WOL or Battle.net?

[ordos45]

Which do you prefer? I prefer battle.net myself for two reasons. First the easy interface, and the second reason is this statistic for an hour of play online:

Battle.net: 2 alerts from my firewall.

WOL: 813 alerts on my firewall.

So which do you prefer to play on and why?

[exatreide]

battel.net easier to regiserter. log onto.

and more players :)

i know what duke leto will chose...

[Acriku]

Battlenet because loads of people and very easy GUI, with the minor annoyance of learning /commands.

[Desert_Eagle25]

I agree with O45.

Ah well...too bad we cant block posts from "certain" people.... :O

[Terror]

Battle.net is has lag, (not that won.net lags badly). I also prefer battle.net's interface but i must admit that won.net is also great and it is my second choice actually. And sierra also has great games so i'm at won.net too at times.

[DukeLeto]

i know what duke leto will chose...

Ah well...too bad we cant block posts from "certain" people.... :O

Think before you speak. WestWood OnLine sucks. I play two WestWood games online: Red Alert I (when I can find someone) and Emporer. Everything is too laggy, too hard to find players for, etc. Battle.net is a LOT better, and you are likely to see me playing SC a lot. Now if only they made more games worth playing... ::)

[Nyarlathotep]

Battle.net

Renegade is the first game I played on WOL (apart from the one time I played EBFD on WOL) and have to admit, it's okay. However, it lags terribly at times. Even though the server I connect to gives me a ping around the 100 msec. Battle.net has never given me problems during the time I play Diablo (and that's a LONG time).

[thomas]

battle.net. wol is ok but too laggy and renegade is dying *snif* *snif* :'(

[Navaros]

you guys who says Bnet is laggy migh be right for D2, but I can say with 100% certainty that as far as War3 goes there is virtually NO lag. I went from playing Emperor all the time constantly on WOL (hence I am very *very* accustomed to experience lag and game-slowdowns on WOL). then when I went to Bnet, it was like Paradise in terms of the virtually non-existant lag. I don't know what Blizz did to stop lag in War3 but WOL could *really* use a lesson from them because if Emperor ran as smoothly on WOL as War3 runs on Bnet then Emperor would be way more fun to play online.

[Gobalopper]

Once the game starts the lag is because of network code not the online service. Well in WW's case at least and I think that is partly true for Blizzard as well.

[ordos45]

At times War3 lags so much that I can be booted from a game, and I have a 56k, but most of the time it is pretty fast.

Another reason I prefer battle.net is because there is more variety in user made maps than on WOL.

[Razorox]

battle.net all the way

reasons:

1) No lag whatsoever

2) Always lots of people on, and easy, effective interface.

3) Easy to register, and log onto

4) Very few crashes (b.net has only d/c me twice in 3 weeks, WOL d/c me like 6-10 times over a 3 week period.

5) QUICK MATCH ACTUALLY FINDS PEOPLE ON BATTLE.NET ;D

[DukeLeto]

battle.net all the way

reasons:

1) No lag whatsoever

Not entirely true. In big games, like 3v3 or more, you can get some nasty lag.

[Acriku]

IMO it isn't Battle.net that is lagging once in game, it's your computer and the others. But in battle.net, there is no lag. This is an uneducated guess.

[Desert_Eagle25]

Yea...it the players u lag u....but mainly in games...once i got a win because all my opponents (3v3 game) dropped due to lag and i felt guilty so i lost another game on purpose :-

[Razorox]

In big games, like 3v3 or more, you can get some nasty lag.

lol, thats because the players computers are too damn slow to process 6 armies battling at once (raz smiles as he looks at his new comp) oh and incase you didn't notice duke, emperor didn't even suppot 3v3 games because the lag would have been unbelievably bad. Heck it was hard enough to find a 2v2 game without getting hella lag, especially if everyone was running 56k.

[Desert_Eagle25]

Then i need a new processor. :)

[Razorox]

Then i need a new processor. :)

i guess so... ;)

[Navaros]

War3 Bnet does NOT lag. If you experience lag in the War3 games you play on Bnet that is *only* because of the sucky connections/ISPS/hardware of the people you are playing with (or your own for that matter)

Trust me, I've spent countless hours on WOL in Emperor and I have come to realize that WOL is slow and laggy by *DEFAULT*. Unless you get *really* lucky, almost every game of Emperor on WOL is gonna lag like mad. Because of WOL. Nothing else. Just WOL. (Yes, Emperor players can *increase* the amount of lag, but even if all 4 players on WOL have everything as perfect as can be, WOL will STILL lag that game)

Conversely, with War3 on Bnet, NO game will lag unless the players in the game are causing the lag themselves.

[Seal89999]

WOL does fine for me. But I bet battle.net is more reliable.

[ordos45]

Hmm, here I thought Red Alert 2 wasn't laggy on WOL the other day. Moved as fast as it does in single player, and both of us had 56k.

[IxianMace]

For now, I like WOL. I really only play Emperor online (sometimes I play The Moon Project, but not much). Haven't been to battle.net, but I might give it a visit soon.

[Frodo]

i do not like wol, but isn't westwood exposed comming out with a new server? I want warcraft 3 right now, but i can't spare the money, and it is dropping in price quick. My guess is in 1 month I will by it at A Costco or Sam's Club for $24.99.

[DukeLeto]

Yeah, Sam's has good prices. I'm waiting for WarII to go down. NO game is worth $60, except possibly Generals when it comes out. (No group cap! YAY!) And you know WestWood'll never charge that much. They never have. Only Blizzard pulls that cr*p.

[Terror]

war2 is like 10 bucks here