Self-Evolving Multi-Agent Framework for Efficient Decision Making in Real-Time Strategy Scenarios
Authors: Li Ma, Hao Peng, Yiming Wang, Hongbin Luo, Jie Liu, Kongjing Gu, Guanlin Wu, Hui Lin, Lei Ren
Organizations: School of Cyber Science and Technology, Beihang University, Beijing 100191, China · Naval Aviation University, Yantai 264001, China · Military Science Academy, Beijing 100091, China · National University of Defense Technology, Changsha 410073, China · China Academy of Electronics and Information Technology, Beijing 100846, China · School of Automation Science and Electrical Engineering, Beihang University, Beijing 100191, China
Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated exceptional potential in complex reasoning,pioneering a new paradigm for autonomous agent decision making in dynamic settings. However, in Real-Time Strategy (RTS) scenarios, LLMs suffer from a critical speed-quality trade-off. Specifically expansive state spaces and time limits render inference delays prohibitive, while stochastic planning errors undermine logical consistency. To address these challenges, we present SEMA (Self-Evolving Multi-Agent), a novel framework designed for high-performance, low-latency decision-making in RTS environments. This collaborative multi-agent framework facilitates self-evolution by adaptively calibrating model bias through in-episode assessment and cross-episode analysis. We further incorporate dynamic observation pruning based on structural entropy to model game states topologically. By distilling high dimensional data into core semantic information, this approach significantly reduces inference time. We also develop a hybrid knowledge-memory mechanism that integrates micro-trajectories, macro-experience, and hierarchical domain knowledge, thereby enhancing both strategic adaptability and decision consistency. Experiments across multiple StarCraft II maps demonstrate that SEMA achieves superior win rates while reducing average decision latency by over 50%, validating its efficiency and robustness in complex RTS scenarios.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: The SEMA framework addresses two pivotal challenges for LLMs in RTS environments. First, the massive observational data leads to excessive input sequences, escalating reasoning latency and hindering real-time response. Second, the inherent stochastic bias of LLMs induces inconsistent decision logic, even in the exact same scenario, two distinct decisions can yield diametrically opposed outcomes, such as a shift from victory to defeat. This volatility severely undermines the robustness of agents in complex adversarial settings.
Notation
Definition
Notation
Definition
Notation
Definition
G
Graph structure
o
Local observation
Φ
Spatio-temporal operator
V
Vertex set
N
Multi-agent set
w
Normalized edge weight
E
Edge set
L
Hierarchical storage
Δ
Attribute variation
W
Global weight function
M
Micro-memory block
δ
Variational metric
d
Node degree
E
Macro-experience pool
μ
Pruning threshold
T
Encoding tree
K
External knowledge base
N
Capacity factor
Table 1: List of Notations for SEMA Framework.
Figure 2: Overview of SEMA. First, structural modeling and dynamic pruning are employed to extract core observations, reducing reasoning latency. Second, decision and evaluation agents perform closed-loop calibration via history retrieval to suppress stochastic bias. Finally, the policy agent analyzes episode performance and updates experience, driving the continuous self-evolution of strategic logic.
Method
3m
8m
25m
Flat32
Flat48
Flat64
Simple64
Lv.1
Lv.2
Lv.1
Lv.2
Lv.1
Lv.2
Lv.1
Lv.2
Random
2/16s
2/9s
0/-
0/-
0/-
0/-
0/-
0/-
0/-
0/-
0/-
Rule-Based
50/8s
46/9s
55/14s
58/6m
53/7m
63/8m
58/9m
60/10m
56/11m
61/10m
59/10m
Single-LLM
40/16s
32/12s
34/20s
75/5m
72/7m
74/6m
73/6m
71/7m
70/6m
71/7m
69/9m
TextStarCraft
56/14s
44/14s
38/19s
83/6m
83/6m
87/6m
80/7m
86/7m
82/6m
85/7m
81/8m
HIMA
66/20s
54/19s
10/23s
94/6m
89/6m
100/7m
94/7m
95/6m
89/7m
90/7m
85/8m
Table 2: Win rate(%) and average episode time for successful games across different methods on SMAC and Melee Maps. The time duration listed represents the execution time of a single successful episode; cases where no victory was achieved are denoted by a dash.
Figure 3: Performance comparison of win rate and response time across diverse scenarios. (a) 3m; (b) 8m; (c) 25m; (d) Flat64 (VeryEasy); (e) Flat64 (Easy). For each point, the values in parentheses (x,y) , e.g., (0.49,88) , denote the average response time (s) and the success rate (%) .
Method
3m
8m
Flat64
Simple64
Lv.1
Lv.2
Lv.1
Lv.2
w/o Dynamic Pruning
50 / 1.4s
60 / 1.4s
90 / 1.5s
85 / 1.9s
90 / 1.6s
75 / 2.1s
w/o Evaluation Agent
75 / 0.5s
67 / 0.7s
93 / 0.7s
86 / 0.7s
93 / 0.6s
88 / 0.7s
w/o Policy Agent
47 / 0.5s
52 / 0.6s
83 / 0.8s
78 / 0.7s
82 / 0.8s
72 / 0.7s
SEMA (Ours)
88 / 0.5s
70 / 0.5s
100 / 0.9s
94 / 0.8s
100 / 0.8s
100 / 0.8s
Table 3: Performance comparison of win rate and inference time per step across different components. The win rate serves as a key performance indicator, while the recorded time denotes the duration of a single successful episode.
Figure 4: Ablation study of structural entropy driven pruning on response time across different maps and different levels. (a) 3m; (b) 8m; (c) Flat64(VeryEasy); (d) Flat64(Easy).
Phase
( α,β )
Resource
Building
Unit
Research
Planning
Total
Early
(0.95, 0.05)
36.6
75.9
63.6
76.4
0
19.1
(0, 1)
53.8
59.5
55.8
81.2
0
18.3
Mid
(0.95, 0.05)
84.6
65.6
77.8
100
100
24.0
(0, 1)
29.0
90.7
75.5
99.9
99.7
22.2
Late
(0.95, 0.05)
62.1
71.4
73.0
100
0
19.2
(0, 1)
68.5
84.4
69.3
70.4
0
19.6
Table 4: Analysis of information retention rates across different combat phases and hyperparameter configurations.
Figure 5: Hyperparameter sensitivity analysis and semantic filtering visualization on the Simple64-Lv2 map. (a) and (b) (at frame 30 and frame 200, respectively) visualize the structural entropy-driven dynamic pruning process of observation information, where red regions indicate observation attribute nodes with ΔH below the threshold μ that require pruning, while green regions represent retained attribute nodes; (c) shows the relationship between average win rate and the number of tokens under different capacity factors N .
Method
3m
8m
25m
Flat32
Flat48
Simple64
Lv.1
Lv.2
Lv.1
Lv.2
Lv.1
Lv.2
Single-LLM
7.0k
8.3k
12.1k
14.0k
16.4k
12.1k
12.2k
12.5k
13.3k
TextStarCraft
2.9k
3.4k
5.1k
15.9k
15.4k
15.2k
15.0k
15.2k
15.6k
HIMA
12.1k
13.9k
33.1k
11.1k
11.4k
12.1k
12.8k
10.4k
11.8k
SEMA (Ours)
0.9k
1.5k
2.2k
2.9k
2.9k
2.9k
2.8k
2.9k
2.9k
Table 5: Comparative analysis of token consumption per step across different scenarios.
Figure 6: Snapshots of tactical evolution on the 8m map ( μ=0.48 ). (a) illustrates the disordered state in Episode 2, while (b) demonstrates the collaborative formation and focus fire strategy in Episode 3.
Real-time strategy (RTS) games require agents to coordinate economic development, production and construction, base defense, unit organization, and attack timing over long matches. Existing studies have applied large language models to command decision-making in RTS games, enabling agents to read textual game states and generate high-level plans. However, long inference latency can cause them to miss critical tactical events. The complexity and tactical diversity of full RTS matches also leave existing systems heavily dependent on manually written experience-based prompts, with limited ability to learn continuously from past games. We present STRATA, a role-aligned hierarchical system with cross-game self-learning for Red Alert. STRATA assigns in-game strategic, logistical, and tactical decisions to a Strategic Agent (SA), Logistics Agent (LA), and Tactical Agent (TA), respectively. The SA generates high-level directives based on the global game state and relevant experience cards, while the LA and TA handle logistics and tactical execution. After each match, a Review Agent (RA) derives candidate experience from game traces, validates and revises it using evidence from subsequent matches, and compresses strategic experience supported across multiple games into concise experience cards for SA retrieval. We evaluate STRATA through the formation of experience cards, full-match comparisons before and after learning, and experience learning against AI opponents with different play styles. Under a fixed scenario, using the learned experience cards increases the observed win rate from 30% to 100%. Sequential learning against AI opponents with different play styles also produces distinct long-term strategic experience.
Xinhe Tian, Xiaoyue Zhang, Ziyou Zhang +4
School of Instrumentation Science and Optoelectronic Engineering, Beijing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics · Tsinghua University · University of Chinese Academy of Sciences +2
Large Language Models (LLMs) have achieved strong performance on static reasoning benchmarks, yet their effectiveness as interactive agents operating in adversarial, time-sensitive environments remains poorly understood. Existing evaluations largely treat reasoning as a single-shot capability, overlooking the challenges of opponent-aware decision-making, temporal constraints, and execution under pressure. This paper introduces Strategic Tactical Agent Reasoning (STAR) Benchmark, a multi-agent evaluation framework that assesses LLMs through 1v1 zero-sum competitive interactions, framing reasoning as an iterative, adaptive decision-making process. STAR supports both turn-based and real-time settings, enabling controlled analysis of long-horizon strategic planning and fast-paced tactical execution within a unified environment. Built on a modular architecture with a standardized API and fully implemented execution engine, STAR facilitates reproducible evaluation and flexible task customization. To move beyond binary win-loss outcomes, we introduce a Strategic Evaluation Suite that assesses not only competitive success but also the quality of strategic behavior, such as execution efficiency and outcome stability. Extensive pairwise evaluations reveal a pronounced strategy-execution gap: while reasoning-intensive models dominate turn-based settings, their inference latency often leads to inferior performance in real-time scenarios, where faster instruction-tuned models prevail. These results show that strategic intelligence in interactive environments depends not only on reasoning depth, but also on the ability to translate plans into timely actions, positioning STAR as a principled benchmark for studying this trade-off in competitive, dynamic settings.
Yang Li, Xing Chen, Yutao Liu +5
Tsinghua University · Ocean University of China (OUC) · CAICT +4
Strategic reasoning in Large Language Models (LLMs) within long-horizon environments is often limited by inconsistent subgoals. In these settings, finite attention resources prevent the model from maintaining strategic coherence over thousands of steps. This limitation leads to strategic drift, where localized decisions fail to sustain a coherent trajectory across reasoning. To address this, we introduce EpicStar, a framework that enables agents to learn memory as policy to tackle long-horizon reasoning. Specifically, the agent maintains a bank of successful past episodes as a heuristic alongside a working memory to track short-term environmental changes. During inference, a dynamic gating mechanism determines whether to execute a retrieved action directly or to perform new reasoning through a contextual fusion of the retrieved episodes and current working memory. Utilizing StarCraft II as the testbed, we evaluated EpicStar against diverse opponent styles. It significantly outperforms baseline methods, achieving higher win rates while consuming an order of magnitude fewer tokens, and it maintains this advantage consistently across difficulty levels and opponent strategies. Our findings provide compelling evidence that structured cross-episode memory is essential for enabling LLM agents to perform robust, long-term strategic execution in dynamic, autonomous settings.
Yi Wu, Zhimin Hu
University of Chicago · University of Wisconsin-Madison