Some of my favorite games are those I lose or have a very hard time. I like the challenge.
When a game is too easy to steamroll from the beginning, I get easily bored. I also don't get frustrated when the game is hard, but offers a fair challenge.
Do you? Which strategy game/mod offers you a great challenge?
Recently playing Strategic Command World War I and got my ass handed to me in the Eastern Front as the Central Powers, though I almost reached Paris. Now I'm trying another approach and decided to tackle Russia with the Wermatch + Austrian Imperial Army and had success in capturing Poland and marching into Ukraine, though the french and british armis are pressing me hard in Belgium and the french-german border.
 Ape Out Shirt $21.68 |
 DMT Has Friends For Me Shirt $21.68 |
Ape Out Shirt $21.68 |
While I can like losing, it's only when it was designed to be fun, which is pretty much never the case in strategy games. The few occasions that I can think of are TTRPGs where the GM has to make the game fun even if you lose and interactive novels that don't take themselves seriously and dying is something to laugh at. I also got a few ridicolous deaths in nethack.
A game that you might like would be the original x-com trilogy: you're gonna' lose a lot of missions if you don't know what you're doing
Losing in RTS doesn't feel fun, it just feels like the game telling you "You done fricked up" either through a small mistake you made at the start which ended up snowballing or you just get steamrolled, very rarely did I have games where it was evenly matched and losing felt justified.
Only when it was with friends or it was an arcade did losing actually fell fun.
As anon said, mainly when the game doesn't take itself seriously does the fun begin with all the wank jack shit going on.
Chaos Galaxy 2 has an excellent tactical AI and its overall strategy is decent. Makes for painful campaigns if you don't savescum or plan properly.
I don't mind losing if it's not bullshit. I like Roguelikes, STG/Shoot 'em Ups, fighting games, and older type genres like that, so I'm used to dying and starting over if I frick up, but strategy games have lots of bullshit. If I lose for reason other than "giant space lobster appears and kills everyone", "one faction snowballed out of control by turn five and is going to win unchallenged", or "Enemy has 15x resources and always knows where you are and what you're making" then I probably had fun.
I would prefer to not know who is truly going to win right up until near the end however, since I'm prone to quit if I know I'm going to lose, and maybe if it's taking too long to clean up and win. Strategy games are too prone to having this period where you're just a lame duck waiting for the opponent to finish you off instead of just quickly collapsing altogether once you've lost critical aspects of your offensive.
>it's only when it was designed to be fun, which is pretty much never the case in strategy games.
>Losing in RTS doesn't feel fun
Pretty much these, except it also doesn't really feel fun to win either. I don't know what it is about a strategy "you win" screen that makes it less fun than any other game's "you win" screen but maybe it's because it's often a chore to get there. I have more of a sense of victory watching the academy blow up in ES2 than I do finishing the match, and probably than finishing any other strategy game match.
Crusader Kings and Dwarf Fortress are a good exception. In fact, losing is encouraged to have even more fun
strategic command is a pretty okay series to dip your toes into wargames with
I never save-scum so yes.
no, whenever I lose I get incredibly frustrated and immediately go to my toilet and choke my wiener out until I splooge huge loads all over the seat
I love RTS games but I will openly admit that no genre of game makes me more frustrated or mad then multiplayer RTS
Somehow it feels like every action my opponent takes to beat me is a personal attack against me. I am practically having an internal narrative of like "Oh you would fricking do that you piece of fricking shit, yeah just keep spamming planes you fricking wienersucker, piece of shit just spams infantry and aircraft, fricking bullshit, play a real fricking game you troglodyte. I bet you're poor and ugly. You want to do that to me you piece of shit?"
Of course I understand that I am probably doing just as much stupid cheese to win myself, and its all part of the game, but I can't help it.
It's weird too because I don't get mad at any other genre of game even in multiplayer. FPS, MMO, whatever. Single player strategy games are very comfy for me even when I lose. I don't know why MP RTS specifically gets under my skin so badly lol. Perfectly valid strategies used by my opponent turn me into a frothing madman
I had to stop playing SCII MP because I just wasn't enjoying it and just last night I probably had a 50% elevated heart rate BPM playing Warno and getting incredibly mad that my opponent was ... merely shooting down my helicopters with planes
Lmao who knows
kek yeah losing to all-ins is infuriating in starcraft i feel ya
Yes it is lol, a cannon rush or something similar drives me insane
Worst part is / was, I'm not bad and I was winning that game, and I did win it. Still made me mad as hell lol
RTS games just have a secret sauce to make everything feel 'personal'
Common problems of people with a serious skill issue (including me)
It's a matter of low/high stakes. Prop Hunt is casual fun, you just run and hide all in good fun. RTS is 'serious business' where by harassing the opponent's workers you might do more damage to his temper than his eco, scoring you a win whether he loses or ragequits.
something similar but I also love it, no other game gives me this rush and enjoyment
I may rage a bit, but 1-2 minutes and it's gone and I want to go at it again
also I usually rage because I know that it was me who fricked it up and I am mad at myself rather than at the game or my enemy
yes, my fondest memories are when i frick up in a game
Can't say I do. Typically losing involves making a dumb mistake and/or failing to keep up as things get worse and worse. The exception is when I specifically want to play against hopeless odds to see how long I can last against AI and see particularly massive battles.
There were some games I didn't play all the way through, though. For instance I liked Jagged Alliance 1 and 2 but the initial parts where you have to make do with crappy weapons are my favorite, and halfway through I feel like I had enough and give up. I also don't care about winning assorted 4X games when I can tell the enemies can't recover.
>While I can like losing, it's only when it was designed to be fun, which is pretty much never the case in strategy games.
Strategy game campaigns are especially bad at it.
>lose late into a mission
>have to do the whole mission again from the start, but now you know all the twists
Meant for
Campaigns suck especially because if you didn't do good enough in the previous scenario you can make the current one impossible, which means that you can screw yourself without even knowing it
Campaigns suck the most when a game has multiplayer because then the entire game will be balanced for that crowd instead of making a separate mod-like mode for them and the campaign will become near impossible to complete.
OP here.
Playing my campaign on Strategic Command, the russians are almost collapsing, just as my Western front is also getting fricked.
Yeah, I think I might lose if in the next turns I don't kick the russians out of the war, but I think I might manage.
But I gotta say, even if I lose, this has been an amazing game.
>That fricking conga line from Scotland to Iceland
Are the Icelanders distracting the Royal Navy with Cod war 0.5 or something?
Blockading germany imports from the Atlantic (the game presumes the Channel would already be blockaded deu to french + british)
Oh well, the game is lost! It's the 3rd of November and the Central Powers are on the eve of surrender!
I'm still trying to understand, but basically Russia had almost zero troops and suddenly they had a surge of manpower and recruiting after the Tsar was ousted and Kerensky took over. Almost knocked them down, was almost there... but they held my troops down near Riga and Kiev, and my supply chain broke, and the whole eastern front fell.
It was followed by the Western Front as the British and French started employing tanks - despite my investments, they got the tech first.
Been literal ages since I touched strategic command, but Russia has very fast mobilization in this game if I remember correctly and your probably better off entrenching along the Eastern front until they've finished mobilizing and mop up after they slav wave into your units. You should probably devote as little effort into the West as possible.
Losing can be fun but as soon as the tide turns against me I have to save and come back later after processing the despair and thinking of a narrative reason why my king/leader was such a frick-up
Enjoying losing is the tell tale sign of a cuckold
Anon, it's not about getting off losing, but enjoying a hard challenge that makes the game interesting. Losing is part of the process, and adds to replayability
A game should be fun even as you are losing, not because you are losing.
I barely even have fun when I win unless I'm winning in the most efficient way. But then because I'm hyperoptimizing I end up not having fun anyways.
Depends on the game but mostly no when it comes to strategy.
If it's a real fight then yeah it's still fun.
If I get stomped from the first minute and continue to get stomped until the end then no it's not fun.
no
I get incredibly frustrated and storm off to the toilet where I choke the life out of my wiener while standing over the bowl until it cries tears of cum and my serotonin levels spike so I can stop thinking about the stupid mistakes I made when playing my favourite strategy game.
Unique defeat screens and cinematics are usually the upside of defeat.
Earth 2150 and its spinoffs had unique defeat debriefings for each mission, typically with amusing complaints about your performance.
I wonder why is it that people claim to like strategy games but become upset by any sort of hardship in the game. Asymmetrical maps, "poor" starts just because they aren't surrounded by a game winning amount of resources, random hit chances, opponents they can't immediately overwhelm, any sort of event happening that wasn't their choice, the absolute idea that they could lose any battle. It's like they really want some sort of RPG/city builder with shoot em up segments where they go and destroy some random enemy's base and holdings.
One thing is that it's fine for singleplayer. In MP strategy games are pretty snowbally and it can be incredibly frustrating to play out a game where you lost 10 minutes ago you just don't' know it yet,
I used to love playing hard Skirmish in Tiberian Sun.
See the thing about hard skirmish is the AI will act like a normal AI at first, with everyone hostile to everyone, eventually though all the AIs will team up against one AI enemy.
All the teams will focus on this one bot, all the super weapons will go after this one bot.
They will build massive armies to destroy this one AI player.
And the moment that bot dies, they all ally and gang up on the human player.
So the largest winning strategy is to passively help out the one bullied AI long enough to create a massive army of your own.
If not.
You get to face down up to 6 armies at the same time all coming for you, It becomes a game to see how long you can survive.
>Play A bridge too far
>Frick up the opening on Market Garden
>Oh shiiiiiiiiiiit
>Try to hold out as long as I can to at least secure the Historical victory even though I know I've fricked myself at the bridge.
how do I like challenges, bros
t. coward
get good enough to overcome them
Start taking notes to understand where each thing fits in and what it's worth. Challenges give you an excuse to innovate.
In single player, I rarely truly enjoy losing. I enjoy challenging maps, but that's it.
In multiplayer, I enjoy losing if the skill level around the players is around the same and the game is really close in general. You know, when both players take each other to their limits, I don't mind losing, it's just fun to have a competitive game like that.
it depends on whether i made a good showing, learned something new, or enjoyed socializing with other players, but the answer is usually yes.
Getting blown out a game your bad at is usually not that fun, PUBg for example is half an hour of shoot and scoot followed by getting shot in the back when you make it to the top 10 slot. I don't like overly competitive people and real time strategy stresses me out, but if there is something you can take away from the game losing isn't even that big of a deal, not really why i play games to begin with.
Victory is just the cherry on top, I like the challenge.
single player RTS is fun because you can take your time, when i play multiplayer RTS i feel like I always have to be doing something, I always choke and end doing something panicky.
Get used to it.
depends on the game. i’ve been playing breakpoint recently and don’t really mind when i die.
i like picking out the perfect spot and trying to take out all the guards one by one.
Depends. Was it close? Can I see what I did wrong and improve?
If I lost because of a diceroll, or just because the enemy got a huge advantage, I'm just gonna feel frustrated. But if it was a close fight and it 'made sense' for me to lose because of what I did, I like it.
Yes, if I feel I lost fairly. It's not fun to lose to a cheating game.
I can't remember when was the last time when I won an MP in HoMM3. 2017? Maybe 2018? Definitely pre-Covid.
It's still fricking fun just to play it, regardless of outcome.
If I lose due to my own frickups, poor decision making, or arrogance in trying to juggle too many things at once and get burned for being greedy, that's totally fine and can even be fun trying to fix the frickups.
If you lose due to some bullshit RNG scenario or just buggy nonsense that's not fun
I sometimes enjoy coming back from a campaign where everything has gone to shit, but more often than not it just is a headache. Even if I'm coming back to an old save. Crusader Kings is the only exception.
No, I always win and if I'm losing I cheat until I win.
I don't like losing but most of the time I can deal with it. Unless it's permadeath lose all your progress after spending dozens of hours type of bullshit.
DnD comes to mind, losing a campaign right near the end after several real life weeks of effort. Refused to play again for a long time. It wasn't cool or epic and it definitely wasn't worth it.
If I invest a lot of time into something it should succeed
Against people? If they are friends or friendly strangers is alright, but if they come in all smug and shit that kind of sours the mood.
Against AI? I fricking hate it, I savescum all the time against the c**t.
Sore losers is the reasons we have alot of piss easy strategy games on the market right now. Including the new paradox slop.