Religion is a core element of human history. Can't understand why they removed such an important concept.
And Islam spread through war and conquest.
Hrm... The one thing I'm wondering about, is there an actual historical empire without a religion? Or more specifically, that adopted any non-state religion policy beyond free religion? I can't think of one. Even the communist powers still had/have religion very prevalent in their populace, the state just didn't officially support it - worship wasn't banned, it was just viewed as the state as superstition. The modern secular states in the free world are pretty much the model for the free religion civic.
When you talk about humanism, secularism, atheism... Has any state ever really adopted these things as an official policy in opposition to a state religion? Not the US, not England, not Canada, Australia, New Zealand... They've all gone the equivalent of free religion. The things you're talking about here seem as if they'd go in another tree entirely, and atheism as a state policy would be more appropriate to SMAC since it has never actually happened (well, arguably in the communist countries, but even there religion was very, very prevalent and worship was allowed).
I am pretty sure that Stalin's Russia was explicitly atheist and persecuted any form of worship.
In civ5 terms, I'd put it as simply a modifier towards city states. So they would be allowed to have a religion, and you would gain influence depending how active your civ is in spreading that religion. Make it one factor so most city states might not care, but a few will give quests like "spread my religion to 3 of your own cities", "build 4 cathedrals" and so on. Have it not really matter against the AI (so like all the other bonuses, they really don't care too much about any), and it'll be fine. So you can ignore it, and all it will cost you is some influence with city-states.
Muslims never conquered Indonesia nor Philippines nor Malaysia and they are Muslims, Islam also spread along the trade routes to china through merchants and poets, and for the record India was one thousand time more populated than Arabia, 300 million against 1 million, i don't see how we could force them ( lol at the concept ) to become Muslims, unless of course they ( yes i know chocking ! ) choose Islam.
I really don't quite understand this thread. Religion, as a concept separate from specific implementation, has always been a part of the Civ series and is in CiV. The only thing that got added to CIV and subtracted for CiV was a specific implementation of Religion as a game mechanic, not as a concept. The concept is still there, and has always been there, and probably couldn't be removed without changing the core concept of the game itself.
I can understand people being annoyed that religion as a game mechanic isn't present in CiV, but it wasn't present in any other Civ besides IV anyway, and to claim the concept has been removed is nonsensical.
I can understand people being annoyed that religion as a game mechanic isn't present in CiV, but it wasn't present in any other Civ besides IV anyway, and to claim the concept has been removed is nonsensical.
I really don't quite understand this thread. Religion, as a concept separate from specific implementation, has always been a part of the Civ series and is in CiV. The only thing that got added to CIV and subtracted for CiV was a specific implementation of Religion as a game mechanic, not as a concept. The concept is still there, and has always been there, and probably couldn't be removed without changing the core concept of the game itself.
I can understand people being annoyed that religion as a game mechanic isn't present in CiV, but it wasn't present in any other Civ besides IV anyway, and to claim the concept has been removed is nonsensical.
In early Civs, religion as a concept was present only in a superficial manner. You say that the concept "couldn't be removed without changing the core concept of the game itself" - prior to Civ IV, this was pretty much represented by temples and wonders which mentioned religion. You changed temples to, I don't know, theme parks, and wonders like the oracle to, say, some other non-theologically oriented wonder, and you've effectively removed it from the game both from a gameplay standpoint and conceptually. Even conceptually, it was only present in an *extremely* abstract and superficial manner, and not anywhere near being a "core concept" like you're claiming. The key point, its implementation was so superficial in early Civ games changing the names on a few wonders and buildings - which could have probably been counted on one hand - would have effectively removed it from the game and Civ would be the retelling of history with no religion existing whatsoever.
In Civ IV, not only was it a major gameplay mechanic that tied religious structures into victory conditions, leader personalities, the spread of culture, and was a tremendous factor in diplomatic relations. Conceptually, it was entrenched in Civ IV in a way that it absolutely wasn't in any previous Civ game. The concept was made concrete as opposed to just being a vague and unformed reference of a few historical wonders. I'm even a bit reluctant to call it a core concept in Civ IV, but it was a very major, well fleshed out, and non-superficial entity both from a gameplay and conceptual standpoint. The same cannot be said of previous Civs.
I disagree with your statement. Religion was hardly even mentioned in Civ I and II, extremely abstracted and superficial in III, and only really became a concrete concept in IV. Conceptually, it was a superficial non-entity until IV. If you want to split hairs though, consider the thread as talking about religion with any sort of specific character or any but superficial lip-service in the series.
How is religion present as a concept in Civ5?
Because a few social policies have a couple vague religious terms attached to them? That constitutes including religion?