new Steamhammer plan: win
In AIST S1, Steamhammer got to play only 5 games and lost 4 of them. It was a sad showing, though the field was strong. CIG is coming soon, and Steamhammer is registered. Then AIIDE is after that. Also, as I have mentioned, Steamhammer is unbalanced in its play skills, much stronger in strategy and macro than in tactics and micro. Looking at results in the past few months, I’ve concluded recently that it is so unbalanced that improving strategy no longer helps at all. When I fix a strategy weakness, even one which demonstrably loses games, the benefit is so small that there is no detectable change in skill, either objectively in elo or subjectively in my judgment. The imbalance is so extreme that nearly all losses, even in games affected by strategy problems, are due to mistakes in tactics and micro.
That means that if I work on the opponent model and opening selection as I planned, I won’t be able to tell if am doing a good job. No matter what I try, it will hardly affect results. It also means Steamhammer is at risk of getting whomped in CIG and AIIDE.
I have made a bunch of bug fixes recently (thanks Bruce!), so here’s my new plan. I’ll release 1.4.4 shortly with source, and to save time I’ll skip releasing the source of 1.4.3. (It takes more effort than you might imagine.) 1.4.4 includes bug fixes (one of which hasn’t been mentioned here), plus a start on an influence map for tactics, plus a zerg strategy fix that may save 1 game in 200 and a zerg tactics change that is more likely to save 1 game in 15 or 20. I think it’s all stuff that people should have.
Then the next public release will be after the CIG deadline next month (CIG releases source itself), and the following one may be after the AIIDE submission deadline in October. I will buckle down and make the changes that improve play the most in that time.
Comments
Antiga / Iruian on :
Jay Scott on :
Tully Elliston on :
https://orig00.deviantart.net/44bd/f/2008/116/c/1/hell_its_about_time_by_biohazard_apocalypse.jpg
Marian on :
Overdroning.
Ideally you want really little drones in ZvZ low drone count ZvT (but with high gas mining) and average drone count ZvP.
Of course you can make more especially in ZvP but I consider that quite a advanced skill to do right.
Actually my bot uses some min-max drone formula something like this: minmax(16, mineralCount*1.5+gasCount*3, 70)
where the constants differ for each matchup.
Jay Scott on :
Dan on :
Jay Scott on :
jtolmar on :
But since bots are kind of bad at killing each other, I'm not as sure over-droning is as big of a weakness as it would be against humans. If all matchups are less lethal and swingy, they all become less like (properly played) ZvZ, and economy becomes more important in all of them.
Marian on :
For example you want to hit protoss before he has high tech units or static defences set up on his expansions.
Also you want to build up units before enemy timing hits e.g. +1 zealot rush.
If your bot can properly scout and guess what you opponent is doing and when the timings are coming then yes you can properly switch from making 100% drones to 100% combat units.
Otherwise you should compromise by making less drones in favor of combat units.