See, abbassids two TC beat trade. Although the only thing that image proves is how easy to take some random game and just publish stats here as “proof” without showing the actual game or why the result happened the way it did.
That HRE vs french game if you actually look up the game on twitch the hre player was passive, gave up map control, had a late 2nd TC, was behind in villager(not including traders) count the whole game, even with a 2nd TC which is shown in the actual post game stats in the stream.
I show you a match between two professionals, I have never published matches against “any” conquerors to analyze the Meta, unless it is the professional who loses
OPA is one of alternative Wam’s accounts, and LoueMT is a pretty good player himself who is ranked number 20 and also played in the Elite classic tournament.
Of course someone who just post images of pro games without doing any actual ressearch wouldn’t know that!
The google translator did not specify the word one, I am not a native of English, on the other hand at least it equals my amount of evidence among professionals, bye
I share the game, I hope that it does not seem easy to you to do
Nothing wrong here. The guy with 3 market+1tc should definitely have more eco than 2 TC. Its almost 4TC vs 2TC song.
Traders are already expensive, and if markets are so OP why not every single civ is trading, and how come Rus is considered the strongest civ when they are not a trade civ and yet are one of the strongest late game civs.
From what I see this is simply a coping post from someone who deosnt know how to deal with trade and uses some random top level games as an excuse.
What is strange to me is that no pro player tries to build trade (as long as the map is more or less decent for it) when he sees that the opponent is gathering stone, even if that civ has no trade bonus.
Perhaps there are hidden metagames not yet discovered.
That is pretty much your opinion, and the devs arent gonna change things for 1 player that dislikes trade. Trade is in a great spot, it gives a lot of variety in the game. Plus there are several ways to contest it and to punish it. In fact its much easier to punish trade boom than punishing multiple TCs.
Aggression is still a good way to play, however you will not see any pro player going for all ins but rather using aggression to put themselves ahead of the oponent and develop their own eco.
The only thing I think could maybe change is how cheap and spammable towers are and how you can easily shut down any aggression with them without having to make units.
I am showing that the Meta is booming (predictable game), who can do “all in” is the English because his landmark is an urban center, and Delih with the sacred places, however, both are on the low tier list.
Beasty himself mentions that in French he is in A because of his high production of villagers with 2TCs
Yes, but that doesnt mean there is no aggression.
French strength doesnt come only from faster vill but also from their aggression with knights, Rus is kinda similar as well.
In all aoe games so far, not sure what the state of aoe3 is right now, but when i used to play aoe3, in higher levels rushing was always weaker because top players were much more skilled at deffending and they are much better at not loosing villagers, so they leaned into greadier and greadier playstyles and the same applies to aoe4. Only way to change that is by making some drastic change like moving tc to age3 or something like that.
Also I may be wrong but even in aoe2 from the little i watched it and played for a while, the meta was to fast castle so players could get their 2nd and 3rd TC.
I take that comment so that, please weaken trade, in general everything that simulates a second TC should not be cheap, this includes the docks, I beg you
