You basically just called the entire Pro scene of AOE 2 toxic 11.
Basically all of them have heavily used the Market on Arena like maps. It’s just a part of a whole bunch of strats on that map type.
Then on top of that. Phosphoru doesn’t even use the Market a lot. Therefore my sarcastic response to your last post. You still haven’t got that it seems.
When you think Phosphoru is toxic because of that, you have to see that Players like DauT use the Market more than Phosphoru in the vast majority of games.
So you basically just called DauT toxic 11
And then there are Plays like the infamous Aztec Eagle Spam, which was played for like a decade as one of the CORE strats on competitive Arabia. Which is probably the most “market abuse” strat ever existed.
All people who used that would be toxic in your eyes, which is basically the entire AOE2 Pro scene currently.
Man you should really look what you’re writing buddy, otherwise it will come just back and bite you in your ***.
Daut built his aoe career being one of the strongest boomers with a monster macro management, he played decades without abusing market, he just adopted market abuse because it became the norm few years ago to improve up times and because he is lazy now, but he can play at his level without using it.
You should know about what you are writing before writing it.
Actually I see DauT as one of the mostl likely to incorporate Phosphorus in his strategical Arsenal.
Alongside fan favorites like Vinchester, Sebastian, ACCM and YO.
And that they haven’t yet is actually a showcase that the strat isn’t really that strong and only really has a chance of working (at least at pro level) when surprising the opponent that much they start to panic.
Are you then still defending DauT with the argument
Despite you being basically entirely wrong in your whole statements, but I won’t waste my time in explaining it. You wouldn’t accept the clarifications anyways and just build up “alternative facts” anyways.
You clearly need some aoe2 education, you mentioned daut pretending to classify him as a clown, when he understands the game beyond your comprehension, he doesn’t need market tricks to be a pro player, he just adopted it cause it is easy to abuse, like many other high level players if something is broken they will abuse it, we just saw hera abusing patrolling bug in the red bull finals, not because it’s on the game is meant to be played or used like that, cause it ain’t fair or was intentionally added to the game.
Market abuse is a reality outside the <0.1% of the top players you are bringing to the table, so there is no point using them as an example cause they don’t play tournaments with ranked rules or maps and they tend troll in ranked matches.
Meanwhile players like hoang or phospu are terrorizing the 2% of the players around 1850 to 2300 with ecoless game play and since there are no drafts or any ban civ system you have to either dodge him or play him.
The problem is that abusing market takes no skill and countering needs double the speed, map reading and map control, heck even if you try to counter it by using the market urself, the first one abusing the market will get the better exchange and since his build order is the same you are on a big disadvantage.
Can you maybe point at game’s in Daut’s past where he didn’t made heavy use of the market? Afaik older pro games are still available to download somewhere.
Ofc there are a lot of daut games where he doesn’t uses the market. That’s not the question.
It’s a weird and twisted narrative here. Cause the implication is that DauT was basically forced to do so. Which I never heard and doesn’t fit ANY of the knowledge on that topic I got from the Pro Scene.
It’s basically completely made up.
And I also want to remind that the original tone of @SouBotsito was that market abuse would be essentially toxic - which would mean that the whole pro scene is toxic. Even Hera does it from time to time, though he is probably the most known to critique the “market abuse” in his eyes.
But this is also just a narrative set up. As it supports his personal playstyle. Hera is known to start placing a lot of Farms and earlier than other players. This ofc reflects in having more food income and therefore can click up faster to castle age without using the market.
But WHO said that the market shouldn’t be used in that way? It’s in the game - and removing that would mean that everybody would have to play the hera style - which heavily restricts the tactical options in Feudal as you would be forced to place that many farms that early. Especially when you look at Archer play this would completely destroy entire strategies like the millless archer play popularized by the french guys.
I see no reason to cripple the game just because some people incepted us with this “abuse” narrative.
Especially if the pleaded “reasoning” is the Phosphoru. Which actually doesn’t require market “abuse”.
It looks like a strawman to me.
By the way, I think market (ab)use as a strategy in general is something that was intended by the devs, given that Saracens have their 5% trade fee all the way back since Age of Kings.
And btw I also supported the increase for food buying cost in the Market. I pledged for that for years and I think it’s a good thing. I think actually 130 G would be “fair price” in feudal.
I just don’t see how disabeling to buy food in feudal would be benefitial to the game.
Honestly, probably going to sound rude, but there is no point arguing on that with people that dont play the game good enough to see it as an active issue, reality is these peoples will contredict you because meta varies a lot though elo range, at first, i was thinking they were wrong but actually no, they are right but on a different elo range, i dont think this can be explained or at least i have no idea how
I think we should introduce a new rule in the forum.
When someone demands a nerf to a certain strat he has to show that he has a basic understanding on how the strat works. And proof that the nerfs he proposes actually work AND not interact with oder strats in a negative way.
I for example gave some time ago an expertise how they can specifically target certain phosphorus with precise nerfs to only these specific UUs.
And btw, that’s what the devs actually DID and it WORKED. I don’t want to imply devs would have listened to me. Probably they asked even Phosphoru himself. Cause he said himself that these are probably too strong. But they actually did the right tweaks there and they worked. And that’s what counts.
Funky none of those guys who claim to be higher level than me didn’t even mention these specifically targeted nerfs…
Imo before you own the right to assess that certain strats should be nerfed you need to do at least the basic work in trying to understand how they actually work. If your to lazy to do so you only showcase your own unwillingness to interact with the community in a constructive manner.
His second round, he basically faced up against his own strategies. Not a lot of market abuse in it though from what I recall seeing (outside of selling stone to get the gold for castle age).
I often do the Phosphoru strat and I hear this complaint sometimes in the chat from my opponent when they quit. They say “Why can’t you learn to play the game properly?” or “So boring, so sick of these all-in strats”. Acting like there is a “proper” way to play the game. Which is funny because they do the same “boring” strats every game like feudal scouts or archers which have existed for decades. Also your right to have a “good time” does not take priority over my idea of a good time. What makes you think your right to enjoy the game is more important than mine? Win or lose, I enjoy doing Phosphoru strats. These strats are not bad manners or against the spirit of the game like laming, griefing, toxic chat etc.
Losing to all-in strats is usually because you didn’t scout it and were therefore unprepared. In other words, a skill issue. You just need to learn how to counter it. Obviously at Phosphoru’s ELO level above 2k you have no chance. But almost all of us plebs are below 1600 so you just need to survive, because opponent only has like 22 villagers. Relocate your TC, move your villagers, keep booming, don’t quit. The longer the game goes on, the more your chances of winning increase, because as your resources and villager count go up and up, you widen your lead and the enemy is on a timer to do game-ending damage to you. I play so many opponents who rage quit when they are massively ahead of me in eco and i explain to them afterwards how they could have won and how they were ahead. They even have the score lead oftentimes. Basically you just have to learn not to panic and stay calm, trust the process, don’t rage quit. Understand the opponent is in a really weak position economically, so all your focus should just be on not dying. Even if you lose villagers, even if you lose a ton of them, you’ll still be ahead in villagers and eco upgrades.
