![]() There are an incredible number of layers of complexity to what a truly fierce Starcraft AI would need to do.Īnd yet, something similar may have been said about Go, Chess, Checkers, Poker, Jeopardy, or many other games before this. Finally, your own initial strategy choice must be tailored to the map, to the player you're playing against, to recent games/strategies other pros have exposed as powerful/weak. ![]() Next, you need to adapt your own strategy, which must also be planned at the start of the match since you can't scout instantaneously or perfectly. Then, another critical layer beyond micro or macro is scouting the opponent and predicting what their plan is. This must be piped into a macro AI, which produces the units with with micromanagement can be done. In contrast, a top player should have a much better edge over a computer in strategic realms, since strategies must be tailored to the expected opponent's strategy and mind games heavily factor into this equation.Ĭreating a micromanagement AI is only the first step. We've seen perfect blink micro stalkers, dragoon AI bots, and I think it'd be far easier to take down top players in a 1v1 micro fight since computers are not limited by mouse accuracy, emotional concerns, stress, fatigue, and a number of other factors which affect your hands' abilities. When it comes to micro and decision space, however, I believe that it is mostly a matter of execution and not decision. There may be "on the fly" macro adjustments due to harassment damage, however strategy is far far more fluid of a category than macro. Nevertheless, if you watch a variety of pros macro out mass marine-marauder-medivac, they will usually have very very similar expansion timings, identical numbers of barracks, and any changes in the timings/build orders is strategic, not macro-related. There may be slight variations in how its done, especially in Brood War where the economics are much more nuanced than SC2. Make your economy and production as efficient as possible. In contrast, macromanagement does indeed have a smaller decision space, since really the "decision" with macro is pre-defined. Thus, strategy is the widest tent, and someone like sOs shows the truly massive number of strategies that can be employed. Strategy itself refers to a broad game plan which may incorporate unit composition, large-scale plans for army movements, plans to limit the economy of the opponent, and so on. They rightly define micromanagement as the control and use of small numbers of units, whereas macromanagement refers to the management of the non-fighting, production related activities like producing workers constantly until saturated, producing supply depots on time, producing units constantly from the correct number of facilities, and so forth. If the parent comment had defined the terms properly, there'd be less disagreement here. The problem here is the conflation of "macro" with "strategy". The general sentiment I've seen that is good macro skills will push you far up into SC2 leagues, and it's not until diamond/masters that micro starts to really matter. Pro players are essentially always scouting what their opponent's doing because the macro decisions can make or break the game. On the other hand, mass infestors will be much worse against a primarily mech-based terran army instead you might see many vipers on the field (which, vice versa, wouldn't be great against a bio army). If a terran player is running a bio-based army (marine, marauder, medivac), what sort of units should zerg produce? Infestors are usually a good choice in this matchup. That protoss player has a well-known penchant for early game stargate harassment, so the other player read this situation and reacted by delaying their first expansion and instead producing early-game air defenses.Īs another example, take unit composition. I watched a pro game just the other day where one of the players noticed that their protoss opponent had a late timing on their second pylon in their main base - as in, it should have been there, but wasn't. I've seen videos where a caster (like Lowko) breaks down "the build order" that a player did in a pro level game, only for the pro to turn around and say something like: I wasn't following a strict build order, just reacting to what I saw from the opponent. ![]() At the pro level, choices like unit composition and expansion timing are very strongly influenced by what the other player is doing.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |