Idea for Religion: Holy City States

[craig123]

Well, one hardly wishes to legitimize Scientology.

Also: Discordianism - Mu.

Well, hold on! Aren't we forgetting something? The 4th largest religion in England & Wales and the 2nd largest in New Zealand?

Spoiler :

Jedi!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jedi_census_phenomenon

 

[Thyrwyn]

You forgot Universal Unitarianism.

 

[generalwar]

They should simply made thousands and millions or even billions of holy city states for every religion that has ever existed on planet.

 

[Lyoncet]

You forgot Universal Unitarianism.

Actually, it's Unitarian Universalism. Used to be two separate churches but they merged. Suppose it's possible that different places call it differently though.

Man, what would the Holy City be for them? Transylvania? Actually, that would be kinda sweet.

 

[GigaNerd]

Judaism. What would there be no denominations? You would need something if adding denominations.

Well, we could base Jewish denominations off of the "four sects" that existed during the time of Christ. Let's see...

Pharisees!
Sadducees!
Essenes!
Zealots!

 

[nomooon]

I think this is a really great idea!



Great idea to add flavor to city-states in that the "holy city" city-states could request wars be fought or churches built -- just to build on that with more specificity:

> holy-city city state when at friendly terms could offer a new building type to civilization on the theme of churches or could even be units. These buildings would offer happiness bonus dependent on relation to said holy-city city state.
> the civilization does not adopt officially adopt religion, but being friendly with any religion is beneficial and could be interpreted as adopting said religion by its people
> civilization can be friendly to more than one holy-city city to get added bonus of buildings and etc.
> holy-city city states have a game generated like-dislike of other religions, random - this would dictate whether holy-city city state would ask for wars against other holy-city city states
> rejection of above, deteriorates relations (as per current city-state model) therefore decreasing bonus from buildings - and if relationship goes very bad it would give negative effects
> the above would push civilizations that invested (building buildings etc) into one holy-city city state religion to do as told
> this system would add interesting dynamics where civilizations could enter wars with each other as prompted by holy-city city states
> if civilization that is on friendly terms decides to conquer holy-city then massive negative effects are in play until released (can you release a city-state after conquest??)
> if a civilization that is not on friendly terms conquers holy city then those that are friendly with get negative effects until said city state is released - forces wars

Fun stuff!! I hope this can be and is done

If on friendly terms, the said civ can engulf the holyland in its influence then annex the holyland. That will make that religion the said civ's state religion and give the said civ a bunch of bonuses. Of course you have to meet some criteria b4 this can happen

 

[StStutter]

If on friendly terms, the said civ can engulf the holyland in its influence then annex the holyland. That will make that religion the said civ's state religion and give the said civ a bunch of bonuses. Of course you have to meet some criteria b4 this can happen

Italy didn't really annex the Vatican though. They don't have much more control over the Pope's business than anyone else though.

 

[nomooon]

Italy didn't really annex the Vatican though. They don't have much more control over the Pope's business than anyone else though.

well in game they can choose to annex or not to, because in real world you have the case of Vatican and you have the case of Mecca/Medina, so I want to leave the option available to the player.

 

[StStutter]

well in game they can choose to annex or not to, because in real world you have the case of Vatican and you have the case of Mecca/Medina, so I want to leave the option available to the player.

Right but would the annexing grant some power to the civ? Because Saudi Arabia doesn't have as much say over the Arab world as say the Vatican did over the catholic one.

Maybe an annexed holy city would function somewhat like a religious shrine did in civ4? Adding gold to your treasury due to tourism, etc. Holy wars and missions would still be declared by the city rather than the civ and the holy city would remain somewhat independent, along the lines of a puppet state. It would also become a target of other holy crusades, and its defense would fall on you as the owner of the territory.

This may become too complicated though.

 

[edpovi]

Hmm, I wonder what city would be good for Pastafarianism and the FSM (Flying Spaghetti Monster)? Perhaps Area 51?

On a serious note, the holy city-state idea is interesting.

 

[nomooon]

Right but would the annexing grant some power to the civ? Because Saudi Arabia doesn't have as much say over the Arab world as say the Vatican did over the catholic one.

Maybe an annexed holy city would function somewhat like a religious shrine did in civ4? Adding gold to your treasury due to tourism, etc. Holy wars and missions would still be declared by the city rather than the civ and the holy city would remain somewhat independent, along the lines of a puppet state. It would also become a target of other holy crusades, and its defense would fall on you as the owner of the territory.

This may become too complicated though.

Thats a good idea, you annex the holyland's earthly prescence but not its spiritual powers, so if you go to war with some guy with the same religion your holy city can will chastise you, but it still has to make that spearman for you.

 

[generalwar]

You could annex holy city-state and make a poppet state that would choosing popes who will be on your side and probably your nationality. You know that in mediaval age you could buy Pop's place. So, instead that, you could install a puppet govermant. What do you think?

 

[stealth_nsk]

I think conquering HCS (a new TLA?) should not you grant you any bonuses at all, acting as a regular city.

From pure gameplay point of view - other CS act in the same way, which makes allying with them more valuable. And surely allying should give both happiness and influence over other civilizations with the same religion.

You could annex holy city-state and make a poppet state that would choosing popes who will be on your side and probably your nationality.

AFAIK you can't make puppet states from city-states. No need in introducing new mechanic. Allying with the city state should do the trick.

 

[StStutter]

I think conquering HCS (a new TLA?) should not you grant you any bonuses at all, acting as a regular city.

From pure gameplay point of view - other CS act in the same way, which makes allying with them more valuable. And surely allying should give both happiness and influence over other civilizations with the same religion.

The thing is that then it's really easy to just remove all religious influence from the game by conquering a HCS, unless that caused all surrounding civs to be much more likely to declare war on you if you own their HCS. In which case we end up in a civ4 scenario in which religion affects the AI differently than it does the player.

 

[stealth_nsk]

The thing is that then it's really easy to just remove all religious influence from the game by conquering a HCS, unless that caused all surrounding civs to be much more likely to declare war on you if you own their HCS. In which case we end up in a civ4 scenario in which religion affects the AI differently than it does the player.

You can't have religion implemented without influence on diplomacy. It will just don't have enough ground.

But this doesn't mean it treats AI in a different way - see "Public opinion" tread.

 

[StStutter]

You can't have religion implemented without influence on diplomacy. It will just don't have enough ground.

But this doesn't mean it treats AI in a different way - see "Public opinion" tread.

Okay, you missed my point completely. I was replying to a post which was replying to one of my previous posts.

I obviously want an effect on diplomacy.

All I said was I don't think it would be a good idea to remove the HCS's religious power by annexing due to influence.

 

[wapamingo]

I am not sure what the best work-around is with regards to annexing a HCS.

 

[craig123]

I think that annexing should be possible, but if the holy city grants larger benefits to the player when it's a city state compared to when it's conquered, that would deter anyone from trying to annex it. For example, if the holy city gave gold and culture each turn to each civ that shared its religion, a player that annexed it would lose that benefit.

 

[Aussie_Lurker]

I think that annexing should be possible, but if the holy city grants larger benefits to the player when it's a city state compared to when it's conquered, that would deter anyone from trying to annex it. For example, if the holy city gave gold and culture each turn to each civ that shared its religion, a player that annexed it would lose that benefit.

Why not simply apply the same approach to Holy City States as all the other City-States. Yes you can annex them, but in doing so you lose the *Unique* benefits that those City-States provide. Perhaps we also need the option to set up Puppet City-States, so we can have a situation like when Spain occupied Rome during the early Renaissance.

Aussie.

 

[imperiex1]

I would be in full support of this idea if it were an option, rather than a requirement.