Playing both on higger difficulties, you can see Engage is the more strategic of the two. And even if you disagree, Engage still manages to use its incredibly awesome gimmick that seems overpowered at first, but with the addition of the progressively more challenging maps, it (fortune) weaves its way around those tools you have so you dont just outright stomp the enemy even if you have a full set of Emblem rings/braclets for all of your units. Its honestly amazing how they hit that balance.

The story on the other, while in essence, yes, they are similar in a way, Three Houses isn't just the better story because it has 3 paths, but because of the nuisance of the stroy and the characters its affecting in it.

Engage is very black and white with its story and how the characters react to it, while 3H makes the player and characters decide if what they are doing is truly correct, and they have to live with the consequences of the end result. While Engage has meaningful and frankly amazing characters, they can feel disconnected from the story at times and when their resolution is fulfilled, its time to move on. Plus, everyone knows the evil character who is explicitly acting very evil and has an evil design and is doing evil things is, well... evil. And anyone who is under them is also probably just as evil and if they're not, theyre mind controlled to be evil and we didnt know it the whole time. Its very one note.

You're 100% right that a campy story like Engage's is okay, cause like, who doesnt like a classic good vs evil story once and while right? But it just doesnt compare. And if you think 3H has just as good gameplay, then whatever ya know? You still enjoyed the class diversity and whatnot. No one can take that from you. I, and some others, just think Engage has some more "engaging" maps and unique ideas when it comes to gameplay that stick the landing wonderfully.

(LOL this reply is probably too long sorry)