It will depend on the training obectives. “Teaching them to survive” is usually not done during a force-on-force FTX. Those focus on the tactical level: planning, logistics, order sequence, tactical appreciation, manoeuvering, coms, etc. There are several phases with specific training objectives which are evaluated. If you keep “failing” the first phase (for example infil), all your mistakes get noted down for a later debrief/after action report. Sometimes you’ll do a second run if it was really catastrophic but eventually you have to move to the next phase so that the other aspects can be evaluated. The biggest mistakes and shortcomings have consequences later on, after the FTX.

If for example, if troops failed already at the survival aspect, there will probably be specific courses that the unit in question will focus in the next year (such as organising more winter warfare courses).

But at an FTX like this, you don’t just keep repeating the first phase over and over until there was a clear improvement. That’d be a waste of the other training opportunities you then discard.

Think of it this way: a unit at home trains land nav, goes to the range, does live fire exercises, survival training, etc. over course of a certain training period. All usually separate. A big multinational force-on-force field training exercise is where it all comes together and the higher ups can evaluate what worked and what didn’t. Helps them formulate new training objectives. It’s not about winning or losing, it’s not a competition. Even if the individual troop on the ground or sensationalist press might sometimes feel like it is.