Religion and Such

[alpha wolf 64]

the problem is that culture also includes education and entertainment. They clumped it all together and called it culture. I would like to see religion seperated so that specific places of worship, and a civ might only allow one type, and gain city happiness but cause unrest with civs with different religions. or they can allow all types of worship, but sacrafice some internal happiness, and be at odds with all non-religiously free civs but at a lessor extent.

 

[Clown2TheLeft]

Leave religion out of it.

Next thing you know, we'd be having religious anarchy, cities in disorder for some abstract concept that cannot be quelled by military units, only by priests/shamans/holy goldfish, domestic advisors insisting we go to war against some neighbor because they're of a different religion, even if it serves no purpose as far as additional luxuries, resources, or anything else.

Yes, this would make it closer to real life, but it's a game, and games are to be played, and, ideally, enjoyable. I could give a crap less about religion in real life. I suspect if you incorporate this aspect into the game, you'd have fundamentalist zealots of every sect up in arms, and Sid might be the only man pursued bu the same cretins that went after Salaman Rushdie, but a group of enraged southern Baptists that interpreted that his implementation of religion was not what they wanted to see.

Can of worms.

Do not open.

So says me.

Your mileage may vary.



Later!

--The Clown to the Left

 

[Mad Hab]

Originally posted by Benderino
Last, it would be cool to name certian historic landmarks on the map. For instance, a place where a big battle was fought, or where a city was destroyed, or to name a fort or a mountain, etc. I think that would be fun.

Or a river, or an island... I always wanted to see that in Civ! I agree it would add to the fun of the game.

Cheers,

Mad Hab

 

[Aussie_Lurker]

In my opinion, there is a way to incorporate Religion more, in the game, without offending anyone-and it doesn't even need that much new code to achieve (some of it can be done by editing the standard game!)
Basically, ALL religious "Techs" should be available in the ancient age, and all of them should be non-prerequisite. My ideas were for Early monotheism, which represents Judaism, Christianity and Islam; Eastern Philosophy-which represents religions/philosophies such as Buddhism, Taoism and Confucianism and Eastern Religion-which represents Hinduism and Shinto. The first religion would have a prerequisite of Code of Laws/writing and Polytheism. The second would be based on Philosophy and mysticism, and the third would be based on Philosophy and Polytheism! Please note that these are merely possibilities, and I haven't quite settled on what techs should be which. This would then allow a polytheistic faith, like Shinto and Hinduism, to survive side-by-side, into the modern age, with monotheistic faiths!! Give each type of religion it's own set of buildings and units, and suddenly religions do take on a whole new shape in the game . The new stuff, though, would be to have a form of 'religious espionage'. This could incorporate things like the Sacrifice=culture idea that has been mentioned for C3C, but could also include a form of "Religious Propoganda" to help simulate conversion via cultural conversion. You could even set up a "Religious Embassy" or sabotage religious improvements of other Civs! All of these are reflected in Espionage, but there should be a seperate one especially for religion!
Anyway, that's just my thoughts, plz feel free to let me know what you think .

Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.

 

[Benderino]

ClowntotheLeft, I don't know what else to say other than I disagree. All those "terrible" things you mention about priests and wars....they sound great! They not only make it more realistic, but I still think it would be more fun as well. And I think there are plenty who would agree with me.

Aussie, I love your idea. One thing...If the computer controlled India, would the AI choose to be Hindu all the time, or would it be random? Would Spain always be Catholic (Christian)?

Thanks for your thoughts.

 

[nini1972]

In my opinion [different kind of] religion must be achieved as a tech advancement, must be choiched as a government form;
finally his socio-economical charachters must be applied as normal consequences of the given government form

 

[Aussie_Lurker]

Bendorino, I feel that, unless it was a scenario, it would be completely random-that way, you could have a Modern Day France that had "Eastern Religion" for instance-and which had discovered the joy of "The Eightfold Way" (Possible Great Wonder). Wheras you could have a Monotheistic India!! After all, isn't the object of the game to "re-write history"-so to speak!!

Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.

 

[Ant509y]

Personally, I still feel that the addition of religion in Civ would be fun, and though I have forgotten my original blueprints for adding it [check in the old "Ideas for Civ 4" thread in General Discussions, on the second to last page to read them.] I would still fine that some, any, implementation would be interesting.

 

[Benderino]

Originally posted by Aussie_Lurker
Bendorino, I feel that, unless it was a scenario, it would be completely random-that way, you could have a Modern Day France that had "Eastern Religion" for instance-and which had discovered the joy of "The Eightfold Way" (Possible Great Wonder). Wheras you could have a Monotheistic India!! After all, isn't the object of the game to "re-write history"-so to speak!!

Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.

I agree that it should be random, however, just to play devil's advocate for a moment if I may, then shouldn't the architecture be random as well? Personally, I don't think so, but if we are re-writing history here, then who's to say the Zulus should have Middle-Eastern and not European or American?

 

[Aussie_Lurker]

I guess that they want to keep at least some elements historically "accurate", but then leave the rest up to chance! That is to say, French and Greeks are European, wheras Zulus are African!! It's just a lot better than simply calling them Civ A, Civ B etc!! How they develop, from then on, is entirely up to you! I like playing on a real world map, for instance, as the Iroquois (on a lower difficulty level), then sending my ships out on a Voyage of discovery to the "New World" of Europe!! Of course, it'd be even more funny if my Aztecs, with all of their "Blood Sacrifice", went on a similar voyage, and enslaved, sacrificed and assimilated the primitive peoples of Europe !! That'd be sooo funny .

Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.

 

[Benderino]

Well said.

 

[Highgeneral]

A nation is builted on religion most wars are fought over religion
i say religion is what this games needs to become a real civ. game!!!

 

[Benderino]

Darn tootin!

 

[GusmanC.Harris]

Originally posted by Drewcifer
They could do something with religion along the lines of Call to Power. Maybe there could be a small wonder that would be the center of your religion and allow you to build priests. If you converted other cities it could increase the chances of culture flip. If you converted other leaders it could improve relations with that civ, or it could be worth while to convert to another civs religion for the sake of building alliances. This could be done without mentioning any specific religion.

I like your idea very much. Would be nice to have tis features.

 

[GusmanC.Harris]

Originally posted by Dom Pedro II
Some other things to consider about religion is that monotheistic religions tend to bring greater stability because in most polytheistic cultures, the people have patron gods or regional gods that prevent national unity.

I disagree with you, polytheistic religions have a pantheon of Gods, just because you (or your city) favors one god over another does not mean that you diregard the other. In Greece, although Sparta and Athens were rivals, and favored different gods, both regarded each other as helenic people.
And monotheism was never a a uniting force, Italy and Germany are two examples, only recently their respective different regions formed an unity.

Of course, this is not always true, but its generally true... at least in older cultures when communication was worse. And in general polytheistic religions developed in agriculturally-based societies, and monotheistic religions in more shepard herder societies...

The assyrians, sumerians, babylonians were polytheistic. The Egypt, for a short period, was monotheistic.

 

[Benderino]

Originally posted by GusmanC.Harris

In Greece, although Sparta and Athens were rivals, and favored different gods, both regarded each other as helenic people.

Sure, that may be true, however, they still fought a lot. "Rivals" is quite a euphemism here. There wasn't stability between these two powers, regardless of whether they thought the other was Hellenic or not.

 

[GusmanC.Harris]

Originally posted by Benderino


Sure, that may be true, however, they still fought a lot. "Rivals" is quite a euphemism here. There wasn't stability between these two powers, regardless of whether they thought the other was Hellenic or not.

Agreed, but the instability was not caused mainly by the fact that they had a polytheistic religion. The Roman Empire was able to maintain a relative degree of coesion despite the fact taht it was a polytheistic power dominating several others polytheistic cultures (and monotheist as well ) .
When there is the want to fight one can find any pretext.

 

[Highgeneral]

This game is not realistic without religion

 

[EddyG17]

what if you give a different tech tree to a civ depending in their religion, i know that in mideival times the middle east cultures were more advance than europe,

 

[Benderino]

Originally posted by GusmanC.Harris


Agreed, but the instability was not caused mainly by the fact that they had a polytheistic religion. The Roman Empire was able to maintain a relative degree of coesion despite the fact taht it was a polytheistic power dominating several others polytheistic cultures (and monotheist as well ) .
When there is the want to fight one can find any pretext.

You are absolutely right on that one.

@EddyG17, brilliant idea. Its true, the Muslims were more advanced during the middle ages than Europe, and so were the Chinese. They should give different techs per different religion, and different looking units. The medieval infantry unit wouldn't look the same in the Middle East as it did for Europe. It could be Almohad or janissary or something to that effect. For Eastern religions, there could be "warrior monks". This is just a more interesting way to distinguish cultures. Another thing, there are Asian looking units in PTW (for Japan at least), so why not Middle Eastern. A lot of them would look something like the Immortal, with scarves and turbans and such.