So few people play custom maps anymore that you can only play maps which need 4 players at most. For example it is impossible to get a full house for "SWAT Aftermath".
Then play different maps. You just have to know the right methods of searching in 2015 to get a quick play.DSG said:I want to play new different maps, not "uther party, protect the house" which I played about a decade ago. When I host a map it is impossible to get any players even if I refresh slots like in the "good old days". People complained about SC2 have a ghost Arcade but if anything WC3 has taken that title.
Again, you can use external sites to see the amount of players in a lobby. Autohost bots are still common but they aren't a pain to the majority anymore. Five years back, the complaining about the bots would not stop. Nowadays, the community seems settled because of the services hosting preferable maps and host-it-yourself sites being popular.DSG said:SC2 has no problem filling up new and different arcade maps as you can filter for active lobbies only (>0 players). WC3 has most lobbies in the list with 0 players. Who on earth are people even hosting games that people do not play. If I wanted to play the map I would host it myself.
They start when there are only a few people in the lobby. 12 player maps set to start at <6 people is kind of stupid.Most lobbies aren't even zero either. Count the list, it easily seems like less than a tenth to me. Not to mention that the autohost games that start reset to zero.
You need a WC3 account on a certain region. BattleNet 1.0 does not link to your 2.0 account. Additionally if you have not logged on in a long time it might automatically remove your account (you need to re-create it).How do I login to my already existing B.NET account?
If the game plays just as well or almost as well as full house for 12 player maps, than that shouldn't be an issue. Plus, sometimes a change of pace occurs when that happens and that adds onto some variety many players value.DSG said:They start when there are only a few people in the lobby. 12 player maps set to start at <6 people is kind of stupid.
DSG said:The reality is there should not be any robots. They used to seem like a good idea but dumb people hijacked it and ruined them for everyone by using them as advertisement billboards or to inflate their egos. I now strongly support having all robots banned from BattleNet.
Indeed most people do not need a robot. However, having a free host bot service to host what you want, have the commands to use to your benefits, and for it to host across multiple servers instead of one is easily better than hosting without one. They simply fill faster and allow better control. When I host on my own (forwarded my ports ofc), I get so little people joining because it's not on a looked at enough list and it's only on one server. I host the same game on a bot, I get better results.DSG said:Except most people do not need a robot to host. Robots were good for features like lower latency but currently having slightly worse latency is well worth it for not having a list of empty games nobody plays.
I do not need a robot to host for me, I can host myself perfectly fine, like I have been able to for over a decade. Shows you what a little NAT knowledge does.