> Mars is considered to be the hardest planet to land on in the entire solar system Questionable. > but it's so thin you still have to land propulsively usin

> Mars is considered to be the hardest planet to land on in the entire solar system Questionable. > but it's so thin you still have to land propulsively using rockets You have to do the same on earth. Starship sized vehicles have to land on earth propulsively too. Sure, you can do somewhat larger payloads to Orbit without engines but for large things you need to have real engines. > You definitely need to sacrifice less spacecraft mass to land on the moon On the moon you can't aerobrake, that is far worse. > Also there is some water on the moon so you can make rocket fuel, though how much exactly remains an open question There is a huge difference. Water on the moon has to be mined from permanently shadowed craters. The water is frozen and incredibly hard, its more like mining stone on earth. On Mars there are places where you can literally land, drill down and make yourself an underground lake pretty easily. Or land basically right on an ice sheet. On the moon you need to figure out how to get energy down into the crater, you need sophisticated mining equipment, all that equipment needs to handle incredibly low temperatures. Mars comparatively is not so far away from earth in terms of temperature for your equipment. In summation, in-situ for rocket fuel/water is far, far easier on Mars.