Je kan informatie over je locatie aan je Tweets toevoegen, bijvoorbeeld je stad of exacte locatie, via het web en applicaties van derden. Je kan altijd de locatiegeschiedenis van je Tweets verwijderen. Meer informatie
A thought that I've been mulling over for a couple weeks: if you increased the size of the StarCraft II competitive playerbase 100x, would the meta start to develop more rapidly - or even change outright - as the result of more competition, higher stakes, etc?
My sense is that the game is sufficiently professionalized and sufficiently practiced that not too much would change. A piece of evidence there is that AlphaStar did not revolutionize the meta after playing millions of games against itself.
I think the constraints AlphaStar operated under are sufficiently different to human as to make it not particularly useful as a source of strategic insight. It's almost playing a different game.
Probably. However A.I. did things that humans dont think to do: super-over saturating workers, and rely on mechanical perfection like mass blink stalkers to be rewarded. Dunno % we can call "AI bullshit" but it's significant.
This is a particularly interesting point IMO! There's a good parallel to humans beating mechanical execution barriers that people thought were impossible. You see this in everything from super old school FGC days to something like skateboarding.
I don't think that AlphaStar could be used as an example, as it did use replays for training, and, well, it is an AI. But I would agree that probably it would not change much.
Twitter is mogelijk overbelast of ondervindt een tijdelijke onderbreking. Probeer het opnieuw of bekijk de Twitter-status voor meer informatie.
