Design: Religions

When we do it in python we will have to expose the religions alignment, too. Do we want this (do we need the religions alignment for other things as well?) or do we simply include the alignment change in the SDK (might be simpler and more secure if we don't need the religions alignment otherwise in python).

Note ive added a second edit above too while you were writing.

 

Perfect! Thats a much better way to handle it.

 

At this point I don't see any reason to have the religions alignment in python.

 

So the code is working, the Alignment changes and not allowing to spread a religion, as well as the different weights for religions based on Leaderhead Weights and Alignment are all in. Furthermore relgious heroes in service are considered before changing the statereligion right now about as valueable as 20-30 population for tier 3 heroes.

I made it so that you could define different pairs of good evil religions. So all good religion with alignment 2 will prohibit bad rligins with alignment -2. Good religions with alignment 3 will not influcence evil religions with alignment -2 but those with alignment -3. For the Alignment change all religions (with +-2 or higher are equal through.)

One more thing. Do you want to change the spread possibility based on the existent religions? So that Veil will improve the chance to spread overlords (Alignment difference 1) and reduce the chance for kilmorph (strong) (Alignment difference 3) and fellowship (a bit difference 2). Same thing for states religion? As we have the iAlignment parameter for religions we might as well use it

Unfortunately i have no time left to post the code so you'll have to wait until tomorrow (or here its already until later today )

 

Woot!

No, spreading overlords should be as likely as runes in an order city or civ.

 

All the better that means no additional coding work

 

Put the Cult of the Dragon in tonight. I gave it the following abilities:

1. Players cannot select it as a state religion.
2. Non-disciple living units built in a city with the cult in it have a 20% chance of gettign the "Cult of the Dragon"promotion.
3. The Cult of the Dragon reduces a cities culture by 1 per turn (this does not effect the Kuriotates or Sheaim). This could destroy small cities.
4. A unit with the Cult of the Dragon promotion who is in a tile owned by Cult holy city has a 5% (maybe 2%) per turn chance of converting and joining the cult hopy city civ.

Also when dragons come in units with the Cult of the Dragon will automatically convert to them if they are near.

Sound good?

 

Yes, that sounds fine. What about the chance for all cities with Cult of the Dragon in them to convert to either Kuriotates or Sheaim when a dragon is born?

We also need the unique cultist units for Kuriotates and Sheaim. Some ideas:

Kuriotates unit = Disciple of the Dragon
National unit(3 allowed). Upgrade from Prophet.
Strength 9
Has access to Fire Divine and Creation Divine magic.
+50% strength when the Gold Dragon is nearby.
Can ride the dragon?
Can call the dragon to their location?

Sheaim unit = Speaker of the Dragon
National unit(3 allowed). Upgrade from Prophet.
Strength 5
Has access to Fire Divine, Entropy Divine and Dimensional Sorcery magic.
Extra Spell Extension and Combat promotions when the Black Dragon is nearby
Acess to special spells while standing in the same tile as the dragon?
Can ride the dragon?
Can call the dragon to their location?

 

Why would a dragon let a silly mortal ride them? Maybe instead they get a strength bonus when near the dragon.

 

I opted for the unit conversion instead of the city conversion. It seemed like a less frustrating mechanic, and was less swingy than city flips. I also liked players looking suspiosuly at their cult of the dragon archmages and it seemed to match, they arent "bad" units, but a little untrustworthy. Perfect for cult membership.

 

But then why would the Player ever build the cultists?

 

He won't. Any living non-disciple unit produced in a city that have the cult has a 20% chance of automatically gaining the "Cult of the Dragon" promotion.

 

Wow and i was just about to suggest something like this...

 

Would it be possible to have a good/neutral religion in the mod that isn't totalitarian or race related, say worshipping Tali, Danalin or Oghma?

 

No firm plans for that, the one we have been considering is a religion for Lugus, the god of the Sun. That may come in "Shadow" (with an opposing religion for Esus). But thats pretty far down the line, there won't be any new religions in "Light".

 

What would you think of religions working as culture - with percentages - instead of just a boolean present/not-present?

 

It sounds like it adds complexity without making the game more fun. What is the "drool factor" for the new mechanic?

 

Hmm, come to think of it, yeah for FfH this indeed wouldn't add anything. I was just thinking this would be better in general to avoid the silly fact in standard Civ4 that the more religions the better. However in FfH it already is bad to have multiple religions of course.

 

Okay, my logic is that since I normally play as Ke-nan in Ffh 1 and will probably play Lanun or Hippus in 2, that none of the religions seem like a good fit for nomads or pirates.

 

I think that the Dragon cult is a little too weak.

A couple of modifications-
a) reduces by 2 culture instead of one. It is nearly impossible to find a city without culture unless it was just founded.
b) If a unit with cult of the dragon is in teh same square or one adjacent to a dragon, it has a 5% chance to flip to that dragon's civilization. This works even if that dragon is not owned by the controller of the dragon holy city. This even works for the Barb dragon.
c) the sheiam and kuriotates can adopt the cult of the dragon as their state religion.
d) 100% of the units built in the dragon holy city are part of the cult. Doesn't really matter except that if the holy city changes hands they might as well.