan 7, 2005
Messages
7,497
I do confirm roleplay maps were rarely ever stable when they were hosted by MMH.

To integrate both services, you might want to automatically approve maps that the Hive has also approved. Then the Hive would have a button to order one of the bots to host at the distance of a click!

EDIT: As for the bot discussion, I prefer the use of bots. You can't do without the features they bring nowadays, especially the decreased latency and uniting of the realms. I agree with MMH's existence because it allows users who have no idea how to get a bot to host their maps too.
 

Dr Super Good

Spell Reviewer
Level 59
Joined
Jan 18, 2005
Messages
26,643
especially the decreased latency
Never noticed. Most latency I get is physical (stupid slow speed of light). Honestly when you are in EU and playing on a US server the latency is at least 100 ms and there is nothing you can do. It only made a difference if the server was in the EU, in which case the US players have bad latency.
 
Level 7
Joined
May 30, 2013
Messages
207
[ .. ]

Their actions are the proof. If someone is destroying a car while shouting out their name proudly what more proof do you need?

As I said it is more a question of whether or not it is malicious (purposely set out to destroy the car) or just ignorance or what they are doing (driving a huge bulldozer and not noticing the car is in the way).
Again, you`re implying too much. These empty ghost bot lobbies might bother you, but that alone doesn`t by any means mean that they`re trying to 'destroy' anything (They might not even bother anyone else, or at the very least, not as much as it does bother you). The closest comparison that`s coming to my mind right now is probably an adaptation of something (like, a motion picture adaptation of a book) where the director takes some liberties and changes things up a bit. While some people will consider it 'destroying' the book/franchise/whatever, it`s not as clear-cut as you make it out to be, like the destruction of your car.

Is running all those bots hosting empty, ghost lobbies stupid? Pretty much definitely. But I wouldn`t try to draw any more conclusions out of this. Like the good ol` proverb, don`t try to see any more things when you can just explain it with stupidity. (or w/e it`s been worded.)
 

Dr Super Good

Spell Reviewer
Level 59
Joined
Jan 18, 2005
Messages
26,643
Is running all those bots hosting empty, ghost lobbies stupid? Pretty much definitely. But I wouldn`t try to draw any more conclusions out of this. Like the good ol` proverb, don`t try to see any more things when you can just explain it with stupidity. (or w/e it`s been worded.)
Which is what I already said...
or just ignorance of what they are doing (driving a huge bulldozer and not noticing the car is in the way).
 
Top