Is Gaul OP?

[Sostratus]

seriously Korean fans are butt hurt over Gaul for some reason. They act like Gaul is what broke camel's backside in terms of balance issue with civ 6. They were slient when Byzantium gets announced but Gaul is too much?

What they are sensing is that Gaul’s bonuses are among those that are very exploitable by humans. In the context of the Crucial opening eras, they have all their power on tap and the big downside - no districts next to city center and no district minor adj- are far less relevant when cities are still fairly small. King of Eburones is extremely strong in capable hands and again, you get handed that right away, along with the Gesaete and the mine powers. And at iron working the Gauls get, essentially, to pretend that all their common mines are resource mines with the +1 from apprenticeship that no one else has yet.

But why didn’t Byzantium get this response?
Byzantium unlocks their admittedly strong bonuses over time instead of right away, and their best bonus - cavalry ignoring wall resist- is conditioned on city conversion. They also don’t have the next level defense of the Gauls, making them vulnerable to early rushes.

There’s nothing you can do to keep well played Gauls from being a problem since they start strong and have great defensive and offensive options; similar to Nubian archers, fundamentally it is a lack of counterplay.

 

[Kupe Navigator]

What they are sensing is that Gaul’s bonuses are among those that are very exploitable by humans. In the context of the Crucial opening eras, they have all their power on tap and the big downside - no districts next to city center and no district minor adj- are far less relevant when cities are still fairly small. King of Eburones is extremely strong in capable hands and again, you get handed that right away, along with the Gesaete and the mine powers. And at iron working the Gauls get, essentially, to pretend that all their common mines are resource mines with the +1 from apprenticeship that no one else has yet.

But why didn’t Byzantium get this response?
Byzantium unlocks their admittedly strong bonuses over time instead of right away, and their best bonus - cavalry ignoring wall resist- is conditioned on city conversion. They also don’t have the next level defense of the Gauls, making them vulnerable to early rushes.

There’s nothing you can do to keep well played Gauls from being a problem since they start strong and have great defensive and offensive options; similar to Nubian archers, fundamentally it is a lack of counterplay.

one thing that really gets me is that they accuse Fraxis of lazy creating OP Gaul and say "Gaul has no substances!"
Gaul is anything but lazly created civ. In fact I will say they are one of well-designed civ out there.

 

[Lily_Lancer]

What they are sensing is that Gaul’s bonuses are among those that are very exploitable by humans. In the context of the Crucial opening eras, they have all their power on tap and the big downside - no districts next to city center and no district minor adj- are far less relevant when cities are still fairly small. King of Eburones is extremely strong in capable hands and again, you get handed that right away, along with the Gesaete and the mine powers. And at iron working the Gauls get, essentially, to pretend that all their common mines are resource mines with the +1 from apprenticeship that no one else has yet.

But why didn’t Byzantium get this response?
Byzantium unlocks their admittedly strong bonuses over time instead of right away, and their best bonus - cavalry ignoring wall resist- is conditioned on city conversion. They also don’t have the next level defense of the Gauls, making them vulnerable to early rushes.

There’s nothing you can do to keep well played Gauls from being a problem since they start strong and have great defensive and offensive options; similar to Nubian archers, fundamentally it is a lack of counterplay.

Based on current situation I seriously suspect that Gaul cannot even ancient rush a city-state. Ancient rushing a Civ using its UU is not even practical for Gaul. Handling the 5 initial warriors is already a great challenge for its UU, and then you need to siege cities with possibly walls. Unlike powerful Pitati, Maryannu, War Cart, War elephant or Eagle Warriors, Gaul's UU end up with nearly zero use apart from its 4 era points.

 

[Kupe Navigator]

Based on current situation I seriously suspect that Gaul cannot even ancient rush a city-state. Ancient rushing a Civ using its UU is not even practical for Gaul. Handling the 5 initial warriors is already a great challenge for its UU, and then you need to siege cities with possibly walls. Unlike powerful Pitati, Maryannu, War Cart, War elephant or Eagle Warriors, Gaul's UU end up with nearly zero use apart from its 4 era points.

that makes all koreans who complain Gaul is OP all-around look extremely awkward and stupid!

 

[Sostratus]

Based on current situation I seriously suspect that Gaul cannot even ancient rush a city-state. Ancient rushing a Civ using its UU is not even practical for Gaul. Handling the 5 initial warriors is already a great challenge for its UU, and then you need to siege cities with possibly walls. Unlike powerful Pitati, Maryannu, War Cart, War elephant or Eagle Warriors, Gaul's UU end up with nearly zero use apart from its 4 era points.

Is this on the basis of it being more expensive?
It has a natural advantage over other warriors from Eburones ability - even alone, engaging in melee combat forces at least +2 - not to mention it gets +5 vs districts.

 

[_hero_]

Gaul's UU end up with nearly zero use apart from its 4 era points.

If nothing else, they will clear barb camps out far easier than most anything else in the ancient era.

 

[comatosedragon]

... the Aztec Eagle Warrior is very powerful as they can capture 5 builders from every CS.

Wait a second. Sorry for the slight derail.
Eagle Warrior ability works on City States? I thought only major civilizations ... And that has been my understanding for 4 years now. Wow, if this is true, consider my mind blown.

 

[Oberinspektor Derrick]

Based on current situation I seriously suspect that Gaul cannot even ancient rush a city-state. Ancient rushing a Civ using its UU is not even practical for Gaul. Handling the 5 initial warriors is already a great challenge for its UU, and then you need to siege cities with possibly walls. Unlike powerful Pitati, Maryannu, War Cart, War elephant or Eagle Warriors, Gaul's UU end up with nearly zero use apart from its 4 era points.

I'm not so sure about that personally.
Walls are usually not up in the ancient era (apart from City States on Deity iirc, sometimes), so personally I don't count that as a factor.
Granted, the warriors have no innate bonus against the defending civ (unless they use horses or spearmen), but the Eburones ability fuels the ability to get Agoge and Oligarchy faster, as well as providing adjacency bonuses from the ability, and possibly flanking bonuses from Military Tradition as well (if the timings work out and we can afford to get it early).
Those bonuses from Eburones by themselves should offset production disadvantages of the UU, as even 3 adjacent warriors with an archer or two behind should provide a leg up when it comes to combat.
Testing of course needs to be done to see how fast we can rush down the civics tree to get Agoge and Oligarchy, but if it works out in a reasonable timeframe I'd say that the Gauls seem to actually have a very strong rushing potential over a vanilla civ.
And speaking of vanilla civs, I frequently use an early warrior/archer rush to take down my neighbours with it if I get an opening to do so, and Gaul at the face of it looks to present stronger options than the ordinary vanilla civ.
I usually also see swordsmen (or horsemen) before walls in my games when rushing a neighbour.
And in the case of swordsmen/horsemen I'd say that Gaul again has a leg up over the vanilla civ, since a vanilla civ is usually behind in tech and has to make do with warriors (unless rushing bronze working), while the Gaesatae will offset much of that tech gap with it's +10 and allow Gaul to stay competitive with a significantly cheaper unit to produce compared to swordsmen.

Is this on the basis of it being more expensive?
It has a natural advantage over other warriors from Eburones ability - even alone, engaging in melee combat forces at least +2 - not to mention it gets +5 vs districts.

Agree, and considering that they get Agoge much faster to help offset the early cost (and possibly Oligarchy in a reasonable timeframe), these warriors/archers look brutal when massed early.
Perhaps especially the archers, as +4 would be easy to get and put them nearly at Pitati Archer levels of raw combat strength (even if Pitati Archers have other bonuses, like lower production costs and 3 movement).
Overall (and without any testing done, mind you), I'd say that judging by the bonuses, Gaul seems to be a top 5 civilization for ancient era rush potential.

 

[Lily_Lancer]

Agree, and considering that they get Agoge much faster to help offset the early cost (and possibly Oligarchy in a reasonable timeframe), these warriors/archers look brutal when massed early.
Perhaps especially the archers, as +4 would be easy to get and put them nearly at Pitati Archer levels of raw combat strength (even if Pitati Archers have other bonuses, like lower production costs and 3 movement).
Overall (and without any testing done, mind you), I'd say that judging by the bonuses, Gaul seems to be a top 5 civilization for ancient era rush potential.

Talking about Top 5, we already have USA, Egypt, Aztecs, Sumeria, Gran Columbia, Nubia and Maya.

 

[Laurana Kanan]

Walls are usually not up in the ancient era (apart from City States on Deity iirc, sometimes)

CSs get walls automatically in the Ancient Era on Immortal and Diety.

 

[Oberinspektor Derrick]

CSs get walls automatically in the Ancient Era on Immortal and Diety.

Is that really so though?
I noticed it myself that city states would get automatic walls on Immo/Deity earlier, but recently I've noticed that they didn't (though they got them very early, esp. on Deity) so I was kind of convinced that it requires them to build them.
A bug perhaps?

 

[Bast]

I'll start a game with Gaul on Highlands map tomorrow and include Korea and go for Science victory.

 

[Kupe Navigator]

ah yes the guy who added the part said that the wiki is Korean and not "western" website so view points from here are invalid. We have our viewpoint and they have their viewpoint.
Even when they didn't do research.
And he is calling me rude.
How typical

 

[Oberinspektor Derrick]

Talking about Top 5, we already have USA, Egypt, Aztecs, Sumeria, Gran Columbia, Nubia and Maya.

Agreeing with that list, but not USA and Maya (and maybe not Egypt).
USA depends on whether or not you fight on your home continent, and +5 as the only bonus isn't that game breaking (especially if your target is on a different continent, where it flat out doesn't work) - Gaul on the other hand will quickly reach similar levels of combat strength, but without the RNG element to it.
Chariot archers are ok I guess (but it is the low-prio wheel tech, and is rather expensive to build at 120 cogs, if we're to consider that), and with Hul'che it's kind of a mixed bag for me - You could of course rush with them (they are fantastic units!), but on the other hand you have less of an incentive to conquer your neighbours compared to other civs (unless their cities are within your capital's radius), and especially because Mayans have to make hard choices on whether they need to make their first builders or continue the siege.
Gaul on the other hand actually wants to build units, if only for the culture bonus early on, so you're already heavily incentivized to go to war in the Ancient Era to get additional return on your investment, and it seem to keep picking up in strength from there on.

Gaul just feels strong overall, all things considered.
I definitely see myself using Gaul in the future for Ancient Era rushes.

 

[lotrmith]

Of course Gaul is op... they get free bonuses for everything you're going to be doing anyways, starting in the Ancient Era. Building a mine? Have some culture, and free tiles. Building a combat unit? Have some more culture. It's 6 culture per scout, 7 per slinger... who knows how much for UU (maybe 10+.. it'd be 8 for a warrior).

Researching Iron Working and building their UD activates apprenticeship to give all their mines +1 production?

Moving units together? Have some combat bonuses. UU attacking a city? Have some combat bonuses. UU attacking anything with higher base strength? Have some combat bonuses.

Early bonuses are the best bonuses. Culture and production are huge. Early combat bonuses are huge
Gaul gets these early and carries them through the entire game.

 

[DeutschDachs]

Of course Gaul is op... they get free bonuses for everything you're going to be doing anyways, starting in the Ancient Era. Building a mine? Have some culture, and free tiles. Building a combat unit? Have some more culture. It's 6 culture per scout, 7 per slinger... who knows how much for UU (maybe 10+.. it'd be 8 for a warrior).

Researching Iron Working and building their UD activates apprenticeship to give all their mines +1 production?

Moving units together? Have some combat bonuses. Attacking a city? Have some combat bonuses. UU attacking anything with higher base strength? Have some combat bonuses.

Early bonuses are the best bonuses. Culture and production are huge. Early combat bonuses are huge
Gaul gets these early and carries them through the entire game.

This is why their design is so boring to me. It's basically "just play Civ as you normally would" and you get some neat bonuses. Only difference is their district placement but that's not really something to get excited about

 

[Lily_Lancer]

Chariot archers are ok I guess (but it is the low-prio wheel tech, and is rather expensive to build at 120 cogs, if we're to consider that),

Well, I suggest you play some games. How long since your last Civ6 game? We all know the game updates frequently, and we also know that the cost of the Egypt archer has changed to 90 since 2018.

 

[Tiger Genocide]

Agreeing with that list, but not USA and Maya (and maybe not Egypt).
USA depends on whether or not you fight on your home continent, and +5 as the only bonus isn't that game breaking (especially if your target is on a different continent, where it flat out doesn't work) - Gaul on the other hand will quickly reach similar levels of combat strength, but without the RNG element to it.
Chariot archers are ok I guess (but it is the low-prio wheel tech, and is rather expensive to build at 120 cogs, if we're to consider that), and with Hul'che it's kind of a mixed bag for me - You could of course rush with them (they are fantastic units!), but on the other hand you have less of an incentive to conquer your neighbours compared to other civs (unless their cities are within your capital's radius), and especially because Mayans have to make hard choices on whether they need to make their first builders or continue the siege.
Gaul on the other hand actually wants to build units, if only for the culture bonus early on, so you're already heavily incentivized to go to war in the Ancient Era to get additional return on your investment, and it seem to keep picking up in strength from there on.

Gaul just feels strong overall, all things considered.
I definitely see myself using Gaul in the future for Ancient Era rushes.

I agree with this. Egypt is more powerful in multiplayer. Due to the way the AIs act in singleplayer, the chariot archers do not make as much impact, but if you have the right terrain, an early rush with them can be a big problem for the other neighbors. If you have AI civs surrounded by jungles, hills, and mountains, the chariot archer is not so great. In multiplayer someone foolish enough to rush an Egypt player too late in the early game, will get their units decimated by chariot archers sitting in cities, then the follow up counter rush against them gets them wiped out, which is always hilarious to do to people.

You can sort of say the same thing about Teddy/USA, that bonus tends to be more of an issue in multiplayer. They are nothing special in singleplayer at all. Both of those civs are still mid tier. I think Maya's Hulche is good, but Maya's horrible maluses and poor design does not make them a real threat to anybody. The Hulche can take cities right out the gate like a Pitati Archer, cool. Now you have a suboptimal city placement that does not fit your rings, all because someone forward settled you. They need to fix Maya. Good unit bad civ.

Well, I suggest you play some games. How long since your last Civ6 game? We all know the game updates frequently, and we also know that the cost of the Egypt archer has changed to 90 since 2018.

You are correct about the cost change and whatnot Lily, but you still have to research the wheel before you can even build one chariot archer. Egypt isn't turn 1 nasty. The Pitati archer is early ancient era. So early you do not want to rush them the minute the game starts, unless you are Sumeria. With Egypt you have a larger window of time to rush them before they can get 3 of those out a wreck your army. Maybe you cannot wipe them out, but you could always get one or two cities. On Deity its a bit tougher to do this because the AIs are further along in tech, but often times I can still get a city from Cleo, two if I am lucky, then try to peace out.

 

[Lily_Lancer]

You are correct about the cost change and whatnot Lily, but you still have to research the wheel before you can even build one chariot archer. Egypt isn't turn 1 nasty. The Pitati archer is early ancient era. So early you do not want to rush them the minute the game starts, unless you are Sumeria. With Egypt you have a larger window of time to rush them before they can get 3 of those out a wreck your army. Maybe you cannot wipe them out, but you could always get one or two cities. On Deity its a bit tougher to do this because the AIs are further along in tech, but often times I can still get a city from Cleo, two if I am lucky, then try to peace out.

2 Techs for Archery, 2 techs for wheel. The Egypt archer is not later than Pitati, just faster and stronger.

Egypt is maybe the only Civ that can ancient rush neighbor Chandragputa on online speed. (Chandra will get war elephant & walls around T20, what else civ can rush him?)

 

[Oberinspektor Derrick]

Well, I suggest you play some games. How long since your last Civ6 game? We all know the game updates frequently, and we also know that the cost of the Egypt archer has changed to 90 since 2018.

Honest mistake, I just looked up the information from the wiki and went with that, as individual numbers like that (and what year they changed) aren't exactly common knowledge to keep in one's mind.
No need to be a **** about it though.

This is why their design is so boring to me. It's basically "just play Civ as you normally would" and you get some neat bonuses. Only difference is their district placement but that's not really something to get excited about

Kind of, but for me Gaul changes up the game significantly because you can leverage the culture boost (from units that is) to rush down civics you otherwise wouldn't be able to get that early, opening up interesting choices in regards to the early game.
The most synergistic seems to be the war path though, but even here you have some interesting options.

Looking forward to testing it, despite having a go with Byzantium first!