Hi Guys! What do u think about religion? This idea that a missionary is just changing a city hex is a bad one. How to find where he changed the religion? I'm running around with my missionary to find the place where I may use him to convert it back. And it's annoin that the are sending tons of them without end. Please adapt it!
Missionaries
- Thread starter Gwydion62
- Start date
Tiger Genocide
Prince
- Joined
- Oct 26, 2016
- Messages
- 362
I think we have to wait for Firaxis to expand religion. As of now, it's barebones. That thread on assets found in the game seems to suggest a update pack of some kind is coming.
wesplaysciv
Warlord
- Joined
- May 17, 2020
- Messages
- 276
Is there even any benefit to keeping your religion in your own cities?
If you look at the Reformation civic, which is the second civic in the Theology civics tree, you’ll see that there are a bunch of policies which can give pretty big boosts for having your own religion in your own cities.
* Rationalism = +15% Gold and Science in your own Cities that have converted to your Religion
* Religious Orders = +15% Culture and Happiness in your own Cities that have converted to your Religion
StargazingDog
Prince
Of course. It blocks the founder's benefit from your opponents. You can also study civics that give bonuses.
I am currently Spain and going heavy religion. I get 4 gold from every foreign city of my religion, and a relic for every city I convert that has 10 urban citizens. It also links to the military path, as you get extra points for conquering settlements that are of your religion.
I think religion is fine. It's like anything else: if there is a lot of competition, you need to find another path less crowded.
Ryansinbela
Emperor
I didn’t notice such a thing, can you point it out?
I don't recall anything other than the possible Atomic Age, and I doubt that will expand on religion.
stealth_nsk
Deity
I generally expect 2 expansions as in previous versions. First is likely to be Atomic age, but second will probably add some new mechanics through ages. So, potentially some additional features could come to religion.
But I wouldn't expect religion to come any close to Civ6 religion. Those are just different games.
But I wouldn't expect religion to come any close to Civ6 religion. Those are just different games.
cmurphy625
Chieftain
- Joined
- Nov 23, 2001
- Messages
- 4
Anyone else having trouble finding the 'rural' tiles. Land the missionary on farms and mines, yet conversion button greyed out. Seems like it's hit or miss.
The religion system blows. It is basically the worst elements of the previous versions.
It can be confusing since most rural tiles are rough terrain, so it ends the Missionary's movement and the conversion button is greyed out. You have to wait until the next turn.
StargazingDog
Prince
You can simply mouse over (or click the stick on controller) to see what is on the tile before moving.
It's never hit or miss. If you are on rural and the rural districts are not converted, you can convert. The only time you cannot is if the city is the holy city for the opposing religion. Holy Cities can never be converted. I don't know if there is an icon on the map, but you can see a list of all Holy Cities in the religion panel.
It’s tedious.
KMadCandy
giggling permanoob
Oh that makes sense once you explained it! Thank you, it was making me a bit crazy LOL.
Kopernikus1979
Warlord
For me, religion is quite a mess at the moment. Building missionaries, converting cities, again and again and again... No information about the red sign at the city name or what I can do against it. As far as I can see, a missionary can not strengthen your own religion in a city... I really get bored about only converting...
Yeah. It's literally the reason why I stopped playing and await for major changes. I can't understand how they thought that this is a good religious system. I really hope that this will be changed and we won't have to wait for expansion for changes. Doubt it, but one can hope.
TreVor_ish
Prince
- Joined
- Sep 29, 2020
- Messages
- 536
I am generally mortified, that this version of religious mechanic is OK to be released in a triple A game, yet alone a Civilization.
The most tedious thing being a missionary point and click, without everything else.
In a previous iteration we at least had more than one unit and, however silly, theocratic battles between them, so at least there was a way to fight other religions.
No consideration about how strong it can be in cities where been founded or how long it had a major number of worshipers.
Just build a missionary and send it to get more numbers.
The most tedious thing being a missionary point and click, without everything else.
In a previous iteration we at least had more than one unit and, however silly, theocratic battles between them, so at least there was a way to fight other religions.
No consideration about how strong it can be in cities where been founded or how long it had a major number of worshipers.
Just build a missionary and send it to get more numbers.
While i agree that religion is lackluster, I think the associated legacy paths are actually fine. Getting the relics in different ways can be quite fun, an converting in distant lands in a coordinated move is also not very tedious. Keeping your religion for maximum bonuses, however, is something that isn‘t fun.
bumpyglint
Warlord
- Joined
- Aug 19, 2016
- Messages
- 213
Converting your cities solely to "blocks the founder's benefit from your opponents" is not a well-designed system.
Consider a game with four players: A, B, C, and D, each with different strategies:
- Player A: Focuses entirely on converting Player B's cities.
- Player B: Focuses entirely on converting Player A's cities.
- Player C: Splits efforts between converting Player D's cities and maintaining their own.
- Player D: Splits efforts between converting Player C's cities and maintaining their own.
In this scenario, the likely winners are A and B, while C and D struggle. Even though C and D might perform well in a one-on-one match, the dynamic changes drastically with more players. Those who ignore their own cities' religious integrity and focus solely on aggressive conversion gain a significant advantage. Meanwhile, C and D waste resources countering each other, ultimately weakening themselves while A and B prosper.
Adding a single policy that provides a marginal benefit for maintaining religious control isn't enough. While the policy offers decent advantages, it requires substantial investment in missionaries, culture/ civics, making it costly and inefficient.
It feels historically inaccurate that, during the Age of Exploration—an era marked by intense religious conflict—players can neglect religion in their core cities without consequence. Religion becomes merely a tool for military purposes (you get military points to convert your cities on distant lands) rather than a reflection of cultural or societal influence. Converting distant lands should be a secondary concern; maintaining religious cohesion at home should carry more strategic weight.
A more balanced system would reward players who invest in their core lands cities while still allowing strategic flexibility for offensive religious play. As it stands, the current mechanics encourage a counterintuitive approach that should definitely be improved, because playing converting your cities not in distant lands will not be optimal in 99% of scenarios.
Elhoim
Iron Tower Studio Dev
Yeah, it's definitely missing a relationship with Diplomacy (penalties for converting other player cities, warnings on converting your own, blocking a player's missionary) and some kind of defense.
StargazingDog
Prince
I guess you only read the first sentence.
Similar threads
