Now that perfect information games have been "solved" it will be interesting to see how these teams move up to exponentially harder (IMO) problems where limited

Now that perfect information games have been "solved" it will be interesting to see how these teams move up to exponentially harder (IMO) problems where limited information gives the cognitive abilities of humans a massive edge over the brute force skill of computers. Look at how Blizzard did computer opponent AI for games like Starcraft and Warcraft in the early 2000s. The "insane" AI builds its base and units well, controls its troops quickly, and can micro manage different types of units. But its real strength is that it gets 2x the normal amount of resources that a human player gets, allowing it to build structures sooner than human players and build 2x the units. This is the necessary tradeoff to make up for the fact that a human can recognize and exploit computer weaknesses, and the computer generally can't infer what its opponent is doing through the subtle hints that humans pick up on. For example if you catch even a slight glimpse of a certain type of unit an enemy has, or see that an enemy has moved into a certain part of the map early on, you can guess with a reasonable confidence level what build or strategy they are going for without seeing the full playing board. “Those multiplayer games are harder than Go, but not that much higher,” Campbell tells IEEE Spectrum. “A group has already beaten the best players at Dota 2, though it was a restricted version of the game; Starcraft may be a little harder. I think both games are within 2 to 3 years of solution.” 2-3 years would be amazing to solve these problems IMO for non-perfect info games.