German playthrough 14/6/13

[stealth_nsk]

I think you misunderstand me. I was saying that it could be a powerful gameplay technique. I couldn't care less about the political correctness aspect of it.

Oh, sorry

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

What is next?

Pious futuristic paratroopers united by common faith with holy plasma weaponry and holy powered exoskeletons who fight against heathen malevolent extraterrestrials?

BNW is too silly, especially with sci-fi crusades.

Well, substitute "Space Marines" for 'Paratroopers' and you've pretty near described the story line of Warhammer 40K, the basis for the most popular miniatures game system in the world, and the anchor for Games Workshop's $250,000,000 a year business. Silly as all get out, but dam' successful in game terms.
And, any sillier than Giant Death Robots?

 

[God of Kings]

Well, substitute "Space Marines" for 'Paratroopers' and you've pretty near described the story line of Warhammer 40K, the basis for the most popular miniatures game system in the world, and the anchor for Games Workshop's $250,000,000 a year business. Silly as all get out, but dam' successful in game terms.
And, any sillier than Giant Death Robots?

Oh, Holy Giant Death Robots are even more ridiculous, especially from the hive world of Holy Terra, home of the Emperor. I forgot to mention that.

 

[Cyanfunk]

Napoleon shall burn in a sea of holy nuclear fire and then crushed by the holy feet of God's holy godless killing machines.

 

[Buccaneer]

I think you misunderstand me. I was saying that it could be a powerful gameplay technique. I couldn't care less about the political correctness aspect of it.

Or what names they attached to the gray, purple or green colors.

 

[Aussie_Lurker]

Initially it sounded like if you simply had a religion, that you could reform it (So say you adopted Islam in all of your cities but you didn't found it, you could still reform the religion to make it a regional variant of Islam/effective to you but not to anyone else)

I feel.that would make.more.sense-from both a gameplay (everyone is still going to want Piety) & historical (all the Christian reformations ocurred in nations that *adopted* Christianity-not in the nation which founded it) perspective.

Aussie.

 

[stealth_nsk]

I feel.that would make.more.sense-from both a gameplay (everyone is still going to want Piety) & historical (all the Christian reformations ocurred in nations that *adopted* Christianity-not in the nation which founded it) perspective.

Yes, but in this case going Piety would guarantee having a religion, which doesn't look good from gameplay perspective. Religion in Civ 5 is designed as a race where first gets the best and those who are too slow get nothing.

 

[HorseshoeHermit]

Yes, but in this case going Piety would guarantee having a religion, which doesn't look good from gameplay perspective. Religion in Civ 5 is designed as a race where first gets the best and those who are too slow get nothing.

'designed' as that, except when you have

• a faith civ
• faith ruins
• lucky quests with Jerusalem, Vatican / meeting Jerusalem, etc.

The factors are enough to make a difference for religion, and an almost overwhelming determination for pantheons. Then, considering luck plus faith pantheons will get you a religion, in turn, religions are more decided by these events than shrine investment.

Do you disagree with Liberty finisher religion? Hagia Sophia religion? Note there is no way the Piety branch will provide both the religion and a reformation belief. I think this is fantastic gameplay.

 

[iRule]

Well, if they're afraid of the Muslim connotations with the Religious Fervor tenet, fear no more, for Portugal and Spain managed to create something called the "Portuguese Legion" (and Spain the Spanish), which may have been, at one point, somewhat close to that religious fervor.

That was in the 20th century.

 

[Aussie_Lurker]

Yes, but in this case going Piety would guarantee having a religion, which doesn't look good from gameplay perspective. Religion in Civ 5 is designed as a race where first gets the best and those who are too slow get nothing.

The two are not mutually exclusive. So you're unsuccessful at founding a religion but you focus on Piety like a boss to get Reformation first. Assuming you adopt a religion, why shouldn't you get the reward?

 

[ehecatzin]

Well, if they're afraid of the Muslim connotations with the Religious Fervor tenet, fear no more, for Portugal and Spain managed to create something called the "Portuguese Legion" (and Spain the Spanish), which may have been, at one point, somewhat close to that religious fervor.

That was in the 20th century.

The Religous fervor belief reminded me of the Cristero war and the Caste war in Mexico.

 

[stealth_nsk]

The two are not mutually exclusive. So you're unsuccessful at founding a religion but you focus on Piety like a boss to get Reformation first. Assuming you adopt a religion, why shouldn't you get the reward?

Imagine all of the civs want to get a religion and decide to go Piety. With current setup of BNW if the number of these civs is greater than the number of available religions, they will be fighting to get religion first, the same way as it's in G&K. If Reformation would provide a religion to those who don't have it yet, all of the civs would have their own religion.

That's not necessary a bad thing, but the current religious game is designed in way that the civs who founded a religion start to fight for followers of those who didn't. The possibility of situation with all, or at least majority of civs having their own religion would break religious game as it is in G&K.

I think that's the explanation. To me, Reformation founding a new religion would be cool, but if developers were unable to adopt gameplay to it, it's better not to.

 

[baghdad]

The tooltip for Reformation clearly states, that it provides Reformation belief IF you have a religion. It does not give you a religion.

 

[stealth_nsk]

The tooltip for Reformation clearly states, that it provides Reformation belief IF you have a religion. It does not give you a religion.

Yes, that's clear. The discussion is - whether it would be better otherwise.

 

[Hakan-i Cihan]

The tooltip for Reformation clearly states, that it provides Reformation belief IF you have a religion. It does not give you a religion.

And what if you don't have a religion of your own at the moment you choose that policy, but get it later? Do you still get the reformation belief afterwards?

 

[camfrlas]

And what if you don't have a religion of your own at the moment you choose that policy, but get it later? Do you still get the reformation belief afterwards?

i think it's unclear now, but [speculation] it would make sense and i hope that's the case. especially now when you can do Piety tree from beginning and do the Prophet rush.

 

[KrikkitTwo]

Perhaps if Reformation could be added to a Pantheon religion?

Then you would only need a Pantheon first.. You could get the full religion later.

 

[stealth_nsk]

Perhaps if Reformation could be added to a Pantheon religion?

Then you would only need a Pantheon first.. You could get the full religion later.

1. It doesn't prevent weird situations as you could never gain religion after getting reformation or even not gain pantheon by the time you adopt reformation.

2. The point of allowing reformation without founding a religion was historical accuracy. Pantheon reformation would be quite opposite.

 

[Schalke 04]

still no speculation on this one?

But when you look closely at the "Jesuit Education" belief, it doensn't say "buy" scientific buildings with faith, but build scientific buildings with faith...

Maybe that means that you can't purchase these buildings like you could with a cathedral. Instead your faith per turn is converted into hammers or something like that.

 

[AriochIV]

still no speculation on this one?

I think you're parsing words unnecessarily. I don't see how one "buying" with Faith and "building" with Faith would be different.