Building comparison
head to head
DistrustvsTotally Accurate Battle Simulator
Neither is meaningfully harder - they pose close to the same test. The widest gap is execution, and it is a single point.
Distrust
Optimization · Systems & Chaos
A survival puzzle of rationing resources while mapping randomised anomaly rules.
Totally Accurate Battle Simulator
Optimization · Systems & Chaos
A physics sandbox where you place wobbly armies and watch ragdoll battles resolve themselves.
Distrust leans Optimization (Systems & Chaos); Totally Accurate Battle Simulator leans Optimization (Systems & Chaos).
DistrustTotally Accurate Battle Simulator
Axis by axis
Execution2 vs 1
Distrust leans a little harder on execution, though the gap is small.
Distrust
Isometric clicking under time pressure, never twitch demands
Totally Accurate Battle Simulator
Place units then watch; no hands required
Reads0 vs 0
Same score on reads - which means the number cannot separate them. The difference is in what each one asks of you.
Distrust
Anomalies follow random rules, not adaptive minds
Totally Accurate Battle Simulator
No adaptive opponent in campaign sandbox
Variance6 vs 5
Distrust leans a little harder on variance, though the gap is small.
Distrust
Procedural stations, hidden anomaly rules and sanity warps dominate
Totally Accurate Battle Simulator
Wobbly physics makes identical setups resolve differently
Optimization7 vs 7
Same score on optimization - which means the number cannot separate them. The difference is in what each one asks of you.
Distrust
Resource triage and sleep management are solvable systems
Totally Accurate Battle Simulator
Unit counters and placement solve each scenario
A matching score does not mean a matching test. Two games can both sit at 10 on execution and demand completely different things of you - which is why the reasoning above matters more than the number beside it.