7 New Civs You'd Like to See in Civ7

[pokiehl]

I wouldn't say faith is exclusively about proselytizing or religious aggression, seeing that it's arguably one of the most polyvalent resources in the game between Monumentality/Grandmaster Chapel/Moksha (not to mention purchasing great people, building naturalists/national parks, and building rock bands).

But then, that's just me.

A good example is Mali. In Civ 6, Mali generates a lot of Faith—not to proselytize or fight religious wars, but to serve as another currency and buff up the economic game of the civ.

 

[Patine]

I wouldn't say faith is exclusively about proselytizing or religious aggression, seeing that it's arguably one of the most polyvalent resources in the game between Monumentality/Grandmaster Chapel/Moksha (not to mention purchasing great people, building naturalists/national parks, and building rock bands).

But then, that's just me.

Not excliusively, but to have an intrinsic civ bonus in it, given the main role it plays in game, should certainly be such civ's.

 

[Patine]

A good example is Mali. In Civ 6, Mali generates a lot of Faith—not to proselytize or fight religious wars, but to serve as another currency and buff up the economic game of the civ.

Mali was one of the biggest gateways to Subsahran Western Africa for Islam, so a history of strong procelytization is there.

 

[Evie]

Frankly, I cannot agree. A faith bonus does not have to be coupled with a religious victory bonus. Quite the reverse; it could be tied with an ability to use faith differently that means *less* faith availabe to pay for religious unit (because you're using it on other things). Say, for example "Pay unit maintenance using faith rather than gold".

Faith in the game is not limited to the religIous victory, or to proselytism/religious aggrsssion, and it shouldn't be when it comes to civ design either.

 

[Patine]

Frankly, I cannot agree. A faith bonus does not have to be coupled with a religious victory bonus. Quite the reverse; it could be tied with an ability to use faith differently that means *less* faith availabe to pay for religious unit (because you're using it on other things). Say, for example "Pay unit maintenance using faith rather than gold".

Faith in the game is not limited to the religIous victory, or to proselytism/religious aggrsssion, and it shouldn't be when it comes to civ design either.

So, why would cultures have a, "special faith," that applies differently than everyone else's, with different rules? That, too, sounds like Victorian-era, "Noble Savage," thinking. It would alsi penalize such a civ if the founded or adopted a, "standard religion," which also makes little sense and is one of those bizarre and arbitrary things.

 

[BuchiTaton]

What about the Spirit Dance (Ghost Dance) from the Paiute, it spreaded to more "prominent" native nations and had a message of unity between Native Ameircans, so it can be used for a bonus that turn Faith into some form of diplomatic influence.

 

[Patine]

What about the Spirit Dance (Ghost Dance) from the Paiute, it spreaded to more "prominent" native nations and had a message of unity between Native Ameircans, so it can be used for a bonus that turn Faith into some form of diplomatic influence.

Yes, it existed, definitely. But it was a latter-day movement built on sybcretic grounds and a reactionary desperation, and was not part of any of those Native American nations' original religious beliefs. It would be more akin to some game mechanic that could allow the creation of Crusader Knight Orders or Mujahadeen, for example, not a base and origial religion.

 

[Evie]

I fail to see in what way a "maintenance through faith" ability has *anything* to do with the noble savage concept. All special abilities cause civilizations to play the game differently than other civilizations, under special rules.

Nor have I, in any event, suggested it be given to any particular civ, since I merely presented it as proof of concept of a faith ability that would not relate to religious victory or proselytism. That's all I'm addressing here.

 

[Patine]

I fail to see in what way a "maintenance through faith" ability has *anything* to do with the noble savage concept. All special abilities cause civilizations to play the game differently than other civilizations, under special rules.

Nor have I, in any event, suggested it be given to any particular civ, since I merely presented it as proof of concept of a faith ability that would not relate to religious victory or proselytism. That's all I'm addressing here.

Although I have misunderstood, your presentation may also have not been as clear in your message as you believe.

 

[Arcaian]

Although I have misunderstood, your presentation may also have not been as clear in your message as you believe.

I don't know how the message could've been made more clear, Evie was very straightforward in their post:

Frankly, I cannot agree. A faith bonus does not have to be coupled with a religious victory bonus. Quite the reverse; it could be tied with an ability to use faith differently that means *less* faith availabe to pay for religious unit (because you're using it on other things). Say, for example "Pay unit maintenance using faith rather than gold".

Faith in the game is not limited to the religIous victory, or to proselytism/religious aggrsssion, and it shouldn't be when it comes to civ design either.

The post mentioned no civs it could apply to, explicitly described it as an example of the general trend of using faith different from a civ ability, and doesn't get involved in any of the discussion about potential indigenous religions; it is engaging exclusively with your argument that a Faith-focused ability has to coincidence with a Civ that is focused on proselytizing. I don't see any way to read Evie's message as being related to the noble savage trope. It seems strange to immediately blame the author of a straightforward post rather than assume that one read it in a way that isn't consistent with the message being communicated because of an assumption that it was about something else.

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

I think part of the confusion may arise from the way 'Religion" is presented in the game. As @Evie pointed out earlier, Religion and religious 'points' can be used for a multitude of activities, including buying units, structures, Rock Bands, building National Parks, getting Great People of all kinds - a whole bunch of only nominally if at all 'religious' activities.

Personally, I haven't attempted a Religious Victory in years, but I always like to have Religious 'points' handy because they can be used to replace Production and other factors in so many ways.

This makes it hard to discuss Religion in game terms, because the game uses Religion in very Non-Religious or only Quasi-Religious ways, and even 'Religious' Civs with specific Religious Bonuses do not have to use any of their Religion for Religious Victory or even traditional Religious 'pressure'. Again, personally I have played Arabia more than once for a Domination or Diplomatic Victory using any religious component of the Civ for non-religious purposes . . .

 

[pokiehl]

I think it is made very clear that Faith has never been intended to be for religion or religious victory only. Equating Faith with religion is an error in perspective I think.

 

[Patine]

I think it is made very clear that Faith has never been intended to be for religion or religious victory only. Equating Faith with religion is an error in perspective I think.

But a leg-up to Faith civ bonuses and civ strong point of a civ as Religious DOES tend to be those geared toward religious victory. That is what I've saying all along. That would not preclude other uses for Faith points by a civ.

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

I think it is made very clear that Faith has never been intended to be for religion or religious victory only. Equating Faith with religion is an error in perspective I think.

- And this makes me wonder if all the Sturm und Drang over Religion and Ideology wasn't entirely misplaced, since Civ VI, at least, uses "Faith" to cover far more than merely Religious fervor and activity. In all my reading of both Soviet Communist and Nazi German documents, they both refer to their ideological belief systems in very Religious terms: including using words like Faith and Belief rather consistently. In addition, of course, both ideological systems had their own forms of Fanatic troops: the NKVD units and Waffen SS formations, respectively, who happily slaughtered their enemies of a different ideology with the same fervor any Crusader or Ghazi showed to their religious enemies . . .

Therefore, in game terms at least, Ideology and Religion might well be Interchangeable mechanically - although I do not personally think that is a completely accurate model, it could be done that way and, I suspect, very few gamers would notice.

 

[Patine]

- And this makes me wonder if all the Sturm und Drang over Religion and Ideology wasn't entirely misplaced, since Civ VI, at least, uses "Faith" to cover far more than merely Religious fervor and activity. In all my reading of both Soviet Communist and Nazi German documents, they both refer to their ideological belief systems in very Religious terms: including using words like Faith and Belief rather consistently. In addition, of course, both ideological systems had their own forms of Fanatic troops: the NKVD units and Waffen SS formations, respectively, who happily slaughtered their enemies of a different ideology with the same fervor any Crusader or Ghazi showed to their religious enemies . . .

Therefore, in game terms at least, Ideology and Religion might well be Interchangeable mechanically - although I do not personally think that is a completely accurate model, it could be done that way and, I suspect, very few gamers would notice.

Well, there's a debate today on whether or not Juche counts as a religion, given all the similarities it shares with the basic notion.

 

[GeneralZIft]

I am, always will be, opposed to interchangeable ideology/religion mechanics. I just don't see them as the same in my own eyes.
Not just mechanically speaking.
Maybe I am just talking personally.

 

[Patine]

I am, always will be, opposed to interchangeable ideology/religion mechanics. I just don't see them as the same in my own eyes.
Not just mechanically speaking.
Maybe I am just talking personally.

But history has shown they can heavily influece each other. And, Juche, at least, does reek of cultishness.

 

[GeneralZIft]

But history has shown they can heavily influece each other. And, Juche, at least, does reek of cultishness.

Oh definitely. I just can't imagine them as the 'same', and I don't think it work well in gameplay either.
I think it's maybe quite surface level to say they are the same.
At least intrinsically, religion is personal and ideology is how you view society.

 

[Patine]

Oh definitely. I just can't imagine them as the 'same', and I don't think it work well in gameplay either.
I think it's maybe quite surface level to say they are the same.
At least intrinsically, religion is personal and ideology is how you view society.

Some religions are personal, some are societal, and some are both, to be honest.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

But a leg-up to Faith civ bonuses and civ strong point of a civ as Religious DOES tend to be those geared toward religious victory. That is what I've saying all along. That would not preclude other uses for Faith points by a civ.

No one here is denying that. But the idea that every civ that has faith bonuses HAS to be geared primarily towards a religious victory is a made-up rule that doesn't exist within the game. You can clearly see that with Mvemba a Nzinga in the base game.

To me it's not hard to fathom playing as the Navajo and building a unique Holy Site, or building, that grants faith and culture to surrounding unimproved tiles based on their appeal, to represent their sacred and spiritual spaces.