The Celts

[Txurce]

Just FYI new beliefs need to use existing belief mechanics.

G

Meaning no additional trade routes?

 

[Gazebo]

Meaning no additional trade routes?

Correct.

 

[CrazyG]

Just FYI new beliefs need to use existing belief mechanics.

G

You didn't happen to have any unused concepts for Celtic pantheons, did you?

 

[Gazebo]

You didn't happen to have any unused concepts for Celtic pantheons, did you?

No I made them all.

 

[ElliotS]

Just FYI new beliefs need to use existing belief mechanics.

G

Is no from isolation also not okay then?

 

[CrazyG]

No religions give them currently, but great person points are possible to do, right?

It turns out that Lugh, Authority, and rushing markets is really good. Cities earn 3 , 4 , 4 , and 7 plus whatever local yield once the merchant is working. Market first in all cities, after that a monument. Cities still grow because of food for border growth and high culture output. It also goes a long way towards fighting unhappiness. I finished Authority on turn 56, and got a prophet on turn 68 while building zero shrines.

Lugh needs a big nerf, maybe to 2 , 2 , and 2 in cities with specialists but scaling with era. The 1 culture for world wonders is pretty negligible, I was too busy building settlers, markets and army to build wonders.

 

[ElliotS]

No religions give them currently, but great person points are possible to do, right?

It turns out that Lugh, Authority, and rushing markets is really good. Cities earn 3 , 4 , 4 , and 7 plus whatever local yield once the merchant is working. Market first in all cities, after that a monument. Cities still grow because of food for border growth and high culture output. It also goes a long way towards fighting unhappiness. I finished Authority on turn 56, and got a prophet on turn 68 while building zero shrines.

Lugh needs a big nerf, maybe to 2 , 2 , and 2 in cities with specialists but scaling with era. The 1 culture for world wonders is pretty negligible, I was too busy building settlers, markets and army to build wonders.

That's what I was saying. It's much better than Dagda. It's why I wanted to make it not so front-loaded. At 2 it would need a better secondary effect, like +1// from Palace, Universities and Banks.

 

[kawyua]

Threads like these make me wonder how much a head start in base yields mean with how the game is now. Snowballing is definitely a mechanic that the player can abuse with these yields, but how much is that really worth? mmmm - it needs context, one that everyone can imagine. I don't think I can yet.

The bonuses, the advantages, and the power from yields like this.

In comparison to other civs, yes, it definitely has more base yields, but every other civ also has some uniquely strong mechanic to compensate.

Its a bit of just where I am in my understanding of the game, at least how I have to play against the ai. There are some ai that can snowball so hard that what a player can snowball with these base yields become paltry in comparison. Understandably, this isn't fair to say, but the game was never really fair against the player.

It is very hard to snowball - at least, as far as I can see. There are so many mechanics to dissuade snowballing that what is op becomes very hard to say.

Maybe the celts should be allowed something like epona, dagda or lugh because its strength comes from the consistency of its start and not from its overwhelming strength to beat anything that comes its way. Base yields are too subtle that saying the timing of policies or religion might not be enough.

yeah, its asking a bit too much. I'll need to play through all these myself to understand.

I think the same thing has to do with trying to have scaling in pantheon beliefs. Why is that necessary? What is too front loaded to have to negotiate some scaling in the future? base yields scales already with how the person uses it over time, so what exactly is in there that makes it too much?

 

[CrazyG]

That's what I was saying. It's much better than Dagda. It's why I wanted to make it not so front-loaded. At 2 it would need a better secondary effect, like +1// from Palace, Universities and Banks.

I always prefer to get a fresh experience with something before tweaking its balance. I really don't think it needs it anything else. I think you have set a target power level for these pantheons above where they need to be

@kawyua
Interesting thoughts. I think an example of a potential snowball is Arabia. He can snowball to an extreme degree, but only in the hands of a skilled player with a good start and a little luck. so I think Arabia is a fair and fun civ.

Mannanan has some crazy snowball potential, but is limited by terrain and presents challenges to overcome (no extra science or culture from your civ or pantheon)

But some of these Celtic options aren't healthy or balanced. Lugh gives you such a strong start that I don't see how others could catch up. Its a game winning snowball that seems pretty consistent; doesn't depend on terrain or starting luxuries in any way. You asked some big theoretical questions there, hopefully I made my point of view more clear

 

[ElliotS]

Morrigan, Harbinger of Strife: Earn , , and Points from kills (1CS = 1 yield scaling with gamespeed). +2 from Barracks, Armories and Citadels.
Epona, the Great Mare: +12 , +12 , and +12 when your Borders expand, scaling with Era.
Bran, the Sleeping Guardian: +10 HP Healed in friendly territory, +25% Growth, and +12 when a Citizen is born, scaling with era.
Lugh, the Skilled One: +2 , +2 , and +2 in Cities with a Specialist, scaling with era, and +2 from Markets.
Dagda, the All-Father: +1, +1, +1 , and +1 for every 4 Followers of your Pantheon in owned cities. (No change)
Ogma, the Learned: +1 for every 3 Citizens in a city, and +3 +3 Great Scientist points in the Capital. + equal to science per turn when you discover a tech.
Nuada, the Silver-Handed King: +1 for every 10 per turn, and +1 Golden Age Points for every 5 per turn. +2 Gold per Market and City Connection.
Rhiannon, Goddess of Sovereignty: +1 , +1 from Farms. +1 , +1 from Pastures. +1 , +1 from Mines, +1, +1 from Lumber Mills, +2, +1 in cities with city connections.
Mannanan, Son of the Sea: +3 , +3 , and +3 in coastal Cities.+1 and from fishing boats and Lighthouses.
Cernunnos, the Horned Stag: +1 and from Forests, +1 and from Jungles. +1 from Camps and + 1 , & from plantations.

Reasoning:
Lugh was already great with authority, but now is good for progress as well because you can support the specialist. The bonuses are also less front-loaded.

Rhiannon focuses entirely on your domestic development. It has good upside, but also requires significant investment, is limited by number of tiles you can work/improve and vulnerable to being invaded. It's obviously best for progress, but I think Authority could make it work as well.

 

[Enrico Swagolo]

Green Mario probably doesn't need +2 Food from markets, scaling will make it very good anyway. I really dislike your ideas having bonuses on the same thing for the same pantheons, like both Luigi the Skilled One and Nude Ada the Silver King have stuff added to markets, and the latter also shares city connection bonus with Rhiannon. Rhiannon really got way too much. You'd have bonuses on nearly every tile in every city (insane sort of bonuses) AND for city connections. It also obsoletes Cernunnos. I'd rather have tons of bonuses on Farms while also getting insane yields from pastures, mines and city connections which are all put together way more common, knowing later my gain from forests will be pretty much the same anyway. You're really adding way too much to your ideas, Celts don't need to have their UA be worth 3 regular UAs, after the buffs everything they have is great, even the UB.

I think maybe some of the others in this thread were right and instead of balancing around Dagda-tier pantheons, we should instead slightly nerf these and give small or moderate buffs to those that really are too weak, like the +1C +25% growth one, Oghma, etc. Even with Dagda at 5, Oghma wouldn't be worth picking in his current form.

 

[ElliotS]

Green Mario probably doesn't need +2 Food from markets, scaling will make it very good anyway. I really dislike your ideas having bonuses on the same thing for the same pantheons, like both Luigi the Skilled One and Nude Ada the Silver King have stuff added to markets, and the latter also shares city connection bonus with Rhiannon. Rhiannon really got way too much. You'd have bonuses on nearly every tile in every city (insane sort of bonuses) AND for city connections. It also obsoletes Cernunnos. I'd rather have tons of bonuses on Farms while also getting insane yields from pastures, mines and city connections which are all put together way more common, knowing later my gain from forests will be pretty much the same anyway. You're really adding way too much to your ideas, Celts don't need to have their UA be worth 3 regular UAs, after the buffs everything they have is great, even the UB.

I think maybe some of the others in this thread were right and instead of balancing around Dagda-tier pantheons, we should instead slightly nerf these and give small or moderate buffs to those that really are too weak, like the +1C +25% growth one, Oghma, etc. Even with Dagda at 5, Oghma wouldn't be worth picking in his current form.

First the idea that the Celt's UA would be better than others: Remember that it also replaces a normal pantheon. 3 faith per city wouldn't be a pantheon I would choose very often. So do you really think Dagda is better than Aztec UA + God-King?

Do you think that my suggested Ogma is better than Korea'a UA + anything?

Do you think that Eponia (at +12 ) is better than Russia UA + God of Expanse?

Do you honestly think that any of these would be better than Byzantium having a WHOLE extra belief and 100% free choice in beliefs? Even moreso when you realize you can choose to do a spreader strategy with them that you simply can't do with the Celts? (Or at least not well)

If you do you're crazy. These are all slightly weaker than a normal UA, as they're supposed to be. Claiming we should nerf them to be worse than Dagda (currently middle of the pack. Lugh, Eponia & Cernunnos are all better in the right place.) would make Celts useless. I'm trying to balance around Dagda because it's where these things should be.

Also for Rhiannon: The tile yields are both high-investment and only 2 yields each. Additionally the one with the best yields is the least plentiful. (pastures) To equal an ancient era Lugh with my proposed nerf you'd need 4 tiles improved and worked in each city.

To equal current Lugh you'd need a whopping 6 improve tiles worked in each city.

Plantations, villages, fishing boats, camps, forts, lakes, marshes, quarries, coast, specialists, great person tiles and everything else not listed don't count. That's half or more of your population in many cities.

You have a point about the city connections, so I removed that.

I seriously think you're being too flippent with your dismissal of my proposal without putting in proper thought.

Morrigan, Harbinger of Strife: Earn , , and Points from kills (1CS = 1 yield scaling with gamespeed). +2 from Barracks, Armories and Citadels.
Epona, the Great Mare: +12 , +12 , and +12 when your Borders expand, scaling with Era.
Bran, the Sleeping Guardian: +10 HP Healed in friendly territory, +25% Growth, and +12 when a Citizen is born, scaling with era.
Lugh, the Skilled One: +2 , +2 , and +2 in Cities with a Specialist, scaling with era, and +2 from Markets.
Dagda, the All-Father: +1, +1, +1 , and +1 for every 4 Followers of your Pantheon in owned cities. (No change)
Ogma, the Learned: +1 for every 3 Citizens in a city, and +3 +3 Great Scientist points in the Capital. + equal to science per turn when you discover a tech.
Nuada, the Silver-Handed King: +1 for every 10 per turn, and +1 Golden Age Points for every 5 per turn. +2 Gold per Village and City Connection.
Rhiannon, Goddess of Sovereignty: +1 , +1 from Farms. +1 , +1 from Pastures. +1 , +1 from Mines, +1, +1 from Lumber Mills.
Mannanan, Son of the Sea: +3 , +3 , and +3 in coastal Cities.+1 and from fishing boats and Lighthouses.
Cernunnos, the Horned Stag: +1 and from Forests, +1 and from Jungles. +1 from Camps and + 1 , & from plantations.

 

[CrazyG]

First the idea that the Celt's UA would be better than others: Remember that it also replaces a normal pantheon. 3 faith per city wouldn't be a pantheon I would choose very often. So do you really think Dagda is better than Aztec UA + God-King?

While incredibly boring, I think 3 faith per city would be a solid pantheon that many strategies would love. Its better than Goddess of Wisdom was pre-nerf. People take God of the Expanse as tradition solely for its high faith output, 3 faith per city would be about the same as borders growing every 7 turns (which is faster than you can realistically get early game)

Rhiannon, Goddess of Sovereignty: +1 , +1 from Farms. +1 , +1 from Pastures. +1 , +1 from Mines, +1, +1 from Lumber Mills.

During the early part of the game this is pretty close to getting 2 yields per citizen, while Dagda is arguably too strong at effectively 1 yield per follower. If you start on a mining luxury, almost every worked tile can qualify for this until villages. The Celts can consistently get cathedrals too

I'd rather not see pantheons give all of ,,,, and. Its much more interesting if the options are deficient in at least one of those.

Morrigan, Harbinger of Strife: Earn , , and Points from kills (1CS = 1 yield scaling with gamespeed). +2 from Barracks, Armories and Citadels.

This out Aztecs the Aztec, doesn't it?
Aztec kill a warrior, they earn 6, 6.
Celts kills a warrior, they earn 6 ,6,6, and another 12 if the kill is with a pict. For these civs, > (I didn't include Authority yields because its the same for both)

Its 6 per kill, +2 from Barracks, Armories and Citadels, and 3per city, that is much stronger than a typical pantheon.

 

[ElliotS]

While incredibly boring, I think 3 faith per city would be a solid pantheon that many strategies would love. Its better than Goddess of Wisdom was pre-nerf. People take God of the Expanse as tradition solely for its high faith output, 3 faith per city would be about the same as borders growing every 7 turns (which is faster than you can realistically get early game)

God of expanse is better though, because it gives faster border expansion and combos with authority.

During the early part of the game this is pretty close to getting 2 yields per citizen, while Dagda is arguably too strong at effectively 1 yield per follower. If you start on a mining luxury, almost every worked tile can qualify for this until villages. The Celts can consistently get cathedrals too

I'd rather not see pantheons give all of ,,,, and. Its much more interesting if the options are deficient in at least one of those.

So during the early part of the game you're working not just all improved tiles, but also no plantations, villages, fishing boats, camps, forts, lakes, marshes, quarries, coast, specialists, great person tiles or anything else not listed?

I'm calling BS.

You'll get between 1.5 to 0.5 yields per follower over the course of a good game, probably closer to the lower end.

This out Aztecs the Aztec, doesn't it?
Aztec kill a warrior, they earn 6, 6.
Celts kills a warrior, they earn 6 ,6,6, and another 12 if the kill is with a pict. For these civs, > (I didn't include Authority yields because its the same for both)

Its 6 per kill, +2 from Barracks, Armories and Citadels, and 3per city, that is much stronger than a typical pantheon.

Except that Aztecs A) Get a hundred turns of golden-ages from their UA B) Also get a regular pantheon.

So the Aztecs can grab God-King and get stable late game yields, slightly worse yields per kill and tons of GA. That's better.

 

[CrazyG]

God of expanse is better though, because it gives faster border expansion and combos with authority.

3 faith per city is worth a lot more faith than expanse during the time period when faith matters most, even with culture luxuries and early monuments. To match you need to be at growing every 7 turns, which doesn't happen. Every 10 turns is extremely fast. There are games where I take God of Expanse but not Authority. India is a notable example of a civ that just sometimes uses it as a faith bomb, the faster border growth by itself isn't something you care about in this situation

So during the early part of the game you're working not just all improved tiles, but also no plantations, villages, fishing boats, camps, forts, lakes, marshes, quarries, coast, specialists, great person tiles or anything else not listed?

I'm calling BS.

You'll get between 1.5 to 0.5 yields per follower over the course of a good game, probably closer to the lower end.

In my current game all tiles worked in my capital qualify for this on turn 60, not even factoring that I wasn't planning around this. But oh no, in my second city there is a fish! Guess I'll just work a farm instead. A farm in a triangle is is better than a fish with a lighthouse for less investment. That doesn't consider Cathedrals either.

Even if you are right and I'm full of BS and my math is totally wrong, its too strong by your math. 1.5 yields per citizen is way too much in ancient era. Yes I sometimes work fishing boats, camps and plantations. That doesn't balance the pantheon, its still crazy broken on mining luxury starts. I know I could snowball yields enough to secure a game before villages even unlock.

Lets say it gives only 1 yield per citizen on average. That's still better than the current Dagda is, which we might nerf! Not working in every single situation doesn't make it balanced, its going to be way too strong on inland mining starts (and a solid choice for most situations)

Except that Aztecs A) Get a hundred turns of golden-ages from their UA B) Also get a regular pantheon.

So the Aztecs can grab God-King and get stable late game yields, slightly worse yields per kill and tons of GA. That's better.

It shouldn't even be this close in my opinion. The celts need to pay a premium for their flexibility, otherwise they just outperform comparable civs.

3 faith per city and that production bonus would be a great pantheon. So then its science per kill vs golden ages. Long game golden ages are definently better, but early on (when the Celts are aiming to snowball) that science is going to be really potent. Its better than the Aztec in a lot of ways and I think thats too much

 

[ElliotS]

3 faith per city is worth a lot more faith than expanse during the time period when faith matters most, even with culture luxuries and early monuments. To match you need to be at growing every 7 turns, which doesn't happen. Every 10 turns is extremely fast. There are games where I take God of Expanse but not Authority. India is a notable example of a civ that just sometimes uses it as a faith bomb, the faster border growth by itself isn't something you care about in this situation


In my current game all tiles worked in my capital qualify for this on turn 60, not even factoring that I wasn't planning around this. But oh no, in my second city there is a fish! Guess I'll just work a farm instead. A farm in a triangle is is better than a fish with a lighthouse for less investment. That doesn't consider Cathedrals either.

Even if you are right and I'm full of BS and my math is totally wrong, its too strong by your math. 1.5 yields per citizen is way too much in ancient era. Yes I sometimes work fishing boats, camps and plantations. That doesn't balance the pantheon, its still crazy broken on mining luxury starts. I know I could snowball yields enough to secure a game before villages even unlock.

Lets say it gives only 1 yield per citizen on average. That's still better than the current Dagda is, which we might nerf! Not working in every single situation doesn't make it balanced, its going to be way too strong on inland mining starts (and a solid choice for most situations)

It shouldn't even be this close in my opinion. The celts need to pay a premium for their flexibility, otherwise they just outperform comparable civs.

3 faith per city and that production bonus would be a great pantheon. So then its science per kill vs golden ages. Long game golden ages are definently better, but early on (when the Celts are aiming to snowball) that science is going to be really potent. Its better than the Aztec in a lot of ways and I think thats too much

God of Expanse nets me 1st religion almost every time on Deity, with Authority and non-religious civs. That's the relevant statistic.

1.5 yields per citizen was the high-end. You're misrepresenting me there.

Also we shouldn't nerf Dagda. It's not OP.

Also you're completely forgetting/ignoring that you need techs, workers and the ability to defend from barbs/other civs to get your yields. You can't get anything from lumber mills before you unlock them. You obviously will rush mining, but pastures also take a tech. I think you're overestimating this pantheon in the extreme.

Lastly the Aztecs have a better UB as well, so once again I think they're stronger. Do you honestly think that Science per kill is better than tons of golden ages and a better UB that enters earlier?

You're being ridiculous if you're really claiming them doing ANYTHING better than another civ that's overall better at what they're doing is too close.

If they're just worse than every other civ there's no reason to pick them now is there?

 

[CrazyG]

God of Expanse nets me 1st religion almost every time on Deity, with Authority and non-religious civs. That's the relevant statistic.

No its not a relevant statistic at all. Firslty because you are the only person who seems to be having that experience. Secondly because this whole thing began trying to value how good 3 faith per city is. You would still get first religion almost every time with 3 faith per city as a pantheon, it would be a very strong pantheon I see myself taking all the time because so many strategies are just desperate for secure, early religion. The Celts access to early faith is such an incredible asset, Boudicca's pantheons can't be as good as other civ's UAs. Honestly I think some of your suggestions are better than existing civs UAs

I've actually wondered for a while if the Iroquois are even better at forest that the Celts are, I think the answer is yes but barely. (I'm not super experienced with Iroquois and would appreciate thoughts from someone who is)

There are a lot of accounts of people really liking Morrigan and thinking its a great pantheon. Its design is great, I see zero need to add new features, just up the numbers. The concept is great.

And this leads in the Celts flexibility and why pick them. The Celts needs to be a little weak at everything they do, or else they outclass comparable civs. A great example is with that Epona, IDK if Russia is really worth playing. More raw yields for border expansion, a better mix of yields, I'm not locked into border blob every game. Boudicca is a swiss army knife as mentioned earlier and has guaranteed religion (which means even more flexibility). Please don't list what russia's other uniques do, I can read them and I know them. I just really question why play Russia and deal with all those challenges when the Celts make for such an easy game?

You constantly overbuff your suggestions. So much of this thread is spent just trying to chill out some of those overbuffs. This isn't a personal attack

On Rhiannon, you are overestimating the tech investment. I unlock mining first because of pictish warriors. I can then build mines and farms, which are going to be the most important two. Animal husbandry is cheap and already an early priority anyways. Yes I do have to build some workers, yes that is a downside but its smaller than the need to build markets for Lugh for more benefit. Its going to be OP for the same reason current Lugh is, its just too much early, I don't think the lumbermill buff even matters. 1.5 is achievable and 1.5 is far too strong. It needs to be balanced when you high roll the start for it, getting a fast worker out is already a solid play starting on mines.

If it averaged 1 yield per citizen that early on it would still be too strong, and there are going to be times its much higher than that. I really hope this thread does not get derailed by discussion of this suggestion, because I just don't see it happening. For more than just balance reasons, just the design of getting culture for mines on hills without resources, like why? Why do I get a super early cathedral as the Celts, that stacks with other cathedrals? That list you keep responding with, like what is your point? I'm sure as hell not working forts with these uber farms and mines available. I guess marshes get worked for a few turns while the worker builds the farm? I don't think lumbermills will even happen because I'm probably going to chop for a mine or farm way before that happens.

 

[kawyua]

Yeah... bringing up God of the expanse is a whole other can of worms. The idea of getting more faith to secure a religion is the issue of how black and white the margins are to getting a religion. I wish the transition was smoother and the bonuses were much more toned down, but that is just how it is. And I can accept that.

But I'd rather not have the pantheons any more stronger than it is right now. having yields >1 per citizen this early in the game is very dangerous for snowballing reasons, even for things like food or faith or culture. These sort of yields can be translated to other yields pretty easily and in turn, breaks the balance of snowballing with citizens. That balance is just way to delicate as it is that the game can not handle such a scalable influx of yields. If there is a line that we can draw, that we have to draw, it is at the point where the needs of the citizens are easily met. That point is based on the how the global average of all the ai scales, and a rather common reference that every civ needs to adhere to. For all intents and purposes, we should keep the bonuses around <=1 if it scales per citizen and per city should be less than lugh

I also agree with Crazy G with nearly all his counterpoints - this has to be done conservatively. I appreciate the thoroughness of all your responses btw, if my thoughts count for anything. Thanks.

A great point Crazy G pointed out was the issue of the celts being too much of a swiss army knife. They can take away the identity of someone like Russia with epona and do everything just so much better. Celts are top tier as they are, and its issues can be easily associated with her pantheons.

Although, I kind of agree with Eliots that the pantheons isn't really the problem that makes them op (oh but... as Gazebo said, we should keep the ideas within existing pantheon mechanics)

I think the biggest issue I have with the celts is how early you can bully neighboring civs and city states. I've always disliked how much a player can cripple an ai, but the celts can absolutely demolish with minimal investment.

The pictish warrior has 12 CS coming right at mining. That's kind of too strong. With some lucky ruins, it is pretty common to have 2-4 by turn 25 and then.. more:

This is the second time I can get a heavy tribute from this nearby city state. Sure! I'll take a free wonder(I'm building mausoleum if you can see in the bottom left corner)! Yeah, I got 4 policies already and about to get the 5th at turn 55! Yeah, 91 production is great! ...

2 turns ago there was this..., another city state right next to it that I'm farming. culture city state and about 104 culture. Yeah second time.

9 pictish warriors at turn 55 is pretty good. With my spare time I go to the neighboring ethiopia and bully. Can't wait to get that settler of his. They eventually come out.


The economy of the celts have is too consistent with how frontloaded all the yields come in and the influx from tributes makes them snowball on par with the ai. Its a combination of things that makes the celts always very strong... Something needs to give.

 

[ElliotS]

I think that there are a few key advantages to the celts:
1- They're focused on a strong development game.

They get literally 0 bonuses to fighting. No stronger GGs. No stacking bonuses on attacking. No OP promotions on all their units. ETC.

Even their UU is more focused on their economy than war, being great for bullying, getting a religion and harassing enemies.

2- They're practically guaranteed a religion.
3- They've got one of the best UUs in the game.
I think the "frankenstien a civ" thread pionted out how good the Pictish Warriors are. They're able to guarantee a religion, bully like crazy and free up your early game tech choices.

I think a nerf to them wouldn't be unwarranted, and might be better than ruining their pantheons.

The celts also have some major weaknesses:
1- They don't want to spread their religion.
Reforming isn't just hard for you, but it also gives your opponents the advantage to reform easier. If you do choose to spread you're giving the AI a UA. That's silly.
2- They've got no bonuses aside from their yields.
Russia gets extra strategics. Aztecs get GAs. Korea gets extra great people. Every other civ gets other bonuses from their UA that the celts don't get. All they have is their yields. If you crap on their yields too hard they're worthless.

That list you keep responding with, like what is your point?

To keep discussion goal-oriented. You shoot down suggestions and ideas, but rarely propose anything yourself. I love discussing this stuff, but I also want to focus on solutions and providing G with real solutions that he can implement. (Or change and implement or whatever)

And this leads in the Celts flexibility and why pick them. The Celts needs to be a little weak at everything they do, or else they outclass comparable civs.

I think the key is "a little weak." It doesn't matter how flexible they are if every choice is worthless.

That said for the sake of discussion I'll take most of what you said into my suggestions because I think having changes to test would be better than going back and forth over hypotheticals.

The economy of the celts have is too consistent with how frontloaded all the yields come in and the influx from tributes makes them snowball on par with the ai. Its a combination of things that makes the celts always very strong... Something needs to give.

Yeah the celts are pure yields and domestic development, by design. It gives them a lot of consistency when in the right hands.

Morrigan, Harbinger of Strife: Earn , , and Points from kills (1CS = 1 yield scaling with gamespeed).
Epona, the Great Mare: +10 , +10 , and +10 when your Borders expand, scaling with Era.
Bran, the Sleeping Guardian: +10 HP Healed in friendly territory, +25% Growth, and +12 when a Citizen is born, scaling with era.
Lugh, the Skilled One: +2 , +2 , and +2 in Cities with a Specialist, scaling with era, and +2 from Markets.
Dagda, the All-Father: +1, +1, +1 , and +1 for every 4 Followers of your Pantheon in owned cities. (No change)
Ogma, the Learned: +1 for every 3 Citizens in a city, and +3 +3 Great Scientist points in the Capital. + equal to science per turn when you discover a tech.
Nuada, the Silver-Handed King: +1 for every 10 per turn, and +1 Golden Age Points for every 5 per turn. +2 Gold per Village and City Connection.
Rhiannon, Goddess of Sovereignty: +1 from Farms. +1 from Pastures. +1 from Mines, +1 from Lumber Mills.
Mannanan, Son of the Sea: +3 , +3 , and +3 in coastal Cities.+1 and from fishing boats and Lighthouses.
Cernunnos, the Horned Stag: +1 and from Forests, +1 and from Jungles. +1 from Camps and + 1 , & from plantations.

Reasoning:
Morrigan will almost certainly be too weak. Why take a risk to potentially get yields when Lugh will always give the same or better? This Lugh is nerfed compared to normal btw, and will still blow Morrigan out of the water. I seriously think you're completely out of your mind if you think this is okay, but whatever.

Epona I think changing the culture to production would have been enough of a nerf, but if people don't then whatever.

Rhiannon. Now the max you can get from it is 1 yield per person, and they're mostly meh yield types and none are culture. Also they don't scale.

 

[CrazyG]

Maybe 50 bonus culture for bullying a CS, available at your second social policy, it just too much. Your third policy only costs 126, I regularly hit my third policy within 5 turns of my second. To be frank, I find civs without early game uniques are garbage as Authority, compared to Zulu or anyone with a spearmen UU. A game earlier this week I started near 2 culture CS and completed Authority on turn 58