Why Letis is best why Lithuanians very strog why all upgrade make buff Lithuanians

sry for my english.
i dont understant why Lithuanians is very strong.
i dont enjoy play against lithuanian (except my civ is saracens )
letis is big problem. it is pawerfull attack , good armour, high HP , fast and very cheap. it is Unstoppable ( only memluk) . it is not balance unit.
i want to new upgrade will come with letis or leithuania is must be big nerf.
i think if they make balance, they make what to do for it
fist HP down
second letis attack unaffected by armour without blacksmith
third attack or armour must be nerf

Lithuanians went from being one of the worst civs in the game, to a solid top 5 in all ELOs. Just goes to show you the power of a decent UU.

They should lose Paladin next.

1 Like

I think we all agreed that buffing weaker civs is a better approach than nerfing the stronger ones.


True, but also making Paladin more exclusive, and making Cavalry civs not just Knight civs, woul be a great change.

1 Like

Lithuanians are fine. Above average at best. Certainly doesn’t deserve any drastic nerfs.

But I guess at lower levels they can be overwhelming. But that’s more a problem of lower level players overly favoring post imp.


The stats disagree.

1 Like

They buff Liths because they were underpowered. Now they are much stronger. I am not a fan of immediately nerfing the civ after a month if it is not too overpowered. Just give civs tweaks time to settle. Lets have a look at the civs over some months. If needed they can be tweaked again in the june or july patch. If not: Dont change the civ again.

How do you know?


If you go 1250+ stats they just are above average.

1 Like

that is 1v 1 play. and they play never see post imp age.
if u play 3v3 or 4v4 , that civ is unstopable.

same idea if i change cataphract property
i add hp , i add attack and change prise low.
how does that cataphract look to you.
now letis looked to same

1 Like

Not only these stats have a tendency to be innacurate (cuz there isn’t even 2 weeks worth of games) but anyway, since 4 civs among the 5 in the top are pala civs, you could conclude that it’s having palas that make Lithuanian good.

Team games are literally the game mode where u don’t care about gold. So the Leitis isn’t that changed in TG.

Well Leitis are different units from catas. Even if these buffs were given to the cata, it would still be super expensive to upgrade and free archer bait.


Team Games can never be balanced. 1v1 is the fulcrum of all balance discussions.

Team balance is only ever considered, if it does not affect 1v1 balance.


If the recent games in Battle of Africa 3v3 are anything to go by, they are absolutely not broken in team games. They still lag behind the classic top tier pocket civs like Franks, Indians, Persians, Khmer, etc.

Lithuanians are a very good pocket civ, don’t get me wrong. But nowhere near broken.


They are the kind of civ which can become absolutely unstoppable in the late game, and even after gold runs out. As they are decent the rest of the time, I think their very late game should be nerved, in particular relic bonus capped to +3 and Leitis HP reduced. Meanwhile, I would (e.g.) make their cavalry loose the lat armour upgrade to give it to the infantry. Then their cavalry could be stronger in attack, weaker in defence.

If you play against goths, you don’t let them get stone and make a castle. If you play against Lithuanians, you don’t let them get the relics. Lithuanians are okey. An A-tier civ right now. Maybe leitis were a little over buffed. Maybe they should cost 60 g. Bur that’s it


@JonOli12 I’m sorry to say, but most of your balance suggestions are bad (generally), just because you are balancing around the wrong thing. Just let these selfmade axioms, thoughts go. Some examples:
-Balance has very little to do with statistics, therefore balance shouldn’t be made around statistics
-Removing paladins or general unit upgrades from civilizations won’t increase the diversity of the game, in fact it would only decrease it, since those civs would be forced to go with their UUs, instead of having a choice between the UU and the general unit (for example paladin)
-It is definitely not true that the game should be balanced around 1v1. Then why do we have ranked teamgames?


I disagree, balancing team games is not possible.
If they could, they would have done that 20 years ago.

1 Like

What do you mean by not possible? If you mean you can’t make it perfectly balanced, then that’s right, but then balancing 1v1 games is neither possible. If you say you can’t make changes that would make it more balanced, then you’re talking about nonsense.

This is just an easy and bad argument, then I can also say if you can make 1v1 balanced then that would have been done 20 years ago.

Accept it that teamgames and 1v1s are equal and have the same attributes. The thing you could do is focus balancing one of them because they are more popular, but you definitely cannot say that teamgames deserve 0 balance changes.


Pretty sure AOC had a decent 1v1 balance.

One has trades, one does not.
How are they equal?!!

I’m not talking about those attributes, you don’t get the point.

Yesssss! Thats why what you said in the previous post is nonsense
Edit: To make it more understandable, if 1v1 once had a decent balance then that means it can be achieved for teamgames aswell, therefore teamgames can be balanced, unlike what you said in the previous post: “balancing team games is not possible”.

I was talking about team balance in that post,
How is this equal with 1v1 balance?

Team bonus then?