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.

Optimization · Practiced Mastery
Tests solving suppress-and-flank squad puzzles more than raw shooting.

Optimization · Practiced Mastery
An open-world co-op shooter about scouting cartel bases and picking the cleanest approach.
Brothers in Arms: Earned in Blood leans Optimization (Practiced Mastery); Tom Clancy's Ghost Recon Wildlands leans Optimization (Practiced Mastery).
Same score on execution - which means the number cannot separate them. The difference is in what each one asks of you.
Brothers in Arms: Earned in Blood
Deliberately loose aim makes positioning matter more than twitch
Tom Clancy's Ghost Recon Wildlands
Headshots, drone marking, and sync shots reward steady aim
Same score on reads - which means the number cannot separate them. The difference is in what each one asks of you.
Brothers in Arms: Earned in Blood
AI flanks reactively but follows mappable suppress-and-flank logic
Tom Clancy's Ghost Recon Wildlands
Enemy AI is scripted patrol logic, not adaptive
Same score on variance - which means the number cannot separate them. The difference is in what each one asks of you.
Brothers in Arms: Earned in Blood
AI repositioning varies runs slightly between attempts
Tom Clancy's Ghost Recon Wildlands
Patrol spawns and reinforcements add mild unpredictability
Brothers in Arms: Earned in Blood leans a little harder on optimization, though the gap is small.
Brothers in Arms: Earned in Blood
Suppress-then-flank squad puzzles are the entire core loop
Tom Clancy's Ghost Recon Wildlands
Outpost approach planning and skill unlocks carry progression
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.