Civ 7 Speculation: Fundamental changes.

[Evie]

Religion and culture are just too tightly interwoven to be separate, IMO. Religion is one of the traditional main ways for a culture to manifest itself and what it is, along with the arts (which are often, themselves, religious) and arguably philosophy.

 

[Zegangani]

Yep, and Ideologies should also play a role in Culture, maybe the Governments and Policies you could have should also be dependant on the Ideologies of your Citizens.

 

[Ryansinbela]

Boris Gudenuf had actually suggested similar things to me (So that the Civs aren’t just Static states allowing you to do whatever you want. Like a Democracy or Republic requires some bargaining to do things)

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

To repeat what I posted to @Ryansinbela in a private post:

"Right now, the Social Policies/Governments are just a thin veneer over a game in which every playable faction is Identical in structure: a completely autocratic, monolithic Empire. I'd like to see a lot more variation in that, so that having a Democratic or Republican government means you have some serious bargaining to do within your own Civ to get what you want, and even a Monarchy or 'totalitarian' government isn't absolute in everything. I think such variation would make for a much, much more interesting game, and give room in the game for a variety of Other Non-Player and Player-Influenced rather than Player-Controlled elements: not only individual City States, but individual Barbarian tribes, Barbarian Tribal Groups (can you spell Horde?) City State Federations and Confederations, decentralized Merchant Republics, Leagues, Constitutional Monarchies, etc."

I'd add that "Player-Influenced rather than Player-Controlled" should also be the guiding basis for Religion in the game. While 'governments' or rulers occasionally made a choice as to what religion to follow, far more often it was something that 'sneaked up' on the government (read: The Player) and they had to react to it. And how you reacted and what religion you were reacting to vis-a-vis other States and their religious choices had Major effects on diplomacy throughout history. I think that Religions as Non-Player Factions which the player can only even slightly control if he heads a Theocracy based on that religion would be a much better model - and that same model could be applied to International Commercial Organizations all the way back to the Hanseatic League.

Adding Religions, Corporations, and other NGOs as 'Minor" Factions/Non-Player Factions to the game would, IMHO, add a whole new layer of interaction to the player-experience, and also clean up a lot of the constant required player actions to micro-manage 'his' Religion. And finally, we could get rid of the Religious Victory and replace it with an Economic Victory condition based on managing your own economy and managing/influencing the International Economy represented by the commercial NGOs. Since it looks like some kind of Economic Emphasis is on the horizon for Civ VI, it will be interesting to see if they are moving in this direction already . . .

 

[Ryansinbela]

When I heard Corporations, I suddenly thought of a lobbying mechanic (The 8th deadly sin)

 

[Jeppetto]

(How should Faith Buy you Units and Buildings? Pray for it and you shall have it?)

No, people simply non-magically build the building as they are conviced it is the correct thing to do due to their religious beliefs, as opposed to doing it because they are paid to do it with Gold.

TBH I wouldn't mind seeing government work like Civ6 religion, while religion should be something that appears spontaneously and something that the player can react to (adopt, ignore, suppress) rather than control. Paradox mechanics are rarely a good fit for Civ, but I actually think CK3's religion system would work great for Civ7.

Doesn't it affect government, too, though? If I am not mistaken the Tenets work simlarily and you have the whole Affinity System where you can lean towards Globalism or Nationalism, Elitism or Equality, Spirituality or Enlightment etc. It seems to me that in Humankind the Religion was slapped on and is sort of building off the Government System they had.

Religion and culture are just too tightly interwoven to be separate, IMO. Religion is one of the traditional main ways for a culture to manifest itself and what it is, along with the arts (which are often, themselves, religious) and arguably philosophy.

Science is also part of civilization's Culture, yet it's separate yield. IMHO we don't need Culture to be even more overloaded with 1 million different things it does, quite the opposite, I'd make Influence its own yield. Otherwise we might go back to one tree that just represents Progress.

 

[Zaarin]

Doesn't it affect government, too, though? If I am not mistaken the Tenets work simlarily and you have the whole Affinity System where you can lean towards Globalism or Nationalism, Elitism or Equality, Spirituality or Enlightment etc. It seems to me that in Humankind the Religion was slapped on and is sort of building off the Government System they had.

I said Crusader Kings 3, not Humankind. Yes, religion has some effects on government in CK3, and it has major effects on diplomacy (nobody wants to negotiate with a heretic--and things get dicey with infidels, too). It also has "religious families" so Catholics will cock their eyebrows at Orthodox or Nestorians but won't treat them like Cathars or Muslims, which I think is a great dynamic. They had to do some historical gymnastics in some places (their portrayal of "Insular Christianity," for instance, which doesn't have a lot of historical grounding in the first place, is just silly, and they straight up invented a good half dozen Zoroastrian sects--which seems avoidable by just, you know, researching Zoroastrianism, which had sects ), but overall it works well.

Science is also part of civilization's Culture, yet it's separate yield. IMHO we don't need Culture to be even more overloaded with 1 million different things it does, quite the opposite, I'd make Influence its own yield. Otherwise we might go back to one tree that just represents Progress.

No, you make separate systems representing Ethnicity, Culture, Religion, Science, etc. and make them interact with each other. I know I keep saying it, but really that's Civ6's biggest problem: systems don't interact with each other. What happens when you culturally overwhelm another civ? Nothing. They're culturally overwhelmed. Congratulations, keep filling those buckets.

 

[Evie]

I mean, the attempt to split off the humanities from science has worked out pretty poorly in practice,, and resut in inanities like libraries, seowons and universities (historically places devoted to studying theology, philosophy, law, etc) having zero impact in the study of those things, while theaters (?!?!) somehow fuel the development of political thought. That's utter nonsense that results directly from hodgepodging two very different ideas of what culture is (political science, philosophy, law and the ilk versus art, religion, cultural manifestations, etc), and I feel zero reason to keep it that way.

Going back to a solo tech tree that's researched with science (or, better, call it research), with culture possibly being able to "rush-build" research (or possibly just research related to humanities) doesn't sound so bad to me.

 

[Zaarin]

while theaters (?!?!) somehow fuel the development of political thought.

I don't really have a problem with this per se. The arts can have a big political impact, and that's not new: e.g., the Enûma Eliš is a masterful piece of political propaganda pressing the primacy of Babylon (via Marduk). However, I do agree with the rest of your post.

 

[Evie]

I mean, I can see that (and broadcast centers too, propaganda and whatnot), but it feels like something that should be a subsidiary contribution, compared to actual humanities research. You know?

The way it is right now stinks of STEM-is-the-only-worthwhile-academic-work.

 

[Zaarin]

I mean, I can see that (and broadcast centers too, propaganda and whatnot), but it feels like something that should be a subsidiary contribution, compared to actual humanities research. You know?

The way it is right now stinks of STEM-is-the-only-worthwhile-academic-work.

Yeah, I definitely agree. One of the weirdest quirks, to me, is Libraries can't hold books. It almost feels like a joke missing its punch line...

 

[Zegangani]

No, people simply non-magically build the building as they are conviced it is the correct thing to do due to their religious beliefs, as opposed to doing it because they are paid to do it with Gold.

If it's stricted to religious Buildings, sure. A lot of people donate Money/Gold their worship/religion Buildings, and contribute in building the buildings voluntarily (with their own hands sometimes). But I can't imagine why people should do that for other things, such as a ComercialHub Building. (perhaps it would make a little bit sense if they donate (being able to buy things with faith) under certain Situations, such as being attacked by an enemy with a different Religion)

This conversation has made me think of what would be the ideal Tech/Civic Tree that would be both, realistic AND Gameplay balanced, and I think the optimal choice would be to keep the 2 Trees and not to rely on one Tree to uphold all the progress of a Civ. It would be neat to have the 2 Trees (Tech and Civic) interconnected with each other, as well as with some other Mechanics available in the Game, such as Loyalty, Ideology...etc.

What I thought of, is , for example, that a Tech in the Techtree can be boosted by an unlucked Civic and vice verse, aswell as by having met some criteria proposed from your Citizens (or some criteria they have to met themselves) based on their Ideologies and Loyalty.
The Boost can be triggere for the same Tech from mulitiple sources, and the amount depends on the Situation (if in war or having unhappy citizens the boost ratio will be smaller).
Same thing for the CivicsTree, except that it should have a bigger impact on the TechTree than the oposite. In return, Ideologies and Loyalty should have a bigger impact on the CivicsTree than on the TechTree.
And the Boost ratio should never be more than 70% (if boosted from all sources).
In contrast to the Techtree, the CivicsTree shouldn't be researched completely, you will have to choose between which way to go with, so upon choosing a root, you can't Go back and research the other ones. But the Civics on the other roots can be unlucked by certain Criterias/Situations, so you can still have the chance to unluck, for example, other Goverments, Policy Cards...etc.

 

[Jeppetto]

I said Crusader Kings 3, not Humankind.

My reading comprehension decided to blink to another dimension for a sec I guess. I saw the word Paradox, then my brain mistook them with the creators of Humankind and it went downhill from there. And it just happens that Humankind does have that scenario reaction system so it made sense to my brain.

If it's stricted to religious Buildings, sure. A lot of people donate Money/Gold their worship/religion Buildings, and contribute in building the buildings voluntarily (with their own hands sometimes). But I can't imagine why people should do that for other things, such as a ComercialHub Building. (perhaps it would make a little bit sense if they donate (being able to buy things with faith) under certain Situations, such as being attacked by an enemy with a different Religion)

That depends on what the religion is. If I found The Religion of Saint Murderitto, then it makes sense I'd have bunch of fanatics among my Citizens ready to join the army for the glory of Saint Murderitto.

Religious people don't always do things that only serve to push their religious strength, I don't see how it sounds strange that you'd convince bunch of religious people that they should build Library to help spread knowledge. Besides, being able to purchase Campus and TS buildings with Faith is specifically locked behind Belief called "Jesuit Education".

 

[Ryansinbela]

Lakely's tech tree is divided based on the purpose (Administration, Agriculture, Aesthetics, Society, Commerce, Engineering, Doctrine, Science)

 

[Evie]

If it's stricted to religious Buildings, sure. A lot of people donate Money/Gold their worship/religion Buildings, and contribute in building the buildings voluntarily (with their own hands sometimes). But I can't imagine why people should do that for other things, such as a ComercialHub Building. (perhaps it would make a little bit sense if they donate (being able to buy things with faith) under certain Situations, such as being attacked by an enemy with a different Religion)

They're building the Commercial Hub in honor of Mercury (or Hermes), God of Commerce? Or of Saint Nicholas, Patron Saint of merchants?

Likewise Athena/Minerva for Campus, Ares/Mars for Encampment, Hephaestus/Vulcan for Industrial, Dionysus/Bacchus for Entertainment...

Religious fervor has been channeled for civic (or military) purposes for aeons.

 

[Zegangani]

That depends on what the religion is. If I found The Religion of Saint Murderitto, then it makes sense I'd have bunch of fanatics among my Citizens ready to join the army for the glory of Saint Murderitto.

Religious people don't always do things that only serve to push their religious strength, I don't see how it sounds strange that you'd convince bunch of religious people that they should build Library to help spread knowledge. Besides, being able to purchase Campus and TS buildings with Faith is specifically locked behind Belief called "Jesuit Education".

Yes, that's dependant. But Yeah, a lot of religious people/institutions did (and still do) encourage Institutions/Great People just for the reason that the the Institutions/Great People of Countries with other relegiouns won't be more successful. Propaganda is very influential.

They're building the Commercial Hub in honor of Mercury (or Hermes), God of Commerce? Or of Saint Nicholas, Patron Saint of merchants?

Likewise Athena/Minerva for Campus, Ares/Mars for Encampment, Hephaestus/Vulcan for Industrial, Dionysus/Bacchus for Entertainment...

Religious fervor has been channeled for civic (or military) purposes for a

Ok! Then what you can buy with faith should be dependant on the Belief/Religion of a Civ too.

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

They're building the Commercial Hub in honor of Mercury (or Hermes), God of Commerce? Or of Saint Nicholas, Patron Saint of merchants?

Likewise Athena/Minerva for Campus, Ares/Mars for Encampment, Hephaestus/Vulcan for Industrial, Dionysus/Bacchus for Entertainment...

Religious fervor has been channeled for civic (or military) purposes for aeons.

They are building artillery units in honor of Saint Barbara, the patron saint of artillery . . .

Almost by definition, very little done in the name of religion has to be Rational or subject to rational analysis.

 

[Evie]

Ok! Then what you can buy with faith should be dependant on the Belief/Religion of a Civ too.

Hardly. Greeks, Romans, Catholics all have gods and/or patron saints covering most if not all spheres of human activities, and even when they don't there are plentiful other ways of channeling people's religious fervor into producing things.

The idea that you would have to manually pick out every single god in your pantheon when creating it is downright daft - it's safe to assume that in some way (one god who is interested in all things, many gods, a god with angels or patrons) your religion has *something* that relates to anything you can build.

 

[dagriggstar]

I would say the bonuses from city states are fun, but is anyone excited by generating and using envoys ?

You know what would be a real fundamental change - if you can devise a system where science doesn't advance 'time' or 'progress' or whatever you want to call it.

 

[Maximus_Prince]

You need a few pentagons with your hexes, but how would that be an issue ?

I mean, the mix works for Rimworld, why not for civ ?

Is Rimworld even a 4x strategy game? I'm not familiar with it. I did look up what you were talking about and what they did by adding some pentagons but that's the only mathematical possible way to make a sphere with hexagons as I said earlier.

I'm not in favor of a spherical map because of this if hex tiles are still going to be used. I think it's bad aesthetically and functionally. You would be decreasing movement from 6 to 5. Movement should be uniform. I heard people propose making pentagon tiles impassible but I still disagree.

I honestly think I have heard it all when it comes to proposals for a spherical map and every solution with hexagon tiles. Even radical ideas like making only land tile based.

One other solution could be to instead of making a sphere give the illusion of a sphere, similar to a map projection. Instead of a flat cylindrical map where the top and bottom essentially are walls, tiles on the top and bottom correspond with each other.

Robinson Map Projection