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

Optimization · Pure Optimization
Beloved fantasy turn-based strategy of heroes, castles, and stacked creature armies racing for map control.

Optimization · Pure Optimization
Optimising colonial economy and revolution timing on an unknown map.
Heroes of Might and Magic II leans Optimization (Pure Optimization); Sid Meier's Civilization IV: Colonization leans Optimization (Pure Optimization).
Same score on execution - which means the number cannot separate them. The difference is in what each one asks of you.
Heroes of Might and Magic II
Turn-based clicking only
Sid Meier's Civilization IV: Colonization
Turn-based clicks - no physical layer
Heroes of Might and Magic II leans a little harder on reads, though the gap is small.
Heroes of Might and Magic II
Hotseat duels reward mind games; AI is mappable
Sid Meier's Civilization IV: Colonization
AI rivals follow mappable tendencies
Same score on variance - which means the number cannot separate them. The difference is in what each one asks of you.
Heroes of Might and Magic II
Map exploration, morale, luck, and combat rolls
Sid Meier's Civilization IV: Colonization
Map generation and exploration hide early information
Same score on optimization - which means the number cannot separate them. The difference is in what each one asks of you.
Heroes of Might and Magic II
Build orders, hero chaining, and creature math are deeply solvable
Sid Meier's Civilization IV: Colonization
Colony economy, specialists and independence timing are deeply 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.
full breakdown
Heroes of Might and Magic II →
full breakdown
Sid Meier's Civilization IV: Colonization →