StarSkirmish Bench v0.2 measures how effectively large language models can write a competitive StarCraft: Brood War Protoss bot given one hour of wall clock time. Each model starts from a minimal mining bot and has access to three demo bots, two libraries (FAP combat simulator and BWEM map analyzer), compile/play/logging tools, and a BWAPI 4.4.0/OpenBW environment. Runs happen in each lab’s first‑party CLI at maximum reasoning effort with ~250k token context compaction and no internet; whatever code is in the bot folder when the hour ends is the final entry. Tournament scoring is plain win rate: five independent runs per model, each final bot plays 13 roster opponents (3 demo + 10 human-written) six times per map across three ladder maps, with ties decided by kills+razings at a 60‑minute cap.
Results show GPT-6 Astra leading the field, GPT-6.1 Sol second, and Gemini 4 Argon, Claude Opus 5.5 and Claude Fable 5.1 clustered behind in the high 30s, but all models remain well short of top human bots (Astra wins only 7% versus Stardust/PurpleWave/BananaBrain). Practice behavior predicts success: models that spend more of the hour playing the strongest roster bots score higher. Cost-performance favors GPT-6.1 Sol. v0.2 elevates realism by running each model in its native CLI at max reasoning, replaces Elo with win rates for comparability, and highlights high run-to-run variance (Gemini 4 Argon shows an 18‑point spread), suggesting long‑horizon, agentic coding remains a distinct capability not captured by other benchmarks.
Summary generated by AI from the linked article. hn.today is not affiliated with Hacker News or Y Combinator.