Just finished my sweep of starts to see if there are any initial tech/civic conflicts, and have uncovered exactly one problem: Columbia starts with Ideology, but not Journalism.
I started a game as Egypt. There were plenty of problems.
Firstly, the description of Egypt's UP is unchanged. It says about Dynasticism, Slavery and Pantheon. In fact, they get Monarchy, Redistribution and Deification. I think that they should start with Despotism instead of Monarchy. It's more realistic and useful, because building wonders is faster with pop rushes.
Secondly, the pop ups about new civics are either wrong or empty.
Thirdly, the Egyptian UHV seems impossible. Babilon gets a lot of free techs and beelines the Pyramids.
P.S. Thanks for the great mod which I play about the year.
P.P.S. Sorry for possible mistakes, I'm from Russia.
How will this work outside of the Mediterranean? Will India have a unique pagan religion/will its pagan religion just be Hinduism? If it is, will that mean India goes Buddhist 100% of the time, or that Rome or Vikings will stay pagan about as often as India stays Hindu? Will there no longer be a special civic for paganism? Can I be a fanatical pagan and build religious persecutors as a pagan? Will Japan be able to win a pagan religious victory without having to conquer the Middle East?
Also, is it really intended for some civs to start with incompatible civics? For instance, 1700 AD Korea starts with Meritocracy and Caste System, but they are incompatible as shown in the civics screen.
In 600ad and 1700ad scenario, I can't use any civs not born in 600ad and 1700ad. And civs have no initial techs, everything needs only 1 production/beaker and so on.
How will this work outside of the Mediterranean? Will India have a unique pagan religion/will its pagan religion just be Hinduism? If it is, will that mean India goes Buddhist 100% of the time, or that Rome or Vikings will stay pagan about as often as India stays Hindu? Will there no longer be a special civic for paganism? Can I be a fanatical pagan and build religious persecutors as a pagan? Will Japan be able to win a pagan religious victory without having to conquer the Middle East?
Tigranes is correct, this is eye candy only. Basically, the generic "no state religion" button has been replaced with a civ specific one, and all references to "no state religion" have been replaced with whatever their pagan religion name is. Conceptually, it is trying to reflect how all civs have their own native religion even with no major religion present, and that something like "no state religion" does not really make sense historically.
The main target of this is the classical mediterranean, because that is where civs starting with no state religion are most prevalent, but excepting Arabia and Ethiopia, I have a (maybe shared) pagan religion for every civ of varying fidelity. For example, Andean and Mesoamerican polytheism is represented as Inti and Teotl. India's pagan religion is called Vedism, referring to the Vedic religion that was the precursor of Hinduism. Since those options are strictly about ahistorical choices, we can be more liberal here in my opinion.
There no longer is a civic for paganism, and the removal of this option is what prompted the current focus. You are pagan if you are not adhering to a major religion, which makes sense intuitively with no extra civic needed. I've added the flavour art/text to make this more apparent and immersive.
The fanaticism civic also does not exist any more (scroll up a bit for the brand new civics list), but now you can be a theocratic pagan, but paganism itself is not treated as a (major) religion, so you will not gain any benefits from state religion. Likewise, persecutors still require state religion, so currently you cannot build them, but I might change that aspect.
The URVs remain unchanged (you get the old Pantheon URV when you have no state religion selected). I don't know if conceptually there should be a pagan religion specific URV, because they are tied to civilisations, so in effect every civ would need to have another civ specific set of victory conditions. But maybe one of the URV conditions could be civ specific while the others aren't? I need to think about it.
Also, is it really intended for some civs to start with incompatible civics? For instance, 1700 AD Korea starts with Meritocracy and Caste System, but they are incompatible as shown in the civics screen.
In 600ad and 1700ad scenario, I can't use any civs not born in 600ad and 1700ad. And civs have no initial techs, everything needs only 1 production/beaker and so on.
I still think we need to address this issue. Leoreth, ballistic missile submarines are a real game changer. They can fire missiles thousands of kilometers from their targets, and acoustic quieting makes them difficult to detect, thus making them a survivable deterrent in the event of a first strike and a key element of the mutual assured destruction policy of nuclear deterrence.What is wrong with an idea to give IBCMs finite range and make Nuclear Subs capable of carrying regular and nuclear missiles?
I still think we need to address this issue. Leoreth, ballistic missile submarines are a real game changer. They can fire missiles thousands of kilometers from their targets, and acoustic quieting makes them difficult to detect, thus making them a survivable deterrent in the event of a first strike and a key element of the mutual assured destruction policy of nuclear deterrence.What is wrong with an idea to give IBCMs finite range and make Nuclear Subs capable of carrying regular and nuclear missiles?
Not sure if that is actually possible using XML, I don't think it's important enough to write custom code around it. I'll make a note to give it a look.
Don't you think that Mongols starting with 3 Bombards could make Genghis Khan turn in his grave? They didn't even have Trebuchets when they invaded China, but Bombards? I understand starting units depend on the initial techs, but still those bombards look very much out of timeline and out of place.
Tigranes is correct, this is eye candy only. Basically, the generic "no state religion" button has been replaced with a civ specific one, and all references to "no state religion" have been replaced with whatever their pagan religion name is. Conceptually, it is trying to reflect how all civs have their own native religion even with no major religion present, and that something like "no state religion" does not really make sense historically.
The main target of this is the classical mediterranean, because that is where civs starting with no state religion are most prevalent, but excepting Arabia and Ethiopia, I have a (maybe shared) pagan religion for every civ of varying fidelity. For example, Andean and Mesoamerican polytheism is represented as Inti and Teotl. India's pagan religion is called Vedism, referring to the Vedic religion that was the precursor of Hinduism. Since those options are strictly about ahistorical choices, we can be more liberal here in my opinion.
There no longer is a civic for paganism, and the removal of this option is what prompted the current focus. You are pagan if you are not adhering to a major religion, which makes sense intuitively with no extra civic needed. I've added the flavour art/text to make this more apparent and immersive.
The fanaticism civic also does not exist any more (scroll up a bit for the brand new civics list), but now you can be a theocratic pagan, but paganism itself is not treated as a (major) religion, so you will not gain any benefits from state religion. Likewise, persecutors still require state religion, so currently you cannot build them, but I might change that aspect.
The URVs remain unchanged (you get the old Pantheon URV when you have no state religion selected). I don't know if conceptually there should be a pagan religion specific URV, because they are tied to civilisations, so in effect every civ would need to have another civ specific set of victory conditions. But maybe one of the URV conditions could be civ specific while the others aren't? I need to think about it.
The eye candy is greatly appreciated! Although I think that pagan religions should work in the same way as the other ones, ie., there's no reason why Mesoamerican polytheism wouldn't yield the same bonus to the Aztecs as Hinduism to the Indians, if a state is theocratic. And ideally religious prosecutors and all other features should be available to the human player (I understand if not to the AI), to allow for alternative history games.
Re: Arabia and Ethiopia, check this out from Wikipedia's Kingdom of Aksum article: Before its conversion to Christianity, the Aksumites practiced a polytheistic religion related to the religion practiced in southern Arabia. This included the use of the crescent-and-disc symbol used in southern Arabia and the northern horn.[39] In the UNESCO sponsored General History of Africa French archaeologist Francis Anfray. suggests that the pagan Aksumites worshipped Astar, his son, Mahrem, and Beher.[40. So you could give them the same polytheism symbol, although to be strict they are referring to Yemen and the religion in central Arabia would be closer to Semitic Polytheism (what you would have for Phoenicia).
There is one question I'd have, which is what happens when you want to be secular or atheistic (ie, like communism in Russia or China) - it wouldn't make sense for the choice to revert to that ancient religion. So perhaps, nothing would be selected instead in the religion advisor screen?
Don't you think that Mongols starting with 3 Bombards could make Genghis Khan turn in his grave? They didn't even have Trebuchets when they invaded China, but Bombards? I understand starting units depend on the initial techs, but still those bombards look very much out of timeline and out of place.
The eye candy is greatly appreciated! Although I think that pagan religions should work in the same way as the other ones, ie., there's no reason why Mesoamerican polytheism wouldn't yield the same bonus to the Aztecs as Hinduism to the Indians, if a state is theocratic. And ideally religious prosecutors and all other features should be available to the human player (I understand if not to the AI), to allow for alternative history games.
But they are not at all religions in the game mechanics sense, they do not spread to cities etc. I have chosen this approach to represent these religions (featured commonly in discussions about "minor religions") without opening that can of worms and all the problems that would arise from that.
Re: Arabia and Ethiopia, check this out from Wikipedia's Kingdom of Aksum article: Before its conversion to Christianity, the Aksumites practiced a polytheistic religion related to the religion practiced in southern Arabia. This included the use of the crescent-and-disc symbol used in southern Arabia and the northern horn.[39] In the UNESCO sponsored General History of Africa French archaeologist Francis Anfray. suggests that the pagan Aksumites worshipped Astar, his son, Mahrem, and Beher.[40. So you could give them the same polytheism symbol, although to be strict they are referring to Yemen and the religion in central Arabia would be closer to Semitic Polytheism (what you would have for Phoenicia).
I ended up having them share Anunnaki, the Mespotamian pantheon.
There is one question I'd have, which is what happens when you want to be secular or atheistic (ie, like communism in Russia or China) - it wouldn't make sense for the choice to revert to that ancient religion. So perhaps, nothing would be selected instead in the religion advisor screen?
But they are not at all religions in the game mechanics sense, they do not spread to cities etc. I have chosen this approach to represent these religions (featured commonly in discussions about "minor religions") without opening that can of worms and all the problems that would arise from that.
Ah, well I guess that makes sense if these religions won't be shown in the cities. I hope one day you want to open that can of worms, I think it would be fantastic!
Not sure if that is actually possible using XML, I don't think it's important enough to write custom code around it. I'll make a note to give it a look.
Isn't this exactly how Submarine units work in BTS? They can carry both Guided Missiles and Tactical Nukes (which are essentially limited range ICBMs)?
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
