• Log InLog In
  • Register
Liquid`
Team Liquid Liquipedia
EDT 23:44
CEST 05:44
KST 12:44
  • Home
  • Forum
  • Calendar
  • Streams
  • Liquipedia
  • Features
  • Store
  • EPT
  • TL+
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Smash
  • Heroes
  • Counter-Strike
  • Overwatch
  • Liquibet
  • Fantasy StarCraft
  • TLPD
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Blogs
Forum Sidebar
Events/Features
News
Featured News
Code S RO8 Preview: Rogue, GuMiho, Solar, Maru3BGE Stara Zagora 2025: Info & Preview27Code S RO12 Preview: GuMiho, Bunny, SHIN, ByuN3The Memories We Share - Facing the Final(?) GSL47Code S RO12 Preview: Cure, Zoun, Solar, Creator4
Community News
BGE Stara Zagora 2025 - Replay Pack2Weekly Cups (June 2-8): herO doubles down1[BSL20] ProLeague: Bracket Stage & Dates9GSL Ro4 and Finals moved to Sunday June 15th13Weekly Cups (May 27-June 1): ByuN goes back-to-back0
StarCraft 2
General
DreamHack Dallas 2025 - Official Replay Pack BGE Stara Zagora 2025 - Replay Pack Code S RO8 Preview: Rogue, GuMiho, Solar, Maru Jim claims he and Firefly were involved in match-fixing The SCII GOAT: A statistical Evaluation
Tourneys
[GSL 2025] Code S:Season 2 - RO8 - Group A Sea Duckling Open (Global, Bronze-Diamond) Bellum Gens Elite: Stara Zagora 2025 $3,500 WardiTV European League 2025 Sparkling Tuna Cup - Weekly Open Tournament
Strategy
[G] Darkgrid Layout Simple Questions Simple Answers [G] PvT Cheese: 13 Gate Proxy Robo
Custom Maps
[UMS] Zillion Zerglings
External Content
Mutation # 477 Slow and Steady Mutation # 476 Charnel House Mutation # 475 Hard Target Mutation # 474 Futile Resistance
Brood War
General
BGH auto balance -> http://bghmmr.eu/ BW General Discussion FlaSh Witnesses SCV Pull Off the Impossible vs Shu StarCraft & BroodWar Campaign Speedrun Quest Will foreigners ever be able to challenge Koreans?
Tourneys
[ASL19] Grand Finals RECOVER LOST BTC USDT FUNDS RECLAIMER COMPANY [BSL20] GosuLeague RO16 - Tue & Wed 20:00+CET NA Team League 6/8/2025
Strategy
I am doing this better than progamers do. [G] How to get started on ladder as a new Z player
Other Games
General Games
Path of Exile Stormgate/Frost Giant Megathread What do you want from future RTS games? Armies of Exigo - YesYes? Nintendo Switch Thread
Dota 2
Official 'what is Dota anymore' discussion
League of Legends
LiquidLegends to reintegrate into TL.net
Heroes of the Storm
Simple Questions, Simple Answers Heroes of the Storm 2.0
Hearthstone
Heroes of StarCraft mini-set
TL Mafia
TL Mafia Community Thread Vanilla Mini Mafia
Community
General
Things Aren’t Peaceful in Palestine US Politics Mega-thread Russo-Ukrainian War Thread Vape Nation Thread European Politico-economics QA Mega-thread
Fan Clubs
Maru Fan Club Serral Fan Club
Media & Entertainment
Korean Music Discussion [Manga] One Piece
Sports
2024 - 2025 Football Thread Formula 1 Discussion NHL Playoffs 2024
World Cup 2022
Tech Support
Computer Build, Upgrade & Buying Resource Thread
TL Community
The Automated Ban List
Blogs
A Better Routine For Progame…
TrAiDoS
StarCraft improvement
iopq
Heero Yuy & the Tax…
KrillinFromwales
I was completely wrong ab…
jameswatts
Need Your Help/Advice
Glider
Trip to the Zoo
micronesia
Customize Sidebar...

Website Feedback

Closed Threads



Active: 29589 users

Flash on DeepMind: "I think I can win" - Page 5

Forum Index > SC2 General
Post a Reply
Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next All
DonDomingo
Profile Joined October 2015
504 Posts
Last Edited: 2016-03-10 19:11:23
March 10 2016 19:11 GMT
#81
Would make much more sense for DeepMind to have a go at DotA; in a game where mechanics mean so much like StarCraft, of course, an ai will be able to rape humans - its just a question of time.
Green_25
Profile Joined June 2013
Great Britain696 Posts
March 10 2016 19:13 GMT
#82
So, to make it fair the AI would have to be a robot controlling the same set of key-bindings as the human rather than just a computer program.

Oh wait, Innovation.
The_Red_Viper
Profile Blog Joined August 2013
19533 Posts
Last Edited: 2016-03-10 19:21:55
March 10 2016 19:18 GMT
#83
On March 11 2016 04:01 ZAiNs wrote:
Show nested quote +
On March 11 2016 03:44 The_Red_Viper wrote:
See the problem i have with this is that the Ai will have such a big advantage through 'mechanics' alone.
It's much more interesting in GO because there is no difference in execution, tactics and strategy is all that matters here.

Even though there are a lot more possible "board states" in sc2, i am not sure if that really matters in the end if you theoretically have a player with unlimited APM and attention.


But hey, i have obviously very little idea about it and when google says starcraft would be the next step, maybe it's harder than i think (or they really want to somewhat limit the AI in the mechanics department so it comes down to tactis/strategy, which would be weird though)

How would it be weird to limit the mechanics? The goal is to be 'smarter' than a human, without limiting mechanics it wouldn't really prove anything or be an accomplishment. I imagine they would want to even limit the mechanics so that they're slightly below the absolute best players mechanically. Attention is a resource in SC2 and I think it'll be hard to give the AI imperfect mini-map awareness or imperfect mouse-accuracy without creating too complicated of a model, but things like actual keypresses a second and cursor speed will be easy to limit.

Because mechanics are such a big part about starcraft. By far the biggest. So how do we really make sure that the Ai didn't win through mechanics? It's impossible (imo) to build it exactly at the sweet spot. Attention is probably even a bigger deal than apm itself.
The only real way to make sure "it is fair" is to make the AI use the same hardware, mouse, keyboard and monitor.
If you don't do that then the result is questionable at best as far as i can tell

edit: and even then you will get a device which is superior to human flesh, so i dunno..
AI vs AI would be interesting to watch though, i would imagine tactis and strategy would be a way bigger deal there because the mechanical part could be made exactly even
IU | Sohyang || There is no God and we are his prophets | For if ‘Thou mayest’—it is also true that ‘Thou mayest not.” | Ignorance is the parent of fear |
CxWiLL
Profile Joined May 2013
China830 Posts
Last Edited: 2016-03-10 19:28:50
March 10 2016 19:26 GMT
#84
Imho, I don't know if we human can actually stand a chance on this.
After watching the Go games, the AlphaGo's play style feels like something next level to me. In the two games played, the bot fell behind in the early-mid game pretty badly, but it just win by out-calculate Lee Sedol in small skirmishes. By the end, the bots won.
Feel like playing some one with perfect blink stalker micro. No matter how badly his status is, as soon as his blink is ready, you start to trade badly here and there. Soon, you find yourself in an awkward position that you cannot walk out of your base and you cannot expand either.

If the Deepmind team goes full try-hard mode, some micro bot can out-micro human players pretty hard, which is nothing challenging to them.
Personally, I would love to see a bot that plays like a human, fetching information from the game through the output image instead of the computer memory. and this might make the game fair.
HellHound
Profile Joined September 2014
Bulgaria5962 Posts
March 10 2016 19:40 GMT
#85
On March 11 2016 01:18 Charoisaur wrote:
BTW a bot that plays starcraft perfectly already exists.
It's called INnoVation.

So we can beat deepmind with nydus play.
Good plan.
Classic GosoO |sOs| Everyone has to give in, let Life win | Zest Is The Best | Roach Cultist | I recognize the might and wisdom of my Otherworldly overlord | Air vs Air 200/200 SC2 is best SC2 | PRIME has been robbed | Fuck prime go ST | ROACH ROACH ROACH
Cuce
Profile Joined March 2011
Turkey1127 Posts
March 10 2016 19:46 GMT
#86
On March 11 2016 03:09 disciple wrote:
This match would have number of interesting implications chief among witch are BO decisions. If AI is strictly superior microing units theres no reason not to assume that it will try taking advantage of this and go for 1 base all-ins most of the time in order to force micro intensive early games. It would be cool if the AI has some doubt about his opponents skill and actually needs to confirm its superiority in micro in order to feel confident in winning and going for all ins. Humans already do that as we all know from Bisu being annoying as much as possible with his scouting probe. Now imagine AI controlling this, it will never die by mistake.



I think AI should go for a late game instead. it has not only perfect micro but also perfect mechanics (maybe not intuitive and predictive macro but still) perfect multitasking, perfect minimap.
more stuff to do would mean more adventages AI will get.

Yes more tiem it gives to the player means player will have more options and tricks to pull of a win, but perfect micro can shutdown quite a alot of stuff.
64K RAM SYSTEM 38911 BASIC BYTES FREE
BjoernK
Profile Joined April 2012
194 Posts
March 10 2016 19:55 GMT
#87
I feel the AI should input the commands via robot hands and a keyboard. Maybe the APM should be limited to a sensible upper bound. (Say 500 or so)
chiasmus
Profile Blog Joined January 2012
United States134 Posts
March 10 2016 19:56 GMT
#88
Like many people here, I think it's weird to compare an AI that can bypass the physical mechanics of the game to a chess or go computer.

What I love about Starcraft, and what makes it my favorite esport, is that it's a *physical sport* in addition to a strategy game. If you take away the need to physically manipulate the mouse and keyboard, it isn't really the same game. That's why it's different from chess, or go, or poker, or hearthstone.

The AI-vs-AI competitions are still kinda cool though.
bITt.mAN
Profile Blog Joined March 2009
Switzerland3693 Posts
March 10 2016 20:07 GMT
#89
Lol.

1. They should do it with BWAPI because SC2 is lame like that (it doesn't have an API to interface code<->game).

2. There's been TONS of theorycrafting on RTS AI and their limitations. link Two big differences between turn-based games and RTS, are real-time computational optimizations (which figure far-less in turn-based AI), and, as Flash rightly states, finite information.
BW4LYF . . . . . . PM me, I LOVE PMs. . . . . . Long live "NaDa's Body" . . . . . . Fantasy | Bisu/Best | Jaedong . . . . .
Grizvok
Profile Joined August 2014
United States711 Posts
March 10 2016 20:32 GMT
#90
On March 11 2016 05:07 bITt.mAN wrote:
Lol.

1. They should do it with BWAPI because SC2 is lame like that (it doesn't have an API to interface code<->game).

2. There's been TONS of theorycrafting on RTS AI and their limitations. link Two big differences between turn-based games and RTS, are real-time computational optimizations (which figure far-less in turn-based AI), and, as Flash rightly states, finite information.


Their limitations NOW you mean. A sophisticated AI built to play SC2 (when it is ready) will destroy any player easily. Regardless you don't factor in the crazy levels of micro you can pull off with infinite APM. Dropping three areas at once while still macro'ing perfectly WHILE stutter step micro'ing each drop is something a human will never be able to do yet it is feasible that a computer could potentially do those things.
Chaggi
Profile Joined August 2010
Korea (South)1936 Posts
March 10 2016 20:52 GMT
#91
On March 11 2016 05:32 Grizvok wrote:
Show nested quote +
On March 11 2016 05:07 bITt.mAN wrote:
Lol.

1. They should do it with BWAPI because SC2 is lame like that (it doesn't have an API to interface code<->game).

2. There's been TONS of theorycrafting on RTS AI and their limitations. link Two big differences between turn-based games and RTS, are real-time computational optimizations (which figure far-less in turn-based AI), and, as Flash rightly states, finite information.


Their limitations NOW you mean. A sophisticated AI built to play SC2 (when it is ready) will destroy any player easily. Regardless you don't factor in the crazy levels of micro you can pull off with infinite APM. Dropping three areas at once while still macro'ing perfectly WHILE stutter step micro'ing each drop is something a human will never be able to do yet it is feasible that a computer could potentially do those things.


I feel like you can solve that by actually having things be possible, like the computer can't be looking at 3 screens at once
ZAiNs
Profile Joined July 2010
United Kingdom6525 Posts
March 10 2016 20:53 GMT
#92
On March 11 2016 04:18 The_Red_Viper wrote:
Show nested quote +
On March 11 2016 04:01 ZAiNs wrote:
On March 11 2016 03:44 The_Red_Viper wrote:
See the problem i have with this is that the Ai will have such a big advantage through 'mechanics' alone.
It's much more interesting in GO because there is no difference in execution, tactics and strategy is all that matters here.

Even though there are a lot more possible "board states" in sc2, i am not sure if that really matters in the end if you theoretically have a player with unlimited APM and attention.


But hey, i have obviously very little idea about it and when google says starcraft would be the next step, maybe it's harder than i think (or they really want to somewhat limit the AI in the mechanics department so it comes down to tactis/strategy, which would be weird though)

How would it be weird to limit the mechanics? The goal is to be 'smarter' than a human, without limiting mechanics it wouldn't really prove anything or be an accomplishment. I imagine they would want to even limit the mechanics so that they're slightly below the absolute best players mechanically. Attention is a resource in SC2 and I think it'll be hard to give the AI imperfect mini-map awareness or imperfect mouse-accuracy without creating too complicated of a model, but things like actual keypresses a second and cursor speed will be easy to limit.

Because mechanics are such a big part about starcraft. By far the biggest. So how do we really make sure that the Ai didn't win through mechanics? It's impossible (imo) to build it exactly at the sweet spot. Attention is probably even a bigger deal than apm itself.
The only real way to make sure "it is fair" is to make the AI use the same hardware, mouse, keyboard and monitor.
If you don't do that then the result is questionable at best as far as i can tell

edit: and even then you will get a device which is superior to human flesh, so i dunno..
AI vs AI would be interesting to watch though, i would imagine tactis and strategy would be a way bigger deal there because the mechanical part could be made exactly even

I don't get what you mean by making the AI use a mouse, keyboard and monitor. The AI would still be able to move them with precision and speed far beyond a human. Speed and precision are big parts of SC2 but at the top-level they aren't what makes players usually win. If an AI that is restricted to the mechanics of an average progamer beats a top-level progamer then wouldn't be its mechanics that made it win.
The_Red_Viper
Profile Blog Joined August 2013
19533 Posts
March 10 2016 20:59 GMT
#93
On March 11 2016 05:53 ZAiNs wrote:
Show nested quote +
On March 11 2016 04:18 The_Red_Viper wrote:
On March 11 2016 04:01 ZAiNs wrote:
On March 11 2016 03:44 The_Red_Viper wrote:
See the problem i have with this is that the Ai will have such a big advantage through 'mechanics' alone.
It's much more interesting in GO because there is no difference in execution, tactics and strategy is all that matters here.

Even though there are a lot more possible "board states" in sc2, i am not sure if that really matters in the end if you theoretically have a player with unlimited APM and attention.


But hey, i have obviously very little idea about it and when google says starcraft would be the next step, maybe it's harder than i think (or they really want to somewhat limit the AI in the mechanics department so it comes down to tactis/strategy, which would be weird though)

How would it be weird to limit the mechanics? The goal is to be 'smarter' than a human, without limiting mechanics it wouldn't really prove anything or be an accomplishment. I imagine they would want to even limit the mechanics so that they're slightly below the absolute best players mechanically. Attention is a resource in SC2 and I think it'll be hard to give the AI imperfect mini-map awareness or imperfect mouse-accuracy without creating too complicated of a model, but things like actual keypresses a second and cursor speed will be easy to limit.

Because mechanics are such a big part about starcraft. By far the biggest. So how do we really make sure that the Ai didn't win through mechanics? It's impossible (imo) to build it exactly at the sweet spot. Attention is probably even a bigger deal than apm itself.
The only real way to make sure "it is fair" is to make the AI use the same hardware, mouse, keyboard and monitor.
If you don't do that then the result is questionable at best as far as i can tell

edit: and even then you will get a device which is superior to human flesh, so i dunno..
AI vs AI would be interesting to watch though, i would imagine tactis and strategy would be a way bigger deal there because the mechanical part could be made exactly even

I don't get what you mean by making the AI use a mouse, keyboard and monitor. The AI would still be able to move them with precision and speed far beyond a human. Speed and precision are big parts of SC2 but at the top-level they aren't what makes players usually win. If an AI that is restricted to the mechanics of an average progamer beats a top-level progamer then wouldn't be its mechanics that made it win.


I mean that the AI would have the same restrictions mechanically as the tpyical human. We only can interact with the game with the help of the hardware, mouse, keyboard and monitor.
The AI probably wouldn't do that, it could be everywhere at once (you as human cannot because the monitor simply doesn't make it possible, just as the mouse doen't make it possible to control different groups at once, etc)
If the human had another device (control the game directly with the brain or something similar) this maybe wouldn't be a limiting factor anymore.

But yeah if you can somehow make it so that the AI doesn't have better mechanics/multitasking/attention than the average pro player, then maybe this would be interesting (even though i am not so sure about that either, even though starcraft might have more possible "board states", i would imagine that most of them are completely irrelevant and that the actual depth of the game isn't anywhere near GO for example)
It being a game with limited information is the only interesting aspect about all of this i can see tbh
IU | Sohyang || There is no God and we are his prophets | For if ‘Thou mayest’—it is also true that ‘Thou mayest not.” | Ignorance is the parent of fear |
ZAiNs
Profile Joined July 2010
United Kingdom6525 Posts
March 10 2016 21:39 GMT
#94
On March 11 2016 05:59 The_Red_Viper wrote:
Show nested quote +
On March 11 2016 05:53 ZAiNs wrote:
On March 11 2016 04:18 The_Red_Viper wrote:
On March 11 2016 04:01 ZAiNs wrote:
On March 11 2016 03:44 The_Red_Viper wrote:
See the problem i have with this is that the Ai will have such a big advantage through 'mechanics' alone.
It's much more interesting in GO because there is no difference in execution, tactics and strategy is all that matters here.

Even though there are a lot more possible "board states" in sc2, i am not sure if that really matters in the end if you theoretically have a player with unlimited APM and attention.


But hey, i have obviously very little idea about it and when google says starcraft would be the next step, maybe it's harder than i think (or they really want to somewhat limit the AI in the mechanics department so it comes down to tactis/strategy, which would be weird though)

How would it be weird to limit the mechanics? The goal is to be 'smarter' than a human, without limiting mechanics it wouldn't really prove anything or be an accomplishment. I imagine they would want to even limit the mechanics so that they're slightly below the absolute best players mechanically. Attention is a resource in SC2 and I think it'll be hard to give the AI imperfect mini-map awareness or imperfect mouse-accuracy without creating too complicated of a model, but things like actual keypresses a second and cursor speed will be easy to limit.

Because mechanics are such a big part about starcraft. By far the biggest. So how do we really make sure that the Ai didn't win through mechanics? It's impossible (imo) to build it exactly at the sweet spot. Attention is probably even a bigger deal than apm itself.
The only real way to make sure "it is fair" is to make the AI use the same hardware, mouse, keyboard and monitor.
If you don't do that then the result is questionable at best as far as i can tell

edit: and even then you will get a device which is superior to human flesh, so i dunno..
AI vs AI would be interesting to watch though, i would imagine tactis and strategy would be a way bigger deal there because the mechanical part could be made exactly even

I don't get what you mean by making the AI use a mouse, keyboard and monitor. The AI would still be able to move them with precision and speed far beyond a human. Speed and precision are big parts of SC2 but at the top-level they aren't what makes players usually win. If an AI that is restricted to the mechanics of an average progamer beats a top-level progamer then wouldn't be its mechanics that made it win.


I mean that the AI would have the same restrictions mechanically as the tpyical human. We only can interact with the game with the help of the hardware, mouse, keyboard and monitor.
The AI probably wouldn't do that, it could be everywhere at once (you as human cannot because the monitor simply doesn't make it possible, just as the mouse doen't make it possible to control different groups at once, etc)
If the human had another device (control the game directly with the brain or something similar) this maybe wouldn't be a limiting factor anymore.

But yeah if you can somehow make it so that the AI doesn't have better mechanics/multitasking/attention than the average pro player, then maybe this would be interesting (even though i am not so sure about that either, even though starcraft might have more possible "board states", i would imagine that most of them are completely irrelevant and that the actual depth of the game isn't anywhere near GO for example)
It being a game with limited information is the only interesting aspect about all of this i can see tbh

The number of game states in StarCraft is several magnitudes higher than Go, even if you somehow got rid of the irrelevant ones like obviously stupid openings (which really is something the AI would have to work out for itself), there would still be several magnitudes more game states for StarCraft. Regardless of what you think about the strategic depth of the game, the sheer number of game states makes things far more complicated for AI to figure out.
The_Red_Viper
Profile Blog Joined August 2013
19533 Posts
March 10 2016 21:47 GMT
#95
On March 11 2016 06:39 ZAiNs wrote:
Show nested quote +
On March 11 2016 05:59 The_Red_Viper wrote:
On March 11 2016 05:53 ZAiNs wrote:
On March 11 2016 04:18 The_Red_Viper wrote:
On March 11 2016 04:01 ZAiNs wrote:
On March 11 2016 03:44 The_Red_Viper wrote:
See the problem i have with this is that the Ai will have such a big advantage through 'mechanics' alone.
It's much more interesting in GO because there is no difference in execution, tactics and strategy is all that matters here.

Even though there are a lot more possible "board states" in sc2, i am not sure if that really matters in the end if you theoretically have a player with unlimited APM and attention.


But hey, i have obviously very little idea about it and when google says starcraft would be the next step, maybe it's harder than i think (or they really want to somewhat limit the AI in the mechanics department so it comes down to tactis/strategy, which would be weird though)

How would it be weird to limit the mechanics? The goal is to be 'smarter' than a human, without limiting mechanics it wouldn't really prove anything or be an accomplishment. I imagine they would want to even limit the mechanics so that they're slightly below the absolute best players mechanically. Attention is a resource in SC2 and I think it'll be hard to give the AI imperfect mini-map awareness or imperfect mouse-accuracy without creating too complicated of a model, but things like actual keypresses a second and cursor speed will be easy to limit.

Because mechanics are such a big part about starcraft. By far the biggest. So how do we really make sure that the Ai didn't win through mechanics? It's impossible (imo) to build it exactly at the sweet spot. Attention is probably even a bigger deal than apm itself.
The only real way to make sure "it is fair" is to make the AI use the same hardware, mouse, keyboard and monitor.
If you don't do that then the result is questionable at best as far as i can tell

edit: and even then you will get a device which is superior to human flesh, so i dunno..
AI vs AI would be interesting to watch though, i would imagine tactis and strategy would be a way bigger deal there because the mechanical part could be made exactly even

I don't get what you mean by making the AI use a mouse, keyboard and monitor. The AI would still be able to move them with precision and speed far beyond a human. Speed and precision are big parts of SC2 but at the top-level they aren't what makes players usually win. If an AI that is restricted to the mechanics of an average progamer beats a top-level progamer then wouldn't be its mechanics that made it win.


I mean that the AI would have the same restrictions mechanically as the tpyical human. We only can interact with the game with the help of the hardware, mouse, keyboard and monitor.
The AI probably wouldn't do that, it could be everywhere at once (you as human cannot because the monitor simply doesn't make it possible, just as the mouse doen't make it possible to control different groups at once, etc)
If the human had another device (control the game directly with the brain or something similar) this maybe wouldn't be a limiting factor anymore.

But yeah if you can somehow make it so that the AI doesn't have better mechanics/multitasking/attention than the average pro player, then maybe this would be interesting (even though i am not so sure about that either, even though starcraft might have more possible "board states", i would imagine that most of them are completely irrelevant and that the actual depth of the game isn't anywhere near GO for example)
It being a game with limited information is the only interesting aspect about all of this i can see tbh

The number of game states in StarCraft is several magnitudes higher than Go, even if you somehow got rid of the irrelevant ones like obviously stupid openings (which really is something the AI would have to work out for itself), there would still be several magnitudes more game states for StarCraft. Regardless of what you think about the strategic depth of the game, the sheer number of game states makes things far more complicated for AI to figure out.


Just to be clear, let's say you place building X at place Y or Z, that are two different "board states" right?
Even if it means that placing your first supply depot in the enemy base probably isn't all that smart?

I get that it isn't "intuitive" for the AI like for a human being, but there surely are tons and tons of these things in sc2.
Even something like: I move my army (or even single marine) a few tiles on the left, it probably won't be the biggest deal but it surely is considered a different "board state" ?
If we want to play 100% perfectly these things have to be considered, but overall it probably doesn't matter at all i would imagine.
I don't think the same is true for GO? (i have no idea about GO though)
My statement was probably just simply this: A high lvl GO players surely possesses more tactical/strategical understanding than a starcraft professional, you don't have to be highly intelligent to play starcraft at a high lvl, the same probably isn't true for GO/chess. i think? (i can see why this isn't all that relevant to the main topic though ^^)
IU | Sohyang || There is no God and we are his prophets | For if ‘Thou mayest’—it is also true that ‘Thou mayest not.” | Ignorance is the parent of fear |
Slayer91
Profile Joined February 2006
Ireland23335 Posts
March 10 2016 21:56 GMT
#96
The number of game states doesn't really matter any more since we aren't using brute force calculation and there are clear ways to evaluate strength of play (economic advantage, supply advantage)
ZAiNs
Profile Joined July 2010
United Kingdom6525 Posts
Last Edited: 2016-03-10 22:03:35
March 10 2016 22:00 GMT
#97
On March 11 2016 06:47 The_Red_Viper wrote:
Show nested quote +
On March 11 2016 06:39 ZAiNs wrote:
On March 11 2016 05:59 The_Red_Viper wrote:
On March 11 2016 05:53 ZAiNs wrote:
On March 11 2016 04:18 The_Red_Viper wrote:
On March 11 2016 04:01 ZAiNs wrote:
On March 11 2016 03:44 The_Red_Viper wrote:
See the problem i have with this is that the Ai will have such a big advantage through 'mechanics' alone.
It's much more interesting in GO because there is no difference in execution, tactics and strategy is all that matters here.

Even though there are a lot more possible "board states" in sc2, i am not sure if that really matters in the end if you theoretically have a player with unlimited APM and attention.


But hey, i have obviously very little idea about it and when google says starcraft would be the next step, maybe it's harder than i think (or they really want to somewhat limit the AI in the mechanics department so it comes down to tactis/strategy, which would be weird though)

How would it be weird to limit the mechanics? The goal is to be 'smarter' than a human, without limiting mechanics it wouldn't really prove anything or be an accomplishment. I imagine they would want to even limit the mechanics so that they're slightly below the absolute best players mechanically. Attention is a resource in SC2 and I think it'll be hard to give the AI imperfect mini-map awareness or imperfect mouse-accuracy without creating too complicated of a model, but things like actual keypresses a second and cursor speed will be easy to limit.

Because mechanics are such a big part about starcraft. By far the biggest. So how do we really make sure that the Ai didn't win through mechanics? It's impossible (imo) to build it exactly at the sweet spot. Attention is probably even a bigger deal than apm itself.
The only real way to make sure "it is fair" is to make the AI use the same hardware, mouse, keyboard and monitor.
If you don't do that then the result is questionable at best as far as i can tell

edit: and even then you will get a device which is superior to human flesh, so i dunno..
AI vs AI would be interesting to watch though, i would imagine tactis and strategy would be a way bigger deal there because the mechanical part could be made exactly even

I don't get what you mean by making the AI use a mouse, keyboard and monitor. The AI would still be able to move them with precision and speed far beyond a human. Speed and precision are big parts of SC2 but at the top-level they aren't what makes players usually win. If an AI that is restricted to the mechanics of an average progamer beats a top-level progamer then wouldn't be its mechanics that made it win.


I mean that the AI would have the same restrictions mechanically as the tpyical human. We only can interact with the game with the help of the hardware, mouse, keyboard and monitor.
The AI probably wouldn't do that, it could be everywhere at once (you as human cannot because the monitor simply doesn't make it possible, just as the mouse doen't make it possible to control different groups at once, etc)
If the human had another device (control the game directly with the brain or something similar) this maybe wouldn't be a limiting factor anymore.

But yeah if you can somehow make it so that the AI doesn't have better mechanics/multitasking/attention than the average pro player, then maybe this would be interesting (even though i am not so sure about that either, even though starcraft might have more possible "board states", i would imagine that most of them are completely irrelevant and that the actual depth of the game isn't anywhere near GO for example)
It being a game with limited information is the only interesting aspect about all of this i can see tbh

The number of game states in StarCraft is several magnitudes higher than Go, even if you somehow got rid of the irrelevant ones like obviously stupid openings (which really is something the AI would have to work out for itself), there would still be several magnitudes more game states for StarCraft. Regardless of what you think about the strategic depth of the game, the sheer number of game states makes things far more complicated for AI to figure out.


Just to be clear, let's say you place building X at place Y or Z, that are two different "board states" right?
Even if it means that placing your first supply depot in the enemy base probably isn't all that smart?

I get that it isn't "intuitive" for the AI like for a human being, but there surely are tons and tons of these things in sc2.
Even something like: I move my army (or even single marine) a few tiles on the left, it probably won't be the biggest deal but it surely is considered a different "board state" ?
If we want to play 100% perfectly these things have to be considered, but overall it probably doesn't matter at all i would imagine.
I don't think the same is true for GO? (i have no idea about GO though)
My statement was probably just simply this: A high lvl GO players surely possesses more tactical/strategical understanding than a starcraft professional, you don't have to be highly intelligent to play starcraft at a high lvl, the same probably isn't true for GO/chess. i think? (i can see why this isn't all that relevant to the main topic though ^^)

Well your first depot position is a bad example because it's actually very important (and even if it wasn't the AI would probably still figure out the best place for it). I get what you're saying though, like if you place your 4th Gateway one space to the left it's a trivially-different game-state which I'm sure feature in Go seeing as the board has 2 lines of symmetry. Even if you remove stuff like that and try to dumb the model down as much as possible you're still going to have a ridiculous number of game states. StarCraft BW and 2 both even have some random factors (more so in BW), even though they are minor they also would increase the complexity of things. How much 'human' strategy is needed is up for debate, but for an AI with mechanical limits conquering StarCraft will be far far more difficult than Go.
Vlad_Slymor
Profile Joined December 2015
France26 Posts
March 10 2016 22:08 GMT
#98
Honestly, I'm pretty sure it would still obliterate any player even with a strong APM cap.
That's the whole point of machine learning: cap it at 100 APM, and it will still find the single most optimal use for every of those actions. Add a 0-reaction time and a perfect decision making, and i can't even imagine how Flash is supposed to win.

Actually, an interesting challenge would probably be to find the minimum APM it needs to win...
disciple
Profile Blog Joined January 2008
9070 Posts
March 10 2016 22:11 GMT
#99
Considering the careers savior and stork had, I think some APM between 80 and 120 will be sufficient
Administrator"I'm a big deal." - ixmike88
WinterViewbot420
Profile Blog Joined December 2015
345 Posts
March 10 2016 22:46 GMT
#100
inb4 timena vs DeepMind in S league
Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next All
Please log in or register to reply.
Live Events Refresh
PiGosaur Monday
00:00
#35
PiGStarcraft603
CranKy Ducklings135
SteadfastSC123
davetesta48
Liquipedia
[ Submit Event ]
Live Streams
Refresh
StarCraft 2
PiGStarcraft603
Nina 195
RuFF_SC2 175
Livibee 126
SteadfastSC 123
StarCraft: Brood War
Britney 33531
Sea 4687
Nal_rA 349
Sharp 59
Leta 30
Icarus 9
Dota 2
monkeys_forever348
LuMiX1
Counter-Strike
Stewie2K514
Heroes of the Storm
Khaldor103
Other Games
summit1g8265
shahzam1084
WinterStarcraft451
ToD259
ViBE222
Maynarde118
Organizations
Other Games
gamesdonequick968
BasetradeTV82
StarCraft 2
Blizzard YouTube
StarCraft: Brood War
BSLTrovo
sctven
[ Show 15 non-featured ]
StarCraft 2
• Berry_CruncH255
• AfreecaTV YouTube
• intothetv
• Kozan
• IndyKCrew
• LaughNgamezSOOP
• Migwel
• sooper7s
StarCraft: Brood War
• Azhi_Dahaki18
• BSLYoutube
• STPLYoutube
• ZZZeroYoutube
League of Legends
• Lourlo1086
Other Games
• Scarra1141
• Shiphtur642
Upcoming Events
GSL Code S
5h 47m
Rogue vs GuMiho
Maru vs Solar
Online Event
20h 17m
Replay Cast
22h 17m
GSL Code S
1d 5h
herO vs Zoun
Classic vs Bunny
The PondCast
1d 6h
Replay Cast
1d 20h
WardiTV Invitational
2 days
OSC
2 days
Korean StarCraft League
2 days
SOOP
3 days
[ Show More ]
CranKy Ducklings
3 days
WardiTV Invitational
3 days
Cheesadelphia
3 days
CSO Cup
3 days
GSL Code S
4 days
Sparkling Tuna Cup
4 days
Replay Cast
4 days
Wardi Open
5 days
Replay Cast
5 days
Replay Cast
6 days
RSL Revival
6 days
Cure vs Percival
ByuN vs Spirit
Liquipedia Results

Completed

CSL Season 17: Qualifier 2
BGE Stara Zagora 2025
Heroes 10 EU

Ongoing

JPL Season 2
BSL 2v2 Season 3
BSL Season 20
KCM Race Survival 2025 Season 2
NPSL S3
Rose Open S1
CSL 17: 2025 SUMMER
2025 GSL S2
BLAST.tv Austin Major 2025
ESL Impact League Season 7
IEM Dallas 2025
PGL Astana 2025
Asian Champions League '25
BLAST Rivals Spring 2025
MESA Nomadic Masters
CCT Season 2 Global Finals
IEM Melbourne 2025
YaLLa Compass Qatar 2025
PGL Bucharest 2025
BLAST Open Spring 2025

Upcoming

Copa Latinoamericana 4
CSLPRO Last Chance 2025
CSLPRO Chat StarLAN 3
K-Championship
SEL Season 2 Championship
Esports World Cup 2025
HSC XXVII
Championship of Russia 2025
Murky Cup #2
Esports World Cup 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall Qual
IEM Cologne 2025
FISSURE Playground #1
TLPD

1. ByuN
2. TY
3. Dark
4. Solar
5. Stats
6. Nerchio
7. sOs
8. soO
9. INnoVation
10. Elazer
1. Rain
2. Flash
3. EffOrt
4. Last
5. Bisu
6. Soulkey
7. Mini
8. Sharp
Sidebar Settings...

Advertising | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use | Contact Us

Original banner artwork: Jim Warren
The contents of this webpage are copyright © 2025 TLnet. All Rights Reserved.