Is this a bug? (Evil Bannor)

[WarKirby]

In my current game, playing as Calabim, I've just met the bannor. A few things have surprised me. See this image

It seems they've converted to Ashen Veil, of their own accord, despite it going against everything they stand for. I founded it, converted to it for a while, built stigmata on the unborn, and later abandoned it in favor of Octopus Overlords. It spread to a few neutral and evil races, which didn't seem too odd, but it does seem extremely out of character for the Bannor to convert to the end-of-the-world-cult religion, and becoming evil in doing so. They're supposed to be the righteous do-gooders. Lawful good.

Is this supposed to be possible ?

 

[Grey Fox]

Yes everything should be possible in the epic game.

 

[lordrune]

You need to keep in mind that when you play a game, you are creating your own alternative history, which supersedes the 'lore' to an extent. In your particular alternative history, the religion of the Ashen Veil became dominant throughout most of the world, and the rulers of the Bannor eventually adopted the religion of their people. So long as it's not happening *every* game, its not a problem IMHO.

 

[Minor Annoyance]

Something from that screenshot that seems like it should be changed is that they still disslike you for using "evil" mana. I guess it's based on the civs original alignment not the current alignment.

 

[ushram]

thats one thing i love about this game lol

 

[Micky Onimusha]

Aye, I'd say the only thing buggy about that is that Capria has a negative attitude at you for using Death and Entropy Mana, despite now embracing evil and the darker side of things. I like that I can turn the Good evil (AV Elohim ftw!) and vice-verser. Nothing wrong about it. People's ideals change... and sometimes they can be changed


To be honest, the only alignment change that I would find not "fitting" would be AV Basium, but that's blocked from happening iirc.

 

[Grey Fox]

To be honest, the only alignment change that I would find not "fitting" would be AV Basium, but that's blocked from happening iirc.

It happened to me way back, and I agree. Possible that it can't happen now though.

 

[mahazel]

In my last game both Bannor and Elohim converted to OO and next to AV, (I was RoK-> Empyrean Kuriotate), when Calabim (Alexis) and Clan ended as the Order...

 

[MagisterCultuum]

I tend to think that most leaders need larger weights for or especially against certain religions.

 

[Switchblock]

Oh, pish posh, I think some things are weighted too much, it cuts down on the fun of you trying to think of explainations for why all the weird things happen.

 

[Minor Annoyance]

Aye, I'd say the only thing buggy about that is that Capria has a negative attitude at you for using Death and Entropy Mana, despite now embracing evil and the darker side of things. I like that I can turn the Good evil (AV Elohim ftw!) and vice-verser. Nothing wrong about it. People's ideals change... and sometimes they can be changed

Since good gods can be turned a mere mortal is hardly immune.

To be honest, the only alignment change that I would find not "fitting" would be AV Basium, but that's blocked from happening iirc.

I would refer to Bhall falling again, but in terms of game mechanics having them required to be at war with the Infernals it wouldn't make sense to have Basium be the Infernals religion.

...Unless he was trying to take over the leadership of the infernals from Hyborem, but some of these divine being have to stick to their principals.

 

[MetalMilitia-]

Conversions happen. Evil civs rise, good civs fall. However, one aspect is problematic imo, conversion through diplomacy. from a gameplay perspective it kinda sucks that you can convert the ai by diplomacy, thereby potentially destroying religious heroes/units.

Overall id say diplomacy needs a bit of an overhaul.

 

[Chandrasekhar]

Spread rates are also a bit wonky. RoK's extremely early founding combined with its relatively high spread rate means that Evil civs turn Neutral en masse when the Khazad are in the game world. I'd give Runes of Kilmorph (and to a lesser extend, Fellowship of Leaves) an extremely low spread rate to compensate. Leaders in general should be less likely to convert to religions which change their alignment, too.

 

[rishubhav]

Spread rates are also a bit wonky. RoK's extremely early founding combined with its relatively high spread rate means that Evil civs turn Neutral en masse when the Khazad are in the game world. I'd give Runes of Kilmorph (and to a lesser extend, Fellowship of Leaves) an extremely low spread rate to compensate. Leaders in general should be less likely to convert to religions which change their alignment, too.

Agreed. I'd love to see FoL and RoK have reduced spread rates for non-elven and non-dwarven civs respectively. In some of my games I've taken to disabling those two altogether to try to get a more Good vs. Evil style world

 

[Thunder_Gr]

I agree that the AI should be considering the changing of alignment when deciding if they convert to a religion, as well as the fact of having any religious heroes at the time. In addition, some civs(like Bannor or Calabim) should have some penalties for changing alignment. Bannor shouldn't be able to crucade when Neutral or Evil, Calabim shouldn't be able to create Vampires and Governor Manors when Good or Neutral.

Yes, people are not immune to changing their minds, but when doing so, they should change their behaviour. Good civs turning away from the good path, shouldn't be still able to benefit by it, and Evil civs, walking towards Kindness, shouldn't be able to get the benefits of being Evil.

It is not so hard to do, since, for example, Druids are only available to Neutral civs, Vampires should only be available to the Calabim if they are Evil etc...

 

[TheJopa]

I agree that the AI should be considering the changing of alignment when deciding if they convert to a religion, as well as the fact of having any religious heroes at the time. In addition, some civs(like Bannor or Calabim) should have some penalties for changing alignment. Bannor shouldn't be able to crucade when Neutral or Evil, Calabim shouldn't be able to create Vampires and Governor Manors when Good or Neutral.

Yes, people are not immune to changing their minds, but when doing so, they should change their behaviour. Good civs turning away from the good path, shouldn't be still able to benefit by it, and Evil civs, walking towards Kindness, shouldn't be able to get the benefits of being Evil.

It is not so hard to do, since, for example, Druids are only available to Neutral civs, Vampires should only be available to the Calabim if they are Evil etc...

I 200% agree. Good Calabim could even keep their vampires, but they should be blocked from feasting. Good Sheaim should never gate in Demon units (and most of gate units are demons) but could still gate in an elemental or something.

 

[Grey Fox]

How boring. Why can't order following Calabim feast on population? What about the heretics and criminals? Or the people that refuse military service?

Good in FfH is not goody two shoes princess saving knights in shining armor riding on white steeds. Good in FfH is mostly about fighting the Evils.

The good are often even more fanatical than the evil civs.

 

[MetalMilitia-]

Usually I find these flipflop situations very annoying. I have no problem with it happening on occasion where it makes sense but in many cases it is just some random spread into some major city early in the game. The AI just switches because of the same old vanilla civ "hey! we got a religion! religions are good, lets convert!". In FFH2 adopting the wrong religion can actually be a hinderance, no human player would ever adopt a religion like order as shieam because it would wreck the whole planar gate spawn. Not to mention unthematical situations like vampires adopting empyrean...a sun worshipping religion.

The list of things that can go wrong here is endless. Often invading forces from a civ that has no religion will take a city that has a religion and immediately convert. It makes no sense that they would convert to the same religion as thier enemies!!!!

This is just bad AI. Both from a roleplaying perspective and a gameplay perspective.

Anyway, Ihve posted about this maaany times allready, it doesnt seem like its high on the list of things to fix. If its even on there.

 

[Minor Annoyance]

I 200% agree. Good Calabim could even keep their vampires, but they should be blocked from feasting. Good Sheaim should never gate in Demon units (and most of gate units are demons) but could still gate in an elemental or something.

I could argue against that. In the description of Basium it tells a story of two guys who fled from their city which was taken by the Infernals and were offering to join Basium in his fight against the Infernals. To demonstrate their usefulness the showed that they could summon and control a Balor to use against the Infernals. Basium then killed the Balor and crushed the two men.
My point being that someone could summon demons for good purposes. Only Basium, is strict about that kind of thing.

 

[WarKirby]

I could maybe understand the bannor turning evil if I was threatening them into it, and I were vastly more powerful .But they adopted AV of their own accord, just from natural spreading. It just doesn't seem right. Surely the bannor would be purging AV believers as heretics, rather than lending them state support. It's not like there was an army of demons on their doorstop.