How to make PIETY a viable choice for your first Social Policy tree

[zwolf]

Yeah, that's the thing, and some happiness, as every ancient branch give some happiness, even if it's minimal.

But for sure culture alone is the way to go.

I like that

 

[kaspergm]

I can't think of any circumstance where I've taken Piety or would even want to before Classical era. By locking it that little amount, the AI is forced into something else first and will likely continue to choose something else with a reduced flavor, unless Piety really is a good choice.

I think that's a very bad solution, we had that in G&K and it clearly show that that did NOT work. I play with a mod that does some changes to Piety - opener now both gives the production speed and the +1 Faith on Shrines and Temples - and this is enough to make me open Piety fairly often, even if I don't always develop the tree fully. Organized Religion has the +1 Happiness from Shrines and Temples as it was back in the days. Personally, I think this solution is much better than letting it open later.

 

[j0tak]

I think opening Piety need to allow workers build holy sites, one pr city.

 

[GoStu]

I think that's a very bad solution, we had that in G&K and it clearly show that that did NOT work. I play with a mod that does some changes to Piety - opener now both gives the production speed and the +1 Faith on Shrines and Temples - and this is enough to make me open Piety fairly often, even if I don't always develop the tree fully. Organized Religion has the +1 Happiness from Shrines and Temples as it was back in the days. Personally, I think this solution is much better than letting it open later.

Good point, based on the evidence. I suppose that changing the timing of the policies would do little, given that the AI loves the hell out of Piety.

Your modified Piety would make the tree somewhat more attractive as a starter, given that Happiness is one of the big constraints on development in the early game. Still, it wouldn't be attractive to me.

The fundamental problem with Piety as an opener is that it's throwing your metaphorical chips on Religion. Compare to the alternatives: Tradition is planning to grow your empire tall, Liberty is planning to grow your empire wide, and Honor is planning to grow your empire by the sword. Piety would therefore be planning on growing your empire by religion. The problem with this is that while Religion is powerful and useful, it is NOT going to carry your empire. Piety's extra Reformation beliefs are strong, but they're all focused late-game, so the total of your increases over a Tradition or Liberty based empire in the early game we're considering is as follows:

+2 Faith per city from Organized Religion
+25% Gold per city after Theocracy (assuming you build Temples in all cities)*
Possible second Pantheon bonus
+Reformation Belief that won't do much until later
Cheaper Faith Buildings/Units

Frankly, this isn't adding up to the counterpart's free units, buildings, etc. Hell, early game the +25% Gold may not even beat the 2 Gold the temple costs to maintain, given that it's hard to work at least 8 Gold worth of tiles consistently on a mid-size early game city.

I stand by my position that Piety is a great tree as-is... for a big empire, that's religious. I've had amazing success playing Wide as Egypt with Piety as my second tree: getting Burial tombs up quickly, and having scored Pagodas and +2 Culture per temple was a sweet deal.

So what policy in Liberty/Tradition can compare with ability to get "free" Universities, Public Schools, and Research Labs in each city? Or use faith to purchase bombers?

I think Piety may be viable e.g. if opener would reduce cost of building walls and libraries - just idea, I agree that it looks too strange to be accepted.

Tradition in particular pays for itself well before Universities would be available through Jesuit education: the extra Growth in your capital and next three cities likely spit out more science earlier than a slightly faster University/School/Lab. Also, the Faith you're spending to buy those later-game buildings could easily be Great People. Liberty's payback period is longer, but yields a free city, a key early worker, etc.

Faith-buying units is obscenely expensive. Expect to pay over 1000 Faith per unit for anything worth having - and Bombers can't be bought.

 

[Njegos]

Theres a tip for first social policy Piety opener. Chose Aztecs and put raging barbs on.

 

[JustinianIV]

Threads about this complaint are so common that it's no longer funny. I think its clear that Firaxis is not interested in making things balanced in the SP department. They gave a half-hearted try when BNW came out, but that's it.

Piety is so inferior that I wouldn't even attempt to complete it with Poland. Shame, because the religion mechanic is fun.

 

[GhostSalsa]

Underground Sect - This wouldn't be as bad if it exerted religious pressure akin Spies are like trade routes (but even less, and they come even later in the game), if you're repurposing them for faith spread, they need to be better than a trade route from the holy city.

And pressure doesn't even do anything by Renaissance. Underground Sect is just cooky.

What would be really cool is the concept in reverse - believers in other cities act like spies. You can View any AI city you have 3 believers in, and steal techs from ones you are majority. Generally the tech stealing would be rare, but Viewing more cities would be a fun perk. The game makes info too expensive and rare, so I would take this one just for flavor.

 

[Browd]

Moderator Action: Moved to Ideas & Suggestions.

 

[kaspergm]

The fundamental problem with Piety as an opener is that it's throwing your metaphorical chips on Religion. Compare to the alternatives: Tradition is planning to grow your empire tall, Liberty is planning to grow your empire wide, and Honor is planning to grow your empire by the sword. Piety would therefore be planning on growing your empire by religion. The problem with this is that while Religion is powerful and useful, it is NOT going to carry your empire.

I fully agree with everything you write except for this being a problem. I don't see this as a problem, because I don't see Piety (and neither Honor) as being competitors for Tradition and Liberty. I see them as partners. I know some players feel all four ancient era trees should be able to carry your empire alone, but I disagree with this: Tradition and Liberty play one role, Piety and Honor are in a completely different group (along with Patronage, Aesthetics, Commerce and Exploration).

Tradition and Liberty are the primary trees, these form the foundation on which your empire rests - Tradition if you're going tall, Liberty if you're going wide. Honor, Piety, Patronage, Aesthetics, Commerce and Exploration each are secondary trees - these add flavor and specialization, depending on which game style you plan to take. Piety if your playing religious, Honor if playing militaristic, Patronage if playing diplomatic, Aesthetics if you're playing cultural, etc.

I don't think Piety should work as your stand-alone start tree, if all four ancient era trees should be able to perform the role that Tradition and Liberty does, they would be too similar imo. I'm not saying that the current policy system is perfect, because I don't think it is (for starters, Tradition and Rationalism are too good, and you get too few policies overall, which means far too many games reduce to Tradition/Rationalism every time, which becomes trivial with time) - but for all the problems there are with Piety, I don't think its (disfavorable) comparison to Tradition is one of them.

 

[zwolf]

I don't see Piety (and neither Honor) as being competitors for Tradition and Liberty.

I beat the game so many times with Tradition and Liberty that is very taunting to go different. I mean, the trees are there!

Making it possible would add a new level of variance to the game. Because now Social Policies wise, the game is too linear on the first eras.

 

[JustinianIV]

I don't think Piety should work as your stand-alone start tree, if all four ancient era trees should be able to perform the role that Tradition and Liberty does, they would be too similar imo. I'm not saying that the current policy system is perfect, because I don't think it is (for starters, Tradition and Rationalism are too good, and you get too few policies overall, which means far too many games reduce to Tradition/Rationalism every time, which becomes trivial with time) - but for all the problems there are with Piety, I don't think its (disfavorable) comparison to Tradition is one of them.

I think that Piety could at best be a complimentary tree, as you say. Though who among us playing on Emp or Deity would ever finish the entire tree once opened? Just not worth it. One or two policies past the opener, but that's it. Then Patronage and Rationalism are available.

 

[Galgus]

I agree with you to an extent. However, there are two flaws to this argument:

1. AI does not understand this, which means that AI will charge headfirst into Piety. Obviously one could just ignore this, but if you want the benefits of Piety - most specifically the reformation beliefs - you're in a race with the AI, which means you can't just postpone it without giving up a good part of the benefits of this tree.
2. Piety will actually help you found a religion by giving you extra faith and, in the end, a Prophet. This adds an unhealthy element of gambling to the tree in the sense that at one hand you invest a lot of social policies in a religion you have not, and may not get to, found, but on the other hand this might be a necessary to get to found at all, less the AI takes all religions.

On paper however, I do agree with you: Piety should not be a first choice tree. Sure, you might want to grab the opener and perhaps Organized Religion early to help you secure a religion, but it should be developed in tandem with Tradition or Liberty which will be the trees of your general empire development. I'm not sure how exactly to fix the current problems with Piety, though ... should one remove the free Prophet from late in the tree? Just lowering the AI flavor for the tree might not work in itself, because after all, going headstrong into piety does after all increase your chance of getting a religion significantly, so while this might not be an optimal strategy for the player, that doesn't mean AI should be completely cut off from doing it.

PS. I guess this belongs in ideas and suggestions subforum.

Personally I'd like Piety to give more of a boost to religion, and other factors that give cheesy early religions such as ancient ruins...first to pantheon shouldn't be a matter of getting lucky on a Ruin.

Heck, I wouldn't mind if some policy in Piety guaranteed you could found a religion regardless of the limit.

 

[kaspergm]

I do agree faith ruins are just way inbalanced. I mean, a culture ruin gives you 20 culture - which is great - but culture is less scarce than faith in early game, so getting 60 faith from a ruin is just massive.

 

[Kallowe]

What if Piety had a science bonus? Would that make it more attractive?
There is a common theme in the game to represent religious believers as a bunch of luddites and this may be true to some extent. However 'back in the day' there used to be far less definition between science and religion.
This is already somewhat in game with the Messenger of the Gods and the Jesuit Whatevers beliefs and it might be an interesting way to empower Piety without supplanting Tradition or Liberty.

Whatever the solution is it's unlikely to be adding more faith to Piety since that's not really the area it suffers in.

 

[noonex]

getting immediate pantheon will make Piety more than viable opener