How's the 2v2 scene? :)

[Nhika]

Was playing COH3, half my teammates are random people from 4v4's that just drop or lose their entire half of the map lmao

What's the meta for 2v2 in AOE2? One Calv / One archer civ?

[[T.R.] James]

It depends on the map. Maps like arabia can be two 1v1, but in black forest you should coordinate with your teammate.

[Kasbfaäfad]

Originally posted by Nhika:

Was playing COH3, half my teammates are random people from 4v4's that just drop or lose their entire half of the map lmao

What's the meta for 2v2 in AOE2? One Calv / One archer civ?

Yes, one archer and one cav civ for most maps. This is the reason why for example memb was bored by the 2v2 world cup 11

This is a criticism that you often hear by pros.
Might be that 3 vs 3 offers more variability

[Marco]

Originally posted by Nhika:

Was playing COH3, half my teammates are random people from 4v4's that just drop or lose their entire half of the map lmao

What's the meta for 2v2 in AOE2? One Calv / One archer civ?

Depends on what mode you choose, if it's ranked. Team Random Map and Team Empire Wars are two different types of team games. Empire Wars is a mode which requires more skill than Random Map because of different starting conditions and it's more unforgiving if you don't overwhelm your opponents in time or if you can't defend from an early raid (on open maps like Atacama). From my experience, 2vs2 often places you in front of the strongest opponent while you team mate gets the weaker one. Otherwise, if your opponent is weaker than you, it is possible he gets the strongest opponent,

Perhaps you might experience different kind of games especially depending on the Elo you reach, but the most 2vs2 games I had on both Team RM or EW ended up in the following ways:

- If your team mate is good and rushes succesfully his direct opponent in time, his opponent will surrender and he will help you out if you struggle with your opponent;

- If your team mate is bad or he gets a direct opponent which is just too much for him, you 90% lose the game even if your direct opponent looks like falling to you but can still hold somehow;

- If you get a very strong direct opponent, who also plays a strong cavalry civ (Franks, Cumans), you will auto-lose most of the time if he is able to rush you within 5 minutes (I'm talking about Empire Wars here), no matter what your mate's skill is.

The META depends on the civs on the map and on the map itself too. Cavalry or archers are good units, but they can be countered by camels and skirmishers. There are also 2vs2 games in which all players prefer infantry civs. Black Forest is a closed map and you can take advantage from crazy strategies, like destroying trees with siege onagers to create a corridor so that Teutonic knights can attack enemy base from the inner (I saw that on a demo I was watching a long time ago). On maps like Arena, a gunpowder civ like Turks plays well as long as they have gold to spend. They have light cavalry and hussar upgrade for free however.

As I said, however, after placement games you might get to a higher Elo if you are already into the genre (you said you come from Company of Heroes), I was just sitting between 850/900 and 1000 for team games (it's not the same as 1vs1 Elo).

Also, note that the pool of maps is different from one mode to another. Oasis, Black Forest and Arena are on Team Random Map while maps like Acclivity, Enclosed or Atacama are generally seen on Team Empire Wars.

[Kasbfaäfad]

Originally posted by Marco - cav+xbows is METAH!!11!!:

Originally posted by Nhika:

Was playing COH3, half my teammates are random people from 4v4's that just drop or lose their entire half of the map lmao

What's the meta for 2v2 in AOE2? One Calv / One archer civ?

The META depends on the civs on the map and on the map itself too. Cavalry or archers are good units, but they can be countered by camels and skirmishers. There are also 2vs2 games in which all players prefer infantry civs. Black Forest is a closed map and you can take advantage from crazy strategies, like destroying trees with siege onagers to create a corridor so that Teutonic knights can attack enemy base from the inner (I saw that on a demo I was watching a long time ago). On maps like Arena, a gunpowder civ like Turks plays well as long as they have gold to spend. They have light cavalry and hussar upgrade for free however.

As I said, however, after placement games you might get to a higher Elo if you are already into the genre (you said you come from Company of Heroes), I was just sitting between 850/900 and 1000 for team games (it's not the same as 1vs1 Elo).

Also, note that the pool of maps is different from one mode to another. Oasis, Black Forest and Arena are on Team Random Map while maps like Acclivity, Enclosed or Atacama are generally seen on Team Empire Wars.

Even Hera mentioned in one of his previous vides that 2 vs 2 gets very boring since it is ALWAYS one cav and one archer civ with exactly one kind of playing to win (at least on not completely closed maps). I was looking for the exact video but have not found it.

If you take a look at how better players (like 2 v 2 WC) play that, it is ALWAYS one cav and one archer civ paired and they fight together. So no variabilty at all if you want to win.

Do you find only one matchup in the 2vs2 WC where an infantry civ was taken instead?

[Marco]

Originally posted by Kasbfaäfad:

Even Hera mentioned in one of his previous vides that 2 vs 2 gets very boring since it is ALWAYS one cav and one archer civ with exactly one kind of playing to win (at least on not completely closed maps). I was looking for the exact video but have not found it.

If you take a look at how better players (like 2 v 2 WC) play that, it is ALWAYS one cav and one archer civ paired and they fight together. So no variabilty at all if you want to win.

Do you find only one matchup in the 2vs2 WC where an infantry civ was taken instead?

If Hera speaks for high Elo or even pro level (WC is for World Cup I guess?), that's reasonable but I'm not sure OP was looking for tournament games. For normal online playing, it depends on Elo IMO. I have had team games at low team Elo (below 1000 or even below 900), the games with only infantry were like this one:
https://www.aoe2insights.com/match/250532168/

My direct opponent destroyed my whole base with jaguar warriors+rams spam. My team mate was Incans and his direct opponent was Romans. This is RM however.

Whereas, on Empire Wars 2vs2 I've had different matchups. Somebody played as Bulgarians and demollished everything my ally had by spamming two-handed swordsmen+konniks. Somebody else played as Hindustanis and I defeated his camels with infantry spam.

I recommend OP to play both modes and in case he doesn't like 2vs2, he can still try 3vs3. But during placement games he will find leavers who quit within 2 mins.

EDIT: 3vs3 Empire Wars games were unlikely to happen compared to 3vs3 Random Map, as far as I remember.

[Kasbfaäfad]

Originally posted by Marco - cav+xbows is METAH!!11!!:

Originally posted by Kasbfaäfad:

Even Hera mentioned in one of his previous vides that 2 vs 2 gets very boring since it is ALWAYS one cav and one archer civ with exactly one kind of playing to win (at least on not completely closed maps). I was looking for the exact video but have not found it.

If you take a look at how better players (like 2 v 2 WC) play that, it is ALWAYS one cav and one archer civ paired and they fight together. So no variabilty at all if you want to win.

Do you find only one matchup in the 2vs2 WC where an infantry civ was taken instead?

If Hera speaks for high Elo or even pro level (WC is for World Cup I guess?), that's reasonable but I'm not sure OP was looking for tournament games. For normal online playing, it depends on Elo IMO. I have had team games at low team Elo (below 1000 or even below 900), the games with only infantry were like this one:
https://www.aoe2insights.com/match/250532168/

My direct opponent destroyed my whole base with jaguar warriors+rams spam. My team mate was Incans and his direct opponent was Romans. This is RM however.

Whereas, on Empire Wars 2vs2 I've had different matchups. Somebody played as Bulgarians and demollished everything my ally had by spamming two-handed swordsmen+konniks. Somebody else played as Hindustanis and I defeated his camels with infantry spam.

I recommend OP to play both modes and in case he doesn't like 2vs2, he can still try 3vs3. But during placement games he will find leavers who quit within 2 mins.

EDIT: 3vs3 Empire Wars games were unlikely to happen compared to 3vs3 Random Map, as far as I remember.

Yeah I guess OP was interested about the meta. And if you want to win in 2 vs 2 one usually (!) takes cav and one archer civ. Sad as it is...
If you are okay with losing u can also do Genitour only or delete your TCs... it's all up for your fantasy :)