On January 19 2011 16:01 Bizarro252 wrote: This might be a stupid question, but is there any risk of getting banned using this or the regular 'green tea' ai? The green tea website ( http://sc2.nibbits.com/assets/green-tea-ai/ ) talks about importing things into SCII and I thought anything that messed with game files could get you banned.
Just want to check before installing anything
Thanks
First off you are being a little bit too paranoid, but I guess normally that is healthy. You are safe to use this mod/map. For one this, is published to Battle.net (atleast thats how i use it, it can be run standalone). If you think about it, since the only way to get stuff on to Battle.net is through Blizzards own Map Editor tool, they have the ability to restrict w/e they want. In fact there are certain reserved files that are not allowed to be overwritten and if I try to import a new version of them it will not let me. You may be a bit confused with what you do with this AI. It is an AI that you can add to a map to replace the original AI. But to do this with Blizzard maps or any map that I didn't create myself, what I do is get a copy of the map then republish the under a different name with the AI added. I get these copies from the Map Editor itself, not through some hack, and I can only download maps that were marked by the publisher as "unlocked". All the Blizzard maps are unlocked so I can copy them. These modified maps are only used in custom games. It has no effect on ladder or any other maps is the game. The only thing affected are the custom maps I publish to Battle.net. All changes are only made to COPIES of maps, not the original maps, not any game files. Trust me you are safe.
Granted, we very recently saw where Blizzard took action against a map called World of Starcraft that was being developed (). This is the only issue I personally have heard of so far, and though Blizzard has not elaborated yet as far as I know as to what the problem is, the issue they are likely taking to that "map" is that they probably consider the name a trademark infringement. There is speculation that they may not want it published, because their next MMO may be starcraft related or other similar conspiracy theories, and their license allows them free will to do whatever they please with Battle.net. So it is technically possible that if for whatever reason Blizzard decided they didn't like people using custom AIs in custom games that they could remove the maps. That is likely the extent to what would happen though if they should choose eliminate custom AIs beyond patching the editor to not allow stuff like that to be published, but at that point a lot of custom maps will be gone and I don't see that happening. Custom AI in custom maps poses no threat to Blizzard or the community and I am pretty sure they know it and agree. If anything I can see them taking some of the code in good AIs and incorporating it in to their stock AI. At least that is what I would do if I were them
Thanks for the informative post, can't wait to try it. One of the reasons I am so paranoid is I use a G15 keyboard, I DO NOT macro with it or use it in anyway in sc other than as a keyboard, but I was always worried/doing research on if just simply having the keyboard and the various programs that go along with it would be a threat of getting banned. Luckily this is not the case but I was worried about it for a while back when they were banning a lot
There's some small things I have started to notice about the AI. First off, the zerg ai in a zvz is tough as heck. The multitasking makes it play almost as good as a top level zerg (Early pressure with expanding). I have only beat it once in a straight up game (without my 10 pool tactice I use but with a 14 pool). Normally I have no problem against the other two races unless I try to be greedy and lose a ton of stuff at the start.
Anyway, the biggest problem I notice is it seems like the ai can still see everything going on. As in it doesn't need to scout. I've noticed every single time that i send my drone scout to the enemy base they are sending out a worker to attack my scout before it is in view. This also made me notice other little things happening (Such as pulling back before it reaches view of my army directly after I reinforce it). So it seems like the computer can still "see" some things a normal player wouldn't.
Thank you OP for reviving this great AI. I'm having a blast playing against the Medium AI and polishing up the weak areas of my macro. Keep up the good work
On January 20 2011 14:54 Atlas_550 wrote: There's some small things I have started to notice about the AI. First off, the zerg ai in a zvz is tough as heck. The multitasking makes it play almost as good as a top level zerg (Early pressure with expanding). I have only beat it once in a straight up game (without my 10 pool tactice I use but with a 14 pool). Normally I have no problem against the other two races unless I try to be greedy and lose a ton of stuff at the start.
Anyway, the biggest problem I notice is it seems like the ai can still see everything going on. As in it doesn't need to scout. I've noticed every single time that i send my drone scout to the enemy base they are sending out a worker to attack my scout before it is in view. This also made me notice other little things happening (Such as pulling back before it reaches view of my army directly after I reinforce it). So it seems like the computer can still "see" some things a normal player wouldn't.
I was surprised that you would say the ZvZ was hard so I tried it out. There are probably other builds the computer does that I have yet to face, but the first build I played against - 1base speedlings into muta + expo - got dominated by a pretty standard 1 base roach build.
EDIT: well I played the other 2 (I assume there's only 3), fast expand into speedling double expand got owned just as bad as the first build, but the roach into somewhat fast expand build was pretty good, except I still won pretty easily.
I think the biggest reason why the AI would loose is because it wouldn't threat assess me in either economy or military power, and would not try to balance his own military or economy to match mine. He'd have like 18 lings, then just POWER drones like mad - when my roaches get there he has a great economy but is completely defenseless.
Also I think I noticed the computer reacting to things he couldn't see as well.
On January 21 2011 06:08 Xapti wrote: I was surprised that you would say the ZvZ was hard so I tried it out. There are probably other builds the computer does that I have yet to face, but the first build I played against - 1base speedlings into muta + expo - got dominated by a pretty standard 1 base roach build.
EDIT: well I played the other 2 (I assume there's only 3), fast expand into speedling double expand got owned just as bad as the first build, but the roach into somewhat fast expand build was pretty good, except I still won pretty easily.
Here are the builds as annotated in the code: 1 Base Mutalisk, 6 pool, Overpool, Baneling, Roach, 2 Base Multalisk, Hydralisk
I cannot guarantee that those are actually the builds that are in there because I have seen instances in the code where a comment was not changed after a build was modified, but those are likely correct.
I think the biggest reason why the AI would loose is because it wouldn't threat assess me in either economy or military power, and would not try to balance his own military or economy to match mine. He'd have like 18 lings, then just POWER drones like mad - when my roaches get there he has a great economy but is completely defenseless.
I am not sure if your economy comes in to account at all in the AI as it stands currently. I would have to check, but it is it possible that it might take in to account enemy expansion timing, but I have a feeling it likely doesn't. I have heard from I believe Day9 that the rule is that there are two options when you see a new enemy expansion go down: make your own or push, not both. I believe this statement was in regards to early expansions. Beyond that though, do good players pay attention to stuff like mineral saturation, or is it basically about making sure you either keep up with expansion counts or attack when they expand? This kind of stuff is not one of my strengths as a player yet and could use some advice so I can make the appropriate changes to the AI.
It does attempt to do threat assessments though it certainly needs to be improved. As I have said a bunch, the scouting it does is stock Blizzard code and is not cutting it. That factors in a lot when you are talking about threat assessment obviously. It is doing a threat assessment constantly the entire game and at any point it may decide to attack. Depending on how late in the game and what race the AI is, I can generally say it asks the question "IF MYARMY > YOURARMY + THRESHOLD THEN ATTACK". The threshold I believe is probably there to make sure you account for how fast the AI can reinforce after army losses based on race and game time. Two things though. One, if you are good about not showing the scout what you have, or two, if the scout hasn't checked in while, the information it is using to make this assessment is "outdated" and therefor flawed. My thoughts on this are that the biggest improvement will come from writing my own scouting code so it does it better and more often. Beyond that, I think it may be good to come up with an estimation algorithm that will estimate how many of each unit type you probably have. This would be based on the rate you have been getting them in the past and maybe based on what is possible from the number of unit producing structures it knows you have and how fast they can make units. You could totally stop making a unit, make a different unit type than it has seen you make yet, or really ramp up the production on a certain unit all of a sudden and the rates it used to guess your army composition would be flawed, but as it stands right now, it always considers your army size to be the exact same as the last time it saw it. Right now, if you deny its scout from seeing most of your army for any significant period of time, it would assume your army is the same size as it was earlier, but unless you are capped at 200/200 this is likely a bad assumption. Also I have always felt that it many times did not turn back and retreat when it should. The code for this should be more simple since many times the decision is as simple as "is the army in front of me bigger than mine" and it may just need a bit of tuning. Looking at what it uses currently to determine whether to retreat, it probably is just oversimplifying that decision.
Atlas_550, I wrote a response your comment about it still vision hacking at home last night and apparently forgot to hit send. Because I am lazy, I am going to wait until I get home and then go ahead and hit that send button. Don't worry, I am not ignoring you
Ok, I LOVE this AI! It's got the only thing that blizzard ai's are missing entirely: Good eco. I played a PvP with it, it had 2 fully saturated bases when I had one + beginning expansion. I still beat it with mass stalkers + proxy pylon though It was doing an odd stalker+collosus build, very well played. (BTW, is it supposed to say stuff? It said "Nice game, don't think we've ever played before") Second game was PvT (I was P). I fast expanded (lol) at like 3 minutes, did one gate expand into void rays, pressured him with a stalker and 3 zealots early on. Got steamrolled by thor+marine+ghost. Third game was PvZ (I was P) The computer went with a 17 hatchery 18 pool (???) I did a 10 gate zealot pressure. He barely held me off with constant zerglings+queens, doesn't rebuild ANY drones AT ALL, and masses zerglings to kill rocks at the gold (LT) He then attacks me with 20 zerglings vs my 8 zealots, gets obliterated and retreats, and I go kill him. In summery, the AI is very good with building an economy, but will not rebuild workers AT ALL (at least on medium). The terran is sooooo powerful with its mules. Good work!
On January 21 2011 08:49 TheAwesomeTemplar wrote:It was doing an odd stalker+collosus build, very well played.
I personally find a number of builds in this AI a bit odd and not very standard. I wouldn't mind it doing odd builds from time to time to spice things up and be less predictable, but I would think it doing standard starters 90% of the time would probably be appreciated as far as practicing goes and I think that is the route I am going to go pretty soon here. I may keep some of the builds I find more strange in, but just rarely used, or I may take them out. When I make these types of changes I will consult with you guys first so the decision I make is what people want.
BTW, is it supposed to say stuff? It said "Nice game, don't think we've ever played before"
Yep. It starts doing that later in the game. It actually will BM you with stuff like offensive GGs when it thinks you should give up. This was put in by the original author of the AI. I don't want to ruin the fun, so don't ask for details because I won't give them, but I will say I have plans for some entertaining modifications to this for my next update since its pretty effortless to do
Third game was PvZ (I was P) The computer went with a 17 hatchery 18 pool (???) I did a 10 gate zealot pressure. He barely held me off with constant zerglings+queens, doesn't rebuild ANY drones AT ALL, and masses zerglings to kill rocks at the gold (LT) He then attacks me with 20 zerglings vs my 8 zealots, gets obliterated and retreats, and I go kill him. In summery, the AI is very good with building an economy, but will not rebuild workers AT ALL (at least on medium).
I will test this and see if I can see what it was thinking and get back to you. It may be a priority issue. I know for sure that all the builds I have looked at have a "set in stone" number of workers it will make in the beginning, and the way its coded, in the beginning at least it would remake those drones. But once it passes a certain point in its build, it will then run this generic routine that I have not looked into detail at, but appears to make sure it makes sure it builds workers to match how many bases and gases it has up to a max number of workers. The max for insane is 60 because it cheats and needs less workers, and other difficulties is 70. I have heard some people say always be build workers (Zerg being the exception). Is this a "rule" people tell to noobs so they don't bother asking themselves when to quit making workers and make bad assumptions, or is there really some kind max you don't want to go over so you don't have too much supply in workers? I guess 60 would be fairly saturated. Would it ever be logical late game to have say 4 saturated bases running or is that just beyond what is necessary or detrimental because of wasted supply?
On January 21 2011 06:08 Xapti wrote: I was surprised that you would say the ZvZ was hard so I tried it out. There are probably other builds the computer does that I have yet to face, but the first build I played against - 1base speedlings into muta + expo - got dominated by a pretty standard 1 base roach build.
EDIT: well I played the other 2 (I assume there's only 3), fast expand into speedling double expand got owned just as bad as the first build, but the roach into somewhat fast expand build was pretty good, except I still won pretty easily.
I think the biggest reason why the AI would loose is because it wouldn't threat assess me in either economy or military power, and would not try to balance his own military or economy to match mine. He'd have like 18 lings, then just POWER drones like mad - when my roaches get there he has a great economy but is completely defenseless.
Also I think I noticed the computer reacting to things he couldn't see as well.
Well I think my biggest problem is I am only very proficient at one zvz build and that is the overpool build. But when I play against the ai I put it on random so that I can work on scouting and being very reactive to what is going on in the game. Once I see that it is z though I already have gone to 12 drones so I try to do some sort of 14 pool or 1 base roach, but my ability with these builds isn't the greatest.
I don't know how much exactly the harder ai's cheat but its definately there. He didn't even start his second CC till 5:04 yet in less then 10 minutes he has 2x the resources i do. http://img535.imageshack.us/i/screenshot2011012019372.jpg/
replayed against medium level and rolled over it when it did the 1-rax marauder expo. He tried to poke in with 2 marauders and got pushed all the way to his main by 1 zealot+3 stalkers. Also for some reason repeatedly targeted my zealot as opposed to my stalkers when engaging. Over-all it is a decent AI for lower levels and with some minor tweaking may even be useful to people in the higher ups. Like maybe lowering the extra resources it gets ?
On January 20 2011 14:54 Atlas_550 wrote: There's some small things I have started to notice about the AI. First off, the zerg ai in a zvz is tough as heck. The multitasking makes it play almost as good as a top level zerg (Early pressure with expanding). I have only beat it once in a straight up game (without my 10 pool tactice I use but with a 14 pool). Normally I have no problem against the other two races unless I try to be greedy and lose a ton of stuff at the start.
Anyway, the biggest problem I notice is it seems like the ai can still see everything going on. As in it doesn't need to scout. I've noticed every single time that i send my drone scout to the enemy base they are sending out a worker to attack my scout before it is in view. This also made me notice other little things happening (Such as pulling back before it reaches view of my army directly after I reinforce it). So it seems like the computer can still "see" some things a normal player wouldn't.
Thats the line in the code that decides whether there is a fog of war (lack of total vision) or not.
Notice it does set normal = true, meaning there is a fog of war so any information the AI tries to get, will only be information it can truly see just a like a player could. As far as I know at least. Everything I have read (not a lot of info) and the code leads me to believe this is the case. When I had this set to false, it was a lot harder and I certainly did notice weird things it would do because it had vision. I am pretty sure this is working correctly. There could be something added i guess (if it even is possible) that extends its vision, but I don't know why they would have added this in unless it is just what the Blizz AI does as well, because the code base this AI started from had a vision hack in it so there would be no reason to increase vision range.
Pre-Post Edit: I have done some testing on the scouting worker meeting you at its ramp issue. I can not say for certain, but if I were to guess, I would say the AI can see about a probe's length past the fog of war. There are times where it looks like the probe was already there waiting, but this appears actually to be because of the timing of you approaching the ramp happened to be when it was about to send out a scout or make something near ramp and it just repurposes that worker to run after you and grabs another worker to scout or make a pylon. It may also pay attention to you "hi fiving" its scouting worker and expect you to be there at a certain time. Its a bit hard to tell, because I can't ask it how it did it, I just kind of have to figure it out through testing. Either way though, I don't think I want to turn this off at the moment because it would then let you do whatever in its base and that doesn't sound like a good idea to me. I do not believe though that it can see you EVERYWHERE even if its fog of war. At the very least it doesn't know your unit counts of each unit type, I know that for sure. Positioning though is another question and I will have to test to prove it. I think if anything, it may have just a slight bit more range of sight than a player (like I said, about the length of a probe).
A very interesting AI, I got completely taken by surprise when playing medium protoss. I'm pretty bad, lol. I tried again, got a zergy AI... and completely baffled it. I pylon blocked the natural and it sat there and didn't make another unit or building the entire game (I can send you the replay if you want).
On January 22 2011 11:03 theit8514 wrote: A very interesting AI, I got completely taken by surprise when playing medium protoss. I'm pretty bad, lol. I tried again, got a zergy AI... and completely baffled it. I pylon blocked the natural and it sat there and didn't make another unit or building the entire game (I can send you the replay if you want).
Yea it might help to send a replay. There are many factors which can lead to the AI doing different things so it will help to see what you did, what its build was, what map you used, and anything else that might give me a sign what happened.
I tested this just now myself. The first game I didn't play long and didn't finish it out like i should have. In that game I put a 2 pylons where the hatch would go and ran back in to its base. I think i waited there until its lings spawned then I ran to the pylons. They followed me there and killed them, but I didn't wait to see if it would build a hatch there. I assume it would have. The next 2 games it did the same 1 base muta build (this should be taken out shouldn't it guys, does anyone do this?) so the hatch comes later and I think this may have affected how it reacted. It didnt kill the pylons and built its expo somewhere else instead (/facepalm). So regardless, it is safe to say it doesn't react correctly to it. I have yet to see it lock up as you say and not make any more units or structures. As far as I can tell its design is robust enough that it is never does that, though you may show me a way to completely shut it down. What I have seen is it make dumb decisions when you throw it a curve ball which lead to it getting farther and farther behind, and of course I will try to weed as many of these things out as possible.
There are things just so expected like pylon blocking a hatch, or bunker rushing the ramp etc that it really needs be able to handle. Once the AI is a bit more solid, I envision it probably will even have a few "builds" that it will switch to in the case of specific kinds of early cheese or aggression so that it will exhibit the appropriate response you expect from it. For instance, not that I want to promote cheese, but lets say you wanted to practice cannon rushing on Xel'Naga by putting a pylon outside the main, then warping a cannon up top etc. To properly practice that so you can be as affective as possible, it needs to make it as hard as realistically possible to pull off. Cannon rush would probably be the last thing of that sort I would have on my list to do since it seems to be not all that viable when the opponent scouts and reacts correctly, but just as an FYI I do intend to implement specific responses to common early game tactics when I can.
Here's the replay. If you look at his base you can see a drone twitching out trying to do something. This was the Metalopolis map published on NA. metalopolis replay
On January 23 2011 00:58 theit8514 wrote: Here's the replay. If you look at his base you can see a drone twitching out trying to do something. This was the Metalopolis map published on NA. metalopolis replay
Well you did it. You truly broke it It didn't get very far so there is not much to go off of, but there are 3 builds it could have been doing based on the extractor trick. The first build I checked very well could have broken because of this. It needed more supply but it was trying to wait until it had a queen to build the next overlord. It couldn't build the queen because it was waiting for the supply to drop from the drone being lost when the expo was started. It couldn't build the expo because you blocked it and it doesn't know how to deal with it. And it is one of a few builds that uses special expo code which if I am understanding right, it will only try to put it at its closest expansion so it even refused to just put it somewhere else which is different from the few builds I happened to get when I tested.
There are a number of things I could do even before I add in proper code to deal with pylon blocking in general that should fix this build. I will check the other zerg builds as well to see if they have the same total melt down problems. At the very least I will try to get all the zerg builds from doing this complete lock down early game. If it is not too hard to figure out I will try and add some basic code to have some drones kill off the pylon, but I really want to get this dialog patch out so people can tweak difficulty settings and choose specific builds to go against.
Love it as far as helping macro, but army composition doesn't really work too well in TvZ. Ive never seen it go muta's which is disappointing because i really wanted to practice timings and turret positioning. Well worth the time to play for practice though.
On January 23 2011 10:52 Freezy3 wrote: Love it as far as helping macro, but army composition doesn't really work too well in TvZ. Ive never seen it go muta's which is disappointing because i really wanted to practice timings and turret positioning. Well worth the time to play for practice though.
The next update I make to it will allow you to select which build it does if you like or keep it random as it is now. It does have 2 muta builds, though 1 of them is 1 base muta which i am not a fan of.
EPT
