Balancing religions would improve your civing experience?

[Englor]

Personally I have no problem at all with the way religion works in the game. I do, however, recognize that others have concerns, and some thoughts on how they could be addressed. In the doing, we could add some improvements to the game that no-one could possibly object to, I think, and would be welcome to all players (including me).

My view of other people's objections is that they are:
1) Tired of the "fixed" setup, where Buddism is first/easiest, then Hinduism, etc; where Christianity/Islam have an inherent disadvantage to spreading, etc. (This is a gameplay reasoning.)
2) A little bored with the lack of distinction between religions. (This is a gameplay reasoning.)
3) A little concerned that the game has identical effects on society by the different religions. Say, Hinduism is identical in effect to Taoism, which frankly is absurd. We're not talking about the beliefs of those religions, which of course are different, we're talking about the effects on society. (This is a storyline/realism reasoning.)
4) Concerned about the cost of missionaries. (This is a gameplay reasoning.)
5) Concerned about percieved high failure of missionaries. (This is a gameplay reasoning.)

Frankly, I think #4 and #5 they got just right, so I'm not going to suggest any alternatives.

#1-#3 can easily be addressed by two things:

Suggestion One-- allowing the player to choose the name/symbol of the religion when a religion is gained. Gameplay is identical, except instead of "Buddhism", it prompts you to see which one you want.

Suggestion Two-- when you get a religion, you get to choose a benefit from a list of choices. The list will not be mutually exclusive (two religions could choose the same benefit) but the benefits will not be cumulative (if the same civ has two religions which have the same benefit, then that civ only gets x1 not x2). These benefits will replace the Shrine gold bonus. So, you could pick the Shrine gold bonus, and your game will be exactly the same as now. Or, you could pick something else (from the list of half-a-dozen choices) such as,
"Your holy warriors (all units) get +15% strength on attack"
"When at jihad (war), your civ produces military units at +25% production"
"Religion is expansionist and spreads 25% faster"
"Emphasis on family, city population growth requires 25% less food"

Just some thoughts.

Wodan

Ok, thank you wodan, this is a good step in the right direction with abudible addressal.


I have some colaberation that I've noticed pertaining to religions and what they have to offer, as opposed to what impedes their longevity/strengths.

I noticed that aspects of taioism get obsoleted by advances.
I noticed no science increases in religious academies.


First off, the root similarity off all religions ofcourse is rienforcing there footholds and influences. However, there must be achievable and undeniable game outcomes and results that effectively may basterdize any nations/leaders progress to the point of covictive change. Ofcourse roundedness is also in favour and there in-turn should be methods of putting up a hell of a front as feeding a cause is also a fairly relevent factor. Yet at worst ends is precisely the means in which one fuels the fires of religious conflict, both diplomatically and hostily.


Judaism- aligns direct conduct, civilty and martial law and teaching parrallel to the religion itself, which is monotheistic and engoverning scientific adherence. Rooted and practiced to its own cultural and taught mainifestations. Monotheistic.

Hinduism- rooted as oldest and strongest foundated value(condoning to its most offbaring and conversion resistent strengths) Practiced in its' surviving community. Polytheistic.

Chrisitanity- Rooted and practiced in its' own foundation, surviving community and continued teachings.
(Condoning to its' second most offbaring, and most influence spreading strengths). Momotheistic.

Buddhism- Rooted and practiced with direct community survival and teachings. Polytheistic with monotheistic values.

Confucism- Rooted from its' foundation, baring the second strongest conversion-resistent strength, practiced in minor form from its' foundation, majorily from its' surviving community. Polytheistic simulation, with monotheistic reality.

Taioism- Rooted and practiced in its' foundation.Third strongest factor in both conversion resistence and influncial spread at plain value. Moontheistic, with polytheistic values.

Islam- Rooted and ppracticed directly in its' foundation. Momotheistic. Influece strength ranks as second strongest despite the much latter foundings in actual life. Islam is the extreme presence of religious, iconist and dare be said, spiritual conviction. Yet this also holds a slight disattraction cost as well.

Explanation of religious values:
"Root" meaning the ongoing strength of its' influnce and relevence, a shift and/or resistence factor, which compiles with factors for the total rating. The perminant stability rating.

"Practice" meaning another influence and conversion-resistence factor, affected by influencial deveopment. The progression stability rating. When this is ultimately conquered, the "root" rating begins to take direct depreciation and existence from any and all conquering religious influences. Each city, holds its' own total rating between the two and other factors(improvements, embracers and historical acts such as conversions and others which also give a slight increase than, and added per/turn increase until depleted or conquered.)
Total state influence is also stored like food or production and is directly administered in times of need to whereever there is need. This may also be intercepted.

"Monotheistc" meaning first off, that tolerance and contentment to the awarness and association with those of a different religion is more decreased than polytheistic religions. Moreso, if nation A has a monotheistic religion, and has relations with nation B baring a polytheistic religion, this intolerance and malcontentment is further increased, and may grow further pertaing to influence both from this nation and globally, and can cause the influencially leading nation of that religion serious disfavour by nation A, and spark tensions with nation B.

"Polytheistic" meaning that tolerance and contentment with other religions is fairly undisturbing to the nations growth and practical peace and relations is more easily open and handeled. Polytheists however do share the same quality of bitterness with those of a monotheistic religion, quite simply do to the fact of the ferocity of monotheistic believers. In which case the resentment is not as bad as thier's, yet it is existent.


Comparisons:
Buddhist to taioist- strengths of population and units differ according to clutural bonus(Buddhist), as opposed to direct statistical and or manifest increase(Taioist)


Conversion-Resistence to spread:Ranking Scheme-
Buddhism- #3-#3
Christianity- #2-#1
Confucism- #2-#3
Hinduism- #1-#4
Islam- -#2-#2
Judaism- #1-#4
Taioism- #3-#3


//
My proposal to implement visible religious differences as such.


Founding religons:
Ofcourse each religion that has a requesite advance is sensible. However, more than just researching the line of thought which bore the conclusive sentiments of religiously formed ideology, actual culture and civilty achieves the foundation possibility to be made. Science is first afforded on behalf of discovering the required advance. Once aquired, culture and civic points/focus may be alotted towards a brief "foundation" period, whcih determines the possibility and competeable measure towards religious claiming.
Like building wonders, efforts are made towards founding a religion, due to production of culture and civil presence(contentment and settings suppose). Unlike wonders, more than one city may condone its efforts to the foundation, the first city to adjust settings towards the achievement becomes the holy city. So choice is available. Education may also be alloted towards foundation. As such, with techs such as writing, alphabet and most importantly litteracy, all litterate nations are able to compete once any nation discovers the requisite for a religion. ( I don't know how thismight take to popular preference, it's still a thought.).
This virtually eliminates the annoyance of not being able to have a shooting chance for religion, desired or general. And once again, no religion has an infinant resistence or spread factor. Some are just stronger than others either way, and decided gameplay matters a great deal in preservation as well in destruction, as civ almost always level out to maintain. No BS'ing with recently added aspects. And again, this is why I am in favor for next to nothing in the game having a fixed number that pertains to a governing body of any game aspect. Government, civics, religions, improvements, wonders(except for some), etc....
All these aspect managers should do, is either, replicate, increase, decrease, eliminate or nuetralize affects, causes, productions and costs, that the lesser game governing aspects create. The fixed number aspectshould only remain upon immediate transference situations(ie plain value output) until compiled efforts begin the "progression" affect.


With Confucism, diplomatic and civic advancement is a direct nature. Science bonuses specifically give these kinds of advances a closer reach.
Under confucism Civil contentment is broadened, and added cultural increases draw upon the proximity factor of science and education.

With Taioism, the functions and structures of confucism aptly follow the same guidelines yet pertaining to war, offensive and defensive advancement as opposed to diplomacy and civilty. Under taioism Special war abilities may be enacted such as a sacrifice for an amplified affect generally produced by generic units and abilities. In turn, units gain a statistical increase that is sublte yet worthwhile.
Under taioism, the effects of martial law and contentment are secondarily spawned from the contributions of cultural increase in some size/ration/percentage. (Whatever adheres to pratical balance and amplifiable achievement as however desired.)

With Cristianity is the foretold strength of religion dominantly.
Christian strength is both stubbern and flexible to an extent, and under this religion, civil advances, culture and contentment all ajoin to much easier achievement. Christianities priciple strengths lye in this and the added resistence to conversion as well discontentment do to other religions as they are siply seen as the wrong kind, yet god allows mistakes and offers redemption.

With Buddhism, the population in all cities of this religion, produce triple the affect of whatever they're doing. Units gain a bonus tied to cultural enhancers as opposed to direct statistical increases, as opposed to the effects of taioism. Income from incense is also increased. Underbuddhism, the affects of science are somewhat lessoned, yet research towards academic sciences are increased, bringing them closer in reach.

With Hinduism, as adversly from christianitys' spread strength, holds an increased strength in conversion resistent strength and plain manifestation values above them all.
With hinduism, the highest general religious manifistations are reached at plain value of simply having the religion, aside from what other addatives have you. And, Hindus are virtually tied to trade and diplomacy. AI governing should be heavily swayed by personal charachteristics, whereas, advantages of utilizing trade and peace bonuses may help aggressive and imperialistic leaders play their schemes wisely, or, they truely wish to balance out. Difficulty level should tie in fairly closely here as to premeditade plausible and likely outcome.

With Judaism, an increased affect from municpal/government improvements or "buildings" :roll eyes: occures and can culminate with other factors that increase the rate and likelihood of producucing great generals. Or even faster rates of prophets/priests/missionaries, whichever aligns to the taste of religion so closely bound to state and/or military governing.

With Islam, the affects of all religious improvements are of the highest rating. Influenced carried on the culture spance is second to christianity, and prophets/missionaries/priests may perform special acts, that can seriously enhance the states embrace, or radically tip the influences of others in favor for this religion, at an equalled cost to diplomacy which may have a chance of causing this to be futile. it all depends on the circumstances and eployment tactics which take part in them.

So the recap is;

Buddhism- grants trippled unit affect and units with enhancing bonuses. Peace and trade are of the favorable priority. Units gain "bonus" enhancers.

Christianity- grants much faster rates of civil advancement, with greater rates of culutre and contenment, as well the most influencial religion. Yet controversy may be n x-factor that could avalacnhe the balances by some percentage.

Confucism- practically grants diplomatic and civil advancements on the spot, yet not completely ofcourse. Contenment is primarily broadened as a major affect aside from improvements, and education/science has added derivative increases from culture.

Hinduism- Is the numeral uno most-resistent religion to conversion, yet that does not in any way make it immortal or the best choice. This religion does produce the strongest plain value influence ratings in the culture spanse, and missionaries of this religion are among the more successful.

Islam- grants the highest plain value output of all religious improvements. Influencial and radical acts may be made as cost dictates. Islams' conversion-resistence strength is mathed to christianity, and is the second strongest influence spreading religion.

Judaism- grants increased output from government improvements, and increases the rate of Great units, General for warlords, and something befitting for cIV regular.

Taioism- Offensive and defensive advances are practically granted. War is much cheaper and contentment due to war is lessoned. Units gain increased statistical benefits. Culture increases the affects of martial law and general contentment.

After very thorough study, this is what I've come up with so far. I think this is an acceptable start in the right direction concerning change towards the concerns that are apparently out there.

This takes care of;
Foundation by research alone.
Seemingly religious immortality.
Lack of religious definition/comparison. I hope I've helped out a bit. Personally I'm gloating right now.

 

[Enigma256]

this just leads to religion x is better than religion y.

that's the reason why all religions are the same
a crusade against a certain religion to "ban" it from your cities and from the enemy would be nice, an inquisition if you will.
you will lose some population in the process, but you can then spread that shiny new religion of yours and deny your opponent the advantage of having his religion in your cities

if slavery is an option, so should be the inquisition and "witch hunts"

it would make those WW2 scenarios that much more realistic

 

[Pitboss]

Personally I have no problem at all with the way religion works in the game. I do, however, recognize that others have concerns, and some thoughts on how they could be addressed. In the doing, we could add some improvements to the game that no-one could possibly object to, I think, and would be welcome to all players (including me).

Very welcome ...

My view of other people's objections is that they are:
1) Tired of the "fixed" setup, where Buddism is first/easiest, then Hinduism, etc; where Christianity/Islam have an inherent disadvantage to spreading, etc. (This is a gameplay reasoning.)
2) A little bored with the lack of distinction between religions. (This is a gameplay reasoning.)
3) A little concerned that the game has identical effects on society by the different religions. Say, Hinduism is identical in effect to Taoism, which frankly is absurd. We're not talking about the beliefs of those religions, which of course are different, we're talking about the effects on society. (This is a storyline/realism reasoning.)
4) Concerned about the cost of missionaries. (This is a gameplay reasoning.)
5) Concerned about percieved high failure of missionaries. (This is a gameplay reasoning.)

Frankly, I think #4 and #5 they got just right, so I'm not going to suggest any alternatives.

#1-#3 can easily be addressed by two things:

Suggestion One-- allowing the player to choose the name/symbol of the religion when a religion is gained. Gameplay is identical, except instead of "Buddhism", it prompts you to see which one you want.

Suggestion Two-- when you get a religion, you get to choose a benefit from a list of choices. The list will not be mutually exclusive (two religions could choose the same benefit) but the benefits will not be cumulative (if the same civ has two religions which have the same benefit, then that civ only gets x1 not x2). These benefits will replace the Shrine gold bonus. So, you could pick the Shrine gold bonus, and your game will be exactly the same as now. Or, you could pick something else (from the list of half-a-dozen choices) such as,
"Your holy warriors (all units) get +15% strength on attack"
"When at jihad (war), your civ produces military units at +25% production"
"Religion is expansionist and spreads 25% faster"
"Emphasis on family, city population growth requires 25% less food"

So the recap is;

Buddhism- grants trippled unit affect and units with enhancing bonuses. Peace and trade are of the favorable priority. Units gain "bonus" enhancers.

Christianity- grants much faster rates of civil advancement, with greater rates of culutre and contenment, as well the most influencial religion. Yet controversy may be n x-factor that could avalacnhe the balances by some percentage.

Confucism- practically grants diplomatic and civil advancements on the spot, yet not completely ofcourse. Contenment is primarily broadened as a major affect aside from improvements, and education/science has added derivative increases from culture.

Hinduism- Is the numeral uno most-resistent religion to conversion, yet that does not in any way make it immortal or the best choice. This religion does produce the strongest plain value influence ratings in the culture spanse, and missionaries of this religion are among the more successful.

Islam- grants the highest plain value output of all religious improvements. Influencial and radical acts may be made as cost dictates. Islams' conversion-resistence strength is mathed to christianity, and is the second strongest influence spreading religion.

Judaism- grants increased output from government improvements, and increases the rate of Great units, General for warlords, and something befitting for cIV regular.

Taioism- Offensive and defensive advances are practically granted. War is much cheaper and contentment due to war is lessoned. Units gain increased statistical benefits. Culture increases the affects of martial law and general contentment.

Those are some suggestions that would spice up the religious part of civ

There is a lot of thread about how religions aspect in civ4 is implementated.
A lot of people are angry about the unbalancements existing in this system, so do you think that balancing the religion aspect is a feature which will really improve your gaming experience or it's just a secondary question?

Balance it or remove it I'd say
And looking at the growing number of threads on the subject their are quite a few people that like to see it happen as well. I've a similar thread on the subject.

 

[Englor]

this just leads to religion x is better than religion y.

that's the reason why all religions are the same
a crusade against a certain religion to "ban" it from your cities and from the enemy would be nice, an inquisition if you will.
you will lose some population in the process, but you can then spread that shiny new religion of yours and deny your opponent the advantage of having his religion in your cities

if slavery is an option, so should be the inquisition and "witch hunts"

it would make those WW2 scenarios that much more realistic

Ok I can see why you've named yourself enigma as your presentation ID, let me also mention that right now I'm still drunk.

First off, no, simple crusade and dominance holds no affect to the rest of the world, except for all those being faught in the name of religion, and if you were scrupuluos read thoroughly through my idea post, you'd see that religions differ in what they'd have to offer. Im' sorry I didn't go further into depth, I did require a respit, as you may not be aware of, sorting this all out took a fair amount of dedicated time and work. No one religion is necessarily better than the other except in the fashion of what the religion ties to, and if you read so scrupulously, it also mentions the all other gameplay interventions, hold a baring on the further affect and outcome alongside the chosen religion. My model simply sets a stage and actual competivtive and fairly open setting, in which allows reliogn its' priciple protperties and ownership, this time, without unbalancing, the fairness of any game.
As I've stated before, all aspects added are aspects to be maintaned, in that maintenence and managment are required, otherwise explaning the process of civ gameplay ingeneral.
And conquered religions may still be converted because they were simply founded and had alifespan, whereas, in games where, religions are so quickly and swiftly crushed, ammusingly and realistically they are expelled from the rest of the game, also tying into the variations of experience, from game to game. Sorry you misinterpreted my idea.

:EDIT:
Criticism helps when you take on more than just your own sense of basterdization of communication or "perception" as you might refer to it, and point of view in the process. I'm sorry if you find that offensive, though I'm not convinced you actually read my post thoroughly.

 

[Gigi Duru]

Indeed the whole world can become hindu/budhist but again, it's just a game. Perhaps, to avoid the lack of realism some complain of, a set of fancy imaginary religions would fit better (there are no "specific religion traits" anyway to make existing game religions look like their real-world counterparts).

By the other hand, there could be an improvement to have some religious "struggle" in multi-religion cities instead of equal repartition. For instance, new missionary could be used to change religion balance, a very unpopular religion could be wiped out of the city, and religion bonuses could depend on the actual number of believers in the city.

This could lead to new gameplay strategies as religious expansion / conversion would become more predictable thus more plannable (does this word really exist ?) True enough, there should exist more means to defend against these strategies to keep the balance...

And finally, wht not a religious victory condition ?

 

[Englor]

Indeed the whole world can become hindu/budhist but again, it's just a game. Perhaps, to avoid the lack of realism some complain of, a set of fancy imaginary religions would fit better (there are no "specific religion traits" anyway to make existing game religions look like their real-world counterparts).

Listen you noob whose been here a month more than I have(scince this name anyways, I keep losing passwords.) with half the posts I have after three days of being here again. If you want to get technical, we'll call the qualities, "buy products" of real religions. You know basisies, such as the difference between monotheism and polytheism which weighs in a factor of foreigne tolerance, actual embrace strength and similar a bonus type that does keep some, similarity. And oh, then there is the practice methods which bare more towards what part the cultural aspects play with the religion. Not just enhanced culture, yet what influence keys in towardsm, that can be matched, with different aspects and focuses, of the game, scince it is the game, in which the religion aspect is being placed.
Kind of like me suggesting idea engineering around the aspect in debate, and only the aspect until room is made for debate from the spread of this aspect, to be debated afterwards. Scince sequence is far more affective critically that whole-form scutiny. The whole-form is better suited for perspective to see how things lye, after the tourny of implementation.

By the other hand, there could be an improvement to have some religious "struggle" in multi-religion cities instead of equal repartition. For instance, new missionary could be used to change religion balance, a very unpopular religion could be wiped out of the city, and religion bonuses could depend on the actual number of believers in the city.

Well, I see you attempting to be fairly argumentatvie to both sides, allow me to further aid in this debate.
This is why I've drawn out the idea as I have. The subtel differences in religion, keeping in mind, that religion is an aspect mainly basing on growth control, and mostly, contentment, people, who are of the same ilk nationally, yet different reliligiously, may cause any number of civil problems. THis can be avoided, simply, and not only because of being the founder, yet having strong alter cultural influences, civics settings, immense contentement anyways, or severe oppression, from the governement. That keeps it pretty civ, IMHO.

This could lead to new gameplay strategies as religious expansion / conversion would become more predictable thus more plannable (does this word really exist ?) True enough, there should exist more means to defend against these strategies to keep the balance...
And finally, wht not a religious victory condition ?

For the speech, try words like premediation, anticipation, and expectation to describe you future insights.
For your continued pondry,
Yes, this was in the net-affect I had in mind. Being able to draw out, logical conclusions, based on set religious gains/to loss, paterns and maintenece demands pertaining to embrace, and longevity. As my main goal, was to address the problems I've seen wodan, draw out so cleanly for us to review. This is my respect to his efforts, and to the game, as I am, despite my states of living, at any time, a loyal gammer.
As for the last part, no, I am not pro religious-victory headlining. As I've stated before, religioun is simply a cutural aspect, and thus cutural-victory, is still the class of this aspect. However, religion, should tie into scoring, upon a weak scheme I can think of right now as follow.

culture - unchanged I guess because I am not to familiarized
religious intensity -simply existent---overwhelming influence

peaceful - years of---total(may hold a perfect game)
hostile - years of---total(may hold a perfectly <snip> up game)

cause accuracy -truely loyal bounds of worship(meaning kept quite directly to the emphasis of religion, all special details come into play at fixed plain value, with changeable scoring to circumstance odds.

cause meyham -completely abused and <snip> the religious emphasis.
That's what I've conjured up thus far and scince.

Moderator Action: Warned - flaming. Also, do not make multiple accounts. If you've forgotten your password, use the "Forgot Password?" link when you log in, or email Thunderfall. Your account will be banned until TF can merge the accounts.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

[Tavenier]

Why not make it more historically as followed:

When you conquer a city which hasn't got your state religion it must show a pop-up where you can decide to do nothing, and the uprising will die out in a few turns. Or you can check the option to spread your state religion there. The uprising will last a few more turns, but it will get your SR automatically. Just like the Arabs spread their religion in real history, for example.

 

[lateralis]

I like a lot of what's been said, here's my take:

We know there is a game mechanic to "cheapen" the research needed for techs if you have more of the pre-reqs. how about the opposite? If you've already founded a religion, all religion techs are twice as expensive as usual UNLESS that religion has already been founded elsewhere. this would make the "religion rush" a little more manageable early and would make for later religions a little more balanced towards someone who hasn't founded one yet. plus, it seems somewhat intuitive that if you've already founded a religion it would be harder to found another one. maybe add a mechanic so that if you found AND adopt it as state religion researching another is 100% more expensive whereas if you found but DON'T adopt as state it is only 50% more expensive? might add some spice.

I'd also not be opposed to some sort of religious victory or even an economic domination victory, but that's another thread

 

[Wodan]

I like a lot of what's been said, here's my take:

We know there is a game mechanic to "cheapen" the research needed for techs if you have more of the pre-reqs. how about the opposite? If you've already founded a religion, all religion techs are twice as expensive as usual UNLESS that religion has already been founded elsewhere. this would make the "religion rush" a little more manageable early and would make for later religions a little more balanced towards someone who hasn't founded one yet. plus, it seems somewhat intuitive that if you've already founded a religion it would be harder to found another one. maybe add a mechanic so that if you found AND adopt it as state religion researching another is 100% more expensive whereas if you found but DON'T adopt as state it is only 50% more expensive? might add some spice.

I'd also not be opposed to some sort of religious victory or even an economic domination victory, but that's another thread

I like all these ideas. Very creative and good additions to the game.

One thing I'm not so much in agreement with are the suggestions (previously in this thread) that amount to basically "give each named religion a special power".

That's great, the gameplay might be fun, and the historical basis might even be justified for each special power as corresponds to that actual religion's history. Problem is it will (1) anger more people than it pleased, and (2) doesn't address all the concerns in the first place.

My suggestions, and Lateralis' (plus a couple others) seem to me to be better because they retain the current design paradigm that named religions don't get specific gameplay.

Wodan

 

[playshogi]

For what it's worth, in this warlords game, the Carthage AI made Islam the largest religion in the game.