32 ms·
DeepMind – StarCraft II Demonstration
- alexandercrohde 8y agoI'm confused, I don't see anything new here. I looked at the youtube channel and don't see a demonstration...
- recursive 8y agoIt's not published yet. It's scheduled for Jan 24.
- benrbray 8y agothen maybe OP should've waited until Jan 24 to post this...
- defertoreptar 8y agoBut then I wouldn't know to set a reminder to see this live.
- Cilvic 8y ago>On January 24, at 19:00 CET Guess we have to wait
- wukerplank 8y ago> On January 24, at 19:00 CET, head over to... You looked too early.
- superpermutat0r 8y agoJan 24th I guess is the publishing date
- SketchySeaBeast 8y ago"DeepMind has been hard at work training their AI (or agent) to better understand StarCraft II. Once it started to grasp the basic rules of the game, it started exhibiting amusing behavior such as immediately worker rushing its opponent, which actually had a success rate of 50% against the 'Insane' difficulty standard StarCraft II AI!" Well, that's fun. I mean, if it works, it works.
- b_tterc_p 8y agoThat doesn’t really sound like it understands the game... is this not training by playing against itself? How is it not learning the flawed reasoning behind this strategy?
- __blockcipher__ 8y ago>How is it not learning the flawed reasoning behind this strategy If it's playing against the Starcraft 2 blizzard AI, it will learn a lot of "bad habits" because outright bad strategies work against the AI. Thus the worker rushing.
- zacharyz 8y agoWhat makes it flawed? It is a legit strategy that occasionally works at the pro level.
- sudo_rm 8y agoNot a worker rush. Worker rushes only really work against lower ranked players that panic and do not know how to respond. The reason is that while the attacking player sends over their workers to attack, the defending player is still constantly making workers. By the time that attackers get there the defending player should have more workers. He simply has to command all of them to fight the opponent's workers.
- MichaelDickens 8y agohttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KP_ZcpZIBDQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KP_ZcpZIBDQ This is a pro-level game where one of the players worker rushes, and the rush is moderately successful.
- wpasc 8y agoI wonder how Starcraft2 compares to Dota 2 in terms of difficulty for the AI. Moreover, I'd be interested to see how OpenAI and DeepMind's techniques, models differ in approaching these games.
- steve_musk 8y agoI would think SC2 is harder than Dota 2. In Dota you control 5 units while SC2 you can build hundreds.
- baq 8y agoin dota there are 10 players, so you have to coordinate. apples to apples this would mean 5 indepdendent bots per team that have to learn that. there are also summons to control and elaborate spell interactions.
- make3 8y agoat the same time that could be seen as an advantage for the machine, as multitasking is much easier for a massively parallel computer not limited by muscle movement or vision than for us. we'll see. depends on the usual stuff like limited apm ofc
- loser777 8y agoI wonder if they stuck with their original game playing API that takes in some "visual" features. In that case it would be "limited" by vision.
- zhobbs 8y agoTechnically, in Dota you only control 1 unit. That being said, I don't know if OpenAI's algorithm had 5 independent agents controlling 1 unit each, or 1 agent controlling 5 units.
- mooneater 8y agoOpenAI Five had a separate agent per unit, no explicit coordination.
- DonnyV 8y agoI recently got my ass beat by a player that had a 400+ APM. Is that even humanly possible or is it one of these bots?
- lhorie 8y agoDefinitely possible. A progamer like Serral for example can maintain 500+ apm on 20+ min games, and can peak to 700+ apm.
- postalrat 8y ago70 real actions and 630 useless clicks.
- Veelox 8y agoThis comment makes me think you have never played starcraft.
- edmundhuber 8y agoI play a ton of SC2 and he is mostly right.
- Rebelgecko 8y agoHave you? It's "easy" to get an APM over 1,000: Step 1: Hotkey units on 1-9 Step 2: Slam face on keyboard numpad Holding down a hotkey to build things (even if you don't have the minerals) also increases your APM. Lots of players (especially the pros) will spam actions in the quieter parts of the early game to keep their fingers warmed up, or to start building a unit the millisecond they have enough minerals to afford it.
- murderfs 8y agoAPM accounting in SC2 is dumb and broken for Zerg: if you're building 100 zerglings, you select all of your hatcheries with one action, select your larvae with one action, and then hold down Z for 100 actions in a split second. It's not unreasonable to have 200+ real APM in bursts, though. For example, at the beginning of games in Brood War, pretty much anyone competent is going to do something along the lines of the following in about 3 seconds: click command center build scv select all scvs mine a mineral patch select a scv mine a different mineral patch select a scv mine a different mineral patch select a scv mine a different mineral patch click command center set command center hotkey set command center rally point set camera hotkey which is 280 APM. You'll see similar bursts during macro cycles, which are generally just (click building, press M) repeated 10 or so times in a short period.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- fartboy69 8y agoAs though StarCraft multiplayer wasn't difficult enough! In all seriousness, this is pretty neat. Does anyone know if it already knows everything on the map, or if it has to discover units like the rest of us?
- lrem 8y agoThe previous attempts at this would plug in the AI to a regular player interface. Tournaments would also impose APM limits to prevent inhuman rate of actions.
- postalrat 8y agoDoes APM alone somehow win games? If that's the case this AI stuff is trivial.
- jandrese 8y agoThe SC community seriously obsesses over APM, but I'm not entirely sure if it's correlation or causation. I personally think it's overblown and became popular because it's one of the few things you can easily measure and compare between players.
- kochthesecond 8y agoit's largely overvalued, but you probably can't be a pro without at least ~150, slightly less than 3 actions per second, increasing as the game goes on.
- s_m_t 8y agoWell, ignoring spam clicks, APM is a measure of the number of decisions that a player makes throughout the course of the game. You'd expect a player making more decisions to come out ahead in a game as fast paced and action oriented as Starcraft.
- cjbprime 8y agoIt's clearly correlation. A pro will still play at a high level with mouse only, or even keyboard only. Example keyboard only game: https://youtu.be/cY0d2kHzrxY https://youtu.be/cY0d2kHzrxY
- neovive 8y agoFor those interested in building their own AI to play Starcraft II, here is a very comprehensive, 17 video series by sentdex (Python AI in StarCraft II): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v3LJ6VvpfgI&list=PLQVvvaa0QuDcT3tPehHdisGMc8TInNqdq https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v3LJ6VvpfgI&list=PLQVvvaa0Qu.... He walks you through building and training a neural network to play Starcraft II via the same API used by DeepMind.
- cybertronic 8y agoVery useful. Thank you!
- krasi0 8y agoAnd for those interested in making their own AI to play Starcraft 1 BroodWar and become a part of the huge BroodWar AI community (get in touch on Discord at: https://discord.gg/w9wRRrF https://discord.gg/w9wRRrF), they can follow the following tutorial: https://sscaitournament.com/index.php?action=tutorial https://sscaitournament.com/index.php?action=tutorial Your AI would then be able to participate in tournaments and fight other AIs on the existing ladders. Additionally, one could watch BW bots fighting each other on: https://www.twitch.tv/sscait https://www.twitch.tv/sscait
- sonko 8y agoAnd those who would like to follow developing a bot from scratch, I'd like to plug in here my blog: www.makingcomputerdothings.com There, I also host a podcast about SC AI development, which can be interesting for everyone. The podcast is uploaded to youtube as well: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCHPl6OFov2v8SK14oQUHY2w https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCHPl6OFov2v8SK14oQUHY2w
- sct202 8y agoI wouldn't be surprised that an AI would be good at StarCraft. If it's allowed to have high constant APM, an AI could do micro maneuvers that most people can't reasonably do like consistent unit splits and fixing any weird unit pathing issues at bottlenecks.
- rcheu 8y agoI’m pretty sure they’ll limit the APM (or do something more fine grained since not all APM is equivalent). It’s already well known that bots can outmicro humans in certain aspects like splitting and focusing the correct units.
- summerlight 8y agoThey limit APM under 200 or something around that number.
- gwern 8y ago180 APM, specifically: pg6 https://arxiv.org/abs/1708.04782 https://arxiv.org/abs/1708.04782
- b_tterc_p 8y agoI have a hypothesis and I’m curious to hear responses. The ability of Ai to work as a team with other AI has shown to be relatively weak. They can do individual tasks well but are relatively agnostic to others (thinking the Dota AI from a while ago). Might this be improved by forcing the AIs to send messages to each other at a constant interval? I feel like this would lead to the development of simple language built around intentions and help the Ai to consider its allies.
- simmanian 8y agoIm woefully qualified to answer any AI related questions, but I must ask, why do you think forcing bots to send messages to each other at a constant interval would lead to the development of simple language and encourage bots to be more aware of each other? If you reward the behavior of writing in chat, bots would start writing gibberish in chat all the time. Communication in animals can be traced all the way back to cells sending each other messages to organize themselves. Cells began to have division of labor and work together, and as multicellular organisms increased in complexity, so did the complexity in their communication. But what would happen if you put these cells in charge of playing Dota and force it to send each other messages? Would the cells somehow develop a simple language built around intentions? Or does it still not understand the concept of intention? Video games like Dota are extremely complicated and made specifically for human biases. We've obtained these biases over many many many generations of evolution. Machines are getting better at doing human tasks, but they still do not possess all the human biases (and I think it'd be quite scary if we actually get there). That's why these bots/algorithms/AIs can do simple tasks like identifying objects really well but they don't know what to do with them, yet. Having machines engage in meaningful conversations with other machines and plan together is a much bigger problem to solve than having them farm up, buy items, and attack things.
- b_tterc_p 8y agoI don’t think you understood my point. I’m not saying train the robots to say things by rewarding them for doing so. I’m saying “force” them to do so as a hard coded rule. And also force them to read the chats of the other AI allies as an input. Continuously train the model to map the messages into an embedding space and use the embedding for decision making. This would likely benefit by some cherry picked training data, but I think AI could get good at communicating their state to each other. Star craft has too much entropy to make a simple example. Imagine the game was just, you pick a random number and your ally has to guess what it is. I think Ai’s could learn to communicate this using a similar training design.
- oskkejdjdkjd 8y agoEveryone likes sci-fi. Star Wars, halo, Star Trek, etc. all these franchises have something in common: they depict AIs working alongside humans. I think that it’s an important demonstration of cognitive dissonance about AI. Fans of these franchises aren’t bothered by the glaring contradictions that some fictional elements create. For example, Star Trek features transporters that teleport people across space and in reality the existence of such a machine would change the economics of many different things very drastically. Life would look a lot different if teleportation were allowed to effect the economics of human life. Another example is communication technology. Star Trek had what we now call smart phones. But they still lived their lives the way people did in the 80s. We now know that when smart phones are present, people stare at them all the time, don’t go out much, are never in trouble because they can’t communicate (car broken down) and etc. it’s not the best example but it’s the only one that actually played out irl. My point here is that people in general do not seem to appreciate the change in economics that are prompted by new things — people are only able to imagine some new technology being used in some niche case. It doesn’t bother anyone, or break their suspension of disbelief, when some groundbreaking new technology completely fails to alter the world and society in a realistic way in a fictional setting. But any other breach of “realism” is somehow very offending. In halo, you have an AI that lives in your power armor and her name is Cortana. Cortana can sense what you see, hear, etc. Cortana is seen to be super smart on multiple occasions and it is clear to the player. This doesn’t bother anyone. It bothers me now, though. If all of this is true, the following would happen. Cortana senses the presence of enemies faster than you. she hears them and is able to identify how many based on their foot steps. She becomes annoyed with how sloppy you are, how many enemies you didn’t even notice and how slow you are to respond to them. She suggests that she take over your power suit. You find yourself in a situation you can’t handle and are forced to give her the reigns. She jumps into action dispatching enemies with speed and accuracy that you’ve never seen before. She shoots enemies as they step out from cover. Your movements are so fast that you vomit. She wipes out army after army as you passively watch, bewildered. As you go through the game, you are on a mission to unravel the mysteries of halo and find a way to survive. Cortana assesses the battle space and concludes that you need to travel east. She notices several patterns of ancient runes and directs you to investigate a hidden passage. Her assessments seem incredible and bizarre but they consistently prove to be correct and eventually she ends up making every decision. At the end of the day, if Halo were real then it would be a story about a man who passively sat inside a suit and watched an ai save the world. He probably would die in the suit at some point due to experiencing high g forces during some adventurous fight or maneuver and it would be a story about an ai who saved the world with a dead guy in the suit. It doesn’t make you feel warm and fuzzy like halo is supposed to, does it?
- throwaway415415 8y agoI couldn't find an actual video of a game.
- a_f 8y agoThe demo is tomorrow on Twitch and Youtube (24th Jan)
- anotheryou 8y agotl;dr: wait for jan 27th I really hate marketing pre-news...
- fingerfoodtasty 8y agoIn other news water is wet