Doing this strat is easy, countering it constantly is insanely hard (at good elo)
1 Like
So what you mean is that 50/50 isnât enough?
This is just batantly wrong. A lot of people tried it, most of it just got oblitterated and never touched it again. Itâs NOT an easy strat. Again, just attributing with NO inside knowledge.
1 Like
No need to be toxic itâs a fact itâs really easy to do iâve done it several times and itâs insanely easier doing it than countering it, you dont need any macro, neither do you need to takes decision just doing the same thing over and over while microing
Winrate isnt an argument at all imagine what his winrate would be playing convential?
What would you do to counter it constantly ?
This is what I was referring to.
IF there were a strat tp counter it âconstantlyâ or you probably mean more âconsistantlyâ the strat would be dead. Useless.
And thatâs what I criticize on this hamster meta. They arenât happy with a 50/50 chance. They want to have a strategical adaption to their playstyle so they can âconsistantlyâ beat every other strat. And they are very close to achieving that.
But thatâs terrible cause the game will became insanly boring as then everybody would only play the hamster meta.
And all this under the pretended smokescreen of âbalanceâ or âhealthâ to the game. Whilst actually pushing the already predominant and most successfull meta.
Itâs a constant attempt to disguise all other partially competitive strats in order to make the own already strongest playstyle even more dominant. THIS IS TOXIC! An attempt to completely flip the reality on itâs head.
There are various main strats that work quite good against it. The most significant of those is going FC yourself. You should get there with a better timing and eco when using your civ bonusses well.
Others include going archers and/or towers and macroing behind a healthy eco, going for a decent competitive castle age uptime yourself.
A lot of stuff can work against the strat. Itâs just that it seems part of the community is unwilling to get into them if they not give an at least 80% winchance.
But itâs way better and healthier for the game if there are a lot of different strats which all have decent chances instead of one that counters it âconstantlyâ.
And even demanding this is actually an oath of manifestation with the inherent request of getting a meta-strat that completely dominates all other potential strategies. Even those who are conceptionally specific to counter the timing oriented âhamsterâ meta with an even better timing.
Have you tried it? I doubt you gave it a real try because you seem to completely neglect the factors required to make the strat work. And this:
Is just wrong. Their are re-occuring scenarios. But itâs definitely not âdoing the same thing over againâ (this is actually more true with the current hamster meta). And taking the right decisions is not even required, itâs MANDATORY to get to a decent elo with this strat. The tactical skill requirement of the Phosphoru is by orders of magnitudes bigger than with the current hamstering whee most tactical decisions are already planned out.
But a lot of the current metaslaves seem to not respect the tactical decision making as a âskillâ anymore. Which ofc in their bubble has basically no benefit at all. Because these decisions are already layed out and they only copy paste them from the metasetters.
2 Likes
I dont think you understood what i said, the thing is to counter that strat, you need first, to get lucky enough to scout early your opponents to adapt, then, you have to play really really well to survive. Thatâs my point losing 50/50 means nothing as again if was going to play classic he would loose elo at first then back at 50/50
Thatâs confirm what i thought ; what you said is really really RNG bc you need both to push deer fast enough and find the opponent quickly to have the possibility to know whatâs going on.
You may say âpushing deers is greedy go scout if youâre unsure what opponents will doâ and to that i just say no you cant because if you dont, in a classic meta game, you will be already in disadvantage and this can be easily a thing that can make you loose, you HAVE TO push deers in this meta and hope that youâll scout these fcs, i dont see it as fun at all.
i dont see it possible to up faster than a guy going straight for a fast fc if you planned to do scouts, skirms, archers, maa, drush or whatever except if you know by advance what you opponent will do and go straight for a fc.
⊠Something like 30 games idk didnt count im really used to do fc siege monks fc uu on an open map you just need your best friend : the market and boom you can make a huge preasure on a better opponent and win peoples 300 elo ahead of you even if they played better than youâŠ
I must clarify this isnt about phosphoru strat but actually all kind of fc all in on open map, this shouldânt work
i love arena for this because i really love playing agressives this way, but on arabia, this is not right and more importantly, itâs very easy to do and doesnt requires much skill to do, as you skip a lot of things like macro, opening, adapting to matchup and maps and multitask since you are playing only in offense on one side, you dont have to make any transition you dont have to wall, you dont have to care about relics, you dont have to care about scouting early should i continue? itâs been quite a long time since i began to learn to play diffently than all in which i used to do all the time few years ago, i can tell you that playing âmeta slaveâ as you said may be boring for you (even if i agree that it isnt the best meta at all) still itâs insanely more complex than fc market uu or siege monks or steppe or whatever and winning fast.
I cant tell you better how fcs are stupid on arabia
oh and i may have 50/50 chance of winning if i am afk for first 3 mins at 1000 elo or so, is it because the âstratâ is fine? no itâs just that if you repeat the same strat over and over you elo will at some point stay still because you find even better or worst players that will compensate again, iâll let you imagine a player like hoang playing âMeta slaveâ and beating top players but i think youâll struggle to do so.
Actually⊠most people on the ladder below like 1k6 elo or so donât care about that and even should probably not even care. Most of them lack the adaptation skills anyways so they are usually better off with just sticking to their own strat.
Which is also what most do and still get about an even winrate.
This is with any high commitment playstyle. Including and especially true with the current âHamsteringâ meta. It makes no sense to switch back to the traditional âhealthy ecoâ playstyle you would immediately lose a lot of elo.
So why we donât again speak about the hamstering in the same way? Itâs literally the same as with phosphoru.
Not more RNG than with any other strat facing any other strat. Ofc there will always be some luck involved. But most of the games are decided on execution and decision making. Itâs the same with Phosphoru as with the current hamster meta. 50/50 winchance doesnât mean a coinflip. Itâs just that the strats are evenly matched and itâs depending on the players actions who will take the W.
Where would you even install the RNG factor here? Itâs not a Clown war where single fast conversions can resutl in a chain reaction.
You see. Maybe the current meta is just the issue here.
People are so used to the few remaining main openers that they think information has no value anymore. But then complain that they donât get that crucial information when they need it. The issue here is NOT that there is now an off-meta strat that makes issues to the metaslaves.
The issue is that the metaslaves refuse to adapt and quesion the own development they forced. And instead of asking to remove the absurd impact of deer-pushing to get back to a game where scouting is at least evenly valueable they demand to remove or nerf the strats that use their refusal to adapt.
Nobody said âfasterâ. I watched some Red Phosphoru games on hi stream and saw a lot of feudal aggressions into âcompetitiveâ castle times. Like 1-2 minutes after Phosphoru. With way better eco than he had. Thatâs enough.
But why am I spilling all these infromations actually. Man guys, you just need to try stuff and you will figure out what may work better than other stuff.
Was always a strat. I donât see why this should be forbidden. And BTW Arabia isnât one of the most open maps. It was always the map with the highest variety of strats. Thatâs what made it so popular. And ofc FC was always part of it.
The next thing is that Phosphoru isnât a standard FC. It has itâs own twerks. Actually so much that I want to hard devide between FCs and Phosphorus. Itâs an entirely different approach that has completely different implications for the decision making.
wrong
you donât âskipâ macro. But yeah, itâs less macro intensive than the current hamstering meta. But that is because the hamster meta is basically ALL macro.
wrong
wrong
wrong
wrong
quickwalling skills are required
90 % of all ladder players donât care about relics
wrong
I probably will set a âwrongâ hotkey then. But please, go ahead.
Iâve won and lost with different strats against players with that higher or lower elo. Itâs nothing that never happens. People are so eager to state âthat should never happenâ to stuff that actually just happens sometimes. Even hera lost to players 300 elo below him. No phosphoru involved.
And have I to remind you when the âhamsteringâ meta began there were a lot of people climbing the ladder with it like crazy? I can remember losing lots of games to players 200+ elo below me who just used that copycat wannabehera strats EVERY SINGLE GAME with civs like Mongols or Khmer to climb the ladder?
Why is it only an âissueâ with Phosphoru and not with the hamster meta? Where does this cynical double standard come from?
1 Like
Sure you know better than everyone, i really hope you were trolling but i dont think so
Sorry, but 800 elo games are not to be considered for balance because they make a loooot of mistakes which changes the balances for them. I know that these peoples are upset about that but that doesnt make any sence to make balance change based of people who lack high level knowledge (and you cant have knowledge but no execution as lof of people think ; theory and ingame is very different.
Thatâs a really well made sentence to tell that these people will not have the skills to compete without these and again fc is very easy to do on high level and i dont care about sub 1600 for the reason i said before.
Well, there is rng involved in maps and civs and some minors things in most games like conversions but in these strats conversion luck is really important and can changes games but the most important is the scouting aspect even with skipping deer (which is a mistake itself but lets just pretend) if you are unlucky to find the opponent strat after like 8 min or so.
Deers are a problem sure, i dont get why deers are still that far and rng to find, and iâd like to have the deer pushing less rewarding or even impossible to do but thatâs an another story, again they HAVE TO push deer, if you try play smart and go scout early youâll be behind very early âadaptingâ to an opponent having bohemians malay bengalis or whatever is a very very bad idea because if they played normal (as most peoples do) they will beat you way easier.
Thatâs litterally the definition of a castle age timing.
Sorry but no there isnt any macro to put 8 on wood and 10 or gold and buy what you need without having to care about idle tc, tech eco, adding lumbercamps, making farms, adding tcs and more importantly without having to look your base
I could say wrong to all your wrong without explaining why, also, that shows that you dont know how fc all in works, you have to win on a very short timing, scouting early is useless, relics are also (and i dont care what 90% of peopleâs mistake), walling is useless neither quickwalling skill is (seriously look hoang), you dont have to make any transition , as if you do that, yourâe dead, and there isnt any adaption to civs nor maps as youâll do the same bo over and over and win without some minutes or loose.
Guess why my current elo is lower than about 200 elo than my max? 
Instead of arguing with theory and assuming that everything you think is genius and asking yourself why these idiot people cant adapt, just try what you said in game (at a decent elo without huge mistake) and see thatâs the game doesânt work this way
YOU were talking about investing into feudal with army and towers and so on.
YOU werenât talking about FC there. I responded to you in the context of Feudal investment with the statement that then itâs not necessary to get faster to castle age there.
Now you try to project my response to your feudal aggression rant on FCs?
Sorry, but in this way I donât see any point in trying to discuss with you any further. You broke the code of a healthy discussion base. Donât foret it was YOUR OWN scneario context I responeded to.
And btw this just shows how you try to argue here, with deceiving methods
Where? 
dont try to invent things to blind yourself, no one here was saying that you have to fc and know by advance whatâs coming when the game start 
Thatâs something i should have done a long time ago my bad
you broke the code of a healthy discussion base
Here you go buddy.
Nothing is more convincing than somebody who already forgot what he wrote just 2 posts earlierâŠ
But whatever.
The thing is:
We allowed the Hamstering to play out - it became the dominant meta. And it was seeable.
The phosphoru isnât even close to ever become the deominant meta. Itâs still a rarity to face on the ladder.
We should allow the Phosphoru to play out when we allowed the Hamstering to play out. Both strats are equally commiting and lacking in strategic adaptation. Both strats try to use certain timing advantages to utilize. Hamstering requires more macro skill. Phosphorus more tactical skill. I donât see why the macro skills should be evalueated higher than the tactical skills.
It would be different if phosphorus would be ânoob basher stratsâ, but as it requires quite some necessary base execution skills the chances of it becoming that is very, very low.
??? So going first for scout skirm archer maa or drush before realizing that the opponent will fc all in and then going for fc yourself is investing army and towers forward? Read again messages
Why would you do that?
Looks like a panic reaction to me. Ofc it doesnât make any sense to switch up strats when you scout the opponent strat late.
But your whole narrative is flawed. If you face a civ that can pull off a phosphoru you can send a scout forward and get the intel you need. Ofc it would hurt your feudal timing a bit. But itâs YOUR decision whether you think that intel is valueable.
You canât complain if you took a wrong assessment there. If you think scouting isnât valueable enough to you but it turnet out it was, itâs YOUR fault. Not that of the game.
And then you jsut walked over the part where I explained thatâs not even necessary to make your own FC. Most people even facing Phosphoru himself donât even go for it despite knowing what strat he uses.
The next fundamental flaw in your narrative. Ofc FC kills all phosphoru strats. But itâs a good thing that it comes with a sacrifice. Because it would kill all phosphorus. Going on one of the feudal conceptional strats against the phosphoru gives way more balanced results.
And there are various, just pick one or try something yourself.
What you aim for here is to get a strat delivered for free without to put in any of your onw brainpower to shut down the phosphoru.
But thatâs just a flaw in your head. Sometimes you have to work for your results. And btw: Phosphoru himself works really, really hard on his strats and skills to get to that 2k3 elo. Way more than most of the âhamsterâ players there actually.
And then he has to read stuff that this wouldnât require any âskillsâ. I feel you should apologize. Itâs dismissive and disrespectful.
You makes my day 11
The âpanic reactionâ is the best tool you have to win as it just worked several times.
i dont even want to elaborate further, all is said.
So you complained about nothing?
And demanded nerfs for a strat you could beat with a small adaptation? Which you got the impression from me here (and I think you categorize it wrongly but didnât expect anything else here).
Maybe next time before demanding nerfs to strats you try this kind of stuff yourself FIRST.
I think Red is trying to fly under the radar right now because it seems like the developers continually seek to nerf any successful strategy or technique that he uses. While he has not been streaming lately, he is still pushing his personal best ELO even higher since the update. The developers and half of the players of AOE2 believed that raising the price of food would nerf him and his strategies, yet all it has done is made the castle age advantage more difficult to counter. I have found as a Saracens player that I can benefit similarly, but I am still unhappy because I was forced to make drastic changes to my play style for this stupid change. Nostalgia is probably the largest driving force for AOE2âs continued success, so it is just sad to see 25 years of build orders and strategies screwed around with so carelessly.
Probably the best summary of this situation. The resistance to change and tendency to stick to one-dimensional low-risk low-reward feudal gameplay could be extremely detrimental to the game in the long run.
Again a great point. Most people who make such nerf cries neither do the high risk strategy nor try the counter strategies. Straight fc, 2 range archers or towers get countered by the common meta. And phosphorus or similar builds forces them to move out of their comfort zone of 3 tc booming which they arenât ready to do either.
Thatâs not being lucky. You have to scout your opponent and figure out what theyâre doing, thatâs the right way to play the game. People are skipping it to push the 3rd deer because majority of the ranked community play the meta. Its good that at least 5-6 civs can force you to be less greedy and go for early scouting.
You mention its easy to do and hard to counter. That would imply the player who goes for phosphorus build is more likely to win against someone who is countering it. If doing a particular strategy makes someone more likely to win the odds wouldnât be 50/50.
The whole point is not to have a stale meta situation. You donât even have to do this every game, just when your opponent has one of the few civs with which phosphorus build is a possibility. And you can still push 1 deer and scout. You just cant push all 3.
youâre not even doing phosphorus build but something else, getting a reasonable success from it by winning against higher elo opponents and yet you want to nerf Phosphorus and not the strategy youâre using? You say youâre non-meta is insanely more complex than fc uu but youâve not tried the fc high dps uu yourself. Why not try it out another 30 times and you might see why it might not be as easy as you perceive it.
2 Likes
Thatâs pure luck to have the information soon enough to adapt, âadaptingâ because you see someone having bohemians malay bengalis or whatever (actually all civs can make a fc forcing yourself to go up to castle age but lets admit you only care about phosphoru rush) is litterally playing head or tails as these civs can play normally and are actually strong doing so, you dont want to be behind right at the start of the game, as this can snowball really fast, there is a reason why peoples push deers itâs not because of any fashion, itâs because itâs simply stronger and scouting early isnt that valuable, otherwise you would be vulnerable to maa openings or you would skip horse collars for example which can make you loosing.
Let me clarify it, itâs just very easy to do, and very hard to defend against if youâre not lucky enough to find what the opponent doing early, for instance, if you open maa and while during militiaâs creation you see what your opponent do, your castle age timing will be awfull and youâll need to be castle age to counter it, staying in feudal lead to huge risk even if you make damage thatâs nothing that would prevent yourself from dying, the only viable and consistant enough thing to do is to market abuse and got to castle age and survive but to do so youâll need to be lucky enough with scouting to dont invest feudal age.
You really think i would dare to say that doing phosphorus is easy without trying it first? itâs not that different and Phosphoru havnât invented it, heâs just well know for that and succes to achieve a very high elo with, as well as optimizing it a lot.
first thatâs just wrong. But before I explain I want to point out:
Youâre trying to bend your own assertion. The initial âluck basedâ was about the interaction of the strats NOT the scouting. You try to set up a strawman here. Despicable
However the strawman is wrong also. With a good scouting pattern you can get that information consistantly no problem. Even phoshphoru himself incorporates scouting the opponent in his build. Which also shows how much tactical details go into this as it is a very important part of his play.
The irony that people like @wolfsilver9640 cry âjust executes build orders!â over others who actually scout and interact with the opponen strategy whilst they themselves refuse to do so but only want to focus on their own builds to get the better timing.
And thatâs exactly the point here. Itâs not luck based. Itâs the refusal to take the adaptation to the build that would give the crucial information. And the attempt to manipulate the devs by telling them a cock-and-bull story. Trying to invert the reality.
You always forget the part on when the phosphoru player FIRST has to defend against your aggression. You act as if this wasnât even the case. Just say âitâs very easy to doâ.
Really? How many players in <1800 elo can defend well against a good feudal aggression? With no army?
Sorry but itâs just not true. Most people who try the phosphoru just get immediately oblitterated. Thatâs the reality.
So donât try to Gaslight us here, nobody believes your old wiveâs story.
Oh it is different. You should really watch him when he streams. Itâs a completely other approach to the game.
But this comes from your ignorance towards tactical skills. If you only copypaste hera and the hamsters you get that aspect delivered by default and donât recognize that there is a whole different world to explore in this realm.
Again, itâs really just your ignorance. Thereâs a reasoen Phosphoru himself is 2k3 and behind him thereâs nobody even close to do that stuff. And the reason isnât Phosphoru would have the best BO. The BO are all well known.
The reason is the tactical Skillset of the guy which you refuse to recognize.
You still owe him the apology you tried to go over by trying to shit on me btw! Pay some respect to a guy who really worked his butt of to develop an entire new strat to enrich the game!
And lastly. You already aknowledged here that you were wrong with your asssertion that you had no working adaptation. You literally said you found one.
So why you are again working on manipulating the devs to nerf the strat? Despite you admitted it isnât OP at all?
But most importantly still: You have to apologize to Red Phosphoru for disrespecting him and false confession about his strat and playstyle!
Assume youâre against Cumans. They have the 2nd tc possibility but also the possibility to go stable and range very fast with the discount. If you donât scout them, a wrong strategy you choose can make you lose the game fast. Scouting gives you that information, it isnât a guess work or a random outcome. If someone does a fc castle drop build, theyâre going to click with 23 or 24 pop up at the earliest. Regular feudal is 19 or 20 pop up. If youâre 60+% feudal but opponent doesnât have loom, score seems high, theyâre on gold or stone, its a give away that the opponent is going for phosphorus build. And its not like you have to compromise eco completely and send your scout in minute 3 or something.
That goes for many uncommon gameplays. You trying to lame but failing, your opponent laming your boar and succeeding in it, walling off your resources, Sneaky forward ranges, hoang rush, youpudding rush.
You can go market abuse fc right away and reduce your risk, if you managed to scout the phosphorus in dark age itself but suppose you havenât you can still go double range archer like tg when you notice your opponent has clicked quite late. The phosphorus build player is going to do market and blacksmith, so no military building. If you tower the mines and put archers into your towers you can delay the fc and castle drop significantly. Its not very easy to defend with 0 military buildings and market dependent eco.
If its very easy to do for everyone, those who do phosphorus build will gain significant elo. Many people will start picking upon it. Play rate, winrate of potential phosphorus civs - Koreans, Bohemians, Portugese will be very high on Arabia. However none of that has happened. If you feel that its not that different and easier, why not try it several times and be at the other end. The grass always looks greener from the other side.
Its a high risk high reward play like Youpudding, Hoang and other rushes. Its obviously easier than monk rushes since monks are more micro intensive and rng dependent. That doesnât imply its broken or too easy that it needs to be nerfed hard or anything.
That isnât the same thing ; adapting while opening on anything is way more possible vs a 2tc boom as you have multiple ways of dealing with.
Easy doesnt mean necesarly strong, it justs means itâs easy to do and doesnt require much of skill to do (still the strat is strong but not that much itâs not my point)