Weren’t the Lithuanians nerfed into oblivion? You start with +150 food was nerfed into each Town Center provides 100 food, but most importantly Blast Furnace was removed. Now you need 2 relics to make the Lithuanian Paladins… Lithuanian Paladins. And the infantry also got nerfed They took out from the Lithuanians what made the Lithuanians Lithuanians. You need 2 relics to make them fully upgraded. And given people are going to counter relics if you play Lithuanians, the civ ain’t what it used to be. I’d say C tier.
Teutons are better than Franks in some instances. So I’d put them S tier.
Cumans lack Husbandry but get eventually 20%, still A tier.
And Persians deserve a special mention even though they no longer have a Paladin it’s functionally a Paladin. Slightly better vs Archers but weaker vs Pikemen. I would put them A tier.
No Persian? I know they have Savar instead but seriously. Also, why Lith Paladins on S tier? you have to capture at least 2 relics to make them generic and 4 to be even any better. And in most game, players won’t be able to get 4.
Teutons and Franks Paladin are fully comparable in terms of their combat prowess, e.g. they can take a similar amount of hits from Halbs (one extra iirc). If you put Franks in S tier, Teutons go there too probably assuming lack of Husbandry isn’t considered a huge detriment.
If you are gonna make a Paladin tier list, probably considerations about economy and tech tree must go in there too, for example Burgundians Paladin is weaker but also comes out 2-3 min earlier at least (arguably more if you tech Cavalier on the way up to Imp), which can be a huge deal on some maps like Arabia/Arena. Burg Paladin is also complemented very nicely by a relatively smooth transition into Halb + HC + BBC, while other civs like Lithuanians don’t have a similar transition (they get HC and BBC too but they play with generic units from that point on).
Other civs like Byzantines should arguably be even lower because, assuming you mass Knights in Castle/late Castle age, I have to ask what Byzantines player would do that instead of going something that plays far more to Byz strengths like Crossbow + Camel or full trash.
Spanish Paladin might be generic but if you are in a TG, their trade bonus alone probably means you can spam Paladins better than any other civ in the game and not care about missing a few extra HP or armor.
Tl;dr: Paladin is a bit of a complex unit, generally the product of a “macro play”, so there is far more to the unit that its 1v1 potential which is what you list in your OP.
The list looks fine, but we could argue putting Teutons up to S-tier or putting Lituanians down to A tier.
By the way, for what it is worth, Burgundians are now the only paladin civ which cannot research heresy, and Magyars are the only civ which cannot research faith.
Well, OP wrote:
So he kind of assumes a deathmatch start or a late game 4v4 Black Forest situation.
I think in his tier list it doesnt matter whether the civ has better options or whether the civ has a poor early game. Only how good a paladin is compared to other paladins, from a theoretical standpoint.
How are Lithuanians nerfed into Oblivion, in castle age you can still gte high attack knights and play an extended castle age game, and that simply kills everything. As for Imperial, the lack of attack hardly matters vs ranged given their low HP so Cavalier/Paladin is still the option to go vs that, but vs melee units then you have to invest into Leiciai (that is cheaper but with 2 relics is killer).
The civ is nicely balanced at this point.