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 · Practiced Mastery
Play-calling chess against the defense with light on-field execution on top.

Optimization · Practiced Mastery
Tolkien-licensed RTS with freeform base building and large-scale faction warfare.
Joe Montana Football leans Optimization (Practiced Mastery); The Lord of the Rings: The Battle for Middle-earth II 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.
Joe Montana Football
Player switching and passing timing matter but stay forgiving
The Lord of the Rings: The Battle for Middle-earth II
Moderate APM demands, forgiving unit control
The Lord of the Rings: The Battle for Middle-earth II leans a little harder on reads, though the gap is small.
Joe Montana Football
Out-guessing a friend's play call is the two-player edge
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.
Joe Montana Football
Hidden play selection per snap, little else random
The Lord of the Rings: The Battle for Middle-earth II
Mostly open information, light randomness
The Lord of the Rings: The Battle for Middle-earth II leans a little harder on optimization, though the gap is small.
Joe Montana Football
Knowing which of 17 plays beats each defense decides drives
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.
full breakdown
Joe Montana Football →
full breakdown
The Lord of the Rings: The Battle for Middle-earth II →