Why it's better to do things closest to as Jake says

Q: Why don’t you need to change much for first?
A: You could have ciliary spasm, which is quite a sensitive condition to deal with.

Q: I hate all the prescription complexities which I have. Why not to go with one single minus value?
A: You will go to this later. But if your far point is for example 10.3 and 10.8 cm, why would you need this now? You’d better be successful at reducing so high sphere you still have.

Q: I want to drop full diopter, or rather two is better?? Well, the next reduction will be 3 diopters: no glasses at all.
A: No one gives you guarantee your eyes will improve by at least 0.25-0.50 D, recommended for reduction. So, don’t suffer you don’t see a **** and do slightest avaliable reductions - up to 0.50 is fine if you really know you need it.

Between those was my question:

Q: Can I at least equalize 0.5 diiference between sphere and cylinder (equal SE) in my eyes, because cylinder in my one eye is so ****ing high for glasses with way less chromatic aberration, while there are my first diffs? I came from Bates, that is rather nothing for my eyes to tolerate.
A: You’d better reduce spherical only while keeping all differences as measured. Because you still aren’t sure you have ciliary spasm, according to your posts, as well as you can have blur adaptation etc etc.
RE: I ordered what I ordered… Wish me the best.

We need to drive away from JengaMaybe20/20 yet slightly more than we think…

I am not sure why there is a question mark in your thread title.

I think that for the overwhelming majority of people doing what Jake says is the best solution.

The Jenga game metaphor is nice, but there is that rare person who ventures into EM who doesn’t have the usual stack of blocks to tackle one at a time in the right order. I am one of those, and we are more or less on our own. This is not a disaster, because if one understands the basic principles, a workaround can always be found.