Religions

[CurtSibling]

@Curt

It seems odd to come to a forum designed to complain, criticize, and give our opinions and rail the posters for doing so..

Really?

And for what reason do people make these complaints, etc?

I just get sick of people shredding the developer's work,
while arrogantly claiming to come up with better ideas...

It gets stale rather quick, don't you think?

.

 

[sir_schwick]

In an institution designed specifically for that purpose, no. What wold you propose occur here instead?

 

[dh_epic]

What wold you propose occur here instead?

Sir Schwick, here are my ideas for the new Civ Fanatics Forums.

- No more ideas
- No more criticism
- YAYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY!!!!!!!!!! RELIGION YAYYY CIVICS YAYYYYYYYYYYYY

 

[Commander Bello]

@CurtSibling: As it seems that you adressed your reply to my posting, allow for some comments:

This gripe-fest about religion, etc is tiresome.

I don't see a gripe-fest, I see some posters explain their view of things, based on what is currently available as information.

If you chaps are unhappy with the game, then simply do not buy it when it comes out.

Be assured, I for my person will follow this valuable recommendation.

Your opinions, while worthy, are unlikely to count for all the fans out there.

May I assume that you are appointed to speak for each and every fan, all over the world?

Also, pouring bitter remarks over every new release of info is hardly any help or any use.

I don't see any of the moan-meisters doing a new CIV game,
or developing new turn-based games software for the community -
So please stop the wails.

But spending standing ovations at every bit of information improves the quality?
Many of those who you seem to name "moan-meisters" at least analyse the current information, state their opinion and are giving other ideas. You
seem to only try to bash them.
What may be better?

Until you are in the position make an 'informed' judgement (EG: when the game is out) you are merely armchair critics...Just because you want something, does not mean the rest of us are wanting it too!

You seem to have a much better insight, so why don't you share it with us?
And the pure fact that you have decided to like what is coming, at all costs, makes us to have to like it as well, and at minimum at least that much as you like it?

Just who on Earth do you guys think you are, anyway?

Frankly, based upon your postings as of the last days, I think to be more contemplative and interested in the game to be of the best quality possible, than you. Not to mention the difference in our individual intellectual skills, if you allow me to mention this.

Honestly, I understand that you are already trembling with excitement about the idea that mommy is going to buy you that game for Christmas. And I truely wish you to be satisfied with the final product.
Until then I would like to kindly ask you to take more naps before trying to bash people who seem not to like to play with you at the playground.

 

[Civrules]

Moderator Action: Ahem... Lets calm down, respect each other’s opinions and get back to the original discussion please...

 

[Camber]

I hope the assimilation rate (for the spread of religions) is moddable. I would like to be able to introduce parasitic infestations into the game, like the Ithkul of MOO3, and have them spread and take over empires. I know we don't yet know whether religion will be able to give any bonuses (besides happiness, if your state religion matches the religion in a city), but it would be nice if religion could grant bonuses (or penalties, even better). I'm imagining the possibilities with Aliens, the Flood, plague, the possibilities are endless.

 

[Yuri2356]

Hopefully, if the game is a modable as they say, we will be able to fix religion to fit our tastes. We might even mod modern "religions" such as Communism, Nazism, secular humanism, or liberal-democracy into the game. Even though these ideologies are not religions in the strict sense they could be said to behave as religions in the modern world. After all Buddhism or Taoism are not a theistic religions but more philosophies or belief systems, yet they are considred "religions".

Why do people keep insisting that government forms have to be 'religions'? At least separate the philisophical portion of them from the political.
(ie Communism-> Collectivism/Materialism, Nazism-> Supremacy/Nationalism, ect.)

 

[mastertyguy]

I hope the assimilation rate (for the spread of religions) is moddable. I would like to be able to introduce parasitic infestations into the game, like the Ithkul of MOO3, and have them spread and take over empires. I know we don't yet know whether religion will be able to give any bonuses (besides happiness, if your state religion matches the religion in a city), but it would be nice if religion could grant bonuses (or penalties, even better). I'm imagining the possibilities with Aliens, the Flood, plague, the possibilities are endless.

Absolutly right. Exactly my opinion. My advanced opinion is that your core's religion gives your civ his religion. Your colonies may disagree with you when you attack an ennemy with the same religion, even if the ennemy attacked another civ with your official religion.

the Flood

Halo fan?

 

[Gogf]

My question is does the first Civilization to discover Monotheism found Judaism, or Christianity (or possibly Islam, but I doubt it)?

 

[Aussie_Lurker]

Actually, on the issue of what Sir_Schwick said, I too would like to see civ traits (Agricultural, Militarisitc etc) be influenced-not by civ, and not by leader, but by the conditions and gameplay that eventuate in each game. So, a civ with lots of plains, rivers and grasslands might naturally become agricultural-wheras a civ in a desert or jungle environment might end up becoming expansionist-again depending on how the player DEALT with his starting environment. Then, if the player pursued a consistently different path later in the game, then those traits would change too.
I guess for me its all about having an 'evolutionary game' which increases player choice, and generates more replay opportunity.

Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.

 

[Kosez]

Actually, on the issue of what Sir_Schwick said, I too would like to see civ traits (Agricultural, Militarisitc etc) be influenced-not by civ, and not by leader, but by the conditions and gameplay that eventuate in each game. So, a civ with lots of plains, rivers and grasslands might naturally become agricultural-wheras a civ in a desert or jungle environment might end up becoming expansionist-again depending on how the player DEALT with his starting environment.

Yes, that would be more close to what really influenced civilizations to be agricultural, expansionistic,...
That would be phenomenal. Really good idea.

I mean, some ideas on this forum are remarkable, maybe they'll be never used, but they're still invaluable, since they raise our demands for Civ. Demand dictates supply.

As I understand religion concept in CivIV, religions are there only to spice up diplomacy. I expect, religion will have influence on relations with other civs, so if a civ has the same religion, relations are better, and vice versa. But I expect also, religion will also have some effects on war weariness. If you're in a war with civ that has same religion, your people will dislike this war more than they would dislike the war with any other civ.
That seems not a bad idea.

But I certainly hope that is not only improvement to diplomacy.

 

[CurtSibling]

@CurtSibling: As it seems that you adressed your reply to my posting, allow for some comments:

I didn't really aim my comments at you specifically, but feel free to boost your ego thinking so.

I don't see a gripe-fest, I see some posters explain their view of things, based on what is currently available as information.

Fair enough.

Be assured, I for my person will follow this valuable recommendation.

Again, fair enough.

May I assume that you are appointed to speak for each and every fan, all over the world?

Of course not, but do a few individual poster's ideas constitute a guiding light for the game's developers?

But spending standing ovations at every bit of information improves the quality?
Many of those who you seem to name "moan-meisters" at least analyse the current information, state their opinion and are giving other ideas. You
seem to only try to bash them.
What may be better?

I named no-one, I was making an observation on premature judgements.

You are running ahead with yourself here.

You seem to have a much better insight, so why don't you share it with us?
And the pure fact that you have decided to like what is coming, at all costs, makes us to have to like it as well, and at minimum at least that much as you like it?

Amusing paranoia.

I have no idea if the game will be what I imagine, just like you.

However, I choose not to sit and gripe about my fears and await to see the innings.

I only wish to see people pouring scorn on the project, without having a clue about it...

Compris?

Frankly, based upon your postings as of the last days, I think to be more contemplative and interested in the game to be of the best quality possible, than you. Not to mention the difference in our individual intellectual skills, if you allow me to mention this.

If you can gauge a person's intellect from a bulletin board, I then have
to assume you are wasting your time here and should be pursuing a
lucrative career in psychology...In short, you are speaking drivel, sir.

Honestly, I understand that you are already trembling with excitement about the idea that mommy is going to buy you that game for Christmas. And I truely wish you to be satisfied with the final product.

My mother would have to somehow renconstitute from the ashes she was
cremated into, in order to by my a gift for a festive celebration I do not
partake in. I thought your hyper-intellect would have worked that one out.

Your flailing attempt at sardonic humour here is priceless.

Until then I would like to kindly ask you to take more naps before trying to bash people who seem not to like to play with you at the playground.

30-year old men do not need naps, my good fellow. And my opinion is what
I will give regardless. I care not for the carbolic words of antagonistic types
like your good self. I tend to challenge unfair judgements, so get used to that.

Now toddle off and talk to a mirror, so you can indulge your ego and paranoia simultaneously.



PS
I will say no more about this debate, my apologies Civrules!

.


Moderator Action: You don't have to prove anything to anyone else, so you shouldn't have responded either way.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

[Communisto]

Moderator Action: Don't feed the trolls. I've already said to get back to the original discussion...
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

[carloz]

What i've found in the screenies:

research monotheism = discover judaism (on one of the first screenshots the symbol of judaism is in the icon of monotheism)

code of law = another religion, I think it is islam (on the landbridge screenshot you could see a religion-symbol in the code-of-laws-icon)

theology = christianity (at the same sc, you found a cross in the theology-icon)


But maybee until september this could change...

 

[Kosez]

But what will be your religion at the atart of the game. Will there be any?
If yes, I suppose all civilizations will have the same?

 

[dh_epic]

I guess they'll have a default religion like anarchy? Or maybe the default will be "no official religion"?

 

[covenant]

Actually, on the issue of what Sir_Schwick said, I too would like to see civ traits (Agricultural, Militarisitc etc) be influenced-not by civ, and not by leader, but by the conditions and gameplay that eventuate in each game. So, a civ with lots of plains, rivers and grasslands might naturally become agricultural-wheras a civ in a desert or jungle environment might end up becoming expansionist-again depending on how the player DEALT with his starting environment. Then, if the player pursued a consistently different path later in the game, then those traits would change too.
I guess for me its all about having an 'evolutionary game' which increases player choice, and generates more replay opportunity.

Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.

Include this with, say after the ancient age, your leader changes, and has those traits. If you were at war alot and on the sea he would be militaristic and seafaring, or if you built alot of markets and farms, he or she would be commercial and argicultural.

Let the players actions dictate the outcome. I would rather have 2d leaderheads and have ten different ones for each civ, then have 3d leaderheads and only one or two.

 

[DBear]

I would guess animism, as even cavemen had some form of religion.

So far we have:

Poly--Hinduism
Mono--Judaism
Theo--Christianity
CoL (?)--Islam

what other ones? I hear meditation will be a new tech, sounds like the gateway to Buddhism.

 

[oldStatesman]

I would guess animism, as even cavemen had some form of religion.

So far we have:

Poly--Hinduism
Mono--Judaism
Theo--Christianity
CoL (?)--Islam

what other ones? I hear meditation will be a new tech, sounds like the gateway to Buddhism.

This is what I was afraid off. Yes, each religion would be 'generic'. i.e. no one better or worse than any other as far as game advantages, but the fact that you are locked into discovering a set religion with a set tech is bad news to me.

Why Code of Laws and Islam? What if I prefer the Christian code of laws for my Civ...i.e. I'm Roman or Spainish or English? Why does theology give me Christianity? Isn't Islam theological? Etc.

Game play may not be mechanically hurt...(but speaking for myself only) I will have a much harder time suspending my disbelief and spending hours in a Civ fantasy world.

Finally I have also read in many posts here where a lot of people get a lot of their history knowledge from the Civ game...they rave about the Civlopedia. Now will we have a new generation of Civ players thinking that Islam started the concept of code of Laws? (Ever hear of Hammurabi, or King Solomon or Buddha?) And that Hinduism is the first polytheism...or theology is the main deveopment of the Christian folks...

All for what seems to be minimal effect on play...a happy face, extra war weariness in cities you capture who are not of your religion perhaps, more of an attitude from Civs who worship different from you.

I have no problem with a more enhanced (compared to Civ3) version of Religion in the game; but as several others here have suggested, lose the real world names. Or at least give us a real choice of which religion we discover - if each is the same, what matter would it be if we choose Christianity or Judaism or Shintuism or Cult of the Comet-ism when we research code of Laws?

JMHO

 

[CurtSibling]

It will be interesting to see what empire-wide happiness (or unhappiness) effects the religions and changing of which will have.

I hear the choice of civics and religion will affect neighbouring civs, that is another intriquing avenue...

.