Welcome to a new thread to discuss matters religious within Rhye's and Fall Europe. Religion dominated many aspects of life in Europe under our timeframe (500 AD - 1800 AD), and our mod should reflect this importance. We have four main religions, and one special minor religion:

Catholicism
Orthodoxy
Protestantism
Islam
Judiasm (special)

Currently, the artwork we are using comes (with permission) from the Rapture (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=288054) mod. This provides a uniform set of symbols and colors across all buildings and units. The religious symbols and missionary art is great. I may want to touch up some of the building textures a bit later. The Protestants use mostly the generic Christian art (this is not attempting to make a religious/political statement) so I show only examples of the Catholic and Orthodox art below.

We have decided to include an inquisitor to remove non-state religions/buildings. There are several different implementations of this that have already been modded, and it would be easiest for us to use that. Should inquisitors have a prerequisite building? Should inquisitors be able to work on rival civs with whom you share open borders and a state religion?

http://forums.civfanatics.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=191113&stc=1&d=1223751613

http://forums.civfanatics.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=191114&stc=1&d=1223751613

http://forums.civfanatics.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=191115&stc=1&d=1223751613

http://forums.civfanatics.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=191116&stc=1&d=1223751613

Welcome to a new thread to discuss matters religious within Rhye's and Fall Europe. Religion dominated many aspects of life in Europe under our timeframe (500 AD - 1800 AD), and our mod should reflect this importance. We have four main religions, and one special minor religion:

Catholicism
Orthodoxy
Protestantism
Islam
Judiasm (special)

Currently, the artwork we are using comes (with permission) from the Rapture (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=288054) mod. This provides a uniform set of symbols and colors across all buildings and units. The religious symbols and missionary art is great. I may want to touch up some of the building textures a bit later. The Protestants use mostly the generic Christian art (this is not attempting to make a religious/political statement) so I show only examples of the Catholic and Orthodox art below.

We have decided to include an inquisitor to remove non-state religions/buildings. There are several different implementations of this that have already been modded, and it would be easiest for us to use that. Should inquisitors have a prerequisite building? Should inquisitors be able to work on rival civs with whom you share open borders and a state religion?


These are good questions.

If we go the building route, I'd favor making the building in question a national wonder, with a fairly high build cost. Alternately, the inquisitor unit itself should have a high build cost - and should have roughly the same chances of removing religion/buildings as missionaries have of spreading a faith.

It makes sense to me that the inquisitors could be sent to your vassals, but I'm not sure if it works for friendly civs/open borders. I wonder if there's a way of coding this, but it would be interesting if the use of inquisitors generates events with neighboring civs - i.e. making the spread of Judaism to neighboring civs more likely, or putting pressure on them to conduct their own inquisiton (with happiness penalties if an inquisition is not conducted).

I still like the inquisition civic idea, but recognize that it's not possible to add it.

And here are files for 3Miro to integrate:

http://rapidshare.com/files/153132447/RFCEurope_Religion.zip.html

This is new missionaries, buildings, and symbols for all three christian sects, including the extremely fiddly Gamefont.tga files so that religious icons show up correct in text and as city badges. It also includes christian shrines as:

Protestant -> All Saints' Church (Castle Church) in Wittenberg where Luther posted his 95 theses. This includes a movie (snazzy).
Catholic -> St. Peter's Basilica, aka the Apostolic Palace
Orthodox -> Hagia Sophia

So, the last two are somewhat up for debate since they take some pre-existing wonders and change their role, which could be confusing. However, after thinking about it, these are really the correct shrines for the respective religions. There are plenty of other nice religious buildings we can add in as wonders.

What do people think of an "Apostolic Palace" by the way? Are we going to have it? We can change the name/artwork to be something more generic.

Judaism should be separate from the other religions, prosecutions against the Jews should happen in an even and Jews in general should be immune to the Inquisition. Inquisition should refer mostly to Catholic vs Protestant vs Orthodox vs Islam, since those four were trying to dominate Europe. We can possibly include a generic heresy building since those were quite common and very important, Inquisitors would work on those.

The use of Inquisitors should come with a stability penalty. I agree that there should be either a building requirement or a national wonder requirement for making Inquisitors (same as missionaries). If we go for a building, then Theocracy should allow Inquisitors without a building.

If Spain is to force Catholicism on Iberia it would have to conquer Cordoba and somehow deal with Portugal. Inquisitors should work for vassals (if you share the same religion), but I am disinclined to allow them simply for open borders. It may open a possibility for abuse, i.e. use a lot of Inquisitors to collapse a rival without war. Which leaves the Spain-Portugal question open.

The three proposed shrines are the correct choices with the Haadj that can be build in Damascus for Islam.

One thing that is important and IMO should be added in one way or another is the difference between caesaropapism and papoceaserism (not sure about the spelling). Those could be mutually exclusive world projects (I don't know if this is possible) so that Orthodoxes build one and Catholics th other. Papoceaserism should act more or less like the AP and ceaseropapism could be something like combination of +X culture for buildings and +2 science for buildings (the Orthodox church was less suppressive on science and culture).

I've just had to look up "Caesaropopism" in Wiki to understand what it meant, having previously not heard of it. It seems to refer mostly to the practice of Byzantine emperors and Russian czars in holding supreme secular and religious power over the church. I think that's covered in our game by Divine Monarchy isn't it?
Presumably it's opposite (Popocaesarism?) is represented by Theocracy, Religious Law etc.? If so, why do we need to know more about it and what effect does it have on gameplay? Are you suggesting projects/wonders that would they just enable certain civics? Is there something about these concepts and their relevance to the mod that I'm not understanding?:confused:

Caesaropopism (Ceaser then the Pope): the concept for the secular authority being superior to the religious one. In the Orthodox world, it is the Emperor or the Tzar is the one who appoints the Patriarch. The Byzantine Patriarch Photios was appointed, then fired, then appointed again the fired and exiled again all by the power of the Emperor. In Bulgaria Tzar Svetoslav executed the Patriarch like a criminal (ant at that time Svetoslav wasn't even the Tzar yet).

Popocaesarism (The Pope then Ceaser): the concept of the religious authority being superior to the secular one. In the west, no one becomes a King without the approval of the Pope and there were many cases where the Pope would excommunicate an undesirable monarch. In the Protestant countries, one of the reasons that the Kings had to split from the Catholic Church was to break free from the power of the Pope (Henry VIII and others)

In my studies of history Caesaropopism and Popocaesarism as being the main difference between the western and eastern church. The fact that the secular authority was above the church was a major reason for the technological superiority of the Byzantines. In terms of Art and music Bulgaria and Byzantines were centuries ahead of the western European countries and in the west the Church would suppress art and technology.

The concept of Caesaropopism goes beyond the concept of civic. Louis XIV was an absolute monarch in the west, however, he was not charge of the religious authority (also Charles V). The Pope is superior to any secular power in the Catholic world (officially). As for Theocracy, Byzantines were quite zealous when it comes to religion, they were the first to start persecutions and burning heretics alive (the west surpassed them, but in later years). Religious persecutions were a big problem in Bulgaria under some Tzars. It could be argues that some of the eastern rulers were in fact running Theocracy.

EDIT: Misspelled the name of the Byzantine Patriarch: Photios

OK. Thanks for the explanation. A couple of questions though. Thinking in game terms, how could this be expressed beyond civics? A boost in science and culture for the civs running Orthodox religion is possible. Any other effect? The reverse under Catholicism is maybe less obvious. Although some Popes suppressed learning and artistic expression, others encouraged it. And some rulers like Henry VIII defied the Pope and created their own state churches while others accepted the Popes' rulings on dynastic succession. The picture isn't so clear under Catholicism and the Reformation complicated the relationship between Church and State even further.
While I see the obvious benefits of caesaropopism for Orthodox countries, how would the opposite have an affect on the other Christian countries in our game?

EDIT: An interesting point of comparison is Islam. Instead of discouraging the pursuit of knowledge in any way, the Koran gives great encouragement to it, to the extent that it is one of the mandatory duties of the faithful in their submission to Allah. This duty of learning coupled with access to all the early scientific writings of the Indians, Persians, Egyptians, Greeks and Romans made them the leaders in every scientific field in the early Middle Ages resulting in thousands of innovations and inventions. It's generally considered that access to translations of Arabic scientific works provided the kick-start of the Renaissance in Italy and France but if the Christian Church had not suppressed that knowledge for centuries how much quicker would Europe as a whole have advanced? We can only guess.

Make two world projects (hopefully we can make them mutually exclusive, i.e. no one can build them both). One project Caesaropopism that would have the function of Sankore University, i.e. +2 science for all Orthodox buildings. Another project Popocaesarism, that would serve as the AP in the regular game, thus representing the centralized nature of Catholicism.

Protestantism would decrease the influence of the AP in the countries where Protestants appear.

Make two world projects (hopefully we can make them mutually exclusive, i.e. no one can build them both). One project Caesaropopism that would have the function of Sankore University, i.e. +2 science for all Orthodox buildings. Another project Popocaesarism, that would serve as the AP in the regular game, thus representing the centralized nature of Catholicism.

Protestantism would decrease the influence of the AP in the countries where Protestants appear.

Why not make the first project only available to the 4 Orthodox civs and the 2nd. ie the AP
pre-built in Rome so all Catholic civs are affected by it from the start? Aren't the historic religions
set as default on civ spawn anyway?

Some would be others would not be. Byzantines should by all means star as Orthodox, while Bulgaria was not for the first 200 years. Bulgaria should wait until Orthodoxy spreads and then convert (considering the proximity between the two, they would not wait for long). Spain should start with a Catholic Missionary or two, but I am not sure if the Franks should. Was Charlemagne Christian by birth or did he convert when he reached Rome. Arabs start with founding Islam and Al Andulas should start with an Islamic Missionary or two. Papoceaserism could be either prebuild in Rome or could be automatically build around the year of Charlemagne. Byzantines could be required to build Ceasaropapism as a UHV or start with it prebuild in Constantinople.

Earlier, when trying to figure out how to spread AP functions over multiple religions, we had agreed to simply remove the hammer bonus from the Catholic AP (and not add one for the others). The thinking was that for diplomatic purposes, being Catholic was already a large enough advantage that we couldn't afford to give any more incentives to stay that way.

We were working under the tentative agreement that we weren't going to do an AP equivalent for the Orthodox or Protestant churches (as nothing comparable existed - Miro, I think you had the final word on the Orthodox church), but if we're going to add them, I don't have a problem with giving the bonus for religious buildings - but I do think it should be a consistent bonus. I'd rather have 2 hammers per religious building in a city than 2 beakers, if I were playing.


It's been a long time since I heard the term 'Caesaropapism'. I wonder if we'd be better off changing it to something more widely known?

Supremacy of the secular authority constituted more science and culture not hammers. For the AP, we can remove the hammer bonus easily.

I don't know is we can have AP for the different religions. Lets go with the current proposal for now and we would definitely add more content later on. The entire Papal State mechanics would have to be changed, I am not satisfied with just an AP function. We would need some unifying forece between Orthodoxes and Muslims and later Protestants, but it may not be easy at this point. It would take time and coding effort and more discussions.

What other name would you prefer to 'Caesaropapism'? That is other term is Equivalent to it? I am fine with changing the name as long as it makes sense.

Was Charlemagne Christian by birth or did he convert when he reached Rome.

Clovis I was king of the Franks in 500 AD, and he conveniently was baptized as a Catholic around that year, traditionally after a "miraculous" victory over the Alemanni. On the other hand, the vast majority of the people he ruled over were not-Catholic (various Germanic religions or Arian). Still, the formal alliance with the Catholic church was a distinguishing character of Clovis versus all the other Germanic kingdoms we're not including, so I think it makes sense to start the Franks with one Catholic missionary.

I disagree that Jews should be immune to the inquisition (though I'm fine with adding unlucky anti-semitic events). Our prototypical inquisition (the Spanish) certainly were focused on both Jews and Muslims.

As for Apostolic Palace(s): This function makes the most sense for the Catholic church historically, I agree. However, RFC does allow for some alternate-history play. It is not inconceivable, for examples, that in an alternate history Protestants could have developed strongly religious-political bonds along these lines. Thus, I would favor an AP-like project/building that any religion can build, but that most of the time will be built by a Catholic nation, probably because of setting up the appropriate starting techs.

Just a thought about the Al Andalus start. Shouldn't they just start as Muslim by default but have to build a temple in each city? And how many cities? My thought was Cordoba, Seville, Granada and Tangier with a decent army of Berber cavalry (UU) to conquer with. Or should it be more? What does everybody think?

Some of the independents in the ares should flip (assuming Granada and others are independent), others should be settled. Al Andalus should start with more than one settler and couple of Islamic Missionaries (no free temples however).

Just a thought about the Al Andalus start. Shouldn't they just start as Muslim by default but have to build a temple in each city? And how many cities? My thought was Cordoba, Seville, Granada and Tangier with a decent army of Berber cavalry (UU) to conquer with. Or should it be more? What does everybody think?

Let's move this back to the civ thread.

Al-Andalus doesn't get free temples like the Arabs do, but they should start with a bunch of missionaries.

Religions also incorporated. Thanks to sedna of course. Now we can tell different religion from one another.

For the mentioning of the building textures: it is hardly a priority (even a low one), but there is one thing I like to see improved in the religion textures is the color of the Orthodox buildings. Black is the color of Orthodox monks and also the color for the lower priesthood, but orthodox churches are not that gloomy.

I agree that the Orthodox black is too much. It's on my eventual to-do list.

Though Byzantinze was more advanced then the West, but that is because most of the West's people lived around there anyways. So this is all about population so I don't think we should give an arbitrary bonus to Orthodox or Catholics.
And Islam stopped all technology so that is why they live like 900 years in the past. (westerners and hindu's living in Muslim land invented all those things that "Islam" claims to have invented.) So Islam could be given a penalty, same with all the other religions that are from primitive countries like Buddishm, Hinduism, but not Confucianism or Taoism.
But I like the religion system like it is now. Having Orthodox and Catholic, Protestants seems hard to implement.

Though Byzantinze was more advanced then the West, but that is because most of the West's people lived around there anyways. So this is all about population so I don't think we should give an arbitrary bonus to Orthodox or Catholics.
And Islam stopped all technology so that is why they live like 900 years in the past. (westerners and hindu's living in Muslim land invented all those things that "Islam" claims to have invented.) So Islam could be given a penalty, same with all the other religions that are from primitive countries like Buddishm, Hinduism, but not Confucianism or Taoism.
But I like the religion system like it is now. Having Orthodox and Catholic, Protestants seems hard to implement.

Uh, thanks for your contribution, I guess.

I don't see any suggestions here, though - just ignorance. For one thing, half of the religions you mention are not in the mod. For another, referring to the non-Western world as primitive, particularly during the time period of the mod, is idiotic. I have no particular love for Islam, but to dismiss the scientific, technical, and cultural achievements of the Arab world during a time that most of Europe was illiterate, ungovernable, and wallowing in filth seems unwise. They're starting with a tech lead not out of pity, but because they had one. And yes, they will research more slowly than the Western civs to reflect the stagnation that settled in after the Mongol and Turkic conquests, but that's more to simulate history than to arbitrarily insult 20% of the world's population.

Uh, thanks for your contribution, I guess.

I don't see any suggestions here, though - just ignorance. For one thing, half of the religions you mention are not in the mod. For another, referring to the non-Western world as primitive, particularly during the time period of the mod, is idiotic. I have no particular love for Islam, but to dismiss the scientific, technical, and cultural achievements of the Arab world during a time that most of Europe was illiterate, ungovernable, and wallowing in filth seems unwise. They're starting with a tech lead not out of pity, but because they had one. And yes, they will research more slowly than the Western civs to reflect the stagnation that settled in after the Mongol and Turkic conquests, but that's more to simulate history than to arbitrarily insult 20% of the world's population.

Thanks for that. I'm glad you got to him before I did. I would have answered that pile of bigoted dogshite with a lot less diplomacy and patience than you've done.:goodjob:

why would you want to remove religions from a city?
are there happines maluses for having multiple religions?

why would you want to remove religions from a city?
are there happines maluses for having multiple religions?

Yes. Like in RFC there are happiness penalties for non-state religions when you're got a state religion. More so with Theocracy too.

About Inquisition, I think it should cause a long term unhappiness penalty, and double penalty in case of failure.

[...]They're starting with a tech lead not out of pity, but because they had one. And yes, they will research more slowly than the Western civs to reflect the stagnation that settled in after the Mongol and Turkic conquests, but that's more to simulate history than to arbitrarily insult 20% of the world's population.

the technological stagnation in muslim countries happened mostly during the industrial revolution. This was a social revolution that changed the "western" world but was highly obstructed by the islamic clergy. Not that the islamic clergy is more conservative than christian one, it's just that in the muslim countries clergy had more power and was more connected to government than in the western countries, where the class was seriously undermined during illuminism, french revolution and napoleonic conquests, and scientific discoveries that discredited the Bible. Muslim countries that did try to follow the social revolution faced the strong opposition of the clergy and of religious fundamentalist and fell victim of state golpe (Persia). However all this happens beyond the scope of this mod IIRC, while a great technological event that comes to my mind thinking of the Middle Age is the refuse of Constantinopolis to acquire the secrets of gunpowder from an arab, in favor of the Ottoman Sultan (muslim again). Culture follows the major trade routes, and until at least a century after the discovery of America the major trade routes for Europe were mediterranean ones and the Silk Road (in fact let's not forget Columbus was trying to reach the Silk Road's easternmost location by sea), and in both these trade routes the Arabs and Muslim were on a highly favorable position. Most of the knowledge we have acquired from the East came to us through the Arabs, so I wonder what kind of technological stagnation during the Middle Ages we're talking about here.

As a great admirer of the Arabic influence of European learning and the sciences in particular, I couldn't agree more on their impact up to the 14th.C.. Most of the science and technology up to the time of Galileo, Copernicus and Newton came solely from Latin translation of Arabic texts. But I think the technological stagnation he's referring to came a little earlier than the Industrial Revolution partly for the reasons he outlined. The main factors, in my view were the following. A defensive Islamic reaction to the Crusades with the constant threat of aggressive Christianity. Then the ravages of the Mongol invasions and the rise of the Seljuk and Ottoman Turks which severed their links with the Silk Road and China. Followed by an anarchic period of schisms and competing Caliphates with their endless uprisings and wars. Along with the constant threat and disruption of the Spanish Reconquista. All these factors created a more insular, insecure and unstable society more interested in preservation of its core values than scientific innovation.

The Church is mostly the one to blame for the lac of scientific progress in Europe in general. In the Catholic west, some priest preached that ignorance was a holy bliss and education should be shunned. In the Orthodox east (following the ceasaropapism principle), the Church had much less influence and education was respected. All Bzantine emperors were well educated and so were most of the Bulgarian rulers (Khan Kubrat was educated along side the Byzantine heir and all Christian rulers starting with Simeon were also educated), in 9th century Bulgaria had 70% literacy rate, while Charlemagne in the west was literate.

There was stagnation in the east due to the idea that all that was important was already discovered, but it took less time for the east to "wake up". John Kukuzelis was a revolutionary in the music preceding J.S.Bach by several centuries and in paintings in some Bulgarian churches bare marks of post-Medieval pre-Renaissance art. That was destroyed by the Ottomans.

The Arabs were initially very tolerant. Add to that the access to the eastern cultures (I believe that the Arabic numerals are actually Hindu), you get a very advanced Arabia. When they turned defensive (because of the Crusades and the Reconquista), they became more zealous and I guess the clergy gained more power.

The Ottomans were in this setting the ultimate destroyers of culture and scientific progress. They were the most zealous of all Islamic nations.

With the Ottoman conquest of the east, ancient texts from Greece and their Bulgarian translations were moved to the west and north-east (Russia) creating the Renaissance. Interestingly, one of the major events in that period was the Reformation that ultimately had the effect of severing the domination of the Catholic church, which opened the opportunity for the scientific and cultural explosion.

BTW Can I just congratulate everybody in the US on the election of your new President,
Barak Obama. Whatever way you voted, I'm sure you'll agree that we've all been witness
to a ground-breaking event in world history.:goodjob:

naah, we should all know by now, if we went to vote at least 3-4 times in our lives (wherever in the world, I think), that politicians are very good at speaking before elections. I've been touched by italian politicians (is that even possible, you're wondering ? Yeah, it is) before as well. However, I'd wait until at least 1 year from now before saying this was a ground breaking event. I hope we won't be saying the same in year from now but from a disilluded point of view... but I kinda fear that.

Back in topic, Galileo Galilei lived between the 16th and 17th centuries AC... well beyond the 14th. There wasn't much technological development until the 17th century in Europe as well. As I said and reiterate, it was the discovery of America to change the course of History in many aspects and in favor to Europeans, because the major trade routes shifted from the med. to Americas, which were an exclusive of Europeans. Coincindentally, Venice and the other maritime Republics also started to decline from this point on.... and they weren't muslim at all :P

also, my apologies for using the verb obstruct instead of obstacolate in my previous post... I was in a hurry !

I wasn't saying that Galileo was the start of anything. The first real movement forward in European science began with the translation of Arabic works into Latin in Florence and Sicily in the 14th.C. Those works were still in use by Galileo, Newton and others 3 centuries later. That's what kick-started the Renaissance. The rise of the Maritime Republics and the search for new trade routes to India and China by the Portugese in the 15th.C. which led to improved ship design came as a direct result of the Mongol and Turkic invasions and the closure of the Silk Road, which isolated the Muslim world. Nothing whatsoever to do with the New World which was only discovered by accident when they were looking for a sea route to the East.

Whatever yours or my views on the American election, a black US President is an important event in their history. Anyway I was congratulating Americans on this forum, not fellow-Europeans. They probably don't care what you or I think anyway.;)

As per your using one of your invented words in your signature, no problem. As long as we can feel free to ignore them if you use them elsewhere. Agreed?:lol:

naah, we should all know by now, if we went to vote at least 3-4 times in our lives (wherever in the world, I think), that politicians are very good at speaking before elections. I've been touched by italian politicians (is that even possible, you're wondering ? Yeah, it is) before as well. However, I'd wait until at least 1 year from now before saying this was a ground breaking event. I hope we won't be saying the same in year from now but from a disilluded point of view... but I kinda fear that.


You know, under most circumstances I'd agree with you on principle, because if politicians don't teach us to be cynical, then nothing will. But since the American government has been so utterly rotten in the past 8 years, it's hard not to look at this as a major step in the right direction. I realize that Obama will eventually disappoint me, as he will disappoint many of his supporters, but he embodies three critical traits that have been completely lacking from the ever-more-powerful executive branch of the American government since Bush took office:
-He possesses both a keen intelligence and good judgment.
-He knows when he doesn't understand something, and is actively curious about things beyond his immediate sphere of interest.
-He's not afraid to surround himself with people who are willing to disagree with him, and actively seeks out different opinions in order to make a more informed decision.
I'd like to think that he's also fundamentally more honest than the pack of criminals who have been running my country recently, but that remains to be seen. He won't have supreme power, and he's not going to enjoy the same level of media support that he did through the campaign (and even then, the American press is a horribly corrupted, ineffective shell of its former self - it hasn't done its job since Reagan was re-elected). It is likely that he'll face multiple assassination attempts from some of the crazed morons that were whipped into such a froth by this campaign, and it's entirely possible that he'll succumb to one. There's a lot that can go wrong, and he's facing a number of monumental tasks and hard decisions, not all of which he will succeed with.
Still, it's significant. Waking up today, I actually have a sense that there's a possibility that things may improve, and also that the American public may be a little smarter than I'm willing to give them credit for. Even if he doesn't turn out to be the second coming of Franklin Roosevelt, we're in a hell of a lot better shape than we were yesterday, and that's worth celebrating.

Jessiecat, thanks for your congratulations.

By the way, Onedreamer, welcome back to the threads. :D

not saying he will be a disappointment, and certainly if McCain&Palin would have won we wouldn't even be dreaming of a change, I'm just saying that for now it's a good start, but more has still to happen to be what voters and not only wish this event to be, and nothing is sure in this world ('cept death and taxes, ok).

on tech advances and islam: I'm not sure what jessiecat's conclusions are but they look similar to mine: until at least the 17th century there doesn't seem to be an islamic stagnation vs an european tech breakthrough, and this means most of the mod's timeframe. So why this islamic tech penalty ?
Don't be fooled by Europa Universalis (if you were): that game is played on a world map that would favor too much the big islamic empires of 15th century had they not any penalty. This would't happen in this mod anyways.

on tech advances and islam: I'm not sure what jessiecat's conclusions are but they look similar to mine: until at least the 17th century there doesn't seem to be an islamic stagnation vs an european tech breakthrough, and this means most of the mod's timeframe. So why this islamic tech penalty ?

Maybe we have been more or less agreeing all along. I thought we were disagreeing on the reasons for a later decline. Maybe not. I agree with you that this idea of a penalty on Islamic research is not justified. Others in this project suggested long ago that because the Arabs and Cordoba would start with a big early tech advantage they should somehow be hobbled in the mid-game with a brake on research. A modified tech research rate after 1500 maybe would be historically correct, but certainly not before. I'm glad someone else agrees with me.:goodjob:

I'm not proposing the EU III system of different religions having different tech rates, but I am proposing that we incorporate some of the RFC penalties to tech rates for early-spawning civs. If the Arabs and Byzantines don't have a tweaked tech rate, they'll outtech everyone for the game with no difficulty, simply as a result of their starting infrastructure. Now, this may change for the Byzantines as they'll ideally be facing constant erosion of the empire, but the Arab empire is likely to be pretty solid, with fewer external threats.

Still, this is more a game balance issue than a judgment on the relative retardation of scientific progress by the major world religions.

I'm not proposing the EU III system of different religions having different tech rates, but I am proposing that we incorporate some of the RFC penalties to tech rates for early-spawning civs. If the Arabs and Byzantines don't have a tweaked tech rate, they'll outtech everyone for the game with no difficulty, simply as a result of their starting infrastructure. Now, this may change for the Byzantines as they'll ideally be facing constant erosion of the empire, but the Arab empire is likely to be pretty solid, with fewer external threats.

Still, this is more a game balance issue than a judgment on the relative retardation of scientific progress by the major world religions.

I don't really disagree with the principle you're suggesting. It's just the severity of the penalty that worries me. If the Arabs achieve a large empire late in the game they will be hampered by the even greater maintenance costs and stability issues than the Byzantines. Though this less likely for the Cordobans unless they expand too rapidly.

Early civs have tech penalty, later civs have tech bonus. This is a purely gameplay issue. Arabia and Cordoba would have a tech penalty, Turkey would probably have a tech bonus, this has nothing to do with real history, just making a good game.

As for Obama: It is interesting to see the reasons for the decline of the Spanish Empire. Economical reasons: the Spanish relied heavily on resources from the New World (Middle East) and the entire Spanish industry, in its Medieval equivalent, was concentrated in the Netherlands (China). When the supply chain was disrupted by pirates (terrorists), Spain suffered enormous losses. In their moment of power, the Spanish got overly obsessed with religion (gay marriage) and oppressed any science (Intelligent Design Theory), which lead to technological decline. The Spanish Empire was thorn by internal struggles (red/blue) on theological issues like Reformation and the role of the church (abortion) resulting in the Netherlands rebelling. The Spanish were succeeded by the British (?????).

If Spain doesn't change its fundamental course fast, it would stop being a world empire or even truly relevant world power.

I can go on, but I think you guys got my point.

I suppose it's appropriate that the religion thread got hijacked for a political discussion. Not that I, as an Obama supporter, mind. Thanks for the congratulations jessiecat, it was a wonderful feeling being able to cast my vote yesterday.

Plus, it's always nice to see a change of political power without a turn of anarchy.

Plus, it's always nice to see a change of political power without a turn of anarchy.

Well said. :D

Not that this is a golden age, or anything.

Well, just more proof that we live in Rhye's world rather than plain Civ.

actually, in RFC there isn't anarchy with a leader change, but with a government type or civic change, which hasn't happened in the USA, AFAIK. We are talking of events like French revolution and social revolutions of '68... I hope you don't compare them to the election of Obama.

I think this matter is still out there, if it's been decided let me know, but has it been discussed having Protestantism appear with the spawning of Sweden (1500, right?). This would save newly spawned Sweden the birthing and religious conversion pains and geographically place it somewhat near where Protestantism happened.

Onedreamer, I too have been touched by an Italian politician. The lawsuit is still pending.

Edit: Yikes, I forgot the Norse! Maybe transition from Norse to Swedes?

actually, in RFC there isn't anarchy with a leader change, but with a government type or civic change, which hasn't happened in the USA, AFAIK. We are talking of events like French revolution and social revolutions of '68... I hope you don't compare them to the election of Obama.

Yes, there has been in RFC terms. The USA starts out as a Republic (it doesn't know Democracy recall), but you are likely to transition out of that in modern times - your turn of anarchy when doing so is in RL the civil war.

The current American constitution is of course quite different from the one it started out with; notably the United States were a plural entity (The US are waging war...) of states, now they are a singular entity (The US *is* waging war) because the states have so much less relative power now via things like the 14th amendment.

Cheers, Luke

Luke... I meant that (in RFC terms) there was no civic change in the USA with the election of Obama. I didn't mean it like: "There has been no civic change in the USA EVER".

@Rhye. I think you missed this thread. It should be moved to the Mods thread as well. Thanks.:)

If people want to talk about religion in RFC Europe this is the place to do it.:)

Sorry, i missed this thread. So:

How will the Judaism will be spread? Via events?

And how will be Protestantism enabled? I've thought it was tied to the Printing press tech but I saw in the Wonders thread that it could be enabled by by J S Bach cathedral.

Regarding Protestantism, I am yet to see a protestant nation in one of my test games

Sorry, i missed this thread. So:

How will the Judaism will be spread? Via events?

And how will be Protestantism enabled? I've thought it was tied to the Printing press tech but I saw in the Wonders thread that it could be enabled by by J S Bach cathedral.

Using the Bach cathedral to start Protestantism was discussed but rejected in favour of a project like Luthers Theses the last time I heard. A similiar case with Judaism I think but both those discussions kinda got put on hold while we were dealing with more immediate issues like making the test version playable enough for everybody, getting the map terrain and resources finalized and fixing the CityName maps for each civ. We'll be getting back to sorting out wonders, colonial projects and religions pretty soon I think. In the meantime, feel free to share your ideas on these and any other topics.

Sorry, i missed this thread. So:

How will the Judaism will be spread? Via events?

And how will be Protestantism enabled? I've thought it was tied to the Printing press tech but I saw in the Wonders thread that it could be enabled by by J S Bach cathedral.

I think it would be cool to have the spread of Judaism stopped or at least hampered after the discovery of a certain technology / wonder, so as to leave room for Christianity and Orthodoxy to spread in Europe.

Judaism would be a building as opposed to a religion. In that respect, I need sedna to add a building "Jewish Quarters", that cannot be build (except enabled by python like the Triumphant Arch) and of course it should not be a wonder. Then I will code in python a semi-random spread of those. "Jewish Quarters" should give +1 trade routes and +2 culture. Maybe some other small commerce bonus.

Add another building: "Heretic Community" that would generate +1 unhappiness, +3 beakers and some instability. Would spread randomly and/or by random events.

Protestantism would be enabled by some appropriate tech (Liberalism as of right now IIRC). As soon as it is founded, the founding city would build both the Protestant Shrine and a Protestant Temple. Anyone should be able to discover that (except maybe the Muslims). I think tying Protestants to single civ (i.e. Sweden) is gameplay restrictive. Swedish UHVs could be modified to "Found a new Religion".

A couple technical post for future reference. This is mostly for 3Miro's benefit.

The Jan 3rd test version (to be posted soon) has switched the order of some buildings in the XML. Previously the religions were in the XML file in this order:

Protestantism, Islam, Catholicism, Orthodoxy

The religious buildings were in this order:

Catholicism, Islam, Protestantism, Orthodoxy

This mismatch caused bugs with onReligionFounded and the Faith UP which both used Temple = CatholicTemple + iReligion*4. Thus, I switched around the religious buildings in the XML and Consts.py file so that the ordering is now always:

Protestantism, Islam, Catholicism, Orthodoxy.

ecv appears to have identified the source of the "1500 AD" crash. The ONLY change to the compiled dll currently being distributed is the one he describes in this post, explaining that he commented out choosePurgeCity() in AI_Update(). I have been unable to figure out exactly what is wrong with this function.

In attempting to figure it out, I came across these definitions in CvRhyes.cpp:

int UNIT_PROSECUTOR = 62;
int UNIT_PROSECUTOR_CLASS = 48;
int NUM_RELIGIONS = 4;


Currently, however, iProsecutor = 71 in the XML and Consts.py and the Prosecutor unit class is 51. I assume at some point you will want to move away from defining these constants statically here, since it is bound to cause trouble.

ecv said:
Also, I tried deleting some units in the world-builder in the turn right before the year ~1450 crash, but it didnt help. I then tried to dig alittle into the problem, and the crash seems to be due to an access violation in the function isHasReligion() - the function looks in an array for someting, I guess the index goes out of bounds? Here's the callstack:

> CvGameCoreDLL.dll!CvCity::isHasReligion()
CvGameCoreDLL.dll!CvPlayer::choosePurgeCity()
CvGameCoreDLL.dll!CvUnitAI::AI_update()
CvGameCoreDLL.dll!CvSelectionGroupAI::AI_update()
CvGameCoreDLL.dll!CvPlayerAI::AI_unitUpdate()
CvGameCoreDLL.dll!CvGame::updateMoves()
CvGameCoreDLL.dll!CvGame::update()

Looking at this, it seems as if atleast my crash is related to the religious prosecutors.

EDIT: Ok, I removed the call to choosePurgeCity() in AI_update() meaning that prosecutors now dont do anything, recompiled the dll, and now the game goes past the turn where it previously always crashed.

ecv appears to have identified the source of the "1500 AD" crash. The ONLY change to the compiled dll currently being distributed is the one he describes in this post, explaining that he commented out choosePurgeCity() in AI_Update(). I have been unable to figure out exactly what is wrong with this function.

In attempting to figure it out, I came across these definitions in CvRhyes.cpp:

int UNIT_PROSECUTOR = 62;
int UNIT_PROSECUTOR_CLASS = 48;
int NUM_RELIGIONS = 4;


Currently, however, iProsecutor = 71 in the XML and Consts.py and the Prosecutor unit class is 51. I assume at some point you will want to move away from defining these constants statically here, since it is bound to cause trouble.

ecv said:

In RFCEBalance there is a function that resets the prosecutor unit, prosecutor class and number of religions. Those are set in consts.py (i.e. the values in CvRhyes.cpp are never used, so I left them like that). The prosecutor AI should be fixed in XML (eventually).

I'd like to brainstorm a little bit about religious buildings here. Setting aside the special case of Judiasm for a moment.

Currently we have the generic: Temple, Monastery, Cathedral for all four major religions. They all have the same benefits and everything, and none of them are really critical buildings, although if the primary science specialist will be the priest/monk, then that is an important role.

What else can we do in buildings to make religion more important? What can we do to differentiate between religions?

A couple thoughts of my own to get things rolling.
New building classes could be:

Chapel/Minaret: (Designating a small church/mosque, like the current church, current church becomes something more powerful)

Abbey? A super-monastery requiring several monasteries pre-built?

Scriptorium: Never got around to adding this, due to the hassle that I need one for each religion, but this could obsolete with Protestantism and not be available in the Muslim world (Because they have the Madrassa for a similar role, though they don't 'cause it's a UB for the Arabs, but that could be changed too).

Seminary. Coming in around the same time as the reformation.

I'd like to brainstorm a little bit about religious buildings here. Setting aside the special case of Judiasm for a moment.

Currently we have the generic: Temple, Monastery, Cathedral for all four major religions. They all have the same benefits and everything, and none of them are really critical buildings, although if the primary science specialist will be the priest/monk, then that is an important role.

What else can we do in buildings to make religion more important? What can we do to differentiate between religions?

A couple thoughts of my own to get things rolling.
New building classes could be:

Chapel/Minaret: (Designating a small church/mosque, like the current church, current church becomes something more powerful)

Abbey? A super-monastery requiring several monasteries pre-built?

Scriptorium: Never got around to adding this, due to the hassle that I need one for each religion, but this could obsolete with Protestantism and not be available in the Muslim world (Because they have the Madrassa for a similar role, though they don't 'cause it's a UB for the Arabs, but that could be changed too).

Seminary. Coming in around the same time as the reformation.

I like the expansion ideas - it does make me wonder if we might want to consider changing the stats on Catholic, Christian, and Muslim buildings to balance out in the case that there isn't an obvious building equivalent.

For example, let's say there's no Muslim equivalent of a scriptorium (I'd say that there probably is, but for the sake of argument), we could increase both the build cost and effect of the Madrassa to include/compensate for it.

On the new building ideas - I like the abbey and seminary ideas a lot, and was already in favor of the scriptorium idea. The chapel/minaret idea is a good one - sort of a village-level religious building - but there's one potential issue here.

If we're adding more buildings that increase tech, happiness, or culture bonuses, we've got potential balance issues to work out, and we're already pretty high on bonus buildings by percentage. I don't necessarily have a problem with this, but it's something to consider. One way of working around this might be to repurpose some buildings.

In particular, I wonder if we can incorporate the chapel/minaret building suggestion by replacing the monument. While some cities might have monuments, it doesn't necessarily make sense that they would have them early - and by the time monument building shows up, the effect of the building is pretty minor. A small religious building would likely represent the arrival of the first educated person in a village - the first infusion of what we've sort of loosely defined in the game as culture.

For the abbey idea, I wonder if it might be best as a mixed-benefit building - providing a bonus to both money and research. It'll have to be considerably more expensive than a cathedral to build, though...

Seminaries could effectively replace the tech bonus from monasteries/scriptoria, and be available to all faiths, but be more expensive to build.

If we're talking about the chapel/minaret as the "village-level" religious building (eg some education outside of the cities), might it make sense as a terrain improvement on top of towns and villages? A plus 1 (science or culture, doesn't matter) for a late stage city when we've researched monument building doesn't do much, a few extra beakers per town might be nice, and it would incentive town building, which seems to me to be somewhat lacking as a result of our lovely and useful terrain. Plus it would give our workers something to do later on and our armies something great to pillage.

I'm a tad concerned that we have a lot of buildings already, especially early on. Maybe a hospice building requiring a monastery and/or cathedral with the discovery of Arab Medicine?

On the brainstorming front, I'd like to see religion impact stability more.

If we're talking about the chapel/minaret as the "village-level" religious building (eg some education outside of the cities), might it make sense as a terrain improvement on top of towns and villages? A plus 1 (science or culture, doesn't matter) for a late stage city when we've researched monument building doesn't do much, a few extra beakers per town might be nice, and it would incentive town building, which seems to me to be somewhat lacking as a result of our lovely and useful terrain. Plus it would give our workers something to do later on and our armies something great to pillage.

I'm a tad concerned that we have a lot of buildings already, especially early on. Maybe a hospice building requiring a monastery and/or cathedral with the discovery of Arab Medicine?

On the brainstorming front, I'd like to see religion impact stability more.


Actually, I really like the terrain improvement idea. Is it feasible to add that?

Actually, I really like the terrain improvement idea. Is it feasible to add that?

The terrain improvement idea is interesting. But like you I'm a bit sceptical about adding too many extra religious buildings just for the sake of it. The basic church/ mosque seems OK as it is. I understand the reasoning behind adding a more basic type but lets be careful about names here. A chapel is not a church. It could be built by anyone in their house without being consecrated. Even as a separate building it would be additional to the church not a replacement of it. A better choice might be a baptistry or chapter house.
A minaret is merely the tower of a mosque where the muezzin calls the faithful to prayer. It is usually
not a separate building any more than a bell tower is. They have similiar functions of course.
The idea of an abbey as being a super monastery is much more feasible for the Christian civs at least. They were very powerful economically and politically. Maybe we can reflect that importance somehow. The Arab madrassa then should become more powerful in the same way.
The scriptorium is OK but again it's not a building. It's a room with a specific function in a monastery or abbey. The Muslim equivalent however was sometimes an institute of study like the House of Knowledge which was so important in the translation of Classical and Eastern sources and the collaboration of leading Muslim thinkers and scientists. But they were not religious buildings, more like universities.
The seminary is OK as a later addition for the Christian civs following the onset of Protestantism but what would the Muslim equivalent be? That function is already covered by the Madrassa.

The terrain improvement idea is interesting. But like you I'm a bit sceptical about adding too many extra religious buildings just for the sake of it. The basic church/ mosque seems OK as it is. I understand the reasoning behind adding a more basic type but lets be careful about names here. A chapel is not a church. It could be built by anyone in their house without being consecrated. Even as a separate building it would be additional to the church not a replacement of it. A better choice might be a baptistry or chapter house.
A minaret is merely the tower of a mosque where the muezzin calls the faithful to prayer. It is usually
not a separate building any more than a bell tower is. They have similiar functions of course.
The idea of an abbey as being a super monastery is much more feasible for the Christian civs at least. They were very powerful economically and politically. Maybe we can reflect that importance somehow. The Arab madrassa then should become more powerful in the same way.
The scriptorium is OK but again it's not a building. It's a room with a specific function in a monastery or abbey. The Muslim equivalent however was sometimes an institute of study like the House of Knowledge which was so important in the translation of Classical and Eastern sources and the collaboration of leading Muslim thinkers and scientists. But they were not religious buildings, more like universities.
The seminary is OK as a later addition for the Christian civs following the onset of Protestantism but what would the Muslim equivalent be? That function is already covered by the Madrassa.


It's kind of difficult to represent improvements to existing buildings, so even if a scriptorium or house of knowledge (what's the Arabic term?) isn't actually a separate building, it makes sense to represent them as additional buildings with pre-build requirements.

One way of dealing with the Madrassa/seminary issue might be to have the madrassa's stats increase upon discovery of a certain tech - perhaps not the tech which enables the seminary, because that would amount to a large free bonus without the burden of having to build the buildings - but another one in the religious branch of the tech tree.

Alternately, are there any other scientific or religious (or both) institutions that you can think of, which are either specific to the Arab world, or which have rough equivalents to European institutions? I know that some sects of Islam had communities similar to monasteries - the Sufi come to mind - but I don't know what those were called.

You raise a good point with the chapel/minaret issue. 'Shrine' sounds a little too Asian as a replacement, but has basically the intended function of the proposal. If it's possible to do this as a tile improvement, it has a clear function (besides giving workers something to do in the late game, and making villages/towns more attractive, which I think are valid goals) - if it has to be a building in the city, it seems a little less useful unless it functionally replaces the monument.

I'm a little surprised to hear people saying that we shouldn't add more early buildings. Others have complained in the feedback thread that they always run out of things to build early on and are forced to build/disband/merc-out units. That's certainly sort of my experience -- these great early capitol sites end up without much to build pretty quickly (unless you're going for all-out war).

I hear your concerns about balance (i.e. too much health/happiness from too many buildings/we should keep things similar so we don't have to re-balance). I know I've expressed such thoughts in the past, but I've sort of come over to the point of view that we've changed too much and that any original balance is long gone. Anyhow, there are all the modern buildings (factories/power/modern entertainment/environmental) that don't have analogs in our current mod. But I'll be restrained.

I like the chapel-as-terrain, but I don't see an easy way to make it stack on top of towns. If anyone has come across an example of this kind of behavior (overlapping improvements) in another mod (or if there's an example from vanilla I just can't think of), let me know, and that'll give me clues on how to implement it. Note that roads/railroads are routes rather than improvements to the game and automatically stack.

Okay, so no chapels, sounds fine. We do need an early culture building. I hate being the norse and not getting a religion and having no culture to even grow my city borders. How about a Pagan shrine (or temple? or other name), that's like the base game monument (just +1 happiness and becomes obsolete quickly with one of the religious techs)?

My opinion is that it is NOT important to have equal buildings for all religions, and that the opposite is desire-able for flavor and historical accuracy -- and we're not trying to make all religions exactly the same and equal ala vanilla civ. Of course we don't want people confused either.

For instance, protestant monastery is a little anachronistic, but I think people will definitely be confused if we were to eliminate such a building, so we should have a compelling reason were we to do so. I guess we could call it a seminary...

For naming, on the Christian side, we could call it a parish church, or something, if it was a terrain improvement. Is there a similar concept in Islam?

For improvements to existing buildings, can we work off the wall>>castle concept? Granted it's a separate building, but it functions as an add-on. I also like the idea of beefing up the madrassas with the discovery of a tech, (or not; the gates of ijtihad were closed in the 10th century, if you subscribe to that sort of thing).

Yeah, I can think of one improvement on top of the other: railroads! Also, there is the resource model (eg mines on grasslands where there is iron).

Yeah, I can think of one improvement on top of the other: railroads! Also, there is the resource model (eg mines on grasslands where there is iron).

In terms of the code roads/railroads are a different class of things from cottages and farms. Unless we introduce improvement Cottage, improvement Minaret (or whatever) and improvement Cottage+Minaret, I don't think it can be really done.

I think the problem with this discussion so far is that we seem to be talking about adding religious buildings simply as cultural bonuses. On the other hand we seem to want more research-related buildings. In my opinion these may be separate issues.
I'm OK with adding the abbey as an enhanced monastery with cultural and research bonuses. The seminary is fine too with obvious cultural strengths.

What we need though is an improvement on the library as an additional research building. The problem lies in Civ itself with the term "library" which historically didn't exist except as part of another building. Anyone could have a library so the building makes no sense. But there is no generic "school" which would fill the educational gap between libraries and universities. In Christian Europe all primary education was run by the Church with cathedral schools being the only path to university. That is until the dissolution of the monasteries by Henry VIII when the system of grammer schools and King's Colleges began to develop which evolved into the modern system of public education.
In the Islamic world though the situation was very different. The term "madrassa" (or madrasah) in Arabic means literally "school", whether it be religious or secular. There were four main types as follows:
1. Madrasah Aamah - public school (as today, funded by the state)
2. Madrasah Khasah - private school (as today, privately funded)
3. Madrasah Diriyyah - religious school (mosque-run school, mostly religious teaching)
4. Madrasah Islamiyyah - Islamic school (part of the mosque. similiar to a seminary)
The vast majority were then, as now, public schools with the primary school within them for very young boys being called a "Maktab" or "Kuttab". Most madrasahs had no connection with a mosque unlike the false impression today in the West that somehow Obama went to an "Islamic school". False. It was a Madrasah Khasah (private school).
Above these were the Jami-at (university) the first of which was the Jami-at al Karawiyyim est. in Fez, Morocco in 859 by a leading female scholar. The next was the Jami-at Al Azhar founded in Cairo in 959. Both preceeded the University of Bologna as the oldest university in Europe.
Also very important was the "Bayt al-Hikma" or House of Wisdom in Baghdad which was instrumental in the translation movement whereby all the works of Greek, Roman, Persian and Indian scholars were studied by a group of thinkers, scholars and scientists who became the leading lights of the Arabic Scientific Golden Age. (9th to 13thC.) Sort of a think tank, research institute or Royal Society.

The point I'd like to make is that we should be looking at another tier of educational or research buildings that preceeds the University as well as adding purely religious ones.
For the Christian side I suggest a Kings College (or just college or school). For the Islamic side it could be a
Jami-at (early university) with maybe the House of Wisdom as a National Wonder or project. What do people think?

As usual great point in historical accuracy by Jessiecat.

What about the University of the palace hall of Magnaura (Constantinople)? Or do you not count it since it does not exist anymore.

We need to redo the science/religion buildings the same way sedna is reworking the units.

How about having a generic building Church (of the corresponding religion). The Church in itself just gives +1 culture. Then have additions to the church:

Chapel/Minaret: +1 happiness (perform religious ceremonies) +1 culture
Scriptorium/Madrasah: boost science
Holy Icons/Muslims don't have icons (just Western offensive cartoons) +1 happiness +2 culture.
Whatever else is appropriate.
Others: use your imagination

One of my suggestions involved putting in the chapel/minaret as a substitute for a monument, available early (possibly from the first religious tech) and cheaply. If we're looking for an early culture building, that would seem to be the way to go.

We'd have to reassign monument a different value or function, but that might not be a bad thing, as it's not an early tech and the building itself isn't worth much as things currently stand.

One thought on stacking terrain improvements - could we make it so a worker could build a chapel/minaret in a village or town, destroying the town but replacing it with a sort of enhanced town improvement? Make the worker action something like 'centralize town', adding buildings like a market (+1 commerce) and a small religious building (+1 culture) in the tile? The improvement would take many worker turns to build, but would essentially replace one improvement with another.
I'm not sure if it's possible to do this as terrain improvements aren't resources, but the computer does a check to see if it's possible to build an improvement in a given tile - such as watermills only being buildable on straight stretches of river. If we can use that same type of check, it seems like it might work.

Another brainstorm idea for early buildings (although now I'm really in the wrong thread) - public well - low cost, available with an early build tech, +1 health?

As usual great point in historical accuracy by Jessiecat.

What about the University of the palace hall of Magnaura (Constantinople)? Or do you not count it since it does not exist anymore.

We need to redo the science/religion buildings the same way sedna is reworking the units.

How about having a generic building Church (of the corresponding religion). The Church in itself just gives +1 culture. Then have additions to the church:

Chapel/Minaret: +1 happiness (perform religious ceremonies) +1 culture
Scriptorium/Madrasah: boost science
Holy Icons/Muslims don't have icons (just Western offensive cartoons) +1 happiness +2 culture.
Whatever else is appropriate.
Others: use your imagination

I like this idea. Rather than icons, why not do relics, which were universal to the three early religions? Relics would become obsolete with the Reformation.

"The point I'd like to make is that we should be looking at another tier of educational or research buildings that preceeds the University as well as adding purely religious ones.
For the Christian side I suggest a Kings College (or just college or school). For the Islamic side it could be a Jami-at (early university) with maybe the House of Wisdom as a National Wonder or project. What do people think?"

I'm happy with the chapel/minaret idea as an extra religious building. And the monument could be delayed to a later tech like Public Works. What do people think of my idea of adding another educational building like a college as described above?
In fact, why not just make it simple like this?

............Christians].................................................. .....[Muslims

Church + Chapel + Library + College..................Mosque + Minaret + Library + Madrasah

Okay, this add-on-to-buildings concept sounds like a profitable way to go. Assume that we're going to be removing the library.

Option 1: Very unique religious lines

Catholics/Orthodox would have the same options:

Monastery > Scriptorium
Church
Cathedral > Chapel, Reliquary, Cathedral School
Seminary

Protestants come later, and so don't get monasteries (which obsolete):
Church > Church school
Cathedral > Chapel
Seminary

Muslims have a totally system based on extending the basic mosque:

Mosque > Maktab (primary education), Minaret, Madrassah (higher education), Sahn (courtyard), Dome

Option 2: More parallel lines

Catholics/Orthodox:
Monastery > Scriptorium
Church
Cathedral > Chapel, Reliquary, Cathedral School
Seminary

Protestants:
Church > Church school
Cathedral > Chapel
Seminary

Muslims:
Madrassah
Mosque > Minaret
Grand Mosque > Maktab (primary education), Sahn (courtyard), Dome

Under either of these schemes:
Monasteries, Seminaries, and Madrassahs allow missionaries
Scriptoriums, Cathedral schools, church schools, maktabs, seminaries, and madrassahs provide research boosts, with seminaries and madrassahs being better.
Churches, Cathedrals, Mosques, and Grad Mosques allow running priest specialists and have some (reduced) culture/happiness
Chapels, Reliquaries, minarets, sahns, domes provide additional happiness and/or culture.

Okay, this add-on-to-buildings concept sounds like a profitable way to go. Assume that we're going to be removing the library.

Option 2: More parallel lines

Catholics/Orthodox:
Monastery > Scriptorium
Church
Cathedral > Chapel, Reliquary, Cathedral School
Seminary

Protestants:
Church > Church school
Cathedral > Chapel
Seminary

Muslims:
Madrassah
Mosque > Minaret
Grand Mosque > Maktab (primary education), Sahn (courtyard), Dome

Under either of these schemes:
Monasteries, Seminaries, and Madrassahs allow missionaries
Scriptoriums, Cathedral schools, church schools, maktabs, seminaries, and madrassahs provide research boosts, with seminaries and madrassahs being better.
Churches, Cathedrals, Mosques, and Grad Mosques allow running priest specialists and have some (reduced) culture/happiness
Chapels, Reliquaries, minarets, sahns, domes provide additional happiness and/or culture.

Nice work, sedna. I would strongly support option 2. But with one slight variation.

I think the Maktab was really just the junior dept. within a madrassah like the English junior school
or US kindergarten. So I'd replace it with a more specialized college like a Jami-at or a Bayt al Hikmah(House of Wisdom) which could only be built as an advanced madrassah (extra research boost).
And there's no reason why we couldn't build a library as well as an addition to the monastery and the madrassah, is there? One thought though. Why would churches and mosques have reduced culture or happiness?
Other than that, an excellent scheme. No. 2 it is for me.:goodjob:

sedna, in this scenario someone would have to update the religious building UHVs. Are you going to do it, or do you want me to do it after you get the XML files.

Other than that, both schemes look good. If jessiecat thinks the second is more historically accurate I would go with it.

Sorry for going Off-Topic, but there is another type of UHVs uncoded yet, except the colonial and these re-coded. I'm talking about the ''control x rescources by x AD'' (Burgundy, Venice, Kiev). When will they be coded and implemented?

Returning on topic-comments about the religious building reformation.
1) Couldn't say that I disagree with removing libraries, dunno about how universities should be kept-until Scientific Method, they were depended by churches. So why not give an extra 15% research bonus to universities after discovery of Scientific Method?
2)Why not differentiating some paths between Catholics and Orthodox? (eg Cathedral-Metropolis, and Cathedral school-Metropolis school)
3) Archdioiceses were something like ''centers of religions'' in Christian religions (don't know their analogue thing to muslims). To represent that, I would propose giving an extra +10%:culture: bonus to cities with Cathedrals, Metropolises or whatever else (depending on religion)
4) An other idea for further differentiating Christians and Muslims would be replacing Universities (christian) with Medical Schools (muslim). A prerequiste for both buildings, though, would be the existence of a religion. As for Medical Schools, effects: -5%:science: compared to Universities, and a +1:health:.

Any thoughts?

Sorry for going Off-Topic, but there is another type of UHVs uncoded yet, except the colonial and these re-coded. I'm talking about the ''control x rescources by x AD'' (Burgundy, Venice, Kiev). When will they be coded and implemented?

Returning on topic-comments about the religious building reformation.
1) Couldn't say that I disagree with removing libraries, dunno about how universities should be kept-until Scientific Method, they were depended by churches. So why not give an extra 15% research bonus to universities after discovery of Scientific Method?
2)Why not differentiating some paths between Catholics and Orthodox? (eg Cathedral-Metropolis, and Cathedral school-Metropolis school)
3) Archdioiceses were something like ''centers of religions'' in Christian religions (don't know their analogue thing to muslims). To represent that, I would propose giving an extra +10%:culture: bonus to cities with Cathedrals, Metropolises or whatever else (depending on religion)
4) An other idea for further differentiating Christians and Muslims would be replacing Universities (christian) with Medical Schools (muslim). A prerequiste for both buildings, though, would be the existence of a religion. As for Medical Schools, effects: -5%:science: compared to Universities, and a +1:health:.

Any thoughts?

1. I don't think Universities do have to wait until Scientific Method. They are already available with Education.
2. Agree
3. Centres of religion are already represented by Cathedrals and Grand Mosques as only 1 in 4 cities can build them.
4. I'm OK with Universities for all religions though your point about medical schools is good for the Muslims. There were a few advanced madrassahs which included a "Bimaristan" or teaching hospital with recuperation gardens,
pharmacy, laboratories and operating theatres where graduate students could be trained as physicians. I'd like to see that included as being available with Arab Medicine. And I'd like the later Medicine tech enable the building of Hospitals as in RFC. I'm surprised we haven't already included that.

My list of fixes from play-testing is growing, but it's more fun to write little bits of Python so that's what I've been doing. I've got a working model for Judaism to include in the next version. It's a little deterministic, but here's a basic description of how it works.

Judaism is a "normal" religion to the game, but has no chance of randomly spreading and no missionaries. There is no normal shrine, so the holy city is unimportant. There will be some Judaism buildings, possibly built automatically when Judaism spreads, possibly as an option to build. These buildings will provide some sort of money boost to reflect the role of Jews of bankers/lenders in medieval Europe.

Judaism starts with a holy city in Jerusalem. From there, it spreads in pre-determined stages:

Around 700 AD it spreads to Toledo, Spain. This city is historical and normally remains independent for a while, so this shouldn't conflict with the early development of Cordoba/Spain as Muslim/Christian.

Between 900 and 1000 AD, Judaism spreads randomly to both another city in Iberia and a city in Germany/France.

Later, around 1500, Judaism spreads to a couple of cities in Poland.

The most important factor to mix Judaism up is the inquisition. When a prosecutor is used to remove non-state religions, if Judaism was present in the city, it pops up in another randomly chosen (alive player) city.

The point is to keep the total number of Jews small yet relatively constant. We may want to have a few more Jewish cities added between 1000 and 1500 AD. It is possible for a Civ to adopt Judaism as a state religion, but as there is no way to spread it, that shouldn't last too long. Through the action of prosecutors it is possible, but unlikely, for a significant Jewish concentration to build up in a particular Civ. I don't have a problem with this alternate history.

From my history lessons I know that Jews were mostly wandering merchants up till the age of banks, where some became bankers but there still were a significant amount of merchants, so I think that each city with Judaism should have +1 merchant slot, will this be possible to code? Also maybe give a small bonus (10%) to the bank in a city with Judaism. If 1 merchant slot is too weak then maybe 1 free merchant? That would certainly give Judaism a remarkable feature in RFC:E and will incourage (sp?) players to spread Judaism to their cities.
That is historically correct in France, Germany and Poland, as many lords gave Jews privilges (sp?) if they came to their cities, up until around 1600.

I can make it in the .dll file so that no one can convert to Judaism. Would it make sense?

Does Judaism spread anywhere other than Iberia, there were significant Jewish communities in Constantinople and Tarnovo (Bulgaria). Actually the mother of the last Bulgarian pre-Ottoman Tsar was Jewish born. Jews have to spread to all European countries.

I think it would make sense to not allow civs to adopt Judaism as their state religion. With that safe-guard in place, I do think it would make sense to have Judaism spread to a few more places (as you suggest). Still, I think the rule should be only places were Jews were a significant minority and/or had some other larger historical role. There were Jews in every country in Europe, but that doesn't mean that we should have Judaism everywhere.

Now that's an issue. IMO there are countries which shouldn't get Judaism. To be more specific, I am talking about Vikings, Swedes, both Russians, Venice and Genoans. If we are going to keep that deterministic model, of course.

Well perhaps the countries without a big Jewish community could just get a small representation for a small number of Jews living in one of their city (A random event?), but not anything like the bonuses some civs will get (such as free merchant slot I proposed earlier).
Also I forgot to mention in my last post: When Iberia was fully conquered by Spain in 1492 many Jews fled to north Africa, so maybe when Spain uses a prosecutor in their cities to remove Judaism from the city it has a much higher chances to pop in north Africa? This would ofc require more cities there, maybe indy's or just code more European settlement there.

sedna, just a reminder: when you add Judaism, also update const.py

Also I will have to make some c++ updates, but those have to be done anyway.

Yeah, I added it to consts.py and the XML and currently Judaism seems to be working okay without any C++ changes, but I'm sure you know best :)

Actually it does not. The spread of all religions is now messed up. There is a fixed size array in Rhye.cpp that contains the spread factors for each civ and each religion.

I will expose that to python, by adding some more stuff to RFCEBalance.py

To the developers:

Guys, I can imagine how hard is it to consider adding new things when you busy fixing bugs with existing features. However please give your thoughts about new, event-driven religion "Heresy". It may work identical to Plague, start somewhere and spread. If the player does not "clean" heresy from the city after 5 turns city becomes independent flipping any unit around. There is a slot for 2 more religions, is it too hard to add any? Paganism might be the 7th one....

Paganism in the Middle Ages? I don't think so... and it's already present with the Pagan shrine.
There's no need for more religions.

Heresy != Paganism. This is not a bad idea for an event. Though we won't introduce Heresy as a new full-fledged religion, it would make sense to have a random event which threatens to remove state religion and/or flip a city independent unless you take action. There were plenty of cases of religious dissidents starting up pretty significant rebellions.

Heresy != Paganism. This is not a bad idea for an event. Though we won't introduce Heresy as a new full-fledged religion, it would make sense to have a random event which threatens to remove state religion and/or flip a city independent unless you take action. There were plenty of cases of religious dissidents starting up pretty significant rebellions.

Some workable examples include the Cathars in France, Bogomils in E. Europe and the Sunni/Shia split in Islam. There's more but I don't think we want too many as the Protestant Reformation itself is a pretty powerful event anyway.

Lithuania, the largest country in Europe in 14th century (represented by Poland in this mod, I guess), was pagan until 1386 AD. This mod starts at 500 AD... Well, maybe "No religion" -- can be understood as paganism...

By the way, Orthodoxy and Catholicisms officially became 2 different branches not until 10th century, 500 years later from our start. But even before, heresies had a huge impact on civs, causing civil wars in Bysantium, take iconoclast controversy for example (lasted 2 centuries!) One of the reason Arabs met little resistances in Middle Eastern provinces was the rift between Monophysites and Orthodox Christians.

And what are your thoughts about Judaism in Khazaria? Maybe independent/Barbarian city Sarkel with Judaism?

Yes, I support the introduction of such events, just not a "Heresy" religion because it makes little sense.

One thing that bugs me a little is I don't think the high diplo penalty from different religions between Catholicism and Orthodoxy is adequate. It almost forbids relations between Byzantium and most other civs.

I have seen no such thing as Byzantium on Emperor, just a regular leader-driven attitude. Pope was pleased with me, thanks to 10 golds :), trading techs with Papal State is vital ( they trade 1 beaker for 10, though). Even Saladin was furious with me not because of religion, I think it's a leader issue. For a VERY long period of time "We upset about your heathen religion" message does not appear in diplo screens, for some odd reason.

Could I suggest that you add a couple more religions? (not by replacing other, but really adding)

1. Norse paganism/Odinism - Sign: Mjolnir (a kind of hammer) - "temple/monsatery": A kind of bardic circle which are shown in Rome: Total War. - missionary:goðar/gothi. - Wonder: Borund stave church (couldn't find anything better..)

2. Celtic paganism - Sign: Celtic cross - temple: same as odinism - missionary: druid - wonder: Rock of Cashel :)

Could I suggest that you add a couple more religions? (not by replacing other, but really adding)

1. Norse paganism/Odinism - Sign: Mjolnir (a kind of hammer) - "temple/monsatery": A kind of bardic circle which are shown in Rome: Total War. - missionary:goðar/gothi. - Wonder: Borund stave church (couldn't find anything better..)

2. Celtic paganism - Sign: Celtic cross - temple: same as odinism - missionary: druid - wonder: Rock of Cashel :)

Norse paganism is to unimportant for the mod. Only the Norse would have it.

Did Celtic paganism still exist after 500 AD? IIRC, it didn't. And if it did, it was too unimportant for the mod.

Okay, just ideas anyways

One of my pet peeve's is that the name of the Islamic holy shrine should be something other than the Masjid Al-Haram, because the Masjid Al-Haram is in Mecca which doesn't show up on the map.

I think a more appropriate name would be the Umayyad Mosque. Just my opinion.

One of my pet peeve's is that the name of the Islamic holy shrine should be something other than the Masjid Al-Haram, because the Masjid Al-Haram is in Mecca which doesn't show up on the map.

I think a more appropriate name would be the Umayyad Mosque. Just my opinion.

I bet The Turk agrees with you. But this building represents the road to the Masjid Al-Haram, that's why it's called this way.

I bet The Turk agrees with you. But this building represents the road to the Masjid Al-Haram, that's why it's called this way.

Maybe we should add "the road to" to the name so that it is more clear. What do you think?

Maybe we should add "the road to" to the name so that it is more clear. What do you think?

I'm fine with it.

I am sorry about necroing this thread, but there is a feel of some unfinished business with "No Religion" aka Paganism in this mod. Namely -- there was a dramatic many centuries long struggle between Paganism and Christianity -- something that this mod fails to capture. Also, if a player of Norse or Lithuania or Hungary chooses to stay Pagan -- game does not provide him with viable alternatives to all the benefits that come with High religions. These are some ideas that can fix that:

1. Nations known to be pagan for quite some time (Bulgaria, Norse, Hungary, Kiev, Lithuania) start with Pagan shrine every time they build a city. By the way, Nidaros missing a pagan shrine right now.

2. Pagan shrines provide +15% science and Woods I and II promotions to all the land units (or +2 Experience to ALL the units). This is to create a dilemma for a player -- should I convert or be Pagan for a while.

3. Forest causes +0.25 health and happiness with No religion. So cutting forest makes pagans sad.

4. All the pagan shrines disappear if the player converts. It disappear in one city if you build a church/mosque in it.

5. Diplomatic dislike among Pagans and others can be elevated.

6. Historically, the overpopulation among Norse caused them to sail for new lands. Shrine of Uppsala can provide +2 Population and -2 health in all the cities.

I think a minor boost is in order but the large religions should eventually prove "superior".

Remove the pagan shrine as soon as a city gets the State :religion: BUT We already have a problem with the Shrine of Uppsala not being built...
The player should be able to choose the :religion: he wants to remove when he uses Inquisitors. e.g."Expel those Muslims but let the Jewish merchants stay. We need their money."
When conquering a city with a different :religion: the player could get the option to 'burn the heretics' (remove the other :religion:, only when using a persecutive civic, :mad: citizens or spawn some barbs or diplo hit with civs of that religion) or 'show them their wrong ways' (convert the buildings; certain chance that buildings of a certain type will stay, e.g. catholic temple becomes a protestant one, only when using a tolerant civic) Maybe only between Christians?

Also, if a player of Norse or Lithuania or Hungary chooses to stay Pagan -- game does not provide him with viable alternatives to all the benefits that come with High religions.

As it should not. As appealing as it was, paganism was never an organised religion, which is why it ultimately failed against the philosophically bizarre but highly organised and ruthless Abrahamic religions.

As it should not. As appealing as it was, paganism was never an organised religion, which is why it ultimately failed against the philosophically bizarre but highly organised and ruthless Abrahamic religions.


I don't want to start anti-New Age religous dispute here, even though every part of your statement calls for the heated debate :lol: My point was that as of right now Paganism is never an option even for the civs who known to be pagan for a long time within the timeframe of this mod. Lithuania became Christian at 1387, but if you play her you feel like converting the very moment any religion gets in your city. However there must be some situations when the player of the certain civs could use Paganism for some time with certain goals in mind. Not all the time, but some time. More options means more interesting game, plus it reflects historical reality.

You see, we have agreed amoung ourselves to see No Religion as Paganism -- but AI doesn't take it that way (it converts the moment it gets any "real" religion, Uppsala never gets built, etc) and mod does not reflect it that way. So I proposed more systematic approach to represent Paganism in this mod.

Remove the pagan shrine as soon as a city gets the State :religion: BUT We already have a problem with the Shrine of Uppsala not being built...
The player should be able to choose the :religion: he wants to remove when he uses Inquisitors. e.g."Expel those Muslims but let the Jewish merchants stay. We need their money."
When conquering a city with a different :religion: the player could get the option to 'burn the heretics' (remove the other :religion:, only when using a persecutive civic, :mad: citizens or spawn some barbs or diplo hit with civs of that religion) or 'show them their wrong ways' (convert the buildings; certain chance that buildings of a certain type will stay, e.g. catholic temple becomes a protestant one, only when using a tolerant civic) Maybe only between Christians?


Most games I have played AI civs with different religions are way to friendly. For example Catholic Spain and Protestant England are nearly always pleased and/or friendly towards each other and even have a defensive pact ( perhaps because of both fighting France for centuries?).

Serious conflicts on the scale of the 30 years war is mostly absent from the game. : (

I would like to have less tolerance and more conflict over religion. Since the AI is happy to prosecute, diplo hits when persecuting another civs state religion could be a solution. Maybe this mechanism could be borrowed from SOI?

As it should not. As appealing as it was, paganism was never an organised religion, which is why it ultimately failed against the philosophically bizarre but highly organised and ruthless Abrahamic religions.

I like your style when handling religions ;)
But Tigranes is right. We shouldn't get into lengthy and pointless debates about them

@others:
I agree that pagan religions should get a slight boost
Cheaper Pagan Shrines, and they obsolete a few techs later. This would also pretty much guarantee the Shrine of Uppsala is built in most games
/Note that pagan shrines stay in the city. Only the abilty to build them goes obsolete - this is standard BtS mechanics.
Thus Shrine of Uppsala can be built even after this tech. On the other hand, we should only allow it with Paganism civic/

Back on pagan religions:
This of course won't solve the issue that none of the later civs "want" to stay pagan.
We should add a unique bonus, so there would be at least some small benefits, at least early in the game. Eventually all civs should and will convert of course
All the major religions have huge benefits if you get some faith points

An idea just hit me
What if paganism would add a pagan promotion for all your early units? Axeman, Spearman, Archer, Horse Archer, nothing else
The promotion can be +1 strength, or +1 movement. Anything really
And Lithuania's UP could be that they can have this promotion for all their units.
This way they can stay pagan longer than any other civs

I would like to have less tolerance and more conflict over religion. Since the AI is happy to prosecute, diplo hits when persecuting another civs state religion could be a solution. Maybe this mechanism could be borrowed from SOI?

This is a good idea
Will look into it
You sure it works this way in SoI?

At least the human player get a diplomatic penalty when you persecute/massacre, which is increased if you do it many times.

So, my plan for the pagan buildings:
Pagan Shrine and Shrine of Uppsala only buildable when you have Paganism as civic
Pagan Shrine: has +1 happiness and +1 culture under pagansim, never obsoletes
(I want to keep the civic as restriction, not a tech - so actually switching out of Paganism makes them obsolete)
Shrine of Uppsala: bonus isn't final yet, probably boosting Pagan Shrines, or cities without a (main) religion. Also never obsoletes directly, but connected to paganism.
Or maybe boosting the Pagan promotion on your early units, this way it will go obsolete after you have better units

Paganism promotion is great! "Morale" (+1 movement) promotion is very fitting -- alludes to the connection to nature and terrain. The problem is -- how to get rid of those promotions the moment you switch from Paganism?

For Uppsala I really recommend to consider boosting the Forest (Woodland). Vanila BTS has health bonus with forests so choping them affects your cites. Uppsala could have -- "Forest tiles provide ..." <-- your favorite bonus here. One of the ideas is to make forest to damage foreight units in cultural borders of the Pagan civ.

After conversion Pagan shrines could produce extra unhappiniess and can be destroyed (removed) by Prosecutors. By the way, AI now builds them often, but does it use them effectively?

Paganism promotion is great! "Morale" (+1 movement) promotion is very fitting -- alludes to the connection to nature and terrain. The problem is -- how to get rid of those promotions the moment you switch from Paganism?

Indeed, that's the main thing to code. Could be rather hard
But IIRC I already saw it somewhere, probably in one of the bigger mods
Will try to find it, or something very similar...
Anyway, please post if anyone has some advice on adding this

This is a good idea
Will look into it
You sure it works this way in SoI?

At least it looks like it works that way when you play SOI.

Extra movement for paganism is unrealistic. Stick to some bonuses for pagan temple when running paganism civic, thats enough IMO.

I like the diplomatic penalty when you prosecute.

Why is it unrealistic? For Vikings it will represent their ability to sail quickly upstream and siege cities like Paris -- far from the sea. Hungarians made it as far as Spain, so this promotion will reflect that (but, I must admit, that 4 MP for Light Cavalry can be too much indeed). On the other hand after converting all the known Pagans usually become less restless and tend to stick to their homeland. Affecting the promotion by simple change of civics is a pretty cool thing to witness for human player :).

At least the human player get a diplomatic penalty when you persecute/massacre, which is increased if you do it many times.

At least it looks like it works that way when you play SOI.

Cool, it makes it easier
But for the next version we have more dynamic diplomatic relations, your previous actions' diplo effects fade away quicker
So I'm only willing to add this if there is a memory decay for this too, and diplo hate from persecution won't stay there for all of the game

Extra movement for paganism is unrealistic. Stick to some bonuses for pagan temple when running paganism civic, thats enough IMO.

I like the diplomatic penalty when you prosecute.

Why is it unrealistic? For Vikings it will represent their ability to sail quickly upstream and siege cities like Paris -- far from the sea. Hungarians made it as far as Spain, so this promotion will reflect that (but, I must admit, that 4 MP for Light Cavalry can be too much indeed). On the other hand after converting all the known Pagans usually become less restless and tend to stick to their homeland. Affecting the promotion by simple change of civics is a pretty cool thing to witness for human player :).

Extra movement is overpowered
If we think along these lines a much better (and realistic) promotion would be the Mobility - at least for mounted units
But we can just simply add an extra promotion with +10% strength

Anyway, having promotions with civics seems much harder than I thought.
I'm not sure anymore that we can remove them when switching from that civic.
Didn't anyone see something similar in other mods?

FhH has Cure Disease Spell -- Removes the Diseased and Plagued negative promotions that spread in the game.

P.S. On the second thought, +1 MP can be overpowered. Lithuania already has +3 EXP from her UB. Perhaps we could add some bonus against (fellow :) ) barbarians? Something like -- peace with barbarians while Pagan can look very cool. Imagine walking right next to that Barbarian Berserker and feeling to animosity :lol:! Or 50% bonus when fighting barbarians. The only bad thing is that in Lithuanian case they were successfully raided by Tatars in 1259, so staying Pagan did not save from Mongols...

Why do you oppose the bonus from the forest? This could be more historical than any bonus units could get...

I noticed when playing as Arabia that I lost faith points by having Christianity in my cities. This is kind of inaccurate as we can all probably agree because Muslims were very tolerant of Christians and Jews. Can we change this?

Now you might think this will result in high faith points for Arabia with no means of reducing them. I look at wine, pigs, crabs, and clams (all forbidden to Muslims) being worked by Arabia, Cordoba, and Turkey and I see the answer.

I counted, there are 7 Haram (forbidden) resources in Turkey alone. Then there is all the clam and crab along the African coast, wine and pigs in Spain and the Balkans...

The Muslim bonus for high faith points is city growth and something else, so I think that not building the winery or fishing boats might be a good tradeoff in some situations.

New players that aren't aware of this detail could be notified by advisor complaints after building an improvement much the same way an advisor recommends you build a building or settler/worker. You can choose to ignore the faith point penalties but then you start to get unhappiness in your cities...

I noticed when playing as Arabia that I lost faith points by having Christianity in my cities. This is kind of inaccurate as we can all probably agree because Muslims were very tolerant of Christians and Jews. Can we change this?

Now you might think this will result in high faith points for Arabia with no means of reducing them. I look at wine, pigs, crabs, and clams (all forbidden to Muslims) being worked by Arabia, Cordoba, and Turkey and I see the answer.

I counted, there are 7 Haram (forbidden) resources in Turkey alone. Then there is all the clam and crab along the African coast, wine and pigs in Spain and the Balkans...

The Muslim bonus for high faith points is city growth and something else, so I think that not building the winery or fishing boats might be a good tradeoff in some situations.

New players that aren't aware of this detail could be notified by advisor complaints after building an improvement much the same way an advisor recommends you build a building or settler/worker. You can choose to ignore the faith point penalties but then you start to get unhappiness in your cities...

Christians and Jews are not Muslims, hence if a portion of the Arabian population are Christians or Jews, this leads to lower Muslim faith. Same goes for all religions.

While Muslims don't eat pork, Christians do. For example, pork has always been a big part of the diet of Christians in the Balkans, even when everything was ruled by the Ottomans.

We can probably make it so that pork doesn't give bonuses to Muslims, but this is knit-picking and will cause some balance issues (i.e. Muslims would be at a big disadvantage).

If we really want something in that direction we could make brewery and such require christianity. But then we are in for a new balance round. After all, the arabs were the first drunkards in the world ;)

We should make the brewery require barley and Christianity. It's weird that countries that didn't drink beer until the 20th century (Spain, Portugal) and countries where beer still isn't consumed (Italians) are building breweries in our mod. Seriously, beer was really rare back then. I'd consider maybe just renaming that building to something else so as to not mess up the balance.

I counted, there are 7 Haram (forbidden) resources in Turkey alone. Then there is all the clam and crab along the African coast, wine and pigs in Spain and the Balkans...

I've made Pigs "obsolete" for Muslims in SoI, and also considered simply renaming Wine to Grapes, so this caught my attention. I never cared about crabs & clams, so I did some research and apparently the position that non-fish seafood is haram is specific to hanafi and ja'fari schools, and it developed over time. Other schools, including shaf'i'i and maliki, consider all seafood except eel to be halal. Hanafi is the most popular school today, but in the Middle Ages, shaf'i'i was the official law used in the Abbasid Caliphate and Seljuk, Zengid, Ayyubid and Mamluk sultanates, while maliki was and still is the law used in North Africa (hanafi was also by the Abbasids in different periods, and later Ottomans). So at least for clams & crabs, I think there're perfectly fine.

Cool, it makes it easier
But for the next version we have more dynamic diplomatic relations, your previous actions' diplo effects fade away quicker
So I'm only willing to add this if there is a memory decay for this too, and diplo hate from persecution won't stay there for all of the game

It does work like it and decays, just keep in mind that it's not a new memory, I just used the negative extra attitude (AI_attitudeExtra), which wasn't used by anything else in the mod.

We should make the brewery require barley and Christianity. It's weird that countries that didn't drink beer until the 20th century (Spain, Portugal) and countries where beer still isn't consumed (Italians) are building breweries in our mod. Seriously, beer was really rare back then. I'd consider maybe just renaming that building to something else so as to not mess up the balance.

What about Pagan Lithuania? Shouldn't they be able to build breweries?

I think it is safe to say that all Muslim countries in the mod had enough of a Christian population to still get benefit from the resources despite being "forbidden" for the Muslims.

For the Brewery, we may change the Brewery to some sort of Winery for the southern nations (Spain, Portugal and the two Italians), but I do feel like we would be knit picking. Tailoring the buildings specifically to the culture of each individual civ is a bit too much. Some general considerations like the UB and religious specific buildings are good, but looking at every single building is a bit too much work.

if anything, then they should rather get unhappiness from say ... house of wisdom (arguing that its there the learned is 'hanging out') for the resources in question

What about Pagan Lithuania? Shouldn't they be able to build breweries?

I think it is safe to say that all Muslim countries in the mod had enough of a Christian population to still get benefit from the resources despite being "forbidden" for the Muslims.

For the Brewery, we may change the Brewery to some sort of Winery for the southern nations (Spain, Portugal and the two Italians), but I do feel like we would be knit picking. Tailoring the buildings specifically to the culture of each individual civ is a bit too much. Some general considerations like the UB and religious specific buildings are good, but looking at every single building is a bit too much work.

What about having both breweries and wineries, with the same benefit, one requiring wine, the other barley. Then we give Burgundy a different UB with a with the same benefit. Everybody wins, the Germanic civs win get a slight bonus because of their access to both buildings.

What about having both breweries and wineries, with the same benefit, one requiring wine, the other barley. Then we give Burgundy a different UB with a with the same benefit. Everybody wins, the Germanic civs win get a slight bonus because of their access to both buildings.

We used to have a Brewery like building that gave a bonus form both Wine and Barley, but we scrapped it because we already have too much happiness. If we were to add more happiness, we should offset it by removing happiness from someplace else.

Currently the brewery gives +1 happiness with and extra 1 for barley. I'm saying two different buildings that give +1 happiness each. Only +1, no bonus for the resource, it's required. If you need that other happiness badly, conquer or trade.

But then which building is required for inn? I say scrap the inn because IMO buildings like that give the mod a "too much" feeling. There are a lot buildings with very small benefits.

Then Brewery gives +1 happiness, +1happiness for barley
The Inn gives +10%:gold: and -x war unhappiness

Here is my proposal. Get rid of the inn, and:

Winery: (Requires Wine) +1 happiness, +5%:gold:, -x/2 war unhappiness

Brewery: (Requires Barley) +1 happiness, +5%:gold:, -x/2 war unhappiness

The effects of both buildings are included, just divided into two other buildings, so that by building both, it's the same as if you had built the inn and brewery.

But then which building is required for inn? I say scrap the inn because IMO buildings like that give the mod a "too much" feeling. There are a lot buildings with very small benefits.

Then Brewery gives +1 happiness, +1happiness for barley
The Inn gives +10%:gold: and -x war unhappiness

Here is my proposal. Get rid of the inn, and:

Winery: (Requires Wine) +1 happiness, +5%:gold:, -x/2 war unhappiness

Brewery: (Requires Barley) +1 happiness, +5%:gold:, -x/2 war unhappiness

The effects of both buildings are included, just divided into two other buildings, so that by building both, it's the same as if you had built the inn and brewery.

Even better, integrate them into one, with 1 happiness base and +5% gold for each resource. The winery + brewery solution feels very arbitrary, it gives the 'too much' feeling even more. The current situation is fine, don't seperate them into nearly the same building for the sake of historicity.

I think an inn and a brewery is more "too much" than a brewery and a winery. What do you propose we call this single integrated building?

On this note, are the improvements for wine on the map still called wineries or can we change that to Vineyard with respect to Burgundy's UB?

Well, those are still 2 different buildings. The winery and brewery are exactly the same, except these require different resources. That's much more of the same to me than the Inn and the Brewery. Integrate both buildings into one or stick with the current situation I'd say.

Well, those are still 2 different buildings. The winery and brewery are exactly the same, except these require different resources. That's much more of the same to me than the Inn and the Brewery. Integrate both buildings into one or stick with the current situation I'd say.

I think it would be best to have one Brewery the gives happiness with both wine and barley, but no happiness by itself. This would make it so that people would drink the appropriate thing in their region and overall it will drop the amount of happiness in the game (we have a bit too much right now). The Inn can stay as it is.

I think it would be best to have one Brewery the gives happiness with both wine and barley, but no happiness by itself. This would make it so that people would drink the appropriate thing in their region and overall it will drop the amount of happiness in the game (we have a bit too much right now). The Inn can stay as it is.

That too is a possibility, improves the current situation somewhat.

EDIT: yay, Emperor Wessel V1 FINALLY made it to 1,000 posts. Hope I didn't spam these forums too much.:D

I think it would be best to have one Brewery the gives happiness with both wine and barley, but no happiness by itself. This would make it so that people would drink the appropriate thing in their region and overall it will drop the amount of happiness in the game (we have a bit too much right now). The Inn can stay as it is.

I can agree with this, but you can't call it a brewery. The name should envelope production of wine, beer and mead (+1 happiness with honey). I can't really think of such a building. I think that if nobody comes up with a suitable name other than brewery, then it should be called a winery. I say this because wineries were found all over Europe, including Northern Europe. Breweries were unique to Northern Europe only. There are also a lot more wine resources than barley resources.

Ideally though, I prefer two separate buildings, the winery and the brewery, and their absorption of the benefits of the inn because I think that breweries and wineries are both a lot more relevant to the game. A winery or brewery each believably affects the economy of a city substantially. Wine/beer make people happy, wine/beer are traded, thus, the benefits we give the brewery. What does an Inn do? An inn gives people a place to stay and serves food and drink. The inn is a small byproduct of the winery that should be represented by +x%:gold: in the winery.

Sorry to go on this rant but I'm trying to make the point that an inn is not in the same league of importance as a brewery or winery. The presence of a winery or brewery in any major city to an extent affects the national economy of these civs, making them relevant to the mod and build-able. How can an inn increase a city's wealth by 10% if a bank only increases it by 25%? It just isn't credible, and not all, but some players are going to pick up on this.

I don't want to create a bunch of balance problems, I'm all for keeping balance the same, but 3Miro you said yourself that there was too much happiness, let's not nerf a relevant building like the brewery but instead eliminate some of the odd and inconsistent details. (Like an inn that produces half as much wealth as a market, for example). Give the brewery and the winery small wealth percentages as well as small happiness bonuses, this puts them in the same "minor economic building family" as the weaver, tanner, warehouse, etc., this streamlines the game a bit more and things start to make more sense to the player.

+5% wealth bonuses for the brewery and winery, each of which require their own resource. The wealth bonus represents the expansion of private enterprise within the city caused by the widespread availability of beer or wine (like restaurants, taverns, inns...). Building an inn for :gold:% after the brewery is like building a "wool salesman" after the weaver.
Wessel V1, a brewery and winery might sound like much the same thing only because they're being discussed together in a thread. Barley and wine are two different resources so there's nothing wrong with giving them each their own buildings. They produce the same kind of product in a way, but then so do the weaver and the tanner, it's just a difference in the animal they're working, isn't it?

In total, building the winery and brewery with these benefits would result in the same total amount of benefits as building the brewery and inn together. No change to balance, and we just call the Burgundy UB something else.

Congratulations, Emperor :goodjob:

Thanks.:)

I don't think it's a problem to have two seperate buildings connected to wine and beer each. However, I think we should be aware that there are many details to be aware of. For example, beer was actually healthier than water in the Medieval era, so many people drank low alcoholic beer. I'm no expert on this matter but I guess beer and wine were viewed in a different way by the people who drank these beverages. Was wine univerisal in Mediterranian countries?

Now you bring it up though, I think what you propose isn't substantially different than the difference between a Tannery and a Blacksmith, except that those have more resources each. A warehouse is more universal, with all resources integrated into one building. I don't know why it was done this way?

Anyway, the current effects of the brewery are often not needed. Only in recently conquered cities with a large proportion of foreign culture the happiness is needed, because of the unhappiness caused by this. The building is cheap and brings nothing, so either change it's benefits or remove it altogether. Still, I don't know if I'd make it similar to a winery. A building, connected to only one resource with the same purpose... seems overkill to me. In that perspective many, many more buildings could be created.

Oh, and I'm going to pick up on the inn.:P Not because I disagree, but because the numbers are factually incorrect. In stead of 25%, a bank gives 50% more output, a market increases output by 25%. The effects are much smaller than stated. Not that I disagree with your point as I said, just correcting facts.

Wessel V1, a brewery and winery might sound like much the same thing only because they're being discussed together in a thread. Barley and wine are two different resources so there's nothing wrong with giving them each their own buildings. They produce the same kind of product in a way, but then so do the weaver and the tanner, it's just a difference in the animal they're working, isn't it?

That's where my major concern is. It is a problem in my view if two different resources get a different building, except if it is desperately needed. We have many types of resources and also many buildings that are not connected to resources. In the end, we have to select what can be in and what can't. Again, it's not about this being in the thread, but that the current proposal is to create 2 exactly the same buildings (in-game), that serve the same goals with a different resource. A civ like France would be building the same thing twice, to make it work with the one resource and with the other. I don't know if this an improvement. The current buildings aren't perfect either (simply because perfection is impossible), but I sit on the fence on this one.

Knit-picking on the effects though. I think a winery could be a good replacement of the inn, but the effects should be different than those from a brewery.

I agree, I didn't think of that, the effects of each could be different. In response to your statement about how not every resource needs a building, this is true, and that's why we don't have butcher shops for pigs, goldsmiths, etc. Wine is, however, an exception, don't you think? Yes, wine cultivation was started in Georgia in 8,000 BC and through the Greek colonization of the Mediterranean, wine was pretty much universal in in the area by the time of the Roman Empire. In the middle ages it was probably the most consumed "luxury resource" and, along with salt, the one of the most widely traded of goods originating in Europe. If we get a winery, it would also get a bonus for having honey. Mead, which is basically wine with honey, was very popular in England, Scandinavia, and Germany.

Here's what I propose based on your suggestion to give them different bonus.

Wine, a more heavily traded luxury produced by the wealthy for the wealthy (with the exception of the Catholic Church distributing its share as well) should produce more wealth effects in the building. Like... 10% wealth and minus war unhappiness. Oh, that sounds a lot like the inn, doesn't it? :D

Beer, more widely available and consumed by commoners, traded, but not as much as wine, was more of a local phenomenon that didn't just generate money like the wine trade. The brewery should be more happiness oriented. Let's say +1 happiness, and it's less hammers than the winery. :)

I agree, I didn't think of that, the effects of each could be different. In response to your statement about how not every resource needs a building, this is true, and that's why we don't have butcher shops for pigs, goldsmiths, etc. Wine is, however, an exception, don't you think? Yes, wine cultivation was started in Georgia in 8,000 BC and through the Greek colonization of the Mediterranean, wine was pretty much universal in in the area by the time of the Roman Empire. In the middle ages it was probably the most consumed "luxury resource" and, along with salt, the one of the most widely traded of goods originating in Europe. If we get a winery, it would also get a bonus for having honey. Mead, which is basically wine with honey, was very popular in England, Scandinavia, and Germany.

Here's what I propose based on your suggestion to give them different bonus.

Wine, a more heavily traded luxury produced by the wealthy for the wealthy (with the exception of the Catholic Church distributing its share as well) should produce more wealth effects in the building. Like... 10% wealth and minus war unhappiness. Oh, that sounds a lot like the inn, doesn't it? :D

Beer, more widely available and consumed by commoners, traded, but not as much as wine, was more of a local phenomenon that didn't just generate money like the wine trade. The brewery should be more happiness oriented. Let's say +1 happiness, and it's less hammers than the winery. :)

What about Cognac and other hard drinks made from grapes, they fit the Brewery perfectly.

Note that everyone is assumed to have access to every resource, what we label as a resource in the game means that we have exceptional quantities of it. This is a level of abstraction. Same goes for buildings, every town had an Inn and Brewery, what we are building are bigger "chains" of Inns and Breweries.

Resource Grapes: +1 :) form wine (everyone is making it).
Resource Barley: +1 :health: form the most nutritious grain.

Building Brewery: +1 :) from Barley (Beer) and +1 :) from Grapes (Cognac and other types of Grape Brandy), +5% :gold: to make it useful even without the resources.

Building Inn: emphasis on Espionage, which included war anger and +2 :espionage: and the ability to gain a spy. To that we add +5% :gold: bonus to make it useful even for non-espionage situations.

I forgot about the espionage. Why the inn though? Isn't there a better fitting espionage building like a Member's Club, Secret Society, Bawdyhouse?

What about leaving the inn as purely espionage related, taking away the :gold:%?, I just don't see an inn as the kind of place that would generate any kind of wealth for an empire. We could give it an extra espionage bonus since we don't seem to have a specific espionage building, then throw the winery in because it would be unique.

I know it's ultimately your opinion that counts but IMO a brewery just doesn't cut it for wine production. Cognac, sherry, and others as you mentioned are distilled wines, produced either in a winery or a distillery, only beer goes through a brewery.

Consider the possibilities of what could be done with a separate brewery and winery. They can be made completely different. Winery, a commerce/culture building like the weaver which requires wine, but bonuses can be enhanced with honey and sugar (just like the weaver gets better with dye, cotton). The brewery, a happiness building which requires barley but can be enhanced with wheat. You might say that this is too many bonuses, but there isn't any one civ that will have access to the winery, brewery, and weaver at the same time. Southern Europe is completely devoid of barley, France is missing barley, Germanic civs are missing sheep, Britain is missing wine.

If the winery still adds too much benefit then there has to be another building that can be removed or weakened. The winery doesn't deserve a spot any less than the tanner or weaver, brewery, or inn does, IMO.

I think brewery is too early in the tech tree since it gives a boost similiar to Notre Dame with barley. Instead I could think of Inn:

+10% espionage
+:) with barley
+:) with wine

Building available with Education (strange tech for inn anyway). Why not change it to alchemy instead to reflect the mixing of strange things to produce beverages?

Resource Grapes: +1 :) form wine (everyone is making it).
Resource Barley: +1 :health: form the most nutritious grain.

Building Brewery: +1 :) from Barley (Beer) and +1 :) from Grapes (Cognac and other types of Grape Brandy), +5% :gold: to make it useful even without the resources.

Building Inn: emphasis on Espionage, which included war anger and +2 :espionage: and the ability to gain a spy. To that we add +5% :gold: bonus to make it useful even for non-espionage situations.

I think this is the best option. Although the I also think that the Brewery should get another name.

The Burgundian Winery can hold it's bonus.

Moving Inns to Alchemy is aslo a good idea
I also disliked them being tied to Education

Moving Inns to Alchemy is aslo a good idea
I also disliked them being tied to Education

We should rename the Brewery to Tavern, this is generic enough for a place where people meet to drink. We can then associate this with both Wine and Barley.

We can also make the Inn into a "Secret Society" for the espionage bonus. We can remove the gold bonus altogether and give the Inn a defensive bonus "Helps Thwart Enemy Spies".

We should rename the Brewery to Tavern, this is generic enough for a place where people meet to drink. We can then associate this with both Wine and Barley.

We can also make the Inn into a "Secret Society" for the espionage bonus. We can remove the gold bonus altogether and give the Inn a defensive bonus "Helps Thwart Enemy Spies".

Something along these lines could work too

renaming Brewery to Tavern (might even adding on the gold% from inn to it, if need be with a tiny raise in cost, since its quite cheap atm) and figuring out some different name for the Inn ... "Thieves' Guild" might be useable, but then again its a open question if such thing ever actually existed ... "Secret Society" is IMO to diffuse and unspecific, and could be argued not even to be a building in itself ... "Guard Post" mayhaps?

The "Secret Society" represents a mason lodge or something. We can't go and call it that because it would also represent Illuminati, Templars, Hashashim for the Muslim civs.

I don't get it though, why so much conjecture about a tavern now? What's wrong with the winery?

The "Secret Society" represents a mason lodge or something. We can't go and call it that because it would also represent Illuminati, Templars, Hashashim for the Muslim civs.

That is more or less what the Inn represents, it is just that the name is probably not very good.


I don't get it though, why so much conjecture about a tavern now? What's wrong with the winery?

We should keep things simple. There used to be many strange buildings that gave all sorts of strange bonuses for all sorts of resources. Things are much cleaner now and we should keep them clean. We should have one :) building. If you want :), then you build a Tavern and you get bonus regardless of whether you are northern or southern civ.

That is more or less what the Inn represents, it is just that the name is probably not very good.



We should keep things simple. There used to be many strange buildings that gave all sorts of strange bonuses for all sorts of resources. Things are much cleaner now and we should keep them clean. We should have one :) building. If you want :), then you build a Tavern and you get bonus regardless of whether you are northern or southern civ.

Ok, what kind of building is it? Wealth or happiness bonuses? Just Wine and barley? Or also wheat, honey, sugar?

Ok, what kind of building is it? Wealth or happiness bonuses? Just Wine and barley? Or also wheat, honey, sugar?

Tavern: +1 :) for Barley and +1 :) for Wine. No Brewery and only Burgundy gets UBwinery that gives +2 culture.

That's it. Generic 5% gold can be added if there are balance issues later on. Pretty much everyone would get barley or wine, so the Tavern would be useful.

Agreed. :)

Thanks.:)

I don't think it's a problem to have two seperate buildings connected to wine and beer each. However, I think we should be aware that there are many details to be aware of. For example, beer was actually healthier than water in the Medieval era, so many people drank low alcoholic beer. I'm no expert on this matter but I guess beer and wine were viewed in a different way by the people who drank these beverages. Was wine univerisal in Mediterranian countries?

Now you bring it up though, I think what you propose isn't substantially different than the difference between a Tannery and a Blacksmith, except that those have more resources each. A warehouse is more universal, with all resources integrated into one building. I don't know why it was done this way?

Anyway, the current effects of the brewery are often not needed. Only in recently conquered cities with a large proportion of foreign culture the happiness is needed, because of the unhappiness caused by this. The building is cheap and brings nothing, so either change it's benefits or remove it altogether. Still, I don't know if I'd make it similar to a winery. A building, connected to only one resource with the same purpose... seems overkill to me. In that perspective many, many more buildings could be created.

Oh, and I'm going to pick up on the inn.:P Not because I disagree, but because the numbers are factually incorrect. In stead of 25%, a bank gives 50% more output, a market increases output by 25%. The effects are much smaller than stated. Not that I disagree with your point as I said, just correcting facts.

Although the thread says something about religion I notice the topic is still somewhat recent. I disagree on the 'disimportance' of the brewery, maybe in the later game but with the civs I usually play (Genoa, Portugal, Austria, England, Germany) they play an essential early role in keeping the people happy/growing beyond size 8. But the tavern idea replacement for the brewery sounds nice I think. :) / %gold bonus for wine and barley, possibly wheat and honey? Some :) should remain no matter what.

It does work like it and decays, just keep in mind that it's not a new memory, I just used the negative extra attitude (AI_attitudeExtra), which wasn't used by anything else in the mod.

Sounds great, thanks for the info!
Will keep that in mind when I'm back on memory decays

Seems strange that missionaries are usually required by the monastery but religious persecutors either don't require a building or require some generic building like the church or monastery (Not sure which). Religious persecutors are available too early and too often, IMO.

I think there's room for one more religious building, namely the Holy Office that's already in RFC modmods like Dawn of Civilization. I'm proposing making this building require the Cathedral like the Reliquary, so that the holy office and thus the inquisitors come later in the game and are less common, being produced by civs that have actively invested in religious building and inquisitors will only be available to humans that have decided to establish an inquisition and persecute other religions in their civ. The religious persecutor wouldn't be available in every city in every civ like it is now.

This could add flavor by making the 'Inquisition' a more definitive event and course of action taken by the civ; a course of action with rewards as well as consequences that can be tied in with the civics and faith points. The completion of the first Holy Office in any civ would begin the existence of the persecution or "Inquisition".

A civ that has the persecution present in their civ gets perks, like higher faith points (+5 for establishing the inquisition, +1 obviously for every next Holy Office), maybe stability with religious law or other conservative/religious civics, great relations bonuses with other civs that have an inquisition of the same faith, and of course the unique ability to purge the heathens/heretics from your civ.

A civ with the Inquisition also gets consequences, like temporary instability at the establishment of the inquisition, further instability with any of the more liberal/progressive civics, bad relations hits with civs of other religions, and small population and stability hits every time the inquisitor does his thing. -1 population for removing Jews, -2/3/4 population for removing Muslims or any Christians, to represent those unwilling to convert fleeing to other civs.

When civ 'x' builds their first holy office in city 'y', there is a notification at the top announcing that "The 'x' Inquisition has been established in 'y'!", the owner of Rome/Damascus/Protestant Holy City would appear to the human founder, congratulating or giving their blessing to the inquisition, and later along the road civs of other religions would get their attention to let the player know that they are highly annoyed by the persecution of their faithful.

Adds flavor, no? There would be no more casually building a religious prosecutor to get rid of those pesky heathens and being done with it, it would be a bigger deal. ;)

I know that this mod isn't asking for any more new features due the nearing completion of the mod, but this only affects the stability balance slightly, and it adds a lot of detail and flavor. Detail and uniqueness keep the player entertained, don't they?

Seems strange that missionaries are usually required by the monastery but religious persecutors either don't require a building or require some generic building like the church or monastery (Not sure which). Religious persecutors are available too early and too often, IMO.

I think there's room for one more religious building, namely the Holy Office that's already in RFC modmods like Dawn of Civilization. I'm proposing making this building require the Cathedral like the Reliquary, so that the holy office and thus the inquisitors come later in the game and are less common, being produced by civs that have actively invested in religious building and inquisitors will only be available to humans that have decided to establish an inquisition and persecute other religions in their civ. The religious persecutor wouldn't be available in every city in every civ like it is now.

This could add flavor by making the 'Inquisition' a more definitive event and course of action taken by the civ; a course of action with rewards as well as consequences that can be tied in with the civics and faith points. The completion of the first Holy Office in any civ would begin the existence of the persecution or "Inquisition".

A civ that has the persecution present in their civ gets perks, like higher faith points (+5 for establishing the inquisition, +1 obviously for every next Holy Office), maybe stability with religious law or other conservative/religious civics, great relations bonuses with other civs that have an inquisition of the same faith, and of course the unique ability to purge the heathens/heretics from your civ.

A civ with the Inquisition also gets consequences, like temporary instability at the establishment of the inquisition, further instability with any of the more liberal/progressive civics, bad relations hits with civs of other religions, and small population and stability hits every time the inquisitor does his thing. -1 population for removing Jews, -2/3/4 population for removing Muslims or any Christians, to represent those unwilling to convert fleeing to other civs.

When civ 'x' builds their first holy office in city 'y', there is a notification at the top announcing that "The 'x' Inquisition has been established in 'y'!", the owner of Rome/Damascus/Protestant Holy City would appear to the human founder, congratulating or giving their blessing to the inquisition, and later along the road civs of other religions would get their attention to let the player know that they are highly annoyed by the persecution of their faithful.

Adds flavor, no? There would be no more casually building a religious prosecutor to get rid of those pesky heathens and being done with it, it would be a bigger deal. ;)

I know that this mod isn't asking for any more new features due the nearing completion of the mod, but this only affects the stability balance slightly, and it adds a lot of detail and flavor. Detail and uniqueness keep the player entertained, don't they?

I would have to say no to this. Mostly because it is too late.

Also, you should note that Religious prosecutions are not equivalent to the Inquisition. Every religion (including Pagans) have prosecuted other religions in some form of shape or another. Mass scale prosecutions have existed at least as early as the 9th century.

I would have to say no to this. Mostly because it is too late.

Also, you should note that Religious prosecutions are not equivalent to the Inquisition. Every religion (including Pagans) have prosecuted other religions in some form of shape or another. Mass scale prosecutions have existed at least as early as the 9th century.

Leave it for 2.0 then?

What about just moving the persecutors to a holy office like I said? Or requiring the Cathedral to build them?

Leave it for 2.0 then?

What about just moving the persecutors to a holy office like I said? Or requiring the Cathedral to build them?

Propose it again for 2.0, I probably wouldn't be around, but others will be.

Holy Office and Cathedral would restrict the prosecutions to non-Pagans and as I said earlier, everyone did prosecutions. We will leave things as they are for now.

Cathedrals would be ok. Pagans arent really relevant in this mod.

I think it's meant for the Lithuanians to be able to stay pagan. Of course, we could just add early religious persecutors to Lithuania as part of their UP, wether we mention it or not, but now we're getting nit-picky

Why would a pagan civ want to persecute? There are no bonuses I can think of.

Why would a pagan civ want to persecute? There are no bonuses I can think of.

Same reason as other Civs, foreign religion messes Stability.

The AI currently doesn't build Prosecutors as often as they should, I wouldn't put more restictions for now.

Propose it again for 2.0, I probably wouldn't be around, but others will be.

Hey, don't say that
I'm still hoping you will find some time for RFCE even after you start your new job
Doesn't really matter if it will be less time, a few forum posts are more than enough in some cases...

The AI currently doesn't build Prosecutors as often as they should, I wouldn't put more restictions for now.

Actually in the latest versions I always saw AIs building persecutors
And then holding onto them, as they don't really need them in most cases

So it may not be a bad idea to tie them into a religious building
Cathedrals are probably too restricting though, I agree with that