Founding religions doing more harm than good on Emperor

[Andraeianus I]

The game that I was referring to was a bit special, I must admit. I concentrated on founding Hinduism as usual. But because I appeared to be alone on an isle with both stone and marble, I decided to at least try a cultural victory. That is why I concentrated on the religions and wonders. I think on emperor you have more a money problem than a production problem, so that is why I don't bother much about worker techs as long as my cities are connected and religion spreads. (Pottery is the exception.)

My research path was something like Monotheism (straight away) -> Sailing (to connect second city + build Great Lighthouse) -> Wheel (to connect marble) -> Priesthood -> Writing (->Theology by Oracle) -> Worker techs.

But in a 'regular' game I really like founding Hinduism and spreading it by Sailing as this gains me early friends. If Buddhism is also founded on the continent it may be wise to postpone adopting a state religion until other civs have adopted Hinduism as well.

 

[Andraeianus I]

Most common is the scenario where you want an early settler before worker, to avoid being crowded out of the best 2nd city site (which happens more often the higher level you go.) Losing the best site more than nullifies any advantage from worker first.

I agree completely. And BECAUSE you want to get a settler before a worker why then invest in worker techs when you don't need them yet? For religion techs it is pretty simple: you have to get there first of all civs. For worker techs it is not important whether you are there first or not. (As long you want to found a religion, which I think is beneficial.)

 

[uberfish]

Don't get me wrong, I used to do Worker first, ignore religion all the time too. I just no longer think it's the optimal move for spiritual civs seeing the benefits you can get out of religion (and it's boring to always play the same way.) I use all sorts of openings from early rushes to fancy oracle builds.

My opinion is that civs starting with Mysticism should pursue one of the starting religions most of the time, and those who don't should consider it occasionally, for example when intending to build the Oracle.

 

[Jorunkun]

I used to do Worker first, ignore religion all the time too. I just no longer think it's the optimal move for spiritual civs seeing the benefits you can get out of religion (and it's boring to always play the same way.) I use all sorts of openings from early rushes to fancy oracle builds.

My opinion is that civs starting with Mysticism should pursue one of the starting religions most of the time, and those who don't should consider it occasionally, for example when intending to build the Oracle.

Thanks for bearing with me, Überfish. Your posts prompted me to read up on some of your Immortal SGs on this site (was well impressed btw) which make good, flexible use of religion in diplomacy without being detrimental to military rushing, and I admit this got me thinking.

Maybe my predisposition against founding religion stems from my tendency to play risk-averse builder-ish wait-and-see openings. I do often go to war before catapults, but usually not at the first opportunity, and I will only workersteal, choke and fight my way through a neighbor if I absolutely have to. In other words, I don't drive the early game as much as you guys seem to do.

In the past months, I learned all the standard plays beating Monarch (slingshots, early rush/choke, specialist economy, inciting wars with religion/diplo), but playing Emperor, I found that I could not to rely solely on these. This is because I would often get beaten to key milestones in the more formulaic strategies, but as my general play has become more efficient, I've been winning almost all games by staying safely flexible, only committing to a risk (building a wonder, early war or founding religion) when the odds are very good.

In this approach, founding religion is a rare occurance, and little more than a fringe benefit if it works, hence this thread. In particular, playing passive aggressive early on, it helps you if the AIs found the early religions as this will worsen their relations and give you more options in who to side with.

However, I guess that I stuggle on Immortal because of this risk-averse habit. Reading your SG's, I came away with the impression that you need to chase every opportunity that presents itself, including religion and wonders I normally pay little mind to.

Sorry for being so long winded, just wanted to share my toughts. The coolest thing about this civ addicition is seeing yourself progress, often learning new tricks onlyto unlearn them again as you move up a level.

Thanks,

J.

 

[Jorunkun]

I agree completely. And BECAUSE you want to get a settler before a worker why then invest in worker techs when you don't need them yet? For religion techs it is pretty simple: you have to get there first of all civs. For worker techs it is not important whether you are there first or not. (As long you want to found a religion, which I think is beneficial.)

Agree this is a very good point, and a good exception to the discussion we had earlier on in this thread. If circumstances necessitate settler first, it does indeed providce a good opportunity to chase a religion, especially if you are spiritual with mysticism.

I guess as a result of this discussion, I have mentally upgraded religious plays from "avoid" to "use when opportunate". Will need to play them more to see how much good this does me though.

 

[PMabey]

There is another problem with founding a religion. in one of my games i founded confuscianism, not really by trying to though, i just wanted early courthouses. the problem came when i was trying to go to war with someone. My 2 neighbours both had confucianismas their state so if i declared war on either my cities would get VERY unhappy because of not only war weariness but the "we will not fight our brothers & sisters of our own faith" penalty

 

[ungy]

Jorunkun--One factor you don't mention that I think is important is what type of map you are playing. On a map where most everyone has contact with everyone else there is less reason to go for an early religion. I find that I always go for hinduism if I start with mysticism as I normally play continents and you have to decide before you know what the game will be like. You just get a lot of flexibility--maybe you're alone or game develops poorly and you decide to go cultural or maybe you're alone in which case it is really a pretty big swing. In many cases you can convert one neighbor and attack another, etc. and don't run into the other religions until much later and get the benefits for the most important part of the game.

Another benefit of religion you don't mention is that it will often spread within your empire and save you having to build obilisks for culture or its much easier to send a missionary to a new city that needs culture than build something.

Just because you found a religion doesn't mean you have to take it or keep it--many of the civs that start with mysticism are spiritual anyway so might as well use it--also those are the civs that it often makes sense to build some temples with.

I agree with you about the later religions and also about the general effect of reducing the number of AI religions but I think the early religion worth the cost in slower development.

Very good piece and discussion topic.

 

[yavoon]

I've been playing aggressive AI/no tech trading emperor games and have not even used a state religion. instead just staying no religion until free religion. it sucks not getting theocracy, but on the plus side I dont have to research it. just trying to avoid the neg modifiers so ppl are less likely to declare war and take two of my cities really quick.

 

[Jorunkun]

Yes, really enjoyed this thread, although the title has become a bit of a misnomer by now. Should probably read "Founding religions a pretty good or bad idea, depending on circumstances" ... but then, who'd read it? Anyhow, I sure learned a lot and came around to a more open pov on use of religions.

Wrt map types, I agree that they do influence the use of religion, but not in a cut and dry fashion. Continents is an interesting case in point: If you nab an early religion on an atheist continent, it really works in your favour. But start out next to Isabella and Ghandi and you're in for trouble - both because of the religious tension on your continent and the religious homogeniety (sp?) on the other one.

Also, I've had many island starts where, with hindsight, I wished I'd have founded an early religion for the early happies and culture. But then there have been many games where I founded a religion in anticipation of one, only to find myself next to some religious nut where having my religion in all of my cities did me no good at all.

My bottom line after all of this is that I would still recommend that one should abstain from founding a religion when learning the ropes on a new level. If you are not on top of every aspect of the game's progress, chances are it will do you more harm than good. If you know what you're doing and have a shot at a religious game with a spiritual civ, it's an interesting option though.

Will be starting an Immortal strategy thread today, and curious what use people find in (founding) religion on this level ...

 

[uberfish]

My arguments in favour of pursuing Buddhism/Hinduism if spiritual are the same on immortal and deity (and I'm more likely to build settler before worker too because AI expansion gets stupidly fast.) If the diplomatic situation demands it, I will switch away from my original religion later in the game without regret, and I still get to keep the +1 happiness and culture from temples.

 

[slowcar]

depending on the ressources of your starting city worker-first gives you the earlier settler, too, as the ressources give a big boost in settler production, especially if you can get 6P-fields (like cows for example).
in addition the 2nd town reaches a productive height much earlier as your worker has finished improving the first 2 or even 3 tiles of your capital and can directly improve your 2nd city.
you come nearly even with your first settler and have an improved capital as well as an improved 2nd city which makes your 3rd (and eventually 4th if you can somehow find place and money for it) settler coming out much faster as well as making your play more flexible.

when i play random civs on emperor and happen to start with mysticism and some commerce i usually try to found hindu as i have to admit
almost never switch to the religion though, i like to go to war when i want to...