In this game the Tc was made in castle age and it was the same way as a long game 
a professional taking time to beat any conqueror with 64% winrate
your theory disproved, bye
That’s just one sample screenshot, we don’t know the entire story of the game, just by looking at the summary. So I’d say my theory still stands 
Edit: Also, upon checking both players, both are only 22 places apart. It isn’t like in AoE 2 where a 18xx Elo and a 23xx Elo player are almost 800 places apart (Or AoE 3 with a ~90 place difference).
1 Like
Do AoE2,3 and 4’s elo systems differ? When it comes to AoE4 there’s just a huge skill gap between professionals (top10) and anything below that. On AoE2 skill should decrease much more gradually with lower ladder positions.
They all use the same system, 4 just has seasons
the game is public, well look at it
there is a big difference between a conqueror and a professional" quoted by Beasty himself
But well, there’s also a big difference between one game and a general pattern And yes, I looked at the summary but you have to look at the actual game, how it developed to this point etc.
True, AoE match without wall and tower normaly end in 15 to 20 minutes. Losing 3-4 villagers when advancing to age 3 is enought to GG most of the time since you only have 21 to 24 villagers at that time.
Amazing post, what is next? Let players start at age IV so pros can bean them in 1 min ?
3 Likes
It seems that in the previous forum they did nothing but ask for more civilizations, as a result: game of 75 hours and wait 20 years to have accumulated orders with the shift
now 3 hour game
statements
https://acortar.link/hCsAtx
Again: the 95+ hour game in AoE 2 is a once in a life time thing. It’s known because it’s a meme among the community. It does not help you to proof your point.
Also: what does shift-queueing have to do this this?
1 Like
Those are the amazing games!
1 Like
It’s a brutally competitive world we’re living in.
You should avoid doing simply stupid and fun things like this.
Otherwise people will use it as a tool to show the world needs to be even more brutally competitive.
2 Likes
Those 95 hours of record were from high-level players (and yes, they competed and it was a unique and fun game).
Seems like you’ve been haunted by some feedback I’ve given in the other AoE.
You should reply to the one who use that game to prove AOE2 games always last that long, identify the players as a professional and a non-professional, and relate it to “asking for more civs”. Not me.
And that makes Feudal and Castle ages pointless to have at all…
There is a reason why these ages exist.
Or you must play a custom MP game, that starts from Imperial age.
Did not understand your point, should a pro beat a non-pro good player quicker than this? This is RTS, and by real-time, it means that some things takes time.
By being a pro, means that he is a faster and makes better decisions, and as I can see on this game, his decision was to play for late game, and this decision has its price, that is what you can see, the time it takes for the game to finish.
If a pro goes feudal all in, I am sure they would win quicker than this. But might be a little bit risky. Pro’s shine on late game and outpacing their opponent with higher APM.
1 Like
Incorect.
Following your logic someone who have skills can finish feudal but doesnt want to because its risky.
This sentence mean that someone who compete at top lvl is scared to be aggresive vs casual player on ladder because he may lose.
This is so called “cheese” and if scouted it’s easy to hold.
Since you start with free scout and nothing stoping you to scout whole game, decent player above gold will 100% scout your base because scouting in this game is easy.
If this “random guy” have this info for feudal all in from pro, he may prepare.
In this game the person who defend is in huge favor.
Ofc you can all in and win but mostly you will lose .
Towers, walls, town centers arrows + repair. Just name it.
You can literally spam only villagers and town centers and you are okay.
TC shoot, you repair.
In worse case you will lose villagers but if you make 3 villagers at once who care.
So if the opponent doesnt finish you , which is really hard, you can just go imperial like a boss.
He can’t do nothing.
The reason pro players don’t go aggro in feudal is because the game is made like that.
I invest in something so I can force you make mistakes.
You can be forced to invest on army, you can be raided and you can lose villagers.
Now since the room from mistakes isnt that big in feudal, why would someone try hard with the risk to lose even to someone mediocre when he can just go late game ?
You can’t kill buildings beside with rams and everyone just put their villagers there.
“Mommy I am home, tell daddy to bring the gun to the roof”
You mostly open with few horses, knights, longbow to harass, that’s it.
If you are the pro player and you know how easy is to defend and how low effort cost to someone to execute it would you be agressive ? Ofc not, ill beat him in late game .
That’s the reason the game doesn’t even start until castle.
1 Like
Professional must win game fast? Feel not right for me.
Professional need to have skill to play in all types of strategy:
- Cheese rush end game fast
- Long boom game and overwhelm with superior resource
- Turtle counter rush defense (make less mistake than enemy)
- Super long game after gold run out (Trash wars)
- etc.(harass, resource deny, hold victory conditions, …)
Just because pro choose not to finish game fast so game is badly design?
1 Like