The debate has raged, on Battle.net and around the counter at comic book stores, since '98: Terran, Zerg, or Protoss? But finally, in the eyes of two researchers in Edinburgh, a conclusion has been reached. Science has spoken. And the winner is...
Terran! In your face!
Allow me to explain. The study, detailed in Wired , used a percolating model. It's the same sort of algorithm used to predict which bacteria will win when you introduce a bunch of asymmetrically-equipped colonies to a single environment. The six "colonies" used were created from analysis of hundreds of professional StarCraft II matches, and represented each race playing a couple of different strategies: Macro (Long Game/Economic) Terran, Micro (Fast Rush) Terran, Macro Zerg, Micro Zerg, Macro Protoss, and Micro Protoss.
Terran Micro came out on top, claiming the most territory in a simulated portion of the Milky Way that stood in for the fictitious Korprulu Sector. Chalk one up for Raynor's Raiders and their fast, hit-and-run tactics. Protoss Macro also did very well, while the Zerg in general proved surprisingly impotent. The full study is freely available for your perusal, if you like colorful graphs and terms like "Mean Stellar Colonisation Occupancy."
To my fellow Terrans: Well done, and happy "I told you so"-ing.
If you love big trucks, establishing trade routes, and the phrase 'post-apocalyptic survival business simulator' then I've got just the strategy RPG for you
Blizzard veteran David Kim's strategy comeback with Battle Aces is 'very personal:' 'I just can't accept... the end-all peak of RTS is StarCraft 2 and nothing can ever be better'
