6 ms·

In the showmatched they made the computer have to look at a regular screen to control, the stalker micro was much less impressive - and mana won.

by cm2012 8y ago

Jyaif 8y ago
The AI lost because it completely messed up the response to the immortal drop, nothing to do with micro.
- celeritascelery 8y ago
  Mana got himself in the same situation where he was surrounded by stalkers on multiple sides, but this time the micro wasn’t so crazy that he couldn’t manage it, and he was able to take on one group at a time. The immortal drop, while unanswered, was not really that effectual.
  - setr 8y ago
    That time, the ai didn’t really even try to engage. In fact, the ending of the match was marked by the entirely absent group of stalkers as the natural was engaged. It’s likely safer to say the AI was confused in general at that point, possibly related to the camera change, but we didn’t really get to see the quality of stalker micro that game
    - nickpsecurity 8y ago
      "possibly related to the camera change, but we didn’t really get to see the quality of stalker micro that game " In software, changes in assumptions can break what depended on them. There could be many assumptions in its neural net centered on full visibility. They should probably retrain all or just some from scratch with the camera change in from the beginning to see what happens. Then, it will be firmly encoded into the strategies over time.
      - maksimum 8y ago
        They mentioned that they retrained after the camera change and it was equivalent to the AIs that beat Mana 5-0 by their metrics.
  - cjbprime 8y ago
    But it was answered: AlphaStar pulled a huge stalker army that was about to hit MaNa's base all the way back home to (attempt to) answer the drop, repeatedly. If you have more complexity to your army but fewer army units, as MaNa did, a delay like that is how you win the game.
    - b_tterc_p 8y ago
      It’s funny because this works against the standard Ai too.
      - nickpsecurity 8y ago
        That's what I said on Lobsters. They were always good at builds, micro's, etc. The one thing they couldn't do was judge human intent, esp if they were being mislead (esp time wasting). I was waiting for one of the players to try to screw with its head to see what it did. Mana showed two gaps: the back and forth thing; that it ignored the observers giving up constant strategy information. Then, he got the first win. Now, the questions are how many more such glitches will show up and can they eliminate them with better algorithms?
      - cjbprime 8y ago
        And against human players up to Masters 3 or so :) When you're still using the all-army hotkey, defending with a small and precise group isn't happening.
  - TulliusCicero 8y ago
    The immortal drop let him keep AlphaStar occupied while he built up a critical mass of immortals (it becomes harder and harder to effectively micro stalkers against immortals as numbers go up, probably even for an AI), then let him put AlphaStar in an awkward position when it was camping near where the warp prism was hiding.
- Laremere 8y ago
  This was my read as well. It seems that Mana simply found a strategy that the AI had not found. Due to not having trained against it, the AI produced nonsense results. The commentators noted that the obvious response was to build a Pheonix and just completely shut down the harassment. The situation is similar to Alpha Go vs Lee Sedol match 4. One of the hardest parts about these kinds of human vs ai expositions is making sure the AI has explored the full possibility space, so that can handle all situations. The techniques at play lack the ability to perceive a completely new situation and formulate a good response. (Though anyone who's lost to cheese in games they later learned easy counters for know that humans, while better than state of the art AI, aren't perfect here either.)
CydeWeys 8y ago
For now. Give them another month. This is like AlphaGo vs Fan Hui all over again -- people knocked that accomplishment at the time because he was just a master, not one of the top players in the world. Well, not much longer, AlphaGo beat Lee Sedol, the best player in the world. The ceiling here is going to be incredibly high, much higher than the level of play that people are capable of, even when restricted to a single window.
- tsbinz 8y ago
  Lee Sedol was not the best player anymore at that time (not saying it wasn't an impressive/important achievement, but overstating it doesn't help either - the "beat best human players part" came later in 2017).
  - eurg 8y ago
    I don't understand who's downvoting you, this is accurate. While AlphaGo/Zero improved quickly to superhuman play, we are just in this thread comparing timelines, so that is relevant.
  - NhanH 8y ago
    Lee Sedol was still top 5, certainly no worse than top 10 at the time. By all mean he wasn't the best and most dominant, but the difference with the top was tiny.
- gambler 8y ago
  It's not the accomplishment that people knock. It's the spin, the inaccurate article titles and the hype.
  - CydeWeys 8y ago
    It doesn't seem like hype to me -- it seems like a genuine, significant accomplishment. Sure, they might not be able to beat the best pro players consistently right now, but I suspect that is right around the corner. Would you rather they stay completely mum until they've reached that goal too? And why? I'd rather know now, and then be able to follow along as it gets better and beats higher and higher-ranked players.

In the showmatched they made the computer have to look at a regular screen to control, the stalker micro was much less impressive - and mana won.

by cm2012 8y ago

In the showmatched they made the computer have to look at a regular screen to control, the stalker micro was much less impressive - and mana won.

Jyaif 8y ago

The AI lost because it completely messed up the response to the immortal drop, nothing to do with micro.

celeritascelery 8y ago
Mana got himself in the same situation where he was surrounded by stalkers on multiple sides, but this time the micro wasn’t so crazy that he couldn’t manage it, and he was able to take on one group at a time. The immortal drop, while unanswered, was not really that effectual.
- setr 8y ago
  That time, the ai didn’t really even try to engage. In fact, the ending of the match was marked by the entirely absent group of stalkers as the natural was engaged. It’s likely safer to say the AI was confused in general at that point, possibly related to the camera change, but we didn’t really get to see the quality of stalker micro that game
  - nickpsecurity 8y ago
    "possibly related to the camera change, but we didn’t really get to see the quality of stalker micro that game " In software, changes in assumptions can break what depended on them. There could be many assumptions in its neural net centered on full visibility. They should probably retrain all or just some from scratch with the camera change in from the beginning to see what happens. Then, it will be firmly encoded into the strategies over time.
    - maksimum 8y ago
      They mentioned that they retrained after the camera change and it was equivalent to the AIs that beat Mana 5-0 by their metrics.
- cjbprime 8y ago
  But it was answered: AlphaStar pulled a huge stalker army that was about to hit MaNa's base all the way back home to (attempt to) answer the drop, repeatedly. If you have more complexity to your army but fewer army units, as MaNa did, a delay like that is how you win the game.
  - b_tterc_p 8y ago
    It’s funny because this works against the standard Ai too.
    - nickpsecurity 8y ago
      That's what I said on Lobsters. They were always good at builds, micro's, etc. The one thing they couldn't do was judge human intent, esp if they were being mislead (esp time wasting). I was waiting for one of the players to try to screw with its head to see what it did. Mana showed two gaps: the back and forth thing; that it ignored the observers giving up constant strategy information. Then, he got the first win. Now, the questions are how many more such glitches will show up and can they eliminate them with better algorithms?
    - cjbprime 8y ago
      And against human players up to Masters 3 or so :) When you're still using the all-army hotkey, defending with a small and precise group isn't happening.
- TulliusCicero 8y ago
  The immortal drop let him keep AlphaStar occupied while he built up a critical mass of immortals (it becomes harder and harder to effectively micro stalkers against immortals as numbers go up, probably even for an AI), then let him put AlphaStar in an awkward position when it was camping near where the warp prism was hiding.
Laremere 8y ago
This was my read as well. It seems that Mana simply found a strategy that the AI had not found. Due to not having trained against it, the AI produced nonsense results. The commentators noted that the obvious response was to build a Pheonix and just completely shut down the harassment. The situation is similar to Alpha Go vs Lee Sedol match 4. One of the hardest parts about these kinds of human vs ai expositions is making sure the AI has explored the full possibility space, so that can handle all situations. The techniques at play lack the ability to perceive a completely new situation and formulate a good response. (Though anyone who's lost to cheese in games they later learned easy counters for know that humans, while better than state of the art AI, aren't perfect here either.)

CydeWeys 8y ago

For now. Give them another month. This is like AlphaGo vs Fan Hui all over again -- people knocked that accomplishment at the time because he was just a master, not one of the top players in the world. Well, not much longer, AlphaGo beat Lee Sedol, the best player in the world. The ceiling here is going to be incredibly high, much higher than the level of play that people are capable of, even when restricted to a single window.

tsbinz 8y ago
Lee Sedol was not the best player anymore at that time (not saying it wasn't an impressive/important achievement, but overstating it doesn't help either - the "beat best human players part" came later in 2017).
- eurg 8y ago
  I don't understand who's downvoting you, this is accurate. While AlphaGo/Zero improved quickly to superhuman play, we are just in this thread comparing timelines, so that is relevant.
- NhanH 8y ago
  Lee Sedol was still top 5, certainly no worse than top 10 at the time. By all mean he wasn't the best and most dominant, but the difference with the top was tiny.
gambler 8y ago
It's not the accomplishment that people knock. It's the spin, the inaccurate article titles and the hype.
- CydeWeys 8y ago
  It doesn't seem like hype to me -- it seems like a genuine, significant accomplishment. Sure, they might not be able to beat the best pro players consistently right now, but I suspect that is right around the corner. Would you rather they stay completely mum until they've reached that goal too? And why? I'd rather know now, and then be able to follow along as it gets better and beats higher and higher-ranked players.