Tips for King please!

Oh yeah, you can play whatever way you want. It's just that what you get from a pantheon is most likely not going to outweigh building a granary first. If you're okay with that, great, go with that. Like I said, I understand there are going to be starts where you're going to have to be okay with it. They're things like "Oh man, I need Desert Folklore and Petra here and this is going to be awesome." In those situations, you know what you're sacrificing in order to get what you need. It's just not a "Do it this way every time" kinda thing because it's not always optimal at all.

Hell, probably half my games I don't even build shrines. At all. Ever.

Chum said:

It's just that what you get from a pantheon is most likely not going to outweigh building a granary first.

Click to expand...

You're phrasing it as if this was a fact, but pretty much everytime the "shrine or granary?"-debate comes up most people seem to go for the shrine. The early food just doesn't give you that much - you won't reach pop 5 before you "have" to build a settler, then you're stagnated anyway. The +2 Food will only speed up the production by ~1 turn (if at all) and shortly after the settler is done, your capital gets a food-boost from tradition anyway, so it really doesn't have that much influence to build it that early in the game - the granary won't be taken by other Civs, but pantheons (which will easily be active for 50+ turns) will.

I just don't think the 2 food is that much, yes its a good amount at the start of the game but I only see it as a viable option if you start off with 2/3 wheats around your cap, and i don't normally get many wheats so i opt for shrine after scouts

Let me ask this, regarding liberty starts, and granarys as big of a priority?

Should I still be prioritizing science techs as a wide, part-time warmonger?

Ryika said:

You're phrasing it as if this was a fact, but pretty much everytime the "shrine or granary?"-debate comes up most people seem to go for the shrine. The early food just doesn't give you that much - you won't reach pop 5 before you "have" to build a settler, then you're stagnated anyway. The +2 Food will only speed up the production by ~1 turn (if at all) and shortly after the settler is done, your capital gets a food-boost from tradition anyway, so it really doesn't have that much influence to build it that early in the game - the granary won't be taken by other Civs, but pantheons (which will easily be active for 50+ turns) will.

Click to expand...

I've never felt short on pantheons. Fertility rites is always going to be there as an absolute last resort, and that's still an above average pantheon.

Also, I tend to not feel I "Have" to do anything on any type of timescale. AI expansion is controlled via other factors -- such as not playing Standard Pangaea all the time, like is the "norm" here.

Chum said:

Well, he was still responding to a post saying basically "settle, then build a scout," which leaves it open for interpretation.

But still. Shrine first means that there are probably half the starts where you're not going to have enough food to grow at a decent pace by citizen 3. That's really bad times, and I dunno if a pantheon is worth that. Obviously if you think you're not going to get what pantheon you want or if you absolutely NEED that pantheon to make that start work (desert folklore, etc) then sure, go ahead. But Granary is the clear better option here for first build after the scouts for the +2 food. It's even more the case if you have any of the resources it buffs.

I can't remember having too many food rich starts where I was good delaying the granary and didn't suffer any population problems as a result.

Click to expand...

Being able to get a pantheon out early and picking up something that further increases your faith can have a huge benefit to further faith picks and how much faith you have at the end game, and maybe even the size of your cities. Getting your cap an extra population early is not likely going to have that much of an impact past the first 50 turns or so.

Now this may be different on Deity, as I notice you sometimes have such aggressive faith neighbors with unreal advantages in spreading religion that it may not help much. (my last game I had 4 missionaries on my door step by turn 50). Outside of Deity with close religious neighbors, shrine appears to give a better return.

Chum said:

I've never felt short on pantheons.

Click to expand...

Well, what difficulty are you playing on then? On Deity if you don't get the shrine early a Civ will just enhance their religion before you can even found a pantheon, so you'll get nothing.

Chum said:

Also, I tend to not feel I "Have" to do anything on any type of timescale. AI expansion is controlled via other factors -- such as not playing Standard Pangaea all the time, like is the "norm" here.

Click to expand...

Of course you don't have to do anything, but sorry.. the rest is just silly. If you are part of a discussion and especially if you make such generalized statements, then you do of course either have to submit to a "standard"-scenario, or at least mention that you play with settings that are very different from what the majority of players have defined as the "norm" - otherwise a discussion about what's generally a good strategy is just not going to go anywhere.

Oh, and Fertility rites is just an awful pantheon.

Ryika said:

Oh, and Fertility rites is just an awful pantheon.

Click to expand...

You are in the minority on that one. This thread is pretty much unanimous on Fertility Rites.

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=477381&highlight=pantheon+rating

What was that about the majority of players and the 'norm' again?

Chum said:

You are in the minority on that one. This thread is pretty much unanimous on Fertility Rites.

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=477381&highlight=pantheon+rating

What was that about the majority of players and the 'norm' again?

Click to expand...

That thread is from 2012, shortly after G+K was released, players didn't really have the necessary experience back then. Because what does Fertility Rites do? It gives you 10% on the food surplus, that means you have to get +10 food to get an additional food out of it and a lot of people just took it because it sounds better than it is.

But yeah, I admit that my statement was a bit to broad here, it has its uses, but using it as a "backup"-pantheon if there's no chance of getting a religion is not one of them. Why? Because it becomes strong in the lategame. You'll lose it as soon as you adopt a Religion, so you only have it in the early game where it won't net you much food, because again.. 10 surplus = 1 food from the pantheon.

...and I find it somewhat telling that you didn't reply to the rest of my post.

Ryika said:

That thread is from 2012, shortly after G+K was released, players didn't really have the necessary experience back then. Because what does Fertility Rites do? It gives you 10% on the food surplus, that means you have to get +10 food to get an additional food out of it and a lot of people just took it because it sounds better than it is.

But yeah, I admit that my statement was a bit to broad here, it has its uses, but using it as a "backup"-pantheon if there's no chance of getting a religion is not one of them. Why? Because it becomes strong in the lategame. You'll lose it as soon as you adopt a Religion, so you only have it in the early game where it won't net you much food, because again.. 10 surplus = 1 food from the pantheon.

...and I find it somewhat telling that you didn't reply to the rest of my post.

Click to expand...

I ignored the rest of your post because you make the same broad statements I do. It kinda refuted itself.

You have a plan that works. That's great. My plan involves religion being pretty far down on the list, and I'll tell you why -- I don't care. If the AI gets all the religions, I am 100% guaranteed to be visited by some clown and his army of missionaries pretty early on. I'll have A religion. It might not be optimal, it might not be the one I pick, but if you're talking about deity play anyway, then you're not getting the cream of the crop either.

So really, your entire argument refutes itself. "Get a pantheon, you need one on deity." But you can't get any good beliefs, because they'll all be gone, because deity. So why put that much effort into it? I've had exactly one game where not worrying about religion totally hosed me -- I was spain, on my own continent. I didn't get one up in time, and I couldn't buy great people. That's the only time I've ever thought "Man, totally shouldda tried harder for a religion." Otherwise, I've got cities converting from missionary and prophet spam and trade route pressure and friendly civ pressure on my borders, and there's not much I can do about it. I certainly am not the type to spam inquisitors just to keep my own, because I want the great people, and nothing else.

All the rest is just a means to an end.

On Deity, I can understand, as you will struggle keeping any religion, even if you get your optimal beliefs, but on Immortal and down, the difference can be huge, though not all starts are benefited as much by it. Having high faith early, with good faith producing beliefs allow your religion to grow much faster, and the sooner you have good faith, the more turns of faith production you earn, snowballing into 6k+ faith points to spend on Great Scientists, Engineers, and Musicians towards the end game.

It's not primarily about the religion, it's about the pantheon. If you don't get one yourself, then you have to wait until another Civ brings you a religion, which just seems to be a huge waste. And even if you manage to get a pantheon, it's still more likely to get a good pantheon if you get the shrine early.

Pretty much any pantheon you can get is better (by numbers) than the early food that pretty much goes to the waste anyway - and it helps all cities, not only the capital.

Now, arguably that's a bit different on King, as it's unlikely that a Civ will upgrade their religion before you can get a pantheon, but you still lose the pantheon for a silly amount of turns (because more pantheons are founded increasing the cost of your pantheon) in favor of 2 food that just don't do much at that point. ^^ I can't really see how that would be better than a pantheon.

But again, it's personal preference and that's okay. Just don't make your opinion sound as if it were facts.

Ryika said:

It's not primarily about the religion, it's about the pantheon. If you don't get one yourself, then you have to wait until another Civ brings you a religion, which just seems to be a huge waste. And even if you manage to get a pantheon, it's still more likely to get a good pantheon if you get the shrine early.

Pretty much any pantheon you can get is better (by numbers) than the early food that pretty much goes to the waste anyway - and it helps all cities, not only the capital.

Now, arguably that's a bit different on King, as it's unlikely that a Civ will upgrade their religion before you can get a pantheon, but you still lose the pantheon for a silly amount of turns (because more pantheons are founded increasing the cost of your pantheon) in favor of 2 food that just don't do much at that point. ^^ I can't really see how that would be better than a pantheon.

But again, it's personal preference and that's okay. Just don't make your opinion sound as if it were facts.

Click to expand...

I thought the 10% food was for all cities with it, and it does not go away when you found your religion, it gets incorporated into it, which is why it is important to get a good one. The only time I have found it felt like a waste was when I get swarmed by missionaries on Deity at ridiculously early turns (before 50).

Uzael36 said:

I thought the 10% food was for all cities with it, and it does not go away when you found your religion, it gets incorporated into it, which is why it is important to get a good one. The only time I have found it felt like a waste was when I get swarmed by missionaries on Deity at ridiculously early turns (before 50).

Click to expand...

Your pantheon goes away if another Religion spreads to your city, that's why I said it's not a good belief to choose if you're not able (or don't want) to found a religion.

Just getting a nice per-tile bonus is much better for early boost, because the %-bonus doesn't really do much until much later in the game.

/edit: And yes, starting right next to Ethiopia would be one of the exceptions where I'd suggest going for the granary.

Ryika said:

Your pantheon goes away if another Religion spreads to your city, that's why I said it's not a good belief to choose if you're not able (or don't want) to found a religion.

Just getting a nice per-tile bonus is much better for early boost, because the %-bonus doesn't really do much until much later in the game.

/edit: And yes, starting right next to Ethiopia would be one of the exceptions where I'd suggest going for the granary.

Click to expand...

At times, lately, I've been more willing to declare war when I see a swarm of missionaries coming my way. Of course this could be problematic if you already declared war on another civ for workers, but I've been working CS's for that now, especially after learning that if you pillage an improvement, you can easily predict where the workers will come to you.

Certainly a possibility, though the way I see it is that a missionary-spamming neighbor can be beneficial on higher difficulties - you're more often than not going to get a religion yourself, so he's just the guy that supplies you with some beliefs as soon as possible. So I'm quite happy to start near a religious Civ if I don't plan to put much afford into religion anyway. ^^

Saying fertility rites matter more in the end game than early game is a misconception. 10% early is as good as 10% late if you look at how fast it helps you grow. It will always be 10%.

However, where it makes sense is when you compare to raw bonuses like goddess of the hunt or sun god. These pantheons are indeed better options for the early game, and if you don't think youll keep religion then they are definetely the best choice if applicable.
Faith and culture pantheon are usually better anyway though.

Hmpf. Did I not post my response a few minutes ago? Strange. ^^ I guess I never finished that post and closed the tab without noticing.

Well, short version:
Yes, 10% is 10%, but it's still 10% of the surplus and the amount of surplus you generate in relation to the amount of food needed to get a new citizen changes dynamically during the game - it's quite strong from pop 1-4 or so on (=fast growth), then gets considerably less efficient (for cities that are not Tradition capitals) until it gets boosted by Civil Service again.

The time that the Pantheon would be active is exactly between these two efficient phases when the overall growth is quite big, thus lowering it's efficiency (compared to the overall-efficency throughout the game) during that time.

The king difficulty isn't all that complicated if you are able to research. Obtaining the research buildings and the research national wonders can help you to understand how to pass the king difficulty. Beelining to research producing technologies such as plastics can help you understand king difficulty better.

Ryika said:

Certainly a possibility, though the way I see it is that a missionary-spamming neighbor can be beneficial on higher difficulties - you're more often than not going to get a religion yourself, so he's just the guy that supplies you with some beliefs as soon as possible. So I'm quite happy to start near a religious Civ if I don't plan to put much afford into religion anyway. ^^

Click to expand...

I wouldn't declare war on missionaries if I had a crappy religion. I'm talking about when I have good beliefs I do not want to lose. If I am rushed with missionaries before I have a good religion started, I'm not likely going to get a good one on my own anyways.