Religion

Hello,

Before I begin I would like to apologise if the discussion on religion has already been covered, but I did search for a post concerning religion or something similar but could not find it.

At any rate I am long time Civ fan (since Civ2 gold edition ) and when Civ4 was in production I was pretty confidant it would meet my expectations, also I was thrilled when I discovered religion was going to be implemented. Needless to say Civ4 not only met but exceeded my expectations in every aspect except one, and that is religion.

Don't get me wrong, religion functions well in the game but lacks individuality. All religions feel the same and there is nothing that defines them other than thier individual music insturmental which denotes that you are the first to discover that particular religion. Admittedly the little musical denotation does give religion a momentary flavor, but a momentary flavor and nothing more.

I merely suggest that religion should play a larger role especially in the early game to define the uniqueness of the individual religions, and as time goes by religion gradually plays a less significant role because of the modern and optimal governmental options you recieve as you gain technology. This would not only define the in-game religions but reflect true history as well.

I believe there are two ways to define and add flavor to the seven in-game religions without complicating the main premise of the game.

1) Implement bonuses and penalties to all respective in-game religions, which should be historically accurate of course.

2) Implement unique units for each in-game religion.

As I stated earlier to remain true to history, religion should play an insignificant role in more modern times. So to reflect this, the unique religion units are only available with the theocratic and/or organized religion governmental options, or when you opt for a no-state religion. Also the religion penalties and bonuses are removed when you opt for the freedom of religion governmental option. Which you will recieve in the latter game. This again reflects history authentically.

This is not to say that a modern era in-game civ cannot still retain a religion unique unit or their respective bonus/penalty. Because people may still opt for the older religion governmental options. The only thing this would change is the religious unique unit, which you can upgrade to a modern era unit. This would still remain true to history because their still are modern day civs/countries that still adhere to ancient governments.

Take for example the religion of Islam. Islams in-game unique unit would be the mujahdeen/jihadist. If the in-game Islamic civ still opts for the theocratic religion governmental option in modern era, then he still retains the unique unit. Of course the ancient horse riding mujahdeen/jihadist warrior would not be practical in modern times given his stats, but the unit could be upgraded to a terrorist/jihadist which would reflect history accurately.

The same format could be applied to the other religions.

There are so many topics out there that discuss why religions should not have any in-game differences...

Religions, whatever they may be, really have little influence on politics and society in general. Regardless of their doctrines, politicians and other leaders will only use them to promote their own ends. For instance, the Crusades go against virtually every principle that Jesus upheld. And how do you think Jesus would have reacted to the corruptions in the medieval Catholic Church, given what he thought of the Pharisees (the Pharisees were Jewish legalists with a massive set of rules that they believed should be followed)?

Mewtarthio said:

There are so many topics out there that discuss why religions should not have any in-game differences...

Click to expand...

I was not aware there were many topics on religion, again I apologise for bringing it up again

Religions, whatever they may be, really have little influence on politics and society in general.

Click to expand...

I completely disagree. Religions in the past have played an enormous role in politics and society. Wars where fought, civilisation where either destroyed or compromised in the name of religion. However, as I have stated today and in the modern era religion has less influence, but this only applies to countries that have adapted a secular government where church and state are seperate. There exist nations/civilisation which still cling to ancient theocratic government forms where religion plays a large political role such as Iran. Religion cannot exist without politics more or less. in fact some religions where born of politics.

Regardless of their doctrines, politicians and other leaders will only use them to promote their own ends. For instance, the Crusades go against virtually every principle that Jesus upheld. And how do you think Jesus would have reacted to the corruptions in the medieval Catholic Church, given what he thought of the Pharisees (the Pharisees were Jewish legalists with a massive set of rules that they believed should be followed)?

Click to expand...

Understood. But we are not talking about the effects of religious dogma. Religion, whether it was twisted and used as a tool or if the very ideological doctrine itself called for war, has always played a dynamic role in the evolution of civilisations.

[ However, as I have stated today and in the modern era religion has less influence, but this only applies to countries that have adapted a secular government where church and state are seperate.

What about moral rules, spiritual conduct and practices relating to ethics? Things such as these are descended from religious dogma and have been continually practiced in daily life since the earliest times! Politics is only a fairly recent developement in culture. The Cult of Personality that worships the Dear Leader or the Father of the Nation, most commonly found in dctatorships such as Nazi Germany and the USSR, is the only known form of religion that is born from politics. Even Democracy realises the need for a spiritual foundation for its ideals because of the very well known fact that, without a groundswell of popular support deriving from emotional mass appeal, even the most rational and democratic form of government will never be accepted by the people. The whole idea that society can function without the need for moral rules and spiritual good conduct is only due to the effects of certain atheistic individuals, such as Marx, Engels, Freud and Nietzche. The cult of reason has not yet managed to cull the human spirit of emotions so the only way round this problem is the popular approach of mass appeal that typically involves charismatic leaders.

There have indeed been many previous threads about religion which discussed how to improve on the system.
People who've read these threads may be so bored with the topic that they just state one opinion or the other, as Mewtarthio did, without citing the endless arguments that have raged about it. There's very good justification for regarding religions as effectively similar, in game terms. Religions have played a big role in history, but the point is whether a particular religion would have had a different effect from another had the same leader attempted the same manipulation.
This is such fantasy that it's hard to reach a conclusion.

However, I think that a way to manipulate your religion, just as leaders have done in history, should be introduced into the game. I have suggested that techs should allow you to customise your personal religion with traits, so that a religion might reduce war weariness, or might increase commerce output. This would give the traits that people so desperately want without offending members of a religion by giving their religion attributes that they think are inappropriate.
There could be a base choice of traits, not requiring any techs at all, with some being mutually exclusive, and many having negative modifiers too.

gianluca790 said:

What about moral rules, spiritual conduct and practices relating to ethics? Things such as these are descended from religious dogma and have been continually practiced in daily life since the earliest times!

Click to expand...

I understand this, but what is your point? I merely suggested that all religions should be given their historical identity without compromising the game. I felt that by implementing modifiers and a unique unit to each religion would be the ideal approach. Delving into moral rules, spiritual conducts and dogma in general will only complicate things.

Politics is only a fairly recent developement in culture.

Click to expand...

Wrong. Religion and politics go hand in hand, one cannot exist without the other. Where ever there is an agenda politics are sure to follow, and all religions began with an agenda. I am not stating that the major religions began as political movements (atleast not all of them) but politics were certainly involved, their very survival depended on politics.

The Cult of Personality that worships the Dear Leader or the Father of the Nation, most commonly found in dctatorships such as Nazi Germany and the USSR, is the only known form of religion that is born from politics.

Click to expand...

Nazi fascism and communism are not religions, they are systems of government. Yes they both began as authoritarian political movements.
Their are quite a few religions born of politics however, Islam being one in my opinion.

Even Democracy realises the need for a spiritual foundation for its ideals because of the very well known fact that, without a groundswell of popular support deriving from emotional mass appeal, even the most rational and democratic form of government will never be accepted by the people. The whole idea that society can function without the need for moral rules and spiritual good conduct is only due to the effects of certain atheistic individuals, such as Marx, Engels, Freud and Nietzche. The cult of reason has not yet managed to cull the human spirit of emotions so the only way round this problem is the popular approach of mass appeal that typically involves charismatic leaders.

Click to expand...

I am not sure if I understand you correctly here. Are you suggesting that democracy cannot exist without religion? or that our moral values cannot exist without religion? I'm alittle confused .
Whatever you are implying just remember our morals are relative. By that I mean that they are ever changing, who knows what are morals will be in a thousand years. What I do know for certain is that are ethics are absolute, they never change, it is our divine compass that defines our humanity. Our ethics cannot be taught to us by any religion, in fact it was our human ethics that gave birth to religion.

Brighteye said:

There have indeed been many previous threads about religion which discussed how to improve on the system.
People who've read these threads may be so bored with the topic that they just state one opinion or the other, as Mewtarthio did, without citing the endless arguments that have raged about it.

Click to expand...

Thanks for the info

There's very good justification for regarding religions as effectively similar, in game terms. Religions have played a big role in history, but the point is whether a particular religion would have had a different effect from another had the same leader attempted the same manipulation.
This is such fantasy that it's hard to reach a conclusion.

Click to expand...

Ahh, but there lies the beauty, given the religion you have founded the conclusion is what you make of it. It is up to you as the leader to manipulate it, exploit it or simply ignore it. With each religion lies a unique strategy and you as leader must utilize the benefits and cope with disadvantages.

However, I think that a way to manipulate your religion, just as leaders have done in history, should be introduced into the game. I have suggested that techs should allow you to customise your personal religion with traits, so that a religion might reduce war weariness, or might increase commerce output.

Click to expand...

Very good idea!

This would give the traits that people so desperately want without offending members of a religion by giving their religion attributes that they think are inappropriate.

Click to expand...

So now we come to the gist of it, the reason religion lacks any identity is the fear of offending people. This is something I disagree with, and I'll give you two reasons.

One, why would anyone be offeneded if the identity of said religions where implemented with historical accuracy? If the the truth of the ideology you follow hurts then maybe you should rethink your beliefs.
That brings me to my second reason.
Why would the in game representation of your or any other ideology for that matter offend you period? Their is nothing wrong with criticizing ideologies however criticizing ethnic groups is wrong. But these are two totally different things.

It is a sad thing indeed that my enjoyment of this game must be compromised by the political correctness that infects our society and blinds us of the truth.

There could be a base choice of traits, not requiring any techs at all, with some being mutually exclusive, and many having negative modifiers too.

Click to expand...

I can live with this

gianluca790 said:

Politics is only a fairly recent developement in culture.

Click to expand...

There has been politics ever since a band of apes grew enough brains to want to have a strongman protect them from the jaguars. Politics is "who gets what, when, where, how, and why" and I'll be da**ed if it hasn't been part of human existance for as long as there have been humans.

/rant.

In any case, I will reiterate the standard arguments in favor of fairly uniform religions:

1. Offensiveness. Religion is a touchy subject. Even if you managed somehow to make things nice, people would talk about how it's not fair that they got such-and-such cool bonus while we got this crappy one. Naturally, the Firaxians chose to neither please nor displease anyone, a good idea.

2. Fairness. Let's say Christianity gets an attack bonus whereas Buddhism gets a bonus to happiness. The peaceful builder with no intention of going to war who founds Christianity would probably rue the day he founded the useless religion; the warrior who founds Buddhism would probably be pleased with the offset to war weariness, but would eternally envy the Christian attack bonus. Having religion with makes the playing field leveler and also increases a player's control over his playstyle.

3. Historical uncertainty. Simply put, it is difficult to tell whether the traits of a religion are really inherent to the faith or applied to the faith because of the people who historically practiced them.

Hello Lockesdonkey,
As you can see, I like replying to posts even if they are not directed towards me.

Lockesdonkey said:

There has been politics ever since a band of apes grew enough brains to want to have a strongman protect them from the jaguars. Politics is "who gets what, when, where, how, and why" and I'll be da**ed if it hasn't been part of human existance for as long as there have been humans.

/rant.

Click to expand...

This may be a rant, but what you say is true.

In any case, I will reiterate the standard arguments in favor of fairly uniform religions:

1. Offensiveness. Religion is a touchy subject. Even if you managed somehow to make things nice, people would talk about how it's not fair that they got such-and-such cool bonus while we got this crappy one. Naturally, the Firaxians chose to neither please nor displease anyone, a good idea.

Click to expand...

It is apparent from your above statement that you are in favor of uniform religions that lack identity.
Is religion a touchy subject to you? if so, then can you explain why?
I ask just out of curiousty so I can understand why people are sensitive to the topic of religion.

2. Fairness. Let's say Christianity gets an attack bonus whereas Buddhism gets a bonus to happiness. The peaceful builder with no intention of going to war who founds Christianity would probably rue the day he founded the useless religion; the warrior who founds Buddhism would probably be pleased with the offset to war weariness, but would eternally envy the Christian attack bonus. Having religion with makes the playing field leveler and also increases a player's control over his playstyle.

Click to expand...

I don't think fairness would be a big issue. The developers have been pretty fair with all the leader traits and I don't see them stopping when it comes to Implementing traits to all the individual religions.

3. Historical uncertainty. Simply put, it is difficult to tell whether the traits of a religion are really inherent to the faith or applied to the faith because of the people who historically practiced them.

Click to expand...

I disagree. There is much history to be found on all of the in-game religions, there is virtually nothing unknown about them. Again I am not asking to implement dogmatic traits to the religions, but only historically accurate traits.
Traits that are derived from historical documentation. I have every confidance that developers are perfectly capable of doing this in a fair and impartial manner.
If people are offended at the historically accurate depiction of a certain in-game religion, Then they are admittedly ashamed and offended by the true history of their religion as well. And that is something they must deal with on their own.

Mott1 said:

Hello,

Before I begin I would like to apologise if the discussion on religion has already been covered, but I did search for a post concerning religion or something similar but could not find it.

Click to expand...

It's been covered many, many times. In fact, the manual has a section from Soren on why this won't happen from them.

Mott1 said:

Nazi m and communism are not religions, they are systems of government. Yes they both began as authoritarian political movements.
Their are quite a few religions born of politics however, Islam being one in my opinion.

Click to expand...

I have an idea about this. When playing the game, I noticed one feature missing from religion. You have to have it. The U.S.S.R. and early Communist China did not allow religion. Free religion is kind of like playing without a religion, but in reality it's the exact opposite. If I wanted to play historically, the religious civic Theocracy with no state religion prevents religion from being spread, but it gives you no advantages. You should be able to choose a civic like, say, Forced Atheism. Here's my idea:

Forced Atheism
High Upkeep (Due to persecuting those who do not abide by your law)
No religion spread.
Cities with religion have -1 for each religion.
Cities have +50% production, -50% war , +50% research
No religous buildings can be built, however, you can train Secret Police, which can remove religions from a city, resulting in 3 for 5 turns.

As for the above, that incoroporates a whole lot, and I'm definitely open to suggestions. However, I feel there is a need to represent this choice. Tell me what you think.