|
TvT: Tank/viking. And a LOT of Tanks. I'm talking by the mid-end game 5-6 factories just making Tanks.
TvZ: You can do almost anything. I've won doing 1 rax expand into pure marine/medivac, I've won with 1 rax expand into marine/tank/medivac. I've won with seige tank expand into blue flame hellion/tank. You don't really have to worry about zerg air units in TvZ.
TvP: I win most consistently with marine/tank, but I have also won with hellion/tank (heavy on the tanks).
Edit: And you have to do this while working out the timings when you can expand aggressively. You also must keep marines/hellions patrolling around at potential expos, so that you can deny expos.
|
Any of you guys ]Notice the capability for the Ai to learn from previous games?
|
On March 17 2011 11:59 TeddyFurious wrote:
Any of you guys ]Notice the capability for the Ai to learn from previous games?
No, can you post a proof?
I personally think that SC-II AI is well below average. So many games have better AI without cheating. Soase had an darn good AI even in no cheat difficulties, company of heroes,theater of war also had an kickass AI while on the other hand SC-II is cakewalk on anything less than 'Insane' at which it openly starts to cheat.
|
I dunno whether they changed the ai or not, but you used to be able to outmacro the Insane AI if you fast expand and keep making scvs, since they have brief pauses in their scv production. I think they stopped at 20 scvs on 1 base, and you could get 34 scvs + mules when that happened.
do you consider medivac drops as abusing ai also?
|
You could try playing on an island map and getting a ridiculous amount of turrets and vikings to defend, taking expansions when you can, but otherwise not taking any risks whatsoever. They keep throwing their armies at you, and eventually will get starved out (if something doesn't go horribly wrong of course). They do start with a resource bonus, so with a regular map, early MM pushes screw me over every time. I play protoss, and haven't pulled this off against terran, but with T's better anti-air turrets and viking's better range, it might be worth a try.
|
You can just keep droning until their timing push maybe. And then just nydus all your units into their base when the AI wants to do its timing attack. That way at least even if you lose the major confrontation, at least you get some extra hits while the AI is moving back.
For terran, I might just bunker and siege and some choke points and let the dumb AI run right into it, while struggling to get lots of bases.
Toss vs AI is a bit of a hassle. I suppose you can expand a lot and then draw tons of probes into the fight to win.
Beating AI is rather easy lol...I wonder when Blizzard is going to teach the AI how to base trade.
|
Wall off.
Siege tanks.
Win.
|
The ai doesn't kite? Try chasing an scv with a zealot. Perfect micro lol
|
if only athenewins could beat a human player instead of AI... lol
|
The AI is terribad. You can't learn anything that useful by playing against it. Only Insane poses any real challenge at all, because it makes up for stupid build orders and not knowing how to kite, drop/harass, deny map control, etc. It's good at making the right hard counter units and macroing a big ball of them to attack right up your ramp at pretty much random intervals, while expanding occasionally. If you do anything but attack-move into it, you start running into limitations of the AI.
The AI is mostly there for newbies learning the absolute basics of the game, like how to build stuff. Insane AI is kinda pointless - it's far too dumb to be an interesting challenge to a decent player, but it cheats enough to overwhelm you if you try to play "standard." The only thing you learn by playing the Insane AI is how to abuse the AI. There is no aspect of the game where the AI's decision-making is anywhere near good enough to simulate a skilled opponent and give you useful practice. Insane adds the silly mineral boost which further makes any comparisons between that game and an actual multiplayer game shaky at best. You're using tricks that shouldn't work to overcome enemy macro that shouldn't be possible.
|
On March 22 2011 16:11 HoodedAvatar wrote:
if only athenewins could beat a human player instead of AI... lol
Try playing him in Player vs Player on WoW.
|
I think it's an immense waste of time Blizzard has implemented into the AI's. When I first started playing SC2, I figured it would be for practice of learning builds and such - but even that has minimal use because they're so damn easily predictable.
The fact that Insane AI is ungodly haxor is just pointless. Wouldn't it make more sense for Blizzard to incorporate 3-4 of the most standard builds for each race and give them an APM of like 400 or something? To reflect your basic plat player?
Even "Very Hard" is laughably easy, and I'm a bronze player saying that.
And beating the AI 1000 times over for an achievement? (Or is it 800? Too fucking many regardless) Sounds like Blizzard is just trying to make money off time sinking.... oh wait...WoW.... never mind.
|
I totally agree with above post.
The AI as it is kinda makes me mad lol. I mean there's a lot of advantages an AI has over a human player already. No "bumps" as Day9 puts it. You can have the smoothest build order ever. Never forgetting to build one scv exactly after one finishes. And the human factors like drops harrass and surround is really not like hard code to implement. Especially since the AI has maphack. I think a good AI would have at least uber good micro as each unit knows how to be the most effective.
But anyways maybe I am just mad from my own personal experience, cuz training against comps literally was unhelpful in real PvP, gave me a false sense of achievement, when i literally fell in a hole rank-wise that i rather buy out of than play the 20 or more games. Wait... I think i see where Blizzard maybe going here. There is absolutely nothing instructive to gain from the AI versus. No mechanics, no Broodwar-esque micro, just kinda-like playing against two players who only do one-base simult push with the single APM of attack+click. The missions were pretty fun though.
|
Beating an AI 1000 times is not about time sinks.
You get nothing but pointless points.
Think of it more as a tracker of games, not progress.
How can you learn nothing from playing against the AI?
Every single game you play you learn more about the game.
No two games are the same, even if you win easily.
Trying new builds against the AI is better than trying it against nothing.
You cry about everything you have. So spoiled...
|
On March 24 2011 05:11 oGm`REM wrote:Show nested quote +On March 22 2011 16:11 HoodedAvatar wrote:
if only athenewins could beat a human player instead of AI... lol Try playing him in Player vs Player on WoW.
Bring the discussion to youtube, sport.
Tank marine medivac battlecruiser with ups would be my way of doing it. As far as I can tell, the AI does a 180% if you attack their base while on the move with their army,so you can delay pushes really well.
|
yeah such a useless ai wasted time and everything, not like there was a single player campaign or something. Or that there are people who like to design campaigns themselfs and don't wanna prog an ai first.
i like the repairing worker focus of the insane ai ^^ looks so funny.
other then that no ai is really good as they are unable to deal with turtling. of course games that force aggressiv gamestyles makes it easier to create a game, like the ones with control points and stuff like dawn of war.
Since playing the reason of the ai is fun and not a clever opponent. (otherwise you would play a turtling ai all the time)
|
I just checked, the insane AI doesn't only harvest more minerals per trip, they have a ridiculous boost their economy, here's how:
They actually extract 5 minerals out of the patch, and deliver 7 to base. So each mineral field yields 7/5 times more minerals for them than they should.
Also. Of course there's the instantaneous and near perfectly split to the 6 closest mineral patches, inhuman, but that's what I'd program an AI to do...
And YES they have maphack, try building anything inside their base but out of vision, they react instantly.
Essencially, they can't be beaten by playing a normal game. If you want to learn a way to play the match that doesn't look cheesy, go for it, should be good practice (not the best, but good nonetheless). I'd rather just cheese the hell out of the AI. It's a "less good" practice, but it is practice and takes less than 5 minutes to get a win.
(long) Edit: Seeing the athene replay against 3 insane AI's I have to reply @ whoever said they perfectly counter your units. You had a guy massing nothing but tanks and 3 AI's using only ground forces and flying units that can't shoot ground. I have to assume there's some luck involved in this, I mean, sometimes the AI "forgets" about banshees and BCs and you can get a win with just the tanks.
As for the drops, if you have a dropship around (but not inside) their base, they don't take it out unless it's in "true" sight. You can exploit the AI with fake drops, not really doing anything of it, just drop, pick up and move back out.
So I guess the maphack isn't used to its full potential. Could be, though. I get the feeling they have a threshold to respond to threats inside the base, not elsewhere.
I would much prefer an AI that doesn't cheat with minerals or maphack but scouts and knows how to counter your army.
|
I don't think people understand how difficult it is to make adaptive ai to both know when to be aggressive and when to be defensive. It's easy if it's just one or the other, not both.
|
|
|
the point of beating the insane AI is learning to perfect "cheese" and win the game in the first 5 mins.
what do you learn from this?
only when you know how a chese works, you can effectively deny it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
