EPTZerg Build Order optimizer. - Page 3
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
LilClinkin
Australia667 Posts
| ||
|
Munk-E
United States672 Posts
I'm serious, people take this game WAY seriously and the teams would pay hundreds of dollars for something like this! think about the korean teams, could you not easily see them paying for something like this? it's easy money. | ||
|
kevmo
United States38 Posts
On October 13 2010 10:11 Lomilar wrote: And yes, it is a moral dillema, since with the appropriate opening and good execution, you can shut down a LOT of builds. This makes the research and testing of build orders somewhat laughable. That means that some pro zerg with this tool could learn about 10 openings that are (theoretically) perfect, and win a lot of money, and were I a bastard, I could sell it to those people for percentage of earnings, or something bizzare like that. Suddenly, static builds start demolishing any sort of dynamic play, since someone has found 'the perfect build', and not through playing for months. Even if this did happen (I don't think someone would a major tournament such as GSL through build order perfection alone), it would only work once. As soon as someone used the build in a tournament, the cat would be out of the bag and everyone would be able to copy the build. Once everyone knew the build, the best players would be winning again. And the way to avoid such an unlikely scenario is not to keep the program a secret. Many competent programmers could write a similar program, increasing the likelihood that SOMEONE uses such a program. Given the assumption that the existence of a build order optimizing program would cause 'BAD THINGS' to happen, it is safe to conclude that the bad things will happen regardless of whether or not you are the one to use said program. The way to avoid the bad things is to publicly release the program so that everyone can use it and come up with the theoretically unbeatable build orders (I don't think unbeatable build orders exist, and if they did they would get patched eventually) before they could be used to win a major tournament. If all players have access to the tool, there is no advantage to using it as the resulting knowledge becomes public. If you watch something like the GSL, a lot of players have what seem to be really close to "perfect" openings, in that in theory it is not likely to lose the game instantly to any given build. The goal of an opening is not to immediately beat everything, but to get you through to the mid game where all the important decision making happens. Because of this, there is really no such thing as the "perfect opening" that would cause you to instawin major tournaments. | ||
|
Lomilar
United States130 Posts
On October 13 2010 10:20 LilClinkin wrote: My main fear is that idiots will refer to the results of these BOs as evidence/suggestions on how the game should be re-balanced, when in reality it holds no bearing towards any balance ideas at all because it cannot test the real-game dynamics of having an opponent who is actively trying to **** you up and adapt to everything you do. Haha. 7 roach > 7 zealots, and 7 zealots come out after 7 roaches, therefore Zerg imba! | ||
|
csfield
United States206 Posts
| ||
|
dimfish
United States663 Posts
On October 13 2010 10:11 Lomilar wrote: The input is currently all code. Basically, you start off with a 'state', that is 6 drones, a hatch, an overlord, and 50 minerals. You then give it a destination 'state', say, 2 hatcheries, 10 mutalisks, 4 extractors, and 44 drones (6 for gas, 16 per base for good saturation). It then finds 'a' way to get there, then starts making it better and better. And yes, it is a moral dillema, since with the appropriate opening and good execution, you can shut down a LOT of builds. This makes the research and testing of build orders somewhat laughable. That means that some pro zerg with this tool could learn about 10 openings that are (theoretically) perfect, and win a lot of money, and were I a bastard, I could sell it to those people for percentage of earnings, or something bizzare like that. Suddenly, static builds start demolishing any sort of dynamic play, since someone has found 'the perfect build', and not through playing for months. After hearing about match fixing scandals, where a lot of money was made and lost, I started questioning. A lot of people (edit: Korea) take this game way more seriously than I do, so I didn't want to just drop the bomb without asking. I don't think you have to worry so much. If it turns out to be an amazing tool, people will ask you for a version for all three races, or roll their own, and good players will add it to their toolbox. As many people pointed out, a perfectly optimized build order is no substitute for a well-rounded dynamic play added to a strong BO. Its not like Zerg will destroy the Earth. Although I'm fine with that. Take me! | ||
|
tackklee
United States270 Posts
I have no idea how accurate these codes or programs actually are, but if there is no error then this would be amazing. I think it'd help boost the game if anything. People will stop blindly doing 1 build but looking towards other options. | ||
|
Rokk
United States425 Posts
| ||
|
kevmo
United States38 Posts
That build has an overall goal "get mutalisks and zerglings on 2-3 bases" with notes on how to hold off various forms of early aggression that threaten you. It is considered stable as no matter what the protoss does, it is unlikely that you lose to a rush (unless you make a mistake). It doesn't mean that this build is unbeatable - you could get outplayed at any point (either out-macroed, or out maneuvered, or out-microed, or any form of being outplayed). | ||
|
mangoloid
100 Posts
I don't know if we'll ever see a case of an "unbeatable" build as speculated above, but by all means try to find one! Finding one will go a long way to helping balance the game. And, since no one else seems to be giving you BO assignments, I want to ask: what is the quickest way to get 5 mutas? I am curious to see what the program comes up with (and if it is different from current players are doing). Also, is anyone taking up the roach BO challenge? I am curious to see timings from actual games and either validation or dismissal of what the program came up with. | ||
|
Lomilar
United States130 Posts
On October 13 2010 10:35 Rokk wrote: This is awesome. I've got one question though. I'm looking at the output and there doesn't seem to be anything about when to move drones to gas. Does it always assume 3 drones per extractor? That may be something you might want to look into in the future. Pulling guys off gas can be useful in linking certain builds together. Yeah, it assumes you immediately drop 3 guys on gas. And yes, that is planned as a potential trick. (for the obvious zergling speed test case) | ||
|
bubblegumbo
Taiwan1296 Posts
I don't see a problem with this program unless it's not free and not openly available to all. | ||
|
Bwenjarin Raffrack
United States322 Posts
On October 13 2010 10:11 Lomilar wrote: And yes, it is a moral dillema, since with the appropriate opening and good execution, you can shut down a LOT of builds. This makes the research and testing of build orders somewhat laughable. That means that some pro zerg with this tool could learn about 10 openings that are (theoretically) perfect, and win a lot of money, and were I a bastard, I could sell it to those people for percentage of earnings, or something bizzare like that. Suddenly, static builds start demolishing any sort of dynamic play, since someone has found 'the perfect build', and not through playing for months. After hearing about match fixing scandals, where a lot of money was made and lost, I started questioning. A lot of people (edit: Korea) take this game way more seriously than I do, so I didn't want to just drop the bomb without asking. Very similar software was written for BW called Evolution Forge. Absolutely nobody used it. That is to say that at the very least, I doubt you need to worry about releasing it and destroying creativity in Starcraft, despite the obvious utility of such a program. | ||
|
deth
Australia1757 Posts
| ||
|
Lomilar
United States130 Posts
On October 13 2010 10:46 Bwenjarin Raffrack wrote: ... Very similar software was written for BW called Evolution Forge. Absolutely nobody used it. That is to say that at the very least, I doubt you need to worry about releasing it and destroying creativity in Starcraft, despite the obvious utility of such a program. Wow. Yeah, it is basically that. Already I've been received by the teamliquid crowd far better than Evo forge... which apparently in its first iterations was called Evolution chamber, the same name as my program. x-| Haha. Guess it is time to find a new name. | ||
|
Cragfire
United States34 Posts
| ||
|
2v2SNAX
Canada97 Posts
The only issue here is I'd say I fear the game would become so much of a science, but it seems that's inevitable. Whether through using this program or just trial and error people are going to find the optimal way of doing things which are going to separate the best with the good. It'd be more annoying than anything when the game becomes a list of hard build orders which if not executed perfectly put you at a disadvantage. Still if you can play with a perfect build order then you probably deserve to win, it just might create more of a divide between players, and while your program helps this it isn't necessarily causing it. | ||
|
SpicyCrab
402 Posts
| ||
|
ZodiakLucien
United States14 Posts
10 ovi 10 pool 15 ext 15 queen 18 warren 18 ovi 18 ovi 18 roach 20 roach 22 roach 24 roach 26 roach 28 roach 30 roach | ||
|
hadoken5
Canada519 Posts
| ||
| ||
