I would go with Street Fighter because it has less micromanagement. Starcraft is not a strategy game, it is a micromanagement game. If you gave the units commands for destinations and level of aggressiveness (instead of giving specific commands to every unit about what attacks and abilities it will use) it might be an actual strategy game. As it stands now, Starcraft is based on whoever can perform the most actions per second.
Indeed. That's why I still hold that Age of Empires is the greatest RTS series ever made. It truly takes strategy and there is still micromanagement but it isn't the entire game, it's mostly just an advantage but it doesn't mean if you don't heavily micromanage you can't win, your attack plan decides if you win.
What a crappy comparison.
Here's an idea, why not compare two franchises that have something even remotely in common.
People keep thinking it should be a comparison of which is a better game in a genre. It's not about genre, it's about which one gave you more entertainment value and which franchise had more overall quality games. They aren't trying to compare them one which one was a better game gameplay to gameplay, they are comparing which game you liked most of the two. It's a random bracket like in a tournament, not set up by genre. That's like complaining that it's not fair to have Subzero vs. Nick Cage because they are too different.