Religions

[Camikaze]

Religion not related to war??? Pretty much all religions have caused some sort of war and its just completely unrealistic to have religion without obvious references to war.

No, religion has been used as justification for wars. But that's a discussion for OT.

And my point was more that designating half of every religion to war is completely unrealistic, and would be viewed by many as disrespectful, and would hence affect sales, publicity, etc.

 

[Danielos]

I love the idea of religions being split up in rival factions like Catholics-Protestants, Sunni-Shia and so on...

 

[Camikaze]

I love the idea of religions being split up in rival factions like Catholics-Protestants, Sunni-Shia and so on...

This. Although I imagine it could get rather complicated. Would you hate an opposing denomination more or less than you hated a different religion, and would this change throughout the game? What would be the benefits and disadvantages of creating a new denomination? And also, could you create denominations within denominations? For instance, Anglicanism in Protestantism.

 

[Colonel]

Seriously can you find me a war outside the modern era that didn't have some religious under tone. The obvious example being the Crusades and Jihads of the 11th-13th century and 8th century respectively. Or the Spanish Reconqestia, or the internal feuds between the Holy Roman Empire's northern protestant princes and southern catholic princes. Next up would between the English and Spanish in the late 16th century war. One of my last examples would be the American conquest and relocation of the Indian nations, partially for land but also had religious under tones. I'm not saying have religion be only tied to war but give some respect to history and show how religion has been tied to most conflicts throughout history. I mean they started this idea in civ4 by showing that having the same religion as another civ would improve relations and thereby make war less likely between them. All I am saying is build on that concept and give credence to the fact that a lot of religion is peaceful and to give a benefit for a civ not using religion in a war purpose.

 

[Camikaze]

That question is like asking me to find a war that didn't involve people. Religion was a part of everyday life, and so, of course, was applicable in all that people did. However, it was not the cause of all wars, or half the object of religion.

 

[exhile]

Genghis Khan's war from Mongolia to all of Asia was not religious. The war between the Qing Dynasty vs. the multiple Europeon countries was also not religious. The colonization of Africa by the Europeons was not religious.

 

[Colonel]

Well first off the Colonization of Africa most certainly had religious under tones to it. Secondly I will give in to the fact that not every war had religious causes or used religion in the justification of war. However with that said, if you are hard pressed to find a war that didn't have a religious cause or justification through religious means, then are you not proving my point that religion truthfully is a cause or reason for war. Whether or not this is morally right or wrong is not my argument, my simple argument is that leaving the war part of religion out of a game that emulates history is simply a lie. Pretending that religion had no military actions carried out in its name is simply pointless and moronic. Religion throughout its history is the history of war for most purposes, so why not emulate that in the game. Yes as I said give some sort of bonus for being peaceful but also give military bonus for being war-like.

Also I am not even saying war is half the object of religion, I am just trying to suggest a way to emulate reality, if that means exaggerating slightly then so be it, if it not only enhances game play but also brings us closer to realism then what is the problem. Also if you want to emulate reality even better just lower the chance of the AI from choosing that side of the religion, that way only a few civs would have been war-like.