Is this the wealthiest strategy ever?

[ABCDPuppies]

I've experimented with early religion a fair amount on Emperor+ just because I think it's fun to mix things up, but please heed the more experienced players here who say it is not an optimal strategic move.

For one thing, it happens all too often that you get beat to med/poly by a turn, even if start with mysticism and are working a 1-2 commerce tile, because of AI research bonuses. Of course you could always start again until you're lucky enough to get a game without religious AIs (or a game where the religious AIs all happen to go for the religion you aren't pursuing), but to me that takes the fun out of it.

Then, as others mentioned, there is the fact that 17 times out of 20 it will greatly slow down your start. If you get a worker first, he will end up sitting idle for some significant turns even if you do start with 1 worker tech. If you get a unit first, you will end up working unimproved tiles for too long, and will be slow to expand.

About the only time I would consider religion as a serious option is as Isabella, if I could build a work boat with a 2-3 tile (and preferably a 2 capital) while researching med/poly, and had enough other clear tiles that I didn't need early Bronze Working ... and even then I would know in my heart of hearts that it was wrong.

Setting aside questions of build efficiency, the problem is that whether or not founding an early religion pays off is just too contingent on your local diplomatic situation. If you can spread it to a couple neighbors none of whom found their own religion, and they then spread it around for you, then great, it might pay off in the long run. But that is just a matter of luck. It could just as easily be that Monty founds Hinduism right next to you and starts spreading it to your neighbors, in which case running Buddhism which you just founded becomes a serious liability.

Most basically, the problem is that you have to decide whether to pursue an early religion on turn 1; but at that point you have entirely insufficient information to know whether it will be a good play or not. In contrast, getting your capital improved and grabbing good nearby land always pays off. So while founding early religion can be fun, and can end up garnering some benefits if you're very lucky, please know that if your main goal is sound, efficient strategy it is not the way to go.

 

[LincolnOfRome]

I'm trying a (unrestricted leader, huge world, emperor level) game with Mansa Musa, leading the Spanish. The starting point had gold and gems nearby, fp's, and few sea creatures. The capital was planted on gems, and fed on clams. The first time I tried it I got lucky and founded Hinduism and Buddhism. Mining and agriculture were researched next before beelining to Monotheism and founding Judaism.

I just realized, this strategy might work better with Liz. Her Philosophical trait might help create great people to build these buildings. Aparently it can work on emperor level. Like others have said, it works best with a financial leader, with a nation has fishing and mysticism as starting techs. The ocean yields three and putting your city on gems produces three . You really need a trick like that to beat the AI's at higher levels. I might even try to play a similar game out.

 

[Hodory]

I'm trying a (unrestricted leader, huge world, emperor level) game with Mansa Musa, leading the Spanish. The starting point had gold and gems nearby, fp's, and few sea creatures. The capital was planted on gems, and fed on clams. The first time I tried it I got lucky and founded Hinduism and Buddhism. Mining and agriculture were researched next before beelining to Monotheism and founding Judaism.

I just realized, this strategy might work better with Liz. Her Philosophical trait might help create great people to build these buildings. Aparently it can work on emperor level. Like others have said, it works best with a financial leader, with a nation has fishing and mysticism as starting techs. The ocean yields three and putting your city on gems produces three . You really need a trick like that to beat the AI's at higher levels. I might even try to play a similar game out.

The English do NOT start with Mysticism, so Liz might not work out.

Now I see a problem here. First, nobody in the mindset to play a regular game of Civ 4 would even think about settling on top of the gems.

Also, you really need a lucky start like you had where you had gems, gold, and seafood all nearby. You don't always get that. So again, this is extremely situational.

In your case, you spent 20+ turns researching Meditation and Hinduism, with only fishing to go by. Luckily, you can get by by building workboats, the problem is that building that thing at the start when you are working commerce tiles to rush to these religious techs will take a very long time, unimproved tiles being worked for even longer.

This delays everything... expansion, growth, and production... not to mention that you will need to defend yourself against barbarians and have the land scouted as much as possible to better plan for your future cities as well as fogbusting.

This is just too risky, too dangerous, and only applies in extreme circumstances. I mean settling on top of the gems? Really?

 

[LincolnOfRome]

The English do NOT start with Mysticism, so Liz might not work out.

Neither does Mansa Munsa lead the Spanish. I was talking about unrestricted leader games. In those games you use the starting tech of the civilization and the traits of the leader.

Now I see a problem here. First, nobody in the mindset to play a regular game of Civ 4 would even think about settling on top of the gems.

Why not? At emperor level, It would make the difference between your city being the Holy birthplace of Buddhism and Hinduism (to begin with), and just another city. The economic advantages in the long run far outweigh a single gem tile. A town at the end of the game will produce more gold then a gem tile anyway.

Also, you really need a lucky start like you had where you had gems, gold, and seafood all nearby. You don't always get that. So again, this is extremely situational.

Elephants, or dye, or something similar next to a river would work as well.

In your case, you spent 20+ turns researching Meditation and Hinduism, with only fishing to go by. Luckily, you can get by by building workboats, the problem is that building that thing at the start when you are working commerce tiles to rush to these religious techs will take a very long time, unimproved tiles being worked for even longer.

Yes, I went workboat -> worker. Actually it was 16 or maybe 17 turns to learn both techs. All the commerce really speeded things up.

This delays everything... expansion, growth, and production... not to mention that you will need to defend yourself against barbarians and have the land scouted as much as possible to better plan for your future cities as well as fogbusting.

This is just too risky, too dangerous, and only applies in extreme circumstances. I mean settling on top of the gems? Really?

You have to always make sacrifices for real advantages in BTS. Sometimes you have to beeline to something you know will give you advantage and go for it. I'm not saying it is the best strategy ever, but I think it would work best at emperor in an unrestricted leader game (Liz/Spanish)

 

[LincolnOfRome]

Oops, triple post.

 

[LincolnOfRome]

Oops.

 

[Hodory]

I am fully aware of how unrestricted leader works. I don't play unrestricted leaders personally, but I know how the mechanics work. It could be fun I suppose. Boudica of Rome with her traits plus praetorians seems to be pretty popular. Many interesting options.

I am pretty much at loss for words as to the rest of your post. If you had not wasted your time spending 16, 17 turns of research into those religion techs, you could have gotten mining and worked the gem tiles for even more commerce earlier. To this date, I have not seen one person in this forum telling me that it is a solid strategy to settle on top of the gems for your capital. Not one.

You might think it is all good and sweet to have found a religion.. no two/three religions in your case, but like other posters have stated as well as myself previously, it doesn't guarantee anything. Actually founding more than one will give you enough of a headache because there is no way you can possibly control what religion gets spread to your neighbors, what religion they will convert to, and how fast they auto spread to which particular neighbor, and etc. There are just too many variable at play there, and you are still taking a huge gamble that is just too risky.

A town at the end of the game? The early commerce from the gem is commerce now, not many many turns later into the game. It is not even comparable. The early commerce from gem mine cannot possibly be compared to a town that needs a long time to develop into one to begin with.

Elephants, dye, or something similar next to a river.. once again, very situational.

If this is what you call real advantage, I don't know what else to tell you. I am not going to continue debating on this, because it is obvious that you and maltson are determined to not to heed advice from me and many others who have been repeatedly telling you that it just isn't a solid play at all. Unrestricted or not, I think this is a terrible play, especially if you overdo it and go for TWO OR MORE religions than just ONE. One is bad enough, but two or three at the beginning of the game spending 16,17+ turns researching religious techs and not getting any worker techs?

No thanks.

Anyway, it is your game, so you play however you like it.

 

[xenex]

Well if you want to go for the early religion(s) this would be the way to do it,you probably want to riverside jumbos or dyes,because you wouldn't lose much settling on it instead of wasting the gems, but still that's the basic idea of improving your chances.

Personally I wouldn't have settled on the gems, that might be because I don't go for the early religions, but even if I wanted to gems are just too juicy to use for this tactic so I would just settle next to them and hope for the best.Chances are with the mined gems and the seafood if you miss out on Buddhism and Hinduism your almost guaranteed to get Judaism.

@LoR (LincolofRome) The main point is not that you wouldn' be able to get the religions,but that even if you get it and in your cases more then one, unless you invest heavily into the religion it wont be worth it.And if you invest heavily into it your almost locking your game into going one way, meaning your military and infrastructure will suffer because you will be using those hammers on missionaries,temples etc, this becomes more costly if you go with more then one religion because you have to invest 3 times as much to get something from the religions.

@Hodory You don't have to be that lucky really, especially if you play with a financial leader to improve your chances to get the religion, which you probably should do if you want to play this strategy.You don't need gold or gems or anything like that, At the start of the game when this matters you will be working 2 tiles at the most and you wont have a worker out before the religions go, so you wont be able to improve those high commerce tiles.All you really need one three commerce tile, with being financial, that only means you need any number of resources that are next to a river.Obviously if you can get 2 "high" commerce tiles that increases your chance drastically.Even that is not hard to get, it could be easily gotten with one riverside commerce given resource and one seafood.

Well obviously you shouldn't go for the religion if you can't get build and use workboats.
Your other point is true, while you can build workboats and you can work commerce tiles to get your religion, it will hurt you after because that seafood tile(s) doesn't give you hammers to get out those same workboats and not to mention units afterwards

TBH it doing it like this shouldn't slow down your expansion and growth that much especially if you have more then one seafood,because both expansion and growth work on food,which the seafood provides pretty well, it does however slow your escorting, fogbusting and defensive units.Which can cost you if your unlucky.

@LoR "You have to always make sacrifices for real advantages" This is the main weakness of this strategy, you sacrifice your early game and pretty much your mid game just to make this strategy work and it only pays off if you invest heavily in it.And its not like it provides you with a benefit that this is the only way to get other strategies can provide the same benefit and without devoting half your game to it.

To the people trying to do this strategy this is how you do it, maybe try to not settle on gems and on something else instead, but you get the point, play with a financial leader as it improves your chances and is plain good, play with someone that starts with mysticism.

If you are someone thinking about whether you should or should not try this strategy, I would advise you to not try it, as it's not that great of a strategy.

 

[LincolnOfRome]

I just settled Hyuna Capac on dye so he could found the first three religions while building quechua and attacking the Zulu. Ulundi is now the Holy City of Judaism.

 

[LincolnOfRome]

@LoM (LincolofRome) The main point is not that you wouldn' be able to get the religions,but that even if you get it and in your cases more then one, unless you invest heavily into the religion it wont be worth it.And if you invest heavily into it your almost locking your game into going one way, meaning your military and infrastructure will suffer because you will be using those hammers on missionaries,temples etc, this becomes more costly if you go with more then one religion because you have to invest 3 times as much to get something from the religions.

I was trying to create a case that it was not difficult to be the founder of all religions even at the tougher levels. I have played games where my civilization has created more than one religion. Diplomatically, I only want to spread one. If you spread more than one, someone is going to convert to a different state religion and be your enemy.

 

[Gwaja]

I think the issue is whether or not founding an early religion is a solid play, since it is the 3 early religions (Buddhism, Hinduism, and Judaism) that become dominant religions in most games. The others come too late to have much of an impact in most games.

A lot of my Monarch games had me found Taoism and Confucianism, so I guess that counts as a founder of two religions? ^_^

It certainly is not impossible to found all religions, I think even at emperor, but it's not a consistent thing and a lot of times you do get beaten often by 1 turn. I think you can forget about it on immortal and deity.

For me though personally, to learn to play this game at the two highest levels, I want to play in a way that will be consistently solid, and not something that will only work well at lower levels. So I don't think this whole thing helps me personally in any way. But it sure is fun to try it though! ^_^

 

[LincolnOfRome]

Really, the only way to test this strategy is to try it in a few games and see how it works out.

 

[jmcfadden]

There seems to be those who believe the only good strategy is a strategy that has potential on deity, regardless of the actual level being played. And those who believe that any strategy that leads to victory on a certain level is a good strategy. While I have no problem who are the former, I am the latter. Though if I'm honest, If someone wants to be competent at deity, I'm not sure why they are wasting there time in monarch. I happen to know a couple of very good gamers, and none of them when they get a new game start at the easiest level and slowly work their way up. If you want a deity compatible strategy then play deity, get your ass kicked, think about why and try again. 50 short games (short cause for the first while you will be beaten fairly early) is far better for getting good at deity than playing the equivalent amount of time, say 25 full length, monarch games using a strategy you "think" might work higher up.

I personally, play everything on random, and the strategy I use is based on who I get, what potential my capital has and what I think the potential map will look like, and that strategy on monarch is sometimes grabbing an early religion. Anyone who says it can't be done is wrong, its not difficult to get, and if you only get one religion it is very easy to spread.

Will it work on deity? No. Do I care? No. I, like 95% of people don't play on deity and probably never will, and yet somehow I can still sleep at night. There are plenty of people who are struggling to win games at monarch, and to tell them that they can't use a strategy cause it won't work at higher levels seems pointless. When the situation is right grabbing an early religion on monarch works wonderfully. I don't think I have ever been in a game that I've grabbed an early religion and regretted it. Though I have been in games without a shrine, frustrated at my lack of income and considered attacking another civs city just to gain their shrine.

 

[Hodory]

There seems to be those who believe the only good strategy is a strategy that has potential on deity, regardless of the actual level being played. And those who believe that any strategy that leads to victory on a certain level is a good strategy. While I have no problem who are the former, I am the latter. Though if I'm honest, If someone wants to be competent at deity, I'm not sure why they are wasting there time in monarch. I happen to know a couple of very good gamers, and none of them when they get a new game start at the easiest level and slowly work their way up. If you want a deity compatible strategy then play deity, get your ass kicked, think about why and try again. 50 short games (short cause for the first while you will be beaten fairly early) is far better for getting good at deity than playing the equivalent amount of time, say 25 full length, monarch games using a strategy you "think" might work higher up.

I personally, play everything on random, and the strategy I use is based on who I get, what potential my capital has and what I think the potential map will look like, and that strategy on monarch is sometimes grabbing an early religion. Anyone who says it can't be done is wrong, its not difficult to get, and if you only get one religion it is very easy to spread.

Will it work on deity? No. Do I care? No. I, like 95% of people don't play on deity and probably never will, and yet somehow I can still sleep at night. There are plenty of people who are struggling to win games at monarch, and to tell them that they can't use a strategy cause it won't work at higher levels seems pointless. When the situation is right grabbing an early religion on monarch works wonderfully. I don't think I have ever been in a game that I've grabbed an early religion and regretted it. Though I have been in games without a shrine, frustrated at my lack of income and considered attacking another civs city just to gain their shrine.

Are you referring to my post? I am not limiting myself to a strategy that will probably work at a decent chance at lower levels, such as founding an early religion or two. I don't care what level I play, I am not concerned about beating Deity and not being able to sleep at night because I can't beat Deity.

No matter how much I look at the situation, I just can't see how delaying basic worker techs to improve the land and work better tiles can't be considered as a solid play. It seems like the most basic fundamental. It is reliable. Going for early religion is a gamble, and more so at higher levels when you often get beaten by 1 turn, or sometimes by 2 or more turns at higher levels. And you waste too much time delaying basic techs which delay expansion, growth, defensive capability to deal with barbarians and sometimes AI that become aggressive towards you much earlier in the game at higher levels.

If one is so concerned about making , I am sure plenty of good players have showcased how they can manage to do that without religion. You grab as much good land as possible, sometimes at the expense of the AI, make solid tech choices depending on the map situation, and utilize them to make full use of things you can do with those techs to get an advantage on the AI. Concentrating on these things and improving upon these techniques work on all levels, not just at lower levels, which I consider to be more important.

Why don't you post one of your saves and we will talk some more? I will like to look at it and see what techs you pursued, how long it took you to start expanding, how many hammers you spent on building missionaries, how often you got what type of great people, how you used those great people, etc. And I would like it to be a custom game with the "Lock Modified Assets" settings so that world builder won't be accessible during game. Let's see how easy it was for you to spread your religion. Relying on random luck from the game auto spreading your religion? Spending hammers on missionaries where those hammers could have been spent better elsewhere? Dealing with other AI and their different religions? I am curious!

You say you play everything random. Let's say you started a monarch game. Like an early poster mentioned, you HAVE to make the decision from turn 1 if you want to go for an early religion. You have very limited knowledge of your surroundings, who your neighbors are, where they are located, whether or not if you are isolated, etc. You have just so little information yet you MUST make this decision at turn 1. How in the world do you even know if the situation is right? You don't! And that's the gamble.

Yeah sure, getting an early religion or two can be done. I never said it is impossible. I said it is too risky, too big of a gamble that must be made with so little knowledge from the start. But if you want to talk solid strategy, let's talk about decisions you can make with good and enough information in your hands, not some gambit that you go on a hunch with limited information.

Nobody said you can't use the early religion strategy. I and many others simply said it is not a good and reliable strategy. And definitely not "THE wealthiest strategy ever."

 

[ABCDPuppies]

There seems to be those who believe the only good strategy is a strategy that has potential on deity, regardless of the actual level being played. And those who believe that any strategy that leads to victory on a certain level is a good strategy. While I have no problem who are the former, I am the latter.

...

Will it work on deity? No. Do I care? No. I, like 95% of people don't play on deity and probably never will, and yet somehow I can still sleep at night. There are plenty of people who are struggling to win games at monarch, and to tell them that they can't use a strategy cause it won't work at higher levels seems pointless.

Well, obviously anyone can use any strategy they like, and what counts as a "good" strategy may be relative to what your goals are: a good strategy for the purposes of winning eventually on Monarch, or for learning, or having fun, may not be a good strategy for the purposes of winning as soon as possible, or on a higher difficulty level. And it would of course be completely pointless to debate about what sort of goals people ought to have. It's a game after all, and everyone has their own reasons for playing.

That said, some strategies really are more efficient than others. Victory in Civ is, after all, definitely quantifiable: space victory requires a certain number of beakers and hammers in a certain distribution, culture a certain number of culture points, domination a certain number or percentage of tiles and population points (which are themselves reducible to units of culture and food), and so forth. In view of these definitions, the more efficient strategies are those which tend to procure a greater proportion of these goods in a lesser number of turns (or perhaps in less time -- an alternative definition of 'efficiency'.)

I think the point people are trying to make is just that, in this sense, it's very doubtful that pursuing early religion is an efficient strategy on any difficulty level -- and, of course, even less efficient on higher difficulty levels, because of the prospect of losing the race, and the higher opportunity cost of not being able to grab land while it is available. These are, I think, perfectly valid points. At any rate, they shouldn't be confused with the obviously absurd claim that no one will ever win a game where they pursue early religion, or that no one should ever do it or whatever.

 

[Ataxerxes]

For getting very rich - having lots of gold, this is a very good strategy. But if the point is only how much gold you get then the play will be suboptimal. If your leader doesn't start with Mysticism, it's very hard even on Noble to found both Buddhism and Hinduism. And even on intermediate levels, the diplo problems may create problems.

The biggest problem, for me, is the worker which I build first in over 90% of my games will have nothing to do if I'm going after early religions. I think that except for Settler and Chieftain this strategy won't be optimal. And I'm not sure about those levels.

It's true that everyone can play however they enjoy it. I would never criticize anyone for liking to play X strategy in the game. I wouldn't, however, try to say it's a good strategy. Sometimes I don't like to chop in a game for whatever reason - environmental in real world or whatever. That's my personal preference but not a good strategy I would recommend.

 

[ABCDPuppies]

For getting very rich - having lots of gold, this is a very good strategy.

Yeah.. actually I think this points to why this whole topic seems to irk some more experienced/advanced players. The thing is, gold differs from beakers, hammers, food, and culture, in that there is no victory condition that requires having a certain amount, or percentage of it (in that respect it's more like espionage.) Rather, gold is useful because it is convertible into those quantities via a variety of mechanisms (sliders, corporations, rush buys, etc.)

So while a number of good strategies might involve generating a lot of gold in order to convert it into something else, just generating a lot of gold itself isn't really even a full-fledged strategy, if by that we mean a plan to pursue some victory condition.

And that, I think, is partly why this whole topic seems misguided. Aside from issues of feasibility at higher difficulties, having the best gold-producing shrine city in the world won't ultimately help you one bit if you haven't planned some way to leverage all that gold toward some victory condition. And this is actually trickier than it might seem, given that there is a hard cap of how much gold can be converted into beakers/culture via the slider, that you can't rush space parts, etc.

This isn't of course to say that the question of how to generate the most gold isn't intrinsically interesting. It's just a little nonplussing to see some players focusing on it so apparently single-mindedly that they seem to miss the bigger picture.

 

[coanda]

If you want lots of gold, there are better ways to get it on any difficulty level - instead of founding religions, take more land. Build more cities. Get an overall stronger economy, and you'll be able to earn more gold.

Ignore for now the horrendous opportunity-costs involved in distorting your tech pattern that way, and the painful loss of all those great people to build shrines instead of the many other great uses for great people. Let's simply look at the cost in hammers for the missionaries, and consider what else you could get for that same cost. You're clearly spreading your state religion to all your cities for the obvious benefits, but after that first religion let's see how missionary spam does.

Let's consider relatively early on. Your holy cities will likely have markets, so each successful missionary mission returns 1.25 gpt. Even if you're lucky and every mission is successful, that means you're getting 0.03 gpt per hammer spent. On the other hand, if you don't build those missionaries and just build catapults and melee units, you really ought to be able to conquer an enemy city before gunpowder for no more than ~250 hammers lost (it's even better if you can just found in an uncontested area, where it's more like 150 hammers per city). If you get a size-7 city, I'll estimate commerce ~18 (2 per size, plus 1 from center tile, and another 3 from trade routes). With a market, that's 22.5 gpt potentially. That means you're earning 0.09 gpt per hammer from this approach, as opposed to 0.03 from missionary-spamming.

On the other hand, late in the game your holy cities will have MGB for 2 gpt per missionary mission (for 0.05 gpt per hammer). Further, losses taking cities can be significantly higher - perhaps as much as 1000 hammers to take an enemy city away (losing a horrendous 9-10 cannons in the attack, plus garrisoning rifle). However, that city is likely larger and should have some towns developed, so a reasonable commerce estimate of it would be 40 commerce. That means it's capable of earning you 80 gpt, or 0.08 gpt per hammer: still better than missionary spam.

From this it seems clear that in almost any conceivable situation, you earn more gold by simply conquering more cities instead of spending hammers on missionaries to spread redundant religions in your cities.

So much for spamming missionaries. So now look purely at the capabilities of religion-spamming to let the AIs spread religions. But they're likely to have on average about 1 religion per city, and those religions will probably be spread over at least 4 different religions. So you have to sink 4 great people into shrines for that purpose. Those 4 great people could have been great merchants instead, generating perhaps 5000 gold from trade missions. If it's a Standard-size map, there are say 7 serious contenders (counting you), with 9 cities apiece on average. That's worth perhaps 80 gpt to you total (with markets in all holy cities), so your 4 lost GMs pay themselves off in 63 turns - which is a pretty miserable rate of return.

And, again, this doesn't count the cost of distorting your techs that way. You'll be getting basic worker techs later, which hurts immediate development; you'll get military techs later, which hurts expansion potential; you'll get economic techs later, which slows growth. These costs are actually in my opinion probably the most significant, but they're hard to quantify and even without them a religion-spamming strategy is inferior.

 

[maltson]

@ hodory: Haven't had a chance to post for a while, I've been busy with other things. But you seem very keen to have a look so here you are. A consequence of my delay is that I have been able to play some more of my game. I think I am now up to about 1360 AD. My shrine income after multipliers is now about 150gpt. Which actually is now only 5-8% of my empires total gross turnover (down from the 20% in my previous post). But considering I have 21 cities, some of which are 20+ in size that is still a massive contribution from just 1 building. Getting the early religion certainly hasn't restricted my civ growth, I am by far the largest civ; or my military, which I have the largest; I've already destroyed one civ, and have 5 others as my vassals. If fact it has been instrumental in funding both aspects


Anyway here is my current game, and the save from earlier that I described in my previous post. I was going to add my 4000 B.C save as well, but to my horror I realized that when I was testing the ability to get religion that I talked about previously, it of course created a new auto save 4000 B.C. So the old one is gone unless anyone knows how to get it back? Anyway not sure how familiar you are with rise of man 2, I'm certainly not, it’s only my second game with the mod. Its quite a bit more involved so doesn't work that well for our original discussion. But it’s all I got, so it’s all I can give. Anyone familiar with rise of man I’m sure could find a million more efficient tech paths etc, but as I said its only my second game with it, and truth be told as soon as I felt I had a good lead I paid more attention to looking at the depths of this mod than I probably did maximizing my civ, but its working out pretty well so far.

 

[maltson]

This topic seems to have got very diluted. Some people seem to be talking about multiple religions as first suggested by the OP, and some people are talking about grabbing one religion. And in some of the comments it’s impossible to know who they are aiming at. I think this maybe the case with Coanda’s last post. I’m not sure if its directed solely at the OP or at anyone who like myself still believe that grabbing a religion on monarch is viable. But I will address the elements that I believe apply to any religion.

Along with that, Please note that the OP has not written on this post for weeks, and so if your post is referring to his strategy, feel free, but your probably flogging a dead horse.

While I appreciate your effort Coanda, I feel you’ve got confused between math and reality.

Your holy cities will likely have markets, so each successful missionary mission returns 1.25 gpt

First off the notion that in order to have religion you must spam missionaries is ridiculous. Religion spreads remarkably well by itself. Foreign civs are more than happy to spread your religion throughout its empire themselves if it’s their official religion because of the obvious benefits in this. And as such the belief that one missionary only converts one city is also void. One missionary, particularly if placed in a foreign capital, will likely cause the religion to spread to the entire civ. In the game I posted above the major civs all have 10-20 cities, each city having their official religion present, all of which they spread by themselves, so if their religion is your religion they will do it for you. I actually only produced I think 2 missionaries that were sent to other civs, and as I have stated earlier my one shrine is making massive contributions every turn.

On the other hand, if you don't build those missionaries and just build catapults and melee units, you really ought to be able to conquer an enemy city before gunpowder for no more than ~250 hammers lost (it's even better if you can just found in an uncontested area, where it's more like 150 hammers per city).

I have been able to conquer entire civilizations before gunpowder, and brace yourself, I had a religion! It is not an either/or situation, in the game above I have only just got to gunpowder, I have conquered one civ, storming through another and have I think 5 vassal states, and as stated previously my shrine is still making me huge amount of money.

However, that city is likely larger and should have some towns developed, so a reasonable commerce estimate of it would be 40 commerce. That means it's capable of earning you 80 gpt, or 0.08 gpt per hammer: still better than missionary spam.

I’m sorry but there is so much wrong with this logic, I’m not sure where to begin. Are you seriously suggesting that getting an early religion would in some way negate the possibility of attacking cities by the time you get cannons? Once again its not an either/or scenario. In fact if I was to conquer a city of a size that produces 40 base gold I would probably spread my religion there regardless of whether I had a shrine due to the benefits of assisting in pacifying the population. This leads to the second problem with your logic; are you playing with no city flipping? How could you possibly keep a city large enough to produce 40 base gold from revolting with only one rifleman? I have had cities with as many units as pop, revolt and overthrow my rule. Another issue is that 40 base gold is not your average city at a mid point of a game. Again referring to my game above I recently conquered Constantinople, which was a capital, by the time its pacified its was producing 16 base gold, costing me 13 in maintenance, for a grand profit of 3. Not quite the boon you were suggesting. I also love the fact that you have multiplied its base gold by 100%, while all your shrine scenarios are only 25%, makes pretty numbers I guess but doesn’t match reality. A conquest will destroy majority of the infrastructure, and so will basically have to be built up from scratch, requiring masses of time and hammers. I conquer cities for numerous reasons but I don’t think I have ever conquered a city in mid game just because I think it will boost my economy.

But they're likely to have on average about 1 religion per city, and those religions will probably be spread over at least 4 different religions. So you have to sink 4 great people into shrines for that purpose. Those 4 great people could have been great merchants instead, generating perhaps 5000 gold from trade missions. If it's a Standard-size map, there are say 7 serious contenders (counting you), with 9 cities apiece on average. That's worth perhaps 80 gpt to you total (with markets in all holy cities), so your 4 lost GMs pay themselves off in 63 turns - which is a pretty miserable rate of return.

I’m guessing your intending this for the OP here, cause I don’t think anyone is suggesting 4 shrines is optimal. But parts of it are relevant to religion as a whole. Firstly If I some how had all four major religions I still wouldn’t build four shrines. In that scenario its very easy to restrict the spread of all but your official religion, and nobody can spread a religion they don’t have so majority of the other civs will have 1 religion yours, therefore one shrine, and you still get majority of the gold you quoted. Once again you have used only a 25% multiplier to make your numbers prettier. There are markets, grocers, banks, stock exchanges, wonders the list is huge many of which you can get quite early in the game. I currently have 145% gold multiplier in my capital with my shrine. Lots of people play larger maps than standard and for all of those your No. of cities is void and thus the theory is too specific (and yet still wrong). And even pretending that your scenario was accurate, 63 turns is not much on many games, I currently am in a game that has about 1500 turns, say it takes you 200 turns to get to this point plus your 63 that still leaves about 1200 turns of benefit well beyond your merchants. I would say that’s pretty good! I admit some people don’t play such long games, but plenty of people play Epic games, which are close to 1000 turns and Marathon games, which are 1800 turns! Again I refer to my game, but @ 150 gpt (as of the year 1315) for one shrine, Compared to 1 merchant (1250 based on your math) that’s 9 turns. Your merchant wouldn’t have even made it to its destination in that time. See it’s pretty easy to make the numbers look impressive.

And, again, this doesn't count the cost of distorting your techs that way. You'll be getting basic worker techs later, which hurts immediate development; you'll get military techs later, which hurts expansion potential; you'll get economic techs later, which slows growth. These costs are actually in my opinion probably the most significant, but they're hard to quantify and even without them a religion-spamming strategy is inferior.

Again I assume most of this is referring to the OP, cause for the life of me I can’t see how developing one tech has the ability to delay every other tech line in the game. Its like saying because I teched fishing first I’ve delayed my land military and thus according to you hurt my expansion ability. The best of the three though, and according to you the most significant, is economic techs. By this I assume you mean currency etc? You do realise that currency requires writing, which in turn requires priesthood, which of course requires both polytheism and meditation. So I’m not sure how getting a religion could possibly be a detriment to getting economic techs when you have to have them to get the economic techs.