SSCAIT check-in
All players have now reached at least 30 games, so the rating list and crosstable have data for all entrants. That makes today a good time for a check on prospects.
By the way, the 2016 crosstable is missing from its old URL. Did it move, or is it lost? [Update: Last year’s crosstable was and remains here. ]
The elo rating is a better estimate of the eventual ranking than the win rate, because it takes into account whether the bot has played stronger or weaker opponents. On the other hand, the win rate is up-to-date with all games included, while the elo is calculated from older cached data so it may exclude recent games (like CherryPi > McRave, which was just played). Anyway, here are the top 10 by elo.
| bot | elo | win% |
|---|---|---|
| McRave | 2245 | 92.31% |
| Marian Devecka (Killerbot) | 2240 | 90.57% |
| tscmoor | 2223 | 94.59% |
| TyrProtoss | 2216 | 85.71% |
| Steamhammer | 2214 | 89.13% |
| Martin Rooijackers (LetaBot) | 2210 | 84.09% |
| Iron | 2207 | 88.57% |
| Neo Edmund Zerg | 2206 | 82.46% |
| Tomas Vajda (XIMP) | 2204 | 77.78% |
| Bereaver | 2182 | 91.18% |
The first point to strike me is that the rankings are extremely close. There is barely a difference between a rating 0f #9 2204 and #4 2223; 20 elo points is a 53% chance to win for the higher rated opponent. The difference from the top to the bottom of this list gives #1 McRave about 3:2 odds over #10 Bereaver, far from an overwhelming advantage. With little difference measurable between players, the ranking is not stable and the final results could look entirely different in detail.
Bereaver is the bot with the biggest difference between its rank by win rate and its rank by elo. It has played weaker opponents. That probably reduces the accuracy of its ranking.
Iron surprisingly lost 3 games early and fell far back. Since then it has lost only 1 more and climbed back upward.
Steamhammer has been pretty stable over time at rank #4 plus or minus 1 (currently at #5). I predicted that it would finish in place 4 to 8, and so far I haven't seen a reason to doubt my prediction.
The CherryPi-McRave game was sad to watch. CherryPi did its usual thing, with tons of zerglings plus a few mutalisks. McRave made many high templar and idly walked them into the middle of the map to die. Not once in the game did protoss cast a storm or merge an archon. Could this be related to the last-minute binary hot-fix? Against this unit mix, protoss could have gotten away with skipping storm research and merged archons right away. Other protoss mistakes in the game gave me a feeling that McRave is easy to beat if you can just get your basics up to a good enough level.
Trackbacks
No Trackbacks
Comments
MicroDK on :
McRave on :
AILien on :
http://www.openbw.com/replay-viewer/?rep=https%3A%2F%2Fsscaitournament.com%2FReplays%2FAILIEN%2F1607-AILi_McRa-ZvP.rep
So it's not a general issue.
Btw. This game was really cool in some regard. One of the losses, that weren't caused by a rush or a bug but simply the opponent having the upper hand and never surrendering the map-control so AILien couldn't get up a third.
AILien on :
Cherry-Pi did really good early on, deflecting Tyr's first attack and then swinging around for a counter. But then it ran into the worst bug I've seen from it thus far. It went into a hatchery-building frenzy and built like 20 of them instead of units.
Simon Prins on :
http://satirist.org/ai/starcraft/blog/archives/179-SSCAIT-2016-links.html
Which included the following link to an unofficial crosstable:
https://purplepie.bitbucket.io/sscait.html
On the topic of the current tournament, I really like how my bot is doing. I was surprized it even took a win off of Iron today. The round of 16 is going to be very interesting.
Jay Scott on :
MicroDK on :
V0d01ey on :
https://purplepie.bitbucket.io/sscait18.html
IMP on :
LinesPrower on :
Dan on :