3 ms·

Real time strategy games are peculiar because they are played mostly moment to moment in a very reactive style with very little medium or long term planning (be

Real time strategy games are peculiar because they are played mostly moment to moment in a very reactive style with very little medium or long term planning (beyond the next batch of units in production). So a neural network with a tiny bit of memory should be able to play that by essentially learning counters and a few harrassment and attack tricks. Sure, there's a bit more involved, but when you look at it, any RTS strategy decomposes into a lot of short term behaviours that are sequenced based on momentary triggers. A more interesting challenge in my mind is a game that focusses genuinely on longer term planning, where actions taken at a certain time lead to results 10 to 15 minutes later in game that is simulated in a continuous fashion (that is, definitely not turn based and with no way to discretize it perfectly into turns). The loss of a turn structure makes applying min-max-search based strategies hard to apply - each side can make any number of moves in sequence. Add non-discrete moves (e.g. turn unit with a certain turn rate for an arbitrary amount of time, then move forward for another arbitrary amount of time) and the search space becomes vast and unstructured, potentially even unbounded. Solutions to that should be very interesting.

philipov 7y ago
> Real time strategy games are peculiar because they are played mostly moment to moment in a very reactive style with very little medium or long term planning (beyond the next batch of units in production). This is simply not true at a high level of play. Timing attacks, base expansions, and tech transitions involve both medium and long-term planning.
- gmueckl 7y ago
  Base expansions and tech transitions as actions are all triggered by certain momentary events. This is simply due to the fact that each of necessary actions for that have prerequisites. And a neural network will simply learn long term strategies as sequences of trigger responses without any actual long term memory involved.
  - philipov 7y ago
    if you're not thinking several moves ahead with your tech transitions, you're going to have a bad time.
    - gmueckl 7y ago
      How big is the decision tree for tech? About ~100 nodes total? This is quite small and handling that is not so impressive. That's roughly one move in a mid game chess position (and you'd need to think two or three moves ahead to be moderately successful at that game).
Iolaum 7y ago
Starcraft2 definitely needs long term planning. It may not look like that to an outsider because a good caster decomposes that into actions, consequences and reactions. But to be able to play competitively you need a long term plan. The momentary triggers you mention are the distilled knowledge of long term planning and experience. A player executing a baneling rush is a long term plan. Then that player scouting the opposing terran player building a bunker and two barracks to defend can make him to decide to double expand instead of going forward with his baneling attack. This may seem re-active but in truth those decisions depend on long term planning. Pro players can make this long term planning calculations quite fast, the decisions may even appear re-active, however they are based on the long term calculation of the most probable path to victory.
natalyarostova 7y ago
>Real time strategy games are peculiar because they are played mostly moment to moment in a very reactive style with very little medium or long term planning (beyond the next batch of units in production) ??? Have you ever competitively played an RTS?
- gmueckl 7y ago
  Have you ever played chess? Where RTS gameplay is exceedingly short term, these turn based games rely on long and careful explored sequences of moves for successful play. This deep planning is simply not present in RTS gameplay.
  - andrewchambers 7y ago
    Both chess and starcraft have great depth and both require short and long term planning. The fact that you can't grasp it speaks more about your own lack of insight than the nature of the games.
    - gmueckl 7y ago
      I can grasp the differences just fine, thank you very much. Chess requires you to think several moves ahead. This is why it can take minutes until a player makes their next move. Try this in Starcraft! The game instead requires you to switch to a conpletely reactionary style of play where all you can do is make split second decisions based on huge tables of prepared heuristics in your head.
      - natalyarostova 7y ago
        With all due respect, I think you're mistaken. I think you are assuming a game that doesn't allow long periods of pause must be completely reactionary, but that's not true. I've been playing and watching competitive starcraft for well over decade. In competitive starcraft you need to master both micro/reactionary strategy, as well as the ability to predict and respond to your opponent over medium and long run horizons.

philipov 7y ago

> Real time strategy games are peculiar because they are played mostly moment to moment in a very reactive style with very little medium or long term planning (beyond the next batch of units in production). This is simply not true at a high level of play. Timing attacks, base expansions, and tech transitions involve both medium and long-term planning.

gmueckl 7y ago
Base expansions and tech transitions as actions are all triggered by certain momentary events. This is simply due to the fact that each of necessary actions for that have prerequisites. And a neural network will simply learn long term strategies as sequences of trigger responses without any actual long term memory involved.
- philipov 7y ago
  if you're not thinking several moves ahead with your tech transitions, you're going to have a bad time.
  - gmueckl 7y ago
    How big is the decision tree for tech? About ~100 nodes total? This is quite small and handling that is not so impressive. That's roughly one move in a mid game chess position (and you'd need to think two or three moves ahead to be moderately successful at that game).

Iolaum 7y ago

Starcraft2 definitely needs long term planning. It may not look like that to an outsider because a good caster decomposes that into actions, consequences and reactions. But to be able to play competitively you need a long term plan. The momentary triggers you mention are the distilled knowledge of long term planning and experience. A player executing a baneling rush is a long term plan. Then that player scouting the opposing terran player building a bunker and two barracks to defend can make him to decide to double expand instead of going forward with his baneling attack. This may seem re-active but in truth those decisions depend on long term planning. Pro players can make this long term planning calculations quite fast, the decisions may even appear re-active, however they are based on the long term calculation of the most probable path to victory.

natalyarostova 7y ago

>Real time strategy games are peculiar because they are played mostly moment to moment in a very reactive style with very little medium or long term planning (beyond the next batch of units in production) ??? Have you ever competitively played an RTS?

gmueckl 7y ago
Have you ever played chess? Where RTS gameplay is exceedingly short term, these turn based games rely on long and careful explored sequences of moves for successful play. This deep planning is simply not present in RTS gameplay.
- andrewchambers 7y ago
  Both chess and starcraft have great depth and both require short and long term planning. The fact that you can't grasp it speaks more about your own lack of insight than the nature of the games.
  - gmueckl 7y ago
    I can grasp the differences just fine, thank you very much. Chess requires you to think several moves ahead. This is why it can take minutes until a player makes their next move. Try this in Starcraft! The game instead requires you to switch to a conpletely reactionary style of play where all you can do is make split second decisions based on huge tables of prepared heuristics in your head.
    - natalyarostova 7y ago
      With all due respect, I think you're mistaken. I think you are assuming a game that doesn't allow long periods of pause must be completely reactionary, but that's not true. I've been playing and watching competitive starcraft for well over decade. In competitive starcraft you need to master both micro/reactionary strategy, as well as the ability to predict and respond to your opponent over medium and long run horizons.