EPT
Ursadak vs. Automaton 2000 - Micro Bot Duel - Page 15
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Garmer
1286 Posts
| ||
|
jazzbassmatt
United States566 Posts
| ||
|
Tsenister
United Kingdom112 Posts
| ||
|
bmn
886 Posts
On July 26 2011 16:15 Zelniq wrote: so human can do it too if you have 1 pro controlling each marine in a team melee? nice Not if - your humans make timing mistakes (like missing one of those actions by a tenth of a second, ever) - your humans make spatial errors (like misclicking by a few pixels, ever) - the AI used any form of shared state between marines to decide on the actions (good luck exchanging information at that rate with humans) But otherwise, ya, should be easy | ||
|
Ownos
United States2147 Posts
| ||
|
Syorm
131 Posts
| ||
|
Svenskfella
Spain26 Posts
| ||
|
Ryusei-R1
United States2106 Posts
WOULD HAVE BEEN FUCKING AWESOME | ||
|
GrapeD
Canada679 Posts
| ||
|
Luepert
United States1933 Posts
| ||
|
Siretu
151 Posts
On July 26 2011 04:57 BlueyD wrote: Someone needs to make a bot like this which queen-transfuses instead of marine-spreading. I made an AI for my custom Zone Control map that has some impressive transfusion micro. Combined with speedlings for lots of map control it easily owned 4 real players even though it doesn't cheat in any way. I had to nerf the queen so hard to be able to beat it 1v1(it's still quite hard though) Not that transfusion micro is hard to make... | ||
|
Xapti
Canada2473 Posts
On July 25 2011 15:23 Xapti wrote: I'm surprised no one asked yet- You used this AI in only melee games, which leads to the question: What sort of AI does it use for build orders, and other strategy, if any? Was it just a user controlling it and then relinquishing control to auto-micro in fights? It didn't seem at all like Blizzard AI. It sorta seemed like a human controller considering the unit placement (particularly sieged tanks). Also, the whole title and premise at the beginning was Ursadak vs Automaton 2000. Why Didn't you compare their differences in micro in the same situations (put ursadak in the very same situation(s) Automaton 2000 was in)? Does this micro AI do anything other than micro marines (or marauders) right now? Lastly, with regards to the video, it would have been good to include the army size tab, so people can see the losses for each side, and things like how even the fight was. | ||
|
rRod
Brazil28 Posts
Right now we play on Faster, what if we played on Fast or Normal? I was playing that marine splitting map by Griffith(probably mispelled that), and I usually only get to level 14 or so on Faster, I played on "Fast" once without knowing and got to level 18. Would it make blink, splitting marines and bane/ling micro in ZvZ more skilled? | ||
|
Maginor
Norway505 Posts
On July 29 2011 05:23 rRod wrote: Would reduce the speed of the game raise the skill gap? Right now we play on Faster, what if we played on Fast or Normal? I was playing that marine splitting map by Griffith(probably mispelled that), and I usually only get to level 14 or so on Faster, I played on "Fast" once without knowing and got to level 18. Would it make blink, splitting marines and bane/ling micro in ZvZ more skilled? For micro, maybe, but it would also enable everybody to be a macro god. And macro games would be painfully long to watch. | ||
|
Micket
United Kingdom2163 Posts
| ||
|
dmillz
Canada270 Posts
On July 29 2011 05:23 rRod wrote: Would reduce the speed of the game raise the skill gap? Right now we play on Faster, what if we played on Fast or Normal? I was playing that marine splitting map by Griffith(probably mispelled that), and I usually only get to level 14 or so on Faster, I played on "Fast" once without knowing and got to level 18. Would it make blink, splitting marines and bane/ling micro in ZvZ more skilled? Actually you have this backwards, INCREASING the speed of the game would raise the skill gap because it would be a lot harder and take more practice to do proper micro. Slowing the game down just makes it easier for more people to do the same micro with a lot less practice = smaller skill gap. | ||
|
Torpedo.Vegas
United States1890 Posts
| ||
|
TheOnlyOne
Germany155 Posts
On July 29 2011 06:19 Maginor wrote: For micro, maybe, but it would also enable everybody to be a macro god. And macro games would be painfully long to watch. Well playing on "normal" isnt that crazy "painfull" , try it out, its not really a bad thing if players can use more macro. An allready strong macro player will have plenty of more time for micro ; so the games get actual a lot more intresting as you can do much more multitasking if the game is simply slower. The actual "bad" thing is just that is really is slower, games take longer, as the ingame time really matches the real time (which is ironic anyway, that SC has a faster minute than real life). But overall i would rate "normal speed" better for the most players ; and for the real strong, it just gives more room for micro. | ||
|
RoyaleBrainSlug
United States295 Posts
| ||
|
FinestHour
United States18466 Posts
| ||
| ||
