This is sort of the opposite of what I wanted for religion tbh - I wanted it to feel less like normal combat, not more like it, and more like something that felt unique and it functioned in it's own way. Also, this might mean the first expansion will not do a lot for religion, if they are tackling it here. Though now I'm complaining about things I haven't seen in action yet, so we'll see how they actually play.
Presumably no production queue as that was not called out specifically.
Warrior Monk doesn't necessarily have to be tied to a belief. There are enough examples of militant religious orders throughout history around the globe that it could be a new generic unit to purchase with faith and it would still be thematically appropriate regardless of your religion. If anything the Guru sounds more like it will be a belief-locked unit since that's a concept tied more closely to certain eastern religion.
Warrior Monk doesn't necessarily have to be tied to a belief. There are enough examples of militant religious orders throughout history around the globe that it could be a new generic unit to purchase with faith and it would still be thematically appropriate regardless of your religion. If anything the Guru sounds more like it will be a belief-locked unit since that's a concept tied more closely to certain eastern religion.
Religion gets fleshed out with new beliefs and religious units. Two new Pantheons will be get introduced into the game, along with new Founder, Follower, Enhancer, and Worship Beliefs. These beliefs unlock the ability to build two new buildings as well as a new combat unit, the Warrior Monk.
One thing nobody mentioned was that with more beliefs, you can play with more civs without getting that repeating 'x has taken the belief' message - although Ged did make a workaround for it.
One thing nobody mentioned was that with more beliefs, you can play with more civs without getting that repeating 'x has taken the belief' message - although Ged did make a workaround for it.
He must have been joking, albeit poorly - the comment about post-1800s nations in the Americas being more relevant is a dead giveaway. Or maybe not; you can never be sure if anyone on the Internet is trolling or actually believes what he's saying. Still, judging by that user's posting history, trolling/flamebaiting seems likely.
Seems odd to be whining about Isabella's absence anyway when Spain is already in the game. Not like back then when Spain wasn't in Civ V at release and people were whining about that too - understandable, although still not a good look on them.
Gajah Mada was Tribhuwana/Gitarja's prime minister, so I just realized this would be like having Victoria as the leader for England and then William Gladstone as an alternate leader.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
