Celts in Civ VI

[AnonymousSpeed]

Religion is a charged word, but based on what is and is not a religion in Civ6, I would say that the Gauls had no religion; they had a pantheon belief.

Not in the context of Civ6's religion system (which is why I said faith and not great prophet points), but its still beliefs in the supernatural. Again, not a single church, but enough to bring faith bonuses into consideration. Faith founds pantheons, after all.

Also, oppida are much more unique than nemeta; sacred groves in and of themselves are hardly unique and the word probably referred to any place of worship.

Well, Stele are hardly uniquely Ethiopian, and yet they've been the unique building for Ethiopia twice.

Religious bonuses for the Celts are just playing on modern romanticized stereotypes of the Celts derived from eighteenth century nationalism; just once I'd like to see a more historical representation of the civilization. The Celts were a unique and accomplished civilization; there's no need to paint them with the rose tinted glasses of "nos ancêtres les gaulois" or MacPhersonism.

Fair enough, I can understand that desire even if its not the vision I'd pursue if I were the developers.

Gauls were 'hired' by both Carthage and Rome: they could be a Civilization that can rent out its warriors to other Civs for Gold or other considerations.

Or, for that matter, the entire usage of mercenaries throughout history, as in no city-dwelling civ ever produced Horse Achers, they always hired them from the nearest batch of mounted pastoralists, or, a number of German minor states that made a good economic thing out of hiring out their armies to others ("Hessians" were from any of up to 17 different Hessian statelets in the 18th century!). Another of the many lacunae in the game...

I do wish we could levy some units from other civilizations and not just city states.

 

[Gabhar]

I would hope by the time the civ is added they have more interesting systems in play (from expansions), because as is I think the obvious religious angle is a little bit lame.

 

[Manifold]

"Vae victis!"
I want to see Brennus the conqueror of Rome and chieftain of all Celts!

 

[Guandao]

"Vae victis!"
I want to see Brennus the conqueror of Rome and chieftain of all Celts!

Leader Agenda: Sacker of Rome-Likes Civs whose capital he has conquered. Dislikes Civs whose capital he hasn't conquered...
I wonder want language they would make Brennus speak if they put him as the leader. Him speaking Welsh would be even more worst than Boudicca speaking it. I'm guessing he spoke a Continental Celtic language like Gaulish.

 

[Zaarin]

Leader Agenda: Sacker of Rome-Likes Civs whose capital he has conquered. Dislikes Civs whose capital he hasn't conquered...
I wonder want language they would make Brennus speak if they put him as the leader. Him speaking Welsh would be even more worst than Boudicca speaking it. I'm guessing he spoke a Continental Celtic language like Gaulish.

Presumably both Brennus were Gauls.

 

[The Kingmaker]

Unfortunately, we really don't know very much about either 4th century Brennus or 3rd century Brennus. Yet somehow, a representation of one of them led the Celts in both Civ3 and Civ4.

I'd prefer to see Vercingetorix, personally. We know a fair bit more about him and he could have a pretty epic personality in game.

 

[Zaarin]

Unfortunately, we really don't know very much about either 4th century Brennus or 3rd century Brennus. Yet somehow, a representation of one of them led the Celts in both Civ3 and Civ4.

I'd prefer to see Vercingetorix, personally. We know a fair bit more about him and he could have a pretty epic personality in game.

100% agreed; there are half a dozen Gauls I could name who would be better choices than either Brennus. There's even speculation that "Brennus" may have been a title.

 

[Manifold]

Vercingetorix is a loser - Brennus was so cool that we know his words more than 2000 years later.

There is no problem with a Civ named "Celts". In ancient times it was clear who was meant. For example the people of the British Isles were not called Celts they were the Britons, Picts, Caledonians,... Only the different modern subject areas can not agree to one definition.
But I would take the greek and roman meaning and they were perfect:
best iron swords (ferrum noricum), chariots, druid circle, human sacrifice, forest devils...

 

[The Kingmaker]

Vercingetorix is a loser

So were Cleopatra, Pedro II, Hardrada and Pericles. Philip II too, if you count the Armada incident. And Cyrus, if you ask Tomyris.

Sometimes it's fun to root for the underdog.

 

[Zaarin]

human sacrifice

Not likely, outside of Graeco-Roman propaganda. (And if you ask the Romans, everyone who was an enemy of Rome practiced human sacrifice. The jury's still out on the Carthaginians [though they probably did], but the archaeological evidence doesn't support human sacrifice among the Celts.) I agree that the best defining attributes of the Celts were exceptional ironworking, skilled chariots, battle fury, headhunting, fluid social stratification, and druids (ideally divorced from modern romanticism as much as possible). And obviously speaking a Celtic language, thus ruling out the Celticized Lusitanians (probably) and the Belgae (who were either Celticized Germans or Germanicized Celts).

And for the record, the ancient term was about as broad as the modern one: in addition to the Gauls and Celtiberians, the Romans also referred to the Britons, Gaels, Lepontians, Cisalpine Gauls, Galatians, and Lusitanians as Celts, though they distinguished the Aquitanians and Belgae. By the modern definition, it's not in fact clear if the Lusitanians (or the Picts, for that matter) were Celts, though the Lusitanians were clearly Celticized.

 

[Manifold]

So were Cleopatra, Pedro II, Hardrada and Pericles. Philip II too, if you count the Armada incident. And Cyrus, if you ask Tomyris.

Sometimes it's fun to root for the underdog.

You really can not compare this famous rulers with the leader of a not even one year long and unsuccessful uprising.

In the case of Philip II, I am on your side. He lost the decisive battle although he was much stronger. That is why in my opinion his selection is questionable and just for change or to sell Isabella later.

I would prefer Carlos I de España because he was first king of the Spanish Empire before he become Holy Roman Emperor. He is one of the most successful rulers of all times.

And for the record, the ancient term was about as broad as the modern one: in addition to the Gauls and Celtiberians, the Romans also referred to the Britons, Gaels, Lepontians, Cisalpine Gauls, Galatians, and Lusitanians as Celts, though they distinguished the Aquitanians and Belgae. By the modern definition, it's not in fact clear if the Lusitanians (or the Picts, for that matter) were Celts, though the Lusitanians were clearly Celticized.

I guess not 100%. The Greeks called the locals at the river Rhone and in the Balkans, which they believe were similar "Celts". And Romans called the barbarians from the La Tene culture which they did not conquer before Gauls. The Romans did not call the Britons as Celts, or?

What I mean is, if there is a civ that is called the "Celts", what I prefer, it should be this one, which the archaeological scholars today call "La Tene culture" and not only what the Romans called "Gauls".

That means that this Civ should not contend the people from the Iberian peninsula and not these from the British Islands. But I guess the real difference between us is that you want to call them like the Romans and I like the Greeks
And Brennus was the most successful chieftain of them

 

[Zaarin]

I guess not 100%. The Greeks called the locals at the river Rhone and in the Balkans, which they believe were similar "Celts". And Romans called the barbarians from the La Tene culture which they did not conquer before Gauls. The Romans did not call the Britons as Celts, or?

What I mean is, if there is a civ that is called the "Celts", what I prefer, it should be this one, which the archaeological scholars today call "La Tene culture" and not only what the Romans called "Gauls".

That means that this Civ should not contend the people from the Iberian peninsula and not these from the British Islands. But I guess the real difference between us is that you want to call them like the Romans and I like the Greeks

Well, all Celtic cultures derive from La Tène, but I get what you're saying: the various Gaulish-speaking peoples: Gauls, Cisalpine Gauls, Lepontians, Galatians, etc. In that we agree, though that's why I prefer the term "Gaul" as it rules out the Celtiberians, Britons, and Old Irish by default; I think we can all agree that Civ5's attempt to cram 2,000 years into a single civ was a bad idea.

 

[Manifold]

Well, all Celtic cultures derive from La Tène, but I get what you're saying: the various Gaulish-speaking peoples: Gauls, Cisalpine Gauls, Lepontians, Galatians, etc. In that we agree, though that's why I prefer the term "Gaul" as it rules out the Celtiberians, Britons, and Old Irish by default; I think we can all agree that Civ5's attempt to cram 2,000 years into a single civ was a bad idea.

The "Gaul" conceptuality is, in my opinion, more occupied by France than the "Celts" among the Spain, English, Scots and Irish.
Vercingetorix could be a good second leader for France.
Scotland should be a separate Medieval and Renaissance Civ.

And how do you want to unite the Galatians and ferrum noricum among to the Gauls? Everyone connects the Gauls with the light sacrifices of Julius Caesar´s military genius.
Calling this powerful iron age Civ in the game "La Tene culture" is not a good idea.

So there is only "Celts" as popular and more meaningful conceptuality left.


Here is my suggestion for a "La Tene" inspired Civ:

I would say they should try to reach a science victory. Their metalworking was far ahead of everyone else.

LH: Brennus (speaks and looks Gaulish)
LUA: "Vae victis!": If he conquer a city he can choose not only to conquer or raze it, he can also choose "Vae victis!". Then all buildings, districts and improvements of this city are plundered and Brennus gets a huge sum of gold.
But the city does not change the owner. In addition a forced cease-fire will enter into force for 10 turns (had to be tested od discussed). Or it will be a forced peace deal and after some turns the victim gets a casus belli for revenge.
(This ability is supposed to represent the recurrent invasions of the Celts. They were not seeking for new places made of stone to live there, they were just seeking for free goods to go.)

Civ name: "Celts"
Symbol: wild boar
City names of the La Tene culture should not be a problem. Ptolemy called enough oppida, so that neither modern names nor names from archaeological sites would have to be resorted to.
Agenda: He did not like those Civs who try to take revenge. He likes Civs who did not try to take revenge.

UA: Ferrum Noricum: the palace generates two iron resources for free;
all unit which require iron get +3 battle strength;
every iron, copper, gold, silver resource provides a bonus for work them (as it has been proposed here already, best production and/or science).

UU: Forest Devils: swordsman replacements which are invisible in forests or could only be seen from adjacent tiles.
They can move undisturbed in forests and see through them.
Also they get the "headhunter" promotion if they kill an enemy unit for the first time. With this promotion they deserve faith for kills.

UD: Druid circle: holy district replacements which gets +1 faith from every adjacent forest instead of +1 for every two forests.
AND all apostle (with the look of a Druid) which are formed there start with the ability to recruit adjacent barbarians (So this could lead the Celts to no longer develop their religion as many have noted here.).
AND all religious units formed there can embark without losing extra movement points AND can heal in forests tiles (Druid power drink).

I guess this Civ could bring a new play style to the game. Brennus LUA should cause him always have war with all. He can concentrate his forces on one city, get the gold and the cease-fire. Then attack the next one...
This way he will earn a lot of faith (UU) and gold (LUA) and can buy all the great personalities for the space race and a science victory. The extra production from the metallic resources will help him in the construction of the space ship.

I have decided against "oppidum" because it just mean "city in the countryside" in contrast to the "Urbs" of Rome, so it is represented by the city center. These oppida from the La Tene were also in comparsion to the mediterranean cities more like mud holes.
Unfortunately, nothing came to my mind about bardic songs, but I do not think the cultural victory was made for the Celts.

 

[Zaarin]

Vercingetorix could be a good second leader for France.

...By that logic Hiawatha would make a good second leader for America, and Hammurabi would make a good second leader for Arabia. The Gauls may have occupied the same territory as France, but it was the Celtic heartland. There's precious little of Gaul left in France; the Gaulish culture had been almost completely paved by Rome even before the Franks invaded. France grew out of Franco-Latin culture, not Gaul.

I like most of your ideas for the Celts, except that I don't think a little known person that may have actually been a title is a good choice of leader for a game that emphasizes big personalities, and I think a unique holy district for the Celts is just playing on neopagan stereotypes.

 

[Manifold]

...By that logic Hiawatha would make a good second leader for America, and Hammurabi would make a good second leader for Arabia. The Gauls may have occupied the same territory as France, but it was the Celtic heartland. There's precious little of Gaul left in France; the Gaulish culture had been almost completely paved by Rome even before the Franks invaded. France grew out of Franco-Latin culture, not Gaul.

You are totally right, in my opinion, but is it not so that France occupied him for their affairs. It´s the same with the conceptuality "Gaul". But that was also not the subject. I would not take him as a leader at all for the reasons already mentioned.

So I have to correct myself: "Vercingetorix could be a second leader for France. But this would be not a good idea."

I like most of your ideas for the Celts, except that I don't think a little known person that may have actually been a title is a good choice of leader for a game that emphasizes big personalities, and I think a unique holy district for the Celts is just playing on neopagan stereotypes.

After this long time period I guess it is enough to know. We did not know very much of other ancient Personalities. Did you know how many women/children e.g. Hannibal had? the Sack of Rome was the peek point of the La Tene culture and it could have been quite very different if he had not pressed the button "Vae victis!"

There are some others here who have emphasized the religious aspects of the Celts but also said that they did not improve it further. In this game religious advantage comes from the holy district, so a UD Druid circle is a way to justice to it. Furthermore the forest camouflage and invisibility of the Forest Devils is more important for me. They should be the UU1. So I put the Druid aspect to the UD.

What was your suggestion for a UI, UB, UD again please?

 

[Zaarin]

I think what I'd propose for the Celts' unique infrastructure is this:

Oppidum: Unique District replacing Encampment, must be built on hills not adjacent to the city-center, provides +1 , +1 , +1 , and +1 housing.

I think a unique Encampment would be appropriate to the Celts' raid-based culture, while the other bonuses would represent that oppida were also centers of trade in and distribution of luxury goods (much like later Germanic mead halls like Beowulf's Heorot)--and synergize well with the UA I proposed earlier in the thread. It's true that hill-forts aren't unique to the Celts, but to be fair neither are sacred groves.

Did you know how many women/children e.g. Hannibal had?

Well, according to Roman historians writing well after Hannibal lived, he was married to a Spanish-born woman named Imilce (an obviously Punic name, so there may be some truth to the tradition) and had a son. But I probably wouldn't know that if I weren't writing an alternate history about a Punic colony in the Canaries. However, I do know that both Vercingetorix and Hannibal were individual people, not titles--that's more than we know for certain about either Brennus (or, possibly, brennoues).

 

[Uberfrog]

I think what I'd propose for the Celts' unique infrastructure is this:

Oppidum: Unique District replacing Encampment, must be built on hills not adjacent to the city-center, provides +1 , +1 , +1 , and +1 housing.

I think a unique Encampment would be appropriate to the Celts' raid-based culture, while the other bonuses would represent that oppida were also centers of trade in and distribution of luxury goods (much like later Germanic mead halls like Beowulf's Heorot)--and synergize well with the UA I proposed earlier in the thread. It's true that hill-forts aren't unique to the Celts, but to be fair neither are sacred groves.

I think this a great idea, along similar lines to Civ IV's iteration (where they had a special walls feature called the dun). Civ VI's tile based districts are a much better fit, however, and an encampment or fort-style improvement works much better. But then I'm slightly biased because Iron Age hillforts are a major feature of the bit of the country in which I grew up .

 

[Manifold]

I think what I'd propose for the Celts' unique infrastructure is this:

Oppidum: Unique District replacing Encampment, must be built on hills not adjacent to the city-center, provides +1 , +1 , +1 , and +1 housing.

I think a unique Encampment would be appropriate to the Celts' raid-based culture, while the other bonuses would represent that oppida were also centers of trade in and distribution of luxury goods (much like later Germanic mead halls like Beowulf's Heorot)--and synergize well with the UA I proposed earlier in the thread. It's true that hill-forts aren't unique to the Celts, but to be fair neither are sacred groves.

Besides that "oppidum" means city and is the city center of the tribe, what I wrote already, a unique encampment did not fit for the Celts. They were wild and undisciplined that has nothing to do with military training. As place of retreat on a hill it would fit but not with the barracks things in it - no!

Also a culture boost for one of the most uncivilized Civ, is this seriously? Then they were more cultivated as Rome.

Well, according to Roman historians writing well after Hannibal lived, he was married to a Spanish-born woman named Imilce (an obviously Punic name, so there may be some truth to the tradition) and had a son. But I probably wouldn't know that if I weren't writing an alternate history about a Punic colony in the Canaries.

I can not confirm your story, but I forgot that Hannibal was a Greek hostage.

However, I do know that both Vercingetorix and Hannibal were individual people, not titles--that's more than we know for certain about either Brennus (or, possibly, brennoues).

For the Roman historians was Brennus a name. In addition, titles often come from names. Sometimes rulers give up their name for the title term. I did not see the problem.

 

[Zaarin]

Besides that "oppidum" means city and is the city center of the tribe, what I wrote already, a unique encampment did not fit for the Celts. They were wild and undisciplined that has nothing to do with military training. As place of retreat on a hill it would fit but not with the barracks things in it - no!

Oppida were not city centers: they were hill forts. An encampment replacement makes perfect sense.

Also a culture boost for one of the most uncivilized Civ, is this seriously? Then they were more cultivated as Rome.

Look, if we're going to base this civ on Roman propaganda, we might as well throw in the human sacrifices. The Celts were not barbarians; they were an urban culture who possessed advanced craftsmanship (that excelled that of the Romans, I might add) and rich traditions of poetry. That they were less urbanized than Rome (one of the most urbanized civilizations in the world at the time) doesn't make them hut-dwelling cavemen.

For the Roman historians was Brennus a name. In addition, titles often come from names. Sometimes rulers give up their name for the title term. I did not see the problem.

The problem is that Brennus is only a name. That might be fine for Civ3 or Civ4, but in Civ6, where the leaders are chosen for their personality, that rules out someone who is no more than a name. I'd also point out that when Roman historians talk about the Celts, they're wrong more often than they're right. Likewise for the Carthaginians. Or anyone else they regarded as a blood enemy. The Romans were excellent propagandists; Kim Jung Oon has nothing on them.

 

[Manifold]

Oppida were not city centers: they were hill forts. An encampment replacement makes perfect sense.

"oppidum" is a Latin word and "city in the countryside" every new pupil knows that.

Julius Caesar used it to designate the Celtic hilltop settlement. Most of them were refuge. This kind of places exist every were in ancient Europe (also on Crete) and is nothing special for the Celts. They were mainly used in times of war.

I remain, military training of any kind, even if they were very warlike, and +1 housing does not fit to the Celts. Military experience was more a tradition and men ritual. They were not particularly good at defense. Technically Caesar just needs two years (58-56 BC): "Veni, vidi, vici".

And finally, how do you want to bring the Druid, which starts with the ability to recruit adjacent barbarians, then?
How do you want to bring the UU, which is invisible in forests and the headhunter promotion?
It is difficult to bring all aspects of the rich Celtic culture together and give them a unique gameplay (more than just distributed bonuses). What sort of victory would the Celts prefer? Try it!

Look, if we're going to base this civ on Roman propaganda, we might as well throw in the human sacrifices. The Celts were not barbarians; they were an urban culture who possessed advanced craftsmanship (that excelled that of the Romans, I might add) and rich traditions of poetry. That they were less urbanized than Rome (one of the most urbanized civilizations in the world at the time) doesn't make them hut-dwelling cavemen.

The Celts moved around and robbed gold like Conquistador and they had the best weapons of their time.
When the Romans called them barbarians, the first thing they ant to say was that they did not speak Latin or Greek language.
Robbery and piracy were not special in this time even Odysseus was a pirate and the Roman history included the "rape of the Sabine women".

The winners write history. Too bad that the Celts had only oral traditions. So the most things we know about them is from their enemies written. By the way, what others have written about the Minoans was similar, if I think of the labyrinth, the Minotaur and Icarus. But later the memory of Minos was very positive. The conquerors saw that they had learned a lot from the Minoans.

There are a lot of archaeological evidence of human sacrifice and cannibalism among the Celts. But that is probably a cultural stage, if I think of Abraham of the Bible, Homer and Carthage.

But unfortunately, as I wrote, when I made my suggestion for the Celts, was, that nothing came to my mind about bardic songs. So a small culture boost could be ok. That could help them, when they not build theater districts.

The problem is that Brennus is only a name. That might be fine for Civ3 or Civ4, but in Civ6, where the leaders are chosen for their personality, that rules out someone who is no more than a name. I'd also point out that when Roman historians talk about the Celts, they're wrong more often than they're right. Likewise for the Carthaginians. Or anyone else they regarded as a blood enemy. The Romans were excellent propagandists; Kim Jung Oon has nothing on them.

Ah, like our informations about Vercingetorix.

We know this one over 2000 years old sentence of Brennus, tells us very much.
He was a tough and harsh guy. He was carrying weapons. He united a huge band of robbers. He thought economically and foresighted. He weighed well his chances and the attendant expense. He just want to sack and the gold and then return home nothing more. He knew about weights. He could calculate. He was clever and tricky...


That fits to my suggestion for a Celtic Civ. Here again this time with a small culture boost for the bardic songs.

LH: Brennus (speaks and looks Gaulish)
LUA: "Vae victis!": If he conquer a city he can choose not only to conquer or raze it, he can also choose "Vae victis!". Then all buildings, districts and improvements of this city get plundered and Brennus gets a huge sum of gold.
But the city does not change the owner. In addition a forced cease-fire will enter into force for 10 turns (had to be tested or discussed). Or, it will be a forced peace deal and after some turns the victim gets a casus belli for revenge.
(This ability is supposed to represent the recurrent invasions of the Celts. They were not seeking for new places made of stone to live there, they were just seeking for free goods to go.)

Agenda:
He is always ready for war.
He always tries to conclude favorable peace treaties.
He does not like when his offers are rejected.
He did not like those Civs who try to take revenge.
He likes Civs who did not try to take revenge.


Civ name: "Celts"
Symbol: wild boar
City names of the La Tene culture should not be a problem. Ptolemy called enough oppida, so that neither modern names nor names from archaeological sites would have to be resorted to.

UA: Ferrum Noricum: the palace generates two iron resources for free;
all unit which require iron get +3 battle strength;
every iron, copper, resource provides a bonus +1 production and +1 science
every gold, silver resource provides a bonus +1 culture and +1 gold (for human sacrifice, bardic songs and trade system, goldsmith)

UU: Forest Devils: swordsman replacements which are invisible in forests or could only be seen from adjacent tiles.
They can move undisturbed in forests and see through them. They get +2 for fortify on forest hills.
Also they get the "headhunter" promotion if they kill an enemy unit for the first time. With this promotion they deserve faith for kills.

UD: Druid circle: holy district replacements which gets +1 faith from every adjacent forest instead of +1 for every two forests.
AND all apostle (with the look of a Druid) which are formed there starts with the ability to recruit adjacent barbarians (So this could lead the Celts to no longer develop their religion as many have noted here.).
AND all religious units formed there can embark without losing extra movement points AND can heal in forests tiles (Druid power drink).