Nine Ideas

[REDY]

1)Its now
2)I disagree, its nice
3)OK
4)No they were influental only in colony-era
5)I think England and Spain are often quick in it and congress obviously give it to Europeans if some city is there. Maybe its fixed now?
6)I agree, I feel there should be more independent cities also on islands where is not possible go with army.
7)No Judaismus deserve it
8)I would be happy if it will be
9)OK

 

[Blasphemous]

Paganism should just give a bonus to cities whitout religion, that will be more than enough, there is no need for a building.

I like this approach. It will create some very interesting dynamics: you get this neat free bonus and the only thing that can ruin it is those damn codified religions... So you tiptoe around carefully but no matter what you do those damned religions start creeping in and ruining everything... And you hate them and there's little you can do against them, until you have the option to embrace them as your State Religion, and suddenly they're way better than the puny little bonus you used to have... And now you actually actively spread you new SR and you just love it!
I really like this!

 

[McA123]

Sounds like a much simpler solution.

 

[fearuin]

Other way to do it can be give a benefit for staying pagan AND without state religion. A +1 and +1 culture in every city, for example.

This can be that bonus. +1 culture and +1 is fine at start , because culture and happiness are scarce at the start, and if you get Slavery as civic (and you'll probably do) you will want this; but with a state religion you get a lot more, so it will be worth to convert, as soon as possible.

 

[Blasphemous]

I don't know about +1, it would mean a stupendous culture boost to anyone around in the early game and nobody around after the classical era...

 

[fearuin]

I don't know about +1, it would mean a stupendous culture boost to anyone around in the early game and nobody around after the classical era...

I haven't think of it that way... But you're right. "Classical Age" should be the rise of culture, not the fall! But +1 seems too little for me... maybe +2 ? That will mean you have to convert and build a temple to have the same effect (in happiness, I mean).

 

[Blasphemous]

I think +1 +1 would be fair. It's big, but not as big as what a real SR can get you.

 

[Phallus]

I like the suggestion that you need a temple dedicated to that religion in each city to make conversion worthwhile. If the AI can understand this, a Jewish Mediterranean will be less likely and we won't end up weakening Christianity or Islam.

 

[fearuin]

I think +1 +1 would be fair. It's big, but not as big as what a real SR can get you.

I thought on it, also. But I dissmissed the idea quickly. The reason? If you give more cash to a civ, it will become either more advanced technologically (because she can support a higher rate of research) or more powerful (because she can support more units abroad, or can upgrade units faster). It can also make them more prone to become victims of pillaging (diplomatic and by war) by other civs, what can counter-balance it, though. So, we must think: should pagan civs be richer than converted ones? If you think on Herodote wasting his monies touring around Egypt, I could agree.

However, I still support the idea of +2 . Not because I am stubborn (what can happen), but because of Phallus appreciation: I don't know AI can understand that she needs all cities to have a temple to make worthwhile the conversion, but indeed that such human perverts who love Slavery (like me, I must confess) will understand it in just a glimpse. In any case, some civs pound a lot the happiness of their people, more than others. That's the case of Greece, for example. Egypt loves culture, so she will convert on any case. Rome usually funds Christianism, so stays out. But Mongols, Aztecs and Incans can make this decision to be considered. I just hate to see that casually hinduism reached to an Incan city, and the turn after they convert to it.

 

[Phallus]

The problem is, I'm not sure if the AI would understand it. Russia may still convert as soon as Confucianism reaches Orenburg, meaning only the human player gets extra happiness/money.

 

[Blasphemous]

The problem is, I'm not sure if the AI would understand it. Russia may still convert as soon as Confucianism reaches Orenburg, meaning only the human player gets extra happiness/money.

They'll understand it just fine, since it will be in the Paganism Civic. They can understand Civics.
And you're right fearuin, gold is a bad idea. +2 is good. It also means there will be an initial happiness crash when paganism is driven out, which makes a lot of sense.

 

[fearuin]

It also means there will be an initial happiness crash when paganism is driven out, which makes a lot of sense.

Yes, that's the historical sense of that era of Christian zealots making paintings and vandalism (when not violently rioting) against the Roman emperor, and perishing in the Colosseum. I might recall also the riots in Japan when Portuguese Christian missionaries first reached there, in the late Renaissance. Not to mention the fall of the pagan african kingdoms, overthrown by christians (Ethiopia) and muslims (Mali, Ife, and other).

 

[sdLeo]

Yes, that's the historical sense of that era of Christian zealots making paintings and vandalism (when not violently rioting) against the Roman emperor, and perishing in the Colosseum.

I hate to break it to you, amigo gallego, but the idea that Christians were martyred in the Colosseum is from the 16th century, although today this idea is very widespread. There is no historical evidence to these claims, as recent studies have shown. But as I said, this story has been repeated so many times that it became truth.

(Sorry if my posts are sort of off-topic, I just like history a tad toooooo much)

 

[fearuin]

I hate to break it to you, amigo gallego, but the idea that Christians were martyred in the Colosseum is from the 16th century, although today this idea is very widespread. There is no historical evidence to these claims, as recent studies have shown. But as I said, this story has been repeated so many times that it became truth.

(Sorry if my posts are sort of off-topic, I just like history a tad toooooo much)

OK, OK. I comprehend you put it in doubt. In any case, were they martyrized in the Colosseum or not, they sure had been punished for betraying the "holy authority" (remember the Roman Emperor was also Pontifex Maximus, the heading religious authority) of the Emperor. Roman Law regulated the punishment for those crimes in the Edictum Praetoris, and there is no reason to think they didn't had it. I haven't the book in hand now, but I'm pretty sure one of these punishments was "die as slave in the Circus", but there were others (being precipited from the top of the Capitolium, I think)

Anyway, what I wanted to say is that changes from Paganism to any "Major religion" (the ones that appear in CIV) were always thraumathic, and a reduction of happiness would be a good way to show it.

 

[sdLeo]

Anyway, what I wanted to say is that changes from Paganism to any "Major religion" (the ones that appear in CIV) were always thraumathic, and a reduction of happiness would be a good way to show it.

Agreed. Heck, in cities where the religion is not the "official" one, we could even have population loss due to massacres (refusal to convert) or cultural loss due to destruction of pagan temples and what not. But that's just crazy me adding to the confusion, I guess

 

[fearuin]

Agreed. Heck, in cities where the religion is not the "official" one, we could even have population loss due to massacres (refusal to convert) or cultural loss due to destruction of pagan temples and what not. But that's just crazy me adding to the confusion, I guess

I think this is a good idea, but I have another opinion on how it should shown on the mod. The reason: we already have the period of anarchy to make the transition from non state religion to one.

What would be a good way to show this is to have a little percent (maybe a 5% would be right) of possibilities to fail a conversion on a city where there's no religion, and no state religion has been declared yet. When a conversion is failed (in any case, not only in the pagan one), the city may have a great increase of unhapiness for a few turns ("We don't want to abandon our faith" would be the motto), what can cause civil disorders, with its common effects: no production, culture, and possibilities of destruction of buildings and harming units garrisoned.

Also, the period of anarchy to convert to a state religion should be increased depending of the number of cities that have the chosen religion. So if a minority of believers tries to undertake the goverment, consequent chaos should be greater than if averyone believes in that faith. As long as you can see how much the revolt period will last, you decide if it is worth to do it, or not. I think the AI will understand this, as long as you don't usually see her to make "major changes" in her civics. She adopts a religion if she has just a city converted. But if you give her a bigger transition period, I think she will consider it better. However, a limit can be given; for example, 5 turns.

So, to summarize the pagan issue, this way we have: if Paganism gives a +2 on any city when there's no state religion and no religion is present in the city. If any religion happen to be spreaded "automatically", the +2 is lost. (The city adopts the religion, but the people are still aware of the "new faith"). When a missionary is sent to try a conversion, if he success, then the same effect is give. If he fails, the city gains a +10 (or a given number that probably puts the city in disorder, but a +10 , that is reduced by 1 each turn it's okay I think). When state religion is adopted, we have a period of anarchy (that depends on how many believers the faith it has in the civ). The result of all this modifications should be a reduction of the speed of spreading the religion, and the adoption of state religions, reflecting with reductions of happiness and increasing of unhappiness the effects on the mood of the people who sadly had to live in this periods.

So a long post, but I think this can conclude the debate on paganism!

 

[GoodGame]

On #2, the freebies are relative. Many of the medieval civ's weren't 'born' (at least they weren't nearly as recognizable as they are in the modern era) until the medieval era, but technologically competent people were living there. I find the freebies reasonable. It's better than playing out the migration of the Anglo-saxons, and their struggles with the Celts, Vikings, and Normandy.

#3 is arguable, but you can change it yourself in game, in the menu I believe.

On #7, I like having Judaism in the game. Rather, I'd recommend adding ethnically diverse Polytheisms (e.g. The Ancient Mediterranean mod). Hinduism shouldn't cap all the polytheisms, but there should Greek, Egyptian, and Roman ones at the least. Nordic ones as well to give an alternative to going Christian.

#8 would be excellent. A Protestant reformation schism (and a counter-reformation) at least, and maybe the option for a pretender pope (French schism).

First of all, I would like to repeat what everyone else has been saying: that this mod is truly awesome! I used to have plans of remaking my civ2 ‘Ascension of Europe’ scenario in civ4 but this mod is so much better than anything I had in mind that I see there’s no point! If it seems I’ve written a large number of suggestions here it’s only because I’m so inspired by this mod that I’ve been putting lots of thought into how it could be enriched even further.

So here, in no particular order, is my humble list of suggestions for future amendments:

 

[GoodGame]

I have to agree, Animism doesn't seem to go well with urbanization; Something like it might resurface in the modern/late Industrial era though to represent pseudo-scientific interest.

Zoro / Mitra / and a lot of other stable religions could exist in the modern world in my opinion----it just they weren't as charismatically championed in real life.

Zoroastrianism would solve two problems, Hindu-Persia and Jew-Europe. Animism would solve only Jew-Europe.

If we have Zoro or Animism, there should be an option to remove religion from a city. There aren't many animists or zoros in present world.

 

[fearuin]

I think there's no need to add more religions... what we need is to empower Paganism on the early era, so the AI and human players prefer to stay pagan at least for a while. My proposition goes on this way. I hate as much as everybody to see the Persians, Egyptians and Romans converting to Judaism, as well as the Mongolians to Confucianism (well, I'm not so versed in Oriental history as Mediterranean one, but I might recall the Mongolian were pagans until the invasion of China, at least). The solution, is not to swap Judaism or to add one or more religions, but to modify things a little to mantain paganism, which is the only thing in common which the historical religions of these civs have in common.

However, as long as I have seen, Christianism usually is the state religion of half of the civs in the game: all the european, all the american, and sometimes, Mali. So schisms would be a great addition, even if only Christian ones are added (I know, there are other schisms in almost all religions, but our problem is that europeans give a lot of importance to religion, and sharing one, there are few wars between them, except for the ones who starts the human player, and the ones who are linked to settling struggles).

 

[Blasphemous]

a. I agree there's nothing wrong with having Schisms only for Christianity if it saves work. It definitely shouldn't happen in religions with less than 10 civs sharing the religion as State Religion.
b. It would be a good idea to try the whole Paganism thing before adding another religion - Babylon, Rome, Persia, Greece, and Egypt might stay irreligious long enough for Christianity and Islam to fill in the blanks. Maybe Judaism could be the only religion not to cancel the Pagan bonuses, so it would spread slowly and not bother the Pagans (as far as their choice of SR) long enough for history to right itself.