The official social platform for ConsimWorld
I like them both, but OCS better.
IMHO, OCS plays faster and I prefer the greater emphasis on logistics. EFS has logistics, but it is simplified and I prefer the greater complexity/realism of the OCS supply model. I also prefer the OCS "surprise" effect on combat (it's not really surprise, but local tactical vagaries). It creates a more realistic uncertainty during combat. EFS KtR feels rather scripted, and all the EFS battles occur in 1941 so the Soviet is quite hamstrung operationally. OCS Case Blue and Baltic Gap, on the other hand, models periods during which the Reds were ascendant. Plus you get Burma and Sicily and Korea and Tunisia and the whole DAK2 enchilada, which is probably my favorite game.
On the plus side for EFS, I like the air rules a little better. I also like the way EFS Crimea models the naval activity. Very narrative and thrilling, and it creates a lot of fun decisions. Bottom line is both systems are good, but OCS has more variety, more fluid decision-making, and better logistics.
EFS players, please do not shell me. Just my opinion. :-)
You dont realize ground and position its paramount in OCS. It matters very much less final result in the combat table if you are defending or attacking with a good position.
From the worst result to the better in the CRT your direct losses are only 2 steps (1-4 with a 1 dice roll, or 13-1 with a 15 dice roll), either AL2, or DL2o3DG.
It means that your "lost everything" in fact is as much 2 steps if your position was good.
In war shit happens, and there are plenty of WWII operational accounts where tactical bad coordination between battallions or regiments, tactical ambushes, etc. lead to a disaster to lead units, stopping cold following units. Surprise deals with that.