Is it just me, or were the Celts completely hosed in their UU/UB's?

CELT UU: Gallic Warrior (Replaces Swordsman)
ROMAN UU: Praetorian (Replaces Swordsman)

CELT UB: Dun (Yay! A redundant Guerrilla promotion with my WALLS...)
ROMAN UB: Forum.

Hmm...

I don't think the Gallic Warrior is all that bad a UU. A free promotion is a free promotion, and you can build the Gallic Warrior with copper according to v2.08's patch notes. Plus, Guerilla III gives +30% withdraw chance with the new patch. Maybe not your thing, but could be fun/useful. It's not really fair to compare it to the Praetorian; that thing just destroys every other ancient/classic era unit.

Don't care much for the dun though. Walls aren't something I usually like to be spending shields on in the early game unless I have stone, which I often don't.

Their trait combination is awesome, and permanent. Don't worry about the rest. ;)

Ahhh the "Are the Celts any good debate" is back.

Like what DigitalBoy and Sparta said.

Have a go and see for yourself the traits are bad at all, I've had one of my fastest Emporer space races with Brennus, and I only got to use Gallics about 5 times before I'd pounding Vicky into a tundra city giving me enough land to cruise to victory.

I've had games with Ramses where I've never been able to build chariots, and didn't have enough food to use obelisks but his traits are awesome.

Yeah, but compared to, say, Augustus Caesar, who has great traits AND world-dominating Praetorians AND a useful UB?

However, I didn't know about the copper thing... that helps somewhat.

Augustus is just sick, I'd have to say my favourite combo of traits. I'm tempted to play a game with him and NOT build praetorians.

Yes, the Celts' UU/UB are relatively weak. However, there is a reason - the trait combination is superb. ;)

I don't like the celts.
I can win with most leaders at monarch level (random leaders generally).
But not with Brennus.

Brennus is tricky to play. The main advantage of it's traits are hapiness bonuses from cheap temples, charismatic and obliesks. You essentially don't need calendar until the AD period. The reason why it's hard is because although this early advantage can be translated to either an aggressive or a peaceful powerhouse, it does need translating, and it's not like other traits where the road map is layed out for you. It's a great leader, but not in the hands of someone that doesn't have a plan in mind.

you can build the Gallic Warrior with copper according to v2.08's patch notes.

Maybe my v2.08 is broken, because i still cannot build them until iron.

Personally, I like Bren. He's no power house, but you can usually grab an early religion and the happiness boosts are nice.

You can't build them until you discover Iron Working, but once you have done that you don't have to have iron, copper or iron will work.

The main reason that Brennus is great for me is because of the trait combination which allows instant switching back and forth into the military civics, and then churning out cheaply promoted units. 8 XP gets you a level 4 unit, 13 XP gets you a level 5 unit... very nice indeed, and neither of them difficult to get with some or all of Barracks/Drydock/Vassalage/Theocracy/Pentagon/West Point/Great Generals.

Aside from that, Charismatic's +1 happy face (and extra happy faces with Monuments) really shine on the higher difficulty levels. And Spiritual is always a nice trait in itself, with the no anarchy.

Brennus is my choice for best leader in the game. He really is extraordinarily good, and an amazing headkicker. The trait combo is unparalleled, and they both work very well with each other.

Charismatic is imo the best direct warmongering trait, and the extra happiness is extremely significant in the early game too, in peace or wartime.
Spiritual is my pick for the game's best trait, especially for warmongers, with the ability to switch painlessly between peacetime and wartime civics for maximal empire efficiency. And easy religion switching to play the diplomatic game. Plus cheap temples never hurt.
They work well together in really giving you the most out of theocracy and vassalage, and the happiness helps with big cities or lots of whipping for slavery/caste system/pacifism switches, or quick bursts of drafting.

The Gallic Warrior is surprisingly solid. The "uses copper or iron" is very powerful in itself, not just because there may not be iron in your territory, but because if you have copper and make the effort to road it up, you can be churning out Gallics the very second you hit Iron Working (avoiding the massive lag time and resource cost of connecting iron or even settling a new city for it). If you've already been building a few axemen, a few Gallics will add a massive amount of punch to your axeman rush in that crucial period before defences have been significantly built up. And of course, because there's less attrition and because you're Charismatic and getting lots of promos, there's a lot more momentum behind the rush and you can breeze through more and tougher cities.
The "getting them early" aspect makes a remarkable amount of difference if you're in a position for an axe rush, and gives you the most powerful axe rush in the game.

As for the hill bonus, here's something I posted in another old thread:

The UB is no Sacrificial Altar, granted, but it essentially gives three more mini-UUs (archers, longbows, crossbows) which I think is pretty decent. I think it works well in combination with the UU, to create small forces comprising only Guerrilla II troops (and maybe a mounted unit). You've then got a little combined-arms strike force that can run swiftly over any hilly terrain to quickly get deep into enemy territory and do whatever. For all intents and purposes, a little group of GII troops (especially with archery units thrown in the mix) cannot be removed from a hill (except with serious losses). So hills become massively-fortified staging points deep in enemy territory, from which you can pillage and retreat, cut off enemy supply lines, harass and block enemy reinforcements, heal up your troops, steal workers if youre lucky (or just stop them working), and just generally be a complete and utter nuisance. You can also force them to build/keep more defensive troops in all their other cities, and seriously weaken their frontline defence (or even get lucky and take an inland city or two). It's the combo of the great defence and the fast movement that make it so very nice. And the terrain doesn't actually have to be particularly hilly for it to pay off either.
Remember that Brennus also will have some of the game's most highly-promoted troops, so your guys are likely to have other promos too - a medic to help with healing, some shock promos to take out passing troops, guerrilla III for removing other guys on hills, eg to clear a hilly path for your main force (GIII crossbows are niiiiiiice), a couple of city raiders just to be threatening, etc.

Guerrilla I is really just a nice bit of gravy for your main stack, and you probably won't want to go for GII for most of your gallics and crossbows (although GIII crossbows are excellent against hilly cities - and then frighteningly good defenders of the same). It's the versatility that really makes it shine. Oh yeah, and Guerrilla Gallics upgrade to Guerrilla Macemen too!

The Gallic Warrior is surprisingly solid. The "uses copper or iron" is very powerful in itself, not just because there may not be iron in your territory, but because if you have copper and make the effort to road it up, you can be churning out Gallics the very second you hit Iron Working (avoiding the massive lag time and resource cost of connecting iron or even settling a new city for it).True, I'd forgotten about that little bonus of being able to build Gallics from mere copper. That's quite nice. :)

Oh yeah, and Guerrilla Gallics upgrade to Guerrilla Macemen too!And that reminds me, that's one of the things I love so much about Ragnar... those CRIII Berserkers are quickly upgraded to become CRIII Amphibious Grenadiers which pack a very dangerous punch, and can later be upgraded further to CRIII Amphibious Infantry and Mech Infantry. Very nice. ;)

The main reason that Brennus is great for me is because of the trait combination which allows instant switching back and forth into the military civics, and then churning out cheaply promoted units. 8 XP gets you a level 4 unit, 13 XP gets you a level 5 unit... very nice indeed, and neither of them difficult to get with some or all of Barracks/Drydock/Vassalage/Theocracy/Pentagon/West Point/Great Generals.

Aside from that, Charismatic's +1 happy face (and extra happy faces with Monuments) really shine on the higher difficulty levels. And Spiritual is always a nice trait in itself, with the no anarchy.

You forget to mention Stable, Charismatic is a very powerful trait, Especially with the Invention fo Military Tradition Technology where I Build a Military City with GG Instructors, HE,WP barracks and Stables swicth to Military Civics (Vassalage & Theocracy) for Level 5 Cavalry and promote them with Combat 1,2,3 Blitz or Pinch...

True, I forgot the Stable. :)

Even more powerful though, if you can reach level 6, is to grab a bunch of combat IV, commando cavalry. Now those are scary beasts - especially in multiplayer. ;)

True, I forgot the Stable. :)

Even more powerful though, if you can reach level 6, is to grab a bunch of combat IV, commando cavalry. Now those are scary beasts - especially in multiplayer. ;)

LEVEL 6!?... You'd have to Assign 4 Military Instructors to a city while running both military civics, It'd require 5 GGs in the whole game, the 1st one used to get a level 6 unit.

Barracks + Stables + West-Point + Vassalage & Theocracy + 4 Great Generals
= 3 + 2 + 4 + 4 + 8 = 21XP

And With the Pentagon, All your units would be level 6, if built in that city... scary...

It's probably only be possible most of the time with Cyrus Cha/Imp. I Bet Cyrus could get level 5 Knights, if you got 3 GGs early enough in the game.

Blitz Knights in the middle ages... :S

In multiplayer, with gifting, it's far easier to get hold of 4 Great Generals. ;)

Anyway, you don't have to build them to be Commando right out of the barracks (although I must admit that'd be an awesome thing to try to do), you just have to get them near it (2 or 3 GG's should do) and then win a couple of high odds battles. :)

I never tried gifting Great Generals before. Always thought spreading out XP's are more efficient, even witht he Civ4 battle system.

But now that you've mentioned it: is it worth all the trouble having Spain in your team to get the Commando for their UU, despite having an unsynergistic trait combination and the slowest starting tech combination?

The main reason that Brennus is great for me is because of the trait combination which allows instant switching back and forth into the military civics, and then churning out cheaply promoted units. 8 XP gets you a level 4 unit, 13 XP gets you a level 5 unit... very nice indeed, and neither of them difficult to get with some or all of Barracks/Drydock/Vassalage/Theocracy/Pentagon/West Point/Great Generals.

Aside from that, Charismatic's +1 happy face (and extra happy faces with Monuments) really shine on the higher difficulty levels. And Spiritual is always a nice trait in itself, with the no anarchy.

Actually, I hadn't thought of that. That's pretty convincing.

Job One against the Romans is to deny them Iron, stack the axes and suicide-catapults, and hope you survive until you get Machinery and can Mace and Crossbow them off the map. Ideal is to not piss them off to begin with, in the early phase of the game.

I never tried gifting Great Generals before. Always thought spreading out XP's are more efficient, even witht he Civ4 battle system.

But now that you've mentioned it: is it worth all the trouble having Spain in your team to get the Commando for their UU, despite having an unsynergistic trait combination and the slowest starting tech combination?Yes, it'd be an interesting comparison. In general I always used to believe that it was best to spread out Great Generals for the overall XP benefit. However, in the case of Charismatic civs, it may just be worth concentrating Great Generals in the West Point city. I'll have to do some more testing on this and then get back to you, though.

I definitely don't think that it'd be worth it for Spain though, since they're not Charismatic and thus would require a hefty 27 XP's to reach the required level... that's 3 extra Great Generals on top of the 4 that Charismatic civs require. (And you need West Point as well, which doesn't get unlocked until Military Tradition and Cavalry IIRC. You also now get the experience adjustment when gifting between Charismatic and non-Charismatic civs since the 2.08 patch, so Spain can't "cheat" their way to level 6 Conquistadors by gifting them.)

Either way it's clear that 7 GG's is pushing it, even working together with another player in multiplayer. I'm fairly sure that the GG concentration strategy will only be effective with Charismatic civs, if it's viable at all. Like I said, I'll get back to you all on this. :)

I think that for Charismatic civs, and Brennus in particular with his Spiritual, stacking up GGs in one city (the Heroic Epic city, of course) is the best use for them.
There's the general economic calculation that if you're building units twice as fast with the HE, you're getting twice the number of promotion points from each GG. You're also wasting them if you're not running those other cities permanently as unit factories - but for Brennus, it's much more efficient to just switch into theo and/or vassalage for a while and go into more widespread unit production. On the other hand, a Heroic Epic city with some GGs is going to be producing good units all the time (and spectacular ones with theo/vassalage), while also getting double the hammers worth, so you can definitely just keep it permanently pumping out troops even in peaceful building time.

You can also shift the type of unit you're producing in the HE city based on your current GG/theo/vassalage situation, to make sure that no individual GG is wasted. If you're getting 15xp knights with theo/vassalage, you can have it building 13xp trebuchets instead (and let another city with a stables build 9xp knights), and switch back to 13xp cav when you're only running one of theo or vassalage. That way, all the GGs are together contributing to a higher level rather than just spare XP.

To really make the most of Charismatic, I think you really need to be exploiting the 4xp difference for level 5 (and with West Point, going for the 7xp difference for level 6). You need to be stacking GGs to really do this effectively, though. I agree that a single GG in a secondary military production city can still be useful (especially if it later gets ironworks), but only after the HE city has built up massive XP itself.

After combat 3 I would prefer march over blitz and other promotions.Mass March cavalry with one medic3 Warlord cavalry is scary if enemy doesn't have rifles.
I have a mutiplayer question . Is it benificial to declare war on your team mate and have a small stack of unpromoted warriors each battling each other on open ground. It would be 50% chance to win in each fight, both of you could keep on sacrificing cheap warriors getting Great general points and lvl4 unit for heroic epic.

After combat 3 I would prefer march over blitz and other promotions.Mass March cavalry with one medic3 Warlord cavalry is scary if enemy doesn't have rifles.
I have a mutiplayer question . Is it benificial to declare war on your team mate and have a small stack of unpromoted warriors each battling each other on open ground. It would be 50% chance to win in each fight, both of you could keep on sacrificing cheap warriors getting Great general points and lvl4 unit for heroic epic.Commando Cavalry are scarier if you're against a human opponent who likely has 1 archer/city in his cities back from the borderline.

Yes, it is extremely beneficial (as with sending suicide warriors against a powerful unit to get it highly promoted), but that is why it's considered an exploit by most players. It's banned in the Civ4 Intersite Democracy Game, not to mention many other competitive multiplayer games.

Oh ok, I think you will understand that I have no multiplayer experience at all:blush: . I suppose by now all sort of multiplayer exploits would be discovered and most of them fixed by now.

Human player with 1 archer per city? Please kindly send me a private message telling me what their names are. I would like to play them.

Human player with 1 archer per city? Please kindly send me a private message telling me what their names are. I would like to play them.Not 1 archer per city... no-one is that silly (or at least I would hope not). What I meant was 1 archer per city back from the borderline. Most human players in multiplayer (myself included) will stack up troops massively in their border cities, but leave the cities that are 5 or 6 tiles or more into their territory defended just lightly (since they don't expect to be harrassed there, and can move troops back and forth if they are). After all, defending your capital which is deep inland and deep within your territory by 20 infantry is kind of pointless... those infantry would be better defending your borders and preventing the enemy from advancing in the first place. However, the Commando is a rarely obtained promotion which can cause a nasty surprise for those kinds of (otherwise excellent) players. ;)

It's probably only be possible most of the time with Cyrus Cha/Imp. I Bet Cyrus could get level 5 Knights, if you got 3 GGs early enough in the game.

Blitz Knights in the middle ages... :S

Actually, I just did this today with Julius Caesar. Had 5 GG's in Rome with the Heroic Epic, while running theocracy. I started turning out cavalry and totally ruined Alexander's day. :)

Some are obviously easier than others, like Cyrus, but it is possible with just about any leader, though imperialist helps a lot.

Actually, I just did this today with Julius Caesar. Had 5 GG's in Rome with the Heroic Epic, while running theocracy. I started turning out cavalry and totally ruined Alexander's day. :)

Some are obviously easier than others, like Cyrus, but it is possible with just about any leader, though imperialist helps a lot.

I assumed you built/captured the Great Wall Wonder (an extra 100% Great General Generation). Personally I think Charismatic is the better trait for high level unit production as you require less Great Generals and if you can build/capture the Great Wall then you can effectively get half of the Imperialistic Trait.

The High level unit and combined with the Great Wall Strategy would probably work well for a Charismatic/Industrious Combination, if such a leader exist in the game, maybe the makers will include such a leader in the next expansion pack for us to try out. Hopefully with a UU Knight/Cavalry... Then they'd be deadly.

Can you imagine Russia with a Charismatic Leader? level 5/6 Cossacks Overpowered? possibly lol

Not 1 archer per city... no-one is that silly (or at least I would hope not). What I meant was 1 archer per city back from the borderline. Most human players in multiplayer (myself included) will stack up troops massively in their border cities, but leave the cities that are 5 or 6 tiles or more into their territory defended just lightly (since they don't expect to be harrassed there, and can move troops back and forth if they are). After all, defending your capital which is deep inland and deep within your territory by 20 infantry is kind of pointless... those infantry would be better defending your borders and preventing the enemy from advancing in the first place. However, the Commando is a rarely obtained promotion which can cause a nasty surprise for those kinds of (otherwise excellent) players. ;)

The key advantage on defense within your culture is *mobility*, which in most cases means that if you have highly-mobile defenders, a small number of regional stacks can "cover" the defenses of a large network of back-area cities. I've had Commando cavs leap into my back regions once or twice, in MP (and in single-player the Mongolian Keshliks are infamous for this deep-penetration attack), and if I hadn't had a mobile defense stack covering the "zone" of those cities, I'd have been screwed, not so much with the loss of cities (as I tend to keep a single unit of the strongest, highest-tech defender in my back-cities, in the cities themselves, e.g., Infantry when I get Assembly Line, while in the border regions I'll stack up older, more expendable units for counterattack), but in the devastating plunder they could do to Towns, etc., that are behind-the-lines.

Yes, but if those commando units act within a single turn and make a coordinated razing strike at several of those cities behind the front line, it'll do quite a severe amount of damage and won't be counterable by even the fastest stack (since it all happens within 1 move on 1 turn).

Yes, but if those commando units act within a single turn and make a coordinated razing strike at several of those cities behind the front line, it'll do quite a severe amount of damage and won't be counterable by even the fastest stack (since it all happens within 1 move on 1 turn).

The times that it happened to me I had 3 or 4 Riflemen with good experience travelling along railroads to counter 2 or 3 Cavs doing the deep-penetration. I lost one of the Riflemen and had some Towns turn to Villages, and had my blood pressure temporarily go through the roof, but I recovered from the attack reasonably well. I don't think the loss of Cavs for 20-ish gold would be worth that sort of a venture, on offense. IMO.

How much gold could you get for the hammers to build Cavs if you just put a production city to Wealth? That's how I calculate the efficacy of plundering.

The times that it happened to me I had 3 or 4 Riflemen with good experience travelling along railroads to counter 2 or 3 Cavs doing the deep-penetration. I lost one of the Riflemen and had some Towns turn to Villages, and had my blood pressure temporarily go through the roof, but I recovered from the attack reasonably well. I don't think the loss of Cavs for 20-ish gold would be worth that sort of a venture, on offense. IMO.

How much gold could you get for the hammers to build Cavs if you just put a production city to Wealth? That's how I calculate the efficacy of plundering.

commando isn't about plundering
It's about city razing.
2 commandos cavalries in a railroaded empire are enough to get to a second row city and raze it.
4 cammondo cavalries are enough to raze 2 backcities.
This would mean a pretty hard hit, even at the cost of those 4 units, and it's not sure at all that you can get them.
More than 4 commandos is like this : you defend the front line, but you lose the core cities. Of course you cannot really defend them so it's about razing.

I never had more than 2, but here is how I used them :
the main stack take one front city, then my 2 commandos enter deep into enemy territory to capture the city putting cultural pressure on my new aquisition.
If "deep" is within reach for my defenders, in this same turn, i keep the inner city. If not, I raze it and defend in the front line city.

commando isn't about plundering
It's about city razing.
2 commandos cavalries in a railroaded empire are enough to get to a second row city and raze it.
4 cammondo cavalries are enough to raze 2 backcities.
This would mean a pretty hard hit, even at the cost of those 4 units, and it's not sure at all that you can get them.
More than 4 commandos is like this : you defend the front line, but you lose the core cities. Of course you cannot really defend them so it's about razing.

I never had more than 2, but here is how I used them :
the main stack take one front city, then my 2 commandos enter deep into enemy territory to capture the city putting cultural pressure on my new aquisition.
If "deep" is within reach for my defenders, in this same turn, i keep the inner city. If not, I raze it and defend in the front line city.

If my back cities can't fight off Cavalry when the culture modifier is 60 to 80% (e.g., Riflemen with CD2), then it's time to give up the game anyway.

Just go to a bar and drink the time away.

If my back cities can't fight off Cavalry when the culture modifier is 60 to 80% (e.g., Riflemen with CD2), then it's time to give up the game anyway.

Just go to a bar and drink the time away.The point is more when there are obsolete units like Archers and Longbows defending those back cities, which is what many good players actually tend to do (since Commando is such a rare and uncommon promotion to encounter).

It isn't fair to compare any leader to Augustus Caesar. He has great traits, an awesome UU, and a very handy UB.

While Brennus' UU isn't as good, it's still a swordsman with a free promotion. Brennus has very nice traits though. If you found an early religion, you may never have to worry about unhappiness getting too high. It may pile up during wartime, but Brennus can deal with it easily. Basically, Brennus main strength is that he can juggle civics around and wage longer wars with free happiness and cheap temples.

The point is more when there are obsolete units like Archers and Longbows defending those back cities, which is what many good players actually tend to do (since Commando is such a rare and uncommon promotion to encounter).

I guess I'm "OCD" or "paranoid" toward not leaving any city defended anywhere by way-obsolete weakling units. I mass-produce replacement units and start with the back-cities, sending the older units from the back-cities to the front-cities where they stack up in defense stacks on resources or counterattack stacks for cities, or a rapid-reaction defense stack for the front and/or coastal cities (1 for every quasi-cluster of cities, no more than 2 turns march to each).

BAD memories of Mongolian Keshliks eating my lunch (literally) in the medieval era, swarming from everywhere to everywhere, and not just plundering, but razing (due to back-cities only having archers rather than longbows).