Proposal: Realistic religions mod. COMMENTS NEEDED.

[MRM]

What's not mentioned here - for a realistic religion mod - take away the advantage of having more than one religion. Different Religions in different citys should cause a risk of a civil war ( f.e. if hindu is your state religion and 3 of your cities have islam as a religion, they may try to split of your empire, india - pakistan )

And several religions in a city should cause unhappines, especially under theocraty and oranised religion, lesser under pacifism and freedom of religion. I don't see any example of having more religions in a city causes more happiness ( at best it causes not less ), but many of having many religions in a city causes trouble ...

to balance this, the player should be able to convert wrong religions ( inqusition, available under theocraty )


- and to the other issues - I agree there should be more ancient religions in ( many of them lasted far longer than the modern ones exist ) , and taking out judaism ( not a world religion, stick to their own people ) and konfucianism ( not a real religion ) may be a way to do this. Other way would be the concept on national religions - and no, its not the same as culture, because you cannot build temples.

Edit : And an alternativ fordifferen traits for religion might be a UU for each religion ( that automaticly disband if you change your state religion )

Edit2 - and anarchy should last longer if you change your state religion

 

[maxpublic]

I don't see any example of having more religions in a city causes more happiness ( at best it causes not less ), but many of having many religions in a city causes trouble ...

Just about every major city in America has adherents to Christianity (a huge number of different brands), Islam, Judaism, Buddhism, and a host of lesser-known faiths, yet we have very little religious strife - none, in Civ 4 terms. The 'happiness' effect here is that you can worship whatever gods you like - or none at all - and the extremist elements of other religions can't do a thing to you. We have *never* had a religious-based uprising of any sort, nor is there any reason to believe that we will ever have one any time in the near (or far) future.

Max

 

[MRM]

Just about every major city in America has adherents to Christianity (a huge number of different brands), Islam, Judaism, Buddhism, and a host of lesser-known faiths, yet we have very little religious strife - none, in Civ 4 terms. The 'happiness' effect here is that you can worship whatever gods you like - or none at all - and the extremist elements of other religions can't do a thing to you. We have *never* had a religious-based uprising of any sort, nor is there any reason to believe that we will ever have one any time in the near (or far) future.

Max

That's what I mean at best it causes not less happines ) If you have a christian city in america and suddenly there are moving in more buddist and moslem - at best there is no trouble - but there is not more happiness ( like in civ 4 when you build a temple for each religion )

+ I said it depends on your religion civic, I guess you have no theocraty in america ( at least not yet )

Edit : maybe the temple problem can be solved if you have to build a temple for each religion in order to get the advantage of a temple ...

 

[maxpublic]

That's what I mean at best it causes not less happines ) If you have a christian city in america and suddenly there are moving in more buddist and moslem - at best there is no trouble - but there is not more happiness ( like in civ 4 when you build a temple for each religion )

Our cities aren't defined by the religious affiliations of the majority of citizens. It doesn't matter if 90% of the citizenry is christian, you can still open a Jewish temple or a Muslim mosque without encountering problems. There are hate crimes, of course, but just about everyone qualifies as a target for SOMEONE's preferred hate crime.

Where the 'happiness' comes in is that without that option - if, for instance, some form of christianity were to become the state religion - everyone who wasn't christian, or the 'right kind' of christian, would become very, very unhappy. So the happiness is there, you just don't see it because religious freedom is ingrained into our society (despite what some fanatics would like to see). Take away the freedom and you have lots of unhappiness; add it in and you have lots of happiness. America already has the bonus of happiness working for it.

If you need a comparison, just take a look at any number of countries around the world where religious intolerance is part and parcel of daily life. Much unhappiness. Give them religious freedom and there would be less unhappiness (net effect = more happiness).

I said it depends on your religion civic, I guess you have no theocraty in america ( at least not yet )

Nor will we. The extreme religious right is a tiny minority of Americans, less than 3 million people in a nation of 285 million. They're just very, very loud and the press loves to cover them because they're so obnoxious. Kinda like PETA; hardly anyone belongs to the organization but any time some dude from PETA opens his mouth the press just HAS to blast whatever nonsense they're spouting all over the airwaves. Why? Because it ticks people off, and that translates into ratings.

Our fringe groups always get an inordinate amount of airtime. The fringe sells for the same reason that Jerry Springer just keeps on trucking: people love to watch the freaks do tricks in the electronic circus. This gives the rest of the world, who get their information on America largely from TV, a very skewed view of how things are over here.

In any event, the religious freedom = happiness thing really does work. I live it every day.

Max

 

[MRM]

Our cities aren't defined by the religious affiliations of the majority of citizens. It doesn't matter if 90% of the citizenry is christian, you can still open a Jewish temple or a Muslim mosque without encountering problems. There are hate crimes, of course, but just about everyone qualifies as a target for SOMEONE's preferred hate crime.

Yes - in best case it don't matter - but the christians don't get suddenly more happy just because there is a mosque not, do they ? But this is how CIV4 works at the moment - have 5 religions in a city and build 5 temples and then you get 5 happiness points

But thats not how it works in real live. If only 20 % of a city are christian, than only those 20% get happy by a christian temple

Because of that it would be more realistic would be - you have to build 5 temples to get the one happiness point, otherwise those religous people who don't have their temple are getting unhappy ...

have all 5 shires and you get 5 gold of them - unrealistic to, because not all people in the town will visit all 5 shires, they only would visit the shrine of their own religion so in a 5 religion city a the christian shrine should only give a fraction of the gold ( 0.2 in this case )

Where the 'happiness' comes in is that without that option - if, for instance, some form of christianity were to become the state religion - everyone who wasn't christian, or the 'right kind' of christian, would become very, very unhappy.

And that is not so in Civ 4 - and should be added...

So the happiness is there, you just don't see it because religious freedom is ingrained into our society (despite what some fanatics would like to see). Take away the freedom and you have lots of unhappiness; add it in and you have lots of happiness. America already has the bonus of happiness working for it.

Look - having freedom of religion should have the same degree of happiness as lets say hindu state religion when everybody is hindu - in such a state nobody would complain too.

But it should be a problem when you have a state religion and different religions in a city or in your empire. Because thats what happen in the real world - just look in history books or watch the news ...

But

If you need a comparison, just take a look at any number of countries around the world where religious intolerance is part and parcel of daily life. Much unhappiness. Give them religious freedom and there would be less unhappiness (net effect = more happiness).

It's not that simple ( and I guess you know ) - its fine if the state declear freedom of religion, but not all religous extremist will care for it and will still cause problems and trouble ( AFAIK today there are more states with religous freedom than than states with state religion )

Nor will we. The extreme religious right is a tiny minority of Americans, less than 3 million people in a nation of 285 million. They're just very, very loud and the press loves to cover them because they're so obnoxious.

And managed it to get influence on school books AFAIK

Our fringe groups always get an inordinate amount of airtime. The fringe sells for the same reason that Jerry Springer just keeps on trucking: people love to watch the freaks do tricks in the electronic circus. This gives the rest of the world, who get their information on America largely from TV, a very skewed view of how things are over here.

That's not what I had in mind but

In any event, the religious freedom = happiness thing really does work. I live it every day.

Look - if you have total religious freedom ( and lets asume no extremist ) than why should a city with 5 different religons be more happy than one with only one religion ? That is the point !



Max[/QUOTE]

 

[Wyz_sub10]

What's not mentioned here - for a realistic religion mod - take away the advantage of having more than one religion. Different Religions in different citys should cause a risk of a civil war ( f.e. if hindu is your state religion and 3 of your cities have islam as a religion, they may try to split of your empire, india - pakistan )

Good ideas, but I think balance is the key. There are many, many religious groups in Canada but it's a non-issue with regard to social hostility.

Why? 1) Because many groups are more peaceful than two main factions. 2) Canada is secular - no state religion, no religion-based education in schools, etc. 3) Most religious folk here are very "soft" theists - fundamentalism is low.

How do you get these into Civ4?

 

[MRM]

Good ideas, but I think balance is the key. There are many, many religious groups in Canada but it's a non-issue with regard to social hostility.

Why? 1) Because many groups are more peaceful than two main factions. 2) Canada is secular - no state religion, no religion-based education in schools, etc. 3) Most religious folk here are very "soft" theists - fundamentalism is low.

How do you get these into Civ4?

Putting this in is very easy - only those citys with a religion that is different from your state religion tend to split of => no state religion = no civil war

The hardest part would be to tell the AI how to handel this ...

 

[Donegeal]

Here is what I had posted at Apolyton, but the mod community isn't as large there.

I haven't been able to get this concept out of my head. The way the game is now, there really is no difference between the religions and the only reason to have one over another is beacuase more of your cities have one certian type.

Here is some of my ideas:
Christianity Unique Unit: The Inquisitor. Concept from the Spanish Inquisition. May only be built in cities that already have a Christian Cathedral (or maybe just the Christian Holy city) and has Christianity as the state religion. Works as an anti-missionary. Goes to a city that has Christianity and any other religion and "purges the heathen religion" from the city. Effect is one religion from city is removed (random if more than one religion other than christianity is present), population of city is decreased by 1 (unless city is size one), all corresponding buildings of the "purged religion" destroyed, unit is consumed. Limits: may only be done to civs that have christianity as the state religion.

Religious tensions:
Sure this is in, but there are particulars here. Islamics hate Jews. Maybe Civs that have the Islamic State religion should have a -100% reaction to civs that have Judaism as the state religion. I'm not sure about the other religions so I can't say about them.

If a civ (we'll call it civ 1) has a state religion where the founding city of that religion is "under the sway" of a different religion (ie: it is possesed by civ 2 that has a different state religion), then civ 1 has an additional -100% reaction to civ 2 to increase the likelyhood that a "Crusade" to liberate the founding city occurs.

Religious restrictions:
Civs that have Islam as their state religion cannot have the "Universal Sufferage" Government civic (the way I understand it, women in Islam are more like a type of property and subject to the mens rule, but I an not an expert on the subject).

Hinduism requires the Caste System civic (Isn't Hinduism primarily in India, where a caste system is strongly prevalant?).

Other Religious Benifits:
Islam suffers no war weariness when at war with civs of a different state religion (Jihad). Also spreads 20% faster.

I am sure there are more possibilities out there. More Religious unique units, more tensions, more restrictions, more benifits. I'm just not familier enough with all these religions to make stuff up. Give suggestions.

 

[Leonel]

Instead of modding extra things to the "named" religions in the game, how about changing the religions to a more generic, general sounding name.
For example:

1) Sun Cult (ie Aztec, Inca, other sacrificial religions)
Bonuses to attacks on other units to symbolize the warlike nature of the religion.
Missionaries spread religion easily but kill off citizens in city through conversion.
Severe hurt to relations with "civilized" nations (nations with free religion or after emancipation, etc.) if state religion

2) Mythologic Polytheism (ie Egyptian style Polytheism with gods of nonhuman identities)
Bonuses to happiness from luxary resources
Quicker production of religious buildings due to usage of slavery

3) Humanist Polytheism (ie Greco-Roman Polytheism with gods with human qualities)
Bonuses to commerce due to humanist gods (people like money, so gods like money)
Temples increase science slightly

4) Caste based Religion (ie Hinduism and Buddhism where religion is based upon how well you do in this life determines how well you do in the next)
Better specialists than normal
City health and welfare buildings, improvements built quicker
Quicker Great Prophets

5) Early Monotheistic (ie Judaism )
Holy City (ie Rome, Mecca, Constantinople, Jerusalem) big culture city with bonuses for religious expansion (free missionaries, LOS even without Organized religion and in Free Religion)

6) Conservative Monotheism (missionary spreading of the faith through example)
Very slow natural expansion but very cheap missionaries, temples, etc. Decreases aggression and increases diplomacy level
Seen as benevolent

7) Fanatical Montheism (war based spred of religion through conquest and assimilalation)
Also has very slow natural expansion but has several UU such as Inquisitor which functions like Sun Cult missionary (converts but at cost of pops), Fanatic (Missionary fighter with good offensive but poor defensive skills)
Acts like Militaristic civs by giving extra promotion.

Also this will lead to people getting less ticked off by stereotypes at "their" religion.

I love this idea a lot more! Then it'd be up the gamers imagination as to what sorts of religions their civilizations have. I am confident that this would solve the generalization of a religion as obviously religions in some places are FAR more militant than other places that are FAR more passive yet are still considered the same religion.

 

[Japhthor]

Instead of modding extra things to the "named" religions in the game, how about changing the religions to a more generic, general sounding name.
For example:

1) Sun Cult (ie Aztec, Inca, other sacrificial religions)
Bonuses to attacks on other units to symbolize the warlike nature of the religion.
Missionaries spread religion easily but kill off citizens in city through conversion.
Severe hurt to relations with "civilized" nations (nations with free religion or after emancipation, etc.) if state religion

2) Mythologic Polytheism (ie Egyptian style Polytheism with gods of nonhuman identities)
Bonuses to happiness from luxary resources
Quicker production of religious buildings due to usage of slavery

3) Humanist Polytheism (ie Greco-Roman Polytheism with gods with human qualities)
Bonuses to commerce due to humanist gods (people like money, so gods like money)
Temples increase science slightly

4) Caste based Religion (ie Hinduism and Buddhism where religion is based upon how well you do in this life determines how well you do in the next)
Better specialists than normal
City health and welfare buildings, improvements built quicker
Quicker Great Prophets

5) Early Monotheistic (ie Judaism )
Holy City (ie Rome, Mecca, Constantinople, Jerusalem) big culture city with bonuses for religious expansion (free missionaries, LOS even without Organized religion and in Free Religion)

6) Conservative Monotheism (missionary spreading of the faith through example)
Very slow natural expansion but very cheap missionaries, temples, etc. Decreases aggression and increases diplomacy level
Seen as benevolent

7) Fanatical Montheism (war based spred of religion through conquest and assimilalation)
Also has very slow natural expansion but has several UU such as Inquisitor which functions like Sun Cult missionary (converts but at cost of pops), Fanatic (Missionary fighter with good offensive but poor defensive skills)
Acts like Militaristic civs by giving extra promotion.

Also this will lead to people getting less ticked off by stereotypes at "their" religion.

This is the smartest idea I've heard in a long time. Easier for you to imagine your own religion with its own quirks etc. and takes out the whole political-correct element.

This way you can have your own "Christian" sun-cult (like the TOS episode where the 20th-century Roman Christians worshipped the "Son"); or your "Christian" polytheism (a plethora of saints and semi-deities) etc; however you envision your religion to be. Or your Aztec fanatical monotheism, where Quetzacotl is the Supreme Deity...

Brilliant.

 

[Ktulu]

I love this idea a lot more! Then it'd be up the gamers imagination as to what sorts of religions their civilizations have. I am confident that this would solve the generalization of a religion as obviously religions in some places are FAR more militant than other places that are FAR more passive yet are still considered the same religion.

I also think this is the way to go. Fictional is much better.

 

[Wyz_sub10]

I understand the comments on the fictional mod, but I don't think we'll be any farther ahead.

At some point, people are still going to want a more realistic religion mod and we'll still have to make some decisions on where to go with it.

 

[Wizard of OU]

As far as diplomatic disadvantages go, I don't think there should be any at the start.

I like the idea that if you found a religion (say Taoism) and a civilization has it as their religion, and you are Confuscian they should be Crusading.

I also like the idea that if you have a State Religion your missionaries should be able to "convert" citizens, by that I mean go into a city with numerous religions in your empire and convert Taoist to Confuscian (exception being a Holy City)

Religions Advantages and Disadvantages.
First I would like to say the concept of disadvantges is not one I like, giving advantages.
Islam: As I have studied this religion, I have realized it at nature a very peaceful religion that in it's beginning emphasized helping your neighbor. I would thus say the advantage should be a food benefit.
Disadvantage: No benefits from Wine, and perhaps other food sources.

Jewish Faith: A lot has been said about this religion, but I believe it is one of the most important in the game. It is not an expansionist religion, but I believe this can be used as an advantage. Such as cities with a Jewish Temple produce a free specialist. It has been said that until the 19th century the jewish people had a lock on a lot of things, by doing this it would give people the ability to make Judaism a religion which can dominate art, merchants, or science even engineering.
Disadvantages: no food benefits from Pigs, not really sure about disadvantages for any religion.
Confucianism: Order, it's about respect. I think a Courthouse should be cheaper to produce (which only makes you want to be this religion shortly), or have that Courthouse create happiness and likewise buildings as well
Christianity: I really think that this one should be really one that is a double edged sword. I think if more than 2 civilizations have Christianity, that it should splinter. Thus protestant revolution. Christianity is (like Islam) a peaceful religion, so I believe war weariness should be high. But also Christianity is a religion which emphasizes hell, so it should have a penalty with other religions. Advantages could be that foreign cities with Christianity have a percentage to join a different civ. Thus missionaries that travel overseas can end up taking cities.

I'll come up with more later. I mean no disrespect by not mentioning a few religions, just in a hurry.

 

[Master Kodama]

Religious tensions:
Sure this is in, but there are particulars here. Islamics hate Jews. Maybe Civs that have the Islamic State religion should have a -100% reaction to civs that have Judaism as the state religion. I'm not sure about the other religions so I can't say about them.

This has not been true until VERY recently in history, i.e. like the 20th century (since the founding of the Israeli state, which pissed off the Muslims who occupied the area). During the middle-ages, you were probably MUCH better off as a Jew living in Muslim controlled lands than in Christian lands. Jews were respected as physicians and teachers, because of their reputation for intelligence; the fact that the men were forbidden to touch any woman who was not their wife, making them "safe," helped a lot too. Plus, they were followers of Abraham, "People of the Book," which was the real reason they were tolerated in the first place -- as were Christians living in Muslim territories.

For the majority of time that Christianity has existed, nations following that faith have been far less tolerant of other faiths than Muslims have been. You never hear about any "Arabic Inquisition," do you? Since diplomatic penalties from differing religions are already built in to the game, I would say that civs with Christianity as their state religion should face additional unhappiness caused by non-Christian religions in their cities.

Also, many of your other claims/ideas are skewed towards the state of affairs in the modern world, and especially the rise of Islamic Fundamentalism which has swept the Middle East. I am lead to believe, for instance, that during the middle-ages (yes, again), Muslim women had much more personal freedom, and, according to a friend of mine who I trust on these historical fine-points, married women even had the legal right to an orgasm

One of the problems in the modern Muslim World is that people and nations are heavily in favor of strict, fundamentalist theocracy -- which, in Civ4 terms, is a "Civic" issue and not a "Religion" issue. Similarly, what was once the heavily theocratic Christian world has now become largely the realm free religion and expression, meaning that the intolerance caused by Christian theocracy is no longer an issue.

 

[anomalek]

I respectfulyl disagree with the latter comments made by "Master Kodoma" above - specically that (a). "the modern Muslim world's people and nations are heavily in favor of strict fundamentalist theocracy" and that (b). "intolerance caused by Christian Theocracy is no longer an issue."

I would say that Christian - as well as Jewish- theocratic intolerance is absolutely "an issue" of premier importance on the world scene today, and that while Christian and Jewish theocratic intolerance enjoys a wide degree of support among its "people and nations", there is an enormous degree of public revolt against "strict fundamentalist theocracy" in the modern Msulim world - especially since so many of those "strict fundamenalist theocratic" regimes are created, armed, funded, endorsed and imposed upon "the modern Muslim world" against their will by intolerant Christian and Jewish theocrats.



On a less boring note, I don't like the proposals made re Buddhism's advtanges in the initial post - I think this would be more historically apt:

BUDDHISM:
ADVANTAGE - an additional culture bonus for every additional OTHER religion present in the same city. Additionally, barbarians attacking a city with Buddhism present run a 25% chance of "converting" - i.e., becoming fighters for that city.

 

[Dom Pedro II]

I think one should look not towards making the religions themselves have different effects on their respective countries, but in allowing said religions to provide access to units and buildings that others don't have. Also editing the effects of the "cathedral" buildings might be useful as well.

Confucian Academy could provide +25% science (it is an academy after all) or it could be used to train civil servants and thus lower maintenance in cities where its built.

And then find different things to apply to all of the other religious buildings.

The Wonders could also be made more unique in their functions.

 

[Nuh Uh]

Everyone is forgetting about Copticism. Basically, it provides demigod powers to religious leaders: earthquakes, tidal waves... real wrath of God type stuff for the enemy. As well for the home team: Happibliss and Celebration of the King.

 

[CyberChrist]

The idea about requiring a Great Prophet to found any religion (as well as the appropriate tech) is a good one.

Does anyone know how to go about activating/implementing that function for the Great Prophet unit?

 

[abbamouse]

The idea of multiple religions causing civil war is unsupported by the evidence. There are clearly some civil wars fought along religious lines, but religious diversity turns out to be a terrible predictor of whether a country will experience civil way, once you control for poverty, regime type, etc. The same is true for linguistic and ethnic diversity -- most of the countries we think of as being diverse are also quite poor or undergoing constitutional turmoil. These appear to be better predictors of civil war propensity than ethnolinguistic or religious diversity.

 

[MRM]

The idea of multiple religions causing civil war is unsupported by the evidence. There are clearly some civil wars fought along religious lines, but religious diversity turns out to be a terrible predictor of whether a country will experience civil way, once you control for poverty, regime type, etc. The same is true for linguistic and ethnic diversity -- most of the countries we think of as being diverse are also quite poor or undergoing constitutional turmoil. These appear to be better predictors of civil war propensity than ethnolinguistic or religious diversity.

Well IMO there are some factors that make a religous civil war more possible

a) the state have a state religion, therefore religous minoritys feel suppressed.
b) if the minority is pretty strong ( 10% > more ) or even as large as the promoted religon
C) this minority is the majority in a specific region, and not widely spread across the country.

Look for example at Sudan, or british india ( falls apart in hindu india and moslem pakistan, AFAIK 3 wars followed ) , or what about 30 years war in central europe ( between protestants and catholics ? )

Or Ache or Phillipines, where independent movements often belongs to a religous minority. ( so far unsuccesfully )

of course you can allways argue there where other factors involved - but for me it seems religous diversity can function as a catalysator here.

Of cause religous diversity don't always end in a civil war - thats why there should be a chance that a civil war happens , but it should not be inevitable...