Do you play in Ironman?

[Silva]

I see a lot of people criticizing the state of AIs in strategy games. I'm not really in disagreement here, but at the same time I also see a lot of people savescumming to get to the end no matter what, which, frankly, defeats the whole purpose of AI competence in my opinion.

I for one always try to play all strategy games in Ironman. The exception being new playthroughs of games I'm not knowledgeable yet. When I feel I've developed a minimum competence in a game though, it's Ironman all the way. Civ4, Alpha Centauri, EU2, CK2, Rome Total War, Shogun 2 Total War, King of Dragon Pass, are examples of games I've finished, or went very far into, in Ironman.

Please be honest. If you play to paint the map no matter what, or to see the end of story, and use savescumming for this, say so. Dont be ashamed for being a pussy.

 

[taxalot]

Always. If losing is fun, then it means the game actually manages to get a few things right.

 

[tindrli]

rarely

 

[MadMaxHellfire]

almost never. too many bugs to be afraid of. almost all the strategy games are also built with savescumming in mind, with unavoidable failure states out of your control and no way to save the situation.

 

[thesheeep]

Almost never.
I don't enjoy not reaching my goals due to making a single dumb error, and I do tend to brainfart sometimes.

Games in which Ironman is the standard, like most roguelikes, etc. are an exception of course.

Silva The vote is very much lacking in options.
A strict yes/no means that pretty much everyone will pick yes, because even "almost never" is technically yes.

 

[Raghar]

Almost never.
I don't enjoy not reaching my goals due to making a single dumb error, and I do tend to brainfart sometimes.

Games in which Ironman is the standard, like most roguelikes, etc. are an exception of course.

Silva The vote is very much lacking in options.
A strict yes/no means that pretty much everyone will pick yes, because even "almost never" is technically yes.

According to CIA classifications almost never is no. You are supposed to pick proper wording that exactly states the situation. There are categories from probability to probability and you should used correct phrases according to the current nomenclature.

 

[Chippy]

Problem with ironman is Autism. I could get through Severence:Blade of Darkness on ironman, but then go into Autistic rage if my character bounced off an enemy and glitched several hundred feet across the screen into a chasm of molten lava. Is that really a death?. Of course not. But then Autism kicks in.
Same thing with Fallout 1,2 and Tactics - do you really wanna go Ironman and try to keep Dogmeat alive? Or assume that randome selection of bullets won't hit you for +1000 damage?. Really it just depends on how well the game is put together, or if you're playing a game put together by the best like Warhammer Dark Crusade, and you decide to walk across a chasm created by a Titan gun firing...assuming you'll get a moment to teleport away, but the developers make your character's death part of an actual fucking cutscene ...


Edit: I'm playing it right now. Still one of the best games ever created.

 

[Bocian]

It seems like a masochism, I never do it. The game's challenge shouldn't be about removing the progress of the game, and starting over from scratch is almost never a fun experience.

 

[zool]

Always with games like JA2, where losing a battle and getting your top squad massacred/captured does not mean it's game over, even if it puts you in a tight spot for a while.

JA2 is so awesome, there are no words for it, only

 

[Stormcrowfleet]

I do it unless I did a stupid error or something. Rome2 /w Iron Man is much more enjoyable as your defeat becomes quest of vengeance and you can revive your legions etc.

 

[Jokzore]

exception being new playthroughs of games I'm not knowledgeable yet.

Most games I only play through once, so no ironman.

 

[Falksi]

I've got this awesome in-built version of Iron man called "self discipline".

 

[Tigranes]

Softly.

Usually I'll never reload unless there was a crash or I am totally dead/fucked. I don't always fancy losing all progress.

It's not really a 'discipline' thing once you get used to it. You just never think about reloading unless you really have to. Now I wonder why I ever wasted my time not having fun, sitting there reloading again and again like a particularly retarded rat in a Skinner box.

 

[laclongquan]

No. Ironman is for autistic meat beating~ As a proper introvert gamer, i dont do meat beating even to other nerds~ What are you, hidden extrovert?

In what case would I choose to play ironman? Well, that is for only when reloading is too much of a bother: too much mini area loading (SOZ), or due to self buff to amazing degree that it's not fun to repeat every half hour... And even then ironman make me play in a turtle, safe way~ It's not fun.

As for what's for fun, if reloading like mad is fun for you why would I judge? If the now you look down your past self for doing that, well, that's your business~

 

[someone else]

SOZ?

 

[Agame]

Softly.

Usually I'll never reload unless there was a crash or I am totally dead/fucked. I don't always fancy losing all progress.

Pretty much this, I usually "soft ironman" just because of bugs or the occasional reloads when everything has gone to shit and its a game over situation.

Half the fun of games like XCOM, JA etc is getting spanked by the enemy and having to claw your way back.

I feel sorry for people who have to save scum, but I guess it probably is enjoyable for an anal retentive personality.

 

[laclongquan]

Storm of Zehir. I really dont want to load 200 mini area whenever I reload the world map, so it's a straight ironman experience. Also the fact that the mini area is too mini so a fast run through is possible without reload~

 

[someone else]

Storm of Zehir. I really dont want to load 200 mini area whenever I reload the world map, so it's a straight ironman experience. Also the fact that the mini area is too mini so a fast run through is possible without reload~

That's not a strategy game though.

 

[Cael]

Ironman means you play conservatively, usually excessively so, unless you really know the game back to front. That takes away the fun in most games in that you won't dare to try out new tactics and strategies, especially in a RPG type game where you may have invested a few tens of hours into it already.

Ironman is good for a challenge, but not good for "I will always play all games like this". In fact, the latter is pure retardism as you won't get to explore parts of games. Even Mechwarrior 2 Mercenaries has scenarios that require you to lose certain missions to unlock. You want to unlock the Madcat or the Masakari in the campaign? Guess what, buddy? You have to lose certain prior missions first! A guy playing ironman all the time won't ever figure that out without the use of guides like some fucking millenial shit.

 

[laclongquan]

Take Warzone 2100 for example. IF playing ironman I would have to gather a force several times over the requirement before I attack a base, or a suspected zone of enemies. That would require turtle to make use of production until it's not possible. Then an overweighted hammer throw straight at target.

It's not that fun. Ironman is never about fun, though~ Ironman is about whose dick is bigger, harder.

 

[laclongquan]

Half the fun of games like XCOM, JA etc is getting spanked by the enemy and having to claw your way back.

I feel sorry for people who have to save scum, but I guess it probably is enjoyable for an anal retentive personality.

You have a masochist tendency, my little padawan. It's not bad if you know it, and how to channel it. But unknowing your own, then look down on others because they dont have M tendency... That calls for St Andrews cross, cat of nine tails, hot wax, and ball gag.

 

[Norfleet]

Sort of. I don't really use the official mode for this kind of thing because games are too buggy for that, though. If you don't keep saves, CRASH! BOOM! BANG!

 

[Risewild]

I don't play Ironman. For the simple reason that I like to try totally ridiculous stuff, that I am pretty sure I will die if it goes wrong. Because I want to see the result of what happens when I fail and/or succeed.

I also like to pick options that are going against what character I am playing (pick an evil option when I play with a good character) on purpose just to see if the game reacts to the difference of "alignment" between the character actions and it's moral code. After that (and even if I got an awesome reward by picking the evil option) I just reload and pick the option my character would pick.

I have way more fun trying crazy stuff like that to see how games handle it, and then reload and play normally, than I would always playing "seriously" because I couldn't reload.

 

[HeatEXTEND]

4X yes
RPG no

 

[catfood]

No, I don't have autism.