Idea for Religion: Holy City States

[generalwar]

C'mon people, start chatting about something. You're asking yourself why 2K isn't paying any attention to this good thread and idea. Here's the answer. No one looks interested any more. When people go for this link from our sigs, they see that it's a stupid link and they will never look it again, because it's boring. C'mon

 

[Xoatl_169]

i support the idea

 

[craig123]

C'mon people, start chatting about something. You're asking yourself why 2K isn't paying any attention to this good thread and idea. Here's the answer. No one looks interested any more. When people go for this link from our sigs, they see that it's a stupid link and they will never look it again, because it's boring. C'mon

Sounds like a call to arms

Let's try to spark more discussion.
1. Should it be possible to ally with a holy city state? Can only one civ ally?
2. What benefits should holy city states give to followers of the faith? Should benefits depend on whether neutral / friendly / allied?
3. What happens when a holy city is captured by (i) a follower of that city's faith, or (ii) a follower of a different faith?
4. How can these factors be balanced to ensure that civs of the same religion still fight against each other, but also to encourage them to unite against a different religion?
5. Should wonders, social policies and eras affect religion?
6. Should religions be randomly assigned to city states or should it attempt to be accurate? Should all religions begin in 4000BC?

Discuss. (Please!)

 

[Col Mustard]

Sounds like a call to arms

Let's try to spark more discussion.
1. Should it be possible to ally with a holy city state? Can only one civ ally?
2. What benefits should holy city states give to followers of the faith? Should benefits depend on whether neutral / friendly / allied?
3. What happens when a holy city is captured by (i) a follower of that city's faith, or (ii) a follower of a different faith?
4. How can these factors be balanced to ensure that civs of the same religion still fight against each other, but also to encourage them to unite against a different religion?
5. Should wonders, social policies and eras affect religion?
6. Should religions be randomly assigned to city states or should it attempt to be accurate? Should all religions begin in 4000BC?

Discuss. (Please!)

This could be a great way to bring religion back into the game with overpowering regular diplomacy. Also, for starters at least we should stick to the seven religions that were in cIV. After all the mechanics are figured out then more religions could be added. I've been lurking on this thread for a while lol, so I've being thinking about this for a bit. Here are my suggestions/ideas for holy city states.

1. Holy city state diplomacy should be the same as for other city states types the only thing different should be the rewards. Any civ should be able to be friendly with the holy city state but only one can ally with the city state. This will mirror the fact that in real life one civ/country has more ties to a religion that others that also follow the religion.

2. Some reward ideas as follows
Allied: happiness, culture, and gold bonus, special religious building that can be built in your capital (will become inactive(no bonus) if no longer allied and will be reactivated if you become allied again), civs can only be allied with one holy city state at a time but may be friendly with many or all if the holy city states are not hostile to each other. if the city state switches who it is allied with then that new civ can build the special religious building in its capital.
Friendly: small happiness, culture, and gold bonus
Neutral: no bonus
Hostile: will try to destroy your civ (there should be ways to diplomatically change the status back to neutral with gold, units or something)

3. If a holy city state is attacked by a hostile or neutral civ then all its friendly, allied, and other neutral civs will get a quest to defend it. Those that help defend the holy city state should receive a nice bonus in gold, culture, or happiness and in status with the city state. The civ that attacked the holy city state will not be able to improve it's status from hostile with that holy city state for a long time if the attack is stopped. If the attacking civ succeeds in capturing city state then the bonuses for that holy city state are applied to that civ and no others but they cant build the special religious building.

If an allied civ to a holy city state wants the holy city state then there should be an option for the holy city state to peacefully join the civ. This will take alot of work to get to the point that the city state want to join your civ. I'm thinking that you have to do everything that it asks for a long period of time (500-1000 years?) and not be friendly with civ and city states that it doesnt like. If you annex a holy city state peacefully other civs will not like it but it wouldn't cause a liberation war. If the allied civ succeeds in annexing city state then the bonuses for that holy city state are applied to the civ but they cant build the special religious building if they haven't already. If they have built the special religious building then it becomes inactive when the holy city state is annexed.

If a friendly civ tries to take the holy city state, the allied civ (if there is one) and other friendly civ will be asked to defend the city state. If the attacking civ is defeated the city state will be hostile to the civ for a time. If the attacking civ succeeds in capturing city state then the bonuses for that holy city state are applied to the civ but they cant build the special religious building.

There could be a way to capture and then release the holy city state but I'm not sure how it should work.

4. Holy city states will not care if you attack another civ it is friendly with. it will care if you destroy the special religious building that it allows its allied civ to have in its capital. The holy city state could care if you destroy an inactive special religious building as well but not as much as for destroying the active special religious building.

5. The special religious building would act as a sort of minor wonder. Special religious buildings will unique to the religion and give unique bonuses. Social policy should affect how holy city states react to your civ. Some holy city states can require certain social policies to be allied with it. I don't think eras should affect religion as religion is a relative constant throughout history.

6. Religions should be accurate to the real life religions in the special religious buildings, and to the city states they are assigned to. You could give them a natural hostility to another religion or it could be developed in game by tracking who attacks its allied and friendly civ and what holy city states the attacker is friendly or allied with. The holy city state wouldn't hate the civ that attacks its friendly and allied civs but the religion that the attacking civ is friendly or allied with. I dont know if that's to complicated to code easily but it's a thought.

I think that the holy city states should start from 4000BC because otherwise you have to figure out how to convert a regular city state to a holy city state. What if the regular city state is allied with a civ, does that alliance continue when it becomes a holy city state? Do the quests the regular city state started continue when it changes to a holy city state? When should the city state change to being holy or should a holy city state just pop up on the map when its time for it to appear? Should a holy city state be able to appear from a civ's city? All these questions and more are solved simply by starting at 4000BC with holy city states. So for simplicity and gameplay start at 4000BC.

 

[Col Mustard]

Some special religious buildings ideas and city state names for each religion
format: religion(city state name) - special religious building - special religious building bonus

Buddhism (Bodh Gaya) - The Mahabodhi - The Noble Eightfold Path: Wisdom (science bonus), Ethical conduct (culture bonus), Concentration (production bonus). the builder can pick one bonus and can switch between the three bonuses at any time.

Confucianism (Qufu) - The Kong Miao - Li (culture bonus, reduced corruption)

Hinduism (Benaras) - The Kashi Wishwanath - Dharma (reduced wariness, production bonus)

Taoism (Tai'an) - The Dai Miao - Tao Te Ching (reduced corruption, city defense bonus)

Judaism (Jerusalem) - The Temple of Solomon - Torah (population growth bonus, culture bonus)

Christianity (Bethlehem) - The Church of the Nativity - New Testament (happiness bonus, population growth bonus)

Islam (Mecca) - The Masjid Al-Haram - Qur’an (science bonus, attack bonus vs. civs hostile to mecca)

The religions and religious buildings are from cIV and the names for the city states were pick from a quick Wikipedia search of the religious buildings and picking the city/town the building is in or near the religious building. The building bonus are just some ideas I got from research the religions. Suggestions?

 

[craig123]

Some good points, Col Mustard

Your idea of a kind of 'peaceful takeover' is interesting. One of the issues discussed earlier in the thread was how to balance the advantages and disadvantages of annexing a holy city vs. becoming its ally. Clearly, it would be boring if the first civ to find a holy city immediately annexed it (and also if holy cities were never annexed). Perhaps if the 'peaceful takeover' option gave the greatest long-term benefit, it would solve this problem. (In other words, all civs would attempt to ally with the holy city in order to eventually gain a 'peaceful takeover'; however, this would require lots of effort, meaning some civs would just attempt to annex it.)

However, I'm not sure how much extra depth it would add to the game (i.e. could the same result be achieved simply by making the relative advantage of being allied stronger that the advantage for annexing?). Another argument against the idea is that it may add additional complexity. Does anyone else have any thoughts on this idea?

 

[generalwar]

Sounds like a call to arms

Let's try to spark more discussion.
1. Should it be possible to ally with a holy city state? Can only one civ ally?
2. What benefits should holy city states give to followers of the faith? Should benefits depend on whether neutral / friendly / allied?
3. What happens when a holy city is captured by (i) a follower of that city's faith, or (ii) a follower of a different faith?
4. How can these factors be balanced to ensure that civs of the same religion still fight against each other, but also to encourage them to unite against a different religion?
5. Should wonders, social policies and eras affect religion?
6. Should religions be randomly assigned to city states or should it attempt to be accurate? Should all religions begin in 4000BC?

Discuss. (Please!)

Maybe we're complicating too much. Holy city-states should do exactly as other city-states are doing. Give you bonuses if you help 'em against barbs, rival holy city- state... But, there should be special quests that can only holy city-states demand. E.g. Vatican send you a letter to build cathedral. if you refuse, you loose influence, if you build it, you get some culture with that cathedral until Vatican exists as a holy city-state. That same should apply for other holy city states. Buddhist holy city state request pagoda, Mecca request mosque, etc.

1. I think that it should be possible to ally with only one civ, but can be friendly with everybody else. Holy city-state would be milked to bankrupt if every civ could ally with it.

2.On neutral you get nothing, friendly-some small amount of culture and from time to time a little gold, allied-more culture and money and military units from time to time. Maybe there could be only one special unit for all holy city-states like Pop's guard(pikemen) replaces regular pikeman but has 50% vs mounted units as regular(if it is as in civ 4) and 50%vs melee units. Those units only allied civ could get, like you how you can get brute from barbars.

3. E.g. Vatican is annexed, your cathedral doesn't give you any culture any more and you aren't reciving culture, gold and units any more. It can be discussed can you restore Vatican as a holy city when you liberate it.

4. it was discussed before. Religion wouldn't have any effect on diplomacy. Only holy city-states would care about religion so, there wouldn't be any impact on diplomacy as in civ 4. Simple.

5.Maybe rationalism. Holy city-states start weakening and they start giving you smaller bonuses and no more units gifts.

6.Religions should be accurate. As Belgrade is always militaristic, Budapest cultural, so every holy city-state should know it's place in the world,right? All religions should start in 4000 BC, because otherwise, early religions would too powerful against this new ones.

 

[craig123]

Your answer to 3 seems a good enough way to ensure that if a holy city is captured all followers of that faith will unite to liberate it (or use it as an excuse to capture it themselves ).

I also agree with 4 - religion shouldn't influence diplomacy between civs directly. The point I was raising is that countries of the same religion shouldn't be stopped from fighting each other (i.e. the holy city shouldn't intervene).

Regarding 6, I definitely agree they should all start in 4000BC, and I tend to agree it should be accurate - however, I wouldn't be too bothered if religions were assigned randomly to city states at the start of the game.

 

[Aussie_Lurker]

Sounds like a call to arms

Let's try to spark more discussion.
1. Should it be possible to ally with a holy city state? Can only one civ ally?
2. What benefits should holy city states give to followers of the faith? Should benefits depend on whether neutral / friendly / allied?
3. What happens when a holy city is captured by (i) a follower of that city's faith, or (ii) a follower of a different faith?
4. How can these factors be balanced to ensure that civs of the same religion still fight against each other, but also to encourage them to unite against a different religion?
5. Should wonders, social policies and eras affect religion?
6. Should religions be randomly assigned to city states or should it attempt to be accurate? Should all religions begin in 4000BC?

Discuss. (Please!)

1. I think that only *one* civ should actually ever be able to ally with a Holy City-State. In real-world/Civ terms, think of it like Rome being allied to The Vatican or Arabia being allied to Mecca. This doesn't preclude other civs from being friendly with that City-State though.

2. Benefits should definitely depend on your level of friendship/alliance. If you've only started down the path of friendship, then it might give you access to that faith's monastery. Increased friendship will give you access to missionaries (& the ability to set priest specialists) & Temples, then ultimately to their larger religious buildings). Not sure what impacts an alliance should have, beyond a diplomatic boost with other Civs that are clearly friendly with that City-State (how much would depend on how friendly they are to the City-State & how well you've been "defending the faith"). Perhaps an alliance could also boost the effects of your religious buildings/specialists &/or grant some kind of financial benefit (similar to having the Shrine in Civ4). Perhaps it might also give you some say in the Religious/Piety settings of friendly civs of the same faith?

3. If a city-state is annexed by a civ of the same faith, then all benefits of being allied to that City-State are lost, but are not gained by the conqueror. In effect, pushing the religion now becomes entirely the responsibility of those who already have that religion as their State Faith-but without the ability to befriend that city state, the benefits of gaining that religion would be limited from then on. The conqueror would almost certainly gain significant diplomatic penalties with others of the same religion.
If a city-state is made into a puppet, then they effectively become the "ally" of that City-State, albeit under duress, & gains all the abilities thereof. Whoever liberates the City-State would obviously gain the undying gratitude of said Civ (even if of another religion). Annexation by a Civ not of the faith would almost certainly lead to war in most cases (unless there was strong friendship/alliance already in existence-but even then such an alliance would almost certainly be canceled)-but all other effects would be the same. If merely made into a puppet, then all *new* benefits of being allied or would be lost, & benefits of friendship would be diminished in strength-thus acting as a strong incentive for liberation.

4. Only the allied Civ gets the diplomacy benefits mentioned, friendly civs would still be impacted only by normal diplomatic factors. Not that the diplomacy benefits of alliance are a guarantee against war. Indeed, conflict could break out simply as a means of preventing 1 civ or another from gaining-or keeping-an alliance with said City-State-its just that, once an alliance has formed, Civs that strongly share that faith are far less likely to war with you. These things are not static, though. The City-State itself will frequently demand quests (like Holy Wars, spreading the religion to heathens, adopting certain Social Policies, tithing wealth to them etc) in order to maintain their favor. Failure to do these tasks might not only cause you to lose favor with the City-State, but could lead to it declaring you an "Enemy of the Faith"-which could lead to a war against you. Of course if a brother of the faith, or your Holy City-State, is in danger from a "Heathen", then most followers of the faith will probably unite against the threat.

5. I'm thinking it should work both ways. Having certain Piety policies might impact on the effects of your religious buildings/specialists, & certain religious buildings/specialists might provide additional effects for some of your Piety policies. Indeed, I'm of the opinion that additional policies should be created-not for the purposes of winning the culture victory, but simply for defining your religion & how it impacts on your empire-& other faiths within that empire.

6. My view is that the appearance of the religions should be semi-random, & tied to the current, highest levels of piety that exists in the game. So once someone first buys into the Piety branch, Shinto & Hinduism are free to appear in any of the City-States that exist in this game (though this might be limited strictly to those City-States defined as Holy). Once the 1st tier of the piety Piety is purchased (I think Mandate of Heaven?), then Buddhism & Daoism have a chance of appearing. Once someone in the game buys a 2nd tier policy (like Organized Religion), then Christianity, Islam & Judaism have a chance of appearing.

Aussie.

 

[Aussie_Lurker]

btw, good point re: Rationalism!

Aussie.

 

[StStutter]

It makes me sad that they relegated this thread to the civ5 ideas board. Way to sabotage a great idea!

 

[craig123]

Aussie - I agree with your most of your points above. Your answer to 6 is interesting: I hadn't thought about linking the founding of religions to social policies. One advantage I see with this idea is that by the time a religion is founded, several civs will have made contact with that city state. One problem with all religions being founded in 4000BC is the possibility that the first civ making contact with a holy city can become allied before any other civ has the chance to meet it. The main potential problem with the idea is how to make sure that the later religions are important (e.g. if all civs on a continent convert to Hinduism once it is founded, if Christianity is founded on the same continent what would happen? Would some civs convert to Christanity? Would they all attempt to destroy it?) In civ4 Islam very rarely had any impact on the game because it was founded so late.

It makes me sad that they relegated this thread to the civ5 ideas board. Way to sabotage a great idea!

Me too! The only reason I check this board is for this thread.

 

[ClasuSiosa]

You have my support and ill link in my sig as soon as i can get it to hyperlink properly.

Ideas:
Holy Cities: (Christian) Jerusalem, Vatakin City, Damascus, Byzantium, Alexandria, Bethlehem;
(Jewish) Ur of the Chaldees (Abraham), Jerusalem, Gilgal, Goshan, Samaria;
(Islam) Jerusalem, Mecca, Medina, Baghdad, Samarkand;
(Zoroastrism) Persepolis, Babylon, Susa;
(Pan-Hellenism) Olympus, Athens, Rome, Corinth, Sparta, Rhodes, Pergamum, Heakleum;
(Blood Cult (Aztec/Myan)) Chichen Itza, Tenochitlan, Teohuican, Cuzco, etc;
(Druidism) Aliesa, Lugdunum, Mona, Norfolk;
(Confuism) Bejing, Yin, etc;
(Daoism) Bejing, Yin, etc;
(Shinto) Edo, Fuji, Kyoto;
(Hindu) Deli, other Budha places, cant remember off the top of my head;
(Greek Orthodox) Byzantium, Alexandria, Damascus, Kiev;
(Protestentism) Geneva, Edinburha, (Bohemia), Ampsterdam, London, (Luther's town), La Rachel.

Some of the cities wernt "Holy Cities" per say but were important for the stated religion and give some options.

Units: (Islam) Ansar Warrior (mounted Jihadist), Imam (Healer/Scientist/Priest/ Missionary), will think of others later;
(Jewish) Maccabe Warrior(gurilla), Zelot(gurilla), Essene(assassin/spy), Davidic Hero [has a hebrew name] (swordsman);
(Christian{Primaraly Catholic}) Crusader (Foot Knight), Inquisitor, Monk(relig pts., ), Bishop(relig pts., ), others mostly knightly;
(Pan-Hellenism) Cultist (think Maened), Olympian (athlete), Myrmidon (Spear);
(Blood Cult) Eagle Warrior, Feathered Warrior, Blood Priest;
(Druidism) Druid, varius celtic warriors;
(Hindu) Vishnu Warrior, others;
(Protestantism) Hugenought (Musketman), Dike Guard, (Dutch/Engilsh pirates), Swiss Cantoneer, German/Scotch/Dutch/Hugenought infantry and cavalry.

The others could have units as well, I just cant think of them right now.

Buildings could also be avalible such as Churches, Temples, Mosques, and wonders such as the Dome of the Rock, the Temple of Solomon, St. Paul's Cathedral, etc.

So there is my 2 cents worth...

 

[generalwar]

Ideas:
Holy Cities: (Christian) Jerusalem, Vatakin City, Damascus, Byzantium, Alexandria, Bethlehem;
(Jewish) Ur of the Chaldees (Abraham), Jerusalem, Gilgal, Goshan, Samaria;
(Islam) Jerusalem, Mecca, Medina, Baghdad, Samarkand;
(Zoroastrism) Persepolis, Babylon, Susa;
(Pan-Hellenism) Olympus, Athens, Rome, Corinth, Sparta, Rhodes, Pergamum, Heakleum;
(Blood Cult (Aztec/Myan)) Chichen Itza, Tenochitlan, Teohuican, Cuzco, etc;
(Druidism) Aliesa, Lugdunum, Mona, Norfolk;
(Confuism) Bejing, Yin, etc;
(Daoism) Bejing, Yin, etc;
(Shinto) Edo, Fuji, Kyoto;
(Hindu) Deli, other Budha places, cant remember off the top of my head;
(Greek Orthodox) Byzantium, Alexandria, Damascus, Kiev;
(Protestentism) Geneva, Edinburha, (Bohemia), Ampsterdam, London, (Luther's town), La Rachel.

Some of the cities wernt "Holy Cities" per say but were important for the stated religion and give some options.

Units: (Islam) Ansar Warrior (mounted Jihadist), Imam (Healer/Scientist/Priest/ Missionary), will think of others later;
(Jewish) Maccabe Warrior(gurilla), Zelot(gurilla), Essene(assassin/spy), Davidic Hero [has a hebrew name] (swordsman);
(Christian{Primaraly Catholic}) Crusader (Foot Knight), Inquisitor, Monk(relig pts., ), Bishop(relig pts., ), others mostly knightly;
(Pan-Hellenism) Cultist (think Maened), Olympian (athlete), Myrmidon (Spear);
(Blood Cult) Eagle Warrior, Feathered Warrior, Blood Priest;
(Druidism) Druid, varius celtic warriors;
(Hindu) Vishnu Warrior, others;
(Protestantism) Hugenought (Musketman), Dike Guard, (Dutch/Engilsh pirates), Swiss Cantoneer, German/Scotch/Dutch/Hugenought infantry and cavalry.

Wuldn't this be a little too complicaed with all of this faits? We don't need so many holy city-states. There's enough Vatican for christians, we don't have to complicate too much. After the church's split theres so many other christian churches and sects, somewhere over 3200. You can't coplicate too much. Than it's better without holy city states if they would put all of this special units and stuff for city states.

 

[PeterWimsey]

The largest religion in the world is Roman Catholicism. Not Vatican Catholicism. The holy city for (Western) Catholics is Rome.

Which brings up one issue with religious city states: they often have importance beyond the fact that they are holy. For a few hundred years, Rome was both the "holy city" for Christianity in the west *and* the capital of the Roman Empire. Constantinople had a similar role in the East, and for several hundred years *it* was the capital of the Byzantine empire and the seat of the eastern orthodox patriarch. Much earlier, Jerusalem was also an important city both civilly and religiously.

All of these cities fielded armies at one time or another, and - at least in the West - conflict between religious and temporal rulers was not uncommon...despite being Catholic, France fought on the side of the (or many) Protestants in the 30 Year's War, without losing its Catholicism. And of course the Reformation showed that sometimes you gain more by ditching your connections with the holy city.

And, in modern times, the Taliban and other extremist Islamic factions are in no way "allied" with Mecca, which is in Saudi Arabia, but are still highly motivated by their version of that religion.

 

[ilduce349]

Medina could be the city-state for Islam.
Tibet's capital could be the city-state for Buddhism
But Taoism, Confucianism and Hinduism still need a city.

 

[generalwar]

So, holy city states are a good idea or not? Yes, that is a good idea, but stop complicating with all of thes holy city states and tons of religions and especially UU's of city states. Maybe only one type of them for all kinds of holy city states, but that's it. No more complicating, please

 

[Aussie_Lurker]

So, holy city states are a good idea or not? Yes, that is a good idea, but stop complicating with all of thes holy city states and tons of religions and especially UU's of city states. Maybe only one type of them for all kinds of holy city states, but that's it. No more complicating, please

I concur. Never forget the adage of KISS ("Keep It Simple Stupid" ) That's at least where I felt they got Religion right-just 7 religions (8 maximum) would work perfectly. So Buddhism, Shinto, Taoism, Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Hinduism &-maybe-the Greco-Roman Pantheon (or even perhaps Mithraism instead of Greco-Roman). I'm happy with either all of these religions being associated with the real cities they were "founded" in (where we know)-so Mecca or Medina for Islam, Vatican for Christianity, Jerusalem for Judaism (obviously) for example-or to be randomly assigned (but with the addition of 8 new City-States to the game).

I think a lot of the complex stuff that others are asking for could be potentially replicated if we had Religion Policies (separate from Piety) to simulate differences in doctrine within each faith.

Aussie.

 

[generalwar]

I concur. Never forget the adage of KISS ("Keep It Simple Stupid" ) That's at least where I felt they got Religion right-just 7 religions (8 maximum) would work perfectly. So Buddhism, Shinto, Taoism, Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Hinduism &-maybe-the Greco-Roman Pantheon (or even perhaps Mithraism instead of Greco-Roman). I'm happy with either all of these religions being associated with the real cities they were "founded" in (where we know)-so Mecca or Medina for Islam, Vatican for Christianity, Jerusalem for Judaism (obviously) for example-or to be randomly assigned (but with the addition of 8 new City-States to the game).

I think a lot of the complex stuff that others are asking for could be potentially replicated if we had Religion Policies (separate from Piety) to simulate differences in doctrine within each faith.

Aussie.

Yes, thanks for support. We need to keep it simple if we want 2K apply HCS(Holy city-states) in civ 5. Otherwise, religion would be inplemented like in civ 4 and whole civ 5 would become civ 4. Totally agree with that christian HCS is Vatican as Belgrade is always militaristic, or Vienna neutral. It's a good idea this with policies too. Confucionism would work for that generals are the best soldiers, financial ministers are best economy specialists. If I'm right, confucionism is a more a philosophy that stands for tradition, respecting older people. Also, best people of profession would be on high places, like general won't be emperor son but one experianced general (like Sun Tzu). Christianity could be something like piety( maybe piety stands for christianity?? at least in it's meaning?). Maybe religions already are part of civ 5(there are reformation, free religion and org religion that reminds on religions). But, there could be a good mod where religion policies play a bigger role, it could be very interesting. That and Ryes and Falls of religions.

 

[craig123]

Agreed. All that's needed is a 4th type of city state, Religious. Then we'd just need to decide what benefits these city states give and to think of some quests. Anything more complicated than that will end up detracting from the game.