Religious UU's

[The Snug]

What do ppl think about the idea of having UU's based upon running a particular state religion or simply the presence of a particular religion?

For example, if your state religion were Christianity you could build Crusaders.

I think this would be a cool idea for the later religions (Islam, Christianity, Taoism, Confucianism), since these religions come too late to make much impact, and whose lack of spread could give unique abilities to an elite few.

Brainstorm with me, what potential URUs (Unique religious units; doesn't need to be military) or URBs can you think of?

Templar: same as knight but starts with CR 1&2.
Saracen Archer: same as longbowman but strength 8.
Zealot: same as archer, but 70% city defense and 1 FS.

Pagoda: requires Buddhism as SR. Gives 1 free priest. Obsoletes with guilds.

I'd like the idea of URUs that would simply require the presence of a religion, and URBs that would require a particular State Religion.

Hopefully we can think of something for every religion.

 

[johnny42strom]

Unique Religious Buildings seem like a good idea, but too limited since most people change their state religion many times (and eventually go free religion to avoid all the political issues). I like that you can only build the buildings if you have that state religion, but they have a permanent effect and another effect if you have the state religion. So, to build on your idea:

Pagoda: requires Buddhism as SR to build. 1 free priest in city if SR is Buddhism. +2 Culture. Like Monasteries, free priest is obsolete with Guilds, but +2 culture stays.

 

[The Snug]

Confucian Center: 1 free spy. Obsoletes with gunpowder.
Taoist Center: 1 free artist. Obsoletes with economics.

Hindi Pachyderm: Doesn't require elephant resource. Requires Horseback Riding. Strength 6, +50% against mounted. Upgrades to knight.

 

[The Snug]

Each of the URUs and URBs could last for only a specific era (perhaps golden era) in order to create a limited balance.

 

[sydhe]

Confucianism: Scholar, replaces spy, gives you one lightbulb per turn within the city. You may wish to limit this to one scholar per city.

Buddhist: Shaolin Monk. Has as many hit points as the weakest military unit you can build.

Taoist: Taoist Philosopher. Replaces monk. When you fortify one in a city with a monastery, he produces one happiness and no longer counts toward your three monks. Limit: one fortified monk per city and he can't be unfortified, although he'll disappear if the monastery does.

Jewish: Jewish mother. Replaces spy. Increases war unhappiness by making opponent feel really guilty for picking on her son. Also reduces pollution by making you pick up your room. You can only settle one per city because there's no one like mom.

Christian: Benedictine. Similar to Taoist philosopher except he adds one food instead of happiness. If wine is available, he also adds one happiness.

Hindu: You can settle one worker per city to reduce unhealthiness due to the absence of mad cow disease.

EDIT: Islam: Imam, replaces monk. Similar to Taoist Philosopher except that he doesn't add happiness and he settles in a temple instead of a monastery. For each Imam, there is a one-percent chance per turn that any war you are fighting against an opponent with a different religion will be declared a holy war, eliminating any additional war weariness for five turns and giving you two espionage points per imam vs. that civilization.

 

[PieceOfMind]

Templar: same as knight but starts with CR 1&2.
Saracen Archer: same as longbowman but strength 8.
Zealot: same as archer, but 70% city defense and 1 FS.

These units are unbelievably powerful. Would the templar have access to CR? A 2move unit with CR2 free is ridiculous, as are a str8 longbowman and zealot, both would be practically invincible.

 

[Kadazzle]

A Zealot with something like +50 defense only would be better. Saracen Archer is extremly powerful; adjust it to make it more suitable.

As for the Templar, keep it the same as Knight, but with a different promotion other then CR 1&2.

 

[brandon1965]

OFF-TOPIC, but I have a pet peeve about seeing anyone misquoted or taken out of context:

"To suppose that the eye, with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest possible degree."

Yes, Charles Darwin wrote those exact words. Then, in the next two sentences he wrote:

"When it was first said that the sun stood still and the world turned round, the common sense of mankind declared the doctrine false; but the old saying of Vox populi, vox Dei, as every philosopher knows, cannot be trusted in science. Reason tells me, that if numerous gradations from a simple and imperfect eye to one complex and perfect can be shown to exist, each grade being useful to its possessor, as is certainly the case; if further, the eye ever varies and the variations be inherited, as is likewise certainly the case and if such variations should be useful to any animal under changing conditions of life, then the difficulty of believing that a perfect and complex eye could be formed by natural selection, though insuperable by our imagination, should not be considered as subversive of the theory."

Please don't imply, by out-of-context quotes, that someone said the opposite of what he actually said. Such quote-mangling is dishonest.

 

[PieceOfMind]

@brandon1965

...interesting post, but why did you put it here?

 

[brandon1965]

Check the sig of the post above mine.

 

[Kesshi]

What do ppl think about the idea of having UU's based upon running a particular state religion or simply the presence of a particular religion?

The Snug,

It has already been done. Who remembers this guy?

 

[zenspiderz]

Would be a nice feature but as mentioned state relgions tend to change over time.. This is not too bad for URU (unique religious units) but it would be difficult for URBs (unique religious buildings) unless you could build it just by having the religion and not neccessarily a state religion.

I was thinking of state religions having unique modifiers to their buildings. Maybe islamic temples/monasteries/shrines +1 beaker or health, christian temples + culture or reduced war weariness, buddhist buildings + happiness, gpp points, jewish buildings + espionage or gold, etc.. These modifiers would only apply when the religion was state religion.

Perhaps state religions could give some special civics.. Christianity - crusade (can draft without nationalism or unhappiness) - or some kind of bonus to building missionaries), Islam could have 'jihad' which would be like crusade but more defensive less offensive i suppose, don't no about other religions.

It is important not to make the abilities too powerful or the game may be unbalanced. It would be boring if the only way to win was to adopt christianity as a state religion and then spam draft invincible uber knights.

Also realism, simplicity and tactical interest needs to be consicered.

 

[Airefuego]

most people change their state religion many times (and eventually go free religion to avoid all the political issues).

I'm not sure that "most people" change their state religion many times.

I'd rather pick one and stay in it. Get a buildings boost with OR, build +2XP units with Theocracy, kill your enemies. Get the shrine (build it or take it!) and get rich too.

Who honestly has time to spam missionaries in three different religions and then bounce between them? There are better ways of controlling your diplomacy.

 

[Airefuego]

These units are unbelievably powerful. Would the templar have access to CR? A 2move unit with CR2 free is ridiculous, as are a str8 longbowman and zealot, both would be practically invincible.

Yes. The buildings suggested are also a bit overpowered. A pagoda that gives a free priest? That's half a wonder! (temple of artemis) Putting one in every buddhist city would be ridiculous.

The core idea is an interesting one but the benefits would have to be very marginal - there are already signficant benefits to having a religion. The idea of using it to boost Islam and Christianity (latecomers) may be a good one though.

 

[Sian]

problem which pops up is "Choose Religions"

 

[DonaldAtHome]

If your state religion is Hindu, you can not use cow resource but you get +1 happiness in all cities if you have one.

If your state religion is Jewish or Islamic you can not use pig resource, but you get +1 health in all cities because of strict food related cleanliness.

 

[zenspiderz]

If your state religion is Hindu, you can not use cow resource but you get +1 happiness in all cities if you have one.

If your state religion is Jewish or Islamic you can not use pig resource, but you get +1 health in all cities because of strict food related cleanliness.

Yeah i had that idea too. Actually islamic state religion should deny use of wine as well as pig and give additional +1 health for absence of hangovers

 

[Rusty Edge]

These units are unbelievably powerful. Would the templar have access to CR? A 2move unit with CR2 free is ridiculous, as are a str8 longbowman and zealot, both would be practically invincible.

You think those are overpowered? How about my Old Tesstament Prophet UUs?

Solomon- every nation pays tribute to his wisdom.

Joshua- enemy walls fall before him.

Gideon- invading armies panic and return to their capital.

Moses- Not only does he bring plagues upon his enemy, remove slavery as an option, but he leads his settlers across the sea as if it were dry land.

 

[idiianni]

It's easy to see why there are no religious UUs in Civ 4. In the manual they explain that they want to avoid controversy by making all the religions basically the same. Including crusader units and imam units probably would offend someone. I'm not saying I agree with this reasoning, but there you have it.

Kesshi reminds us that in a previous civ there was a fanatic unit that could be produced only by fundamentalist civs. The fanatic was a weak unit, but it could be produced very inexpensively.

I liked this feature, and it wouldn't be hard to bring it back. The rule could be: If you have a state religion, you can build a generic "religious militant" unit. If you don't have a state religion, you can't build it. It could have theology as a prerequisite, be a relatively weak unit (maybe strength 4 or 5) and have a movement of 2. Its cost should be low, maybe 30 or 40 hammers. It would not become obsolete directly, though as civs switch to Free Religion it would disappear by default. It might be useful for normal military purposes for a short time after it becomes available (for crusades/military jihad style conquests), but not long after that it would probably be useful only for suicide-pillaging.

 

[DonaldAtHome]

David: Slinger, replaces archer. Kills most powerful unit in AI Civ Stack of Doom and causes all other units to run away.

Queen of Shiba: Seduces all other leaders. Nobody can say "no" to her.