| Forum Index > Closed |
|
Icapica
Finland206 Posts
On April 29 2013 01:31 Inertia_EU wrote: Is SC2 more like Go or chess? What the hell is go? Google would have answered that question very quickly, but anyway it's a really, really good and deep strategy game. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Go_(game) | ||
|
ROOTFayth
Canada3351 Posts
On April 29 2013 01:24 KingAlphard wrote: I didn't say there's no luck factor in sc2. But it's still WAY smaller than in poker. a bit smaller, but there's either more luck than you think in SC2 or less luck than you think in poker | ||
|
Cloak
United States816 Posts
On April 27 2013 00:28 Charlie.Sheen wrote: Incomplete information in game theory means you don't have full information about current state of the game, not future moves. In SC, you don't know if your opponent has a dark shrine or not, that's current state of the game. In chess, you know exactly where every piece is at right now, so you can deduce a set for possible next moves from opponent. In SC, you can't deduce that exact set. Further, knowing all future moves and the optimal strategy would make it solved, like checkers. | ||
|
MarkCJ
Canada239 Posts
| ||
|
bluQ
Germany1724 Posts
| ||
|
sisyphusroc
3 Posts
On April 27 2013 01:47 AnomalySC2 wrote: I think Blizzard could absolutely design an AI to win 100 games out of 100, assuming the AI knows the build order you're going for of course. There is no perfectly safe build in the game, there is a hard counter to everything. ( only table-bases exist for most endings,involving more than a few pieces, which does not mean they are completely factored in many circumstances , but have access to the exhausted heuristics and diagrams . That being said most definitely a computer could easily be designed to own human players in SC2 with a near 100 percent win-rates as this is a mechanics and micro-intensive game. Both strategy and micro curve toward infinite importance as game play approaches near-perfect rates. I do not think the build order trees are even in the same realm of chess or go, or even checkers has way more build order permeation , the point being it would not be difficult to make a bot that had every current optimal strategy and response factored.But the mechanics would be the real problem for humans to deal with . It would never miss injects, never miss a mule in perfect time , have unreal multitasking , and an apm a human could never compete with as we have arms and physical limitations which cause delay between us and the gameplay . in any event dejavu | ||
|
Emix_Squall
France705 Posts
| ||
|
MasterCynical
505 Posts
but its more like chess than it is like go imo. | ||
|
aintthatfunny
193 Posts
On April 27 2013 00:25 Meatex wrote: Wow surprised by the responses Guessing none are serious chess or go players Yes there are differences board games being turn based while RTS games being not but the similarities in the game game design are numerous. Chess is about using all the different "units" you have to kill your opponent's king. Certainly the unit use fits but SC2 has a vastly different goal Go however is, I feel, very similar to SC2 at its core. Both put strong importance on board/map control to gain economy/points. You have similar importance place on timings - also in chess though I feel its stronger in go - and of course like chess you have different opening "build orders" Chess is all about positioning and map control lol cool example: | ||
|
Daswollvieh
5553 Posts
| ||
|
sisyphusroc
3 Posts
On April 29 2013 02:13 ROOTFayth wrote: a bit smaller, but there's either more luck than you think in SC2 or less luck than you think in poker the luck versus skill in poker and sc2 becomes apparent the more sample hands and games one sees, still it probably takes more sample hands in poker than sc2 games for this to be realized. | ||
|
sisyphusroc
3 Posts
On April 30 2013 18:10 sisyphusroc wrote: the luck versus skill in poker and sc2 becomes apparent the more sample hands and games one sees, still it probably takes more sample hands in poker than sc2 games for this to be realized. depending of course on the disparity of skill. A pro sc2 player would only need 1 game versus most rankings | ||
|
rauk
United States2228 Posts
On April 30 2013 18:12 sisyphusroc wrote: depending of course on the disparity of skill. A pro sc2 player would only need 1 game versus most rankings forget to login different account? zzz | ||
|
JackDragon
525 Posts
| ||
|
aka_star
United Kingdom1546 Posts
| ||
|
Garmer
1286 Posts
| ||
|
Evangelist
1246 Posts
Instead, Starcraft and games similar to it should be compared to fighting. You can rush all out (power through, punch on the inside) where your defense is weaker but you're relying on hitting someone at a bad time. You can box defensively and wait for a weakness or for your opponent to tire. You can evade and counterpunch, your mentality plays a huge role. There is room for fighters that just rely on sheer physical power (macro), technique (micro) but the best fighter is a combination of both. There is even room for misdirection, almost constantly, as anyone who has any fighting expertise whatsoever will remind you. Kind of makes sense, considering you're basically fighting a real time mini war on your computer screen. | ||
|
MasterOfPuppets
Romania6942 Posts
 + Show Spoiler + yes there is an undertone to this statement | ||
|
Saumure
France404 Posts
The problem is that Starcraft is also a speed based game, there would be too much tree traversal that would have to be done in a very short time period, to find the optimal action at every moment. Ofc, you could make the computer scout perfectly in the early game and chose an appropriate all-in, but that is not what we want... Also, I don't know how the computer could adapt to a change of metagame. | ||
|
GolemMadness
Canada11044 Posts
On April 27 2013 00:25 Meatex wrote: Wow surprised by the responses Guessing none are serious chess or go players Yes there are differences board games being turn based while RTS games being not but the similarities in the game game design are numerous. Chess is about using all the different "units" you have to kill your opponent's king. Certainly the unit use fits but SC2 has a vastly different goal Go however is, I feel, very similar to SC2 at its core. Both put strong importance on board/map control to gain economy/points. You have similar importance place on timings - also in chess though I feel its stronger in go - and of course like chess you have different opening "build orders" You say that nobody is a serious chess or go player, but the only comparisons you draw between chess and Starcraft 2 is that they both involve "units," both involve controlling the board/map, and both have planned strategies at the beginning of the games...? You could something similar about football, LoL, monopoly, etc. | ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Britney Dota 2  21766Calm  4978Mini 1019Horang2 650firebathero  390EffOrt 308BeSt 265Soulkey 203actioN 170hero 59[ Show more ] Counter-Strike Heroes of the Storm Other Games gofns11685 Grubby3198 FrodaN1503 Beastyqt571 Fuzer  161ArmadaUGS127 KnowMe120 ToD114 QueenE80 C9.Mang077 crisheroes74 Trikslyr47 |
|
Replay Cast
RSL Revival
Maru vs MaxPax
BSL
RSL Revival
Cure vs Rogue
uThermal 2v2 Circuit
BSL
Afreeca Starleague
Wardi Open
Replay Cast
Sparkling Tuna Cup
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
