Pros & Cons: Playing against A.I. Vs. Playing against humans.

You can do whatever you want and whatever makes you happy . If you want to play against IA it's perfectly fine. But try to convince the rest of the world that everybody should do what you do because humanity sucks is going to far . Actually your post look like be wrote by an insane person .

Losing a game of chess can surely feel like a blow to one's intellect... Just the nature of the game. I guess playing against people is preferred because there's a greater sense of battling ideas, rather than trying to defeat an "average centipawn loss" calculator... which sounds very un-romantic to me...

Also... Don't assume everyone is weak, and worry if they're going to be "okay," just because you've encountered some with "fragile egos." That's not what an empathetic and compassionate person does...

Get off your high horse, friend.

With humans, expect the unexpected.
With engines, expect the perfect move.

When a game ends around 40 moves, it sounds normal.
When it lasts above 40 moves, normally both made errors.
If it ends quickly, there was a blunder that was exploited.

When playing against an engine, maybe the aim is to drag the game out.
When playing against a human, maybe the aim is to end it quickly.

There are lots of advantages and disadvantages playing either A.I or humans. One example: Don't expect a blunder from an engine unless the engine is programmed to not play the perfect first moves. Don't expect a human to play the perfect moves, unless the game outcome is so predictable.

I feel that the engines, especially at lower levels have little strategical awareness.

Me vs stock 6 as an example of what I mean. Even at 1900 level, it makes moves that just don't make sense to me and I can't understand. 14...ne7 instead of Bxb4 for instance in this game. It strategically allows my A & B pawn to both be passed for some odd reason. Then it does things like allow it to be traded down into hopeless endgame pretty quickly.

Humans generally don't play this way, and the engine even at this level can spot some obscure tactics that may even make a GM scratch their head, but will strategically almost always play with weakness far below the stated rating.

So the engine is more about tactics than the long-term strategic aspects of chess relative to a human. If your tactics can hold up a fair amount you can use superior human strategy to have a victory.

Furthermore, they don't resign unless you make it to move 150 then they always resign even if they are about to mate you. I don't see most human players playing on past move 32 here as it's easily converted to a win. However, the engine will draw it out to move 70 or so even when it's totally hopeless.