View Full Version : DoW2 multiplayer ports
Option to change game port from 6112 to anything else would be very usefull, because many players share one internet connection, so there is one working port for two or more PC's and there is no way to play together for there people - including me and my friend.
I know that W3:TFT has that option - it would be nice to add something like that to DoW2.
4th May 08, 5:35 PM
Ooh this is a small point, yet one close to my own heart too.
I'd love to hear any and all changes about the multiplayer connections DoW2 will make, though doubt we'll hear anything before the game release unless a very nice Relic employee decides to enlighten us.
My current problem, and cause of such interest, is similar to the OPs. Port 6112 appears to be blocked on the University Campus network. Regardless of the fact that I won't be using the network for gaming next year I'd like to see DoW 2 using a more conventional method of multiplayer connection.
4th May 08, 6:19 PM
since its relic online, expect it to be fixed similar to the COH ports - Although I agree, setting which ports to send outgoing/recieve incoming connections is a very good idea. (like war3).
Regardless of the fact that I won't be using the network for gaming next year I'd like to see DoW 2 using a more conventional method of multiplayer connection. I dont know what you mean by this :/ Direct connection? incredably inefficient. Peer 2 Peer is the only real option in an RTS game nowadays, the only one built into Relic Online (the likely choice for DOW2) and central servers are a possiblity but still...
5th May 08, 5:46 AM
Well I don't know much about the connections and ports the game needs/uses to connect to other games. But I do know that none of my other games use port 6112 at the very least, and thus I can connect to other people when using these games. DoW seems to be the odd one out, the non-conventional one.
I still need to try CoH:OF online, I've been wary of playing against real people for far too long.
I don't understand, why does port 6112 specifically prevent you all from playing together with people on the same local network? Can't you just open the port up for each IP that will make use of it?
5th May 08, 9:02 AM
Some University networks block 6112, some people are just completely unable to open it and need another way around, or you need it for having more than one people playing behind a NAT...
5th May 08, 10:02 AM
Yeah my Uni blocks it, and since I can't access the router I can't change that. It's a common problem. Took me a hell of a long time to locate the problem though, a terrible time of despair and no Soulstorm, now there is less despair but still no online Soulstorm.
In the end the problem manifests as an inability to join games. The blocking of port 6112 means I can see games online but can't join. Sucks.
(I still lan it every Thursday on campus though as part of the gaming society, so I get my fill.)
6th May 08, 5:32 AM
Changing the ports would be a nice option for those who have the knowledge to do so, but I reckon Relic will put a good deal of effort into creating a generally much better online experience. There are a good number of people I know who gave up on DOW because of connectivity issues and I don't think Relic will make that mistake twice.
I know the game's not out for another year, but it would be great if whoever Buggo's successor is would create a sticky with news about the development, including things like improvements to the multiplayer. I'm not asking that they give away their secrets, but they do have a loyal fan base that would greatly appreciate a wee bit of info on their progress every now and then.
6th May 08, 5:43 AM
The realist in me says that there will not be any progress made towards port mapping of anything other than 6112. Specifically because for every user who has it mapped to a different port the user on the other end needs to have that port open to recieve communication. For a game where they are connecting to the server and games are hosted on the server this works perfectally and is quite understandable request. However given that relic through relic online are moving towards decentralized and p2p connectivity, this cannot happen without major pain for the consumer.
If you have 7112 open, and he has 6112 open, and you both configured your firewalls and other devices for this. We have a major connectivity problem that will only expand given the variation in ports. If they decided to make 6113 the new port for dow2, then anyone with presets would have to create a new condition and thus more problems.
Yes for those university students who have evil network managers it does suck, but there is off campus housing if you really must play online.
It's not just about universities, Weavern. If you have two computers networked in a single household behind a single router, the router can only forward 6112 to one of those machines at a time. Having a friend come over to play CoH online together is pretty difficult if you have to rely on a single fixed port.
13th May 08, 2:45 PM
Many students simply arent allowed to live off campus their freshman year. These students were probably told that they had an internet connection to use and were probably not informed that gaming ports would be blocked. So they probably wouldn't choose not to go to that school because of it. These people without any prior knowledge could end up buying the game and have no connectivity. All of these issues are quite common in the schools in my area. These schools encompass hundreds of thousands of students and probably quite a few gamers. Doesn't seem like a non-issue to me.
16th May 08, 2:37 AM
Yepp, dynamic ports are a must. It's annoying like hell to be on a LAN with my brothers and we can't all play online at same time... In some cases even several games share the same ports (like the ports to Lamespy), and then one of us can only play 1 out of those games at the same time. It really sucks, glad I live at another location for most of the year so I can play with them anyway lol...
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.0 Copyright © 2013 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.