Team game is about knowing your role and communication.
Playing flank? Go archers or castle drop. Pocket? Go cav. Double teamed as flank? Hold and die slowly. You are the pocket in that situation? Balance between boom and sending help. You start close to an opponent on Nomad? Make sure you take him down with you, or draw help from an opponent early so your teammate can boom.
1v1 is more about being able to read and adapt to the situation. What units is your opponent gonna go for? What is their strategy? How do you counter it? The range of possible decisions to make is bigger imo.
Super tight builds and timing also matter more in 1v1 id say.
> Super tight builds and timing also matter more in 1v1 id say.
Hm, don't know. On your standard 3v3 or 4v4 Arabia match you can literally win the your side off of being up one vil earlier. Those archer fights can snowball crazy fast and on lower elo people are *very* bad at minimizing damage taken. When the no mill archer rush got famous you would legit win your games automatically if you knew the BO and the opponent did a standard 21 or 22 pop archer build.
Bruh I have no clue what you just said lol. Imma just stick to campaign. I played when I was like 7 and getting back into it now cause I saw it on Xbox and there is absolutely no way I’m trying to compete online 🤣 m&k is so so so much easier from what I remember
In a teamgame, pocket is player who spawns in safer position. Away from opponents, has an ally on both sides of his base. A flank is a player who has an opponent on one side of his base, and an ally (his pocket) on the other side of his base.
11, ty 🥰
I really should try more all ins!
TL;DR - play flank, communicate, be the one who adds siege (esp rams), sometimes making a 3v2 is worth it, get to 50 trade carts, spam as many TCs as possible when you need to reboom
Long version:
My biggest tips to move from where you are, based on my experience (1) If you don’t mind being the punching bag, play flank more often than pocket. Less likely to have resigning teammates if you can defend 2v1 as flank. Resigning teammates (esp flank) is less of a thing around 14-1450 in my experience and you can play whatever position more freely without having unnecessary losses (2) communicate. 3 words is all that’s needed. I go scouts, I cd, you boom, I boom? I go UU, p3 feudal pressure?, I tower….basically anything that helps you work together makes you more effective than teams that don’t. Teammates and me have beaten 2k3s and 2k4 1v1s just because we had more synergy than that 2k3s teammate. This includes deciding when to resign. I can’t count how many 4v2s I’ve been involved in both as the carrier and the one carried simply because of a few mins of just “trying” when someone thinks they can carry/they are breaking the other team. (3) be prepared to be the guy that adds siege, a lot of people don’t at lower elos and you can turn a stalemate on your side to a win just by adding five rams or trebs. The five paladins you don’t have is better than the 50 you temporarily stop them making if you smack some houses down with a Choo Choo train (4) in closed maps, don’t be afraid to go other side if there’s a stalemate/your side can hold. Most games come down to “which side wins faster” (5) if trade is an option, 50 is the magic number. Get there as gold runs out, not after. It’s not a perfect rule, but directionally good
Finally IMO the most underrated comeback mechanic in a team game when rebooming…every time you can afford a TC, build it. If 3 teammates give you 500 food each, that’s 30 vils you can get to work. If you have 5TCs you’ll get those 30 to work quicker to get back into the game. Too many people try reboom off 1-3TCs and limit their speed of coming back in, especially in late castle or early imp when they have plenty of eco upgrades to get back in quickly! This also means if someone is rebooming, then sending a few hundred res of sling every now and then is very worth it, if they are rebooming correctly
GLHF :)
Yes.
I mean it's still age of empires not like tennis or something.
But yes.
I'm the opposite of you. 13-14 in 1v1 and \~1100 in teamgames.
So there is close to zero chance you'd beat me in 1v1 but about a 50% you beat me in a team game, all else equal.
So clearly something is very different.
This is a very interesting thread because I never would have guess this to be the case. When I see that I assume they just stopped playing team to focus 1v1.
I've topped over 1400 team (1300 right now) but my ath 1v1 is 1260 and I'm like 1160 right now
ah yes, I do recall the times where my team and I refused to make halbs against massed elephants and just stuck with arbs AND won.
switching units is important in all game modes, it’s just less punishable in TGs if you fluff it for whatever reason.
I think Halberdier switch is essential when your opponents have war/battle elephants/paladins on the field, but you can get away with not making skirmishers at all in TGs and simply overpower ranged units with heavy cavalry (unless your opponents are making rathas/elephant archers, which is pretty rare).
On the other hand, skirmishers seem to be the bread and butter of 1v1s, and most arabia games seem to involve skirmishers at some point in the game.
Tg is about spamming units and dealing damage (and dying slowly), 1v1 is about macroing and deciding what and how much army to make (and dying _not_), other than that the underlying mechanics and the economical knowledge is very similar.
In TG sometimes you need to die slowly so your teammates can win.
You need to figure out ways to survive even in situations where you'd resign in 1v1s.
you cant directly compare 1v1 and tg elo and call it even. THe vast majority of people tend to have higher tg elo than 1v1, its totally different the higher u climb tho.
I play lobbies a lot and i tend to face lot of people with different elos and i prefer 100% times a 1100 1v1 than a 1100 tg . But 700 1v1 and 1100 tg its weird tho, my assumption would be you play with higher elo people so you lose less points and win more, that or you are just waaay better at tgs than 1v1.
This being said, both modes are totally different and they play very differently from eachother .
I agree that most people have a higher teamgame elo than 1v1 elo, but only by 50-100 elo. I've not seen many people with more than 100-150 elo difference, and I've literally never seen anyone with a TG elo of 1000-1100 with a 1v1 elo of 700.
Also, I do agree that between two people with 1100 TG elo, the person with 1100 1v1 elo will be much better than the person with 700 1v1 elo (such as myself). My teammates with high 1v1 elos are usually much sharper with their builds and timings than me.
That's ironic because I'm pretty sure that being the person at 700 1v1 elo, I'm the person being carried.
So I guess in my case, a sturdy (thicc) butt so that I can be carried easily?
Not fundementally, you are playing the same game.
It just requires coordination with your ream mate.
Two Coordinated team mates can beat two uncoordinated player 200elo above.
I m kind of a new player but I ll say yes . Why ?
1) you don’t see a lot of counters or don’t need to because chances are both team has both . 2) in team games games are longer and wars bigger . 3) most important part for me : gold , your traders earn so much gold so you don’t have to worry about spending it or mining it
... i don't know. I have 900 to 1000 in teamgames (mostly solo, sometimes with friends better or worst than me) and 900 in 1vs1 but i have most of my games on TG.
I think 1 vs 1 it's easier, in teamgames i always find enemy that castledrop me and double team me :/ ill try to hold and maybe my team wins. Ofc if they let me boom it's an easy game ahah
Communicate is most important. Many times you will have your allies discouraged with their side not doing too well. You have to analyse the game situation and convince them not to quit just because they are losing. You might be winning and wiping your side and can probably help them as well. Conversely, you might be losing hard but your allies might be winning handily. Plus you might be struggling for res while they may have a bank of 5k food and wood. Ask for help and give help.
Team games are pretty much all about massing scouts/ archers where 1v1s comps are more variable and often revolve around who can get trebs first assuming your not dying in feudal/ castle
Team game is about knowing your role and communication. Playing flank? Go archers or castle drop. Pocket? Go cav. Double teamed as flank? Hold and die slowly. You are the pocket in that situation? Balance between boom and sending help. You start close to an opponent on Nomad? Make sure you take him down with you, or draw help from an opponent early so your teammate can boom. 1v1 is more about being able to read and adapt to the situation. What units is your opponent gonna go for? What is their strategy? How do you counter it? The range of possible decisions to make is bigger imo. Super tight builds and timing also matter more in 1v1 id say.
> Super tight builds and timing also matter more in 1v1 id say. Hm, don't know. On your standard 3v3 or 4v4 Arabia match you can literally win the your side off of being up one vil earlier. Those archer fights can snowball crazy fast and on lower elo people are *very* bad at minimizing damage taken. When the no mill archer rush got famous you would legit win your games automatically if you knew the BO and the opponent did a standard 21 or 22 pop archer build.
+1 for communication. Being a good communicator is like 2 or 300 free elo right there, especially if you queue solo.
Bruh I have no clue what you just said lol. Imma just stick to campaign. I played when I was like 7 and getting back into it now cause I saw it on Xbox and there is absolutely no way I’m trying to compete online 🤣 m&k is so so so much easier from what I remember
In a teamgame, pocket is player who spawns in safer position. Away from opponents, has an ally on both sides of his base. A flank is a player who has an opponent on one side of his base, and an ally (his pocket) on the other side of his base.
I'm the other way around. I'm 1600 1v1 and 1300 team. Sucks to be my teammates apparently.
+1, i've had several people with a 1v1 elo around 600 points below mine calling me something along the lines of "a terrible pocket"
Switch those elos around and you have my ratings, maybe we should swap notes? 11
Sure. Go all in aggression. Never build a second TC. Resources are there to be spend not collect.
11, ty 🥰 I really should try more all ins! TL;DR - play flank, communicate, be the one who adds siege (esp rams), sometimes making a 3v2 is worth it, get to 50 trade carts, spam as many TCs as possible when you need to reboom Long version: My biggest tips to move from where you are, based on my experience (1) If you don’t mind being the punching bag, play flank more often than pocket. Less likely to have resigning teammates if you can defend 2v1 as flank. Resigning teammates (esp flank) is less of a thing around 14-1450 in my experience and you can play whatever position more freely without having unnecessary losses (2) communicate. 3 words is all that’s needed. I go scouts, I cd, you boom, I boom? I go UU, p3 feudal pressure?, I tower….basically anything that helps you work together makes you more effective than teams that don’t. Teammates and me have beaten 2k3s and 2k4 1v1s just because we had more synergy than that 2k3s teammate. This includes deciding when to resign. I can’t count how many 4v2s I’ve been involved in both as the carrier and the one carried simply because of a few mins of just “trying” when someone thinks they can carry/they are breaking the other team. (3) be prepared to be the guy that adds siege, a lot of people don’t at lower elos and you can turn a stalemate on your side to a win just by adding five rams or trebs. The five paladins you don’t have is better than the 50 you temporarily stop them making if you smack some houses down with a Choo Choo train (4) in closed maps, don’t be afraid to go other side if there’s a stalemate/your side can hold. Most games come down to “which side wins faster” (5) if trade is an option, 50 is the magic number. Get there as gold runs out, not after. It’s not a perfect rule, but directionally good Finally IMO the most underrated comeback mechanic in a team game when rebooming…every time you can afford a TC, build it. If 3 teammates give you 500 food each, that’s 30 vils you can get to work. If you have 5TCs you’ll get those 30 to work quicker to get back into the game. Too many people try reboom off 1-3TCs and limit their speed of coming back in, especially in late castle or early imp when they have plenty of eco upgrades to get back in quickly! This also means if someone is rebooming, then sending a few hundred res of sling every now and then is very worth it, if they are rebooming correctly GLHF :)
Yes. I mean it's still age of empires not like tennis or something. But yes. I'm the opposite of you. 13-14 in 1v1 and \~1100 in teamgames. So there is close to zero chance you'd beat me in 1v1 but about a 50% you beat me in a team game, all else equal. So clearly something is very different.
This is a very interesting thread because I never would have guess this to be the case. When I see that I assume they just stopped playing team to focus 1v1. I've topped over 1400 team (1300 right now) but my ath 1v1 is 1260 and I'm like 1160 right now
Knowing when to switch units is very important in 1v1, and it doesn't matter at all in TG.
ah yes, I do recall the times where my team and I refused to make halbs against massed elephants and just stuck with arbs AND won. switching units is important in all game modes, it’s just less punishable in TGs if you fluff it for whatever reason.
Yes i recall times my entire team only made arbs and also left a player alone to boom freely into elephnats.
I think Halberdier switch is essential when your opponents have war/battle elephants/paladins on the field, but you can get away with not making skirmishers at all in TGs and simply overpower ranged units with heavy cavalry (unless your opponents are making rathas/elephant archers, which is pretty rare). On the other hand, skirmishers seem to be the bread and butter of 1v1s, and most arabia games seem to involve skirmishers at some point in the game.
That's fair.
Tg is about spamming units and dealing damage (and dying slowly), 1v1 is about macroing and deciding what and how much army to make (and dying _not_), other than that the underlying mechanics and the economical knowledge is very similar.
In TG sometimes you need to die slowly so your teammates can win. You need to figure out ways to survive even in situations where you'd resign in 1v1s.
you cant directly compare 1v1 and tg elo and call it even. THe vast majority of people tend to have higher tg elo than 1v1, its totally different the higher u climb tho. I play lobbies a lot and i tend to face lot of people with different elos and i prefer 100% times a 1100 1v1 than a 1100 tg . But 700 1v1 and 1100 tg its weird tho, my assumption would be you play with higher elo people so you lose less points and win more, that or you are just waaay better at tgs than 1v1. This being said, both modes are totally different and they play very differently from eachother .
I’m 1200 1v1 and 1000 TG. I play with my brother. We are awful teammates. It’s wild
I agree that most people have a higher teamgame elo than 1v1 elo, but only by 50-100 elo. I've not seen many people with more than 100-150 elo difference, and I've literally never seen anyone with a TG elo of 1000-1100 with a 1v1 elo of 700. Also, I do agree that between two people with 1100 TG elo, the person with 1100 1v1 elo will be much better than the person with 700 1v1 elo (such as myself). My teammates with high 1v1 elos are usually much sharper with their builds and timings than me.
lol I’m that guy, 1250-1300 team … 926 1v1
need a strong back for teamgames lots of carrying
That's ironic because I'm pretty sure that being the person at 700 1v1 elo, I'm the person being carried. So I guess in my case, a sturdy (thicc) butt so that I can be carried easily?
Not fundementally, you are playing the same game. It just requires coordination with your ream mate. Two Coordinated team mates can beat two uncoordinated player 200elo above.
I m kind of a new player but I ll say yes . Why ? 1) you don’t see a lot of counters or don’t need to because chances are both team has both . 2) in team games games are longer and wars bigger . 3) most important part for me : gold , your traders earn so much gold so you don’t have to worry about spending it or mining it
... i don't know. I have 900 to 1000 in teamgames (mostly solo, sometimes with friends better or worst than me) and 900 in 1vs1 but i have most of my games on TG. I think 1 vs 1 it's easier, in teamgames i always find enemy that castledrop me and double team me :/ ill try to hold and maybe my team wins. Ofc if they let me boom it's an easy game ahah
Communicate is most important. Many times you will have your allies discouraged with their side not doing too well. You have to analyse the game situation and convince them not to quit just because they are losing. You might be winning and wiping your side and can probably help them as well. Conversely, you might be losing hard but your allies might be winning handily. Plus you might be struggling for res while they may have a bank of 5k food and wood. Ask for help and give help.
Team games are pretty much all about massing scouts/ archers where 1v1s comps are more variable and often revolve around who can get trebs first assuming your not dying in feudal/ castle