Does converting you own cities to your religion makes sense in Civ 7?

[bumpyglint]

Just wondering this (obviously talking of exploration age).

All the religion bonus comes from converting the cities of you enemies (or city states), so having your cities converted seemes useless.

Is there any reason to convert your own cities, other than "removing" bonus to other people? If I'm not missing something, it feels useless to do it.

Also, is there anymore the passive religious spread or it's just missionaries now?

Thanks!

 

[Oberst Kraft]

Just wondering this (obviously talking of exploration age).

All the religion bonus comes from converting the cities of you enemies (or city states), so having your cities converted seemes useless.

Is there any reason to convert your own cities, other than "removing" bonus to other people? If I'm not missing something, it feels useless to do it.

Definitely useful if you're playing in the Cultural Dark Age.

 

[bumpyglint]

Definitely useful if you're playing in the Cultural Dark Age.

View attachment 717535

I think that If you change the choice in the related narrative event is the opposite, like that you have a bonus in cities without your religion (but your missionaries are way weaker). So it's still definitely neutral, I hope there are more reason to not ignore being fully converted

 

[Zaarin]

I think that If you change the choice in the related narrative event is the opposite, like that you have a bonus in cities without your religion (but your missionaries are way weaker). So it's still definitely neutral, I hope there are more reason to not ignore being fully converted

You're thinking of the religious crisis, not the cultural dark age. (But you are correct about that.)

I agree that I'm annoyed that the benefits of converting your own cities are minimal and situational.

 

[AriochIV]

Requiring that the player convert foreign cities to get much benefit out of religion might be justifiable from a gameplay perspective (otherwise it's just a free bonus that everyone gets)... were it not for the fact that the religion spreading mechanic is the most tedious thing added to Civilization in the last 20 years.

 

[Lorizael]

The end of the theology "tree" has some policies that benefit your converted settlements.

 

[Metecury]

Isn't it good for the military legacy? I thought having settlements with your religion in distant lands helped.

Also, it helps deny points to your enemies I guess.

 

[Leyrann]

Requiring that the player convert foreign cities to get much benefit out of religion might be justifiable from a gameplay perspective (otherwise it's just a free bonus that everyone gets)... were it not for the fact that the religion spreading mechanic is the most tedious thing added to Civilization in the last 20 years.

Global happiness would like a word.

...although I guess you could argue it was more actively hostile than merely tedious.

 

[Lord Yanaek]

The end of the theology "tree" has some policies that benefit your converted settlements.

Ah, that's good to know that there is at least a way to make it beneficial, although i think it should have a small bonus on it's own. Given how religion was intertwined with state during that period and often used to justify why one person would be the king/chief/tlatoani/.. leading the state, keeping your own citizens following your religion was even more important than spreading your religion far and wide. Also considering that one of the most important aspects of religion is relics, you get them as soon as you convert some specific targets for the first time, and keep them even if religion flips, it wouldn't hinder any gameplay if players/AIs tried to revert their converted cities back to their religion.

Isn't it good for the military legacy? I thought having settlements with your religion in distant lands helped.

Also, it helps deny points to your enemies I guess.

It does help for military, but only on distant lands. Keeping the core of your empire following your religion is, currently, a waste of precious missionary charges (unless those policies Lorizael mentioned are strong enough)
As for denying points, it does nothing. As i said above you get your relics once you convert a city for the first time and you keep them even if it flips to another religion. The only way to deny those points is to prevent them from spreading at all which now that we no longer have "wizard battles" can only be done through regular warfare i guess.

were it not for the fact that the religion spreading mechanic is the most tedious thing added to Civilization in the last 20 years.

Thinking about re-selecting trade routes destination regularly, repeating couter-spying operations, trying to move great works for theming in a screen where you can't filter them and that's not large enough to fit all your great work buildings ...
I have to respectfully disagree on that statement

 

[bumpyglint]

As said in this thread, the military bonus for converting your cities is only in distant lands, so it's definitely no sense that the game incentives you to ignore the enemy religion spreading in your core cities. I hope there's at least one simple modifier that incentives you to keep your religion in your core cities (the easiest thing I could think is a happiness bonus/ malus if you have your religion/ enemy religion in your cities). Having some policies unlocked in the final part of the age is definitely not enough in my opinion (many people will simply not use them, and the fact that they are in the final part also doesn't help)

 

[untitledjuan]

Historically speaking, your newly founded cities should have your main religion as default, or at least the predominant religion of the city in which the settler was built. After all, one assumes a new city is founded by people emmigrating from an existing place with and existing culture, religion, language, etc.

 

[bumpyglint]

Historically speaking, your newly founded cities should have your main religion as default, or at least the predominant religion of the city in which the settler was built. After all, one assumes a new city is founded by people emmigrating from an existing place with and existing culture, religion, language, etc.

You're definitely right, but I can accept this simplification in order to improve the gameplay (also we can think that the new cities have a majority of population of indigenous people with a different pantheon, that must still be converted).

The point is that letting people almost completely ignore the conversion in their core land instead is a bit too much, and that's definitely "a strange choice" also on the gameplay prospective (it creates strange dynamic between the players, dynamics that the AI probably could not even understand also)

 

[Lord Yanaek]

Having some policies unlocked in the final part of the age is definitely not enough in my opinion (many people will simply not use them, and the fact that they are in the final part also doesn't help)

The Theology tree is very short so those policies can probably be accessed quickly if you choose to progress that tree instead of your Civ tree or the generic tree. If the benefits are strong enough this could be an interesting strategic choice, but i have yet to see what sort of bonus they give.
However i think the religion itself should have bonuses for being in your cities. Maybe having a founder belief giving bonuses from presence in your own cities, while some "proselytizer" belief gives you bonuses from presence in other players cities could be a good approach. Relics will already encourage people to spread anyway so no need to have all the benefits coming from presence in other civilization cities. Choosing between keeping your religion in your own cities or spreading would be more interesting than the current situation.

 

[Krikkit1]

As said in this thread, the military bonus for converting your cities is only in distant lands, so it's definitely no sense that the game incentives you to ignore the enemy religion spreading in your core cities. I hope there's at least one simple modifier that incentives you to keep your religion in your core cities (the easiest thing I could think is a happiness bonus/ malus if you have your religion/ enemy religion in your cities). Having some policies unlocked in the final part of the age is definitely not enough in my opinion (many people will simply not use them, and the fact that they are in the final part also doesn't help)

They are unlocked on the second civic of the theology tree

 

[AriochIV]

Thinking about re-selecting trade routes destination regularly, repeating couter-spying operations, trying to move great works for theming in a screen where you can't filter them and that's not large enough to fit all your great work buildings ...
I have to respectfully disagree on that statement

Having to refresh trade routes and spy missions was indeed tedious, but each required one or two clicks. Spreading religion is an entire minigame that requires accumulating a Faith resource, buildings units, moving units to a destination, protecting them from enemy units and fighting enemy religious units, and spamming abilities to move a meter on a city, then repeating and doing it again... endlessly for the entire game. It's not even close as to which is more tedious.

The timeout preventing movement of great works was pointless and irritating, but there was nothing "tedious" about it.

 

[Cyon]

Did anyone catch if there is any passive spread like in civ 6 or if religion in civ 7 is only spread via missionaries?

 

[TheMarshmallowBear]

Did anyone catch if there is any passive spread like in civ 6 or if religion in civ 7 is only spread via missionaries?

I don't think there actually is, I think you need to spread it manually, but don't quote me on that.

 

[Lorizael]

Would prefer passive spread and/or some kind of diplomatic endeavor. (I know there's an espionage action to convert a city, but there should be a friendly version.)

 

[Krikkit1]

Would prefer passive spread and/or some kind of diplomatic endeavor. (I know there's an espionage action to convert a city, but there should be a friendly version.)

A diplomatic endeavor makes some sense.
Accept: I get one free charge on one of your settlements.. you get or culture
Support: we each get one free charge on two of the other's settlements.. and +1 happy on any city that has the others religion