|
I'd like to see such a program available.
You could certainly use it in a game against a buddy where you both agreed on a match to see who could get the first 20 ultralisks, (or whatever), out first.
Then after you win, show him the program too.
But besides that silly use, it would just be very interesting to see what came up for various inputs.
|
On October 14 2010 05:30 Aberu wrote: Let's say you get 7 roaches super fast thanks to this. But then he went just a few marauders, and held off the attack. Your economy now sucks, and you lose. That's why this isn't as amazing as the OP is claming it to be. No build can be ironed out in this way. There is no godlike build in Starcraft. It's not like Red Alert 2 was (where literally you had to get 3 tanks as fast as possible and push out and reinforce in Soviet vs Soviet, or you lost).
LETS SAY YOU GIVE ME THIS FORK
THEN I TRY TO CUT BREAD WITH IT
IT WONT CUT THE BREAD
YOUR FORK IS SHIT MAN WHAT HTE FUCK
|
^You sir are my hero.
We've been stating that over and over in this thread, but some people just don't get it. The roach was an example, you can use this to optimize ANY build order with ANY combination of units.
|
What would be awesome is if once it found the optimal build, it'd give you a snapshot of your entire composition at the end. E.g. 8 muta, 22 drones, so we can see how much econ was actually cut.
|
On October 14 2010 03:25 Phrencys wrote: @tetracycloide
just because you don't have 0min/0gas after reaching your goal doesn't mean that the build isn't optimized to get the mutas ASAP. That's true but it's also not what I said. The sticking point isn't that it's not at 0/0 but that it's at 0/x. It's patently obvious that if you're mineral limited while rushing for mutas there are too many workers mining gas. If the build had a surplus of minerals but just enough gas then it could still be 'fastest' but it's not possible for the reverse to be true given the relative mining rates of each resource per base.
|
Wouldn't mapping every possible build up to say 25min of game and then building a DB be more efficient than what you're doing?
I don't think theres that many builds specially when you disconsider the obvious silly builds.
|
this really is not as special or significant as this thread makes it seem.
It's not realistic. At best it would be a worse version of heal meters in WoW. "Yeah dude ur so bad u got ur 7th roach out at 4:42 instead of 4:40 that's why u lost"
|
On October 14 2010 08:48 Eknoid4 wrote: this really is not as special or significant as this thread makes it seem.
It's not realistic. At best it would be a worse version of heal meters in WoW. "Yeah dude ur so bad u got ur 7th roach out at 4:42 instead of 4:40 that's why u lost"
Believe it or not for pros 1 second can be enough time to be the reason why you won or lost.
|
Interesting program. What language is it written in? I don't think this will ruin very much in e-sports or even normal good players since so much of higher level gaming is skill and control-based. This will have a larger impact on new players though. I think this would teach a lot of new players some builds for rushing, and if the program was more complicated to where it could give builds for good economies then it could be a great teaching tool.
|
For anyone still following this who wants to help develop, send me a PM in TeamLiquid, and I'll give you a link to where the source is being hosted.
Whomever is interested in helping, there will be props.
I/We will get a build out with some functionality as soon as possible.
|
This existed for SC1, but I forget the name. I managed to get a few PvT and PvP wins at D- with a 3gate goon rush it developed (fastest possible way to 12 goons)
|
On October 14 2010 08:43 gustavo wrote: Wouldn't mapping every possible build up to say 25min of game and then building a DB be more efficient than what you're doing?
I don't think theres that many builds specially when you disconsider the obvious silly builds.
That's probably possible... if you let your PC calculate this for around 10 years and then spend the next 30 years disconsidering all the "silly" builds by yourself. Up to 25 minutes? Are you kidding?
|
On October 14 2010 08:54 Dionyseus wrote:Show nested quote +On October 14 2010 08:48 Eknoid4 wrote: this really is not as special or significant as this thread makes it seem.
It's not realistic. At best it would be a worse version of heal meters in WoW. "Yeah dude ur so bad u got ur 7th roach out at 4:42 instead of 4:40 that's why u lost" Believe it or not for pros 1 second can be enough time to be the reason why you won or lost. Believe it or not pros would still have to figure out how this build actually holds up in real combat which means practicing it regardless of the computer's "perfect timing"
So they'd be back to where they are now. Working the kinks out of builds they've tried. Having a computer program spit out a time wouldn't help any pro more than playing it against another pro would.
|
On October 14 2010 09:29 Eknoid4 wrote:Show nested quote +On October 14 2010 08:54 Dionyseus wrote:On October 14 2010 08:48 Eknoid4 wrote: this really is not as special or significant as this thread makes it seem.
It's not realistic. At best it would be a worse version of heal meters in WoW. "Yeah dude ur so bad u got ur 7th roach out at 4:42 instead of 4:40 that's why u lost" Believe it or not for pros 1 second can be enough time to be the reason why you won or lost. Believe it or not pros would still have to figure out how this build actually holds up in real combat which means practicing it regardless of the computer's "perfect timing" So they'd be back to where they are now. Working the kinks out of builds they've tried. Having a computer program spit out a time wouldn't help any pro more than playing it against another pro would. I think you're missing the point. If a pro wants to know 'can I squeeze an extra X in at Y time' then this is a way more cost efficient way to determine that then practicing it. It's like video taping movements in other sports and analyzing it to look for inefficiencies of movement you'd never notice without the aid of a machine. Which is, believe it or not, pretty common in many sports. It's not there to teach you how to read opponents or how to react in game or even to show what the 'best' build is for any given situation. It's simply a tool that, once polished enough to be useful, could reveal some efficiency flaws in any given set of play.
|
Love this. So awesome. I want! :D
|
That's probably possible... if you let your PC calculate this for around 10 years and then spend the next 30 years disconsidering all the "silly" builds by yourself. Up to 25 minutes? Are you kidding?
I'm going to code it, you're vastly overestimating the number of possibilities, as for the "silly" builds I dont need to look to check if its a silly build I can simply take it out a plethora of them by inserting rules such as dont build overlords if supply left >20 , dont expand more than x before x minutes etccc...
Computers are really powerful these days, it will definitely not take years ;D
|
This will be a useful time saving tool.
But it won't change the game or spoil it. It's kinda like in chess you still have to study the openings to know them and be able to react to the opponents moves. If you just follow some steps and really don't understand what you are doing you will lose.
Don't know much about programming but i'm sure that these kind of AI's are capable of adjusting the goals and reacting to scouting info for the best result but as long as it's not able to do it and answer while the game is running it's just a tool.
|
On October 14 2010 09:47 gustavo wrote:Show nested quote +That's probably possible... if you let your PC calculate this for around 10 years and then spend the next 30 years disconsidering all the "silly" builds by yourself. Up to 25 minutes? Are you kidding? I'm going to code it, you're vastly overestimating the number of possibilities, as for the "silly" builds I dont need to look to check if its a silly build I can simply take it out a plethora of them by inserting rules such as dont build overlords if supply left >20 , dont expand more than x before x minutes etccc... Computers are really powerful these days, it will definitely not take years ;D
If you mix in spine crawlers, upgrades etc. I am pretty sure you are underestimating that number - that is if you don't add a whole bunch of additional rules. While a rule like don't make OL while supply left > 20 helps, the number of possibilities still range into the Billions if my math isn't completely off.
EDIT: Even Billions is a huge underestimation - not all units are buildable in the beginning but over the course of the game we can probably consider about 15 different possibilities for each supply point, when you build a spine crawler etc. it frees another supply, so the number is probably even bigger - but if we take this we are looking at a rough estimate of 15^200 possibilities... good luck at enforcing any rules on that number.
|
it seems to me like this program will mostly be used to create super-allin builds, but i don't think it would be all that useful beyond the early game because zerg is so reactionary and builds and strategies must be very carefully adapted in ways unique to each game you play.
|
EDIT: Even Billions is a huge underestimation - not all units are buildable in the beginning but over the course of the game we can probably consider about 15 different possibilities for each supply point, when you build a spine crawler etc. it frees another supply, so the number is probably even bigger - but if we take this we are looking at a rough estimate of 15^200 possibilities... good luck at enforcing any rules on that number.
Builds all derive one from another - I'm not going to simulate every build from scratch, and yes I think 25 minutes is probably going to take too long and really not that useful I'll be shooting for something smaller at first for sure.
|
|
|
|