head to head
Neither is meaningfully harder - they pose close to the same test. The widest gap is optimization, and it is a single point.

Reads · Grand Arena
Three-faction Cold-War RTS with naval combat where faction asymmetry and multi-front pressure are the core tests.

Reads · Grand Arena
Grimdark RTS where requisition nodes, squad reinforcement, and chapter counter-picks define competitive depth.
Command & Conquer: Red Alert 3 leans Reads (Grand Arena); Warhammer 40,000: Dawn of War leans Reads (Grand Arena).
Same score on execution - which means the number cannot separate them. The difference is in what each one asks of you.
Command & Conquer: Red Alert 3
Naval and air micro alongside base-building taxes player bandwidth
Warhammer 40,000: Dawn of War
Squad retreat timing and builder unit micro require practiced hands
Same score on reads - which means the number cannot separate them. The difference is in what each one asks of you.
Command & Conquer: Red Alert 3
Three-faction asymmetry means opponent choices must be constantly predicted
Warhammer 40,000: Dawn of War
Opponent chapter choice and rush timing must be predicted
Same score on variance - which means the number cannot separate them. The difference is in what each one asks of you.
Command & Conquer: Red Alert 3
Ore spawning and naval choke variance add moderate uncertainty
Warhammer 40,000: Dawn of War
Relic capture variance and squad reinforcement timing add uncertainty
Warhammer 40,000: Dawn of War leans a little harder on optimization, though the gap is small.
Command & Conquer: Red Alert 3
Production order and defensive placement are learnable but more flexible
Warhammer 40,000: Dawn of War
Requisition node priority and tech tree builds are well-studied
A matching score does not mean a matching test. Two games can both sit at 10 on execution and demand completely different things of you - which is why the reasoning above matters more than the number beside it.