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

Optimization · Pure Optimization
A Pathfinder system-mastery game where feat optimization and kingdom timeline routing determine survival.

Optimization · Pure Optimization
An original RPG system where engagement optimization and passive-stacking theory dominate hard-mode encounters.
Pathfinder: Kingmaker leans Optimization (Pure Optimization); Pillars of Eternity 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.
Pathfinder: Kingmaker
Real-time-with-pause removes twitch; timed kingdom events add pressure marginally
Pillars of Eternity
Real-time-with-pause removes all twitch pressure from the player
Same score on reads - which means the number cannot separate them. The difference is in what each one asks of you.
Pathfinder: Kingmaker
All enemies and advisors follow scripted patterns without player modelling
Pillars of Eternity
All AI opponents use fixed scripted behaviour trees
Pathfinder: Kingmaker leans a little harder on variance, though the gap is small.
Pathfinder: Kingmaker
Hidden ability check thresholds and timed kingdom deadlines create unknowns
Pillars of Eternity
Hidden enemy immunities and ability distributions require investigation
Pathfinder: Kingmaker leans a little harder on optimization, though the gap is small.
Pathfinder: Kingmaker
Pathfinder feat chains and kingdom management routing have known optimal solutions
Pillars of Eternity
Per-encounter ability management and passive stacking define trial-of-iron mastery
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.