|
Just after Google's AlphaGo victory today, Google has announced their new target along with their new game to challenge their AI: Starcraft. After defeating a world champion of the ancient Chinese board game, could the AI take on a player with a similar caliber in Starcraft?
BoxeR has already publicly denounced the possibility of a victory for the AI if pitted against a real Starcraft progamer; however, like Go, Starcraft is a game of strategy, but in additional to mental agility, it's also a test of physical prowess. Players from the early days of WoL have experienced the extent of AI on their highest difficulty. The multitask capability and the execution an AI posses could be overwhelming, and if loaded with the ability to analyze information of the strategies its opponent's capable of, we could very well see an AI 3-0 one of the best players in the upcoming match.
However, with that said, a computer lacks intuition, and hopefully the element of surprise. A player could very well pull a NEXLine or a Shine strategy against the AI.
TL;DR: SC2 as next game to beat, confirmed.
Sauce:+ Show Spoiler +
|
On March 13 2016 17:04 Advantageous wrote:Just after Google's AlphaGo victory today, Google has announced their new target along with their new game to challenge their AI: Starcraft. After defeating a world champion of the ancient Chinese board game, could the AI take on a player with a similar caliber in Starcraft? BoxeR has already publicly denounced the possibility of a victory for the AI if pitted against a real Starcraft progamer; however, like Go, Starcraft is a game of strategy, but in additional to mental agility, it's also a test of physical prowess. Players from the early days of WoL have experienced the extent of AI on their highest difficulty. The multitask capability and the execution an AI posses could be overwhelming, and if loaded with the ability to analyze information of the strategies its opponent's capable of, we could very well see an AI 3-0 one of the best players in the upcoming match. However, with that said, a computer lacks intuition, and hopefully the element of surprise. A player could very well pull a NEXLine or a Shine strategy against the AI. TL;DR: SC2 as next game to beat, confirmed. Sauce: + Show Spoiler +
The article says "game from 1998". It's talking about Starcraft broodwar not SC2
|
Yeah, it is referring to Brood War.
It is already extremely painful to see Lee Sedol get rekted by a computer. It will be infinitely more painful to see Boxer and God get utterly destroyed by the fucking computer. 
|
The article has also a sc2 game linked..
|
On March 13 2016 17:25 Charoisaur wrote:
The article has also a sc2 game linked..
Far easier to find an SC2 match easily with great quality and English commentary
|
On March 13 2016 17:31 LongShot27 wrote:Show nested quote +On March 13 2016 17:25 Charoisaur wrote:
The article has also a sc2 game linked.. Far easier to find an SC2 match easily with great quality and English commentary
I don't think they have specifized which game they will be using. But considering SC2 is BWs successor I'd be surprised if they took BW.
Why would they take the older game.
|
I don't think they care about game age... but SC1 is very established meanwhile SC2 is still patching, dealing with growing pains that go with it.
Makes sense they'd go with SC1.
|
Do we really need five different topics about Google/AlphaGo?
|
Real time games are so different from turn based board games thou. As we all know bots can have super human mechanics in this game which are impossible for a human to achieve even in theory. This means that especially in some match ups such as ZvZ the AI can be much inferior in strategy and game understanding but still reach close to 100% winrate if it has TAS tier mechanics.
|
|
|
|
|
If it's allowed to do all the unlimited mechanical things (e.g. 1k apm) then there's no way a human could win.
|
Exactly the same announcement has already been posted here. And even the followup interviews/responses have received another thread.
And then the AlphaGo vs LeeSedol thread has been hijacked for the same conversation about Deepmind vs SC. Come on... at least check for a second if you are just spamming new threads.
|
If its for BW then its old, there are already computers playing BW. THen its just that google is involved now. thats it.
|
I don't get why people are so excited about this. AI with unlimited APM could easily be made to stomp humans. The only way to make it fair would be to add arbitrary limitations to the AI, which kind of defeats the purpose of the competition. And LOL at tasteless's idea that the AI has to physically press the keys and move the mouse. If that's the case, they can just put a piston over each key to instantly press them, and create a "mouse" whose signals they can control programmatically.
|
On March 13 2016 18:59 ClysmiC wrote:
I don't get why people are so excited about this. AI with unlimited APM could easily be made to stomp humans. The only way to make it fair would be to add arbitrary limitations to the AI, which kind of defeats the purpose of the competition. And LOL at tasteless's idea that the AI has to physically press the keys and move the mouse. If that's the case, they can just put a piston over each key to instantly press them, and create a "mouse" whose signals they can control programmatically.
The purpose of the competition is to show machines are more intelligent than humans.
ALLOWING unlimited APM would defeat the purpose of the competition.
We already know that an AI can have better mechanics than a human.
|
On March 13 2016 19:10 Charoisaur wrote:Show nested quote +On March 13 2016 18:59 ClysmiC wrote:
I don't get why people are so excited about this. AI with unlimited APM could easily be made to stomp humans. The only way to make it fair would be to add arbitrary limitations to the AI, which kind of defeats the purpose of the competition. And LOL at tasteless's idea that the AI has to physically press the keys and move the mouse. If that's the case, they can just put a piston over each key to instantly press them, and create a "mouse" whose signals they can control programmatically. The purpose of the competition is to show machines are more intelligent than humans. ALLOWING unlimited APM would defeat the purpose of the competition. We already know that an AI can have better mechanics than a human.
Yeah, but where do you draw the line? Do you choose an arbitrary APM? Then can the AI burst insane APM during an engagement and then not do many actions for the rest of the minute so their "average" APM that minute doesn't break the rules? Is it fair that the AI has perfect precision and instant reaction time, so they can still pull off inhuman micro without an unrealistic APM?
Inputting actions is such a crucial part of the game, and there isn't really a way to make it "human-like" without imposing arbitrary restrictions. I just don't think AI vs human competitions really mean much in a non-discrete environment like starcraft.
|
the real question is the micro, if google use micro like automaton 2000 then humans dont have a single chance. Otherwise yes.
|
Less pixels in BW to analyze, would take faster to get good A.I for.
However, Starcraft is not a game of complete information like chess and Go.
For the same reason there are no A.I.s that can beat top poker players, I doubt this will be successful.
|
On March 13 2016 19:32 ClysmiC wrote:Show nested quote +On March 13 2016 19:10 Charoisaur wrote:On March 13 2016 18:59 ClysmiC wrote:
I don't get why people are so excited about this. AI with unlimited APM could easily be made to stomp humans. The only way to make it fair would be to add arbitrary limitations to the AI, which kind of defeats the purpose of the competition. And LOL at tasteless's idea that the AI has to physically press the keys and move the mouse. If that's the case, they can just put a piston over each key to instantly press them, and create a "mouse" whose signals they can control programmatically. The purpose of the competition is to show machines are more intelligent than humans. ALLOWING unlimited APM would defeat the purpose of the competition. We already know that an AI can have better mechanics than a human. Yeah, but where do you draw the line? Do you choose an arbitrary APM? Then can the AI burst insane APM during an engagement and then not do many actions for the rest of the minute so their "average" APM that minute doesn't break the rules? Is it fair that the AI has perfect precision and instant reaction time, so they can still pull off inhuman micro without an unrealistic APM? Inputting actions is such a crucial part of the game, and there isn't really a way to make it "human-like" without imposing arbitrary restrictions. I just don't think AI vs human competitions really mean much in a non-discrete environment like starcraft.
if the AI uses all his APM to micro flawlessly he won't have enough APM left to macro properly and then die because he has no units. Low level players always get told that you shouldn't bother with fancy micro tricks when your macro is still lacking and I think the same thing applies here.
Of course it will be impossible to create an AI that plays exactly like a human but an APM cap would make sure the AI couldn't just win by having far better mechanics but it would need to be very good strategically too.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
