SammyKhalifa
Deity
- Joined
- Sep 18, 2003
- Messages
- 6,740
I'm not sure converting a holy city is a very good idea considering how the VC works.
There is a belief you can adopt where establishing a trade route converts the city, and this feels fun and the most organic of the current religion mechanics. Otherwise, like religion in both Civ5 and Civ6, I find the entire thing to be onerous. My suggestion would be to just get rid of it completely, but short of that, I like this idea of tying it into influence or making it passive.Would like passive pressure, also with trade.
I know this is going to be unpopular, but I wouldn't mind a Religious Legacy Path available in Ancient and Exploration, with Ancient being about Relics, where you use Faith as a way to spread Religion, and Exploration about dominance, where you spread it across the Distant Lands, without the need for it to be part of the Expansionist Legacy Path and Cultural Path respectively. Exploration could be about amassing Great Works Again.I really like the idea of spending influence to spread religion to a city. The cost could be based on population. I would make it so that temples also gain a base yield of +2 influence.
Instead of making another resource, why not just use influence?I do like this idea, actually, just changing faith into a resource and doing conversions directly that way the way that influence is used right now for city-states and endeavors. If anything, you could even play with policy cards or general mechanics that allow for faith-specific alternatives to influence-spending (e.g. spend a higher raw value of faith, which would be easier to get in a religious empire, on religious ceremonies and holy site visits to boost standing with city states or as a replacement for influence in endeavors PROVIDED THAT the other civ has your faith as a majority in their lands OR has a tenet that allows for interfaith dialogue/religious tolerance).
My only problem is the Golden Age should give the Enhancer belief for Modern, instead of the Founder, cuz I honestly don't care for the Founder, not this time when they're all foreign cities and you can't keep spreading religion afterwards.Realistically, after playing several games, I think religion is fine if you remember you're playing Civ7 and not 6, 5 or 4. You could play it on minimum and just assist in cultural and military victories, or you could get it max, focusing on foreign settlement conversion. Actually even without multiple religious unit types and lightning battles, cimpeting for cities is still fun and you could get a lot from it for both exploration age and legacy in modern.
Yes, but that's the idea. If you want to play religion to maximum, you fight for those foreign cities and could keep your founder bonus, which is quite nice.My only problem is the Golden Age should give the Enhancer belief for Modern, instead of the Founder, cuz I honestly don't care for the Founder, not this time when they're all foreign cities and you can't keep spreading religion afterwards.
Part of me agrees with you, but if it's going to be part of a victory condition I can see why they would want you to put some work into it.I would also like a more passive religion system. Missionaries should at best be a limited resource not something to be spammed. Also I don't like that there isn't any initial benefit for converting your own cities.
True, but for me personally, if I put in the work to get that golden age, continuing the same process feels more like a punshment than a reward.Yes, but that's the idea. If you want to play religion to maximum, you fight for those foreign cities and could keep your founder bonus, which is quite nice.