Religon in Civ3? (NOT A ANTI RELIGON THREAD!)

[Mark2010]

Hi I'm Mark and I'm new here.


Anyway..

I just wanted to post a message about something. In history goverment and religon where two things that kept people in order. Goverment helped the people peform things, build and create. Religon helped order, helped people love each other and respect each other as well as believe.
Goverment is in CIV3. But no religon!

Why dont we have religon in civ? Heres my concept for having it:
Bascially when you start the game they will be no religon. Until you get mythiscm then you get the mytholgy religon. And soon after later religons will be discovered and used.
Religon adds to a goverment but gives only a small percentage, either adding or subtracing the goverments rate no mater what.
Heres my hope of religons to be:

Islamic:
-50% war weariness
-1 draft rate
MIlitary police plus one
+3 income
+1 production
Citizen lolaty added by 3

Christian:
+100% war weariness (if agressor)
+2 Draft rate
No military police
-1 income
+2 production
Citizen lolaty added by 2

Buddhism
No change to war weariness or draft
NO Military police
Citizen lotaly no change
+5 income
-3 production

Satanic
-100% war weariness
no change to draft
Police added by 5
Citizen lotaly decreased by 2
-3 income
-2 production

Mythology
no change to war or draft
police added 1
Citizen lotaly plus 1
+4 production and income

Basically these are the religons I can think of but if you have ideas, please share.
Christians are good for peaceful democracys and if you want some work done.
Islams and Stanics are good for raging war. But Islam is more strict and is good if you want to keep your citizens in line.
Buddhist are a rich religon filled with hope and peace. If your low on cash then you need this one.

It doesn't matter if you chose a religon or not, it's only to create more hope or lesser hope than before. Like you can be a lovely republic but still worship Satan. (That's creepy, but hey you change history)
And choseing a religon does not mean even your foreign citizens have to be the same. If they are a different religon than they will stay that way but have no effect on bonuses.
I am not a anti religous guy, I'm a catholic, but I would like to see this to add more feel into the game and more history to it. Besides wouldn't it be weird if the American religon was purly Islam and all of the middle east were Buddhist? Anyway please respond

 

[Quiet Sound]

Christianity hasn't always been peaceful ya know. Being Catholic you should be especially aware of that.

Personally I've always prefered fictional religions because there's always someone out there who gets offended and makes it their goal to make sure everybody knows about it. Also, with fictional religions you can do anything you want with them, make them anything you want, obviously this isn't possible with real-world religions. But since this game is supposed to be semi-historically accurate I don't think that could really be done.

 

[Graeme the mad]

I can see what you mean about religion but culture helps represent religion in civ3 and governments give the attributes you want. However one thing I find quite amusing:

You included Satanists as a religion

Of all the religions in the world you include one that is very, very, very obscure and leae out Judaism, Sikhism, Hinduism, Shinto etc

 

[black_adder2]

Religion is included in the form of temples and cathedrals (and the wonders that go with them).

Certain levels of religion are required to build wonders with various effects and to advance in other techs.

I like religion in the game the way it is. I think you are missing the point: Play Babylon or another religious civ which gets the religion advantage, it does change the game for you and you will play a diff strategy than say Germany.

 

[Mr Spice]

I like the concept but I don´t think implementing it would be such a good idea. Who would decide what "character" different religions have? What period of time do you choose as the most significant for each religion? Forexample, should Christianity be warlike (crusades, 30-year war, etc) or peaceful? Whatever attributes you choose to give a certain religion, there will always be plenty of people who think those attributes are utterly wrong and feel offended. In short, religion is a far to delicate subject to be included in the way you suggest.

 

[Dinorius R.]

Damn! I was looking forward to a good anti-religion thread.

Actually there is a guy who calls himself GOD who posts in this forum - perhaps we should ask Him what he thinks of all this?


p.s. What the hell is "Citizen lolaty"??

 

[danielhart]

Hey, I'm new here too.. just found it odd that you lumped the Muslims and the Satanists together, and the stats you had for Islam mainly focused on war. That doesn't seem right... Aside from the things happening now, Islam has been a pretty peaceful and tolerant religion.

 

[bobgote]

yes, Satanic, maybe if you say pagan, it would make more sense. I think that's what you're getting at

It's not a bad idea, but as someone already said, the effects would have to be thought about. Why did you put -1 income for christianity. Because the church takes all the money??

If you are going to do this, I don't think the effects should be so dramatic, this would make the game very complex and hard to use. I don't know if it's really needed because the culture - ie temples, colosseum, cathedral improvs are religious and have a big effect, and the Religious civ attribute with cheaper religious improvs and 0 anarchy is very good and represents strong religious civs well.

(EDIT)I thought I'd add a bit since I saw this last post

Hey, I'm new here too.. just found it odd that you lumped the Muslims and the Satanists together, and the stats you had for Islam mainly focused on war. That doesn't seem right... Aside from the things happening now, Islam has been a pretty peaceful and tolerant religion.

During the crusades, both Christianity and Islam were very war-like. They are very similar in that once they label something "holy" they'll go into fanatical wars to try to win these things ie Jerusalem + holy land.

There are periods in both religions when they were very warlike. For Islam, they have been very warlike often. The ottomans are an example that comes to mind. Christianity these days is entirely separated from the governing of countries so we don't see it from them so much anymore

 

[thedisturbedpop]

good idea, but they would need a lot more. Also, Some civs shouldnt get certain religions. (Like india wouldnt get satanic)

HOW COULD YOU FORGET JUDISM?????????????????????

 

[bobgote]

Originally posted by thedisturbedpop
good idea, but they would need a lot more. Also, Some civs shouldnt get certain religions. (Like india wouldnt get satanic)

HOW COULD YOU FORGET JUDISM?????????????????????

(I assume this is Judaism)
How could they forget the Jews?

 

[GodsPetMonkey]

Good idea, but perhaps a bad implementation.

Rather then use existing religions, how about we make it more generalised.

Say you start with some Mystical Religion (perhaps a Druid society or something?) then when you research polytheism you can have a polytheistic religion (called a Polytheistic Religion, this way we can’t offend anyone by their particular religious beliefs.) Then later, when you get Monotheism, you can have a Monotheistic religion (I hope you can see the pattern now )

I don’t think 3 religions is quite enough though, so another could be Atheism, after all, there are those members of society who don’t wish to follow any religion (like myself), and besides, the world is becoming more and more religion neutral. But I’m not sure what a no# 5 could be... hmmm, maybe that satanic religion could have a place after all, as long as we get to gate in daemons to assist our war efforts :skull:

**FEAR MY WRATH MORTAL SPEARMAN**

maybe I have been playing to much Baldur’s Gate

Still, non-specific religions pose a problem, as we can see in reality different religions of the same type can have a totally different outlook and this can variate over time (eg. during the middle ages, Christian nations were a lot more warlike (classic examples being the crusades and the 30-year, as already noted by someone else) whilst Islam was in a more renaissance like stage, which of course flipped later on, with the Islamic nation crumbling and Europe finding some damn good painters

So my other suggestion would to be so that it doesn’t affect more militaristic properties, but rather have civil comparisons. eg. a polytheistic religion would provide better income (it was command practice for the nobility to donate large sums to temples) whilst a monotheistic provides better production (monotheism provides a more developed structure, and a goal for the followers to aim for, plus, they don’t have to pray to so many gods ).
On top of that, perhaps set it so implementing certain religions at certain times can have negative effects. eg. an Atheist nation may not be as likely to as willing to partake in wars where they are the aggressor (the leadership being unable to cite religious grounds for the war, or the lack of facilities (eg. churches, mosques) where propaganda can be spread from) thus increasing war weariness.


Hmmmm, maybe it’s not such a good idea, religions just seem to variety to much from one time period to the other, from each other, and from your perspective. After all, (stereotype time) Christians (actually, I’m using Americans as the example, but they are predominately Christian right?) view Islamic fundamentalists as the aggressor in the war on terror (re. sept 11 among other things) whilst they view the Christians as the aggressor. It’s just to complicated. I suppose the same can be seen of the governments in civ though.

And I agree, don’t turn this into a anti-thisorthatreligion discussion. Maybe there is a good way to implement this (or something similar) so that it works.

 

[danielhart]

Sorry, all I was trying to say is that Islam really hasn't been more or less warlike than any other major world religion... Perhaps now is just one of its warlike periods, but every great religion has them.

I wouldn't exactly say that Islamic countries crumbled , I'd just say they had a.. momentary lapse.

Btw, mainly Islamic countries can certainly have a peaceful democracy, too... just look at Turkey, for example.

 

[GodsPetMonkey]

Originally posted by danielhart
Sorry, all I was trying to say is that Islam really hasn't been more or less warlike than any other major world religion... Perhaps now is just one of its warlike periods, but every great religion has them. And btw, mainly Islamic countries can certainly have a peaceful democracy, too... just look at Turkey, for example.

Yes, you are right, Islam is still tied with state whilst most other religions have seperated themselves (which is what is causing so much trouble, religion and politics don't mix)

But, lets keep this on topic. If you want to have a religous discussion, head to the off-topic region, plenty over there.

 

[danielhart]

Sorry, it's just kinda important to me. I'll stop.

 

[rjgo]

Why isnt there judaism in there. how could you forget the longest lasting and oldest religeon in which many religeons started from it. well here is what i made for Judaism.

Judaism
+ 90% war weariness
+ 0 draft rate
Military Police
-1 income
+ 4 production
citzen loyalaty no change

there you go

shalom

rjgo

 

[Curufinwe]

Just something very interesting I read, Judaism and all of the religions spawning from it, was in origin a fertility cult that held very sacred a mushroom that looked like a penis. Weird but true.

 

[Phoenix]

Taht quite a good idea - might add something to the game. However you should make sure that all of the religions get negative points as well as good and then you could have a civ that decides not to have a religion - things are going that way in some countries.

 

[rjgo]

no, judaism didnt start from a fertility cult that held very sacred mushroom that looked like a penis. i dunno where you got that from, but thats not true.


shalom

rjgo

 

[Curufinwe]

Look far and be unbiased, variations of the name of Yahweh mean things all related to that, but we're growing of topic, so end this discussion. Also, how would you know that that isn't true, and how do I know that it is? But don't answer that.

 

[monkspider]

I think this is much-needed in Civ 3. Does anyone remember how fun managing religion was in Europa Universalis? I think that perhaps it would be best that the effects were more subtle, so that Islam wasn't stereotyped as a barbaric religion, and that there could be other cool effects like better diplomatic relations with civilzations that share the same religion. I think the religions should be
Pagan
Hinduism
Judiaism
Buddhism
Taoism
Christianity
Islam
Atheism (or no religion)

I look forward to seeing something like this in an expansion pack or two.