counter beserk, how?

[Zyro]

i just had my first encounter against these tanky, fast moving monsters that apparently also generate over time.

how can i successfully counter this? am i missing something here?
i tried archers but they move in too fast.
i even had archers behind walls but they are just too tanky, it didn't feel like i had the upper hand.
i tried scorpions because they apparently counter big groups (i fail to see it), i tried it anyway. didnt work.
i tried onagers, had some nice shots but they just wont die because of their high health.

mind you i am low elo. i cant macro well and i cant give a hundreds commands every minute. i just want to understand what would be the best and easiest aprouch to counter this unit. i felt very hopeless.

[Cacomistle]

TAW MikeyPlays eredeti hozzászólása:

Cacomistle eredeti hozzászólása:

He's asking what the counter to berserks is because there isn't a standard unit with a massive bonus against them (like pikes to cav, or skirms to archers although that's more a pierce armor thing). There is a blatantly obvious difference here. You were talking about pikes vs cav, or skirms vs archers. These are really obvious counters (it says they're counters when you hover over the unit). Infantry units don't have these hard counters. They have soft counters (like arbs, which will actually not beat berserkers if you don't micro them).

Plus if you would read, HE TRIED ARBS. "i tried archers but they move in too fast." He literally figured out the counter you mentioned (along with every other counter you mentioned), and it didn't work. Don't tell me he's too stupid to try something when is written right there in his post. I am betting here that the reason it didn't work is because he didn't have enough arbs.

The simple point I am making is that you need good macro before unit counters work. Ask yourself, what is more effective vs berserks? 50 arbs, or 50 paladins. The answer is quite obviously the paladins, because 50 paladins is way more resources. A lot of an ineffective counter is better than a little of an effective counter. So as long as he doesn't try to go skirms or something, he just needs better macro to beat them.

And yeah he can't be better than an evenly matched opponent by 25%, but if he gets better at macro, he'll climb elo. He'd beat all the people he lost to that spawned this thread. If he reaches like hera/viper level of macro but gets stuck at 2k because his unit compositions suck (probably higher, I've seen mbl beat 2k players with pure men at arms several times), I think he'll be fine with his performance.

1. Another weird comment as usual. IF YOU COULD READ YOU COULD SEE HE DIDN'T SAY THAT HE TRIED ARBS, HE SAID ARCHERS. ARCHERS NOT ARBS. And seeing he is a low elo player, I'm not sure he had all the upgrades. Arbs kill berserkers. I have played the matchup. If arbs don't counter berserkers then paladins sure as hell don't.
50 paladins take 3x the gold than 50 berserkers. Being 25% better won't net you 3x the gold. Your math is sus.
And of course you need macro to do anything in this game, how does that discount the fact that your unit is ♥♥♥♥ vs what you are fighting?

2. Comparing a match up b/w MBL a 2k5 player and a 2k player with a match which has people of similar skill level and to suggest that you can pull off a victory by trading unevenly with a player of similar skill level is beyond moronic. One has a 500 elo difference, another a max 50 elo difference. One is a game between equals and another a pro beating a wannabe. Do you even math?

You think he tried feudal age archers against berserkers? He just, decided not to upgrade them for some reason? No he just calls them archers because they shoot arrows and its easier to remember archer for the entire line than remember arbalest. I usually refer to longswordsmen as "champion line" because its easier than always recollecting what the castle age champion line is callled.

There is no way he knows what onagers are, plays pvp, but hasn't yet noticed the crossbow upgrade.


But if you really think this guy doesn't understand the basic mechanics of upgrading units, then we have an obvious issue that isn't unit composition. Not upgrading your units is a macro issue. So... he should probably improve his macro. THIS IS ACTUALLY LITERALLY MY POINT. A basic build order guide (not even any actual understanding of macro) would have told him the crossbow upgrade exists.

I edited out the mbl comparison cause I wasn't really going anywhere useful with that. It would take too long to explain my thought process there, but it wasn't about the elo difference, it was the idea that without any thought into unit composition he's still 2k. He wouldn't be 2k without any thought into macro.

And for the billionth time, I did not say "hurr durr throw cav or other garbage at them and hope it works". I said prioritize macro. That doesn't mean you should just try to counter berserks with skirmishers or some ♥♥♥♥. It just means you should make sure your macro is on point before you question unit counters (otherwise you could for example, think that berserks counter archer-line because you forgot to upgrade to crossbow/arbalest. Are you seeing the obvious point you made for me?).

Quite honestly you made the claim for me. This guy is never gonna counter berserks if he doesn't know to upgrade his archers. That is actually perhaps the strongest argument possible to support my argument if that's actually what happened. All the justifications for why his arbs might not have worked, that's my whole argument. Those are macro problems. I don't understand why you're so confused about my point when you are writing my points out for me (for reference I never claimed he should use cav, which is the point you've been attacking every post).

Oh and I think you're thinking way too deeply about the math. The math with that paladin example was more stuff > less stuff. I didn't calculate out 1.25x the cost of 50 berserks (plus all the upgrades and buildings and everything else built throughout the game, I wasn't referring to only units when I made that post). Just stop extrapolating out ♥♥♥♥ I didn't say, and respond to more stuff > less stuff and macro>composition.

[Cacomistle]

TAW MikeyPlays eredeti hozzászólása:

Oh and you're gonna miss it if its not in its own post, but for like the 5th time now I NEVER SAID TO COUNTER BERSERKS WITH PALADINS. I understand paladins are bad vs berserks. I understand arbalests are good vs berserks

I said to counter stuff with more stuff with more upgrades. Lots of resources into well upgraded crappy units (like paladins vs berserks) will get you further than small amounts of crummily upgraded counter units (like your theory that he was actually using feudal age archers). The best thing to do is get lots of well upgraded counter units (so lots of arbs), but if you lose a game you should question whether your macro was off before questioning if the counter was. Everything he tried could have worked if his macro was better.

[TheDiaper]

No, theres something called momentum, you can win a game by overwhelming your opponent, even with unfavourable trades. Cost efficiency doesnt matter when you have zero units, real games arent army-comp simulator.

High level players make efficient choices - be it army composition, map control, macro, micro, etc. Bad army comp loses games at any elo.

How do you get that momentum if not by making better choices in macro, map control, army comps?

Even viper would say it depends but I guess he is a scrub.

Also army comps matter at all levels. What is your elo anyway? I don't see you on aoe2.net. All aspects of the game matter - macro, micro, etc. At low elos you don't have the MACRO to mass MORE of anything, if you lose your initial mass you tend to LOSE the game. They have bad MACRO that is why they are low ELO. Why not mass what's optimal instead of being a moron?

Imagine (I know it's hard for you) that your opponent masses heavy camels, will you still mass paladins to fight that or will you exploit the fact that camels have low pierce armor? Suggest any pro player who would recommend against that if that's an option. They tech switch and unit switch. Low elo players won't be that efficient but telling them counters don't matter is stupid.

https://aoe2.net/#profile-4822001
https://aoe2.net/#profile-76561198045972770

[Rockstar]

u guys wrote ur whole college essays here

[Sleepy Joe]

Cacomistle eredeti hozzászólása:

TAW MikeyPlays eredeti hozzászólása:

Oh and you're gonna miss it if its not in its own post, but for like the 5th time now I NEVER SAID TO COUNTER BERSERKS WITH PALADINS. I understand paladins are bad vs berserks. I understand arbalests are good vs berserks

I said to counter stuff with more stuff with more upgrades. Lots of resources into well upgraded crappy units (like paladins vs berserks) will get you further than small amounts of crummily upgraded counter units (like your theory that he was actually using feudal age archers). The best thing to do is get lots of well upgraded counter units (so lots of arbs), but if you lose a game you should question whether your macro was off before questioning if the counter was. Everything he tried could have worked if his macro was better.

It's not my theory that he was using feudal age archers. He literally said ARCHERS. Of course MACRO matters. What's the ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ argument then? Don't make paladins at low elo vs berserkers.

Your MBL argument was stupid.

You not taking into account the cost of units was dumb.

[Sleepy Joe]

Tinea Pedis eredeti hozzászólása:

No, theres something called momentum, you can win a game by overwhelming your opponent, even with unfavourable trades. Cost efficiency doesnt matter when you have zero units, real games arent army-comp simulator.

High level players make efficient choices - be it army composition, map control, macro, micro, etc. Bad army comp loses games at any elo.

How do you get that momentum if not by making better choices in macro, map control, army comps?

Even viper would say it depends but I guess he is a scrub.

Also army comps matter at all levels. What is your elo anyway? I don't see you on aoe2.net. All aspects of the game matter - macro, micro, etc. At low elos you don't have the MACRO to mass MORE of anything, if you lose your initial mass you tend to LOSE the game. They have bad MACRO that is why they are low ELO. Why not mass what's optimal instead of being a moron?

Imagine (I know it's hard for you) that your opponent masses heavy camels, will you still mass paladins to fight that or will you exploit the fact that camels have low pierce armor? Suggest any pro player who would recommend against that if that's an option. They tech switch and unit switch. Low elo players won't be that efficient but telling them counters don't matter is stupid.

https://aoe2.net/#profile-4822001
https://aoe2.net/#profile-76561198045972770

He has 12 games with 1339 elo, I have 7 ranked games with 1205 elo; I haven't calibrated yet - you can check ingame but whatever. He hasn't played in a while, so I couldn't search by name at aoe2.net.

And I checked your 1k7 elo as well. Doesn't make my point wrong.

[TheDiaper]

First off, you were the one ♥♥♥♥ talking Cacomistle, "I know it's hard for you". Turns out hes a 13+ with a 10-2 record, losing to a 1361 MAX and a 1432 MAX, while you are barely a 12+ with a 6-1 record, losing to a 1231 MAX.

Second of all, you were the one ♥♥♥♥ talking Quintem, who mentioned pop efficiency, production rate advantage as well as the raiding potential of paladins. "Because you run out of gold pretty fast in late imp in a 1v1." "Real games are not some simulation 40 paladins vs 40 berserkers like a SOTL video." Then literally two comments after, "High level players make efficient choices - be it army composition, map control, macro, micro, etc." Oh so now map control ,macro and micro matter now?

Lets say you killed 40 of the 70 frankish paladins with 90 zerks, yeah you took a gold-efficient fight (3000G vs 2250G), but your opponent now has the map control with 30 units remaining (or even more due to the production advantage) on the field which can maneuver to raid, to take down your buildings, or dropping castles in your face. Cost efficiency doesnt matter when you cant keep up the production.

[Sleepy Joe]

Tinea Pedis eredeti hozzászólása:

First off, you were the one ♥♥♥♥ talking Cacomistle, "I know it's hard for you". Turns out hes a 13+ with a 10-2 record, losing to a 1361 MAX and a 1432 MAX, while you are barely a 12+ with a 6-1 record, losing to a 1231 MAX.

Second of all, you were the one ♥♥♥♥ talking Quintem, who mentioned pop efficiency, production rate advantage as well as the raiding potential of paladins. "Because you run out of gold pretty fast in late imp in a 1v1." "Real games are not some simulation 40 paladins vs 40 berserkers like a SOTL video." Then literally two comments after, "High level players make efficient choices - be it army composition, map control, macro, micro, etc." Oh so now map control ,macro and micro matter now?

Lets say you killed 40 of the 70 frankish paladins with 90 zerks, yeah you took a gold-efficient fight (3000G vs 2250G), but your opponent now has the map control with 30 units remaining (or even more due to the production advantage) on the field which can maneuver to raid, to take down your buildings, or dropping castles in your face. Cost efficiency doesnt matter when you cant keep up the production.

First of all, read the chat history, he started dropping f bombs before I did.

Second of all, I have like 170 hours in this game & 7 ranked games total. And I'm not barely 1200, I will raise elo fast enough (I'm 6-1 in calibration & I didn't lose to a 1231, I lost to him when he was 1129; I watched the replay, learned my lessons and improved to 1205), I have been practicing in unranked lobbies all this time. I watch the replay of every game I play.
I don't have the time to play 3000 games like you. You have a 51% win rate so you are pretty much maxed out, if you play the game for fun then cool; if you are a student, it's a colossal waste of time; you could have invested that time elsewhere. If you are thinking of making a career out of it, good luck unless you stream with a lot of subs.

Third of all, all those factors matter. But if you are 300 elo facing another 300 elo, then you'd be at par skill wise in those factors unless you are SMURFING. The OP didn't ask for macro or micro decisions, he admitted he sucks at them. He asked for Unit Composition - go an read it. I was answering that question when you started with your lame responses "11".

Fourth of all, you won't have 30 paladins left in your hypothetical scenario to gain map control because the viking guy can pump more zerks with the remaining gold. Since we are talking all things equal - macro, micro wise. So it should be equal resource wise as well. More zerks will cost you more food for sure but gold is scarcer resource in late imp.

TL DR: The OP definitely stands to improve if he focuses on macro, micro and other apsects of the game. He specifically asked for units which can beat berserkers. And I answered that question. It's not my fault you got a stick up your behind when I used the word UNIT COMP or supposedly mocked your god SOTL. OOoo I'm scared. Bugger off now.

[Moist Butt]

TAW MikeyPlays eredeti hozzászólása:

Cacomistle eredeti hozzászólása:

Oh and you're gonna miss it if its not in its own post, but for like the 5th time now I NEVER SAID TO COUNTER BERSERKS WITH PALADINS. I understand paladins are bad vs berserks. I understand arbalests are good vs berserks

I said to counter stuff with more stuff with more upgrades. Lots of resources into well upgraded crappy units (like paladins vs berserks) will get you further than small amounts of crummily upgraded counter units (like your theory that he was actually using feudal age archers). The best thing to do is get lots of well upgraded counter units (so lots of arbs), but if you lose a game you should question whether your macro was off before questioning if the counter was. Everything he tried could have worked if his macro was better.

It's not my theory that he was using feudal age archers. He literally said ARCHERS. Of course MACRO matters. What's the ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ argument then? Don't make paladins at low elo vs berserkers.

You realize that he's a noob right? It makes much more sense that he isn't using the correct terms rather than not upgrading at all. When ppl say spear/pike they dont literally mean spearman or pikeman but they mean that unit line. Pretty sure its the same here.

[Moist Butt]

TAW MikeyPlays eredeti hozzászólása:

Tinea Pedis eredeti hozzászólása:

First off, you were the one ♥♥♥♥ talking Cacomistle, "I know it's hard for you". Turns out hes a 13+ with a 10-2 record, losing to a 1361 MAX and a 1432 MAX, while you are barely a 12+ with a 6-1 record, losing to a 1231 MAX.

Second of all, you were the one ♥♥♥♥ talking Quintem, who mentioned pop efficiency, production rate advantage as well as the raiding potential of paladins. "Because you run out of gold pretty fast in late imp in a 1v1." "Real games are not some simulation 40 paladins vs 40 berserkers like a SOTL video." Then literally two comments after, "High level players make efficient choices - be it army composition, map control, macro, micro, etc." Oh so now map control ,macro and micro matter now?

Lets say you killed 40 of the 70 frankish paladins with 90 zerks, yeah you took a gold-efficient fight (3000G vs 2250G), but your opponent now has the map control with 30 units remaining (or even more due to the production advantage) on the field which can maneuver to raid, to take down your buildings, or dropping castles in your face. Cost efficiency doesnt matter when you cant keep up the production.

Fourth of all, you won't have 30 paladins left in your hypothetical scenario to gain map control because the viking guy can pump more zerks with the remaining gold. Since we are talking all things equal - macro, micro wise. So it should be equal resource wise as well. More zerks will cost you more food for sure but gold is scarcer resource in late imp.

what are you talking about? The paladin player would have 30 paladins against 0 beserkers for awhile. How does that not translate to map control? Resources clearly wont be the same either because with map control you can take the extra gold pile or even deny gold from your enemy (raids). Assuming the paladin players continues the pressure, it would be very hard for the viking player to catch up in pop space. I am not going to explain to you why pop space matters, but pros have resigned from games just because their pop space isn't healthy.

The situation you are describing is when gold has already run out and players are just using their banked gold. You can't assume this. You can't expect both players to have equal resources if one has map control. Its quite obvious and i am not sure how you overlooked this.

[TheDiaper]

TAW MikeyPlays eredeti hozzászólása:

Second of all, I have like 170 hours in this game & 7 ranked games total.

Then dont act like you are an expert.

And I'm not barely 1200, I will raise elo fast enough (I'm 6-1 in calibration & I didn't lose to a 1231, I lost to him when he was 1129;

You know thats even worse right?

I watched the replay, learned my lessons and improved to 1205), I have been practicing in unranked lobbies all this time. I watch the replay of every game I play.

Then go play a few more and see where you land, Im pretty sure you wont reach 14+, which gives you the slightest edge against Cacomistle, anytime soon (Not that it matters much tho).

I don't have the time to play 3000 games like you. You have a 51% win rate so you are pretty much maxed out, if you play the game for fun then cool; if you are a student, it's a colossal waste of time; you could have invested that time elsewhere. If you are thinking of making a career out of it, good luck unless you stream with a lot of subs.

As if you ahve the password of my bank account 11.

Third of all, all those factors matter. But if you are 300 elo facing another 300 elo, then you'd be at par skill wise in those factors unless you are SMURFING. The OP didn't ask for macro or micro decisions, he admitted he sucks at them. He asked for Unit Composition - go an read it. I was answering that question when you started with your lame responses "11".

Improve your macro, all the units you mentioned counter zerks, you lost because you dont have the numbers.

Guess eye lens is another thing needed to be written on your body transplant list.

Fourth of all, you won't have 30 paladins left in your hypothetical scenario to gain map control because the viking guy can pump more zerks with the remaining gold. Since we are talking all things equal - macro, micro wise. So it should be equal resource wise as well. More zerks will cost you more food for sure but gold is scarcer resource in late imp.

Did you not say "real games are not simulation?" 11111

TL DR: The OP definitely stands to improve if he focuses on macro, micro and other apsects of the game. He specifically asked for units which can beat berserkers. And I answered that question. It's not my fault you got a stick up your behind when I used the word UNIT COMP or supposedly mocked your god SOTL. OOoo I'm scared. Bugger off now.

God SOTL 1111111

They are very good against cavalry due to their civ bonus, so that's out of the question.

Thats utterly false, simple as that.

[Sleepy Joe]

Then dont act like you are an expert.

You aren't an expert either and the OP didn't ask for an expert opinion. You are just bummed not everyone agrees with you.

You know thats even worse right?

I've just started playing this game so how is that worse? I got 1049 elo after my first game. I got to 1205 in 7 games; granted calibration gives more points but it's not worse. Your near 3k games 1k7 is worse. Do you even play any pros? Win any tournaments? Do you make any money off of it?

Then go play a few more and see where you land, Im pretty sure you wont reach 14+, which gives you the slightest edge against Cacomistle, anytime soon (Not that it matters much tho).

That's your opinion, in my opinion I can get to 1k4 in about 200 games.

As if you ahve the password of my bank account 11.

You are making a foolish investment of your time if you suck so much after 3k games.

Guess eye lens is another thing needed to be written on your body transplant list.

Your comp shouldn't be a problem if you are behind walls, maybe the lack of numbers was the problem. Try to have more production buildings if you can't seem to make units faster than your opponent. Try to macro your eco better if you don't seem to have the res to sustain production. Try to have full upgrades for the archer line if you are going for that option.

That's rich coming from the idiot who can't read what I wrote in my very first comment. I mentioned macro, unit upgrades & unit comp. You came back with MOMENTUM.

Did you not say "real games are not simulation?" 11111

Yes they aren't simulation of 40 units of this vs 40 units of that. You asserted that I suggested that they are comp simulators when I did no such thing.

God SOTL 1111111

11 when you lose the argument.

They are very good against cavalry due to their civ bonus, so that's out of the question.

Thats utterly false, simple as that.

It's not false, it's a it depends. Given OP is a low elo player, it stands to reason that macroing hard enough to take & sustain uneven trades would be difficult against an opponent with similar skill level. But you are literally viper with your 1k7 elo so what do I know?

[Sleepy Joe]

what are you talking about? The paladin player would have 30 paladins against 0 beserkers for awhile. How does that not translate to map control? Resources clearly wont be the same either because with map control you can take the extra gold pile or even deny gold from your enemy (raids). Assuming the paladin players continues the pressure, it would be very hard for the viking player to catch up in pop space. I am not going to explain to you why pop space matters, but pros have resigned from games just because their pop space isn't healthy.

The situation you are describing is when gold has already run out and players are just using their banked gold. You can't assume this. You can't expect both players to have equal resources if one has map control. Its quite obvious and i am not sure how you overlooked this.

Fair enough, I assumed that OP is a low elo player & having watched many low elo gameplays in T90's stream I thought it would be a single showdown post imp. If he is around 1k then that might not be the case & some back & forth can happen.

You realize that he's a noob right? It makes much more sense that he isn't using the correct terms rather than not upgrading at all. When ppl say spear/pike they dont literally mean spearman or pikeman but they mean that unit line. Pretty sure its the same here.

But if he is around 1k, he won't mistake a xbow or an arb for an archer. So how do I assume (1k + arbs) or (300 + archer)? I took him literally. But it can be either.

[Zyro]

i may not have been fully clear on a few things, i thought it would be an easy general question on what is a good unit to counter Beserkers. but that quickly turned into a lot of situational answers. so to get rid of the whole grey area;

- i played Chinese and it was a 1v1 arena.
- i was focussing on archers and using the upgrades from the blacksmith as well as they are used for the castle units. that was my plan at least.
eventually i had a mix of arbalesters and the rapid-fire unit (chookonu?) - later added Onagers and a attempt to scorpions.
i ended up producing non-stop from 2 castles and 2 (or 3?) archer ranges because i couldnt keep up with the Beserks pressure. i was only holding a line because i was behind a wall. but every time i got past my own wall i got destroyed.

so my army was mostly archer-units. i understand that this is stupid in many situations, but on the Beserker page it shows that archers are a 'weakness'. its why i placed this question.

i am not a good player, i know this. i mostly struggle with having a good balance between economy and military. but putting all of that aside, i want to know how to react better in such a situation. if the answer is; ''you already messed up because you had a bad start. if you had a better start you would have more units ect.ect.'' - that is not helping. i was able to stop him from getting through my wall, but i failed to find a way how to push back. so - if i am able to hold a line, how can i break trough and push back when all there is is a wall of beserkers?

[TheDiaper]

Everyone in this post have already told you the answer, arbs / scorps / onagers all counter zerks. And this

you already messed up because you had a bad start. if you had a better start you would have more units ect.ect.

is the answer.