Civilisation Concept - The Welsh

Presenting the second civ in my hypothetical, needlessly Euro-centric split of the Celts into 4 parts. This time, the Welsh. Historically, the Welsh were known as ambush fighters, using knowledge of the terrain and powerful longbows to launch deadly attacks, but would often retreat in the face of stubborn resistance. I wanted the in-game Welsh to reflect this, with strong options for early-game aggression and a strong early economic advantage, but a weaker late-game.

The Welsh - Archer Civilisation

  • Villagers work 6% faster in the Dark Age.
  • Foot Archers move 5%/10%/15% faster in Feudal/Castle/Imperial Age. (Alternatively, +5/+5/+10% if they become too oppressive)
  • Spearman and Skirmisher food cost replaced by additional wood cost. (Both now cost 60 wood, 0 food)

Team Bonus: Lumber Camps and Mills support 2 population

Unique Unit - Saethwr
Welsh unique foot archer with a charged attack. Strong vs. Infantry. Cost 45 wood, 55 gold

The numbers (unique)
Hitpoints: 45 (50)
Attack: 6 +6 (+9) charged damage. Charge recovers in 22 (18) seconds
Range: 4
Armour: 0/0 (1/0)
Speed: 1.05 tiles/sec
Reload Time: 2 (1.9) sec
Bonus: +2(+3) vs. Spearmen

CA Unique Technology - Gwynedd Spearmen
Spearmen get +15 hitpoints. Cost 250 wood, 200 gold

IA Unique Technology - Helwyr
Saethwyr and the Archer-line get +2 attack. Cost 400 food, 300 gold

Tech Tree (missing technologies listed)

Archery Range

  • Hand Cannon
  • Parthian Tactics


  • Eagles
  • Champion


  • Paladin
  • Regional units


  • Bracer
  • Plate Barding Armour

Siege Workshop

  • Siege Ram
  • Siege Onager
  • Bombard Cannon


  • Masonry + Architecture
  • Bombard Tower
  • Fortified Wall


  • Elite Cannon Galleon
  • Shipwright


  • Atonement


  • Guilds
  • Stone Shaft Mining

Design Notes

  • The Dark Age gather bonus works out at approximately equivalent to the Lithuanian food bonus with a 22-24 pop advance. It’s obviously better the longer you spend in the Dark Age and a lot weaker with an earlier advance time. The broad nature of the bonus hopefully leaves the door open for a few different Feudal Age options, rather than funnelling you down the archer route
  • Welsh archers are very strong in Feudal and Castle, but the lack of Bracer hurts in Imp. The Helwyr unique technology is intended to be aggressively costed enough to serve as a decent alternative early-Imperial power spike.
  • The Saethwr is meant to capture the idea of ambush fighters, with fast movement and a very powerful opening volley. Their shorter range makes them ineffective against archers, but you have wood-only Skirmishers to help with them.

So you think its balanced to give archers extra attack and movement speed?

1 Like

I think the extra movement speed is strong. Maybe balanced, maybe not. It could easily be nerfed to +5%/+5%/+10% if +10% in the Castle Age is too powerful.

As for attack, they end up with only +1 compared to a generic FU arbalest, and they have -1 range, which is arguably more impactful. In post-Imperial, Welsh arbalests end up with pretty much the same damage output as Ethiopian arbalests, who have +1 range and have got there without having to pay more for a Castle and unique technology. If it does prove too much of an early-Imp power spike, you can put the price of Helwyr up very easily.

So yes, I think in context it is balanced.

But not in later ages? I suppose that makes it “balanced,” but at the cost of the game’s usual feeling of progression. Although I kind of like the concept of having a tradeoff to remaining in dark age longer, I don’t like the idea of villagers becoming worse once you hit Feudal.

This is probably fine, but I wouldn’t pair it with any other archer bonus/tech.

Wasn’t this a beta Lithuanians bonus? Being able to produce spears/skirms without dipping into food (and while benefitting from the faster gather rate of wood with double-bit) is pretty strong. Not too strong by itself, but I’d be wary of pairing it with a decent early game eco bonus or a strong synergistic military bonus.

Archers with charge attacks are an interesting idea, but I think are too hard to balance across a range of situations. Their charge attack will make them much too strong against traditional archer counters in much smaller numbers (for example with fletching/bodkin doing 10 damage to +2 knights on the first shot instead of 3 for xbows, and doing 7 damage to mangonels vs 1 for xbows). Especially on any UU with decent speed, the potential to shoot and micro away is too hard to counter (especially synergizing with their wood-only spearline) and too easy to abuse.

Is it the small United Kingdom state Wales that sometimes appears in cricket?

So…are they supposed to have Elephant Archers? Because I missed that on my last trip to Anglesey :stuck_out_tongue:

I personally think that the name of the Brits civ refers in a certain way to the Celtic Britons, that is: Welsh, Cornish, Breton and Pictish. I’m only talking about the name itself, because otherwise this civ is absolutely ENGLISH.

The history of the British Isles in the Middle Ages is very interesting, but there are too many places in the world that need much more love in the form of new civs and campaigns.

I think that if new content for the British Isles were to be added, the best opportunity would be the Vikings DLC (Scandinavian Umbrella split).

In a nutshell, we currently have two civilizations from the British Isles:

  1. Celts - who can represent Scots and Irish (Gaels peoples). This civ could be renamed to Gaels
  2. Britons - who are English but use the name Celtic Britons (English). This civ could be renamed to English

So in this situation a real British civ would have to be created. Well, unless someone decides that it would be better to create a completely new English civ, and leave the current British civ unchanged and consider it a representative of nations such as: Welsh, Cornish, Breton and Pictish.

I disagree with this, both about the name and the civ design. I’m pretty sure they’re using ‘Britons’ simply in the sense of ‘people from (Great) Britain’ (which, admittedly, is anachronistic, but that’s the usual modern meaning of the word). As for the civ design, it’s primarily based on England and Wales after Edward Longshanks’ completed his conquest of Wales. As far as I can tell, the only specifically English thing about it is the Town Centre bonus (presumably based on Anglo-Saxon burhs reusing material from existing fortified sites). The rest could apply equally well to Wales as to England.

And in fact, for the same reason, I’m confused by this civ proposal. To me, it seems less Welsh than Britons do already.

The Britons as a civ, at least in terms of their military bonuses, are completely English. The only Welsh aspect to the Britons archery package is the word “longbow” in the name of the unique unit, but the Briton archery as presented in game, i.e. massed, long range volley fire with longbows, was an English innovation and never used by the Welsh pre-English conquest

Welsh longbowmen fought at close range, they ambushed, and would quickly retreat into the woods if the course of battle turned against them. Hence faster moving archers and a short-range, high power archer UU

Hmm, ok, it sounds like your problem is with the way Longbowmen and archers generally are represented in the game, rather than anything to do with a difference between English and Welsh. Large groups of archers firing in volleys is an invention of Hollywood, based on later musket tactics. It wasn’t used by the English or anyone else. The long range of Longbowmen is a game mechanic to represent powerful bows, not a historical fact - longbows did not actually have a superlative range. In game, archers are always going to be more powerful when massed and focusing fire (i.e. firing in volleys), and that’s not specific to Longbowmen. In fact, the longer range of Longbowmen often makes focusing fire less important.