Immortal vs Gallic Swordsman. Which UU do you like best?

[Artifex]

I am talking standard maps here.

These are 2 good UU's. I am curious which one is liked more. I personally like the Gallic swordsman for its speed and it's retreat ability (which saves it in alot of battles).

It was also decreased from 50 shields to 40 shields in C3C.

 

[SuperBeaverInc.]

I prefer the Immortal. It is cheaper than Gallic Swordsman and has a great attack value, which allows it to dominate the ancient age.

 

[Gainy]

The gallic swordsman - easily. The extra movement point is much more valuble in the Ancient age than the extra attack point, as there isn't such a good road-network. Being able to retreat is also nice

 

[JonathanValjean]

Gallic Swordsman, even before its cost was lowered to 40 shields in C3C. Its retreat ability and increased movement makes it quite a dominating force. Yes, it is more expensive, but the trick is to have your core infrastructure ready to take advantage of the golden age that the Gallic triggers.

 

[Strider]

Immortal, extra movement doesn't matter to me, I want to pretty much be guarenteed that my unit is going to win, less loss's.

 

[HalfBadger]

Gaelic Swordsman, movement is more fun than extra attack.

 

[Aramazd]

Immortal 4 attack destroys every unit save hoplites numid and legions easily

 

[Ision]

I vote - Immortal

 

[barron of ideas]

The immortal, but even if it is a tie, take the persians, scientific and industrious are a very useful combination. What do the Celts get?

 

[Gainy]

What do the Celts get?

They get Agricultural/Religious, which is really useful with their early UU - early expansion and a quick goverment change.

 

[Ville]

Immortal

 

[Gengis Khan]

Is there any doubt?

Immortal, for pretty much the same reasons as strider. If they nearly always win, what good is retreat?

 

[troytheface]

Movement is more fun and tactically gives one more flexibility.
Almost all modern strategy is based on speed and concentration of force.

 

[Schmek]

Immortal, If I decide to attack then there is no retreat.
in ancient times the strategy was not all about speed and concentration of force, that is why it is called a modern strategy

 

[troytheface]

lol good point. However, at Marathon the Greeks were reported to run at the enemy -(for the first time) and too some military minds have speculated that Alexander's army could have matched early armiies with gunpowder-and Alexander's strategy used disruption and penetration of the enemy via his horse...the Battle of Canaeu (sp) Hannible's horse encircled the Roman back flanks...
After which the new Roman maxim was to have at least twice as many horse as ur opponent...