Have you ever seen any of those things happen, eerr? I haven't, and I'm just interested if anyone has. I know what CotD is supposed to do, I'm just curious if it actually has a detrimental effect on a civ from time to time.
FfH2 0.21 Balance Feedback
- Thread starter Kael
- Start date
Have you ever seen any of those things happen, eerr? I haven't, and I'm just interested if anyone has. I know what CotD is supposed to do, I'm just curious if it actually has a detrimental effect on a civ from time to time.
Nikis-Knight
Deity
well, it shouldn't do anything else, for you. Try capturing a city with CotD (as a non-CotD civ). It will stay useless for some time if you don't prophet it.
Blakmane
Prince
- Joined
- Feb 17, 2007
- Messages
- 447
I thought I read that the auto-raze function is broken and doesn't work. I've certainly never seen it.
It is only useful against new cities, which is made totaly irrelevant due to a combination of
A) the fact that the religion spread is random and can't be directed
B) Prophets or Disciples, which can totally negate the pitiful -1 culture CotD gives
C) Inquisitors. CotD spreads so slowly a single inquisitor can remove it entirely from the game, barring the holy city.
I seem to remember Kael stating that, yes CotD was broken, but that it would be fixed at a later date as it was low priority. Correct me if i'm wrong Kael
MagisterCultuum
Great Sage
I concur. CoTD will eventually need to be seriously beefed up. A higher spread rate would be a good start, but I really think it eventually needs its own units.
I would also like it if settlers that have religious promotions build cities that start with that religion. Why should the settlers be devout followers of their faith and then abandon it as soon as they find a good place to live? Players could then send their CoTD settlers to found the cities closest to a rival's smallest cities, making it more likely to spread there.
I would also like it if settlers that have religious promotions build cities that start with that religion. Why should the settlers be devout followers of their faith and then abandon it as soon as they find a good place to live? Players could then send their CoTD settlers to found the cities closest to a rival's smallest cities, making it more likely to spread there.
vorshlumpf
Emperor
It just occurred to me that it would make more sense if the effects for Tsunami and Earthquake were switched 
There's nothing wrong with earthquakes causing a piece of land to shear off the edge of a continent, and it also makes sense if a tsunami is clearing the land of improvements/buildings.
- Niilo
There's nothing wrong with earthquakes causing a piece of land to shear off the edge of a continent, and it also makes sense if a tsunami is clearing the land of improvements/buildings.
- Niilo
Blakmane
Prince
- Joined
- Feb 17, 2007
- Messages
- 447
awesome idea.
Jean Elcard
The Flavournator
I can't remember exactly which civ mod it was, but somewhere I saw a mechanic implemented like the one you are proposing. Would be a nice thing to have.
onedreamer
Dragon
awful idea. As above stated there was a mod for Vanilla that did that and it was a very bad idea strategically. In fact, it was abandoned by the community. Probably in FFH it would have less negative impact than on Vanilla, but it's still a bad idea.
![[NWO]_Valis](https://civfanatics-data.community.forum/avatars/m/110/110973.jpg?1475248361){kind=avatar}
[NWO]_Valis
A bad kitty!
Why would it be bad?
I cant think of a reason for it being bad except that your settlers could be of a religion that you do not like [a non-state religion] so it would force you to either spread that religion into the world or disband it, a nice feature I would say.
I cant think of a reason for it being bad except that your settlers could be of a religion that you do not like [a non-state religion] so it would force you to either spread that religion into the world or disband it, a nice feature I would say.
MagisterCultuum
Great Sage
If settlers in general spread state and/or random religions from your empire I see how it could become very bad, but if we leave it dependent on the religious promotions as implemented now I don't see a problem. If you really need to found a city but don't want the settler's religion spreading you can make sure to escort it with an inquisitor (well, if you have an inquisitor and are still trying to expand by building city's instead of conquest still). Since FfH religions can be removed in multiple ways I don't think this could cause major problems.
Of course, Cassiel would probably not like this idea, but he really shouldn't have enough religions in his cities for a large percant of his settlers to start with religious promotions anyway. I personally think that the Luonnatar should be able to remove all religions from any cities, not just non-state religions. (also 'inquisition' doesn't seem like the right name for their teaching on the One and on the pettiness of the gods. It wouldn't be too hard to code another spell that is almost identical to inquisition but with fewer restrictions, thus fewer lines of code. Call it something like "Enlighten") Since they could move through rival terrain with open borders deleting religions everywhere, they could combat the increased religious spread from the more devout settlers.
Of course, Cassiel would probably not like this idea, but he really shouldn't have enough religions in his cities for a large percant of his settlers to start with religious promotions anyway. I personally think that the Luonnatar should be able to remove all religions from any cities, not just non-state religions. (also 'inquisition' doesn't seem like the right name for their teaching on the One and on the pettiness of the gods. It wouldn't be too hard to code another spell that is almost identical to inquisition but with fewer restrictions, thus fewer lines of code. Call it something like "Enlighten") Since they could move through rival terrain with open borders deleting religions everywhere, they could combat the increased religious spread from the more devout settlers.
onedreamer
Dragon
in FFH it wouldn't be as bad as in Vanilla because religions aren't as early and as many and because more than one religion can spread naturally (so at least it wouln't help monopoly of early religions as much) but I still don't like the idea, most of all because religion is a strategical concept and not only I fail to see a strategic component in settlers spreading religion, but it also goes against the existing ones. On the "realism" or "roleplaying" component, I think that the religion promotion is more of something that regards the soul of a creature and its destiny in the afterlife than its faith.
MagisterCultuum
Great Sage
If that is the case,then why have different promotions for runes and order or for OO and the Veil? It doesn't effect gamepay, sine they still will serve the Mercurians/Infernals. I guess you could say that these souls are bound for the vaults of whatever gods they served unknowingly, but it makes more sense just to assume that the units themselves are followers of the religion.
It doesn't make sense for you to need to send missionary units to minister to people who grew up being indoctrinated in the faith of their forefathers in order for them to convert to what they were raised as. Cities starting with religions makes as much sens as the cities you found begging with citizen who all identify themselves as being of your race or culture.
Most settlers would still not spread religion.
It doesn't make sense for you to need to send missionary units to minister to people who grew up being indoctrinated in the faith of their forefathers in order for them to convert to what they were raised as. Cities starting with religions makes as much sens as the cities you found begging with citizen who all identify themselves as being of your race or culture.
Most settlers would still not spread religion.
onedreamer
Dragon
Well you have assumptions that I don't agree on.
1a- I grew up in a catholic christian country but I don't follow this faith (or any other close to it, for the matter).
1b- Religion in Civ4 is an institution, not a matter of faith. Let's leave this out please. In any realistic scenario, a new city of a Civ should adopt the state religion first, and after include minor religions (for that civ).
2- It is safer to assume that colonists are looking for a new life when they leave their motherland than to assume they are trying to recreate it somewhere else (unless they are chinese )
1a- I grew up in a catholic christian country but I don't follow this faith (or any other close to it, for the matter).
1b- Religion in Civ4 is an institution, not a matter of faith. Let's leave this out please. In any realistic scenario, a new city of a Civ should adopt the state religion first, and after include minor religions (for that civ).
2- It is safer to assume that colonists are looking for a new life when they leave their motherland than to assume they are trying to recreate it somewhere else (unless they are chinese
)
MagisterCultuum
Great Sage
Why start with a random religion? The starting religion of the city should represent the religion of the city's first inhabitants, its founders, the settlers.
I guess I am ok with there not being a 100% chance of it spreading there, but I don't like the random religion idea.
Some settlers do leave their homeland for religious freedom, but most carry their beliefs with them. These beliefs may or may not conform to the norms of their motherland. I would like to point out, again, that it doesn't really matter what the religion of the state is, what matters is the religion of the settlers.
Since many people don't continue follow the faiths they were raised in, I think that there should be a chance for religions to disappear from a city or unit on their own. I would rather have a higher spread chance and a disappearance chance to counter it.
I would also like it if units with religious promotions had a slight chance of spreading their religion both to other units on their same tile and to the cities in which they are garrisoned. It might also be nice if irreligious units of agnostic leaders had a similar chance to remove religions.
These too make much more sense historically, but I'm not insisting the changes be made.
I guess I am ok with there not being a 100% chance of it spreading there, but I don't like the random religion idea.
Some settlers do leave their homeland for religious freedom, but most carry their beliefs with them. These beliefs may or may not conform to the norms of their motherland. I would like to point out, again, that it doesn't really matter what the religion of the state is, what matters is the religion of the settlers.
Since many people don't continue follow the faiths they were raised in, I think that there should be a chance for religions to disappear from a city or unit on their own. I would rather have a higher spread chance and a disappearance chance to counter it.
I would also like it if units with religious promotions had a slight chance of spreading their religion both to other units on their same tile and to the cities in which they are garrisoned. It might also be nice if irreligious units of agnostic leaders had a similar chance to remove religions.
These too make much more sense historically, but I'm not insisting the changes be made.
I will believe to people that said that this isnt good idea, as this question was brought up before. In ideal conditions, civ4 would have religion influence in city shown in perencetages (like in Medieval Total War 2). Then inquistors would slowly decrease non-state religion influence, priests stationed in city would increase % of people following their religion and building temple would do the same.
...and if you became a settler, you wouldn't have a religious promotion.
In any realistic scenario, a new city should adopt the religion of its founders.
2- It is safer to assume that colonists are looking for a new life when they leave their motherland than to assume they are trying to recreate it somewhere else (unless they are chinese
That is a poor assumption at best. Anyway, members of the religious minority in a city leaving to found a new will be represented by settlers with that religious promotion.
onedreamer, I think you are forgetting that units don't get religious promotions very often.
on demons, angels and the armageddon counter-
i was thinkin, that holy damage doesn't have any real good counters... and
perhaps making the armageddon counter part of the demon and angel promotion would be in order (so holy will get a direct counter-high ac)
angle +50% vs unholy damage, -counter vs unholy damage
demon -50% vs holy damage, +counter vs unholy damage
other effects of the promotions will remain, and stigmata can remain as it is
i was thinkin, that holy damage doesn't have any real good counters... and
perhaps making the armageddon counter part of the demon and angel promotion would be in order (so holy will get a direct counter-high ac)
angle +50% vs unholy damage, -counter vs unholy damage
demon -50% vs holy damage, +counter vs unholy damage
other effects of the promotions will remain, and stigmata can remain as it is
