State & Non-State Religions and Ideologies

[Aussie_Lurker]

So as a palette cleanser for the Denuvo debate in another thread. I just wanted to discuss some things that I *hope* makes their way back into Civilization VII that were in previous titles.

1. In Civilization IV, there was a clear distinction between State Religion and Non-State religion, and the relationship between the two types of religions could be impacted by your Social Policies. I would *love* to see that make its way back into Civ VII in some fashion, and its impacts on Diplomacy (though maybe in a much more nuanced and less OP fashion).

2. Whilst I was never a massive fan of Civilization V at launch (OK, I disliked it quite a bit, to the point where it felt like I was "hate-playing" it ) I admit that the game got very compelling after the 2 DLC's. The thing I loved most from the DLC's was Ideologies from the Industrial Age onwards. I would love to see them come back in some form....with the added wrinkle of having a Theocratic Ideology that could tie nicely into my 1st point.

Anyway, those are just my thoughts. I'd love to know what everyone else thinks about this idea, how they'd like to see it implemented and what other things from prior games players would like to see in Civilization VII.

 

[stealth_nsk]

It looks we're not getting religion as a separate system at launch, probably added with some expansion. Sure, potentially they could happen in exploration age, since major crash of religions happened in late medieval, but I think there would be some kind of pantheons mentioned for the antiquity age. And yes, it's totally possible religions would be replaced with ideologies and/or corporations in modern era.

One thing we'll not see, though is religious victory, unless you play exploration age only. If you play full campaign, it's now impossible to win before the modern age and modern age surely won't play for religious victory.

 

[Aussie_Lurker]

It looks we're not getting religion as a separate system at launch, probably added with some expansion. Sure, potentially they could happen in exploration age, since major crash of religions happened in late medieval, but I think there would be some kind of pantheons mentioned for the antiquity age. And yes, it's totally possible religions would be replaced with ideologies and/or corporations in modern era.

One thing we'll not see, though is religious victory, unless you play exploration age only. If you play full campaign, it's now impossible to win before the modern age and modern age surely won't play for religious victory.

I'm pretty sure that Saxy Gamer or Potato McWhisky had access to Pantheons in the Ancient Era portion of the game they played, which does imply that religion is in the base game. Plus, given the massive backlash they got with the removal of religion in Civilization V's base game, I think its highly unlikely they'll repeat that mistake again.

 

[Siptah]

I'm pretty sure that Saxy Gamer or Potato McWhisky had access to Pantheons in the Ancient Era portion of the game they played, which does imply that religion is in the base game. Plus, given the massive backlash they got with the removal of religion in Civilization V's base game, I think its highly unlikely they'll repeat that mistake again.

Religion is confirmed to be in the base game. It‘s main effect will be on happiness, if I interpret the known snippets correctly.

 

[Krikkit1]

Religion is also confirmed to primarily be Second Age. (First Age is only pantheons, Third Age religion gets less significant)

 

[Mr Jon of Cheam]

I agree with both points. You've got to think that the Modern Age gives them great scope to bring back something like Ideologies, something that disrupts and shifts global alliances and adds diplomatic tension to the end game.

They've said that religion has been simplified vs VI. For me, I hope this means that it spreads passively (no more missionary spam) and is tied to diplomacy, much more like IV.

 

[Olleus]

Ideologies (Civ5) or Corporations (Civ4) both seem like plausible Modern Era defining mechanics. If the Modern era starts around the 1700-1800 mark, I think corporations have more the right flavour; they can cover everything from the late-exploration East India Companies, to Railroad Tycoons, to Oil Barrons, to Microsoft. There's a lot of space for mechanics there. Ideologies, on the other hand, have small hints with the French Revolution and Marx in the 19th century, but really explode with the Russian revolution and subsequent rise of Fascism in the 1st third of the 20th Century. And greatly diminish after 1991. That makes Ideologies great for what Civilization has traditionally called the modern age, but a little too brief for what Civ7 seems to be calling modernity.

Mechanically too, I think corporations have more room to be tied in to other system: trade, resources, city growth, buildings, and so on. Ideologies seem pretty much fixed to diplomacy and happiness. Or maybe I'm just partial to this Civ4 mechanic and want to see another (hopefully more engaging) take on the same mechanic.

Or, who knows, Civ7 might throw a curve ball and make migration the key theme of the Modern Era.

 

[TheSpaceCowboy]

While I like the Original Poster’s idea of a Theocracy ideology (I’d probably call it something like “‘religion name’ Nationalism, eg “Christian Nationalism), I think mechanically ideologies work best when they truly divide the world.

If anything, instead of adding another ideology, I’d get rid of Fascism and make it a binary choice between Capitalism and Communism (I’d also be tempted to rename Capitalism to something like Liberty or Freedom, as the West’s ideology in the First Cold War was not merely about its economic system).

Alliances and trade routes between civilizations of different ideologies should be next to impossible, relations perpetually strained or hostile, and war all but inevitable except through extremely deft diplomacy.

There should be the equivalent of NATO and the Warsaw Pact, and a shared Diplomatic Victory for all members of one when the competing alliance suffers the equivalent of the dissolution of the Soviet Union.

Fascism did have a major impact in history, but the First and Second Cold Wars were/are much more impactful, and I’d be more interested in seeing the latter more fully fleshed out than in adding in Fascism (and Theocracy) at the risk of watering down the Cold War elements.

Moreover, Theocracy/Christian Nationalism has not been a leading or significant ideology in the modern world, at least in the West. In America, an extremely small minority faction of each of the parties tends to have some theocratic leanings, but our Constitution is not anytime soon going to codify either Sharia law or that Christ is King.