I understand that you don’t like the fact that AoE2 has a metagame, but this is just unavoidable. And the reality is that the metagame has never been so “healthy” than it is on DE now.
What seems is that you present it as a issue. The HC3 tournament that you said, people were competing for thousands of dollars on those games, why wouldn’t they always try to seek using the civs with the best tools for each situation? That’s the best way to win, of course people will opt for the strongest settings. Honestly having a metagame is not a issue, because in the end winning it still about the best display of skill within the game.
So, deliberately adhering to suboptimal strategies or even giving up on having one (pretty much what’s going random on a non-mandatory random setting is about) puts you at disadvantage. What’s the problem here??
This. That’s exactly why it’s nothing but goofy and why your experience of purposefully going random on the ranked matchmaking is disappointing for you when you approach it as valid to win on that setting. You explained in the best possible way.
Trouble is that…
… What you often do here on the forums is bash on the game and on the playerbase, trying to blame them for you not knowing how to overcome strategies and playstyles, or making bad decisions while playing the ranked mode and portraying both as flawed for not corresponding your expectations, when in reality none ever proposed to please your most desired wishes about how the game should be played according to your taste. And this is just not cool. Some of your criticism is indeed valid and even intones with the community, but most of the times is just nonsensical and awful.
If anything it should give us all a lesson about spending our money and setting expectations more carefully.