Building comparison
head to head
Company of HeroesvsStarCraft
Neither is simply harder - they are hard in different places. Company of Heroes demands more variance; StarCraft demands more optimization.
Company of Heroes
Execution · Grand Arena
WWII squad-tactics RTS where cover micro, sector pressure, and doctrine counters form an interlocking test.
StarCraft
Optimization · Grand Arena
A real-time strategy classic where perfected build orders and mechanical speed decide most matches.
Company of Heroes leans Execution (Grand Arena); StarCraft leans Optimization (Grand Arena).
Company of HeroesStarCraft
Axis by axis
Execution7 vs 7
Same score on execution - which means the number cannot separate them. The difference is in what each one asks of you.
Company of Heroes
Infantry cover micro and suppression-break timing are precise demands
StarCraft
APM and micro control ceiling is huge
Reads7 vs 6
Company of Heroes leans a little harder on reads, though the gap is small.
Company of Heroes
Opponent sector pushes and doctrine choices must be predicted
StarCraft
scouting and predicting human opponent builds
Variance4 vs 1
Company of Heroes leans clearly harder on variance.
Company of Heroes
Reinforcement point capture variance and munitions drops add uncertainty
StarCraft
minimal hidden info beyond fog of war
Optimization7 vs 9
StarCraft leans clearly harder on optimization.
Company of Heroes
Resource point priority and doctrine selection are learnable systems
StarCraft
build orders and economy are near-solvable
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.