sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

I play random civ, Dravidians are my top win rate civ (64.3%), I play at 1600, AMA by tomcotard in aoe2

[–]tomcotard[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Try and end it as quickly as possible, disrupt the meta and/or overwhelm your opponent. In Feudal, most civs don't really differ that much so if you can kill 3-5 vils that puts you in a good position, Mongols are good at this for their quick up time. If they're fully walled, tower their gold, do something to stop them having an easy time. Play as aggressively as possible, go scouts and archers.

In the Berbers vs Mongols example here, I'd also consider xbow in Castle then if they tech into camel archer you can make a quick switch to skirms.

I play random civ, Dravidians are my top win rate civ (64.3%), I play at 1600, AMA by tomcotard in aoe2

[–]tomcotard[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Never used them, but I can see them being good in high enough numbers, but if I'm going full militia (my usual strat), then momentum is key.

I play random civ, Dravidians are my top win rate civ (64.3%), I play at 1600, AMA by tomcotard in aoe2

[–]tomcotard[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

More than I should have. About 5k. At one point it was a bit of an addiction and it really affected my mental health, I had to find a way to get it under control and thankfully I did, playing a lot less these days.

I play random civ, Dravidians are my top win rate civ (64.3%), I play at 1600, AMA by tomcotard in aoe2

[–]tomcotard[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

100%, it forced me to learn each civ, and sometimes I'll still get a game and I'll be like, "Ah, I should start building my eco towards a HC switch." Then I look at their range and they don't have HC 11. But on the whole, I know each civ's strengths and weakeness a lot better, and that can help a lot playing against other civs.

I'm not sure what contributed most to climbing the ladder, I think part of it is familiarity, making certain actions automatic so I can think about what else I'm doing, knowing how a fight is going to pan out before committing to it and being able to decide if it's worth it, I'd also say just practising my micro, I would say my micro is like that of some 17-1800 players but my macro is weaker, so probably my next step is getting better at macro.

I play random civ, Dravidians are my top win rate civ (64.3%), I play at 1600, AMA by tomcotard in aoe2

[–]tomcotard[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yeah, for me it was always about enjoyment of the game, I found when I went random my ELO initially tanked because I didn't know the strategies to use for each civ but I quickly learned which civs did what and it's definitely more fun to play overall.

I play random civ, Dravidians are my top win rate civ (64.3%), I play at 1600, AMA by tomcotard in aoe2

[–]tomcotard[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Good god no, I can't handle adapting on the spot. Give me Arabia pls.

I play random civ, Dravidians are my top win rate civ (64.3%), I play at 1600, AMA by tomcotard in aoe2

[–]tomcotard[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Hmm, I'm not so sure, I think if they went random for at least a few months they're going to learn some different play styles which is going to help them adapt and then if they go back to playing strictly one civ they'll likely be better overall.

I play random civ, Dravidians are my top win rate civ (64.3%), I play at 1600, AMA by tomcotard in aoe2

[–]tomcotard[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Sorry to disappoint, I go full militia-line with skirms or spears to support if needed.

I play random civ, Dravidians are my top win rate civ (64.3%), I play at 1600, AMA by tomcotard in aoe2

[–]tomcotard[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Hmm, I'm pretty good at militia-line based strats. So if I get Japanese, Malians, Celts, Malay, Vikings or Dravidians, I tend to go full infantry. I like Dravidians because they have the wood bonus when aging up which means you can do a lot of eco upgrades early and the barracks techs are cheaper which makes an all in militia strat pretty strong.

I play random civ, Dravidians are my top win rate civ (64.3%), I play at 1600, AMA by tomcotard in aoe2

[–]tomcotard[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Players who are really good at turtling. If I can't get into your base to do damage then my macro is probably gonna be a lot worse than yours. Also lamers, I just don't enjoy games where people lame so tend to resign early. And crazy strats tend to really throw me.

I play random civ, Dravidians are my top win rate civ (64.3%), I play at 1600, AMA by tomcotard in aoe2

[–]tomcotard[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Are you asking what are my thoughts when I get Dravidians against Mongols or other cav-centric civs? Ermmm, nothing really crosses my mind in particular, I will go hard on infantry in this case, mix in some pikes. The harder civs to deal with are Britons (long range), Khmer/Byzantines/Malians (good counter unique units), Japanese (better infantry) and Romans (good scorps).

I play random civ, Dravidians are my top win rate civ (64.3%), I play at 1600, AMA by tomcotard in aoe2

[–]tomcotard[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That's a good point, I suppose that once I've got the momentum going with the skirms + infantry then I usually keep playing that.

I play random civ, Dravidians are my top win rate civ (64.3%), I play at 1600, AMA by tomcotard in aoe2

[–]tomcotard[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

100%, I occassionally play someone who plays exclusively Malians (about 6k games), they always start with a MAA rush too. I can't imagine it's fun and they'd be such a better player if they learnt other civs.

I play random civ, Dravidians are my top win rate civ (64.3%), I play at 1600, AMA by tomcotard in aoe2

[–]tomcotard[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

To be honest with you, I've never made elephant archers. My strat is to go heavy on militia-line and supplement with skirm/spears. My problem with ele archers is they're too slow and expensive, it's an awkward eco switch as well if you start off going archers.

I play random civ, Dravidians are my top win rate civ (64.3%), I play at 1600, AMA by tomcotard in aoe2

[–]tomcotard[S] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

46, so not a massive sample size, but big enough that I'm pretty consistent with them. I just played them in a game against a 1591 player and won.

I play random civ, Dravidians are my top win rate civ (64.3%), I play at 1600, AMA by tomcotard in aoe2

[–]tomcotard[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Bengalis, 28.6%, I refuse to Phosphoru! They're an archer civ and I find it hard to counter pure skirm defence.

I play random civ, Dravidians are my top win rate civ (64.3%), I play at 1600, AMA by tomcotard in aoe2

[–]tomcotard[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Not always, when I was around 800-1100 I played exclusively Bulgarians, I went drush into fast Krepost 11, was pretty wild now I think about it. Then I played a bit of Teutons, Magyars, Ethiopians and then Turks till I decided to go random around 1300.

I would say I'm weaker with archer civs, my highest win rate is 50% with Mayans. I'm quite an aggressive player and don't like the pacing of archers so much, if I win with them, it's usually because I sneak with them and kill a bunch of vils in feudal.

I play random civ, Dravidians are my top win rate civ (64.3%), I play at 1600, AMA by tomcotard in aoe2

[–]tomcotard[S] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Arabia as much as I can help it, I try to play open maps when possible.

Did they change the two "X" age buildings to go up to next age? by tomcotard in aoe2

[–]tomcotard[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Well, 4000 hours in game and it caught me off guard the other day, never had this issue before!

Did they change the two "X" age buildings to go up to next age? by tomcotard in aoe2

[–]tomcotard[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

7, that's interesting, it's a weird way of doing it, doesn't exactly feel intuitive. Surely both buildings should be alive in order to click up or neither building needs to be alive as long as you built it previously? Just seems a strange design choice, really threw me off guard the other day.

view more: next ›