EPTStill, I think it would be a great experiment for them to allow a handful (just a few dozen or so) of special game licenses for AI programmers to play on ladder with bots to test the limits of AI against human players.
Strength of AI compared to BNET - Page 2
| Forum Index > StarCraft 2 HotS |
|
Yoav
United States1874 Posts
Still, I think it would be a great experiment for them to allow a handful (just a few dozen or so) of special game licenses for AI programmers to play on ladder with bots to test the limits of AI against human players. | ||
|
Alexfrog
1 Post
So I would say that all AIs up to Very hard are bronze league, of increasing difficulty. Even Hard AI would be low bronze, only very hard gets into upper bronze. | ||
|
corpuscle
United States1967 Posts
edit: to respond to the post above me, I agree that players in Bronze are "harder" than the Very Hard AI, but that's because a human plays reactively and is more likely to try something abusive. The AI is better mechanically than most Bronze players, though, and that's really what matters at low levels. | ||
|
carloselcoco
United States2302 Posts
On May 15 2011 07:31 Alexfrog wrote: I dont think these are very accurate. I find players in High Bronze to generally be more difficult than 'very hard' AIs. Mate, I don't want to sound mean, but I think you might have a problem then... If you can beat Very Hard AI, but have trouble beating Bronze up to Gold, then your multi-player skills are just bad. | ||
|
KevinIX
United States2472 Posts
Very Easy: Not really meant to challenge. They only build like 2 marines the whole game. Easy: Practice League. Also not really meant to be a challenge. Maybe just for people experimenting with how units work, tech trees, etc. Medium: Bronze league on the lower tier. People who are just starting the game. Hard: Mid-Bronze league. Very Hard: Mid-Bronze league. Insane: Cheats. | ||
|
Antylamon
United States1981 Posts
On May 15 2011 08:56 KevinIX wrote: I think it's like this: Very Easy: Not really meant to challenge. They only build like 2 marines the whole game. Easy: Practice League. Also not really meant to be a challenge. Maybe just for people experimenting with how units work, tech trees, etc. Medium: Bronze league on the lower tier. People who are just starting the game. Hard: Mid-Bronze league. Very Hard: Mid-Bronze league. Insane: Cheats. Imo it would be more like this: Very Easy - Sim City player (pretty much the same thing as you said tho) Hard - Mid to High Bronze Very Hard - High Bronze to Low Silver Insane - Silver using every cheat they could imagine I agree with your description of easy and medium tho. | ||
|
Heimatloser
Germany1494 Posts
"hard" and "brutal" are the highest ones. i dont understand what easy, medium, ... very hard, insane means. sorry. btw, im not a total noob, as a forum regular i ofc watched a lot of vods already  so some ppl state that when you cant beat brutal, you wont get out of bronze, others say that you can get into platinum after beating hard... i guess one just cant say. but i am aware of the fact that i dont learn reactive playing or even scouting when playing the tvt demo on blistering sands. but i cant even secure a second base vs hard, so i guess im not sc2 material. ps: the ai always makes an initial tank/marine/marauder push which is only stoppable by getting units early that can snipe tanks behind marines quickly, like banshee or battlecruiser. otherwise he simply sieges my wall-in, kills all units near the cliff and beats me afterwards. | ||
|
Iyerbeth
England2410 Posts
On May 15 2011 09:11 Heimatloser wrote: i can only choose the above stated ai levels. "hard" and "brutal" are the highest ones. i dont understand what easy, medium, ... very hard, insane means. sorry. Brutal is the hardest difficulty in single player where as Insane is the hardest in multiplayer. Brutal in single player changes the number and type of units that spawn and their upgrade levels and the like. In multiplayer Insane AI gathers normaly mineral patches as if they were rich patches and so just builds up faster, or in other words it's the Very hard difficulty with cheats. I don't know if the demo uses the term brutal as the difficulty level instead insane for it's multiplayer (based on you saying you can play a TvT on Blistering Sands) but the basic point that being able to beat the AI doesn't in any way prepare you for playing real players still stands. I used to do a warm up game against a Very Hard AI when I was in Bronze before laddering and that's the highest it goes without cheating, so it'd be very difficult to make any realistic guess where it'd place you just from that information. | ||
|
jmols
New Zealand41 Posts
| ||
|
TuckerX
United States16 Posts
And to be honest I still agree with him, but i am willing to believe that as the game develops even more, this curve can change. | ||
|
Mataza
Germany5364 Posts
The AI will go low on siege tanks and hard on marine Marauder. That means you can have more tanks, even if the AI cheats. Btw, in TvT you don´t wall in, you build Tank/Marine. | ||
|
corpuscle
United States1967 Posts
On May 15 2011 10:25 TuckerX wrote: Back when I was being coached ages ago, my coach told me that "once you are consistently beating all 3 races of Very Hard AI without cheesing or doing gimmicky strategies, you will be playing at a very low diamond level." And to be honest I still agree with him, but i am willing to believe that as the game develops even more, this curve can change. I don't think this is accurate, I can crush Very Hard in a straight macro game with my offraces, and I'm still plat. It macros pretty poorly, and takes its second and third bases really late, so all you really have to do is hold off its first push and you're basically fine. edit: and it's worth mentioning that its initial push is typically pretty weak, you can easily hold it with a 2rax/2gate FE, which puts you WAY ahead. | ||
|
VIB
Brazil3567 Posts
You really cannot compare apples to oranges here. | ||
|
Ruscour
5233 Posts
When you start out, the biggest thing I can recommend is to practice scouting and early pressure, the practice matches take those factors out and it's super important that you understand it going in to real matches or else you'll get stomped. | ||
|
Iron_Booger
Canada9 Posts
Forge at natural entrance + 4 cannons which holds off the 5minute-ish roaches Expand into 3gate + sentries + robo: the zerg attacks again but very stupidly and it's held off with extreme efficiency by FF+cannon zoning. Double forge upgrades Then I went into colossus and DT's. Used the DT's to deny the AI's third, and meanwhile expanded into the 9pm position. The AI has trouble dealing with more than one DT at a time... doesn't want to split its army unless it is doing an attack on your base. I afforded this by being very light on gateway units because zerg kept attacking up the ramp and it was easy to roast everything with sentry/colossus/cannon. This build is heavy gas, and the extra minerals went into rebuilding a total of maybe 12 cannons before taking a third. Then just good old 200/200 deathball of colossus/immortal/stalker/sentry. Engage in the center, take a 4th, and crush everything. Insane zerg has the following disadvantages as I saw: 1. Poor upgrades (only 1-1 melee and ranged by endgame while I was on 3-3) 2. Directionless endgame composition... the comp invested into literally every tech path but none of them were well developed or well-used (i.e. infestors with no NP, ultras without plating, only 2 brood lords, it was weird stuff). Most importantly: 3. They will engage in terrible spots with their main force. Just keep you army near ramps/chokes and the battles can be won with high efficiency, nullifying the zerg's economy cheat. Yes, it's 'taking advantage of the AI,' but lots of real life diamond zerg players are just as dumb with their armies  So basically, turtle like a motherfucker. I found that the game got easier and easier as it went on, because the more cost efficient the protoss ball gets, the worse the AI is at handling it. And I don't see this so much as a way to beat the AI unfairly, it's actually a very good strategy against zerg in general (at least on maps with easily defended nats and thirds) | ||
|
Iron_Booger
Canada9 Posts
| ||
|
teekesselchen
Germany886 Posts
And even without cheese, knowing that an opponent is AI (as brutal difficulty) makes it really easy, at least as terran which can easily do one-base tank counterpushes after defending first push to win a game. As Zerg it's tougher most definitly, it seems that here also the way to take a win is a spinecrawler defense into a counter push, or distracting the opponent with mutalisks. AI totaly can't deal with that, because they never split their army. Have three mutalisks harassing his base, and you can go and kill all his expansions you want, because he'll run around in his base.. As for protoss, Iron_booger already posted a way two posts above. Well done four-gating can work, too! - well, probably not anymore after the patch. | ||
|
Madkipz
Norway1643 Posts
On May 15 2011 06:14 Madkipz wrote: yes you can, by playing passive, overly turtling and then massing units that punish the ai for its lackluster unit control and below optimal unit mixtures. As zerg this would be something like massing spines at the front with zergling baneling defence into a 2 base mass mutalisk against protoss. The AI will ram units at your front that die while mutalisks travel around raping all his bases. Voidrays do the same thing only better. On May 15 2011 06:17 Cloud9157 wrote: Doesn't it map hack though, and pretty much auto counter your unit comp? It does not have the unit control to auto counter anything and even if it made phenixes it would never scoot and shoot with em nor place high templars at its bases. | ||
|
Eatme
Switzerland3919 Posts
And it's a big difference how to view the ai skill if you play vs it as if it was a random guy on the ladder or play like it is an ai and prepare to counter it's initial push or abuse it in some way. So the question should be, if you let these ai's out on the ladder, what rank should they get? | ||
|
teekesselchen
Germany886 Posts
On May 15 2011 06:00 Cloud9157 wrote: Theres really no way you can beat an Insane AI unless you 6 pool, 2 gate proxy, cannon rush, 2 rax proxy or some other cheese. On top of that, you pretty much have to abuse their aggressiveness towards buildings being on the same level as their workers. Building a Pylon, Depot, or Extractor and canceling it will slow their economy down a significant amount and make yours surpass theirs. They expand like crazy. I played a few 2v2s with 3 Insane AI. I cheesed one of them while I relied on my ally to do well enough to kill the other one. After about 15 minutes, my ally took about 4 or 5 expansions and had a huge army. Non-Cheesy ways of winning: -Terran: Marine-Tank, perhaps Banshee if you like, on one base. Defend first push (and perhaps even second push), then counterpush. This is a fail-proof way of winning. If going for Macro Game: Multi-prong harass, Siegelines, Battlecruiser-Viking. Ravens with HSM can pay off, too. On small maps this is pretty easy win by just sieging forward, such as Steppes of War. -Protoss: 3 Base Deathball, or 4-Gate (pre-patch). Good counter-pushes can also work sometimes. -Zerg: Going for lategame-strong armies on 3-4 bases while harassing the opponent with Mutalisks and thus keeping him at his base. However, apart from The Tank-Counterpush these tactics indeed require approx Master level, and are not foolproof. I think it's fair to say that Insane AI beeing cheeseproof (and if it was better against Terran) would make it into Master League. | ||
| ||
