If you read the TL thread on this, the bot is technically running at 240 APM, but its commands get split off into separate commands for each unit, so the APM looks higher.
replyI've watched several replays on this. It using map hacks is lame but it also doesn't always take advantage of them. It sometimes does respect its own fog of war. It mostly wins with incredible micro (kinda has to, it's macro kinda sucks).
Most of its few losses come from drops (it never makes turrets and doesn't know how to handle them), bad macro (blocking its own ramp) or just incredibly unconventional play from its opponent (which is certainly not in its training set).
Specifically, it can micro across multiple screens of engagement in a way that we can't as easily.
replyStarCraft is just not a good benchmark exactly for these reasons: Endless complaining about the bots not being limited in the way humans are.
reply"Oh it's able to issue commands too fast." "Oh no, I give it full map access and it uses that."
Ego shooters are, naturally, also not good benchmarks.
OpenAI won DotA2 in 2019, a way better game.
dota wouldn't exist without Aeon of Strife (the UMS map from Starcraft that was later reworked into WC3 dota)
replyIt is in fact APM limited, and its creator claims it was trained without the map hack so it should do just as well without it. I think the bot is VERY impressive and has already managed to beat several top Korean pros which is really godlike
replyI’m a little bummed it did have map hack on. Would love to see this play “legit”. It really reminds me of my pastime, chess. When you play bots, if you don’t mess up early, it can often feel like you’re winning in the early game even though you’re just hanging yourself slowly with the rope it’s giving you.
reply[dead]
replyBots have been unable to beat even pretty good amateur humans despite those advantages so it's still pretty interesting.
replybot is at the top of the kr ladder right now (excluding drop hackers) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1vsTqNwHquE
reply