8 ms·
"The contest Facebook entered, like most AI research in the area, used an older version of StarCraft, which is considered equally difficult for software to mast
by Merem 9y ago
"The contest Facebook entered, like most AI research in the area, used an older version of StarCraft, which is considered equally difficult for software to master."
I'm surprised this one hasn't been called out yet but Starcraft: Brood War and Starcraft II are completely different games, not just different versions.
And apart from what was already mentioned regarding information on the scene, this link is pretty useful: http://sscaitournament.com/index.php?action=tutorial http://sscaitournament.com/index.php?action=tutorial
An older post on this topic: http://www.teamliquid.net/blogs/485544-intro-to-scbw-ai-development http://www.teamliquid.net/blogs/485544-intro-to-scbw-ai-deve...
Facebook: facebook.com/groups/bwapi
As for SSCAIT in particular: http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft/SSCAIT http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft/SSCAIT
- bfung 9y agoHmm, are they truly completely different games? From a high level, it seems like the elements for an AI to learn are mostly the same: Resource gathering and optimization, map/location battle optimizations, building/technology decisions... It's not like Starcraft: verison X is different than Starcraft: version Y is different the way Starcraft and Hearthstone are different games.
- XR0CSWV3h3kZWg 9y agoHonestly from an AI perspective SC:BW and SC2 are probably more similar than from a human's perspective. 12+ unit selection, multi building selection & intelligent worker rallies aren't huge improvements for AI.
- haeffin 9y agoSC2 ticks way faster than SC1 though, which you don't notice much as a human, but you might change your strategy when designing the ai components.
- XR0CSWV3h3kZWg 9y agoAlso I'd imagine the amount of time you spend making sure that units will path efficiently is way less!
- baddox 9y agoBut doesn't that just make the search space of possible moves per unit time larger? That would require more processing power, but it doesn't seem like it would necessarily change the fundamentals of how the AI works.
- lazzlazzlazz 9y agoThey are truly completely different games.
- jasonlotito 9y agoSo which one isn't an RTS?
- seattle_spring 9y ago"Apples and bananas are basically the same thing because they're both fruit."
- __s 9y agoUp next: if a dog fucks a cat do they birth kittens or puppies?
- jasonlotito 9y agoI didn't say they are basically they same. However, you are saying they share nothing in common.
- lkbm 9y agoAre Star Craft and Red Alert the same game?
- bfung 9y agoFrom creating an AI perspective - they are actually pretty similar games! All the elements are there, the end goal is mostly the same, the constraints on the systems are not all too different...
- jasonlotito 9y agoNo, but neither did I claim it. However, my argument wasn't that. It was that they are not completely different. Their are similarities between the two. Do Star Craft and Red Alert share absolutely nothing in common? If they do, you agree with me!
- FlorianRappl 9y agoI agree with the sentiment that for a human the difference is much larger than for a machine, however, taking into consideration that a huge amount of the AI in SCBW needs to be on the micro (i.e., in-battle) execution which is - for the most part - handled by the in-game AI in SC2 I feel both games are different enough on AI development. Some basics are definitely shared, but beyond a certain level the two games go in different directions. One thing to add is the openBW project (http://www.openbw.com http://www.openbw.com). It is truly amazing: The guys there managed to reverse engineer the full SCBW engine (I thought that's nearly impossible, as the whole flow depends a lot on implementation details, some of the details are even considered bugs, which turned out to be just the right implementation to balance the game perfectly...).
- bfung 9y agoIt happens that SC2 implements certain micro AI functions for the game player, however, that doesn't stop a player from micro-ing all the units themselves, just like in SC1. The number of units in SC2 make it much harder to micro for humans, hence the game provides help. But the human player experience shouldn't define the AI player behavior; especially one that is to learn the game on it's own. Breaking down the goals, components, and constraints of the games, I'd actually say SC1 and SC2 are pretty similar games, especially to an AI on both micro and macro levels.
- nurettin 9y agoExtra waypoint actions, better pathing and the propensity to form nicer circles around an opponent targeted by an attack command isn't what I'd call micro AI. Most of that choppy feeling you get after switching to classic is because of how tiles and stacking is handled in sc2 where units step on each other's toes and slowly ease away and tiles are much smaller.
- taw55 9y agoI haven’t played either, but I know for a fact that they use different pathfinding methods (grid vs navmesh, II has swarm behavior).
- david-cako 9y agoAI has a significant edge in micro and mechanics in BW that is much less significant in SC2.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- dsjoerg 9y agoI'd say about as similar as football and soccer. Both involve getting the ball thingy into the opponent's end-of-field thingy. Indeed lots of common skills.