The Religious sides don't make sense

Princeofnigeria · Oct 17, 2012

I hate to be a naysayer, but I don't really get firaxis's logic. For the three "religious" sides, they chose the celts, the maya, and the Etheopians. Ignoring the fact that they mashed up ancient scottland, whales, ireland (Gaels), and modern scottland, and Ireland and just labeled it "celts", I don't understand why they picked a country whose religion is obscure and not entirely preserved, a country which in civ terms only had a pantheon (maya), and a country whose religion isn't that Globally important (etheopia). And the fact that celts where never an organized group (not nearly as bad as huns, Maya, or polynesia in that regard but still) doesn't help. I'm just questioning, why these nations, and not nepal? It seems if they wanted a defensive, well known, and religiously important country, they couldn't do much better than them. They have a well known UB (monastary- replaces temple) and a well known UU (Ghurka- replaces rifleman) and giving them the mountain ability rather than carthage would make a lot of sense. It just seems weird that they go in with four religious countries and none of them are nepal (or that religiously important, excluding the very religious Byzantine).

fuzzatron717 · Oct 17, 2012

Nepal is not a civ it's a city state.

Princeofnigeria · Oct 17, 2012

Currently it is, but what's stopping them from converting them in? Being a CS didn't stop Spain, Austria, Netherlands, Denmark, Sweden, Celts, Or Korea from becoming civs.

Rooftrellen · Oct 17, 2012

The Celts were a heck of a lot more than Ireland, Scotland, and Whales. The Celts, though not organized like Rome (though Greece wasn't either), controlled almost as much land as Rome would much later. Rome was certainly bigger, but the Celts were a heck of a big, and important, group before Rome was even founded, and, yeah...I'd probably compare them more to China as far as unity goes, just smaller groups and less desire to control everything.

As for why them, I think it's ok. They obviously had quite a strong religion, even if we don't fully understand it. Of course, such a large group of people, it's not exactly easy to put them all in one group, either, but not everyone in Japan was/is a samurai, but look at their UA, and that's a much smaller group than the Celts were at their height.

The Maya had a rich religion. I think they went a little too far with the whole end of the world thing, which Pacal is unfortunately prone to showing, but their religion was very important.

I don't know enough about Ethiopia to comment.

What we consider religiously important could be because of the religions we recognize as important. Had Rome not been rebuilt after getting sacked the first time, and we inherited the Celtic culture, would they be unimportant?

Princeofnigeria · Oct 17, 2012

While I do concur that pacal is a huge racist generalisation (yes we get it! The world end in 435 turns Blah bla blah... Can we just trade these citruces with you allready?!) and annoys me to no end, I disagree with your opinion on the celts. Many of the places you name where not celts, but Gauls, Franks, and Goths. Sure they may all share Celtic heritage, but they are still very unique (and the in game celts don't represent these groups in any way) and if where talking real like terms, nepal was a huge Religious gateway, bringing confucionism to northern india, bringing buhddism to china, and meshing hindu and tao beliefs harmoniously, much more important than a few pantheons and a relitively unkown and primitive religion. Also in game terms, they efect four of the 11 major religions, while etheopia, the celts, and the maya effect... 0. I'm not debating the relitive global importance of each side, just the religious impacts each had, and why nepal would have been a more sensible religious side

OmniPotent42 · Oct 17, 2012

Princeofnigeria said:
While I do concur that pacal is a huge racist generalisation (yes we get it! The world end in 435 turns Blah bla blah... Can we just trade these citruces with you allready?!) and annoys me to no end, I disagree with your opinion on the celts. Many of the places you name where not celts, but Gauls, Franks, and Goths. Sure they may all share Celtic heritage, but they are still very unique (and the in game celts don't represent these groups in any way) and if where talking real like terms, nepal was a huge Religious gateway, bringing confucionism to northern india, bringing buhddism to china, and meshing hindu and tao beliefs harmoniously, much more important than a few pantheons and a relitively unkown and primitive religion. Also in game terms, they efect four of the 11 major religions, while etheopia, the celts, and the maya effect... 0. I'm not debating the relitive global importance of each side, just the religious impacts each had, and why nepal would have been a more sensible religious side

Just imagine how Pacal will look after 2012..... :lol:

seasnake · Oct 17, 2012

Honestly India should have some religious benefit, Population Growth was pretty decent in Vanilla but doesn't do a lot in GK. They should have some religious benefits, like cheaper to recruit great prophets, bonus happiness from Shrines, earn faith from rivers, etc.

Rooftrellen · Oct 18, 2012

Princeofnigeria said:
While I do concur that pacal is a huge racist generalisation (yes we get it! The world end in 435 turns Blah bla blah... Can we just trade these citruces with you allready?!) and annoys me to no end, I disagree with your opinion on the celts. Many of the places you name where not celts, but Gauls, Franks, and Goths. Sure they may all share Celtic heritage, but they are still very unique (and the in game celts don't represent these groups in any way) and if where talking real like terms, nepal was a huge Religious gateway, bringing confucionism to northern india, bringing buhddism to china, and meshing hindu and tao beliefs harmoniously, much more important than a few pantheons and a relitively unkown and primitive religion. Also in game terms, they efect four of the 11 major religions, while etheopia, the celts, and the maya effect... 0. I'm not debating the relitive global importance of each side, just the religious impacts each had, and why nepal would have been a more sensible religious side

The Celts were a major group in Europe and controlled a VERY large part of it. That's not opinion, but fact. It's not unlike saying Rome didn't control all that much, what they controlled was Italy, France, and Spain, but they are all unique.

In game, the Celts pretty well have to be represented by one tribe, since they were never united, not even as much as Greece (and I'm fairly sure they use Alex because of the whole unity thing, though certainly better leaders for Greece exist from a historical perspective.)

I agree that Nepal would be a great religious civ, but I don't see how calling Pacal a racist generalization (even worse than that really, since the Maya didn't think the world was going to end at all) can really be followed by the statement "a few pantheons and a relitively unkown and primitive religion." THAT is the racist generalization, reducing organized religions of other cultures to primitive pantheons.

Princeofnigeria · Oct 18, 2012

I'm speaking in the terms of civilization! A pantheon is EXPLICITLY STATED IN THE OFFICIAL 2K LET'S PLAY AS "a primitive religion". In civ terms the three civs only had pantheons and thus, only had primitive religions. And you can't say the celt controlled it, only that celtic peoples controled the land (same reasoning as polynesia and greece). Rome actually held the peoples and had government linked back to a central capitol in the lands it held, thus they held it. And for the other persons comment, even in vanilla population growth wasn't all that helpful. And now with the near infinite ways to get happiness it's nigh on useless, and would agree with give india a religious boost.

Kwami · Oct 18, 2012

I don't understand the complaint against Ethiopia. Christianity in Ethiopia dates back to the 1st century AD and Ethiopia is either the second or third oldest state to practice the religion. Christianity was declared the state religion in 330 AD. The nation is very close ties to the birth and early spread of Christianity. Is that not enough for you? Besides, their leader is the messiah in the Rastafari movement, though he denied his divinity. That should count for something!

Drawmeus · Oct 18, 2012

They are some weird choices as the BEST religious civs in the game. Arabia, India, and Spain are all quite a bit more closely associated with religions than Ethiopia or the Celts. For new civs, Nepal and Israel would have made more sense.

However, I'm just happy to play with more civs. The more they release, the happier I'll be, as long as they don't screw my game up too much with stuff that's just so ridiculously overpowered that I can't put up with it in single player - and I can handle Maria Theresa.

Hammer Rabbi · Oct 18, 2012

seasnake said:
Honestly India should have some religious benefit, Population Growth was pretty decent in Vanilla but doesn't do a lot in GK. They should have some religious benefits, like cheaper to recruit great prophets, bonus happiness from Shrines, earn faith from rivers, etc.

+2 faith to every unimproved cattle resource. improved cattle resources no longer provide food but production (for hauling, tilling, etc.) or somesuch.

isnorden · Oct 18, 2012

Hammer Rabbi said:
+2 faith to every unimproved cattle resource. improved cattle resources no longer provide food but production (for hauling, tilling, etc.) or somesuch.

My "Urban Renewal and Sacred Cows" mod gives India a unique improvement (Gopachara/sacred cow pasture); cows inside a Gopachara provide +1 Faith and +1 Food per turn (the latter from milk and butter; sacred cattle are rarely used for work, so there's no Production bonus). If I knew how to generate Faith and Food from an unimproved resource, I'd drop the Gopachara improvement and keep the Faith/Food generation for unused cows.

Hammer Rabbi · Oct 18, 2012

isnorden said:
My "Urban Renewal and Sacred Cows" mod gives India a unique improvement (Gopachara/sacred cow pasture); cows inside a Gopachara provide +1 Faith and +1 Food per turn (the latter from milk and butter; sacred cattle are rarely used for work, so there's no Production bonus). If I knew how to generate Faith and Food from an unimproved resource, I'd drop the Gopachara improvement and keep the Faith/Food generation for unused cows.

i think it would be a good free pantheon for their UA. not sure if that can be done in mods or not. that or just say that all cattle tiles are 1 food/1 happ/1 faith as their UA. it does change the value of several things though, like granary or pantheons that specify pastures. maybe a pasture for India would be +1 faith and still get bonuses from the aforementioned items.

isnorden · Oct 18, 2012

Hammer Rabbi said:
i think it would be a good free pantheon for their UA. not sure if that can be done in mods or not. that or just say that all cattle tiles are 1 food/1 happ/1 faith as their UA. it does change the value of several things though, like granary or pantheons that specify pastures. maybe a pasture for India would be +1 faith and still get bonuses from the aforementioned items.

Thanks for the comment; this is the Unique Ability as I actually coded it in the mod--

Spoiler :

And this is my code for the Gopachara improvement; I created it so the Faith/Food bonus would apply only to cows and not other pastured animals.

Spoiler :

Code:

<!-- Unique terrain improvement for India:  Gopachara (sacred cow pasture).  Does not replace Pastures altogether -->
<!-- (they're still needed for sheep and horses), but Indian workers will strongly prefer building them over a -->
<!-- tile containing cattle; that's why the Flavor ratings look unusually high compared to most improvements. -->


<GameData>

<!-- Add the Gopachara to the Improvement list -->

	<Improvements>
	
		<Row>
		
			<Type>IMPROVEMENT_GOPACHARA</Type>
			<Description>TXT_KEY_IMPROVEMENT_GOPACHARA</Description>
			<Civilopedia>TXT_KEY_CIV5_IMPROVEMENTS_GOPACHARA_TEXT</Civilopedia>
			<Help>TXT_KEY_CIV5_IMPROVEMENTS_GOPACHARA_HELP</Help>
			<SpecificCivRequired>TRUE</SpecificCivRequired>
			<CivilizationType>CIVILIZATION_INDIA</CivilizationType>
			<ArtDefineTag>ART_DEF_IMPROVEMENT_PASTURE</ArtDefineTag>
			<PillageGold>10</PillageGold>
			<PortraitIndex>29</PortraitIndex>
			<IconAtlas>TERRAIN_ATLAS</IconAtlas>

		</Row>

	</Improvements>
	
<!-- Make it worker-buildable -->

	<Builds>
	
		<Row>
		
			<Type>BUILD_GOPACHARA</Type>
			<PrereqTech>TECH_ANIMAL_HUSBANDRY</PrereqTech>
			<Time>800</Time>
			<ImprovementType>IMPROVEMENT_GOPACHARA</ImprovementType>
			<Recommendation>TXT_KEY_BUILD_GOPACHARA_REC</Recommendation>
			<Description>TXT_KEY_BUILD_GOPACHARA</Description>
			<EntityEvent>ENTITY_EVENT_BUILD</EntityEvent>
			<HotKey>KB_G</HotKey>
			<OrderPriority>100</OrderPriority>
			<IconIndex>29</IconIndex>
			<IconAtlas>UNIT_ACTION_ATLAS</IconAtlas>
			
		</Row>
	
	</Builds>
	
	
	<Unit_Builds>
	
		<Row>
			<UnitType>UNIT_WORKER</UnitType>
			<BuildType>BUILD_GOPACHARA</BuildType>
		</Row>
		
	</Unit_Builds>
	

<!-- Add rules for building on special terrain, and for removal -->
	
	<BuildFeatures>
	
			<Row>
			
				<BuildType>BUILD_GOPACHARA</BuildType>
				<FeatureType>FEATURE_JUNGLE</FeatureType>
				<PrereqTech>TECH_BRONZE_WORKING</PrereqTech>
				<Time>700</Time>
				<Remove>true</Remove>
			
			</Row>
			
			<Row>
		
				<BuildType>BUILD_GOPACHARA</BuildType>
				<FeatureType>FEATURE_FOREST</FeatureType>
				<PrereqTech>TECH_MINING</PrereqTech>
				<Time>400</Time>
				<Production>20</Production>
				<Remove>true</Remove>

			</Row>
		
			<Row>
			
				<BuildType>BUILD_GOPACHARA</BuildType>
				<FeatureType>FEATURE_MARSH</FeatureType>
				<PrereqTech>TECH_MASONRY</PrereqTech>
				<Time>600</Time>
				<Remove>true</Remove>
				
			</Row>
	
	</BuildFeatures>
	
	
<!-- Gopachara is buildable for CATTLE ONLY! -->

	<Improvement_ResourceTypes>
	
		<Row>
		
			<ImprovementType>IMPROVEMENT_GOPACHARA</ImprovementType>
			<ResourceType>RESOURCE_COW</ResourceType>
		
		</Row>
	
	</Improvement_ResourceTypes>
	
	
<!-- Now for the flavors and bonuses; we want automated workers to choose the Gopachara over the regular -->
<!-- pasture when they find cattle... -->

	<Improvement_Flavors>
	
		<Row>
		
			<ImprovementType>IMPROVEMENT_GOPACHARA</ImprovementType>
			<FlavorType>FLAVOR_GROWTH</FlavorType>
			<Flavor>75</Flavor>
			
		</Row>
		
		<Row>
		
			<ImprovementType>IMPROVEMENT_GOPACHARA</ImprovementType>
			<FlavorType>FLAVOR_RELIGION</FlavorType>
			<Flavor>25</Flavor>
			
		</Row>
	
	</Improvement_Flavors>
	

<!-- Cows in a Gopachara are not used for labor (no Production bonus), but they do provide milk/butter (+1 Food) -->
<!-- and play a significant role in the Hindu religion (+1 Faith) -->
	
	<Improvement_ResourceType_Yields>
	
	
		<Row>
		
			<ImprovementType>IMPROVEMENT_GOPACHARA</ImprovementType>
			<ResourceType>RESOURCE_COW</ResourceType>
			<YieldType>YIELD_FOOD</YieldType>
			<Yield>1</Yield>
			
		</Row>

		<Row>
		
			<ImprovementType>IMPROVEMENT_GOPACHARA</ImprovementType>
			<ResourceType>RESOURCE_COW</ResourceType>
			<YieldType>YIELD_FAITH</YieldType>
			<Yield>1</Yield>

		</Row>
		
	</Improvement_ResourceType_Yields>
	
	
<!-- Text tags begin here; English only so far, but any help with translation is welcome! -->

	<Language_en_US>
	
		<Row Tag="TXT_KEY_IMPROVEMENT_GOPACHARA">
			<Text>Gopachara</Text>
		</Row>
	
		<Row Tag="TXT_KEY_CIV5_IMPROVEMENTS_GOPACHARA_TEXT">
			<Text>Although India's sacred cows typically roam freely in the real world, linguistic evidence shows that people there did reserve pastures for cattle.  The Gopachara is a terrain improvement unique[NEWLINE]to India:  a pasture reserved for the use of sacred cattle.  Because the animals are not used for labor, a Gopachara does not increase [ICON_PRODUCTION] Production like ordinary cow pastures.[NEWLINE]Instead, the Gopachara provides two benefits:  +1 [ICON_FOOD] Food per turn (from milk and butter), and +1 [ICON_PEACE] Faith per turn (from the cows' traditional role in Hinduism).[NEWLINE][NEWLINE][COLOR_RED]NOTE:[ENDCOLOR]  The Gopachara does not replace regular Pastures altogether, unlike some unique improvements.  Indian workers can still build regular Pastures[NEWLINE]for other animals; however, they will always build a Gopachara for cattle unless the player orders otherwise.</Text>
		</Row>
		
		<Row Tag="TXT_KEY_CIV5_IMPROVEMENTS_GOPACHARA_HELP">
			<Text>Unique Pasture variant; only India may build, and only for [ICON_RES_COW] Cattle (other animals still use the regular Pasture).  Generates +1 [ICON_FOOD] Food and +1 [ICON_PEACE] Faith per turn.</Text>
		</Row>
		
		<Row Tag="TXT_KEY_BUILD_GOPACHARA">
			<Text>Build a [LINK=IMPROVEMENT_GOPACHARA]Gopachara[\LINK]</Text>
		</Row>
		
		<Row Tag="TXT_KEY_BUILD_GOPACHARA_REC">
			<Text>Provides [ICON_FOOD] Food and increases [ICON_PEACE] Faith; buildable for [ICON_RES_COW] Cattle only</Text>
		</Row>
	
	</Language_en_US>
	
</GameData>

Feel free to borrow from this mod, as long as you give me credit for the original!

Arachnofiend · Oct 18, 2012

It's worth mentioning that the civs that would make more sense for having religious bonuses (Rome, Arabia, India, etc.) predate Gods and Kings. Wasn't much reason to give these civs religious bonuses when religion wasn't even a factor in the game.

Of course the home of Eastern Orthodoxy wasn't added until G&K and hey look at that they have a religion-based UA.

Socratatus · Oct 18, 2012

Princeofnigeria said:
I hate to be a naysayer, but I don't really get firaxis's logic. For the three "religious" sides, they chose the celts, the maya, and the Etheopians. Ignoring the fact that they mashed up ancient scottland, whales, ireland (Gaels), and modern scottland, and Ireland and just labeled it "celts", I don't understand why they picked a country whose religion is obscure and not entirely preserved, a country which in civ terms only had a pantheon (maya), and a country whose religion isn't that Globally important (etheopia). And the fact that celts where never an organized group (not nearly as bad as huns, Maya, or polynesia in that regard but still) doesn't help. I'm just questioning, why these nations, and not nepal? It seems if they wanted a defensive, well known, and religiously important country, they couldn't do much better than them. They have a well known UB (monastary- replaces temple) and a well known UU (Ghurka- replaces rifleman) and giving them the mountain ability rather than carthage would make a lot of sense. It just seems weird that they go in with four religious countries and none of them are nepal (or that religiously important, excluding the very religious Byzantine).

I agree.

Louis XXIV · Oct 18, 2012

Kwami said:
I don't understand the complaint against Ethiopia. Christianity in Ethiopia dates back to the 1st century AD and Ethiopia is either the second or third oldest state to practice the religion. Christianity was declared the state religion in 330 AD. The nation is very close ties to the birth and early spread of Christianity. Is that not enough for you? Besides, their leader is the messiah in the Rastafari movement, though he denied his divinity. That should count for something!

I'd add on top of that they were the only other Jewish state at one point (iirc, there's some evidence of Yemen having a large number of Jewish people, but Ethiopia is the only one that stands out) and they have a large Muslim population. They are the convergence of three religions, plus Rastafarianism. I think a religious bonus for Ethiopia is a no-brainer (there's an argument that India is similar in this regard, but it's exhausting to list all the civs that could have some random bonus because they are "just as good" as another civ in that category).

woodshadows · Oct 18, 2012

Princeofnigeria said:
I hate to be a naysayer, but I don't really get firaxis's logic. For the three "religious" sides, they chose the celts, the maya, and the Etheopians. Ignoring the fact that they mashed up ancient scottland, whales, ireland (Gaels), and modern scottland, and Ireland and just labeled it "celts", I don't understand why they picked a country whose religion is obscure and not entirely preserved, a country which in civ terms only had a pantheon (maya), and a country whose religion isn't that Globally important (etheopia). And the fact that celts where never an organized group (not nearly as bad as huns, Maya, or polynesia in that regard but still) doesn't help. I'm just questioning, why these nations, and not nepal? It seems if they wanted a defensive, well known, and religiously important country, they couldn't do much better than them. They have a well known UB (monastary- replaces temple) and a well known UU (Ghurka- replaces rifleman) and giving them the mountain ability rather than carthage would make a lot of sense. It just seems weird that they go in with four religious countries and none of them are nepal (or that religiously important, excluding the very religious Byzantine).

would have required them to rework some of the previously included civs - like spain, arabia, india, china, etc. I suppose it was easier to just stretch the truth a little and make these new civs 'religious civs'. I don't mind so much the inclusion of ethnic groups like the celts, huns, polynesians though, it's like when people get upset over Germany, because it spans a time when Germany as a modern nation state wasn't yet formed. Who cares though? All the way back to Tacitus Germany was Germany, it might have been barbaric Germany, or later middle ages fragmented Germany, or modern day unified Germany, but Germany was always Germany in so far as it was populated by the "Germanic people", unified by culture, language, dare I say 'racial characteristics'? And the same goes for the others as well.

Princeofnigeria · Oct 18, 2012

I realise that changing civs that where allready in game would have been bothersome (despite the fact that they did it with the ottomans, songhai, and england, but more for compatability issues.) and I am not going to give them a harsh time for that. However I feel your arguements for etheopia are invalid. While it may have ADOPTED many of the worlds major religions, it had very little to do with there spread (the three sides that spread those would be Byzantium, Arabia, the Ottomans, Spain, England, the Netherlands, and Portugal) and even if it was an early adopter of christianity, it did little to effect the beliefs and customs of it. And as for rastafarianism, thats exactly my point when I say "a religion that isn't globally important", as it has far less followers than Even sihkism and shintoism (5 million and 2.75 million respectivly), the two smallest of the 11 religions in G+K.

The Religious sides don't make sense

The illustrious

Holy Warrior

The illustrious

King

The illustrious

King

Conquistador

King

The illustrious

Deity

Emperor

Deity

Amnesiac Modder

Deity

Amnesiac Modder

Perturbed Pugilist

Emperor

Le Roi Soleil

King

The illustrious

Similar threads