ELO ranks not so real and beating OP civs

Hello evryone!

Firstly I wanna discuss ELO, I honestly think its not clearly real and accurate, Personally it took me months to learn the civs and the OP civs now and their units, so my ELO score is low in 2v2 and 3v3 but I consider myself a good player today. So I get paired with real noobs…

This gets me to the second point of this post… i was just paired with a noob in 2v2 and I beat France and Russia with China (basically 1 vs 2) and it worked perfectly. They had the famous lancers and horse archers you all mention but pikemen and hand cannoneer took them down so easy.

PS: If you are an average/good player add me and lets play! my in-game name is Jack_2005

1 Like

If you are a better player than your current elo, you should be able to just climb your elo back up to where it is accurate.

5 Likes

If there is nothing wrong, your failures are up to 3v3 24.14% My dear friend

1 Like

Same happens to me. I usually play 2v2. I can put pressure in early game and mostly cause a stalemate (1 v 2) in castle age so my teammate can age up and build army without pressure. Most of them are noobs and take too long and opponents can break stalemate but are weak and If my teammate attacks at this point we win. So it depends on teammate.

Ranked play should help in a few months :slight_smile:

I am also always looking for more AoE4 buddies, so let’s play sometime!

Not realy.

Atm ur climbing if ur picking Mongols or Rus in 1vs1
and Chinese in TG´s

At the same skill level the player wins who picked one of that civs.

That shouldn’t begin to apply until you hit the average high-intermediate ELO. If you are actually better than your ELO suggests, you should definitely be winning enough games to get you up to a proper ELO reflecting your skill level.

Between 0 & 1100 ELO, too many mistakes are being made by the players to have games decided upon the loading screen.

1 Like

I dont go with u there.

First of all im out of that 0-1100 bracket that ur talking about in all brackets.

Second u will see at the statistics that players over that rating are running increasing more often into mongol/rus/chinese picks depending on the bracket (1v1/2v2/3v3/4v4).

Im not blaming the players for picking it because the devs are giving the enviroment for it but If ur into it maybe give me a build guide for example the HRE vs mongols matchup were I can beat the stupid tower rush (nearly) constantly please?
And Im picking/asking for the badest matchup in specific. The diffrenece is only increasing at the moment with more games are added to the statistic. There are nearly on a 33-66% rating now what is redicoulus overpowered and out of a blanced state.

And this is the same only with other civs as a suspect in 3vs3 for example. This is my best placed bracket with 1350 aka around top 1000 global. It ends in the same game everytime. Try to hold the enemy chinese player down to not letting him to there Firelancer spam.

So please stop the “learn to play” attitude. It doesnt fit there. It is proven by numbers allready

those matches were previous, 3 vs3 depends a lot on the TEAM not only on me right??? i know that scores sucks

Im furious, i have just been paired up with a noob who was playing his/her FIRST match ever!!! cmon really??? it makes me not want to play this anymore

i dont understand what you are talking about, i know I have to learn a lot, but I consider myself , as i said, GOOD. Not pro not champion not ultra best. So i expected to be paired with GOOD players at least, thats all

I’m aware of the win percentages, I’m also aware of how badly I and others at my ELO and lower play, with any Civ.

Most players, 1100 on down, don’t have a preference towards any specific top Civ, but they do avoid Delhi & Abbasid (quite logical thinkers); the most played are English & French in that range, for ease of use. Of course, they aren’t getting any Civ advantage over the Mongols or Rus, but they aren’t losing purely as a result of their MU.

If you’re playing above that range, in the 1200 on up, where mistakes become fewer with each game resulting in Civ bonuses mattering a whole lot more, then you’re only proving my previous point.

If you want to be paired with good players every game, you have to choose an ally before you go into matchmaking, otherwise you’re at the mercy of the system. You can add my noob self to your list of allies for 2 vs 2 if you want a somewhat competent player on your team. In-game: todracket

1 Like

Well French vs Mongols is the 2nd worst winrate matchup in the game right now (after HRE vs Mongols) and once you get to 1200+ English become quite poor especially at like 1400+ they are like the 2nd worst civ in the game (although they do still perform well on a couple maps like altai).

Also I think playing English in team games is shooting yourself in the foot, the reason they are kinda bad in high elo games is they frankly suck post feudal age.

1 Like

If you don’t trust elo how are you determining your skill?

1 Like

by myself i mean a random number wont define how good i play. I was paired with someone who took 20 MINUTES to age up to FEUDAL AGE. Im so much better than that i can positively say hahaha

1 Like

Yesterday I began teaming up with friends and I won 4 out of 4 matches, then tried quick matching and I paired up with a very good player and we rocked it!

1 Like