Foreign Missionaries

[Albertan Civfanatic]

How do you kill foreign missionaries?

 

[billmason]

You don't/can't.

 

[Albertan Civfanatic]

You don't/can't.

Wow that is so broken.

 

[stealth_nsk]

Wow that is so broken.

It's not broken it's a design choice, killing them would make the religious game too easy. Instead of killing you could just negate their efforts with your own missionaries.

 

[Krikkit1]

It's not broken it's a design choice, killing them would make the religious game too easy. Instead of killing you could just negate their efforts with your own missionaries.

There is some problems with it…with potential solutions
1. Missionaries as military scouts…
Solution: have the ability to “expel” them from your territory with your units while at war

2. Whack a mole…
Solution: give missionary actions an influence cost that depend on factors , some that you can control .. (So add an Inquisition…foreign conversion costs up domestic conversion costs down)….so those foreign missionaries won’t do much

 

[McSpank01]

It’s kind of amazing that the decision was made to include missionaries at all in civ 7. Given how tedious they were in civ 6, you’d think they’d learnt the lesson and find another way to spread religion.

It’s made even worse by just dumbing the whole interaction down and simplifying it in a, quite frankly bizarre way. Having to convert rural and urban districts now? Does that make sense? Is that fun?

Very undercooked as a feature

 

[stealth_nsk]

There is some problems with it…with potential solutions
1. Missionaries as military scouts…
Solution: have the ability to “expel” them from your territory with your units while at war

It would totally break the cultural legacy path for Exploration. It could only be added if religion would undergo significant changes.

2. Whack a mole…
Solution: give missionary actions an influence cost that depend on factors , some that you can control .. (So add an Inquisition…foreign conversion costs up domestic conversion costs down)….so those foreign missionaries won’t do much

Potentially it could work, but again, it would really damage the legacy path and would require adjustments.

The current religious game could cause issues for people who liked religion in previous Civ games, but it's actually very consistent:
1. The minimal amount of religion involves converting specific settlements to your religion . Nobody could stop you from it and you don't care about keeping your religion in those converted settlements
2. If you want to get bonuses from settlements and keep them in the next age, you need to focus a lot on using missionaries on both defensive and offensive
Those allows making the religious play, which could be called "dynamic" or "whack a mole", depending on whether you like it or not

 

[GeneralZift]

You can't remove heresy, you can't make inquisitors? Even Civ6 combat of godliness at least would be better

 

[Krikkit1]

It would totally break the cultural legacy path for Exploration. It could only be added if religion would undergo significant changes.


Potentially it could work, but again, it would really damage the legacy path and would require adjustments.

The current religious game could cause issues for people who liked religion in previous Civ games, but it's actually very consistent:
1. The minimal amount of religion involves converting specific settlements to your religion . Nobody could stop you from it and you don't care about keeping your religion in those converted settlements
2. If you want to get bonuses from settlements and keep them in the next age, you need to focus a lot on using missionaries on both defensive and offensive
Those allows making the religious play, which could be called "dynamic" or "whack a mole", depending on whether you like it or not

#1 is a problem…no interaction easy Legacy path…The Legacies should require both some investment and counterplay

#2 is a problem because whack a mole is the most annoying type of counterplay… as opposed to researching, building defenses, putting in policies, etc.

 

[stealth_nsk]

#1 is a problem…no interaction easy Legacy path…The Legacies should require both some investment and counterplay

#2 is a problem because whack a mole is the most annoying type of counterplay… as opposed to researching, building defenses, putting in policies, etc.

I really like that playing religion in the minimal mode (just for legacy path) requires little investments. Maybe a bit too little, but the direction is ok.

For the second part I agree with you, the thing is - in the current concept foreign missionaries should be allowed to convert your cities to get their relics, so I see options:
1. Change the way how relics are earned, which require pretty big changes
2. Make the defenses about gaining settlements back, not protecting them. For example, some time ago we discussed policy which would allow missionaries to turn your own settlements back to your religion with a single action on any city tile, not two actions on different tile types.

 

[WillK96]

It would totally break the cultural legacy path for Exploration. It could only be added if religion would undergo significant changes.

I don't see how this is true. There are so many ways to get relics (so many relic beliefs) that stopping civs at war with you from converting your cities by expelling missionaries would be immaterial to their ability to complete the legacy path (12 relics - you can get that in as little as 6 cities total with Sukha).

 

[stealth_nsk]

I don't see how this is true. There are so many ways to get relics (so many relic beliefs) that stopping civs at war with you from converting your cities by expelling missionaries would be immaterial to their ability to complete the legacy path (12 relics - you can get that in as little as 6 cities total with Sukha).

It would need a lot of balance for all the options. Imagine you chose to get relics from settlements with wonders and suddenly the only civ other than you which ever built wonders, declares war on you. Yes, it's extreme case, but different beliefs could have different issues.

 

[WillK96]

It would need a lot of balance for all the options. Imagine you chose to get relics from settlements with wonders and suddenly the only civ other than you which ever built wonders, declares war on you. Yes, it's extreme case, but different beliefs could have different issues.

I'd think you'd have to weigh those factors when picking a relic belief. While it is possible to complete all legacy paths, you're not supposed to be able to complete them all in every game every time (and that many can, on deity no less, is a bit of an indictment on their current design).

 

[Krikkit1]

It would need a lot of balance for all the options. Imagine you chose to get relics from settlements with wonders and suddenly the only civ other than you which ever built wonders, declares war on you. Yes, it's extreme case, but different beliefs could have different issues.

That's where things like the conversion Espionage ability come in... or take your Missionar(ies) with the invasion force and convert while sieging.