Building comparison
head to head
Guild of DungeoneeringvsTotally Accurate Battle Simulator
Neither is meaningfully harder - they pose close to the same test. The widest gap is variance, and it is a single point.
Guild of Dungeoneering
Optimization · Systems & Chaos
Baiting a rule-driven hero with tiles while playing the odds of card draws.
Totally Accurate Battle Simulator
Optimization · Systems & Chaos
A physics sandbox where you place wobbly armies and watch ragdoll battles resolve themselves.
Guild of Dungeoneering leans Optimization (Systems & Chaos); Totally Accurate Battle Simulator leans Optimization (Systems & Chaos).
Guild of DungeoneeringTotally Accurate Battle Simulator
Axis by axis
Execution1 vs 1
Same score on execution - which means the number cannot separate them. The difference is in what each one asks of you.
Guild of Dungeoneering
Laying tiles and playing cards - zero twitch
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.
Guild of Dungeoneering
Hero AI follows fixed lure rules, never adapts
Totally Accurate Battle Simulator
No adaptive opponent in campaign sandbox
Variance6 vs 5
Guild of Dungeoneering leans a little harder on variance, though the gap is small.
Guild of Dungeoneering
Card draws and loot rolls swing every delve
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.
Guild of Dungeoneering
Deck knowledge and dungeon-tile baiting are the solvable core
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.