I haven't played but it looks like a cross of these two games. Wondering if that's the case. Thoughts?

Yes, it is often described as a cross between these games.

Compared to Death Angel, the characters and the choices you have each turn seem more interesting. In Death Angel sometimes the options available to me do not always feel meaningful or interesting to me, whereas in Warhammer Quest ACG every action feels meaningful. I will say that the enemy behavior in Warhammer Quest has more variety than the enemies in SH:DA, but sometimes is less interesting. I mean, the location of enemies in Space Hulk matters quite a bit; which heroes they are next to, what the facing is, what environmental cards they are on or near, etc. Warhammer Quest has more varied enemy behaviors, but there are only three general locations an enemy can be: engaged with your hero, engaged with another player's hero, or not engaged with anyone. Not exactly bad, but at times a bit simplistic.

Compared to Lord of the Rings LCG, there are plenty of similarities, especially with the location and travel mechanics, and sometimes in the enemy behavior, and as well as the exhaust/ready mechanic. But Warhammer Quest avoids the need to make decks. The game still offers a surprising amount of options with the characters despite only having four action cards and a handful of equipment cards, but certainly you're not going to have the depth and variety that you would in LotR. Whereas refining your play versus a quest in LotR may see you tweaking your deck contents, refining your play versus a quest in WQ:ACG is more about changing your overall approach (when to clear what enemies, when to travel, when to take one action over another, etc.). Certainly plenty of that in LotR too, of course.

Overall I feel WQ:ACG is a very pleasant combination of some of the best features of both games, yet also adds its own unique spice. The result is a game that feels very solidly like its own creation, rather than a variation of either of the others. It satisfies some of the itches the others usually cover, but not so much that you'd necessarily want to give up the others.

Although honestly, I've had WQ:ACG since its release and I haven't felt the urge to play Space Hulk: Death Angel since. :/ I'm sure I'll still play it, as it plays differently and has quite a different flavor, but my Space Hulk play count is certainly going to suffer now. I've also been playing LotR less, as it's nice to have an option where I don't have to spend a lot of time fiddling with crafting and adjusting my decks.

I have both DA:SH and LotR so I'm questioning whether I should get another game that is in a way two games I already have. That said, the reason I don't play LotR much anymore if because I'm **** at deck building and therefore generally lose at it. (I don't mind losing a game, but losing because I can't build a decent deck I do mind), plus you need to alter your deck to suit the scenario you want to play; so that makes it more tedious. That said, WQ:ACG appears to be LotR without the deck building; so I'd probably play it more often.

From what you've said, it sounds like it is something that suits me.

I agree. Although LotR is wonderful, I also suck at deck building, and am often not in the mood to deck build anyway. Warhammer Quest ACG is a lot easier for me to get to the table.

I have both DA:SH and LotR so I'm questioning whether I should get another game that is in a way two games I already have. That said, the reason I don't play LotR much anymore if because I'm **** at deck building and therefore generally lose at it. (I don't mind losing a game, but losing because I can't build a decent deck I do mind), plus you need to alter your deck to suit the scenario you want to play; so that makes it more tedious. That said, WQ:ACG appears to be LotR without the deck building; so I'd probably play it more often.

From what you've said, it sounds like it is something that suits me.

Sorry for some slight necromancy (hey, it's still on the first page so it shouldn't count, right)

I picked up WHQ:ACG, and from there got Death Angel and LOTR just in case my group wants to switch things up, or as a backup if the base game is all we ever get (not saying we won't play WHQ, just saying that we will need some variety).

I haven't played LOTR yet, but I have read up on it, but we have played Death Angel a lot in the short time I've owned it.

Death Angel is both more simple and harder than WHQ (and the rules in the box aren't great, I learned to play from a combo of rules, board gamers and YouTube). You don't have as many options each turn, there are some dud squads (if I draw the blue squad in a solo or 2 player game, I have taken losing as a foregone conclusion), and a bad genestealer spawn or a bad die roll can just ruin you. I think it's just a bit too much on the random/swingy side. Also, having no option as to when you travel can lead to being overwhelmed.

On the other end, you have LOTR. Again, take this with a grain of salt as I haven't played yet, but it seems like the game can be lost at the deck building phase if you haven't built the right deck for the quest. Easy mode seems to change this a bit. Careful deck construction can also mitigate the randomness. It's a game that rewards careful prep just as much as good play.

In the middle you have WHQ. The dice give a random aspect that can be mitigated with the right actions and teamwork. Random locations and enemies makes each game different but similar, and a combination of luck, teamwork and smart play can pull off even the most desperate win.

All three offer different experiences. If I were to compare it to Heroes of the Storm, Death Angel is ARAM. It's going to be an utter shitshow, but you are most likely going to have a blast and a few laughs along the way.

LOTR is team ranked. Carefully planning, drafting and communication is rewarded. It will be difficult and potentially stressful, but with a great payoff if everything clicks.

WHQ is quickmatch. There will be times where you play perfectly, but you just get outplayed or you have a teammate who doesn't know his ass from his elbow, but a modicum of communication and coordination will see you through.

All of them are fun, but they all offer different kinds of fun.

I completely agree with your assessments of all three games!

Death Angel can be great fun and laugh-out-loud ridiculous at times. The swingy-ness and high luck factor means I get tired of it pretty quick though, and need to put it back on the shelf for many moons before I feel like picking it up again. But when I'm ready for it I'm glad it's there.

LotR has taken me a fair amount of time to get into, due to it being pretty necessary that you deck-build yet I'm generally a terrible deckbuilder. I therefore started out quite slow, and would often go a month or more between games. But now that I've gotten over that initial difficulty curve I play it much more often and it's starting to become an obsession...

WQ:ACD is a pretty good balance between the two, mechanically. If I have a complaint about Death Angel or Lord of the Rings, chances are excellent that the thing I'm griping about isn't a problem at all in WQ:ACD. Now I just desperately need MORE CONTENT!