MADiSON

Both lean on execution about the same (2 vs 2). Biggest difference: variance (4 vs 5) - Armor/strength interaction and random narrative outcomes create variance

Both lean on execution about the same (2 vs 2). Biggest difference: reads (1 vs 0) - Horrors follow fixed rules

Both lean on execution about the same (2 vs 2). Biggest difference: reads (1 vs 0) - Shark and seagull AI are scripted with no player modelling

Both lean on reads about the same (1 vs 1). Biggest difference: execution (2 vs 3) - Clunky combat is intentional; survival over precision

Both lean on execution about the same (2 vs 2). Biggest difference: reads (1 vs 0) - Suspects follow fixed scripts, never adapt

Both lean on execution about the same (2 vs 2). Biggest difference: reads (1 vs 0) - All enemies scripted with fixed attack patterns

Both lean on reads about the same (1 vs 1). Biggest difference: execution (2 vs 1) - Menu-driven turn battles demand no physical skill

Both lean on execution about the same (2 vs 2). Biggest difference: reads (1 vs 0) - No adaptive opposition, only branching scripts

Both lean on execution about the same (2 vs 2). Biggest difference: variance (4 vs 3) - Familiar catch and drop rolls

Both lean on execution about the same (2 vs 2). Biggest difference: optimization (6 vs 7) - Karma allocation and archetype synergies have known dominant configurations

Both lean on execution about the same (2 vs 2). Biggest difference: reads (1 vs 0) - Monsters and citizens follow fixed scripts

Both lean on execution about the same (2 vs 2). Biggest difference: reads (1 vs 0) - Zombie waves are announced patterns, not minds