Poll: Founders vs. non-founders, a few ideas to discuss

[CrazyG]

I really think the current state of founders encourages you take followers that provide heavily over other yields. Nerfing the best founder beliefs will help follower balance on it's own.

1. Aesceticism and Mandirs are weak partially because Apostolic Tradition can do their job but better. This one belief makes most other source nearly irrelevant.
   
2. Way of the Pilgrim is very good for any strategy involving city-states. This hurts beliefs since it largely replaces the need for gold to buy diplo units, instead you want to get open borders or ocean crossing faster.
   
3. Seperate issue, but if from AI gets resolved, that moves Thrift, Cathedrals, and Diligence back into consideration for me

None of these civs are really considered top tier right now anyways.

What?
Celts, Byz, and Ethiopia have always been top tier and certainly remain so on this patch.
India does suck right now, but that's because of strong founder beliefs. He can't use Apostolic Tradition and Way of the Pilgrim, nerf those and he becomes much stronger as a civ.

I'm not sympathetic to the idea that players should uniquely rewarded for just "diving" on a specific yield type. shall we discuss special abilities to give players that didn't found ideologies next?

Well we kind of did, but it's a very different situation regardless.

 

[HungryForFood]

What if a civ's pantheon belief always gives its bonus?

That way, non-founders get to have two pantheon beliefs while founders have only one.

 

[pineappledan]

you’re talking about giving a unique wonder/policy to whoever didn’t found. That’s not what was done to ideologies. You don’t get a special science building for being the bottom 3 for culture generation in the game, yet you think it’s fine to get a unique science building for having the bottom 3 faith generation in a standard game?

Perhaps this is tangential, but I think reforming is too easy right now. It’s pretty much a foregone conclusion that if I found I will eventually also reform. Raising the % population requirement would have the effect of fewer beliefs in the game overall and a higher investment requirement for reformers makes it costlier and later to reform.

 

[pineappledan]

India does suck right now, but that's because of strong founder beliefs. He can't use Apostolic Tradition and Way of the Pilgrim, nerf those and he becomes much stronger as a civ.

Another reason why I think we should replace 1 on-spread founder entirely or combine the two into a single missionary spread belief:

Pilgrimage
When you spread your Religion to cities other than your Holy City, Receive 10 Food in Holy City based on the number of followers converted and 10 Tourism, scaling with the number of Followers of other Religions.

Then there is only 1/9 unpickable founders for India

 

[tothePAIN]

Council of Elders as well

 

[pineappledan]

CoE is at least somewhat usable by India, whereas the other two strictly require missionaries to work at all. CoE yields proc when a city converts to your religion via any method (founding, GProphet spread, passive spread). You will still get yields from CoE as India, but you don’t have much control over when passive spread will flip a city, so it just makes CoE harder to use.

 

[CrazyG]

Pilgrimage
When you spread your Religion to cities other than your Holy City, Receive 10 Food in Holy City based on the number of followers converted and 10 Tourism, scaling with the number of Followers of other Religions.

I'm fine with this idea, I just want to note that if you support this, you do support nerfing the strong founder beliefs, because this is incredibly weak in comparison the current apostolic tradition or way of the pilgrim.

Perhaps this is tangential, but I think reforming is too easy right now. It’s pretty much a foregone conclusion that if I found I will eventually also reform. Raising the % population requirement would have the effect of fewer beliefs in the game overall and a higher investment requirement for reformers makes it costlier and later to reform.

I think we need to lower overall faith output a little bit to make reforming harder. I remember in older patches racing to get Fealty and Hagia Sophia quickly so I could enhance while spreading fast, but these days I enhance and reform consistently without Fealty, a wonder, or a civ's faith bonus.


Also, since you are concerned about Byz and Ethiopia, if regular faith output is lowered a little bit, it raises the relative value of the Stele or Tetranoch.

 

[Kim Dong Un]

On a somewhat similar topic, but I'm still of the opinion that taking 2 religious buildings is ultimately superior 9/10 times, regardless of the civ or situation.

 

[Stalker0]

On a somewhat similar topic, but I'm still of the opinion that taking 2 religious buildings is ultimately superior 9/10 times, regardless of the civ or situation.

the issue with 2 religious buildings is it consumes a lot of faith early on to get those buildings up....so either:

• Your focusing on spreading, and therefore not getting the building benefits for a while.
• Get the buildings early, which delays spread founder bonuses and enhancement.

1 building I agree is really good, 2 can be tricky unless you have a strong faith engine.

 

[pineappledan]

I'm fine with this idea, I just want to note that if you support this, you do support nerfing the strong founder beliefs, because this is incredibly weak in comparison the current apostolic tradition or way of the pilgrim.

I do support it, yes, but I also expressed some concerns that nerfs need to be mindful of how religious civs rely on beliefs for their power. I can do both things.

I could put my ideas in the founder balance thread

 

[azum4roll]

The reform percentage was lowered to 15% from 20% I think? Should we raise it back to 20%? I don't think reducing faith sources is a good idea since it affects GP purchase later on too.

 

[Stalker0]

The reform percentage was lowered to 15% from 20% I think? Should we raise it back to 20%? I don't think reducing faith sources is a good idea since it affects GP purchase later on too.

Reforms are a bit opponent dependent though. Yes if you have a nighbor that didn't found, its pretty easy to just spread and reform. But if all your neighbors are religious, it can be trickier.

If nothing else, if we do raise it back, make it like 18% or something, we don't have to go a full 5% on this one.

 

[pineappledan]

Just want to note that @HungryForFood put his money where his mouth is, and made a mod that allows non-founders to keep their pantheon beliefs.

It's an interesting idea, and I suggest people try it if they care about this topic.
https://forums.civfanatics.com/threads/religion-permanent-pantheons.670446/

 

[usadefcon1]

TBH this is the easiest solution. No quirks, no quips, just nerfs.

G

What if each religion had a conversion bonus: a one time yield bump to ANY civ that spreads the religion to another city. The yield type would be picked when the religion was founded.

 

[tothePAIN]

The reform percentage was lowered to 15% from 20% I think? Should we raise it back to 20%? I don't think reducing faith sources is a good idea since it affects GP purchase later on too.

Its still 20%. Only 15% with Cathedral of St Basil.

 

[pineappledan]

It says 15% in game (10% with Basil)