| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Bagration
United States18282 Posts
On March 11 2016 07:11 disciple wrote: Considering the careers savior and stork had, I think some APM between 80 and 120 will be sufficient Could you imagine a player with savior's strategy and game-sense, Boxer's creativity, and unlimited APM? | ||
|
Slayer91
Ireland23404 Posts
| ||
|
OkStyX
Canada1199 Posts
On March 11 2016 07:55 Slayer91 wrote: yeah, flash good response, yeah flash was the pinnacle of BW for a human haha. | ||
|
andrewlt
United States7702 Posts
On March 11 2016 07:11 disciple wrote: Considering the careers savior and stork had, I think some APM between 80 and 120 will be sufficient Lots of pro APM isn't really effective APM. Hyuk once had all of 4 zerglings to defend when Flash caught him unaware with a rush. He was hitting 800 apm doing god knows what. | ||
|
Shinokuki
United States924 Posts
| ||
|
WinterViewbot420
345 Posts
On March 11 2016 08:37 Shinokuki wrote: Why is this in sc2 section if alpha go is playing bw and flash mostly played bw and won lots of championships.. Because everybody knows OP so telling him he did something wrong is bad in TL's eyes | ||
|
Deleted User 3420
24492 Posts
| ||
|
ZAiNs
United Kingdom6525 Posts
On March 11 2016 08:37 Shinokuki wrote: Why is this in sc2 section if alpha go is playing bw and flash mostly played bw and won lots of championships.. Because it's very relevant to SC2 as well, and more people will see it in the SC2 section. | ||
|
BeStFAN
483 Posts
ideally flash would be playing a protoss AI | ||
|
bITt.mAN
Switzerland3693 Posts
Of course "playing StarCraft optimally" would be really cool - I would love it if the game could be 'solved'. Similar to watching some speed-runs that play full-tilt, ultra-risky, and after the 500th try they finally get that perfectly lucky run (such as the Deus Ex 1 or Jedi Knight: Jedi Outcast runs on SDA). The problem is, DeepMind playing Go and DeepMind playing Starcraft is not a valid comparison. 'Solving' Go doesn't guarantee you have 'solved' Starcraft, because Starcraft presents bigger, different types of challenges. Here are the two big ones (I'm no comp-sci or AI expert, btw, these are the obvious ones). 1. Limited information (which is the point Flash is making).. In Go, both players can see the entire game state, not in SC. You have to react pre-emptively, you have to get observers just in case. Working with limited information is hard (and don't get me started on mind-games, series strategy, or going on tilt). For example, there are two places your opponent can expand to, you can only afford to scan one of them. You can use the process of elimination, but how the hell will the computer teach itself to do that? It's a new category of idea. It's not just 'push the buttons slightly faster and more precisely', it needs to THINK, it needs to teach itself this new 'process-of-elimination' mechanic.. Sure you can hard-code it to play, assuming the opponent is using a rational build order - but that predictability is straightforward to subvert. 2. Computational throughput. The whole fun of RTS > turn-based, is the real-time trade off: "Do I commit to my current decision" OR "Do I hold out for a better decision". Computing more takes more resources (time), if you wait too long to act they'll kill you. I don't enjoy Chess for this reason. In SC, if I send my units to the far side of the map, then change my mind, I can undo the 'badness' of the situation if I change my mind soon enough. In Chess, you're not allowed to undo your move up-to the point of the opponent responding, You commit, that's it. Now how the hell do you program an AI to on-the-fly adjust it's computational depth, where sometimes it thinks a lot, and other times it knows just to act (Flash for example, can sim-city when he needs to, but other times just throws down depots messily to not get mentally slowed down). The way humans manage this balance is to practice so much, they delegate 'thinking' to 'instinct', they don't think about the right move, they act according to how they feel in the moment. But it works, because 'how they feel' is trained to instinctively make the right decisions. They don't compute, they do by impulse. THAT is HARD for an AI! Of course AI could multi-task and micro better than humans, but the real challenge is dealing with limited information (scouting, assuming, and adjusting, as opposed to sticking to your cookie-cutter 'optimal strategy'), and having good decision-making fast enough (rather than searching DEEP, which takes time). Oh and needless to say, Go's mechanics are vastly simpler than that of SC. Economy, defense, attack, tech switching, positioning, harassment ... it's a whole 'nother level of difficulty to program for! | ||
|
ilikeredheads
Canada1995 Posts
| ||
|
BeStFAN
483 Posts
On March 11 2016 09:25 ilikeredheads wrote: Of course Flash can win, he's a terminator as well. Machine vs Machine the first terminator had issues when it faced the next iterations of terminators after the first film  | ||
|
OkStyX
Canada1199 Posts
| ||
|
OkStyX
Canada1199 Posts
On March 11 2016 08:49 travis wrote: like other people said, apm would have to be limited. otherwise, the ai would win on apm alone. It could macro perfectly while nonstop microing 100 different units in 100 different spots all at once. wouldnt that be so exciting to watch though? | ||
|
WinterViewbot420
345 Posts
On March 11 2016 09:46 Shakattak wrote: wouldnt that be so exciting to watch though? AI vs AI TvT on BW would be a nightmare though | ||
|
LetaBot
Netherlands557 Posts
On March 11 2016 02:36 Cuce wrote: btw does broodwar has a hardlimit for command accepted per frame? like 12 per frame or something. I wouldnt be suprised if there was, at least a limit to buffering There is a buffer yes. When you exceed it StarCraft Brood War wont process any further commands. Thus you cannot simply spam apm all the time. In general, for the people who think the bot can win based on its high apm alone: If that was true then the Berkeley Overmind would have defeated Flash already. As a matter of fact, micro-management is currently the biggest issue in the top StarCraft AI bots. This has to do with the fact that micro-management is in the complexity class EXPTIME . So the main issue is deciding where to attack/move based on the information you have. High apm isn't going to help you if you don't know what to do with it. | ||
|
rockslave
Brazil318 Posts
Go is already a game with an impossibly big search tree for brute force. Even chess is. The classical approach of heuristics coupled with brute force solved chess, but it was never even Platinum in Go. The only reason for AIs starting to beat Go players is a somewhat recent innovation in AI: deep learning. From 10 years ago or so, there were several advancements to machine learning that made a gigantic leap in many fields for which computers always sucked. For instance: character recognition used to be a PitA, but nowadays you can write Python code that gets it right 99% of the time in a few minutes (the breakthrough was a particular optimization technique called backpropagation). Even if you cap micro a lot, StarCraft isn't too much different from a combination of Go and a bunch of pattern recognition. That is precisely what machine learning solves. It's not easy though, there is a lot of clever training and parametrization to be done... But if they put it in their roadmap (with enough money), it will happen. Oh, and imperfect information is not a problem at all. Even with a more standard (backtracking / brute force) approach, you only need to throw some probabilities around. It's rather easy to write programs that play Poker well, for instance (discount the poker face though). | ||
|
Superbanana
2369 Posts
 Don't say "solved". Chess is not solved, Go is not solved. But the point that the breakthrough is learning is very interesting. SC2 may not be too different from Go. While its not solved, chess can be played very well with processing power brute force. But its interesting that chess engines have a big game database, specially in the early game the computer checks the known positions instead of trying to find out everything possible from the start. This way it can go deeper in positions that make sense and don't bother looking at silly moves. edited | ||
|
vOdToasT
Sweden2870 Posts
After that, they will only lack the ability to artistically express and describe things that are valuable to humanity, because they don't know what it's like to be human. Eventually, they may be able to understand that, and create art, too. That is why I support cybernetic enhancement for humanity. If we do not find a way to give our brains the ability to do what computers can do, then we will be doomed to an existence as an inferior weaker species while artificial intelligence takes care of every thing for us. | ||
|
Superbanana
2369 Posts
On March 11 2016 10:54 vOdToasT wrote: It's only a matter of time until artificial intelligence can defeat the greatest of us at all games. After that, they will only lack the ability to artistically express and describe things that are valuable to humanity, because they don't know what it's like to be human. Eventually, they may be able to understand that, and create art, too. They could describe art, they could create good art. The day they can enjoy it i quit. | ||
| ||
|
|
GSL
Shopify Rebellion Sundays
Spirit vs Mixu
BSL
Ret vs TerrOr
DragOn vs StRyKeR
Replay Cast
Afreeca Starleague
Shine vs Rush
WardiTV Weekly
Monday Night Weeklies
Sparkling Tuna Cup
Afreeca Starleague
Light vs EffOrt
PiGosaur Cup
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
