AI preferences for the religions?

[Markus6]

Your citizens automatically choose what religion they are (depending on how close they are to a holy city and which missionaries have come visiting). I assume this will work along percentages (i.e. Rome is 60% Hindu and 15% Daoist). Your state religion allows you to build temples of that type (e.g. Daoist temple). So if your state religion was different to the religion held by the majority of your popluation (because you wanted to be the same as your neighbours) the surely your population would get unhappy, they'd have nowhere to worship. So clearly you have to start sending out missionaries and convert your neighbouring civs. Also as I see it if you've got the holy city of your state religion then every of civs cities that have that religion have to pay you (like a tourist attraction, you'll get money from the pilgrims).

What I want to see is what will happen if you have two religions holy cities. So if you had the christian and buddhist holy cities and your religion was buddhist then would other christian civs get angry at you and come and try to liberate their holy city. I think itd b cool if your population forced you into some holy wars.

 

[Invisible Rhino]

I think it would be best if there was an option to click at the start of each game whether or not civs favor their traditional religion. That should keep everyone happy.

 

[JavalTigar]

If fog of war is actually working in this incarnation then, yes I can see the usefullness.

But if what Markus6 says is true then I will need to be making these things all the time just to keep my own people in check. Boy that sounds FUN! (I thought they were trying to remove Micro Management)

Although if you have to dedicate a percentage of your empires production to maintain a religious balance, that would slow your growth a bit, helping with the Big getting Bigger debate from the other thread.

 

[Markus6]

I can't prove anything I've said most of it is opinion from the videos/write ups ive seen. I just hope the religious aspect is going to be more interesting than 'i'll just choose the religion of my neighbours to make them like me'. I think it's a really good idea and could add lots more interested to the game like the resources did to CivIII.

 

[Aussie_Lurker]

I TOTALLY agree with you, Javal. Like Espionage, I don't see why they can't represent conversion and missionaries at a STRATEGIC-rather than tactical-level. Espionage and Religion work best when they are done at this level-IMHO-because there is much less MM involved.

Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.

 

[Dearmad]

I'd rather have a spy unit and a prophet unit I enjoy that level of play.

 

[Djc]

I'm not sure that having Civs favor a specific religion would work all that well. After all, which of the seven religions would you say the Romans should prefer? The Aztecs? Giving certain civs a religious preference while giving others none, or a random preference, doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me. And, as has been said before, I rather like the idea of Muslim England and Hindu Japan. It seems very 'civvy' to me.

Just my two cents.

 

[benjamin28]

I think Albow is right... why I should have a religion if it doesn't make a difference? Very strange point...
If I find a Buddisthic Russia or a Jewish Mali I would be very happy: is an exciting perspective: modifying history. But, as you know, the middle is the best way, so the civs should have more probabilities of being the historical correct religion (ie. India being hindu, Arabia being muslim), but not the things that happened in Civ3: All the civs beings democratic when there is peace and communistic when there is war!!!! That's unfair, and unfanny. I know is about religions, and not governments, but please: not always America being democratic...