Is it just me or are the Celts underrated?

[HughFran]

I just finished a game with The Celts after not playing as them for ages and I have to say, I really enjoyed playing as them. +1 Faith from adjacent unimproved Forest (+2 if three or more forests) per city. The Pictish Warrior is pretty good for an ancient era unit and can also help towards faith generation and finally the happiness that the Ceilidh Hall provides cannot be ignored, especially when happiness can sometimes be a problem!

Because they generate so much faith, you often get the best picks of Pantheons and Beliefs which means you can get access to Pagodas, Mosques and Monasteries which have a positive boost to faith, culture and happiness!!

In my last game I made a B-Line for Theology and built the Hagia Sofia, Borobudur and Great Mosque of Djenne (with Piety unlocked) and along with Pagodas and Mosques (which I chose as beliefs) I became a faith powerhouse! I completed Piety and picked Sacred Sites as my Reformation belief to give my tourism a big boost to compete with other cultural Civs and because I was generating so much faith I was able to purchase Writers, Musicians and Artists pretty regularly.

I focused mostly on Musicians and became influencial over three nearby Civs and ended up winning a Cultural Victory. If the Celts are used right, their faith can be a very powerful Civ. Granted, I got lucky being able to build all of the Theology buildings but even without them I think their faith can really put you on the way to victory.

So, is it just me or are the Celts underrated?

 

[kamex]

I also had a game with them recently that I enjoyed, but unfortunately I have one big issue with them (which happened that game). I didn't have any forests next to my cap, and moving would mean sacrificing a decent spot (coast, river etc). If you start off in a jungle heavy area you can be really screwed over. Fortunately, I had Sri Pada for my second city, and further cities had forests, but overall there was no turn 10 pantheon for me... This seems to happen often to me too. And before anyone says it... I don't reroll starts.

 

[noto2]

The Celtic UA is unreliable but can be quite good. It can often guarantee a quick pantheon and early religion. The UB is probably the best in the game. +3 happiness per city is incredible. Combine those two and you've got a civ with a strong religion and religion is very helpful for wide play, and extra happiness for each city helps a wide empire immensely. The UU fits into the strategy as well, giving more faith in the early game.

The Celts are one of the best civs for a sprawling, wide empire, absolutely.

 

[beetle]

Their are two tier lists I know of. Adwtac has the Celts has them as upper tier and consentient has them in the middle. So I don’t agree with the characterization that they are underrated.

I think they are great fun, as the forest bias means you usually have plenty of chops for early buildings. My biggest difficulty with them is that while getting an early pantheon is easy, founding is not. See the war academy article, and especially my post #6 and Browd’s response at #7 explaining why I am wrong!

 

[Popedesu]

They're definitely underrated, but that's probably due to them not always being consistent, as others pointed out sometimes you don't get a start with forest so you can't always rely on the UA being good. Though other than that, I kind of see them as a lower risk Spain in that aspect, with Spain you have to hope that you get some amazing wonder near you, or at least a semi-decent one. With the Celts on the other hand, you can almost bet you're gonna get at least some forest in your start, unless you turn off start bias.

 

[ShakaKhan]

The two things they have going for them is religion and happiness. When I played lower levels and when I played needing to found a religion every game, I thought they were in the bottom end of the top 10 (overall somewhere between #6-#10.) Now that I usually don't do either of those things, I'd rank them in the upper end of a cluster of B-level civs.
Their unique ability AND the greater portion of their unique unit are dedicated towards religion, which is the majority of their bonuses dedicated towards something not needed for any victory condition. This is not to discount the UU's free pillage ability, which is so-so, or the foreign lands bonus, which is incredible especially when they upgrade to pikes. That big bonus actually becomes a bit of a planning problem - you want several pikes with foreign lands bonuses, but you don't want to delay CS (arguably the third best pre-Renaissance tech after education and philosophy) and early game hammers are valuable and limited. More than any other civ, I never get to my target amount of their UU. Also, as everyone else complains, the pikes upgrade path is sub-par and their window of effectiveness pretty much ends with pikes. Another concern, admittedly minor, is that the pictish warrior loses the bonus vs. mounts of a spearman, and since 2 out of 3 of the most aggressive AI's (Attila-yes, Genghis-yes, Shaka-no) favor mounted units, it can be a costly trade-off.
But I agree that +3 happiness/city is one of the best advantages for a UB, they have the best happiness bonus out of any civ, perhaps excluding India but that's a tangled web for comparison. The Persians and Egyptians are the only other civs with happiness bonus, both of which are 2/3 the bonus of the Celts. However, both Egypt and Persia have their bonuses in buildings which are considerably further up the build que normally. It makes renaissance era build orders kind of troublesome for the Celts because you basically need everything. Normally at the time, you focus on Uni's, workshops, and banks, maybe one of the awesome 1st-level Renaissance wonders, and save both amphitheaters and OH's for Hermitage prereq, but with the Celts you need everything.
They are a great civ for Liberty, and especially a great civ for the consistent Tradition player trying to broaden their horizons to Liberty. One of the most frustrating things for me (I mean tradition-converting-to-Liberty players) is that there's less happiness potential in that SP tree, and the Celts make up for this both with their UB and probable earlier picks at religion. Their UA compounds more times with more cities, so that complements Liberty play as well. Finally, Liberty play usually focuses on earlier aggression, and the foreign lands bonus of upgraded pikes is quite helpful here as well, particularly on higher levels when the AI has so many units that the melee units need to take a more active part instead just blocking for ranged units who do all of the work.

 

[beetle]

...as others pointed out sometimes you don't get a start with forest so you can't always rely on the UA being good.

But it is much more hit than miss!

...With the Celts on the other hand, you can almost bet you're gonna get at least some forest in your start

Exactly.

...unless you turn off start bias.

Which would be stupid. You could also use them on a great plains map. Or be one of these people who likes all their settings random. But all of that relates to why it is silly to hope that pure RNG sets you up for an interesting game, not to the Celts being a weak civ.

 

[ShakaKhan]

you can almost bet you're gonna get at least some forest in your start, unless you turn off start bias.

Agree with Beetle. If playing with start bias off is one of your personal rules, then either don't play with civs like the Celts or Iroquois, or play as either of them with start bias off... on an Arborea map. There, now you've included the unnecessary personal restriction but still get the bonus... that you shouldn't get because that's the whole point of the unnecessary personal restriction.

 

[Athenaeum]

The Celt pantheon is similar to the Ethiopian Stele benefit. You have early faith generation, first pantheon, and don't need to build shrines for faith. You even start accumulating faith earlier than Ethiopia and don't need to build a Monument. However you need to keep stupid useless forest adjacent to ur capital I guess if you're next to deer/forest or something then that's all right. Late game when you chop or improve the forest you'll lose that benefit.

So I guess it largely relies on whether or not there are any strong pantheons around you, and if those pantheons are going to be competitive in the game you're playing.

 

[Athenaeum]

Also unless you go Aesthetics are you really going to invest hammers and gold in enough opera houses for that to matter? I almost never build Opera houses at all in my (multiplayer) games. I usually fill my Musician's Guild just for the culture and my only great music slots will be from wonders, if at all.

 

[zxcvbob]

The Celts are almost guaranteed to get first or second pick of pantheons. That's pretty good all by itself, but you still have to work at getting a religion. Pictish warriors are good. The happiness from the UB is probably their best trait.

 

[beetle]

However you need to keep stupid useless forest adjacent to ur capital I guess if you're next to deer/forest or something then that's all right.

Nah, as the forest needs to be unimproved and 1fpt just is not relevant after the early game.

So I guess it largely relies on whether or not there are any strong pantheons around you, and if those pantheons are going to be competitive in the game you're playing.

That is the trick with the Celts. Since the UA on its own won’t get you a religion, and forests are not all that compatible with the faith-oriented pantheons.

I almost never build Opera houses at all in my (multiplayer) games.

For single player at Deity, ideology pressure can be problem. My own experience is that a themed Hermitage is just about enough on its own to get me “exotic” with several civs. So I build Opera House every game.

 

[Athenaeum]

And I mainly play multiplayer where building opera houses is a waste of time. The gold maintenance for opera houses and amphitheaters are just not worth it if you have not adopted that Aesthetics policy that reduces hammer cost (forgot what it's called).

 

[ShakaKhan]

Also unless you go Aesthetics are you really going to invest hammers and gold in enough opera houses for that to matter? I almost never build Opera houses at all in my (multiplayer) gamesl.

Hard to argue this point, and I don't have that much experience in MP. From an SP point of view, you can consider amphi's and OH's instead of zoos, which are available at about the same time. Cumulatively, you end up with 50% more happiness (3/celidh hall vs. 2/zoos) for 50% more hammer cost (100/amphi+200/celidh vs. 200/zoo), plus you have 2 culture per city and the slots.

 

[ShakaKhan]

That is the trick with the Celts. Since the UA on its own won’t get you a religion, and forests are not all that compatible with the faith-oriented pantheons.

Disagree somewhat, moreso when the Celts go Liberty which, as I mentioned earlier, I feel they are designed pretty well for. If you can spam 5 cities each getting at least 1, with one or two cities getting the full 2, plus the stronger cities (top half at least) just getting shrines, you can easily get to the 8-12/turn necessary for establishing a religion (though maybe not one of the first) on Deity. This is why I usually choose a pantheon other than faith for the Celts (and Ethiopia), I'd rather spread the advantage than being all-in on religion.

 

[Iberian]

One of my best games of all time was at the Celts. I had an eight water resource city with forest and little tundra. I was able to chop the Colossus and run a coastal economy that was rolling in gold all game. Went wide and never looked back. Too bad I don't have that save or even that computer anymore.

 

[zxcvbob]

Disagree somewhat, moreso when the Celts go Liberty which, as I mentioned earlier, I feel they are designed pretty well for. If you can spam 5 cities each getting at least 1, with one or two cities getting the full 2, plus the stronger cities (top half at least) just getting shrines, you can easily get to the 8-12/turn necessary for establishing a religion (though maybe not one of the first) on Deity. This is why I usually choose a pantheon other than faith for the Celts (and Ethiopia), I'd rather spread the advantage than being all-in on religion.

Try spamming 30-something cities! (for that Longest Name achievement) Gandhi hated me even tho' I expanded away from his half of the large map, and there was still plenty of room for him and the barbarians.

I didn't know at the time that I could have multiple Celtic civs in the same game. And I should've had more than one AI, so I could bribe them to fight each other instead of focusing all their attention on me.

 

[Xahz]

I almost never build Opera houses at all in my (multiplayer) games.

This type of logic really bothers me. Obviously if you're not going culture you're not going to be building Opera Houses - but the Celts don't have Opera Houses, they have Ceilidh Halls which are absolutely worth building. Refusing to adapt your playstyle to a civilization's strength is what makes people underrate so many strong civilizations. Stop thinking in terms of "what do I normally do" and think in terms of "what should I do to take advantage of this civilization's strengths".

More to the point, the Celts are quite strong, mostly because of the free pantheon and the Picts. Other posters have made a good point that the UA is only really strong if you have a good pantheon available, but in my experience that isn't particularly hard to do. The Picts are brutes that are very well suited for early aggression; they're absolutely one of the strongest Ancient Era units and can last a surprisingly long time depending on who your neighbors are. While the UA alone won't get you a religion, a couple early wars or aggressive barb clearing with the UU can.

 

[Sclb]

Even on SP, opera houses are waste of time unless attempting culture victory. But with celts it is possibly an exception as it is happiness. Hermitage costs a lot of hammers and are not gonna produce much if your base culture generation isn't high, which it won't be unless CV.

 

[beetle]

Hermitage costs a lot of hammers and are not gonna produce much if your base culture generation isn't high, which it won't be unless CV.

No doubt I paying the opportunity cost, and I am pretty much stuck a lower plateau with my play at Deity, but one of the changes I have made in the last few months is making it a point to theme Hermitage, especially if I found and picked up Religious Art. As compared to my play from six months ago, I am having much less problems with ideology pressure. I am sure I am doing other things better too, but just a little tourism goes a long way (as compared to zero tourism, which is pretty much how I played six months ago).