4 ms·
>Progress is much farther along than I expected. I had thought this as well, but the more I think about it the more I'm questioning how far along the bots actu
by chibg10 8y ago
>Progress is much farther along than I expected.
I had thought this as well, but the more I think about it the more I'm questioning how far along the bots actually are.
They're excellent at teamfighting. No doubt about it. But they seem to be inferior to humans at nearly everything else. Basically anything that requires strategic thinking, the bots pail in comparison to even a 3-4k mmr player. I'm really starting to suspect that the bots have essentially been able to be successful purely due to their tactical abilities. And I see very little reassuring progress in strategic abilities tbh. For example, the highground push with no buybacks on the AI side that ended in a 5-man buyback and teamwipe from the humans was a glaring strategic error. The warding is bad. The Rosh play is terrible. Item choices (another enormous strategic element) are still scripted. Nearly all heroes with abilities that require significant strategic thinking are left out of the AI's hero pool. Axe was pushing Radiant top without a TP while his base was getting destroyed and all of his other teammates were dead.
On one hand, it's easy to feel like OpenAI Five is making good progress because it's legitimately challenging pros. Upon deeper analysis though, the bots haven't actually demonstrated ability at more than a 2.5k-mmr level on anything other than laning, teamfighting, and perhaps defensive map movement. Given that I haven't seen much evidence that the AI is making progress on the truly strategic elements of the game, I'm not entirely convinced that what we are seeing isn't close to a plateau already.
More breakthroughs are certainly possible, but I've seen enough to make me more skeptical than I was before I'd seen OpenAI Five play with my own eyes.
- rightbyte 8y agoI feel the bots greatest strength are their "aimbot" abilities. They have such great precision from their "targetEnemy(obj)". They know perfectly when in range or not. They are never looking on the other side of the map. Without this they would get stomped.
- arenaninja 8y agoI think you're right. The mechanics of the game are HUGE. From misclicking, miscasting, mistiming a spell, last hitting, etc.
- BaronSamedi 8y agoI agree with you though I still think what the OpenAI team has achieved is impressive. Dota has two levels: the strategic and the tactical. The AI is very good at the tactical level (teamfighting) but poor at the strategic level. Perhaps they could train a "Captain AI" through replay analysis that would direct the player AIs? I could see the Captain AI having various modules to help it decide what should be done next. For example, a drafting module, a module to predict where the enemy players currently are (some kind of threat heatmap?), what the enemy players are likely to do next (i.e., where they will farm, smoking, roshing, etc.), and what items the team needs (i.e., centralized item purchase decisions). I imagine these modules would be trained in an entirely different way from the way the AIs are trained in-game. Technically, I can't help wonder if some kind of hybrid ANN-expert system architecture wouldn't work better. ANNs are rightfully popular due to their effectiveness but they seem so inefficient in this case. A few hand-coded rules could eliminate the basic mistakes the AI makes, and for the rest they could evolve the rules using some type of genetic programming. The latter would still allow the AI to come up with its own novel approach to the game.