Suggestions for Piety start?

Going wide with religion on Deity does not quite work. The pressure is exerted by surrounding cities, so you are actually better off converting every other city on the way to create a web of pressure. But the AI's spam missionaries and prophets too much for this to actually happen, unless you pick something like Evangelism or Unity of the Prophets. And if you convert AI cities, they will be mad at you, anyway.

I really think they should rework at least religious tolerance because it is situational at best and worthless at other times. The rest of the tree is pretty decent, though they could also tweak organized religion. I feel like giving Piety culture and happiness on its own can make it a really good starting tree, though it is always going to be situational.
 
I really like Theocracy (25% gold in all cities). It's like the Commerce opener civ-wide. In my standard science game I typically put 2 policies into Patronage (to Consulates) before opening Rationalism, but often on Immortal I will instead put 3 into Piety left side, ending with Theocracy.
 
The thing about "small piety" is it, unintentionally or not, abused the living hell out of the overflow bug which is now fixed, not to mention being kinda luck based.

Small Piety is about efficiency and diplomacy. I don't agree that it's luck based. You can almost always get a faith pantheon, and with Piety's bonuses you're basically guaranteed a religion anyway. Even if you don't get one, it's fine, you let someone else convert you and use the faith for holy sites which are amazing. Whatever happens you're pretty much guaranteed a science victory as well.

The argument about abusing the AI is pretty moot, surely all strategies try to take advantage of strengths and capitalise against weaknesses. If my local team Gateshead had to play against Barcelona would we try and pass them off the pitch? No, of course not. What would we do? Defend for our lives, get in their faces, knock big long balls up to our big lump of a striker. Are we abusing them?
 
Small Piety is about efficiency and diplomacy. I don't agree that it's luck based. You can almost always get a faith pantheon, and with Piety's bonuses you're basically guaranteed a religion anyway. Even if you don't get one, it's fine, you let someone else convert you and use the faith for holy sites which are amazing. Whatever happens you're pretty much guaranteed a science victory as well.

The guide itself says "I started with only one rule, which is that I needed a start where my land would give me a real faith pantheon (so, not sun-god). Without this dirt, or a faith UA/UB, I would not recommend this strategy.". That is heavily luck-based outside of certain start biases for certain civs.

First, some of faith pantheons are not very good. Dance of the Aurora and God of War are horrible. One With Nature is great but you need it on a faith wonder to acutally get a religion. Goddess of Festivals just doesn't work early game because working those tiles is brutal. Religious Idols is better but still kind of hard to work sufficient tiles. Stone Circles is cool but it's delayed because you have to get Masonry + get the Quarries improved after. There's very few pantheons that would make me say "I'm gonna get a religion".

Second, your land simply may not have anything that gives you faith. Sure, you can probably scrape together 1-2 faith from a given start with a certain pantheon but it's not going to get you a religion.

Third, getting a faith pantheon even with Piety's bonuses does not guarantee you a religion anymore. It didn't really before but especially not now with the overdose of religious flavor the AI has now. I wish it wasn't common for all the religions to be gone by turn ~65 but unfortunately it is(of course it seems when I play a religious civ I will get locked out by turn 55 but when I don't care about a religion I can backdoor 5th religion at like turn 95 :(). Maybe it's different on lower difficulties, I dunno, but getting a religion on Deity is brutal even as a religious civ that's gone all-in with Piety. I learned this painfully while experimenting with it after people suggested I do a Piety challenge following the Germany Honor Challenge thread a while back.

The argument about abusing the AI is pretty moot, surely all strategies try to take advantage of strengths and capitalise against weaknesses. If my local team Gateshead had to play against Barcelona would we try and pass them off the pitch? No, of course not. What would we do? Defend for our lives, get in their faces, knock big long balls up to our big lump of a striker. Are we abusing them?

I wasn't talking about abusing the AI, I was talking about abusing the overflow mechanic especially when it was egregiously bad before it was capped(I thought it was removed entirely but I was wrong apparently). When you intentionally leave yourself that far behind in techs, you are/were abusing the overflow mechanic whether you intend to or not.

You could make an argument that any mechanic in single-player is abusing the AI and that's a silly road to go down which is why I didn't.
 
The argument about abusing the AI is pretty moot, surely all strategies try to take advantage of strengths and capitalise against weaknesses. If my local team Gateshead had to play against Barcelona would we try and pass them off the pitch? No, of course not. What would we do? Defend for our lives, get in their faces, knock big long balls up to our big lump of a striker. Are we abusing them?


That's not the same. If Gateshead (which I heard of :D) receive the ball back each time their keeper knocked his left cleat against just because it signals some sort of an injury or whatever that's an actual rule, that would obviously be an abuse innit.

Diplomatic win in itself is quite broken and I don't even need to explain why
 
For sure, if I am going full piety and don't get a religion, that would be no fun at all to play out.

If a person goes full Piety and doesn't get a religion then they didn't do it right, or they tried it on a map where it was never possible to get a religion anyway.

If we start from the proviso that 'a religion is possible' on a given map (even if we may not be able to know this) then it will be made easier to achieve it by going full Piety. OK, it's a big commitment. If you miss out on the 5th religion, you just quit. No one is saying that Small Piety works on all maps. But neither does Tradition or Liberty or Honor. No one is even saying that it works on enough maps to make it as good as Tradition. But people who bash Piety usually miss the point completely.

With Tradition and Liberty, it seems to me that there is usually a religion left by the time of the closer. So is the trick to emphasis cultural-oriented religious benefits? So that the Piety closer and free GPr comes fast enough to found?

No. If you go Full Piety and do it properly, you will have a huge faith output early so you can spread your religion effectively while ignoring things like growth. It's not just about the reformation, though getting to that in short order is a good idea. The Small Piety guide goes into a lot of detail about short-term vs. long-term play, and what to think about when choosing to spend F on mosques or on missionaries.

I don't understand this complaint, since there are nine of them (plus God King). With three shrines and the early +1 faith SP, even a weak faith pantheon should be enough to found.

Yes. The only exception might be Pearls. They could be too weak to found sometimes.

Which follower beliefs do you think are of no or little value? And are there several, so you get stuck with at least one? Yes, I much prefer getting a religious building, but even when those are gone there are always a couple follower beliefs that I would characterize as “good”. (I think the weakest of the bunch is Liturgical Drama, but I have never been stuck with it.)

If you do Full Piety correctly, a) you will seldom have last choice of Follower beliefs; and b) most of them are quite useful, as you say.

I disagree with this as religion benefits your game no matter how many (or few) cities you have. Aside from CS quests, do you try and spread outside your cities? That has never worked for me.

Yes. You need to fight the religious battle. But you will have enough faith to do this if you plan your strategy correctly.

I feel like To the Glory of God and Jesuit Education are the only really strong Reformations beliefs.
\

Evangelism is incredibly powerful. And Charitable Missions is the first choice of the Small Piety guide creator as it goes well with general Diplo play. And Heathen Conversion has all kinds of sick uses. And Unity of the Prophets is great too.

Missing out on the best reformation beliefs is only a problem because or your detour with Liberty!

Yes. Full Piety is full Piety. You don't need anything else. You push through the tree and you get a reward at every stage.

You are on the mark there! I understand how Honor can be played competitively, but really I don't think the same can be said for Piety. The Small Piety strategy seems pretty stuck to a diplo win (not that hard anyway). Honor opener is not just for domination runs, and of course Tradition and Liberty work for any VC. I would love to be convinced that Piety has some of that flexibility.

Small Piety is pretty much limited to Diplo, yes. But it virtually guarantees it. It is probably the most consistent individual strategy I ever tried. I think I proved this by winning it with Shaka on DCL #1 (a crowded map).

I admit I never heard of "small-piety". Everything I knew of religion was to go wide

Yeah, that would be a bad strategy on Deity. Small Piety, conversely, practically guarantees victory, assuming you a) know what you are doing, and b) have a faith pantheon. By contrast, even good players are forced to sometimes abandon CV/SV/DomV and pursue other VCs.

I haven't read through the strategy yet, nor have I attempted it. To be fair, I won't comment until I do that. However, the author himself said he re-rolls if he doesn't get a start with a strong pantheon option. It sounds consistent with what I said: it's a risk, and at best only substitutes for what you could have done going with a different opener.

Actually, I have to take issue with the last sentence. On some maps if you didn't play small you would have to face tougher opposition from the local bullies. Which you can deal with, of course, but it's not fair to characterise it as substitution.

It is interesting though, looking forward to trying new things! Also, I know it may be arrogant to ask so I apologize in advance, but is there a more concise write-up for small piety that covers the basic ideas? Obviously I'd read the whole thing before trying, but for the sake of this conversation it would be helpful.

You don't want concise, believe me. You want to absorb everything comprehensively so you don't do what I did and do it wrong the first 3 times.

With something like Church Property, you can can boost your early culture by about 40%. My most successful piety game I actually filled out rationalism before modern era because of this policy. I believe I had 5 CS's following my religion and my neighbor AI didnt found a religion until late so I had a foothold in a few of their cities.

You're talking about World Church, and yes, it's my 1st choice Founder belief for a CV.

If my local team Gateshead had to play against Barcelona would we try and pass them off the pitch? No, of course not. What would we do? Defend for our lives, get in their faces, knock big long balls up to our big lump of a striker. Are we abusing them?

Did Andy Carroll move to Gateshead? :O (fellow Inglander here)
 
Do you feel small piety achieves a diplomatic victory when tradition would not have been able to?

If someone post map unbeatable with Tradition but beatable with 'small piety' I will be glorify small piety to the end of world, but it obviously won't happen.
 
Do you feel small piety achieves a diplomatic victory when tradition would not have been able to?

depends on the player skill i think. for the better deity players, i dont think so, but this seemed to be started for non-deity players trying to get that win without adopting certain playstyles. some players know the first 100-150 turns really well but fall apart in the mid-game and late-game. for those players, it might let them win with Diplo when other 'standard' strategies fall apart later because they dont understand late game as much. so, for certain players, yes it can let them win when their Trad plan wouldnt. at anything under immortal, i'd say no regardless of skill level.
 
Do you feel small piety achieves a diplomatic victory when tradition would not have been able to?

It's not that simple. What I mean is that, for me (and I think for other players too), choosing Tradition and playing peaceful, even with building a decent army for defence, and maybe even trying to use bribes, may not - according to the chaos theory of the game and how it wants to play out - be completely optimal ON SOME OCCASIONS.

By comparison, I think that, as long as you have a faith pantheon, you're almost certain to win with Small Piety. It might be 'broken', as some have said, but if you spread your religion to the whole world they are so less likely to DoW you, and you can come from behind quite remarkably.

I am not saying Small piety > tradition except in context. Every context is different, and out of the dozens of games I've played, the Small Piety ones have felt easiest.
 
If someone post map unbeatable with Tradition but beatable with 'small piety' I will be glorify small piety to the end of world, but it obviously won't happen.

That's the thing, right? Even if you can make something "work" it doesn't necessarily mean it's a good idea. I've done a LOT of stuff in this game that shouldn't have worked but it ended up working anyway and I would not recommend it. :p Also, Tradition may not be able to beat every map but I would wager it comes very close to doing so. It is simply so powerful and consistent.

Also, I cannot recall every having to bail out of a Domination victory(maybe i've gotten bored before and just launched instead of slogging through the capitals but in BNW I just use XCOM) and I have only bailed on an SV in the "go attack the runaway Korea/Iroquois/other science AI across the map" sense and then gone and finished the SV. Culture and diploy are the only ones I've ever had to completely bail out of.
 
I'd like to clarify one more time, because you top players keep coming and arguing against propositions we're not making. Sure, for you, there is no such thing as an unwinnable map. However, the reality for most Deity players is that sometimes you get a tough map, and SOMETIMES it would be better, for someone who isn't so good they can triumph no matter what, to go Piety rather than Tradition. Please accept this as a fact FOR OUR GAMES, and stop saying that there is no point. The only effect you have is to discourage lesser players from ever trying it. If the difference is so clear by the time a player gets to your level then I'm sure everyone will have worked it out by the time they get to that stage.

EDIT: You know, the OP said he wanted to try something different. He said he had tried H-C-A, which I suppose you'd also say was suboptimal, except in most cases I would say otherwise as I think it's probably quite optimal if you want to win an early DomV, especially on Pangaea.
 
What did I say that addressed something that wasn't said, exactly?

im guessing it was mostly responding (concurring even?) to IF's response to BruinBound's question. The problem was BB's question was more about the concept of the small piety strategy (and not so specific to this thread of playing Piety generally). (also, consentient is, im guessing, addressing IF more than you, even though you talked about it too.)

im feeling here that some assumptions are at play as to what/why small piety is used for, misconstruing the need to compare it 'equitably' with other superior strategies when its creator said many many times it was never competitive or superior to them.
 
For me, Piety opens up a new style of play. Sure, range units are a must, etc., but what makes the Civ franchise so enjoyable for me (since Civ II days, a couple decades) is the chance to try different things. And since the religion sub-game game is fascinating to me (other than blocking annoying GP wanderings), playing with Piety is fun.

Some of the basic concepts of the small piety strat I was already using - don't forward settle mean people if not planning to war, get at least one religious ally, etc. But some of the twists of the strat in the diplo game were absolutely new to me, and worth the long read just for that. I've also focused more on gold and production lately, which is more satisfying than being so food/growth focused. Obviously Piety is worse than Liberty for vanilla conditions, but if you play the religious sub-game well it is damn fun.
 
It's not that simple. What I mean is that, for me (and I think for other players too), choosing Tradition and playing peaceful, even with building a decent army for defence, and maybe even trying to use bribes, may not - according to the chaos theory of the game and how it wants to play out - be completely optimal ON SOME OCCASIONS.
In reality, Tradition and Liberty are always superior on Deity. They cover culture, happiness, and growth/production bases and set you up for any type of victory.

Piety does not set you up for any kind of victory, and the way you scrap for the leftover beliefs does not make religion a reliable force in achieving a victory condition. Now, Piety can actually work even without founding a religion: extra faith from shrines helps get more of it for faith buys, gold from temples is really good, and organized religion can be used to do faith-buys from other religions if they spread to you, and religious tolerance works without founding a religion. Only Reformation requires having your own religion. But then again, if you are relying on AI's religion, that makes the tree situational and even ineffective, since you can't actually control the game on your own terms.

I love playing with Piety and religion, but on Deity it is situational and literally always worse than Tradition>Liberty. It's not the fault of Piety per se but the result of how the game works on Deity.
 
If someone post map unbeatable with Tradition but beatable with 'small piety' I will be glorify small piety to the end of world, but it obviously won't happen.

I won't say that's impossible, but it's extremely unlikely that there will ever be such a map.


I'm honestly not getting any of the hate that Small Piety Strategy gets in these parts. Many players have proven that it IS working rather nicely and it is ONE POSSIBLE way of getting a win. If you have a beef with it, then it's about, like I said, the fact that a Diplomatic Win is very broken. Basically it's a binary situation in which you stockpile 10000 gold in cash and buy everyone on the map, then win the next turn
 
Thing is, you can accumulate that amount of cash playing with any other tree.

I was actually checking some G&K gameplay, and Piety there seems really strong, but then part of it became Aesthetics...
 
What happens if you choose reformation social policy before founding your religion and found religion like 10 turns later? Do you get reformation belief? I suppose you should get it but you never know how they programmed it
 
Do you feel small piety achieves a diplomatic victory when tradition would not have been able to?

I have read the other replies to Bruin’s question, but also have only skimmed Small Piety. I understand diploV in general, and the article emphasis on “small” is very sensible. I remain skeptical that small+piety is better than small+tradition.
 
Top Bottom