Discussion in 'General Balance' started by Stalker0, May 16, 2018.
How are you getting zealotry so fast that you actually get to use 100 horsemen effectively anyways?
Maya can do it pretty well.
Its also a situation where you've unlocked later units, but horses are just half the price, so you build them even if your original intent was another unit. Similarly, knights are really cheap by faith compared to their hammer cost.
To be honest the only situation I find zealotry useful is if you can get it extremely early, otherwise I've already built a lot of units and its not that hard to keep building more.
What G said. I also had tributes on a few faith CS early in the game, so got a very big faith push from that.
Faith Costs are not affected by War Weariness, btw.
I've tried to use zelotry before but I don't get enough faith to use it well.
Up until current game ... where I went all in with god of war, hero worship, zelotry with authority/fealth.
With this in combo I can reinforce my murder hobo empire when I get jumped on the other side, I can have several armies roaming.
edit: Units bought with faith also come with full exp and you can purchase several at once as long as there is space around the city.
Dioceses is just outright better than Universalism.
Edit* Not only do you get 4 different yields with Dioceses compared to Uni, but those yields are potentially higher, along with also receiving a comparable missionary buff that effectively functions that same as the missionary trait from Uni.
Dio gets a flat +10 culture and faith right out of the gate, on top of the +2 gold and GAP for every foreign city following, so even having just 5 foreign cities converted grants you +10 gold / GAP. Uni gives no flat yields, and only +1 gold / faith for every 10 followers in foreign cities; i.e., you'd need 100 foreign followers (way more than 5 converted cities) just to equal the gold / faith yields granted from Dio, and that's excluding the culture and GAP Dio receives.
Universalism needs a buff.
I'll admit I haven't done like for like comparisons (I don't use IGE), but I find the Missionary buff from Universalism markedly stronger than the one from Dioceses. Eroding pressure makes converting a breeze, even at a late stage.
Basically I take Dioceses for the yields (in a small empire, otherwise Mendicancy is better) and I take Universalism when I found/enhance late but still want to spread, the goal frequently being to get a Reformation.
So possibly I'm misunderstanding what Enhancer beliefs are for, but in my last couple games I've found myself largely unimpressed by any options I have available come Enhancement time. I might start ignoring it entirely in most games.
My problem is that I feel like every option except Mendicancy (and maybe Zealotry, in a different way) is either for someone who is aggressively spreading, or someone who is playing Tradition. What am I missing?
Inquisition is an exception, in addition to Iconography, Mendicancy and Zealotry (the latter two you cited).
But yes, several of them or so are about spreading... The field is still fairly diverse, no?
the more I think about enhancers the more an enhanced that doesn’t scale with followers/spreading seems like a cop out. People talk about how the religion game gets stale in later eras, and it’s because they can take mendicancy, iconography, or to an extent prophecy and get 100% of the power from their enhancer without doing anything.
there must be some way that iconography and mendicancy would be made to scale on spread, or replaced with something that does.
One reason I really agree with this is using a GP to enhance is at odds with using Faith on missionaries and buildings to spread religion naturally. This way if you rush to enhance early, you may get a better enhancer but you wouldn't have as stable a foundation of cities converted to make it good.
just moving this here.
And then you reform and you never need to spread or hold onto the places you converted again. No reward for maintaining a large religious coalition besides the WC votes.
I believe you also get extra tourism, positive diplomatic modifiers, and increase several founder beliefs and reformation beliefs. Unless there are changes I'm unaware of?
You're trying to suggest that small scaling bonuses for religious domination refute my suggestion that enhancers should be uniform in augmenting, rewarding, or protecting your spreading. I don't think these small bonuses are sufficient excuse not to make all enhancers scalable.
1 additonal vote for every 10 cities following your religion is universally useful, but it's a fairly small bonus for so much work
25% tourism modifier makes very little difference to a civ who isn't pursuing a CV, and civs that are pursuing CVs have more efficient ways to spend faith. The best enhancer for CV (iconography) doesn't depend on spreading at all
No one under any condition is going to work that hard for a slight diplomatic modifier.
4/9 Founders and 1/9 reformations that scale on cap at 20 cities or 200 followers,so there is always a limit. The limit, especially on 200 followers, is fairly easy to reach and it doesn't reward you at all past that.
The fact that 7/9 of the existing enhancers work this way seems to suggest there is some agreement there. You wanted to change iconography anyways, so why not make it dependent on spread as a way to control its power?
You can reread my post if you want. I didn't try to suggest anything. I'm asking a question for clarification. Please stop trying to make anytime I comment on your post in any way an argument.
Did my post sound hostile to you? I simply disagree that those other religious modifiers are worth mentioning outside the WC votes. If you don't want to take advantage of a spreader enhancer then that's fine, but I think it would be fair to make that a concious tradeoff. Unless you get Hagia Sophia, you trade a faster reformation and better spread/less resistance for enhancement early on. If your enhancer doesn't depend at all on spread for its power then there isn't much of a tradeoff. You can do the bare minimum of spreading, or just take St. Basil, and there are religion combinations where there is no implicit sacrifice for doing so.
It also just so happens that some of the belief combinations that no compromise between spreading and their full potential also happen to be some of the strongest belief combinations in the game right now.
I think its reasonable to have a few beliefs that don't rely on spreading, to allow for that style of play. I am fine that with some beliefs I am expecting to spread hard to make them good, and others I can not play the religious game and still get benefit. There's a variety in playstyle there that seems attractive to keep.
At the very least, balancing spread enhancers against non-spreading ones is harder. Given that I think Mendicancy is too niche to be reliable, and iconography is just headn and shoulders the best enhancer, the evidence seems to bear that out.
I think it's fair to have ones that rely more or less on spreading. Prophecy and zeoltry have very minimal bonuses to/from spreading, but I don't have much issue with them. What I ave issue with is the 2 that allow you to simply reform and then ignore the religion game.
I honestly don't see anything wrong with Mendicancy. I agree Iconography is too strong, in which case....nerf it...you don't have to fundamentally change it. I think a slight weakening of the yields is fine....or the idea you all had to split it into 2 beliefs I think is also a solid way to go. But that doesn't mean you need to change its paradigm completely.
Your not ignoring it, you are playing the game, and your reward is reformation. And then your using your faith for either more holy sites or late game GP through faith buying. Your still playing the game just in a different way.
*After reformation* you can ignore spreading with no consequences. Your reward is a belief that is as strong as it's every going to be no matter how many followers you accrue. An immutable bonus
Any of the minor spreading bonuses beyond that point without an enhancer (WC votes, tourism modifier for shared religion, etc.) aren't worth the heavy faith investment.
Separate names with a comma.