It has been written about in the forum for quite a while now, so we might as well make a thread. With the increased introduction of so many new civilisations, it makes no sense to maintain such a generic name.
Factual Gaelic military organisation
9th century. Introduction of heavy infantry to the Green Isle due to contact with the Vikings clad in iron chain mail and helmets. The Gaels realised the need for heavier weapons to penetrate the large, heavy Norse shields and chain mail. Heavier bladed swords and inlaid weapons became more common, as did iron helmets and chain mail. Gaels began to regularly use the large inastate axe known as the âDanish Axeâ. Gaels infantry troops began to fight with broadsword and mace and regularly wore heavier armour alongside their native darts and bows. These heavy troops became known as gallowglaigh often supplied by hybrid Viking-Gaelic clans, and formed an important part of Gaelic armies in the future.
11th century. Kings maintained small permanent fighting forces known as lucht tighe, who were often assigned houses and land in the kingâs monthly land. These were well-trained and well-equipped professional soldiers, comprising both infantry and cavalry forces. The arrival of the Norsemen in Ireland and Britain forced the Irish and Scots to use increasing numbers of heavily armoured gallowglass combined with fast skirmishing cavalry to effectively confront the well-armoured Norsemen. Apart from hobelars (highly mobile, lightly armoured skirmishers and horse archers used mainly for reconnaissance and ambush), the main Gaelic cavalry usually consisted of the king/chief-clan and his close relatives. The Gaelic knight practised bareback riding and wore chain mail and a basinet. So, a fully equipped medieval Irish army would, at that time, have included light infantry, heavy infantry and mixed cavalry.
12th century. Regular use of new weapons: the cavalry lance, the Lochaber axe and sparth, the modern sword of arms and the Scottish claymore.
13th-14th century. During the Wars of Scottish Independence, the troops of the Kingdom of Scotland had to develop a means of countering the army of the Kingdom of England that combined heavy cavalry and longbow. The Scottish rebels develops the schiltron (foot-soldiers armed with axe and spear, they fought in tight, mobile formations with adequate cavalry support) as a means to counter the Normans and their first use of combined arms warfare.
In AoE2 terms
Unique unit: rename the âWoad Raiderâ to âGallowglaighâ or âGallowglassâ or âRedshankâ.
Barracks: no change
Archery Range & Stable: add âBloodlinesâ and remove âHeavy Cavalry Archerâ and âPaladinâ. In essence, it depicts the major use of chivalry in the 11th century before it declined.
Siege Workshop: now part of their identity in the game.
There will probably be some other adjustments to be made that you can suggest.
I remember someone saying like Gallowglass doesnât match Woad Raiderâs speed feature.
It might be a viable way to make Gallowglass become an unique upgrade replacing Two Handed Sword and Champion, and have Woad Raider renamed and reskinned to something like Kern.
As the upgrade to Longsword, Gallowglass can gain some special, such as the ability to build towers, which fits in with their role as a strong defence for holding a position. This could also work well with Stronghold.
What would you do with Furor Celtica? One idea I thought of was to rename it âGreat Warpipesâ, abstractly representing that warriors played the warpipes to inspire each other during sieges. Not gonna deny that itâs a bit far-fetched and very likely not the best approach.
Furor Gaelic? If the point is to emphasise the Gaelic soldiersâ enthusiasm, why should it not be maintained?
In fact they were among the few soldiers who had two squires, they were basically nobles. One of the two squires carried extra spears. So in theory they could make an infantry unit that could switch to ranged. A hybrid Pikeman or Champs / Throwing Axeman to make a point.
In any case, I would settle for low-cost modifications. Considering that they have just redone the skin I doubt they want to make many changes. But even Redshank would be fine, ok, it would still be a slight stretch, but the name only indicates the Scottish mercenaries from the Highlands and Western Isles. The equipment was basically the common one.
Give the woad raider to Picts and make Celts Scots (or Gaels if there are no Irish).
Picts would look almost like a meso civ I think with a focus on fast infantry, light cavalry and skirmishers. Probably with a terrain bonus not based on elevation.
I guess Scots/Gaels would retain the heavy infantry and siege (?) core plus a bit of defense.
From a developerâs perspective, popularity and popular culture are more important than historical accuracy. For example, thatâs why Berserkers wore horned helmets, despite the fact that Vikings never actually wore them in battles.
âCeltâ is a much more well-known and popular name than âGaels.â If they go that route, more civilizations will have their names replaced with less-known but historically accurate ones.
As a casual player, the word âCeltsâ has much more appeal to me.
Warriors of every culture have a passion and enthusiasm for fighting. For this UT, itâs not entusiasm but fury like what Berserker famous with.
I feel like this is a term coined by the developers themselves at the time in Latin. Looking for historical references to it, I found these in the Wikipedia:
Charging into the enemy camp topless and without formation to stir up panic and fear, such image of barbarian became a reference for UT, but Iâm not sure itâs accurate for medieval Gaelic warfare. Especially, at the latest with the arrival of the Normans, we know that the Gaels began to value equipment and formations more and more and adopt a more scientific approach.
Furthermore, this ancient tribal warfare can hardly be associated with siege warfare. That kind of combat culture values ââraiding and plundering rather than occupying territories, and the spirit and traditions of single combat cannot abstractly reflect the organized combat required for siege.
I think the best compromise would be splitting the Celts, so people who want to keep Woad Raiders can still have them and people who want better representation of medieval Scottish and Irish people can also have what they want.
But for whatever reason people think âGaulsâ are too early for the timeline even though they have no problem with Woad Raiders as long as theyâre included in Celts, which makes no sense to me.
If it was only popularity to have integrated the Cumans, it makes no sense, I think most people did not know them (including me). And furthermore, again if one reasons by popularity, they should have renamed them to Scots long ago.
I know the Celtic revival is much more recent phenomenon and most celts in the Middle Ages didnât identify as such, but that doesnât change the fact that they are Celts. And itâs not like the term Gael meant the exact same thing back then, so itâs not really a perfect term either.
This game already uses anachronistic terms for other civs that in my opinion are far less justified, like the Aztecs (which I understand as itâs far more popular than Mexica), Britons (who should be called English, as some translations of the game did) or Byzantines (this one in particular I consider the worst offender)
