Policy Discussion: Piety

[mystikx21]

I think the question on the piety picks is whether they offer a sufficient long-term gain to be worth the lack of short-term benefits, and not whether the AI is wasting its time. If the AI is wasting its time, then so, likely, would we.

The purchase pick offers a solid long-term benefit (if you have a religious building or warriors or a religion to spread). We can push it back to a point where it is closer to the actual benefit (requiring another policy perhaps first?), but it is otherwise fine structurally.

The tolerance pick does not as it is unpredictable, possibly useless, and often irrelevant. This is a bad design as it is inherently long-term but offers a very limited benefit.

Theocracy is probably somewhere in between, where it offers no immediate benefit (often), but will offer a benefit soon. The question there is whether the benefit is strong enough.

 

[Ahriman]

Filling out Piety before going into other trees (as is likely for the AI with the current choice of policies) deprives you of basic culture and gold generation

Other early policy trees don't give you much in terms of gold generation either. If we change theocracy to be +x gold rather than +X%, then Piety will be better in terms of early gold.

I agree that there probably needs to be something in there that helps with culture. I'm not sure the best way to do it though. As mentioned above, we're in danger of too many effects that boost shrines and temples.

a) Belief rebalancing (and reshuffling, f.e. heathen conversion to a Founder belief?), taking a look at overpowered combinations

Fine, but doesn't preclude redoing Piety.
And CEP has already done one belief balance pass IIRC?
I think my main complaint is that Founder beliefs aren't really powerful enough, spreading your religion benefits your neighbors almost as much as it benefits you.

b) Passive Spread vs. Trade Spread (only works if farther than passive) vs. Missionary / Missionary or Great Prophet Spam by the AI.
c) Leading to numbers of religion in each game and their spread.

I don't see a problem with the vanilla mechanics here.

d) The Faith Mountain in the late game.

Faith can be spent on great people. What's the problem?

e) Shrine vs. Temples imbalance

What's the problem? Temples were already boosted, though IMO the wrong way, I would prefer to increase their base faith than the faith on resources. I don't like the boosts on resources being too large. It's ok for minor flavor, but you don't have control over which resources are near you, and so it's frustrating if you can't play an effective faith game because you didn't get incense, and so forth.

And lastly: how religion ties into other game system like the World Congress and Tourism.

I don't think religion should tie into the World Congress, other than through the World Religion vote which we have already.
Religion ties into tourism already through the same religion spread bonus and through the Reformation belief and IIRC maybe 1-2 other beliefs, I don't think it should tie in further than that.
I don't think it should be compulsory to use a religious playstyle to play a tourism game.

There is also very poor synergy between Piety and Aesthetics, because neither of them give you happiness bonuses.

* * *

I think the question on the piety picks is whether they offer a sufficient long-term gain to be worth the lack of short-term benefits, and not whether the AI is wasting its time. If the AI is wasting its time, then so, likely, would we.

Right, the main problem is that some powers are just too weak, it's not that they're too long term.

 

[EricB]

I just see the Piety and religion system as broken, but I prefer a playstyle where many things are not available early in the game. Religions shouldn't appear in the ancient era, only pantheons. So, I double all faith costs. This has the effect of religions appearing in the classical and medieval eras, mostly classical.

I also push back Cargo ships to Compass so that caravans dominate until the medieval era. I know this isn't historically accurate, but it makes the game more interesting for me because I actually use caravans now.

I'm also trying out a first game experimenting with delaying policy trees until later eras. Piety is classical. Patronage and Aesthetics are medieval. Exploration and Commerce are renaissance. Rationalism is industrial. Ideologies are modern (no change there). Giving it a try.

So, I like to delay effects longer than most people. This gives me something to look forward to as I advance through the tech tree. Most people probably wouldn't like this, but I prefer a playstyle where each era feels a lot different. Having too many components of the game available early in the game makes it kind of boring, but I recognize that many people would feel the opposite way and want lots of choices on turn 1.

 

[xInVicTuSx]

I also push back Cargo ships to Compass so that caravans dominate until the medieval era. I know this isn't historically accurate, but it makes the game more interesting for me because I actually use caravans now.

I don't see the need so long as Cargo ships have the higher hammer cost and are difficult to protect.

 

[EricB]

I don't see the need so long as Cargo ships have the higher hammer cost and are difficult to protect.

Yeah I know it's not something that everyone would like. The reason for it is threefold. First, it makes caravans more important. I actually use them now. Second, the production cost for a Cargo Ship is so high in the ancient and classical eras that they take a very long time to build. The AI can't properly protect them, so they waste a ton of hammers building them only to have them pillaged. The AI is to dumb to know not to build them yet, so pushing them back to the medieval era makes the AI more competitive as they aren't wasting hammers on cargo ships anymore. Third, it gives me something to look forward to advancing through the tech tree.

I wouldn't expect everyone to agree, so I wouldn't push for that change in the mod. Just throwing it out there in case anyone wanted to give it a try. Makes the game more fun.

 

[xInVicTuSx]

By the way, does the AI use internal trade routes? Its always hard to tell.

 

[BroOfTheSun]

By the way, does the AI use internal trade routes? Its always hard to tell.

Yes they do. At least in unmodded BNW they do. In my current game, I saw Zulu use an internal trade route to one of their cities. It was one of their satellite cities, so they used the ITR to build it up.

 

[mystikx21]

b) I think a case can be made that faith generation in a city could play into passive spread mechanics (by increasing pressure or reducing conversion possibilities), but otherwise, I don't see a problem with the existing spread mechanics. The issue is how well the AI will use them, or how persistent it is at trying to spread when it doesn't have very good options to spread with (if it has no one else on the continent for example, building a lot of missionaries is a waste of faith).

d) I think realistically the issue is that there aren't very many good places to spend faith points prior to the late game when you can buy GPs. If you don't get pagodas/cathedrals, or don't take holy warriors, then there's little to do but accumulate in the early and middle game once a religion is enhanced and spreading passively.

More than likely since the human player tries to get a building or the faith-buying units effects, the AI religions aren't getting these and leads to building up prophets and missionaries at ridiculous levels. I still think we could consider moving an option for religious buildings to the social policy so they would at least have something to burn points on if they're a religious civ, and as would we. The pagoda/cathedral/mosque are some of the more powerful beliefs as it is. A simpler option is just to make holy sites more valuable (culture+gold) so at least if anyone engages in prophet spam, they get something for their effort.

 

[BroOfTheSun]

b) I think a case can be made that faith generation in a city could play into passive spread mechanics (by increasing pressure or reducing conversion possibilities), but otherwise, I don't see a problem with the existing spread mechanics. The issue is how well the AI will use them, or how persistent it is at trying to spread when it doesn't have very good options to spread with (if it has no one else on the continent for example, building a lot of missionaries is a waste of faith).

d) I think realistically the issue is that there aren't very many good places to spend faith points prior to the late game when you can buy GPs. If you don't get pagodas/cathedrals, or don't take holy warriors, then there's little to do but accumulate in the early and middle game once a religion is enhanced and spreading passively.

More than likely since the human player tries to get a building or the faith-buying units effects, the AI religions aren't getting these and leads to building up prophets and missionaries at ridiculous levels. I still think we could consider moving an option for religious buildings to the social policy so they would at least have something to burn points on if they're a religious civ, and as would we. The pagoda/cathedral/mosque are some of the more powerful beliefs as it is. A simpler option is just to make holy sites more valuable (culture+gold) so at least if anyone engages in prophet spam, they get something for their effort.

How about adding more faith bought buildings? They should be available to anyone with a religion (doesn't require a follower belief to build). It can also give you more options to use with piety policies, rather than stacking more and more bonuses on shrines/temples.

One example just to start with, is a faith bought building that increases pressure in the city it is built. Like a missionaries temple/church (is this just called a Mission?).

I also like the idea of tying small science bonuses with piety (since religion had a big part in education and writing in history). How about a faith bought science building?

You could probably take this further with faith bought units (can't be made with hammers or bought with gold), like some type of crusader unit. These would be unique units that can only be bought with faith, and separate from Holy Warriors belief.

 

[mystikx21]

We could convert the monastery to a faith bought policy building maybe and make it a science related effect? It really is unnecessary overkill to have a bonus faith percentage building other than the grand temple NW. My thinking was to make the cathedral/mosque/pagoda options buildable this way but somehow lock to one per city rather than add more buildings. We could attach religious pressure to those instead of temples as desired.

 

[Ahriman]

We could convert the monastery to a faith bought policy building maybe and make it a science related effect? It really is unnecessary overkill to have a bonus faith percentage building other than the grand temple. My thinking was to make the cathedral/mosque/pagoda options buildable this way but somehow lock to one per city rather than add more buildings.

I'd support this. Maybe +1 happiness, +3 science, +1 faith?

My one concern is that then with the reformation policy that gives tourism from purchased buildings, and 2 follower slots, you could be getting +6 tourism per city from quite early in the game.

 

[mystikx21]

Right, the idea would be limiting it to one per, mostly because the buildings are already decent, but also because otherwise there's a ton of tourism available.

But the monastery conversion makes more sense honestly.

 

[BroOfTheSun]

Right, the idea would be limiting it to one per, mostly because the buildings are already decent, but also because otherwise there's a ton of tourism available.

But the monastery conversion makes more sense honestly.

How about 1 per religion instead of per city? If you limit to one per city, it takes away one of the benefits of having another civ's religion spreading to your city, in that you can buy the faith building for that religion.

It's not a big deal, but I always thought that was a fun part to spreading religion in unmodded BNW.

 

[Ahriman]

Right, the idea would be limiting it to one per, mostly because the buildings are already decent

Are you saying that Pagoda, Cathedral, Mosque and Monastery would block each other? That would be a problem. If the monastery is from a Piety policy, then anyone who goes Piety is effectively blocked from getting a religion with a Pagoda/Cathedral/Mosque belief (or must waste a policy pick if they do so).

Since it is already possible to get 2 belief buildings and the tourism reformation belief, it might be more effective to merely stop any religion from picking 2 of Pagoda/Cathedral/Mosque as both beliefs, which then would mean that you could get one belief building and the monastery policy building.

but also because otherwise there's a ton of tourism available.

With all the culture increases on buildings, I think we might have not quite enough tourism in general; maybe great works (but not artifacts) should go up to 3 tourism? They're a bit weak at 2 each. For a great engineer I can get 8 production, but for a great writer I can only get 2 culture and 2 tourism, and it requires a great work slot.

If you limit to one per city, it takes away one of the benefits of having another civ's religion spreading to your city, in that you can buy the faith building for that religion.

Are you sure? I thought that in G&K at least if you lost majority religion in a city, then you lose all effects of its beliefs, including the belief building. I thought I remembered a Pagoda from my religion disappear when someone converted my city with a great prophet from a religion that had Mosques, and then I gained the opportunity to buy a mosque, but when I used an inquisitor to remove the other religion the mosque disappeared and the pagoda reappeared.

But I might be remembering wrong.

 

[mystikx21]

Pagoda/cathedral/mosque should block each other under that logic. I think it's probably fine to go with the monastery as a non-belief building, and then one of those three.

I would prefer if the beliefs were exclusive yes.

 

[BroOfTheSun]

Are you sure? I thought that in G&K at least if you lost majority religion in a city, then you lose all effects of its beliefs, including the belief building. I thought I remembered a Pagoda from my religion disappear when someone converted my city with a great prophet from a religion that had Mosques, and then I gained the opportunity to buy a mosque, but when I used an inquisitor to remove the other religion the mosque disappeared and the pagoda reappeared.

But I might be remembering wrong.

Yea, pretty sure (with unmodded BNW) that once you buy a faith bought building (pagoda/cathedral/mosque/monastery), it stays in your city. Changing religions does not take away that building, or it's benefits.

 

[Anvari]

darn ... i just typed 4k characters and i deleted it with a press on BACK at my mouse...


The most problems you guys describing now had already been solved with GEM. And it a cool solution.

1) Opportunities: We had them with Gold and other things and Thal expanded them with Faith.
2) GEM had all Belief-Buidlings purchasable without the Belief. I think this is a nice solution because you always have useful things to buy. I don't know about multiple Belief-Buildings in one city but i assume we had one or two max.
3) I think we had all civilian units purchasable without any requirement. That includes Settler, Worker and Workboat and could now be expanded to Caravan and Freighter. (don't know the name, played BNW on german, sorry ;P)

Additionally 4) We have a lot more GP now compared to G&K which is also a nice way to spend your faith if you aiming for a cultural victory.

One additional idea. What about Holy Warrior. We could introduce this as a Policy.
- we could throw Religious Tolerance out (yay)
- Holy Warrior could be a requirement for Mandate of Heaven
- Holy Warrior is this way available got everyone. You don't get screwed because couldn't get your Religion up ASAP. Because HW works only until Industrial Era, it isn't overpowered. I think it should be fairly easy to get the AI to use this, considering they invest often in Piety now.
- Holy Warrior is "part one" of the purchasable units, the second part comes from a Reformation Belief which is also available as a Social Policy. (Consistency)


Another thing: i wouldn't mix Faith and Science because it would be strange. ATM Faith is a mix from Gold and Culture, because you can get bonuses (beliefs), same as with Culture and you can buy stuff (not so much now).

 

[mystikx21]

GEM didn't have the belief buildings purchasable without beliefs. Or faith-based opportunities (yet). I'm in general agreement though that the problem such things would solve is rather limited to not having something to spend it on (either units or useful buildings).

 

[Ahriman]

Yea, pretty sure (with unmodded BNW) that once you buy a faith bought building (pagoda/cathedral/mosque/monastery), it stays in your city. Changing religions does not take away that building, or it's benefits.

Thanks. I wonder if this was a change from G&K to BNW, or I just imagined seeing it in the first place?

 

[agc28]

If we kill religious tolerance, can we also kill Candi please?