It was the first time I saw a Lith go ham in a pro game with the +8. Miguel sacrificed himself so that Dogao could have all the masses and make a FU upgraded Paladin army. It was their goal to get to masses with Paladins +8 and the masses of knights with +4 and even +6 during castle age gave them the deciding edge over MBL and Nicov. It was literally their game plan to make the most of the Lithuanians relic bonus and it worked perfectly. And it also shows that although Lith lacks longterm eco boni, they can still boom pretty damn well. That’s why it’s worthy of a discussion.
Because the Lith knights dominated castle age with the relic boni… You need to connect the dots.
no. you said they were “kind of weak”. not straight up dumpster tier garbage. like you said franks was.
that doesn’t make them great. if that makes them great then 18 civs in the game (almost half) have great hussars or better.
only if their skirms can get to the mangudai and cav archers.
i donno, considering archers tend to do very well against cav archers, i’d take persian trash bows.
free attack upgrades. which kick in before lithuanians can take advantage of relics.
and how many civs is that? seriously - you’re limiting their use to basically teutons and a few other civs.
Teuton skirms aren’t that terrible despite what you often like to portray.
the difference is other civs get their faster or can do it with less workers.
so they have weaknesses, despite what you claim. the biggest weakness being they are slower in feudal and early castle, you know, when it matters the most.
no teutons just have much better siege with which to destroy the markets with.
all paladins are slower then trade carts, with the exception of cumans. furthermore teutons paladins gain two advantages that you ignore.
no, its about how you want to nerf the only military bonus in the game that can be taken away to something that is INFERIOR to existing bonuses that can’t be denied.
go watch that video and tell me again how Lithuanians do without relics.
so they get 2 free bonuses that can’t be denied, but at the cost of husbandry. meanwhile you want to yank Lithuanians only bonus, despite the fact that it can be denied and taken to something EQUAL to Teutons bonus. tell you what - you want to take there relic bonus down to +2 despite teutons getting equal for free, give Lithuanians some compensation.
you can kite knights in general with cav archers period.
and they get two free bonuses to their knights for it.
again you miss the point though.
you want to nerf this bonus down to the point that it is literally inferior to other bonuses that other civs get, and they get theres as something passive, or something that can’t be taken. that makes zero sense.
lets make lithuanians cap at +2. when there is a civ that gets +2 armor for free. and lithuanians have to work for it.
lets make lithuanians cap at +2. when there is a civ that gets +3 attack for all cavalry. and there is another civ that gets +33% attack speed. neither of which can be denied once achieved.
you’re making something that is HARDER TO ACHIEVE, and CAN BE TAKEN AWAY, INFERIOR TO STUFF OTHER CIVS GET FOR FREE. DO YOU NOT SEE HOW DUMB THAT IS?
furthermore you want to take bracer away from them, nerfing them even more.
do you even plan on compensating them or do you just want to dumpster the civ?
wow seriously? that is the situation that blames for all this? sounds like bullcrap to me. sounds like one side got massively outplayed.
so basically you use a one sided game where one side had a full rolling deathball and the other side was not prepared for…that isn’t a good example of balance at play.
so one side grabbed the relics and took advantage of them and the other side got blitzed. there are much better civs at knight rushing then lithuanians are.
here you go another game. no relics. stuck on the defense the entire time. how did that go? see why the relic bonus is so essential?
Bro, Persians have the best trash in the game. FU Hussars, FU Halb, Skirm lack Bracer (big one, but isnt that important against CA, or Arbs and Skirms, because most dmg comes from bonus) and freaking Trashbow who wreck everything what isnt Skirm or Ram.
And to add, Magyars have complete upgrades to paladins with free attack upgrades and complete upgrades to Skirmishers (Plus the amazing Magyar Huszar), but lack the eco, same for Spanish (Except, Maybe in team games).
Oh and Persians have the strongest UU, the War elephant, bUt gUYs, kAmAnDaRaN is OP
One way to tell if this bonus is truely OP and not just seemingly OP (kinda lime the new civs before they came out) is to go through and see how many of the wins the civ has are with 4 or 3 relics instead of 2 or less. Im willing to beat that less then 5% of the wins have 3 or more relics.
The game was dominated by scs getting in in early castle. Something that eg magyars would have done way better. After that, it was just a numbers game and nothing about Lith bonus.
Well, that’s not true though. Just look at Hidden Cup 4. Lithuanians are strong. Don’t think they need nerfs though, except maybe some tweaks here and there.
They are a solid civ on arabia too, though. Of course, not at the level of chinese, vikings franks etc., but still good. I would pick them over, say, byzantines any day of the week.
They are also good on arena thanks to good monks. Again, not top tier most, but very solid. They are an all-rounder civ.
I think lithuanians are overall fine, strong but not too strong. The only change is maybe capping the relic to +3 for castle age (and then back to +4 in imperial), just so there are no +6 attack knights steamrolling stuff in team games.
so the game is finally on youtube so i can see what happens and what do i see?
MBL and Nicov never even tried to contest relics.
that’s right. you hear that. despite knowing they were playing against Lithuanians, they literally let Dogao walk around and pick up 4 relics UNOPPOSED. And at least 3 of rhe relics were literally closer to mbl and Nicov
on top of this they focused all of their harassment on Miguel, even when Miguel was clearly already out of the fight and never tried to harass Dogao
that’s right - they let a Lithuanian player boom and collect relics unopposed. they should have spent the early castle age harassing Lithuanians when they were at their weakest.
before we even get to the point where the OP is complaining about (+4 relic Lithuanian paladins) the casters were already saying nicov and MBL should resign, as Dogao’s team was sitting at a score of 5600 and change to MBLS teams 4600.
the final fight was 64 Lithuanian paladins with full upgrades and 4 relics against 47 pikeman with +1 attack and +2 armor, and 21 Burgundian paladins with +1 defense (no attack upgrades).
frankly it looked like a lot of bad decision making from MBL and Nicov, who didn’t contest relics, didn’t get many upgrades, and didn’t harass dogao.
furthermore this just highlights why i don’t like the two pools tournament style - sure its something different but half the civs you get to choose from are picked by your opponent and you get obvious mismatches where a very weak Burgundians civilization is one of the civs you get to use.
Frankly Burgundians and Sicilians shouldn’t have even been allowed to be chosen given how weak they are right now.
They’re probably stronger on lower elos where early attacks are less frequent, and less effective when they do come, giving more chance for Sicilians eco bonus to shine. But higher up you go, the less likely this is.
What game are you playing? There are so many maps on which skirms have no problem to get to cav archers. And Lith skirms are faster than others. What counters cav archers anyway? You either need cav archers yourself, siege or skirms unless you outrange them with Britons or have Berbers. Lithuanians have one of the best answers to cav archers in the game. And to mangudais esp., since they are hard to counter with siege because they eat siege.
The fact that they have a FU hussar is a great bonus for a civ anyway. To have the best hussars with techs and civ bonus is the cherry on the top. But having hussars with all techs is a great option to have. Any civ that does not have FU hussars misses them dearly and would be happy to have them.
Persians are only one civ and their cbs deal 8 damage in imperial. They deal 4 damage vs weaker cav archers (the cheap hun ones) and vs Mangudais, 2 vs most other cav archers and 1 vs Tartar cav archers. Sounds like a solid counter. Not. Skirms do, if they are 3+4, 6 vs weak CA/Mangs, 4 vs strong CA and 3 vs Tartar CA. Teuton skirms deal 1 damage less in these scenarios. It’s a big difference if a volley of 20 7 range 6 damage skirms deals 60 damage or a volley of 20 8 range 7 damage skirms deals 80 damage which kills a FU CA unless it is from Turks or Tartars. Teuton skirms are not the worst, but they are far worse compared to FU skirms when it comes to countering CA. And Lith skirms only take 1 damage from CA, 2 from Mangs and 2 from Magyar CA. Lith skirms counter CA like no other skirms. Aztec ones and imperial skirms are the only ones that rival them, maybe Mayan skirms as well. But Lith skirms are absolutely top notch.
They have a weakness. But that does not justify potential +6 knights in castle age and +8 paladins in imp. If you go against Lith and allow the Lith to get early relics or are just not able to prevent them from getting them, Lith can easily snowball with an early domination of knights. In castle age a +2 or more for knights is very noticable. It wins you battles, but it’s tougher vs Teuton and Frankish knights. Also Lithuanians force you to play a style that stems from the Lith bonus, because obviously you are at fault if you do not try to prevent them from getting relics. That way you are always forced to play (kinda) offensive vs Lith. Their bonus does not allow you to sit back, it forces you into having map control. It’s in general nice to play like that, but it’s not nice being forced into playing like that.
The Lith cav bonus is just stupid. It can have a very weird impact on the game and allow them to snowball into an unstoppable force or it guts them heavily if they try to get relics and fail. Matches vs Lith are different and not in a cool way just because their bonus is potentially so strong that you need to go and prevent it. The Lith bonus impacts your own gameplay, if you fight and not play them, more than most other boni in the game. It forces you into trying to dominate the Lith or at least get map control. It limits your approach to the game. I think a bonus that works like +1 in CA and +1 in imp that is fix and not dependent on relics would balance this issue out and doesn’t leave it potentially useless to potentially op. Cuz that is the state of this bonus. A static +2 in imp that “cannot be taken away…” (as if getting at least 2 relics is such a hassle in an even match, it’s not that hard since there are usually 5 relics on a map) would leave you with FU husbandry Paladins with 20 damage, which sounds pretty damn sick to me. And it would stop this bonus to have a weird impact on the game. And it would not break the game since the knights could only get a +3 in CA and not a potential +6 which is borderline op in this age.
Come on… You don’t roll up on markets with siege onagers… That’s just not smart and a waste of a unit that you need in the field. You send CA or the scout line into trades. And Teutons do not have siege rams, so what you are saying just does not make sense here.
They gain 1 armor in CA and 1 armor in imp. That’s one advantage. What’s the second? The conversion resistance? Yeah, it’s nice. They don’t have LC. I would rather have LC than this anti conversion bonus… And you seem to really not see the difference in Paladins with and without husbandry. And it is also a difference if you are barely slower than a trade cart or severely slower. If they bulk up, husbandry Paladins can do work while Teuton Paladins are just less effective.
For the Lithuanians to lose the bonus once they achieved it means that they probably lost the game anyway. If you are somewhat smart you relocate your relics the longer the game takes. And if the monastery is deep within your base, you only lose it if you get battered. You act like you just need to slip and suddenly you lost the bonus which you had to work for so hard… Once you have it it is on you to keep it.
I never said they should completely lose their bonus. I say cap it at +2 over all the ages (with a potential +4 in CA) or make it a +1/+1 in CA and imp. I am always talking about a Lith that gets their +2. The Lith bonus as it is rn forces you into having to go for relics anyway. This civ guts the player and the opponent because they have an exotic bonus that works in a strange and unreliable way. That’s also why this civ annoys me the most. Lith are just like the Leitis: overwhelming or underwhelming. They are considered to be balanced because they suck as much as they dominate. It is a stupid bonus.
There is still a big difference if the knights have husbandry or not. They are very much less kiteable with husbandry, although they keep being kiteable.
Nah, man. It was just the first time I saw a +8 in a pro game. I’ve seen Lith domination in CA with relics on pro levels before, but I had never seen a +8 pro match.
Again. I was never about completely taking the Lith bonus away. I was always about halving its power.
Yeah, okay, Persians take a special role. Their trash is great at taking on other trash and most infantry. It’s still heavy on wood, so affording skirms, cbows and hussars is tough even for Persians. But I agree, their trash is special. And elefants are strong but are hard countered by any illumination 9+3 monk civ and are not cost effective against halbs.
Yeah. And they are pros. And they got smashed for it. So you are forced to go for relics if facing the Lith. It forces you into doing that unless you dominate the game early and rob them of any chance to get to that point.
I agree with you on that. But it leaves you with having to contest the relics. If you don’t you are at fault. And I don’t like that one bit.
Sicilians have a great civ bonus, but their army is kinda weak. They might not need much to become a good civ. Serjants should become much cheaper, tho. It’s similar with Burgundians. They can potentially have the cheapest and fastest paladins, but if they don’t get there with a good timing, they just fall back and suck. But I have never thought about how to fix them. They probably need an eco bonus. There are moments in which they are strong, but all in all they are underwhelming and cannot compete with most other civs and it’s mainly because of their eco. CA Cavaliers with bloodlines would be op, so it’s probably not their army, but their eco that needs tweaking.
All things considered, even with 4 relics, lithuanian paladins are hardly better than frank paladins against most things, against some (arbs, cavarchers, siege, ships) theyre even worse than frank’s
yeah that’s why the mangudai no counter joke exists.
or you know even crossbow and arbs outrange cav archers if you have bracer. if not the range is equal.
so according to you 18 civs have great hussars.
except skirms don’t outrange cav archers do they? furthermore they fire slower then archers do.
again that doesn’t say much though because cav archers can just run away from them.
except again - other civs get + 2 for free. or for the cost of a tech. that can’t be taken away once its achieved. so what makes you think nerfing the lithuanian bonus down to +2 is fair? they actually have to put effort into getting there bonus, and it can be lost too. something no other civ has to deal with.
oh but earlier you said they would be just fine without the relic bonus.
you mean like preventing civs on black forest from booming into siege or elephants? or preventing goth flood? yeah. but i don’t see you whining about those.
good. different civs should change how you approach them. it adds variety to the game. imagine if you played against lithuanians the same way you did franks. BORING.
except attack is the worst stat for melee units. so they get less then what other civs get.
also - you said its no issue to get 4 relics in team games - which means in most team games they should be getting +4 attack. and yet despite that their winrate is 50%. so what would nerfing their castle age down by 3 total and their imperial age by 2 total do to their winrates?
what says the bonus is borderline op? except you? winrates say the civ is balanced. tournament results say they are balanced. i don’t see pros complaining about the relic bonus.
Teutons don’t have siege rams they just have siege onagers, trebs, and siege engineers.
you might but i don’t see pros complaining about it. i’ll take there word over y ours anyday. lets see. lose light cav and gain conversion resistance for my knights against monks, arguably the best unit to use against knights. sounds like a win to me.
no i know they are slower, and it hurts. but there knights literally gain conversion resistance against monks for free, and they also gain bonus armor which keeps them alive longer vs halbs. guess which bonus is better for paladins. the bonus attack which doesn’t even enable them to kill halbs faster or the armor and conversion resistance which keeps them alive longer?
and durign that relocation the bonus is lost. furthermore it doesn’t matter, you can still lose it. can franks lose their extra hp? can teutons lose their extra armor? can cumans lose their extra speed?
so then instead of coming in and GUTTING THE CIV COMPLETELY, how about you propose and alternative bonus to balance them around that doesn’t cut there knight most pertinent military bonus down to a joke and also removes bracers from their skirms? you want to remove those? provide compensation. but i haven’t seen you say crap about it. let me aks you this. lets go pick another civ like say…Vikings. now lets say were going to remove Vikings free WB/and Handcart and also remove the bracer upgrade from them. do you really think that would be fair? or do you think that some compensation would be required?
you saw a poor matchup where one side played poorly and had a bad civ and got smashed because of it. end of story.
except what do you think halving its power would do? look at where their winrates are in team games with it as is. now imagine you just nuked their most pertinent team game bonus in half. now what do you think is going to happen to the civ?
so by your logic - because they played bad - and got smashed for playing bad. we should gut a bonus on a balanced civ. Logical.
oh no. a civ encourages you to play the game slightly different. that isn’t a bad thing. not every civ should be franks. not every civ should be britons. civs should encourage different playstyles depending on the matchup. that’s a good thing.
so if i let goths free boom into imperial goth flood and i lose because of it, i am at fault.
if i let mongols free boom into mangudai i am at fault. and yet i don’t see you wanting them nerfed into the ground.
and they are worse then Teutons against monks and halbs.
Again I’d like to mention Hera’s simple suggestion of removing Hussar from Lithuanians. It keeps their attack potential on knights/leitis, but nerfs one of their other options. Possibly remove some other non-stable tech/unit in addition to this.
