2TC Is not viable and this game favors fast age3 hard

Hey guys, been watching a lot of marinelord, grubby, and other players (mostly through vods, leenock, kiwian, beastyqt some, etc.) and of course I am playing myself, clearly I am only a top 1k player which is nothing compared to high level. But I open 2tc 99% of my games unless its water in which I just, altf4 cuz french OP. However, a huge trend in the meta as it sits is that 1 tc fast castle is hugely favored to the player who rushed, you guessed it, fast castle first. The main trend I see is use whatever mechanic you have chinese bonus eco, rus eco scout, french already have an insane eco, holy roman empire Prelate, etc, to just hit age 3 knights/lancers ASAP and just str8 rush with that. Or as rus and other civs CA is an option and we have seen top players lose to this playstyle and adapt by simply just going quick age 3. Now the last few games I have played have all been this meta age 3 rush. With watching marinelords stream the same thing I saw today is still going. He went 2 tc only 2 games, and both games he rushed age 3 THEN he got a 2nd tc. To me the issue here makes this game copy a sad trend of AoE2DE, quick wall, camp, get quick age 3 and just rush with age 3 units and win. This made aoe2de meta kinda shift to dark and feudal into a useless loop of “Oh my opponent full walled looks like ima head home and just do the same”. This same concept is now aoe4, I see my opponent is going quick age 3, I can’t kill a tc fast enough or dive his TC because well, it just doesn’t work of course so I can either try to horseman harass which doesn’t do much at all. I can also try to age 2 him as quick as possible, however age 3 can come super early 8 mins faster for better players (this is even at my low skill level). This means he will have lancers/age3 knights that take maybe 3-4 to delete my entire army? Because the gap between age 2 and age 3 units is huge. Now, we obviously don’t want to make quick age 3 useless, in a bo3 you’d ideally want different types of game, water, land, macro, unique strat etc. So I don’t have an reliable options to punish age 3 quick, even with good scouting. My only real option that is viable is to just rush age 3 myself and skip a 2nd tc all together. The extra food I have should go to making units to defend his lancer push/knight push/ CA push, not making more vils or a 2nd tc at all. Like I said I only saw him do it two games, both after rushing age 3. It is kinda sad, but I hope to see this 100+ balance patches address the issue of “everyone rush age 3”…

TL;DR: Even the top players/pros go fast age 3 now, it is simply too strong to go something else, defending with age 2 units is impossible because age 3 knights/lancers are so good. No one really gets a 2nd TC in most high level games only after rushing age 3.


Yeah your 2TC is not supposed to punish fast castle, second age all in is supposed to punish fast castle.


In some cases, AKA Delhi, fast castle is the only way to defend against something like a Longbow Ram rush. Until horseman get a buff against ranged, there are no other options for Feudal civs that don’t get armored units.

  1. Formatting: please…

Top 2% is low skill level? Do you think this game is meant only for the top 100 players? If anything you are an outlier for the playerbase.

  1. They’re gonna make Feudal units stronger against cavalry in a few weeks, which will help defend Age 3 harass.

A spear / archer push should work most of the time, ofcourse some maps just don’t allow for such a push, but still.

If the default play becomes fast castle with a low (or no) amount of units, then the default counter play should become a fast push with spear + archer.

So I would think it still isn’t meta, but part of finding the best meta around this current game version.

1 Like

Feudal Masses of Archers and Spears produced from 3 rax / 3 ranges backed up by 2 TCs can hold of a 1 TC Castle push for some time. When he starts the siege at one point you are even able to also support two stables off of it and produce some horseman to go for his siege.

From what i have seen is the most important thing to simply never stop producing units as the feudal player. Never ever.

Also hovering around 1350 Elo / Ranking 100-850 ish. But what do i know? :slight_smile:

2 TC is a greedy move, heavily focused on economy. If you weather the storm that a fast castle into knights provide, you will be in a way better position economically, so it must be difficult to do. One is the counter for the other.

The counter to the FC is the Feudal age all-in.

And just like that you have the rock-paper-scissors you need for a good strategic game.


Think we have a misunderstanding, I mean feel free to read all of it. We want age 3. And we also want to see other builds, I have yet to see anyone say that the meta isnt just everyone rushing age 3. Also, from what I have seen the only civ that is even remotely good at top level is the English outpost push that even can fail if they rush age 3 correctly. I have yet to see anyone suggest or show any vod or info about top players doing what is suggested, trust me if you could do it they would have done it and most have tried punishing quick age 3. I’m saying we need more builds, more strategy’s, not the same build every game like sc2 or something that game is Omega boring and quit it long ago because every game was double medical marine stim push. If you guys like playing the same lancer knight rush every game have fun, but no one wants to play that every game. This is what I am trying to say I guess there was a misunderstanding. Hope this clears up the air as I we want multiple openings, 2tc should be viable I have yet to see a top 100 player do it vs another top 100 player with out losing or taking so much damage they lost anyway. One thing I noticed in studying up on this is that most times even to attempt to defend you must stop villager production which makes the 2tc useless and they can keep making villagers making the meta kinda weird. And if they keep making villagers they can get ahead on one tc… Like my question becomes why even have a tc as an option this game is heavily geared to 1 and I mean no one does it unless they get lucky and the other person does it 2tc… Does no one see that flaw? Or I guess everyone is happy to see only age 3 rush at high level… Idk lol but yeah, also to the guy who says strategy games need a rock-paper-scisors ouch :face_with_head_bandage: that logic is painfully flawed if that is all it takes then we don’t even deserve a competitive scene at all…

1 Like

To begin with, I feel the use of a translator but it is faster.
Already to the question, it seems to me that you are losing something. Your post claims that 2 Tc is not a viable solution to fast castle rush, but it surprises me a lot.
Going with data, 2nd tc costs 700 rss and fast Castle is 3200 rss. Exactly what did you spend 2500 Rss on for you to be struck down by Knight? Only in Spears / archers mix we talk about 30 units of advantage, not to mention that your double tc benefit is activated before.
2tc is perfectly viable, your echo is much higher and depends on knowing how to defend against better units, but of course a rush of knights (at 240 rss per troop) is not the problem. The problem is the siege, mangonel and spingarda. The fast castle vs tc jump is the siege, but it is only a problem if you give it more time and do not finish climbing.
Theviper for example tends to 2tc in almost all his games before going to fastcastle.

Two TCs is also countered by All-in feudal.

1 Like

Hmmmmm :thinking: those numbers, your assuming that since he went castle age I’d have the same amount of rss which is not true at all, and the fact that I went for more vils, wood, stone etc this doesn’t make sense at all. I watch theviper and also have notice him losing a lot vs fast castle because of the meta. Now understand, you can go 2tc if they go 2tc. That is fine, I have seen theviper lose a lot to these quick age3’s, so I’m glad you mentioned him. The siege honestly is a big issue as well but I felt that wasn’t even worth mentioning because if you can stabilize most times you can horseman/scout the siege down. But it never gets to that point because well, how do you deal with 8 min lancers? 5 lancers at 8 min. Go run a game go two TC and let me know what you have at 8 mins. With proper scouting you can see it coming but man defending it is a whole nother level… When the pros figure it out I guess we will but as for now the meta still stands fast age 3 is golden.

Yeah not to mention the thousands of builds that seem to work vs 2TC?

The game meta is still subject to change, it was very recent that the only strat people used was all-in feudal particularly French knight spam while castle was something you reached late in the game. 2 TC play is very common on closed maps or with the Abbasids eco wing right now.

the viper lost some games, because his rivals are obviously very good, but there was not much difference between fast castle or double tc. however, I may have a bad memory and will leave it there.
As for the knight push, of course I assume you have the same resources as him. If you don’t have them, the problem is already another (different civilizations with different potentialities, bad use of bonuses etc), but you have two TCs, where is he going to attack you with his 8 horses? (Even with two stables it is 2 minutes x 4 units) I mean, your two tc protect resources, and the only one that remains is with your base army (or towers or wherever you have spent 2500 rss). Honestly, no problem.
I reiterate the problem is the siege, no feudal troop can against spitting / mangonel (and the horsemen … they are rubbish, I think that the whole forum agrees on that).
Where I am going is that fast castle or double tc are parallel strategies, in itself neither is better than the other.

What do you honestly expect, units are just stronger in Age 3 with upgrades along with siege. Sure if you can hold them off going 2tc, congrats. At the end of the day, your strategies aren’t working because it’s simply not as strong as Fast castle or heavy feudal. That’s just facts.

Been watching more pros and this issue still persist, what is the point of 2tc if age 3 you get more resources lol PLZ FIX THIS!!! Beastyqt is even confused as why he so far behind yet he fast expanded… kinda sad you guys don’t see this issue yet.

Also note this game was vs GL.TheViper and he got destroyed even tho he had the extra eco from his tax collectors and 2 tc. WHY Lol

In my opinion knights arent the reason for age 3 rush. It’s springals and siege in general. So if siege would be nerfed or some weaker options of it would be added in age 2, that would be great.


To be fair 2tc in age 2 is ultimate greed. Tcs in past age games were only available starting in castle age. I still think 2 tc is good on closed maps, for example it’s the go-to strat for Abbasids and china on most maps.


I personally see it as a design flaw, why have tc available age 2 if it is quite useless, I have changed my gameplay to start going age 3 instead of 2tc and my winrate in those games are now well over 90% as compared to my 50% winrate with 2tc. Funny part is when I go quick age 3 I play people who go 2 tc and just destroy them like it’s soooooo easy I feel like I’m cheating I’m so far ahead. It just needs to be moved to age 3 I think. It’s pointless to get a 2nd tc rn age 2.

Why would they ever remove a gameplay options like this? I don’t know how you play 2 TCs but if you know (by scouting) that the enemy is going for a FC and try to pressure him. Every minute u deny him the age up you get a huge advantage with your 2 TCs.
Also the balance patch coming out next week will surely have a huge impact on the meta(e.g. the springald nerf).
Calling things design flaws after not even a moth after release… We saw how the apparantly “OP” french performed in genesis.