the fact that lithuanians have to actively work to get it, unlike every other stat buff civs get, and that it can be taken away as well?
and yet once its researched, the stat boost is permanent and can’t be removed.
and yet that’s pretty much all they have to carry them in castle age, is their bonus attack knights.
and yet winrates say they are balanced - so clearly it isn’t that bad.
Dude palas with +4 is totally OP, specially if You can get 2 or 3 relics un castle age for your knights.
It’s a huge buff for probably the Best unit in Game.
The Main reason is not broken it’s because You still have to get those relics and if liths don’t get it they fall behind in 1v1… it’s a higher effort higher reward bonus.
I like that makes relics more important, i would like some bonus like that for others monks civ (of course not the same one)
i never said it’s that bad, especially for me. I am trying to be fair towards everyone, and i totally agree and understand that getting +4 in castle age is a bit too much, hence most civs have progressing bonuses regarding the age they are in.
Having +3 (or maybe even +2) limit in Castle age and +4 limit in Imperial age is probably the fairest of options.
How often do Lithuanians lose with +4 relics? Must be quite rare, whereas it’s really rare to even get the farimba tech and put it into use. You could also argue that Stirrups are basically castle age worse farimba - and they work well;)
mmm have you considered that you need to get a Monastery and Monks (+Fervor or Sanctity), basically a much stronger eco if you want to collect relics in your own risk.
Not sure what game but in the HC 4 one player with Byzantines made the Lithuanian player to lose the 4 relics that collected and barely recovered 1.
yes, i do - and yet it’s what the best players do - invest into relics.
and yet winrates say the civ is still balanced.
and good play should be rewarded.
and now that were buffing other monk civs, including aztecs, how do you plan to compensate lithuanians?
again - they have to actively work to get that bonus, why shouldn’t they be rewarded for it?
considering their team game winrate is balanced and according to people like you the team is stacking relics to lithuanians i’d say right around 50% of the time.
how is it rare to get farimba? its one of the best UT in the game.
You probably don’t need the extra hp to get the relics, also the other player Will most likely try yo do the same so he can deny the relics to liths.
And the extra food for lith can be translated to A few more scouts and extra exploration and they counter enemy monks… Pretty much lith is a well design civ to get relics
6 games, 5 went into (post) imp, just 1 farimba near the end when it’d already been decided. Should i bother with Lithuanian videos and relic collection, too? Winrates are indeed important, capping the relic bonus to +3 in castle age would not mess up with it, only stop the super snowball and give a small chance to the non lithuanian…If you really want to argue with this, then you’re not thinking straight, sorry.
edit:
here are 3 more DE games that i found among pros… and no farimba…unfortunately
You basically used 1v1 ranked games, but in tournaments Farimba is quite common.
Mmm why not nerf Stirrups then, is a 33% attack rate that’s permanent once you get it in castle age, you can tear apart Pikes and Camels much faster.
Well they are balanced because they depend on an unreliable bonus… if it was a UT or a civ bonus it would be OP with no doubts.
I don’t know if I would buff aztecs relics, they already get the extra gold and thats pretty good reason for them. Maybe buff their Monk Range up to +2, something that fit their civ.
Also why would a bonus in another civ should compensate a fairly balanced civ as liths? Did celts get a compensation for liths faster halbs? Or Frank paladin for BL?
i apologize, i just did not have enough time to go through all the tournaments and check out malian farimba - so i just checked something that is the most common among aoe → ranked games and somewhat “meta”
Farimba simply lets you have a decent light cav and cavalier, with probably the highest DPS camels, but i wouldn’t trade farimba for hussar and paladin, would you?
+2 monk range and no relic bonus is extremely dangerous to experiment with. The relic bonus is very much fair imo (just like aztec and burgundian relic bonuses) and changing it would shake the civ way too much, while somehow capping the relic bonus is castle age is just ok…having the gold trickle and +2 (or +3) attack is a reward enough for castle age.
You basically act like Farimba is odd, and isn’t, is one of the most effective Imperial UT
And still waiting the difference between 21 and 22 attack??
Stirrups gives you a permanent 33% attack rate that is enough to kill pikes and camels pretty fast, once you research it the Bulgarian Knights are simply overwhelming in castle age against all non Bulgarian players, by your logic it needs a nerf.
Farimba light cavalry beat most hussars.
as for Paladin - its painfully expensive and rarely sees 1v1 use. are you telling me lithuanians are op in team games? because winrates disagree.
i like farimba and stirrups. The only argument is that “+3 relic bonus cap equals worse farimba” while we also have sitrrups that are similar to farimba. The only thing i was making point about is somewhat mitigating lithuanian potential in castle age, that’s everything. Keep the +4 in imp, reduce to +3 in castle age.
Bulgarians aren’t that great overall and investing into castle is much more expensive than investing into monastery;) Never had a problem with stirrups nor farimba nor even the relic bonus, but i understand that many get frustrated with the +4 cap in castle age. That’s it.
And again - unless you can prove that somehow Lithuanians are too strong, you have zero grounds to justify a nerf for them.
but getting a castle and researching a tech that can’t be taken away is better then a bonus that can be denied, and can be taken away.
then those people can propose a counter buff to keep Lithuanians castle age strength, because outside of the relic bonus their castle age is mediocre.
Where did we mention teamgames? You came up with them! And how many of them end in castle age? A tiny margin maybe? Hence the “cap at 3 in castle age” would do NOTHING to imp lithuaninans in team games, nor even 1v1s. It was obvious we were talkign about 1v1s with lithuanians and their castle age potential with +4 relics.
Thats pretty much the only place that you can get 4 relics as lithuanians unless you’re drastically ahead.
if it would do nothing, why does it need to change?
and what do winrates say? Lithuanians are balanced. how often do you actually see +4 relics in castle age in 1v1?
proof is right here - and i did not even search for more than a minute - i would no problem send you many more 1v1 castle age +4 relics lithuanian games that snowball this much. I agree Admiral would have won, but not that easily.
exactly! How often do we see it? Rarely…and this nerf is only aimed at those rare situations (also obvious if you read through the posts and saw ornlu’s video), nothing would change for the most other situatuations. And yet you still have a problem with this proposal and have to blindly argue…