Does anyone like playing as the Celts?

[Bongo-Bongo]

The Celts aren't as bad as I first thought they would be, although, I would rate them as probably the worst Civ in the game. Brennus gets a fairly good trait combination. Spiritual is useful if you change civics regularly whilst Organized can be useful in maintaining a stable economy.

On it's own, the UB can be quite good. If you have cities on hills, then getting Guerilla 1 promotion straight away can make for very powerful city defenders if you have barracks in the city. Where it goes wrong is the combination of the UU and UB. They both basically do the same with the Gallic Warrior getting the same promotion that the Dun gives to Archery units. It seems very uninspired, especially seeing as the intention of the Gallic Warrior is to attack, yet it gets given a defensive bonus. This definetley lets the Civ down.

DevilJin I agree with you about Arabia. They used to be my favourite Civ on the Vanilla version, know they are one of the worst. The UU, whilst useful due to being resourcless, is mediocre as there is little else it offers and the UB really doesn't offer that much extra. I find Priests probably the worst specialist, so being allowed two extra of these really doesn't appeal.

 

[pukii]

when i first played warlords i thought "wow cool every unit i build will start away with guerilla I - but after the first axemen and horses i realized that i would never ever build this dun again - i mean whats the point in just getting the promotion for the archers??

well at least i never saw this free promotion on another built unit.

so

But that's not the worst part - the UU and UB are HORRIBLE! Oohh - extra Hills Defense! Pinch me - I must be dreaming! I defy you to name another Civ that has a UU/UB combination that bad. Not just a combination - the UU and UB are each, by themselves, easily near the bottom of their respective categories.

great quote from bovinespy

 

[InFlux5]

I am pretty much in agreement with most people on this thread. I don't think the traits are bad. The UB is underwhelming and the UU is utterly pathetic.

The traits have good synergy for a builder. As you move up in difficulty, happiness becomes the limiting factor to growing your cities, while health is much easier to come by. His traits and starting techs lend themselves to building large cities early.

The UB I can see some use for. First there is the obvious case of cities built on hills. With a Dun in this city (or another for that matter) it will be basically impenetrable. Also, if you combine a Dun with a Barracks you can give new units Guerilla II, making them able to move twice as fast over hills. This kinda-sorta imitates the original Celtic Swordsman. It's underwhelming, but not useless.

Then there's the UU. It almost makes me angry that they would put such a ridiculous unit in the game. It makes me wonder if the designers even play their own game. The Swordsman is an offensive unit. The Guerilla I promotion is essentially useless. It could be combined with a Barracks to get Swordsmen that move twice as fast over hills - or you could just use the UB for the same effect on any unit. So not only is the UU a joke in its own right, it duplicates the effect of the UB, making both of them less valuable.

IMO the Celts' UU needs to be changed in a future patch. It's just ridiculously stupid. It doesn't even compare to Jaguars or Camel Archers.

 

[SpartanEvolved]

I think to fix the Celtic UU, they should give him 2 movement points, and give him an advantage while attacking from hills instead of just defending. Also, if built in a city with a dun, give him guerilla 2.

 

[Mad2rix]

What if the Celts get Aggresive and Spiritual instead of Charismatic?

 

[Hitti-Litti]

Then why did Firaxis and Sid add those friggin Barbarians instead of Mesopotamia??????
SICK, IF THEY DON'T INCLUDE THEM IN THE VERY NEXT EXPANSION THEN THIS SERIES IS OVER FOR ME

Relax, man, just wait to end of October and you can play eith them in Rhye´s and Fall of Civilization. But you´re right, if Babylonia is not included in next expansion, then Sid and his team are nuts. It doesn´t matter what is the theme of next expansion, but it must be in it.

 

[Wodan]

DevilJin I agree with you about Arabia. They used to be my favourite Civ on the Vanilla version, know they are one of the worst. The UU, whilst useful due to being resourcless, is mediocre as there is little else it offers and the UB really doesn't offer that much extra. I find Priests probably the worst specialist, so being allowed two extra of these really doesn't appeal.

Prioritize Angkor Wat and Representation.

Wodan

 

[Mazruk]

Personally, I love playing the celts.

What most people ignore when saying whether or not a civ is good or bad is also the start techs. The celts get Hunting and Mysticism so I start with scouts (get all the goody huts and therefore a tech lead) and half way to a bunch of religions (I like religions and usually manage to lock out most of them which means I own overyone financially).

The UB is actually worse than most of you realise as it only affects certain unit types, not all.

However, actually PLAYING as the celts (rather than just reading about them!) is great fun. The UU is pretty good in a fight, can be promoted to Guerilla 3 (so gets an ATTACK bonus against hills) which can really help when added to CR3 against those annoying enemy cities on hills. Remember that the bonus is retained when you promote the unit.

I particularly like the trait combo of the celts too - charismatic is one of the best there is and spiritual has got me out of a tight spot in more than one occasion (being able to switch civic and rush production in the same turn is a lifesaver).

As a holistic group of attributes, the celts is pretty good. I love em! Why not actually PLAY them for a whole game before you say they are crap - go for the goody huts and religions, if you have a city on hills, promote your defenders with guerilla 2 (assuming guerilla 1 from dun) before CR1 for the extra 5 % defence.

 

[Meatbuster]

How about skewing the map in your favor when playing as the Celts?
Pick Highlands. Or any other map with Rocky climate?

 

[bovinespy]

Personally, I love playing the celts.

What most people ignore when saying whether or not a civ is good or bad is also the start techs. The celts get Hunting and Mysticism so I start with scouts (get all the goody huts and therefore a tech lead) and half way to a bunch of religions (I like religions and usually manage to lock out most of them which means I own overyone financially).

The UB is actually worse than most of you realise as it only affects certain unit types, not all.

However, actually PLAYING as the celts (rather than just reading about them!) is great fun. The UU is pretty good in a fight, can be promoted to Guerilla 3 (so gets an ATTACK bonus against hills) which can really help when added to CR3 against those annoying enemy cities on hills. Remember that the bonus is retained when you promote the unit.

I particularly like the trait combo of the celts too - charismatic is one of the best there is and spiritual has got me out of a tight spot in more than one occasion (being able to switch civic and rush production in the same turn is a lifesaver).

As a holistic group of attributes, the celts is pretty good. I love em! Why not actually PLAY them for a whole game before you say they are crap - go for the goody huts and religions, if you have a city on hills, promote your defenders with guerilla 2 (assuming guerilla 1 from dun) before CR1 for the extra 5 % defence.

All right, then! This is the person I was looking for! I must concede that you do manage to put a nice spin on playing Brennus, though I'm still not convinced enough to actually want to play them. Maybe next time they come up on Random, I'll actually try 'em out.

And I did not know about the Guerrilla 3 promotion and how it helps attacking hills. That actually does sound kind of useful...

 

[Smidlee]

However, actually PLAYING as the celts (rather than just reading about them!) is great fun. The UU is pretty good in a fight, can be promoted to Guerilla 3 (so gets an ATTACK bonus against hills) which can really help when added to CR3 against those annoying enemy cities on hills. .

Exactly. Celts UU is the only melee unit (as far as I can tell) which can get Guerilla 3. Yet I would still head for CR3 first so this requires a lot of promotions.

 

[marioflag]

Exactly. Celts UU is the only melee unit (as far as I can tell) which can get Guerilla 3. Yet I would still head for CR3 first so this requires a lot of promotions.

personally i find guerrilla promotion too much underwhelming.Bonus in hill defense can be good but it is a bonus too much situational.Personally if i have a unit i would like more to give it a city raider promotion, or combat promotion .In my last game i'm playing as celts, gallic warrior is just like a swordsman because you will end up giving it raider promotion which is more useful for this kind of unit and i haven't yet found any utility for guerrilla promotions of gallic warriors (this unit is anyway the prettiest in the game).
Combo of traits is really powerful and as Brennus you will easily found one of the religions.So my judgements after my first hours of game as Celts are a bit better but anyway it remains one of the weakest civ in the game (surely better than aztecs)

 

[turquoiseninja]

I kinda like the celts too. Spirtual and Charismatic combined GREATLY help to curb unhappiness. One happiness from charismatic, another happy from monuments, and another from broadcast towers. Spirtual lets you quickly adobt civics that give happiness (or decrease unhappiness) AND gives half-priced temples, thus giving even more happy faces.
CHARISMATIC MAN AND SPIRTUAL MAN, UNITE!!!!

And also you must remember that the Dun replaces walls, not barracks. So in addition to Gurriela for your city garrison, you get a defensive bonus from walls as well. I think if you have a Dun in a city when you get a gallic swordsman they should get Gurriela two. But charismatic also let's you promote those swordsman faster, so you can get Gurrielas two and three pretty quickly.

 

[karr1255]

In my game with the celts I had stone so that made it kind of useful. 3 turn Duns are not so bad. But compared to other buildings it just blows. Only exception might be a highlands map.

However I love the traits for the reason turquoiseninja discribed and the starting techs so I'll still play him once in a while.

 

[CivDude86]

Don't forget the cheaper temples so happiness is rarely problem with Brennus. Dun would be a bit better if didn't obsolete.

 

[Meatbuster]

Walls still take almost forever to obsolete and by the time they are gone, you don't need Guerilla I that much anymore because you simply have so much firepower and defense.

 

[scu98rkr]

I think to make the celtic UU better, it should have guerilla I if built with out the Dun and guerilla I and guerilla II if built with the DUN. This would give it double movement in hills like the old celtic UU and with a barracks you could go straight to guerilla III this means if you build any cities on hills the celtic UU can be used as both an offensive and denfensive unit. Due to the huge defensive bonus it would have.

 

[ahab_in_rehab]

I've played around with the celts a bit to see if they are as bad as the general consensus on the forums would have me beleive. I certainly think that they have decent traits, which whilst not having the most synergy in the game are by no means a poor combination. The starting techs are ok too and starting with mysticism gives them a good shot at an early religion to tie in with the spiritual trait.
The real problem is of course the UB and the UU. The UB itself is ok, Guerilla 1 by itself is not going to set the world alight but any free promotion is by no means a bad thing and being able to build guerilla II archery/gunpowder units from the box is quite useful for covering units and fogbusters. In the right context a guerilla II unit can make decent cover for pillaging mines accompanied by a mounted unit or two. Its the UU that really lets the side down though, Its one thing sacrificing a combat/drill/CD promotion for an archery unit to bring them up to GII but for a melee unit its next to useless. GIII is next to useless, the offensive bonus is poor and is equivalent to one level of CR, if you want to take out troops in hilled cities a pure CR unit is better, for general fighting outside the city Combat II gives you only 5% less against hill based units but is effective in all terrains. Fundamentally the addition of a weak, situational defensive promotion on to an offensive unit is bound to be ineffective in almost all situations. To make the celts a more viable civ id definitely be looking at changing the UU rather than anything else

 

[pukii]

you are speaking from my heart.

and i can only repeating myself: if at least every unit would get the guerilla I promotion it would be enough to look away from their crap UU.

dot.

 

[budweiser]

I just tried a few openings with Brennus over lunch and died to barbs. Standard, pangea, monarch. I didnt have great starting terrain, so oh well. I like to try and get stonehenge whenever I play Brennus and not an early religion. Is early religion a must?

I tried going for worker techs like agriculture, AH and the wheel first. One time I even did masonry first. But I think a good tech opening is mining to bronze, then the worker techs. It seems you could get a second scout or a warrior or two. allowing growth before you get your first worker. Is this a good way to go?

Does anyone have any other tips?