(3-VT) Increase the % Global Follower threshold for Reforming by 5% on standard.

Status
Not open for further replies.

pineappledan

Deity
Joined
Aug 9, 2017
Messages
9,723
Location
Alberta, Canada
Here are the current reformation % requirements for map sizes:

Duel - 37.5% (250% of standard)
Tiny - 30% (200% of standard)
Small - 22.5% (150% of standard)
Standard - 15%
Large - 12% (80% of standard)
Huge - 9% (60% of standard)

I propose that the % of followers required to reform should be raised by 5% on standard. The new requirements would be:

Duel - 50% (250% of standard)
Tiny - 40% (200% of standard)
Small - 30% (150% of standard)
Standard - 20%
Large - 16% (80% of standard)
Huge - 12% (60% of standard)

It is my opinion that reforming is too easy right now. Reforming doesn't feel like a stretch goal; a reward for good play. Instead reforming is easy enough that every civ should be able to do it. In the current meta, reforming is something you are expected to be able to achieve every time. By increasing the threshold for reformation, reforming would happen later, be costlier, and would be hard enough that some players will not be able to do it in a game. That would make reforming more special, more worthwhile, make the Karlstejn wonder more valuable, and make the religion game more competitive.
 
I have had games where I don't reform, or reform very late. It all depends on your religion and spread plan, there are absolutely strats where I don't spread early and find reforming tough to pull off.
 
I would agree to this provided Karlstejn's bonus was increased to at least +10%, maybe even more than that. Having harder reforming puts more point to having a wonder as an end around, but the 5% it does now isn't enough to feel booming.
 
No thanks. Already quite hard to get reformation in games were you are next to 2 super religious powers. Usually I blindly follow your suggestions but this one I really feel is unnecessary.
 
The starting placement and the neighboring civilizations condition too much the chances of being able to reform. Raising the threshold makes the chances of being able to do this even more random. I'm not in favor of it.
On the other hand, adapt the % to the number of religions since it only seems to be linked to the size of the map (especially since the number of religions will be conditioned by the number of players).
 
I would fully support changing the reform % to be based on the number of religions.

This proposal is to make reformation require 20% of global population on standard. Standard map has 5 religions on default. So reformation would just be 100%/number of religions. This proposal aims to make it so reforming at least requires your "fair share" of adherents on standard.

There is an element of chance to spreading -- you can have an easy time with non-founders nearby -- but dominating the religion game is a choice that requires skill and significant investment as well. You can conquer and kill nearby religions, or delay enhancing in order to spread more efficiently early when there is less competition. Or you could build the Karlstejn, which makes reforming much easier. The point is that reforming could be harder, and require more from players, and my own experience is that the current 15% threshold is much too forgiving.
 
Last edited:
Copied from Discord, before the change to MaxActiveReligions was passed:
1. Change % to reform to X/MaxActiveReligions
2. Karlstejn changes that to Y/MaxActiveReligions, where Y is some number smaller than X

You're suggesting X to be 100, but Karlstejn shouldn't be adding a flat %. I suggest Y = 75 or 80.
 
This proposal is to make reformation require 20% of global population on standard. Standard map has 5 religions on default. So reformation would just be 100%/number of religions.
Copied from Discord, before the change to MaxActiveReligions was passed:
1. Change % to reform to X/MaxActiveReligions
2. Karlstejn changes that to Y/MaxActiveReligions, where Y is some number smaller than X

You're suggesting X to be 100, but Karlstejn shouldn't be adding a flat %. I suggest Y = 75 or 80.
I remain convinced that the value seems a little high but I am really for it to be conditioned by the number of religion as well as the Karlstejn bonus. In any case, if it's a value in the settings, everyone can go and change it as they want.
Your proposal could not go in this direction? I mean conditioning linked to the number of religions?
 
Off topic but would it be possible for one to mod in a set of reformation beliefs for achieving a low amount of population converted? Was thinking along the lines of the golden/dark split from civ six, these beliefs would help you back into the religious game at the cost of ultimately choosing a final reformation belief. Or would this be a massive pain.
 
The reformation threshold is determined by your founder belief, and you can set them differently. You could make a weak founder that is easy to reform with, and a strong founder that is hard to reform with, and see if you can reach some sort of balance between those.

So something could be done like what you are describing, but not exactly
 
So if I am understanding you correctly, currently, all founder beliefs are set to trigger a reformation at the same threshold, and an easy way to achieve what I am thinking is to change these thresholds for every founder belief. If I could, would it also be possible for each founder belief to trigger a separate reformation at a different threshold or are the set of beliefs a religion can have hardcoded/practically immutable? (That is to say each religion is limited to having a pantheon, founder, follower etc)
 
You cannot gate off different reformations for different founder beliefs. There is 1 pool for reformation beliefs. All you can do is make it easier or harder for individual founders to reform.
 
So if I am understanding you correctly, currently, all founder beliefs are set to trigger a reformation at the same threshold, and an easy way to achieve what I am thinking is to change these thresholds for every founder belief. If I could, would it also be possible for each founder belief to trigger a separate reformation at a different threshold or are the set of beliefs a religion can have hardcoded/practically immutable? (That is to say each religion is limited to having a pantheon, founder, follower etc)
The problem there being that you can't choose your Founder until you've Founded, so you can't choose to shortcut the religion race until you've already lost it. Workshopping this idea, I suppose you would frame fast-reforming as the perk, and figure out how to make Enhancement slower as the penalty? Maybe the fast-reforming Founder beliefs have poor faith scaling, so you're giving up any concept of an efficient faith economy for the immediate benefits of being faster to Reformation? ... And now we're well and truly off-topic. Sorry about that.
 
Last edited:
Maybe the fast-reforming Founder beliefs have poor faith scaling, so you're giving up any concept of an efficient faith economy for the immediate benefits of being faster to Reformation?
To be fair, making reformation harder based on founding beliefs could be a valid counterproposal. Moreover, risking a higher reformation gate for a more immediate benefit could be a fun decision while choosing a founder beliefs.
.
(Edit): For example, gating the one which gives instant production and science on city conversion behind a ~30% gate to encourage rapid spreading (and perhaps justifying massive buffs to it) while giving the one which confers city state bonuses (abode of peace(?)) minimal spread to reform because no one ever takes that one anyway :)

You cannot gate off different reformations for different founder beliefs. There is 1 pool for reformation beliefs. All you can do is make it easier or harder for individual founders to reform.
I was more hoping if it was possible to add more 'pools' as it were. Will look around independently at this, though failing that I've noticed some modders used the bonus belief as a distinct 'pool'.
 
Last edited:
You should check out my new beliefs mod which includes the Libations belief, which has a unique reformation path
 
@pineappledan Given the large number of untested/queued changes to religious beliefs in the last session, I'm inclined to veto this until players have had a chance to playtest those changes.
 
Proposal vetoed.

Reason:
Conflicts with the various queued proposals modifying religious beliefs.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom