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
Engineering unit pairings and reclass paths to dominate maps whose enemy scripts are fully mappable.

Optimization · Pure Optimization
Using stealth-phase positioning to construct optimal ambushes against scripted patrols.
Fire Emblem: Awakening leans Optimization (Pure Optimization); Mutant Year Zero: Road to Eden leans Optimization (Pure Optimization).
Mutant Year Zero: Road to Eden leans a little harder on execution, though the gap is small.
Fire Emblem: Awakening
No twitch elements; pair-up placement is the only spatial decision under time
Mutant Year Zero: Road to Eden
Stealth positioning before combat demands spatial precision
Same score on reads - which means the number cannot separate them. The difference is in what each one asks of you.
Fire Emblem: Awakening
Enemies follow simple aggro patterns on fixed maps
Mutant Year Zero: Road to Eden
Enemies patrol fixed routes; no adaptive opponent modeling
Same score on variance - which means the number cannot separate them. The difference is in what each one asks of you.
Fire Emblem: Awakening
Hit and crit rates plus random level-up stats create run variance
Mutant Year Zero: Road to Eden
Hit chances and mutation procs introduce meaningful RNG
Same score on optimization - which means the number cannot separate them. The difference is in what each one asks of you.
Fire Emblem: Awakening
Marriage pairings and Second Seal reclass chains are the optimization spine
Mutant Year Zero: Road to Eden
Stalker trait loadouts and pre-combat positioning are tight optimization puzzles
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.