On November 28 2009 07:32 bp1696 wrote: Wow, this is really awesome.
Will computer be able to beat the pros one day soon? Reminds me of Deep Blue and chess .
no thanks, having a computer play better than the best human players destroys the game imo
I don't see chess as being a "destroyed" game despite a wide range of AIs. Even a middle of the road AI that a normal consumer computer processor can run is easily capable of destroying the majority of human players. But I would still rather play chess with another person rather than with a computer. Same for tournaments.
Maybe a team of Jaedong, Effort, Calm, Luxury, Yellow, Kwanro, Hyuk, Zero, Hero and July, each controlling one mutalisk, could replicate that result. And I guess also get something like 4,000 apm.
On November 28 2009 07:32 bp1696 wrote: Wow, this is really awesome.
Will computer be able to beat the pros one day soon? Reminds me of Deep Blue and chess .
no thanks, having a computer play better than the best human players destroys the game imo
I don't see chess as being a "destroyed" game despite a wide range of AIs. Even a middle of the road AI that a normal consumer computer processor can run is easily capable of destroying the majority of human players. But I would still rather play chess with another person rather than with a computer. Same for tournaments.
In either game that person could be cheating by using an AI though. Of course with SC, it'd be wayyyy more obvious.
Stupid question but why put wraiths against unupgraded hydras? Show off the AI a bit? The Dragoon micro is crazy though, I'd like to see more like that where the AI shows off against bad or more even odds and destroys the other units.
On November 28 2009 08:54 iCCup.Raelcun wrote: Stupid question but why put wraiths against unupgraded hydras? Show off the AI a bit? The Dragoon micro is crazy though, I'd like to see more like that where the AI shows off against bad or more even odds and destroys the other units.
To have an advantage while microing against range upgraded hydras I need to stack the wraiths. And so far I have not found a way to do that yet.
On November 28 2009 07:39 zergnewb wrote: @TheYango: Well isn't the reason mutas are stacked in the first place are to kill marines fast which unstacked mutas wouldn't really be able to do unless like just enough mutas to kill a marine target a single one which still won't work because without the stacking mutas are easier to hit. That is unless the mutas don't target a single marine all at once but close to the same time which still doesn't work too well since it makes it easier on the medic to heal the marine. ALTHOUGH it still isn't bad because it makes it much easier for mutas to work around marines and harass several spots.
It's sort of a tradeoff. A muta stack hitting single marine makes the most real gain in an engagement (since any injured marines can get healed), but it also wastes damage, because often your stack is large enough to do more damage (which is why with a large stack, hold position get's used, so some of the damage gets spread around). If each muta is getting controlled individually, then damage will be put on every marine, because they're attacking from a wide angle. The medics simply can't keep up with the damage being dished out, because they have to travel back and forth to heal damaged marines (whereas with concentrated fire, they only need to heal the same 2-3 marines). Obviously, this also means that this takes longer for the marine force as a whole to die, and they will therefore put out more damage before dying, but with the AI's micro, putting out a significant amount of damage could be difficult.
On November 28 2009 07:32 bp1696 wrote: Wow, this is really awesome.
Will computer be able to beat the pros one day soon? Reminds me of Deep Blue and chess .
no thanks, having a computer play better than the best human players destroys the game imo
I don't see chess as being a "destroyed" game despite a wide range of AIs. Even a middle of the road AI that a normal consumer computer processor can run is easily capable of destroying the majority of human players. But I would still rather play chess with another person rather than with a computer. Same for tournaments.
In either game that person could be cheating by using an AI though. Of course with SC, it'd be wayyyy more obvious.
Yeah, the ICC is pretty good about detecting hackers by monitoring your currently level of play. If you suddenly start playing a lot better they're going to know you're abusing computers. The same could be done with Starcraft in theory.
On November 28 2009 09:08 XinRan wrote: If unit groupings don't exist in Starcraft programming, how does the game handle hotkeyed control groups?
It's not that it doesn't exist in starcraft, it's just that the BWAPI doesn't hook into it and provide us interface functions to use them.
On November 27 2009 14:43 AssuredVacancy wrote: Yeah I don't think the team will bust my balls for this because I took off all the debugging markers before filming, so this just reveals very very cool micro rather than anything important.
Well, you know my opinion. I prefer we don't make this kind of videos public, but it's no big deal for this kind of stuff. I know it's a great feeling to show them and to have your work recognized. It's somewhat hard emotionally to keep them private, I'm really fighting hard to keep mine under wraps honestly :D But I still will, at least for now. Maybe in a couple of weeks/months when they'll be outdated.
On November 28 2009 09:31 motbob wrote: Hey guys, look! Another team managed to make a full game Terran AI! It seriously looks like it could beat C players on iccup... just watch.
On November 28 2009 09:31 motbob wrote: Hey guys, look! Another team managed to make a full game Terran AI! It seriously looks like it could beat C players on iccup... just watch.
On November 28 2009 09:31 motbob wrote: Hey guys, look! Another team managed to make a full game Terran AI! It seriously looks like it could beat C players on iccup... just watch.
On November 28 2009 07:32 bp1696 wrote: Wow, this is really awesome.
Will computer be able to beat the pros one day soon? Reminds me of Deep Blue and chess .
Honestly, by the end of the AIIDE contest, the AIs will beat anyone on the 4 maps in the pool. The difficulty of AI programming is rarely making something that beats humans (it was with chess and still is with Go), it's giving the user the impression of playing against a human, who makes mistakes like him. It's all about creating an enjoyable experience. That's really hard. Also if you limit the APM of the AI to something reasonable, like 1000, then all the problem is about making choices and decisions, and that is also quite hard.
I dont believe that for a second... Yes, the AIs can micro air units and ground units on open ground well, and macro, but hows the strategical aspect, target prioritizing, army positioning, risk assessment, terrain, filling out missing info etc etc done?
Afaik theres no existing examples of computers doing extraordinarily well on a limited information game. So to me its ridiculous to say its a given that AI will destroy everyone in 2010, you dont have any solid backing for that atm. It might happen, some matchup on some map, but surely its not easy...
Micro AI is really nice. But what about all the rest? I remember my AI battles in WC3 and the biggest problem I had, was even if I managed to get awesome build orders (and AI actually following it like it should) I had absolutely no influenco on where/how the buildings were placed. For example, if your strategy required some towers to be built on the perimeter, AI would put them randomly in center of the base etc. Building placement is very important. I don't even mean wall-in or stuff like that, but just look how much depends on it: unit pathing and distance they need to travel to waypoints, flanking options, defence etc. etc. I guess with Zerg most of the problems go away, but still sunken placements can mean difference between winning and losing.
EPT
.
