How about having Hellenism, Zoroastrianism and the Meso american religion without removing Judaism? the new religions (Islam and Christianity) would spread to the cities, ignoring and replacing the old ones. the new religions could spread to cities with Judaism but wo'nt replace it, to represent that Judaism survived.
Minor Suggestions Thread
- Thread starter Lokolus
- Start date
The religions in any one city represent a religious MAJORITY, otherwise all the religions should be in all the cities. Whith this in mind judaism should be in one city only for the vast majority of the game.
however if all non state religions slowly left over time then religions could leave areas as is historically accurate, (for example, egypt changed from christianity to Islam, Spain changed from Christianity to Islam then back again, the new world adopted christianity, and Pakistan is now mostly Muslim)
Gameplay wise it would mean that when islam randomly spreads to Moscow then it wont stay their long, or when the Turks invade Istanbul, it wont have Christian and Jewish mojorities forever!
however if all non state religions slowly left over time then religions could leave areas as is historically accurate, (for example, egypt changed from christianity to Islam, Spain changed from Christianity to Islam then back again, the new world adopted christianity, and Pakistan is now mostly Muslim)
Gameplay wise it would mean that when islam randomly spreads to Moscow then it wont stay their long, or when the Turks invade Istanbul, it wont have Christian and Jewish mojorities forever!
Panopticon
Utilitarian
Zoroastrianism would have a very nice side-effect of making the Persian UHV easier. 
I suggest decreasing the barbarian presence in Vanilla RFC in, at the very least, Africa.
The swarms of barb camels/horses/skirmishers and lack of independent Civs makes the Mali and Arabian UHV's nigh on impossible.
I almost finished Arabia only to have Egypt respawn right as swarms of Barb Camels swarmed in and razed an egyptian city I controlled.
With Mali, unless you get some free barb camel flips, I still deem their UHV completely impossible in Vanilla, though I've never accomplished it in BTS even still. I have literally lost on turn 2 with Mali because of the ridiculous barbarian presence in Africa. Even had two camel archers flip once and two horse archers and still could not keep the endless flow of barbarians at bay long enough to start building a couple elephants to turn the tide. One of my camels died attacking an archer with 100% combat odds (not a camel archer, not a horse archer, not even a longbowman...an archer...on a desert tile). Then 5 turns later lost all of my units and Timbuktu to an onslaught of Camel archers/skirmishers and spearmen from barbarian Egypt.
Unfortunately, I had to reinstall civ recently and have neither my Warlords or BTS discs
Please if you do any additional patching, take a hard look at Africa in Vanilla RFC.
EDIT: So i loaded up the Inca...yeah right. Within 20 turns of starting I had met the spanish with a workboat (no conquerers fortunately) yet with Plague lost 2 cities to barb axemen on the north coast of South America. Seriously, between barbarians and plague, vanilla RFC is almost unplayable it seems for many civs. 3 barbarian axemen could have literally wiped out my entire civilization if they had wanted to because of the plague. Three turns after the plague hit Venezuela, I had no more units in any city in all of South America. There was absolutely nothing that any player could do about it.
Guess I will try the Aztecs now, but from what I remember, they had any even harder time than the Inca with the barbarians.
The swarms of barb camels/horses/skirmishers and lack of independent Civs makes the Mali and Arabian UHV's nigh on impossible.
I almost finished Arabia only to have Egypt respawn right as swarms of Barb Camels swarmed in and razed an egyptian city I controlled.
With Mali, unless you get some free barb camel flips, I still deem their UHV completely impossible in Vanilla, though I've never accomplished it in BTS even still. I have literally lost on turn 2 with Mali because of the ridiculous barbarian presence in Africa. Even had two camel archers flip once and two horse archers and still could not keep the endless flow of barbarians at bay long enough to start building a couple elephants to turn the tide. One of my camels died attacking an archer with 100% combat odds (not a camel archer, not a horse archer, not even a longbowman...an archer...on a desert tile). Then 5 turns later lost all of my units and Timbuktu to an onslaught of Camel archers/skirmishers and spearmen from barbarian Egypt.
Unfortunately, I had to reinstall civ recently and have neither my Warlords or BTS discs
Please if you do any additional patching, take a hard look at Africa in Vanilla RFC.
EDIT: So i loaded up the Inca...yeah right. Within 20 turns of starting I had met the spanish with a workboat (no conquerers fortunately) yet with Plague lost 2 cities to barb axemen on the north coast of South America. Seriously, between barbarians and plague, vanilla RFC is almost unplayable it seems for many civs. 3 barbarian axemen could have literally wiped out my entire civilization if they had wanted to because of the plague. Three turns after the plague hit Venezuela, I had no more units in any city in all of South America. There was absolutely nothing that any player could do about it.
Guess I will try the Aztecs now, but from what I remember, they had any even harder time than the Inca with the barbarians.
Ah! You mean like what actually happened? The native Americans must not band together - that is completely unhistorical.
I find it interesting that Judaism's existence "interferes with the spread of Christianity in Europe." Very interesting indeed. Is this not, to some extent, supposed to be alt-historical? Christianity becomes dominant by itself on many occasions (by my own experience) anyway - furthermore, Judaism's existence at least adds some edge to European politics. If all European nations went Christian - boom - like that, then all the religious tensions which made the Reformation so fun would be gone. If Protestants and Catholics can't exist, then settle for Jews and Christians.
The Q-Meister
King
- Joined
- Jun 22, 2005
- Messages
- 774
Yes I agree with having Judaism and EITHER Confucionsim or Taoism be replaced by Zoroastriasm, Hellenic polytheism, or a Meso American religion though I think the former 2 are far more important as (sad to say) the MesoAmerican civs are so few and their main contribution, is...er, getting conquered so I don't think the game should be reworked simply for that.
But Zoroastriasm and a Greco Roman polytheism would be wonderful additions!
But Zoroastriasm and a Greco Roman polytheism would be wonderful additions!
The Q-Meister
King
- Joined
- Jun 22, 2005
- Messages
- 774
Lastly, anyone bothered by Hereditary Rule's dominance in the game? It seems that in many games it's just Hereditary Rule into for many if not most civs right into the 21st century. I wonder if some kind of World Event makes Hereditary Rule more unpopular throughout the world when a certain technology is reached (say Liberalism?) and unhappiness results and increases progressively every so often as long as Hereditary Rule is in effect; thus not rendering it impossible just more difficult to maintain as your civ heads into the modern eras.
Would also be nice if there was an Ancient Repubic or State Council government option as an early alternative to Hereditary Rule, but that's probably asking too much.
Would also be nice if there was an Ancient Repubic or State Council government option as an early alternative to Hereditary Rule, but that's probably asking too much.
SadoMacho
spanker of civilizations
I'd reather see flavoured religions first before cahnging religions, but thas going on dangerous terrain.
I'd love to see a %-religion in cities, that can change over time (dynamic religions) next (but that's gonna need a lot of new checks = slower game) and with this completed new religions could be added, but I think that's gonna stay a wish.
I'd love to see a %-religion in cities, that can change over time (dynamic religions) next (but that's gonna need a lot of new checks = slower game) and with this completed new religions could be added, but I think that's gonna stay a wish.
Panopticon
Utilitarian
In the CityNameManager, under England's entry, "Kopenhagen" should read "Copenhagen".
The Beer Baron
Chieftain
- Joined
- Oct 3, 2006
- Messages
- 19
I like to play America a lot, and one reason for too much Hereditary Rule is a lot of the leaders have that as their favorite civic.
I think a place to improve is civics AIs run. As a big trader, I hate it when civs are running Mercantilism. Has anyone seen Russia and China ever run State Property? I think Japan and China's economic problems in the game are religion based, but civic based as well; always running Mercantilism.
onedreamer
Dragon
I see too much Theocracy 
In the 600AD start, if Rome is invaded by someone with a different state religion could the effects of the Apostolic Palace switch to their religion if they spread it to that Rome?
Then the Arabs and Turks would have a large insentive to invade Rome, as they tried to historically.
Also for the 600AD start +1 gold for the Temple of Soloman isn't really that large an insentive to rescue the Holy Land, maybe something a little better would be useful.
Thirdly does the holy city for Confucianism and Toaism have to be built on a Silks resource? I don't want to raise the holy cities, but I also can't stand cities built on resources...
The Khmer also found Singapura in the wrong place, giving it one less food resource and slowing its growth, is the any way to force them to build it further south?
In the 3000BC start Europe is rarely entirly or even mostly christian. If the spread rate for Judaism was reduced, and christianities increased then this might help.
Then the Arabs and Turks would have a large insentive to invade Rome, as they tried to historically.
Also for the 600AD start +1 gold for the Temple of Soloman isn't really that large an insentive to rescue the Holy Land, maybe something a little better would be useful.
Thirdly does the holy city for Confucianism and Toaism have to be built on a Silks resource? I don't want to raise the holy cities, but I also can't stand cities built on resources...
The Khmer also found Singapura in the wrong place, giving it one less food resource and slowing its growth, is the any way to force them to build it further south?
In the 3000BC start Europe is rarely entirly or even mostly christian. If the spread rate for Judaism was reduced, and christianities increased then this might help.
Generally I find Christianity dominates Europe. Though this mostly depends on where the holy city is, if it is Rome or Greece, it has complete control. If founded in Jerusalem it is normally powerful, but has competition. If founded in Asia it dies. I almost always see mostly Christian Europe with the exception of either France or Spain.
If anything I would like to see Islam and Judaism spread more.
This is on Warlords BTW, but I don't see that having to much of an effect on the spread or religion compared to BTS 3000BCE start.
If anything I would like to see Islam and Judaism spread more.
This is on Warlords BTW, but I don't see that having to much of an effect on the spread or religion compared to BTS 3000BCE start.
The Beer Baron
Chieftain
- Joined
- Oct 3, 2006
- Messages
- 19
I think in the 600 AD start Germany is much too powerful. The last game I tried as America they had the Eiffel Tower built before 1800.
Some proposals to combat......
Lose 1 settler because Mainz flips to them for free.
Have them stop building Hamburg. This crowds the Dutch too much and the Dutch should get a chance to have a 2nd city.
Russia AI needs to be more aggressive near the Ukraine and should build a city there on the Black Sea.
France needs to build a city on the southern Rhine again like they used to. What happened to Aix-la-Chapelle or Strasbourg? They never build anything east of Paris now.
Some proposals to combat......
Lose 1 settler because Mainz flips to them for free.
Have them stop building Hamburg. This crowds the Dutch too much and the Dutch should get a chance to have a 2nd city.
Russia AI needs to be more aggressive near the Ukraine and should build a city there on the Black Sea.
France needs to build a city on the southern Rhine again like they used to. What happened to Aix-la-Chapelle or Strasbourg? They never build anything east of Paris now.
