No point in religion?

[Commissar_Yari]

Having read that the religions do not give individual benefits, is there really a point? It seems to me that if the religions are all essentially the same (just with different names) then it's not really a new "feature" as such, simply another form of trade or conflict between civs.

I know they don't want to offend anybody, but giving all religions the same attributes seems kind of silly to me. Thoughts?

 

[GeneralZed]

It's so silly that I doubt it will be so.

 

[Ramalhão]

I think it will be used mainly for diplomatic contacts. AIs may tend to be cooperative with civilizations who chose the same religion and possibly will avoid to contact civs with a different religion.

There's also buildings and wonders who will require some specific religion.

 

[Tomoyo]

I believe each religion has it's requisite technology.

 

[mudblood]

But honestly, what traits could you give each religion that wouldn't offend one or another of its faithful? I don't like how PC Firaxis is being over terrorism, but you can't blame them on this one. If, for example, you gave Islam the power of the jihad, you end up getting into all sorts of trouble because you defined Islam as violent, or because jihad isn't necessarily a military struggle and can also be a personal or social struggle, and then what do you end up with to differentiate religions, since they all teach morality, justice, and right and wrong? Islam, the power of the non-representational image?

Religion is an extension of the old culture groups from Civ III, except now you get to choose who will look on you more favorably. And it's an important change for the AI. There will be reasons why civs choose to attack one civ over another now, and different factions will mean that the largest civ isn't necessarily the strongest civ. If it's done right, it can have a huge anti-snowball effect, which is a huge gameplay advantage right there.

 

[Gogf]

Presumably they'll all be the same, but there won't necessarily be enough for each Civilization.

It would be nice to have certain traits to the religions, but it would undoubtly offend people.

 

[North King]

I completely agree with you there; the religion factor is nearly useless. Therefore, I'm going to focus all my efforts into making every civilization Buddhist, for the fun of it.

As for offending religions? Bull. I've seen many good games pull off giving bonuses to every religion, and I've rarely seen it offend someone.

Case in point: Europa Universalis. Sunni Islam has a stability bonus, Shiite Islam has better morale for their troops, Catholicism has a stability bonus, Protestantism has better colonization and trade, Buddhism has... I forget, lol, Hinduism has a morale bonus and extra stability.

But in any case, they are all play blanced so none is necessarily better on an absolute scale than any other, while different religions better fit your style of play.

This is the system they should have in Civ 4, I think.

Also note the entire game is utterly moddable, so if the players were offended by religion's bonuses, they could easily enough change them to something else, or remove them altogether.

 

[Vael]

Just because religions aren't differentiated from each other doesn't mean they can't interact to make religion an interesting new component for Civ.

Oh, and mudblood:

What if you say something and you're wrong but Firaxis listens and makes a worse game?

 

[mudblood]

Oh, and mudblood:

What if you say something and you're wrong but Firaxis listens and makes a worse game?

Yeah, I was hoping no one would notice that.

 

[player1 fanatic]

There is a good reason why religions have no unique bonuses.

It prevents discussions like "X regligion is better then Y", or "why Religion Z is portraied as militaristic", or "these bonuses don't fit religion W at all".

It's called political correctness.

 

[Zoldin]

I liked how other games handled religon, facts only. Such as Shogun: Total War. If you coverted to the religon of the foreigners you could no longer train Buddhist Monks. Simple and easy.

Like they said it will make some wonders and buildings available. I also guess it would add to unrest if you conquered a city belonging to another religon.

 

[Aussie_Lurker]

A simple solution would have been to have all religions START as generic, but then have the religion aquire traits over the course of the game. What traits it would gain would depend on the civics choices, leader choice and play-style of the founding civ. So, if you found the Hindu faith, and then adopt a Xenophobic view of different 'culture groups', then Hinduism in that game might aquire a Fundamentalist trait, which makes you more resistant to religious conversion, but also gives you a penalty in dealing with civs outside of your faith (even if they are from the same culture group).
The thing is, though, that anyone who ADOPTS Hinduism in this game will get the Fundamentalist trait as well. If, however, a Hindu civ changes its civics settings to Multicultural, then there is a chance of either a change in the underlying trait of Hinduism (from Fundamentalist to Ecumenicist) or a chance of an ecumenicist sect of Hinduism forming. Aside from that, though, I think there could have been some very basic starting traits which would probably have not offended anyone-these could have been:

All the Monotheistic Faiths (Judaism, Christianity and Islam) have a greater chance of converting other cities, but are also more prone to sectarianism.

The Polytheistic Faiths (Hinduism so far) have a lesser chance of converting other cities, but are also less prone to sectarianism.

The Non-Deist Faiths (Daoism and Bhuddism) have an even lesser chance of converting other cities, but are also even less prone to sectarianism.

Pagan Faiths have the least chance of converting other cities, but also the least chance of sectarianism.

These two trait systems could be fairly easily adopted into the game, without causing any real offence to anyone, as the traits do not accrue to any SPECIFIC religion (i.e. no-one is saying that Christianity is more prone to sectarianism, or religious conversion, than Islam or Judaism-it all comes down to how persistant you-the player- are in trying to 'spread the word', either with missionaries or through your religious buildings and the 'culture' they produce).
Well, here's hoping that this will be in for future expansions-at the very least.

Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.

 

[bob rulz]

If they're going to make religions simply for relations between civs, then they should probably split up Christianity into Orthodoxy, Catholicism, and Protestantism, since the three haven't exactly gotten along great in the past...then split Islam into Shi'ite and Sunni as well.

 

[Bluemofia]

I thought they already did that.

 

[Ranbir]

They should have religion like they have made Government.
Customisable, and no set standards. They did it to Government, why aren't they doing that with religion off the bat?

The seven religions I see mentioned aren't even the top 7 religions in the world. It's silly. I sent an e-mail to "Ask Sid". Hopefully I'll get a reply from Sid himself clarifying the religion aspect because this something that might end up so so wrong.

Giving "positives/negatives" to religion is quite offensive. Who are they to judge? Really, give us customisable religions, pleaaase Sid pleaaase!

 

[Aussie_Lurker]

But they HAVEN'T given 'positives/negatives' to religion. But I don't see ANY reason why a religion can't AQUIRE said 'positives/negatives' in the course of a game-'no fuss, no muss' as they say.

Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.

 

[North King]

They should at least put the option for bonii in there--easier to take it away than add it.

 

[puglover]

Religion is pretty pointless in a civilization game.

 

[Xineoph]

Religion is pretty pointless in a civilization game.

Religion has been an important part in civilization, since forever.

As for religion bonuses, i don't agree so much to it....

I think there should be bonuses to the religion, on how long it's lasted in the area. Like harder to convert or somthing.

Or better yet, take the core beliefs of the 7 religions, and if at any point the civ is a theocracy and acts different then how the religion should act, the religion would have a schism.

So Islam to Sunni and Shia
Hinduism to Hindu and Sikh
Buddhism to ...Thravada and Mahayana....or however it's spelt and etc.


There would be no difference, in theory bonus wise, but it would increase unrest in cities, where the new sect, might want to split off and make it's own country.

Just look what's happening in Ireland, or in Pakistan, Israel and Iraq.

Lots of religious conflicts.

 

[Darwin420]

Not to be picky, but....

Taken from Dictionary.com (with corresponding link):

pa·gan ( P ) Pronunciation Key (pgn)
n.
One who is not a Christian, Muslim, or Jew, especially a worshiper of a polytheistic religion.

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=pagan

I think you're meaning Pagan to be one of the ancient Earth and/or Goddess-based religions.

I think this again illustrates the precarious position that religion has in this game. I'm waiting to see how they do it, but I'm not holding my breath for anything spectacular.

Personally, I'd like to see the option for Humanism, Agnosticism, and Atheism. Although technically not a "religion" per se, they serve the same functions as dictated a system of belief.