Scrolling through from All to say I also felt this the other day checking my Rocket League stats. Thousands of matches played, 51% win rate. If I get better, I play against harder opponents. Seems to be the nature of the beast
this post was submitted on 12 Nov 2025
104 points (96.4% liked)
Real Time Strategy
334 readers
14 users here now
For discussions about all real-time strategy games. Everyone is welcome, Starcraft, Age of Empires, Stormgate, etc.
| Related Communities | |
|---|---|
| General strategy games | !strategy_games@piefed.world |
| Tycoon games | !tycoon@lemmy.world |
| Turn-based strategy games | !turnbasedstrategy@piefed.world |
| City builders | !citybuilders@sh.itjust.works |
| Other gaming | !games@sh.itjust.works, !games@lemmy.world, !pcgaming@lemmy.ca |
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
A well-designed matchmaking system should leave you with a 50% winrate. That's how Elo and Elo-like ranking systems are designed to work.
If your Elo is climbing over time, that's (probably) good progression. If your Elo stays stagnant with a 50% winrate, that's you not getting good. With the caveat that how "good" a particular Elo is can change over time, since the starting Elo is by definition the average. If existing players are learning to be better, or worse players are quitting the game, or better new players are joining, remaining at the same Elo might mean you're actually improving; you're just improving at the same rate as the average player. And conversely if more casuals join or hardcore players quit, the average should go down.
Or getting cheesed. Rank was never fun for me. It was too much methodical actions and memorization. Then there is a balance patch and all the builds you once knew are different and you have to play different.
Then there is a balance patch and all the builds you once knew are different and you have to play different
I definitely found that to be the case in AoE4, and to a lesser extent in AoM, but never in AoE2. I think partly it has to do with how mature the game and its balance are. When they get to a stage where fewer big changes are being introduced at once, older builds are probably still viable.
I think it can also be easy to get caught up watching the pros' "Patch X Civ Y build order" videos, thinking you have to watch and follow the latest patch's BO, when really this BO is often just an extra option on top of BOs that worked in the previous patch and still can work. But the pros gotta put out that content to appease the algorithm.
I agree If you are already watching pro content anyway then no sweat but it feels like prep work to play the game lol. that's why I only play comp stomp. 😄
Your previous comment mentioned that you would learn a build order from somewhere and be frustrated at it becoming unviable in the next patch. That's what I was addressing.
I feel seen, but then again I'll still keep queueing up. Lithuanian knights go brrrrrr
I haven't played much AoE2 in quite a while, but I do love playing Lith. Prefer leitis to knights, if I can get them.
That's the thing, I usually try and win in castle age with knights and skirms. If the game goes into imp I definitely try to make the switch, mostly because of the fast creation time. It's a great civ to practice getting relics with in any case!
The more I play the lazier I get. I guess its a sign I'm getting better because im doing the bare minimum and trying to get away with as much greed as possible. But then when i vs someone who is good I get punished so hard it looks like I'm brand new. Gotta shake myself off and try to actually play the game.
Playing hearts of iron feels like this