[JonnyBGood]

Well game was nice enough to do out a hits by spreadsheet for us ages ago so in two stages for a start, who wins because there are less terrans and etds? Cath have one of their easy hit by options eroded down, xan two, zik two (neither etd nor terran gain because of this). In terms of targets you can hit then cath could have hit both with either fleet but it's irrelevant as they've got so many more options, xan have an fi and an fr option reduced and will spend more time hitting ziks with their fr in all likelihood, zik reduced fr viability which will lead to more self-feeding. However with ziks ability to steal and the de fleet's potential on cath it's not too bad for them as inevitably given stealing ziks will expand their own range. Etds reduced option for their co but they can still hit the large number of ziks around with that, reduce numbers of terrans as well but their bs would have spent most of the time hitting xans anyways so that's irrelevant really. Terran might have hit etd with their de but caths are a better idea due to non-attack fleet and worse efficiency.

Overall then etds and terrans are obviously the weakest races purely due to their small numbers meaning the fat targets get more attention. Zik seem to have been hit hardest by how this played out of the other three races but it's always difficult to tell really. Xan didn't gain much either with cath being about the same level. Here's it's largely a question of whether xan lose more with attack options going down or cath lose more with more fleets switching to targetting them. It'll be easier to re-evaluate midround.