Here's the site if you're interested: http://www.battleping.com/
[H]Battleping: A good way to lower latency?
Forum Index > SC2 General |
da_head
Canada3350 Posts
Here's the site if you're interested: http://www.battleping.com/ | ||
Tropics
United Kingdom1132 Posts
| ||
Liquid`Jinro
Sweden33719 Posts
Eagerly awaiting asia proxies to be added | ||
sLiniss
United States849 Posts
On May 08 2010 03:49 FrozenArbiter wrote: I use it, yes it works. I heard the US servers were moved from LA to Boston recently tho, so it's already quite decent even without it. But it still makes it better. Eagerly awaiting asia proxies to be added If this is true, then I am in luck cuz i'm JUST outside Boston! Go Sox haha On topic: I have never seen this before. I'll try it out later today. | ||
Liquid`TLO
Germany766 Posts
| ||
Mohdoo
United States15081 Posts
| ||
semantics
10040 Posts
On May 08 2010 03:54 TheLittleOne wrote: If you are in the USA there is no reason to use it (unless you want to play on Europe). Yeah the only reason why you would want to use it if you're in another continent then the server you wish to play. | ||
da_head
Canada3350 Posts
| ||
ghen
United States1356 Posts
| ||
DeCoup
Australia1933 Posts
| ||
KiWiKaKi
Canada691 Posts
| ||
muzzy
United States640 Posts
On May 08 2010 03:49 FrozenArbiter wrote: I use it, yes it works. I heard the US servers were moved from LA to Boston recently tho, so it's already quite decent even without it. But it still makes it better. Eagerly awaiting asia proxies to be added Really? Wow... that'd be great for me, but I'd be surprised. Why would Blizzard move the servers to Boston, when they're located in California? Oh well, no big deal... I assume they'll have servers throughout the US (and elsewhere) once the game goes live. | ||
tyCe
Australia2542 Posts
On May 08 2010 10:16 KiWiKaKi wrote: is this legal Yep. Forgot the sources, but it is definitely fine with Blizzard. | ||
RAUS
210 Posts
On May 08 2010 03:49 FrozenArbiter wrote: I use it, yes it works. I heard the US servers were moved from LA to Boston recently tho, so it's already quite decent even without it. But it still makes it better. Eagerly awaiting asia proxies to be added are you serious? summer break is starting and i'm leaving from boston to los angeles tommorow. this is ridiculous | ||
xylon
United States22 Posts
On May 08 2010 09:02 ghen wrote: So just to wrap my head around this, battleping is an encrypted proxy server that somehow manages lower ping than if you talk directly with the b.net server unencrypted? *head explodes* this would make sense if you are using a network that is using packet shaping. if the network firewall has gaming packets set to a low priority, it may let encrypted packets though faster if it is setup not to shape unknown packet types to a low priority. | ||
avilo
United States4100 Posts
| ||
Disastorm
United States922 Posts
On May 08 2010 03:56 Mohdoo wrote: Need asia proxies! That would be a dream come true. You can probably use http://www.overplay.net/ for VPN but they cost money. They have a server right in korea that you can VPN to. However, how can proxies or VPN decrease ping to a certain location? Packets should still take roughly the same amount of time to travel there shouldn't they? Or does BNET actually block IPs? | ||
ghen
United States1356 Posts
On May 08 2010 10:52 xylon wrote: this would make sense if you are using a network that is using packet shaping. if the network firewall has gaming packets set to a low priority, it may let encrypted packets though faster if it is setup not to shape unknown packet types to a low priority. Speaking of which, I should set my QoS for SC2 :D Although if like FA said the servers are in boston, I have a max ping of 20 to boston. (In counter strike servers at least) | ||
Liquid`Jinro
Sweden33719 Posts
On May 08 2010 10:46 derpaderp wrote: are you serious? summer break is starting and i'm leaving from boston to los angeles tommorow. this is ridiculous I have no source, I just remember someone saying that's why the latency is so much better by default on the US servers for us europeans now. | ||
Wilko
Germany470 Posts
Can anyone help? ~edit~ I had to install Windows Framework and now it works | ||
icydergosu
528 Posts
it also could make your latency even higher. All depends on your isp´s routing. Without Battleping: You --- Battlenet With Battleping: You --- Battleping --- Battlenet I suppose you could do a simple port forward from a computer in a data center in your city you got a good connection to and afterwards change the SC2 Gateway configuration so it connects to your data centers ip. Just had a quick look. France (server at ovh data center) to 12.129.193.242 (should be the US bnet server): 64 bytes from 12.129.193.242: icmp_seq=22 ttl=242 time=153 ms 64 bytes from 12.129.193.242: icmp_seq=23 ttl=242 time=155 ms 64 bytes from 12.129.193.242: icmp_seq=24 ttl=242 time=151 ms 64 bytes from 12.129.193.242: icmp_seq=25 ttl=242 time=151 ms from my own connection (austria) to 12.129.193.242 64 bytes from 12.129.193.242: icmp_seq=18 ttl=235 time=175.976 ms 64 bytes from 12.129.193.242: icmp_seq=19 ttl=235 time=174.529 ms 64 bytes from 12.129.193.242: icmp_seq=20 ttl=235 time=177.377 ms 64 bytes from 12.129.193.242: icmp_seq=21 ttl=235 time=174.691 ms So even if i would live in france and maybe get around 10 ms to ovh, the improvement would be non existent. | ||
Re-Play-
Dominican Republic825 Posts
| ||
ghosthunter
United States414 Posts
On May 09 2010 05:56 Re-Play- wrote: i wont install that i download the program and my Kaspersky said its Trojan! A lot of anti-viruses by default assume programs it hasn't seen before are trojans. When windows Silverlight came out my Norton went crazy. If other people can confirm it's legit use, I would take this with a very small grain of salt. | ||
yanot
France130 Posts
I can't figure out if it works or not for me | ||
xylon
United States22 Posts
On May 08 2010 11:10 ghen wrote: Speaking of which, I should set my QoS for SC2 :D Although if like FA said the servers are in boston, I have a max ping of 20 to boston. (In counter strike servers at least) i am using smoothwall on a 30+ user network and for some reason sc2 is was not recognized as game packets so i had to turn unknown packets all the way up in my QoS. otherwise the game would lag a lot. this may help but i don't know if you are using this sort of setup. | ||
Slayer91
Ireland23335 Posts
| ||
Gont
Germany239 Posts
On May 09 2010 12:10 Slayer91 wrote: Just to hijack this thread slightly, if you have a second beta key do you actually need someone American to set up a US account or can you just like say in your battle.net account that you're from USA? u can say that u are from usa | ||
AmstAff
Germany949 Posts
| ||
Dommk
Australia4865 Posts
However, how can proxies or VPN decrease ping to a certain location? Packets should still take roughly the same amount of time to travel there shouldn't they? Or does BNET actually block IPs? If it's anything like WoW, the server prioritizes people closer to the servers, so in effect, people from Australia have low priorities. What you are doing here is tunneling your connection to some server near Battle.net servers so you get higher priority and all you really need to worry about is your ping to the tunneling server, which in most cases since there isn't a 20000 people load, is going to be quite allot lower. | ||
danbel1005
United States1319 Posts
+ Show Spoiler + On May 09 2010 05:39 icydergosu wrote: Yes and no, it also could make your latency even higher. All depends on your isp´s routing. Without Battleping: You --- Battlenet With Battleping: You --- Battleping --- Battlenet I suppose you could do a simple port forward from a computer in a data center in your city you got a good connection to and afterwards change the SC2 Gateway configuration so it connects to your data centers ip. Just had a quick look. France (server at ovh data center) to 12.129.193.242 (should be the US bnet server): 64 bytes from 12.129.193.242: icmp_seq=22 ttl=242 time=153 ms 64 bytes from 12.129.193.242: icmp_seq=23 ttl=242 time=155 ms 64 bytes from 12.129.193.242: icmp_seq=24 ttl=242 time=151 ms 64 bytes from 12.129.193.242: icmp_seq=25 ttl=242 time=151 ms from my own connection (austria) to 12.129.193.242 64 bytes from 12.129.193.242: icmp_seq=18 ttl=235 time=175.976 ms 64 bytes from 12.129.193.242: icmp_seq=19 ttl=235 time=174.529 ms 64 bytes from 12.129.193.242: icmp_seq=20 ttl=235 time=177.377 ms 64 bytes from 12.129.193.242: icmp_seq=21 ttl=235 time=174.691 ms So even if i would live in france and maybe get around 10 ms to ovh, the improvement would be non existent. Great, Thx | ||
Shaoling
Sweden344 Posts
| ||
iko
New Zealand137 Posts
On May 09 2010 05:39 icydergosu wrote: Yes and no, it also could make your latency even higher. All depends on your isp´s routing. Without Battleping: You --- Battlenet With Battleping: You --- Battleping --- Battlenet I suppose you could do a simple port forward from a computer in a data center in your city you got a good connection to and afterwards change the SC2 Gateway configuration so it connects to your data centers ip. Just had a quick look. France (server at ovh data center) to 12.129.193.242 (should be the US bnet server): 64 bytes from 12.129.193.242: icmp_seq=22 ttl=242 time=153 ms 64 bytes from 12.129.193.242: icmp_seq=23 ttl=242 time=155 ms 64 bytes from 12.129.193.242: icmp_seq=24 ttl=242 time=151 ms 64 bytes from 12.129.193.242: icmp_seq=25 ttl=242 time=151 ms from my own connection (austria) to 12.129.193.242 64 bytes from 12.129.193.242: icmp_seq=18 ttl=235 time=175.976 ms 64 bytes from 12.129.193.242: icmp_seq=19 ttl=235 time=174.529 ms 64 bytes from 12.129.193.242: icmp_seq=20 ttl=235 time=177.377 ms 64 bytes from 12.129.193.242: icmp_seq=21 ttl=235 time=174.691 ms So even if i would live in france and maybe get around 10 ms to ovh, the improvement would be non existent. The advent of proxy tunnels came from the demand of Oceanic WoW players. Incase you don't know, the backbone connecting Oceania to America is a huge piece of shit and once you leave Australia/New Zealand packets gain an extra 200ms because gaming packets get shaped leaving our country, and then they get shaped going into America. Generally you can ping about 200~ to US Servers, but in real-time the game data will end up getting prioritized to hell and back and you'll have a latency of around 500. The way Lowerping, Battleping and Smoothping etc all work are by establishing an SSH tunnel to a proxy in America and sending the SC2/WoW data through it. SSH traffic has much higher priority than gaming traffic does, so instead of being delayed, the data flies through. Afaik, it also doesn't get shaped as incoming traffic from the Blizzard serverside, because they're originating from a proxy inside of the US. Feel free to correct me, I might be wrong on some things, but that's what I've picked up from using the very first tunneling service (Lowerping) since it came out As someone has just said though, the transition to UDP instead of TCP has killed all tunneling services. | ||
AmstAff
Germany949 Posts
On May 26 2010 19:42 Desutroyah wrote: This doesnt work anymore for those who dont know, they've changed the Networking(or what you call it) protocols from TCP/IP to UDP and battleping doesnt support UDP bla forget it | ||
jackww
Canada1 Post
User was banned for this post. | ||
| ||