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

Optimization · Pure Optimization
Instanced online RPG where deck-like eight-skill builds decide battles before they begin.

Optimization · Practiced Mastery
Tolkien-licensed RTS with freeform base building and large-scale faction warfare.
Guild Wars leans Optimization (Pure Optimization); The Lord of the Rings: The Battle for Middle-earth II leans Optimization (Practiced Mastery).
The Lord of the Rings: The Battle for Middle-earth II leans a little harder on execution, though the gap is small.
Guild Wars
Interrupt timing and kiting in skirmishes
The Lord of the Rings: The Battle for Middle-earth II
Moderate APM demands, forgiving unit control
Same score on reads - which means the number cannot separate them. The difference is in what each one asks of you.
Guild Wars
GvG and arena metagame against adapting humans
The Lord of the Rings: The Battle for Middle-earth II
Human opponents in skirmish reward prediction
Same score on variance - which means the number cannot separate them. The difference is in what each one asks of you.
Guild Wars
Modest drop and spawn randomness
The Lord of the Rings: The Battle for Middle-earth II
Mostly open information, light randomness
Guild Wars leans a little harder on optimization, though the gap is small.
Guild Wars
Eight-skill build construction is the game's soul
The Lord of the Rings: The Battle for Middle-earth II
Economy, base layout, and faction counters drive wins
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.