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
Planning support bonuses and BEXP investment to navigate tightly scripted tactical maps.

Optimization · Pure Optimization
A space tower-defense game solved by optimal module placement under timed pressure.
Fire Emblem: Path of Radiance leans Optimization (Pure Optimization); Space Run: Fast and Safe Delivery leans Optimization (Pure Optimization).
Space Run: Fast and Safe Delivery leans a little harder on execution, though the gap is small.
Fire Emblem: Path of Radiance
GCN menu combat; no real-time inputs
Space Run: Fast and Safe Delivery
Real-time placement under pressure adds mild twitch
Space Run: Fast and Safe Delivery leans a little harder on reads, though the gap is small.
Fire Emblem: Path of Radiance
Fixed-script enemy AI with predictable targeting priority
Space Run: Fast and Safe Delivery
Enemy waves are scripted, not adapting to you
Same score on variance - which means the number cannot separate them. The difference is in what each one asks of you.
Fire Emblem: Path of Radiance
Hit rates and level-up rolls provide mild uncertainty; BEXP smooths it
Space Run: Fast and Safe Delivery
Wave compositions and timing add bounded surprises
Same score on optimization - which means the number cannot separate them. The difference is in what each one asks of you.
Fire Emblem: Path of Radiance
BEXP allocation, staff usage, and transfer bonuses to Radiant Dawn are key
Space Run: Fast and Safe Delivery
Optimal weapon placement and resource use win runs
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.