I've been practicing mouse accuracy a lot and have been curious as to if it correlates to how high a player can get on ladder. I created a thread on reddit and it got a few responses, but ideally would like a few more responses to get as accurate results as possible.
Obviously there is a lot more to SC2 than mouse accuracy, and macro is probably the most important which doesn't include much mouse accuracy at all, but I think it would still be fun to see how the community does.
Since this thread doesn't seem to be getting much traction, I've decided to just make conclusions on what data I did have. Thank you for all that participated! For results:
Almost all participants had high accuracy with only three scoring lower than 80% so I've decided to neglect looking into this more. For the ends of the spectrum, it was mostly unsurprising as silver players did the worst, and GM players did the best. However, in the platinum to masters range the averages were very similar with all of them being around the 70 ish percent mouse efficiency.
Because Starcraft is such an open game in what the players are able to do, it seems like this is the range where strategy, unit composition, macro, and army positioning would make more of a difference than individual micro of units and small armies.
Another interesting point to look at is that the difference between silver player's efficiency and master league player's efficiency is only around 6%, but the difference between master's and GM player's is over 11%. So if you're in that mid range of leagues, you can probably get a lot of results by looking your gameplay, while if you're trying to push for GM, you might want to ensure you're able click dem circles.
I can't draw too many other conclusions, but I will note that for Diamond and Masters players (which I got the most data from), Protoss and Terran players had better than average efficiency, while Zerg and random players did slightly worse. For GM, Terran and Random did the best, with Protoss and Zergs performing below average.
All of these results should be taken with a grain of salt as the sample size is extremely low and there are a ton of things that could have affected the results such as:
There was no data verification, so users could have just lied on their results The space between the targets changes with how large the window is and I did not specify how large the window should be I asked for league and did not specify what bracket (in other words 1v1, 2v2, etc) When asking about the user's league, I did not specify what league they are in currently, and users could have responded with their peak There's currently a bug with the leagues where many players are being placed incorrectly and users could have put the bugged result in I gave users access to the results which could have influenced how they entered their results I did not specify how many times the users could take the test so some could have taken it multiple times and only submitted their best score etc etc etc